House or Senate investigations NEVER result in anything substantive. Name the last time an investigation br either the House or the Senate ever resulted in jail time or executions.
Well I agree with you about the People part; soon after WWII, citizens who were prosperous and at peace with the world after a depression and two World Wars back to back....they slipped into a trance. And their children, who had not suffered what their parents had paid little heed to what was going on in DC. We The People had basically gone to sleep while the Progressives began stealing America from us right under our noses.
But my point was, while occasionally our Justice System gets it right, the House and Senate have held self-serving, publicity-seeking investigations for decades. But I don't recall ONE SINGLE TIME when any of these investigations led to a meaningful result... an indictment, people getting fired or going to jail....nada.
If you DO know of such examples, please enlighten me. But to me, House investigations or Senate investigations are where matters of public interest go to die. Stir up some headlines and maybe a little pubic outrage, as if something has been done.... and then nada.
I recall when HRC testified before such an "investigation" into the Benghazi matter. We got that famous headline "At this point, what does it matter?" and then nothing. HRC is still waddling the streets of Chappaqua, NY in a moo-moo..
We all know that! If the news is relevant to our country even though it is another country reporting on it, who is to say it's not valid? So, what's the big deal? It's weird, some of these interviews and reporters outside our country are more interested in US news, politics, economics than their own country.
You've misinterpreted my comment. (That's so easy to do when there is very little context.)
Not everyone knows simply by your headline that this is Sky News Australia. There is Sky news in a number of other countries, including the UK.
Also, my note is simply pointing out that Sky News Australia is the one reporting. I'm an Aussie, and I'll admit, I enjoy that the fact that Sky News in Aus is reporting on stuff most US MSMs ignore.
That's all.
(Notice how you assumed that for some reason, I'm a US anon?)
But I fully agree: it makes no difference whether its an organ in different country reporting; good info is good info.
To be honest, I was a bit surprised but also pretty happy that SN Aus had brought in Bannon. How many US operations do that?
years of this bait bullshit and some people still havent figured it out.
unless the "BOOM" has literal election decertification or perp walks then fuck off.
But consider this: Consider an army, or a full national military. What's it comprised of?
Firstly, you've got land, sea and air. All with unique special abilities, skills, roles, and functions. (And now Space)
In each other of these, you have all sorts of diverse roles, units and functions: i.e. army: general troops, logistics, intelligence, leadership, even special ops units, etc.
Here is the point: in a way, you need a very diverse array of units all functioning with the ultimate same purpose, but each with their own smaller focused purpose and priorities.
Anons and digital warriors are a very, special unit. This includes the 'commanders' or 'quarter masters' we have, such as those anons who publish, have telegram channels, share analysis, etc. you know, names like Dave X22, etc.
But we need a lot of diverse ways of communicating and helping the public to engage.
I listen to Bannon's Warroom now and then. I almost always like the tone, and it gives me a really good <non-anon> view on things that most normies will be able to relate to. I don't listen all the time. I spread my listening efforts over a variety of different sources coming from different angles who, in my view, are reaching different audiences.
Such as Seth Holehouse, Dave Hayes, Bannon, very rarely Fox (i.e. Jessie or Tucker) or Sky, and a good variety of Telegram posters.
But GAW is my home base, and the axis on this array.
Even if you don't particularly like Bannon, you might consider the role he is fulfilling for a certain audience out there, and be supportive from that angle.
Of course, if you just see yourself as a single small unit, and if you're only focused on what you like and what interests you, no real harm, as long as you don't trip up your compatriots on other missions.
Thanks for posting.
House or Senate investigations NEVER result in anything substantive. Name the last time an investigation br either the House or the Senate ever resulted in jail time or executions.
Strongly inclined to agree. But, if enough people wake up to what is going on, they'll DEMAND action.
The establishment won't ever police itself. It needs the People to drive it forward.
For decades, the People have been AWOL.
Well I agree with you about the People part; soon after WWII, citizens who were prosperous and at peace with the world after a depression and two World Wars back to back....they slipped into a trance. And their children, who had not suffered what their parents had paid little heed to what was going on in DC. We The People had basically gone to sleep while the Progressives began stealing America from us right under our noses.
But my point was, while occasionally our Justice System gets it right, the House and Senate have held self-serving, publicity-seeking investigations for decades. But I don't recall ONE SINGLE TIME when any of these investigations led to a meaningful result... an indictment, people getting fired or going to jail....nada.
If you DO know of such examples, please enlighten me. But to me, House investigations or Senate investigations are where matters of public interest go to die. Stir up some headlines and maybe a little pubic outrage, as if something has been done.... and then nada.
I recall when HRC testified before such an "investigation" into the Benghazi matter. We got that famous headline "At this point, what does it matter?" and then nothing. HRC is still waddling the streets of Chappaqua, NY in a moo-moo..
If you want some insight as to how the 'progressives' began stealing America, watch this.
If this is new info, it will put a lot of things into place for you. It did for me.
The Architects of Western Decline
https://rumble.com/vhlbrt-the-roots-of-cultural-marxism-the-architects-of-western-decline.html
Thank you. While watching that I was reminded of the words of John Adams:
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” ~ John Adams
NOTE: Sky News AUSTRALIA.
You're welcome.
We all know that! If the news is relevant to our country even though it is another country reporting on it, who is to say it's not valid? So, what's the big deal? It's weird, some of these interviews and reporters outside our country are more interested in US news, politics, economics than their own country.
You've misinterpreted my comment. (That's so easy to do when there is very little context.)
Not everyone knows simply by your headline that this is Sky News Australia. There is Sky news in a number of other countries, including the UK.
Also, my note is simply pointing out that Sky News Australia is the one reporting. I'm an Aussie, and I'll admit, I enjoy that the fact that Sky News in Aus is reporting on stuff most US MSMs ignore.
That's all.
(Notice how you assumed that for some reason, I'm a US anon?)
But I fully agree: it makes no difference whether its an organ in different country reporting; good info is good info.
To be honest, I was a bit surprised but also pretty happy that SN Aus had brought in Bannon. How many US operations do that?
Remember the motto, fren: wwg1wga
"It's weird, some of these interviews and reporters outside our country are more interested in US news, politics, economics than their own country."
Nothing weird about that. What IS weird is that news organs in America pay so little attention to the rest of the world!!!!
How much SKy News Aus content is devoted to US news politics, etc, do you image? It's a small percentage.
But, some people know that what is happens in the US affects the rest of the world, including us, and so absolutely, it's relevant.
Thanks for the post, by the way. I don't follow Sky News Australia (Stay away from MSM almost completely) but was pretty interested to see this.
BOOM. EXPLOSIVE. HAPPENING. fuck off.
years of this bait bullshit and some people still havent figured it out. unless the "BOOM" has literal election decertification or perp walks then fuck off.
It is a boom and you’re a doom. You’re watching a movie and I’ll ruin the ending for you… God Wins!!!
Seeing is believing...Lots of people have told me what they are "Going to do"
He seems way too establishment republican for my taste. Can’t listen to him for more than a few minutes.
Not saying he’s a black hat. I just don’t like his show.
Fair enough.
Personal taste is allowed, right.
But consider this: Consider an army, or a full national military. What's it comprised of?
Firstly, you've got land, sea and air. All with unique special abilities, skills, roles, and functions. (And now Space)
In each other of these, you have all sorts of diverse roles, units and functions: i.e. army: general troops, logistics, intelligence, leadership, even special ops units, etc.
Here is the point: in a way, you need a very diverse array of units all functioning with the ultimate same purpose, but each with their own smaller focused purpose and priorities.
Anons and digital warriors are a very, special unit. This includes the 'commanders' or 'quarter masters' we have, such as those anons who publish, have telegram channels, share analysis, etc. you know, names like Dave X22, etc.
But we need a lot of diverse ways of communicating and helping the public to engage.
I listen to Bannon's Warroom now and then. I almost always like the tone, and it gives me a really good <non-anon> view on things that most normies will be able to relate to. I don't listen all the time. I spread my listening efforts over a variety of different sources coming from different angles who, in my view, are reaching different audiences.
Such as Seth Holehouse, Dave Hayes, Bannon, very rarely Fox (i.e. Jessie or Tucker) or Sky, and a good variety of Telegram posters.
But GAW is my home base, and the axis on this array.
Even if you don't particularly like Bannon, you might consider the role he is fulfilling for a certain audience out there, and be supportive from that angle.
Of course, if you just see yourself as a single small unit, and if you're only focused on what you like and what interests you, no real harm, as long as you don't trip up your compatriots on other missions.