Report: 26 FBI INFORMANTS in J6 protest, some entered the Capitol

[markef]

Idiotic and taken out of context.

Even so, the cybersecurity firm isn’t in charge of proving anything and doesn’t have the capabilities to fully do so. The DoJ investigated and obtained ample evidence to prove it was Russia, although you will ignore it anyway.

The DNC refused to allow the FBI access to its computers and hired instead CrowdStrike to investigate the stolen DNC data instead. That is why CrowdStrike's admission that there is no clear evidence the DNA data had been stolen by hacking is so important. Other expert testimony leaves no doubt that the amount of data turned over to WikiLeaks was too voluminous than to have been stolen and transferred by hacking. The only clearly logical explanation for the theft of the emails was that the data was stolen by an insider at a DNC terminal. Seth Rich was just such an insider who had developed an animosity toward the DNC for cheating Bernie Sanders out of contention in the primary. Assange even hinted he may have gotten the data from Rich but for some unexplainable reason Mueller never examined Rich's possible involvement.

 

[markef]

Not only did they fight like hell like he told them, there are multiple times you hear them chant "fight for Trump." They were there to fight.

Americans will never be able to escape constant democrat encouragements to fight to get their people elected so the candidates can fight to promote leftist policies or to fight to stop policies supported by republicans.

 

[sartre play]

You commies MUST BE SO PISSED OFF the people who BUILT THE VERY FUNCTIONAL GALLOWS....with the INTENT OF MURDER BY HANGING have not been arrested, charged, and punished.

TOTAL BS.

I AM WITH YOU! WE MUST BRING THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE GALLOWS TO JUSTICE!!!

COME ON.. while the gallows were creepy, they were built to scare people.

 

[Marener]

The DNC refused to allow the FBI access to its computers and hired instead CrowdStrike to investigate the stolen DNC data instead. That is why CrowdStrike's admission that there is no clear evidence the DNA data had been stolen by hacking is so important. Other expert testimony leaves no doubt that the amount of data turned over to WikiLeaks was too voluminous than to have been stolen and transferred by hacking. The only clearly logical explanation for the theft of the emails was that the data was stolen by an insider at a DNC terminal. Seth Rich was just such an insider who had developed an animosity toward the DNC for cheating Bernie Sanders out of contention in the primary. Assange even hinted he may have gotten the data from Rich but for some unexplainable reason Mueller never examined Rich's possible involvement.

The DNC was in the middle of a presidential campaign and their operations would have been seriously curtailed by dismantling their server.

Instead they had a forensic copy, which is in some ways better than access to the hardware. Forensic copies are routinely used in cybersecurity because it’s a bit for bit copy of everything including what’s loaded into volatile memory.

See, this is how we know you’re a hack. All you do is repeat the same bullshit talking points. One after another after another.

I explain to you why they’re bullshit.

Instead of admitting you’re wrong or arguing back about why I’m wrong, you just move on to another bullshit talking point.

Because you don’t understand anything about what you’re saying. You’re smart enough to learn the talking points but too stupid to ever understand them.

 

[markef]

Ah, Gorka on Hannity, what could they possibly lie about?

Is that the $145 million you're talking about? From the Uranium One deal?

Did Gorka tell lies about the democrats' enrichment from deals related to Uranium One? Can you pinpoint at least one lie and successfully refute it?

 

[markef]

How could he know that when there was no protest scheduled at the Capitol?

It must have been widely known in advance that congress had reluctantly scheduled hearings about voter fraud before certifying the election for Biden on Jan 6.

 

[sartre play]

INTERESTING QUESTION

 

[Marener]

Did Gorka tell lies about the democrats' enrichment from deals related to Uranium One? Can you pinpoint at least one lie and successfully refute it?

Already did. They claimed a guy connected to the deal was donating $100 million to a charity.

But that guy has sold his stake in the company years prior.

 

[markef]

You are damaged in the head.

They were doing it FOR TRUMP, which is why he pardoned all of these violent criminals as soon as he got back in power.

Democrats are wrong to claim many Trump supporters are blind sheep following a charismativc leader telling them to what to think and how to act.

Biden pardoned all sorts of undesirables for various reasons but Trump pardoned J6 prisoners of wrongful prosecutions by hateful democrat fascists.

 

[markef]

You mean these other sources?

One man charged in the riot, Joseph Randall Biggs, an Army veteran and an organizer in the Proud Boys hate group, encouraged others to travel to Washington, D.C., for the Jan. 6 rally with specific instructions. He told them not to dress "in colors," according to court documents. And he allegedly directed an online message at antifa groups, whose members are known for wearing black to counterprotests:

"We will be blending in as one of you. You won't see us. You'll even think we are you," Biggs allegedly wrote on Parler on Dec. 29. "We are going to smell like you, move like you, and look like you. The only thing we'll do that's us is think like us!"

---

“Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. But I’ll tell you what, I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem.”

I'm sure there may have been hundreds of reports of leftist involvement in the J6 protest that day.

 

[markef]

Ah, another book from right wing hacks funded by anonymous conservative billionaires who have a history of lying to attack Dems.

It is best read as a provocative, investigative-style narrative rather than an established factual record.

Well-researched books and articles are not disproven by unsupported disagreements with the facts or details reported.

 

[markef]

The DNC was in the middle of a presidential campaign and their operations would have been seriously curtailed by dismantling their server.

Instead they had a forensic copy, which is in some ways better than access to the hardware. Forensic copies are routinely used in cybersecurity because it’s a bit for bit copy of everything including what’s loaded into volatile memory.

See, this is how we know you’re a hack. All you do is repeat the same bullshit talking points. One after another after another.

I explain to you why they’re bullshit.

Instead of admitting you’re wrong or arguing back about why I’m wrong, you just move on to another bullshit talking point.

Because you don’t understand anything about what you’re saying. You’re smart enough to learn the talking points but too stupid to ever understand them.

You still fail to adequately disprove the facts or details reported by the published reports I have provided.

 

[Marener]

Well-researched books and articles are not disproven by unsupported disagreements with the facts or details reported.

Which I already provided and you ignored.

I take issue with calling it a well researched book. It’s a partisan hit piece written by people with a history of lying.

 

[markef]

Already did. They claimed a guy connected to the deal was donating $100 million to a charity.

But that guy has sold his stake in the company years prior.

Finding fault with someone who contributed to the report does nothing to refute the claims made in the report.

 

[Marener]

You still fail to adequately disprove the facts or details reported by the published reports I have provided.

It’s not possible to disprove anything to you because you refuse to listen.

I provided link and reports at length and that didn’t matter so there’s nothing anyone can do.

Your mind is shut off. You refuse to consider anything else.

 

[Marener]

Finding fault with someone who contributed to the report does nothing to refute the claims made in the report.

The claims are unsubstantiated and denied by the subject.

 

[markef]

Which I already provided and you ignored.

I take issue with calling it a well researched book. It’s a partisan hit piece written by people with a history of lying.

You think you have refuted some or all of what was reported but I have not seen a clear refutation of any of the published claims.

 

[Marener]

You think you have refuted some or all of what was reported but I have not seen a clear refutation of any of the published claims.

Of course you didn’t see it.

You’re willingly blind.

https://enewspaper.latimes.com/infinity/article_popover_share.aspx?guid=18f6c144-7492-41d4-85c6-efcc37f13cde

 

[Lockback]

Ah, another book from right wing hacks funded by anonymous conservative billionaires who have a history of lying to attack Dems.

It is best read as a provocative, investigative-style narrative rather than an established factual record.

Your ability to complete ignore facts and reality is unparalleled.
Congratulations!

 

[AntonToo]

Democrats are wrong to claim many Trump supporters are blind sheep following a charismativc leader telling them to what to think and how to act.

Biden pardoned all sorts of undesirables for various reasons

Hey blind sheep I'll let you in on a little secret - Your bag full of whatabout-Bidens DO NOT EXCUSE TRUMP's degenerate behavior.

You know how many violent BLM rioters Biden pardoned? ZERO.

Biden spoke with moral clearity on the subject of political violence - you have a right to protest, you don't have a right to cause chaos.

Biden also pardoned his convict son - a corrupt act you will never see me defend or make excuses for, no matter how many corrupt acts Trump commits.