Judge Napolitano stated clearly,
“Judge Scalia told him that he was under surveillance of the Obama’s administration. Scalia didn’t like that and probably other members from the Supreme Court had been under surveillance by the intelligence agencies under Obama.”…
Two crucial Obamacare rulings. Gay marriage legalized nationwide — one of the most controversial rulings in recent memory. And if Obama’s White House really did have the Supreme Court under surveillance, Obama could have been inappropriately informed about all of it.
And, as the judge pointed out in the segment, “the use of intelligence data for political purposes is a felony.”
Scalia was talking about it, and he didn’t like it. In Burn Notice, Michael Westin once did a voice over, saying “There are two types of surveillance. One is designed to find things out about you. The other is just designed to be a pain in the ass.” The first is inherently designed to not be seen or noticed. What I interpret Napolitano’s statement to mean is Scalia was getting the second type, in part as intimidation.
Have no doubts, when Scalia told Napolitano, they were listening, and this would have caused Scalia to be labeled a threat who wasn’t keeping his mouth shut. He was telling media figures about it.
At that point, the Cabal who was running things figured Hillary would have won. But if a Supreme Court Justice had started talking about what was going on, all of a sudden it could have become a narrative shift that could not be allowed. Other people might have begun looking around. There is no telling how that would snowball, and who else would get pissed off and promote the narrative.
Obviously there was much about Scalia’s death which was suspicious. The spontaneous and chance aspect of running into a friend in a busy airport, and being invited somewhere he didn’t expect to go. His security being left behind. The place was owned by a Democrat with deep ties to the machine. Scalia was found with a pillow over his head. He was pronounced dead of natural causes over the phone, without an exam. He was cremated immediately.
This only adds to the intrigue, in my opinion.
I mentioned this previously, but when Scalia died I read the police report and noticed a glaring inconsistency in the timeline of events: http://researchteacher.com/texas-sheriffs-report-on-scalia-death-contains-strange-inconsistency/
I called the sheriff who had been on the scene and according to him it was just a mistake. Perhaps, but given the profile of the deceased it’s something you’d think would interest people in the media, if only on the right. For whatever reason I haven’t heard it mentioned elsewhere. Here’s the report: https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/politics/presidio-county-sheriffs-office-report-on-justice-antonin-scalias-death/1968/?tid=a_inl Notice that he says that he arrived at the ranch at 12:35pm, even though he mentions speaking with people on the phone from the ranch at 12:35pm, and the U.S. Marshall Service at 12:44 and 12:51pm, before leaving for the ranch.
Good catch. And interesting the media will ask *no* questions.
The media has turned “the dog that didn’t bark” into a mascot.
Wretched filth.
The one thing that gives me pause is the fact of the pillow over his head. If you murdered Scalia — why leave the pillow over his head? Why not put it back, or put it on the ground or anything else?
No one would be surprised if Scalia just died. He was an overweight, out of shape octogenarian.
I have no satisfactory answer, it seems like an amateur mistake. If Scalia was murdered, there is no way an amateur was sent to do the deed.
To send a message of intimidation: “Yeah, we did it, whaddaya gonna do about it?”
Why would a hitman of the level that would be used to kill such an important target do something as stupid as leaving a pillow over the victim’s head?
Tough to say. A message? He got rushed? Not a pro, and got flustered?
I’d lean toward message, as Scalia was talking to Napolitano, and that lets it be known you keep your mouth shut.