Jump to content
The Education Forum

James DiEugenio

Members
  • Content Count

    7,720
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

About James DiEugenio

  • Rank
    Super Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

26,665 profile views
  1. Something like this is coming up at Kennedys and King by David Mantik. He is doing a review of a book and has a small section at the end which contains some of these personages.
  2. As per Prouty: he was involved with Krulak and Krulak was working on Vietnam policy. To the point that Krulak was one of the guys who, at the end, was trying to yank the withdrawal plan out of the McNamara Taylor report in October of 1963. This is in the update of Newman's book. And that is not a factoid, as the host on the panel said. The reversal of Kennedy's policy is a fact. And we now have tapes of LBJ admitting he did this and also tried to cover it up. BTW, Prouty was also correct on the point that NSAM 273 was not the real major alteration. That came with NSAM 288 in March
  3. Joe, If you watch that panel carefully, its pretty clear that the guy hosting it had arranged for Moldea to be there and wanted him to go after Prouty as a symbol of the film. Note the host's use of the word "factoid". To me, Dan Moldea is one of the worst things that ever happened to the JFK critical community. His haranguing the panel about this Garrison/Marcello mythology is a venture into a cul de sac. As Bill Davy and myself later discovered this was all BS, set up in part by Walter Sheridan/ Clay Shaw ally Aaron Kohn, who used to work for Hoover. There was no such connectio
  4. If someone is out of office then there is no ethical standard. I don't see how it applies. Everyone knows that . The other problem with this is what Frank Luntz said, the GOP campaign advisor: no one gives two cents about Hunter Biden. They are concerned about the CV 19 plague and the economy. Hunter Biden is not even in the top six issues on polling. If Rudy was going to launch this 1.) It should have been much earlier, 2.) He should not have shopped it around so everyone who saw it can discredit it, and 3.) It should not have coincided with him being in a hotel room with a
  5. I should add though, another person what was in high office and thought it was a plot was Al Gore. He studied the case for about a year under the tutelage of Bernie Fensterwald and came to the conclusion it was a conspiracy. And unlike Bill Clinton, he never went back on it.
  6. This is what I thought Steve.. Biden was not in office at the time Hunter Biden went to China for a capital investment mission. So where is the ethical violation if one is not in office, and if its not even Joe Biden? And what the heck was Trump talking about during the debate when he insinuated this?
  7. At the time that JFK came out, I think Salinger was in a debate about the movie and he clearly expressed doubts about the official story. That debate was with Summers--who I think has really regressed on the case--and that carnival barker, the late Chris Hitchens. I think you can still see this online. Not sure about Sorenson.
  8. It almost makes you wonder does it not? Scott Atlas is clearly Trump's go to guy on this issue today. He is not an epidemiologist. He is a radiologist. But he advocates for herd immunity. I think Trump might be moving for this without actually saying it. And I wish Biden had addressed the issue last night. Because if that is what the Trump/Atlas agenda really is , they should say it.
  9. Good, keep it coming. Epstein looks like he was handpicked early.
  10. A Ph. D candidate gets the run of NBC NEWS for four months, including internal memos and budget statements? Good job Anthony. Maybe Vince was right about this guy. Sure looks like that.
  11. This is a good story thanks Andrew. I posted it at FB and Twitter. But Andrew if you wrote, as you did, that the Steele Dossier was not published before the election, then what is that supposed to mean? The publication of the Steele Dossier was the single most instrumental device that caused the MSM to go into a state of mass dementia over RG. And if you recall, it was not until months later that it was made public that it was made possible by the HRC campaign.
  12. See above. Andrew did not even check out his Varnellian quote before he printed it. A Google search of about 1 minute would have proved it was wrong. CNN did push Russia Gate before the election. Andrew then doubled down on that erroneous assertion by saying heck, they did not even print the Steele Dossier before the election. Geez maybe because HRC was funding it? The late Bob Parry had this whole RG mythology smoked out years ago before he passed on. Aaron Mate has also exposed it in several columns. Matt Taibbi has also gone after it. These guys are all liberals and worke
  13. He was responding to me. Andrew quoted CV--its the only way I see it since I have him on ignore-- saying that no cable company brought up "Russian interference" in 2016 prior to the election. Andrew quoted that like it was accurate and worth quoting. As I showed, it was not. He then doubled down on it by saying, well no one printed the Steele Dossier prior to the election either. I replied with, HRC was paying for it, can you imagine being caught in October funding "oppo research" and then passing it off as factual in the press? The Democrats, Adam Schiff in particular, tried to hi
  14. You quoted CV saying the Russian Interference was not noted by the cable companies until after the election. Which, as I showed, was not the case. That is not being smart ass, its correcting an inaccuracy which you quoted. Why until after? Andrew, you do know that HRC was financing that dossier don't you? Can you imagine getting caught red handed in October? As it was, Schiff did all he could to hide that fact from the intel committee even afterwards. But to me, this is ridiculous to argue. HRC had every advantage in that campaign that one can have. Plus Access Hollywood, plus Al
  15. Andrew, the following story is from CNN, clearly a cable compnany, and its from October of 2016: https://www.cnn.com/2016/10/07/politics/us-blames-russia-for-targeting-election-systems/ So the excerpt you used from CV is wrong. Your comment above is incredible. That utterly unreliable and bought and paid for pile of rubbish--going by the name of Steele Dossier-- should have never been published by anyone in any venue. It was clearly an oppo assignment. Since when does that merit being published? But further, for Buzzfeed to have published it without any attempt at fact checking it wa
×
×
  • Create New...