I wouldn't doubt these attempted bombings today are actually by a paid figure of the "deep state" trying to get the hounds off their trail.
I wouldn't doubt these attempted bombings today are actually by a paid figure of the "deep state" trying to get the hounds off their trail.
Absolutely! probably by Soros. It isn't a coincidence that the very first "package" arrived at his compound first. He wanted to portray himself as a victim of some plot, to win some sympathy, and he wanted to divert attention away from himself as the source of the mailings. So, he included himself, knowing most people, stupid people, would say, "No way! Soros is not behind this, he was targeted too!" Nope. Soros knew full well none of the packages would reach the "intended" targets.
But, I am so tired of the coverage. Move on! Damn FOX is dedicating 24/7 coverage to it. Same info over and over again.
Meanwhile, in real news...Midterms voting has started and already the dems have been caught cheating; the invasion is falling apart, half the slimy invaders have given up, taken their paycheck from Soros, and are headed home. Home? Back to Honduras, where just the other day it was so dangerous these people feared for their lives? And the stock market has backed up as investors take profits, and now sit on the cash waiting to see the results of the midterms.
Assassination attempts are a big deal.
While technically possible, I highly doubt it. Whoever did it is clearly deranged because it won't help their cause.
If it's a right winger, it already looks bad for them and plays into the narrative of violent extremists and Trump encouraging violence.
If it's a left winger ("false flag") and they catch the person it's another in a long list of hoax "hate" crimes and plays into the TDS narrative.
If the person is not caught before the election, I suppose there is some benefit to the democrats, but it's a steep price to pay.
It's amazing that none of the devices have actually gone off even accidentally. It will be interesting to find out more details if they ever release them.
Just like the black USAFA Cadet planting racist memos and letters around campus and then yelling racism this year.
Besides, the Clintons and the left always plan and plant lying crap like this for their own CYA purpose. And the FBI and CIA (even Russian's) methods used are similar (i.e..disinformation).
But we shall see as either way or side of this is sick!
There is absolutely nothing the Democrats won't do to try to regain control of the US House. Don't think for a minute that this bombing BS is somehow beneath what the DNC is capable of. The people in charge of the DNC are absolutely sick and they wouldn't hesitate to pull such a ruse if they thought it would help them win the midterm elections. Hopefully, we'll have actual competent FBI and ATF agents investigating this and we'll get to the bottom of it.
[QUOTE=Guisslapp;1713680]Have you gotten a call from them yet?[/QUOTE
It would do them no good. I have no idea where they could find you.
Two conspiracy theories....
1). Cesar Sayoc, the "mad bomber" worked at the same strip club in Florida as Stormy Daniels. That's a fact. Now, some are alleging it was because of that association Sayoc was recruited by the "creepy lawyer" and Soros and the Deep State to agree to be the "fall guy" in this fake bomb scheme.
2) "Whitey" Bulger was murdered in prison, and the killer had just been moved from an out-of-state prison to where Bulger was. Everything about the transfer was unusual, though not necessarily unprecedented. Both Bulger and the killer have (had) connections to Robert Mueller. Conspiracy theorists are claiming Bulger, in declining health, and age, was about to spill the beans on the FBI, and on Mueller, so he was murdered to silence him. Very Klinton-like!
As I said, these are your typical conspiracy theories, rooted in some truths, with some "poetic license" taken to connect the dots. Usually such claims do have a measure of truth to them. Given what we know about the Deep State, especially Soros, the "creepy lawyer," and Mueller, these theories are not only possible, but plausible. Doesn't make them true! just plausible.
Let's go get her and "lock her up". This isn't going away.
JUDGE ORDERS NEW REVIEW OF CLINTON EMAIL SCANDAL
Charges 'Deep State' with trying to 'hoodwink' his court
Published: 4 hours ago
A federal judge has issued a scathing decision that orders a new review of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private and unsecure email system for classified information while she was secretary of state.
The ruling from Judge Royce Lamberth comes in a case brought by Washington Watchdog Judicial Watch to obtain information regarding the terror attack on an U.S. outpost in Benghazi that left four Americans dead.
The ruling instructs the Departments of State and Justice to work with Judicial Watch on a proposed schedule for discovery into whether Clinton tried to evade the Freedom of Information Act.
It also must be determined whether the State Department acted in “bad faith.”
Calling Clinton’s use of that private email one of “the gravest modern offenses to government transparency,” the judge placed blamed on federal bureaucrats under President Obama, saying his State and Justice Departments “fell far short.”
“So far short that the court questions, even now, whether they are acting in good faith,” he said. “Did Hillary Clinton use her private email as secretary of state to thwart this lofty goal (Obama’s ‘transparency’)? Was the State Department’s attempt to settle this FOIA case in 2014 an effort to avoid searching – and disclosing the existence of – Clinton’s missing emails? And has State every adequately searched for the records in this case?”
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the “historic court ruling raises concerns about the Hillary Clinton email scandal and government corruption that millions of Americans share.”
MORE
Read more at https://www.wnd.com/2018/12/judge-or...RxDB8heLLkz.99
Comey doesn't take questions before closed-door interview
Former FBI Director James Comey sits down with House lawmakers to answer questions on the Clinton email investigation and alleged political bias within the agency; chief intelligence correspondent Catherine Herridge reports from Capitol Hill.
Former FBI Director James Comey’s lawyers have prevented him from answering a number of questions during Friday’s closed-door testimony before House lawmakers, according to a lawmaker in the room.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., told reporters that some lawmakers have been frustrated with the testimony so far and that Comey didn’t seem upset about being told by his lawyers that he doesn’t have to answer certain questions.
"One of the disappointments of this deposition so far has been the amount of times in which the FBI believes that Congress doesn’t have a right to know," Issa said.
Issa said Comey has two attorneys, including one from the DOJ, who have “instructed” the former FBI director not to answer “a great many questions that are clearly items at the core of our investigation.” Issa said the instructions have been followed with Comey’s “gleeful acceptance.”
"The Department of Justice is going to have to agree to allow him to come back and answer a great many questions that currently he is not answering," Issa said.
Comey, who may publicly speak at some point Friday, initially fought the committee’s subpoena to appear in court but finally forged an agreement to appear. The committee is expected to release a transcript of the interview, perhaps as early as Saturday.
"The details of what's going on in there will remain private until after the deposition," Issa said. "... [T]here is an amazing amount of things that reasonably the public will need to know that the Department of Justice and FBI attorney are guiding him not to answer."
He later told Fox News’ “Outnumbered Overtime” that the questions not being answered generally concerned the Hillary Clinton email probe, surveillance warrants and the anti-Trump dossier.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/law...y-gop-rep-says
You know, Comey wanted the hearings to be public. If the Republicans wouldn’t have blocked that we could actually judge for ourselves what is going on in the hearing rather than relying on a politician’s hearsay.