Smells, behavior patterns, and predispositions

The Pipe-Bombs Story: Another Example of Why No One Trusts the Media. Andrew C. McCarthy – “I’m at a loss to understand how the climate is improved by spicing up reports with thinly veiled suggestions that President Trump may have triggered a series of potentially murderous attacks on political opponents.”

“At this point, there is no evidence whatsoever that provocative words from the president had anything to do with the sending of bombs. Indeed, there is as yet no known evidence of who is behind these possible attacks. And speaking of “attacks,” why, in light of the context of a possible bombing spree, is the Times asserting that Secretary Clinton, President Obama, and Mr. Soros have “figured prominently in conservative political attacks”? They have not been subjected to “attacks” in the sense conveyed by this report; they have been on the receiving end of mere political criticism, not the subjects of attempted political assassinations.

Explosive Packages a False Flag? Daniel John Sobieski – “Now the Democrats genuinely get to say “both sides”, with packages containing explosives sent to the Clintons, Eric Holder, George Soros and others conveniently two weeks before a possibly history-changing midterm election.”

“Somehow it is all too convenient, this “October surprise”. None of the named targets were really in danger, although others could have been hurt touching, picking up, or opening a package. The same could not be said when a Bernie Sanders supporter showed up at a baseball field in Alexandria determined to kill Republicans.

Back then we weren’t supposed to link that individual with the rhetoric of Sanders and other Democrats who warned that if the Republican agenda was enacted, millions would die.
Of course, rhetoric does not justify a response with explosive violence, yet, as noted, for a so-called domestic terrorist attack, this scattering of suspicious packages seems too lame, too ineffective, too conveniently timed and doesn’t really pass the smell test,
The packages may be found to be a real threat from an obviously unbalanced individual or individuals, but it may very well also be a false flag designed to reaffirm the Democrats’ continuous slander against the GOP.

See AP: CNN Pipe “Bomb” and Powder Within It Were Perfectly Harmless. Ace of Spades – “That last bit, the Git ‘er Done thing, makes me think this is a false flag, and not merely a fake bomb.”

“One expert, the guy who caught the UNABomber, says this looks like it might be false flag to him. He pointed out that there was no method by which the bombs would detonate themselves — he said something like “the recipient would have to figure out how to detonate it himself.”

An expert on CNN said something like “the bombs seem to be designed to be intercepted, and not to actually harm anyone.”

A self-professed expert (admittedly, his expertise is unverified) said the bombs were “silly-looking” and look like the most common type of bomb, which is a fake bomb.

Are Chuck and Nancy overplaying their hand on political violence? Paul Mirengoff – “Today, President Trump did just what Schumer prescribed. … How did Schumer respond? He issued a statement, along with Nancy Pelosi, essentially rejecting the president’s call.”

“They then recited standard-issue Democrat talking points in a dishonest attempt to support of their assertion that Trump condones violence. They claimed, for example, that Trump “express[ed] support for the neo-Nazis who killed a young woman in Charlottesville.” This is a bald-faced lie.
In other words, it might cause them [moderates and swing voters] to see Schumer and Pelosi for what they are — hyper-partisan jerks with even less class than Donald Trump.

What you smell is like what you see in the mirror.

Comments are closed.