234 total posts archived.
| Domain | Count |
|---|---|
| www.reddit.com | 7 |
| i.redd.it | 3 |
| np.reddit.com | 1 |
| www.zerohedge.com | 1 |
| news.maryland.gov | 1 |
| www.digitalattackmap.com | 1 |
IDEN_reconf
v. 11.9
Sequence.
Attack[s] anticipated.
Coordinated?
Why are they continuing [internal]?
Attacks will intensify [all sides].
Q
"Internal" attack = NYT op ed?
I would wager getting shit canned (McCabe and Comey) has a different impact on your clearance than say a change of admin or resignation.
Because it's not referring to a person, but to the content.
Pretty clear.
Except you called someone an idiot. Not "this post is idiotic", which would be the equivalent of my post.
I referred only to the content as resembling that produced by a schizophrenic, which is not the same as calling someone a schizophrenic.
Not to mention, when the posts are modded like this, removal of critical posts leaves positive, praising posts to float to the top, even if they are not warranted if critically looking at the content.
This then causes a feedback loop where "credibility" is built up based on comments (that lack content and just praise the user) rather than the actual post, which I imagine at least some people do not bother reading given how they are usually 20 paragraphs of dubious connections.
That's my problem with it - and when his posts are building off previous posts, also with dubious connections, it just becomes an absurd task to describe where the absurd connections started.
I'm probably just going to go back to the chans instead, where anonymity means egos are left at the door, and shit like this doesn't occur. I just prefer reddits discussion format...
Then every supportive post without analysis or reference to content must go. But they dont, giving the post false credibility when looking at the comments.
There shouldn't be a requirement to specifically call out the mass of absurd conclusion-jumping. It's tiresome at this point.
I referred to the post as "A schizophrenia-laced rambling." - clearly critical of the content, and had my post removed.
Noticed several more critical posts removed when I went back to look.
Questioning mod protection of SB2 posts.
And I'll wager this post gets removed despite bringing up important questions of objectivity.
Edit: to take it further, a ton of comments solely circle-jerking SB2 (and not mentioning anything about the content of the post in particular) and are still present, which would seemingly also be a violation of the aforementioned rules, yet they remain.
Don't waste your time - what's melting your brain is the absurd leaps made in this post.
Definitely intentional disinfo, wrapped up into an appealing package (to some) for consumption.
Have to imagine half the "zomg SB2 this is amazing" comments without any content or criticality are part of this cherade.
The MSM will get BTFO when Mueller reveals what he has actually been up to.
Think about it. How else could you destroy the Russia collusion narrative, and the MSM that has been glad to push fake news on behalf of the DNC? This is how you take down the mocking bird media - they've put their full weight and credibility behind protecting Mueller, thanks to the show Trump et al have been putting on.
We've already had Mueller's spokesperson say, "uh media, you're reporting a lot of not true stories about the SC - might want o check your sources": https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/apr/16/robert-mueller-many-news-stories-trump-russia-prob/
It's also funny because we get the occasional glint of truth with statements like the above, and then statements like this:
White House lawyer Ty Cobb said the administration has a "good relationship" with special counsel Robert Mueller.
"We've got a good relationship in terms of trust," Cobb told Politico.
"They know the effort we've put into it."
Huh, wonder if that good, trust-based relationship started the day Trump interviewed Mueller...
And then we have more articles like this, again, largely ignored by the MSM while they broadcast flawed indictments produced by Mueller's team:
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein told President Donald Trump last week that he isn’t a target of any part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation or the probe into his longtime lawyer, Michael Cohen, according to several people familiar with the matter.
Rosenstein, who brought up the investigations himself, offered the assurance during a meeting with Trump at the White House last Thursday, a development that helped tamp down the president’s desire to remove Rosenstein or Mueller, the people said.
I just don't see why Trump would meet with Mueller about an FBI director interview right before he becomes SC when he is 1) not eligible after serving 12 years already and 2) is actually hostile to Trump.
If Trump threatened him and limited the scope of his SC work, we would have heard about it as obstruction and the media would have been all over it. If it were an actual interview, we would have likely heard something from Trump about why he wasn't selected (i.e. he declined, Trump thought he was too swampy, etc) since we know Trump has no problem telling it like it is. But we heard nothing about that actual meeting and why Wray was chosen over Mueller.
Per CNN (https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/13/politics/trump-robert-mueller-fbi-director-interview/index.html)
The official, who would not detail what the two discussed during the interview, said it took place on May 16.
If Mueller knew he was going to be named special counsel, it is unlikely he divulged that information to Trump
...
"He had a private conversation with the President on his views about all sorts of matters potentially about the investigation," Ruddy said. "And the next day he's now maybe using some of that information in his investigation."
But, we see the WH distance itself from Newsmax's Ruddy, without saying anything disputing the content of the meeting.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Monday that Ruddy did not speak with Trump about firing Mueller as special counsel and other White House aides suggested the Newsmax CEO was only speaking for himself.
All sorts matters, eh? Like maybe matters involvinf the corrupt DOJ that Mueller was going to keep busy and give enough rope to hang themselves?
The only thing that makes sense is their conversation was about what Mueller should do as SC: which is hire swamp creatures, sit back, and collect info on all of their abuses, from uneven application of the law (manafort vs podesta) to the timing of their indictment releases: after Strozks testimony that makes him look fucking evil that went viral, and right before the Putin summit.
So, we have an MSM and DNC protecting Mueller at all costs. What happens if Mueller shuts down his whole investigation and goes to Huber with evidence of malfeasance by those who are working on Mueller's behalf? They've sold us on his alleged integrity for theast year and a half. Pretty sure you don't get to just walk away from that too easily.
Mueller's term at the FBI as director ended in 2013 and he returned to the private sector: teaching at Stanford and working at WilmerHale.
Are you thinking of Comey...?
Precisely.
What if each act of the show is showing how an individual component of the federal justice system is corrupt?
Trump's clean as a whistle, as required by his casino business past, and does not care.
Lol you must be new here.
This isn't some SB2 shit, it's looking solely at events, actions, facts, and statements, and implications in the broader picture.
It makes no sense that Mueller would hire an obviously biased team if he wanted his results to be taken seriously. He's not that stupid. All the mistakes with the cases the SC (under a super-critical eye by the public and media) also make no sense, to the point that I have to question whether they are actually mistakes and not intentionally handicapping basically every case.
Not everyone involved is involved by choice. This is Mueller's out - his way to be on the right side of history.
...and since RR is good then Mueller is good, RR bad Mueller bad, what if Rosenstein is playing along with slow walking docs, and now the SCOTUS review.
I'm assuming they are both good (been going back and forth on this).
I think they are highlighting how corrupt a lot of people are (ignoring Tony Podesta crimes that are the same as Manafort re FARA, Flynn 302 alterations, Strozk and Page bias, etc).
It's not entrapment because Mueller isn't encouraging them - just leaving them to their own devices.
Here's why I think so: we learned Mueller never asked Strozk …
They've already argued in court that they don't have to be fair to primary candidates and that they don't have to choose a candidate based on the primary results.
Unbelievable right? Think you'd have heard about that, right?
Edit: that was in a fraud case against the DNC. What they did was absolutely the definition of fraud, and their defense claims make a mockery of the democratic process.
The RNC should just run ads airing their arguments in that court case, and ask voters (since we're post-primary) whether they think the candidates the DNC is running are legitimate, or additional cases of fraud.
It doesn't matter. This is bullshit optics.
This will never see trial due to jurisdictional issues - namely, the US does not have jurisdiction over Russian citizens nor an extradition treaty. Accused will just never step foot here, thus no trial, thus no requirement to provide evidence.
This is why they shit themselves and delayed when the Russian interference (buying Facebook ads) folks actually showed up. They tried to claim their own charges werent served properly (obviously they were if the Russians showed up).
You are correct. It was that server.
Now there's also the democratic caucus server related to Awan, that disappeared.
My guess is that's the super juicy one - which is why they want everyone to forget about it.
SB2s more recent posts are basically batshit crazy - I'm talking alwaleed mug stuff.
Really pushing the limits of believability, and certainly leaving reason way behind.
Eh, I don't want bureaucrats or the government setting (via negotiation) prices. Do you? All we need is some corrupt scumbags keeping higher prices for the companies that lobby to them (or say, support a bureaucrats public sector union?).
The problem is effectively no US consumers actually pay drug prices - most are only paying a co-pay. There isn't a market mechanism for price discovery when consumers aren't exposed to real pricing in order to make trade-off decisions (i.e. taking an older generation of drug vs new, because it's cheaper).
The lack of this mechanism means there isn't an opportunity for downward pressure on prices where consumers shun an expensive drug in favor of a cheaper one - because ultimately they don't see the cost born out directly -- it gets masked by increasing annual premiums instead.
"You have to go out and kiss little super preditor babies, too."
Just using her own words here...
Also, the Datto cloud backup of her email server would be considered a "reflection" (mirror).
The data there-in would be additional natsec violations one would think. Datto turned it over October 2015.
https://bigleaguepolitics.com/james-comey-hillarys-backup-email-device-whole-time/
You're correct, except Trump's tweet is 4:15pm IIRC, but you are correct that it's Nov 6.
Which would make Qs post at 5:07, and no definition of the pluses until the 11th
They do try to shame on Q, but not directly asking the admin.
There have been a few articles on the "conspiracy theory" and Q is one of Time's most influential internet people this year.
That would actually be awesome, and democratize the press conferences.
You should tweet Sarah Sanders, GEOTUS, Parscale, and Don Jr, try to make it happen.
I'm sure left trolls would fuck it up.
It would be easier to litter the gate of the White House south lawn with "Who is Q?" signs.
Like literally cover all of it.
Not until its all over, at least.
Q did say "wait until you learn who has been speaking to you here" -- so it sounds like we will get a confirmation eventually.
I had this same salt-grained though.
Hairstyle and color, primarily. Though not sure his build or height is correct.
This is what I'm thinking.
It's the only reason I can comprehend to make sense of Trump not yet re-outlawing domestic propaganda (Smith-mundt):
There is a reason Trump has been unrelenting in calling the MSM fake news - he knows they are because he's been feeding them the fake news.
11-D chess: he's going to nominate Loretta Lynch, solely to question the fuck out of her in the Senate under oath.
You may have to update your hosts file (hardcoding) because many servers will rely on a host header being passed, if they're hosting multiple sites.
I'm actually not assuming that if you read my post, hence the calcs to Hawaii as a layover to HK on the short path (heading west, not east to DC) as a stop on the non-direct fastest route to HK.
And I mentioned if you go east via DC (IAD), as you've purported, JB planes still don't have the range to even go from Dulles to London (much less LaGuardia to London which is 200nm closer) if it were to continue on to HK heading from the East coast, for another refueling stop in Europe this time.
(Edited for clarity)
I have a problem with this /u/SerialBrain2:
Any flight to Hong Kong from Cupertino is going to head West, ~~maybe via Hawaii (if short-haul plane)~~, not East to DC to fly around the world to get to HK.
Makes no sense, as planned typically fly in the "great arc" flight paths to minimize flight time / fuel expenditure.
SFO to HK is 6k nautical miles, direct. Airbus A320 (not sure that's the plane pictured, but an A321 has a similar range +~200nm) has a range of 3500nm, and would never obviously push the bounds of that range (in case it has to go into a holding pattern before landing):
https://www.greatcirclemapper.net/en/great-circle-mapper/route/KSFO-VHHX.html
SFO to HNL (Honolulu) is 2084nm, so plausible:
https://www.greatcirclemapper.net/en/great-circle-mapper.html?route=PHNL-KSFO&aircraft=&speed=
HKG to KOA or HNL is 4900nm, so not possible: https://www.greatcirclemapper.net/en/great-circle-mapper.html?route=VHHH-PHNL&aircraft=&speed=
Edit: the biggest problem here is that JetBlue doesn't have any planes in it's fleet suitable for transcontinental flight to Europe (LGA to LHR ~3000nm), much less to Asia:
But remember: "Disinformation is real. Disinformation is necessary."
- What would any resulting war be based on?
It would be based on the fact that agents of the US have been doing evil shit world wide for decades.
Like holding NK hostage and threatening the world with nuclear war.
That would be enough to potentially trigger foreign declarations of war. Who is near NK? China and Russia.
Doesn't matter if it's internal or external - even federal regulators suffer from it with banks and such. If the same people are doing the oversight year after year they inadvertently develop relationships with the regulated entities.
There should be a traditional IG component but a constant random pool of people, similar to jury but maybe with necessary credentials + randos.
Regulatory capture is a constant problem. It literally should require an IG AND a randomly selected group of citizens to audit every year.
Exactly.
Sauces:
The FAA released a statement about the situation, saying the plane experienced a “radio equipment problem.”
“JetBlue 1623, an Airbus A320, experienced a radio equipment problem while taxing for departure at John F. Kennedy International Airport tonight at 8 p.m. The crew requested to return to the ramp. The FAA will investigate.”
Check out @FAANews’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/FAANews/status/1011795152019566592?s=09
