ChiGoose Posted October 25 Posted October 25 That sound you hear is Big Blitz moving the goal posts at the speed of light because he got caught falling for an obvious lie. 1 1
Big Blitz Posted October 25 Author Posted October 25 3 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: That sound you hear is Big Blitz moving the goal posts at the speed of light because he got caught falling for an obvious lie. The “outrageous” theory that Team Harris coordinated with her college buddy Dana Walden a top executive at Disney to go over debate topics and how she will never “get fact checked” during back and forth? That outrageous theory we saw play out live? Crazy. 2 1
ChiGoose Posted October 25 Posted October 25 8 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: The “outrageous” theory that Team Harris coordinated with her college buddy Dana Walden a top executive at Disney to go over debate topics and how she will never “get fact checked” during back and forth? That outrageous theory we saw play out live? Crazy. When I saw the claim that ABC had given questions to Harris before the debate, I thought it could be possible. It wouldn’t be the first time there were some shenanigans around debates. So I looked at the claims, I checked out the affidavit. I saw some comment about Disney Media Networks being defunct, so I looked into that and confirmed that it was disbanded years ago. At that point, I thought it was pretty clear that this was a hoax. So you have no evidence other than conjecture and your tacit acknowledgment that she performed well. Which is why you’re moving the goalposts away from the whistleblower story. But honestly, what question at the debate was not predictable? Where was the “gotcha” she needed to be prepared for that any campaign adviser wouldn’t have been able to predict and prepare for? 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 25 Posted October 25 11 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: When I saw the claim that ABC had given questions to Harris before the debate, I thought it could be possible. It wouldn’t be the first time there were some shenanigans around debates. Of course. That's all that needs to be said. 2
ChiGoose Posted October 25 Posted October 25 (edited) 10 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Of course. That's all that needs to be said. So you must agree with every claim about Trump, right? Who needs evidence when feels are all you require? Edited October 25 by ChiGoose
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 25 Posted October 25 51 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: So you must agree with every claim about Trump, right? Who needs evidence when feels are all you require? Oh gosh, no. I believe quite a bit of what we discuss here is fabricated and/or people/organizations leading us astray. I believe absolutely in the need for whistleblowers, anonymous sources deep within, and that a fair amount of pundits/media organizations use the veil of secrecy to mislead the public. I also think the FBI/DOJ/AG/court system is used at times to pursue political agendas, choose winners and losers, and that the law while often beautiful and pure can be quite ugly and cold. I’d think the odds of Harris getting questions in advance were 50/50. Maybe, maybe not. Don’t make this weird, I agree with you and just cut out the yip yap. 3
The Frankish Reich Posted October 28 Posted October 28 On 9/16/2024 at 5:00 AM, 4th&long said: Idiot maga. Hey Blitzy, any confirmation on the "death" of the "whistleblower" yet? It's been six weeks.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 28 Posted October 28 6 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said: Hey Blitzy, any confirmation on the "death" of the "whistleblower" yet? It's been six weeks. These things take time, Frank. We should know more by mid-November. 1
The Frankish Reich Posted October 28 Posted October 28 3 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: These things take time, Frank. We should know more by mid-November. I'm not holding my breath.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 28 Posted October 28 (edited) 23 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: I'm not holding my breath. "No one cares". -Frankish, usually, but not in certain cases Let's just agree that if there is a Whistleblower, our collective hope is that he/she is ok. Edited October 28 by leh-nerd skin-erd
The Frankish Reich Posted October 28 Posted October 28 1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: "No one cares". -Frankish, usually, but not in certain cases Let's just agree that if there is a Whistleblower, that he/she is ok. Yes, no one cares about this manufactured scandal. I am pointing out that it was obviously manufactured and that some suckers here bit on it. 2
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 28 Posted October 28 5 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Yes, no one cares about this manufactured scandal. I am pointing out that it was obviously manufactured and that some suckers here bit on it. We cannot say for sure that it was not not manufactured, or speak specifically about who bit on what. Paraphrasing the once alive Harry Reid, the seriousness of the charges warrants further investigation. The problem is that with the ever-growing list of potentially manufactured scandals and suckers of all political stripes biting like zombies on The Walking Dead, it takes time. Were you aware the GW Bush has yet to be brought to account for lying/manufacturing intel that lead us into a war that killed a million+? Were you aware his VP at the time now supports Kamala Harris, and how grateful she is for his endorsement? We've got a lot of ground yet to cover here, Francis. Let's stay the course. 1
The Frankish Reich Posted October 28 Posted October 28 Just now, leh-nerd skin-erd said: We cannot say for sure that it was not not manufactured The classic Trumpian response! "Many people are saying it's true, I don't know, but is it wrong to ask the question?" It came from a weirdo in Rochester who just made it up. Period. No confidential affidavit, no mysterious death of the affiant. All made up for consumption of fools who trust the alt media. 2
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 28 Posted October 28 22 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: The classic Trumpian response! "Many people are saying it's true, I don't know, but is it wrong to ask the question?" It came from a weirdo in Rochester who just made it up. Period. No confidential affidavit, no mysterious death of the affiant. All made up for consumption of fools who trust the alt media. The classic cut/copy/paste from the Harrassian left! Take what was said, mish mash it up, ignore the context of what was written...but most importantly, play dumb and imply this is something new in political circles. ThumbyChiGoose did that the other day, too. And...if it turns out that some gentleperson from Rochester (we don't say "weirdo" anymore, Frank, you probably missed the memo) misunderstood, incorrectly cited, or made it all up, well, let's try and look into the 'why' of all this. We'll be better for it collectively.
The Frankish Reich Posted October 28 Posted October 28 1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: The classic cut/copy/paste from the Harrassian left! Take what was said, mish mash it up, ignore the context of what was written...but most importantly, play dumb and imply this is something new in political circles. ThumbyChiGoose did that the other day, too. And...if it turns out that some gentleperson from Rochester (we don't say "weirdo" anymore, Frank, you probably missed the memo) misunderstood, incorrectly cited, or made it all up, well, let's try and look into the 'why' of all this. We'll be better for it collectively. Yes, we should definitely convene a congressional committee to investigate because SOME GUY POSTED SOME SHITE ON THE INTERNET
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 28 Posted October 28 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: Yes, we should definitely convene a congressional committee to investigate because SOME GUY POSTED SOME SHITE ON THE INTERNET I'm offering olive branches and you're making things up and lobbing hand grenades filled with schoolboy angst, wild rhetoric and pink baby powder. Someone is always making things up, Frank, including your preferred candidate(s). Some might say "especially" your preferred candidates. Sure, someone will believe the claims. Sure, some will not believe them. Most though will never even know about them. I've cited a couple examples here of much, much more brazen political misdirection by people in leadership positions and you're stomping around here complaining about some guy allegedly in Rochester like he's that guy who made the film that some said lead to the deaths of American citizens in Benghazi. Let's stay on track here. I do not support a congressional committee investigating anything on this whistleblower story at this time. We agree there. For now, let's keep bird-doggin this and see where it goes, but let's too keep the channels of communication open. This could be another Jussie Smollette story, or one following the path of young Nicholas Sandmann.
The Frankish Reich Posted October 28 Posted October 28 22 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: This could be another Jussie Smollette story, or one following the path of young Nicholas Sandmann. It’s not even a Jussie Smollette story. That fool actually filed a police report, which as we’ve seen at least exposes you to prosecution if it’s shown to be a sham. This “affidavit” has never even been seen. The “affiant” is anonymous. There is nothing to give it any air of credibility other than it being posted on Twitter.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 28 Posted October 28 11 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: It’s not even a Jussie Smollette story. That fool actually filed a police report, which as we’ve seen at least exposes you to prosecution if it’s shown to be a sham. This “affidavit” has never even been seen. The “affiant” is anonymous. There is nothing to give it any air of credibility other than it being posted on Twitter. If it’s anonymous, who discovered the alleged connection to the alleged guy in allegedly Rochester? Anyway, based on your analysis, it’s unlike Jussie Smollete “sham” because of the legalities of filing a police report—and more like the allegations by members of the Obama admin about the filmmaker? Or DNC allegations of hookers n’ urine? Statements obviously untrue, designed to influence simpletons, unethical but legal? I appreciate you ratcheting back the rhetoric a bit.
The Frankish Reich Posted October 28 Posted October 28 2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: If it’s anonymous, who discovered the alleged connection to the alleged guy in allegedly Rochester? The Rochester guy posted it on Twitter/X. How do we know that? Because some of that account's other posts included a photo of his screen with his email address visible. Yeah. Smart guy! Millions fell for it. Now that we know who he is, why don't you ask him where he got the info from?
The Frankish Reich Posted October 28 Posted October 28 https://www.wxxinews.org/local-news/2024-10-25/report-ties-former-rochester-real-estate-investor-to-black-insurrectionist-social-media-account The AP traced the account to Palmer based on posts made by Black Insurrectionist that included biographical details about living in upstate New York, a screenname and an email address. Those details cross-referenced with information available online that the AP tracked down with assistance from Gisela Pérez de Acha, an open source reporting specialist for the Human Rights Center at University of California, Berkley. A video posted in March by Black Insurrectionist shows a computer screen displaying the docket of Trump's election case in the Georgia. His initials "JP" are visible in an icon on the web browser's toolbar. And Palmer's email address can be seen in the corner of the screen, indicating that he used it to log into the state's online court system. The email address is linked to a phone number, according to opensource data provider Osint.Industries, that is listed for Palmer in New York court records. The same email is also linked to a Skype account with the username "jg palmrt," according to the opensource data provider Epieos. Palmer's middle initial is "G." Palmer also used similar iterations of the email address in the past, according to court records. Duped by a criminal with a history of drug abuse. Not even a clever one. One doing the dirty work of the campaign, that picked up on "Black [White] Insurrectionist's bs stories.
Recommended Posts