Carl Gallups' "BIG 'PLAN A'" - “THIS DAM IS GOING TO BREAK” Starring Birthers Joe Arpaio & Mike Zullo P6980

[Suranis]

Ya but come on, he could have replaced them with his mad haxxor skils. Even for us mere mortals, it does not take that long to download a few gigs of "I love Lucy" episodes.

[bob]

Ironic Headline of the Day: FF's Facebook:

FAKE NEWS? REALLY? Pastor Carl Gallups has first-hand experience ...

"First-hand experience"? Gallups lives, breathes, eats, and of course peddles fake news.

At the link is Gallups' lies retelling how he was so unfairly called a Hooker,* a weird Arpaio/Zullo reference, and some war story from 1970s.




* Sandy Hook denier. Yet:

I have, on several occasions, stated that I do not believe the entire Government narrative and the MSM reports on Sandy Hook.

Not a denier!

And:

When that initial story was released, which in my estimation was fairly accurate, other MSM picked up the story and gave it a headline that read something like this: "FLORIDA PASTOR SUPPORTING TRUMP IS A SANDY HOOK DENIER - Believes No One Died At Sandy Hook."

A headline that, in fact, was never written by anyone. E.g.:

Trump boasted of an endorsement from Carl Gallups, a Florida pastor who is also a Sandy Hook “truther” who believes that the 2012 massacre of children in Newton, Conn., was set up by the government as an excuse to seize Americans’ guns.

In other words, SLPC accurately described Gallups' beliefs. Yet Gallups attacks a non-existent strawman.

Fake news, indeed.

[Notorial Dissent]

Fake news is Giddyup's specialty, he's an expert at it, has years of experience.

[bob]

The Facebook:

Today's guest: Former Sen. Tom Coburn and his efforts to effect a Constitutional Convention of States ...

[bob]

Teh Facebook:

CHALLENGE TO OBAMABOTS!

How is it that Trump is LYING about Russia (when no evidence exists that he is) but Obama is NOT lying about his fake BC when tons of forensic evidence exists to the contrary - complete with a 5 year criminal investigation by America's 4th largest sheriff's office and verified by two international document expert entities? Now - just HOW does THAT work?

I guess Gallups got tired ignoring those irrelevant Obots.

[bob]

The Facebook:

Which news outlet wrote that Pastor Gallups doesn't believe that anyone died at Sandy Hook?

Many.

I couldn't find any.

LOL! Good! But they are there.

* * *

If they are NOT there now - then they have changed them per my challenge. They cannot produce a SINGLE piece of evidence that I have EVER claimed that. It doesn't exist. I didn't say it - nor do I believe that no one died. My point has been that people DID die there - which makes the whole thing even WORSE - especially if, somehow, the gov't WAS involved. I have never said that, categorically, either. Only that I do not buy everything the gov't and the MSM told us about it. Considering what we now know about the FAKE NEWS MSM and lying gov't operatives - why should we "believe" it.

See? There's no headline that says Gallups said no children died at Sandy Hook because "they" deleted them all. And not because no headline was ever written.


*

[bob]

On the Facebook:

BREAKING!

Just what Mike Zullo and Carl Gallups have been telling you for several years. We were NOT wrong ... We were not lying ... we were not exaggerating. This story is FAR from over. BTW - where have all the Obamabots gone? Gee... we wonder.

And:

JUST WHAT WE'VE BEEN SAYING ON FREEDOM FRIDAY
Mike Zullo has been saying this for the last few years ...

Barack Obama's team secretly disclosed years of illegal NSA searches spying on Americans

Both are in reference to this: Circa: Obama intel agency secretly conducted illegal searches on Americans for years.

[SLQ]

Here , we're right here!

[SLQ]

I skimmed the supposedly declassified FISA court order. (Some of the comments call these leaked court documents.) To say it supports Gallups and Zullo's claims (which I believe were limited to Montgomery's bank records made-up crap) is ridiculous. What is says is that the Obama administration self-identified some problems with NSA data collection (5.2 percent of the time under NSA Section 702 upstream data) and between 0.7 percent and 1.4 percent regarding NSA activities under Section 704 and 705). They proposed changes in procedure to correct it. The court approved the new procedures. This is the Conclusion on page 95:

For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that: (1) the 2016 Certifications, as amended by the 2017 Amendments, as well as the certifications in the Prior 702 Dockets as amended by those documents, contain all the required statutory elements; (2) the targeting and minimization procedures to be implemented regarding acquisitions conducted pursuant to the 2016 Certifications, as amended by the 2017 Amendments, comply with 50 U.S.C. 1881a(d)-(e) and are consistent with the requirements of the Fourth Amendment; and (3) the minimization procedures to be implemented regarding information acquired under prior Section 702 certifications comply with 50 U.S.C. 1881a(d)-(e_ and are consistent with the requirements of the Fourth Amendment. Orders approving the amended certifications and use of the accompanying procedures are being entered contemporaneously herewith.

The Circa article leaves all of that out and cherry picks a few sentences from the 99-page order. Surprise.

[bob]

Teh Facebook:

CHALLENGE TO OBAMABOTS!

How is it that Trump is LYING about Russia (when no evidence exists that he is) but Obama is NOT lying about his fake BC when tons of forensic evidence exists to the contrary - complete with a 5 year criminal investigation by America's 4th largest sheriff's office and verified by two international document expert entities? Now - just HOW does THAT work?

I guess Gallups got tired ignoring those irrelevant Obots.

Gallups got so tired of winning (i.e., no one responded) that he issued his challenge again. To which, some jerk* responded:

To get an answer, you would probably have to go on an "Obot" radio program or website.

They are irrelevant. We never go to any website or "radio program" they might operate. But they DO listen to our programs and go to our sites. THAT is something we are absolutely certain of.

Since they're irrelevant, who cares about their opinions?

It's not the "opinion" I care about. It's about exposing the utter hypocrisy and the relevant fact that the BC is the foundation to the fraud and decay now among us. There IS a method to my madness. LOL. But they certainly ARE irrelevant idiots. No doubt.

*

[Northland10]

They are irrelevant. We never go to any website or "radio program" they might operate. But they DO listen to our programs and go to our sites. THAT is something we are absolutely certain of.

If they don't go to our sites, how do they know we listen and go to their sites?<sup>1

1</sup> Besides that jerk who posts on their sites/page.

[Reality Check]

If I can gather up enough motivation I might write a reply to Gallups on by RC Radio Blog. That's a big if. Gallups' challenge is silly and the question is ill formed. "Is Trump lying about Russia" is an extremely vague statement lacking in specifics. Trump has told numerous documented lies containing the word "Russia". He claimed he had no business dealings in Russia when in fact he did. He claimed in 2016 that he had never met Putin. His own words in an interview in 2015 contradict that. Of course Gallups would deny that the tons of evidence that Trump's surrogates and campaign actively communicated with Russia mean nothing about Trump.

Gallups can't even get his lie straight about the international forensics entities declaring President Obama's birth certificate was a forgery. Last time I looked Hawaii wasn't a foreign country and that isn't what either Reed Hayes or Forlabs declared.

[Orlylicious]

Carl keeps deflecting projecting engaging with some jerk. And the topic title is still going strong, "This story is far from over yet"

Carl.JPG

[bob]

Are there any Obots in particular that should respond? Maybe targeted challenges will be more effective.

Perhaps. Know any?

[ * * * ]

Again - we have no interest in "targeted" challenges. That is exactly what they would want. They desperately want to be relevant. They care WAY more about us - than we care about them. We apparently ARE relevant. They are not. BTW Bob ... well, never mind....

[ * * * ]

[Three emojis]

So "Obots" not responding to these challenges show that they care, is that correct?

You DO know that from your very first post we were "on to you" - right? How long you wanna play this charade? I went "fishing" and you took the bait. Proves my point from the beginning. Not once could you answer the question. Correct? [Eight emojis]

[bob]

There was a bit more, but Brave Sir Carl deleted the thread and baned some jerk.

"For the record," on Facebook, Freedom Friday and Carl Gallups have baned some jerk. (Next up: PPS.)

The weirdest part was Gallups' emoji screed. It is odd enough that Gallups was communicating like a 'tween girl, but they didn't really even make sense. One might wonder if Gallups needed to visit the virtual drunk tank.

[Suranis]

Carl's mighty Banhammer, the tool of one who don't care about your opinion and know they are in the right!

[bob]

"For the record," on Facebook, Freedom Friday and Carl Gallups have baned some jerk. (Next up: PPS.)

TRIFECTA COMPLETE!

(PPS did not appreciate an innocuous question about Reed Hayes.)

[Foggy]

Whoa, good thing you can quit anytime, huh?

[Northland10]

Carl seems to be obsessed with the irrelevant us.

[Notorial Dissent]

Well no one else is paying any attention to him, so I guess he'll take any attention he can get, even if it is being laughed at.

[mighty dawg]

Well no one else is paying any attention to him, so I guess he'll take any attention he can get, even if it is being laughed at.

With but 711 followers of his Facebook page for his radio program, we can pretty much gage how relevant Carl Gallups is in the larger scheme of things.

[bob]

Whoa, good thing you can quit anytime, huh?

Gallups quit me first!

* * *

Among the things that are hi-larious about Gallups is his constant bragging about the vastness of the PPS "network." When, in reality, it is a few free accounts on some social media platforms. That receive relatively little traffic, e.g., the average kitten video receives far more comments than his til-foil nuttery.

Heck, until yesterday, Gallups" most prolific commenter was some jerky troll.

[Orlylicious]

Maybe if Carl starts putting kittens in his vile birther videos....

[bob]

Teh Facebook:

Sounds like you're an obot trying to cast doubt.

He was. He was probably the same one we booted yesterday. He posted again under yet another name on a "sock puppet" account at FB.

Only one other Obot did post something, but rather than answering the question posed, he simply attacked Zullo's character and spewed completely false information. Typical. So he was blocked as well.

Actually, this challenge was more of a fishing expedition to eliminate as many as possible from this page. We threw the lure, they bit, it worked. They're not real smart. One guy thought he was. Weeks ago he showed up making "neutral type" but snarky remarks. He finally revealed himself after we baited him along for a while. He was blocked as well. This is really almost too easy.

Hope that gives some light to the matter. God bless.

That is what democrats do. They can't handle the truth so they make up their own version of what they try to pass off as truth. They think, if they just keep saying it, it will become the truth.

Yes. So true.

And that, my friends, is how Brave Sir Carl won the Facebook Wars. Epic Klingon poems will be written about his valorous deleting of comments that were not in complete agreement with his fantasies. Done in His Name, of course.

[mighty dawg]

And that, my friends, is how Brave Sir Carl won the Facebook Wars. Epic Klingon poems will be written about his valorous deleting of comments that were not in complete agreement with his fantasies. Done in His Name, of course.

I can almost hear Sir Carl now declaring victory and dominion over his birther kingdom as he sends his OBOT heretics into exile.

Of course one of the fallacies of social media is that it makes us think we are more relevant and significant than we truly are. 20 "likes" on a Facebook commentary makes one feel nearly invincible, yet in a world of 7.5 billion people is virtually undetectable.