Trump and the Unspeakable?

[Cliff Varnell]

25 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Cliff,

 

Funny,  I thought we were talking about someone whose name is mentioned in the title of this thread, and whether or not the cumulative, synergistic effects of 90-years of Ruski "active measures" counterintelligence operations interwoven with 58 years of highly successful Ruski "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations, against the U.S. (and, uhh ....THE WEST in general) could have had much of an impact on the way out 2016 Presidential Election turned out, you know, with said said (sic) person's being installed as our Putin-favoring president.

But somewhere along the  way, its God-given internal dialectics turned into something more in the nature of "whataboutism".

Imagine that.

Somewhere along the line you can't take yes for an answer.

Putin punked the American public enough to get Trump elected.

But Kobach, Comey and Clinton herself had bigger impacts, yo.

Edited May 12, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[James DiEugenio]

Yeltsin bombed the Russian parliament in 1993 when they were about to impeach him.  Killed anywhere from 200 to 500 people.  Clinton supported him.

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/09/30/world/clinton-repeats-support-for-yeltsin.html

 

Then, Clinton went even further with directly intervening in the 1996 election with advisors and tons of money.  I guess Bagley does not mention this so you do not know about it.

How about this then: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46233.htm

Edited May 12, 2018 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

Tommy, I'm way ahead of you, dude.

This is from a thread I started on the Deep Politics Forum.

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?16087-The-Assassination-of-Hillary-Clinton#.WvdfFTPascA

Thread: The Assassination of Hillary Clinton

 

1. 11-08-2016, 10:07 PM #1

   Cliff Varnell

   Member

    

    

   The Assassination of Hillary Clinton

   Julian Assange, Vladimir Putin and James Comey rigged the 2016 election and I will never accept this scumbag as my Prez.

   (quote off)

   Note the date and time.

Edited May 12, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[Thomas Graves]

5 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Graves' and Varnell's view of history is so incredibly lopsided and agenda driven its almost funny.

The US intervention is Russia after Gorbachev is documented in places like the LA Times and Time Magazine.  It was massive.  Done in support of that fascist Yeltsin and done mostly by Bill Clinton, after Yeltsin had requested Freidnmanesque shock therapy for the Russian economy.

The shock therapy drove Russia into an economic crisis worse than the Great Depression.  The Russian people were about to get rid of Yeltsin.  Suddenly a team of political advisors arrives to aid him, including Dick Morris.  They had hundreds of thousands of dollars to spend to revive his candidacy. And then the IMF, at Clinton's urging, gave him a grant of millions.  To stave off impeachment, Clinton's buddy Yeltsin bombed the Kremlin killing scores of innocent   bystanders.  

‘The largest giveaway of a nation’s wealth in history….’

-Mortimer Zuckerman, member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), owner of US News & World Report, relating what took place in the looting of Russia under Boris Yeltsin.

 

Geez Tommy, would these qualify as Bagley's "active measures".

As per Varnell, the CIA redid the plan at JFK's request in mid March.  He thought it looked too much like a World War II operation.  This information is contained in the declassified Kirkpatrick Report. Which is still the best compendium of information on the Bay of Pigs that I know of. (See Peter Kornbluh, Bay of Pigs Declassified, pp 125-27)

 

 

James,

 

Where do you get your "info"?

 

ZeroHedge?

 

Or is it too far to the Right for you?

 

--  T.G.

 

Edited May 13, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[James DiEugenio]

You know Tom, your cheap smears of everyone's info while you trust a CIA guy is a little bit off-putting. 

Also off-putting is your apparent sight problem.  I listed these sources above and as you can see when you click through they are from the LA Times and NY Times.    Is that not MSM enough  for you? Who do you ask for then Chris Matthews?  How about Hannity?

Yeltsin bombed the Russian parliament in 1993 when they were about to impeach him.  Killed anywhere from 200 to 500 people.  Clinton supported him.

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/09/30/world/clinton-repeats-support-for-yeltsin.html

 

 Then, Clinton went even further with directly intervening in the 1996 election with advisors and tons of money.  I guess Bagley does not mention this so you do not know about it.

How about this then: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46233.htm

Edited May 12, 2018 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

The refusal of TG to even click through and instead  to try and discredit the information before reading it by assuming it came from a site I never visited  proves  my point.

It is fine and dandy when the USA intervenes in the Russian election with direct and indirect infusions of tons of money and also with campaign advisors.  And that is proven and admitted to.

But let something happen with xxxxx farms and web sites and emails--none of which is proven and much is in dispute-and suddenly we call for investigations, possible impeachment, and the demonization of Russia and Putin. And TG does not even blink at the double standard. 

I think he would call this American Exceptionalism.

Edited May 12, 2018 by James DiEugenio

[Thomas Graves]

39 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

You know Tom, your cheap smears of everyone's info while you trust a CIA guy is a little bit off-putting. 

Also off-putting is your apparent sight problem.  I listed these sources above and as you can see when you click through they are from the LA Times and NY Times.    Is that not MSM enough  for you? Who do you ask for then Chris Matthews?  How about Hannity?

Yeltsin bombed the Russian parliament in 1993 when they were about to impeach him.  Killed anywhere from 200 to 500 people.  Clinton supported him.

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/09/30/world/clinton-repeats-support-for-yeltsin.html

 

 Then, Clinton went even further with directly intervening in the 1996 election with advisors and tons of money.  I guess Bagley does not mention this so you do not know about it.

How about this then: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46233.htm

 

James,

 

You haven't read that "CIA guy's" book yet, have you?  And you never will, will you?

Undersized gonads, James, or "don't need to"?

 

Already got the straight skinny from the likes of RT and Oliver Stone?

 

--  T.G.

 

Edited May 12, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

DiEugenio posted:

 

Then, (after supporting Boris Yeltsin during the 1993 crisis in the Kremlin --  T.G.) Bill Clinton went even further with directly intervening in the 1996 election with advisors and tons of money.  I guess Bagley does not mention this so you do not know about it.

How about this then: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46233.htm

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


James,

 

You gotta be kidding me.

 

INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE? 

 

I mean, I mean, I mean .... isn't that put out by ... gasp ... GLOBAL RESEARCH?

 

Oh My God, I think I'm gonna die this time.  Somebody bring me an oxygen tank, quick!

 

 

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-research/

 

 

 

--  T.G.

 

 

Edited May 12, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Cliff Varnell]

3 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Oh come on, Cliff. Don't be so PC. Just get over it!

Uh...okay...Go Warriors!🏀

[James DiEugenio]

TG, look you might think the Russians killed Kennedy.

Virtually everyone else here thinks that is so fruity as to be ludicrous. It is simply a time-waster and a diversion.  

And that is what you are saying.  Like Trejo, you think Phillips and Angleton and Dulles were fine people and great Americans.  I don't. So I am not going to fall for their line on the JFK case.  

Got that.  Its not a matter of "gonads",   its a matter of brains.

You feel fine with it.  OK, people can draw judgments from those choices.

[Thomas Graves]

47 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

TG, look you might think the Russians killed Kennedy.

Virtually everyone else here thinks that is so fruity as to be ludicrous. It is simply a time-waster and a diversion.  

And that is what you are saying.  Like Trejo, you think Phillips and Angleton and Dulles were fine people and great Americans.  I don't. So I am not going to fall for their line on the JFK case.  

Got that.  Its not a matter of "gonads",   its a matter of brains.

You feel fine with it.  OK, people can draw judgments from those choices.

 

James,

 

Maybe you've even worse than Morley, come to think of it.  I mean, if that's even possible.

 

Where in the hell have I ever even suggested that Phillips and Dulles were "fine people"?

 

As regards the "evil things" they undoubtedly did in their jobs, do you think they were up against Boy Scouts or The Little Sisters Of The Poor in trying to fend off and/or subvert the KGB and the GRU?


I gotta ask you James, does Vladimir Putin pay you, or do you spread the garbage you do for free?

 

--  T.G.

 

PS  It's interesting that, in the Part 2 video that I watched, you couldn't even bring yourself to clap for John Newman at the end of his recent "Spy Wars" presentation in San Francisco.

Was it because he'd convinced Peter Dale Scott that Yuri Nosenko was a false defector, after all?

 

Edited May 13, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[James DiEugenio]

BTW, backpacking to the  4th post above, shows us all just how underhanded and untrustworthy TG really is.  

If you link to the Eleanor Randolph story at Info clearing house you will see that they got it from the LA Times. That site is a collection site.  It presents stories from all over.

Here is the direct link to the  story, and where it came from, the LA Times:  http://articles.latimes.com/1996-07-09/news/mn-22423_1_boris-yeltsin

As you can see its the same.  And I said in a post above that the stories came through the NY Times and LA Times. I made a big deal of this.  All TG had to do was read the link inside and do what I just did.  He did not do that. That is the kind of researcher this guy is. 

He does not want to deal with facts that show how ignorant he is about contemporary history, or how that info shows what hypocritical values he maintains.  So he ignores them as if they do not exist.   And then tries to smear the messenger because he does not like being showed up.

And he does this to the point that he does not even know when he shoots himself in the foot.  He does that so often that soon he will not have any toes left.  Should we take up a collection?

Edited May 13, 2018 by James DiEugenio

[Thomas Graves]

31 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

BTW, the 4th post above, shows us all just how underhanded and untrustworthy TG really is.  

If you link to the Eleanor Randolph story at Info clearing house you will see that they got it from the LA Times. That site is a collection site.  It presents stories from all over.

Here is the direct link to the  story, and where it came from, the LA Times:  http://articles.latimes.com/1996-07-09/news/mn-22423_1_boris-yeltsin

As you can see its the same.  And I said in a post above that the stories came through the NY Times and LA Times. I made a big deal of this.  All TG had to do was read the link inside and do what I just did.  He did not do that. That is the kind of researcher this guy is. 

He does not want to deal with facts that show how ignorant he is about contemporary history, or how that info shows what hypocritical values he maintains.  So he ignores them as if they do not exist.   And then tries to smear the messenger because he does not like being showed up.

And he does this to the point that he does not even know when he shoots himself in the foot.  He does that so often soon he will not have any toes left.  Should we take up a collection?

 

James,

 

I know you aren't paranoid or anything, but have you considered the possibility that, as regards your precious newspaper articles, that I am neither "underhanded" (isn't that a synonym for "dishonest," James?) nor "untrustworthy" (isn't that another synonym for "dishonest," James?), but that I am just pain too lazy and/or bogged down with other things to have read them, yet?  Or is that a too mundane, and therefore implausible, explanation for you?

 

I promise that I will, though, James, but probably not the article you posted from the "Global Research" affiliate or subsidiary or whatever it is.  See my earlier post as to why that is the case.

 

In the meantime, please don't flatter yourself by fantasizing that my life resolves around that highly gaseous planet, "Jumbo-Duh." 

 

Somewhere, way WAY WAY out there in the outer solar system.

 

--  T.G.

 

Edited May 13, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[James DiEugenio]

 

I wish they had a Yawn icon.

[Thomas Graves]

7 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

 

I wish they had a Yawn icon.

Cute avoidance reaction, James.  Unbearable stress always make you yawn?

 

Regardless, guess what??? 

 

I just now skimmed those two precious articles I promised you I would read!

 

So, lemme ask you a question:  Would you have preferred that the Communist had won that Russian election, James?

 

 

Why?

 

--  T.G.

 

Edited May 13, 2018 by Thomas Graves