September 24 - 30, 2019
God Now Pointing to Hunter Biden with Heraldry
The Shark and the (U)Crane
If you're waiting for Jesus to return, see Post-Tribulation Rapture
(if google refuses to load this link, copy and paste this: http://www.tribwatch.com)
It seems my job these days, during the Middle-East lull, is to cover corruption in the world's richest country, the one most-resembling Mystery Babylon. It happens to be a country where its Christians are zealous for their Lord -- outspoken and active -- more than what I see in other countries. This zeal may wane the more that we see the powers stacked up against us. Let's face it, we are not going to rule the world based on our equal use of the Internet, because we're not allowed to cheat while google and others are cheating us. There is no equal use of the media. Even though Fox had almost equalized things media-wise, when the Internet was still like nothing, the Internet has sent the scales tipping back a hard left.
They have us hands down; they are going to rule the future, and there's nothing we can do about it. It's probably the way that God wants it, so that the rulers may be Judged, and their powers removed, at the Return of the man once called Y'Shua. He's coming with a new name not known to us yet.
Below is a good job by Hannity to lay out the Biden crime. Repity-Repeat Hannity speaks fast, so you might want to pause it when he adds new information at times to let it sink in, especially at the media quotes. It seems best to view the latest attack on Trump (as per the whistle-blower against him) as so weak an attack that it might instead be against Biden, for by attacking Trump on his attack on Biden, the latter's crime is being splashed all over the news, tending to threaten him outright as a presidential candidate. You see, if Biden becomes the president, republicans would exert efforts to discover his crimes under Obama, and that could threaten others on the Obama team. They might therefore think it best if Biden didn't win, so long as they can install another corrupt player on their behalfs.
It's amazing how Biden admitted his own corruption -- guilty conflict of interest -- on television for all to see. Apparently, he was so accustomed to operating in this way, and/or he saw others operating this way so much, he saw nothing wrong with it anymore. In the Hannity video, note that Biden's son becomes an issue in November and December of 2015, for mid-December (17th I think) is when the CIA's Mifsud is present at a Russian dinner with Putin and Flynn. The Obama deep state may have set Flynn up with Putin at this dinner for creating the ability to slander him as a foreign partner. Did Flynn, as an honest broker, know too much about Obama's Ukrainian schemes? Wasn't Biden doing the same sorts of things, using political position for making money from foreign nations, as the Clintons? How can Barr still lay hands off of these absolute crooks after all of these months? Why does he need to wait until the full investigations are over before arresting, since there is enough evidence already in the news alone to arrest?
So, if Barr lets these absolute crooks off, we will then know that corruption is steeped into government players because the corrupt hired and appointed their own like-minded kinds, over decades of time. On top of a corrupt media leaning heavily anti-Christian, there is also a deep-state brotherhood that operates in violation of God's laws, in cahoots with the military and it's Intelligence brothers. We Christians are in no position to overcome this snake. The only good news thus far is that the snake has been disguising itself as righteous, which tends to hamper its wicked deeds. It's when it ceases to abide by a righteous facade that we need to worry most. The left is well on its way into that direction.
The so-called whistle-blower against Trump has been identified by the Inspector General of all Intelligence organizations. There are moves to expose him publicly, and to get his story. On Wednesday, Trump released his July-25 phone call (via transcript) with the Ukrainian leader, and frankly I'm more than content (even happy) with the way the president has done this. Gregg Jarret said on Fox the night before that any U.S. president is compelled by law to inquire of the Ukrainian leader on whether a previous vice-president is guilty of a crime. Here's the story as per daytime, Wednesday:
Below is the transcript. As I begin to read the niceties of both presidents to one another, it comes to mind that Zelensky's team can withhold assistance to Trump in getting deep-staters in hotter water unless Trump increases sanctions on Russia. It's not where Trump wants to go. If Zelensky's team is playing him in this way, then it needs leveraging from Trump. Once the niceties are done, Trump goes to work, and while asking for help on Mueller, etc., he mentions CrowdStrike. I didn't know CrowdStrike was involved here. He starts off:
I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you're surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General [Bill Barr] call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it's very important that you do it if that's possible.
It's what I've wanted to see from Trump, and here it is. I mean, I think Trump wanted to release this call because he wanted to let the voters know that he has been trying to get Mueller caught. It's the first piece of evidence I've seen that Trump initiated his own work toward this end. Leftists are trying to make him feel guilty about asking the Ukraine to help, in hopes that he'll stop asking, but this is like a tiger (Trump) versus a chicken, if Trump wants it to be. The tiger has every right, and as Jarret said, every DUTY, to ask Ukraine to stick-it to the Mueller team. Let's go see how president Zelensky answered Trump's request:
Yes it is very important for me and everything that you just mentioned earlier. For me as a President, it is very important and we are open for any future cooperation. We are ready to open a new page on cooperation in relations between the United States and Ukraine [sounds like he's asking to make a deal in return for granting Trump's request]. For that purpose, I just recalled our ambassador from United States and he will be replaced by a very competent and very experienced ambassador who will work hard on making sure that our two nations are getting closer [has nothing to do with Mueller, etc.]. I would also like and hope to see him having your trust and your confidence and have personal relations with you so we can cooperate even more so [like, give us more weapons and money]. I will personally tell you that one of my assistants spoke with Mr. Giuliani just recently and we are hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine...I also plan to surround myself with great people and in addition to that investigation, I guarantee as the President of Ukraine that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly. That I can assure you.
I'll let you read the rest. I am surprised to discover that, in the next paragraph, Zelensky is very open to helping Trump and Barr together, once he appoints a new chief prosecutor to look into the matters. It's not a wonder the Democrats are making Trump feel as though he's done a terrible thing. I really didn't know Trump had it in him to do this. It better not be a political trick.
I really can't understand why Fox gives such importance to Pelosi's move to impeach. It's making a nut look important. Why not rather ignore her all the dang-day long, send her a message that she's a NOBODY. Really, give her not one story on it. That says it all. Just have a headline, PELOSI JOKE, and don't bother writing a story underneath it. It's a zero story, but I've got to hear it all the dang-week long. Fox really knows how to make viewers sick. On top of that, the thumb-sucking, pamblum-licking Cortez is making it to the Pelosi story, on Fox...a psycho on top of a psycho. Please Fox, have a heart.
Zelensky told Trump that he would look into CrowdStrike. It's perfect. it's gotta be about Guccifer 2.0. It's perfect. Guccifer 2.0 was the near-beginning for the Trump-attack strategy. Here's Repity-Repeat Hannity on this phone-call story (and lots of repeat):
[The video above was the best full show on the 25th, but the night after, it was reduced to 1 second long. This is how youtube will go into the next election. There are at least seven Hannity shows on the 25th that were showing last night, all seven now reduced to 1 or 2 seconds as of now, the night of the 26th.]
I wonder how Barr feels about Trump's mention of his name on the phone call. Why can't Trump get Barr to ask Wray to look into CrowdStrike, so long as Trump supporters are a part of that investigation to keep Wray straight?
They are saying that the phone call was leaked by someone in the White House who had knowledge of it, but this doesn't sit right with me. It's more likely that leftist or Bushite Intelligence was listening into the call (secretly, illegally), and that Intelligence then arranged, from someone near the call, to leak the story as though the leak did not originate from Intelligence.
See the 24th minute (Hannity above) for something new and huge from John Solomon on the Biden crime. This is a developing story, and Solomon is tripping over some words trying in zeal to get his words right. He'll have the story out tomorrow (26th) from The Hill, and Hannity will have him back on tomorrow night to expound. The beauty of nailing Obamaites this hard is that the leftist media looks progressively more mentally deranged to keep denying the crimes. It's perfect, please celebrate with me. Let's have a street party.
Don't you think that Obama got some of that money from Biden's son? Don't you think that Biden got some? Biden's hammer against the Ukrainian leader was Obama himself. That is, Biden told him that Obama was behind his threat. The money granted to the Bidens via China and Ukraine combined were not free gifts. Behind these monies were secret deals / promises from the Obama government to pay both countries back with more than they gifted the Bidens. But we don't expect Obama to make such promises unless he too pockets some of the foreign gifting. Where did they launder these gifts? Why should tax payers fork out untold billions to foreign nations just so Obamaites can become filthy rich? How can Barr not set the right example with Biden and Clinton at the least, for starters? Make haste, man, because 2020 can alter the politics against you.
Here's Laura Ingraham if you want the story from she:
I think that Trump asked the Ukraine for a favor for his own political needs. I think Trump asked for a foreign nation to "interfere" in the 2020 election. However, this sort of interference is justified, ABSOLUTELY. Fox should not have guests denying this picture. It is exactly due to Biden being Trump's competitor that Trump has the ethical right to ask the Ukraine to nail Biden. American voters have the right to know the truth about Biden, before the election takes place, and Trump merely asked the Ukraine to find, and then enlighten him on, the truth. There's no unethical thin-ice here unless Trump gives the Ukraine tax money in return for this favor. It's important that Trump used, "do us a favor," for a favor is asked often for nothing in return. Trump didn't say, "can we make a deal?" Instead, he asked for a favor. Zelensky said, sure, love to. Nations are allowed to band together in fighting corruption. That's what this issue is. It serves Trump, but it also serves his voters, and is win-win all around.
If Trump had been wrestling high-level corruption that doesn't touch upon himself, he would have soared in true greatness, but he hasn't had the wisdom / desire to take that tack. I've viewed him as a lowly chicken, a president who has shaken off his responsibility as a president. I do understand that there is an assassination threat, but you cannot promise to cleanse swamp in getting to be the president, and then break such a promise. He broke it. To make himself safer, he needs to get rid of Wray, and he should have chaired Intelligence chiefs who would definitely use Intelligence to protect him from an assassination, and who would seek to catch the corrupt Obamaites for jailings, for it is the latter who will urge his assassination. The sooner they start getting prosecuted, the sooner the rest will withdraw (run for the hills) rather than design well-planned assassination schemes. If you allow them to linger feeling safe, they will have plan B, assassination, at the ready. The corrupt have way-too high a measure for their superiority and smarts. They will cower easily. Go tiger.
On Thursday, Fox obtained a copy of the whistle-blower's complaint, saying that MULTIPLE Trump-team officials verified to him that Trump was using his position to obtain "interference" from a foreign nation.
Achem. THERE IS NOTHING AT ALL WRONG WITH SEEKING DIRT ON YOUR POLITICAL OPPONENT, and, if finding it, to announce it. In fact, it is standard procedure in elections, and is rather compulsory material if it involves criminal activity. If Trump happens to be the president at the time, it's not anything he should be blamed for, for starters, and if he has a friend in the Ukraine who can nail Biden to the wall, that is not a crime if Trump should merely ask his non-American friend to help expose the crimes) of his political opponent. The whistle-blower team wants this to appear criminal. I am not a lawyer, but this is easily reckoned as non-criminal action on Trump's part.
What's Trump to do, step down as president for a short while during the phone call wherein he asks a foreign friend for dirt on Biden??? Or, as president, does he no longer have the right to seek and find dirt on Biden? Does Biden only have the right to seek and find dirt on trump? Hello? As president, Trump has gained friends, but, anyway, it is COMPULSORY for Trump to discover Biden's crimes, even if it requires material from a foreign country. In like manner, it is compulsory for Trump to discover all of the Obama-team crimes. That's been my point from the start. He has a duty as the president to disclose those crimes, meaning that he MUST ORDER the FBI and DoJ to discover those crimes. It must not be viewed as his conflict of interest. Disregard leftist cries and complaints, for they are hollow.
The whistle-blower team has only claimed thus far, not proven, that the Trump's people tried to hide the actual phone call, and to modify it into a semi-concocted transcript. I wholly agree that a call like that should be highly classified to keep Biden's friends from discovering it. That's why it makes more sense that leftist Intelligence leaked this thing...possibly through a Republican proxy that wishes to take the White House from Trump in 2020.
The Inspector general for Intelligence claimed that this whistle-blower has merit in his report, signalling that the Inspector is left-leaning, or at least not a friend of Trump. How then can one produce proof that Trump officials leaked this to the whistle-blower, if the officials wish to remain invisible while the Inspector's not telling their names? In the current atmosphere, no accusation such as this one can be taken as fact automatically. The smart thing for Trump to do is to say that he's not talking about it until the officials and the "official" whistle-blower reveal themselves. You can't blow the whistle and remain invisible, sorry. You can't play that way.
I went to do a little work, and returning at 5 pm, news came out that the whistle-blower is with the CIA. It absolutely figures. "Little else is known about him." Achem. Was this person part of the previous attack-Trump cabal? What could make more sense. he was previously "detailed to work at the White House at one point". When, during Obama or Trump. If he was working under Trump's White House, look out, he looks like another mole, sent by Brennan. It's convenient that he's CIA because the latter can argue that his identity can't be revealed in order to safeguard his job. No matter, Trump has done nothing wrong, and the issue only serves to put the spotlight on the schemes behind the Trump-attack. This whistle-blower is probably a good thing over-all in urging Trump to unveil, though lawyers will use this to forbid him from partnering with Zelensky any longer for the purpose of unveiling...the real / hidden facts behind "Russian collusion".
It's Trump's biggest playing card for 2020 to prove that the attack was crime-upon-crime. If Trump can do this well single-handedly, without the DoJ and Intelligence assistance, he could win in a 2020 landslide.
It is necessary to press the whistle-blower or the Inspector General to reveal who in the White House (or the one privy to the call) leaked the call and the program to the whistle-blower. Otherwise, it should be assumed that the CIA obtained the phone call illegally. Naturally, if the CIA was listening in on the call (that's illegal, isn't it?), it would devise a story that the information was obtained by another way. It's no good to claim that someone close to the call was the initial leaker, unless a name is given, and the person admits to it. If that doesn't happen, this story is just a story.
If we thought that Maguire was one of the good guys, hmm:
...A spokeswoman for the acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, said that protecting the whistle-blower was his office’s highest priority. “We must protect those who demonstrate the courage to report alleged wrongdoing, whether on the battlefield or in the workplace,” Mr. Maguire said at a hearing on Thursday, adding that he did not know the whistle-blower’s identity.
What kind of an Intelligence leader is this? He still doesn't know the whistle-blower's name? How can Maguire decide whether the whistler deserves protection if he's not even in charge of this case??? He's Da Big Boss, and he hasn't asked for the details on his desk promptly??? What kind of a boss is that? How does it feel, Maguire, to protect a criminal asset of the deep-state mob? Maguire has his top-spot job today because others elevated him to a deputy position at National Intelligence, and that doesn't happen in a corrupt organization unless you're a good winker.
If the whistle-bower side had released its complaint BEFORE Trump released the phone transcript, the complaint would be more credible, but as it came after the released phone call, it's to be expected, from corruptors, that they would claim the transcript to be not even close to the original phone call. It's expected because there's nothing terrible about the phone call as it stands in the transcript, yet the whole case of the whistle-blower stands or falls on this call.
In the 14th minute of Bongino, we find a piece from the Wall Street Journal telling that the Inspector general of Intelligence communicated with Barr's department in such a way as to attempt placing Trump in legal hot water. Barr rejected the quasi-accusation, but the point is, this was going on below the news radar, and we didn't get wind of the story until weeks after Barr refused to assist the Trump-attack. In other words, failing with Barr, they leaked the story to the court of public opinion, but, very apparently already, they will fail here too:
This issue has been around since August between the CIA and the DoJ, and Maguire can say today he doesn't even know the whistle-blower's name? I can't believe it.
Bongino continues to support the constitutional protection of free speech for the media. He really cannot call himself a Christian so long as he holds to that doctrine. God has never given anyone the right to speak things that oppose all that is good and right, let alone PROTECT it under any national constitution. Absolute free speech is for the devil, because there can be no law against speaking anything good and right unless the devil makes such a law. No one but a child of the devil would forbid true speech. And while God forbids false speech, Bongino supports protecting it for the media. Think again, Mr. Bongino. Make an adjustment and rephrase. Speaking the truth is a crux of Jesus' doctrines so that anyone who calls himself a Christian is not permitted to grant a right to falsifications and verbal tricks for turning realities into self-serving concoctions. We can't stop it from happening, but we don't need to support it, especially as a right.
For example, protection of absolute free speech allows leftist media right now to make accusations without evidence of fault in Trump's phone call. Drudge is soaking up the cash by putting out a slew of leftist reports on this issue that lean way over in the Trump-is-guilty region, fodder for self-serving slander. This should be treated under media rules as punishable writ. Where are those rules that forbid media to make accusations (at the threat of punishment)? Bongino says that no punishment is lawful; they are allowed to lie and slander liberally. A media is permitted to state the whistle-blower claims, but the media is responsible for fairly laying out the opposing side: a sizable lack of evidence, so far. If the media does not follow that rule, have a media governor dish out "free-speech tickets" i.e. like a speeding ticket, only far-more expensive.
With the leftist side of the story damaged due to an invisible whistle-blower's coming out with mere second-hand knowledge, there's only one remedy: let the person(s) with first-hand knowledge state the case to the appropriate authority...which may not be the CIA if indeed the first-hand accusers were government officials. But if there are no government officials who were the first-hand accusers, then they must be make-believe by the CIA. If this story never produces the first-hand accusers, they sure do appear make-believe. This can amount to yet another CIA crime, and the leftist media would be a contribution to pushing the crime from the get-go...without punishment to curb such behavior. That's what's ripping apart the nation's social fabric, month after month non-stop. Here is the fruit of protected free speech Bongino-style. He laments what the left is doing, yet gives it the right to do it. Mr. Bongino, God does not think like you in this regard.
The leftist congress is pushing Maguire to force the whistle-blower to come before congress publicly. Wunderbar, but this is a nothing-bar, because the first-hand accusers are to be called instead, and, by the looks of it, the leftist congress probably won't demand them to come forward because it is in secret cahoots with leftist Intelligence, and the latter won't prosper with the appearance of the first-hand accusers, my prediction. The more they ignore the first-hand accusers, the more the latter look fake, either non-existent or impotent for the CIA cause.
I've just noticed that youtube has a lot of 2-second videos on Fox shows for the 25th, and some for the 26th already. They were full shows last night. It looks like a youtube black-out of Fox shows when the Democrats are down-and-out. youtube stinks. Skip Hannity's show on the 26th until the 16th minute if you are familiar with recent news. Solomon's new story starts there:
In case youtube cancels this video, let me say that Solomon has the story up in print. He says that, a week after Biden got a Ukrainian prosecutor fired, the replacement prosecutor was apologetically told, by Hunter Biden's company, that the accusations against the fired prosecutor, that he was corrupt, were not true, but concocted by the Obama government to get him fired. Solomon has this in undeniable print.
Solomon also speaks to a court case ongoing now where the fired prosecutor seeks to clear his name by swearing to a court that he was fired because the Ukrainian government, his boss, needed to make Biden "happy." It's as though the timing of this whistle-blower against Trump couldn't have come at a better time for stomping on the Obama government. Credit goes to Trump, for getting the leftist steam-roller into motion, and it sure is flattening Biden pretty good into the tar. Solomon will be back on Hannity on the evening of the 27th to offer yet more.
How did Maguire manage to be in a multi-hour congressional hearing today, the 26th, in the thick of this latest scuffle? It looks like pre-arranged theater. Below is a four-minute clip of Maguire explaining to Schiff-and-company that while he was not permitted to relay the CIA whistle-blower issue to congress, he wanted to do so, anyway, in cahoots with the anti-Trump Inspector General. Is Maguire trying to ride the fence? Looks like. He may have been hoping to be appointed to his top job on a permanent basis by Trump, but, having lost his balance on the fence today, he now has pickets in his crotch.
It he didn't want the pickets in that sensitive part, he should have told Schiff what an abomination he is for taking this hoax to this level. Instead, Maguire looked like a soft and seedy fruitcake (spineless). Maguire was under no compulsion to respect the urgings of the Inspector general. Maguire is the boss here, not the IG. If Maguire had reason to snub the IG's desire to hand the case to the leftist congress, then stand up like a man and say so. Don't try to play both sides and meanwhile give the IG respectability. Don't you see a con-job when it's in front of your face? Is Maguire out of touch, or trying to play both sides because he fears losing the hearts of the leftist swamp creatures within Intelligence? Here's John Ratcliffe giving what amounts to a rebuke to Maguire, even if Ratcliffe didn't mean it as such:
Ratcliffe reveals details of the whistle-blower's testimony such that Maguire should have blown the whistle on the people behind the whistle blower, for Maguire had that information to begin with: that the whistle-blower was no witness at all. In other words, Maguire, if he was any man at all, was expected to stick of fork into the CIA...that is under his authority. Instead, Maguire treated the situation with respect unto the CIA. Maguire does not look like the man for this top job. But he might change his tune, one just never knows.
Maguire says that he was compelled to forward the IG's views over to congress, but I think this is bogus. As the Intelligence boss, Maguire is required instead to demand a meeting with the first-hand accusers before treating the whistle-blower with respect. Only after verifying on his own that the complaint is legitimate does he need to forward the issue to a congressional body as "urgent." If the complaint fails to have teeth, it fails to be urgent. Maguire wants us to think that this issue was urgent just because the IG said so based on the testimony of an anti-Trumper. Therefore, Maguire is as good as putting on some theater on behalf of the left.
I don't trust Giuliani. He was poking around at the Ukraine situation weeks before Trump made the call. It could be that Giuliani egged the president to making the call to set him up for the accusations now coming against him. I don't trust Giuliani, and neither do some others.
There is also the possibility that this call is a political gimmick birthed by Trump to make appearances of fighting the swamp for those voters who think he's abandoned that promise. Bloomberg: "In a statement Wednesday, the department attempted to distance Barr from the events. He didn’t learn of the July 25 phone call until 'several weeks' afterward, department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said. 'The president has not spoken with the attorney general about having Ukraine investigate anything relating to former Vice President Biden or his son,' Kupec said. 'The president has not asked the Attorney General to contact Ukraine -- on this or any other matter. The attorney general has not communicated with Ukraine --- on this or any other subject. Nor has the attorney general discussed this matter, or anything relating to Ukraine, with Rudy Giuliani.'" Yet Trump said that he was going to get Barr involved way back on July 25. Perhaps the president was waiting for the right time to notify Barr, when the Ukraine had its new prosecutor, for example, but don't we at least expect Trump to give Barr a heads-up on the impending matter? Yes, we do, because it's expected that John Durham is looking into these very Ukrainian issues.
In the second minute of the video below, it's claimed that Barr's DoJ knew about the phone call a couple of weeks after it was made, and that a DoJ official went to get a copy of the transcript, which is what looks like a slipped White-House notice to Barr of this Ukrainian request. Perfect. There is nothing wrong with this safe approach, if this is what Trump did. There was no contact between Trump and Barr that Democrats could twist to their own purposes.
It's not foreign interference in an election if the Ukraine merely hands Trump information which Trump then disseminates. Interference would be more like a foreign nation acting unilaterally to support its own candidate. We learned that it was not a crime for Trump's son to go see a Russian who claimed to have dirt on Hillary. So, even if the Ukraine acted on it's own determination to support Trump by handing him valid dirt on Biden, how can that be a crime? But in this case, Trump requested the dirt on behalf of the people, and can claim that the American people have a right to know how the president-wannabee acted heartlessly and corruptly in a foreign nation. Nobody knows better how Biden acted but the Ukraine government. It's just logical, professional and wise to make the request of Ukraine rather than a broken, compromised CIA Trump can't trust.
In Israel, the so-called "centrist" party wants to dump Netanyahu from all power. I have no idea what will happen to Israel under the centrists.
A New, Eurasia Look at the Shark
I had a dream in 1979 that I've been speaking on for months in a row. Not many weeks ago, I resolved that the start of the dream, a bulldog half-way down a shark's throat, was Trump half swallowed by his deep-state enemies. I know it sounds, to one who hasn't read the material, as bogus on my part, but the particulars of the dream were very convincing that the scene was indeed pertaining to Trump's troubles. One day, while on the Scute surname's crane, I realized, or at least suggested, that the heraldic CRANE can be code, at times, for a family from the "UKRAINe." I didn't know at the time that the crane was code for the Ceraunii Illyrians whom I now view as proto-Croatians. The point is, a crane is used by the Shark surname so that, indeed, the dream can be pointing to Trump's troubles starting now in this Ukraine scandal (use Shark link to load other surnames).
This is not to say that the shark depicts the Ukraine, but the deep state working through Ukraine.
I had claimed that Trump was depicted in another dream (of mine) by an old friend of mine, Mr. Kepke, whose father is Ukrainian. Kepke's were found as branches of Keeps and Keppochs. The SCUTE's, who use so-called eSCUTcheons for obvious reason, share the Chief-Shield colors of Fife's, and the latter share the lion of neighboring FIVE's/Fifys, which was the main reason that the Scute crane was viewed as code for Ukrainians, for Five-like L'viv is a Ukrainian city.
I'll get back to Trump, but first here's a whack of heraldic background on these bloodlines tending to prove that they had been connected by marriage. Scute's use a "deer," which has no antlers, same as the Crest of Ceraunii-line Crauns. Was Ukraine named by Ceraunii or proto-Ceraunii? Let me repeat here from Wikipedia-article claim that "Ragusa," a home of the Shark-suspect Saraca's, means "deer." Let me repeat also that while the ELAPHITi islands are beside Ragusa, Grounds/Crannys/Craineys use an ELEPHANT. Plus, the crane of Crains/Crane's, in the colors of the Shark crane, is said to stand upon a "RAGully staff," which looks like part-code for RAGusa. Staffs have an item (swan) inside of a CROWN (as do Crauns/Crains), code for the Ceraunii. The Ground/Cranny/Crainey crane is in the colors of the Orne/Horn heron. Crauns/Crauns (Bull kin) were first found in Suffolk Bullis'/BULLIARDS while Billiards were first found in Maine with the Crannes location of Crains/Crane's, and moreover Bullis'/Bulliards share the stars of Amori's/Damori's while "Amor" is a motto code of Grounds/Crannys/Craineys. Bullis is a location beside the Ceraunii mountains.
Staffs could be a branch of the Stave variation of Stevensons whose Coat looks linkable to that of Billiards. Amori's/Damori's were first found on Sardinia, beside the Malta that I link to Melita, an island beside the Elaphiti islands. Melita-like Mallets (Suffolk, same as Bullis'/Bulliards and Crauns/Crains) are said to use the deer.
Tate's were first found in Suffolk too, with the Bullis'/Bulliards expected in the BULLdog, and while the bulldog also represents Trump, the Trump stag head is shared by Jumps who in-turn share the Tate roses. The Ceraunii were from the mythical crow (i.e. myth writers used the crow to depict the Ceraunii or a branch thereof), and crows are used by the same Tate's, tending to explain the "expecTATa" motto term of Sharks. Lake Tatta (now in Turkey) is off the Halys river, home of Elaphiti-like Halybes. The mythical crow, Coronis, was an Elaphiti-like Lapith (a real people group). The Tate pale bar looks connectable to that of ROXburghs, and the latter's "audax" motto term suggests descent from RoqueFEUIL (in Aude), explaining the treFOIL of Sharks and possibly their SherKOTT variation as per Kotts/Cotts, the latter first found in Languedoc with Aude (land of proto-Rus = proto-Rose's). On the Halys to the north side of Tatta was MOKissos, and Mochs can be with one the three Aude swords. Mochs ("viDERi") use a SCIMitar while Schims share the Haley boar head.
I see the trefoil, as opposed to quatrefoils and cinquefoils, as part code for the Treff variation of Trips while English Trips have a "scaling LADDER" that I see as part-code for the Tooth-related Lauders/Letters. In this way, the shark's teeth can be deciphered with Rockefellers. Fellers and Rocks use trefoils along with the Rods from Rodez of the Roussillon / Redones entity, and, again, the Coat of English Rhodes is much like that of Grounds/Crains while German Rhodes share red roundels with Bullis'/Bulliards. English Trips have the Gore/Core crosslets while the latter's Coat is linkable to the Craun/Crains/ Coat because the Gorski area of Croatia is within easy reach of proto-Croatia's Ceraunii Illyrians. Shark-liner Saraca's were in proto-Croatia's DalMATia while Mate's (same saltire as Tate's) and Manders are linkable to the English Rhodes Coat. Mate variations suggest an Illyrian peoples from the modern Mat (ancient Mathis) river.
The trefoil is used by Sharks while Rock-branch Roach's share the white fish with the Arms of Saraca. The Roach fish is in the colors of the same of Laus-like Luce's, and Ragusa was also called, Laus(a). As Mate's share the saltire-with besants of Manders while Manders have a "Laus" motto term, it seems that Mate's are indeed from Dalmatia. "Laus Deo" is shared between Manders and Oliphant-related Arbuthnotts (Moray), a good reason to trace Oliphants to the Elaphiti islands off the shore from Ragusa. It makes ArBUTHnotts look like Butua liners i.e. beside the Kotor location of Saraca's. It is to Kotor and Butua (at RHIZON) that the very last scene in the shark dream pointed, though the RISING in that scene can be gleaned with raven-line Rice's perhaps for more reason than a raven being a crow; perhaps also for Susan Rice's involvement in the Trump attack. Susans use a giant lily, and Lille liners merged with Lys/Lise liners from the Cavii Illyrians (a fleur-de-lys was made a lily due to Lille being near the Lys river).
It should be mentioned here, as per Amori liners, that Belly-like Bailys, a branch of Baliols, share the Moray stars while Bellys were first found in Moray while sharing the Jump / Tate rose. The Moray stars are also used by Bulliard-like Billiards/Billets, first found in Maine with Crannes. Don't be in a rush; contemplate as to what this could all mean. We were given my dream where KIDS were JUMPing on a yellow mattress that was pointed out to me by a salesman, and Sales' along with Salemans / Salmons are expected from Seleucid-like Saluzzo. Kids share the Moray stars too, and Seleucids are highly suspect from Bullis. In the shark dream, the bulldog either FELL into the swimming pool, as code for Fellers liners, or jumped in as code for Jumps. I have a feeling that I have not fully deciphered the importance of Jumps.
This discussion has new material with the indirect Shark link to Trumps via the Shark motto (I need to remember this). In the dream, the shark's TEETH were surrounding the belly of the bulldog (head first in the shark's mouth), and while Tate's share the Jump and Belly rose, Scottish Tate's/TEETs (Berwickshire, same as Tooth-related Lauders/Letters) were first found beside Roxburghshire, and also beside a Lauder location near the two Tyne rivers expected in the Tooth motto. That's how you can be sure that the shark dream was not happen-stance, but a code-filled event from God to you.
It tends to prove that the Tate roses are those of Jumps, and thus it over-all stands as good evidence that the shark and bulldog pertain to Trump's woes from his enemies. I have already shown that the shark teeth represent Stefan Halper, and also showed that Halpers/Halfpennys, with their Help/Half branch can link very well to Avezzano's (Sardinia) that named Avesnes on the Helpe river (Belgian border). This is repeated here because Avezzano's use the potent = crutch pattern.
In the dream with Kepke, a sickly-looking stag followed him, interesting where the Trumps use a giant stag head alone. Is this a picture of a future, ailing, political posture for the Trump team? Following the sickly stag was Paul Smith on crutches, as I have told many times, but I can now report that the motto of Scottish Smiths (crane-like heron), "Semper fidelis," is the motto also in the Arms of L'viv! That looks like a bingo to me. Paul had owned a red Jeep three to four decades before God used my red Jeep to plant, upon its hood, a medallion reading, "SAINT-PETERSBURG RUSSIA." Roxburghs use a "fidelis" motto term too, and ancient ROXolani Alans were in the Ukraine theater.
An escutcheon is sometimes called an INEScutcheon, which I think is code for Innis'/Innes' and/or Innus' along with Scute and Keon / Keen liners. The "pruDENTia" motto term of one Innis/Innes surname should be for the Dents, suspect as a branch of Dance's who are in turn in the colors and format of Keppochs (Yorkshire, same as Dents and Dance's). Innus' share the MacDonald "galley" (ship, used also by Keeps likely due to their being from the Keppoch branch of MacDonalds. God pointed to that branch of MacDonalds when Kepke and I sat on my hood watching Allison Bauer leave me for a fellow employee. Scottish Allisons, you see, are said to be of a MacDonald branch that was the Keppoch branch. I had found a Kepoi location in the Taman peninsula (Caucasia) not far from the DON river i.e. to which DONalds may trace. Anciently, the Don was the Tanais, expected to such things as Dance's/Danse's and Dents.
The "Tam" motto term of Roxburghs (ROS-Alans) could suggest Taman elements. By what coincidence do Roxburghs share the WHITE horse head (same design) as Keep-loving Hepburns (ROSES)? It very-much appears that Roxburghs were at least merged with Taman / Kepoi elements. It bears repeating that, while with Kepke and his girlfriend, Miss Peare, I rode her WHITE horse. Gawk: Peare's, first found in Oxfordshire with Amore's and THAMES', share the Thames chevron-with-stars. Kepke is a symbol of Trump (they wore the same hair, have similar personalities), and "Ukraine"-like Grounds/Craineys have an "Amor" motto term.
There's more, for HEPburns use a "KEEP TRYST" motto while Scottish Innis/Innes' use a "TRAIST" motto term...suspect with Trusesti off the PRUT river not far from L'viv. That river looks like the reason for the "PRUDentia" motto code of English Innis'/Innes'. The Swords, first found in Northumberland with Hepburns, use a motto, "Paratus," which is very much like ancient names for the Prut river. Swords even share the swords of Scute-like Shute's. "Semper paratus" is a common motto in heraldry.
There's more to prove that God gave the dream. Paul Smith was on crutches while the fitchee cross of English Smiths is virtually the one of Crutch's/Crooch's in colors reversed. A crutch is the heraldic basis for a so-called potent cross, and the latter is used by Crooch-like Croce's (crane-like stork). I was able to find good evidence that Croce's trace to Crociatonum, also called, CRONCiaconnum, and CRONKite's have a crane with one foot raised, as do Scute's. The Cronkite foot is said to have a ROCK as code for Roque's/Rocks (same place as Roquefeuil) = Roxolani elements. It tends to nail Paul Smith as a dream-code for the Ukraine while verifying that the Scute crane is code for Ukrainians. I trace the Roxolani to the Alans of Dol, and trace the latter from Aulon/Avlona. Keep the latter in mind for a few minutes.
Crociatonum is in Manche, explaining why Crocs use a "maunch" sleeve. Croce's (Scute / Fife colors) had a branch in LEDsham while a crane is used by Leto's/Lette's. Let's/Late's share the stars of Tiens/THAMES', and have a Chief-Shield in colors reversed from the same of Scute's, Fife's and Veys/VIVians. The latter were first found in CORNwall (Ceraunii center) with Hepburn-beloved Trysts and Tristans. Trysts share the stars of Bullis'/Bulliards, and the latter share the red roundels of Tristans while Rundels/Roundels are clearly using a version of the Alan Coat (as per FitzAlans of Arundel).
Ledsham is in Cheshire with the first-known Creuse's; the latter share the giant lion of Crozier's and Italian Croce's. It's probably the giant lion of the STORKhouse Odins (CROZier), explaining the stork of English Croce's. The latter (first found in Lincolnshire with le-Meschin/s wife) have the quadrants of the Manche Masseys / Vere's, and while Masseys of Ferte-Mace were off the ORNE river, the Smith heron is code for Orne's and their Heron branch. Finally, I always link Crociatonum with Manche's ancient Alauna, which I trace to Aulon/Avlona smack beside the crane-line Ceraunii mountains, and beside Bullis too, where I trace the bulldog in the shark dream. It's notable here that the Odin Coat is also that of Ceraunii-like GREENwich's (Kent, same as Greens and Rundels). The Leto's and Lets above can be expected from mythical Leto, mother of Apollo, the namer of Apollonia, beside Aulon/Avlona. Apollo's twin sister was ArTEMIS.
If we are still wondering how the bulldog can represent Trump as well as elements from Bullis, this gets interesting where Bullis is suspect with Seleucid blood from Alexander Balas. It's also interesting that Greens have stags half in the colors of the Trump stag head i.e. can this reveal a Trump merger with Ceraunii elements?
The Hepburn-beloved Trysts use a "TREPiDUM" motto term to look linkable to the "Dum" motto term of Croce's. The Hepburn motto term is expected with the TRYPillians of the Ukraine, and because Kepke got a job in shoe sales as little as a couple of weeks after we sat on the hood of my car, it appears that God's message there is that the Trips (near first-known Trumps), now showing shoes, are from Trypillians along with Kepke's Ukrainian ancestry. Trypillia was south of Keep-like Kiev. English Trips were first found in Kent with Masons/Massins in-turn sharing the Croce and Darlington motto. If I recall correctly, the ancestry of Miss Florida is from the L'viv area. She introduced me to Trypillians (and much more). Doesn't "Trump" look like "Tryp."
Darlingtons are a Darlene branch, and Darlene, my girlfriend immediately before Allison (all five of us worked at the same place), was given an ice-cream symbol. For what it could be worth, Ice's (trefoils) were first found in the same general area as Trumps, and Cremers/Cramers have a write-up suggesting crane liners, yet they evoke CRIMea, in the Ukraine. It could appear as though proto-Ceraunii, then the mythical Coronis crow, named Crimea. Krume's were first found in Hamburg with Trips, and Crombys (Aberdeenshire, same as Fife's) come up as Crimms. "Aberdeen" looks like it's from "Kabardino" off the north-east side of the Crimea. Crooms/Crone's show the Ceraunii crown symbol.
I'm going to take the position that Trump's not in a political gimmick (feigning that he wants revelations to come out), and that he sincerely wanted/wants Obama-camp crimes to come forth from the Ukraine. Democrats are trying to draw blood by claiming a cover-up on Trump's part, yet Trump released the crux of the issue, the phone call, on day one of this scandal. How does this rate as a cover-up? If Trump didn't want the call to get out to his Intelligence enemies, there is a reasonable explanation for it (they can't be trusted, and here we are in a broil). Dan Coats was forced to step down shortly before the phone call because he can't be trusted to keep Trump secrets. Trump is permitted to keep secrets, isn't he, in the current environment?
When Nunes questioned Maguire, the latter said that the allegations (from the whistle-blower side) included the claim of about a dozen people listening in on the phone call, including members of National Security. Maguire then says that others yet were briefed on the phone call, i.e. IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A TRUMP COVER-UP. It doesn't even look like Trump had the slightest chance of covering it up. I'm assuming that Trump knew at least roughly who was listening in. Maguire wants to assert that Intelligence had nothing to do with the leak on account of the dozen or so others being the best candidates. That is, Maguire is half-way taking the whistle-blower side of this scandal and protecting his own nest from Nunes' allegations. Mr. Nunes, poke Maguire where it really hurts with a sharp picket, will ya? Get him off the fence onto solid ground.
To put this as concisely as possible: the whistle-blower side is freaking, worried about being caught imminently. The matter in the latest scuffle is a struggle on how to interpret the call, but prior to the release of the phone call, the evil side had accusations that went beyond what is seen in the call, no surprise at all. The evil side didn't think that Trump would release the call, and so it was prepared to ill-describe the call in any way it wished.
While Barr's department says there's nothing wrong with the call's motives, it troubles me that Barr has not yet spoken to Ukraine. Surely, if Barr is being truthful about wanting to discover the beginnings of the Trump attack, he would have spoken with Ukraine long ago. Is Barr an imposter, saying one thing but doing another? Barr can't possibly ignore what Solomon put out this week. It's the Biden team apologizing to the Ukrainian government (for destroying a man's high-level job with slander), for the Ukrainians wouldn't talk to the Biden team apart from this apology, we must assume. That leaves only one Biden motive for slandering the man: to save Biden Jr. from prosecution. That action involved a crime, Mr. Barr, by the previous vice-president of the United States.
I say that Trump was an imposter for some 30 months, though it was predictable that if 2020 looked lose-able, he would finally do something to unveil his attackers' schemes. And here we are. The evil side is trying to make this first step from Trump so hot for him that he won't try a similar thing again. Mr. Trump, they are suits lined with knives and daggers, but you must do what you must do. Now is your hero moment; don't squander.
It is a little hard to be a hero from the bottom of a shark's mouth while it's teeth are clamped down on your rumb like a vice. And Trump has had his share of vices, we all know that. It's not as though he doesn't deserve judgment from God, let's not leave that out of our picture. The political center knows full well that Trump made this call as a self-serving action, but the center may not understand that Trump has more than a right to expose his political opponent precisely because he wants to become the new president. Acquiring truth on a presidential candidate should never be a crime unless it's done by unacceptable spy programs, or by blackmail. Trump's method was simply to ask a favor for "us."
I'm sure that Trump did have as a partial-motive to punish his guilty attackers, for even after Mueller's failure, they didn't let up on him. It's just human nature to want to punish those who seek your demise, and so we can't imagine that Trump didn't want it. When he resisted punishing them, it was probably for political reasons, not to cause waves that could harm his poll numbers. However, he must do what he must do: cause waves because they are unavoidable. Make waves, Mr. president. Rock the boat until they all fall overboard in a frenzy and get eaten by the sharks. Make our wish come true. Stir up a lot of confusion for them with a bang-bang-bang approach, giving them no time to plan a response because your next bang comes at them too fast. Your slow-poke attitude has only made them stronger.
How do we explain that at least three youtube channels for Hannity, on the 27th, and others at Fox for the 27th, offer videos only two seconds long? I missed Solomon on Hannitys 27th show. Is youtube doing this, but if not, then aren't the channel owners conspiring together to rob conservatives? Or does one person own all of them? What kind of a game is this? Just skip Hannity's introductions if you can't handle the repetitions, and try to find his guests for anything new.
On a Hannity show dated Saturday (28th), Giuliani (after 30 minutes) admits that he looked into Biden's Ukrainian scandal at the behest of Trump's state department i.e. Pompeo. Suspicious? Trump trusts Pompeo. I do not. CNN: "Giuliani said he would not testify without consulting his client, Trump, and that testimony about his work for the President should be protected by attorney-client privilege. "Ultimately, if I were to say yes and he were to say no, I can't testify," Giuliani told CNN Friday. Not long after, news broke that he had told Sky News essentially the opposite that he would in fact testify." I can believe this with Giuliani's past track record; he always acts zealous for Trump, and then at times lets Trump damage slip between his lips.
The Biden scandal has Biden's crime but that's not all. Ukraine gave exceptional, undeserved monies to Biden's son for what should be the obvious purpose of seeking a favor, not from Biden the nobody, but from Obama and/or John Kerry at State. See Jarret at about the 30th minute in video above for the talking point that Trump should use in his public appearances for pouring hot oil down the leftist throat.
Wow, I've just gone to John Solomon's recent article, which says, "Hunter Biden’s American business partner in Burisma, Devon Archer..." I remember by heart that Archers and Larchs have a white dragon in a red crown, looking like the white swan out of the red crown of Staffs. The latter came up where the Crains have a crane STANDing (Arthur-related code) on a raGULLY staff. Gullys and Gulls can be gleaned as kin of Swans/Sions/Sine's. Gullys have a "cruce" motto term, and were first found in Oxfordshire with Amore's. The crown type used by Archers and Larchs is sometimes called a CORONal crown, we get it.
Swan liners are from lake Sevan, not far from Kepoi. French Archers look like they share the crescents of neighboring Labels/La Bells. Labels are used by Amori's/Damori's and Tristans. The latter made it to Arthurian myth's Cornwall elements, and as king Arthur was made born in Cornwall, location of Bude, I suggest that the Bude arrows are those of Archers and Larch's, and that the ARCHibure variation of Arthurs ("obSTANTia") relates. Archibalds (Roxburghshire) share the French-Archer crescent. The "Ut" motto term of Archibalds is suspect with Uts, son of the Biblical Nahor, the latter suspect with the proto-Neuri. Neuri were in the Ukraine, on the Bug river. German Bugs use crows, and English Bugs were first found in Nottinghamshire with a branch of early Archers.
Again, the Archer arrows are suspect with the arrows of Bude's (share the blue roundel with Arthurs). Arrows/Arras' are from Artois, we get it. The Bude-like BUDini were south of Kiev along with Trypillians, and Budini lived with Alan-suspect Geloni, the latter suspect to Julians. French Julians share the Chief of French Alans. Bude's look like a branch of Bute's/Butts, and while KIMs were first found on Bute, Kepke left Miss Peare for KIM Walsh. "Amor proXIMi" is the Ground/Crainey motto. Walsh's/Walchs, who have a swan, are from Wallachia, and that's exactly where I saw Roxolani upon one map, at the Buzau river (near the Prut) along with the Cotesii. Scottish Walsh's/Walchs were first found in Roxburghshire, no guff.
Gullys and Gulls were branches of Julians, and the French Julians were first found in Languedoc with Cotesii-suspect Kotts/Cotts (share fretty Shield with ARC-river Modens), possibly explaining the SherKOTT variation of Sharks. Hmm, Julian-like Giuliani. The Cotesii are suspect to the royal Cottians, where the white horse of Miss Peare traced. The Cotys surname is listed with ARCHdeacons, no guff, and Deacons (Suffolk again) with Decans have a Coat like that of English Grounds/Grundys. Grands/Grants ("Stand") use more crowns and throw in a rock.
I believe that God caused me to kind Kepoi by making Miss Peare look like the female face of a sphinx I found in a Wikipedia article for a location (forget the name) beside Kepoi. A sphinx is used by Procks/Brocuffs, possibly in "Prokimi," though that term can also be for the Peare-branch Pero's. Pierro's/Pero's share the Alan fesse and look linkable to Bute's/Butts/Boets. The latter happen to share the fesse of BUTTons/BIDENs, that's right, who look like they can be from "BUDINi." Impressed? We started on Biden's business partner, Mr. Archer, and then landed on Biden liners as immediately as I made the Archer-arrow link to the Bude arrows. Impressed? God's providing all of this, isn't He? His enemies in the ancient land of Israel, unto the end-time stupids bent on their own self-destruction.
Let's bring back the Schims/Schiens that were to topic above with the Moch scimitar, for I trace BOETs/Butts and Schims/Schiens to BOEOTia's Schimatari. Schims/Schiens share the boar head of Mole's (Roxburghshire) because Schimatari-liner Shake's use mole hills. It wasn't until hours after writing the paragraph above that I came back to the CNN article featuring Giuliani. The article came to Viktor SHOKin, and checking for Shokin-like surnames, I saw the Shake's coming up as Shocks. German Shocks are also Shockens. I think that's very interesting, for Shokin is the chief Ukrainian prosecutor that Boet-liner Biden got fired.
Ukraine-like Orion (just add a capital C) was a mythical character of the Schimatari area. LOOKIE: Orion was the mythical HUNTER, and Biden's son, HUNTER Biden, is the one who was in the Burisma gas company that Shokin was prosecuting!!! WOW. That can't be coincidental. And Buttons/Bidens use a so-called "horn," code for Orion liners! WOW.
AHHHH, I can now realize why I found the red BUTTONS in the SINK of my trailer. I told this story several times, and here it can be asked why it should be that Shockens and Sinks both use a man wearing a hat and holding flowers? That is simply amazing.
The two red buttons were still in their original bag, and Bags, first found in Norfolk with Bus', share the cinquefoil with them. If the men are holding what are called, "flowers," note that Flowers share a giant, white cinquefoil with the Bus'. You'll see below, when Bus' return to topic, why Bags should be Bug-river liners. The Sink man almost looks like his hand is in his pocket (or maybe the hand is at the belt for Belts) while Pockets share the giant Bus cinquefoil in colors reversed.
It seems that God caused me to tear down the old trailer piece by piece so that the buttons I didn't know of (from the trailer's previous owner) would fall out of the KITCHEN cupboard, into the kitchen sink. Can we believe it, the Kitchens ("Pro REGE") share the water bouget with Bugs!!! Kitchens were first found in Lancashire with Shake's (shocking!), and the latter were beside Astleys while Astleys have another giant, white cinquefoil. Incredible.
After Biden got Shokin fired, he was replaced by anti-Trumper Yuriy LutSENKo, though no Senk surname comes up in order to link him to the kitchen sink. The Sinka variation of English Sinks looks like it could have a Ukrainian ending, "ka." German Sinks were first found in Bavaria while German Sings/SENGs share the Bayer (Bavarian) bear design and the hexagrams of both the Bavarian Weis'/Wise's and Peare-branch Pero's. Miss Peare dated, and almost married, Mr. KepKE. Checking out the colors of the BarWICK / Berwick bears, one could get the impression that Bavarians were in the namers of bear-depicted Berwickshire. Hmm, the WICE variation of English Wise's has a "SaPERE AUDE" motto while RoqueFEUIL is in Aude while Wice-like Ice's (ROStock, suspect with Roxolani) have Rockefeller-line trefoils. Suddenly, God's ice-cream symbol looks linkable to Adam WEIShaupt, founder of the Bavarian Illuminati.
AHA-HA, German Sinks have exactly the man (or woman), though in a different color, that's in the Vick Crest, and these Vicks (Bavaria) have a giant version of the Weis/Wise / Pero star! The Vick man/woman is in the blue suit of the person in the Shocken Coat which likewise wears a hat. Ice's were first found at the Pomerania theater with grape-using Deeters/TEETers (goes to the shark teeth?) while the woman in blue of Jewish Franks holds grapes and wears another hat. Moreover, grapes are held by the man in yellow suit (wear a belt) and yellow hat of LAUS'/Lauers (Bohemia, can be related to Bavarians) and the Shark-liner Saraca's were at Laus (Mate-likely DalMATia). Belts share the Mate and Mander besants while Manders have a "Laus" motto term while the Sink person looks like he/she has a hand on the belt. German Franks (Bohemia) share the column of Malta's while Melita is near Laus. Laus/Ragusa is at ancient ASAmum while Assi's come up as Ise's. Assi's were first found in Shetland with Yellow-suspect Yells, and the latter have been highly suspect with the garb of Sticks, used also by Sink-like Sings.
If Sings have the WAISTell horse "on a gallop," note that Gallops have the motto, "Be bold, be WYSE." Note that the hand on a bold-like belt is also on a WAIST, for God gave Miss Peare a waist symbol for the Waistells at the end of the sleeping-bag dream. Waistells share the blue dove with George's, suspect from George, father of Drummonds, who married a woman of Bohemia's Podebrady. The Wessel variation of Waistells may allude to Whistle's/Wissels i.e. to the so-called whistle-blower now in the news. Some think that John BOLTon is one of the first-hand witnesses who conspired with the whistle-blower...but I have no evidence that the waist event in the sleeping-bag dream alludes to the whistle-blower now in the news. I'll think about it.
Bags share the Shield of Crimea-like Grimaldi's, and Gog-like Cocks while Mole's were first found in Roxburghshire with the GOOGE's whose boar head they share. Roxolani can be of the Rosh, the partner of Gog in Ezekiel 38. German Baggs/Beggs might even be from the Khazar kings called, begs. Khazars, though ruled by Jews of some sort (Shechemites / Nahorites?) claimed to be from the tribe of Togarmah, another people group in Ezekiel 38. Khazars had an empire into the northern Crimea at least. Compare Baggs/Beggs with the Skene's/Skins ("regia"), a branch of Schims/Schiens. Skene's look like they named ESCHYNa de Molle.
[Insert -- Wow, an hour or so after writing here, I was listening to Hannity talk about Whitey Bulger, and checking the Bolgers/Bulgers, not only do they have a trefoil version of the Bag/Bagg Chief, but Khazars were Bulgars/Bulgarians! Just see the headline: "Hunter Biden’s China Deal Partners Include Mobster Whitey Bulger’s Nephew, John Kerry’s Stepson." Togarmah was a son of Gomer, and Kerrys were first found in MontGOMERyshire. Amazing. The heraldry appears Set-up by God to point to Obama-team foreign crimes of 1st-degree corruption. Compare Kerrys with Helps/Halfs. John Kerry was born with a Cohn or Kohn surname, and Cohens are from Khazars! Wow. Jewish Cohens are also the Kagan surname, and Khazar king-priests with called, kagans. The Mate's mentioned earlier are expected as a branch of Mattis' sharing the Shield of German Cohens.
As per the belt above, compare the Belton/Balton Crest (expect the Bauer wing) with the wings of German Cohns/Kohns. Boltons are Baltons too. I's guess that the white Belton/Balton roses are for Rozala of Ivrea, a location on the BALTea river. The Belton/Balton fesse is in the colors of the fesse-wise bars of the Leavells of Ivrea-like Yvery, and Scottish Leavells share piles with the Beltons/Balton fesse (they look like piles, anyway). Boltons/Baltons have a motto linkable to that of Chives', who named the Chivasso location of the Baltea. Chives elements are expected on the Lys tributary of the Baltea.
I can begin to see here that Boltons/Baltons are of the Italian Botters previously suspect in naming the Bautica river, the alternative name of the Baltea. If that's correct, we take it to English Botters/BODINs, first found in the same place as Bottons/BIDENs (fesse in Bolton/Balton colors). Suddenly, John Bolton becomes suspect with Biden i.e. with the unknown whistle-blower against Trump...though this potential evidence is hardly strong in itself. Scottish Leavells share the red fesse with Bottons/Bidens.
I have more, for the waist scene in the sleeping-bag dream came with an "it FELT so GOOD." As I showed, Miss Peare on this and another account pointed very strongly to the line of Gothelo, and especially to his great-grandson, Godfrey de Bouillon. I can add here that Bouillons, first found in Auvernge with BAUTs (Bautica-river liners), share the flory cross of Felts and BIRDs in colors reversed, while Boltons/Baltons share "bello" with boiullons and moreover use a so-called "bird bolt" (arrow) in Crest. Arros/Arras' are from Arras (near another Lys river), near the Boulogne home of Godfrey's family. I think this now tends to nail John Bolton, or at least make him a serious contender as yet another mole in Trump's camp, chosen by, you guessed it, Trump himself. German Bolts use the bird bolt. Scottish Bauds and Balds had worked strongly into the medallion-on-hood event.
As the Cavii on the Mathis river are expected with naming Caiaphas the high priest, let's add that "cohen" is the Jewish word for a priest, for it can stand to reason that a known line from Caiaphas (known at the time by the family) would develop a Cohen surname from a Cohen-like surname. Why do Irish Cohens/Cohns share the Mate besant? German Cohns (share sun with Jewish Cohens/Kagans/Cohns) have the crane with raised foot i.e. expected with a rock in claw. German Cohns even have the Catherine wheel belonging to Rhodes-suspect Catherine Roet while Mate's have a saltire version of the Rhodes cross. The Rhodian Illuminati can be expected to be secretly from the line of Joseph Caiaphas, chief killer of Jesus along with his father-in-law, ANANus. The Mate / Mander saltire is also that of ANNANs. It appears that God worked, by manipulating heraldry (marriages) in the past, the killers of Jesus into his nasty shark. Again, Saraca's were from DalMATia, not far north from the Mathis river of the Cavii. Rivers down to Dalmatia come from the land of Ceraunii.
The Lissus location at the mouth of the Mathis is to the Lys/Lise surname that named the Lys river to Ghent/Gaunt (Belgium), and while Catherine Roet married John of Gaunt (red-rose founder), Ghent liners are highly suspect with the Belgian Gone's/Guenets (share Gaunt bend) who come up also as Cohns and Kohns. Heraldic gauntlet gloves must be partly for Glove's who share double-gold wings with German Cohns/Kohns, and while the latter were from Khazars, Cathers are in Glove colors and format. End insert]
I have told at least ten times of my dream wherein my dentist laughed at the red buttons on my shirt. His surname happens to be a major kin if Tancreds/Tanks, the latter being in Shirt colors and format, and a branch of TANKERville's i.e. from TANAGRa, home of Orion. God knows what He's doing with my dreams and special, set-up events. The laughing part was highly suspect with the "LA FIN" motto phrase of Scottish Kennedys, for Irish Kennedys were first found in Tipperary with LAFINs/La Fonts. It's perfect for His main point of tracing Buttons/Bidens to Orion Boeotians, for the Biblical Shechemites who named Schimatari were associated with proto-Kennedy Kenites. He laughed at my buttons after we played a game of golf, the letter item suspect with Guelphs = Welfs, and then Welfs/Wolfs happen to share the gold-on-red wolf heads at the TIPs of the Skene/Skin swords.
Ukraine-like Crains have a crane STANDING on a RAGully staff while Botters/BODINs, first found in Hampshire with Buttons/Bidens, have an eagle standing on a perch. Raggs' are expected, due to the white-on-blue colors of their fleur-de-lys, with Ragusa liners, and Crains have the Shark crane. The Shark-line Saraca's of Ragusa named Saracena, or vice-versa, on the Sybaris river along with Morano, and Marone's happen to share the white-on-blue Schim / Mole / Haley boar head. There was a Haley river near the Sybaris. Amazingly, peoples from Greece's BOURA (near Coronis-suspect Corinth) are known to have settled Sybaris, and Burisma-like Buris' (boar head) bring up the Burys who share a green Shield with white-boar-head Burleys. Wikipedia's Saraka article says that they were at Kotor before Ragusa, and Kotor is beside BUDva/Butua. Budincidence? Burley-branch Bowers share the bow-and-arrow theme with Bude's.
I've been stressing a fairly-new idea in Shechemites of Schimatari for significantly longer than the Hunter-Biden scandal, and here I think I now see why. God led me to Schimatari, very apparently, because He needed to do what you just saw on Hunter Biden. The Schimatari location was discovered by an event of mine at age five, when I peed on the head of my next-door neighbor accidentally. It was that event that had me looking up the mythical urine symbol, which I found as the rain of URANus, but also with urine-like Orion. The latter's father, I had read, was at Tanagra, in or beside the Schimatari area. If we wonder why Coronis elements are merging with Orion's, just assume that Uranus' son, Cronus, evolved into Coronis (she evolved as per the story-telling of myth writers) while Uranus evolved into Orion.
The neighbor, about my age, was walking around the corner of the PORCH. I was standing on the railing of this porch, and he came walking around, getting my urine on his head. This event was resolved with PortisHEAD, for Porch's are also Portis'. Porch's/Portis' share the giant Bus cinquefoil, and while Pockets have it in colors reversed, Pockets have a Poucher variation like the Porcher of Porch's. Portishead is at Clapton, and one Clapton Coat (no longer shows symbols) shares the patee cross of Crains/Crauns. As per the sleeping bag, the Sleep-liner SELEPITANoi Illyrians at the Butua theater may have named CLAPTON (maybe just a fat chance).
I have the red-button story in probably ten previous updates, but there was also the dead squirrel found in the POCKET of my shorts, and Squirrels have been resolved as a branch of Sire's/Sirets.
Coronis was made the mother of Asclepios, and there is an Asclepios rod, by the looks of it, in the TILDon Crest while Shake's were at TYLDesley. Tyldesleys (share "amor" with Grounds/Craineys), with a Ragusa-like "Regis" motto term, have mole hills in the colors of the Crain staff. Tildon have a "Truth" motto term that, as a surname, is listed with Trotts, suspect from the Trotus river not far up the Siret from the Roxolani at the Buzau. The descendants of the 600 Benjamites of Rimmon were at the Rimna river between the Trotus and the BUZau. Astleys were looked up because Tyldesleys were in Tyldesley and in neighboring Astley. An Astley motto term is just about the "justitia" of Sire's/Sirets, and the latter share a coiled green snake with Tildons! Bingo. TILTons have another item (wolf head, linkable to Nahor-liner Neuri on the Bug river of Ukraine) inside of a crown, the Coronis > Ceraunii-line symbol. The Tilton Coat looks like a version of the Raggs Coat. The Siret was also the AGARus, suspect with "Hagar," concubine of Abraham (father of Israel), Nahor's brother.
The giant BUS cinquefoil is suspect with the giant one of Astleys (things inside a crown), for the latter have the Toeni family in their write-up while the Toeni's have their sleeve in an Arms of Leicestershire, though those Arms can also show the Bus and Hamilton cinquefoil alone. Tiltons were first found in Leicestershire. HAMILtons are from KEMUEL, third-named son of Nahor (Abraham's brother), after BUS, the second-named son. Kemeul's descendants are suspect in the heraldic camel, used by the Irish Pattersons suspect in the "Regis PATRia" motto phrase, and the pelican, of Tyldesleys. Tiltons were first found in Leicestershire with the Dexters sharing the double-Huck chevrons, blue like the chevrons of Huckabys who in turn have Asclepios rods, the symbol, I expect, of Tildons.
The Bus cinquefoil is shared by TANKERville's, from TANAGRa, and by Bacons, from Bacau at the mouth of the Trotus upon the Siret. Tankerville's were kin of CHAMBERlains, the latter having been of the namers of Chambre on the ARC river. The BALDs are a branch of Bude-like Bauds, and while Uts was Nahor's first-named son, "Ut" is a motto term of ARCHiBALDs.
I don't think Trump would dare tweet the following so soon if the truest version of the phone call has what the whistle-blower claims it has: "...The Whistleblower knew almost nothing, its 2ND HAND description of the call is a fraud!". But Brett Samuels of The Hill, who might be one of Trump's enemies ganging up on John Solomon, writes, "The [whistle-blower's] complaint largely aligns with the White House's rough transcript of the call." No, the transcript and complaints do not align, except where they agree that Trump asked Ukraine to look into deep-state crimes, but this is a non-issue for a complaint because it's not complain-able. It's praise-able. There was an article telling that some or many at The Hill are trying to reign John Solomon in, to silence his deep-state attack.
Here's The Hill on Trump's call to a quasi-civil war if he's impeached, where he calls on evangelicals to fight for him:
Careful, Christians. It seems that Trump is using this Ukraine issue to zeal-itize Christians. It shows, at least, that he's concerned with losing Christian votes unless he acts against the deep state. We do not use violence, right? We fight with words.
Here's a passionate Giuliani at the end of the week, who seems intent to do Biden some political damage:
Proof that Google has Wiped Out Tribwatch
On September 24, tribwatch's webpage at imperator.htm was visited by a computer with IP address, 184.108.40.206, from a location in Nuremberg, Germany. On online page says that this page is suspect for:
Attacks websites by trying to access known vulnerables of plugins, brute-force of backends or probing of administrative tools.
zzZZzz blocked content access.
Abusive content scan (200)
Scanning unused Default website or suspicious access to valid sites from IP marked as abusive.
There are 105 reports from people around the world on that IP address, and though I haven't read them all, no one reports an IP address just to say it's fine. This computer downloaded the imperator page only. That is, my tracker shows it downloading this page only, yet doesn't show my page from where one may access the imperator page. It appears that it entered tribwatch straight at this page. How can it do malice by simply downloading this page? Are they able to imbed things in the page, then re-load it into my server's files so that others get spyware or something? Are they able to imbed something that tells them who else visited this page in order to keep track of their enemies?
My new tracker is telling me that google has probably all of tribwatch's pages separately in its own cache. This means that you can download one of my pages from google without the use of my server. Surprise-surprise. We all thought that webpages must come from a server. Not so. An employee at my server told me yesterday that Google simply handles the traffic all on its own, if it chooses to. That is, google becomes my server at times, for certain pages that it chooses, without my permission. Could google keep the entire world's files in its own computer to alleviate the work of the servers? Impossible. Why would it even want to? It looks shady in a world where cheating tricks are being applied. I see no advantage in this. So why is google doing this to my files?
Ahhh, it's a great way to effect corruption on all of us. In other words, I have no evidence that anyone is actually seeing the pages that google provides on its own. On one of the stats pages from my server, the category for this type of download is shown as a 304 page. Note how that number reflects a 404 error page, as though a 304 action could secretly be a non-dowloaded page but specifically from google's cache. Yes, google can just program its computer to not download my pages, and then this perhaps shows up in my tracker as a 304 download. Over a one day period that I used this tracker, there were plenty of 304's.
All of the hits showing a 304 also have a download size of zero bytes. I now need to ask whether this is explained due to google not loading the pages at all, or whether the tracker records only the bytes taken from my server so that anything from google is automatically recorded as zero...because, we are to assume, the tracker doesn't know the size by that method of download. All downloads with the true file sizes are shown as 200s (verses 304s and 404s), but, for all I know, this doesn't necessarily indicate whether the downloads were from my server versus google.
The big point. If the tracker can count the size of the file from my server, why can't it count the size taken from google when the latter acts as the server? Google could easily provide this information to trackers, but, if google is using itself as a server for rotten purposes, it would naturally disallow trackers from knowing the file sizes, so that it records, zero size. In that way, we could be told that zero does not necessarily represent a non-dowloaded page when in real fact it does. If you ask your web expert about this, he/she might say that a 304 record of zero bytes is not indication of google providing a 404 page, and maybe it's not most of the time. But for webpages that google wants to suppress, it could in fact provide 404s that are recorded as 304s, and there's no way for anyone to know. I counted more than 25 304 hits from tribwatch's files, 15 of them in these updates, in a small part of one day earlier this week. Google is handling a lot of my server's workload. WHY? Because it's kind and adorable and cuddly?
My server's employee suggested yesterday that 304s shows zero bytes because nothing came from the server. But then how do I know whether google downloaded the page to someone requesting it? Google hides tribwatch pages. It's not inclined to doing me favors. When I see my files in google's cache, I tend to think it's not for helping me out. I'm burnt toast on the Internet. Google has suppressed my work absolutely, and this has probably been the case for several years. I am not at all convinced that tribwatch files are being viewed by humans 18,000 per three-week period = 6,000 weekly = 850 daily.
My server provides a "Visitors" page to let me view the minute-by-minute traffic. This is the page with the 304s, etc., mentioned above. The top of this page has no stat counter's name, but has my server's name in the header, and so I assume that this is a service from my server. But the suspicious thing is, everytime I load this page, it shows me only a small window of the day, sometimes 15 minutes long, at other times 70 minutes. It does not allow me to view an entire day if I choose. If I re-load the page hour after hour, I get new time slots, but I am not allowed to click back to a previous page so that I might have record of a longer stretch than each little time slot. Is this not suspicious?
My impression is that my server wants to hide from me the real low traffic I am getting, nowhere near the 850 daily that AWStats reports for this month. Probably, the reason that webpage counters are no longer seen is that the counters were discovered as counting robots, severely inflating the true numbers...just as the Internet bosses wanted. Yes, they have been corrupt slimes from the start, at first making us think they were doing our world a big favor, but in the end we discover they're nothing but deplorable spies of the political left. Google with its cute little animated pictures; the message: enjoy yourself on the Internet and tell us all about yourselves. Slimes.
People entering the home page or the Iraq-update's index are at times expected to click one of the links seconds later. But I have yet to see, over the last few days of checking over a few hours of time (at the Visitors page), computers clicking to a link from a page it was previously on a few seconds or minutes earlier. Most of the hits (each one shows an IP address = one computer) are loading one of my pages only. A good example of what I'm saying is where a hit is for only a photo, yet that same IP address shows no webpage of mine from which the photo can be accessed. It therefore doesn't look like human traffic. How did the computer get to the photo only? It must have that file bookmarked, and that's what robots do: bookmark / record all my files, and periodically check-in to checks for changes in the file.
I'm sure the Internet bosses can demand robots to come with some identifier allowing stat counters to either mark robotic visits, or ignore them. Why hasn't that been happening with all stat counters? Because, the slimes wish for us to believe their lie that our webpages are doing much better than is the reality. Webelizer can have no other explanation, for AWStats is able to discover and ignore robots, as does StatCounter. Yet can we even trust the latter two to be reporting all robots? I'll bet not. I'll bet that only some robots can be identified because Internet bosses work on ways to operate robots unidentifiable. Yes, that's what slimes do, find ways to operate in corruption sneakily.
In the Visitors page, robots are easily identifiable when they come with that slew of 404s I talked about above, the list ending with favicon.ico (an icon). Yet that Visitors page has other hits not showing that list of 404s. That's because robots are not all checking to see whether I have favicon and similar things active on my pages. Therefore, a stat counter may not be able to recognize the robot as such. BUT, IN ANY CASE, the Internet bosses can EASILY arrange not to classify favico.ico, apple-touch-icon.png, apple-touch-icon-precomposed.png, etc., as non-hit actions. Why did they allow these items to be viewed as hits in the first place? Exactly what we expect of the mothers of all slimes. It's just plain human nature for leftist slimes to deceive us. The people who run the Internet want to give web owners falsely-inflated numbers to make them feel good about Internet potential, otherwise the Internet -- the deep-state spy tool -- is as good as dead.
Most companies are spending tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for first-class webpages that do next-to-nothing for them. But it's the job of Internet bosses to give them the illusion that the web is doing something substantial for them. We would do best to wreck the Internet, like someone stomping on a piece of junk, and go back to playing games with one another, in person. The Internet is vital for their futuristic totalitarianism.
Yesterday, I asked my server why the Webelizer stat-counter / tracker has about 110,000 hits for tribwatch so far in September, while AWStats stat-counter only has about 18,000 for the same period. He said he didn't know. He was lying. Why was he lying? Later in the conversation, he let slip that Webelizer counts robots as hits (robots asking for webpages). I asked if Webelizer informs its customers of this. He said to the effect, "I don't see it on its page." I then asked whether my server (his boss) informs its customers of this, since my server offered Webelizer to me to check out my traffic? He said no. I replied, "depressing," and left it at that. It's an under-statement. We are being criminally abused by the Internet. It's a sham. It was made for the deep state and corporate globalism, and we are its victims.
Is tribwatch.com really getting 18,000 hits per three weeks? AWStats is good enough to add that, on top of the 18,000, there were 96,000 hits in what it calls, "Not viewed traffic". AWStats says: "Not viewed traffic includes traffic generated by robots, worms, or replies with special HTTP status codes." It's suggesting to us that the 18,000 were viewed, but were they really? I know no way to prove it.
The AWStat page has a "Robots/Spiders visitors" box showing more than 25 of 58 (33 not shown) robots with an accumulated number of hits of over 8,000 (I didn't use a calculator). It's boneheaded of these services not to explain themselves. Do we subtract the 8,000 from the 18,000 hits that are supposed to be all humans. That makes no sense. Below is how the 8,000 hits can turn to 96,000. The following data is on my server's "Visitors" page for one robot in the same minute of time:
There are 11 entries there, and only the index/htm is a webpage (my home page). The other entries have a 404 beside them, telling that the robot was not able to access them, and, besides, they are not webpages anyway, but features of webpages that I haven't bothered to research. The point is, Webelizer counts those 11 items as 11 hits instead of just one to the home page. Is that not dishonest? Why is this dishonesty allowed?
I see that Miss Florida is STILL READING, non-stop for years. At least, everytime I check the StatCounter, every few to several months, there's the same IP address from Florida, which I assume is from she. Hi girl, hoping all is well.
Here is my conversation with John at my server, with my comments to you (the reader) in square brackets. I was trying to discover how to differentiate humans from robots. I start the conversation off like so:
What does it mean when the following items appear in [your server's] "Visitor" page for cPanel? All the items appear in the same minute, 2:55 pm, and this process, repeated continually several times per hour every hour, always starts at one of my webpages. What does this mean? Is it a problem that I should fix? Is it a human or otherwise? The list indicates a 404 message per each item aside from the 200 when starting at my home page.
The index.htm was visited the earliest, followed by the rest
John -- Happy to take a look at your visitor logs. One moment while I pull up your account [he wanted to see what else I had said on the topic so that he could better tailor his responses according to what another employee may have said to me. The previous employee, the day before, was dishonest with me too].
John -- All that indicates is those pages do not exist [actually, it indicates a lot more, but he apparently didn't want to talk about it. He's trying to minimize the importance].
Me -- But why are they there? Did anyone actually visit the index page, or was it a robot?
John -- They aren't there. That just indicates someone attempted to view those pages. Maybe a google bot [why does he say "maybe" when he knows darn well it's a robot]. You can look up the IP of the visitor for more information regarding who it may have been.
Me -- Have you any idea on whether this process with those non-existent pages are a human or a robot?
John -- Could be either. Either way, this doesn't appear to be an issue or negatively impacting you or your site? [He wants to not talk about it anymore, doesn't want to admit its a robot for sure.]
Me -- How can anyone make sense of a tracker if we can't know whether its human or not? Why or how are those non-existent pages there?
John -- What information are you trying to get out of the visitors metric? [Duh, he's acting ignorant of my purpose].
Me -- I have these bogus pages continuously as I study the tracker. It's just normal to ask what they represent. Are you not familiar with this? Am I asking the wrong person?
John -- I am asking what information your are looking for so I can better assist with you finding it. [I told him my purpose and reasons, but it's like he's out-to-lunch]. Visitors Metric displays up to 1,000 of the most recent entries in the Apache log for a given domain’s web site. Regardless if they are a bot or human. Most of the recent activity on your site is probably bot-driven.
Me - I'm asking what the bogus pages represent, and whether they are there as evidence that robots are demanding files from my website.
John -- OK great. It looks like bots to me. Is there anything else I can assist with? [Heh-heh, he's finally admitting it's not human, and then wants to make me feel bad for inquiring.]
Me -- What does favicon mean?
John -- Favicon is the classic ICO file of 16 × 16, with 16 or 24-bit color and transparency support. Much later, it appeared in a 32 × 32 size, but older browsers still reduce it to 16 × 16. Today, it is an important component of the website interface, which also plays an important role in advanced web applications. It is shown at the top of web browser [I think it's the little logo on a browser's tab, nothing to do with my website.]
...Me -- So this is definitely evidence of a robot intrusion?
John -- Robots index all webpages on the internet.
Me: So this is definitely evidence of a robot intrusion?
John -- I have already indicated that it looks like bot traffic. I would not word it as you have though.
Me -- But you said it could be human or robot [I was sticking it to him for lying to begin with].
John -- Ok great. It looks like bots to me. Is there anything else I can assist with?
me -- I want to know whether they are robots, and if you don't know, can I ask someone else there?
John -- You can look up the IP of the visitor for more information regarding who it may have been [you see, he still skirted the question even though he knows the answer is, yes, this favicon junk indicates a robot definitely.]
Me -- The IP doesn't tell anything about human versus robot.
John -- It may if you look it up [no it may not. Was he trying to get rid of me before answering the question?] You may consider this resource to look up IPs: https://whatismyipaddress.com/ip-lookup Instant IP Address Lookup Lookup details about an IP address including location, ISP, hostname, type, proxy, blacklist status and more. Trace, Track and Locate an IP address. [IP details don't tell whether webmasters operating under a specific IP address are running robotic services, unless maybe ALL webmasters at the IP address are running robotic services.]
Me -- No, IP addresses tell only of the provider's name, location, not the individual computer.
John -- Yeah, that would be protected information. But if you determine the source of the IP you may be able to deduce what is behind it [he's trying to skirt me off onto a wild-goose chase to get the answer even though he knows the answer].
Me -- Is there anyone there that can tell me whether these processes are robots or humans?
John -- No and what is the driving need for this information? What are you looking to do? Block bots or?
Me -- As any web owner might want, I want to know the true traffic volume from humans.
John -- I would recommend using a different metric, like AWStats [he's wasting my time].
Me -- Is there anyone there who can tell me whether this process is robotic or human driven?
John -- Which process?
Me -- The favicon junk that gets me straight 404s that makes no sense to me, which you have not enlightened me on.
John -- I already indicated those 404 entries on visitors is likely bots. Robots index all webpages on the internet. Almost all websites have a favicon.
Me -- "Likely robots" is not "definitely robots". Can humans generate that junk too?
John -- Yes, but it is not likely. You can look up the IP of the visitor for more information regarding who it may have been [humans generating that junk is not what I mean by "humans." I'm looking for humans interested in seeing my webpages, not humans doing manually what robots otherwise do. So, this John fellow was still skirting my simple question: could this junk be generated on the tracker from a human seeking to read one of my pages?]
...Me -- Are those 404s counted as hits / visitations?
John -- If you really want a comprehensive visitor log metric, I would recommend using a third party tool like Google Analytics.
...me -- I'm not looking for comprehensive, just a solid idea of human traffic, not asking much, really.
...John -- I would guess most of the traffic on your site is driven by bots unless you are promoting traffic to your site somehow.
Me -- Are those 404s counted as hits / visitations?
John -- Yes [ouch, what a revelation].
Me -- Depressing. It looks like falsely-inflating the numbers is the entire game. How can they be counted as hits? No pages were opened, and they are not my pages to begin with.
John -- In order to increase human traffic, I would recommend looking into SEO and updating your site to a more modern aesthetic [talk about changing the subject]. Me -- How can they be counted as hits? No pages were opened, and they are not my pages to begin with [copy and paste because he didn't answer the question the first time]. Awstats gives tribwatch 18,000 hits over the past three weeks, but I'm asking you, are most of those just junk hits from favicon / apple? Shouldn't I be concerned and asking these questions?
John -- Scroll down. This information is all on the AWStats page. There is a section for robots. And none of this is concerning as far as I can tell.
Me -- ...Can you verify that each one of the items in my original list above is one hit each?
John -- The visitors log did not list how many times each page was visited. It was just a list of recently visited pages and the results. Each robot could have hit each one of those pages multiple times [he's not making sense here in the context that I'm enquiring about. He seems to be suggesting that each item in the list below can be more than one hit each].
Me: How many hits in the following showing:
John -- I don't know.
Me -- 10 hits? Not less than 10? Any number above 10?
John -- I don't know. The visitors log did not list how many times each page was visited. It was just a list of recently visited pages and the results. Each robot could have hit each one of those pages multiple times [it sounds like nonsense to me].
Me -- That list was made by one IP address, so it assumes one robot. Are there therefore at least 10 hits in that one exercise, or call it what you want.
John -- Again, I would not recommend using the Visitors log for what you are trying to do. Visitors Metric displays up to 1,000 of the most recent entries in the Apache log for a given domain’s web site [looks automated at the press of a button]. In this case, I am only seeing about a 10 minutes window [he's skirting again]. And if you want to block robots, look into using a robots.txt [yup, he's skirting].
Me -- That list was made in the same minute or less by one IP address. Do you know whether there were ten hits or more, or do you not know? You keep changing the subject, annoying.
John -- I don't have a clear goal from you other than asking circular questions about the Visitors log. Yes, let's call that 10 hits.
me -- It's irrelevant what my goal is, and besides I told you my goal. That list was made in the same minute or less by one IP address. Do you know whether there were ten hits or more, or do you not know? This is a case of just answer the question, pretty please, I BEG of you.
John -- Yes, let's call that 10 hits, John [I'm John too].
Me: But do you know it, or do you not know it? You're the only one here who can answer that.
John -- Yes. It's 10 hits. 10 entries is 10 hits. What is your next question?
me -- So why didn't you say so at first?
John -- What is your next question? I will stop providing unrequested assistance and advice.
me -- I just want to know whether you know what you're talking about, or whether I should open a new window and find someone who does.
John -- I am good at my job. What is your next question?
Me -- 10 is an absolute correct answer?
John -- Yes, What is your next question?
Me -- Why did the robot download the index page? What's it want with it?
John -- That's what robots do. They index all pages on the internet.
Me -- Okay, thanks bye.
John -- My pleasure. Is there anything else I can assist with?
Me: Maybe later.
John -- Ok Thank you for contacting [our company]. Have a great day.
Talk about pulling teeth. It seems that robotic activity in trackers is a well-guarded secret for Internet experts only; the rest of us lowly webpage owners had best not know the details. He very much didn't want me to know that robotic junk generates 10 extra hits on top of the original, one download of one actual webpage. It scores 11 hits instead of the real one hit, and even the real one is not by a human. That's 11 hits every few minutes on my website 24/7.
The evil of this may be that the Visitors page, which he calls the Visitors Metric, may have zero humans. For example, at 10:49 on September 25, IP address 220.127.116.11 enters my page, http://www.tribwatch.com/up/updateIraq6Jun2.htm (2016 Iraq update) out no nowhere, without first entering the updatesIraqIndex page that allows one to arrive to it. This download comes with no favicon / apple junk so that I can't identify it as a robot with certainty, and it's possible that a human has the 2016 page bookmarked, explaining why it pops up downloading the page out of nowhere. However, in the same minute, a near-identical IP address, 18.104.22.168, is said to have loaded my home page out of nowhere, not coming from any other of my pages. It looks like two different computers from the same server has robotically downloaded a couple of pages at the same minute (10:49 am). A minute later, IP address 22.214.171.124, downloaded the home page; all three downloads are of the 200 type, and none came with favicon/apple junk.
I can now check StatCounter in an effort to discover whether any or all of the three were humans. Nope, StatCounter did not register any of the three, suggesting that even junkless hits at the Visitors page are robots. I don't know whether you can load this Visitors page, or whether it's available only to me, but there you go in case you can see it. Where there are a string of 200s, they are either at the same minute or the next one, indicating robots.
At 10:45 and 10:46, two IP addresses have downloaded the home page five times, but StatCounter has not registered either address as a human viewer. At 10:40 am, a computer has downloaded the http://www.tribwatch.com/updateIraq/Index.htm page, but the same computer is not shown clicking any link at that page, indicating a robot. This Visitors page is a sample from 10:36 AM - 11:05 AM, with 159 hits, none of them from humans so far as I can make out. It's been this way, page after page, because google has killed tribwatch. So far today, the 25th, at 5:30 pm, there has been just one hit worldwide, according to StatCounter, into my home page. There are only seven visits to the home page for two days previous to today. That's impossible unless: 1) StatCounter is incorrect; 2) Google is not bringing up the home page in search results no matter what word / phrase people search; this is to be expected from google to me to a large degree.
AWStats says that my home page was viewed 2,005 times over 23 days, or about 87 daily, by humans. However, AWStats has the second-top webpage as redshield.htm, with 1,101 views. I had noticed that the robots on the Visitors page liked redshield.htm more than any other page. Perhaps the robots go in everytime a person loads the page, to discover who loaded it. I think redshield.htm (on Rothschilds) is offered by another website, which increases traffic there.
So, which is the truth, StatCounter of AWStats? Is it two or three hits daily on the homepage, which about makes me want to cry, or is it 70-100 daily? I've put a colossal amount of time into the website, most of which I've enjoyed doing. AWStats figures are suspect, and I'll tell you why below. Somebody online: "I've been using StatCounter for a while but it seems to have stopped working. It's not tracking any more visitors. What's wrong?...The counter is installed correctly but it is not increasing!" In my stat counter, the charts always had the page views significantly higher than unique visitors for each day, but now have them exactly equal every day, indication of a problem. The charts always showed the number of returning visits, but now there is always zero returning visits.
I suggest that, if StatCounter is owned by a leftist goon, its part in the political war can seek to artificially lower the numbers of conservatives to de-spiritize them, hope they stop writing. I can definitely see that Google's ambitions would be to do exactly that, not only by deflating numbers artificially, but by lowering them in reality by hiding pages. It's completely easy to program a computer to NOT bring up webpages as often as they would apart from tampering. For google to tamper, just give "dangerous" (influential) conservatives a code for ignoring their sites every 5 or 10 searches that people make. Or, by putting them on a punishment list for some bogus reasoning. Even my server may be punishing me by not sending out all page requests. I could never know the truth unless perhaps I switched servers.
Some possible good news: writing this section has made me realize that StatCounter has changed its installation code since last I installed it years ago. It can explain why it's not working properly. We'll see now with the new code installed.
"Also, Awstats counts visitors that have accessed image files or document files on your server directly..." In my view, loading a picture or map from a page is not a hit, and there could be many other websites who link to my photos and maps that get scored as hits on my end. So, this inflates the hits numbers to an unreal number. AWStats could easily ignore jpg's and the like, but it doesn't. What guess would you guess as to why it doesn't ignore them? Inflating the numbers deliberately and deceptively is my guess.
"Google Analytics by default counts a session as a 30 minute interval. So if the user goes on a 30-minute lunch break in between visits on your website for example, that will count as 2 visits." That's not to say that a hit is not a hit unless a person has spent at least 30 minutes at a page; it's to say that Google views one hit as a session 30 minutes or less. It's to say that google inflates hits if you just leave a website alone on a browser's tab, for more than 30 minutes, and then you go to that tab again and again throughout the day or week. A person may have read your page once, but then goes back to reference part of it = inflated hits that are not what you would want recorded as hits.
"Awstats counts a session as 1 hour." Why only one hour? Why not have a limit of one hit per full day? Because, that doesn't inflate the numbers as well. It appears that google goons wish to inflate the numbers more than AWStats does. Surprised? Why not give web owners the choice of how long a session will be? StatCounter offers this service, and I have mine set at 24 hours. However, perhaps I've been deceived into making a mistake with this.
StatCounter recommends using 30 minutes, and says: "This [setting I choose] is the amount of time that needs to elapse between pageloads for a pageload to be considered part of a new visit." The way I've been viewing this , and the way the ordinary person views this: "pageloads" refers to the re-loading of the SAME page. I want it scored as one hit per day no matter how many times someone enters the SAME page on a given day. However, if StatCounter has rigged this as referring to the reloading of DIFFERENT pages, then any computer visiting multiple pages over one day is scored only one hit for the way I've got it set. If that is the case, it's forcing me to use a much lower period than 24 hours. Use of the latter can now explain why my pages have low hits with StatCounter. I'm changing it now to 30 minutes in case I've been understanding this wrong.
Does this mean that someone visiting two pages in 29 minutes is scored only one hit? I don't know, but that seems wrong. I've assumed that a change of page, regardless of the duration spent there, always scores one hit, for stat counters even inform us of page visits of 30 seconds or less.
Online quote: "But, while Awstats does try to identify and exclude these non-human visits, it can’t do so with 100% accuracy. Awstats has a list of known robot/spider ips, and most of them do identify themselves as robots/spiders, but not all do." Ahh, some robots don't want to be known as such, and arrange to fool stat counters. But why would they do that? My best answer: because Internet bosses want to inflate numbers to keep low-traffic sites believing that their Internet presence is worthwhile. It's just the logical expectation. It's what we should have expected when the Internet was fledgling, in order to make it work with small businesses and small-fry writers. Once they played that deceptive game at the start, why give it up ever?
As robots don't spend time at webpages, I think I can bank on AWStat's "Visits Duration" chart. It claims that, for the first 23 days of September, 410 visitors have stayed at the website between 30-60 minutes, and 119 additional visitors for an unknown amount more than one hour. That's not a bad audience. I don't despise "small things." These numbers don't include all visitors because trackers can't count the time of many viewers. Those it can't count are given zero time.
Take a youtube video channel that gets 2,000 views on average, video after video. Roughly, its the same 3,000 people, not all watching every video. At my numbers above, 410 + 119 over three weeks means that there are 23 people reading an approximate average of an hour daily, and that's 8,400 annually. If google were controlled by a post-tribulationist, that number would rise to 8.4 million annually.
It seems that AWStats is including a lot of robots after all. AWStats claims that, for the first 23 days of this month, Miss Florida has visited 98 pages (about four per day). Even if she's reading every one of these updates, that number seems too high, but easily possible if she's venturing into other pages even if just to look around (just to let you know, I haven't been viewing the tracker but once every several months, and now only to see what google has done to me). The point is, AWStats has the top viewer (IP 126.96.36.199 = Hurricane Electric Internet Services) at 1,743 pages in 17 days (last visit on the 17th), and that can't possibly be a human, even though AWStats claims that it tracks only humans in these numbers. That sinks my heart again, because it's evidence that AWStats is lying to the world, making it appear that it filters out all robots.
The second-top viewer has far less: 356 views, followed by 271 and 184, all over about 23 days. I don't imagine too many people could be that excited about my website. Recall that AWStats reported 18,000 hits, and then gave a list of
The total number of unique visitors over the 23 days is 2,800, and the total hits are 18,000. It just doesn't seem possible that 2,800 humans are each accessing 6.4 pages on average each, because the bulk of the 2,800 are expected to be let's-just-see-what-this-is viewers, and once into the first page, they leave and don't come back (e.g. pre-tribbers). If they load just one page, the tracker doesn't know how long they were at the page, and all such hits are given zero time as the visitation length.
I urged readers at one time to surf with methods to hide their surf details so as to go untracked. I don't know how big or successful that has become, but at the time, tracker details fell significantly.
I have three "Phantom Unknown" browsers listed on the 23rd of September, and they all have the same time (11:29:29) to the very second:
23 Sep 11:29:29 Phantom Unknown Morocco Fes, Hostoweb Ltd (188.8.131.52)
23 Sep 11:29:29 Phantom Unknown United Kingdom Maidstone, Vooservers Ltd (184.108.40.206)
23 Sep 11:29:29 Phantom Unknown United Kingdom London, Bitfolk Limited (220.127.116.11)
This is the first I've ever seen of "Phantom Unknown" as the browser type. The three are obviously not from humans, for they came at the same second to my homepage. Both UK computers above entered the same page at 11:28:22 am, but the Morocco computer entered at 05:28:26 am. I wonder what this is. I have not been able to load my own pages since last Saturday, at least, the 21st, even though everyone else's pages load. I don't know how long before Saturday the situation was such, but it persists to today, the 28th; I've never seen this problem before.
Previous to my installing a new StatCounter code, the StatCounter records showed two separate pages for hits, one for "www.tribwatch.com/index.htm" (call this A) and another for "tribwatch.com/index.htm" (call this B). Now, however, with the new code installed, it's showing statistics for "tribwatch.com" (call this C) and "www.tribwatch.com" (D). The hit results on all four pages are different, and A and B do not have hits for the latter part of the 27th and beyond, because the code was changed midway on the 27th. So, C and D have my new tracker records, yet they include records going back to September 21 even though the new code was installed on the 27th. The records are indicating that StatCounter is missing hits, at least for tribwatch.
For example, I asked a friend to load three pages on the 24th, but it looks like he entered four, because C has four, yet B has only two, meaning that it missed two hits. How many other hits had it missed, and why? Why are there so many foreign computers when the great bulk of the Internet has American computers? Is Google blocking page loads from American computers, or have readers been turned off by my lack of love for Trump, Bush, and pre-tribulationism...not to mention what looks nutty, my talk on dreams and events in my life.
A and B did not show Knoxville Tennessee and Friendswood Texas (they show in D), who I recognize as long-time readers (years) of the Iraq updates. Whenever I checked the tracker, months apart, for the updates, some of the same computers showed up everytime, the two above included, as well as a reader in Spain who did not show up this week in A and B but does show in C. Hello, Santiago, if you are reading here, it's got to be about 12 years you've been reading. I don't think I ever saw one time when this Spanish computer didn't show up in the updates. I feel the weight of the world. I thought by now you would have moved on, Santiago. By now your babes are teens.
In A, there's a hit from Norcross (Georgia), but it's not in either C or D, showing absolutely that, even with the new code, StatCounter is not fully reliable. The lists for C and D go back to the 21st and 22nd. In A, there is a hit from Swanton on the 27th, which is in neither C nor D. Big problem there, StatCounter, big problem. In A, Brampton has a hit on the 26th, but not showing in C and D. In fact, as I go down the list in A, none of those hits are found in C and D. To put this another way, A has hits on the 23rd only from Chicago and Singapore, but C (same home page) has hits for the 23rd from: Woodbridge, Victorville, Metairie, Sydney, Singapore (different time than in A), Dublin, New Orleans, Ashburn, New South Wales, and Moldova. It's a bit of a relief that the old code wasn't catching most hits, but then what hits are not being caught by new-code C and D? D has hits neither shown by old-code A and B or C. What a mess.
Even if I double or triple the homepage hits as recorded by StatCounter, the number is so low that I suspect google's suppression of the website, for I have hundreds of pages (800, wild guess) each with a link to the homepage. There are over 600 Iraq-Update pages, though I can understand why people won't enter those links, for google brings up their dates (i.e. old dates). Even if people don't like the homepage, I'd expect say 50 hits daily just from curious people who've never been there...if google were providing those 100s of pages in even a normal way. But if Google suppresses them, or brings them up as 404s, then this explains the low hits (5-10 daily on C and D combined).
There are so many prophecy-interesting chapters at tribwatch, and especially due to the high number of chapters, that many people will bookmark the page to make it easier to return until they have exhausted what they want out of it. How can there be only 5-10 hits daily, therefore? In C and D, even with the up-to-date code installed (on the homepage), almost all of the hits have "no referring link" as the point or origin for those visiting the homepage. That is, almost all hits originate from bookmarks, for "no referring link" is said to refer to bookmarks. When the person enters the home page from google, it will say so. Over 35 hits in C, not one is said to come from google. Over 23 hits in D, only one is said to come from google. However, with all others coming in as "no referring link," there seems to be a StatCounter glitch here.
Every hit in D has "no referring link" except the one from China. If this is the correct classification, no one in D came to the homepage from another tribwatch page. Likewise, not one hit in C has a computer originating in another tribwatch page, yet there are several doing so in old-code A and B. Either the new code is not working for me in this regard, or A and B disregarded hits that come from bookmarks. Either way, StatCounter is now (in C and D) failing to record hits coming from one tribwatch page to another? The code is so simple, how can things go this way wrong? I just paste the code to any webpage I'd like tracked. If it's not working for me, shouldn't it be failing others too? Or does StatCounter have ways to punish a few of us not living up to the image of the social future, as the technocrat anti-Christs plan it?
Of the 47 hits showing in A (records only go back so many days), a vast majority come from a tribwatch page. Of the 24 hits showing in B, only two are "no referring link," all others are from a tribwatch page. That looks normal, as though it's working. Yet not one in either A or B is from google! There we have it, Jesus: proof positive that google is a mobsterous creature of the darkness. I'm not exactly celebrating here. That's what the google spider has done to me. Someone needs to step on this spider. I wonder for how long its been this way. Google needs to be split up.
It has never come to mind to check the stat counter as a means to see if google is wiping me out. I didn't have an inkling until this month that google has wiped me out almost completely. It seems to me that most hits at this time are from those who had bookmarked one tribwatch page or another.
My stat counter records only 500 computers at any one time, free of charge, which is the way I'm doing it. So, if the last 500 computers go back two weeks, that's all the record I see.
On Saturday afternoon, the page for C would load but not show any results. I've tried loading it several times over several minutes. How can this be, RIGHT NOW? I don't recall a StatCounter page ever doing this before. It loaded earlier in the day. Page D loads fine.
When clicking "Visitors Paths" from C, a page loads with greater visitation details on all the computers listed. I see that some are still loading updates previous to the current one, suggesting they want to finish reading them before moving on to the next ones. But of concern are found computers with some times matching to the second, and all belonging to Amazon.com, one each from Dublin, Virginia, Singapore and Australia. It's a good question as to how computers from so far off from one another can download a page all at the same second. So, with the new code in D, I'm getting robots, whereas without the new code in A and B, these particular robots didn't show. It means that at least some of the "no referring link" in C and D are not bookmarks, but robots. Mr. StatCounter, that's garbage. Why are you giving us a new code that lets this slip through? And why are the real humans of the old-code A and B not showing up in C and D?
So, with Google no longer making my post-tribulation work available to the best of its ability (without getting caught easily), what will I do? I'm going to put a pitch for the home page at the top of every update. The time is coming when the post-trib message for tribulation preparation will be vital.
Today, I discovered that the Updates Index link at the top of this update and others won't load for me on my computer, even though there is nothing wrong with the way I have the link done. Likewise, the new link to the homepage, added to the top of this update, won't load for me either. If it won't load for you, assume google's cheating ways.
For Some Prophetic Proof for Jesus as the Predicted Son of God. Also, you might like this related video:
Table of Contents