Specifically allows us to hire mercenaries. We just there's some for you. Yogi there's some process, and I guess it was you in the year closer to the revolutionary days, It was used to essentially higher pirates. To attack the ships of countries we wanted to attack. So here's my question: Do you see a day when private drone operators will be authorized by the government of the United States, It's to fly their drones into cartel territory and start killing cartel members with the droughts. Now, what I say private Jones and talk about, you know that the hobby sized roads that you can

gotta. It's not gonna, be it's not gonna, take very long before there Militarized, your bullet shooting don't you see them already on the internet right? If you gotta Youtube, you can? Google somebody attached a gun to drown. But nobody, I don't think anybody has yet build a drone that that is built from scratch to fire a gun. Maybe somebody stole that I haven't seen yet, but can you imagine just visualizes some letters of mark and reprisal? there would authorize a certain number, not everybody in the world, but a certain number of a drone operators in this country to send their drones into card EL territory simply hover around for a little bit, find somebody who looks like they're up to no good come down and just shoot them and then disappear

Now. Let me ask you this suppose. You were a cartel compound, you're, full of armed guards and what not. And a swarm. Of privately operated. Mercenary drones appear above and they're all armed How are we to be for a squad of drones, each one operated by an operator to real look through the view? scream light up people on the ground and shoot them. Somebody says already exists, and I would imagine that's true. So here's what is easy for me to imagine remember the big problem with going to war with the cartels, as you can't get the gun. When the Mexico to ever agree, also don't really want to send our military down there. You don't want boots on the ground.

Oh somebody stole me: it's pronounced more k, letter of market. I guess we. To get a ruling that so we have have a different opinion and the presidency issued. But I can easily imagine that the government of the United States, perhaps not making public, perhaps is the public. Maybe they just quietly off. Rise, some private drone people too, to put a little lower. The drone. Jonah firepower above the cartels seems to me. That's coming because the beauty is that even if the drone get shot down the cartel won't know who was operating it. There will know that the? U S government.

Apps was operating it, but they won't really know what else we are today. So I was fascinated to see what the Democrat supporters were saying about the Horowitz report. Now, if you didn't actually watch Horowitz, is testimony, I don't You could know from the news coverage just how devastating that is to the F B, I admit, is really really bad. Apparently, what horror with sound is just massive bad behaviour at the FBI all in one direction, so it's really bad. So I wondered so one of the Democrats say about this, and so I looked at what jobs cable said David S or an article in the USA. Today

Is it the hit? So here's a sentence that he says like it's true he says the idea found that fell. The Russia case was properly opened and uncovered no quote evidence that political bias or improper motivation influence that decision. Launch the investigation. So therefore, everything that Trump has been saying for a few years is all bunk because of what Josh Campbell said, Thus, I feel like a complete and accurate statement what happened a really get so this is the Democrats view of what the idea found that it was quite properly opened? Let was just do it one part in time. Is it true that the ideal found The case was properly opened. Well depends what proper means doesn't it? I think what the hygiene actually found is that there is no stand

For when you can open a case, because the written standard says that all you need is an articulate bull basis and other words, you can simply put it in a sentence that make sense. So the idea did say we can't say it was improper. Nor can we say as proper. We can only say that the standard is so low. That is like a mood question. So when Josh Cable says that the idea felt that the case was properly opened said exactly true, because I dont know that the ig ever use the word problem. I think it would be more fair to say, there's no real standard, so therefore we're not going to say that it was improper. That's really different have saying: there's no stay.

It does? The idea did say that it wasn't illegal or anything to open. It was here's. What else Josh Campbell leaves out Out there s some point fairly early on wind. These steel Darcy was debunked. They should have stopped if you don't mention their part and the fact that the the known bogus steel dossier was used to continue. The investigation after it should have been stopped according to Horowitz. If you leave it out, you you're really just lying to the people really are declining. If you leave out that there were seventeen errors at all when one direction you're, not

really telling your readers will happen area s kind of important and I think you would have to mention the Horwitz clearly indicates without saying so that it's hard to explain seventeen errors and less attention so did Jack Campbell make his point that there is no evidence that political. By us or improper motivation, influence the decision to launch the investigation. Well, that's actually true, but is also true that the lack of evidence is not proof that it didn't happen. That's kind of important concerning dirhams gonna, give us a little more visibility and here's the most interesting question, and I don't know- I'm not sure I understand this yet what George Papa.

Apples retweeted yesterday that he apparently is learning recently that the investigation against Papadopoulos actually started long before the event? that everybody is talking about and he doesn't know how that's right, there's still a mystery about how Papadopoulos originally came to be investigated. So maybe that's what Durham knows If we find out that lets say I just gonna pick me, randomly. The CIA was behind the initiation of all this. It could be that the F b I was following the rules, but they were set up by some eggs,

force, Democrats, CIA or CIA Democrats or Sunday about saying? Is the CIA I'm just saying. We haven't ruled out that option. So that's what's gonna today Has anybody seen Brandon lately? Is it my imagination or classroom little bed under exposed lately, like they Maybe they're stay off the air? Maybe a guy who's. Reading here I'll pop a doubtless was with Ben Carson's campaign before use was true,

Look John Brennan's face. Well, let me say this. When I listen to all of the people in the FBI, I would say is obvious that they are by us, because the human beings, at its obvious, which direction thereby us was because their their actions in their text messages clearly show that so the F B, I people were clearly operate, Was biased and a reasonable person would say that's why they made the mistakes that they? hey, were really mistakes. They were operating. A bias now use question Somebody is brainwashed by the fake news to think that cheating on their own internal procedures is actually worth it to stop Orange Heller from taking over the country. Would you call that a conspiracy or

would you call it incompetence and we say that again because it is an interesting question, If my theory is true that there was a such an organised conspiracy, theory, so much as people on the same page, doing independently things that they saw. It would be good for them. Team, after being brainwash by the media, to think that saving the country from Orange Hitler if you thought you were saving the country from Orange Heller- and you are just completely- Would that be a case of a conspiracy or a case of incompetence right? So what does it mean to be fooled? by the faint media into believing that Orange Hitler was taking over the country. When you saw the the language in the text, messages was struck page,

isn't it is obvious that they are trumped arrangement syndrome? Looked exactly like it, it looked exactly like two people have trump arrangements in Rome on Twitter. They look like they thought that this president will just be somebody with it. A different view, a policy that they thought it was like the end of the world or something so I think you could call it incompetence conspiracies a little harder to get too with the evidence we have, but perhaps Durham will clear. Let up somebody says, give us a toad.

The break. They were not fooled. So those who say that the F b I employees were not fooled by the fake news, have to imagine that the FBI employees have a special capability, the next and immune from the tedious infected. Basically a hundred percent of the people on their side. That's a big stretch. If you think that the FBI were immune to tv ass, there is no basis for that. Believe. All evidence suggests it will affect people equally, no matter their training. You can be fooled into participating in a conspiracy yet and that I guess will of course, have fascinating word thinking. Discussions about the word can spare

percy, imagine if you will see that the employees all had talked about their mutual disliked for the president was say: the employees of the FBI, let's say that they had talked with each other on a number of occasions about how much they didn't. What trumpet to get elected is that a conspiracy will not by itself suppose that they all talk about it in various YO, casual and beating settings, but they had also agreed that there are still trying to do the work of of the public. Is that a conspiracy now suppose they believed that weren't Schiller was coming to power and they were They were operating in some kind of strict organised way with the other. People were the same opinion, it's just that when each of them were faced with

the decision that could have gone one way or the other. They said. Well. If Orange Heller's gonna kill us all, air? On the side of bending a rule, I'm gonna err on the side of say. Well, we have very slim provocation, but that's something so the line between incompetence, fuelled by trumped arrangement syndrome and actual conspiracy is called a grey, and I think you'll find people who look at the same knowledge and still say you have two different opinions all was Scott fooled by fake news, Fake news you talk about, there's, none

whoever than fooled by fake news. That's another thing, but were full by different fake news. Is yes so one of the statements- and I think it was an email- is quoted- we'll stop him some each one of them asked, could drop, actually get elected and suddenly said we'll stop him. What does that mean What does it mean we'll stop him? Whose way is we Democrats in general, Is we the F B, I doing their job legitimately because they thought there was actually something to be found there. So they thought here will stop him because will do are legal investigation and we're going to find something wrong about asylum. So you don't know what we'll stop of means it could have been bluster could have been vs

in a bender, something is in a tweet could obtain just you acting confident could about just making. Somebody else feel better. Could then you could then five different things. We pay the F B. I director to not be fooled. Yes, but we don't expected because everybody gets hold. Your argument is not come telling which part of it was to help the globalists. So so what theory is that while there, if there's one theory, is that the FBI employees were tried to keep their jobs because they fear that, if trumpet took office that they wouldn't all get their promotions, that they thought they would get under Clinton, maybe you no one has to assume that does at least part of the buyers, certainly in the next year,

then somebody said the comments that the FBI is really trying to work for the global US they thus the worst take. I think the FBI, each individual was doing whatever they thought was good for that individual and maybe for the world battle. Think anybody was seeking, globalist or non globally. That's a strange FBI lawyer, Klein Psmith facing solemnly obstructions doctoring, size, evidence yeah. Now let me give you the nun conspiracy version of how clean Smith could ever removed the statement. The Carter page had had done the source and he changed it to the opposite, not a source. Could you imagine any innocent reason for doing that? Well, I can know I'm not going to say that the reason play

that was in honourable or a girl that he had good intentions, I must say that I am simply saying that if you can imagine the other possibility, your suffering from a lack of imagination. As I talk about my book losing the lack of imagination than this Is is that if you are locked into the theory that the only reason he would have done that disease just trying to get the president You're, ignoring the other reason there, people do something like that. Here's the reason, I suppose he thought the courier page thing was necessary and important less. I actually believe that was important, but he knew that if he put in their little clause could raise questions in her heart answer my but maybe could be answered there just hard dancer either and it have weakened the application if he thought the application was

Sufficient with or without that information, but he thought you know this is good for the world. It is good that we have this investigation. If I put this exculpatory thing in there probably wouldn't change? The final result is whether or not Carter page had been sort. Might not be everything you need to know so he might have just said. You know I'm gonna weasel words this and say well by definition of what a sources is. It wasn't exactly swore a sudden say if anybody She's me on this, I'm going say we use different words were so he's, not a source he's just somebody. We talked you, I'm just making this up now, but the point is, The lawyer probably is going to have a defence that looks something like

I wasn't really lying because technically I was right in a very technical sense. I'm going to argue that I was cracked, even though it seems to have reverse the meaning of it. So I think it's going to look more gray than you think it is when the details are locked into so is her eye is rising. I can tell you that I disagree with Horowitz. Who said all these errors going in the same direction have to be intention in this case. I'm giving you two possibilities of how it happened, and both of them are intentional in one cases intentional to get the present, because it's part of a conspiracy to take down the present in the other possibility is also intentional. But it's just me things easier for the person who filled out the paperwork because he doesn't want to do another round of answering questions.

Does one they have to defend why Carter is still worth looking into. Even with that fact. It might just spend convenience, and they might just said I think I can weasel this through, because if anybody ass well just say well its technical, the true he's not working without her world. Any real way were wasn't was an important result like this one thing, He changed to a lie that might be technically accurate when he gets a chest to defend himself. When you talk with lawyers and you there one lawyer giver, give a case. How much should you rely. On one lawyers opinion whose on one side, it's always gotta? Look. You're one lawyer, talking without the counterpoint from their lawyers, always gonna, be convincing because their lawyers

So you ve heard of one side you ve heard the side. The says plainsman did something bad and that appears to be absolutely true, but. You haven't heard is closed with. Who is a lawyer? Give you his version of why you did it and where do you get that version there's a pretty good chance is not going to be as clean as you thought. I'll bet it will be something like well technically. I was true. I can see why you think this is misleading, but it was technically true. I think it'll be some like that open your mind. Stop so to the person who said open your mind, I'm gonna start blocking people who seem to be intentionally not understanding. My point, I'm telling you that seventeen,

errors in the same direction and everything that horror? What said clearly indicates intention, but that we don't have confirmation that it was your specifically a conspiracy. I am certainly open minded to being a conspiracy, What am I saying? It was suggested that open minded and literally accepting all of the explanations talking about them all and adding extra explanations. If that's me, open minded. What is open minded look like those many decision a year ago her saying a low levels and send the fine report. Just like I thought I think you have to ask yourself. You have to ask yourself if you, if you got confidence in your opinion, a little too early.

Somebody same page was a source for the CIA about twenty years ago, yet it would be easy to imagine. The Clyde Smith is not going to be prosecuted for this. Cause there's something in his answer. That makes it close enough to being technically correct when he won't go to jail for you may about a conspiracy that came from the fake news, as opposed to originating in the FBI scrapped

It would still be a conspiracy, but it would be a conspiracy of the mainstream NEWS to paint tribe as Hitler, which would have the effect of of essentially activating everybody in the public to do everything they could ever every time they could to fix it. To give a time I your covers right now. You have said everything even say, and I'm going to talk to you all later by flu,