"FBI Issue" is better thought of as a distraction and IGNORED - Don't waste precious research time!

[Baobab]

Last edited Mon Apr 18, 2016, 11:46 AM - Edit history (2)

If the US is a "captured state" (where all the institututions, NGOs, media, even blogs, are 'captured'.) you can rest assured that she will be cleared of any wrongdoing at the last moment!


Thereby furnishing the opposition with a big win at a critical moment, after sending Bernie supporters barking up the wrong tree.. There is lots of wrongdoing thats known and also- what about the WTO? Its a plan to give away a lot of jobs to developing countries.


Look at how Dan Rather's career was destroyed by the provision to him of fake documents on a real issue- with Bush's getting out of Vietnam, etc.


The opposition is more sophisticated than many people think and almost the entire "establishment" is captured.

The core area I would research is trade deals which are nothing less than an attempt to render democracy powerless in all key areas involving anything of economic importance - especially hijacking the ability of countries to have safety nets and control their own economic destinies and stimulus, basically making all of Bernie's platform impossible to carry out, possibly before the election.

Research Hillary's involvement in globalization - especially the El Dorado pie in the sky scheme of "progressive liberalisation" Google it using that spelling!

Also learn and understand everything you can about the WTO "General Agreement on Trade In Services" which is a really bad thing and the cause of a great deal of problems for us already, And I suspect the worst is yet to come.


Good sites to get info it as well as on trade deals generally are Public Citizens ( http://citizen.org ) and Policy Alternatives ( http://policyalternatives.ca ) as well as http://bilaterals.org


NOTE: THIS POST IS NOT AT ALL ABOUT 9:11

[berniepdx420]

1. I think we are sophisticated enough to present all the facts... I implore you to do research and

teach others how to do the same... thank you.. but I think the voters of NY need to understand that Hillary is under an FBI criminal Investigation... not sure why you would try and suppress this.. let's present all relative information... Thanks in advance

[noretreatnosurrender]

3. Take a Cue

from Bernie. He is politically smart enough not to touch that issue with a ten foot pole. When your opponent appears to be in hot water the best thing you can do is to stay far away from the controversy and let them fall all on their own.

[berniepdx420]

4. I respectfully disagree in this case.. if we nominate her and she's indicted during the GE ..we are

screwed.. just because Bernie stays away from it.. does not mean we should... it is a very important fact to consider when voting... and in case you missed it we are about to have an incredibly import vote on Tuesday.. get the facts out...

[noretreatnosurrender]

5. Thank you

for your respect. I give it back to you. You do whatever YOU feel is right. We don't all walk in lockstep and we respect each others opinions. That's a good thing.

[berniepdx420]

7. .

[Baobab]

23. International law (Helsinki and Nuremberg) on human medical experimentation

requires informed consent from human subjects in medical experiments.

What if a country's healthcare system had been intentionally and knowingly kept in a state of dysfunction for 20 years while some trade deal based scheme to make more money as middlemen could be finagled into place (betraying some huge number of Americans in the process) Say "excess deaths amenable to health care was a conservative 1 million during that time.

???

[Baobab]

29. Yes, but there are bigger issues out there that need to be understoood-see this thread has already

Last edited Mon Apr 18, 2016, 10:10 PM - Edit history (1)

been hijacked. i speak the truth.

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.405.5725

https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/major-complications

http://www.pnhp.org/states_flatline/State%20Health%20Reform%20Flatlines%20IJHS%20-%202008.pdf

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/National_Office_Pubs/bad_medicine.pdf

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/National_Office_Pubs/putting_health_first.pdf

[noretreatnosurrender]

2. I Posted Something Similar Last Night

in a thread where a person claiming to be an author wanted Sanders supporters to get involved with his research. He was claiming the only way Bernie could win was on this issue which is totally false. I hope people are smarter than that and will devote themselves to giving meaningful help to the campaign. If the FBI investigation leads to an indictment then Hillary will fall all on her own. She needs no help from any of us. Don't fall for the dirty tricksters message.

[Oilwellian]

8. You have no clue what you're talking about

Paul Thompson is well known for writing the famous 911 Timeline. Calling him a "trickster" is fucking insulting to those of us who are educated on the excellent work he has done.

And yes, I was smart enough to volunteer and help him with the Hillary timeline that will soon be published. I consider it an honor to have worked so closely with him and this latest timeline he created is absolutely devastating to Hillary's campaign. I can't think of anything more meaningful to all of us than the release of this document, asap.

It is the tricksters who try and discourage us from doing this important work. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

[noretreatnosurrender]

10. He Might Be Well Known

but how do you know this anonymous person who claims to be him is really him?

[paulthompson]

11. What the heck?

What the heck is all this "dirty trickster" stuff? I am that person!

I posted in that thread that you can look at my DU account info and see that I've had the same account here since 2002. You can easily find my old posts from then and see I'm the same person, with the same views all along.

I also recently wrote this essay here at DU, which I recommend you read before you call me more names:

Bernie Sanders, Automation, and the Fate of the US

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511494371

Isn't there a DU rule against disparaging people?! What is your deal?!

[noretreatnosurrender]

12. Interesting

The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks.

I actually wasn't talking about you specifically when I posted about dirty tricksters (plural). But this overheated response from you makes me wonder if maybe I should revise my thinking about that.

[paulthompson]

14. Um, no

You're clearly speaking about me, and exclusively me. Here's what you posted yesterday in the other thread:

A lot of things about this post do not ring true. Why would a professional author need people at DU to do his work for him? Think about it. Remember we are on the internet and just because someone claims they are this person does not mean that they are. Anyone knows that if a candidate is in serious trouble their opponent and his supporters would be well advised to stand back and let them fall all on their own. Discussing this matter on DU like any citizen would do is fine but there is NO way I would get involved with helping to spread speculation far & wide as this poster suggests.

I'm not protesting too much. Imagine if someone accused you of not being who you say you are. Wouldn't you complain about that?

If you continue to insist that I'm an imposter, I'm going to have to take it up with the moderators. Again, I've had this same account since 2002. Can you at least look that up? Various people at DU have known me all that time and can vouch that I'm the same person, with the same email. If you want to argue about issues, that's fine, but to claim I'm an imposter is absurd and below the belt.

[noretreatnosurrender]

15. Proving my point

My comments are my opinions and you can contact anyone you want. Feel free. By the way thank you for bringing my comment from another thread to this one. It's good to have them both here. I stand by both of them.

[paulthompson]

17. Sheesh!

What do I have to do to prove I'm the same person?! Seriously, what?

Look at my DU profile.

Account status: Active
Member since: 2001
Number of posts, all time: 2,255
Number of posts, last 90 days: 316

How is it possible I'm an imposter?!

[paulthompson]

18. Here's some proof

I can't believe I'm having to do this, but here's some proof I'm the same person. I did go into "lurk mode" for a long time, but I did reappear occasionally. Here's one thread where I showed up in 2011. Look at how many people recognize me:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1847361

and here's another one, from 2013. Same thing:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023209241

If you want, I can get a bunch of people to vouch for me in this thread too, but that would be a waste of a lot of people's time.

[noretreatnosurrender]

19. I Didn't Ask You

to do anything for me. Why are you so concerned about what I think? Why are you so focused on a stranger on the internet? You really need to let this go, it's getting embarrassing for you. I've stated my opinion. You don't like it. Fine. We can now go our separate ways having given our views.

[paulthompson]

20. No

Because you're making a false accusation, that I'm an imposter. If I don't stop you now you're likely to keep on doing it, and thus try to discredit my work. If you admit that you're wrong and that I am who I say I am, I'll be glad to drop it.

[Oilwellian]

22. I can think of only one group who doesn't want to see your timeline completed

and would impugn your character like this. Consider the source.

[dorkzilla]

24. Nailed it

Thanks Oilwellian - if that is your real name.

[Major Hogwash]

27. You've been here for all of 2 months.

According to your profile.

[noretreatnosurrender]

30. Yes, you are correct

it's been about 2 mos. that I've been posting here under the name noretreatnosurrender. My information in my profile also shows I was here before but that's just what I said. You have no idea if it's true or not. You don't know who I am and I have no idea who you or anyone else is. That's just how it goes on the internet. You can look at my posts and what I recommend and make your own judgment about why I'm here. That's all any of us can do unless we know the person outside of DU.

[riderinthestorm]

38. Some of us know and remember Paul from way back

You're the one coming across as an imposter - either you are a long time member under a new name (in which case you'd know Paul), or you're a newbie shit stirrer.

All indications point to you being a newbie shit stirrer who owes Paul an apology.

[noretreatnosurrender]

41. Some of us do not know or remember Paul

I did nothing but post my opinion. You can clearly see from my posts on DU that I am not a shit stirrer. I've never even had a post hidden although I was banned from the Hillary group and the History of Feminism group. My crime was that I didn't know Paul Thompson and questioned him diverting Bernie supporters to work on his project. Yeah, I was worried he was a troll trying to mess with us and now supposedly I am the troll because I didn't know who he was and dared to question this? And after I questioned it I was pummeled with heated rhetoric and dogged. I'm a 59 year old grandmother who happens to be a Bernie supporter. In fact some of my posts in threads about the email investigation agree that the investigation is a big deal. I will not apologize for questioning his original post or for trying to defend myself against the onslaught that followed. You can believe me or not, that is your right.

[riderinthestorm]

42. After being informed by Oilwellian in post #8 @ Paul

You then proceeded to double down in posts # 10, 12 and 15.

I've been harassed @ my identity here on DU so I am sensitive to any other DUer having their authenticity questioned.

You weren't trying to save us from a "troll who was trying to mess with us". That much is clear...

[noretreatnosurrender]

43. You Can Believe Whatever You Want

I'm done with this whole conversation. This certainly is the weirdest election I've experienced at DU. The only time I've had people go after me were from my fellow Sanders supporters. But that's ok because I'm still supporting Sanders.

[Bubzer]

32. I find it odd that you've been attacking Paul pretty much since he started piecing together the ...

e-mail scandal. And now you're trying to pretend no one will notice the context of the conversation in which you are clearly targeting Paul's credibility. I don't know what your deal is, but there are very clear rules about attacking people here.

[paulthompson]

13. Another point

I said I fear that if Sanders doesn't do that well in some of the remaining primaries, the Clinton email scandal may be his last chance. But I hope that's not the case. He could pull out a win anyway, and I hope he does. But even Sanders has said he only has a "narrow path." That's the unfortunate reality.

I don't think it's going to be so simple that Clinton will be indicted, and then her campaign will be over. For one thing, the FBI may recommend to indict her before the primaries are over. It could be in May, and I hope that's true. But then it probably will be months before Loretta Lynch decides to act on those recommendations or not, which will push that decision after the Demcratic convention. There's a good chance she would appoint a special prosecutor to handle the case, in which case that would take months to set up, pushing the decision to indict or not after the November election.

Thus, was really matters is the FBI's recommendation, and the Clinton campaign will inevitably try to spin that and say the FBI is biased and out to get her. (She's already implausibly claimed that the State Department inspector general is in cahoots with the Republicans to get her on this issue.) Furthermore, there are lots of intermediate possibilties. For instance, what if the FBI admonishes Clinton but only recommends to indict some of her aides? Or what if they do recommend to indict Clinton, but only on one or a few charges? What's likely to happen in cases like that is that Clinton will admit to making a few mistakes, maybe have her aides take the fall for her, and then continue her campaign.

So this is likely to be a battle of public perception. So far, Clinton has been saying lots of clearly untrue things about the scandal, and she's largely been believed because there hasn't been a credible push back. The Republicans have pushed back, but they're rightly seen as blatantly politically motivated, esp. after the Benghazi witch hunt. Sanders has largely avoided the issue so far, and most of the mainstream media has an obvious pro-Clinton tilt.

Whether or not Clinton is ever indicted, this scandal says volumes about her competence, honesty, and integrity. I believe the more people learn the true facts about this scandal, the more they will see Sanders as the more competent, honest, and trustworthy candidate. Sanders isn't running alone, he's running against Clinton. The main reason Sanders even has a chance at this point is because people have so many doubts about Clinton, especially when it comes to honesty and trust.

I don't see how any Sanders supporter could have an issue with pointing out the facts about what Clinton has done. The more you learn about this scandal, the more disturbing it gets.

[Baobab]

25. Everything we've been told about health care is wrong too.

A huge cluster of very big lies revolves around the 1995 W T 0 "Services" trade agreement.

[RobertEarl]

33. Good points

I look forward to seeing your report, Paul.

The true picture it paints will be the picture which shows what we can expect from a Clinton administration, and if given enough exposure can help end her campaign. I am sure that the Bernie campaign will certainly read it and once verified may use some of it in the campaign.

This thread and the attacks on you have served a purpose and it's not the purpose your attackers intended.

[Oilwellian]

21. Because I doubt anyone impersonating Paul...

would have created the 276 page timeline I've been doing illustrative work in for the past two weeks.

Your attempt to dissuade us is a bit late. It's a done deal.

[Bubzer]

34. Nice! Can't wait to read it!

[JackRiddler]

37. paulthompson is the Paul Thompson of 9/11 timeline etc.

And if you don't want to believe some Internet entity like myself who's been posting here since 2002, just read what he says. It's pretty convincing!

[grasswire]

28. "a person claiming to be an author"??

Oh my lordy.

I believe this is the new Brock trick. Try to talk researchers out of looking at Hillary's corruption.

[Major Hogwash]

31. No big deal. Just ignore him and move on.

Last edited Sun Apr 17, 2016, 02:32 AM - Edit history (1)

Whenever someone tries to throw a monkey wrench in the works, just keep doing what you're doing and eventually the monkey wrench will fall out.

It's preposterous for someone to accuse someone else of not being themselves, but since that's how he wants to play his hand, let him.

They did the same thing to Bev Harris when she posted here.

[Baobab]

46. If you're talking to me I think you misunderstood what i was trying to say.

I don't need anybody to do any research for me, nor am I am author, I just want people to inform themselves about big and important things that have happened in the last 22 years that not enough of us know about.

The things people need to know are not being written about in the media.

[HooptieWagon]

6. FBI has some evidence.

They wouldn't be giving immunity to an IT guy unless he had something to proffer. So even if the DoJ declines to prosecute, we can be absolutely certain the first action by 2017 Congress will be to file impeachment charges. Do we REALLY want to go through yet another Clinton impeachment?

[mmonk]

9. Yep

[paulthompson]

16. By the way...

In case this OP is referring to my recent research efforts about the Clinton email scandal, I want to point out that I agree the trade deals are a serious issue and I would like to research that too in the near future.

I recently wrote an essay about automation that touches on the trade deals, as you can see here:

Bernie Sanders, Automation, and the Fate of the US

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511494371

I recommend you read it if you haven't already. I thought about making a section there just about the trade deals, but I decided it was too tangential and big of a topic. So probably that deserves an essay of its own.

But also, the Clinton email scandal DOES get into issues of Clinton's involvement in globalization, through the misdeeds of the Clinton Foundation. For instance, here's one entry in the Clinton email scandal timeline I'm making:

June 2010 - 2011: While running for president in 2008, both Clinton and Senator Barack Obama (D) publicly oppose a US trade deal with Colombia, the United States-Colombia Free Trade Promotion Agreement, due to human rights violations there. In June 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, her husband Bill Clinton, and Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra meet with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe in Colombia. Giustra has developed business ties worth hundreds of millions of dollars in Colombia after repeated meetings with Uribe and Bill Clinton. He also has donated tens of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation. Uribe has been widely criticized for human rights abuses. Representative Jim McGovern (D) warns Hillary in a private email that "while in Colombia, the most important thing the Secretary can do is to avoid effusive praise for President Alvaro Uribe." But Hillary ignores this warning. After the dinner, she gives a public speech in which she praises Uribe as an "essential partner to the United States" whose "commitment to building strong democratic institutions here in Colombia" would "leave a legacy of great progress that will be viewed in historic terms." She also publicly supports the US trade deal, a deal which would greatly benefit Giustra and other US investors in Colombia. In 2011, workers for the Giustra-owned Pacific Rubiales company in Colombia go on strike. There are allegations they are forced to live and work in "concentration camp-like" conditions. However, the Colombian military uses force and breaks the strike. By this time, Giustra has donated $130 million to the Clinton Foundation. Clinton's State Department certifies that Colombia is "meeting statutory criteria related to human rights," despite widespread evidence to the contrary, and Clinton and now President Obama decide to support the trade deal they had opposed. Later in 2011, the trade deal passes Congress and becomes law. This is followed by more donations from both Giustra and Pacific Rubiales to the Clinton Foundation. (The Hill, 4/9/2015)
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/238313-clinton-changed-stance-on-trade-deal-after-donations-to#
(The New York Review of Books,1/30/2016)
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/01/30/clinton-system-donor-machine-2016-election/

So please don't judge before you know all the facts.

[dorkzilla]

26. Don't waste your precious time, Paul

You have much more important things to do. And THANK YOU, and the others who are assisting you, in doing the heavy lifting. I look forward to reading through the final product.

[Bubzer]

35. +1

[Baobab]

40. Thank you- that is a very sordid story indeed, Also automation is the reason for

the FTAs now, which represent a global coup against democracy. Automation and exponential growth in technology are leading to an ending of the job era so the FTAs are basically an attempt to future proof, as it were the future for the global elite against the people everywhere. Visualize the very powerful signaling left and turning right again and again, lying repeatedly, saying anything to sell them, even as jobs are vanishing for good, and pitting groups who should be allied against one another cynically, trying to create a global race to the bottom on wages. (See how they lie about that too.) WTO could rule on Mode Four soon and wages could fall a lot due to that if quotas are overturned. Imagine nurses and teachers and IT specialists and construction workers being forced to globalize, and then working for minimum wage, or the lower of the two countries minimum wages. Thats what they want. They feel entitled because of supply and demand.

[Baobab]

44. Here is an interesting donation - $600,000 for one speech from Dutch insurer Achmea

http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2014/06/insurer_achmea_paid_bill_clint/


the following may not be related?


http://www.italaw.com/cases/2564

http://www.italaw.com/cases/417

http://gala.gre.ac.uk/2744/1/PSIRU_Report_9828_-_2010-02-H-tradelaw.pdf

[Baobab]

45. Good essay on exponential growth and why politician and economists always are wrong

and always underestimate its magnitude-


For example, politician go on about how "we'll have to raise the retirement age" (!!!)

As if we could. Thats shows just how monumentally clueless they are about this.

This is good, it should be common sense to anybody in the sciences.

http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns

[eridani]

36. Time wasted on emails is time you have not spent phonebanking n/t

[riderinthestorm]

39. There are lots of ways to help Bernie’s campaign

And each of us should do what works for us.

Personally I think canvassing works far better than phone banking. I could say to you that every hour you phone bank is an hour lost to canvassing.

Paul feels strongly about this timeline (so do I ) and frankly if Bernie isn't the nominee, then Paul's timeline will become even more important to the bigger movement in its ability to educate folks on the corruption in the highest offices.

This revolution isn't ending in June or even November.