The plans for Biden's treason...

[Raoul_Luke]

I must have missed the declaration of war.

You miss a lot. Where does it say it has to be a declared war? You guys were accusing Trump's team of being a bunch of traitors simply for talking to some Russians.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

got any examples?

Merrick Garland Has a List, and You’re Probably on It - WSJ

 

[Lance Freeman]

what you are posting is right outta yer ass.

A Hasbara should always have the last word, yes? Even if it is a negative parting shot---straight from the sewer.

The United States can never/will never be properly restored, folks, until the problem of the Israelite 'fifth column' in our country has been addressed.

 

[middleview]

Merrick Garland Has a List, and You’re Probably on It - WSJ

1 which has nothing at all to do with the patriot act.
2. If you threaten to kill members of a school board you should be on a list.

 

[middleview]

You miss a lot. Where does it say it has to be a declared war? You guys were accusing Trump's team of being a bunch of traitors simply for talking to some Russians.

"Simply talking"? At the same time the Russians were hacking election systems and releasing email from the DNC hoping to help Trump get elected? Then there all those social media ads that were pro-Trump. People did call Trump a traitor...but it wasn't for "simply talking".

Treason is the crime of attacking a state authority to which one owes allegiance.[1] This typically includes acts such as participating in a war against one's native country, attempting to overthrow its government, spying on its military, its diplomats, or its secret services for a hostile and foreign power, or attempting to kill its head of state. A person who commits treason is known in law as a traitor

I did not call Trump a traitor because that word has a specific meaning.

Trump was impeached twice. He actually did violate a law by putting a congressional appropriation on hold without notifying congress. He then obstructed the investigation. How can you possibly deny either?

His second impeachment was hindered by the republicans in the senate...but it is not debatable that his mob attempted to circumvent the constitutional process of completing the election in the hope of forcing a rejection of the electors from battleground states.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

"Simply talking"? At the same time the Russians were hacking election systems and releasing email from the DNC hoping to help Trump get elected? Then there all those social media ads that were pro-Trump. People did call Trump a traitor...but it wasn't for "simply talking".

Treason is the Crime of attacking a state authority to which one owes allegiance.[1] This typically includes acts such as participating in a war against one's native country, attempting to overthrow its government, spying on its military, its diplomats, or its secret services for a hostile and foreign power, or attempting to kill its head of state. A person who commits treason is known in law as a traitor

I did not call Trump a traitor because that word has a specific meaning.

Trump was impeached twice. He actually did violate a law by putting a congressional appropriation on hold without notifying congress. He then obstructed the investigation. How can you possibly deny either?

His second impeachment was hindered by the republicans in the senate...but it is not debatable that his mob attempted to circumvent the constitutional process of completing the election in the hope of forcing a rejection of the electors from battleground states.

LOL! You could be a CNN talking head you have the propaganda pratter so down pat.

Lets start with the hack of DNC emails - that was a Sussman operation. You know, the guy who's been indicted for lying to the FBI to push Hillary's fake "Russian collusion" sleazebag campaign character assassination, right? The guy who refused to let the FBI examine the DNC servers to verify this hack, and then there's this:

Over the course of the hearing, Henry grudgingly gave ground with answers such as these:

“Counsel just reminded me that, as it relates to the DNC, we have indicators that data [the DNC emails] was (sic) exfiltrated [taken by hackers off the server]. We did not have concrete evidence that data was (sic) exfiltrated from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated…. There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There’s circumstantial evidence … we didn’t have direct evidence. But we made a conclusion that data left the network.” (Emphasis added.)

Okay, there was no direct, concrete, or other proof that the emails were actually taken from the DNC computer. But what were these “indicators” that led CrowdStrike to conclude that the emails were hacked?

According to Henry, CrowdStrike found “indicators of [server] compromise, which are pieces of malware, et cetera.” He then explained that CrowdStrike’s investigative report states that the data [emails] were “staged for exfiltration” by the purported Russian hacker.

He added, “There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case, it appears that it (sic) was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left.” (Emphasis added.)

Got that? With no evidence that the emails were actually hacked, CrowdStrike nevertheless concluded that the Russians hacked the emails.

John Durham and the Amazing Disappearing DNC Hack | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics

So they took the fact that the Russians had hacked the DNC network, which they routinely do for their own espionage efforts, and not to interfere in US elections, and wove it into the Clinton campaign's (false) narrative that the "Russians" were "colluding" with the Trump campaign.

Someone stole those emails and gave them to Wikileaks, but there is no proof it was the Russians, yet here you are, for the gazillionth time, asserting it as if it is an accepted fact. It may well be "accepted" but I just proved (again) it is not a "fact."

 

[middleview]

You literally read all my crap. Must taste good at some level.


___________________________________________

In defense of natural law

www.baltimoresun.com

User Clip: Biden Natural Law

Biden's famous "you know and I know" quote on natural law during the Thomas Confirmation Hearings

www.c-span.org

------------------------------------------------
Too many c-span hours to peruse. Feel free.

Search | C-SPAN.org

www.c-span.org

______________________________

CQ Almanac Online Edition

library.cqpress.com

'Natural Law, An Elusive Tradition

For a time, the hearing on Clarence Thomas last week promised to provide a mini-course on the elusive concept of "natural law." But it never happened. In his opening statement, Sen.

www.newsweek.com

In New Doc, Clarence Thomas Revisits Joe Biden’s Questions During Confirmation Hearing

Filmmakers behind ‘Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words’ have struck a theatrical distribution deal for a Jan. 31 release, four days before the Iowa caucuses.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

When Joe Biden Tried To Paint Clarence Thomas as a Crazy Libertarian

The episode reflects poorly on Biden.

reason.com

User Clip: Biden and Clarence Thomas

Beginning of hearing

www.c-span.org

Justice Clarence Thomas rebukes Biden-led confirmation hearings in new film

Justice Clarence Thomas criticizes former Sen. Joe Biden's handling of the 1991 Supreme Court confirmation hearings that have been an issue in the 2020 campaign.

abcnews.go.com

Thomas Backs Off Abortion, Natural Law Statements : Court: Nominee supports privacy right but won't say whether it includes abortion. He rejects anti-abortion article that he once praised for applying natural law.

Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas opened his confirmation hearings Tuesday by backing away from his controversial past statements on abortion, natural law and economic rights, saying that they were merely the musings of a "part-time political theorist."

www.latimes.com

What, exactly, is your point about Biden's comment on Natural Law?

 

[middleview]

LOL! You could be a CNN talking head you have the propaganda pratter so down pat.

Lets start with the hack of DNC emails - that was a Sussman operation. You know, the guy who's been indicted for lying to the FBI to push Hillary's fake "Russian collusion" sleazebag campaign character assassination, right? The guy who refused to let the FBI examine the DNC servers to verify this hack, and then there's this:

Over the course of the hearing, Henry grudgingly gave ground with answers such as these:

“Counsel just reminded me that, as it relates to the DNC, we have indicators that data [the DNC emails] was (sic) exfiltrated [taken by hackers off the server]. We did not have concrete evidence that data was (sic) exfiltrated from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated…. There’s not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There’s circumstantial evidence … we didn’t have direct evidence. But we made a conclusion that data left the network.” (Emphasis added.)

Okay, there was no direct, concrete, or other proof that the emails were actually taken from the DNC computer. But what were these “indicators” that led CrowdStrike to conclude that the emails were hacked?

According to Henry, CrowdStrike found “indicators of [server] compromise, which are pieces of malware, et cetera.” He then explained that CrowdStrike’s investigative report states that the data [emails] were “staged for exfiltration” by the purported Russian hacker.

He added, “There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case, it appears that it (sic) was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left.” (Emphasis added.)

Got that? With no evidence that the emails were actually hacked, CrowdStrike nevertheless concluded that the Russians hacked the emails.

John Durham and the Amazing Disappearing DNC Hack | The American Spectator | USA News and Politics

So they took the fact that the Russians had hacked the DNC network, which they routinely do for their own espionage efforts, and not to interfere in US elections, and wove it into the Clinton campaign's (false) narrative that the "Russians" were "colluding" with the Trump campaign.

Someone stole those emails and gave them to Wikileaks, but there is no proof it was the Russians, yet here you are, for the gazillionth time, asserting it as if it is an accepted fact. It may well be "accepted" but I just proved (again) it is not a "fact."

Unreal...So Trump's own appointees to head up intel agencies agreed that the evidence was that Russia was behind the leak of DNC email. Putin says "it wasn't us" and your choice is believe Putin and Assange.

So from a technical standpoint I interpret "staged for exfiltration" as they found a .ZIP file or some other compressed file. What they don't have is a way to have seen that file being copied via FTP or some other means off of the server. That hardly means it wasn't. You'd have to be running a trace on that system to have caught it.

So the fact is that those emails were extracted from the email software and found their way to Wiki. Who stood to gain? Trump. Who would want to help Trump...Putin, for one.

Before Crowdstrike got involved the FBI had already informed the DNC that the Russians had hacked their network.

In his testimony in January on the cyber attacks, then-director of the FBI James Comey said the agency never got access to the machines themselves, but obtained access to the forensics from a review of the system performed by CrowdStrike, a third-party cybersecurity firm.

"We got the forensics from the pros that they hired which -- again, best practice is always to get access to the machines themselves, but this my folks tell me was an appropriate substitute," Comey said.

"The DNC coordinated with the FBI and federal intelligence agencies and provided everything they requested, including copies of DNC servers," Watson said. She added that the copy contains the same information as the physical server.

PolitiFact - Did John Podesta deny CIA and FBI access to DNC server, as Donald Trump claims?

In the midst of talks on the global economy, climate change and immigration at the Group of 20 summit in Germany, Presid

www.politifact.com

So the FBI had copies of the servers that had been hacked....there was no reason to actually have custody of the servers.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Unreal...So Trump's own appointees to head up intel agencies agreed that the evidence was that Russia was behind the leak of DNC email. Putin says "it wasn't us" and your choice is believe Putin and Assange.

So from a technical standpoint I interpret "staged for exfiltration" as they found a .ZIP file or some other compressed file. What they don't have is a way to have seen that file being copied via FTP or some other means off of the server. That hardly means it wasn't. You'd have to be running a trace on that system to have caught it.

So the fact is that those emails were extracted from the email software and found their way to Wiki. Who stood to gain? Trump. Who would want to help Trump...Putin, for one.

Before Crowdstrike got involved the FBI had already informed the DNC that the Russians had hacked their network.

In his testimony in January on the cyber attacks, then-director of the FBI James Comey said the agency never got access to the machines themselves, but obtained access to the forensics from a review of the system performed by CrowdStrike, a third-party cybersecurity firm.

"We got the forensics from the pros that they hired which -- again, best practice is always to get access to the machines themselves, but this my folks tell me was an appropriate substitute," Comey said.

"The DNC coordinated with the FBI and federal intelligence agencies and provided everything they requested, including copies of DNC servers," Watson said. She added that the copy contains the same information as the physical server.

PolitiFact - Did John Podesta deny CIA and FBI access to DNC server, as Donald Trump claims?

In the midst of talks on the global economy, climate change and immigration at the Group of 20 summit in Germany, Presid

www.politifact.com

So the FBI had copies of the servers that had been hacked....there was no reason to actually have custody of the servers.

Not if you have access to the NSA records of all internet traffic - you'd be able to see that file leaving the DNC network and going somewhere. The "intelligence" community, regardless of who puts the hacks in charge, is notorious for disseminating false information. If there is proof (and there apparently isn't) someone should produce it. The "intelligence" community, for all we know, got their "conclusion" from Crowdstrike.

LOL! You cite PolitiFact "debunking" that John Podesta denied the FBI access to the DNC servers, when, as a matter of fact, I never asserted that. This is par for your course, producing a debunked straw man and using it to declare victory. In fact the FBI did not have access:

In testimony before the Senate, FBI Director James Comey stated the following:

Question (by Senator Burr): Did the FBI request access to those devices [the servers and Podesta’s devices] to perform forensics on?

A: Yes, we did.

Q: And would that access have provided intelligence or information helpful to your investigation in possibly finding … including to the Intelligence Community Assessment?

A: Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server that’s involved. So, it’s the best evidence.


Q: Were you given access to do the forensics on those servers?

A: We were not. We were … a highly respected private company eventually got access and shared with us what they saw there.

​

Q: But is that typically the way the FBI would prefer to do the forensics or would your forensic unit rather see the servers and do the forensics themselves?

A: We always prefer to have access hands on ourselves, if that’s possible.

Q: Do you know why you were denied access to those servers?

A: I don’t know for sure. Um, I don’t know for sure.

Q: Was there one request or multiple requests?

A: Multiple requests at different levels and ultimately what was agreed to is that the private company would share with us what they saw.

So, instead of using a search warrant or some other legal process to perform a direct, hands on forensic examination of the DNC server, the FBI agreed to base its investigation on the findings of a private cybersecurity company. And, as discussed in the previous article, that company, CrowdStrike, was to do the investigation pursuant to its contract with Michael Sussmann of Perkins Coie, the law firm that represented Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Think about that. When presented with allegations of a devastating foreign cyber attack on one of the two major political parties, the FBI meekly agreed to allow CrowdStrike and Perkins Coie to do the forensic examination and, for all intents and purposes, run the investigation.

Sounds to me like the FBI did not get any copies and simply relied on Crowdstrike's "findings." If they had received the copies and did their own forensics, why would Comey say they agreed to accept what the "private company saw?"

Even if they did, would they have found the elusive "smoking gun" of Russian exfiltration of the email file? Obviously not, or they would have produced it.

So again, you hide behind the skirt of deep state obfuscation and suggest that whatever the spooks are telling us simply must be fact - no need for evidence. But then that, of course, is absurd.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

All 80 million of us are traitors?

You should give up on the copy machine bullshit. I've already told you how impossible that would be...but you still try to float that boat...

Yes, treason is treason...so who is the "Enemy" we are at war with that Biden has given aid to?

Treason is "the highest of all crimes"—defined as intentionally betraying one's allegiance by levying war against the government or giving aid or comfort to its enemies. (In re Charge to Grand Jury, 2 Curt.C.C. 630 (D. Mass. Cir. Ct. 1851).) It's the most serious offense one can commit against the government and punishable by imprisonment and death. Treason prosecutions are rare, with around 40 federal prosecutions (and even fewer convictions) in U.S. history.

https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/treason.htm

Dr. Trump Recommends a Globotomy

The enemy is the jealous non-White world and its decadent European appeasers. They control the United Nations, which has become a petting zoo for our own degenerate slumming multiculties such as Bi-den and his whole anti-American Party.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Your ancestors were globalist, you hypocrite.

The Statue of Liberty Faces One Continent and One Continent Only

Then why didn't our forefathers emigrate to some Port-a-Potty country, since Globubbies believe all races are the same, except for THOSE HORRIBLE WHITE PEOPLE?
Wanting to build up America instead of freeloading off it is a betrayal of Globulism.

 

[Spamature]

The Statue of Liberty Faces One Continent and One Continent Only

Then why didn't our forefathers emigrate to some Port-a-Potty country, since Globubbies believe all races are the same, except for THOSE HORRIBLE WHITE PEOPLE?
Wanting to build up America instead of freeloading off it is a betrayal of Globulism.

Which direction does she face?
The Statue of Liberty faces Southeast

Frequently Asked Questions About the Statue of Liberty - Statue Of Liberty National Monument (U.S. National Park Service)

www.nps.gov

Wouldn't South East be the Continent of African



They did emigrate.
To take the resources of people who didn't have guns.
To take the people as slaves who didn't have guns.
To force the entity called the corporation, the very symbol of America, on people around the world.

Globalist from the start.

 

[middleview]

Not if you have access to the NSA records of all internet traffic - you'd be able to see that file leaving the DNC network and going somewhere. The "intelligence" community, regardless of who puts the hacks in charge, is notorious for disseminating false information. If there is proof (and there apparently isn't) someone should produce it. The "intelligence" community, for all we know, got their "conclusion" from Crowdstrike.

LOL! You cite PolitiFact "debunking" that John Podesta denied the FBI access to the DNC servers, when, as a matter of fact, I never asserted that. This is par for your course, producing a debunked straw man and using it to declare victory. In fact the FBI did not have access:

In testimony before the Senate, FBI Director James Comey stated the following:

Question (by Senator Burr): Did the FBI request access to those devices [the servers and Podesta’s devices] to perform forensics on?

A: Yes, we did.

Q: And would that access have provided intelligence or information helpful to your investigation in possibly finding … including to the Intelligence Community Assessment?

A: Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server that’s involved. So, it’s the best evidence.


Q: Were you given access to do the forensics on those servers?

A: We were not. We were … a highly respected private company eventually got access and shared with us what they saw there.

​

Q: But is that typically the way the FBI would prefer to do the forensics or would your forensic unit rather see the servers and do the forensics themselves?

A: We always prefer to have access hands on ourselves, if that’s possible.

Q: Do you know why you were denied access to those servers?

A: I don’t know for sure. Um, I don’t know for sure.

Q: Was there one request or multiple requests?

A: Multiple requests at different levels and ultimately what was agreed to is that the private company would share with us what they saw.

So, instead of using a search warrant or some other legal process to perform a direct, hands on forensic examination of the DNC server, the FBI agreed to base its investigation on the findings of a private cybersecurity company. And, as discussed in the previous article, that company, CrowdStrike, was to do the investigation pursuant to its contract with Michael Sussmann of Perkins Coie, the law firm that represented Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Think about that. When presented with allegations of a devastating foreign cyber attack on one of the two major political parties, the FBI meekly agreed to allow CrowdStrike and Perkins Coie to do the forensic examination and, for all intents and purposes, run the investigation.

Sounds to me like the FBI did not get any copies and simply relied on Crowdstrike's "findings." If they had received the copies and did their own forensics, why would Comey say they agreed to accept what the "private company saw?"

Even if they did, would they have found the elusive "smoking gun" of Russian exfiltration of the email file? Obviously not, or they would have produced it.

So again, you hide behind the skirt of deep state obfuscation and suggest that whatever the spooks are telling us simply must be fact - no need for evidence. But then that, of course, is absurd.

I gave you a link that showed the FBI was given complete copies of the systems not because of the mention of Podesta.

"The DNC coordinated with the FBI and federal intelligence agencies and provided everything they requested, including copies of DNC servers," Watson said. She added that the copy contains the same information as the physical server.


Why in hell do you think the DNC would have to uninstall and replace their email servers for the FBI to investigate them.

What could the FBI have done with the servers that they couldn't do with the copies?

Do you have evidence of a contract between Crowdstrike and Perkins Coie? I'd bet not.

Where you came up with the idea that the NSA would be able to capture and store all data traffic on every system in the internet is beyond me. How in hell would a trace like that actually know what file was being transferred?

 

[Raoul_Luke]

I gave you a link that showed the FBI was given complete copies of the systems not because of the mention of Podesta.

"The DNC coordinated with the FBI and federal intelligence agencies and provided everything they requested, including copies of DNC servers," Watson said. She added that the copy contains the same information as the physical server.


Why in hell do you think the DNC would have to uninstall and replace their email servers for the FBI to investigate them.

What could the FBI have done with the servers that they couldn't do with the copies?

Do you have evidence of a contract between Crowdstrike and Perkins Coie? I'd bet not.

Where you came up with the idea that the NSA would be able to capture and store all data traffic on every system in the internet is beyond me. How in hell would a trace like that actually know what file was being transferred?

So if what Watson said was a fact, why didn't Comey state that in his testimony? Who would he say the agreed to rely on the findings of Crowdstrike? I think the clear answer is that Watson was with mistaken or lying.

To get to the bottom of who stole the emails? The DNC definitely had backups and could have been up and running in hours with new equipment. We don't know that the FBI had "copies." do we? If they did I would think Comey would, you know, know.

I already provided you with the evidence that the DNC contacted Sussman and Sussman hired Crowdstrike. It was a Sussman operation all the way. I think at this point (with as many times as I have proven you to be spouting false narratives) that you should have to produce the evidence that someone other than Sussman contracted with Crowdstrike.

 

[middleview]

So if what Watson said was a fact, why didn't Comey state that in his testimony? Who would he say the agreed to rely on the findings of Crowdstrike? I think the clear answer is that Watson was with mistaken or lying.

To get to the bottom of who stole the emails? The DNC definitely had backups and could have been up and running in hours with new equipment. We don't know that the FBI had "copies." do we? If they did I would think Comey would, you know, know.

I already provided you with the evidence that the DNC contacted Sussman and Sussman hired Crowdstrike. It was a Sussman operation all the way. I think at this point (with as many times as I have proven you to be spouting false narratives) that you should have to produce the evidence that someone other than Sussman contracted with Crowdstrike.

View attachment 66391

1. You have shown no evidence that the NSA captures all traffic on the internet nor that they'd be able to identify a zip'd file being copied from a DNC server.
2. You have not shown any evidence of a contract between Crowdstrike and anyone at Perkins.

The Senate report states on page 48:

“The Committee found that specific intelligence as well as open source assessments support the assessment that President Putin approved and directed aspects of this influence campaign.”

• Page 157 of the Senate report states that the Select Committee on Intelligence “conducted an extensive examination of the intelligence demonstrating Russia’s intrusions into DNC networks.“ Senator Richard Burr (R – North Carolina), who served as Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time the report was issued, confirmed this finding: “The Committee found no reason to dispute the Intelligence Community’s conclusions.”
• The Intelligence Community Assessment, published on January 6, 2017 also confirms that Russia was behind the DNC hack, stating on page 2 of the report: “In July 2015, Russian intelligence gained access to Democratic National Committee (DNC) networks and maintained that access until at least June 2016. This unclassified ODNI report was based on extensive classified intelligence collected by the CIA, NSA, and FBI; the ODNI determined the classified intelligence should not be released in order to protect the sensitive sources and methods by which it was collected.

 

[middleview]

We need some whistleblowers on Biden. Even if its just leakers. Anything that can be added to the treason charge would just be cherries. If the Secret Service watching Hunter cold just leave some hints with the NYPost.

and yet when we had a whistleblower drop a dime on Trump he was vilified by repoblicans and fired.

 

[God of War]

I must have missed the declaration of war.

China reportedly tested nuclear-capable hypersonic missile in August

China reportedly tested a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile in August that circled the globe before speeding towards its target.

nypost.com

 

[Raoul_Luke]

1. You have shown no evidence that the NSA captures all traffic on the internet nor that they'd be able to identify a zip'd file being copied from a DNC server.
2. You have not shown any evidence of a contract between Crowdstrike and anyone at Perkins.

The Senate report states on page 48:

“The Committee found that specific intelligence as well as open source assessments support the assessment that President Putin approved and directed aspects of this influence campaign.”

• Page 157 of the Senate report states that the Select Committee on Intelligence “conducted an extensive examination of the intelligence demonstrating Russia’s intrusions into DNC networks.“ Senator Richard Burr (R – North Carolina), who served as Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time the report was issued, confirmed this finding: “The Committee found no reason to dispute the Intelligence Community’s conclusions.”
• The Intelligence Community Assessment, published on January 6, 2017 also confirms that Russia was behind the DNC hack, stating on page 2 of the report: “In July 2015, Russian intelligence gained access to Democratic National Committee (DNC) networks and maintained that access until at least June 2016. This unclassified ODNI report was based on extensive classified intelligence collected by the CIA, NSA, and FBI; the ODNI determined the classified intelligence should not be released in order to protect the sensitive sources and methods by which it was collected.

Maybe you didn't notice, but neither of your cites actually proves the Russians, who everyone admits hacked the DNC network, took the emails and gave them to Wikileaks.

I already showed you the citation that Sussman was the person who hired Crowdstrike in another thread. It was just another one of my posts you never bothered to respond to. I'm not going to waste time reproving the same points to you repeatedly.

 

[God of War]

Maybe you didn't notice, but neither of your cites actually proves the Russians, who everyone admits hacked the DNC network, took the emails and gave them to Wikileaks.

I already showed you the citation that Sussman was the person who hired Crowdstrike in another thread. It was just another one of my posts you never bothered to respond to. I'm not going to waste time reproving the same points to you repeatedly.

My exact problem with MV in another life. A bloviator more interested in hearing himself I wonder sometimes. Gets you thinking you aren't expressing yourself well because he doesn't seem to get the point you're driving at. Maybe its purposeful.

 

[middleview]

Another lie and another provocation---
Lies and provocations: two words that define you and what you stand for. So, what else do you offer? You spend all your time on the forums, all day long it seems, provoking posters you do not like--and twisting everything they say--with garbage that makes no sense. Clearly, you are a plant, and you have an agenda.

So, what is your PJ biography in a nutshell? Here it is: Ten years ago (when I first ventured into PJ), you were outed as a 'Hasbara', an Israelite plant. Nothing has changed since.

So, what is the mission of a Hasbara on the public platforms? Well, his mission is quite simple: It is (1) to trip up any truth-teller who comes on to the platform, using deceptive language to trip him up and make him feel uncomfortable, (2) to promote the Globalist narrative, (3) to defend the media lies that keep Americans blind to what is really happening, and (4) to run interference for any Israelite inspired program in Washington, which most often involves wars for plunder and profit. And nowadays, of course---to defend the Biden tyranny, which is a Globalist-inspired conspiracy against the American people. That is it in a nutshell.

But, all that aside, I bet your bagels taste great. I hear that 'Hasbara Bagels' are the best-kept secret in Poughkeepsie.

and anti-semite defines you.