Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

335

Shareblue has taken a mandate from the Democratic Party to influence discussion on the internet. Many "shills" are paid by Shareblue.

So it's interesting to see an email giving talking points on how to handle the discussion on Epstein! (files.catbox.moe)

NEW: Far-Left Panic Over Epstein’s “Suicide” – Shareblue Dispatches Urgent Talking Points For On-Line Activists (theconservativetreehouse.com)

http://archive.is/4sIt4

Good to note: “ROLCON” refers to role playing as a conservative.

Full David Brock Confidential Memo On Fighting Trump (scribd.com)

**Shareblue has taken a mandate from the Democratic Party to influence discussion on the internet. Many "shills" are paid by Shareblue.** **So it's interesting to see an [email giving talking points on how to handle the discussion on Epstein!](https://files.catbox.moe/797g4a.jpg)** *** **[NEW: Far-Left Panic Over Epstein’s “Suicide” – Shareblue Dispatches Urgent Talking Points For On-Line Activists](https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/08/10/far-left-panic-over-epsteins-suicide-shareblue-dispatches-urgent-talking-points-for-on-line-activists/comment-page-2/)** http://archive.is/4sIt4 **Good to note: “ROLCON” refers to role playing as a conservative.** *** **[Full David Brock Confidential Memo On Fighting Trump](https://www.scribd.com/document/337535680/Full-David-Brock-Confidential-Memo-On-Fighting-Trump#from_embed)**

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (19).
[–] • 0 pt

I'm not trying to redact. I'm letting @AOU know because he's admin and this is about Shareblue. I posted it on Voat as well.

I should also ping @PMYB2 to see this.

[–] • 0 pt

I never said you redacted.

Just noted that it was redacted.

Are you the primary source for the email ? Then you did redact. Kinda hard not to say that its not redacted.

[–] • 0 pt

Oh, I was confused by what you meant. Sorry. No, it's not my email.

[–] • 0 pt

Gotcha .. well you can only show what you can show.

But be wary of redacted documents. It maybe that the receiver wanted to hide his own email meta data. I don't know, the redaction is not explained so I'm not going to just assume why. Never assume. I would think if it was a single email recipient and he wanted to hide his ID from the sender then he would have redacted the time too as the recipient would have no idea if that was the only email the guy sent out at that minute or not and the time may ID him.