I have a feeling that Trump is again playing some chess.



As we all know, Bannon is very important figurehead in Trump's administration. So important that is he falls down, Trump falls down. And that fact makes him a prime target for the Opposition Media.



Now, if Trump puts him out of harms way...the pressure towards Bannon should cease somewhat, which may allow him to continue to do his job. He, after all, still has clearance (he can still attend top security meetings) - it was not revoked.




Sky ain't falling guys.

Anyone freaking out over anything that Trump has SAID - (especially regarding Syria) - needs to remember the concept of A/B testing. Trump says a lot of things, then waits for public response, and then re-formulates. As of now, I'm highly confident that Trump won't accept the "Assad just used chemical weapons in Syria!" narrative.

Remember Iraq? Around 5000 of our troops killed, 100,000 wounded (estimated,) power vacuum leading to 1000s dead in terror attacks and an excuse for Europe to allow an invasion?

Syria is Iraq times 100. All the above, plus proxies we CAN NOT GO TO WAR WITH!

Shore up domestic and let a Syrian invasion slide? No no no no.

This Rice situation is extremely delicate, this is not some low level government employee, this is some top level official that only respond to the president, Rice did not do this without Obama's order and approval, if somebody like Rice falls then it will bring down the entire Obama administration and big part of the MSM.

Laura Ingraham said two former FBI officials told her these requested to unmask Americans need to be documented, not verbal, every time Rice requested to unmask some American she had to log in, meaning there is a very long trail of evidence that is now on Trump's people hands.

Watch Rice' interview on Andrea Mitchel, she looked extremely nervous and was stuttering constantly.





Rice, Obama, Lynch and the rest now know is a matter of time before more is revealed, Cernovich revealed people in the press had this for some time but were holding it to protect Obama and his people, and anything that makes Trump looks right is avoided, who knows what else they are holding now.

We are lucky the internet exist because if this was the 90s this wiuld have never happen.

Via above mentioned link, "BREAKING: @BarackObama’s CIA Director John Brennan and His Allies Are Targeting Trump Supporters For Surveillance":

Quote:Barack Obama‘s CIA Director John O. Brennan targeted Trump supporters for enhanced surveillance, intelligence sources confirm to GotNews’ Charles C. Johnson.

The surveillance took place between Trump’s election on November 8 and the inauguration in January, according to White House and House intelligence sources.

The focus was on General Mike Flynn, billionaire Erik Prince, and Fox News host Sean Hannity — all of whom had close ties to Trump before and after the November election and had helped the future president with managing his new diplomatic responsibilities.

Hannity was targeted because of his perceived ties to Julian Assange, say our intelligence sources. Hannity was reportedly unmasked by Susan Rice at Brennan’s behest thanks to his close relationship with Trump and Julian Assange.

Blackwater founder Erik Prince, a former CIA covert asset, has long criticized the CIA’s bloat and incompetence, including the Brennan-run CIA drone program’s failure to properly target terrorists rather than Afghan civilians. Prince has repeatedly called for restructuring the CIA and argued against Brennan’s tenure.

He has particularly criticized Brennan’s decision to centralize a lot of decision making among bureaucrats in the Capital Beltway in Langley, Virginia instead of in the field, where the agents are actually spying.

Billionaire monopolist Jeff Bezos’ CIA-affiliated blog The Washington Post alleged a meeting between Erik Prince, the crown price of the United Arab Emirates and an unnamed Russian “close to Putin” nine days before Trump’s inauguration. The meeting was supposedly to establish a back channel of communication.

Left unanswered in the Post’s story was the following: wasn’t Trump supposed to be colluding with the Russians prior to his election? Why would Trump need a back channel nine days before he’s inaugurated?

The motivations for Brennan’s dislike of Flynn date back years. The two had publicly feuded during Flynn’s time as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). Flynn was producing intel documents that showed how the supposed Syrian moderates were actually assets of Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Brennan also brought in disgraced Syria analyst Elizabeth O’Bagy to brief the CIA. O’Bagy was outed by this reporter for manufacturing her credentials and for being paid by the Syrian rebels. O’Bagy worked for the defense industry funded Institute for the Study of War, a neocon think tank headed by the Kagans, a controversial family which advised David Petraeus. Petraeus was brought down. Intel sources I’ve spoken to believe Brennan was behind his ousting.

Former CIA agent John Kiriakou discussed John Brennan’s “deep-seated hatred of Trump” and decision to make “Russian intervention… the hammer he is going to hit Trump with.” “Flynn has been screwed by the agency in the past and Flynn has had a difficult personal relationship with Brennan,” Kiriakou said in January. “Even though Brennan is gone, the CIA is still being run by Brennan’s people.” Both Flynn and Trump called for reorganizing the CIA–a direct threat to Brennan’s remaking of the CIA.

John Brennan, who — incredibly — voted for the Communist Party in 1976, nearly didn’t make it into the CIA. Here’s how he recalled the events once he left office:

This was back in 1980, and I thought back to a previous election where I voted, and I voted for the Communist Party candidate… I froze, because I was getting so close to coming into CIA and said, “OK, here’s the choice, John. You can deny that, and the machine is probably going to go, you know, wacko, or I can acknowledge it and see what happens.”… I said I was neither Democratic or Republican, but it was my way, as I was going to college, of signaling my unhappiness with the system, and the need for change. I said I’m not a member of the Communist Party, so the polygrapher looked at me and said, “OK,” and when I was finished with the polygraph and I left and said, “Well, I’m screwed.”

But Brennan made it into CIA.

He nearly washed out in Riyadh after the Khobar Tower bombings and was even fired before he fell in with Director George Bennett.

In his 1980 graduate thesis at the University of Texas at Austin, John Brennan denied the existence of “absolute human rights” and argued in favor of censorship on the part of the Egyptian dictatorship.

“Since the press can play such an influential role in determining the perceptions of the masses, I am in favor of some degree of government censorship,” Brennan wrote. “Inflamatory [sic] articles can provoke mass opposition and possible violence, especially in developing political systems.”

Brennan, who speaks Arabic and has a prayer rug in his office (he is rumored to have converted to Islam), favored the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood while he worked for Obama.

He planted stories with The New York Times‘ Cairo bureau chief David Kirkpatrick. Kirkpatrick wrote a controversial article whitewashing the Benghazi attack and repeatedly pushed a pro-Muslim Brotherhood agenda, according to his wife.

No wonder President Donald J. Trump and his supporters were targeted and surveilled by these people.

Stay tuned for more.

Our researchers shut down Facebook’s biased left-wing trending news team. They discovered never before seen footage of a young Barack Obama whining about white privilege in Kenya. They debunked and destroyed Hillary Clinton’s narco baby mama Alicia Machado, who quit giving interviews because of us. If you’d like to hire our research team, email us at [email protected]

(04-05-2017 06:05 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Anyone freaking out over anything that Trump has SAID - (especially regarding Syria) - needs to remember the concept of A/B testing. Trump says a lot of things, then waits for public response, and then re-formulates. As of now, I'm highly confident that Trump won't accept the "Assad just used chemical weapons in Syria!" narrative.

What would be the point of this "A/B testing?" Are you saying that Trump is trying to decide whether to pointlessly and disastrously invade Syria and is basing the decision on whether the public buys the fake gas attack motive or not? That would be beyond fucking retarded on Trump's part.

"Hey guys, I can't decide whether we should get bogged down in the middle east again. So what I'm going to do is, I'm going to go on the Tee-Vee and act outraged over fake media coverage of dead Syrian babies. If Americans don't buy it, we won't invade, if they do buy it, we're going to invade Syria so fast your head will spin."

If that's the concept consider me not reassured.

Quote:Brennan, who speaks Arabic and has a prayer rug in his office (he is rumored to have converted to Islam)

CIA director huh?

Anyone catch Ron Paul calling this Syria shenanigans as a false flag?

This is awesome.

(04-05-2017 06:53 PM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 06:05 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Anyone freaking out over anything that Trump has SAID - (especially regarding Syria) - needs to remember the concept of A/B testing. Trump says a lot of things, then waits for public response, and then re-formulates. As of now, I'm highly confident that Trump won't accept the "Assad just used chemical weapons in Syria!" narrative.

What would be the point of this "A/B testing?" Are you saying that Trump is trying to decide whether to pointlessly and disastrously invade Syria and is basing the decision on whether the public buys the fake gas attack motive or not? That would be beyond fucking retarded on Trump's part.

"Hey guys, I can't decide whether we should get bogged down in the middle east again. So what I'm going to do is, I'm going to go on the Tee-Vee and act outraged over fake media coverage of dead Syrian babies. If Americans don't buy it, we won't invade, if they do buy it, we're going to invade Syria so fast your head will spin."

If that's the concept consider me not reassured.

Or he just wants to look tough on Syria so people give him breathing room.

From The White House Press Room, Statement from the Press Secretary on the Decline in Southwest Border Apprehensions:



Democrats continue spinning their "Blame Russia" narrative. This time, Senator Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire) was whining about Russia's RT & Sputnik news media on the Senate floor recently. Via video description:

Quote:'Propaganda empire': Senator Shaheen talks bill to take on RT
Published on 4 Apr 2017

US Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D, New Hampshire) took the Senate floor to talk about her bill which would force the Department of Justice to investigate RT America, which she accuses of being a part of a Russian propaganda empire aimed at spreading disinformation and chaos at the request of the Kremlin.

(04-05-2017 07:10 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 06:53 PM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 06:05 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Anyone freaking out over anything that Trump has SAID - (especially regarding Syria) - needs to remember the concept of A/B testing. Trump says a lot of things, then waits for public response, and then re-formulates. As of now, I'm highly confident that Trump won't accept the "Assad just used chemical weapons in Syria!" narrative.

What would be the point of this "A/B testing?" Are you saying that Trump is trying to decide whether to pointlessly and disastrously invade Syria and is basing the decision on whether the public buys the fake gas attack motive or not? That would be beyond fucking retarded on Trump's part.

"Hey guys, I can't decide whether we should get bogged down in the middle east again. So what I'm going to do is, I'm going to go on the Tee-Vee and act outraged over fake media coverage of dead Syrian babies. If Americans don't buy it, we won't invade, if they do buy it, we're going to invade Syria so fast your head will spin."

If that's the concept consider me not reassured.

Or he just wants to look tough on Syria so people give him breathing room.

If that is his goal, then he is going about it in an absolutely idiotic way. Making a speech denouncing a completely unproven allegation and promising to "do something about it" puts pressure on him to do exactly that: do something. If he wanted to give himself breathing room he'd have simply stayed quiet and let the absolute lack of evidence, let alone motive, make the Assad gas attack fake news die a slow and quiet death.

Now he's gone on the television and stirred up a shitstorm of tough talk, going so far as to say Syria is "his problem now" and criticizing Obama for not doing enough. That doesn't look like the maneuvering of someone who is trying to avoid getting involved in Syria.

(04-05-2017 04:33 PM)Gmac Wrote:  I'll come back when you guys are off your man-periods and "sky-is-falling" mindsets, which will probably be about 48 hours and after Gorsuch's appointment.

(04-05-2017 05:16 PM)greekgod Wrote:  This election was about domestic righting of the ship. The foreign policy stuff can get fucked until we sort the home front first.

And if it fails it will be a familiar headline "baby boomer father tries to appease his feminists daughters unrealistic whims and his world collapses around him"

Foreign policy stuff getting fucked would mean staying the fuck out of Syria right?

Or does it getting fucked mean hey lets send thousands of men to die in Syria and start WW3 so we can get a war economy going?

(04-05-2017 07:05 PM)philosophical_recovery Wrote:  Anyone catch Ron Paul calling this Syria shenanigans as a false flag?

This is awesome.
...

Re-posting this tweet, which I posted in the other thread.

(04-05-2017 07:54 PM)budoslavic Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 07:05 PM)philosophical_recovery Wrote:  Anyone catch Ron Paul calling this Syria shenanigans as a false flag?

This is awesome.
...

Re-posting this tweet, which I posted in the other thread.

Penis envy is a helluva drug.

I was wondering when Erik Prince would be drug into this.

NY Times claims that Ivanka and her husband are pushing Bannon out.

Quote:For the first 10 weeks of President Trump’s administration, no adviser loomed larger in the public imagination than Stephen K. Bannon, the raw and rumpled former chairman of Breitbart News who considers himself a “virulently anti-establishment” revolutionary out to destroy the “administrative state.”

But behind the scenes, White House officials said, the ideologist who enjoyed the president’s confidence became increasingly embattled as other advisers, including Mr. Trump’s daughter and son-in-law, complained about setbacks on health care and immigration. Lately, Mr. Bannon has been conspicuously absent from some meetings. And now he has lost his seat at the national security table.

In a move that was widely seen as a sign of changing fortunes, Mr. Trump removed Mr. Bannon, his chief strategist, from the National Security Council’s cabinet-level “principals committee” on Wednesday. The shift was orchestrated by Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, who insisted on purging a political adviser from the Situation Room where decisions about war and peace are made.

Mr. Bannon resisted the move, even threatening at one point to quit if it went forward, according to a White House official who, like others, insisted on anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/05/us/po...annon.html

Feminist Ivanka and her Jewish husband are trouble. There hasn't been one good thing coming out of their corner, and I don't buy it that Ivanka helped Trump get more female votes.

^ I don't trust anything that comes out of the failing NYT

(04-05-2017 08:55 PM)Gmac Wrote:  ^ I don't trust anything that comes out of the failing NYT

And I don't trust Breitbart... not anymore anyway.

(04-05-2017 08:56 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

(04-05-2017 08:55 PM)Gmac Wrote:  ^ I don't trust anything that comes out of the failing NYT

And I don't trust Breitbart... not anymore anyway.

Cernovich promised an article today on why Breitbart has turned into such shit. He hasn't posted it yet, but I'm looking forward to it. It should be... enlightening.

Anyone have any info on death count? I looked around and can't seem to find anything in terms of confirmed counts. I saw some mentions of casualties but nothing concrete.

Alex Jones just claimed talks are ongoing with Damascus to convince Assad to step down and leave and if he doesn't, strikes could come tonight or tomorrow.

(04-07-2017 12:13 AM)rainy Wrote:  Alex Jones just claimed talks are ongoing with Damascus to convince Assad to step down and leave and if he doesn't, strikes could come tonight or tomorrow.

And then who takes over?

Good to see everyone here is thinking about this critically, standing by their principles and not just backwards rationalising for Trump

We have the best forum, don't we folks?