« Cuomo should be recalled, and then prosecuted ... | Main | " ... Florida Gov. DeSantis a 'Strong Potential Presidential Candidate'" Gaetz »

14 February 2021


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

David Parsons

Re Fanning's spreadhseet & network-flow animation. It looks like a QAnon-style hoax. ("If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit")

ANYBODY CAN MAKE A SPREADSHEET LIKE THE ONE SHE SHOWED. The info in the spreadsheet could be real, or could be fake. It's just a spreadhseet, after all.

But let's assume it's all REAL, with Chinese IP addresses. Does that mean Chinese hackers? No. It means the hacker wanted to use Chinese IP addresses.

The real culprit here isn't a mystery. The culprits are the people who insisted on using computers to count votes. They are the criminals. If you want a real, fair, actual election, you use paper and written human signatures, with no room for editing or tampering, not computers.


David Parsons wrote:

Re Fanning's spreadhseet & network-flow animation. It looks like a QAnon-style hoax.

It might be relevant to note that some posters on 8kun today claimed that Larry C. Johnson, Bill Binney, and Ray McGovern are the masterminds behind the Q drops. However, before the other posters could address the arguments, the thread was derailed by the ritualistic name-calling that always prevents anonymous imageboards from hosting rational conversations.


ah so ah so the q drops.lol.so what was that all about.seriously at the end of the day it does not matter because the Q was jumped by the R.
Let it go Larry just let it go and look to the future which is the R drops.
R does not stand for Russia.nooooo.it stands for Rubicon Larry.Ops rubicon is the future

Seamus Padraig

Still waiting for an investigation of the mail-in ballots ... my hair keeps getting grayer!


Larry, I followed your work since NO QUARTER.
Consider the following:
Something happened in Germany you said so yourself.
Something happened in the Austin raid.
Someone was in fact arrested in Italy for hacking into defense networks.
To many statistical analysis of the election results by professionals indicate conformity in cheating that could only be achieved by a program.
The recent discovery of consistent percentages in the fraud in New Hampshire indicates programing was used.
None of this will go away.
Just like the magic bullet.
Or the 2 buildings that were designed for a passenger plane crash collapsing straight down just like you pay professionals to do and show it on TV so everyone can marvel at their expertise.

So, the "table" could be misdirection to stear the conversation away from the CIA. But that would mean Mary and Dennis are CIA assets.

And by the way, putting the FBI on your resume doesn't carry water with me.

Larry C Johnson

I don't know whether Montgomery is doing this on his own or has outside assistance. He's been running scams for years that have nothing to do with CIA. You are mixing apples and oranges. There was election fraud and Dominion machines played a role. But Montgomery's information is so off the mark (e.g., interference from over 70 countries) that I believe he is being used as a wedge to discredit anyone who challenges the fraudulent 2020 election.


But Montgomery's information is so off the mark (e.g., interference from over 70 countries) that I believe he is being used as a wedge to discredit anyone who challenges the fraudulent 2020 election.
Posted by: Larry C Johnson | 15 February 2021 at 11:12 AM

he did reference interference from over 7O countries? If you mentioned that before I missed it.

How many do you think were involved?


Yup. That is one way of looking at it. At least some ppl are talking about the alleged dominion fraud. Too much time discrediting the guy. Easy target. Maybe spend more time- with all of your connections- figuring out how the hacking was really pulled off? Thanks in advance.

Fourth and Long

Borderline plausible is Montgomery as a discrediting insert. But what level of person would have anything to do with someone having his track record? Not a particularly high level. Most likely he's just one of the rubbernecking gawkers and flies inevitably drawn to the scenes of colossal disasters. Just a glance at his photographs would be enough for me to not have anything to do with him. And he's Alan Turing reincarnated to boot? Sure thing.

Walter L. Wagner

Mary Fanning and Kirk Wiebe are in deeper and deeper. Once one's ego gets so involved, it's hard to admit one's been taken for a ride.

It appears that it would be easy to disprove the claim that it is pure fiction. Instead, it is more talk-around. That, in and of itself, is highly suspicious.

If this material was generated real-time (circa November 1-10, 2021 as claimed by Fanning), why was it not presented in toto at the earliest of times. Instead, it was not released until late december/early january, then reformatted and presented to lindel in late January

I have not seen anyone refuting Rondeau, and her expose, either.

Just because there was extensive ballot fraud in many states by many methods does not mean we have to accept everyone who presents claims of such without evidence.

Here are some good refs:




A "discrediting insert"?

Seems like that ploy was also used in Sharyl Atkisson's Benghazi report on CBS (?) when she laid out facts from her own independent investigation. Which apparently included some last minute addition offered by her network (?) that was later determined to be bogus, which had the effect of discrediting her entire case against Obama's handling the Benghazi affair.

If the real Benghazi story was about the CIA station gun-running to Syrian rebels that needed covering up, is it plausible the CIA, via CBS - run by whathisname's brother of Obama insider and Benghazi fabulist Ben Rhodes -- provided this "discrediting insert" just to undermine Sharyl's careful independent investigation?

Apologize upfront if I have the network wrong, but the fact pattern and watching Sharyl end up with egg on her face after that prime time Benghazi "investigative journalism" incident stuck with me.

I also never understood why someone demanded she wear a short very low cut dress for her formal journalist presentation either. Undermined the gravitas. That is not typically how she presents herself. It was distracting.

Is that basically what an intentional "distracting insert does"? Can't kill the story because the facts are out there, but can kill the credibility of the reporter so any facts now become dubious?

One (intentionally inserted) rotten apple does spoil the whole barrel.

Thanks for the follow-up on the Lindell "documentary". It was one off. But this makes is hugely one off. Again, why and who needs to go to such lengths to distort the record when we still should be uncovering the record. Hope this tale will continue to unravel.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad