Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Jim Johnson steps down from Obama VP search committee

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 02:14 PM
link   
With the recent discussions on Obama ties to the Bildebergers I found this interesting.

firstread.msnbc.msn.com...




posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 02:28 PM
link   
I am struggling not to infer to much from this development. But nevertheless, perhaps, just maybe, the big money connection wasn't being seen as 'business as usual' after all.



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 02:34 PM
link   
I like this part. I think it speaks volumes.



But this also is a good reminder that what Obama wants to do -- keep lobbyists and corporate types out of his potential administration -- is difficult, since so many supposedly qualified people have ties to corporate boards or lobbying firms. You can't run a government based academics alone.



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 09:22 PM
link   


I couldn't believe I just read this. This is big. I hat to say it, but if his Bilderberg man just jumped ship, I don't think the Captain is going to make it, if you catch my drift.

Now I'm really wondering what Hil told him at their quiet little one on one meeting. Do you think she would have come right out and threatened him?

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


I still think Obama is under their thumb. The resignation to me seems like a red herring. Johnson had plenty of time to influence the VP selection choice, lets see who Obama picks.

I just think that it doesn't make sense that if he truly is against these people, why wouldn't he come out in public and tell the people of the influence the BG's are trying to exert. It makes more sense that the resignation is a ploy to make people think Obama is not connected to these people.



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Grambler
 



It makes more sense that the resignation is a ploy to make people think Obama is not connected to these people.


Do you really think most people know, or even care? I seriously doubt they're trying to court the CT vote. How many people do you know that have ever heard of the Bilderberg's, or would let you take the time to explain it to them?



Johnson had plenty of time to influence the VP selection choice, lets see who Obama picks.


Maybe Johnson told him he was going to have to pick Hillary.



I just think that it doesn't make sense that if he truly is against these people, why wouldn't he come out in public and tell the people of the influence the BG's are trying to exert.


That is answered in three letters... J F K




[edit on 6/11/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


To be honest, I hope your right (not about Obama being in trouble of course). I hope that He did tell them to get bent. I just find it hard to believe that he did. I'm not saying he wanted Johnson out to convince people hes not associated with the BG, I'm saying that McCain pressed him on Johnson having shady Countrywide loans (note that it is suspicious that he didn't mention Bilderberg or Perseus), and thats why the resignation. He wants the average person to think that hes not associated with lobbyists, so thats why the resignation. It seems entirely plausible to me that Johnson just thought he would hurt Obama's chances, so he backed down. I see no evidence of Obama forcing him to because he doesn't want involved with those type of people.

Whatever the reason, we can both agree that Bilderberg is or is at least trying to control both candidates.



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grambler
To be honest, I hope your right (not about Obama being in trouble of course). I hope that He did tell them to get bent. I just find it hard to believe that he did. I'm not saying he wanted Johnson out to convince people hes not associated with the BG, I'm saying that McCain pressed him on Johnson having shady Countrywide loans (note that it is suspicious that he didn't mention Bilderberg or Perseus), and thats why the resignation. He wants the average person to think that hes not associated with lobbyists, so thats why the resignation. It seems entirely plausible to me that Johnson just thought he would hurt Obama's chances, so he backed down. I see no evidence of Obama forcing him to because he doesn't want involved with those type of people.


This is WAY simpler than you guys are making it!

The entire role of Jim Johnson, George Soros, and the rest of the Perseus group was to make sure Hillary wasn't the nominee. Remember this image from the Perseus homepage:


Perseusllc.com

Obama was propped up so that he could vanquish the Medusa.

Once Hillary was held down to the mat and convinced to suspend her campaign and support Obama, Johnson's role was done. They suddenly changed the VP vetting position into a "committee" and added Elder and Kennedy. They released the Countrywide story about Johnson to contrive an excuse for him to step down. He was able to resign without much fanfare because the "committee" was already in place to vet the VP candidates.

The question is this: did they want to make sure Clinton wasn't the nominee because they want Obama to be the next President, or because they want McCain to be the next President?

The answer to this question will be found when the source of the Countrywide story is found. How did the MSM learn about Johnson's Countrywide loan?

[edit on 11-6-2008 by jamie83]



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Grambler
 

Indeed. Good points you raise. Star.



reply to post by jamie83
 

And for you as well. Very insightful.

[edit on 6/11/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 11:43 PM
link   
I just did a search on the Countrywide story.

The best I can tell the story was first published on Friday, June 6, one day after Obama's meeting with Hillary, and one day before Hillary gave her big "let's all support Obama" concession speech.

This is also the day that James Johnson was reportedly attending the Bilderberg conference in Virginia.

The story was first published in the Wall St. Journal. I find it curious that the story was published the very next day after Obama met with Clinton to presumably discuss her possibly being the VP.



posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


I don't know, I still think the evidence the way I presented it is stronger (that probably sounded conceited but it wasn't meant to). Heres the problem I have with your theory: If johnson was only meant to be picked to detroy Hillaries chance of winning the nomination, why did Obama wait to name him until after Hillary had already been beaten (may 23 I think, I'll look for the cite)? Why the need to bring him on at that point, only to come up with a story as a charade a couple of weeks later? Why not just stay behind the scenes seeing as how Hillary had already lost?

To be honest, its a moot point. I agree with you that this has (at least for me) severely hurt Obama's credibility and proved to me that he is not about change. Sadly, McCain is no better as he has accepted tons of contributions from the Bilderbergers, Kissinger and even the Rothchilds themselves just to name a few.



posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 07:54 AM
link   
This is actually pretty interesting. I had stated in another thread that started to tie Obama to Bilderberg that I had actually emailed his campaign.

I had questioned his legitimacy if he was willing to employ people like Johnson who has ties to such immoral organizations as the ones he did. That if he would do this and tie himself to the money he says he opposes then how can we believe him.

Of course I had put a bit more in there in regards to reasons for him being in VA last Wednesday and such while the Bilderberg group was meeting.

I didn't expect a response. However, I got one but it wasn't really one that touched on any of the points I had questioned. It was a pretyped response/speech that he obviously has set up for inquiries. However, the funny thing is that it didn't show up until yesterday.

Here is the response:

"Dear Friend,

Thank you for taking the time to write to me. Your interest in my candidacy and participation in the electoral process is important to me and will help shape the future of the country.

Since voting began earlier this year, the volume of mail we are receiving has exceeded all expectations. I have been impressed with the diversity and depth of the comments and questions I receive, most of which underscore the significant challenges the next president will face. And I have appreciated the candid observations about my campaign and policy positions.

At the core, the Democratic primary contest and the 2008 general election are about national priorities and national values. The 2008 elections will not only be a referendum on George W. Bush's agenda over the past 8 years; they will also be about who the American people believe has the judgment to chart a new course and draw the nation together in pursuit of its common purpose.

President Bush stands behind his decisions to stay the course in Iraq, pursue a "go-it-alone" foreign policy, and rely on tax cuts for the wealthiest among us to strengthen the economy and improve the lives of working Americans. He is unapologetic about allowing industry executives and lobbyists to write government policy or injecting politics into the decisions of federal prosecutors.

I hold an alternate vision – one that invests in education, job creation and the environment; seeks to break the hold that oil companies and foreign producers have on our economy through conservation and the development and use of renewable sources of energy; acknowledges the importance of fundamental civil liberties to our society; preserves the integrity of Social Security and Medicare; reforms our social contract so that Americans enjoy health and pension security in the global economy; and insists that the government live within its means and reduce the national debt. I am running for president to build a national consensus behind strengthening the economy, improving the quality of life for all Americans, including the most vulnerable among us, unleashing the creative energy of
American ingenuity to build a 21st century economy, restoring America's reputation and leadership in the world, and defeating the forces of terror.

Some pundits, and my opponents, like to suggest that my three years in the United States Senate are a liability for my campaign. Three years may not be a long time, but I can assure you it is long enough to know that things in Washington must change. That is why I am running my campaign out of Chicago, not Washington, D.C., and concentrating on meeting with and listening to people who live outside our nation's capital. And that is why I believe of all the candidates running I will be best able to break the longstanding grip that vested interests and their lobbyists have had on the policy making process in Washington.

I have been gratified by the amount of grassroots interest my campaign has generated. As I travel the country, my campaign headquarters is receiving thousands of personal messages a week from people like you. This volume of mail reflects the importance individual citizens place on this election. Although I am unable to address each of the concerns raised in these communications individually, you can be assured that collectively they are helping shape my vision of where our country should go.

Again, thank you for writing, and for voting.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama"



posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by dariousg

"Some pundits, and my opponents, like to suggest that my three years in the United States Senate are a liability for my campaign. Three years may not be a long time, but I can assure you it is long enough to know that things in Washington must change. That is why I am running my campaign out of Chicago, not Washington, D.C., and concentrating on meeting with and listening to people who live outside our nation's capital. And that is why I believe of all the candidates running I will be best able to break the longstanding grip that vested interests and their lobbyists have had on the policy making process in Washington."



The more I learn about Obama, the more transparently disingenuous his campaign appears. His campaign is being managed by the most connected Washington insiders there are, and yet he can send out this email?

Here is a quote from Plouff and Axelrod's company website:


AKP&D Message and Media has worked for clients at every level of politics – from candidates for U.S. President to governors, State Supreme Court Justices, Senators, Congressmen and Mayors. We've helped win races across the country – from New England to California and everywhere in between.


So these are the guys running the campaign and Obama tries to portray he's running an "Washington outsider" campaign because their main offices are in New York and Chicago?

The ironic (and disgusting) part is that it's Plouff and Axelrod, two well-connected political insiders, who created the message that Obama isn't using political insiders.

Are they really counting on the people who support Obama being that stupid?



posted on Jun, 12 2008 @ 10:22 AM
link   
I'm afraid I am beginning to lean more towards your stance on this. I always try to keep my personal feelings out of these type of discussions but I feel like we are all being mislead big time yet again. That was another point I had made in my email which was not addressed at all. I stated that I fear for the people that are following him because they cannot take another betrayal. We are on the brink of systematic collapse of this government. It will be something that will take many lives and years to rebuild. People are not going to sit idly by anymore to have their leaders lie to their faces while they live the high life. It's not going to be accepted.



posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 12:04 AM
link   
I think johnson resigned because he was no longer needed, they already picked the VP, who may end up becoming president...









 
2

log in

join