Mark Zaid, JFK and Trump

[Bob Ness]

4 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said:

Trump Demeaned Bureaucrats. This Is Their Revenge.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/16/opinion/sunday/trump-impeachment-hearings.html

I don't think it's their revenge. I think they are trying to save the country. Impressive group so far in the hearings.

[James DiEugenio]

That's what everyone thought of James McCord, John Dean, and Alex Butterfield during Watergate.

Let us wait until all the facts are in.  They aren't yet.

Edited November 17, 2019 by James DiEugenio

[Kirk Gallaway]

That is such a false equivocation. Everyone Jim? All 3 of those people were different, but they were all trying to save their necks in one way or another. Those who wanted Nixon's impeachment. (of which I was one,) generally applauded Dean, but knew he was covering for himself. No one thought that about Butterfield, another Nixon appointee, who up to that point was concealing the tapes. And Mc Cord was CIA, period, until we learned of his greater affiliations.

So Jim, this was your first true contact with the Deep State, the people behind the scenes! And sure enough,  as you and Ollie have been warning,they're trying to bring down the President! These are the people you've been warning us about for years!   Was it a spooky experience?  I can only imagine to  finally  see these people in the flesh just left you trembling!!!  Tell us your visceral reactions to actually seeing these people! That would be fascinating!

Yes they were so partisan and deeply working under the surface, they needed a whistle blower to come out? Otherwise they would have obediently carried out the policies of a corrupt President. Holmes sat on the sidelines to the end knowing he had first hand information, that's how partisan he was.  So you're waiting for Robert (who voted for GW twice)with some damaging connections about them? And  somehow that will exonerate the President from actions he took?  In 5 years, I could see you portray the whole Ukraine episode as another CIA sting. Will you ever give Trump responsibility for his actions?

You were cowering in a "speak no evil" corner from Trump  for 3 years. Your one contribution on the forum about Trump was a thread declaring "Trump was right". Now you're going to dish up some dirt about these witnesses  political affiliations? They don't believe like you, or in some cases me, so get over it.  Stop griping and deal with the world as it is! . 

Edited November 17, 2019 by Kirk Gallaway

[James DiEugenio]

Sometimes Kirk--well actually more than that--you get so caught up in your own paroxysm of antipathy for me that not only do I not know what you are talking about, I don't know who you are talking about.

Who is Ollie?  (God, I hope its not who I think it might be.)

Who is Holmes?

Who is the whistleblower?

The rest of this is just such malarkey that its gibberish.  And also deceitful. I have said many times, and posted many times, that I think Trump is a very bad president.  What just happened in Bolivia is one example. And in my article I wrote that if this charge turns out to be true that would seem to me to be an impeachable offense.

But it doesn't matter how many times I do that.  Does it.  You need an excuse to jump on and go at it with me no matter how inane, no matter how obtuse, no matter how false the declarations are. You are getting pretty close to Varnell Land.  At that point I will be putting you on ignore.  

[Bob Ness]

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

That's what everyone thought of James McCord, John Dean, and Alex Butterfield during Watergate.

Let us wait until all the facts are in.  They aren't yet.

Fair enough.

[Kirk Gallaway]

Don't play the victim. There's no antipathy Jim.

Google David Holmes Jim, he testified a couple of days ago.. You probably won't believe it.

Who was the whistle blower? That's you obsession, or talking point that I've pointed out, not mine.

Let me count the ways. You were silent in Charlottesville, you were silent about tax cuts to the  rich. Silent about the wall. For an aspiring foreign policy wonk, silent about abandoning the peace treaty with Iran, and leaving the Paris accords. Total silence until after midterms. This is the first I remember even about "deceit."

As the thread shows, I've tried to get a direct answer from you about Trump's culpability on anything!  (Come on Jim, let's stick to the current issues, or the elephant in the room, there's an impeachment inquiry going on) . But you don't think he's culpable, or can't admit he is..

Edited November 17, 2019 by Kirk Gallaway

[Cliff Varnell]

46 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

You are getting pretty close to Varnell Land.  At that point I will be putting you on ignore.  

Jim DiEugenio putting me on ignore has been mutually liberating. 

He's liberated from reading critiques of his posts for which he has no fact based rebuttal, and I'm liberated from his shrill ad hominem.  Win-win!

There is nothing inane, obtuse or false about my critiques of DiEugenio's posts.

This is the thread in which Jim DiEugenio found out he couldn't match my arguments.  Fun starts on page 3...

 

[Cliff Varnell]

27 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Let me count the ways. You were silent in Charlottesville, you were silent about tax cuts to the  rich. Silent about the wall. For an aspiring foreign policy wonk, silent about abandoning the peace treaty with Iran, and leaving the Paris accords. Total silence until after midterms. This is the first I remember even about "deceit."

In all fairness to Jim, he has denounced Trump's tax cuts more than once.

But he's been silent on Trump's white supremacist advisor Stephen Miller, for one example. 

DiEugenio's denunciation of Ukrainian fascists is well and good but where is the Kennedys and King article about Trump's fascism?. 

 

[Bob Ness]

Very interesting point made by Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Il) in the Yovanovich testimony the other day. I've been having trouble figuring out why they would call her back since I haven't heard anything about her being a direct impediment to Volker, Sondland, Guilianni etc. The impression I get is that people may have viewed her as too honest or whatever but then they replaced her with Taylor, who really is just as credible as Yovanovich, cut out of the same cloth so to speak.

Republicans pointed out that she was replaced by Taylor after her call back to DC and asked how could that be devious? Good point.

Krishnamoorthi in his questioning pointed out one thing that I had missed (maybe it was apparent to everyone else??). Yovanovich was removed and flew back the day of Zelenky's inauguration and the three amigos attended instead. But Taylor didn't arrive until a month later, leaving a month or so where the Ambassador's post was unfilled and the three amigos back channel was operative and presumably executing policies. Interesting revelation to me.

If the President wanted to sideline ongoing stated US policy, removing the Ambassador and waiting for confirmation would allow him to flank around the State Department to extort or blackmail the Ukrainians. It's probably been done thousands of times (mostly for other reasons) but that would explain the move.

Another interesting thing arose from the Yovanovich hearing that got me to slapping my forehead.

Nunes read into the record an obviously doctored April 21st telephone transcript (let's just call it "Dick and Jane say, thank you!") which directly contradicts the official NSC Executive Summary read out from April 21st previously disseminated by the White House . Why the MSM keeps referring to these as "transcripts" (which they aren't) and reinforcing Trump's lies about it is beyond me. None the less dumb-ass Nunes read it into the record without his staff (or in this case the White House - obviously) checking the record and now they're blaming Lt. Col. Vindman for the discrepancy.

I'd call that ridiculous but frankly it's more scum-baggery than anything else. Of course the WH will try to turn their own idiotic BS around and blame anyone they can knowing their apparently equally idiotic base and Fox News will buy it.

 

Edited November 17, 2019 by Bob Ness

[Bob Ness]

12 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:

In Friday's Closed Door Testimony - David Holmes said in his testimony that he told he immediately told the Deputy Chief of Mission and others at the Embassy about the call with President Trump and Sondland. Holmes added that he told Ambassador Taylor about the call and “repeatedly referred to the call and conversation with Ambassador Sondland in meetings and conversations.” [This would have been around July 26.]

The problem though is that it contradicts William Taylor's testimony. He said he heard about the call "last Friday", which was November 8.

 

 

Yes it certainly would be interesting for the State Department to release this information to exonerate him wouldn't it? Oh I forgot, they're too busy ignoring subpoenas to do that. Weird huh?

 

[Bob Ness]

8 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

Democrats Omit Exculpatory Information from Summary of Tim Morrison Transcript

It can't be omitted if it's in the transcript. I presume after reading the transcript Republicans can also provide a summary? And it's not exculpatory.

Here's the important part:

THE CHAIRMAN: And you weren’t concerned that the President bringing up one of his political opponents in the Presidential election and asking a favor with respect to the DNC server or 2016 theory, you weren’t concerned that those things would cause people to believe that the President was asking his counterpart to conduct an investigation that might influence his reelection campaign?

MR. MORRISON: No.

THE CHAIRMAN: That never occurred to you?

MR. MORRISON: No.

He basically admitted to hearing it didn't he? Why didn't he say that never happened?

Edited November 18, 2019 by Bob Ness

[W. Niederhut]

23 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

William,

With all due respect, can you show me where I ever said Joe Biden was a rabid dog with dementia?

 

 

      I was only joking about NOKO state media, apparently, sharing your low opinion of Biden.

      But, speaking of "state media," a conservative radio talk show host here in Denver, former Assistant DA Craig Silverman, was fired yesterday in the middle of his show for criticizing Trump's conduct during the impeachment inquiry.

    (I went to high school with Craig Silverman, and he used to coachmy nephew's baseball team.  Good guy.)

    The story is out today that Silverman's KNUS employer, Salem Media, had forbidden any negative commentary on their shows about Trump and the impeachment hearings. 

    Creepy stuff.

    

 

[James DiEugenio]

I saw that story at Huffpost.

I agree its pretty bad.

[James DiEugenio]

9 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Don't play the victim. There's no antipathy Jim.

Google David Holmes Jim, he testified a couple of days ago.. You probably won't believe it.

Who was the whistle blower? That's you obsession, or talking point that I've pointed out, not mine.

Let me count the ways. You were silent in Charlottesville, you were silent about tax cuts to the  rich. Silent about the wall. For an aspiring foreign policy wonk, silent about abandoning the peace treaty with Iran, and leaving the Paris accords. Total silence until after midterms. This is the first I remember even about "deceit."

As the thread shows, I've tried to get a direct answer from you about Trump's culpability on anything!  (Come on Jim, let's stick to the current issues, or the elephant in the room, there's an impeachment inquiry going on) . But you don't think he's culpable, or can't admit he is..

Can you please explain to me, using just one example,  what on earth the wall had to do with JFK?

Or what the Paris Accords have to do with JFK?

Please explain it to us all.  Since we have all missed it.

Waiting.  

When you find out, please let us all know and open up a thread on it.

My original post does have something to do with JFK, namely Mark Zaid.  And I explained it in full. 

Now what William is talking about, that does have a connection to JFK since it connects to the neocons who completely usurped his foreign policy.  And I think the differing attitudes toward the USSR are important.

But the idea that anyone should have to say, hey I don't agree with the wall, or hey I liked the white Supremacists and Trump's equivocation about that--this is just malarkey on your part. And no I was not playing the victim, I was trying to expose the nonsense you type here.

Edited November 18, 2019 by James DiEugenio

[Kirk Gallaway]

Jim did you find out who David Holmes was? And how's the search for that no good whistle blower going?

Jim says:

Please explain it to us all.  Since we have all missed it.

Waiting.  !!!!!

Waiting???Well you might wait a while because I don't live here, like you Jim.

Oh coming back with vitriol 10 hours later. Who has the antipathy Jim?

 

And your mad?, but in your last effort , I would never characterize your writing as gibberish Jim, as you did mine...But I might occasionally characterize it as paranoid rantings of someone who sees some evil under every rock and has the peace of mind of someone who believes no people are truly as they appear. A little less childish and a little more descriptive, wouldn't you say? 

But  even then, I'll say occasionally.

 

 

 

Edited November 18, 2019 by Kirk Gallaway