Posted on 04/28/2012 4:47:19 PM PDT by rightjb
Steve Bannon Says Breitbart Will Not Have an Obama Bombshell | @PolitiJim's Rants for Reasonable People | http://bit.ly/JtyXFx
I have just spent two days at the True the Vote National Summit featuring James O’Keefe, Anita MonCrief, Christian Abrams, Pat Caddell, John Fund and many others. I wanted to rush two newsworthy items out before a much more thoughtful and comprehensive post tomorrow on the conference.
The final speaker was the Executive Chairman of Breitbart.com and Sarah Palin THE UNDEFEATED Producer Steve Bannon who broke a bombshell by saying:
Breitbart will not have a magic video that will change the election. It is going to be done at the grassroots level by ground troops (like True the Vote.)
Many have noted that Andrew Breitbart seemed to indicate at CPAC 2012 something much more profound and injurious to the Obama campaign when he said:
(Continued at: http://www.politijim.com/2012/04/breitbart-will-not-have-obama-bombshell.html)
In the New York Times? On CBS? How?
Sheriff Joe presser
He’s what 82? Too bad if he has a “heart attack” or sumpin.
Besides, his last presser got enough coverage to be totally invisible.
Oh wow, I didn't hear about that, thanks for the info!
your point ?
How convenient. Is that why they are scheduling the “war games” with Russia and China during May, about a week after the NATO summit in Chicago?
So, it tuns out the package was sent by a guy with a business opportunity for Rush?
If true, still sounds like piss poor judgment or maybe it just shows how far we've really sunk.
Sad either way.
IMHO sooner or later the MSM will not be able to avoid what Arpaio is making public. And again IMHO Arpaio and his posse have found evidence that backs up what people here have posited (what of course I have no idea other than my own thoughts) that will be so shockingly outrageous that it cannot escape the notice of various entities; including politicians, much of the general public - the ones not already hard leftists/drugged out etc - as well as more and more of the media.
Notice how even the MSM is admitting more of the truth of the Zimmerman/Martin issue. In fact it’s blowing up in their faces and will do so even more, I am sure, once more evidence is made public. So sooner or later the evidence be so clear and outrageous about who and what Zero really is and was, that even the MSM will have to say something about it. When their boy is going down, more and more rats will jump ship. They don’t want to wear orange, either.
Water washes away stone...
not sure what you mean
not sure what you mean
I'm sensing a pattern here...
July 20 ± one day.
Third option: It was a none-too-subtle warning.
I understand where you are coming from, and you may be very correct. I’m seeing this year as a huge game-changer no matter what happens and the little pieces I see fitting together in the big picture are extremely disturbing.
It’s frustrating to see some things positive and negative, and knowing that these issues are a HUGE chess game and that the strategy on both sides won’t likely be known until after it’s all over, leaves the little people (like me) on the edge of our seats.
I do as much as I can to give others within my personal “sphere of influence” the “little” pieces of truth I’ve gleaned, but their reaction is mostly to hide their heads in the sand - not sure if it’s out of fear, embarrassment, or desperate denial, but I’ve seen it even in my own family members.
Sitting back and waiting for the chips to all fall is a very uncomfortable position to be in - especially if you don’t know all of what those chips are, and afraid that even those in the know don’t see what’s coming up behind them!
I pray I’m wrong, but I feel this year is going to be a rough one, and it has nothing to do with the Mayans (unless you’re talking about some biker gang in the Sons of Anarchy show whose plot so closely mimics Fast & Furious).
[Could my post have been anymore vague-sounding? LOL My apologies if no-one can follow this post. There are so many little issues that it’s hard to combine them all to explain adequately my concerns (it’s not JUST Obama)]
what ?
An ee cummings lack of capital letters.
I drop my g’s too
Given the totality of events that day, it is most likely the correct one.
The strange desire to be a birther martyr? - First, I’m not trying to make him into a “birther martry”. Second, I reject your use of the term “birther” as I’m a CONSTITUTIONALIST. Third, with all of Brietbart’s contact with Sheriff Joe’s Investigative Posse do you not think it plausible that Brietbart was waiting for HARD, SOLID evidence before going out on that limb. ALL of us that have come forward thus far have been attacked on the issue mercilessly. I don’t think that ALL of those with a voice in the media have been silent precisely because they didn’t understand, or didn’t agree. I understand the motto; “Live to fight another day”. And, I understand the meaning of “getting all your ducks in a row”.
I had long been worried about a LOT of the so-called conservative media and their unwillingness to bring up the subject (some I still am worried about, but their actions and beliefs don’t determine mine).
I also believe I understand more now of what some people were saying - that his ineligibility is NOT enough, not because it’s not enough under our laws, but because we are playing a worldwide game of chess and the issue of Obama’s eligibility is just one part of the whole (it’s only one chess piece, and the ones in charge of the game see him as only a pawn).
Also, in case you haven’t noticed, it’s EXTREMELY hard to get ANY of Obama’s supporters to even LOOK at the evidence, much less look with an open mind. Hence, why the big picture is becoming more important (not that Obama’s ineligibility has become LESS important mind you).
Do I believe Obama is ineligible - no doubt in my mind that he is NOT who he says he is, and that nearly all of his “official” papers are forged, or tampered with, or *hidden* in some way, hence that Obama is NOT a lawful President of these United States. The thing I’m worried about now is that the Communist interests across the world are going to USE this crises to gain a foothold in the US and Obama is stupid enough to LET them thinking it will somehow protect HIM personally... (see upcoming “war games” with China and Russia - the plot of the Russian “game” is a lot like the original “red dawn”, except they’ve added Chinese destroyers and other Chinese military vessels to the game).
I don’t think we have enough TIME to ferret our way out of the eligibility issue at this point. Obama’s fake BC, Selective Service record, etc... is quickly becoming “small potatoes”, but I by no means dismiss it.
As for Brietbart, I would like to believe - seeing as he had met with Sheriff Joe who HAS hard evidence is that the eligibility issue was one of many Andrew was going to hit Obama over the head with this election season. Even if he DIDN’T believe the Communists/Socialist/Radical Islamist Troika had somehow tampered with records to make Obama *appear* eligible on the surface, Brietbart exposed SO MUCH of the OTHER issues we as a country are facing that I don’t think he’s someone to dismiss precisely BECAUSE he didn’t venture into the field of Obama’s eligibility. It could be because he knew others were covering it in-depth and he may have made the estimation that his time was better spent investigating the numerous other anomalies, and people around him. I don’t think we can read Andrew’s mind - especially now that he’s gone, nor can we guess what he believed while he was alive.
One more thing to consider - do you think, had he come out strong on the “birther” issue, that he would have opened or closed more doors to information on Obama? If most of Obama’s followers think that those of us concerned about eligibility are a bunch of loons (which we ARE NOT), but if they think we are, then are they even going to bother sitting down with someone who supports and talks about that theory? My point being - could he have gotten an interview with Ayers, etc... if he HAD been really outspoken on the eligibility, or was he able to fly a little closer to the radar precisely because he didn’t?
Like I mentioned - this is a HUGE chess game, and everything relating specifically to Obama would disappear were he to be gone, but the organization, the networks, the big picture are ALL still there whether we get rid of Obama or not.
[PS - New puppy HAS to go outside, so it will be a bit, and I haven’t had time to adequately edit/proof this post.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.