[greeneyes]

Me too. It made my eyes “bleed” after awhile.

[Cboldt]

I finally read the whole thing. The style was not entertaining to me, and it is an inefficient view of the author's version of events and players.

For the primary premise of the article, that Brennan was the architect of a frameup and Comey was a reluctant participant, the assertion that Guccifer 2.0 was in fact the source of DNC emails is not so important. Still, I find that (Guccifer 2.0) and other substantial assertions in the article to be probably false. There is no mention of Crowdstrike.

I don't see "conspriacy" as much as I see a terrorist-like operation, meaning control is decentralized but effects can converge into what looks like common action. Many, many players involved. Multiple independent conspiracies, and half of them still in play.

He also goes way too easy on the press, making that their complicity can be resolved by admitting they were duped.