How the U.S. Federal Government Has Been Corrupted

[Fred Steeves]

There is no better way to sabotage a trial then getting the plaintiffs to introduce garbage information. If you can prove the information is garbage, then the criminal is much more likely to get off the hook. You really need to put your critical thinking skills ahead of your need to believe you have simple answers or else you will fall into this trap.

And they're well laid traps indeed, containing just enough truth to convey a veneer of credibility, but also containing just enough crap to discredit anyone who starts spouting said information. Leaving one wide open to "look, if they actually believe some of that crap, how much else do they have to say that's also crap? Maybe someone to stop listening to..."

The "there were no real planes on 9/11" is one such.

You've probably noticed that it's by and large the lazy copy/pasters that fall easily into these traps, as they seldom actually take a closer look at anything themselves. They've not managed to acquire the hard won fine art of nuance, discernment, or critical thinking skills that eventually come with self research, and it shows.

[Christian]

You've probably noticed that it's by and large the lazy copy/pasters that fall easily into these traps, as they seldom actually take a closer look at anything themselves. They've not managed to acquire the hard won fine art of nuance, discernment, or critical thinking skills that eventually come with self research, and it shows.

Yes, "lazy copy/pasters". Links are great to support your ideas, but you need to be able to defend them too.

not[/I] "garbage."

Can you tell us what is in that 43 pages and how it relates to what has been said here? It certainly isn't my job at this point. I've already waded through the first link you posted which turned out to be 4 pages of steaming swamp sludge, why would anyone want to put themselves through 43 more pages of that? Please tell us in your own words, with your own brain, using your own critical thinking skills, what exactly it is in those 43 pages that refutes what I am saying here. If you put forth this idea and you are still holding to it, then you are obligated to defend it. I imagine that I have spent a lot more time looking at the original link you posted, analyzing it and researching it. Its now your turn to formulate an intelligent response IN YOUR OWN WORDS. We're waiting ....

[WantDisclosure]

Can you tell us what is in that 43 pages and how it relates to what has been said here?

A screenshot of the post you ignored:

[Christian]

A screenshot of the post you ignored:

Why do say I ignored this? I read it. But you didn't state how this was relevant, and even with your redlined boxes, I am still not sure what you are trying to say here, but since you can't articulate your ideas any better, I will respond as best I can.

The Stenstrom Article claims that there is a Council of Seven leading the CIGIE, including FBI director Christopher Wray. Per the CIGIE website, there is no council, but a "Leadership Staff" ( https://www.ignet.gov/content/leadership-and-staff )of seven people, none of whom are Christopher Wray, and as far as I can tell, none of them have anything to do with the FBI. The CIGIE website all shows that it has about 70 members from different departments of the federal government (https://www.ignet.gov/content/inspec...eral-directory ). There is no representative from The FBI on this list, however, there is one member from the DOJ (Department of Justice) which is the parent organization of the FBI.

So Christopher Wray was never part of CIGIE. The Stenstrom article also lists Robert Muller and James Comey as members emeritus of this alleged CIGIE counsel and yet neither of them have ever been Inspector Generals and would never ever had anything to do with CIGIE.

The "Counsel a.k.a. CIGIE" that is part of our "legislated" reality is utter B.S.

[WantDisclosure]

Why do say I ignored this? I read it. But you didn't state how this was relevant, and even with your redlined boxes, I am still not sure what you are trying to say here, but since you can't articulate your ideas any better, I will respond as best I can.

The Stenstrom Article claims that there is a Council of Seven leading the CIGIE, including FBI director Christopher Wray. Per the CIGIE website, there is no council, but a "Leadership Staff" ( https://www.ignet.gov/content/leadership-and-staff )of seven people, none of whom are Christopher Wray, and as far as I can tell, none of them have anything to do with the FBI. The CIGIE website all shows that it has about 70 members from different departments of the federal government (https://www.ignet.gov/content/inspec...eral-directory ). There is no representative from The FBI on this list, however, there is one member from the DOJ (Department of Justice) which is the parent organization of the FBI.

So Christopher Wray was never part of CIGIE. The Stenstrom article also lists Robert Muller and James Comey as members emeritus of this alleged CIGIE counsel and yet neither of them have ever been Inspector Generals and would never ever had anything to do with CIGIE.

The "Counsel a.k.a. CIGIE" that is part of our "legislated" reality is utter B.S.

You claimed that this blog article was "garbage" because your source, the U.S. government, didn't list the names cited.

I say you ignored my post because it showed the FBI, a very big part of the tyranny we're up against right now, specifically was listed as part of CIGIE, the subject of the author's article and one of the members listed.

You failed to acknowledge this challenge to your assertion that the author was dead wrong.

I fundamentally disagree with your opinion, but I'm not here to try to change minds, only to share my research and make comments where I think I can be helpful to others.

You've made your point. I hope you'll stop belaboring it.

[Emil El Zapato]

Why focus on the negative? Because you are 'attuned' to that. Try to change your perspective on why entities do what they do and recognize the result of given actions. Are they pro or con to societal progressiveness? Are we oppressed? Yes, we are! Everything that Trump and his minions foretell for me and others like me is dire. Do I want Kristallnacht to knock on my door? Uh no, I don't think so.

[WantDisclosure]

There is no doubt, if you've been following the lawfare and raids that have taken place in recent years that the Executive Branch of the Federal government is corrupt.

Regarding lawfare, there is a video online dated September 25, 2024 by Mike Adams of NaturalNews entitled "Brighteon Broadcast News, Sep 25, 2024 – Court orders InfoWars AUCTIONED OFF as lawfare goes NUCLEAR to silence free speech."

A screenshot and link to watch:


https://www.banned.video/watch?id=66...6cbbfd2e0ae28b

Alex Jones will be reporting further about the nuances of this lawfare.

[Emil El Zapato]

The Supreme Court has most assuredly lost its way. But I've known that for decades.