Why the surprise – COMEY is a Hillary cover-up agent

May 27, 2017

Fake news denies being fake news all day every day.

It backfired on them almost as soon as they coined the term to supposedly “debunk” the alternative news sites that are not beholden to Operation Mockingbird entanglements.

It was about the same time as that fake news Fake Dossier story popped up. Never mind that almost every story they come up with to support the theme for the day they are telling us, almost every time, it is exposed now sooner rather than later.

Like Comey asking for more money.

Somebody mentioned that the firing of Comey by surprise and while he was on the other side of the continent was not a mistake. It was self-preservation against a Fake Investigation witch hunt. Surprise so Comey couldn’t arrange counter-measures, like Obama did during the transition period, when he issued the intelligence directives to make it easier to share secrets among the Deep State departments, it was cover for the hiding of who does the leaks among multiplied numbers of people with eyes on them. And helps the parts to coordinate with their Dirty Tricks operatives.

Jerry Pournelle lists some of the TRUE FACTS about Comey:


Jerry Pournelle lists more TRUE FACTS about Comey:


Overdoing it is one way in How to Spot a Liar

May 27, 2017

Pamela Meyer lecture on Hot to Spot a Liar:

One of the ways is overdoing the emphasis too much:
Formal language denial and distancing language; for example, do you remember who said this:
“Not listen to me very carefully. I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”

Also, she says, the innocently accused will more likely deny emphatically in sort of flashes, but the liar will more likely be angry throughout an interview or discussion.

Why, hello, that’s what we have in the Fading Media Internetwork, all indignant now about being accused using a term that they were the first to use. Somebody somewhere wrote some talking points about how Hillary Clinton lost the election of 2016, and from her mouth and from President Barry we began hearing about “fake news” stories that caused trouble.

Barry used the fake news about “fake news” to create an office in the federal behemoth bureaucracy to explore how to use “local media” to fight the scourge of “fake news”.

Of course by that they meant the kind of stories that started coming up in alternative news sources not encumbered by membership in the fading media and press of the Fake News Networks (FNN). In other words, “the rest of the story”.

Before, the Counter-Media, the real Opposition Media, had to publish in small-circulation magazines, and rare opportunities to show enough of the ideas on one of the three major networks to get ridiculed. An early Ron Paul appearance got him pummeled with ridicule and insult on one TV talk show because he advocated drug legalization.

But in the age of the Internet, Ron Paul gave his message as a presidential candidate, forcing it into the national conversation, and the following for the message of peace and liberty and free markets exploded, and the ruling class barely held it back.

It took years for the general public to become aware of details like JFK’s double head jerk, the magic appearance of the bullet, an autopsy full of generals, and a coffin swap. It took years for a court to finally declare that there had been a conspiracy by governments (local police, state authorities, federal government) to cover up suspicious details about the Martin Luther King murder and to declare James Earl Ray a patsy.

But it did not take that much time, historically speaking, for the TRUTH in the CONTENT of the wiki-leaks dump about the DNC conspiracy to cheat for Hillary to get around, including the content that showed a slur about former Governor Richardson that referenced him being “Latin”, that Team Hillary said Catholics should change their religion to accommodate things like abortion, and other messages that showed collusion to block Sanders.

Try a search playing off Chris Cuomo’s version of “I did not have sex with that woman” from when he said “fake news” was the worst thing you can call a journalist. The links are full of denial after denial that they are Fake News publishers, but now they’re always denials of Trump quotes. They are clueless that they are feeding Trump’s popularity with the public. In one survey, two-thirds of Americans believe the traditional media, legacy media, official propaganda media, is full of fake news. By which they mean of course the choice of stories to cover, which guests to interview, what questions to ask, and so on, are all tilted to manipulate audiences into their way of thinking. It’s more than just what would be a sort of subconscious bias that results from their views of things.

They deliberately omit talking about certain news items, for example. Throughout the occupation years in Iraq, the ethnic cleansing of Christians that resulted from the invasion and occupation of Iraq never made it to most media. They covered Obama’s immigration policy, undeclared, to slow-walk the granting of refugee status of Christians from the Middle East in favor of Muslims. In fact this is the discrimination against Christians that right now the Fake Media is pretending that Trump’s orders do to people from six Muslim-majority nations.

Yes, they deny being Fake News with all vehemence and repetition. But it has become so obvious they have come up with new slogans for themselves. NYT now wraps itself with the slogan “Because the Truth Matters”. Like their publishing reflects that? Boys can be girls, and girls can be boys? Really? After all those FAKE POLLS? And the dark news publisher Washington Post saying “The Truth Dies in Darkness”. The Washington Post is helping the New York Times bury it!

Jeff Bezos owns, runs Amazon and the Washington Post. Some poeple are going to start looking for an alternative to Amazon. That’s the all around cure though, because Deep State props up whoever it wants to with FAKE MONEY.

What appears to be a ray of sunlight is that a lot of states are passing bills that recognize gold and silver or metallic coin as legal tender, plus killing state taxes on the metals. Woo-hoo! So now some of us, some of “we the real people” will get to engage in commerce with honest money, independent of the FAKE MONEY from the Federal Reserve.

Be not deceived, God is not mocked. Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

(But see Isaiah 1:18. It is not too late for most of you fakers to repent. Udo Ulfkotte did and he is still alive.)

New on Youtube: An idea for liberty and investment that just might work!

May 25, 2017

The more projects there are for freedom, the better.

There are other ideas, and Trevor Lyman to me sounds a lot like what some in Honduras had in mind with the Zonas Economicas de Dessarollo y Empleo (ZEDE) project.

There are quite a number of settlements of expats in many countries around the world. There are special economic zones where private investment is allowed and even encouraged by governments, with liberal tax rules (“liberal” in the classical sense). There are Free Zones in all kinds of poor countries anywhere.

Trevor Lyman, on a negotiated “liberty territory”:

Throughout history, when people have been oppressed by their governments, they have left their homes in search of a new land where they could live as they pleased. If it worked for them, maybe it can work for us.

Of course today there is no unclaimed land worth living on and no one wants to fight and kill for land (which wouldn’t work anyway), but we should be able to trade our way to a new Terrority, especially if we negotiate with a nation with a weak economy.

If a territory could be negotiated, would you want to live there? Would you be willing to move and build a new “nation” from scratch if it meant you could live without oppression?


If you are interested in this idea and would like to follow progress, please either subscribe to my YouTube channel or send me an email at lyman.trevor with the subject “Interested LT”

Evidence in Creation

May 23, 2017

(This is my reaction to fellow libertarian Gloria Alvarez’s video on why she is an atheist, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpB_aQL6g5w )

El verdadero metodo scientifico requiere una serie de pasos que se pueden repetir para legar a los mismos resultados.
La “teoria” de la gravedad es un ejemplo de algo que se presta para pruebas en el mundo fisico que se pueden repetir.
Por lo tanto, y a la par de tantas evidencias forensicas de naturaleza fisica, scientifica, historica, requiere mucha “fe ciega” concluir que no hay en dise~no intentional en la Creacion.

Erase un tiempo en que yo tambien volvi ateo, pero los hechos, la sciencia, hechos historicos, y la logica me volvieron a creer en Dios y es mas en la Biblia.

(I used to be atheist myself, but then followed facts, science, history and logic back to belief in God and then the Bible.

(Note that the true and honest scientific method requires being able to repeat an experiment that corroborates the theory. Rinse and repeat as we say. But origins of the universe, or the solar system, are not repeatable to test theories about their origins. Scientists have no clue how to go about testing the origins of life. (The first test was by Louis Pasteur who proved “life only comes from life”)

And the only experiment in many-generations evolution produces changes within the original kind, the E. Coli experiment.

Gloria, you are a fantastic spokeswoman for liberty in Latin America, but your atheism falls short of the same logical rationality that supports Austrian economics and personal liberty. May I suggest you take another honest look at the evidence that convinced Antony Flew to believe in God, after a lifetime of being the foremost spokesman for atheism? I think he said DNA was the clincher but there was more than just that too.



#1. BIG BANG. Most scientists believe in the origins theory of the Big Bang, but the Big Bang requires something they call “Inflation”. The Big Bang is a retro-fit they deduce logically from the present state of the universe and its apparent expansion. But the same principles also leads back logically to the beginning from the singularity. The logic then requires “Inflation”. But that Inflation requires a suspension of the same rules of physics that requires the Big Bang to explain origins. But they MUST believe in Inflation because they have no alternative if they are to avoid saying the word “Creation”. FAIL.

#2. ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE. The weak atheist explanation for the anthropic principle is to restate the principle as a circularity. “The universe has a set of independent physics constants that make it look like it is made to support life, because we exist”. I doubt even Descartes would stop there. That’s lazy thinking.
==> Why do a dozen or more independent(!), and fine-tuned(!) different physics constants line up perfectly to make life even possible, even if spontaneous biogenesis is even more statistically improbable than Luis Pasteur could know?
Just an example: Change the gravitational constant by a fraction of 10 to the minus 38th power, and then planets, stars, life would be impossible. (The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, the perfectly exact polar-opposite equality of charge of an electron vs. proton, the Plank length, speed of light, electromagnetic force, peculiar attributes of carbon, peculiar attributes of water, , etc.)

And there is Isaac Newton, who said that just the fact that physical universal constants exist in the first place are proof that God made it.


#3. PRIVILEGED PLANET. Earth has the optimal combination of two very important environmental factors: (1) life-supporting factors, and (2) observability out into the universe, and (3) equilibrium-balancing factors.

(1) Life-supporting and protecting:
–a– Gravity,
–b– magnetic core supporting the Van Allen protective belts preventing harm from solar and cosmic radiation,
–c– the exact composition of the atmosphere,
–d– right amount of water,
–e– in the “Goldilocks zone” distance from the sun (supporting liquid water),
–f– unique properties of water that uniquely freeze top-down instead of bottom-up, allowing life to survive in the polar zones, and temperate zones, and provide a perfect medium for biochemical activity,
–f– protection from cosmic bombardment by placement so far from the center of the galaxy, and by the planet Jupiter and even Saturn and Uranus sucking in many of the objects from space that would end life on Earth at least human life,

(2) Observability
–a– Observations of the universe have supported scientific observations in physics and other disciplines, meaning no opaque cloud cover like with Venus, Jupiter, outer giants (this also allows the sun to power life on the surface),
–b– in the outer reaches of the galaxy in one of the spiral arms, meaning the sky is not so cluttered as to hide the universe,
–c– positioned where we can see the universe, providing navigational aids for humans traveling.

(3) Equilibrium
–a– Oxygen and carbon dioxide are balanced by the life on the surface, below the surface, and in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide compressors are on the market if you want to give your plants a growth boost, and CO2 is starting to stabilize the southward march of the Sahara desert. The ice caps and glaciers are stabilizing mechanisms, not just measures of global temperature trends…
—b— The Earth’s magnetic field balances out solar and cosmic radiation in our favor.
—c— The moon not only provides a light for the night, it also interacts to give us our tides in the ocean and in water, and supports movement in the ground that replenishes fertility in the ground and in the water.


DNA, RNA, Cells, Statistical Improbability: things that have to line up at the same time for life’s origins.

Darwinian evolutionists (by which I mean molecules-to-man ancestry) claim that Darwinian evolution has nothing to say about the origins of life itself, although they did before creation scientists forced them to admit they have no clue as to even imagine how it could have started, enough to form a convincing argument.

(a) DNA is a huge testimony to design. It requires a completely digital computing environment and a specific interpreter language comparable to Basic or Python or Ruby, and even “natural language”. The amino acids known as A, T, C, and G that make up the genetic alphabet and their specific properties per se have nothing to do with the actual functions that they are associated with. They have to be interpreted, expressed, by messenger RNA, into the many compounds that go to work in the cell.

(b)mRNA: DNA means nothing without corresponding mRNA to interpret it, and neither of them are able to do anything without a supporting cellular environment. Even a virus has to piggy-back on an organism’s cellular machinery to do anything.

(c) And then, after you have DNA, mRNA, the cellular environment (skipping steps of protein manufacture, energy providers, etc), you have to make sure you have an autonomous biological unit to begin with (a cell at least, for origins), that has the attributes of self-nourishing, self-reproducing, self-protecting. ====> Even the apparently most primitive cell in nature has “only” 525 genes. Laboratory work seems to indicate that between 250 and 300 genes are the absolute minimum for a cell to function and reproduce.

(d) With all that you still have to have those amino acids in EVERY gene ALL line up in what biologists call “left-handed” versions, because none of them are “right-handed” in our world. Try calculated 2×2 for each amino acid in the sequence and see if you get less than the atoms in the universe. Mathematicians told biologists in one joint conference that they needed something other than “natural selection” to explain life because of this.

Crystals do not match up to cell machinery. Crystals form when like molecules “fall into place” based on the same microscopic forces that result in molecules. Water cannot spontaneously form snowflakes, they form based on the electrochemical properties of its components. How can you get DNA, mRNA, and cellular machinery from that?


(1) E COLI EXPERIMENT. There is a lab experiment underway that has a closed environment where E. Coli has been reproducing itself since 24 February 1988. As of 66,000 generations of reproduction, they have had some mutations happen. This is the kind of “evolution” that Creation scientists also forcefully emphasize happens. But they still have E. Coli, they don’t even have a different kind of bacteria.

(2) IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY. Charles Darwin admitted for one item of evidence that would disprove his “Origins” theory. That would be an organic structure that did not admit for discrete steps of changes to create it from primitive precursors.

Biologist Michael Behe gave several examples of such irreducible complexity in his book “Darwin’s Black Box”. Not just the complex macro-machinery of the eye of a human requires some imaginary acrobatics, but the conversion of ONE PHOTON hitting a retina cell, to the nerve message to the brain, and the restoration to prepare for the next photon, requires at least 12 different complex steps, all in place, all the time, simultaneously.

Try coming up with that from a small light-sensitive spot on the skin, by steps that work for some useful “selected” purpose and don’t kill the organism along the way.

(3) ** Forward planning –
Scientists in Spain found that roundworms can transmit environmental information, in this case temperature information, to future offspring, through as many as at least 12 generations, using “transgenes” and tags to keep the data on the shelf as if “until needed”. This corroborates an earlier theory of creation biologists that species actually “experiment” (trial and error, apparently) with this “unused” (unexpressed) genes in times of environmental stress.

(4) FOSSIL RECORD. Stephen Gould, evolutionary biologist, declared that the fossil record only shows STASIS, not the expected evolutionary changes. There is variation within what creationists call “kinds” as described in Genesis, meaning all canine species descended from one original “wolf-kind”.

This is the ONLY true forensic science that an origins theory can be tested against. Changes from a photo-mammal to apes and rats are NOWHERE to be found in fossils. The historical humanoid finds are fraught with frauds, hoaxes, including a Lucy skeleton put together by pounding away at his bones with a chisel so it would fit, and a Chinese peasant making fools of biologists everywhere with a bit of plaster.


A scientist working at one of the biggest fossil digs in the world in Montana discovered FLESH in the fossils, actually BLOOD VESSELS. (Crichton didn’t have to use amber after all in Jurassic Park, maybe?) The scientist that made the discovery says that her first impression on arriving at the dig was that it had a very strong STINK. Despite the stink, despite the flesh, she still affirmed that this fleshly membrane is the requisite 60 million years old.

——I’ll abbreviate the rest, there is way way too much evidence that the politically enforce theories of origins now taught in politically controlled academia is wrong. (Yes, scientists are also humans, too) +++++++++++++++++++++


(a) Inverted strata, where textbook geological layers are “inverted”, the “older” one above the “younger” one.

(b) “POLYSTRATE FOSSILS”? Fossils that span geological layers supposedly millions of years apart. They abound in the Grand Canyon, and they are visible. Fossilization cannot happen that way. One professor was quoted as saying he hopes creationists don’t find out about this.

(c) WATER FLOWS DOWN NOT UP. The river that supposedly cut open the Grand Canyon has its source at an altitude that is significantly lower than the topmost points in the Canyon.

(d) RADIOISOTOPE DATING requires about 20 assumptions involving a long-ages historical constant rate of decay and many other premises that are taken as given. Scientists have now discovered that changes in both cosmic and solar radiation cause the rates of decay of such isotopes to change. Geologists have said this is the “most reliable” dating indicator.

(e) “POLONIUM HALOS” were called “natures’ tiny little mysteries” under oath by an anti-creation scientist, but they have no explanation for them. By their own dating methods they are evidence of same-as-instantaneous creation.

Regulation and innovation co-exist, but innovation better thrives without a straightjacket

May 20, 2017

The only reason that “history has shown that regulation and innovation can co-exist” is because there is no choice for any innovators, but history has also shown that regulation always strangles innovation. It’s more difficult to see the innovation that did NOT happen because of regulation, but you have enough real-life examples that it should be obvious to anybody who considers it even lightly.

Science thrived after the Reformation let loose some freedom of thinking, and began to release push back on authoritarianism. Can one really say that regulation results in better results than the generation of Isaac Newton, Francis Bacon, and the like? Considering the proliferation of regulations in the late 20th century, multiplying like rabbits into the 21st, can anybody make the case that innovation has multiplied in like manner?

Compare the phone monopoly of the 20th century, a national enforced regulation, with what happened when long distance and phone service were let loose. We got more innovation in a couple of decades than the 100 years previous.

Uber is continuing to innovate, as is Lyft, as is airbnb, and other like services, *-> except where governments and regulations, written with “help” from crony interests like taxi companies and hotel chains. Venture capital is going into new ideas for using the new communications infrastructure in like manner.

And make no mistake: any effort to regulate the Internet or the delivery of content with any mandate out of D. C. will only end up as regulation of the content of speech and press. It will start with some pleasant sounding euphemism like “net neutrality”. But let a Godzilla the size of the U. S. government get started with any idea with a label or justification that includes the word “fair” in it, will end up being used very unfairly.

Who decides, follow the money. “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you” is followed by “I need your ahem, contribution, ahem to help you”.

Why Most Published Research is False

May 20, 2017

This is my reaction to a blog entry at https://cacm.acm.org/blogs/blog-cacm/216306-fact-over-fiction/fulltext titled “Fact Over Fiction”.

The author could get a better perspective if he would read. Why Most Published Research is False:

One implicit premise to the article is that reductions in funding for science is tantamount to censorship. It is not. Censorship is a ban by the biggest institution of coercion in a given territory: the government that claims jurisdiction over it.

Science research funded by involuntary confiscation of resources (aka “taxes”), and by inflationary government debt, is by definition “politicized science”, it is not pure. Sure, anybody can apply, but who pays? And who decides?

Politically directed funding is the biggest distortion today.

Now there is also empirical evidence about the very bad consequence of trusting government-funded decision makers:

Hunh. Fake news in medical studies. Who would have thought it? (It’s worse than I even thought)

Disinformation is endemic now in academia. Even set aside for a minute the issue of political motivations in funding, and the indisputable fact that funding decisions are political decisions by nature made by people who have their own perspectives and preferences. Big Pharma pays for studies used by FDA for approval or denial. The skepticism shown to corporate studies should also apply to the deciders of grants in governments.

Climate-gate, non-repeatable medical studies, falsification of data, source code hidden from peer review, peer reviewers who enforce conformity, these are problems that are built into current traditional institutions for science.

The wild wild Web is now proving to be a solution to misinformation. Let us call it “fake information”. The P versus not P solution offered recently in a Web post was refuted in about 24 hours. Best peer review ever.

The same principle applies to the wider Internet. Misinformation? Look at the long list of historical misinformation below in the traditional news media and press. Note that the most trusted newspapers and media networks propagated these false stories, mostly from government sources..

** Battleship Maine: Culpability still not resolved, a war was fought based on it.
** Gulf of Tonkin: Another war justified based on a later proven false story.
** WMDs in Iraq: Another war justified based on a false intelligence report.
** Wikileaks: NOT ONE of their leaks –begun during the Bush administration– has been refuted, yet the reports are quashed and their implications denied in traditionally trusted media. It is non-traditional Internet web sites and blogs that have pushed it out into the public conscience. — Yet the “intellectual class” is pushing back against it.
** FBI Funding myth, that Comey requested more money for the Russia investigation.

With so many false stories coming from places like NYT, Washington Post, CNN, allegations repeated as if they were credible with no evidence at all and stories with evidence ignored, why in the world would anybody think there is a problem with alternative news sources? We should celebrate, for example, that climate scientists have a forum to speak if they disagree with the politically approved dogmas?

Easy to see fake news sometimes

May 20, 2017

Comey’s firing blares out in living color that there is a gargantuan effort going on to fabricate so many false narratives to block the Trump administration that it will sink into the body politic mind.

Like Trump saying that firing Comey would take the heat off a Russian investigation?

That’s utter baloney! That’s so stupid! Why would he think the heat would go away? Even NYT knows, with all this dangerous hate fest going on, they know there is no way below or above that Trump or anybody else would think it would take off the heat.

So it’s an obvious fake story right out of the gate. These anonymous sources are probably the same sources that made a story out of that stupid Dossier-Gate. The British spy and DNC opposition research agent that the FBI hired for $50,000 couldn’t even keep his narrative consistent enough to believe them.

After regurgitating all the fake intelligence story (WMDs in Iraq) that got us bogged down again after Vietnam (Gulf of Tonkin) into another quagmire in the Middle East, and regurgitating the false flag chemical attacks in Syria later exposed as being unleashed by “rebel” forces supported by the United States intelligence agencies, how much longer is everyone going to continue to believe them?


Jorge Ramos: You might not like Latinos taking over the country

May 19, 2017

Jorge Ramos lectured Tucker Carlson on immigration in one interview of the Univision anchor on Fox News, among other things saying it was moot anyway, because Latins are on the statistical trend lines of becoming the majority demographic in just a couple of decades.

Tucker Carlson was trying to stay on the topic of illegal immigration, while Jorge Ramos kept trying to make it about immigration as if Tucker was not talking about just illegals.

The topic of gangs did not come up except in Tucker’s examples of illegal immigrant Latins raping at 14-year old girl at a high school and a series of murders.

Even the hate-spitting so-called “Southern Poverty Law Center”, guilty of the most vile vitriol against decent Christians who just want to testify in public, defenders of burkas, even they have had to admit this Latino-black thing is a real thing:


The web page article on their site does not say much about black-on-Latin hits, except to mention a “rivalry” between the “Mexican Mafia” gang in prisons in California, and the “Black Guerrillas” gang.

If she runs again for president, will anybody be alive to vote for her?

May 19, 2017


If she runs again for president, will she leave anybody alive to vote for her?

Can somebody please run the actuarial tables on the chances of so many people dying around the Clintons, let alone the ones that spilled dirt on them before they got too famous to kill outright?

Say what you want, but how can so many people in Operation Mockingbird Media and Mockingbird Press say exactly the same things with only slight variations in synonyms and grammar?

And how can they NOT say anything at all, or so little, in unison, about events that have such a huge impact on everyone’s personal life? Or of huge significance?

Like the Audit the Fed bill just getting passed out of Committee in the House.
Ted Cruz missed the vote on the bill to audit the Fed and Trump made an issue of that in the campaign. We’ll see what happens with it as president.
Harry Reid had demanded an audit of the Fed his entire political career until 2011-2012, when he blocked a House bill from even being considered in the Senate.

Arizona’s legislature just having made gold and silver to be legal tender in the state, AND remove the capital gains tax on gold and silver. Ron Paul was able to advocate for this in testimony there.

The capital gains tax is a very sneaky trick by snakes and vipers to rob investors blind. The Fed lets inflation devalue the currency, prices and capital returns on investments go up while “purchasing power” in material terms per dollar declines, but the tax gets slapped on you in dollar terms as if you actually earned something.

So they rob you with the printing machine (“sprint” commands even) and then they rob you on the devaluation of the currency unit. Double trouble.

Here’s another example of the censorship part of Operation Mockingbird in the media they control. Remember the big Paris hit and the death metal band? Vocalist says the media distorts his comments and his views. He’s

Kissinger said once you’re not paranoid if they’re really out to get you.

The Left, financed by power-mad plutocrat billionaires around the world, driven by “hate minutes” against messengers of freedom and personal autonomy and symbols of them, by any means necessary, is really and truly out to get you if you are in their way. Or even protest their use of violence in paid thugs and in paid government operatives (judges, police, lawyers, legislators).

Net neutrality for equal access to Internet: Ban Drudge!

May 18, 2017

So now we see the truth about the Net Neutrality idea being pushed by authoritarians who want more government intrusion into free speech and free press:


They want to ban Drudge! So much for a “free and open Internet”!