Posted on 09/29/2018 12:54:47 PM PDT by Drew68
1. I don't know Christine Blasey-Ford, but I do know what Democrat political operations look like when I see them.
2. I also know what Democrat "handlers" do when they are working their political instructions. In this case the visible handlers are: Debra Katz and Michael Bromwich.
3. The reason Ms. Ford's airline travel was an issue, was because Katz and Bromwich constructed that *false narrative* as a delay tactic.
4. Likely the socially awkward Ms. Ford was a useful tool by Katz Inc. on behalf of the Democrats and their media allies. This is how they roll.
5. Hence Ms. Ford has no idea who is the financier behind the entire operation; and all of her subsequent expenses. The script was written around her, with an intended purpose. Likely the first narrative was reliant on never actually appearing before congress.
6. The airport hotel lie-detector narrative, part of the constructed evidence through Katz inc. A familiar testing resource, only two questions, a carefully written script to follow etc. Purchased via legal counsel (Katz Inc.)
7. As the loose narrative became more evident it was going to end with a congressional appearance, Katz needed more specific support from a Capitol Hill legal insider. Enter Bromwich's contracted assistance.
8. Loose origination details lead to conflicts. During narrative engineering the most important part of creating falsehood is to avoid specificity.
9. Specific claims can be hazards because if they are refuted, the gig is up. So everything needs to be vague, ambiguous and easier to shape.
10. The narrative engineers cannot specify the *house* where the event took place, because that would lead to specific ownership trouble. If the owner of the residence refutes the false claim, the lie cannot advance. Hence, the "where" must be generally ambiguous.
11. The "when" can also be a problem. It would suck to give a specific "WHEN" only to find out the accused wasn't in town, or was elsewhere. Hence any specific "when" must be avoided to retain the false assertion.
12. As noted, the "who" in this narrative *had to* be a part of the story. But as with this story under scrutiny those four "who's" actually refuted the accusation and aligned with the accused. Thus the problem with specific "who's".
13. The use of a validating "counselor" or "therapist" is a common part of a false narrative. The reason is HIPPA protection. Regardless of what the accuser claims, the Dr. is bound to silence unless released.
14. Now we see more of the origination details falling apart
15. Keep pulling these threads, and there's likely to be many more aspects of the false narrative that will fall apart. [fear of flying, document origination and process issues]
16. One can easily imagine a person being exploited, who was promised their need to testify would likely be negligible, beginning to freak out as it appeared testimony was going to be required. Imagine the stress.
17. Which would explain the emails to the committee backing out.... trying to find an exit.... not realizing it was going to go THIS FAR. I would doubt strongly the "hacked work email" is even remotely accurate. Occam's Razor = Panic.
18. Under questioning, the Ms. Ford doesn't even know the committee volunteered to go to her, because the *handlers* (Katz Inc, then Bromwich) controlled everything. She was originally clueless to the airline travel excuse which needed to be constructed rapidly.
19. The handlers can't change history, the frequency of Ms. Ford's airline travel negated the original excuse; and needed to be shaped. Thus she needed to support the excuse in testimony, yet historic reality refutes it.
20. This is how modern Democrats roll. Fabrication and the false framework of accusation is their skillset. The lie only needs to hold up long enough to get them to the objective. [ex. Romney's taxes and Harry Reid]
21. The end justifies the means; any means. Nothing is out of bounds. This is how the modern political left operate now. Leaks, lies and intentional falsehoods. This is what Lindsey Graham was angry about during the Kavanaugh hearing.
They don't care.
/END
Preach it!~!!
https://gab.ai/RealJamesWoodsTweets
That's a fan account who reposts Woods' tweets on Gab. Not Woods himself
I said here are his tweets. I don’t care where they are coming from...him or fan.
And as I said, it is an alternative to the Liberal censoring Twitter universe. and as I said, conservatives who are getting banned are going to gab. Happy to provide list...Our own FR Matt Bracken is now on gab for example...and he is urging people to go to gab btw.
You are free to support Twitter.
I rather go to gab and not support Twitter any more than have to.
Please disregard my post...I see from your tag you are fully invested in Twitter.
Twitter is where the war is being fought.
Appreciate the repost, Drew. It’s very good.
Ok. I’m gonna sign up over there too. Thanks for the tip!
I am leaning towards this interpretation as well at the moment.
That is your view...and I get it. I have had a twitter account since summer 2009. I used to encourage folks to to there and tweet.
However, if everyone said screw Twitter and Facebook, etc. and went to gab or somewhere similar, places that don’t censor, suspend, ban, change search results likes, etc., then sites like Twitter, Facebook, etc. would either shrivel up or change their tyrannical policies.
Frankly those leading the charge, taking the bullets are going to end up on gab...
I used to encourage folks to go to twitter; however, twitter has changed over the years—they are now a tyrannical tool of the left.
I’m having trouble registering. Any user name I put in is telling me it is “invalid.”
Hmm. As a test, I just signed up another account.
Like you it did not like my user name...I just just added a couple numbers to the username beyond what I had initially typed, and it worked fine.
I figure if I can get the information there, I will—like this article was reposted there...
Of course they don’t have nearly the numbers of Twitter, but my hope is they will—and as I said in another post I have had Twitter for over 9 years, I just think Twitter has changed a lot since when I first joined and free speech was welcomed..
Also, Freeper Matt Bracken is there after a Twitter censor or ban.
Also like Helen, she has a face that launched a thousand Schiffs.
The irony is that these sites are screwing themselves.
Most people would be perfectly happy with terms of service that were kept simple: ban illegal activity, restrict porn to an adult section. Leave the rest alone.
But once all these platforms decided to get involved in social engineering (after blaming themselves for Hillary's loss) the sites just don't work the same. Functionality has beed affected and it's pissing people off. I hear people who aren't political complaining about it. The same posts in their feeds, friend's whose posts they never see, etc. "The site doesn't work like it used to." is a common refrain.
Their blind rage to everything Donald Trump is producing platform modifications that are driving regular people away.
And then stuff like pass coding James woods is just Jack Dorsey being a dick. He woke up one morning and said, "I'm going to block an Oscar-winning actor with 1.75 million followers because I can. I have that power. No other reason."
All the FBI would have to do is tell her ‘Handlers’ to sit down and shut up during the interview.
There is no reason for them to be permitted to coach her in the answers for every question.
bttt
Thank you. I’ll try again.
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.