1. It really doesn't matter what my position is on the sighting of Bigfoot, because:
A. They really could be BSing, boasting, or plain old lying.
Let's use a bit of common sense and logic and examine that possibility.
First let's establish a few facts about those 3 unedited conversations that I posted from the video:
1. They were from 3 different men. (Creamer, Foval, Black)
2. They each worked for 3 different political groups/entities. (Democracy Partners, AUFC, DNC)
3. They each took place individually at different locations.
4. They each centered around the events at Trump rallies, the groups on the ground at those events, and their personal involvement in those events.
Now let's review what each of them said in those conversations:
Bob Creamer: Coordinates with the DNC, Clinton campaign and manages the planned events at Trump rallies.
Scott Foval: The events require prepared groups of people with "agitator" training, and then names locations of several of those groups.
Aaron Black: Is the DNC "field general" who coordinates with the groups on the ground at events. He cited the Chicago riots that caused Trump to cancel his speech, as an event that they (the DNC) and Bob Creamer were responsible for carrying out. He states that the public can't know about the party's involvement in that event.
When you put all of the facts above together, it seems pretty unlikely (but not impossible) that it was a coordinated effort to lie or deceive anyone. Each person's conversation ties to and corroborates the conversations of the other 2, painting a pretty clear picture that's hard to write off as fictional.
Now if you still believe that no such events ever existed and all 3 of those men fabricated what they said, the following will take that belief from "pretty unlikely" they lied, to "highly improbable" or "no damned way in hell" they lied.
Just ask yourself, "What did they have to gain and what did they have to lose by making those admissions?"
Wouldn't you agree that based on their professions, they all knew that should their admissions be heard publicly, not only would it threaten the democrats in the presidential election, threaten the DNC and threaten the democratic party in general, it would also threaten their careers, their 6 or 7 figure salaries, and quite possibly their very freedom should their admissions wind up in a court of law?
That is a hell of a lot to lose if what they said on that tape were ever made public. With that much on the line, they must have had something pretty spectacular to gain by lying to implicate themselves, the Clinton campaign and the DNC in taking part in organised efforts to incite violence at the political rallies of their opponents... For the life of me, I can't think of anything that could possibly have motivated them to admitting to such despicable, deplorable and illegal behavior, especially if untrue... Can You?
The bottom line is, It makes absolutely no sense at all for those 3 men to fabricate the claim that they are part of an organised effort to incite violence at Trump rallies, when doing so could have such a devastating effect on their own political and personal self interests.
In conclusion, those men unknowingly implicated themselves in inciting violence at Trump rallies, by sharing that information with people they believed to be like-minded political allies. Based on their high positions within the democratic apparatus, what was at stake politically, personally, and financially, and the fact that what each of them said fits together neatly, to paint a clear picture of the operation from top to bottom, there is absolutely no reason for me, or anyone else to doubt the veracity of the statements they made.
This isn't a court of law... Anyone with a lick of common sense and a shred of honesty, knows damned well that those weren't claims or stories told by those men, but confessions.
