HIGH LEVEL INSIDER AMA from 4Chan transcripts ... easy to read, not in 4Chan form.... PART 1: 7/10/16 (1)

I'm transcribing these AMA sessions from HLI on 4chan.

This is not because I'm necessarily subscribing to every word or believing it without question, but it was more compelling than any AMA I've seen in a long time. It takes a long time to read them on 4chan so I thought this might be quicker for busy people to get at the content.

He says some pretty heavy shit along the ride. Obama = Osama, Clinton blackmail/pedo/cocaine dealing/9-11, he even says Hillary's campaign logo is symbolic of her pride behind closed doors over 9/11.

He wholly ignores the storm of racist shitposters on 4chan - but if one of them does have an intelligent question underneath the epithets, he will skip over the offensive language and answer the question.

He starts later posts with mysterious photos - for example, the spooky Bank of America mural in Charlotte, NC and Plato's Allegory of the Cave, plus many more. I'm including those in the transcripts. He refers to his organization as Three and is completely non-racist on all fronts (unlike FBIanon). It's compelling stuff when you dig through it. I wanted to see if anyone is as fascinated as I am.

Here's the first one. I'll be posting each one on a separate thread.

7.10.2016 (1)

HLI: High level insider here.

Question session is open.

/pol/: Will you post any proof of that?

HLI: Yes - the answer to your questions.

/pol/: What insight do you have that can help us out in investigating CF?

HLI: Do you know how the USSR was brought down?

CIA (Bush, Clinton) cocaine trafficking provided a large portion of the funds that were used to buy off a variety of people in the USSR's society from the mob to high level politicians.

The other side of this was fraudulent bonds issued from 9/11/91 to 9/13/91 with ten year expiration dates.

So on the one hand you can credit these people for taking down the soviet union, but on the other hand you have things like 9/11 as a coverup of their means of doing it.

The Clinton Foundation operates on these principles.

/pol/: K. Who will Trump's VP pick be?

HLI: Someone from the Pentagon.

/pol/: You are a roleplayer unless you give us hints what agency was McCullough talking about in the hearing.

HLI: The mishandling of classified information is truly a nothingberger as they say. Happens all the time.

If you want to bark up this tree, you should question Comey's assertion that it was careless.

How many billionaires do you know that can't setup a secure server? It was insecure on purpose and that is the tree you should be barking up - why?

/pol/: Finders/keepers?
Safe places to form resistance?
Hope for return to health?
How to save the world?

HLI: Both.
Your mind (given sufficient encoding).
Science.
Science.

/pol/: Is Trump going to be assassinated by Hillary when she wins?

“The Clinton Foundation operates on these principles”
On which principles; the USSR or that which brought it down?

HLI: Doubtful.
That which brought it down

/pol/: Are there questions we're not asking that we should be?

It was intentionally insecure because she was selling SAP's to our enemies. Now how do we prove treason?

HLI: Yes.
Depends on what you hope to accomplish in proving it.

/pol/: This is a line of inquiry I think has merit.

I think it was done this way purposely so that it could be used as a rhetorical quagmire to keep a lot of people bound up in useless arguing over semantics and the minutiae of meaning in words.

I've also always maintained that the CF/server set up was intimately integrated.

The server was set up as a means to let specific information leak and the CF was set up as a means to capitalize on those leaks.

HLI: Yes.

/pol/: So what is the most efficient, effective way to bring down the CF?

I'm talking like when a geologist holds a simple rock hammer, looks over a huge bolder that people have hammering on trying to break for a long time without success, and with the slightest tap in an unlikely, obscure location, overlooked by everyone else, the huge bolder cracks and falls apart.

HLI: It depends on what your goal is in taking down the foundation.
/pol/: Are we facing population culling at the bottom of all this?
What is the timeline for the first biggest global change we will face?
Best way to cheaply ensure I don't become a goy slave?

HLI: This isn't an objective of any serious people, but might be a consequence.
Depends on you more than us.
Think for yourself without making it a problem for others unless you have the ability to defend yourself first.

/pol/: Are you saying that evidence of these fraudulent bond sales was destroyed on 911?

Is cocaine trafficking still something the clintons are into? If so give us a clue to where the money goes, is it laundered through the foundation?

HLI: Yes, yes, partially.

/pol/: Would it be dangerous for the US' stake to spread the info about the Clinton Foundation's too early?
Also, in your opinion, should canada feel threaten by what we're unraveling right now?

HLI: Societal upheaval is always dangerous.

/pol/: “It was insecure on purpose and that is the tree you should be barking up” - why?

As a honeypot right? To spread disinfo to foreign governments? To allow CF donors access to genuine info? Give us more.

HLI: You're clever, anon.

The Clintons always do their shady deeds under cover of state sanction.

Now you know why the FBI can't touch it.

/pol/: Obviously not all of the exchange of information between CF supporters, benefactors and/or operatives and the dregs of this world, such as connections to terrorist funding, are electronic. There have been meetings and other forms of direct social interaction.

Given how big all of this is, how complex, there are bound to be some lower-level people someplace with recordings, video, documents or some form on evidence that could be helpful in exposing the CF.

Is there any investigative effort underway to find such people or forms of evidence? Or is all of this just a big computer search?

HLI: There is no effort within the government to take down the Clintons.

/pol/: 1. Exposing the FULL myriad, tangled web of crimes perpetrated by and through the CF

1. The perpetrators brought to justice, no matter how long the list of names
2. Pulling the charter of the CF, complete dissolution and sale of assets for the public good and victims
3. Making the crimes and punishment of the CF mandatory education in schools as one measure to prevent same or similar from happening again

HLI: I recommend high tech surveillance then.

As an example, why not build yourself some laser microphones and eavesdrop on them?

You should be more willing to take certain strategies out of their playbook. These people regularly take down opposing actors, but never by trolling the internet to build circumstantial cases.

/pol/: If FBI can't get to them, are there other agencies that could?

How about Interpol?

HLI: Interpol is used against people who have turned against the system. This doesn't characterize the Clintons whether you like them or not.

/pol/: You're right, they actually typify the system.

CF/DNC/FEC connections?

HLI: DNC/FEC are small fish, practically irrelevant to the world in any operational sense.

/pol/: “never by trolling the internet to build circumstantial cases.”

There's the futility shill. As predicted.

HLI: What do you estimate as the likelihood of a Clinton indictment on the basis of information you find on the internet?

Very close to zero if not precisely that.

What about if you go and gather actual information in the real world?

Very close to 100% if you do it correctly.

/pol/: “The Clintons always do their shady deeds under cover of state sanction. Now you know why the FBI can't touch it. There is no effort within the government to take down the Clintons.”

In other words, the government basically accepts such "shady deeds," as they have been properly couched within existing law.

Like, Hillary gets 123 back on the table in 2009, shoves it through coincident with her "reset" effort, and thus paves the way for the whole Uranium One boondoggle. "Selling out US resources to Russia became legal right in front of your eyes (even though you did not pay attention), so we did it via a series of maneuvers and made hundreds of millions, fuck you."

So, all this CF shit is merely a matter of one's individual perception of right or wrong, as every deal in Colombia, Haiti ad infinitum was/is in fact legal?

Then what is the point of all this?

HLI: Sort of.

You have an opportunity in that legality doesn't confer legitimacy necessarily, nor can you expect the government to acknowledge such legality.

Going after Clinton requires forcing circumstances similar to the disavowal of a spy.

/pol/: “us”

Can you describe your faction a bit more?

Also, I happen to have the opportunity to pursue insider-dom. Do you recommend it? Where do you think the biggest opportunities for personal gain are over the next five to ten years?

Thanks for taking the time.

HLI: We operate with two key principles:

• the law of the jungle
• the long view

There are a variety of factions in the world. The answers to your questions depend on who you are considering associating with, your own views, and what you seek to accomplish in your life.

/pol/: What is the likelyhood of us exposing the Clinton Foundation?

HLI: 100% if you make an intelligent effort.

Anyone that tells you they haven't done things most of the public would want to hang them over is lying to you.

/pol/: OK, then info dump us with some low tech solutions to these problems. Some anons will pick it up.

HLI: The lower your technological sophistication, the lower on the food chain your targets should be.

It's much harder to get a recording of Clinton than it is to get one of Huma, and much harder to get one of Huma that it is Cooper.

On the other hand, the lower down the food chain you go the more likely they are to say things they shouldn't in less secure environments.

/pol/: I'm already staunchly in support of Trump. All of this corruption has really shaken my political views and I don't really know where I am politically anymore.

You mentioned surveillance. If there was someone who went out to do just that, what places would he go to? Additionally, are any of us in danger for our involvement in this?

HLI: The amount of danger you are in depends on how you go about your work as well as the mechanisms you put in place beforehand to provide disincentives to others to harm you.

--end--