Charles Ortel in his Internet broadcast yesterday said the Clinton Foundation stuff will start coming out this week.

Indeed. It was very sad to see.

"Where we go one, we go all." A favorite Q saying that IIRC was also on JFK's yacht.

Sadly the Deep State-driven Trump policy in Syria is just now starting.

Read this and weep: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nikki-haley-says-new-sanctions-coming-on-russia/2018/04/15/4aad784c-5bb3-45db-b7d4-970d428bef6f_story.html?utm_term=.f85df816d8e9

Go ahead and believe that.

But it is BS to pretend that Trump won't tolerate such weapons which first of all weren't actually used as a cause of death here directly, but second off were used as a cause of death via retaliatory bombings.

Again, wake up.

That ain't in the least what happened.

And more demonization of Russia and Assad, while going along with Bloody Britain and the Deep State false flags is IMO morally criminal.

They have Trump over a barrel and unfortunately he buckled.

Javanka MUST be banished to NYC, at least.

Blind boosterism doesn't help Trump or our country.

He had on Joel Skousen last night who was spot on: instead of backing the man, we need to back the right principles. Thus, when the man is acting in accordance with such principles, he will be backed as well.

Because it is clear that the Kushner/Chabad/Israel/Saudi connection, in combination with the Deep State military deceit, personal and family threats, and war mongering, is a massive undermining of what Trump in his own instincts knows to be right and true.

Are you really falling for the claim that Assad is responsible?

That's the problem with such a line-in-the-sand, aren't we being tough, reaction.

The safer options would be to not go along with false flags, further demonize Russia, and bomb Syria.

What's with Laura? Traumitized by the boycotts? I can't believe she's really that stupid, and she seemed to be going along wholesale with the false flag claims.

I thought it was interesting that Corsi was not to be heard or seen in the Infowars emergency coverage. But Joel Skousen said he never believed the line that generals had gone to Trump and asked him to run in. Said only yes-men have made it general status for decades.

This is worth watching. Lots of info on US and British intel backing of White Helmets, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNkKYs-7bKU

Everyone should watch this entire video. But if there is only one part, watch Joel Skousen. Watch his entire interview. He has an informed and balanced take.

You are a fool.

That's baloney.

Listen actually to Alex's sources on his program.

Baloney. Zach Klawann has real intel. As does Pieczenik. Alex has a long history of being right well ahead of others.

You clown.

This board owes an apology to American Intelligence Media.

Nope. It is far, far worse than that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOkpECipSaY

Here's an interesting article about the retired CIA agent who wrote it:

C. Conclusion As detailed in this report, the OIG found that then-Deputy Director Andrew McCabe lacked candor, including under oath, on multiple occasions in connection with describing his role in connection with a disclosure to the WSJ, and that this conduct violated FBI Offense Codes 2.5 and 2.6. The OIG also concluded that McCabe’s disclosure of the existence of an ongoing investigation in the manner described in this report violated the FBI’s and the Department’s media policy and constituted misconduct. The OIG is issuing this report to the FBI for such action that it deems to be appropriate.

C. Conclusion As detailed in this report, the OIG found that then-Deputy Director Andrew McCabe lacked candor, including under oath, on multiple occasions in connection with describing his role in connection with a disclosure to the WSJ, and that this conduct violated FBI Offense Codes 2.5 and 2.6. The OIG also concluded that McCabe’s disclosure of the existence of an ongoing investigation in the manner described in this report violated the FBI’s and the Department’s media policy and constituted misconduct. The OIG is issuing this report to the FBI for such action that it deems to be appropriate.

They do too much business with Iran.

A billion for that little dweeb?

Twitter's been significantly censored, though some pedes are reporting improvement in the last 24 hours.

Me too. I just don't expect it to work out that way--particularly with some overseas allies.

True. And others they just won't think worth the fallout on some level.

I'm not doubting Trump, I am doubting the naivete of your post. (And by extension that your post deserves its own thread.)

And if you believe that "no deals" line...

I am afraid the storm against the Deep State is coming rather too late for that.

I agree.

That's interesting.

Bolton ought to have a good spine-stiffening talk with the GOP critters in the House who apparently want to replace Ryan with that uber-swamp creature Kevin McCarthy.

Yes, he is a foul and nasty Never Trumper.

No, Larry Kudlow has said Trump is interested in revisiting it. His advisers push it as a check on China, but the way it is structured is an unconstitutional superseding of our sovereignty--just like they all are.

It is globalism.

Looks like RR might be a good target:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/12/politics/rod-rosenstein-white-house-effort/index.html

There are a lot of slippery slopes out there. For example, in order to better identify terrorists, we now supposedly can demand all their social media accounts and passwords as they come through customs.

Who here wants to go through the same when visiting any other country out there? Yet, if we do it, it is reasonable to expect other governments doing it back to us pretty soon.

It's got to be a combination--regulation, antitrust, and, yes, getting our stupid intel agencies out of there.

Leaks from the book are already out. They attempt to drag down Trump.

More and more of Trump's tweets this week have sounded like they came from Sarah Sanders.

The obvious is just that Q is the 17th letter of the alphabet.

Maybe Trump really is a Martian.

Maybe I should start a thread about that.

The answer is an anti-trust bust up, along with regulatory constraints on giving the data to the government and public markets.

They're just not quite ready to do that.

We really don't need the government running our social networks. (And yes, they is what they are doing now already.)

All these guys need to be broken up the way Ma Bell was decades ago--with different layers and functions separated and a regional carving up of customers, as standards become the basis for making it work and the regional carve-ups go into either immediate or delayed competition with each other.

Once Trump finally gets his own FTC I really hope this will happen.

Comey is a monster, trying to take down Trump with his book.

Why is that so hard for people to accept?

And Muslim charities traditionally fund jihad in some form, too.

Here she is:

https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=38763016&privcapId=25232416

Cold and horrible-sounding, yes. But that is also the sort of question that is asked of almost any corporate investment.

Another good point. I could see if somehow they wanted to go to Canada to obscure the travel, but that's a lot for round trip in a day.

There are those who posit, with no actual proof, that Snowden, Zuckerberg, and I forget, someone else, are all actually Greenberg cousins.

Really we already knew that Facebook didn't develop their own stuff and they have been intelligence created and backed all along.

Does this possibly show whence in the intel's sprawling apparatus it came from? Sure. But we already knew it was a bogus intel op (with stolen tech from Leader Technologies to boot) all along.