Pizza Picnic At Chancelorsville ( pizzagate )

submitted by DarkMath

This could crack Pizzagate wide open. Ever wonder what the CPP red-herring was distracting from?

Yes? This is part of what they were hiding.

It's related to Pizzagate by the fact CPP as just mentioned was probably set up for this very reason. They needed a line of defense to protect 31 compromised members of Congress, the ones who just had a bunch of IT equipment "stolen".

I think I can even begin to see the game-plan for the take down. Unless James Comey has a good explanation this really looks like interfering with a Presidential Election

That's enough dirt to get him to resign and the rest will be History. And speaking of History, it's this kind of shit that will require the last 50 years of American History be rewritten.

Civil War 2.0 may have just gone hot.

;-)

Are_we_sure

There's not going to be Civil War.

I think it's hilarious that you now think Comet Ping Pong is a Red Herring. Well whose fault is that? Who were saying Comet Ping Pong was so important in the first place. James Comey? Or this board?

CPP's a red herring is just the new line to take after pouring over the place for months and coming up with what? Some naughty instagram comments and bad art criticism?

Unless James Comey has a good explanation, this really looks like interfering with a Presidential Election.

Exactly how did Comey interfere? Comey said nothing about this investigation prior to the election. So what's your interference? Are you claiming law enforcement should never look at people working for a campaigh? That there was some investigation into the Trump campaign leaked before the election, but there certainly was no announcement from Comey. Nor should there have been.

Comey's did interfere will the election, but it helped Trump. He never should have sent his letter to Chaffetz either. Giant screwup by him.

Basically, all the while you guys were claiming the dossier was fake news, we were learning that the FBI had collaborated elements of it. Comey recently confirmed to Congress that a criminal investigation was opened. We know now that the FBI was able to attain a FISA warrant covering at least Carter Page last year. The dossier helped with getting this warrant. http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/18/politics/fbi-dossier-carter-page-donald-trump-russia-investigation/index.html

The FBI became interested in Page, the officials say, in part because of concerns about his interactions with suspected Russian intelligence operatives last year. The Justice Department and FBI haven't accused Page of wrongdoing and it's unclear whether any charges could be brought in the investigation.

Comey and the Justice Department did not say anything about this last year, thus they didn't interfere with the election. This came out afterwards and if went and got warrant then any surveillance of Page is legal. They are either going to build a case against him or they are not.

This also came out today >Republicans and Democrats agree Susan Rice did nothing wrong with surveillance unmasking

GOP and Democratic congressional aides who have seen the flagged material stand by Rice, with one official briefed on the matter telling NBC News that Rice didn't do anything inappropriate. "I saw no evidence of any wrongdoing," said the official, who asked to remain anonymous. "It was all completely normal." http://theweek.com/speedreads/692809/republicans-democrats-agree-susan-rice-did-nothing-wrong-surveillance-unmasking

The whole unmasking thing was a smokescreen because the White House is realizing that Trump campaign aides like Page and probably others have been caught on tape. Remember the Midnight Ride of Devin Nunes? Trump falsely claimed Obama had wiretapped him and they had to come up with some story to justify that and to take the focus off Nunes and the others. So they attacked Rice, but everybody knew this was weak sauce and today that was confirmed. She did nothing wrong let alone illegal.

I would guess that Page wasn't the only one they were able to get a warrant on. Manafort's real estate purchases in NYC looks like money laundering. Remember Flynn wanted immunity before speaking to Congress.

I mentioned this thing was real. Folks didn't want to believe me.

PS. That Gateway Pundit idiot, has a "BREAKING" news tag on something the Washington Post published in February. And that idiot thinks this is evidence of corruption.

Oh and in addition to our warrant on Page talking to Russians, Russian intelligence officials are under surveillance by at least 6 countries I can think of. If Americans were talking to those officials, they made be other tape that is sent to the US. That can be used to get other warrants, I believe.

DarkMath

Before I proceed to verbally kick your ass for like the 100th time I just want to mention you forgot to respond again about the evidence of thermite in the 9/11 dust samples. Are you finally going to acknowledge the evidence?

Anyway regarding this evenings drivel: "CPP's a red herring is just the new line to take after pouring over the place for months and coming up with what?"

I don't want to blow your mind but that's how it works. Remember "See something, say something."? You see sketchiness that may be evidence of child porn and/or the sexual abuse of children and people investigate. It's actually very normal for any well adjusted human being to freak out when they see possible evidence of a child being abused. THIS IS WHY BROWNSTONE OPERATIONS USE CHILDREN. Pedophilia is the only crime left that will generate such outrage. This is mind-numbingly obvious to most people. This is the bread and butter of any intelligence service these days. It's laughable that you would doubt it.

Do you know anyone in the intelligence community who you could talk to? They should be able to set you straight. Right now your mind can't begin to grasp the depravity that keeps all these Brownstone Ops chugging along. I don't know how many times I have to explain "The Big Lie" to you before you acknowledge that too.

"It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously." - Adolph Hitler

1) Thermite

2) The Big Lie

;-)

RweSure

You confuse shadowboxing with kicking my ass. Your internet tough guy antics are kind of sad. If I didn't respond, I probably have a comment written out at home........I only get a certain amount of comments per day cuz otherwise fee fees get hurt. welll this one didn't go through either.......

I'll see if I can post that when I get home. Thermite was not found. Jones and Harritt found red and grey chips they claimed were thermite. They were not. They didn't know the red part was and claimed 5 years ago to do more testing to find it. The red part was clay. The chips are mostly clay, epoxy and iron oxide. They are primer paint bonded to a thin layer of steel. Composition matches the primer paint used on the WTC floor joists. The WTC had 10,000,000 square feet of floor space, so they used a ton of this stuff. Also when you burn it you iron rich microspheres.

DarkMath

"Thermite was not found."

I say it was, you say it wasn't. Let's go to the tape.

Two FDNY fireman explain how they saw rivers of molten steel in the basements of the WTC.

Which proves either NIST is incompetent or lying.

"Tough guy"?

No. That's actually frustration that results from you keeping your head up your ass. I gave you evidence but you're too important to look at it.

RweSure

Here's the longer post.

Two FDNY fireman explain how they saw rivers of molten steel in the basements of the WTC

There's no way of knowing what type of metal that would be. You can't look at molten metal and say or that's steel ......as opposed to something with a lower melting point like aluminum....like used in aircraft that crashed in the building.

There is zero evidence of thermite. Jones and Harritt are frauds. Even their own testing didn't show thermite. Their evidence of thermite is they found red and grey chips and iron microspheres in the dust. However, both have other way more plausible explanations. And they didn't find enough iron or aluminum in these red/grey chips. You can't have thermite if these are less than 10% of the mix. And it was elemental aluminum. Jones and Harritt didn't even know what the red part is. They promised to do more testing and to document their test so it could be replicated.......years ago. They haven't done any of these things.

When another test was done on this chips, the red substance was found to be kaolin, a clay used in primer paints. The chips being iron oxide, epoxy and kaolin bound togehter, very similar to the primer paints you put on steel. Guess what happens when you burn steel coated with these primer paints? You get iron-rich microspheres. You also get them when you burn steel wool or other very thin applications like wires.

From the real world.

The red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments.

There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite.

The aluminum that was found was part of the clay. For a substance to be thermite, you lots of aluminum by itself, not as part of a compound.

Also for some fun, look up the detonation velocity of nanothermite, it can't cut steel. Also look up how much nano/thermite is needed to melt steel. You can't paint it on a beam and expect anything.

DarkMath

"as opposed to something with a lower melting point like aluminum"

AreWeSure all that aircraft aluminum burned away almost immediately. And yes jet fuel can make aluminum burn. Here's what that looks like:

Where'd the aluminum go?

In fact at the Pentagon almost the entire aluminum 757 burned up into thin air. The only thing they found after the fires were put out was one engine and some landing gear. Ditto for Flight 93, its high speed impact with planet Earth burned up so much aluminum they barely found any metal at all. By your theory they'd have found pools of molten aluminum in the craters in Shanksville and at the Pentagon. None were found.

So you lose again. Sorry. Maybe you should wake the fuck up now and stop being so naive as to think the Deep State could never have done something so ghastly as kill 3,000 of its own citizens on national T.V.

DarkMath

AreWeSure you didn't address the issue again.. I clearly said the thermite micro-spheres was a draw. That's why I provided the video clip of the two firemen. They saw MOLTEN STEEL in the basements of the WTC. And we're not talking a little bit. They saw RIVERS OF MOLTEN STEEL.

This is why I get frustrated. You never give a straight answer and more often than not you "forget" to respond to the topic at hand which in this case is the molten steel.

RweSure

That's because you're focusing on an anomaly for which there could a dozen answers as to what was actually molten and how it got that way. Molten metal by itself is no evidence of thermite.

I never give a straight answer? You have no way of explaining how all the excess energy of thousands upon thousands of high velocity explosives or thousands of pounds of thermite would go undetected. You have no theory how these could survive a thousand degree fire. There would be no way to hide these.

Explosive would give off energy in the shock wave and in sound. For explosive charges to work they would be loud enough that, 1500 yards away, they would sound like standing a foot from the speakers at a Who concert. These noises would be on every single video of that day. You need these amount of pressure to cut steel. You can make the charge quiet AND cut steel. It's impossible. You need a lot of pressure to cut steel and that amount of pressue is LOUD. The WTC would be an order of magnitude the biggest buildings every demolished via explosives. To cut the core columns at the bottom you would need massive and massively loud charges. Windows in other buildings would have shattered. People in the streets would have felt the shock waves. They would have been picked up on seismographs in the area. Loudness is just one way that extra energy would have appeared.

Also when you see the actually collapse you see some heavy steel falling before the dust cloud. High Velocity explosives would have sent that dust rocketing past that heavy steel and travelling to the East River and beyond.

Thermite releases not just heat but light. And it burns out quickly. You would have needed tons and tons of the stuff all around the building. The building would have lit up like a fourth of july sparkler. And it both cases you have seen these extra energy before the collapse.

The building did not need any extra force that gravity to collapse. All three buildings were exhibiting structural damage from fire way before the building collapsed. In the towers, we could multiple floors sagging pulling in the exterior collumns. On the opposite of the building from the planes impact we could see columns bowed out.

Molten Steel? Says who?

A. There's no where to tell what metal they saw. Zinc? Lead? Aluminum? All burn at lower temps than the fire.

B. There's no evidence this was from before the collapse

C. The collapse itself released a gigantic amount of heat.

The pile stayed warm a long, long time months later they would flip a piece of concrete and once the oxygen hit the debris underneath a fire would break out. That heat could not have been caused by thermite. Because thermite burns out super quick. It doesn't need a oxygen source, it would all be gone in minutes. It could not have been keeping things warm months later.

The collapse when well through the basement garage floors and all those cars were burned. You ever see what happens to alloy wheels in a fire?

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/moltenMetal.jpg

it could have been this. It could been any power supply batteries in the building. It could have been the aluminum planes. We have no way of knowing.

I never give a straight answer? You have no way of explaining how all the excess energy of thousands upon thousands of high velocity explosives or thousands of pounds of thermite would go undetected. You have no theory how these could survive a thousand degree fire.

DarkMath

"Molten metal by itself is no evidence of thermite."

That's correct. I agree! Here's the problem though. You are sighting NIST as an authority on what happened on 9/11. Well your "authority" doesn't even acknowledge molten metal at all. Full Stop.

Do you need me to explain the implication of them failing to mention molten metal? Yes? NIST claimed to have done an exhaustive survey to find any and all evidence. They had an obligation to AT LEAST mention the FDNY's testimony: "There were RIVERS of molten metal in the basements of WTC 1,2 and 7".

But NIST didn't acknowledge any witness saw molten anything: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YaFGSPErKU&feature=youtu.be&t=52

That means NIST is either incompetent, lying or both. At the very least NIST needed to say "I'm aware of the FDNY testimony but I'm here to tell you what they saw wasn't molten anything."

NIST's conclusion therefor is suspect. Given their effort to scare and finally bribe Professor Steven Jones to stop researching thermite there's only one conclusion I can reach. Explain why I'm wrong please.

RweSure

That's correct. I agree! Here's the problem though. You are sighting NIST as an authority on what happened on 9/11. Well your "authority" doesn't even acknowledge molten metal at all. Full Stop.

Your objection is irrelevant.

NIST is the National Institute of Standards, they are not NIASKFUQ, the National Institute of Answer Some Kook From Utah's Questions. Their work began in 2002 and they published it for public comment in June 2005. All this was way before some cold fusion scientist from Utah from raised the idea of thermite being involved in late 2005. The first time thermite was raised was in Jones paper, a paper in which he

By the time Jones published his dubious paper*, NIST had already identified the collapse mechanism and was seeking public comment from experts from Leslie Robertson on down agreed.

Congress spelled out the purpose of the NIST investigation when they funded it - improve the safety and structural integrity of buildings in the United States - and enumerated their first duty as establish the likely technical cause or causes of the building failure.
https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ231/PLAW-107publ231.pdf

NIST has four objectives

  1. How and why the three buildings collapsed
  2. Determine what caused injuries to be high or low
  3. Determine how the buldings were designed, built and maintained
  4. Indentify necessary changes to the building code.

They were not asked to determine all the things that occurred AFTER the buildings became to collapse. (Indeed that would have been incredibly expensive, The chaos of the collapse would be exponetially harder to model than the collapse and probably involve finding out the contents of each floor among other things.)

NIST claimed to have done an exhaustive survey to find any and all evidence. They had an obligation to AT LEAST mention the FDNY's testimony:

They did not. This is a strawman. The explicitly stopped their review when they discovered what caused the collapse and it was not a controlled demolition. They never went into discussing all the effects of the collapse.

That means NIST is either incompetent, lying or both.

This is a false conclusion based on your false premise. NIST's study was peer reviewed both before and after publishing. Even those structural engineers who quibble with parts of NIST's conclusions, recognize it as valid science and no structural engineer experienced in building tall buildings believes in the controlled demotion theory. All recognize that once collapse started the dynamic load would be too great for the lower structure to stop.

The major engineering organizations have endorsed the NIST review. Contrary to your claims AE911Truth represent a tiny fringe, most without relevant expertise. AND they have never created a model that would support their claims and they seem to avoid presenting their work where they would have to defend it against qualified experts.

Quite simply your objection has nothing to do with their report. Full Stop.

Towers Mechanism of Collapse

Background

At the time of collapse, the towers were severely structurally compromised in the following ways. * The planes impact cut exterior and interior columns The planes exploded upon impact Pieces of the plane went clear though to the other side of the building. The initial impact, explosion and the shrapnel would have the effect of removing the SFRM (Sprayed Fire Resistant Material) from the structural steel. In fact, there is photographic evidence of this, where we can see the red paint on the steel columns on the damaged floors.

Given the above, we can expect that since the buildings did not collapse immediately, the rest of the columns were taking the weight of missing columns. That is, they were now under more load than they were intended for. The redundancy built into the initial design kept the building standing. But that wouldn't last due to the fire.

We know that if structural steel gets too hot, it will deform under pressure well before it reaches its melting point.

Collapse

The Collapse initiatied exactly where the planes impacted the building and where the fire were. The bottom of the building was intact. There is photographic evidence of at the point of collapse of

Collapsed floors Sagging floors (Both of these due to weakened floor joists.) Exterior support columns being pulled inwards. The connections of the initial floors were still intact and pulling on the columns. This pulling and the fire weakened the exterior columns. The columns were estimated to be pulled inwards up to 1.5 meters (IIRC)

All of the above can be seen in the half hour before collapse. Eventually the exterior columns failed and initiated collapse.

Once the collapse began the dynamic loads were far too much for the subsequent floors to stop. The loads would have been something like 200 million pounds in one building and 100 million pounds in another, moving at almost 20 mph at the point of initial impact on the first intact floor. It was below the collapse where the floor connections failed as evidenced by sheared and bent steel examined by volunteers from Structural Engineers Association of New York and by other experts. At the point of collapse, it was the exterior columns that failed after the many interior core columns were already damaged by the planes.

NIST estimated that an intact floor could have supported at the VERY MOST the dynamic load of six floors crashing down on top of it. In this case, the loads were 12 floors and 28 floors, At that point nothing but the ground could stop the collapse. The remaining floors would only offer minimal resistance before the intact floor was disconnected from the columns.

Gravity was the only force that was needed once the building was weakened and the fires started. Regarding the enormous destruction that occurred, the potential energy of each tower was something like 2 million pounds of TNT. More than the smallest nuclear weapon the US ever built.

We can say conclusively based on calculations and visible evidence that a controlled demolition did not occur. Therefore, something else caused the molten metal to be at the bottom of the Trade Center.

*How dubious?

I can debunk Jones's assertions with no scientific background. He claims this image is a pool of now solidified metal. http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/images/pagemaster/6.jpg

You can clearly see concrete and unmelted steel rebars in that picture. Concrete will fall apart at high temperatures and however hot this got. the steel rebar is not melted. Closeups of the WTC "metor" show this quite clearly http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/hanger17/meteor3.jpg

DarkMath

"The explicitly stopped their review when they discovered what caused the collapse"

Ok. That's your explanation for why they never considered the FDNY witnesses who saw "rivers of molten metal that looked like Lava". That's fine. It's justification for starting a new investigation. This time NIST can include evidence like "molten metal".

They can build more computer models, put all the cars in the basement parking garage, maybe throw in some aircraft aluminum and whatever else that can model to explain the molten metal.

Here's what you aren't allowed to do though AreWeSure. You can't assume the molten metal was

1) 100% from aluminum rims from cars in the parking garage

2) 100% from aircraft aluminum

3) 100% from aluminum

4) 100% from steel

Why? Because WE WANT TO BE SURE AreWeSure. YOUR FUCKING NAME IS AREWESURE AreWeSure. If you picked a username like AreWeSure that means YOU WANT TO BE DAMN SURE we got the story right.

Oopsies, you got pwned again.

;-)

RweSure

This is zero justification for starting a new investigation. They have shown there is zero evidence for a controlled demolition. We are sure.

This idea that something more than the the planes + fire took down the building caught on years after the fact. By the time Jones proposed thermite he was trying to find something that would justify a conclusion that had already been reached by the conspiracy community. The problem is the science of it was never valid.

I think a good point for you would be to look up how the actual structural engineering community reacted to the NIST investigation. You could see what critiques of NIST they have. They basically amount to quibbles over small picture details, they agree with the big picture of a gravitational collapse after the plane impacts and fires. Get yourself a copy of the Volume 138 Issue 1 - January 2012 issue of the Journal of Structural Engineering and you can see the NIST's WTC 7 report passed serious peer review as did previous reports. When the American Institute of Architects put resolution before its members if they felt their needed be a new WTC 7 investigation, 96% said no. The truthers are a fringe.

The demoltion theory fails on the before, the during and the after. Evidence from all three of these phase point to no controlled demolition. Before - I don't think you appreciate how much demolition work goes before the final controlled demolition. Just to get to the bare steel columns and to pre-weaken them and set and wire the explosive charges involves an enormous amount of loud, dirty, dusty and smelly work. (How quickly could you get rid of the fumes caused cutting steel in an enclosed space?) During-the collapse only happened on the floors impacted by the planes. Both above and below remaining intact at first. No explosions were heard. No excess energy was observed, even in close up footage from NYPD helicopters. No debris at high velocity speeds of thousands of meters per second were seen. There was no way for explosives on these floors to survive the fire or for the wires and detonators to survive the plane impacts. After- no evidence of detonation cord/wire, no blasting caps, no cuts in the steel, no copper smears on the steel

what evidence is present when it happens and what evidence it leaves behind. If you were to understand how controlled demolitions work when you use explosives or why thermite is poorly suited for a controlled demolition, you would have less questions.

Thermite is a very poor candidate for demoltion as well. Are you aware of the amount of thermite that would be needed? To bring down the two buildings floor by floor? Thousands of tons. The idea of painted on thermite is laughable. There wouldn't be enough heat. I know of one time something similar was tried. The Skyride at the 1935 Chicago Word's fair had too large towers at either end. One they took down with 120 pounds of dynamite. One they had to take down and make it fall a certain way. Nowadays they would use RDX shape charges. To cut two columns, they first put on four giant firebrick cupolas and they they used 1500 pounds of thermite. The Chicago Tribune reported the flames were visible two miles away during daylight. There also would be the difficult in igniting the thermite which is exceptionally hard to ignite. Detonators or Magnesium cord wouldn't have survived the fires. Afterwards we would have found the method of holding the thermite and there would be tell tell signs on the steel.

The controlled demolition theory requires magic basically for it to work. You want to focus on an anomaly here or there without putting together a plausible scenario of how the big picture would actually work. No one from Jones on down has put together a plausible way for the demoliton to actually occur. It's scientifically invalid.

DarkMath

I don't know why you keep getting stuck like this. Please pay attention. You admit there was probably molten metal in the basements of the WTC towers. It's hard to argue with the FDNY. Remember you said the molten metal could be from car rims?

The problem is NIST doesn't acknowledge ANY molten metal at all! That puts you in the same position I'm in and that's not believing NIST's version of events. Full Stop.

You need to get that straight before you can argue your point with me. Make sense?

DarkMath

"I never give a straight answer?"

Correct. You can't make it two paragraphs without doing it. Exhibit A:

"You have no way of explaining how all the excess energy of thousands upon thousands of high velocity explosives or thousands of pounds of thermite would go undetected"

I've sent links that explain how Marvin Bush was affiliated with the company in charge of WTC security. I believe I also sent links from people who worked at the WTC and said the 2 years leading up to 9/11 they had many drills and "power downs" which would often see 5 or 10 floors be told not to come in to work for a couple of days. They might work over the weekend and then get Monday and Tuesday off. One video I sent was of an English guy who had not gone into work on 9/11 because of "power downs".

Then there's the fact WTC 1 and 2 were half empty. My personal favorite is Larry Silverstein explaining how plans for a "New WTC 7" were begun in 2000.

Isn't that odd? Larry Silverstein sure has great timing.

DonKeyhote

Hey moron: you can't scaremonger a board where we all believe the us govt to be corrupted. Unless you show Russia is equally corrupted I fully support them and would love Putin as president if we didnt have the Donald. Also Susan rice gets no benefit of the doubt as she's proven liar. Go fuck hourself

Are_we_sure

I fully support them and would love Putin as president

lololol

Also who the f is scaremongering? Here's the facts, the Russian investigation is ongoing, active and has at least one Trump campaign advisors on the hot spot.

A factual timeline:

Feb 28th Washington Post reveals that the FBI came to an agreement with Christopher Steele, ex MI6 agent, to use his dossier. They discussed paying him, but eventually did not. Gateway Pundit and DarkMath find out about this today.

March 4th Trump accused Obama of illegally wiretapping him

March 20th Comey in front of Devin Nunes's committee confirms active FBI investigation into whether or not Trump campaign colluded with Russia during campagin

Midnight March 21st: Devin Nunes: Is riding in an Uber with a staffer. Gets a call, jumps out of the car, heads to White House

Morning of March 22nd Holds press conference "The intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition" Doesn't share his info with the Committee, briefs Trump.

March 25th Boris Epshteyn, special assistant to President Donald Trump is fired. Speculation is that Nunes was discussing Epshteyn during his midnight trip to White House.

April 11th Washington Post reports The FBI obtained a secret court order to monitor communications from former Trump adviser Carter Page in summer 2016

April 18th CNN reports that info from the Dossier used to get warrant on Carter Page.

Also Susan Rice doesn't need the benefit of the doubt, because today's news report doesn't rely on her. Democratic and Republican congressional aides reviewed her requests and they were completely legit and not illegal.

DonKeyhote

Maybe true. I like Putin. I like that he kills nuisance journalists. I like that he holds terrorists families hostage. If you think I'mgoing to dive into the weeds as to why voters chose against Hillary or whatever links to Russia Trump might have, youre mistaken. I do real research unlike you.

gurneyx

Really Dark? you are always so critical of people posting and you post this shit....not helping and makes me think you really are a paid shill...

DarkMath

"post this shit"

Shit? I wasn't aware evidence of High Treason is considered "shit". I wasn't aware evidence James Comey interfered with a Presidential Election is also considered "shit". These are some of the very crimes the CPP red-herring was supposed to distract from.

Care to elaborate on why that's wrong?

DonKeyhote

The dossier thing didn't even break until after the election. If anything he interfered on Trump's behalf by reminding people how corrupt Hillary was days prior to the election. Get your talking points straight and GWs dick out of your mouth. First reply saw through your shill ass LOL

DarkMath

Don the Dipshit,

It sounds like your defending James Comey which is odd given James Comey was made director of the FBI to slow walk any investigation of the Deep State.

James Comey was on the board of HSBC which evidently you didn't know is the money laundry-mat to the 1%. HSBC will clean drug money, bribe money, kick-backs, pay to play's, charity fraud, you name it. If it's dirty money HSBC can clean it.

So yeah Don the Dipshit forgive me but it sure as fuck seems like YOU'RE the only shill in this conversation. YOU'RE the one throwing shade for what sure the fuck looks like the best slow-walker in Deep State history.

So lay it on me bitch, explain your hard-on for James Comey.

DonKeyhote

Nowhere did I defend comey, that misread alone exposes you.i have posted about hsbc and comey too btw. Nice try shill. Gonna say I'm shilling for comey when you literally said Alefantis is a distraction LOL

DarkMath

"Alefantis is a distraction"

It boggles my mind you can't get your head around what a red-herring is. Do you at least acknowledge red-herrings exist? You can surely admit "throwing off the dogs" is one of the common ways criminals avoid detection.

DonKeyhote

A red herring has to be false you idiot. So he'd be an offering if anything. But you didn't say that you parrot the AJ line that it's bs.

DarkMath

"A red herring has to be false"

That's correct. Please let me know when James Alefantis is arrested. We can finish this up then.

In the meantime: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein.

DonKeyhote

Absence of evidence...

BTW my favorite Einstein quote is where he supposedly says mankind's greatest invention was compound interest, a perfect statement representing the KIKES you seek to protect

DarkMath

"perfect statement representing the KIKES you seek to protect"

And there it is. Of course you don't like my opinion. You're a Nazi! Here I was the whole time trying to figure out what the fuck your point is.

Bee tee dubs, good luck with the whole kill "The Jews(tm)" thing. Just curious, have you ever met an old school Nazi? You know, a German WWII vet. Someone who could fill you in on what it was like?

DonKeyhote

Not addressing points and smearing your opponent with guilt by association? Kinda seems like shill tactics. I'm guessing a German wwii vet would explain that jews created the most openly depraved society in memory, including pedophilia, in their great cities. Are you suggesting I have some fetish about returning to 1940s germany in the docs delorean? And a vet would dissuade me? That's a bizarre accusation. I think you might be a mental defective

PizzagateBot

Hi! I created the following archive link(s) for this voat submission:

OriginLink ArchiveOrg ArchiveIS WARCLinkSHA256
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1802482 archive.org link archive.is link 6373048755930c8a0de2a29c2d29e9e9f17f9ca39b1dd2ea31fd70a865a5b26f
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1jbkEczjbU archive.org link archive.is link N/A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UmtJ30Rl5o archive.org link archive.is link N/A

WARC files are created with https://webrecorder.io/
WARCs can be viewed offline with WARC replay tools like https://github.com/webrecorder/webrecorderplayer-electron
Final WARC will be created after 1 week from posting.
Let me know if you would like to see a !RemindMe function.

PizzagateBot

Hi! I used Google to find related Voat posts using the URL(s) in your post and created the following link(s):

OriginLinkFromCurrentPost RelatedPostTitle PostDate LinkOrigin
9UmtJ30Rl5o The Irish Slave Trade, The Forgotten Whites 4/17/2017 8809486