Therefore, the operation to recalibrate the hacking attack would have taken place in via Veneto, and if this fact were to be confirmed
“Trump was taking a record number of votes” says Johnson, and the switching of votes from Trump to Biden was not enough to definitely deliver the “victory” to the democratic candidate.
The US embassy in Rome allegedly involved in the hacking attack
At that point, Rome went on
Therefore, the operation to recalibrate the hacking attack would have taken place in via Veneto, and if this fact were to be confirmed
In this scenario, the subversive powers infiltrated in the US government, the deep state, had planned a coup d’état against their commander in chief.
At this moment, the US
Johnson claims that during the election night in the US Rome embassy there was a man from the US department of State.
The former CIA agent shows in the video the picture of this man, apparently taken by the Italian authorities which were conducting a surveillance operation
This official would have been directly involved in the coordination of the hacking attack.
The role of Leonardo and the Italian government in the fraud
At this point, Johnson offers a revelation even more shocking.
There is another actor that played
Once that the hackers created the new algorithms to switch more votes from Trump to Biden, they sent “these new numbers back up to a Italian military
After doing this, the new manipulated data were sent back to the Dominion voting machines in the US.
https://t.co/2GNhmD5U8y
More from Trump
This is mostly right but strikes me as it needing said that I don't think the left or the intelligentsia have the slightest idea how low institutional trust in anything coming from a left mouthpiece is now. Except in-network, the best heuristic is "the opposite of what they said"
If you look at the situation from a predictive models perspective instead of the more rigorous and appropriate (under normal circumstances) "prove your case or gtfo" perspective, trusting the opposite of whatever the left side says has an AMAZING track record, as we know it.
Literally, the best heuristic most people have right now, in terms of how often it gets things right versus *completely* wrong, is "whatever CNN, the NYT, public health officials, and the Democrats said... yeah, the opposite." That is, they're wrong WAY outside of statistics.
They're also not just wrong. They're *completely* wrong, backwards, often transparently covering something up that they don't want known or refuse to believe. This isn't just a legitimation crisis because there's a heuristic: whatever the official left narrative is, is wrong.
There are a few reasons why such a heuristic would be more predictive than not. One of those is conspiracy, and another is mass hysteria with ideological capture. We know at least one of those is happening and have rather strong evidence both are. That makes conspiracy reasonable
I read part of the transcript of the Trump call.
— Eric Weinstein (@EricRWeinstein) January 4, 2021
The following strikes me.
A) Trump is a true political outsider & the only one to reach the Presidency with zero government experience.
B) There is an obvious open institutional conspiracy to prevent any outsider gaining power.
If you look at the situation from a predictive models perspective instead of the more rigorous and appropriate (under normal circumstances) "prove your case or gtfo" perspective, trusting the opposite of whatever the left side says has an AMAZING track record, as we know it.
Literally, the best heuristic most people have right now, in terms of how often it gets things right versus *completely* wrong, is "whatever CNN, the NYT, public health officials, and the Democrats said... yeah, the opposite." That is, they're wrong WAY outside of statistics.
They're also not just wrong. They're *completely* wrong, backwards, often transparently covering something up that they don't want known or refuse to believe. This isn't just a legitimation crisis because there's a heuristic: whatever the official left narrative is, is wrong.
There are a few reasons why such a heuristic would be more predictive than not. One of those is conspiracy, and another is mass hysteria with ideological capture. We know at least one of those is happening and have rather strong evidence both are. That makes conspiracy reasonable
You’d think that if Pence could overturn the election like Trump claimed then Biden surely would’ve taken up that chance
Also this is such a small thing but one thing I noticed in that Trump campaign ad the defense just ran, there were no citations, unlike every clip that the impeachment managers showed
Michael Van Der Veen is giving us the full Fox News Primetime Defense.
PROCESS ARGUMENT.
DRINK.
Lol my guy this is the chance to rebut the evidence that they’ve presented against Trump.
Unless Trump's new lawyer is going to argue Hilary Clinton went to court and lost 60 times and then launched an attack on the Capitol, these clips of Democrats objecting to vote counting and being overruled by VP Biden are a waste of time.
— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) February 12, 2021
Also this is such a small thing but one thing I noticed in that Trump campaign ad the defense just ran, there were no citations, unlike every clip that the impeachment managers showed
Michael Van Der Veen is giving us the full Fox News Primetime Defense.
PROCESS ARGUMENT.
DRINK.
Lol my guy this is the chance to rebut the evidence that they’ve presented against Trump.
