Tag Archives: wikileaks

The ‘We Was Hacked!’ Defense

Image result for hackers

Every bit as good as the “Everybody Does It” Defense, albeit not quite so universally applicable, is the “We Was Hacked!” Defense.

This was pioneered in 2009 when hackers got into the computers at the Climate Change Unit at East Anglia University, UK, and released thousands of confidential emails that proved, beyond even an unreasonable doubt, that the whole Global Warming jihad rested on lies, suppression of data, intimidation of critics, political payoffs, and other misdeeds: the scandal known as “Climategate.” If you don’t know much about it, that’s because the “mainstream” nooze media did their utmost to bury the story.

Here’s the argument: You are not allowed to consider all this chicanery because the information was obtained by hackers. Never mind that if it weren’t for the hackers, we never would have known about it. You have to ignore it, and still believe in Man-Made Climate Change, because… hackers provided all that information and hacking isn’t nice!

The success of this gambit inspired Democrats to resort to it again, after Donald Trump’s election as president. “Russian hackers made us lose! No fair!”

Thanks to hackers, thanks to Wikileaks, we learned some unsavory things about Hillary Clinton and her mob. To wit:

The DNC rigged the Democrat primary against Bernie Sanders. But you’re not allowed to know that.

Big-time “journalists” actively colluded with the Clinton campaign, and some of them were paid for it. But you’re not allowed to know that.

Off camera, candidate Hillary was anything but “presidential”–cursing people out, flying into rages, throwing things at staffers, and drinking herself silly now and then. But you’re not allowed to know that.

And of course there was much, much more, none of it flattering to Team Hillary. But we weren’t supposed to know about it. And we wouldn’t have, if not for hackers.

Consider this bizarre argument. Because the information was put out by hackers, we are expected to disregard the lying, the cheating, the bribery, and the candidate’s profound dishonesty, plus her revolting personality–and goldarn it, that whole election oughta be overturned because the Russians and Wikileaks hacked the Democrats’ emails! All that stuff was supposed to be a secret! No fair, no fair!

Absent from the discussion is any serious attempt to claim the information wasn’t true. Well, that wouldn’t get them very far, would it?

All right, it’s too bad we have to rely on hackers to get the truth about our politicians and our–ahem!–scientists.

But coming from the crowd who praised the stolen “Pentagon Papers” as the greatest act of public spirit since Paul Revere climbed onto his horse, it rings a bit hollow.


Texas: Machines Flip Trump Votes to Clinton

Image result for crooked voting machines

They’ve started early voting in Texas, and there’s just this teensy-weensy little problem with it.

According to a number of voter complaints, the machines are changing votes for Donald Trump into votes for Hillary Clinton ( http://www.infowars.com/more-reports-of-votes-flipping-from-trump-to-clinton-in-texas/ ). Oops.

The complaints are coming out of Arlington and Amarillo and turning up on social media. The headline says “Election officials dismiss concerns” and are blaming it on “voter error.”

Has anybody seen any complaints about the voting machines switching Clinton votes to Trump? I haven’t. Have you? How come these complaints are all going just one way? Something about that smells bad.

If these voting machines are really so poorly programed that so many voters just can’t get it right, what are we doing, using such machines, in the first place?

As we know from Project Veritas and emails opened up to us by Wikileaks, election fraud is a staple of the Democrat Party and the Clinton campaign. And it’s not just crooked machines. It’s dead people voting, people who never existed voting, non-citizens voting, and real people voting two or three times in the same election. “Election officials” dismiss it all. Never happened, just move on, folks, there’s nothing to see…

When it’s your turn to vote, look twice, and then look again, to make sure the machine has recorded the vote as you intended it. Don’t take it for granted that your vote has been accurately recorded.

Remember this important Democrat principle: “If you can’t beat ’em, cheat ’em.”

We are not dealing with honest people here.

Is It a Presidential Campaign or a Crime Syndicate?

Image result for images of billowing black smoke

Think there might be any fire down there?

I hate conspiracy theories. There, I’ve said it.

But I know from history that certain things do happen. When Henry II cried out, “Will no one rid me of this meddling priest?”, his knights heard him, marched into the cathedral, and cut Archbishop Thomas Becket into small pieces. The Church was rather vexed, and Henry had to do a painful public penance. Although he didn’t expressly order the assassination, his men were pretty sure they knew what he wanted.

And so we come to the Clinton campaign, 2016–and a 27-year-old Democrat National Committee operative, Seth Rich, murdered on the streets of Washington, D.C. Police have had to rule out robbery: nothing of value was taken, the man was simply killed.

Now we have Julian Assange, of Wikileaks, “suggesting” that Seth Rich was the source of the DNC emails published by Wikileaks–the ones that proved the DNC rigged the primary against joke candidate Bernie Sanders ( http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/08/wow-breaking-video-julian-assange-suggests-seth-rich-wikileaks-dnc-source-shot-dead-dc/ ).

Has it come to this? Does the Clinton campaign actually kill people who get in its way?

No one has ever proved anything much about the famous “Clinton body count” that has accompanied, over several decades, this corrupt and lawless pair in their continual quest for wealth and power.

So now we have another body.

Do I believe Hillary Clinton explicitly put out a hit on Mr. Rich? That question is irrelevant, because she didn’t have to, no more than Henry ordered Becket’s murder.

“Where there’s smoke, there’s fire,” is a saying that sometimes engulfs an innocent man or woman.

But here we’re talking about huge columns of billowing black smoke that can be seen for miles around–and they’re asking us to believe there’s no fire?

%d bloggers like this: