How would you feel if the White House ordered their insiders: David Plouffe, Sid Blumenthal, Robert Gibbs, David Axelrod, David Brock, Fusion GPS, Black Cube and the Denton Scumbag tabloids, to "end your life"?

 

"How can we prove that those people ordered and financed those attacks against us? - Because we have the emails, texts, financial records, whistle-blowers and other evidence and because we were the only parties on Earth that were attacked by those people, in those ways, at that time, right after we reported their crimes to the authorities..."


The attacks, in bold red print, below, were actually undertaken and documented against the whistle-blower victims here.

 

POLITICAL KILL ORDERS AND STATE-SPONSORED CHARACTER ASSASSINATIONS

How A Modern Character Assassination and Political "Kill Order" Is Executed By the White House, their Silicon Valley Oligarchs and their total control of propaganda media

Patrick George At Jalopnik attacks outsiders under contract with Elon Musk and the DNC. Silicon Valley campaign finance oligarchs hire him to run hatchet jobs on innocent outsiders and then Gawker-Gizmodo-Jalopnik uses their financial partnership with the DNC's Google to push the character assassination articles to the top of Google web products and searches. Patrick George, Adrian Covert, John Hermann and Nick Cook are the sexually degenerate cabin boys that report to boy-loving sleaze-tabloid oligarch Nick Denton. They created the Fake News crisis in the media by flooding the internet with defamation posts and reprisal hatchet job articles designed to damage political enemies of the Socialists. They coordinate a large number of the character assassination efforts at Gawker, Gizmodo, Jalopnik, CNN, New York Times and other propaganda outlets. These Millennial boys are "Media Rapists" and should be treated as abusers.

How and why did a Donald Trump stripper-date named "Stormy" or an Elon Musk sex party or a Kavanaugh drinking incident or the Moonves and Weinstein indiscretions suddenly hit the news at about the same time in news history?

In addition to actual murder, Politicians and Silicon Valley Oligarchs hire operatives to end people's lives in other creative ways.

It is all part of the modern trend in vendetta, revenge and political payback when a Senator or a tech oligarch issues a "kill order" on an opponent.

The client does not like to get their hands dirty so the actual social hit job is performed by companies such as: IN-Q-Tel - (DNC); Gawker Media - PsyGroup - (DNC); (DNC); Jalopnik - (DNC); Gizmodo Media - (DNC); K2 Intelligence - (DNC); WikiStrat - (DNC); Podesta Group - (DNC); Fusion GPS - (DNC/GOP); Google - (DNC); YouTube - (DNC); Alphabet - (DNC); Facebook - (DNC); Twitter - (DNC); Think Progress - (DNC); Media Matters - (DNC); Black Cube - (DNC); Mossad - (DNC); Correct The Record - (DNC); Sand Line - (DNC/GOP); Blackwater - (DNC/GOP); Stratfor - (DNC/GOP); ShareBlue - (DNC); Wikileaks (DNC/GOP); Cambridge Analytica - (DNC/GOP); Sid Blumenthal- (DNC); David Brock - (DNC); PR Firm Sunshine Sachs (DNC); Covington and Burling - (DNC), Buzzfeed - (DNC) Perkins Coie - (DNC); Wilson Sonsini - (DNC), David Plouffe Associates (DNC),  and hundreds of others…These are the people and companies that except cash, revolving door jobs, political appointments, insider trading stock in Silicon Valley tech companies, prostitutes and real estate in exchange for destroying the lives of others.

These attackers deserve to be punished for the rest of their lives for taking away the lives of others in exchange for cash. Any company who is corrupt enough to hire any of these assassins should be forced out of business. These attack services are responsible for 90% of the "Fake News" problem in the world because they are the authors of most fake news. Congress must act to make these kinds of companies illegal!

These digital assassination services offer hit-jobs, character assassinations and economic reprisal programs to famous billionaires and corrupt politicians who are seeking revenge, retribution and vendetta executions. In the case of reporters getting targeted for attacks, President Donald Trump has been accused by the liberal corporate media of whipping up a hateful frenzy against the press. But while CNN’s Jim Acosta grandstands against Trump, real journalists are still reeling from the draconian extrajudicial measures that Barack Obama and his administration used to target them for exposing truth.

This secretive targeting occurred while Obama speechwriter and hate-filled ANTIFA supporter Ben Rhodes was running “Operation Echo Chamber,” which reportedly continues, in which he fed information to willing corporate media scribes. “They literally know nothing,” Rhodes said of the twentysomething journalists he easily manipulated.

The Freedom of the Press Foundation’s Trevor Timm published documents showing how former attorney general Eric Holder changed the rules to more effectively intimidate and surveil members of the press.

Timm writes: “Today, we are revealing—for the first time—the Justice Department’s rules for targeting journalists with secret FISA court orders. The documents were obtained as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by Freedom of the Press Foundation and Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.”

Trending: Brennan and Clapper Accused of Hacking John Roberts To Blackmail Him

Obama is also clearly linked to the plot to obtain fraudulent FISA warrants on President Trump’s team, as evidenced by Peter Strzok and Lisa Page’s texts confirming that Obama was overseeing their fly-by-night operation.

Larry Schweikart reported for Big League Politics:

For months pundits and researchers have been pondering the mystery of the FISA approval that led to the illegal and historically titanic scandals to ever hit the U.S. government. Some have argued that Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein knew the FISA was bogus when he extended it. Others have wondered if Special Counsel Robert Mueller knew about the fraudulent basis of the FISA when he used it, in part, to indict Michael Flynn. Other still, that Mueller was fooled by the FBI.

This is what President Trump calls “SPYGATE”.

It may well be that the surveillance that was conducted began with UK intelligence services and then was fed back to the White House of Barack Obama. Here’s the kicker:

President Barack Obama did not need a FISA warrant to authorize spying/electronic surveillance on Trump because Obama all along had legal authorization to by-pass the normal court vetting process. According to 50 U.S. Code 1802, the “Electronic Surveillance Authorization” () “Foreign intelligence in relation to a US person (Trump or his associates) is information that’s necessary for the US to protect against attack, hostile acts, sabotage, . . . as well as other clandestine activities by a foreign power . . . OR . . . information relevant to national defense/security of the US, or the conduct of foreign affairs of the U.S.” Such an authorization by Obama required certification by Attorney General Loretta Lynch that must be logged with the FISC court. (“The [AG]+ shall immediately transmit under seal to the court [FISC] a copy of his certification.”)

In short, the DOJ has this. If we are correct, a copy of that certification is currently under seal at least with the DOJ and the FISC.

This is what they are hiding.

However, the Act requires the AG to keep the Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Committee on Intelligence informed of these authorizations and unmaskings therein. See 1803 (a) (1) (C) If indeed this is what happened, did Lynch report—or only selectively report—to the committees in a way that excluded non-friendlies? Can you see why Adam Schiff, Mark Warner, and their ilk are terrified?

1) Obama authorized spying/electronic surveillance on Team Trump, by-passing normal judicial oversight.

2) To create “foreign intelligence,” John Brennan and others organized for UK intelligence to conduct surveillance on Trump and his associates, either from the UK or from UK assets within the U.S. This is another reason revealing this will unleash an excrement storm: the UK is about to be caught meddling bigly in an American election.

3) Lynch certified Obama’s authorization which is now held under seal by DOJ (and FISC).

From this authorization, all unmaking followed, as well as the FBI fraudulent counter intel investigation and perhaps the FISA warrant too. Obama knew this was all fake when he made the authorization; Lynch knew it was fake when she certified it; the entire inner circle, including the FBI, all knew. This takes the U.S. into uncharted territory, and could imperil any politician in the British government who supported this or had knowledge of it. Proving any of this would be difficult, as if confronted Lynch would almost certainly cover up and Obama would simply deny knowledge. Without a paper trail, a conviction might be a bridge too far. This is only one of thousands of "kill order" tactics introduced by the Obama Administration.

------------------------------

These are the playbook tactics that The White House, Senators and tech oligarchs used to destroy the lives of their political and business enemies who are the victims herein:



    - Government agency bosses solicited the target victims with false promises of future loans, contracts or grants from their agency and caused the target victims to expend millions of dollars and years of their time for projects which those government bosses had covertly promised to their friends. They used the target victims as a “smokescreen” to cover their illegal government slush-funds (Ie: Department of Energy programs and DOT "Autopilot cars") for the victims competitors and personal enemies. By using this tactic, the attackers drain the target victims funds and force them into an economic disaster in plain view of everyone without the government bosses fearing any reprisal for their scam.

    - Every match.com, okcupid.com, Plenty Of Fish, Seeking Arrangements and all other IAC-owned, or similar, dating sites (IAC is managed by Hillary Clinton's daughter) have had their profiles, texts, and inter-member communications, since those companies were started, hacked or purchased. The attack service providers use Palantir and In-Q-Tel financed data analysis software to analyze every activity in those dating services in order to find honey-trap, blackmail, sextortion and social conflict exploitation opportunities. If you had a bad date with someone, that someone will be hunted down and convinced to help harm, #metoo or "rape charge" the intended target. All dates involve a search for sex, so the likelihood that a sexual disappointment experience will exist in each persons dating history is high. Searching every past dating email and text of a subject is quite easy with modern software and hacking techniques. A synthetically amplified, PR-agency optimized sex scandal can destroy any target. Your dating experiences from the 70's or 80's will come back to haunt you decades later. Most dates involve drinking alcohol and taking drugs. If you were unattractive or had bad sexual skills your bad date will be called "date rape", "drugging your date for sex" and related twisted narratives that are designed to shame you, the target. If you try to get a date in the future, your potential date will be contacted by a third party who will slander and libel you to make sure your potential first date gets cancelled. Your social life will, essentially, end. Every photo on every dating site is cross checked with every other photo on the internet in order to cull your Facebook, Linkedin, Snapchat and other social media together to create a total psychological manipulation profile data file on you. A single photo on a dating site can be cross searched on every mugshot archive, photo album and corporate database in the worth within minutes using modern super-computers. Your sex life will be on public record in a flash.

    - Social Security, SSI, SDI, Disability and other earned benefits were permanently stone-walled. Applications of targets were “lost”. Files in the application process “disappeared”. Lois Lerner hard drive “incidents” (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRS_targeting_controversy )are operated in order to seek to hide information and run cover-ups in order to run state-sponsored attacks on whistle-blowers.

    - Government officials and tech oligarchs contacted members of the National Venture Capital association (NVCA) and created national “black-lists” to blockade target victims from ever receiving investor funding. This was also confirmed in a widely published disclosure by Tesla Motors Daryl Siry and in published testimony. When Silicon Valley political campaign finance oligarchs and their White House insiders black-list you (see the "AngelGate" Scandal and the "Silicon Valley High Tech No Poaching Class Action Lawsuit" cases) you will never get investor funding again.

    - Victim's FOIA requests were hidden, frozen, stone-walled, delayed, lied about and only partially responded to in order to seek to hide information and run cover-ups.

    - State and federal employees at agencies have played an endless game of Catch-22 by arbitrarily determining that deadlines had passed that they, the government officials, had stonewalled and obfuscated applications for, in order to force these deadlines that they set, to appear to be missed. This can bankrupt a target victim.

    - Some Victims found themselves strangely poisoned, not unlike the Alexander Litvenko case. Heavy metals and toxic materials were found right after their work with the Department of Energy weapons and energy facilities. Many wonder if these targeted former federal employees and contractors were intentionally exposed to toxins in retribution for their testimony. The federal MSDS documents clearly show that a number of these victims were exposed to deadly compounds and radiations, via DOE, without being provided with proper HazMat suits which DOE officials knew were required. California laws say that the victims were "employees" yet the federal agencies they worked for kept trying to call them "contractors" in order to stave off liability. Poisoning whistle-blowers is an age old political practice undertaken by executive officers in State agencies like the D.O.E.

    - Victims employers were called, and faxed, and ordered to fire targeted victims from their places of employment, in the middle of the day, with no notice, as a retribution tactic. No legal reason for the firings was ever supplied to the victims.

    - On orders from Obama White House officials, DNC-financed Google, YouTube, Gawker Media and Gizmodo Media produce attack articles and defamation videos. DNC-controlled Google locked these attack articles and movies on the internet on the top line, of the front page of all Google and Youtube searches for a decade in front of 7.5 billion people, around the world. This attack-type uses over $40 million dollars in server farms, production costs and internet rigging. The forensic data acquired from tracking some of these attacks proves that Google rigs attacks against individuals on the internet and that all of Google’s “impressions” are manually controlled by Google’s executives who are also the main financiers and policy directors of the Obama Administration. This data was provided to the European Union for it’s ongoing prosecution of Google’s political manipulation of public perceptions.

    - Victims HR and employment records, on recruiting and hiring databases, were embedded with false negative keywords and coded "red flags" in order to prevent the victim targets from ever gaining future employment. These hacking-like tactics were so sophisticated that only a state-sponsored group could have undertaken such attacks!

    - Gary D. Conley, Seth Rich, Rajeev Motwani, Micheal Hastings and many other whistle-blowers in these matters, turned up dead under strange circumstances. It is very possible that some of these attack services, operated by former CIA operatives, offer discrete murder-for-sale services using high-tech assassination tools that make murders look like heart attacks and organ failures.

    - Disability and VA complaint hearings and benefits were frozen, delayed, denied or subjected to lost records and "missing hard drives" as in the Lois Lerner case.

    - Paypal (A DNC-biased operation) and other on-line payments for on-line sales were de-platformed, delayed, hidden, or re-directed in order to terminate income potential for target victims who competed with the attackers interests and holdings.

    - Web server global DNS redirection, "website spoofing" sent target victims websites to dead ends where no sales orders or customer inquiries actually get back to the target victim. These internet revenue activity manipulations are conducted using Google and Amazon servers. All commercial storefronts and on-line sales attempts by target victims, will have had their sites hidden, or search engine de-linked by a massively resourced facility located in Virginia, Texas or Palo Alto, California in order to terminate revenue potentials for the target victims.

    - Thousands of hired "trolls", "blogger shills", "botnets" and "synth-blog" deployments were deployed to place defamatory statements and disinformation about victims in front of 7.5 billion people around the world on the internet in order to seek to damage their federal testimony credibility by a massively resourced facility. Many of these click-farms and shill farms are located off-shore but the payments to them, for the attack services, track back to White House contractors and financiers.

    - Campaign finance dirty tricks contractors were hired by campaign financiers to attack the friends and family members of the target victims in order to create low morale for the target victims psyche and motivation.

    - Electronic attack devices were placed in nearby vehicles and apartments located close to victims. The U.S. Government has now acknowledged that the Cuban, Chinese and other embassy "sonic attacks" are from a known microwave beam weapon. Any one of the technical departments of the attack services listed at the top of this article can build such a biological harassment weapon. It can be aimed at the target victims office, bedroom or vehicle and, within a week, have caused biological and emotional damage using a weapon that has no visible track of trajectory. It is designed to make the target victim think they are "going crazy" or "hearing sounds in their head". While this may sound pretty wild, web search "Embassy sonic attacks" on the top 5 non-Google search engines and read the very credible reports of these attacks.

    - In one case covert political partner: Google, transferred large sums of cash to dirty tricks contractors and then manually locked the media portion of the attacks into the top lines of the top pages of all Google searches globally, for years, with hidden embedded codes in the links and web-pages which multiplied the attacks on Victims by many magnitudes.

    - The U.S. Patent Office was used as a weapon against victims who had inventions. Covert Cartel financier: Google, placed Google’s lawyer: Michelle Lee, in charge of the U.S. Patent Office and she, in turn, stacked all of the U.S. Patent Office IPR and ALICE review boards and offices with Google-supporting employees in order to rig the U.S. Patent Office to protect Google from being prosecuted for the vast patent thefts that Google engages in. Google has hundreds of patent lawsuits for technology theft and a number of those lawsuits refer to Google’s operations as “Racketeering”, “Monopolistic Cartel” and “Government Coup-like” behaviors. Thousands of articles and investigations detail the fact that Google, “essentially” ran the Obama White House and provided over 80% of the key White House staff. A conflict-of-interest unlike any in American history. Google’s investors personally told Applicant they would “kill him”. Google and the Obama Administration were “the same entity”. Applicant testified in the review that got Michelle Lee terminated and uncovered a tactical political and social warfare group inside Google who were financed by Federal and State funds.

    - Honeytraps and moles were employed by the attackers. In this tactic, people who covertly worked for the attackers were employed to approach the “target” in order to spy on and misdirect the subject.

    - Gawker Media, Gizmodo Media, Snopes, SPLC and other hired media assassins were retained to produce "hatchet job" character assassination articles about victims. Then those articles were faxed, mailed and emailed to the employers and investors of victims with a note saying: "You don't want to have anything to do with this person, do you..?" in order to get victims fired from their job and get their loans or financing pulled. The attackers used the attack media, that they authored, to create an attack designed to end victim's lives via economic warfare.

    - Mortgage and rental applications for victims had red flags added to them in databases to prevent the targets from getting homes or apartments.

    - Krebs On Security, Wired, Ars Technica, The Wall Street Journal and most major IT publications have reported that hundreds of spy "back-doors" have been found on every Intel, AMD, Apple, Xfinity, Cisco, Microsoft, Juniper Networks motherboard, chip-set and hardware component set. This means that any kid with the "key" code can open any computer, server, router, cloud-network or other network connected device and read every file, photo, video, your calendar and email on your devices at any time from any location on Earth. The key codes have been released to every hacker community in the world for over ten years. There is now no government, corporate or personal data that can't be hacked, even data from decades ago. Every single one of your darkest secrets can be in the hands of your enemy within 60 minutes, or less. Important meetings you had planned with potential investors, employers, clients, dates, suppliers and others will suddenly get cancelled at the last minute. They will get cancelled because your enemies are reading your calendar remotely and covertly sending slander information to those you had hoped to engage with in order to sabotage your life. Nothing you have ever typed on a computer or Smartphone is safe. it WILL be acquired and it WILL be used against you. This WAS DONE to the victims by a sophisticated hacking effort.

    - McCarthy-Era type "Black-lists" were created and employed against target victims who competed with Obama Administration executives and their campaign financiers to prevent them from getting funding and future employment.

    - The victims were very carefully manipulated into a position of not being able to get jobs, unemployment benefits, disability benefits or acquire any possible sources of income. The retribution tactics were audacious, overt..and quite illegal.

    - There are thousands of additional Dirty Tricks tactics being used by these Attack Services yet Congress refuses to pass laws out-lawing such attack services. The cost of an attack on a person ranges from $150,000.00 to over $50,000,000.00. While a Silicon Valley billionaire can afford to launch counter-measures to these attacks, any regular taxpayer will be utterly destroyed, and incapable of fighting back, against even the smallest version of one of these "kill orders". A number of modern office shootings are the results of these attacks against an individual who has lost everything because of the attack and has no options left.

YOU TUBE PRODUCED A DEFAMATION ATTACK VIDEO AND LOCKED IT IN THE FIRST SEARCH RESULTS SLOT OF YOUTUBE AND GOOGLE SEARCH RESULTS FOR OVER FIVE YEARS IN ORDER TO DESTROY THEIR CEO'S COMPETITOR - THE FACTS PROVE THAT GOOGLE AND YOUTUBE ARE SCAM ELECTION RIGGERS AND ANTI-TRUST VIOLATING MANIPULATORS

60 Minutes:’ More Than 300 Ads by Campaign Taken Down by Google and YouTube To Rig Elections

AP Photo/Reed Saxon
AP Photo/Reed Saxon

 

More than 300 of President Donald Trump’s political ads have taken down by Google and its video platform YouTube, mostly over the summer, according to a report by 60 minutes.

The CBS reporters were unable to find specific reasons for the mass takedowns of Trump ads, a common problem with social media companies, which are often reluctant to explain precisely why a ban or other act of censorship has happened. “We found very little transparency in the transparency report,” concluded 60 Minutes.

CBS reporters investigated the removal of pro-Trump ads after YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki highlighted the company’s decision to ban some of the President’s ads during an interview.

Via CBS News:

60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl asked Wojcicki, “Have you taken down any of President Trump’s ads at all?” YouTube’s CEO responded, “There are ads of President Trump that were not approved to run on Google or YouTube.” When pressed for an example, Wojcicki added, “Well, they’re available in our transparency report.”

In response to concerns raised after the 2016 election cycle, Google and YouTube, like Facebook, keep a searchable archive of political ads that have run on the site.

60 Minutes reviewed the archive to learn more about President Trump’s problematic political ads. We found that over 300 video ads were taken down by Google and YouTube, mostly over the summer, for violating company policy. But the archive doesn’t detail what policy was violated. Was it copyright violation? A lie or extreme inaccuracy? Faulty grammar? Bad punctuation? It’s unclear. The ads determined to be offending are not available to be screened. We found very little transparency in the transparency report. 

The GOP and the Trump campaign have condemned Google’s recent rule-changes around political ads, calling them a “blatant attempt to suppress voter information” ahead of the 2020 election. 

Are you an insider at Google, Facebook, Twitter or any other tech company who wants to confidentially reveal wrongdoing or political bias at your company? Reach out to Allum Bokhari at his secure email address allumbokhari@protonmail.com.


r. Robert Epstein

A generation ago, cultural critic Neil Postman published the clever little book Amusing Ourselves to Death. In it, Postman considers the rival dystopian visions of George Orwell and Aldous Huxley as articulated in their classic novels, 1984 and Brave New World, respectively. Orwell’s vision is that of the modern police state; it’s “Big Brother,” a place where technology is used as an instrument of oppression. Huxley, by contrast, imagined a technologically advanced society where we willingly surrender our freedom for pleasure, safety, and convenience. Postman concluded that it was Huxley’s, not Orwell’s, vision that is carrying the day.

Postman’s thesis is remarkably enduring. I heard ominous echoes of it at a panel discussion last month at The American Spectator’s annual Robert L. Bartley Gala in Washington, D.C. There, before a room full of journalists and politicians, Dr. Robert Epstein presented his jarring research on the brave new world Google is creating. Epstein is the former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today and currently a senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology. Here’s a sample of what I found so disconcerting:

Google and Gmail are surveillance platforms. Google has no product other than you. They gather information about you and monetize it. They sell you.

That alone is food for thought. But Epstein is making a much more important — and chilling — point:

Google has positioned themselves to blackmail anyone. If you have used Google for 20 years, as most have, they have on average three million pages of information on you. That includes a massive amount of data collected without your knowledge via means you don’t know about. Did you know they have invested in DNA companies? That’s to get more information about you…. They’re collecting information about you not just on Chrome, YouTube, Gmail, and Google.com, but also in many ways you cannot see – for example, on millions of webpages that invisibly embed Google Analytics, or through the microphones Google secretly installed on home thermostats made by Nest, a company Google now owns.

Before you dismiss Epstein as a conservative crackpot conspiracy theorist, consider the fact that he is a well-respected academic with a Harvard Ph.D., that his endorsements come from the likes of B. F. Skinner rather than Alex Jones, and that he does not, in his words, “have a conservative bone in [his] body.” Furthermore, as the Wall Street Journal recently reported, Google is moving into banking, giving them access to your financial information, and “Project Nightingale,” which, in addition to the newly acquired Fitbit, gives Google access to the personal health data of millions of Americans without them knowing it.

 

“This is not a conservative issue,” says Epstein. “It is an issue of freedom.”

This brings us to the heart of Epstein’s critique. With Google controlling 90 percent of the world’s online searches, the left-wing company is using that power to seriously influence search results on topics ranging from the environment to state and federal elections. According to Epstein’s research, 60 percent of all Google searches do not result in a click (i.e., an actual search): “This is because the person conducting the search finds an answer in answer boxes Google now shows above search results. People trust those answers as being true even when they are not.”

“[Google is] the gatekeeper of information,” Epstein says. “If they don’t want kids to know Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, they will suppress that search result or change the answers.… Through their search engine biases, they are influencing elections, not just here, but around the world. I lean left and supported Hillary Clinton in 2016. But I am speaking out because I love freedom and democracy. Google is a threat to both.”

Thinking the Lincoln remark a bit of hyperbole to drive his point home, I nonetheless decided to type the following into the Google search box:

“Was Abraham Lincoln a Democrat or a Republican?”

The misleading answer given in the autocomplete suggested search was “National Union Party.”

 

I then did the same at Bing.com. The answer (with search): “Republican.”

This is an example of Google’s power to influence, say, term papers. But do you begin to glimpse their power to influence elections? Epstein wrote to me, “Big Tech can shift 15 million votes in 2020. Google search results shifted upwards of 78.2 million votes (spread across hundreds of elections) toward Democrats in 2018.”

Google calls this manipulation an “ephemeral experience,” that is, an experience in which people are manipulated without realizing it and where there is no paper trail. Yes, while Democrats tilt at the windmill of Russian influence on U.S. elections, the real threat to free elections is domestic and a major contributor to Democratic candidates.

Epstein’s data tells the tale of the Google threat: “My experiments show that just by manipulating autocomplete search suggestions, Google can turn a 50/50 split among undecided voters into a 90/10 split with no one knowing.”

Epstein said to a gathering of optimistic Republicans at the Trump International Hotel in D.C., “You are kidding yourselves if you think a Republican can win in 2020. There is absolutely no way without reform.”

He then added, “If Big Tech companies aren’t stopped, democracy will be only an illusion.”

Welcome to Google’s brave new world.

60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl visited YouTube headquarters in San Bruno, California to have a scorching interview with YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki over free speech controversies online.

Stahl opened the episode by saying that the internet’s biggest video platform has “come under increasing scrutiny, accused of propagating white supremacy, peddling conspiracy theories, and profiting from it all,” setting the tone for an intense interview.

Lesley Stahl commented, “You recently tightened your policy on hate speech,” before asking “Why'd you wait so long?”

Susan Wojcicki explained that rules have had to be reshaped and then enforced by a “combination of people and machines,” including a team of “10,000 people that are focused on controversial content.”

“You can go too far, and that can become censorship,” the YouTube CEO cautioned, before adding, “we have been working really hard to figure out what’s the right way to balance responsibility with freedom of speech.”

Narrating for the segment, Stahl then proclaimed that “the private sector is not legally beholden to the First Amendment.” She then inquired, “You’re not operating under some freedom of speech mandate. You get to pick.”

Wojcicki replied, “We do,” and further suggested that, while this may be true, “we think there’s a lot of benefit from being able to hear from groups and underrepresented groups that otherwise we never would have heard from.”

Stahl summarized YouTube's policy, stating that, “videos are allowed as long as they don’t cause harm, but her [Wojcicki’s] definition of ‘harm’ can seem narrow.”

60 Minutes Overtime filmed a segment that same day about section 230’s protections of tech companies from the consequences of users’ posts. Wojcicki admitted that “if there was [sic] laws that said this is the type of content you can't have, then we would remove it.” However, she clarified by explaining her company’s current stance on hate, stating, “Just to be clear, because you've asked me so many questions about hate, that's not necessarily something that we're getting any legislation about. That’s allowed. That’s allowed here in the U.S.”

YouTube has had a troubled history with regard to censorship, however.

Conservative pundit Dan Bongino responded to the 60 Minutes interview via tweet, warning, “Make absolutely NO MISTAKE, the @60Minutes piece on YouTube tonight is nothing more than a push by liberal activists to silence conservatives through corporate pressure. Liberals, and their media pals, DESPISE free speech.”

An example of the platform’s unstable policy on free speech occurred last August. A day after deplatforming many right-wing accounts, YouTube released a creator blog titled “Preserving openness through responsibility.” It proclaimed itself an open platform for diverse, even controversial, ideas.

After being unclear regarding why these channels were removed, YouTube mysteriously reinstated some of these deplatformed channels the next day, while leaving others offline.

YouTube even reportedly banned a retired Navy SEAL, retired Senior Chief Petty Officer Don Shipley, who used his channel to expose Covington activist Nathan Phillips as being a refrigerator mechanic for the USMC rather than a ”Recon Ranger” who fought in Vietnam, as the media formerly reported.

More recently, it became public that The Heritage Foundation had been sparring behind closed doors with the video hosting platform regarding a video that was taken down from The Daily Signal’s channel. The video in question featured a pediatrician who said, “if you want to cut off a leg or an arm you’re mentally ill, but if you want to cut off healthy breasts or a penis, you’re transgender."

 

YouTube posted a terms of service update of upcoming policies to take effect on December 10, 2019. Some worry that the policy update may be more akin to a purge of controversial creators. One of the rules stated that “YouTube may terminate your access, or your Google account’s access to all or part of the Service if YouTube believes, in its sole discretion, that provision of the Service to you is no longer commercially viable.”

Mashable speculated that “these terms can be seen as YouTube giving itself the ability to remove users and channels that disseminate hate speech or other violent rhetoric.”

YouTube informed Mashable that it made changes to its “Terms of Service in order to make them easier to read and to ensure they’re up to date,” also claiming that it is “not changing the way our products work, how we collect or process data, or any of your settings.”

But based on YouTube’s problematic history of customer service, users and creators may have a right to be concerned.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------



Federal law enforcement, the United States Congress and the highest level investigators in the U.S., and abroad, have documented (per the “FISA Memo”, Congressional Reports and federal employee testimony) and proven the fact that the Obama Administration regularly engaged in the operation of retribution, vendetta and reprisal campaigns known as “hit-jobs” against domestic natural born U.S. citizen domestic taxpayers. The Federal Court, in at least one previous court case,has ruled that Applicants, in this particular matter, were the victims and target of a number of these attacks designed to inflict permanent medical, emotional, character assassination, brand negation, economic and career damage.

'They Can't Beat Him On The Law So They Are Trying To Destroy His Life' -Sen. Graham Questions Dems' Motives On Brett Kavanaugh Sexual Assault Allegations (dailycaller.com)

LINKS TO PROOF OF THESE ATTACK DEPLOYMENTS THAT WILL STAND UP IN COURT:

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/they-literally-know-nothing-ben-rhodes-bragged-about-manipulating-clueless-reporters/



https://freedom.press/news/revealed-justice-depts-secret-rules-targeting-journalists-fisa-court-orders/



https://freedom.press/news/lawsuit-seeks-government-guidelines-surveillance-journalists-leak-investigations-surge/



http://www.google-is-a-mobster.com



https://knightcolumbia.org/


 

http://www.londonworldwide.com



https://bigleaguepolitics.com/brennan-and-clapper-accused-of-hacking-john-roberts-to-blackmail-him/



https://freedom.press/news/revealed-justice-depts-secret-rules-targeting-journalists-fisa-court-orders/



https://bigleaguepolitics.com/heres-why-obama-clearly-ordered-the-spying-on-trump/



https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/17/lindsey-graham-dems-kavanaugh/



https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/okeefe-strikes-again-project-veritas-exposes-doj-official-using-govt-databases-to-stalk-business-owners-video/



https://www.politico.com/gallery/16-worst-political-dirty-tricks



http://artofverbalwar.com/2016/11/03/quick-dirty-guide-political-debate-tactics/



https://politicaldictionary.com/topics/dirty-tricks/



https://www.learntoinfluence.com/dirty-tricks-and-office-politics/



https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/11/election-dirty-tricks/



https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/21/us/politics/video-dnc-trump-rallies.html



http://freakonomics.com/2007/11/06/the-complete-history-of-dirty-politics-a-qa-on-anything-for-a-vote/



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratfucking



https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-npr-video-and-political-dirty-tricks/2011/03/17/ABbyMym_story.html



https://www.huffingtonpost.com/rich-rubino/dirty-political-tricks-from-american-politics_b_9324226.html



http://www.electomatic.com/dirty-campaign-techniques/



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO



https://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/29/obamas.first.campaign/



https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/us/politics/dirty-tricks-vandalism-and-the-dark-side-of-politics.html



https://whyy.org/articles/political-dirty-tricks-are-a-staple-of-modern-politics/



https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/19/cambridge-analytica-execs-boast-dirty-tricks-honey-traps-elections



https://medium.com/@j363j/how-roger-stones-campaign-of-tammany-hall-political-corruption-lead-to-trump-russia-3099d87784e



https://www.bridgemi.com/detroit-journalism-cooperative/lawsuits-dirty-tricks-and-angry-ex-wife-detroits-ugliest-election



https://www.salon.com/2016/03/25/hillary_clintons_dirty_politics_bernie_sanders_is_experiencing_the_same_nasty_tricks_that_clintons_campaign_dealt_obama_in_2008/



http://savannahnow.com/opinion-opinion-columns/2016-10-25/cal-thomas-political-dirty-tricks-then-and-now



https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/5-political-dirty-tricks-we-learned-from-the-robocalls-trial-1.2669924



https://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/2d0r1d/the_reactionary_political_debate_playbook_karl/



https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/south-carolina-dirty-tricks-republicans-219116



https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-02-10/yale-newspaper-publishes-guide-destroying-white-boy-lives-using-stasi-tactics



https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/02/yale_editor_chillingly_urges_fellow_yalies_to_act_as_a_stasi_to_monitor_white_males.html



https://russia-insider.com/en/jeff-bezos-nudie-pics-be-released-cyber-tycoon-complains-about-loss-privacy/ri26224



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP5jqLAjbDw



!!!!! Mueller Hears That Silicon Valley Has Been Manipulating The Entire BREXIT Campaign using covert Opposition tactics  !!!!!!

- Second former employee of controversial data firm to be questioned by special counsel’s inquiry into Russia collusion

By Carole Cadwalladr

Brittany Kaiser is said to be cooperating fully with the Mueller inquiry.

A director of the controversial data company Cambridge Analytica, who appeared with Arron Banks at the launch of the Leave.EU campaign, has been subpoenaed by the US investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

A spokesman for Brittany Kaiser, former business development director for Cambridge Analytica – which collapsed after the Observer revealed details of its misuse of Facebook data – confirmed that she had been subpoenaed by special counsel Robert Mueller, and was cooperating fully with his investigation.

He added that she was assisting other US congressional and legal investigations into the company’s activities and had voluntarily turned over documents and data.

Kaiser, who gave evidence to the UK parliament last April in which she claimed Cambridge Analytica had carried out in-depth work for Leave.EU, is the second individual connected to the firm subpoenaed by the special counsel. The Electoral Commission has said its investigation into Leave.EU found no evidence that the campaign “received donations or paid for services from Cambridge Analytica …beyond initial scoping work”.

Damian Collins, chairman of parliament’s inquiry into fake news, said it was “no surprise” that Kaiser was under scrutiny by Mueller because “her work connected her to WikiLeaks, Cambridge Analytica and [its parent company] SCL, the Trump campaign, Leave.EU and Arron Banks”.

He said it was now vital Britain had its own inquiry into foreign interference: “We should not be leaving this to the Americans.”

Tom Watson, the deputy leader of the Labour party, echoed Collins’s statement, saying: “This is the first evidence that a significant player in the Leave.EU campaign is of interested to the global Mueller inquiry. People will be bewildered that the British government has no interest in establishing the facts of what happened.”

In August, Sam Patten, a US political consultant who had worked for Cambridge Analytica on campaigns in the US and abroad, struck a plea deal with Mueller after admitting he had failed to register as a foreign agent for a Ukrainian oligarch.

He became a subject of the special counsel’s inquiry because of work done with Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign manager, in Ukraine. He had also set up a business with Konstantin Kilimnik, a key figure who Mueller has alleged has ties to Russian intelligence and who is facing charges of obstruction of justice. In a 2017 statement to the Washington Post, Kilimnik denied any connection to intelligence services. Kaiser, however, is the first person connected directly to both the Brexit and Trump campaigns known to have been questioned by Mueller.

The news came to light in a new Netflix documentary, The Great Hack, which premiered at the Sundance film festival last month and is expected to be released later this spring. Film-makers followed Kaiser for months after she approached the Guardian, including moments after she received the subpoena. She claims the summons came after the Guardian revealed she had visited WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange while still a Cambridge Analytica employee in February 2017, three months after the US election.

One part of Mueller’s investigation focuses on whether the Trump campaign sought to influence the timing of the release of emails by WikiLeaks before the election. Investigators are looking at communications between them. In the film, Kaiser says that she has gone from being a cooperating witness to a subject of investigation because of her contact with Assange.

In October 2017, it was revealed that Alexander Nix, the chief executive of Cambridge Analytica, had contacted Assange in August 2016 to try to obtain emails from Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign – which indictments from Mueller’s team say were obtained by Russian military intelligence – to use in Donald Trump’s campaign. When Kaiser gave evidence to parliament last year, she was asked about her relationship with Assange and WikiLeaks but failed to reveal that she had met Assange.

In the documentary, Kaiser is shown after receiving an email from the Guardian last June asking about meeting Assange and alleged donations of cryptocurrency to WikiLeaks. Kaiser did not respond to the email at the time, but on camera says: “She knows I met Assange. And she knows I donated money to WikiLeaks in bitcoin.”

Her legal representatives later wrote to the paper to say that the allegations, including that she had “channelled” donations to WikiLeaks, were false. Kaiser said she had received a small gift of bitcoin in 2011 – long before she worked at Cambridge Analytica – and, not knowing what else to do with it, gave it to WikiLeaks, because she had benefited from material it had released over the years.

Her lawyer told the Observer that the meeting with Assange came about after a chance encounter in London with an acquaintance who knew him. It lasted 20 minutes and consisted mainly of Assange telling her “about how he saw the world”. He said they did not discuss the US election.

Patten and Kaiser were involved in a controversial election campaign in Nigeria in January 2015, which former Cambridge Analytica employees say had “unsettling” parallels to the US presidential election.

The Guardian revealed that the data firm had worked alongside a team of unidentified Israeli intelligence operatives on the campaign. Ex-Cambridge Analytica employees described how the Israelis hacked the now-president of Nigeria’s emails and released damaging information about him to the press weeks before the election.
=====================

CBS NEWS 60 MINUTES Lara Logan "I’m Being ‘Targeted’ For Saying the Media is ‘Mostly Liberal"
by Tamar Auber

On Wednesday, former CBS News foreign correspondent Lara Logan spoke with Fox News Sean Hannity about her recent comments slamming the media as “mostly liberal.”

Logan told Breitbart podcaster Mike Ritland the remarks made on his show — which drew widespread attention online — amounted to “professional suicide.”

Defending her remarks on Hannity’s show, Logan said that as the result of her speaking out about how the media is “mostly liberal” she has been targeted because she is an independent voice.

“Any journalists who are not beating the same drum and giving the same talking points,” she insisted “pay the price” for not going along with the liberal crowd.

She also called out her targeters by name.

“I know they’re going to come after me,” she told Hannity. “Michael Calderone who is at the Huffington Post. I can give you the script now. I can tell you who the players are. Joe Hagan. Brian Stelter.”

She added: “They smear you personally. They go after your integrity. They go after your reputation as a person and a professional. They will stop at nothing. I am not the only one. And I am just, I am done, right, I am tired of it. And they do not get to write my story anymore. They don’t get to speak for me, I want to say loudly and clearly to anybody who is listening, I am not owned. Nobody owns me, right? I’m not owned by the left or the right.”

Logan made headlines recently when, during a scorched earth podcast interview with Ritland, she said that there was a lot of “weight” in most news organizations on “one side of the political spectrum.”

“The media everywhere is mostly liberal. But in this country, 85 percent of journalists are registered Democrats. So that’s just a fact, right?” she told Ritland.

She also trashed reporting based on single, anonymous government sources.

“That’s not journalism, that’s horseshit,” Logan stressed. “Responsibility for fake news begins with us. We bear some responsibility for that, and we’re not taking ownership of that and addressing it. We just want to blame it all on somebody else.”

=================================

MEET THE ATTACKERS CALLED: Psy-Group

Internal documents from a private Israeli intelligence firm called Psy-Group show that, at the time of many incidents, the company, and possibly other private investigators, were targeting U.S. citizens because they spoke up about crimes.

Psy-Group’s intelligence and influence operations, which included a failed attempt in the summer of 2017 to sway a local election in central California, were detailed in a New Yorker investigation that I co-wrote earlier this month. Before it went out of business (ie: changed it's name) , last year, Psy-Group was part of a new wave of private-intelligence firms that recruited from the ranks of Israel’s secret services and described themselves as “private Mossads.” Psy-Group initially stood out among its rivals because it didn’t just gather intelligence; its operatives used false identities, or avatars, to covertly spread messages in an attempt to influence what people believed and how they behaved. In 2016, Psy-Group held discussions with the Trump campaign and others about conducting covert “influence” operations to benefit the candidate. Psy-Group’s founder and C.E.O., Royi Burstien, a veteran Israeli intelligence officer who established the firm in 2014, told me that his talks with the Trump campaign went nowhere. The company’s posturing, however, attracted the attention of Robert Mueller, the special counsel, who has been investigating interference in the 2016 Presidential race.'

Silicon Valley oligarchs have over 100 different Psy-Group type attack services to choose from!

================================

FED BOMBSHELL: Fusion GPS Bribed Dozens of MSM Journalists With Cash To Run Character Assassinations, While News Companies Paid Firm to Dig Dirt on Trump

High-ranking FBI insiders are pulling back the curtain on Fusion GPS, the firm that commissioned and spread the bogus Trump dossier.

It appears the embattled intelligence firm was quite busy paying off Big Media reporters, according to federal sources who have traced dozens of transactions between TD Bank and media members as well as media organizations, sources confirm.

But stunningly, Big Media organizations have employed Fusion GPS to dig dirt on politicians and D.C.’s elite — namely Donald Trump.

“Fusion GPS was on the payroll of the media and in turn had members of the media on its payroll,” one FBI insider said.

Bombshell revelations.

FBI insiders confirm Fusion GPS employed law firms as well as shell companies to send and receive funds to and from media and reporters. But the embattled firm also used its accounts at TD Bank to directly commission reporters. Likewise, Fusion GPS received funds from media companies into its own accounts at TD Bank, FBI insiders said,

“There are dozens of payments from the media flowing into their (Fusion GPS’) account,” one federal law enforcement official said. “One company wired funds to Fusion (GPS) more than a dozen times.”

Why would media companies commission Fusion GPS? Likely to dig dirt on enemies or secure records that reporters could not legally obtain, one federal law enforcement insider said. One FBI insider said the payments to Fusion GPS coincide with Donald Trump’s run for the White House.

The payments were made between Sept. 2015 and Sept. 2017, records show.

The unthinkable: The mainstream media paying Fusion GPS for dirt on Trump to the same firm the Democratic National Committee paid to fund the bogus Trump dossier. And at the same time Fusion GPS bribing journalists to place stories — likely negative about Trump, as well as spread the bogus Trump dossier around.

Stunning.

Was Buzzfeed — the only company to publish the full bogus dossier — on that list?

And who is on the payroll? We are trying to run that information down.

And why aren’t these people behind bars?

 

The California DMV Is Making $50M a Year Selling Drivers’ Personal Information To Your Enemies

A document obtained by Motherboard shows how DMVs sell people’s names, addresses, and other personal information to generate revenue.

 
by Joseph Cox
 

Image: Mark Boster/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

The California Department of Motor Vehicles is generating revenue of $50,000,000 a year through selling drivers’ personal information, according to a DMV document obtained by Motherboard.

DMVs across the country are selling data that drivers are required to provide to the organization in order to obtain a license. This information includes names, physical addresses, and car registration information. California’s sales come from a state which generally scrutinizes privacy to a higher degree than the rest of the country.

In a public record acts request, Motherboard asked the California DMV for the total dollar amounts paid by commercial requesters of data for the past six years. The responsive document shows the total revenue in financial year 2013/14 as $41,562,735, before steadily climbing to $52,048,236 in the financial year 2017/18.

The document doesn't name the commercial requesters, but some specific companies appeared frequently in Motherboard's earlier investigation that looked at DMVs across the country. They included data broker LexisNexis and consumer credit reporting agency Experian. Motherboard also found DMVs sold information to private investigators, including those who are hired to find out if a spouse is cheating. It is unclear if the California DMV has recently sold data to these sorts of entities.

california-dmv-document
A screenshot of the DMV document obtained by Motherboard. Image: Motherboard.

In an email to Motherboard, the California DMV said that requesters may also include insurance companies, vehicle manufacturers, and prospective employers.

Asked if the sale of this data was essential to the DMV, Marty Greenstein, public information officer at the California DMV, wrote that its sale furthers objectives related to highway and public safety, "including availability of insurance, risk assessment, vehicle safety recalls, traffic studies, emissions research, background checks, and for pre- and existing employment purposes."

"The DMV takes its obligation to protect personal information very seriously. Information is only released pursuant to legislative direction, and the DMV continues to review its release practices to ensure information is only released to authorized persons/entities and only for authorized purposes. The DMV also audits requesters to ensure proper audit logs are maintained and that employees are trained in the protection of DMV information and anyone having access to this information sign a security document," Greenstein wrote.

 

Do you know anything else about data selling? We'd love to hear from you. Using a non-work phone or computer, you can contact Joseph Cox securely on Signal on +44 20 8133 5190, Wickr on josephcox, OTR chat on jfcox@jabber.ccc.de, or email joseph.cox@vice.com.

Multiple other DMVs around the U.S. previously confirmed to Motherboard that they have cut-off data access for some commercial requesters after they abused the data.

One of the main pieces of legislation that governs the sale of DMV data stemmed from a case in California. Lawmakers introduced the Driver's Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) in 1994 after a private investigator hired by a stalker obtained the address of actress Rebecca Schaeffer from the DMV. The stalker went on to kill Schaeffer. The DPPA was designed to restrict access to DMV data, but included a wide array of exemptions, including for private investigators.

After Motherboard's earlier investigation, senators and digital privacy experts criticized the sale of DMV data, and some said the law should be changed. Senator and Democratic Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders said DMVs should not profit from such information.