First We Had Obots (Obama Online Bots & Trolls) – Now We Have Hbots (Harris Online Bots & Trolls) — Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation and Gas Lighting Tactics Used by the Far Left & Its Allies in the Main Stream Media

First We Had Obots (Obama Online Bots & Trolls). Then We Had CruzBots (Ted Cruz Supporters Tried It Too ), But Were Not As Good At It As the Far Left. Now We Have the Far Left Hbots (Harris Online Bots & Trolls). But They All Use the Same Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation and Gas Lighting to Change the Meaning of Language to Push Their Agenda — Especially to Change the Meaning of Words and Terms in Our U.S. Constitution.

Twenty-Five rules of Obot & Hbot online disinformation specialists — aka “Gas Lighting” and in more erudite propaganda-pushing marketing circles, more euphemistically known as “Perception Management”.

Source: Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth:   The Rules of Disinformation  (Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist) by H. Michael Sweeney — http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.  Regardless of what you know, don’t discuss it — especially if you are a public figure, news anchor,  etc. If it’s not reported, it didn’t happen,  and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant.  Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus  on side issues which can be used show the topic  as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the  ‘How dare you!’ gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers.  Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public  can learn of the facts are through such ‘arguable rumors’. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a ‘wild rumor’ from a ‘bunch of kids on the Internet’ which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make  yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges.  Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.  This is also known as the primary ‘attack the messenger’  ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’,  ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’,  ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others  shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet  and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning — simply make an accusation or other  attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent’s viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal  agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough ‘jargon’ and ‘minutia’ to illustrate you are ‘one who knows’, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man — usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent  is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.  Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the ‘high road’ and ‘confess’ with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made — but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, ‘just isn’t so.’ Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly ‘call for an end to the nonsense’ because you have already ‘done the right thing.’ Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for ‘coming clean’ and ‘owning up’ to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution.  Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic
which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.  This requires creative thinking unless the crime  was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses.  If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won’t have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys  listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can  ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the ‘play dumb’ rule.  Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant  and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations — as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed
with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body which is in your pocket. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable  events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid  the issues, vacate the kitchen.

Note: There are other ways to attack truth, but these listed are the most common, and others are likely derivatives of these. In the end, you can usually spot the professional disinformation players/teams by one or more of seven distinct posting traits: 1. Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input … ;  2. Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach … ;  3. Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions … ;  4. Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams … ;  5. Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for ‘conspiracy theorists’ [and are quick to label anyone opposed to their view as a conspiracy nut and other put-down names] … ;  6. Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of ‘artificial’ emotionalism and an unusually thick skin — an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance … ; and 7. Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives.   Click here for the full review and discussion of these frequently used disinformation traits of the far left, and the new 8th one, commonly used by Obot [and now Hbot] operative quick response teams:  http://www.whale.to/b/sweeney.html

# # # #

Click on image for an example of the Gas Lighting technique portrayed in this 1944 movie
Click on image for an example of the Gas Lighting technique portrayed in this 1944 movie

Also see Gas Lighting, another disinformation term to describe the orchestrated confusion of reality to confuse the target … which in Obama’s and the far left’s case is the American electorate … all enabled by a cowardly and complicit U.S. Congress and an enabling and complicit main stream media:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

And …  Perception Management – The Far, Far Left Obama and Now The Harris Teams are Masters of It:   https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/12/10/perception-management-the-obama-team-are-masters-of-it/

In addition, read more about Kamala Harris’ lack of constitutional eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief, or the VP, in this detailed report here:  http://www.scribd.com/lists/22182725/Some-Politicians-Seeking-High-Office-Who-Are-Not-A-Natural-Born-Citizen-of-U-S

When will we return to the rule of law and enforce the original intent, purpose, and understanding of the founders and framers for Article II Section 1 Clause 5 , the natural born Citizen clause, of our U.S. Constitution as to who is constitutionally eligible to be the President and Commander in Chief of our military?  The “natural born Citizen” clause is a “national security” clause!

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/user/52640192/protectourliberty/lists

Advertisements

Moscow’s agents have always supported Democratic candidates | by Trevor Loudon

Moscow’s agents have always supported Democratic candidates | by Trevor Loudon @ TrevorLoudon.com

(February 20, 2018 – 6:09 pm EST) –Russian interference in the 2016 US elections should come as no surprise. Moscow, both under Soviet and neo-Soviet (Putinist) rule, has attempted to influence US elections since the 1920s – usually on the Democratic Party side.

Cross-posted from WND.

The Soviets historically used the communist-controlled unions and co-opted journalists as the means to manipulate elections. Currently, the Soviets use their old tactics in addition to manipulate social media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter.

Leading Soviet nuclear physicist Andrei Sakharov quoted Soviet premier Kruschev in 1961 claiming credit for helping to elect President Kennedy the previous year in his Memoirs.

Sakharov Memoir page 217

This is credible, because the pro-Soviet, communist-controlled US labor unions, especially in Chicago, supported Kennedy and he won that election by an incredibly narrow margin – with allegations of widespread voter fraud in Illinois’ Cook County.

According to Sakharov, Kruschev also expressed disgust that when the Soviets met with Kennedy after the elections in Vienna, they did not get the concessions they had hoped for.

According to Politico, on June 3, 1961:

“President John F. Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev met in Vienna for a two-day summit. In a letter delivered to Khrushchev in March, Kennedy proposed the two leaders meet for an informal exchange of views. Accordingly, they conferred without a set agenda.

Subsequent accounts, including Kennedy’s, confirmed that the summit did not go well. Khrushchev took a particularly harsh stance over Berlin, a Western enclave within communist-controlled East Germany, where the United States, Britain and France had maintained a symbolic military presence since the German defeat in World War II.

In addition to Berlin, Kennedy later told reporters, Khrushchev had berated him on a wide range of Cold War issues, including ‘wars of national liberation’ and nuclear weapons.

After Kennedy was assassinated, the Soviets worked to elect his successor Lyndon Johnson in 1964. Johnson (who had worked under Communist Party member Aubrey Williams in the Roosevelt-era National Youth Administration) beat conservative Barry Goldwater by a wide margin.

By 1960, Chicago Communist Party member David Canter (who had been raised in the Soviet Union) had teamed up with another well known Chicago Communist Party USA member, LeRoy Wolins. The pair owned a company called Translation World Publishers, which specialized in publications from and about the Soviet Union. The company soon attracted the attention of the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), which suspected Canter and Wolins of being conduits for Soviet propaganda.

From the HUAC report: “Communist outlets for the distribution of Soviet propaganda” recorded hearings dated May 9, 10 & 17 and July 12, 1962:  …  continue reading at:  http://www.trevorloudon.com/2018/02/moscows-agents-have-always-supported-democratic-candidates/

# # # #

Obama the Enigma: Click on the image to learn more about Obama he does not want you to know.
Obama the Enigma: Click on the image to learn more about Obama he does not want you to know.

A warning from the past — some conspiracies are very real and are also large and well organized and in process for a long time. Such is the nature of far-left Marxist activities in the USA. The target of the seditious political conspiracy we are currently faced with is to destroy our U.S. Constitution, our Republic, our culture, and our military. Remember this quote from history: “We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of communism [now called Democratic Socialists of America] are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. … The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst.” Quote by: J. Edgar Hoover former FBI director. Source: Elks Magazine (August 1956).

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.scribd.com/user/52640192/protectourliberty/lists

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

Breaking-Exclusive: Co-Author Neal Katyal of Harvard Law Review Forum (HLRF) Article on Cruz Eligibility Argued 1952 INA Law Make Persons “naturalized Citizens” but in the 2016 NHRF Article – Not So for Ted Cruz – Katyal Double Talking to America

Flores-Villar-Front-Page-SCOTUS-450x446Flores-Villar-p-31-450x437Breaking-Exclusive: Co-Author Neal Katyal of Harvard Law Review Forum Article on Ted Cruz eligibility argued in favor (and the U.S. Supreme Court Ruling agreed) of and for upholding the applicable 1952 U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) in the 2010 SCOTUS case which established conditions for and said that persons born abroad to a sole U.S. Citizen parent in a status similar to Ted Cruz, whether the parent is a Father or a Mother, are at birth Statutory Citizens and Naturalized Citizens per the 1952 statutory immigration and naturalization law enacted by Congress.

Then in 2016 in the Harvard Law Review Forum, Neal Kaytal argued the opposite for a similar set of facts for a foreign-born person to one U.S. Citizen parent.  He argued that foreign-born Ted Cruz is NOT a “Naturalized Citizen” at birth per U.S. Statutory Law enacted by Congress but instead is a “natural born Citizen” at birth and thus since a “naturalized Citizen” cannot be President, that Ted Cruz is eligible. Katyal Double Talking to America.  What an ethically challenged and politically driven and conflicted attorney and person Neal Kaytal obviously is.

Read the new article here:  http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/04/17/breaking-exclusive-co-author-of-harvard-law-review-forum-article-on-cruz-eligibility-argued-in-favor-of-contradictory-citizenship-law-in-2010/

# # # #

Read the: The Who What When Where Why and How of the “natural born Citizen” Term in Our U.S. Constitution

cruzandrubionoteligiblepetitionsbanner(596x130) Cruz and Rubio were Citizens at Birth of a Foreign Country (Ted of 2 Foreign Countries) – Both NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States

Get PDF Copy of Ted Cruz Foreign Citizenship Facts Petition Here — Get PDF Copy of Marco Rubio Foreign Citizenship Facts Petition Here – Neither is constitutionally eligible to serve as President and Commander in Chief or Vice President!

A Simple Euler Logic Diagram Shows Logical Relationship of “natural born Citizens” to Other Type “Citizens” of the United States. Only a “natural born Citizen” Can Constitutionally be the President and Commander in Chief or the Vice-President. Click on Image For More Information.

More historical and legal papers and analysis on the true constitutional meaning and intent of the founders and framers of the presidential eligibility clause, natural born Citizen, in our U.S. Constitution can be found at this link: http://www.scribd.com/collections/3301209/

CDR Charles Kerchner (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the constitutional term in the presidential eligibility clause “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus — Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8 and Part II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoaZ8WextxQ

ProtectOurLiberty WebsiteSpaceMy BlogSpaceDocs Collections Re Obama SpaceMy YouTube SpaceMost Recent Full Pg Ad SpaceAd Archives SpaceFliers/Handouts SpaceBlock Ads SpaceSheriff to Sheriffs – Sheriff Kit Project SpaceGet A Sheriff Kit SpaceInterviews-Audio/Print SpaceBooks SpaceGoat’s Ledge SpaceContact Me

Of Neologisms, End-Around Runs and Gorillas: The Congressional Research Service 2016 Report (CRS Report) on Presidential Eligibility

Canadian-born Ted Cruz and Cuban Citizen at Birth via his Cuban father is NOT constitutional eligible to be President and CINC, or VP
Canadian-born Ted Cruz and Cuban Citizen at Birth via his Cuban father is NOT constitutional eligible to be President and CINC, or VP

Of Neologisms, End-Around Runs and Gorillas: The Congressional Research Service 2016 Report (CRS Report) on Presidential Eligibility | by Joseph DeMaio | @ The Post & Email

” … The Deceptions Begin With The Title:  The title of the January 11, 2016 CRS Report is “Qualifications for President and the ‘Natural Born’ Citizenship Eligibility Requirement.”  To begin with, the terms “qualifications” and “eligibility” are not synonyms. One can be eminently “qualified” for a job, and yet still be “ineligible.” … “

Read the entire four chapter/part article [Part 1- “NOT WHAT THE FOUNDERS INTENDED”, Part 2 – “DANGEROUS NONSENSE”, Part 3 – “A FALSE IMPRESSION” , Part 4 (final)-“NONSENSE ELEVATED TO AN ART FORM” ] about the latest in the series of duplicitous, disinformation CRS Memos/Reports (2009-2016) about presidential eligibility put out by Atty Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress to aid the members of Congress deceptively answer constituent questions in their continuing efforts to continue the cover-up of their allowing abrogation of the presidential eligibility clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution, provide major media talking points to aid the deception, and to confuse the American Electorate. 

Congressional-Research-Service-CRS-logo
A Propaganda Service for the DC Establishment — What This Latest CRS Report Deceptively Reports is NOT What the Founders and Framers Intended. Click Image for Details.

This masterful new article in the series written by Joseph DeMaio about the CRS’s multi-paper, multi-year deceptions on the presidential eligibility clause is a must read. He clearly and factually exposes and debunks Maskell’s latest deceptive techniques, significant omissions, and flawed historical and legal arguments in the CRS Report (CRSR) which Maskell prepared at the behest of the political party controlled establishment leadership of the Congress to help enable politically attractive but constitutionally ineligible candidates to run for President and CINC (or VP) and, hopefully to the posers, to get away with it.

See these links:

Part 1 –“NOT WHAT THE FOUNDERS INTENDED”http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/04/02/of-neologisms-end-around-runs-and-gorillas-the-congressional-research-service-2016-report-on-presidential-eligibility/

Part 2 –“DANGEROUS NONSENSE”http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/04/04/of-neologisms-end-around-runs-and-gorillas-the-congressional-research-service-2016-report-on-presidential-eligibility-part-ii/

Part 3 – “A FALSE IMPRESSION”: http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/04/07/of-neologisms-end-around-runs-and-gorillas-the-congressional-research-service-2016-report-on-presidential-eligibility-part-iii/

Part 4 (Final Chapter) –“NONSENSE ELEVATED TO AN ART FORM”: http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/04/09/of-neologisms-end-around-runs-and-gorillas-the-congressional-research-service-2016-report-on-presidential-eligibility-final-chapter/

# # # #

Read the: The Who What When Where Why and How of the “natural born Citizen” Term in Our U.S. Constitution

>cruzandrubionoteligiblepetitionsbanner(596x130)Cruz and Rubio were Citizens at Birth of a Foreign Country (Ted of 2 Foreign Countries) – Both NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States

Get PDF Copy of Ted Cruz Foreign Citizenship Facts Petition Here — Get PDF Copy of Marco Rubio Foreign Citizenship Facts Petition Here – Neither is constitutionally eligible to serve as President and Commander in Chief or Vice President!

A Simple Euler Logic Diagram Shows Logical Relationship of “natural born Citizens” to Other Type “Citizens” of the United States. Only a “natural born Citizen” Can Constitutionally be the President and Commander in Chief or the Vice-President. Click on Image For More Information.

The Presidential Eligibility Clause in the U.S. Constitution is a National Security Clause since the President is also the Commander in Chief of Our Military. The Supreme Court and/or Congress Must Act so as Not to Repeat Having a Constitutionally Ineligible Person Permitted to be Elected into the Oval Office – Now Or in the Future. CDR Kerchner (Ret) – ProtectOurLiberty.org

CDR Charles Kerchner (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/