Thomas Graves

The West? Oh, okay, Cliff. Hmm. When did Litzi Friedmann recruit Philby? 1934 or so? And wasn't it Arnold Deutch who recruited Burgess, Maclean, et. al. at Cambridge? And quite early on, too? Oh yeah, and there was that Roger Hollis fellow at Oxford (but probably recruited by Sorge in China back in the day) ..... Just to name a few in your The (Early) West. But as regards the Soviets/Russians "Main Enemy" (the good old U.S.A.) ... uhh ... "Operation Trust" (shortly followed by other "active measures" counterintelligence operations) was launched 20 years before even the Office of Security Services' predecessor, the Office of the Coordination of Information, was founded, Cliff. And the Soviets were lightyears ahead of us in waging highly successful "strategic deception" (aka "operational deception") counterintelligence ops (e.g., 1958 "Operation Boomerang," mentioned above, and Yuri Nosenko's January 1964 "defection" to the U.S.). All in all, the Soviets/Russians had a tremendous head start on our intelligence services and, generally speaking, have run circles around the OSS/CIA and whatever from day one. Of course, the fact that during much of that time our FBI was run by a director who was very territorial, paranoiac, envious, vain, and gullible (e.g., his reliance on Fedora and Polyakov and his disbelieving of pre mid-1964 Golitsyn) didn't help much. Sounds as though you need to read Bagley's "Spy Wars" and "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," and Riebling's "Wedge," Cliff. -- T.G.

Cliff, What I think you and a lot of other people need to realize is that Soviet/Russian "active measures" (beginning with "Operation Trust" in 1921) have been quite skillfully waged against the West (and against us, in particular, since around 1935, iirc) for over ninety years now, and that their "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations have been artfully interwoven with them since 1958 (i.e., with "Operation Boomerang," the dispatching of the fake double agent Polyakov to the U.S.). What you will hopefully also come to eventually realize are the cumulative deleterious effects that these hydra-headed Soviet/Russian counterintelligence operations have had on our body politic and our society in general (e.g., the rise of legions of Tin Foil Hat Wearing Conspiracy Theorists, the concomitant loss of confidence in our institutions, the demise of fact-checking with reputable sources, the cynicism, "The Horror, The Horror," the hearts of darkness if you will, etc, etc), all magically working together in a synergistic sort-of-way to, among other things, create opportunistic situations to be taken advantage of. As evidenced, for example, by the "fruition" of Trump's being installed as a result of ... gasp ... the FSB/GRU - influenced "vote" on November 8, and, of course, the Electoral College's not doing its Constitution-required job to protect us from having a madman/potential tyrant become our president through the election process. -- T.G.

It's all good, Comrade. Remember to put the vodka in.

Cliff, Thanks for your reply, but I thought I'd directed the question and the observation to Paul Brancato. Maybe I pushed the wrong button (i.e., yours), or something. My bad. -- T.G.

So, Paul, you don't think the Russian's hacking of DNC's and Podesta's emails (and giving them to Putin's lackey Assange to distribute), and the divisive fake news and "ads" they placed on social media, and the way they targeted individual viewers of social media with said ads and fake news, etc, etc, etc, had much of an effect in, first, making sure that Hillary didn't win, and second, when they realized it was actually do-able, "pivoting" away from "Anyone But Clinton" to actively trying to help Russian mobbed-up, blackmail-able Trump win? If not, I guess you still don't understand the concept of "active measures" and "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations. (No, Paul, waged against us not by your bugbear, the evil, evil CIA, but by the Soviets/Russians for a very long time, indeed, now...) Sad. Very sad. -- T.G.

Paul, What do you mean, "Russia is a diversion"? -- T.G.

Cliff, I think it's been shown that the original overall plan behind all of the "active measures" employed by the Ruskies before the election was B&D, but was later switched to C ("vote Trump"). Incorporating "anyone but Hillary" all along, of course. -- T.G.

It had kind of a synergistic effect, then, huh. What did the Ruskies think that "information," if leaked to the public before the election (by someone like Assange) would encourage Americans in authority and / or Americans in general, to do? Vote for Clinton? Vote for anyone but Clinton? Vote for a specific person, but not for Clinton? Not vote at all? -- T.G.

Ron, James' implicit belief that Hiss was not a spy, Nosenko was a true defector, and that U.S. intel wasn't really penetrated until Hanssen and Ames came along in 1979 and 1985, respectively, is "unrelated fluff" in your opinion? Even though he does tout the buying and reading of his book as one of the best ways to understand modern America? -- T.G.

Why did the FSB "provide" the FBI with that fake memo, Cliff? -- T.G.

You're crackin' me up, Cliff. Regarding your assertion that "traitor" Comey "knew they were duplicates," or some such thing, I guess you're right, but what does that matter given the context of the situation? You know, having received a Trojan Horse from the FSB, that sort of thing? Then-FBI Director James Comey knew that a critical piece of information relating to the investigation into Hillary Clinton's email was fake -- created by Russian intelligence -- but he feared that if it became public it would undermine the probe and the Justice Department itself, according to multiple officials with knowledge of the process. As a result, Comey acted unilaterally last summer to publicly declare the investigation over -- without consulting then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch -- while at the same time stating that Clinton had been "extremely careless" in her handling of classified information. His press conference caused a firestorm of controversy and drew criticism from both Democrats and Republicans. Comey's actions based on what he knew was Russian disinformation offer a stark example of the way Russian interference impacted the decisions of the highest-level US officials during the 2016 campaign. The Washington Post reported Wednesday that this Russian intelligence was unreliable. US officials now tell CNN that Comey and FBI officials actually knew early on that this intelligence was indeed false. In fact, acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe went to Capitol Hill Thursday to push back on the notion that the FBI was duped, according to a source familiar with a meeting McCabe had with members of the Senate intelligence committee. ... The Russian intelligence at issue purported to show that then-Attorney General Lynch had been compromised in the Clinton investigation. The intelligence described emails between then-Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and a political operative suggesting that Lynch would make the FBI investigation of Clinton go away. In classified sessions with members of Congress several months ago, Comey described those emails in the Russian claim and expressed his concern that this Russian information could "drop" and that would undermine the Clinton investigation and the Justice Department in general, according to one government official. Still, Comey did not let on to lawmakers that there were doubts about the veracity of the intelligence, according to sources familiar with the briefings. It is unclear why Comey was not more forthcoming in a classified setting. Sources close to Comey tell CNN he felt that it didn't matter if the information was accurate, because his big fear was that if the Russians released the information publicly, there would be no way for law enforcement and intelligence officials to discredit it without burning intelligence sources and methods. There were other factors behind Comey's decision, sources say. ... In at least one classified session, Comey cited that intelligence as the primary reason he took the unusual step of publicly announcing the end of the Clinton email probe. In that briefing, Comey did not even mention the other reason he gave in public testimony for acting independently of the Justice Department -- that Lynch was compromised because Bill Clinton boarded her plane and spoke to her during the investigation, these sources told CNN. Multiple US officials tell CNN that to this day Russia is trying to spread false information in the US -- through elected officials and American intelligence and law enforcement operatives -- in order to cloud and confuse ongoing investigations. -- CNN "Politics" May 26, 2017

Cliff, And if image-conscious and "closet" anti-Trump Comey hadn't reopened the investigation based on the Weiner Dog "revelations," how would that have reflected on Comey, the FBI, and the DOJ if Clinton had won? -- T.G.

James, Sorry to hurt your feelings, but I wasn't talking about your book. As I said in an earlier post, I'm going to wait for the City of San Diego to buy one copy to be shared among its twenty-or-so libraries, read it, and then write a very "glowing" review of it on Amazon. Instead, I was talking about how people could learn about modern America. Because you said something about that in your post. And as to my allegedly "not knowing what I'm talking about," I distinctly remember your saying something along those lines regarding Rudolf Hess a couple months ago, and how, when I showed that it's now commonly accepted by historians, including our own John Simkin, that Hess was indeed a spy for the Ruskies, you never came back to that thread. Remember? And Nosenko? After listening to John Newman's recent "Spy Wars" presentation, do you still think the guy who said KGB didn't interview Oswald was himself a true defector? Talk about not understanding anything. -- T.G.

Right, Comey was fooled by the Ruskies, and by cancelling the investigation in July, unintentionally paved the way for Weiner Dog's revelations' blowing up Clinton's campaign when he, Comey, had to reopen the investigation so close to the election ... gasp ... due to said revelations. -- T.G.

Cliff, Duplicates of what? That "memo" with the text of a fake a e-mail in it (which fooled Comey into thinking that Lynch was going to go easy on Hillary) was given as a "gift" to the FBI by the FSB. Yes, or no? -- TG

Cliff, Only one thing you got wrong. It was Vladimir Putin and Julian Assange who installed Trump, not the FBI. You are aware, aren't you, that Comey closed down the first investigation of Hillary's e-mails based on a bogus memo provided to him by the FSB? Which made his having to open it up again a week or two before the election (based on "revelations" in the Weiner Dog Case) particularly disastrous for her? Oh yes, and there was that thing with Cozy Bear, and Fancy Bear, and Guccifer 2.0 and the DNC's and Podesta's e-mails, wasn't there. Oh yeah, and all those divisive ads paid for by mysterious Russians on social media! And, OMG, those legions of professional trolls in Saint Petersburg. (Russia, Cliff, not Florida. Russia.) -- T.G.

Paul, Wow, that's totally rad, dude. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.) -- T.G.

Ok. So he drove, and he was the head of SDECE for the Western Hemisphere. But the crux of the question was and still is: How do you know he fled (or whatever you want to call it) to Mexico right after the assassination? Mangold tell you? If so, anybody else? -- T.G.

But Nosenko said KGB didn't even interview Oswald, right? How could John Newman be so gosh darned wrong when he claims (as he did during his recent presentation in San Francisco) that KGB not only interviewed him, but that they did it twice? (sarcasm) -- T.G.

okay EDIT ALERT: Is it okay if I post oodles and gobs of old Mexico City recap B.S.? -- T.G.

David, What if the KGB or the DGI told you Oswald entered Mexico by car? You know, either from a document from back in the day, or more recently by someone like Mitrokhin or ...? Would you believe it then? If so, why would you prefer the KGB's or the DGI's information to that of the CIA? Because they're generally speaking more trustworthy than the evil, evil CIA? -- T.G.

Paul, For what it's worth, de Vosjoli resigned on October 18, 1963, and he was head of only those French Intelligence operations that were based in the U.S. Regardless, who told you that he flew to Mexico right after the assassination? Tom Mangold? -- T.G.

But best of all, in order to learn how Vladimir Putin and his lackey Julian Assange were able to install a Russian mafia-mobbed up, blackmail-able, expendable-for-Putin, "useful idiot" as our president on November 8, 2016, one must first learn about "KGB" "active measures" and "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations, and how such diabolical operations, so successfully waged against us for 90-plus years and 58 years, respectively, can give rise to Tin Foil Hat Wearing conspiracy theories, the decline of fact-checking, the decline of liberal democracies in general, etc. And of course in order to do that, one should read Tennent H. Bagley's Spy Wars. I mean, it's obvious that John Newman has read it, right, James? James? -- T.G.

Dear David "Mysterious" Jacobs, Yes, of course I knew that. Like at least ten times over the years. Ever read "Wedge," by the way? Think Hoover had the straight scoop, do you? But ... Your disjointed. And ... curiously juxtaposed sentences and sentence. Fragments! Make no sense to. Me, kind sir... For example, your "Regarding KOSTIKOV" ? Yes? "Spit it out," please. The Russians said what first, David? That Oleg Brykin (and by TUMBLEWEED connection, KOSTIKOV, too) was, according to a Russian (i.e., FEDORA, aka Aleksy Kulak) ... Department Thirteen? (That's what I'm trying to tell you!) (Problem is, David, that Russian was a ... gasp ... triple agent. Didn't know that? Refuse to believe?) (Don't get all "aggro" on me, David. It perplexes me, too!) And your, "More than enough potential suspects." ??? To what are you referring, Master Mysto? Forever "nash," Your Stupid, Stupid, Stupid, Stupid Tommy Graves, -- T.G. PS Not that it matters, but how do you know it was Azcue's job to recruit? Whom did he ever recruit, or try to recruit? MAYBE YOU'RE RIGHT, so don't get all defensive on me, now. Just enlighten Old Obtuse Tommy if you can.

EDITED: Yeah, well, I threw the date that he resigned from his French intelligence and governmental positions (October 18, 1963), and the fact that JJA helped him "get away." Do you know exactly when he "fled" to Mexico, Paul? -- T.G.