Trump?

[Sandy Larsen]

41 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Talbot also does a nice job of describing Dulles as hopelessly out of the loop on the Bay of Pigs.

See The Devil's Chessboard, pgs 393-6.

As far as JFK goes, the idea that Dulles would set up the Paines, family friends of his girlfriend Mary Bancroft, as Oswald-enablers is idiotic.

1) You don't know the difference between the plot to kill Kennedy and the plot to kill Oswald.  Mostly you go on about the Oswald assassination, not the Kennedy assassination.

2) You are dismissive of the physical evidence in a murder case, which indicates you understand nothing about how murder cases are investigated. What was your famous line over at Deep Politics?  Oh yeah..."Most researchers respect the clothing evidence."

That's like saying -- "Most mathematicians respect the formula 1 + 1 = 2."

In fact, James DiEugenio has bragged about ignoring the physical evidence in the JFK murder case -- calls it a "Model T."

3) In your 2013 paper on JFK's foreign policy you proudly point out that you left out Vietnam.  As collateral damage from this approach you left out Laos.

You're a master of all details -- except the important ones.

How can anyone in their right mind justify what Comey did?

Comey's intent can be inferred from the pattern of his behavior, starting with lies he told regarding Hillary's "extreme carelessness," which was revealed when Comey admitted under oath that any reasonable person would have made the same mistake she did thinking the e-mails were not classified.

It was the State Department as a whole which was guilty of "extreme carelessness," but Comey did his best to create the worst possible optics for Clinton.

I posted the Oct. 31 quote where Weiner's e-mails were revealed to be duplicates -- Comey didn't need 9 days to figure it out, it could have been done in under 9 hours.

If Comey had done this to Trump -- declaring him the subject of FBI inquiry 11 days out, then calling it a false alarm 9 days later --I'd be just as outraged, especially if Trump had then gone on to win the popular vote by 2% but lose.

That James DiEugenio cannot see the obvious voter suppression in all this is mind-boggling.

 

Cliff is spot on regarding Comey and his October Surprise. If anybody questions this, google the words COMEY OCTOBER SURPRISE. You will see plenty of support for Cliff's assertion in major news outlets.

[Cliff Varnell]

DiEugenio's inability to see the obvious is downright Von Peinesque.

[James DiEugenio]

This is the face of Fascism according to Varnellism:

 

 

[Cliff Varnell]

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Tom,

I am definitely on your and Cliff's side.

 

Tom, Sandy -- thank you both, more than I can say.

It's a public relations civil war with an eye on '18 and then Elizabeth Warren 2020.

I want a firebrand.

As far as Ron Ecker goes -- one of my main guys!

Check this vastly under-appreciated article:

The Tokyo Flight -- Coincidence or Conspiracy?

http://www.ronaldecker.com/tokyo.html

Ron describes the top level of the Kennedy Cabinet as out of town 11/22/63 with the exception of Attorney General Bobby K,, Sec of Defense Robert McNamara, and a couple of nobodies.

Bobby was at home making phone calls; McNamara wasn't even informed by the military that Kennedy was killed -- he had to hear about it from Bobby.

According to David Lifton McNamara busied himself with Oswald's files and arranging for the return of AF1.

Super-light duty, in other words.

So most of the Cabinet was flying back, the Attorney General was at home, the Sec of Defense given odd jobs.

So who was running the US government?

Which Cabinet position is at the top of succession?

The State Department!

Who was #2 at the State Department?  George Ball.

#3?

Our tackboard guy W. Averell Harriman.

From Spanning the Century: The Life of W. Averell Harriman, by Rudy Abramson, pgs 624-5, 630 emphasis added:

<quote on, emphasis added>

Some of Averell's friends, including [Roger] Hilsman, who had heard Bob Kennedy muse about the possibility of Harriman as secretary of state, thought there was still a chance that Averell might yet get the Foggy Bottom job he long coveted.  But that had been before the notorious coup cable [243 authorizing Diem coup 8/24/63].

    Though the President had avoided criticism of Averell in the episode, Harriman knew Kennedy's confidence in him was shaken.  After working his way to the seventh floor, he was suddenly viewed as a problem.  Almost overnight, he looked ten years older.  Privately, the President and the attorney general talked of finding a way to rehabilitate him, to find a job that would get him out of the Vietnam business.  There was a need to put more emphasis on hemispheric matters, and the President thought that one way to solve two problems might be to create a new post of undersecretary for Latin American affairs for him.

As deeply as the administration had involved itself in the machinations against Diem, Kennedy still appeared stunned when the long-anticipatred coup ended with the assassination of Diem and Nhu on November 1.  The United States could technically claim that it had been a Vietnamese affair; but the administration had conditioned the atmosphere, beginning with the Harriman-Hilsman cable to Lodge.

By that time, Averell was already turning more attention to hemispheric problems.  The afternoon of November 22 was set a side for a meeting with oil company executives about the future of their contracts with the government in Argentina.  Beforehand, he went to a Hilsman luncheon for a delegation of politicians from the Phillipines.  He was finishing his dessert and talking with Senator Frank Church about extremism in American politics when Church was called to the telephone.  A minute later, the senator rushed back into the room, his face ashen.  The President had been shot, and was feared dead.  There was a momen of silence, and then turmoil, shouted questions, and people getting up from the table to head for telephones.  Averell hadn't heard, and when Church repeated the news, his reaction was that it couldn't be true.  "No, sir, I'm not joking," said Church.

Averell heard the shattering confirmation of Kennedy's death in George Ball's office moment later.  So undone that he could only think of nothing else to do, he convened his oil meeting, but it lasted only a few minutes.  When an executive tastelessly suggested an urgent approach to the new President to write the government of Argentina in behalf of American oil interests, he adjourned in disgust.

He spent the afternoon helping Ball, who was, if anyone truly was, running the United States government, since Rusk and several other Cabinet members were airborne, coming home after turning back from a flight to the Far East.  As darkness fell, Averell drove out to Andrews Air Force Base with Ball and Alexis Johnson, joining the official mourning party standing silently on the floodlit ramp as the President's casket was lowered from the rear door of Air Force One.

The following days were a blur of meetings and trips to airports to greet delegations arriving from all over the world for the state funeral.  While Rusk and Ball attended to ceremonial duties, Harriman sat down with visitors who brought urgent diplomatic problems with them--an insurgency developing against the government in the Dominican Republic, intelligence warnings of political upheaval in Brazil, and signs of new trouble between India and Pakistan over Kashmir...

<quote off>

So on a day when everyone was out of town or side-lined, Harriman and Ball were running the show.

Same thing happened on August 24, 1963, when everyone was out of town and Harriman enlisted Ball to aid and abet ramming Cable 243 past Kennedy.

So the two guys who were most responsible for setting off the Diem coup were the same two guys at the top of the government the day Kennedy was killed.

Coincidence or conspiracy, indeed.

 

Edited November 26, 2016 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

This is the face of Fascism according to Varnellism:

 

 

Factually incorrect.

One doesn't have to be a fascist to be a fascism apologist.

When, during the campaign, Jill Stein said Clinton was worse than Trump she was being a fascism-apologist.

She's making up for that gaffe now.

Edited November 26, 2016 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

Now, because all he has in place of argument is strawmen, Jim D. will continue to equate "fascism" for "fascism apologia."

The two are not the same no matter what anyone says.

 

[James DiEugenio]

More Fascism from the person I voted for:

 (C'mon Cliffie, you don't really think I am going to read you anymore do you?  I just want to show how you hijacked this thread for your own purposes as you usually do)

 

 

[Cliff Varnell]

5 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

More Fascism from the person I voted for:

 (C'mon Cliffie, you don't really think I am going to read you anymore do you?  I just want to show how you hijacked this thread for your own purposes as you usually do)

 

 

 

As predicted.

I'd like to hear Jill Stein tell us now how Trump is better than Clinton.

I was all along planning to vote for Hillary to run up the popular vote total, and donate $27 to Jill Stein.

When she came out with that bit about Trump being better than Clinton she cost herself $27.

Edited November 26, 2016 by Cliff Varnell

[James DiEugenio]

BTW, you know I expected people like Fox News, and Conway to be against this recount effort.

But its really important to note that the new online media establishment is also against it e.g. TPM and Politico.  Which is why I said long ago, the New Media is looking a lot like the Old Media.  The so called Storming of the Gates that Markos Moulitsas talked about has simply established its own gates.

But don't worry, something good is around the corner for us.

Edited November 26, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

The recount stuff is good but we can't let it distract from other real crimes -- like the purge program Crosscheck and the perfidy of James Comey.

All three legs of the 2016 Voter Suppression Election need to be examined thoroughly.

Edited November 26, 2016 by Cliff Varnell

[James DiEugenio]

In that particular excerpt, it did not show a couple of the things she advocates that are really good ideas.

First, more inclusive and open debates.

Second a ranking system for your vote, that is 1-2-3-4, instead of just voting for one.

If you go to Facebook, i think her whole address is on her page.  Very good and democratic.  It will be really interesting to see the results if she manages to pull it off.  If nothing else, she is getting a lot of attention to how badly this election was conducted and how unhappy most Americans were with the choices.

 

Edited November 26, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

15 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

 I just want to show how you hijacked this thread for your own purposes as you usually do)
 

 

As an important point of clarification, I didn't bring up the subject of Harriman.

James DiEugenio did -- twice.

One of the moderators questioned the relevance of the thread and I took the opportunity to provide that.

[James DiEugenio]

Here is the link to my candidate's page.

https://www.facebook.com/drjillstein

Go down to the fifth picture where she is wearing a blue suit and that is the whole address.  BTW there is another one above that,  of her signing for the Wisconsin recount.

I really liked the other ideas that she is pushing:  1.) Inclusive debates 2.) Get the big money out 3.) Dump the Electoral College 4.) Ranked voting 5.) Dump voter ID 6.) Stop voter roll stripping (began in Florida in 2000).  

They have raised 5 million from 110,000 contributors, less than fifty bucks per donor.  They just need 2 million more.  Hope they get it.

As they say Donald, its not over until its over.

Edited November 26, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

Over the last two or three years of his administration I grew to approve of President Obama, in spite of the drone wars, the crackdown on whistleblowers, his failure to re-classify cannabis.

I liked the way he negotiated the removal of chemical weapons from Syria, nukes from Iran, opened Cuba, made the internet a utility ensuring net neutrality.

But I do not approve of his calling James Comey a "good man" when the FBI head blatantly interfered with our electoral process.

Now they say he's discouraging Hillary from recounts.

Fascism apologia.

Edited November 26, 2016 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

6 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Over the last two or three years of his administration I grew to approve of President Obama, in spite of the drone wars, the crackdown on whistleblowers, his failure to re-classify cannabis.

I liked the way he negotiated the removal of chemical weapons from Syria, nukes from Iran, opened Cuba, made the internet a utility ensuring net neutrality.

But I do not approve of his calling James Comey a "good man" when the FBI head blatantly interfered with our electoral process.

Now they say he's discouraging Hillary from recounts.

Fascism apologia.

 

Please note, gentle reader, I'm NOT calling President Barack Obama a fascist, although there are systemic fascist elements in his government.

Nothing as bad as what's coming, not by a long shot!

Gonna miss that Obama guy a lot...