Mark Zaid, JFK and Trump

[Bob Ness]

On 10/20/2019 at 5:50 AM, James DiEugenio said:

As per a direct answer on Mutual defense agreements: from New York Magazine 9/14/18,

"In the criminal defense world, there is nothing untoward or immoral about lawyers for targets and subjects of complex criminal investigations pooling resources and sharing their notes.  There's power in numbers, and joint defense agreement are a perfectly acceptable, if not preferable, way for lawyers to navigate a complex criminal investigation and not do double work and for their clients to get their stories straight and feel as if they're not alone in this.  Big government is coming after them, after all, its resources are limitless, and a coherent defense strategy makes perfect sense."  That article then adds, that whenever someone wants to drop out, as Flynn did to cop a plea, he lets the other lawyers know and the flowing of info stops.

If these things are common practice and designed to pool resources in these types of large complex inquiries, then why should their use be some kind of golden talisman in this case?

For these reasons:

Firstly, the subject in this case isn't the run of the mill alleged co-conspirator in a drug running case. Quite the opposite actually. He's the boss of the branch of government that is responsible for prosecuting the case against himself! Big difference huh?  if Joey Bonano had that going for him what do you think would happen with the case?  Think it would go to trial?

Now that's bad enough but there is also this to consider:

The other alleged conspirators in the case, or subjects if you will, can be prosecuted and tried but the ring leader can't! He can't even be indicted! Maybe-maybe after he leaves office but only if the statute of limitations hasn't run out because he can't even be identified as an unidicted co-conspirator because ... well it's just so unfair!!

It's beyond ridiculous at this point but we should all understand that the ring leader can harmonize with everyone else easily because if they go to trial separately and are convicted the big guy can COMPLETELY REVERSE ALL CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR CONVICTIONS including losing their freedom, voting rights reinstating salaries with back pay, gun rights the whole nine yards...

But all my conspiracy friends can't imagine anything funny about The President of the United States entering into these agreements with convicted and admitted felons after which they become mysteriously uncooperative with prosecutors. It's as if their eyes have scaled over with a purified vision of what we're stuck with in the White House.

[W. Niederhut]

8 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

Ah ... the "Kremlin Octopus" conspiracy theory. I think I prefer Cliff calling everyone a fascist.

Best to everyone. The next year or so will be a crazy ride.

Jeff,

       I get the impression from this thread that many people here have been so focused on researching and accurately identifying the black ops and mainstream media disinformation of the post-WWII U.S. Deep State that they have lost sight of the fact that the modern Russian Federation is also capable of black ops and the propagation of disinformazia.

      No doubt, our own U.S. military-industrial complex has engaged in black ops and the propagation of Cold War propaganda for decades after WWII, but, surely, you don't imagine that Putin's Russian Federation hasn't also engaged in active measures, including black ops, to achieve a weakening and destabilization of the U.S. and their Western European adversaries in NATO-- especially in response to NATO aggression against Russia in the aftermath of the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

     Gary Kasparov hit the nail on the head a year or two ago when he said that Trump has been completely over-matched in Putin's chess game against the U.S./ Israel/Saudi Arabia/NATO coalition since 2015.   And Trump was an easy mark for Putin and his FSB associates-- a greedy, vainglorious libertine who was ensnared by a combination of old-fashioned KGB sexual kompromat and money (including major Russian money laundering through the purchase of Trump's properties in the U.S., and the Trump Moscow Tower deal, which was being secretly negotiated throughout 2016, contrary to Trump's public denials.)

     People need to look at the forest when it comes to the Trump administration and Putin's Russian Federation.

     The forest is Putin's 1997 geopolitical playbook-- Alexander Dugin's The Foundations of Politics-- Russia's Geopolitical Future, and its close relationship to the Russian Gerasimov Doctrine of asymmetrical cyber warfare.

[Kirk Ross]

2 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

I may be suffering from confirmation bias with my belief that George P's pals were CIA.

I like to imagine the CIA "tricked" the FBI, or placed a few bad eggs in the FBI executive suite, and that the FBI is not inherently corrupt.

What makes you think he has "pals" in the CIA?  In his testimony (he could have lied, but he was sworn) he seems to suggest that he was set up from the beginning.  Probably by the FBI, but who really knows.  Do you discount his testimony? Do you feel you have a more reliable source of information?  What's your take on his testimony if you have read it?

[Dennis Berube]

On 10/20/2019 at 12:23 PM, W. Niederhut said:

  As a guy who believed for most of the past 56 years that Lee Harvey Oswald had murdered JFK,

Case closed on Wm...

[Dennis Berube]

On 10/17/2019 at 12:43 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Take a look at this press conference, from about the 34 minute mark on, he really gives it to Graham and people like Kristol who want to see us stay in Syria.  I can see why the neo cons don't like this stuff.

Thanks for posting this Jim. I usually do not watch Trump on tv because I can't really stomach him, but this was really kind of amazing to watch. Unlike so many political situations where Trumps' approach is ghastly, his demeanor is actually quite effective for the modern audience in rebutting the permanent war psychosis that our country (and now Democratic party) has been sick with since WWII.

 

I'm not sure who else said it on here but, I have to agree that Trump's foreign policy is the main conflict he has with the oligarchical power structure. It is the only context I'm aware of that explains everything we have seen in the last few years in regards to all this fake Russian news garbage. This reminds me of a comment Putin made in his interview with Oliver Stone (who I'm sure Cliff will call a fascist pig) when Stone asked him if he interfered in the 2016 election. Putin's answer was something like "No, of course not, that is all related to Americas domestic political situation". In other words, its a story designed to have a political effect, not a genuine one where the chips fall where they may. 

[W. Niederhut]

3 hours ago, Dennis Berube said:

Case closed on Wm...

Dennis,

         Is this supposed to constitute a rebuttal of the many facts about Trump, Russia, Alexander Dugin, and the Gerasimov Doctrine that I posted above?

         How utterly ridiculous.  To whom are you appealing with this kind of glib rhetorical nonsense?

         It's the kind of intellectual dishonesty that serves no useful purpose in a serious discussion of history and politics.

       

[Bob Ness]

On 10/17/2019 at 11:03 AM, James DiEugenio said:

From my understanding, Jaworski wrestled with this idea for months on end during Watergate.

He came to the conclusion that one could not indict a sitting president and that the Constitutional method was impeachment, and perhaps indicting him later once he was out of office.

Its not what the Constitution does not say, its what it says.

This is the intro to US District Judge Marrero's ruling on Trump's tax returns and what they claim to be the President's immunity to everything under the sun. Trump lost that case and is now going to appeal the decision tomorrow before an Appellate Court. Here's the King's position according to Marrero:

The President asserts an extraordinary claim in the dispute now before this Court. He contends that, in his view of the President's duties and functions and the allocation of governmental powers between the executive and the judicial branches under the United States Constitution, the person who serves as President, while in office, enjoys absolute immunity from criminal process of any kind. Consider the reach of the President's argument. As the Court reads it, presidential immunity would stretch to cover every phase of criminal proceedings, including investigations, grand jury proceedings and subpoenas, indictment, prosecution, arrest, trial, conviction, and incarceration. That constitutional protection presumably would encompass any conduct, at any time, in any forum, whether federal or state, and whether the President acted alone or in concert with other individuals. Hence, according to this categorical doctrine as presented in this proceeding, the constitutional dimensions of the presidential shield from judicial process are virtually limitless: Until the President leaves office by expiration of his term,  resignation, or removal through impeachment and conviction, his exemption from criminal proceedings would extend not only to matters arising from performance of the President's duties and functions in his official capacity, but also to ones arising from his private affairs, financial transactions, and all other conduct undertaken as an ordinary citizen, both during and before his tenure in office.

Moreover, on this theory, the President's special dispensation from the criminal law's purview and judicial inquiry would embrace not only the behavior and activities of the President  himself, but also extend derivatively so as to potentially immunize the misconduct of any other person, business affiliate, associate, or relative who may have collaborated with the  President in purportedly unlawful acts and whose offenses ordinarily would warrant criminal investigation and prosecution of all involved.

In practice, the implications and actual effects of the President's categorical rule could be far reaching. In some circumstances, by raising his protective shield, applicable statutes of  limitations could run, barring further investigation and prosecution of serious criminal offenses, thus potentially enabling both the President and any accomplices to escape being brought to justice. Temporally, such immunity would operate to frustrate the administration of justice by insulating from criminal law scrutiny and judicial review, whether by federal or state courts,  not only matters occurring during the President's tenure in office, but potentially also records relating to transactions and illegal actions the President and others may have committed before he assumed the Presidency.

This ruling could kill the useless DOJ memos as well. It will be interesting to see. CSPAN 7ET

[W. Niederhut]

50 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:

Don't get me wrong. Putin has had some very serious gripes with the USA. 

Back in 2009, Hillary gave Putin the shaft when she cancelled the sale of Opel (GM's European) to a Russian led group. Not only did a number of Oligarchs friendly to Putin lose a lot of money down the Clinton Foundation Pay to Play Donation Drain, Putin did not get the chance to show off to his own people that he could bring them the first Western style modern car manufacturing plant. Putin had a gripe with Hillary. It was personal.

I do think he prefers Trump. I think, like anyone else, Putin prefers to be metaphorically punched in the face by Trump then be stabbed in the back by Hillary.

There is a much, much, darker reason for Russian resentment of Hillary and what she represents, than just the loss of a car factory.

We'll just add it has something to do with the Magnitsky Act, and the Russian law enacted shortly thereafter. The Dima Yakovlev Law. Pay special attention to the restrictions placed on the adoption of Russian Children.

Then consider the possible reason this adoption agency in Strongsville Ohio was raided by the FBI and what that might have to do with a Visa lawyer named Lisa Page (and Strzok "girlfriend") who used to live in Strongsville.

 

 

 

Robert,

     I know more about how Putin and the FSB operate than you imagine.  I've had some direct experience with them during the past 20 years.  In fact I'm a Russophile,(though not a Soviet-o-phile) a member of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROCOR) for the past quarter century.

    Surely, you jest in referring to Trump "punching Putin in the face" (metaphorically or otherwise.)  Putin owns Trump, and the world knows it (other than the delusional 30 percent-- Fox News-watching crowd -- in the U.S.) Trump made an international laughing stock of himself in Helsinki by denying that Putin meddled in our U.S. elections.  He's, obviously, terrified of Putin-- one of the few politicians in the world (besides Kim Jung Un) he hasn't dared disparage.

    Policy-wise, Trump has functioned as Putin's king pawn on the world stage since 2015-- fracturing and weakening U.S. society and our alliances with Western Europe, and ending our Timber Sycamore proxy war in Syria (probably a good thing there, considering the damage we have done in Syria.)  Trump has also repeatedly undermined the Ukraine in their struggle to prevent occupation and annexation by the Kremlin.

   Putin has used Trump brilliantly to help implement Alexander Dugin's 1997 geopolitical strategy for advancing Russian Federation hegemony in Eurasia.

    

 

   

Edited October 23, 2019 by W. Niederhut

[Andrew Prutsok]

Probably not so great for the Kurds, who were our allies.

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

Probably not so great for the Kurds, who were our allies.

True.  The Kurds have long been persecuted minorities in both (northern) Syria and Turkey.

Now they are at the mercy of both national governments-- unless Putin can prevail upon Assad and Erdogan to protect them from genocidal military ops.

If Putin's grand game is to ally the Kurds (especially in Iraq's Kurdistan) with the Russian-Iranian-Syrian Axis, perhaps he will try to protect them from Assad's regime.

Meanwhile, in his inimitably idiotic style, Donald Trump has just claimed credit for Putin's resolution of the border dispute between Erdogan and Assad.

If the Nationals manage to win the World Series Trump will, doubtless, take credit for that as well.

[Ray Mitcham]

Looks like John Gotti has lost his soubriquet, the Teflon Don, to the guy in the White house.

"We have achieved permanent peace in Syria" followed by "whatever "permanent" means in the part of the world."

"I have achieved a great victory," ( by abandoning his allies, the Kurds, to the animal Erdogan, and his butchers.)

And some Americans still believe this man is sane?

Edited October 24, 2019 by Ray Mitcham

[W. Niederhut]

49 minutes ago, Ray Mitcham said:

Looks like John Gotti has lost his soubriquet, the Teflon Don, to the guy in the White house.

"We have achieved permanent peace in Syria" followed by "whatever "permanent" means in the part of the world."

"I have achieved a great victory," ( by abandoning his allies, the Kurds, to the animal Erdogan, and his butchers.)

And some Americans still believe this man is sane?

It's truly Orwellian.

If Trump told his cult members here in the U.S. that little green men from Mars had invaded Louisiana, they'd all hunker down in their bunkers.

[Bob Ness]

1 hour ago, Ray Mitcham said:

Looks like John Gotti has lost his soubriquet, the Teflon Don, to the guy in the White house.

"We have achieved permanent peace in Syria" followed by "whatever "permanent" means in the part of the world."

"I have achieved a great victory," ( by abandoning his allies, the Kurds, to the animal Erdogan, and his butchers.)

And some Americans still believe this man is sane?

I don't quite understand why nobody but John Bolton objected to Trump surrendering to the Taliban at Camp David. Why wasn't everyone up in arms about that one? He proposed doing it the week of 9/11. The Dems are so inept when it comes to pointing out the obvious. That should have really scarred his future alone IMO.

[Paul Bacon]

12 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:

How many different ways can your narrative fall apart? 

BREAKING: #SDF Commander thanks

@POTUS

"for his tireless efforts that stopped the brutal Turkish attack" Gen Mazloum Abdi also says US promised "long term support at various spheres"

This is good.  I think I see a trend.  Let's continue the hostilities via Twitter. 

[Dennis Berube]

On 10/22/2019 at 9:46 AM, Robert Wheeler said:

There were any number of competing development plans for the gas fields. Broadly, the difference in the plans is/was where to run the pipeline through to get the gas to the European market. The War in Syria is basically over pipeline rights of way. One contingent wants to go through Turkey, another via Cyprus. In either case, lots of Money is at stake. The Russians are involved because they are Western Europe's main gas supplier and stand to lose their monopoly.

There was an interview, I believe foreign, with a high ranking French (maybe German, can't remember) diplomat who said this is the exact scenario. I tried searching for it briefly to no avail, anyone recall this as well?

 

That basic concept seems to fit just about everything we've seen since the conflict started.