Who's paying PR firms to shill Sandy Hook TWO YEARS & counting?

Really? Like, who would pay for TWO SOLID YEARS to shill Sandy Hook?

That's a pretty long term interest, wouldn't you say? And some pretty deep pockets?

I seriously, seriously doubt they thought they'd have to be paying people in 2015 to sit at those consoles, typing away on GLP. But--they're paying. No one shills for free.

I believe there are truly dedicated individual citizens who remain on this topic because it's important to them. No doubt. We know Sandy Hook is a lie one way or another and we're still here because we care. I really don't think that, on the other side, there are passionate supporters of the official story who have made it their personal goal to defend it, but I guess I'll allow for a small possibility. Why would they need to, though? The official story has won, hands down. What is there to be passionate about? The shills posing as "official-story citizens" tried to create this whole "we will oppose the evil truthers!!" astroturfing meme but obviously that's a sham and no one bought it.

But I feel very, very strongly that Robert Riversong, for example, is an example of someone paid to respond to every Sandy Hook post in his work sphere (and you can tell he is more than fed up with it). There is no question in my mind that he is paid to do this, none. So he's an example of someone that I know in my gut is paid by someone for his efforts.

Paid by WHOM?

Who would give a flying you-know-what two years later?? The public has already bought the official story, the school is torn down, Sedensky et al have gotten away with making a mockery of the justice system, and an apathetic, unhtinking public doesn't give a damn. it's over. So who in God's name feels they need to continue to "guide public opinion" on this topic??

Why on earth do they care what some subsection of the public thinks anyway?

Is there some formula or statistic that shows that if a topic is under discussion by citizens--citizens who for the most part are spinning their wheels in frustration but not getting anywhere legally--that under these conditions, someone who WILL do something about it is statistically likely to read about and do something?

Are there going to be jury trials? Do they think civil suit judges are going to be affected by GLP discussions??

Are they afraid we might slowly work out what really happened, and that the logic of it will be so self-evident that a pesky journalist will actually take notice?

At any rate, someone IS paying someone to shill Sandy Hook. What's kind of chilling to me is that the longer this is true, the more powerful and wealthy the entity paying for the shilling must be.

Who benefits the most from trying to convince people no one died?

I really want to believe that Sandy Hook is just a case of local coverup that snowballed, and I still do think that's the most likely scenario. But what's bothering me lately is that there is at least one scary option on the list of reasons for shilling Sandy Hook two years and counting, and that is if it really was a false flag.

"It was a hoax" was really just a gateway drug to "no one died," and that would benefit anyone conceived of and executed a false flag 12/14/2012. Maybe at the topmost level, or maybe someone like a Bloomberg or worse who decided it was worth slaughtering people to get gun control. If you don't believe me, watch how the false flag threads morphed into the no one died threads. Who benefits? Someone who actually pulled a false flag, that's who.

But it's a little murky, because "no one died" works nicely as away to reduce interest and concern and outrage--and I guess in the end that would benefit any coverup of a crime where people died.

So whether it's Washington trying to cover up a false flag, or an acutely embarrassing foreign terrorist attack, or a privately-conceived "for the greater good" slaughter, or Governor Malloy freaking out about state liability (but why continue to shill now?), or even just Newtown lawyers--the "no one died" meme benefits them all. And, finally, it also befits the Big Ammo/NRA/Vision for a Conservative America/whatever groups.

Because "no one died" means anyone on the above lists is "bad, but not that bad."

So we're left with the aggravating question: Who would pay PR firms good money to still be shilling Sandy Hook for over two years?? Who pays Robert Riversong to come out of hiding every time I say "the ambulances couldn't get in?"

Cui bono? Is it so hard to figure out because there are actually multiple PR firms shilling for multiple reasons?

Somebody somewhere is paying for this, and certainly out of all those people sitting at consoles, one of them must be willing to talk. Maybe we're going at this the wrong way--instead of chasing down the big guys, we need to find the little guys and ask them who the hell is paying them and why. Certainly at least one American has got to be saying to him/herself by now, "What the hell am I doing this for?"