Trust The Plan YouTube Where We Go 1 We Go All Qanon is 100% coming from the Trump Administration. - 6 min YouTube President Trump This Video Will Get Donald Trump Elected (The Plan) - 6 min Table tang-soo et. al. Q Boot Camp Quickest way to learn the basics about Q. CLICK HERE to see the full table
https://www.breitbart.com/science/2019/08/18/pinkerton-why-buying-greenland-donald-trump-best-ideas/
Pinkerton: Why Buying Greenland Is One of Donald Trump’s Best Ideas
Needs the interior links
Assisted Suicide Avoidance – John Brennan Intel Asset Joseph Mifsud “Gave Audio Tape Deposition Before Going Into Hiding”…
According to an interview granted by the lawyer for intelligence asset Joseph Mifsud to journalist John Solomon, professor Mifsud admitted to being a western intelligence asset who was part of a CIA intelligence “operation” against candidate Donald Trump in March 2016.
Yes, stop and read that introductory paragraph again….
Solomon notes that an audio-taped deposition exists from Joseph Mifsud prior to going into hiding after the 2016 Presidential election. From the description it sounds like Mifsud anticipated his assisted suicide and recorded a deposition as leverage against his unwanted demise.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4fPWMloqRQ
What Solomon describes would align with the CIA purposefully leaking the details about Mifsud to the Washington Post on July 1st, 2019.
In the synergy between the U.S. intelligence apparatus and their media agents, the CIA, DOJ and State Department have specific outlets assigned to public relations.
A long-tracked pattern reflects the DOJ and FBI leak their needs to the New York Times. The preferred outlet for the U.S. State Department is CNN; and the Washington Post generally comes out first with leaks in defense of the CIA agenda.
This pattern has been remarkably consistent for years.
So against a backdrop of looming revelations about the intelligence community and their activity in the 2016 election; suddenly The Washington Post, seemingly out of nowhere, pushed an article intended to diffuse the issues around western intelligence asset Joseph Mifsud.
As we noted in July, we can reasonably assume something is happening in the background that has officials in the CIA worried about exposure and their image. From the WaPo introduction we can see what part of “spygate” the CIA is concerned about:
(Wa Po) […] The Maltese-born academichas not surfacedpublicly since that October 2017 interview, days after Trump campaign aide GeorgePapadopoulos pleaded guilty tolying to the FBI about details of theirinteractions. Among them, Papadopoulos told investigators, was an April 2016 meeting in which Mifsud alerted him that the Russians had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails.”
The conversation between Mifsud and Papadopoulos, eventually relayed by an Australian diplomat to U.S. government officials, was cited by special counsel Robert S. Mueller IIIas the event that set in motion the FBI probe into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.
With Attorney General William P. Barr’s review of the counterintelligence investigation underway,the origins of the inquiry itself are now in the spotlight — and with them, the role of Mifsud, a little-known figure. (more)
The entire WaPo article is fraught with highly manipulated narrative engineering intended to cloud the fact that clear evidence exists that Professor Mifsud’s engagement with George Papadopoulos was directed by some entity other than Mifsud.
It would be intellectually dishonest not to see some other purpose and intent beyond an academic wanting to build a relationship with some obscure policy staffer for the Trump campaign.
If he walks like a counterintelligence agent; acts like a counterintelligence agent; sounds like a counterintelligence agent; hangs out with other counterintelligence agents; has admitted to engagements on behalf of intelligence agencies; trained U.S. FBI agents in conducting counterintelligence operations and generally has a history of counterintelligence agent behavior, well, he ain’t just a Maltese professor.
Just sayin’.
So what’s up?
Why was the Washington Post trying to get out-front of Joseph Mifsud all of a sudden?
Likely it’s because someone in the background (Barr via Durham) is peeking at the connective tissue between John Brennan’s instructions in 2015 and 2016; and John Brennan’s “electronic communication’ results to the FBI in July 2016 that kicked off the counterintelligence operation against candidate Trump known as Crossfire Hurricane.
Additionally, there is clearly some recording of Papadopoulos and/or transcript of Papadopoulos engaging with CIA and FBI assets (spies) that Trey Gowdy has claimed to be “very exculpatory” toward any claim that Papadopoulos was doing anything wrong. Those transcripts are possibly part of the AG Barr’s declassification directive.
Remember, back in May Devin Nunes told AG Barr something was going on:
(Via Fox News) “He is the first person that we know of on earth that supposedly knows something about the Russians having Hillary’s emails,” Nunes, R-Calif., said on “Fox News @ Night.”
“He has since denied that but (Special Counsel Robert) Mueller in his report claimed that Mifsud – or insinuated that Mifsud – was some sort of Russian asset. We know that this is not the case. In fact, we know that he was in the U.S. Capitol… just steps away from an intelligence committee.”
[…] Nunes, a ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, told Fox News that the has sent letters this month to the CIA, FBI, NSA and the State Department asking for documents tied to Mifsud. He said all of the agencies except one – the FBI – have cooperated with his request.
He then made the leap, “The FBI is not cooperating, per usual, which means they’ve got something to hide.”
“It is impossible that Mifsud is a Russian asset,” Nunes added. “He is a former diplomat with the Malta government. He lived in Italy. He worked and taught FBI, trained FBI officials, and worked with FBI officials.” (read more – w/ video)
Whoops.
Someone at the CIA is nervous….
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/08/election_2020_its_the_crowds_stupid.html
Election 2020: It’s the Crowds, Stupid!
By Brian C. Joondeph
FTA:
The media only reluctantly reports strong economic news, being careful to not attribute any of it to President Trump. Instead they try to make the case, as NPR did, that today’s economic juggernaut is due to the last president, now over 2 ½ years out of office. Another of many examples of fake news and history revision, a staple of modern media.
Economic indicators are easy to measure but what may be equally or even more important in the 2020 election is voter enthusiasm. This is harder to quantify compared to unemployment numbers or the S&P 500 index.
One such measure is consumer confidence. Rasmussen, arguably the most accurate pollster in the 2016 election, noted this.
Thirty-nine percent (39%) of Likely U.S. Voters think the country is heading in the right direction, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey for the week ending August 8. By comparison, this number ran in the mid- to upper 20s for much of 2016, President Obama’s last full year in office.
On August 15, Rasmussen also reported, in their Daily Presidential Tracking Poll, that Trump’s total approval was at 46 percent, compared to Obama at 44 percent at the same point in their respective presidencies.
I suggest another metric to gauge voter enthusiasm, crowd size. As we are in campaign mode, all of the candidates are holding campaign rallies around the country. Trump was famous for holding massive rallies in 2016, several in one day, as election day drew near. In fact, on the day before the 2016 election, Trump held five rallies in five states, his last one running into the wee hours of election morning.
Meanwhile Mrs. Clinton was gulping chardonnay, picking out drapes for the Oval Office, and trying not to tumble to the ground in front of a camera. Her rallies, the few she held, were far less enthusiastic and much smaller in size. If one used the metric, “It’s the crowd, stupid” to predict the electoral outcome, the results would have been far more accurate than the myriad polls predicting a Clinton landslide.
...
Did Senator Elizabeth Warren really “pack a crowd” in New Hampshire? Despite the misleading banner, Drudge linked to an article with this headline, “Warren speaks to crowd of hundreds in Franconia.” She “spoke to a crowd of more than 700 voters,” according to the article.
How much more? Certainly, less than 800 or else the headline would have said she “spoke to a crowd of nearly 800 voters.” How did that crowd compare to another campaign rally in the same state on the next day?
Is Warren just another of the 20 desperate Democrats seeking the nomination? Hardly, as she is only one point behind front runner Joe Biden. Warren is not a bottom of the barrel candidate like Bill de Blasio who drew only 15 people to a recent campaign event in Iowa, with more media in his audience than voters.
This reinforces my correlation of crowd sizes and electoral popularity. Warren had 700 attendees and she’s the co-front runner. De Blasio is polling at zero percent and his “crowd” of 15 reflects as much.
Who else held a rally this week in New Hampshire? Another presidential candidate who drew over 11,000 voters to his rally, filling the auditorium to capacity. That’s 15 times the audience that Warren drew. As usual, many more showed up to see the president but couldn’t watch the rally in the actual venue, instead watching outside in the overflow space.
...
Rather than listen to the nay-sayers on cable news, use your own eyes. Look at crowd sizes and enthusiasm as a better metric than opinion polls which oversample Democrats, the same polls that predicted a Clinton landslide victory.
Despite CNN’s constant contention that “President Trump is on the ropes,” remember that “it’s the crowd, stupid.”
This thread has been slowing down to a crawl. Are we in festival?
