Table of Contents
Forensicator May Be Skipping Over White Rabbit Like He Never Heard of Him
Trump Loves the Scaramucci Stain
Heraldry Around the Scaramucci Surname Mouse-Interesting
I'm not taking email at this time, here's why. I apologize to all having left email, as I can't even mail to inform you. I may never be able to use the Yahoo email account again.
Making the Case for DNC Criminality
Just found an interesting statement from Crowdstrike on a Forensicator page. I missed this page until now. Keep in mind that, with an issue like this, the guilty side will be on the page with possibly deceptive statements. TwistedSec claims that 23 MG/s is not necessarily indicative of a local transfer, making him a suspect for the criminal side. The Forensicator doesn't respond to that proposal until much later on the page, and says that he will try later to explain why, even if someone remote was able to achieve that speed in practice, factors on the physical end of things would slow it down drastically.
It is IMPORTANT that TwistedSec does not argue the 23-MG speed of transfer as set out by the Forensicator; this, along with no one else commenting on that speed, convinces me already that the files were obtained in-house. Congratulations, Forensicator. This is a big deal. It's opening my eyes as to how the sinister side operates, and even puts a bad light on certain Republican congressmen. As of July 25, Forensicator has NOT altered his original page where he claims that the transfer speed does not allow an outside hack job. It's not until mid-week that we discover the Forensicator as part of an elite group of former spy people blowing the whistle.
“In May 2016 CrowdStrike was brought to investigate the DNC network for signs of compromise, and under their direction we fully cooperated with every U.S. government request [inc. FBI requests],” a [Crowdstrike] spokesman wrote. The cooperation included the “providing of the forensic images of the DNC systems to the FBI, along with our investigation report and findings. Those agencies reviewed and subsequently independently validated our analysis.”
This statement by Crowdstrike, that it cooperated with the FBI, as though it had nothing to hide, contradicts those who say that the FBI were wholly uninvolved, including the FBI itself. How does Crowdstrike expect to get away with this claim? There can be only one reality: the FBI and Crowdstrike winked together in creating a false event. Crowdstrike doesn't want to admit guilt in shunning the FBI's involvement, and the FBI doesn't want to admit complicity with Crowdstrike's complicity with Guccifer. The two organizations are not on the same page as far as their claims go, each protecting their own donkeys.
The good news is, the statement clearly says that the FBI agreed with Crowdstrike's assessments...including that the hacking came from Guccifer. If the FBI now argues that it did not validate the Guccifer part of the analysis -- or if the FBI disagreed with it -- then why didn't the FBI call to attention this most-important part when Crowstrike announced it to the world? Is the FBI going to pretend that Crowdstrike (private company) is the final authority on the identification of the hacker?
There was no other purpose for the DNC in hiring Crowdstrike but to find the hacker, and to determiner related facts. We must therefore assume that the FBI was dandy with the accusation against Guccifer and Russia. Jeff Sessions needs to investigate whether the DNC files were copied versus hacked. So far, neither he nor Trump has spoken a word on this question / issue, and Trump's accusations against Sessions this past week are to be returned onto his own head if the president himself does not emphasize it. The FBI is the self-same organization attacking Trump, and here the FBI is clearly guilty with Crowdstrike in a situation involving Russia. It's a perfect situation for Trump and Sessions to go after the FBI, to step on it and reveal its stinking guts. But if Trump is unwilling to go after the FBI, why should he be able to accuse Sessions of a similar / identical thing?
Just before the quote above, the Forensicator said:
Per Comey’s [FBI director] testimony, as I understand it, he said that the DNC denied access [by the FBI] to their servers, even after being asked repeatedly ("at multiple times and several levels") by the FBI. Comey also stated that they (the FBI) depended upon Crowdstrike for analysis of the servers and the (alleged) hacks. Crowdstrike declined an invitation to appear at a Congressional hearing subsequent to Comey’s testimony.
The first sentence tends to contradict the claim in the earlier quote which said that the DNC freely gave to the FBI all that it asked. The second sentence means only that the FBI was made to depend on Crowdstrike analysis. In other words, the FBI was given the analysis only, not the ability to check the analysis. That's like a doctor telling the FBI that a patient has cancer, with the FBI agreeing without having its own doctor verify. That's a wink, in other words, the FBI acting complicit with a criminal act by Crowdstrike.
The FBI apparently nodded with Crowdstrike because the two were in collusion to support the DNC, firstly in hiding the murder of Seth Rich, and secondly in collusion to make the Russians look guilty of a hacking. This has everything to do with the follow-up plot to make Trump look guilty in plotting election issues with the Russians. Shame, Trump, if you let the DNC get away with it, great shame.
Forensicator adds a noteworthy thing (square brackets always mine):
It was enough for the DNC that the media kicked in to disseminate the Crowdstrike analysis. On Forensicator's claims against Crowdstrike, nothing at all from the media. Does it appear that there is a large blob in a one-sided situation? Does the blob look Democratish? This is how Democrats craft "reality," whatever they so desire for political gain. And shall the people also give the Democrats the ability to spy on politicians??? That's insane. Trump is feeling the brunt of this insanity, yet he's publicly attacking leakers in his own house more than he's attacking the spy agencies. There could be an explanation in that he's working hard to catch the FBI leakers while keeping a low profile. Let's hope. But my gut thinks that, if this troubling situation were not coming over Trump like an omen of bad things yet to come, nothing would get done to curb spy corruption. So, I say, pour the afflictions upon the White House until the White House actually does what needs be.
It's not just the fake news from CNN that Trump should be concerned with, it's also issues that CNN does not wish to touch. That's how we are to know the truth, when something compelling, intriguing and not unreasonable is left out of the news. It's a no-brainer that something of a truthful nature is being left out if the media is simultaneously trying to pass off a faked accusation. So far, aside from TwistedSec, there's no one else on the page claiming that 23 MB/sec is roundly doable by other methods aside from local transfer (e.g. from within the DNC system). Forensicator's story is therefore news worthy. If Obama were the president now, the Forensicator claim wouldn't have a chance of making the news, but we thought that Trump was different. So, what's the problem?
Against TwistedSec, Forensicator says further: "You state: 'Crowdstrike presumably still has the harddrive images. And they claim to have sent copies to the FBI'. I missed that Crowdstrike claim. Can you provide a cite? It doesn’t square with the Comey’s testimony that the FBI was denied access to the DNC servers." You can't make a preliminary case against the FBI better than this. It should be rewarded with digging-in to find more. Return on the FBI's head what the FBI is trying to do to Trump. It's perfect. Step on the snake's head, reveal its stinking guts.
If you missed the point, let me spell it out? The DNC accuses Russia of working against Hillary Clinton, and Comey, whose already shown himself in criminal collusion with Hillary, cries the blues that the DNC would not let the FBI in its door. Laughable. The FBI doesn't need an invitation to enter the DNC door. Comey cries like the DNC locked him out in the cold, and there was nothing he could do about it. Hillary loses the election thanks to the Russians hacking the DNC, and the FBI says to the DNC, "I can't come in? OK, I'll go home."
And people on the Trump side are also holding the DNC up by its hypocritical ears for not inviting the FBI in to discover the Russian collusion with Trump. It makes no sense at all that the DNC discovered Russian involvement while not allowing the FBI to disseminate that "fact," for the DNC should want to have the FBI disseminate it, unless it's not a fact, or unless the DNC would get caught in a fabrication if it let the FBI in. But, in this very situation, Comey says, "I can't come in? Ok, I'll go home. I have some memos to fabricate, anyway." But lest we think that the former FBI leader is guilty alone, nay, there is one Trump fat cat that has not rewarded the Forensicator's work, which comes out at great risk to himself. Why has Trump been so closed, so stingy, so hard-nosed? The Forensicator situation before the president is exactly a strip of the filthy rag that he promised to cleanse, but Mr. Clean is looking more like a fellow dirtball himself. It appears that someone needs to force a reluctant Trump to act, and, in the meantime, he's blaming his own house, throwing darts at everyone.
Forensicator and his aid cite a Washington-Times article on July 5, fours days before the White-Rabbit release, and on the first anniversary of the DNC theft (the copy under discussion). The Times plays stupid, like everyone else, pointing to the Russians, but there is the admission that the FBI ("federal investigators") has distanced itself from Crowdstrike, for obvious reason because Crowdstrike is involved in a crime:
It is perhaps the key piece of forensic evidence in Russia’s suspected efforts to sway the November presidential election, but federal investigators have yet to get their hands on the hacked computer server that handled email from the Democratic National Committee.
Indeed, the only cybersecurity specialists who have taken a look at the server are from CrowdStrike, the Irvine, California-based private cybersecurity company that the DNC hired to investigate the hack — but which has come under fire itself for its work.
...Members of Congress say they still believe Russia was responsible but wonder why the DNC has never allowed federal investigators to get a look at the key piece of evidence: the server.
What's going on has been obvious to Republicans for a long time, yet we are to assume that the Trump White House hasn't heard about it? Is Trump a liberal? Is he for organized crime? Is that the problem? Is Trump accusing all the good guys of leaking so that he can replace them now with criminal types? Some evidence came in this week, that he's doing exactly that.
Did you catch the Times statement: "Members of Congress say they still believe Russia was responsible..." Does that include Republicans? Say it isn't so. But if it is so, then aren't they stabbing Trump by supporting the Guccifer hack? Shouldn't Trump desire to change the minds of Republican congressmen by elevating the Forensicator's work, and then holding the FBI up by its ears as a farce? Can't Trump take the opportunity now presenting itself to do an FBI investigation against the FBI so that it acts naturally against the Mueller movement within the FBI? Won't that help Trump to shake off the Russia-collusion accusation? Doesn't Trump want to come out smelling and looking clean? Then why isn't Trump supporting the Forensicator and others (e.g. Adam Carter)? They are pointing the finger straight at the FBI. Hello? And it's pointing at an FBI in collusion with Obama so that tackling this one item can create a glorious stomping all to the credit of president Trump. Yet, so far as we know, he's completely dumb on this.
It seems that Crowdstrike had assurances that the FBI would wink, play the game, from the start, otherwise Crowdstrike would not have pointed the finger at the wrong place only to be subsequently up-ended by the FBI or others. Comey: "we banged on Crowdstrike's door more than once, but Crowdstrike would not let us in. It's not our fault." Ok, then Jeff Sessions needs to ask Crowdstrike what it's been hiding from the FBI. The best way is for Trump to act, however, not Sessions. Never mind openly accusing Sessions, Mr. Do-Nothing, but set the FBI against the FBI with a White-House panel (if even just one confidant) overseeing the entire attack. If the FBI refuses to properly attack the FBI, make light of it. Can Wray (the next FBI director chosen by Trump) be counted on for being a Trump confidant? Not necessarily, if Trump has been choosing CFR or other deep-state operatives for running his government. In that case, Trump is destroying himself. In that case, Trump is hiring leakers, and it's his own fault, stupid.
The Congress is covering the DNC crime for unspoken reasons. We need to guess the reason, and there's an argument to be made that Congress is compelled by the machinery to abide by one deep-state faction or the other. Congress' Republican majority wants this DNC finger pointed at Russia because the Republican Congress is aiming to crush Russia. The sanctions against Russia now in process within the Congress are being justified exactly on the Guccifer hacking and related interferences. The Republican congress is a hard-shelled crab without a backbone. It crawls rather than walks. It is a useless Egypt, as when God compares Israel to the wilting vines in the stinking Nile. The Republicans have failed the good of the nation because they have no intentions of helping the good of the nation. The stagnant, Egyptian bog crosses over to the Republican side.
In return for the up-scaled sanctions, Putin, late this week on Sunday, ordered more than 700 American diplomats to leave his country. But this is only the beginning. Trump now has 700-plus extra, unemployed bodies to use in fixing the spy problem.
The problem is simple (not necessarily easy) to fix, if an honest president does the right things, if he attacks and succeeds over the deep-state to the applause of the greater part of the population. There are many Democrats that oppose the deep state. Trump was elected much for his promise to undo the deep state. If an honest president calls the greater part of the people to fight it, they act as a team, the president and the people together. He needs only to identify the deep-state congress people, making a list of them just before election time, asking the voters to elect someone else, but definitely not CFR members or anyone with a hint of deep-state love. This project demands an honest / reliable person, for a dishonest president would falsely accuse the wrong congress people.
TwistedSec acts like a scholar: "The scenario you [Forensicator] envision, frankly, is overly complex and unlikely. It is, in my opinion, far more likely that a remote attacker utilized a single breached DNC machine to locate and collect the desired data, did so using their attack tool..." It is clear deception (it won't fool anyone, anyway) to claim that it is "complex and unlikely" to copy files in-house. It's done routinely, and the computer system is pre-arranged to make this easy for those having the keys. I know very little about a shared computer system, but we can all assume that copying files from another computer is standard practice without complications by design.
There's no reason I can see that the in-house thieves couldn't have used some hacking techniques first, if they didn't have the in-house keys, and then copy the files. They could first hack past the gate(s), and finally choose on a method of copying the files. If the DNC or Crowdstrike say / imply that Guccifer could hack from Romania, so could an in-house team hack past the firewall(s). Or, an outsider can first hack to the nest, however long it takes, then use an insider to get the eggs lickety-split.
The page from Forensicator is very welcome because it discloses that he knows what he's talking about; otherwise, without his explanations, the general public isn't able to make a judgment about his expertise. Professionals can certainly test his claims, but no one is able to contradict his claim, for if it could be, CNN and the rest would be sure to do a story on it.
On the page, no one but TwistedSec is taking him on, and even he isn't calling the Forensicator names. In fact, the enemy says he respects Forensicator's work aside from his bias toward an in-house theft. Therefore, seeing that the Forensicator is respectable and reliable, why can't the White House do it's own investigation, go around the Congress?
Trump just said that he would not have hired Sessions if he knew Sessions would recuse himself on the Russia issue. We can turn the question around so that it points to Trump. Why didn't the president ask Sessions, before hiring him, whether he would be willing to support him honestly against the Russia scandal? Didn't the president ask Sessions whether he'd be willing to arrest the Clintons? Didn't the president ask his candidates whether they would be willing to bring Obama to justice? What right does the president have in claiming to drain the swamp if he hires an attorney general without first asking whether he is willing to work honestly to drain it? It is absolutely not wrong to ask a candidate whether he will do the president's will in fulfilling an election promise(s). The Democrats will frame such requests as unethical if done by a Republican president, but then turn around and do it themselves with a Democrat president.
There is nothing unethical in Trump asking his potential appointees whether they will attack the injustices of the previous administration. It is unethical to ask candidates to attack just people, as Democrats do, but it is not unethical to assure, before hiring someone, that he/she will attack the injustices that the president is himself concerned with. It's necessary to do this in order to keep election promises. Comey tried to make the people believe that Trump had no right to direct the agenda of an FBI director. Wrong. It's not meddling in FBI affairs for the White House to direct the FBI to investigate injustices pertaining to the White House or any other house.
Similarly, there is nothing wrong with a president asking the FBI to let go of a certain investigation. It's called disagreement, but that's life. If a president doesn't agree with an FBI investigation because he thinks it's opposed to a good man not deserving the investigation, the president is compelled to speak up about it...especially if he thinks it's a witch hunt for political purposes. The president was weak in allowing the press to frame his secret words with Comey as unethical. Trump had a duty to ask Comey to leave a certain individual alone, if that individual appeared innocent of the charges. There's nothing there to be ashamed of. The FBI can then resume the investigation once it has sufficient evidence of wrong-doing.
As things now stand, the FBI has zero evidence against Trump, and is using the investigation against him to find the dirt, which is unethical because an investigation is unwarranted until at least some dirt first presents itself. If we abide by this philosophy, used by Mueller, then Trump has a right to officially investigate Mueller for anything even before the evidence for it is secured. Judge for yourself whether that's ethical.
When Forensicator writes, "Guccifer 2's claim," he's talking about the July-5 theft, and doesn't know whether Guccifer is in fact Guccifer. He clearly lumps Guccifer in with the July-5 theft, which confuses me. Convinced that there was no hacking from Romania or elsewhere far off, Forensicator has reason to claim that Guccifer's claim was instead fabricated by the DNC in seeking to cover the real culprit. I have not seen evidence that the July-5 theft was a Guccifer product. Nobody seems to be explaining the proof for it. It is possible that the July-5 theft was by a person at least associated with Guccifer. Thus far, Guccifer has not come out to deny that he's involved with the July-5 (2016) theft.
If we accept the existence of a Guccifer man that stole DNC data on other dates aside from July 5, we can bank on the DNC creating a fake Guccifer in efforts to tie him to Russia while drawing him away from Seth Rich. Evidence for a fake Guccifer exists at his Wikipedia article. He must be a faked Russian agent working for the United States to tarnish Russia. That's a crime too, isn't it, Mr. Trump? Are you going to be afraid of passing justice? Will you fear directing the FBI to conduct what it was created to conduct? For the time being, we can see a Wray of hope, but I'm preparing myself for a disappointment.
Forensicator shouldn't be shy in repeating that Seth Rich was killed a few days after the first copy of the files was made. It's perfectly fine to include this aspect in all speculation of where the files derived. Congress, shame on you for not even asking a question. I can't think of a better way for the Republicans to tarnish themselves but by ignoring this story. May God ignite this story in the face of the Senate, shaming the Democrats thereof until they lose their seats in 2018. Would Trump like to see something like that? Oh, boy. Yet, he seems too dumb to take the opportunity.
Forensicator repeats that the DNC / Crowdstrike never did / could accuse Guccifer, because the evidence wasn't there. But he says that Crowdstrike accused Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear...in Russian lalaland. Once that was done, the media claim of Guccifer's involvement made the story naturally compelling against Russia, enough that Republicans are running with it.
Forensicator is troubling here: "This study analyzes only the metadata in a 7zip file attributed to Guccifer 2. There were no emails in that disclosure, AFAIK [as far as I know]". I was under the impression, as per black-and-white claims from the start of the story, that the Hillary emails were in that file. For example, "BOMBSHELL ANONYMOUS TWITTER USER “WHITE RABBIT” DUMPS 28,000 PRIVATE HILLARY EMAILS ONLINE". Or is it apples and oranges with the Forensicator's concern having nothing to do with the White-Rabbit files? Am I confused because someone's trying to make me? There was a headline, "‘White Rabbit’ Twitter Account Dropped 28,000 Hillary Emails Online," but in the article, there was talk of the Forensicator as well as sharing a White-Rabbit page which itself shares the Forensicator-Guccifer story from Dustin (i.e. Dustin contributed to his page with the Guccifer story early at 5:36 am July 10 ), leading me to think that the Forensicator was working on part of the White-Rabbit release. Maybe not. Maybe I jumped to conclusions. Was there an attempt to make people researching White Rabbit refocus on the Forensicator's = Guccifer's material rather than on the Hillary emails? Maybe.
[This is the first I've started to realize that the 7dc58-ngp-van.7z file analyzed by Forensicator was NOT related to the White-Rabbit dump. Or am I wrong, somehow? I aim to look into this in the next update. So far as I can recall, no one relating the Forensicator's work mentions White Rabbit, unless the two merely happen to be on the same page. However, on White Rabbit's Twitter page, this 7dc58-ngp-van.7z file appears with a date of September 13, 2016, tending to assure that it's a Guccifer file.]
Forensicator: "I also don't have a theory or rationale for the content in that NGP-VAN 7zip file; although there is 2 GB of data there, it is somewhat of a hodge podge and some reviewers question its overall usefulness or relevance as a 'leak'. As mentioned in the study, there may be another 18 GB that was held back. One speculative theory is that the purpose of the disclosure was to tell the owner of the original data, 'We have your data. Act accordingly.'."
I read all posts on the page, very informative, and there was not one pimple with a foul mouth, great! Unfortunately, the politics is against Forensicator. The rabbit acquired a readable set of files, though this doesn't necessarily mean that the rabbit copied the files from Guccifer's archives, or in any other way received them from a real or fake Guccifer. If Seth Rich sent his theft to the fake Guccifer (real man, but U.S. agent) for wholesale release to the world, that's one way to get caught and killed. Would Rich send material to Guccifer hoping to get them to Wikileaks through him? It's possible. In this picture, the owners of a fake Guccifer tipped off Rich's would-be murderer.
If Rich sent the files to Guccifer, why would the latter put them online if indeed he's a U.S. agent? That doesn't seem right. I can fathom a deep-state / fake Guccifer putting material online that is not very damaging to the DNC. On the one hand, I feel compelled to assume the existence of a real Guccifer who put material online damaging to the DNC in mid-June (15th), who was then caught and replaced by a fake Guccifer. On the other hand, Guccifer may be so disconnected from the DNC that the deep-state operatives owning him didn't care whether they released some material damaging to the DNC.
It makes more sense that Guccifer got nothing from Seth Rich because Wikileaks reported, essentially, that it received the material from Rich. This can explain a fake Guccifer that came out after July 5 to announce that he hacked the DNC, then sent the theft to Wikileaks. It can appear that this Guccifer is trying to take the credit that belongs to Rich. The first that Guccifer appears is in mid-June, and there is nothing said (from Reuters) about his being a Russian agent. Why would Reuters leave that part out if it was so central to the story?
Ask question: would the true leaker really come out three days after Wikileaks announced a major leak of Hillary's emails? Guccifer came out three days (June 15) after Wikileaks made that very claim. Would Wikileaks condone such a risky attitude? Doesn't Guccifer look like damage control?
A post on June 30 at his blog: "I can only tell you that I was born in Eastern Europe..." He then goes on to stress Romania. That can sound like garbage, the mouthpiece of the DNC. The writer even uses derogatory language, as expected of elite and egotistical Democrats with no respect for humans. I haven't as yet loaded all the files he claims to reveal on June 30, but if they are all generally tame / lame, it's another argument for seeing a fake Guccifer:
Debbie Wasserman was forced out around July 25. The Washington Post article suggests that she was forced out as per 20,000 DNC emails released by Wikileaks on July 22. Guccifer comes out immediately on the 22nd to claim that he gave the DNC emails to Wikileaks. It looks like a fake Guccifer. Thereafter, from his Wikipedia article: "On October 4, 2016, Guccifer 2.0 released documents and claimed that they were taken from the Clinton Foundation and showed 'corruption and malfeasance' there. Security experts quickly determined that the release was a hoax; the release did not contain Clinton Foundation documents, but rather consisted of documents previously released from the DNC and DCCC thefts, data aggregated from public records, and documents that were fabricated altogether as propaganda." This seems to be an attempt of portraying Guccifer as unreliable / corrupt as further damage control over the Wikileaks leaks.
We can fathom that the rabbit received the files from Wikileaks. But if White Rabbit's 2-gig trove has nothing by which to damage the DNC, what would Wikileaks be up to in using the rabbit in this lame way? But wait. The release by the rabbit is not without value, for it points to an inside job, and thus the motive for the release seems to be to start the revelation that Rich was murdered by the DNC. I can see Wikileaks being all concerned about that, for Wikileaks offered a $20,000 reward for key info on Rich's murderer. Try to imagine Wikileaks offering that reward if Wikileaks had no files from Rich. It's impossible to imagine. The reward says it all. If Rich was a nobody to Wikileaks, or disconnected from it, there would have been no reward offered.
And White Rabbit looks like a Wikileaks associate seeking to keep the Seth-Rich story alive. As the story still hasn't gotten wings, Wikileaks may release yet more until Trump can't ignore it any longer. It would help the cause if Trump gets to feeling icy-cold from the leaks in his own bathtub. I don't think he has any friends left in the White House.
In a video dated July 25, the Webb-Goodman-Negron trio reveal what they think is the name of the Forensicator, can you believe how rotten to the core these three are? I dealt with them in the last update, showing well-enough that they are government and/or DNC agents faking their pro-Seth-Rich position. We learn here that Skip Folden sent a letter to Trump on the Forensicator material.
Note that while Webb is on the phone with Skip, the latter speaks of Forensicator as another person. But this Webb team wants exactly to identify Folden as the Forensicator. Skip doesn't realize that he's talking to a Venus fly-trap. Webb asks him a personal question before ending the call. Look at Goodman pretending to be busy on a computer.
It's predictable that Skip will rebel against the Webb team after he finds out about this video. Webb says he got Skip's phone number from Crowdsource, a lie. The video is a waste of time after he gets off the phone. It's all filler after the main point was advertised: the identification. It will become common knowledge now. Thanks to Skip's name, I've just found this:
In a memo to President Trump, a group of former U.S. intelligence officers, including NSA specialists, cite new forensic studies to challenge the claim of the key Jan. 6 “assessment” that Russia “hacked” Democratic emails last year.
...[Their memorandum stated:] Forensic studies of “Russian hacking” into Democratic National Committee computers last year reveal that on July 5, 2016, data was leaked (not hacked) by a person with physical access to DNC computers, and then doctored to incriminate Russia
...Independent analyst Skip Folden, a retired IBM Program Manager for Information Technology US, who examined the recent forensic findings, is a co-author of this Memorandum. He has drafted a more detailed technical report titled “Cyber-Forensic Investigation of ‘Russian Hack’ and Missing Intelligence Community Disclaimers,” and sent it to the offices of the Special Counsel and the Attorney General. VIPS member William Binney, a former Technical Director at the National Security Agency, and other senior NSA “alumni” in VIPS attest to the professionalism of the independent forensic findings [of Forensicator, for example].
...Based mostly on the cumulatively unique technical experience of our ex-NSA colleagues, we have been saying for almost a year that the DNC data reached WikiLeaks via a copy/leak by a DNC insider (but almost certainly not the same person who copied DNC data on July 5, 2016).
You can read the rest for yourself, it's exactly the same story as that of Forensicator. BIG WOW: the Forensicator's work is supported by NSA people. He's not a loner if he's Mr. Folden. There is a team. The article with memorandum was out July 24, a day or less before Webb was notified that Folden is the Forensicator. Apparently, the publishing of the memorandum tipped the deep state off. It means that there is an activist program in cahoots wit the White Rabbit, and I have a prediction to make: this movement will be supported by God. You can bet your best shiny-white bra.
The memorandum was sent to the attorney general, who may not be Jeff Sessions much longer. If Trump fires Session, this memorandum may be buried. Or, Trump may hire someone to replace Sessions who will deal with it as a priority. We wait. We see. Here's a 2016 quote: "Another [theory], floated by presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, is that the [Guccifer] hack was actually a 'false flag' operation performed by the DNC to generate negative publicity for his campaign." It sounds as though Skip should have Trump's ear on this message.
The memorandum adds an easy-to-understand conclusion which I've italicized: "[Independent cyber-investigators] found that the purported “hack” of the DNC by Guccifer 2.0...originated with a copy (onto an external storage device – a thumb drive, for example) by an insider. The data was leaked after being doctored with a cut-and-paste job to implicate Russia. We do not know who or what the murky Guccifer 2.0 is. You may wish to ask the FBI." I only wish that the cut-and-paste job was added for our understanding. Is there proof that there was a doctored paste job? Let's see it.
The memorandum states that there were two separate incidents (June 12 and July 5) that copied DNC files prior to the DNC killing Seth Rich. It claims to know the reason for the July-5 copy-leak, but frankly I don't understand what's being said about it: "...a separate leak on July 5, 2016, to pre-emptively taint anything WikiLeaks might later publish by 'showing' it came from a 'Russian hack.'" First of all, I can't know whether the "showing it came from a Russian hack" pertains to the thief or to Wikileaks, but if Seth Rich stole the files, the sentence is not making sense. Neither can I fathom Wikileaks wanting to blame the Russians [I make sense of this below].
This story has been out for two days as I write. The only explanation for the big media not touching it is that the story cannot be combated. If it could be easily rebuffed, even Snopes would be doing so.
Here is another segment of the memorandum that may be confusing. As it's stated, it sounds as though the DNC, not Seth Rich, copied and stole the files on July 5 with the aim of making the Russians look guilty. However, Guccifer came out prior to July 5, and I was under the impression that the framing of the Russians came out likewise before July 5. Yet, Skip's team phrases things as though the July-5 copy was another attempt of the DNC to frame the Russians:
The Key Event
July 5, 2016: In the early evening, Eastern Daylight Time, someone working in the EDT time zone with a computer directly connected to the DNC server or DNC Local Area Network, copied 1,976 MegaBytes of data in 87 seconds onto an external storage device. That speed [22.7 MB/sec] is many times faster than what is physically possible with a hack.
It thus appears that the purported “hack” of the DNC by Guccifer 2.0 (the self-proclaimed WikiLeaks source) was not a hack by Russia or anyone else, but was rather a copy of DNC data onto an external storage device. Moreover, the forensics performed on the metadata reveal there was a subsequent synthetic insertion – a cut-and-paste job using a Russian template, with the clear aim of attributing the data to a “Russian hack.” This was all performed in the East Coast time zone.
It is confusing me. The Eastern Time Zone refers expressly to the July-5 theft. The statement therefore lumps the July-5 copy with Guccifer. But here's Wikipedia affirming that Guccifer was out at least weeks prior to July 5:
On June 21, 2016, in an interview with Vice "Guccifer 2.0" stated that he is Romanian. On June 30, 2016 and January 12, 2017, "Guccifer 2.0" stated that he is not Russian. However, despite stating that he was unable to read or understand Russian, metadata of emails sent from Guccifer 2.0 to The Hill showed that a predominantly-Russian-language VPN was used [expect this to be fabricated by U.S. Intelligence]. When pressed to use the Romanian language in an interview with Motherboard via online chat, "he used such clunky grammar and terminology that experts believed he was using an online translator."
There we have good evidence that this Guccifer is a fake. Guccifer is reported to have used his Twitter account as well as his Wordpress blog spot, and Guccifer tweeted that he was on Twitter as of June 20. This was the day he promised that the Clinton emails would be out soon from Wikileaks, just eight days after Wikileaks' founder announced that the emails were on the way. It's clear that Guccifer was all wrapped up in taking credit. He continued his tweets regularly until July 22nd, the day Wikileaks released the emails, the day that Guccifer came out to take credit for the hacking. And that's when the DNC and all its boys start to emphasize a Russian hacker.
It appears that Skip's team takes the view of a fake Guccifer (real man/men, U.S. agent(s) responsible for the July-5 leak, but, now that it's known to have been a copy session from in-house, this same team can be inferring, between the lines of their statements, that Guccifer was at least associated with Seth Rich. Or, Guccifer was the special agent working under a Rich-team task to expose the DNC. I don't think that words at all. In my opinion, the Russian emphasis on Guccifer reveals him more a fake and not an associate of the DNC on the East Coast.
I can now understand what I couldn't earlier; I'll repeat that quote here from Skip's team: "...a separate leak on July 5, 2016, to pre-emptively taint anything WikiLeaks might later publish by 'showing' it came from a 'Russian hack.'" It now makes perfect sense if the thief was the DNC itself, not at all meaning that I necessarily agree with that assessment. It's weak, anyway, until the Skip team provides evidence that there was indeed a cut-and-paste in the July-5 file. I'll assume that without a cut-and-paste, there's no evidence that the July-5 theft was a fake-Guccifer product of the DNC.
If Skip's team is correct, we must conclude that the DNC made and distributed the material without realizing that it was going out with a length-of-transfer-time fingerprint that would come round to bite it on its donkey. Would the DNC be that sloppy in trying to fake a DNC theft that was intended expressly to corroborate the HACK? Why would the DNC leave evidence on the material that denies a hack? The other theory is the Wikileaks claim: Seth Rich stole the material. It was just 17 days after the theft that Wikileaks came out with 20,000 emails, which was also the number of dollars offered by Wikileaks as reward for Rich's murderer.
On his analysis page (undated), Forensicator doesn't even use the word, "Seth." It's baffling, for he first put out the analysis on the one-year anniversary of the murder, and even his related page, where he explains the analysis, has not a word on Rich. Perhaps the team is trying hard not to be a lightning rod for DNC lightning. Perhaps the team wants to implicate Rich without mentioning his name, let the analysis speak for itself. Yet Carter's page suggests that talk of including Rich as the leaker is a jumping to conclusions. Is this professionalism or tact, or winking with the devil? Might the analysis have come out on the one-year anniversary by a coincidence of God, not the plan of Forensicator nor the VIPS team? Seth Rich goes unmentioned in the memorandum, yet the reader gets the impression that VIPS is asking Trump to get an investigation done to discover something of the truth on who stole the files.
Forensicator's page under discussion above starts with: "A study has been added which analyzes the file metadata in a 7zip archive file, 7dc58-ngp-van.7z, attributed to the Guccifer 2 persona." Ok, but who attributed it to Guccifer? On his analysis page: "Thanks go out to Elizabeth Vos at Disobedient Media who was the first to report on this analysis; her article can be read here. Thanks also to Adam Carter who maintains the g-2.space web site — the one stop shop for information that relates to Guccifer 2.0. "
Adam Carter's Guccifer page: "The Forensicator and the Digital Forensic Analysis of Guccifer 2's NGP-VAN Archive. As some of you may know, over the past few weeks I've been in contact with someone who has been working on a digital forensics analysis of the NGP-VAN archive that was released by Guccifer 2.0 in September of 2016." Hmm, okay, the claim seems to be that the July-5 theft was included with the material in the Sept-2016 release by Guccifer (Carter's timeline has this release on September 1). In that case, the July-5 data may not have come with the White-Rabbit package (I haven't yet checked, and details are not always easy to find).
A year and four days after July 5, White Rabbit came out with files that people could actually read, and the next day (or even starting on the 9th), the Forensicator came out with his length-of-transfer-time revelation, making it appear (to me) that the July-5 theft was introduced by White Rabbit. Perhaps I've got that assumption wrong, but, in any case, it's as though there was a concerted effort by White Rabbit and Skip Folden's team to attack the DNC on July 10, exactly one year after Seth Rich's murder. If there is anyone I do not see as a deep-state operative, it's White Rabbit, and he timed the release so that it would make the news for July 10. We should expect people in the deep state to immediately plot some damage control. Forensicator? Carter? Folden's group? Now my head is spinning.
How does this theory sit with you: Skip Folden's team is a deep-state agency seeking to protect Rich's murderer by coming out and blaming the July-5 theft on Guccifer.
Carter's page may be implying that he doesn't want anyone to link the White-Rabbit story to Seth Rich when Carter says: "Unfortunately, there were many versions of the [Disobedient-Media] story that added partisan spin or engaged in baseless speculation about Seth Rich despite us cautioning against it!. - We cautioned against it for a good reason and by not heeding our advice, those that engaged in it did the opposite of helping get justice for Seth." Uh-oh, do I detect another Webb-Goodman act to do damage control while faking a pro-Rich stance?
I've got to say, Carter's page is a good one if anyone wants a timeline of Guccifer-related events. On this timeline, he says: "10th - Seth Rich murdered. - There are some who suspect Seth Rich may be related to the leaks. - This article isn't concerned with trying to support or refute that claim, we are only including this for sake of reference in the timeline." Adam Carter, not interested in surmising whether Seth was the leaker. Achem.
If the Forensicator was afraid of giving the impression of being a partner with White Rabbit, he would have waited another day or two before publishing his analysis. Or, if the Forensicator is White Rabbit's enemy, and a stooge of the deep state happy with Rich's murder, not only is there no need for him to fear, but it looks as though he came out with no time to waste in doing the damage control on the rabbit's outlay. This may explain why the Forensicator claims that the near-29,000 emails in the rabbit's disclosure are a "hodge podge" of nothing to bother about.
The memorandum goes on to discuss the Wikileaks revelation of March, 2017, wherein the CIA has the ability to blame any hacking it itself conducts on anyone or any country whatsoever. Imagine such power abused. It seems that we are seeing that abuse right here, and it's leading to a Cold-War scenario worse than was the case under Obama's last years. Trump should be able to see better than anyone else that the CIA is falsely pegging Russia for something that the CIA has done, for Trump has been tasting a similar, faked-up thing for months. Normal people are imploring the president to kill this nasty spy machine, but I have no confidence in Trump whatsoever. He'll need to surprise us.
At the bottom of the page, there are 17 names for the VIPS organization to which Skip belongs. There are known whistle blowers on the list which the mainline spies have vilified, for obvious reason.
Here's a video on the memorandum, out already, and RT has one too:
Here's how one puts it: "The strong implication is that someone affiliated with the Clinton campaign created the persona of Guccifer 2.0 to trick our gullible intelligence agencies into concluding that Russian hacks had been responsible not only for the Guccifer 2.0 releases, but for the WIkileaks releases as well." I'm not so sure that they are gullible as much as they are winking, criminal accomplices. If you don't fully understand, the deep state routinely creates (fabricates) situations / events out of thin air to combat any leak of a truth harmful to itself or its agenda. What do we call this, aside from criminality? It's demonism, is it not? Soon, claims of hacking by others will become as reliable as lie-detector tests. None of us will be able to verify if an accused hacker is the real suspect versus a fabrication for political gain.
Here is a video with the founder of Wikileaks essentially telling the world that Seth Rich was the source for the Wikileak:
LOOK AT THIS VIDEO calling, and getting the votes for, a scathing investigation against Obama's criminal past. Just listen to this talk (first four minutes only, you should skip the rest):
You may have heard of the Awan-brothers scandal, where Debbie Wasserman (former chief of DNC) got three Pakistani brothers the job of maintaining computers for some congressmen. The brothers were released from their jobs when evidence appeared that they were doing monkey business, like stealing state secrets. The brothers had Obama's hands all over it, because he was in Pakistan in his youth, but admitted to being there far less time than he actually was. Besides, Obama was a hairy operator, wanting to spy on all due to the dirty deeds that he stood for. To safeguard his operations, he had to spy on everyone, as far as he could swing it. Now, the FBI under Trump has arrested one Awan brother for bank fraud. It suggests that the FBI have been investigating his doings. Last I heard, one or two of the other brothers fled the U.S. Fox News is told that federal officials arrested Awan at Dulles airport in suburban Virginia as he was 'trying to leave the country.' The judge let him out on bail, the stupid.
Days before this story, the FBI seized smashed, DNC hard drives that impinge upon the Awan brothers because the hard drives were in the home of one of them.
How can we explain that CNN is not doing the same story as we see here:
Destroyed computers in relation to the Awan brothers, and CNN sees no merit in the story? One would think that CNN would at least play close to fair in its political games. Here's a Google search for "smashed hard drives" CNN, but CNN's is nowhere to be found (as of July 26). As the story goes, Awan rented his home to some military people who found and reported the hard drives to police. Somehow, Awan forgot / neglected to remove the drives.
It can appear as though he stole hard drives of congressmen for the purpose of destroying them. In that picture, he might have replaced the hard drives in the computers of the owners without the owners knowing, and with some incriminating data left out of the new drives. The owners would probably never find out. Deleting the incriminating data in the original drives wasn't acceptable in case the computers landed in the hands of the FBI, for computers are now being built to retrieve at least the details of deleted data.
Or, the hard drives don't belong to any congressional people.
Were there no Americans that could maintain congressional computers so that Wasserman had to hire Pakistanis? Isn't it illegal for companies to hire foreigners when Americans are plentiful to do the same job? Yes, it is illegal. "Pakistani-born Imran Awan, long-time right-hand IT aide to the former Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairwoman, has since desperately tried to get the [smashed] hard drives back, the individual told The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group." We shouldn't be quick to applaud the FBI involvement in what started out to be Capital-Police case, because the FBI may be there to save the Wasserman side. It's a good bet Obama is trying to use certain FBI people to save this case from getting out of control.
So, the FBI was concerned in the Russia-hacking story, promoting it. And yet it pretended to have had no way to force the DNC to allow FBI people to peruse their computer system for to see what could be obtained towards corroborating the charge against, or even identifying, the Russian criminals. This neglect is how we can know that the FBI is the real criminal, not the Russians. Capital Police (in charge of congressional security) needs to be vigilant where the FBI monkey now has fingers on the smashed drives. Had the drives been obtained while Wray was the FBI chief, we could better expect an outcome favorable to Trump. As it is, one or more of the smashed drives may be already missing, or may be already smashed into worse condition, by the FBI.
As Rod Wheeler says about this issue, the Capital Police are not under the thumb of the Washington mayor, who worked with the DNC to silence officers at Washington police on the Seth-Rich murder. There is the hope that Capital Police (works for Congress) will issue the truth as it finds it, yet the steep state will fabricate a situation to combat any truth that comes out. This is what we are steeped in, thanks to immoralists in liberal camps. This is the new path paved by liberals, Republican or Democrat.
The FBI demanded Hillary's private server, after she refused to give it over for a long time, just days after the White Rabbit released her emails publicly. What may have happened is that Hillary's enemies found some illegality in the rabbit files, then passed the message to the Trump team and/or Congress and/or the FBI. In seeing this while the government is under Republicans, the FBI had no choice but to treat Hillary like an ordinary lawbreaker. They are saying that at least two emails on her server are classified, top secret, and this is enough to force the reluctant FBI to act, now that things far-more minor against Trump are being investigated.
This is a noteworthy piece from Sean Hannity. One of the things said is Obama's change in spy policy, by executive order, allowing all 17 Intelligence agencies to see classified data, two weeks before he left Office, meaning that he changed the policy to allow the agencies to spy on the Trump team. So, why doesn't Trump change the order with another order?
Here's a good sign. Obama's team killed judge Scalia to get the Supreme Court 5-4 in favor of Democrats, but Obama had thrown away too many Congressional seats so that he couldn't get his new appointee confirmed to replace Scalia. Trump then won the next government with a Senatorial majority, and managed to get his new appointee on the Supreme Court. It turns out that his appointee (Gorsuch) voted this week against Obama's game plan to teach Muslim religion in American schools, and the vote was 5-4 against Obama, showing that Trump's pick might just be a reliable one to deny the Democrats their other lunatic plots whenever they are challenged in court. Story here:
Here's Gorsuch on abortion, however, looking like he's for it. I'm not against women's rights. I'm against a woman murdering her own child. That's the most despicable act, worse than Hitler's deeds. Killing your enemy is one thing: killing someone for money is worse; but killing your own child in your own body is the nearly the worst, especially when she calls it a "right." Especially when she calls it a "right to choose." Admitting that she has the choice, she brings Hell over her soul because she can choose to let the child live. She has the choice, and chooses to kill. No one is forcing her hand.
Perhaps Gorsuch used the words he did to create a pro-abortion aura, to keep liberals from attacking him during his confirmation hearing. Perhaps he's got some heart and cares for the unborn. But if not, and if Trump knowingly chose a man that would not change abortion laws, there is no pity from me when they roast in fire screaming. The thought of millions of babies being torn apart with the mother's consent, in the name of "health care," is more than I can take. The hope is that God takes the babies out of pain before too much of it, and the further hope is that abortionists and unrepentant mothers should roast in Hell, screaming in pain, aborted by God from the realm of life. So be it, they deserve it. Don't tell me I'm being over the top. Don't tell me I'm being cruel. Don't project the cruelty of the abortionist on me.
One thing about the Drudge Report: with all of those headlines, I rarely click to anyone of them. Clearly, Drudge and I don't have similar brains or hearts. And Trump news is uninteresting when you realize that his game is simply to save himself. If people have their hopes set on Trump, there's pain coming. He's going to let you down. I report news pertaining to Trump to show how little hope there is in hoping for his changes, and in the meantime we get to see the demonic methods used by his political enemies as our wake-up call.
Best thing, try to get more excited in Jesus. The thing worse than killing your own child is to teach that the message of the Apostles was false. This is what makes the world Hell for those who are born. The world will never straighten out until it takes Jesus seriously. It's not just that Jesus' principles are good for making a decent society for children to grow up in; it's also that God gets actively involved in curing society when the people are careful to respect Him. And by "seriously," I don't mean that we can't enjoy things, or that we need to be stern. Taking God seriously means to be glad that He's the rightful ruler, and we make God a part of our daily conscience. This is what pervaded my life when I turned to Jesus: I was conscious about him every day, at work included. My entire mentality changed, and it permitted his words to trickle down into my soul. I very-much cared for society, that it would not go toward the evil that it has gone in. I fully understand Christians who oppose abortion, and who take activist positions hoping to curb the wicked wave now covering us. I don't think Trump has any mentality to curb this thing.
This wicked wave is a very-temporary thing to expose what society becomes under demonism. We might get disappointed in God for doing nothing to stop it. We might ask, where is God, and how can he tolerate abortion? How can he tolerate the wicked ruling over us? And on and on the questions go while all love becomes cold in a world having chosen to ignore God.
It's better not to read the news. I have pierced myself for covering news, It's almost-always the pain of my days. There is nothing of value in Middle-East news until the prophecies start to take place. But, even then, the news will get worse. I am close to me death; I may not see the Return of Christ while here on earth. We have one victory alone in all the hopelessness of the anti-Christian world. The news is the worst part of that world, and it's the part exposing the rot, the cold, the demented, the fruit of godlessness. I'm not just a goodie-goodie; I'm a true man for loving goodness. The demon would mock me as a goodie-goodie, as though being good is somehow the choice of a loser. No, it's the other way around: choosing evil makes one a juvenile.
A real man chooses the good. A real man is not the tough guy; a real man is one who chooses God where all others chose to mock Him. Here I am, tough guy, far tougher than you. You may have strong muscles of flesh, and you may have a hard soul, but I have the truth and will conquer you like one leaving you in the dust. I conquer you because nothing you say can change my mind about forsaking you. Go ahead and mock, but I'll not become like you again. I saw what you were made of when becoming more like you, and I decided that Jesus was far better, as the distance between dust and sky. Yours is the dust, mine is the sky. It's so ridiculous that you should mock me when I'm far above you, but you have no eyes to see it, otherwise you wouldn't be mocking. And it's your mocking that will get you the dust as your reward, tough guy. You are a pimple or a wart in my sight, and wherever you may think you're tough or manly, it's of no value to me.
The reason that God remains invisible to the world is to surprise mockers with their "reward." God wants to see what people will do when evil is in their midst. Will they chose to be one with it, or will they say that it's nuts to go with that flow? It is nuts, isn't it, for a woman to kill her own baby? Just the thought of the wicked today makes me sick. The news only reminds me of it all.
There is no end of women who pose to inflame men with sexual desire. I can't come to terms with this. I imagine that a woman would have the sense enough to keep her clothes on because a world filled with sluts isn't good for her own children. I try to understand how any woman can be caught dead performing pornographic movies or photo shoots, but I can't grasp it. She seems unashamed with what she's doing. She seems as though she likes it. She exposes the private parts, takes the money, and goes home to live her life. And she allows pornographers to thrive financially by these deeds. I can't grasp it, I honestly cannot. Instead of women fighting against this thing, they are, from earlier ages than before, rushing out to be porn "stars." It's like the end of the world.
She gets in front of the camera, and spreads the lips of her vagina with her own hand to show the world the interior. Great shame. The pornographer redesigns her shapes, and makes her skin look far different than it does in real life, and men are inflamed by this. They become more prone to committing adultery, leading to more divorce and broken families. Far more are prone to raping women unwilling to give them sex than would be the case without porn. In the meantime, there's more abortion or unloved children due to promiscuous women. This is what happened in my generation. Porn was tame and hardly rampant in the generation before mine. It was far worse in the generation after mine. And they want to make the entire world like this in the name of liberalism (actually, it's in the name of sexual enjoyment masked as liberalism). There can be no shackles in liberalism. Judges give porn stars the right to make and distribute porn thanks to the god of liberality. Never mind that it has evil effect in multiple ways; the judge puts liberality first, giving the generation over to a flood of sexuality in its crudest forms.
God made sexuality, and He made it pleasurable, and at times irresistible. People do in sex what they would not do had not something in the body caused it. That's sexual desire. But we are not to fuel sexual desire openly. We are not to abuse this gift. The pornographers are not doing it in the name of the liberality that they argue in court. They are doing it to get rich quick. A hooker and a porn star have exactly that motive, to make fast and easy money. Is this any acceptable reason for the judge to ruin society? Is that judge unable to reason properly? Is he blind to the money motive of the pornographers and models alike? No, he is not. Instead, he is an anti-Christ wishing to bring society to the place where all anti-Christs want it to go. And they conspired to get their own kind into positions of political and judicial power in order to carve out their anti-Christ world.
When Trump chose Gorsuch, what was Trump thinking? Did others suggest Gorsuch to him? We have yet to see what Gorsuch will choose in matters pertaining to Christianity versus anti-Christianity. Do we think that Trump was concerned about this issue? He's a man who ran casinos, where sluts and hookers manifest and infest. Pornographers and lovers of porm attend casinos and give them their daily bread. It's where money-lovers go, hoping to snag a slut for the evening. And female sluts love male sluts, the definition of fornicators (forn = porn). If they can't get a woman, a man will now use a man. The chief judges have been guilty of spreading this situation, and, the fact is, Scalia wasn't useful in eradicating it. When the Republicans had a 5-4 edge on the liberals, they failed to do anything about it. Great shame.
No woman likes to be called a slut. A slut is not just the whore, but the typical liberal female with many sex partners without qualms. She's the epitome of the liberal movement. Most female anchor women wear extreme-high heals as a symbol of sluttery. It's become fashionable to look like a slut. Some anchor ladies inject foreign material into their lips to give them that look. What does news and sexual attraction to the anchor person have in common? Money making. If this is the sort of woman hired and created by media bosses, what shall we call the bosses? How many women do you see out and about in the high heels you see on major media? Perhaps they wear normal shoes to work, then slip into high heels for the news.
Can't "slut" be applied to men too? It's the perfect word to use. In my generation, it worked to give young ladies a conscience, to make them more sexually pure. Liberal women want to be sexually inviting without being labeled sluts. This is the generation of the cheap woman, the easy divorce, the predictable divorce.
Part of Christian activism, or speaking out for a better society, is to defame the liberal movement in this regard, and get back to modesty. The first order of the day is to put away porn, to make it illegal because illegality signals corruption. Besides, it is fully reasonable for a judge to argue that the ruin / degradation to society / individuals by porn is of greater importance than the pornographer's right to use porn as merely a business product.
The argument that people have a right to engage porn has nothing to do with the court decision on whether porn should be legalized. If viewing / engaging porn is harmful across the board, the judge has all-the-more reason to outlaw that too. And if God forbids porn, a judge is compelled by Him to make the right decision against it. The human pimple, the wart, shall not arise in the kingdom of God so much as to breath in it. Yet the judges have decided in their favor.
The devils are getting in their best shots before God closes the show. We're going to need to deal with it, to "tolerate" it against our wills. It's easy for me, living in the country where almost every last woman is either between physically unattractive and middle of the road. Living in the country has indicated to me that attractive women flock to cities, where the male money-action is. Melania Trump wanted a man like that, and with her looks, she bagged a sucker.
I can tell you this: a Christian loves repentance, and holds no grudges on anyone who repents. Jesus commands us to forgive others for their general sins. But if the one sinning against a person does not cease, then the person sinned against does not need to forgive. In the same way, unless a person repents, Jesus can condemn the soul, for the Father will make Him the Judge when He returns. He did not come the first time to judge because he came to heal, but if a person will not heal, Jesus becomes his judge. The Judge of the foolish judges is coming to sentence them. The irony of his steel rod will be felt.
If Trump sins against me alone, God will take up my case and punish him. But what will go to Trump if he sins against all the Christians whom he lured into voting for him? It would have been better not to promise Christians anything than to promise while pretending to fulfill the promises. On top of the original lies, and the unfulfilled promises, he would pile on deception, and mockery. In God's eyes, ignoring the calls of Christians is equal to murder, and will reap the abortion of the soul. The best man on a presidential team is not the man who can get things done, as Trump thinks he can, but the man who simply acts as God would desire. In time, the things will get done "naturally" as God remembers to repay such a man. The end will be good produce, healthy fruit. Obedience to God rubs off on others, but liberals are horrified by a man of God.
If we don't call the world to obey God, he won't act for us. He won't force the world to obey, but if we call the world out for its sins, using any media available to us, God will find it a pleasure to act on our behalf. We don't need to overdo the message of forgiveness, because everyone knows this about Jesus. It's the message of the sins of the deep-state that matters, the sin of leading the world away from God's commands. And His commands are not burdensome, all-the-more reason that deep-state operatives will be Punished. Jesus will make it His special project to teach and enforce the laws of God while wielding a rod of iron. There will be no twisting moral arguments at that time to the whims of liberals. The Rule of Rod will be unbendable. The Rule of Rod will make for great contrast to what had existed up to Armageddon. First do the will of God, and then God will slip in the blessings for our pleasures. It's the message of Jesus, so easy to understand.
Globalism is one and the same as when a military chief becomes the king and pays his chosen generals to be loyal to his rule. It's nothing new. Your money goes to the generals of the invisible cabals who would change your hearts perfectly suited for Hell. Woe unto those through which sin comes; woe to those who want a world in unison in rebellion to God.
My focus at this time is on the Clintons, and I am interested in what Trump's team effects in that regard. After the election, Trump came out and sent Hillary a heart, saying that the Clintons are good people, leave them alone. It was a brilliant sign that Trump made false promises to get elected, no great surprise at all. But the Democrat onslaught against Trump, which is in a hurry to take back the presidency, has resulted in a Trump backlash against Hillary Clinton. His team, and even his family members, are now calling out the Clinton collusion with Russia. The more that Democrats attack Trump, the more that their beloved symbols -- their leaders -- will be attacked in return. This appears to be the game for the next three and a half years. The greater the irony for the Democrats, or the greater their inability to thwart Trump due to his increasing powers over them, the more they will plot to kill him. The murders of others don't matter to Trump. He won't go after the deep-state murder rings until the bullet flies past his own face.
In the last week or so, he's shown disappointment with Jeff Sessions, his own Attorney General. Sessions seemingly has something to hide in connection with the Russians, and, interestingly enough, Trump is publicly asking why Sessions won't go after the Clintons. Is it true that the lack of attack on the Clintons is Session's fault? I'm not so sure.
First of all, it's possible that Trump and Sessions have made a closet deal, where Sessions recuses himself from partaking in the Russia investigation at Trump's request, and meanwhile Trump pretends to be upset with Sessions to give appearances that the president wants all facts to come out on the Russia investigation. If that's not the truth, and if the two are truly at odds, then, yes, we would like to know why Sessions won't go after the Clintons when the highest priority on his table should be corruption in high places by the likes of the Clintons. Trump was elected partly to clean the Clinton swamp, and so his voters believed that Trump hired Sessions to get that job done. Yet because Trump blew the Clintons a kiss to kick-off his presidency, he may have directed Sessions to leave the Clintons alone. That policy may be coming to an end, we hope.
If Sessions won't go after the Clintons because a fearful Sessions acknowledges that Scalise was shot by the Clinton crime ring, then Trump needs to address that fear. If his team members can't do their jobs for fear of being murdered, then Trump needs to do another investigation (besides the one on Seth Rich) on the Scalise event, which was a staged event to silence Scalise. The latter man was opening a crusade against child porn, explaining well why John Podesta called for a petition / movement to get Scalise removed from his congressional position. If Trump allows this Scalise event to pass untouched, let Trump be assassinated, I will not weep a tear. The best thing that Trump can do is to remove Scalise from the hospital that murdered Seth Rich. That will send the appropriate message. Scalise is under daily threat of being murdered by the Jack-Sava circle.
I can't find the reason that Sessions has given for recusing himself. But during this past week, while he's been under pressure to produce, Gowdy's committee (small group only) passed a vote for a second special counsel (shouldn't it be "council"?) that wants to include a deep look at Hillary's crimes. You saw a bit of this vote in a video above, but here it is in print:
The House Judiciary Committee on Thursday called for the appointment of a second special counsel to investigate matters relating to actions taken by members of the Obama administration.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte of Virginia and other Republicans in the committee sent a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein asking for the second counsel to investigate matters related to former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, former FBI Director James Comey and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
“We are writing to you to request assistance in restoring public confidence in our nation’s justice system and its investigators, specifically the Department of Justice and the FBI,” the letter says. “We need to enable these agencies to perform their necessary and important law enforcement and intelligence functions full unhindered by politics.”
It's what Republican voters have been waiting too long to see. But I think there needs to be a few more hurdles to jump before it gets rolling. The vote probably means only that they can ask Sessions to appoint the special counsel, but he has the say. Still, Trump just chastised him for not investigating Clinton, and so here we are with Sessions in the perfect place to appoint the counsel (shouldn't it be "council"?)
I was reading a few days ago that there were no members of the Council on Foreign Relations running on the Republican ticket for president in 2016. However, the article said that Ted Cruz was the closest thing to it. Looking into it, I found that his wife (Merrill-Lynch and JP-Morgan banker) was a CFR member. After Jason Chaffetz left his congressional position on oversight (maybe pushed out), he was replaced by Trey Gowdy. The latter is now insinuating that Jeff Sessions be replaced, and the replacement candidate includes Ted Cruz. Mrs. Cruz has had her name dropped from the CFR list, no doubt because Cruz was forced to appear opposed to CFR in order to become the presidential nominee. Mrs. Cruz worked on making a North-American union, which amounts roughly to the Obama agenda with Mexico. The Republicans chose against Mexico, obviously. The United States is now the poorest country in the world, thanks to globalists, and cannot afford to let Mexicans piggy-back on the American dollar.
Will we be disappointed? Or will we get juicy?
Attorney General Jeff Sessions will reportedly make an announcement about several criminal leak investigations within the next few days.
Officials told The Washington Post about the forthcoming news from the Justice Department. The investigations will be centered on news stories containing sensitive material about intelligence, the report said(thehill.com).
I'm not expecting anything big. I think the players behind the scene own the Republicans. We are seeing the same-old that we saw under Bush, the do-nothing-for-God Republicans.
Trump Has a New Image Maker
Trump has a Roman Catholic, Mr. ScaraMUCCI, re-inventing his White-House staff right now. Does it sound as though Trump's staff is going to have Bible-based believers anytime soon? Scaramucci is a money man, and this week he revealed a filthy mouth that has shocked the nation. I've just checked for a Mucci surname, and found it listed with Machi's/MACONi's. Virtually all variations shown are the same as Masci variations but without the 's'. The Mucci/Machi Coat almost uses the Massey fleur-de-lys. It's interesting that the surname is said to derive from "macchia," which means "stain/MARK." It's just that I expect the mark of the beast from a mouse liner.
There is a Mussi/Mucy/Mousy surname that can be using the Vienne eagle (both colors of the Ghent eagle) because Vienne-Isere is near MACON. Mussi's/Mucys were first found in Brittany while Vilaine of Brittany, where Dol is located, should be of the Vilain Coat that uses the Shield-and-Chief combination colors of the Ghents above. Then, the wavy Dol fesse is that of Dutch Ghents. This makes the white eagle in the Ghent Crest suspect with the white Masci wing, especially as Gaunts are beloved by the gauntlet gloves of Maceys (from FERTE-Mace) while Vienne's use the giant eagle of Ferte's in colors reversed.
I can link Mussi/Muci's and Mucci's to Meach's/Meaks, Mea's/Meighs and Macclesfields very well with multiple arguments, but also to the Meu river near Dol. The "Jungor" motto term of Meech's/Meeks can be for German Jungs/Youngs/JungBAUERS (same place as Bauers) that use a stag in the colors of the same of Trumps (MECKlenburg, same place as Dols). The Schwerin location in Mecklenburg can perhaps explain "SCARamucci." In fact, after seeing a ScaraMOUCH variation at Wikipedia, the Mouch's were loaded to find a horizontally-split Shield in the colors of the same of Schwerins. I'm very impressed.
The title for one of Scaramucci's books included "rabbit hole." The Montfort location on the Meu can trace back to MonFORTE very near Bra, especially as "Ferte" is like that area's MontFERRAT. It all appears to be the king-Maccus bloodline to the barons Massy of Dublin and Monaco. Again, a member of Monaco's baron Massy married Mrs. Quintana while Quintana's use three dice all showing the 6. The Dice surname is also "Deise," which, as a location, is at Waterford, where I found the Trump stag (in an arms of Waterford). It's all perhaps a tell-tale sign that we are progressing fast to the False Prophet's 666 stain.
I expect the 666 from bankers:
Scaramucci began his career at Goldman Sachs, where he worked from 1989 to 1996 and held positions in its Investment Banking, Equities, and Private Wealth Management divisions. Scaramucci left Goldman in 1996 to launch Oscar Capital Management with his colleague Andrew Boszhardt. In 2005, Scaramucci founded global investment firm SkyBridge Capital, serving as co-managing partner before selling the company in early 2017 to take a role in the Trump administration.
The article reveals that Scaramucci uses open profanity, like any dirtball pimple you can read in Internet posts. It's one thing to hammer your thumb and scream out a profanity, but when people use it in everyday talk, they are problematic, guaranteed. I expect Mafia members to talk like that. "In 2008, Scaramucci served as a fundraiser for President Barack Obama." If that's not Mafia, it's close to it. Trump has no idea what he's doing, guaranteed. If his great success thus far has been to wiggle out of Russia-collusion, that's only because the Democrats used it as a false charge, not because Trump has a magical means to success. The way to success is to honor God. "Scaramucci has long been an advocate of liberal positions on social issues, having tweeted at various times that...'Republicans should support Gay marriage'" Trump, the jerk. He's not serving Christians at all. The White House will now have a liberal with lip-service conservatism in charge of portraying the president.
Scaramucci is a member of: "The World Economic Forum (WEF) is a Swiss nonprofit foundation...'committed to improving the state of the world'...The Forum is best known for its annual meeting...brings together some 2,500 top business leaders, international political leaders, economists, and journalists for up to four days to discuss the most pressing issues facing the world." It makes Bilderberg look tiny. With whose money is this forum improving the state of the world? With their own, or with ours? By "state," are they alluding to global statehood?
Companies fund this organization, but the organizational bosses can ask the companies to pass their donations on to their customers, which ultimately is you and I. This is how we feed globalism against our wills; high prices everywhere, and higher to come, along with scams of all sorts such as the Clinton Foundation. Prices will never go down as long as globalists are intent on "fixing" the world. Why do they include journalists? We know. It's the fascist method, to control information. Since when are journalists good for cleansing well water, or making the world a better place in any way? Forget it; this Davos creep is another monster to avoid.
Need we say more: "Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Bono, Paulo Coelho, and Tony Blair also are regular Davos attendees." Regulars only? They must run more than half the agendas. Might Scaramucci be a friend of Bill Clinton? There is a Moose/Mose surname than can be with a version of the Clinton Chief.
So, Trump, after giving his voters the impression that he's not a globalist, comes round to loving a member of Davos. Shame shame, Mr. President. Don't you have any Christians that you can trust? "[Scaramucci] is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations". Dope.
Scaramucci was born in Tadino...in Perugia province, where Ottone's were first found that share a long and solid chevron with the Arms of Waterford. Of further interest, Waters share three, red chevrons with Tadini's/Taddei's (same general area as Mucci's), and the Arms of Tadino use three bends in the colors of the Water chevrons.
It wasn't many months ago when I last predicted (more of a suggestion) that the Biblical False Prophet can be from an ancient false prophet, Muksus (or Mopsus as he was better known). I traced Muksus from Mokissos (location, ancient Turkey) to the MOCH/Mouchet/Mucher surname(s). Scaramucci has the nickname, MOOCH. Just a thought.
Mokissos is beside lake Tatta, what I see to the Taddei and Tatton-of-Massey surnames. "Mokissos" is much like "Moschi," the name of mountains not far east of Mokissos. French Moch's/Mochrys were first found in the same place as Messeys/Messier's, and Scottish Mochs (same place as Washington, England) and Mopsus-like Mopps'/Moberleys (Cheshire, same place as Dunham-Masseys) both use versions of the Washington Coat (first found in Durham, once called DUNholme). The Moch sword design is used by Dunns while MOCHRum is in the DUNbar write-up while Dunham-Massey was home to Masseys. Mochs/Mochrys use a good reflection of the Rome/Room/Rume Coat so that "MochRUM" can apply. Mochrum is in Wigtonshire, not far west of where the Rome's/Rume's were first found, and the Hanna's, first found in Wigtonshire, use stag heads in colors reversed from the Trump / Jung / Doun stag. Or, Rome's/Rume's were first found in the same place as KilPatricks while it's the GosPatricks that are said to be in Mochrum. Mochrum was granted to Gospatricks by Malcolm III, and we saw (last update) why the Malcolms/Columns were linked to Messeys/Messier's. GOSpatricks can thus be suspect with Richard GOZ, the grandfather of the first Meschin, ruler in Cheshire. Durham is where CONTE's were first found while Richard Goz married Emma de CONTEville. The brother of the first Meschin married the family of king Duncan, father of Malcolm III. Malcolms/Columns link to the columns of Schore's, a SCARamucci possibility.
It can suggest that Scaramucci was at least distantly related to the Dunham/Downham surname of Obama's mother. The Trump stag is in the colors of the Down/Doun stag. Obama's mother descended from Jonathan Dunham, who changed his surname to "Singletary," and the latter surname (Lancashire, same as Washington location) shares the black antelope of Mousquette's/Muscats (variations much like those of Mochs), which, in red, is the antelope design of Wheelwrights while the Polish Mieszko's were made to descend from a mythical Piast the Wheelwright (MOUSE tower) as part-code for Wheelwrights. The latter share a six-sectioned Shield with Tatta-like Tate's. It all checks out; I am not wrong with a Mokissos trace to Massey liners. Compare Mousquette's/Muscats with Rome's/Rume's / Washingtons / and Mopps'/Moberleys.
A black antelope head, in the design of the red Derby antelope head, is used by Chimneys (same place as Wheelwrights) while ancient Derbe was near lake Tatta. Derbyshire is beside Cheshire. Singletarys, using a triple chevron in colors reversed from same of Muschats, were large in Sussex, where Mascals were first found, and Taddei's share the triple chevrons in red with Muschats. The latter are also Montfiquets while the Gernons (same place as Muschats) are said to be from Montfiquet while the son of the first Meschin was Ranulph de Gernon. Here's is the Arms of Robert de Gernon (three gold chevrons) in the Gernon write-up, almost the triple chevron of Singletarys. My guess is that Robert Gernon's wife, Emma, was a daughter of William Meschin (brother of the first Meschin), and named after William's grandmother, for something needs to explain why the son of the first Meschin was styled, "de Gernon."
Ranulph de Gernon's daughter (Alice) married Richard Clare of Tonbridge, and it's known that Mopsus was a false prophet of ancient Clarus. This location was in the midst of Amazons, whom Herodotus traced in earlier times to the area between TRABzon and the Moschi mountains. TRABY of Poland married Astikas', whom I trace to the STICKs that share gold garbs with the Arms of Cheshire. Lucy Taillebois, wife of the first Meschin, "founded the convent of STIXwould in 1135." Irish Clare's share five, white ostrich feathers in Crest with this 666-suspect Arms of Traby. Three such feathers are in the Crest of Bolingbrooks, while Lucy was styled, "of BolingBROOK." It just so happens that Brooks (Suffolk, same as Clare's) use the Stick Coat! Richard Clare's mother was of Claremont while Taddei's were traced excellently to Ferrand-Clermont (Auvergne).
Clare's (triple chevrons in colors reversed to the same of Robert Gernon) were first found in the same place as Muschats/Montfiquets. Bolings use a version of the Saddock Coat, and Mascals use the Saddock escutcheon in colors reversed. Bolings were first found in the same place as Singletarys (share white roundels with Mussels/Muscels who named Musselburgh, home of Mascals/Keiths), and the two share white, footless martlets. The Keiths are said to be from Catti, which can trace to the Hatti on the Halys river, location also of Mokissos. Note the blue HAT of Bolingbrooks.
So, you see, the presidential powers (including Obama's circle) are all gravitating to the end-time Massey bloodline just in time for God's Great Rat Trap. Trump just replaced PRIEbus (Bray / Bra entity?) with John Kelly while it was Grace Kelly, princess of Monaco, that started the baron Massy of Monaco. Kellys are said to be from south of Dublin, and Dublin was home to barons Massy.
Monaco is near Grasse. English Grasse's were first found in the same place as Lucy above. The CRISpin line of Clare's traces to the GRAZio's (share pomegranate with French Crispins), first found in Umbria, location of Spoleto. The Spoltons/Spauldings (another six-sectioned Shield), who share buckles with Guys (said to be from Guy of Spoleto), are said to be of Ranulph le Meschin, father of Ranulph de Gernon. At her Wikipedia article, Lucy of Bolingbrook founded the Spaulding Abbey. Beside's, Lucy was of Lincolnshire, where Spoltons/Spauldings were first found. Her previous husband (Ivo Taillebois) was given lands in CUMBERland, which I trace to "Umbria." The first Meschin had rule over Cumberland. I can glean that the black Grazio rooster is that of the mouse-tower Kopple's.
The Spolton/Spaulding and Dunn buckles face left, a fundamental Masci / Massena / Rasmussen symbol from an ancient mythical Mucius, whose right hand was destroyed so that the left alone remained. They say that Mucius was a symbol of a Mucianus family.
By the way, if you've been following heraldic discussions lately, or if you're familiar with my link of the Fens/Venn surname to Feins/Finis' (same place as Clare's of Tonbridge) and Fiens/Fane's/Vans, I now have proof, for the Bolingbrook Coat ("blue hat", same as a chapeau) uses the Fien/Finis lions while New Bolingbrook is said to be of a Fens location in Lincolnshire, a location I've not known before now. The Bolingbrook fesse is colors reversed from the Fens/Venn fesse. The Fien/Finis lions are colors reversed from the one of Masons/Massins (same place as Fiens/Finis'). The Capelli's (chapeau) traces to the TONso/Tosini surname (same place as Taddei's/Tadino's), suspect with "TONbridge."
As I've said before, I was with my girlfriend, Kelly, immediately before (within weeks) I was with Diane MUSCHATov. On probably the last night I was at Diane's, I walked her fence, an event that caused my initial finding of the Fens/Venn surname (shares white scallops with Tailbois' and Meschins). Understandably, the Fens/Venn Crest is the green griffin of buckle-using Leslie's.
It's interesting that the Brie's/DuBRAYs, looked up as per "Priebus," use the same lion as Wikipedia shows as the Arms of Ranulph le Meschin at his article. Prie's/Dubrays were first found in Lorraine, the location of the pomegranate Crispins. Brays come up as "Bree." If you've been following, you may know why Lorraine should link to Bray-like Bra. For one reason, there were Bra-like Bars of Bar-le-Duc in Lorraine. In fact, the Lorraine connection to Bra had to do with a girlfriend of mine, Lorraine, and the last day we were together is when I accused her of being on the GRASS with her friend's husband. They had gone for a walk just as I dropped in to her apartment to visit, and when the two got home, there was a grass stain along the rear of her thigh (bright-white pants, can't miss it). I suggested that the Grass surname is part of the Grazio > Crispin line.
Grazio's were first found in PERUSia (same as Ottone's) while Crispins were from Parez in Lorraine. Plus, I met Lorraine at a BUS stop, evoking "PrieBUS." Parez- and Bray-like Preys/Duprays (Baut colors, probably the Botter / Grasse/Craze bend) were first found in Auvergne, where Bouillons (and Bauts) were first found that use the Taddei cross. The latter's Chief is in the colors of the Chief of Irish Prays (County Down). Preys/Duprays (Bar colors) almost use the bend of Barone-related Bruno's (same place as Taddei's) while it's known that Bars were of BRUNswick. Bruno's are even said to have had a branch at Asti (smack beside Bra), which I trace to ancient AstiBUS!
Bruno's at Asti were near the Cottian Alps, where I trace Cotta's, first found in Languedoc along with Brune's. And the Brune's are very important because they share two stars in Chief of Aurelia's, suggesting Aurelia Cotta, mother of Julius Caesar. Brune's share the Conte / Falcon crescent. Interestingly, my first three girlfriends as a new Christian were blond, with Miss Muschatov as the third. While French Brune's were first found in the same place as Rocks/Roque's, the fourth was ROXanne, a BRUNette. Lorraine (blond) was the fifth.
Rasmussens were first found in Hesse, home of a Chatti peoples. And the giant Hesse sun is shared in red by Aste's/Haste's, suggesting a strong Hesse link to the namers of Asti. As I said, Lorraine had beautiful feet, and then Feeters use the Hesse sun too. Aste's/Haste's were first found in the same place as Flacks suspect in the "flax breaker" of Brays. Breakers/Brecks use another antelope, and we may ascertain that Breakers were BRAY-kers, so to speak.
I've given many reasons as to why I think God chose my girlfriends as per their names, which I would study some 40 years later. If the Bennets had a blue Shield, it would reflect the French Brune Coat, and Roxanne was Miss Bennet. Bennets were first found in PERTHshire, and Perta was an ancient location on the shores of lake Tatta. Again, Bruno's were first found in the same place as Taddei's, and I have a Taddei great-grandmother.
As Perusia above was also, Perugia, let me repeat: "Scaramucci was born in Tadino...in Perugia province, where Ottone's were first found that share a long and solid chevron with the Arms of Waterford." The line of Ottone Visconti gave up titles to Sforza's that happen to use the same lion as Bolingbrooks i.e. the ones that trace to Guy of Spoleto, in Umbria, location also of Perugia.
My first girlfriend as a Christian was Miss Pascal, who traced excellently to proto-Pollocks in Vespasia Polla, mother of the emperor that is the fourth head in the seven-headed dragon of Revelation 17. I know what I'm doing. I traced Polla's father-in-law to the Petro's, and they happen to share the fleur-de-lys in the colors of the same of Mucci's/Machi's, first found in Tuscany along with Bruno's and Taddei's, and suspect with the Mokissos entity at lake Tatta.
The line of VesPASIa Polla goes through the Pascel/Pace/Pasi > Paisley line to the Speers (same place as Pollocks) that use the Tatton / Tute crescent. Elements at lake Tatta were expected with Tertullus, husband of Plancia Magna at Perga, right beside ANTALya to which I trace the ANTELope that we saw above. Pascel's/Pace's were first found in Pollok-like Bologna, and while Vespasia married Sabinus, and while Pullens share the Sabine scallop, Boling-like Polings/Pollins use a version of the Pullen Coat. Pollocks use the shot-through boar of Bole's. Pullens and Polings/Pollins use a reflection of a Bone Coat (Bolingbrook lions?) while Bologna was also, Bononia.
Tertulla was the wife of Petro, Sabinus' father, suggesting that the family of emperor Vespasian was related to Tertullus of Perga. As I said, Chimneys use the antelope, and I lived beside Bruno while God struck my chimney (age 11) with lightning. Bruno's use the same bend as Polings/Pollins, suggesting a Bruno link to the Vespasian line. Bone's / Bononia is beloved in the motto of Ore's (same place as Pollocks / Pasleys) that use a version of the Guiscard/WIShart Coat, and this surname traces to VISconti's. If Bone's (compare with Weis'/WISE's) are using the Sforza lion, it starts to make the case for a VESpasian line to "VISconti / WIShart." The Wies' (not "Weis"), who share the Weis wings in Crest, even use a version of the Bolingbrook Coat! Excellent.
The end-time anti-Christ is said to be a revival of the seven heads of the Revelation-17 dragon, and the 6th head is Vespasian's grandson (ruled until 96 AD) if true that Revelation was penned in 90-95 AD. There is no emperor who fits the 7th head as well as Nerva (96-98) or Nero (to 69 AD). The seventh head comes for a short time only, otherwise nothing more is said of him. Three emperors in succession, immediately after Nero, were dethroned quickly (in weeks/months), and these I interpret as the three uprooted kings in Daniel 7. Vespasian followed these three. In Daniel 7, there are 10 Roman kings with three uprooted, for a total of seven, the same number as per Revelation 17. In Daniel 7, the 11th king is the end-time anti-Christ, and he's the 8th head in Revelation 17.
This view of the seven heads is far superior to the status quo in prophecyland, where the kings (not called kingdoms, but "kings") are interpreted as seven empires (bad theory) starting with Assyria and Egypt. Achem, no one has the right to inject those two empires into the Daniel / Revelation prophecy. And who says that there were only two empires prior to the Babylonian empire? There were more than two. The only reason that prophecy experts claim only two is so that they with Daniel's four add up to six, and in this way they make the 7th empire, the one that comes for a short time, look like the end-time anti-Christ. Yet, he's the 8th king in the very prophecy that has the seven heads. This theory stinks. Trust mine, it works.
It's interesting that Nerva's family may have been named by the Nervii, a Gaulish peoples in the area of the Artois homeland of Godfrey de Bouillon. The "bello" motto term of Bouillons should be for a line from the Bellovaci, a Gaul peoples on the south of the Nervi. "A large population [of Nervii] occupied the southern territories, near the river Sambre with the biggest being at Avesnelles, near Avesnes-sur-Helpe." This is the Avesnes location whose elite were maritally joined to Champagne's elite, assuring that the Champagne bend (compare with Pullers and Bone's) is used by AVEZZANo's. (i.e. like "AVESNes"). Avezzano is up-river from the Rieti home of VESpasian, and as such the two terms look related.
I trace Gauls, "Gali" to the Romans, to the older Galli queers (see Kabieiri/Cabieri) that were at least near Mokissos. Some Gauls of France / Belgium returned to that Anatolian area as the Galatians, whom I say had part in forming the Maccabees proper. It was evident to me that the Laevi Gauls became part of the Galatian line to Laevillus' wife, and moreover there was evidence that the proto-Gaul Galli had been from pagan Israelite Levites (see Jonathan in Judges). The Nervii were also in Hainaut, and the French Levi chevrons, which I have found in no other surname or Coat of Arms, was used by the counts of Hainaut. To this, we can add: "Caesar also mentions smaller tribes who were expected to contribute troops to Nervian forces; Levaci..."
It's interesting where it's known that the Atrebates of Hampshire lived at Atrecht, the Artois capital. The Josephs, highly traceable to Flavius Josephus, were first found in Hampshire, and share the gold garbs of Avezzano-like Avisons. It's known Josephus acquired his Flavius name from the family of Vespasian. Josephus was an Israel general that warred against Vespasian's army in Israel, but Josephus betrayed his army (murdered them first) and went over to Vespasian. He claims to have been from a line of Maccabees. The Artois capital was also, Arras, and the Arras surname comes up as "Arrow" while the Pollocks put an arrow in their boar. I trace "Arras" and "Artois" to "Arezzo/Arettium" (Umbria border area), where Bruno's are said to originate. Arettium was the home of Cilnius Maecenas, whose surname is suspect (by me) with a Mucianus > Maccabee line.
This is an amazing paragraph. I kid you not, that at about 9 am on Monday, three hours before this update was due, a moose walked casually by my rear-patio door, reminding me of the Mussi / Mucci surname. After the beast walked into the woods, for an hour or so, it returned to the back yard just as it was time to upload the update (around 11 am), which was roughly when this paragraph was being inserted here. As far as I can remember, this is only the third moose sighting at this place in almost ten years. You decide whether it has to do with Scaramucci and/or the Mucianus surname that may have been of Cilnius Maecenas. I came here to the Scaramucci zone trying to figure out where I would tell of this moose event, and that's when I realized that "CILNius" may be a line to the Clints/Clents and therefore to Clintons. I had just seen that Moose's/Mose's use a one-star version of the Clinton Chief. Clintons may have been at first a Clin(e) line (i.e. before "Clinton" was formed), for Irish Cline's share the Shield-and-Chief color combination of Clintons. The Clints/Clents share three gold garbs in the positioning of the same of Avisons, and moreover the Clints/Clent Coat is a reflection of the Arthur Coat while Arthurs were first found in Berwickshire along with the Blythe's (near the first Clints/Clents of Yorkshire). Bill Clinton's father was Mr. Blythe, and Blythe's share three gold garbs with Clints/Clents (compare Blythe's with Keppocks of Yorkshire). Clements (Clint branch?) may be using the bends of Moose's/Mose's. Jewish Cline's share one wavy bend with the Clements (same place as Clintons!) having two of them in black, the colors of the two Moose bends. German Cline's and Irish Cline's share the trefoil, and the German branch uses the bear, symbol of Berwicks and the Arms of Berwickshire.
Where the Pepins (same bend-with-fleur as RasMUSSENs) love the Mens surname in their motto, and where Pepin of Landen was in Belgium smack at the Hainaut / Nervii theater, it's likely that the Mens' were from the MENapii Gauls, Nervii neighbors. But I trace the Mens' to Isle of Man, and the Manx people of that island were the namers of Manche, where Masseys lived. Manche is in code with the so-called maunch sleeve's of MANfields, first found in the same place as Annas' and Tease's/Tighs. The latter are traceable to the Tessin/Ticino river, home of the Laevi Gauls. These Laevi had conquered Ticinum, which was later called, Pavia/Papia, a Pepin line, apparently. The Laevi conquered Ticinum with the Marici, whom I trace to a Marsi peoples at the Avezzano theater.
It was made plain to me that God was pointing to Pepin of Landen through my girlfriend, Lorraine. On the last night I had been with her, I was at a party at the home of Mamie, whom I met that night. I left her party early to go see Lorraine, which was the night of her grass stain. Mamie (brunette) would become my next girlfriend. It turned out that Mamie was representative of Mamesfelde, a location of Manfields in Nottinghamshire (where Manfields / Tighs were first found). The Brays use a Coat reflecting the Mansfield Coat.
I know how it can sound crazy of me, but anything that I can still recall, and that had impressed me, is taken for a possible Sign. For example, on our first day together as a couple, I noticed that Mamie (in a bathing suit) had impressive thighs. The Dutch Thigh surname happens to have variations linkable to Tye variation of the Tease's/Tighs. Our relationship started the night I was at her party. Up until the time that I left the party, she and I were the only ones that had danced. There was no dance floor set apart for anyone. The Italian Dance's/Dannas' (D'Annas?) were first found in the same place as Asti and Bra. And we danced in the LIVING room while Livings/Levins can be of the Ticino-river Laevi.
The night before I saw her thighs, we slept in a sleeping bag together, in a tent (nothing happened, there were others in the tent). I had noted that Tintens use tents in a Coat much like the Manfield Coat, but the Bray Coat is yet a third look-alike. The Tintens speak to that Pepin-Mens trace to Ticino elements, don't they?
I can't go over all that was previously said about Mamie as evidence that God used her for my revelation. Mamie had large breasts, and the Manfield write-up traces (probably wrongly) the Manfield surname to "mam," the Celt word for "breast." I'm suggesting that God arranged a lady with large breasts to nail down her link to the Manfield surname. I may be wrong, but what choice do I have? I've got to entertain it. Mens' are also MENGzies', and the maunch is shared between Manfields and MANGels/Mansells. I say that Manfields were Isle-of-Man liners, and that king Maccus applies directly. It's very feasible to trace Maccus (viking) back to Maccabee-related Galatians.
Pepins share the camel with Pale's/Palys (same place as Pullens), and Dance's/Dannas' use so-called PALE bars, suspect with the Bar bloodline (same place as Crispins). In fact, as I've said repeatedly, I wouldn't have been with Mamie had not Barry convinced me to go camping, luring me by saying that Mamie was coming. When I arrived, there was Mamie at the far back of a truck's cab with Barry. He was already moving in on her. But as we sat around the camp fire, she came to sit with me. The point is, heraldic bars are called, barry. Some Barry surnames do use bars, in the colors of the Crispin bars. We are right back to what could be the Bra bloodline. In fact, as someone opened the hatch on the cab where the two were squatted, giving me a line of sight, I could swear that Mamie had bare breasts i.e. her BRA was off. I didn't take a close look because my head went down immediately, mainly in disappointment. I can't be sure whether she was bare breasted, as it was dark in there, but that event, as I saw it, works excellently here for a Barry / Mamesfelde link to Bra.
Scottish Barrys (were first found in Angus while the Angus Chief uses two stars in the colors of the one used by Angus-like Annas'. Let's not forget that Annas' were first found in the same place as Tighs and Mamesfelde. Plus, the two Angus stars are white, as are the two in the Chief of Aurelia's, and then Aurelia Cotta became suspect with Donnus, a Cottian king, father of king Cottius. Compare "Donnus" to the Donnas variation of Annas-like Dance's/Dannas', first found in Piedmont, downhill from Susa (Piedmont), the Cottian capital.
There is a raGULLY symbol of heraldry that can be partly for Raggs and partly for Gullys that share the cross of Julians and Tigh-like Teague's. Julians are important here as per Aurelia Cotta, and while Scottish Barry's use a "regi" motto term as well as the Weis / Wies crest, the Raggs use a version of the Weis Coat with perhaps the Bush/Busch fleur-de-lys. If so, it's a trace to Piedmont's Busca location.
The Galatian line to Laevillus' wife (Miss Bassus) was at Akmonia, suspect with the Asman / Assman variation of Rasmussens, and with "Hasmon," the name of the original Maccabees.
Lorraine (the location in France) was home to the Este line of Bars, and Pepins not only use the Este horse head, but an "est" motto term. Maccabees proper of Israel ended up at Gamala, suspect in the Pepin camel. Gamble's share the Petro / Mucci/Machi fleur. Long before knowing these Galatians under discussion, I traced Pepin to the Heneti, who lived where the Galatians would later settle. I didn't yet know, at first, that Pepins were linked to Este, which happens to be in the land of the Veneti, named after the Heneti. The Heneti-like Kennati were at Cetis, a location ruled by the Bassus family descended from Akmonia.
The story of my six girlfriends is that the anti-Christ will be from the king-priests of Israel, probably in marriage via Josephus to the Roman house of Vespasian, later through the Templars in the circle of Godfrey de Bouillon, as well as Champagne elements, and later still through Freemasons. You know the rest of the story as it touches upon those scheming to control the world.
On July 27, someone leaked Scaramucci's financial affairs. It's ironic for him because he threatened all leakers days earlier. I guess no one's listening. Scaramucci is going after Trump's chief of staff, Reince Priebus, for this particular leak, but does he have the power to remove Priebus? Yes, almost immediately, Trump removed Priebus, and replaced him with another Catholic, and military man, John Kelly. To me, this is like bringing a police state into the White House. The real solution, stupid, is to attack the deep-state spies relentlessly, put them in fear of jail.
So far, as far as I have read, Trump has not accused Priebus of leaking data. And two days later, no one in youtube is accusing Priebus as the leaker with any evidence. What we have in Trumpland is more foul language in the comments sections, of dirtbags hoping to steal Trump fervor from Christians. This is a nasty set-up, and Scaramucci will play to the foul mouths, encouraging them.
I have the impression that Trump loves Scaramucci a great deal. This mafiosa-like Italian has the mind of a child, calling Priebus, "Reince Penis". I thought rotten kids with ungodly parents talked that way. He said worse against another on Trump's team. Scaramucci's language indicates that he's the type I detest most. Where is Trump's mind for picking this spiritual rot for forming Trump's media image? Nothing good can come of this. Scaramucci reminds me of a guy who'll shoot you if you insult him. That's another definition of a boy in a man's body. Scaramucci, you need to learn that God is against you. It's gonna hurt. Get ready, be prepared to take the pain.
If Priebus didn't want Scaramucci in the White House, not a wonder. I can guess that an ambitious Scaramucci has eyes for a higher spot, and that he's going to court Trump for this goal. In the end, he would turn the president more into a globalist. Already, a military man is the chief of staff. Scaramucci may be working out a CFR agenda in the Trump house. The first order of such an agenda is to worm in and befriend Trump, complimenting him, acting like him, creating the image of like-mindedness.
Priebus has been on television. In his interview with Hannity, he speaks only good of Trump, and Trump had nothing to say, the day before, about him except that he's a good man. Therefore, the president seems to want to leave Priebus' reputation smeared by Scaramucci. Is this the man to run the country? Better than Hillary, maybe, but don't expect delivery of a moral world. I guarantee you that when a president ignores God, God will place monkey wrenches in his ambitions; in the end, as well as along the way, that bold person will regret life itself.
They are saying that Priebus didn't have full authority to run the White House, but that Kelly would not have quit his leadership post at Homeland Security unless Trump assured him the power to fire and hire. Kelly is being called a gatekeeper of all information flowing in and out of the White House. This is nonsense so long as the Intelligence people can get glimpses of most the data. There can be no gatekeeper (firewall) untill the spies are dealt with. They will cause chaos, Trump's nightmare. Perhaps Trump thinks that a crab with a hard shell, Scaramucci, is the answer versus men with softer hearts.
There can be no doubt that deep-state corruption has been monitoring John Kelly's communications for years. This is how the invisibles control too much. The question is, who are Kelly's friends? Are they pro-Christian? Nothing else matters. Nothing in humanity matters if it hasn't aligned with God's agenda. The agenda now is to call out His enemies, to make the contrast between the scoffers and God's people.
The False Prophet of Revelation 13 causes fire from the sky, which I still view as an American-military drama...because I see the U.S. as the most-likely source to push / initiate / control a 666 commercial system. We now have a military man in charge of the Trump agendas all-around, and we have Trump himself showing that he's not shy with the use of firing missiles at the Middle East. And we have Scaramucci certain to be influenced by demons. Another peculiarity of the False Prophet is that he creates an image to the beast, an icon image that can even speak, suggesting your computer screen. The job of a press secretary such as Scaramucci is to create the president's image. It's an interesting paragraph, but I'm not making any claims, yet anyway.
Here's Scaramucci's fellow Catholic, Bill O'Reilly, playing down the bad attitude of the crab. O'Reilly claims that ALL political operatives talk like that, which of course is not true. The first couple of minutes is all you need to hear to learn that avid Trump supporters will now say that everyone's like Scaramucci. He's the normal:
The country needs a law forbidding the Intelligence people from listening to any person without a warrant. A law must be passed that sounds an alarm on your phone or Internet connection whenever anyone is listening in without a warrant. The alarm is automatic unless it's turned off due to a warrant granted from a normal court. Look at this new and alleged FBI leak:
The FBI man is the top lawyer, James A Baker, an appointee of James Comey. This story on Baker might just derive in Jeff Sessions. He promised some juicy things during the week, and this story was out Thursday. Chances are, Sessions did not want to reveal this investigation, but Trump, if indeed Sessions is responsible, forced his hand. In a way, it's a good thing because the voters need to urge the investigation onward whereas I don't trust congressmen to do anything drastic, such as actually sending an elite to prison. Without harsh punishment, leaks will go on forever.
George Bush's James A. Baker said, about a month ago, that Trump needs a new chief of staff. This Baker was chief of staff for Reagan. But this is not the James A. Baker at the charge of the FBI legal team. On the latter Baker: "He joined the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice as a federal prosecutor during the Clinton administration. In 1996 he joined Office of Intelligence Policy and Review (OIPR). This government agency handles all Justice Department requests for surveillance authorizations under the terms of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, advises the Attorney General and all major intelligence-gathering agencies on legal issues..." (Wikipedia). His Wikipedia article says that Circa News has now reported that "Baker is under a Department of Justice criminal investigation for allegedly leaking classified national security information concerning the Trump administration to the media." Breitbart has the short story (no details) in print.
A Thursday report in Circa cites three officials claiming that FBI General Counsel James A. Baker is the “top suspect” in an investigation into leaks of classified Department of Justice information to the media.
The following is dated this week, i.e. not under the Obama administration: "Israel’s conduct, including the tightening of security measures around holy sites in Jerusalem and reluctance to restrain West Bank settler activity, is pushing Palestinians to resort to violence, the US State Department said in a new report." I see, Tillerson is permitting / urging his employees to blame Israel for Palestinian violence. And he's opposing West-Bank projects just as the Bush and Obama administrations had.
The way for the West to deal with Israel is to leave Syria and Iran alone. If either country is caught smuggling weapons to Hamas or the PLO, you put out the lights of Hamas and the PLO. You build large cages, and jail those who rebel against the state of Israel. You don't talk about giving the Palestinians their own state. Israel won the war, and therefore it owns the West Bank. If Israel must return the West Bank to those that fought a war against Israel, let the Unites States return the country to the British, or to the native Americans. There is blanket disregard here for the will of God across all the West, and even in Trump's state department. It is not God's will for Old Jerusalem to go to Palestinians. That much we know.
When Hebrews were settling in Israel prior to 1948, the Arabs went to war against them, and the Arabs lost. It wasn't illegal for the Hebrews to settle Israel at the time. The Arabs did not have the right from God to disallow that settlement. The Arabs gambled, and they lost, because God wanted the Israeli nation to exist, apparently, in-time for the Eternal Restoration immediately after Armageddon. The same Republicans who want to weaken Israel's enemies also want Zion to go to Arabs. Therefore, the Republican war hawks care not for God even while they care for their interests in state of Israel. The Western interests can be maintained with the loss of the West Bank and Gaza to Arabs, a small price to pay, but this violates the will of God. Therefore, I dislike the West, especially as the West thinks wrongly that the giving up of some Israeli territory will fully appease the Palestinians.
The West is banking on a false hope. The terror Predicted against Israel will arrive. There's nothing anyone can do about it. The Israeli nation has been given time to turn to its ancient God, but it has decided to Westernize instead. Liberal sluts crawl all over the nation. The religious Jews hate their own Messiah, and the conservative ones dress and look ridiculous so that not many take them seriously. Isaiah reveals that, when the terror is allowed to come against Israel from all around, the Israelis will eat and drink, and be merry, and accept their ultimate destruction in that way, rather than turning to God.
I didn't know that Russia Today had an office in the West Bank's Ramallah. The Russians want to see a Palestinian state. To me, this looks like Russia trying to protect the Palestinian press that shares the same building in Ramallah from attack by the Israeli's. In this latest skirmish regarding the temple site, the Israeli's raided Palestinian media at this building.
This week, the deputy attorney for the state of California has been charged with child porn on his computer. How can a man in such a position be that disgusting? If ever a man deserved to get a head cut off in the public square, this is it. Which reminds me, the pope has a lot of head-cutting to do.
Something must be wrong with the Trump-Putin ceasefire, or the following wouldn't have come out:
Syria has achieved great progress in fighting against the Islamic State (ISIS) with the help of the Russian air force over the past two months, the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) said at a press conference on Monday.
Syrian government forces have liberated 55 settlements, retook an area of 2,400 square kilometers, wiped out over 2,000 rebels, and seized about 20 tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, as well as over 40 pickup trucks in Aleppo Governorate since June 1, said Sergei Rudskoy, head of the Main Operational Directorate of the Russian Armed Forces General Staff.
In the past two months, Russia has destroyed six ISIS facilities with Kalibr cruise missiles and another four with Tu-95MS bombers. Russian air forces have conducted 2,010 sorties and 5,850 airstrikes over ISIS commands, ammunition depots, and barracks.
...Rudskoy said that before Russia's operation, the Syrian government controlled an area of 19,000 square kilometers, but they have now expanded their control to an area of 74,000 square kilometers.
Syrian forces have also achieved positive results near the Iraqi border recently [new to me].
"At present, [the Syrian government] has resumed control over 150 kilometers along the Syrian-Iraqi border where four posts and 22 checkpoints have been set up, dramatically reducing the possibility that the ISIS group delivered militants and weapons from Iraq to Syria," said Rudskoy.
I don't see articles like this, from Russia, often. It seems like an in-your-face-USA article, and seems to be mocking especially where Assad now holds a key part of the war, the Iraqi border, where Mosul's fleeing ISISites might like to cross to join Syria's fleeing ISISites. This Syrian presence along the Iraq border was not in Western press, so far as I saw, and can explain why the Americans were bombing Assad's forces (May and June) near the Syria-Iraq-Jordan border i.e. in hopes of keeping the Syrians from establishing along the border. I think this is a big deal, and that Russia will want to expand along that border. In the meantime, I hear almost nothing of the American war against Raqqa, as though virtually nothing is happening there.
On July 31:
Iraqi forces kill 20 IS militants near Syrian borders: military media."
Last I heard, Assad's forces were heading east to Raqqa, but were contained by American tactics to its west. But now: "The self-proclaimed Islamic State group launched, at dawn today, a surprise attack on locations of the Syrian army, south of Raqqa, Qasioun News reported.
...It is noteworthy, Islamic State group lately captured wide areas of the city of Raqqa, while Syrian forces conducted several operations to retake the city.
This is the first I've heard that ISIS is actually gaining anything, in more than a year, and it comes with Trump's promise to attack ISIS much better than Obama had. There's no place more than Raqqa that Trump is supposed to be focused on, and he's losing ground there. Coincidence? Where really are all those American weapons going that we read about, supposedly going to the Kurds? Here's from July 30:
The self-proclaimed Islamic State group attacked two convoys belonging to the Syrian army, and its allied militias, near the city of al-Sukhna, east of Homs.
...The convoys included tanks, armored vehicles and military buses that were carrying several Syrian troops and allied militants.
It is noteworthy that Syrian army, backed by foreign militias managed, at dawn yesterday, to recapture several military headquarters belonging to the Islamic state in the city of Sukhna after violent clashes.
How did ISIS get this powerful after becoming a blip over the last year? According to Trump, ISIS should be cowering by now in fear of complete wipe-out.
I have heard little from the Syrian rebels for months, as though they quit their war against Assad. But now, just after Trump's ceasefire agreement with Putin, "An informed source revealed that Syrian rebels shelled military headquarters and locations of the Syrian Democratic Forces [= Kurds, not Assad] in the area of Afrin, north of Aleppo, Qasioun News reported...Meanwhile, newly formed 'Azaz Rebels Brigade' announced shelling several locations belonging to the Syrian Democratic forces in the villages of Katma and Kafr Janna Camp, in response to..." So, here's a new war, apparently, between the anti-Assad rebels and the Kurds that are supposed to be with Trump's right hand in the final murder of ISIS.
It's all looking like a movement to re-establish ISIS power, and maybe to have ISIS fighters join the new brigade above for use against Assad. The Kurds are at this time threatening to quit Raqqa if the Turks don't stop fighting Kurds in northern Syria, and this is just what the Americans want, wherefore additional fighting between the Kurds and the rebels acts to get Kurds out of Raqqa even better. If that happens, ISIS in Raqqa will be left for the Russians to mop up, exactly why the Trump factor would want a ceasefire, with Russia in agreement.
Russia is powerless to help Kurds against Turkey unless it wants bad relations again with Turkey, which it does not. Russia thus has a problem forming an alliance with Kurds in order to take their loyalties away from the Americans. A Kurd-Russia assault on Raqqa would look after ISIS a lot faster than Trump aims to. Plus, with Iran and Iraq getting very cozy now on mutual trade ventures, they are talking about sharing Kirkuk-oil deals, and this tramples on Kurds of Kirkuk. So long as Russia wants good relations with Iraq and Iran, it can't side with Kurds in Kirkuk like the Americans can. So, as far as any prophetic fulfillments go in the near future, it looks like the Russians won't have Kurds on-side.
Uh-oh: "Iraq plans to shore up its ground forces with Russian T-90 tanks...the deal is yet another indication that Iraq is favouring Russian equipment [over American] for its armed forces in recent years." These T-90 tanks have become an obscenity to the Americans: "Iraq's neighbour Iran had plans to purchase an enormous fleet of T-90s for its own armed forces but never went through with it for a variety of domestic reasons. Instead the country's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) paramilitary purchased 24 of these tanks and sent them all to forces fighting for President Bashar al-Assad in Syria back in late 2015. There the tanks saw combat and in one case a T-90 withstood a hit from a US-made BGM-71 TOW missile, the incident Akhmetov referred to. "
I keep eyes on any development in good relations between Russia and Iraq in case the anti-Christ will be a Russian agent, for I see his rise in northern Iraq. The reason that Iraq is moving away from the United States is that the latter always wants control of Iraqi decisions. The article adds, "Furthermore, Moscow seldom has strings attached to their deals regarding how their arms are used by their buyers." "Strings attached" looks like code for how the Americans treat Iraqis. George Bush spent obscene dollars in Iraq to get the Iraqi nation away from a Russian alliance, to an American-controlled government, but this has failed already. The morons are ready to double those dollars under Trump, and from thenceforth, expenditures will never end.
The last thing the Americans want is Iranian fingers in Kirkuk oil. This movement allows the Russians to get cozier with Iraq, with the promise of subduing the Kurds of Kirkuk in return for Russian benefits in Kirkuk oil. The trick for Iraq is to topple the oil exploitation / superiority that Kurds of the region have come to hold, thanks to Obama's ISIS invasion of Mosul back in 2014. With Russia and Iraq firmly in Kirkuk, or even beating around its bushes, Kurds can be made subservient to Iraq once again, but only over the dead body of the United States. Over some years to our future, I can envision the Americans invading Iraq when the country is firmly a pro-Russia state about to take American interest in Kirkuk away. That's where Exxon moved to illegally a few years ago, and Trump's foreign minister was Exxon's CEO. Soon, he become the foreign monster.
One way for the Americans to control Kirkuk is though an ISIS revival in Mosul. I don't think Obama had the breed of voters to save ISIS in Mosul, and, besides, he was genuinely intent on getting out of Iraq (or making appearances thereof) from his first days in Office. But Trump has a different breed of voters, with a hawkish Congress very willing to cause Russia's complete downfall. Once again, oil prices are low, the attempt to make Putin fall by ruining Russia's economy while he presides over the nation. The hope must be to launch a pro-West Russian leader once Putin is removed. But he's proved to be a sticky player. It's even possible that the anti-Christ will be a Russian operative of a pro-American Russian government. The Middle-East game is not over, and Trump's Republicans promise to give it new life.
Here's from a week ago, with a lot of blah-blah from the military leader below:
General Raymond Thomas, Commander of the U.S. Special Forces Command, said that the next flash point after Mosul is Kirkuk, arguing that Iraq will never accept the Kurds to take Kirkuk without a fight.
“I keep a very close watch right now on Kirkuk, most you know the Kurds picked very awkward time to have referendum on whether or not they should be independent. Kirkuk is absolutely part of their vision of greater Kurdistan,” he said at the Aspen Security Forum on Friday.
His game is to stay in Iraq because there's a lot more work to do. Yea, of course. And with a military man already sworn in as Trump's chief of staff, we could be seeing some fireworks before July 1. And, by the way, as Kelly is fresh from running things at Homeland Security, he might just have some spy access via that organization to spy on the phone calls of the anti-Trump spies, making for more fireworks of a different kind.
Where is Trump or Sessions on the attempted murder of Scalise? Have they just-about killed him yet? For the attempted murder of Steve Scalise, which may yet turn into a murder, see articles at:
U.S. Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats said Friday that he intends to “try to get some details” about a media report alleging that Attorney General Jeff Sessions discussed campaign-related matters, including policy issues important to Moscow, with Russia's ambassador to the United States during the 2016 presidential race.
The Washington Post reported Friday that Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed those issues with Sessions during the campaign when he was serving as a top foreign policy advisor to Republican candidate Donald Trump.
Kislyak's accounts of two conversations with Sessions were intercepted by U.S. spy agencies, which monitor the communications of senior Russian officials both in the United States and in Russia, the Post reported. It also noted that Sessions initially failed to disclose his contacts with Kislyak, that he then denied that the meetings were about the Trump campaign, and that he has testified that he has no recollection of such an encounter last April.
The new deception: "Scientists who retested mineral samples collected during the Apollo moon missions now believe there's a massive amount of water under the lunar surface – a discovery which may make manned missions to the moon easier than previously thought." Forget it; they never went to the moon with a man, and there is no ocean in the moon; they want you to think they are superman in order to get more of your money for something other than a moon mission.
For Some Prophetic Proof for Jesus as the Predicted Son of God
Table of Contents