…. and people ask me: why not try to engage the guys on “our team”?…. 

As you will see, I have actually tried not to write this.   However, it must be done.
Most of you are now aware for some reason a journalist named Lee Stranahan, representing the Andrew Breitbart media community, took occasion yesterday to attack The Conservative Tree House in general, and myself particularly.
lee stranahan
Stranahan used his Twitter feed yesterday to announce his intentions, starting around 9:30 am on Sunday August 25th.
The actual construct of the slander began early in the morning….


…..then increased throughout the day, and culminated in his airing a radio broadcast with Ryan Julison, the Trayvon Martin family Public Relations Spokesperson and Media consultant, joining Stranahan for the show.
What transpired, and the truth behind the backstory -which drove the attack- is quite alarming.  It also reflects just how vulnerable the media and journalists are to selling Media Consultant storylines and becoming willful accomplices to fraud.
Their promotion of the fraud makes them willful accomplices.
Ryan Julison -with-Matt-Lauer-and-Jones-familyIn March/April of 2012 we identified the man behind the Trayvon Martin narrative, Ryan Julison.    Julison was/is the person responsible for providing the innacurate representation of Trayvon Martin as a 12-year-old child on the way to the store for skittles and Ice-Tea.
Julison is also the person responsible for using “race” as the media-hook to attract attention on behalf of his clients, Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton.
We have written several follow-up articles since we first identified the dangerous race-based narrative that Ryan was selling to the media.
The latest thread was a summary of violent attacks against white people, as a consequence of the false narrative he successfully sold into the broader psyche of the consuming public.
This sunlight summary again drew Julison’s attention.   Only this time he reached out to faux-conservative Lee Stranahan to assist his cause.
According to Stranahan’s recent admission Julison called him yesterday (Sunday 8/25/12) just after Lee woke up.   Julison asked Lee for help in pushing back against the sunlight surrounding him.
Apparently Stranahan was more than willing to assist.
Lee and Ryan have a previous relationship connected by the Pigford scandal.   Julison was the hired media consultant who’s job it was to create public awareness for the Pigford II settlement.    Stranahan was covering the fraud within the settlement.   Hence, they became associated.
The same Lee Stranahan having recently opined all manner of apologist intent behind the poor misunderstood Marxist Dream Defenders who were occupying the governors mansion in Tallahassee, Florida.


The same Lee Stranahan who previously tweeted about his hatred toward conservative Bill Whittle:

” @Stranahan: Seriously, if I see that Whittle asshole the conservative world may suffer another loss “

…. Nice guy huh?
By 9:30am Stranaham was on his twitter feed proclaiming to his followers that he was going to “call out a blogger” [us] on behalf of his friend Ryan Julison.


He made sure to tweet about his broadcast for several hours prior to airing it.
here – and here – and here – and here – and here – and here and, well, you get the picture. He was selling it hard.
Before going further I would strongly urge you to listen to the broadcast which is available here:  https://href.li/?https://www.blogtalkradio.com/stranahan/2013/08/25/blogging-vs-bullying-thelastrefuge2-goes-way-too-far  Because what was said upon that show, on behalf of Ryan Julison was propaganda in the extreme.
Stranahan, who self proclaims all manner of journalistic integrity, told his audience he had previously invited us/me to his show.   That’s a lie, and we will outline evidence thereof.
Stranahan also opined that I had threatened harm against his liberally minded friend Julison, even attributing words to me that never exist. Absolute lies.
Unfortunately, we had no idea Lee Stranahan was intending to attack us, because the only advanced notice was given to his twitter followers. However, at 12:32pm, shortly before his show aired, he did send the following email:
—–Original Message—–
From: “Lee Stranahan”
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2013 12:32pm
To: [email protected]
Subject: What is that article on Pigford / Trayvon connection
You guys have done a lot of good work in the past.
This article jumps the shark, completely.
You’re not only factually incorrect about Julianson and the work he did on both cases — but you DOX him?
You’re adopting the bullying of Anonymous.
Worst of all, you’re doing it with Andrew Breitbart’s picture on the masthead.
Andrew would have HATED this. He hated bullying.
Please pull down that article.
————————————
Do you see any mention of a radio broadcast? Do you see any invitation? Do you see anything which would support his claims on his radio show?
In addition, and not that it matters, we don’t check email every minute of the day. But even if we had checked there is nothing there in that email to support a request, a follow-up, or any indication of what he was about to do with Ryan on his show. Nothing.
The article he is discussing is THIS ONE. Most of which is a reprint below the introduction as outlined in the “April 2012” citation within the construct.
So at this point let me just copy and paste the entire construct of the communication which stemmed forth AFTER we became aware of what was taking place. It was shortly before 5pm.
All e-mails are copied in their entirety for reader context. Again, starting with the first:
—–Original Message—–
From: “Lee Stranahan”
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2013 12:32pm
To: [email protected]
Subject: What is that article on Pigford / Trayvon connection
You guys have done a lot of good work in the past.
This article jumps the shark, completely.
You’re not only factually incorrect about Julianson and the work he did on both cases — but you DOX him?
You’re adopting the bullying of Anonymous.
Worst of all, you’re doing it with Andrew Breitbart’s picture on the masthead.
Andrew would have HATED this. He hated bullying.
Please pull down that article.
————————————

We Replied:

On Aug 25, 2013, at 4:26 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Lee, There is nothing factually incorrect, and no-one is “doxed”.
The article is self-evident, cited, and is one of several we have posted over the course of a year and a half – having actually contacted Julison via email and posted his responses, numerous times previous. Try a site search “Ryan Julison” for the full backstory.
We also have previously shared audio interview with Ryan Julison and all the Martin Family attorney’s which outline the exact framing of the article itself. In their own words.
It appears the sunlight is the problem. AND you are jumping to conclusions.
The article merely copies the advertised contact information Julison has outlined on his website and facebook.
If you wish to challenge the information within the outlined discussion thread, you are, like all others, quite able to do so.
Warmest Regards.
———————-

Which led to this reply from Stranaham

—–Original Message—–
From: “Lee Stranahan”
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2013 7:29pm
To: “[email protected]”
Subject: Re: What is that article on Pigford / Trayvon connection
Is a cowardly act to incite threats against somebody, post their personal information and to do it anonymously if you have done.
Be a man.
Sent from my iPhone
—————————

Incite threats? What the heck is he talking about? So we responded:

On Aug 25, 2013, at 9:02 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Really?
In your opinion it is less than cowardly to send an email at 12:32pm EST, then proclaim on your broadcast that you invited a reply and did not get one.
Your manipulative constitution speaks volumes to your character. Is Ryan Julison really the place you wish to plant the flag of your association?
Hang around a one-legged man long enough, and you are going to start limping.
The vulgarities you expressed, and the vitriol you spewed, shows far more about your character than ours.
However, giving you the benefit of emotional response, and a profound lack of fact-checking, combined with an undisclosed association with Mr. Julison, I would suggest you consider a mea-culpa lest you lose what credibility you may have.
The truth is painful when you are working against it. And I would remind you, we have audio files of Julison’s media interviews (which we have previously shared) where he uses the Race of both George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin to frame his racist media sales pitch.
It is however profoundly ironic when you use the word “incite” to protest our distribution of fact – yet protect, arguably, a person who has incited more violence than any other entity in the past 10 years, which the article you rail against clearly is based upon.
The TRUTH has no agenda.
Warmest regards.
—————————————

Which drew the following retort, again from Stranahan; and for some reason going in another direction completely.

You’ll notice his guy, Ryan Julison, is now no-where in his reply:

—–Original Message—–
From: “Lee Stranahan”
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2013 11:52pm
To: “[email protected]”
Subject: Re: What is that article on Pigford / Trayvon connection
Did you ever correct or retract your ID of DeeDee?
You are a wannabe. You post pictures of Breitbart whereas I knew him and had his highest respect. Breitbart has also been known to curse at fools.
You are such a bad ‘journalist’, you don’t understand how bad you are. You don’t have a story there: you have accusations and incitement.
Sent from my iPhone
————————–

Well setting aside the fact we have never claimed to be journalists, nor do we wannabe – we are a discussion and research opinion blog. But ok, whatever…. guess we’re bound to go off on a snipe hunt now.

But we still have no clue where this is all coming from, so we replied:

————————-
On Aug 26, 2013, at 12:37 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Speaking of accusations and incitement.
Exactly when did you invite anyone from this website to participate in your broadcast?
You claimed as such on your show. Will you now correct that falsehood?
You also made many other accusations, none of which are based on any fact….. I think you even said I had personally threatened Mr. Julison. Can you provide any evidence of that?
If you want to put your credibility out there for review….
Think about what you are doing here Lee. Because this is probably not going to work out in your best interest; And beside, why would you write:
@Stranahan: Seriously, if I see that Whittle asshole the conservative world may suffer another loss
Would that not be considered a “threat”?
I’m thinking Bill Whittle is held in higher regard than yourself. Then again, I digress…
Warmest regards.
——————————-

Stranahan Responded:

—–Original Message—–
From: “Lee Stranahan”
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 1:56am
To: “[email protected]”
Subject: Re: What is that article on Pigford / Trayvon connection
Whittle took the occasion of my friend’s death to do a commentary claiming to speak for Andrew. Not his finest moment. That wasn’t a threat: it was a pissed off comment. Duh.
I said on the show anyone was invited to call in, then referred back to it.
You’re invited to do a full half hour, anytime you want. Tell me when to schedule you.
Sent from my iPhone
———————————

Oh, so that’s how it works. You go on the air, and tell listeners anyone is invited to call in, then claim you invited our opinion.

Is that really how journalism works?

Gee, no wonder we ain’t journalist types. Go figure.

So, apparently Stranahan just wanted to pick on someone he did not expect to fight back or question his attack – yet calls us “bullies”…. huh? So, with diligent pause, we reply:

———————————
On Aug 26, 2013, at 1:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Lee, are you sure you want to do this? I mean, get into a slugfest on behalf of Ryan Julison?
Exactly when did you invite anyone from this website to participate in your broadcast?
You claimed as such on your show. Will you now correct that falsehood?
You sure?
You got anyone you might want to check with first?
Also, can we copy and download to u-tube format your radio broadcast?
I think the CTH readers and subscribers would enjoy hearing your perspective. I’ve heard it described as a full frontal attack. Which is fine with me….
After all, I’m sure you’ve done your research and know our little collective discussion blog are but mere fleas compared to a man of your stature.
Warmest best.
———————————

Mr. Stranahan then replied:

—–Original Message—–
From: “Lee Stranahan”
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 2:44am
To: “[email protected]”
Subject: Re: What is that article on Pigford / Trayvon connection
First, if you are trying to intimidate me–and you clearly are trying–you aren’t.
Second, no I don’t really WANT to do this.
We’re on the same side.
I think you crossed a line. That’s my opinion.
I think you could’ve made your point without posting RJ’s phone numbers.
I don’t think you could should approve comments about being happy if he gets killed.
I asked you two times about the DeeDee story and you’ve still not responded.
And no, you don’t have my permission to excerpt my blog talk radio show but feel free to link to it.
Or- and this is my preference – let’s figure something out we can come to some agreement because as I said we are on the same side. I don’t feel like going to war on this and I have better stuff to do. I’m sure you do as well.
Sent from my iPhone
———————————

I think around this point Mr. Stranahan had that little twitch some people can get when they are trying to reconcile the unreconcilable, and simultaneously recognizing what they have just exposed themselves to.

That’s what it appeared to be when we replied:

—–Original Message—–
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 3:12am
To: “Lee Stranahan”
Subject: Re: What is that article on Pigford / Trayvon connection
No intimidation implied. Merely asking if you have thought this through, best interests n all.
No lines crossed by us. Perhaps differing opinions, yes.

But you have taken it a bit further than that, no?

Mr. Julison, who has been pictured standing with the New Black Panthers, while handing out: “Reward – wanted dead or alive $10,000 flyers” at Fort Mellon Park, on March 22nd, 2012, (which we have copies of) has also been recorded on radio broadcast using race as the “hook” (his own self described word) to bait the media into a successful narrative in March / April and May 2012.
The affect of which might be considered an opinion – but generally, those of intellectual honesty, would align with my presentation. That narrative spawned the intended consequence of violence amid the Professional Black Grievance industry. Said violence continues today.
The contact information was/is from his own website. It was copied to the post in question, because Mr. Julison has a remarked propensity to take down his site sporadically depending on the TM news cycle. I believe it to be merely scrubbing and sunlight avoidance. But I digress…
Regarding “DeeDee”, as the article you appear to have read gives you full credit for knowing more about the Pigford fiasco than I would ever fathom; So too, I can assure you, is my knowledge of the construct in the Trayvon Martin case.
The Trayvn “DeeDee” you cite, is the DeeDee as described by Benjamin Crump and Matt Guttman, of 3/19/12. That person, described as 16-years-old, girlfriend, at Krop High School, was accurate. The distinction, which many conflate, comes from the Rachel Jeantel witness #8, who matched none of those previous identifying characteristics. The reason forwit is far more challenging to explain than in one email exchange.
Suffice to say no retraction is needed, because no erroneous id was made. We correctly identified the person of which they were talking – and Guttman interviewed on two additional occasions. You may want to go back and research that consideration. It was not Ms. Jeantel.
Regarding comments, the site comments post automatically. Once a person has their first comment approved the rest do not require approval. However, as with this example you cite, it was moderated by an admin as soon as noted, with a correction – which you casually seemed to overlook as you gave ME credit with it’s wording. tsk tsk…. again, I digress.
I believe this has addressed your issues and queries.
However, perhaps you would indulge a question from me:

Did Ryan Contact you, or did YOU contact Ryan regarding the construct of your intended disparagements of 8/25/13 ?

How did you become aware of the article which has drawn so much of your energy and criticism?

We will direct as many people as possible to listen to your broadcast. And I look forward to your corrections in that regard.
But if, however, you do not retract, and you choose to engage in conflict over this….. well, ok then. Your call.
Warmest regards.
—————————-

Then I guess everyone went to bed. So today after not getting a response to the question about whether he contacted Ryan, or whether Ryan contacted him; we sent a follow up.

On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 2:02 PM, wrote:
Did Ryan Contact you, or did YOU contact Ryan regarding the construct of your intended disparagements of 8/25/13 ?
How did you become aware of the article which has drawn so much of your energy and criticism?
Regards.
———————–

And then IT ALL COMES TOGETHER ! As Stranahan replied:

—–Original Message—–
From: “Lee Stranahan”
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 3:52pm
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: What is that article on Pigford / Trayvon connection
He contacted me because he knew I’d been harassed before. We talked for about 3 minutes since I just was getting up.
Then I read the piece on the Treehouse, which I found disturbing for the reasons I’ve stated…including posting his phone numbers and IP address, which is doxing someone; look up the term doxing if you’re not clear on it. It’s the release of personal information.
Then I asked Ryan if he’d do the radio show, but I planned to do it either with or without him. I sent him the show info but didn’t hear from him until he called in…and I wasn’t sure he’d call in.
Your answer on DeeDee doesn’t make sense; “DeeDee” turned out to be Rachel Jeantel.
You were 100% wrong: your page doesn’t mention Rachel Jentel one time.
Your refusal to admit this speaks volumes.
————————-

So Ryan Julison called his guy Lee Stranahan, because the sunlight was reaching too far under his bridge.

Then, together, they decided to use the Sunday Radio broadcast to attack us and me, and manipulate the narrative to make it look like, us and me, were avoiding the fight they had set up – that we didn’t know about, and were unable to attend.

You getting this?

This is Lee Stranahan – The self-proclaimed bastion of all things journalistic and integrity filled. Yeah, we were a little shocked too.

Not at Stranahan himself per se’, because we consider him more along the ideological lines of MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough;  we were surprised because this insufferably non-integrity filled construct of doing something, would be used, and then defended, under the auspices of journalism.

Is this really how the Breitbart banner works?

Have the rabid-liberals been right all along?

Is this the journalistic standard of the Breitbart empire? Really?

So hoping to avoid this writing I sent yet another request for a simple apology:

—————————–
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 3:25 PM, wrote:
I thought so.
Are you willing to publically apologize, using the same manner, force, media application and method, you used in your attack against me?
You stated we were asked to participate in your radio show. This is a lie. How would we even know the show was taking place?
You stated “I” threatened Ryan Julison. This is a lie. No such threat has ever taken place.
We do not consider ourselves journalists, we are average, everyday people who runs a research/discussion blog. You however, do call yourself a journalist.
I hope you can imagine what it will look like, to readers and to your peers, to see the construct of your Sunday collaborative creation with Julison, which led to your broadcast, on full display…..
The choice is yours.
I am simply asking you for a public apology for the lies, delivered with the same veracity as they were promoted.
Thank you in advance.
Warmest regards.
——————————

Which rec’d the following reply:

Re: What is that article on Pigford / Trayvon connection
From: Lee StranahanAdd to Contacts
Sent: Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 4:31 pm
To: [email protected]
Cc:
To quote my friend, “Apologize…FOR WHAT?”
Where did I say you asked to participate, specifically?
Where did I say you threatened Julison?
Your credibility is at issue, not mine.
————————

And that’s where this story ends. Maybe….

…..You see, a liberal media consultant, with a lot to hide from, calls a “conservative” journalist and enlists his help. The “conservative” agrees to attack the sunlight that makes his liberal friend uncomfortable. The journalist works with the liberal to make it look like opportunities for response were provided – they were not. Then works diligently to undermine the integrity of the righteous sunlight, by any means possible – including lies; And then when challenged thinks he can just go back to looking for his next victim.
Now that you know…..
Baby Newt
….. are you guys ok with that?

Posted in BGI - Black Grievance Industry, Conspiracy ?, Cultural Marxism, Decepticons, Dem Hypocrisy, George Zimmerman Open Thread, media bias, Polar Bear Hunting, Police action, Political correctness/cultural marxism, Ryan Julison, Trayvon Martin, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized, Zimmerman Post Trial Threads
Share
more