Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: butterdezillion

And the guy who very likely photographed Breitbart’s body for the coroner was the very guy who was killed under suspicious circumstances ...

***

We don’t know that the employee was killed. He died, but the cause and manner of death have not been established.

One thing to remember is that journalism these days is sloppy. Look at the reported cause of Mr. Breitbart’s death. Heart failure. My guess is the reporter saw those words on the report or heard the coroner mention them and just wrote down heart failure as the cause of death. Whatever...careless reporting incites all sorts of problems. A poor choice of words causes chaos. Is it deliberate? Maybe, maybe not. But when we rely on this sloppy reporting, it leads us to draw a number of erroneous conclusions. And we focus on a manufactured issue, while ignoring so many other, real issues.


114 posted on 04/29/2012 4:38:44 PM PDT by fatnotlazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]


To: fatnotlazy

The point remains: the person who may well have photographed Breitbart’s body died right at the point in time when the photos he took would be the only proof of assassination that would come out in the final autopsy results due out a week later.

The ER staff and cops say the death is suspicious. Speculation, sure, but that’s what they’re trained to identify and investigate.

There are a BUNCH of dots - facts - which when put all together form a pretty clear picture.

I’ve asked you for your explanation for some of those dots and you won’t give me one. For instance, why did Breitbart’s friends claim that he was hospitalized for 2 weeks after a heart attack within the last year when the coroner says he hadn’t seen a doctor in over a year and there were no prescription meds in his body? You’re riding us for making assumptions based on the facts we do have rather than waiting for more facts - but there is DISINFORMATION being put out there that also needs to be explained. Why the disinformation from people who are SUPPOSED to be more trustworthy because they have access to know the truth?

The disinformation is one dot. There are a lot more. And together they form a very clear picture.

Are you aware of the threats made to the media if they reported on the eligibility issue? Are you aware of the threats and the actual deaths (Bill Gwatney and Stephanie Tubbs) that were used to scare Bill and Hillary away from pursuing the eligibility issue? Are you aware of the media personnel who have quit their jobs or left the country because of the threats? Are you aware of Breitbart’s conversation with Arpaio less than 5 hours before he died? Are you aware of the bomb scare for Rush Limbaugh the same day as Arpaio’s presser? Are you aware of the killing of Osama bin Laden as soon as people began to realize his long-form was fake?

These are all dots that have to be accounted for. There are also more personal dots - stuff that I have seen which tell me what these people are like. If they keep tabs on piddly old me, I can only imagine how they have Breitbart monitored.


119 posted on 04/29/2012 5:12:26 PM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson