Ik weet niet of je conclusies juist zijn, maar als je vindt dat Redpill informatie verdraait, of zelfs liegt, kun je dat dan aantonen aan de hand van voorbeelden?quote:Op maandag 30 april 2018 15:58 schreef Chewie het volgende:
Ach het is een beetje jammer dat alles wat redpill schrijft/google translate domweg leugens zijn en dat er geen touw aan vast te knopen is (wat uiteraard een beproefde methode is bij dit soort complotten)
Het is ook wel bijzonder dat redpill of de originele schrijver bronnen als Huffingtonpost nogal verknipt zodat het in het cabal plaatje lijkt te passen (je komt er pas achter dat het niet zo is als je het artikel waar de knipseltjes uitkomen gaat lezen) en bronnen die er precies zo over lijken te denken als redpill zoals de moonies krant the Washington Times wel correct geplaatst worden.
Dan lijkt me er toch een duidelijk politiek motief achter de hersenspinsels van redpill (of de echte schrijver) te zitten en zo te merken is dat een niet echt heel fris motief.
quote:Fifteen Things To Know About ‘Pakistani Mystery Man’ Imran Awan
The “Pakistani Mystery Man” is Imran Awan, who worked as Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s email server administrator in the House of Representatives. Nearly his entire family then joined the payroll of other Democrats, until they worked for 1 in 5 House Democrats and had — as the House inspector general called it — the ‘keys to the kingdom‘ and ability to access any file.
1. Imran worked for Debbie Wasserman Schultz since 2004 and had the passwords to her devices
A search of his name on WikiLeaks shows the DNC summoned Imran when they needed her device unlocked.
2. During the 2016 election, the House’s Office of Inspector General warned that Imran and his family were making “unauthorized access” to data
A September 30, 2016, presentation alleged Imran Awan and his family members were logging into the servers of members who had previously fired him, funneling data off the network, and that evidence “suggests steps are being taken to conceal their activity.”
The Awan group’s behavior mirrored a “classic method for insiders to exfiltrate data from an organization,” the briefing materials allege. The presentation especially found problems on one server: that of the House Democratic Caucus, an entity similar to the DNC that was chaired at the time by then-Rep. Xavier Becerra.
3. The Awan group was left on the House computer network until February 2, 2017 — days after Donald Trump’s inauguration
Police then banned the Awan group from the network. The Committee on House Administration put out a statement saying “House Officials became aware of suspicious activity and alleged theft committed by certain House IT support staff.” Since then, no official body has ever publicly provided any information about the case. But the IG report, obtained by TheDCNF, shows that theft was not the primary issue being warned about.
4. Shortly after the IG report came out in September 2016, the Caucus server — identified as prime evidence in the cybersecurity case — physically disappeared
Authorities took the disappearance as evidence tampering, they said. Becerra said he won’t discuss the incident because of an ongoing criminal investigation.
5. Wasserman Schultz declined to fire Imran despite knowing he was suspected of cyber-security violations, even though she had just lost her job as DNC chair after its anemic handling of its data breach
Her office claimed Imran could work on “websites and printers” without accessing the network. Watchdog group FACT has filed an ethics complaint saying this was impossible, and a cybersecurity publication called the judgment negligent.
6. After Imran was banned from the network, he left a laptop with the username RepDWS in a phone booth
Along with a letter to prosecutors and a copy of his ID. Capitol Police found the laptop at midnight and seized it because they recognized Imran as a criminal suspect. Wasserman Schultz still didn’t fire Imran. Instead, she threatened Capitol Police Chief Matthew R. Verderosa with “consequences” if he didn’t give it back, implying it was “a member’s laptop.” The police chief refused.
She hired a lawyer to block prosecutors from examining the laptop, then later said, “This was not my laptop. I have never seen that laptop.” Imran’s lawyer then said he “very strongly” believes the laptop cannot be examined because of “attorney-client privilege.” Imran left a note with that phrase near the backpack.
7. The FBI began surveiling the family but let Imran’s wife, Hina Alvi, leave the country
She flew to Pakistan with cardboard boxes of possessions, FBI agents said in an affidavit. They approached her at the airport, but she refused to talk to them. They found $12,000 in cash but let her board anyway, writing they do “not believe that Alvi has any intention to return to the United States.”
8. Prosecutors arrested Imran at the airport after he began liquidating assets
Imran and his wife had wired $300,000 to Pakistan after allegedly both cashing out a federal retirement account and taking a second mortgage under allegedly false pretenses. The FBI arrested Imran at the airport, and he was charged with bank fraud. Democrats have claimed the case is therefore about bank fraud, but prosecutors imply in court papers the bank fraud occurred because The Awans learned they were under investigation for other activities. “Based on the suspicious timing of that transaction, Awan and Alvi likely knew they were under investigation at that time,” prosecutors wrote of the money moves.
Imran’s lawyer is a former aide to Bill and Hillary Clinton, and Wasserman Schultz’s brother is an attorney at the same prosecutor’s office that is handling the case, the US Attorney for the District of Columbia.
9. A former business partner of Imran’s father says the father handed over USBs of data to a Pakistani official and that Imran claimed he power to ‘change the US president’
The FBI never interviewed the business partner. TheDCNF traveled in Pakistan where numerous locals alleged that Imran traveled that country with an entourage of Pakistani government agents, and routinely boasted about mysterious political influence.
10. Nearly Imran’s entire family was on the House payroll at high salaries, despite most of them having no training in IT — Democrats failed to vet them
All 44 of their House employers exempted them from background checks despite the House policy encouraging checks.
Among the red flags in Imran’s brother’s Abid’s background were a $1.1 million bankruptcy; six lawsuits against him or a company he owned; and at least three misdemeanor convictions.
11. House Dems Hired A Fired McDonald’s Worker As E-mail Administrator
Rao Abbas was added to Reps. Emanuel Cleaver and Ted Deutch’s payroll shortly after court paperwork showed Abid owed him money.
12. Money from an Iraqi political figure
Imran and Abid operated a car dealership referred to as CIA that took $100,000 from an Iraqi government official who is a fugitive from U.S. authorities, according to a business partner’s testimony in a civil lawsuit.
After Imran was banned from the House network, an email address that belonged to him, [email protected], appeared to still be active and invoked the name of a “national security and foreign affairs” specialist for Rep. Andre Carson, an intelligence committee member.
13. The cybersecurity investigation started after allegedly falsified invoices caught administrators’ attention, and the Awans’ lawyers blamed members
No one has been charged for “unauthorized access” or falsified invoices, and Imran’s court date has been postponed five times. It is now scheduled for May 4, 2018.
14. The Awans’ relatives, colleagues and tenants say they would ‘do anything for money’
Their own stepmother alleges they wiretapped, extorted her and held her captive.
15. Imran’s own wife, Hina Alvi, filed a lawsuit in Pakistan in September 2017 alleging he controlled Hina with violent threats
Wasserman Schultz said police might be Islamophobic, but Imran was the subject of repeated calls to police by multiple Muslim women.
Jij kunt er chocola van maken? Werkelijk?quote:
Niet van alles moet ik eerlijk zeggen. Maar ik vind het wel fijn leesvoer en echt iets voor BNW.quote:Op maandag 30 april 2018 20:06 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Jij kunt er chocola van maken? Werkelijk?
Wat de Reddit-users doen van wie TS deze informatie jat, is met hagel schieten om verwarring te zaaien. Gewoon zoveel mogelijk lappen tekst met allerlei gezochte dwarsverbanden in elkaar steken, zodat het lijkt alsof het een plausibel geheel is. Allemaal bedoeld om de aandacht af te leiden van het onderzoek naar de Trump-campagne.
Is jullie niet opgevallen dat TS al verschillende keren heeft geroepen dat er schokkende onthullingen zitten aan te komen en de DNC nu echt de lul is.
Geen van die voorspellingen is uitgekomen. Intussen worden Trump en zijn entourage wel steeds verder in het nauw gedreven door Mueller.
Het is inderdaad uiterst geschikt voor BNW. Goed punt.quote:
Deze post bijvoorbeeld, hierin plakt redpill een screenprintje bij van een artikel van huffingtonpost, nu lijkt dat screenprintje (wat gewoon van reddit afkomstig blijkt te zijn) prima te passen in zijn verhaaltje maar lees je het hele artikel door dan lijkt het toch iets anders te liggen.quote:
Gelet op de naam durf ik de voorspelling wel aan: Trumpsoldier is een gevalletje RWA. dellipder en andere FOK!iaanse Trump fan boys kun je ook in die categorie scharen. Wat is een RWA? Leesvoer: http://theauthoritarians.org/Downloads/TheAuthoritarians.pdfquote:
Dat lijkt me juist gezien de "informatie" van redpil wel de goede insteek, dit "nieuws" komt namelijk uit een bepaalde hoek het enige wat redpill doet is het door de google translate heenhalen.quote:
Nee. Het is niet dat ik geen artikelen lees van “anti-Trump Resistance” en “Never Trumpers” , zoals Glenn Beck, Guy Benson of in dit geval Benjamin Wittes -en daar valt voor mij in elk geval beter doorheen te komen dan bijvoorbeeld een Rachel Maddow of een Seth Abramson, maar ik schat dit soort pennenvruchten overwegend meer in op waarde van de wens die vader is van de gedachte.quote:Op donderdag 3 mei 2018 19:34 schreef Lavenderr het volgende:
Deze had jij hier nog niet geplaatst toch, dellipder?
bronquote:'In 2009, my wife and I moved to my hometown of East Aurora, New York to have a family. Making far less money back home, we had a far better quality of life. That is, until the Trump-Russia narrative took off. Today, I can’t possibly pay the attendant legal costs and live near my aging father, raising my kids where I grew up.
'Your investigation and others into the allegations of Trump campaign collusion with Russia are costing my family a great deal of money – more than $125,000 - and making a visceral impact on my children.
'Now I must to move back to Washington, New York City, Miami or elsewhere, just so I can make enough money to pay off these legal bills. And I know I have you to thank for that.
'Here’s how I know: how many of you know Daniel Jones, former Senate Intelligence staffer for Senator Dianne Feinstein? Great guy, right? Most of you worked with him. One of you probably just talked to him this morning.
'Of course, very few of us in flyover country knew Daniel until recently. Now we know that he quit his job with your Senate committee not long ago to raise $50 million from ten rich Democrats to finance more work on the FusionGPS Russian dossier. The one the FBI used to get a FISA warrant and intimidate President Donald Trump, without anyone admitting -- until months after it was deployed -- that it was paid for by Hillary Clinton.
'In fact, good old Dan has been raising and spending millions to confirm the unconfirmable – and, of course, to keep all his old intel colleagues up-to-speed on what FusionGPS and British and Russian spies have found. Got to keep that Russia story in the news.
'Of course Dan’s in touch with you guys. We know from the news that he’s been briefing Senator Mark Warner, vice chairman of this committee. Which one of you works for Senator Warner? Please give Danny my best.
'I saw some of his handiwork just last month. Remember this lede paragraph, from McClatchy on April 13?
'The Justice Department special counsel has evidence that Donald Trump’s personal lawyer and confidant, Michael Cohen, secretly made a late-summer trip to Prague during the 2016 presidential campaign, according to two sources familiar with the matter.
'That’s your pal Dan, isn’t it? He came up with some kind of hollow proof that Michael Cohen was in Prague meeting with Russians when he wasn’t. He tried to sell that to reporters, and they didn’t buy it because it doesn’t check out. So, to get a reporter to write up his line of bull, he gave the documents to the Office of Special Counsel.
'We know that’s likely, because he’s told people he’s briefing investigators.
'So, technically, the special counsel’s office has evidence. Your pal Dan gave them more of the Democrats’ dossier, funded by more Democrats, provided again by Russian and British spies. Information no reporter would write up, but now there’s an angle: the Special Counsel has it. Now it’s a story.
'It’s a clever but effective ruse. That’s a story, just like when reporter Michael Isikoff of Yahoo News wrote this gem on September 16, 2016:
'“…U.S. officials have since received intelligence reports that during that same three-day trip, Page met with Igor Sechin, a longtime Putin associate … a well-placed Western intelligence source tells Yahoo News. That meeting, if confirmed, is viewed as especially problematic by U.S. officials…”
'Dozens of stories were written from the Isikoff piece, doing real damage to the Trump campaign. Of course, now we know Isikoff’s reference to “intelligence reports” was just him renaming a dossier funded by Democrats and dug up by his longtime pal Glenn Simpson and some foreign spies. Once Simpson gave his Clinton campaign opposition research to the feds, it was news.
'This was especially true after Isikoff intentionally labeled the campaign materials as intelligence – just like McClatchy called Dan’s information “evidence.”
'But who is McClatchy’s second source? It couldn’t be Dan; he was the first source. It couldn’t be Simpson; he works for Dan. It can’t be the Mueller investigation; they kicked the McClatchy story to the curb with aplomb. So who could it be – perhaps one of his former Senate Intelligence colleagues? I mean, you’re all in this together. You’re the swamp.
'What America needs is an investigation of the investigators. I want to know who is paying for the spies’ work and coordinating this attack on President Donald Trump? I want to know who Dan Jones is talking to across the investigations – from the FBI, to the Southern District of New York, to the OSC, to the Department of Justice, to Congress.
'Forget about all the death threats against my family. I want to know who cost us so much money, who crushed our kids, who forced us out of our home, all because you lost an election.
'I want to know because God Damn you to Hell.'
Het is meer de media die dit scenario graag uitgespeeld zien worden.quote:Op zaterdag 5 mei 2018 21:13 schreef Lavenderr het volgende:
'Het is niet heel waarschijnlijk dat de DoJ een zittende president dagvaardt voor een getuigenverklaring. In de kwestie waar Ken Starr de zittende president dagvaarde hoefde Bill Clinton niet voor de grand jury te verschijnen. Bovendien kan zo'n dagvaarding worden aangevochten en als het een rechtsgang betreft dat helemaal leidt tot aan de Supreme Court zijn we maanden of mogelijk jaren verder'.
Dus zoiets wordt niet snel gedaan als het zo lang duurt. Plus het heeft weinig zin want misschien is in die tijd de president al opgevolgd.