Video Length Clue
Leads to Cue-Drop 21

I’ve dumped some crumbs like this over the weekend which started the intense shilling. At this point we are far enough along you can paint the picture without risk of jeopardizing the operation

... https://t.co/5lLOlivTsk

IMPORTANT MASK INFORMATION

From Anna de Buisseret

The Government has FAILED to conduct a Risk Assessment of the risks to the individual members of the public for the harms caused to them by mask wearing- or wearing a face covering.

1. I am in the process of recovering four years of destroyed Twitter posts from my recent hack. Most related to an organization of rogue CIA agents doing election hacking, drug running, and dark weapons trading in a group led by AG Bill Barr. Other have call this the Enterprise.

2. The Enterprise is run Bill Barr himself and organized 800 ex-CIA agents and 300 ex-Soviet KGB Generals into a junta of 1,100 Frank Guistra partners in a sort of law firm of international crime. Iran Contra drug running was the first major operation in 1980. by the Enterprise.

3. Chip Tatum, a CIA pilot, flew Bill Barr, then a CIA attorney for George Bush, to Central America for Iran Contra banking and money laundering operations talks about this extensively in him book about his close friend, Robert Mueller, entitled, "The Mule".

4. A fundamental premise of my work over the last four years is to focus on this core Iran Contra, "Enterprise" group, to follow election hacking, dark weapons trade, drug running, and money laundering. Here are some video notes capture on the web from shows I did in 2016.

5. You can see in these 2016 show notes how my focus was on a USAID funded Serbian election flipping, subversive group called OTPOR. This group received subversion funds for election flipping through KKR, a joint venture of David Petraeus and Henry Kissinger.

Ever since 9/11, we've been instructed that tiny minorities of extremists are solely responsible for their reprehensible actions. There was no greater sin than blaming law-abiding people who share some of their beliefs.

That's how we got the "lone wolf terrorist" cliche. A great herd of lone wolves swept across the world, each completely isolated from anything but the most direct support for their heinous deeds. "Tiny minorities of extremists" were blamed for "hijacking" the beliefs of millions.

The Western world did backflips to completely firewall the actions of terrorists from the larger bodies of people they claimed to represent. We hired a legion of consultants to show us exactly where the line between extremism and legitimate belief was drawn.

We wouldn't even name the adversaries of civilization. We declared a "global war" on their methods, to avoid criticizing their beliefs. The Obama administration launched a huge, expensive "Countering Violent Extremism" initiative that pointedly treated extremism as generic.

The greatest of pains were taken to draw very sharp and bright lines between violent extremism and even the most provocative and incendiary acts of legitimate speech and political organization. This was true of the race riots in the Obama years, as well as terrorism.

Spectator thread: Among the Scottish parliament’s many crucial roles, there is none more important than its ability to scrutinise government and hold it to account. The same is true of a free press. Both are at their best when they hold power to account on behalf of the public.

But neither can do this essential duty when crucial documents are withheld during important inquiries. The Holyrood inquiry into the Scottish Gov’s handling of the Alex Salmond affair decided last week that it would not publish crucial submissions, including Mr Salmond’s ....

... apparently because it would contravene reporting restrictions rightly introduced to protect the identity of complainants.
We have published a duly redacted version of Alex Salmond’s account on our website.

We felt that an overly-cautious interpretation of the court order by the committee was frustrating the due process of parliamentary inquiry — and the freedom of the press to publish matters of public interest and importance.

We were aware that the court never intended to obstruct parliamentary or public scrutiny; but because of how the committee had interpreted the issue, we today sought clarification from the High Court in Edinburgh.

Dems are correct in not calling witnesses, which is obvious when you think this through. First, the case has been made. Any GOPr or delusional Trump fan who doesnt accept that - or care - never will. The country knows/sees what happened. 2nd, if dems called witnesses.../1

...it will add next to nothing. Statements are being admitted into the record from some witnesses. Third, & most important, the GQP is a monstrosity that only cares about power. Once the witness door opens, they'll turn the trial into a farce, calling anyone and everyone.../2

...to muddy up the case. Since their entire case is whataboutism, they will try to call Obama, Hillary Clinton, Holder, Waters, and on and on. If the presiding officer holds the testimony irrelevant before allowing it, there will be weeks of rage about cover-ups, etc. The.../3

...actual case - already strongly proven by the House Managers, even using the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt - will get buried as the days and weeks pass with hundreds of irrelevant witnesses are fought over. Finally, bringing those witnesses.../4

...could interfere with a possibly more important proceeding if it happens: The criminal prosecution of Trump by District of Columbia for inciting a riot, which is a crime in DC. As in the Oliver North case, the public Congressional testimony of North led a court to throw.../5