To the general public I will say this. Congress knows Obama is not eligible but until they have a law enforcement entity tell them that directly they have plausible deniability. That is why Zullo is having trouble getting the actual members of Congress to hear his evidence, and why they will throw away even law enforcement communications that are from non-constituents.
If/when the witnesses go to the foreign press and have the story reported, like Edward Snowden did, plausible deniability will go out the window. So there is a threat to Obama’s lawless regime IF the witnesses go to the foreign press.
The idea of offing witnesses is not a bizarre suggestion at all, and anybody who claims that as the reason to think that I or anybody else is a kook isn’t even TRYING to be genuine. The idea of offing somebody to intimidate others into silence is also not bizarre. It’s fairly routine in criminal circles.
I doubt that anybody expects Fuddy to go to the foreign press, but there are other witnesses who have resisted Fuddy, and if they end up being patriots like Snowden seems to have been (IMHO), then there IS a risk to Obama’s illegal, lawless regime. Offing Fuddy is one way they could try to intimidate those other witnesses.
Or it could just be a plane accident. We’ll probably never know. Given the already-known crimes and cover-ups of this regime and the rubber-stamp, whitewashing “official investigations” they’ve been caught at already, it is not unreasonable to wonder what really happened, and to expect that we’ll never know for sure.
It’s the people who suggest that only a “kook” would wonder who stand out as unreasonable. And when those people pose as conservatives but claim they know nothing about the Benghazi cover-up, that familiar troll scent becomes obvious.
Congress knows Obama is not eligible but until they have a law enforcement entity tell them that directly they have plausible deniability.
So is the MCSO not a "law enforcement entity?" Haven't they and their "Posse" been clamoring to Congress about that for a long time now? Again, your claim and reality don't mesh very well.
That is why Zullo is having trouble getting the actual members of Congress to hear his evidence, and why they will throw away even law enforcement communications that are from non-constituents.
And why would any other law enforcement agency fare any better? Neither the law enforcement agencies nor Congress seems the least bit inclined to delve into this. And yet, under your theory, Loretta Fuddy was suddenly scared she was going to be prosecuted for her part in the 'scheme' (by one or more of these apathetic law enforcement agencies) and so started making agitating noises that caused her to be targeted and killed.
You're theory makes no sense.
If/when the witnesses go to the foreign press . . .
The Birther claims have been circulating for over 5 years, and two Presidential elections have come and gone. Why would these witnesses go now to the foreign press? It must be because of the lack of anyone looking to prosecute them for their involvement, right? That tell-tale "I'm not under scrutiny by law enforcement or the Congress, so I'd better act now" impulse that makes it so urgent?
and have the story reported, like Edward Snowden did, plausible deniability will go out the window.
Your comparison to Snowden is flawed because the surveillance program entailed substantial links to foreign agencies. The international press had an immediate interest. Where or when a U.S. President was born, insofar as that bears on some domestic law issue, isn't really of much concern to a foreign audience.
The idea of offing witnesses is not a bizarre suggestion at all,
Of course not. The Mafia and others have done it for years. But there the prosecution was imminent. Your idea becomes bizarre when posited in a situation (like with Fuddy) where there not the least hint that the 'witnesses' are under any sort of legal scrutiny nor any hint they are in the precipice of talking to the press.
I doubt that anybody expects Fuddy to go to the foreign press, . .
Yet, a moment ago, you were making the comparison to Snowden and posited that the possibility that she COULD have done that is the explanation for why she got assassinated. You've just undermined your own theory.
but there are other witnesses who have resisted Fuddy, and if they end up being patriots like Snowden seems to have been (IMHO), then there IS a risk to Obama’s illegal, lawless regime.
Offing Fuddy is one way they could try to intimidate those other witnesses.
You'd think the Regime would simply "off" one of the recalcitrants, rather than take out one of their own. With Fuddy out of their way, these other witnesses now have a bit more freedom to act without her keeping them in check, right? (Honestly, your thinking gets so backwards and inside-out that it defies reply).
Or it could just be a plane accident.
Your conspiratorial starting point being shown now to make no sense, it's time to consider that option more seriously.
Brietbart's death was the loudest and set the tone for how things would be. As such, Snowden is still in my "Patriot" column and, until I know the "rest of the story", my first impression is that he's a rather brave fellow.
Thanks again for the education and hats off to you once again for carrying the cross, so to speak, and becoming a target for doing so!