I am a citizen investigator exposing a cover-up: David Brock pays a guy to spread disinformation on many sites, including this one. I call him HLI, but he has used many "sockpuppet" identities including HighLevelInsider, Senate Anon, and Wisconsin_Is_Corrupt. He is also the YouTuber "Tory Smith". In this installment, I revisit my Day 8 post and a post I made in April. See my submission history for all reports to date.
In this series, I have admitted to some minor mistakes. For instance:
I thought HLI deleted two posts but Millenial_Falcon did.
I assumed Susan Sanders was Herb Sanders' wife, but she is his daughter.
I'm now admitting to a deliberate and major misstatement. In my Day 8 post, I said Paul Ryan was the Speaker in June 2013. But John Boehner was. He beat Nancy Pelosi in the election of Jan 2011, and again in 2013, resigning as Speaker on Oct 29, 2015. Ryan took over, after Boehner's first choice, Kevin McCarthy, was rejected by the rank and file.
Credibility is essential to this project. So why take the risk of giving wrong info? I had a theory about the cover-up. Things that Brock and HLI don't talk about, can be far more important than things they do. I needed proof. What they chose to do about my "mistake" would tell me if I was right.
On Day 3, I gave an example of this pattern. Obama's mentor, Frank Davis, almost certainly molested him as a boy. As a state senator, Obama hung out in gay clubs. A witness, Larry Sinclair, says he performed oral sex on Obama, twice. Two other gay men linked to Obama were killed execution-style in 2007, when he was about to run for President.
No sockpuppet operated by HLI has ever gone anywhere near this very credible story. Instead, when it comes to Obama, they talk about anything else. Now, some stories that HLI chooses to tell about Obama may be true. But the main goal here is misdirection. If people are talking about "Michelle is a tranny," or Obama being CIA from birth, then true or not, they aren't tying him to pedophilia.
Another example: Neither WIC nor ESOTERICshade have ever acknowledged the anomalies in the Milwaukee recount. They won't debate me about it, not even uttering the word "Milwaukee". When challenged, they invariably change the subject. Strange since it's a provable crime by the Clinton gang in Wisconsin.
Here's why that pattern matters today: None of HLI's sockpuppets ever mention John Boehner, for any reason. "Tory Smith" accused practically every employee or agency of the federal government, including 70 Senators, Dick Cheney, Bernie Sanders, the Air Force, ICE, FBI, CIA, etc. But no Boehner. He may have mentioned Boehner in early deleted videos, but his remaining videos date back only to November 2015, a week after Boehner resigned.
You can check the saved texts of HighLevelInsider, both here and on /pol/, and see that he never mentioned Boehner. Senate Anon never did either. Most surprising of all, @Wisconsin_Is_Corrupt has never mentioned Boehner. This is the shocking one. It doesn't matter whether you view WIC as a sockpuppet, or as genuine. Either way, WIC's silence about Boehner is very strange.
It is strange (a) because WIC casts a huge net of vague accusations centered on Paul Ryan, yet never mentions the man who asked him to take over as Speaker. But even stranger, (b) WIC and I were engaged in a nasty confrontation for five days before I made my Day 8 claim that Ryan was Speaker in 2013. Our fights continued until Day 12, and have re-erupted several times since. WIC called me "a lying evil piece of garbage," among other names. So why would he not humiliate me for getting this wrong? "Hey genius, nice theory about Paul Ryan, except he wasn't Speaker in 2013!" Zing!
Only one reason makes sense. Comments here are accessible to Google, easy for any investigator to find. If HLI/WIC said nothing it must be massively damaging for Boehner's name to even get mentioned along with the Glenn Beck whistleblower incident. That's why Brock and HLI let me get away with saying Ryan was Speaker, rather than correct me. Ryan and Pence remain important, but Boehner emerges as the real key. I believe that Boehner was the weak link in executing the plan.
If you haven't already, please read my two previous submissions (links above). Then bring up the Beck video once more, to see the clues relating to Boehner.
BECK: We talked about the NSA whistleblower, and I think -- am I like really one of the only ones? Am I really alone on the right?
GRAY: You're not alone. There are some.
3RD VOICE OFFSCREEN: It is divided, though. I would say it is divided, yeah.
GRAY: It is, definitely. And as we talked to the Congressmen yesterday -- I talked to several of them about the whistleblower -- a lot of them believe that it's a good thing it's out, [but] they don't like the way he did it. They wanted him to come to some committee, they wanted him to go to Congress.
BECK: Yeah, well, whatever.
GRAY: And like I said to one of these Congressmen, he's probably doing this in part for his safety, because if it was me, I'd want it out there, so I've got some protection.
This all has new meaning when we put Boehner into the story. He was quoted the day before (Jun 11), calling Snowden a traitor. So when Beck and Gray say those "on the right" want whistleblowers before Congress, they are talking about Boehner. Beck himself did not see Snowden as a traitor; he would have broadcast this new whistleblower live on his show. But that wasn't possible. The end result is still the same as I said on Day 8: Beck had to believe that the Speaker (Boehner, not Ryan) would invite the whistleblower to address Congress, or he never would have mentioned him or the document.
The revised sequence of events goes like this: The whistleblower reached out to Paul Ryan (the "ally" Beck mentioned), asking for security (using Pence), release of documents online and on TV (using Beck), and an address to Congress (through Boehner). Ryan remains the only logical choice for this role. He had the personal relationships to make all three things happen. After maybe 24-48 hours of working with Pence and Boehner, the plan looked like a "go," so on the 11th, Ryan told Beck of the plan and gave him the document. Then sometime on the 12th (perhaps during Beck's broadcast), the plan fell apart.
Before we examine Boehner's role, there's a loose end here, an unnamed Senator who may have played a part.
BECK: I was talking to a Senator yesterday, and he said, "What's it about?" And I said, "Senator, I'm not going to tell you what it's about. I'll just tell you that it will take down the GOP, it will take down the Democrats, it will take down many members of Congress, it will take all of them down, and outside of Congress. It will take them down."
If Beck confided in the wrong Senator, that could have wrecked the plan. But my guess is that this was Rand Paul, another favorite of Beck's. I doubt Beck would be dumb enough to say this to, say, Chuck Schumer, or to any Democrat or Republican he didn't trust implicitly. But he would trust Rand Paul. The Senator from Kentucky is very unlikely to be tied into the Clinton child sex trafficking operation. Nothing is guaranteed, but I would suspect at least 95 other Senators before I'd suspect him.
So far I haven't found a disinfo/punishment campaign aimed at Rand Paul. Or rather, since he is the subject of many rumors, I should say I haven't found any new campaign. But since he never saw the document, or knew just what the big story was, perhaps no campaign was needed.
Now, what went wrong? What did Boehner do? We still don't know. I think he was bullied or blackmailed, rather than being bribed or a pedo himself. (It seems very unlikely that he is a pedo. The whistleblower would have known from intelligence intercepts, and not bothered asking to address Congress.) Boehner isn't necessarily a traitor in the strict sense; it might have been duress, or speaking to the wrong person. But the evidence says he was the weak link. Pence and Ryan were targeted by major, prolonged disinfo, implying that HLI/Brock did not trust them to stay quiet. Boehner seems to have suffered no punishment (at least since he resigned), and yet HLI/Brock are still unwilling, four years later, to even say his name.
There is other evidence too. If you had to pick someone who would fold under pressure, Boehner would be a top choice. First, he is known as a "go along to get along" guy, not a hardliner. He took a lot of money from lobbyists, and when he retired, he became a lobbyist himself and took a board seat with Big Tobacco.
Second, Boehner is reportedly an alcoholic, "hammered" by early evening every day. In Sep 2015, Beck wanted to do a story on Boehner's alcoholism, as well as his complete lack of principle, but his staff vetoed the idea. Boehner resigned within weeks even though they did not run the story.
Finally, Boehner is a Catholic. He said he stayed on until he could get Pope Francis to address Congress, in Sep 2015. He wept openly while Francis spoke. He then resigned a few weeks later. Perhaps a gesture of contrition? Worth considering anyway.
So that's my revised view of the Glenn Beck whistleblower episode. Sorry for misleading people, but it did work. Comments?
view the rest of the comments →
ESOTERICshade ago
We know HLI is a shill. So what? Your attempts to tie him to WIC are so clumsy it just shows that something is wrong in Racine. I told you this would happen, you didn't listen.
Saudia Arabia is a puppet and a tool of the western banking oligarchs. Its true. Just because even shill HLI said it does not change reality.
Sadly enough its true. Percentages might be lower but its true. By pedophiles no less.
You keep trotting that dog around like we give a fuck. It has nothing to do with the pedophilia work we do. That is a voting problem.
You're full of shit. The posters in this sub ran his ass off.
No you didn't. We knew that long before you even arrived here.
We knew that long before you arrived. As a matter of fact you are talking to the person that actually found out what it really meant.
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2050893
Your larp has nothing to do with pizzagate and is crafted to distract from the details about child trafficking in Racine, or lack of.
Pizzagaters are not stupid enough to believe that since we don't focus on Milwaukee's voting fraud problems that it somehow makes WIC a liar and that Racine is clean. I think the problem is that you know so little about pizzagate that you think we are stupid enough not to notice that you make no sense.
You don't even have a theory. You just write a bunch of distraction about Milwaukee voting fraud and a shill named HLI that pizzagaters ran off by themselves.
Your problem is that you don't understand what you are talking about and have hooked a lot of unconnected subjects together in a clumsy manner and it shows.
SoberSecondThought ago
I notice you didn't say that you personally had anything to do with that. Which is good, because you didn't.
Jul 24 -- This was a really long Swordfish69 thread where you and HLI were agreeing about the value of good quality surveillance. Later DarkMath visited the thread and confronted him about Osama = Obama being an insane idea.
An hour later in another really long thread, HLI was again lecturing everyone about doing surveillance. When he claimed to have caught a U.S. Senator, you mocked his choice of camera and suggested a better one.
Jul 25 -- The next day, around the time DarkMath was calling HLI insane, 2impendingdoom reported that HLI had been threatening to dox him in retaliation for being called a shill. About ten minutes later, you offered your moral support to 2impendingdoom with a pun on the name "Awan" and no mention of HLI.
Sep 10 -- HLI brought up the Royal Order of Jesters again. This time you actually did call him out, saying that he was pushing the surveillance too much. He didn't answer. Then you said, "Thats why I stay out of his threads. I don't want him to get a foothold of trust here which is what he wants." So bold!
But then 15 minutes later, HLI posted about Andrew Anglin being a pedo, and you helpfully jumped in with a smiley face and more details! Great work preventing him from getting a foothold of trust!
Sep 14 -- You agreed with HLI that the Wexner family are pedos.
Sep 18 -- HLI agreed with you about Planned Parenthood.
Sep 18 -- HLI agreed with you about masonic hand signals
Sep 21 -- In the middle of not doing anything to run HLI out of here, you posted a comment that Honeybee mistakenly deleted using her new mod powers. @Crensch seized on the occasion to denounce you (not for the first time) as a disinfo shill, and to rage at your commenting style in hilarious fashion.
Sep 23 -- HLI posted about civilians helping the police hunt UK pedos, and within minutes you posted the first (positive) comment.
By the end of September, HLI was occupied with LARPing as Senate Anon, so he didn't post much, leaving you no more opportunities to soundly defeat his shilling by constantly agreeing with him.
The reason he left was he had a new set of lies to tell on /pol/. The reason he won't be back is because he knows he'll be confronted about his previous lies, as well as his ridiculous BS about being raised from childhood in the same secret society as Plato. Now, about the Milwaukee recount:
That's a pretty desperate try at dodging the question. The Clinton gang rigged the election to block any investigation into elite pedosadism. The evidence of rigging and the evidence of pedosadism are intertwined in the same set of emails and financial transactions. The cover-up engineered by Brock and paid for by Sandler is supposed to cover both. If your post about archiving software is relevant, then Hillary Clinton rigging Milwaukee is relevant.
You're getting confused about who "we" are. That is a recurring problem of yours. I started posting here 8 months ago, and you started four months ago. Unless you want to confess that you were here earlier, under one or more alternative names? Plus, Jem777 already tried that argument, and failed completely. I invited her to show where anyone had connected Sandler to the Media Matters slush fund, or the slush fund to the disinfo campaign going on here. She put up four old posts, I explained why none of them did these things, and then ASolo, the original author of two of those posts, agreed with me.
Research is only useful if it is specific. What I have been working on has not been worked on before, on Voat or anywhere else that I can discover. Now, do you want to try telling me how (a) you don't give a crap about John Boehner, plus (b) everyone knew all about him before I arrived, plus (c) he's not relevant to the work "we" do here either?
ESOTERICshade ago
What you are failing to understand, or refuse to acknowledge, that almost nobody is going to read all your complex dribble because it does not apply to what we do. It shows your desperation to cover Ryan's ass. It could not be anymore obvious that you have an agenda to divide and conquer. Now fuck off.
SoberSecondThought ago
Google is not your friend.
ESOTERICshade ago
Stop using it then.
ESOTERICshade ago
Yes I did, liar, I was one of the main ones.
SoberSecondThought ago
Read. What. I. Just. Wrote.
ESOTERICshade ago
Done with your disassociated BS. You just need to tell us why Racine is not neck deep in child trafficking instead of playing in the woods. That is why you are here. Your focus is crystal clear. You don't really care about all the filler in your dribble, its just a cover for your focus on child trafficking in Racine. But your attempts are so clumsy that I can clearly see you hiding.