Who Killed Andrew Breitbart?

Just The Facts

Here is what we know:

• At CPAC 2012 Andrew Breitbart, journalist, provocateur, and Tea Party hero announced that he had videos of Obama from his college days:

"I have videos, this election we're going to vet him," Breitbart disclosed to raucous applause. "We are going to vet him from his college days to show you why racial division and class warfare are central to what hope and change was sold in 2008."

"The videos are going to come out, the narrative is going to come out, that Barack Obama met a bunch of silver ponytails in the 1980s, like Bill (Ayers) and Bernadine (Dohrn), who said one day we would have the presidency, and the rest of us slept as they plotted, and they plotted, and they plotted and they oversaw hundreds of millions of dollars in the Annenberg Challenge and they had real money, from real capitalists. Then they became communists. We got to work on that. That is a parenthesis. Barack Obama is a radical, we should not be afraid to say that! Okay? And Barack Obama was launched from Bill and Bernadine's salon. I've been there."

•  Breitbart apparently told Lawrence Sinclair (who alleges Obama engaged in gay sex and cocaine use) "Wait til they see what happens March first."

• On March 1st 2012, walking home from a bar where he met and drank with Authur Sando--an LA Marketing executive--who said he seemed fine:("There were no signs that anything was wrong")--the 43 year old collapsed on the sidewalk and was found by his father-in-law around 12:30 to 1 AM.

• His last written word was a tweet: " I called you a putz cause I thought you werebeing intentionally disingenuous. If not I apologize. @CenLamar @dust92"

• The cause of death was initially described as natural causes--a heart attack--but there will be an official autopsy and it could take weeks.

Who Killed Andrew Breitbart?

There has been no shortage of people and no time wasted in suspecting a hit job. The obvious suspect? Barack Obama--or whoever was behind him. Certainly the narrative that Obama would want Breitbart dead is one even--perhaps especially--Andrew would have endorsed. Andrew Breitbart was (or believed he was) vetting Obama in a way that had never been done before. He had dug up material like this:

A playbill from a performance that really is a "love song" to the community organizer Saul Alinsky (who published the infamous Rules for Radicals -- which is dedicated to Lucifer!). Note at the very bottom right: Sen Baraka [sic] OBAMA--doesn't just attend--but answers questions for the audience after ... on the stage.

That could be damaging, couldn't it? Thus far we have a video released (presumably the first part--one of Breitbart's methods of operation was to release material in stages--this one was shown on PBS some time ago) has been declared a dud by most audiences (it's Obama embracing his former professor Derek Bell--the originator of Critical Race Theory).

From Gawker:

So Andrew Breitbart's belated death-rattlemade its debut last night, and here's what it is: Barack Obama, in 1990, gave a speech saying nice things about a bad man named Derrick Bell. He also hugged the bad man, Derrick Bell. Ipso facto reduction ad absurdum habeas corpus hocus pocus, Barack Obama is a bad man as well. Airtight.

We were told from the CPAC speech that that he had videos and that they showed Obama (perhaps amongst other things) consorting with former Weathermen and them claiming they would someday have the presidency. While Derek Bell and a playbill for a play about Alinsky do work on the "Obama is a radical" narrative they are not that convincing. Tying him to the Weathermen with a stated--on video plan to be president--would be something else.

And would Obama do it? Well, he already assassinated one of his opponents: Al-Awlaki! And, hey, Obama admitted during an interview that stone-cold killer Omar Little is his favorite character from The Wire!* On a far less humorous note, this story suggests that the Obama White House got rattled by Breitbart's expose on Sheirly Sharrod--because, in part, of what Fox News would do with it:

But the emails provide a newly detailed portrait of the panic that beset the USDA and White House as the story gathered steam – panic driven in part by fear of what Fox News would do with it. The emails also show how that panic pushed USDA officials to rush past the partial context that was already embedded in the original video out of worries over how the story would play.

So was Breitbart killed? If so, how--and who ordered it?

Ockham's Razor: Looking At Each Scenario
Let's examine each potential scenario using Ockham's Razor: what must be true for this scenario to be correct -and- what is the risk-level vs. the benefit for each one to Obama?

A few things first: There are several things we need to remember about this set up.

• The Video: If these were taken back in the 90's they were taken on real cameras, not cell phone cameras. At best a camcorder. In other words these videos would have to be set up and not It's-Happening-Now-Let-Me-Get-My-Phone! We must ask ourselves why a group of left-wing terrorists planning on controlling the first black president would film their plans.
• Stopping the Release: Killing Breitbart after he released the videos wouldn't work. In order for the scenario to work the killing would either be retaliation ("You were warned!") or damage control (to stop him from doing things in the future or otherwise containing his actions)--or killing him would have to prevent their release in the first place. That's what we posit here: that there is more material and killing Brietbart has shut down the release.

The New World Order: The Illuminati Killed Breitbart
 In this scenario a power above the White House has Breitbart killed in order to preserve its dominance over the United States--and the world.

The Scenario
Somewhere in old Europe in the halls of real power is an encrypted conference between the Real Kings of the World and the Shadow Government which controls the United States. The men in Europe appear as silhouettes. The men in North America are easily seen, and, above each one, on the screen is a heart-beat or "life-line" indicator-- one that the Illuminati can turn off at any time, killing their minions.

The report is grim: a 'rogue agent' (Andrew) who does not fit into the Total Control Plan has achieved an "inflection point"--the conditions which would cause a radical, unwelcome change in events. He is going to destabilize the puppet (Obama) by the releasing his video. Although it is far from the least favored way of dealing with a situation (they'd much rather 'DSK' their target and have them humiliated and arrested by conventional authorities) this is so far out of control they have only one choice.

• How Do They Kill Him: Satellite Induced Cardiac Infraction. Breitbart is targeted by a "Deep Black Orbital Asset" and he collapses on dead on the sidewalk.
• What About The Tapes: The tapes are overwritten by pulses through the phone lines that create electromagnetic interference in the house that overwrites the real tapes (Obama's initiation at the the Temple of the Puppet Theater--his induction into the Illuminati) with a PBS video of him hugging his professor.
• Who Is Aware Of This: The Illuminati. The Shadow Government. No one else (for a more conventional kill see the next scenario).

What Must Be True For This To Work?
First, there must be a NWO world-spanning conspiracy. I look at this here. That is a lot to swallow.

What Is The Return On Investment / Risk Assessment?
If the NWO is so powerful they can do things like release a clearly faked birth certificate or orchestrate a victory lap for the Superbowl Halftime Show, what is the danger of videos from Obama's college days? Also, why not simply let him fail and then "choose" the next leader?

Conclusion: If the NWO has already won then they don't need to do this. If they haven't, they are not the Illuminati.

The Obama Administration
In this scenario the American government, run by the Tyrant-In-Chief, Obama has Breitbart eliminated using CIA directed assets.

The Scenario
It's 3:00 AM and Obama is on the encrypted line to David Petraeus, Director of the CIA. He's rattled and worried.

Obama: "He's got the sex-and-blow tapes. I can feel it. Dammit! I never should have made those!" 

Petraeus: "I don't--Sir? As you know I'll do anything you want and never talk. What would you like?"

Obama: "Liquidate him. Isn't that what you call it? Terminate him. Just--just kill him."

Petraeus: "As you wish. Just make sure Biden has a pardon ready in case this all goes pear shaped. I'm not going in the freezer with Casey."

• How Do They Kill Him: A Heart Attack Gun: it fires a frozen dart of toxin that feels like a mosquito bite and leaves no trace.  Petraeus gives the order and a nine-man team activates. The first team is a multi-person surveillance squad. It takes three people to keep him "in a box." The second-team is a 2-3 person kill team. The shooter, a driver, and a look-out work together to place the shooter next to him, deliver the toxin, and get him out of there. 
• What About The Tapes:  The final team is a B&E team that goes into the house and replaces the sex-tapes with old PBS footage.
• Who Is Aware Of This: Obama, Petraeus, nine team-members from the 'Civilian Contractor group Executive Outcomes', the team controller. A paper-trail for the Heart Attack Gun (they don't just hand those out).

What Must Be True For This To Work?
Obama must be able to trust David Petraeus with his life. The people involved must not talk. In other words:

1. There must be a team of killers that is in ideological lock-step with whatever administration controls the White House or else they'd refuse if they didn't like the president--they would be, theoretically, willing to kill for Bush--but also willing to kill Breitbart for Obama--hard to find someone who fits both bills.
2. We must assume that either David Petraeus would do this (does not seem likely, does it? Read his bio)  or that Obama is somehow in direct contact with a CIA black-ops team that can get its hands on exotic gear like the Heart Attack Gun without going through official channels. Since Obama just came into the Oval Office 3 years ago either every president gets the kill team in their Welcome-to-the-White-House briefing or something else is going on.

What Is The Return On Investment / Risk Assessment? 
The fewer people involved on the ground, the higher the risk. Trust me on this (I have been trained in Military Intelligence surveillance techniques). If anything goes wrong with this--especially if they can't find the tapes or there were back-ups--they are all "out in the cold." In other words, even if you assume total operational security (no one will talk), the odds of a fumble blowing this are very, very high.

Conclusion: The suggestion that a Heart Attack Gun is in use points the finger at a large and bureaucratic agency that, although it has the core-competency to kill people would involve far too many people to be "tight" (especially using US citizens as the kill team must operate inside the US). It also involves relationships of trust that are difficult if not impossible to swallow (namely: you have to believe Petraeus is willing to murder people for Obama).

The Chicago Machine
In this scenario Obama kind of "does it himself" by calling old contacts back in the corrupt Chicago area an having Organized Crime (or OC, as we call it, eh?) knock off Brietbart.

The Scenario
It's 3:00 AM and Obama is on the phone back to his old people: A corrupt mob boss he often ate dinner with at Bernadine's house.

Obama: "Yo, Sharky--remember how I got rid of all my senatorial opponents for that one election?" 

'Sharkey': "Yeah ... we had them eliminated off the ballot--you ran unopposed. Good times! Good Times!"

Obama: "I need someone else 'eliminated' right now. He's got the tapes of me and Lady Gaga at that 'Anti-Bullying Conference.'"

'Sharkey': "Eliminated as in off the ballot? I don't--"

Obama: "Eliminated as in dead. Get one of Rezko's boys. Tell Tony there's a pardon in it for him end of my second term if I'm smiling."

• How Do They Kill Him: When Breitbart goes to the bar they slip a "mickey" into his drink (maybe it's that MonaVie ad exec guy? Who knows who he really works for). Breitbart dies walking home a few minutes later.
• What About The Tapes:  It was PBS footage all along. He just had a good line on the Gaga stuff.
• Who Is Aware Of This: Obama. The Mob. Whoever put the stuff in the drink.

What Must Be True For This To Work?
Obama must have mob connections. That's ... not a stretch. The problem is the "mickey." If you google "How to chemically induce a heart attack" you will find that there are ways. But there are no good ones and nothing that would stand up to a serious investigation. So we have to assume that either it'll come out with the autopsy or else the mob has a unique and never-before-seen way of killing people.

What Is The Return On Investment / Risk Assessment? 
Consider this: a heart attack for a 43 year old is suspicious. Wouldn't a fake mugging or even a car accident make more sense? Finally, with a limited number of people involved (hit men are not super-assassins: they are often drivers or other mob-boss servants who are (a) loyal and (b) willing to kill for money) the chances of something complex (like getting something in his drink) misfiring are pretty high.

Conclusion: The heart-attack does not jive with the otherwise reasonable Obama-had-his-mob-friends do it scenario (unless poison comes out in the coroner's report). It seems to me that any likely scenario along this line would involve violence.

What Do I Think?
I remember an old Wizard of Id cartoon where the king is told that a building blew up and five terrorist organizations have taken credit for it! The king asks the messenger which one he thinks did it--and the answer is "Whichever one built the boiler."

While the timing is suspicious and the motive is there, I do not think that method of death (chemically induced heart attack) jives with any reasonable suspect (the mob). Let's wait for the autopsy though: you really never do know.

For me the big problem is this: Breitbart didn't behave like a man who thought he had a line on taking down a killer corrupt government. There were no warnings about back-up tapes. There was no sense of personal concern. He was out at night alone. Was he that cocky? Naive? Or was what he had what we've seen? Part of building a narrative that Obama was ... a radical? If he really did have "end it all now" tapes (sex tapes, Illuminati initiation tapes, etc.), the obvious move would be to release them before he could be silenced.

He didn't seem to me like a man who thought he was sitting on dynamite.

* This guy advanced that theory first!