Cory Santos Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 How is this thread still going? The posts have nothing to do with JFK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 7 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: Oh no Doug. You are now implying, based on the Times, that somehow Putin is running Trump based on their phone calls? Wait until Adam Schiff gets hold of that one. https://www.google.com/amp/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2019/12/trump-putin-told-me-ukraine-conspiracy-russia-impeachment.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Santos Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 5 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said: Obviously they have a lot to do with JFK. Why else would the E. Howard Hunt Alien Presence gentleman be so vested in sliding constructive comments with 10 month old USA Today columns? Why, on a JFK Assassination discussion forum of all places, are their participants that believe it is necessary to protect the reputation of a CIA lawyer who on more than one occasion attended actual JFK conferences to spread disinformation? Why does Mr. Depleted Uranium disappear for a few days when nuclear metals are mentioned? Why is it so upsetting to some when I mention that the Muellers, Bissells and Cabels are all related? It just seems like the posts have nothing to do with JFK. So your taking a side against Mr. Caddy with an implication he is posting things to confuse the general community? Is that one of your points? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted January 2, 2020 Author Share Posted January 2, 2020 Cory, I think Wheeler is referring to Zaid as the lawyer attendee who mislead people. And he is on solid ground on that if you look at my original article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Santos Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: Cory, I think Wheeler is referring to Zaid as the lawyer attendee who mislead people. And he is on solid ground on that if you look at my original article. Ok so he is not referring to Mr. Caddy here: "Why else would the E. Howard Hunt Alien Presence gentleman be so vested in sliding constructive comments with 10 month old USA Today columns?" Edited January 2, 2020 by Cory Santos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 (edited) Wow! And all this time I thought this was just Wheeler harassing Doug. Now I see there's something really heavy behind it! Sounds like the perfect time for Jim, with his advanced honorary degree in "MSM Tactical Studies" from K&K U., to pounce! ! Watch out Adam Schiff! Wait until Jim D. gets a hold of that one! Edited January 2, 2020 by Kirk Gallaway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 18 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said: Why, on a JFK Assassination discussion forum of all places, are their participants that believe it is necessary to protect the reputation of a CIA lawyer who on more than one occasion attended actual JFK conferences to spread disinformation? Why would it be necessary to protect the reputation of Mark Zaid? The whistleblower became irrelevant when all those diplomatic corps witnesses came forward. Team Fascist and it’s non-Fascist Useful Idiot Auxiliary obsess over sweet nothings — FISA warrants, the Steele Dossier, the UkraineGate whistleblower — because they can’t face the facts of Trump’s egregious treason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 3, 2020 Share Posted January 3, 2020 (edited) What are the chances the resident Trumpenlinks (DiEugenio, Carter, Berube) will denounce Trump’s hit on Soleimani? If a Democrat pulled this move they’d never get off it. Edited January 3, 2020 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Carter Posted January 3, 2020 Share Posted January 3, 2020 2 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said: What are the chances the resident Trumpenlinks (DiEugenio, Carter, Berube) will denounce Trump’s hit on Soleimani? If a Democrat pulled this move they’d never get off it. FYI - completely denounce this utterly bat———- crazy move. I’m not a “ trumpenlink” and neither are the others you mentioned, as has been repeatedly stated. your inability to process that is widely shared I have noticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted January 3, 2020 Share Posted January 3, 2020 (edited) But Jeff, this didn't just happen all today, none of you were the least concerned about this. Nor have you really said anything questioning Trump. You thought Trump would be a peaceful alternative to Hillary Clinton, who you had some crazy theory going that is she was elected President, she was going to force a military conflict with both China and Russia while there was still time to do it. You never had any real idea who the players, or what their party allegiances. Perhaps you can be forgiven because this isn't your country. But some of your smug, stoic proclamations that you could actually be more impartial because you weren't an American look pretty silly now. Oh still "waiting for Trudeau" (theatrical reference) if you would at last like to share something about Jeff's political beliefs sometime. Edited January 3, 2020 by Kirk Gallaway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 3, 2020 Share Posted January 3, 2020 6 hours ago, Jeff Carter said: FYI - completely denounce this utterly bat———- crazy move. Did you denounce Trump pulling out of the Iran nuke deal? Or his pulling out of the Paris Climate accords? Or his rollback of Obama’s Cuban policy? Or the tearing of babies from the arms of their mothers on the southern border? Or the myriad white supremacist policies and statements? You decry the Carter Page FISA warrants but have you ever denounced the FBI hijacking the 2016 election in Trump’s favor? 6 hours ago, Jeff Carter said: I’m not a “ trumpenlink” and neither are the others you mentioned, as has been repeatedly stated. All your “no collusion” nonsense defines your Trumpenlinks membership. 6 hours ago, Jeff Carter said: your inability to process that is widely shared I have noticed. You repeat Fascist talking points endlessly. Live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis Berube Posted January 3, 2020 Share Posted January 3, 2020 6 hours ago, Jeff Carter said: I’m not a “ trumpenlink” and neither are the others you mentioned, as has been repeatedly stated. your inability to process that is widely shared I have noticed. Jeff you havent blocked Cliff yet? All these guys are able to think is that every statement they disagree with automatically means the person who said it loves trump and therefore needs to clarify their position on every move trump has ever made. This is emotional analysis more than anything else. They probably think they “won” something when we say that the drone strike was wrong and probably a war crime. Thats how attached they are to a never trump philosophy. Im sure cliff is already typing the word fascist into his computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 3, 2020 Share Posted January 3, 2020 3 minutes ago, Dennis Berube said: Jeff you havent blocked Cliff yet? All these guys are able to think Berube has me blocked but he knows all that I’m able to think? 3 minutes ago, Dennis Berube said: is that every statement they disagree with automatically means the person who said it loves trump and therefore needs to clarify their position on every move trump has ever made. No, I push back every time someone who should know better repeats Trump talking points about the secret cooperation with Russian operatives. Berube and DiEugenio especially spend far more time bashing Democrats than bashing Trump — right out of the Trumpenlinks playbook. 3 minutes ago, Dennis Berube said: This is emotional analysis more than anything else. They probably think they “won” something when we say that the drone strike was wrong and probably a war crime. Thats how attached they are to a never trump philosophy. That Berube is openly “unattached” to a never Trump philosophy says a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 3, 2020 Share Posted January 3, 2020 10 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said: Good one Jeff. As the only actual Trump Supporter, I was disappointed not to be named in the list with you, Dennis and Jim. Wheeler doesn’t get the meaning of the German word “links” — “left.” Wheeler isn’t left. 10 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said: Clearly Cliff has made up a word for people who like the "truth" but do not necessarily support Trump. "Trumpenlink" is apparently the best he can come up with. Like Truth & Support Trump = Me ("Trumparians?", "Trumpites?" {what's the 70's sitcom reference Cliff? anyone?}) Like Truth & Do not Support Trump = The "Trumpenlinks" Hate Truth & Support Trump = The imaginary people Cliff thinks he's arguing with. Hate Truth & Do not Support Trump = The real people we are arguing with. Most of the people in the last bullet point still seem pretty intelligent and are certainly articulate. It is hard to believe the high level of cognitive dissonance, they usually show, is congenital. Another guy who knows all about my argument but doesn’t read my posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted January 3, 2020 Share Posted January 3, 2020 (edited) If I may, here is my perspective, as a relative newcomer here, on this lengthy, interesting thread. 1) It's a rare opportunity to observe how a number of true experts on the subject of U.S. "Deep State" history perceive and interpret the available evidence in Trump's Ukraine-gate and Russia-gate scandals. 2) I remain surprised and puzzled by the arguments claiming that Trump's Ukraine-gate and Russia-gate scandals are nothing burgers-- only efforts by the "Deep State" to undermine his bizarre, disastrous Presidency. 3) I disapprove of the persistent ad hominem invective-- on both sides. It only muddies the waters in the quest for clarity. 4) I am suspicious of those who call for their adversaries to be "ignored." If the truth is attained by the dialectal process of an honest exchange of ideas, how does ignoring arguments achieve that worthy end? It smacks of censorship-- walling off the truth. I think it was Nietzsche who once said that he had learned more from his intellectual "enemies" and critics than from his friends. Edited January 3, 2020 by W. Niederhut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now