Tags:
  1. econ41

    econ41 Active Member

    Agreed. That 'kick' at the end would look suspicious in any trend graph. Especially in a process such as this one where there is typically an early spurt of interest then tapering off asymptotic to whatever the ultimate near flat line will be.
     
  2. Oystein

    Oystein Active Member

    Less than a day later, I saw that the count (which is updated only infrequently - sometimes 2 or 3 times a day, sometimes there are 2 or 3 days between updates) had increased by another 44 donations / US$ 2,090. They had sent out a newsletter for a third legal activity, which did not come with its own fundraiser and instead reiterated the call to donate for the FBI thingie. Still, hitting 60K at excatly the day they wanted to have 60K is fishy.

    And anyway, the total number of donations now is 1,224, after 25 days. This appears very unrealistic, seeing that the Truth Movement has trouble finding more than 5,000 supporters to sign any petitions, even after years, or joining groups on social media - for free!

    I have been monitoring fundraisers for a long time, and my rule of thumb has always been that donors are 1% the number of petition signers.

    Neither AE911T nor the Lawyers Committee has more than 100,000 supporters, as >1,000 donors would suggest. The Lawyers' "Grand Jury Petition" petition has just surpassed 4,000 signers, after a full year:
    https://www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org/grand-jury-petition-supporters/
    The AE911T petition of course is still only at 26,000 (A&E plus other supporters) - after almost 12 (!) years:
    https://www.ae911truth.org/

    IMO, it is unlikely in the extreme that 5% of those 26,000 AE signatories would receive, read and approve of the Newsletters AND get active to send money - a good $50 per donation on average to boot.

    And this after the previous fundraiser, for the "Grand Hury Petition" activity, generated more than 1,800 donations for a total of over US$ 100,000, between December 10th of last year and February 5th of this year (after which they stopped displaying the results).

    I am more convinced than not that Gage, Harrison and collaborators are pimping the numbers by donating to themselves in some way, or washing someone else's money.


    Another idea that struck me earlier today: These donations go to fund the legal costs of the Lawyers Committee - read: fees for Harrison and the other attorneys of the LC. But they are handled through the website of AE911T. Maybe they do this so the income of the LC stays below thresholds, to avoid increased reporting requirements?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Nada Truther

    Nada Truther Active Member

    Zat a technical term?
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  4. econ41

    econ41 Active Member

    Probably German Code Law - not Common Law because it's not in my 2001 edition of the Australian Legal Dictionary.