Michael Stuart Kelly Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 William, I see you keep trying, but it just ain't working. But here, let me give you a bone. 31 minutes ago, william.scherk said: We cannot get a straight answer out of Guy Two regarding The Truth of Pizzagate. I've given a straight answer several times. I'm honestly surprised you haven't understood my plain English. Let me give it another try with other words. I think the Pizzagate affair was a set-up gotcha (probably by Podesta & Co., but no one knows what the shadow knows) to divert attention from other pedophiles and pedophile cliques, and human trafficking in general, including Epstein & Co. The expression they like to use (at other times with other topics) is "sucking up the oxygen in the room." The set-up gotcha Pizzagate affair was engineered to suck all the oxygen out of the room, meaning there is no space left in the mainstream media to discuss those more widespread sinister things. And, I believe there was probably some serious monkey-business run through that Pizza parlor based on the guy's closeness to Podesta. But not like the setup gotcha was. Just normal hidden shit nobody finds out if the sleazy dudes are careful. These are not good people. That's my opinion and I'm fine if they don't like me, either. btw - I love the sound of: "The Truth of Pizzagate." It sounds like a book title by a preacher or recipe book or something. Also, nobody's talking about it, but I still think young children victimized (in the past, present or future) by pedophilia rings need to be protected. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 He's baaaaack... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) From Google+ Quote Feb 27, 12:46 PM Note from David- I got the word I would be attacked a lot this week. "Character assassination." Let them do it. Let them say whatever they want. I helped get the word out in time, and that changes history. Fake News corporate media, owned by the people who lost the election, does not represent truth or knowledge or wisdom. I just don't want to see it. I'm somewhere safe and will return to my usual media schedule next week sometime. It is tedious to reply to their made-up theories about me. They use the same playbook all the time- it's called Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals." I don't recommend you read it. It will lower your energy level; it's a book about manipulating people and breaking people, rather than healing through love and insight. But, of course, many in the political class are still operating out of that old paradigm where they need to break and harm us, bend us to their will. I opt out of that paradigm, as should each of you. Anyone with half a mind knows I did not go through what I went through over the last 4 months to promote an out of print Internet marketing textbook I wrote 9 years ago. Anyone with a half a heart knows I did not become one of the first US journalists to call out the ring's child trafficking in order to make money from a gold company's affiliate program. And anyone who is a friend knows I do not like George Soros. I've read his books, he has a legendary financial mind (or did until recently), and he has used his wealth and power to make our world less safe, less beautiful, and more fear-based. That's not acceptable. Ironically, some of the groups calling me a Soros shill are likely financed by him. Why do that? Well, it's in Rules for Radicals- these are not nice people. As for my YouTube, the videos have been deleted for legal reasons. I will be able to discuss this more next week, when I return to my regular public schedule. God bless you all and thank you for being people of great integrity, people who aren't swayed by the flicker of dishonest people on TV and dishonest bloggers at Buzzfeed and elsewhere. A new world is ahead. Not a new world order, as they intended. A free world. Special bonus for conspiracy freaks: Day 125 - Hillary's Henchmen, Tracking Your Assets, Part 2 Edited February 28, 2017 by william.scherk Connecting the dots ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 From the note from David Seaman which William quoted in the post next above: //Quote David Seaman// "George Soros [...] has a legendary financial mind (or did until recently)[.]" //end quote// What's meant by the past-tense comment in parentheses, does anyone know? Is Soros reported or rumored to be ill? Or to have made some bad financial decision? Or...? Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) Re George Soros with the 'until recently' legendary financial mind, Ellen -- I don't know just what David Seaman might be intending to signify. My best guess would be some bad financial decisions, as you suggest, but I don't know who keeps track of these things. The context for the Soros mention by Seaman is discoverable, and is covered in the video 'takedown' somewhere here at OL. The gist is that a bullion holding and management company -- GoldMoney -- was merged with a start-up called BitGold. BitGold is an interesting company, with some critics and some boosters. It allows its members to use a BitCoin-like proprietary software to accept and receive monies, backed by actual bullion, redeemable in bullion (in 10 gram cubes). BitGold also provides customers a personal (prepaid) gold-backed Mastercard. The Soros connection is that Alexander Soros (Soros Brothers Investment) is identified as one of the original principal investors in GoldMoney. I don't think David Seaman gets any referral commissions, since he never to my knowledge offers a referral code. Maybe he does so in his newsletter. Which you can buy a years worth with -- you guessed it -- BitGold. Edited February 28, 2017 by william.scherk Corrected the Soros reference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 On February 26, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: All I can do is stare in wonder. I just spent about 40 minutes watching this guy's [Nathan Stoltman's] video. I know I wasted my time, but I'm not irritated, much less mad. What on earth is it that makes me so fond of the crazies? Maybe that "the crazies" are interesting. I haven't watched the video and won't be watching it. As I've said, videos are hard on light-flicker-related problems with my left eye. But your question reminds me so much of: (1) An all-time favorite movie of mine - "They Might Be Giants." If you haven't seen that, please do see it. Be sure to get the uncut version. There was a truncated version made for VCR which left out a whole swatch from the middle. Here's IMBd's brief description: Quote In a Manhattan psychiatric hospital a man, convinced he is Sherlock Holmes, is treated by a female doctor who happens to be named Watson. Director: Anthony Harvey Writers: James Goldman (screenplay), James Goldman (play) Stars: George C. Scott, Joanne Woodward, Jack Gilford One line, among many lines, which I love is said fervently by a hospital nurse when the inmates are escaping to join "Sherlock" in confronting "Moriarty." "I hope the crazies win!" * (2) Something Jung said in his Memories, Dreams, Reflections: Jung recalls an asylum inmate - I think her name was Babette - whom Freud looked past with disdain, calling her an ugly old thing. Jung says that that aspect hadn't occurred to him, since (quoting from memory) "she had such lovely visions." Ellen * Edit: I think the actual line is, "I hope the loonies win!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 University academics at the University of Cambridge in 2014 (from The Telegraph): 'Paedophilia is natural and normal for males' How some university academics make the case for paedophiles at summer conferences Those are their own words. Did these guys go away just because they stopped talking in public? It seems to me that they are more likely to have good friends in the elitist ruling class than among the normal working schlubs. But, hey, that's England. Here in the US, we would never have anything like that in our academic environment, right? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted February 28, 2017 Share Posted February 28, 2017 (edited) This is cued up for a David Seaman explanation of what Pizzagate is all about. Just a little over a minute's worth. Apparently Pizzagate! is not about an actual satanic child sexual abuse torture cult at Comet Ping Pong. Pizzagate! is about John Podesta emails mentioning "pizza, hot-dogs and walnut sauce." Edited March 1, 2017 by william.scherk Inserted start and end codes, to get to the meat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 On 2/28/2017 at 2:50 AM, Ellen Stuttle said: (1) An all-time favorite movie of mine - "They Might Be Giants." If you haven't seen that, please do see it. Be sure to get the uncut version. There was a truncated version made for VCR which left out a whole swatch from the middle. Ellen, I've put it in my Amazon Prime queue. I'll be seeing it before too long. Thanks. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 King of Pizzagate! cuts short his vacay to give some interviews. Here he is cued up to give more details on the Pizza, Hot Dog and Walnut Sauce sex code "researchers believe" is found in the hacked Clinton campaign mails. And a little bit extra. Would be a great starting-point for a mini-seminar on Objectivist Epistemology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted March 4, 2017 Share Posted March 4, 2017 Is that Pizza enquiry going anywhere? Now that picture of George W. Bush in Michelle Obama’s arms, like he is her little boy or maybe her lover, is very disturbing. My license plate may start out “GWB” but I don’t given him license to join the “dark side.” Uh. Oops. I mean that in a “Star Wars” sense and not a skin color sense. It’s all Dubya’s fault, anyway. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 4, 2017 Share Posted March 4, 2017 8 hours ago, Peter said: Is that Pizza enquiry going anywhere? Peter, This is one of those things like Watergate was. Nobody believed it until they believed it. And then everything came crumbling down. Think like this. If you were a rich and powerful pedophile who owned (or whose friends owned) the major media in one way or another, how anxious would you be to see this story go anywhere? Now multiply this by thousands if not more. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 4, 2017 Share Posted March 4, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 4, 2017 Share Posted March 4, 2017 (edited) This is fairly stern if not harsh, in an Ayn Randian way: when she asks about your premises. "What are your sources?" ... Brian Stetler had 120 seconds to narrow down the guest list, and to put obvious questions to bed. "Our conspiracy theory President is at it again" says @brianstelter of Trump's wiretap claim https://t.co/FsDh3J63Ae https://t.co/TTTpqZcIPS — CNN (@CNN) March 4, 2017 1 hour ago, william.scherk said: 14 hours ago, Peter said: The leakers and destroyers are sponsored by Hillary, George Soros, Barack Obama, and “The Press,” among others. They are the leakers and the leaders of this criminal conspiracy. Mind if I take this over to the other thread devoted to Conspiracy Theories? Placeholder for the thought: "What Criminal Conspiracy?" -- there are some reassuring paragraphs in an Enemy of the American People organ today: Quote Kevin Lewis, a spokesman for Obama, aggressively pushed back against Trump's accusations. "A cardinal rule of the Obama Administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice," Lewis said in a statement. "As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false." [...] “No President can order a wiretap. Those restrictions were put in place to protect citizens from people like you,” tweeted Ben Rhodes, the former deputy national security adviser who’s working for Obama in his new office. Responding to Trump’s tweet that “I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!” Rhodes tweeted, “No. They couldn't. Only a liar could do that.” Exasperated and annoyed, Obama aides try to cast their problem with Trump continually pulling their old boss into the conversation as about more than politics. “My concern about Trump isn’t his day-to-day nonsense, it’s the notion that he could be governed by conspiracy theories and paranoia in a time of actual crisis,” said Bill Burton, former deputy White House press secretary for Obama. “All the rest of this is just the mutterings of a man deeply in over his head.” “No surprise he’s trying to change the subject, but this kind of diversionary maneuver works better in a campaign than in government when you have to deal in facts, and in this area, some very bad facts,” said Anita Dunn, who was a White House communications director for Obama. Asked in his pre-address interview on Fox & Friends about the protests going on at Republican lawmakers’ town halls, Trump said, “I think he is behind it.” Asked about the leaks of national security information, Trump said, “I think that President Obama is behind it because his people are certainly behind it.” There are elements of undeniable truth to Trump’s claims: Organizing for Action, the group formed out of Obama’s old campaign apparatus, is helping organize some of the protests, and some of the leaks appear to have been coming from people in career positions who served during the Obama administration. As has been made partially public, there was a massive intelligence investigation into the Trump’s campaigns possible ties to Russia, elements of which have continued to leak. And despite Obama’s efforts toward a smooth transition and so far holding to the presidential tradition of not criticizing his successor, he couldn’t have been clearer that he didn’t want Trump anywhere near the Oval Office. But even as Trump has lodged severe claims against his predecessor, the president has not offered evidence directly implicating Obama, who’s spending most of his days in his new Washington office setting up his foundation and preparing to write a book that he signed a multi-million dollar deal for this week. If there was a wiretap, after all, Trump now has the authority as president to make it public. Matt Miller, a former Justice Department spokesman under Attorney General Eric Holder, tweeted, “By confirming it publicly, Trump has also pretty much guaranteed no one can be charged for leaking the existence of this FISA warrant. Oops!” [...]The Twitter fury that Trump greeted the world with Saturday morning appears to have wormed its way from conservative radio host Mark Levin to White House chief strategist Steve Bannon’s former Breitbart News website to the president pecking out on his phone, “Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!” -- one stalwart of the 'just asking questions' brigades of The Enemy, Maggie Halberman, is making a case that there should be no surprises here. She figures President Trump gets up early, reads what website print-outs have been prepared for him, and lets off a few angry tweets if he gets riled. And that seems the most plausible to me. Which makes the 'source' of the information Mark Levin. The 'evidence' that President Obama personally ordered that Trump communications be subject to intercept? Murky. Murky in the sense of not yet explained. Which makes a current headline pretty interesting: The Media Reported On the Trump Tower Wiretaps, Why Don't We Believe Them Now? To cleanse the palate, the latest on Pizzagate, from fan favourite David Seaman: Edited March 4, 2017 by william.scherk Stern, harsh, nasty. True? It's all about context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 4, 2017 Share Posted March 4, 2017 35 minutes ago, william.scherk said: To cleanse the palate, the latest on Pizzagate, from fan favourite David Seaman: William, I'm so glad you mentioned David. That Pizzagate video you posted is short and to the point. People can look at some of Podesta's emails and come to their own conclusions without wasting a lot of time or wading through a lot of blah blah blah. Moving on, here's what David's got to say about the then President Obama wiretapping the incoming President Trump. I especially like the short-short below he recorded as an afterthought. He wonders if Obama gave Hillary Clinton any information gleaned from an official US wiretap to help her along in her campaign, seeing how this would have been illegal and all... Some people may think David Seaman is nuts, but I love his tenacity. He reminds me of a honey badger. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted March 4, 2017 Share Posted March 4, 2017 4 hours ago, william.scherk said: The evidence' that President Obama personally ordered that Trump communications be subject to intercept? Murky. Murky in the sense of not yet explained. Which makes a current headline pretty interesting: The Media Reported On the Trump Tower Wiretaps, Why Don't We Believe Them Now? Excerpts from The Media Reported On the Trump Tower Wiretaps, Why Don't We Believe Them Now? Source RedState, Posted at 12:30 pm on March 4, 2017 by streiff Quote Let’s look at the wiretap story. Many [...] think the source is thinly sourced. It is. But it has exactly the same quality of sourcing as every story about Trump and Russia. If you believe the stories in the Post and Times you have zero reason to disbelieve the wiretap story other than the obvious one: you like one story and don’t like the other. [....] That the Obama administration asked for FISA warrants on Trump and some of his campaign advisers seems beyond question. [....] The interesting thing here is that the media reports of wiretaps have been out there for a while. The were circulated at the same time the BuzzFeed “dossier” on Trump was released as a way of bolstering the credibility of that document. They were intended to demonstrate that Trump had been under surveillance by intelligence agencies and therefore we should believe the dossier. Now that Trump has pointed out the flip side, that is, the administration using the national security apparatus of the United States to monitor a political opponent, a lot of people are having a cow. It seems virtually certain that FISA warrants were requested. The only thing we really don’t know is whether the warrants were granted. Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said: Excerpts from The Media Reported On the Trump Tower Wiretaps, Why Don't We Believe Them Now? Source RedState, Posted at 12:30 pm on March 4, 2017 by streiff Suppose it's true that FISA requests were granted, a ThinkProgress article asks: Quote Trump claims he was wiretapped. If he’s right, it could be his undoing. It would suggest a FISA court found probable cause linking his campaign to Russian officials. Add (meant to say earlier): Don't they wish? Ellen Edited March 5, 2017 by Ellen Stuttle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 (edited) Trump adviser Carter Page changes story, now says Trump, despite denial, ordered Ukraine change at RNC after Sessions met w Kislyak there! — Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) March 4, 2017 White House is really seeking access to DoJ warrants? This would be interference with an ongoing investigation https://t.co/YnMITxdO4T pic.twitter.com/OOvYKeEDOv — Justin Miller (@justinjm1) March 4, 2017 @justinjm1 -- So, let's Trump and the Attorney-General and the White House Counsel meet over a long, long, long dinner. — William Scott Scherk (@wsscherk) March 5, 2017 @justinjm1 -- "Yes sir, I will have another glass of Trump water, but I must recuse myself from this conversation, otherwise." Wink Wink. — William Scott Scherk (@wsscherk) March 5, 2017 "Find out what they were doing to me." "Well, I can't quite do that, Sir. I have recused myself, you see." "Oh, I see. And what does my White House counsel say?" "Sir, Mr Sessions has recused himself from the investigation. He cannot go digging down into the investigation for dirt on Obama. That's now how recusal works." "So, can't you as my Counsel demand the warrant, see what it says, make it public?" "Um, Sir, for that, I have to turn that over to the Attorney-General." "Um, yeah, look, I can't really say anything here, you understand. But I am going to teach you boys a thing called Knee-knocking. It's a code. Now, gather close. One knee knock like this means yes, and two mean no. Got it?" "Got it." "Got it." Wink wink, and wink again. Edited March 5, 2017 by william.scherk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaalChatzaf Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 This is all bullshit. There is not enough admissible evidence to get a conviction under the Logan Act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 I've been looking around at the news today in general. It's happening exactly as it's supposed to be happening. Obama's moral character is taking a huge hit. Also, more and more reporters are becoming legitimately interested in digging (instead of just repeating or rewriting the churn). Imagine what they are going to come up with. For instance, one of the more interesting things already is that Obama's staff spread around a lots and lots of classified stuff about Russians to people who were not properly cleared for it right before he left office. At any rate, the news all weekend is going to be talking about nothing else except wiretapping and whether Obama did it or not. I guarantee that's not a mainstream media story he wanted framed like that. Every time I think I have President Trump's persuasion skills all figured out, he hits the mainstream with another masterclass and I get to learn even more. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 On 1/20/2017 at 10:12 PM, Backlighting said: Obama will go back to what he does best...that of a community agitator. --J Not in Chicago. --Brant just found this unposted post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 Why this urge to be so current when most of what is being talked about will soon float downstream to deserved oblivion? --Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 4 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said: Add (meant to say earlier): Don't they wish? Ellen, My, my, my... Don't they wish indeed.? Check this out: If this is accurate, and it seems like it is since the people on Fox being interviewed are speaking with such certainty, here's what happened. People in the Obama administration requested the FISA court for a warrant to wiretap Trump tower. It was denied for the case being so flimsy. In October, they went back and asked for a warrant again, this time to check some specific monetary ties to Russia or something like that. This warrant was granted, but the period expired and the evidence turned up nothing. Now get this: It seems like the Obama people did not turn the wiretap off. They kept it running all throughout the rest of the campaign. If they did this, there is no excuse I can see. It's illegal pure and simple. And it's all on public record, so the perpetrators can be picked off at leisure like shooting fish in a barrel. Bill Still hints there is even a lot more yet to come. For Trump supporters, as the saying goes, it looks like it's time to stand on the beach on a hot day in front of a big wave and prepare to get wet. Let's see where this goes. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 Stephen Molyneaux corroborates this same info with a lot more facts. And it's not looking good for Obama and his people. This video is quite informative if you can take Molyneaux's overly-zealous out-gotcha the gotcha warriors tone. I watched it and, information-wise, I'm glad I did. But I swear, Molyneaux's delivery was like running my finger tips through a box of two-sided razor blades while trying to do a hard math puzzle in my mind as a fire truck with full alarm blasting was stuck in traffic right outside my window. At the end I was frazzled and disoriented. Have you ever seen a wet dog shake himself off? He does it with his entire soul and body and the water flies everywhere. I had to do that mentally about 15 times before I started feeling normal again. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 Current thoughts of America's Pizzagate King and fledgling constitutional expert ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now