Douglas Caddy

Robert Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-18/la-danse-mossad-robert-maxwell-and-jeffrey-epstein?fbclid=IwAR1rxbF2nyBOAkr---uHshW1mDAs76kEnfobRcKeBdNoj5bjBx5Kw4ZAOzA

Dark Journalist maintains that “There's Definitely an Effort in the Trump Administration to Consolidate Knowledge of Advanced Technology Research. The Jason Military Scientists Group was apparently deemed not Loyal Enough...!” A Reuters Special Report Inside a Trump-era purge of military scientists at a legendary think tank https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-trump-science/?fbclid=IwAR1KlwTmBaEEyzRSSb24D5QjUQx4sg8lKnhA7jGjpoI69e_lO5ByqllN24o

Readers of your comment, such as the general public, would think of you and looney tunes as your comment has nothing to do with my posting. We forum members know from past experience to ignore them as a waste of time.

President Trump jokingly acknowledged this past week at one of his rallies that he is way overweight. He is about the same age as Joseph P. Kennedy, the founding father of the Kennedy political dynasty, when Kennedy had a stroke that basically ended his active life. Here from Wikipedia is what happened to Kennedy and could happen to Trump unless Trump's takes steps to lose his excessive weight: "On December 19, 1961, at the age of 73, Kennedy suffered a stroke. He survived but was left paralyzed on his right side. Thereafter, he suffered from aphasia, which severely affected his ability to speak. He remained mentally alert, regained certain functions with therapy, and began walking with a cane. His speech also showed some improvement.[75] Kennedy began to experience excessive muscular weakness, which eventually required him to use a wheelchair. In 1964, Kennedy was taken to The Institutes for the Achievement of Human Potential in Philadelphia, a medical and rehabilitative center for those who have experienced brain injury.[75] "Kennedy's son Robert was assassinated on June 5, 1968.[76] In the aftermath of his son's death, Kennedy made his last public appearance when he, his wife, and son Ted made a filmed message to the country.[citation needed] He died at home in Hyannis Port the following year on November 18, 1969.[77] He had outlived four of his children.[78] He was buried at Holyhood Cemetery in Brookline, Massachusetts. Kennedy's widow Rose was buried next to him following her death in 1995, as was their daughter Rosemary in 2005.[79]" After Joseph Kennedy suffered his stroke he was unable to communicate effectively with his two sons, John and Robert. His mind was intact but he had lost his ability to speak. Otherwise he would have warned them that by taking on investigating the Mafia they were breaking the Rule of Eighth Avenue. Joseph Kennedy had assured the Mafia that if it got JFK elected President, there would be no such investigation. The Mafia arranged for JFK to win Illinois, which put him over the top and elected him president. The Kennedy brothers subsequent crusade against the Mafia once they were in power inflamed the leaders of organized crime who felt the had been double-crossed. The Rule of Eighth Avenue was invoked and the Mafia joined with the CIA to assassinate both brothers. Trump believes he is the Master of the Universe. He never invokes recognition of that there is a Higher Authority, a Prime Intelligence, a/k/a God. Trump's physical weakness is his excessive weight. As a result he could suffer a stroke just as did Joseph Kennedy. It could even occur when he is in mid-sentence in one of his hate-filled speeches before a rally of his base of racists and White Supremacists. Suddenly then both Trump and his base would realize at the same time that he is a mere human being, one suffering a massive stroke that cruelly keeps his mind intact but causes him to lose his ability to speak. Hopefully this will not happen. But if did it would be the end of the Era of Trump. Joseph Kennedy's stroke had the ultimate effect of ending the Era of the Kennedys.,

Epstein had a woman visitor while in prison. https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardbehar/2019/08/15/jeffrey-epstein-spent-time-alone-with-young-female-prison-visitor/#2e8c93fb185b

The “Missing” Notebook and Key In recounting what took place during the arrests on June 17, 1972, Carl Shoffler claimed that after the five burglars had been forced to lean against a wall with their hands, he saw one of the burglars, Eugenio Martinez, slide his hand to something in his pocket. Shoffler asserted that he struggled with Martinez and seized a small notebook that had a key taped on its back. In a deposition, this is how Shoffler described the event under oath on March 13 and 15, 1995. Lawyers for Maureen and John Dean had filed suit against St. Martin’s Press, Inc., publishers of Silent Coup: The Removal of the President, whose co-authors are Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin. Shoffler testified: “We had placed them on the wall with their hands against the wall and their feet out. And we started on the extreme right of the five to search and seize the evidence. “Martinez was on the extreme left. “As I was writing what [Officer] Barrett was seizing, I observed that Martinez was sliding his hand down the wall. We had padded them down initially for weapons. And I didn’t feel that he had a pistol or anything on him. But I wasn’t certain at this point while he was sliding his hand down. “So I moved quickly over to him, pushed his hand forcefully back up. He struggled a little. I had my revolver out. [Burglars] McCord or Frank Sturgis, I believe, instructed him to calm down and just follow our instructions. I think that there was a realization on their part that we were younger officers and we were aggressive. And he started calming Martinez down, and asking him to follow our directions. “Martinez did not comply. At some point, within seconds, his hand was back again going into the area of his coat pocket. We had a struggle again. I was very forceful with him. The others were yelling. We thought things were getting out of hand. “I decided to follow Martinez’s hand. He was grasping something. I’ve always said that I had the impression that whatever he was grasping he was going to get rid of or eat. I don’t know how to put that into words any better than that. “I struggled with him. And I recovered from his hand what he was so concerned about, even to the point of possibly risking being shot. And it turned out to be a simple notebook with a key on it. And that was certainly a bit of a puzzle.”[pp. 23-25] With the arrests wrapped up, Shoffler telephoned the Washington Post and alerted the newspaper to what had transpired at Watergate. At around 7 A.M., nearly five hours after the arrests, Shoffler returned to the P Street apartment that he shared with Merritt and woke him up. Shoffler was happy and excited and he embraced Merritt and kissed him, proudly exclaiming “I arrested five burglars.” He showed Merritt the notebook the he had taken off one of the burglars. He also showed Merritt the envelope that Merritt had previously sealed, now open, along with the paper inside. He produced two keys, one of which was the blank safe deposit key that Merritt had purchased at Shoffler’s request. He took a roll of duct tape from a drawer in the kitchen and taped the second key to the back of the notebook. He then again swore Merritt to secrecy, making him promise never to tell that they knew two weeks in advance of the burglars’ break-in plan of the DNC. He then departed, saying he was going to get breakfast at nearby Hartnett Hall and afterwards go to court to assist the prosecutor in the arraignment of the arrested burglars. What happened to the notebook and key, which, pursuant to police standard operating procedure should have been bagged and tagged, and included in the list of items seized at the crime scene inside the DNC? In his sworn deposition of March 15, 1995, Shoffler provided the answer when asked additional questions posed by the Dean’s lawyer: “Q. Now, what did you do with the notebook and key? “A. Well, it was only recently that I became aware of the fact that, in the logs for all the evidence that we seized, it doesn’t appear that there was an entry for the notebook. And the only explanation I could offer of that is that I was shown a photograph of the national archives. My initials are clearly on the book and the date. “My recollection is that when I got back to the precinct, because we had deviated in our game plan from the actual persons to list and search and seize, because of that shuffle and the fact that I had to actually seize the notebook, I believed I retained possession of it, noted it, and it was my responsibility to process it. “And I believe that’s why it isn’t in the entry that you’ve shown me or someone has shown me recently.” “Q. All right. Let me show what I’ll ask the court reporter to mark as Exhibit 6, which is, and I will represent to counsel, a copy – excuse me, it’s a photocopy of the key and the notebook that is now at the National Archives and was recently copied there, and ask you if you can identify whether that is the notebook and the key that you took from the burglars that night? “A. Yes, sir. I believe this is the notebook and the key. My initials appear in the upper right-hand corner. “Q. Can you show that to the videographer, please? “A. (Witness complied.) “Q. Okay, thank you. Now, at the time of the arrests, did you conduct any investigation to determine whether this key that you seized from the burglars fit any particular lock? “A. No, sir, I didn’t. “Q. Do you know if any such search, excuse me, any such investigation was ever made? “A. I pointed it out to who would be responsible for the furtherance of the investigation. That was the FBI. I don’t recall the particular agent, but I believe I may have even supplied him the notebook. And I read, years later, read a 302, a bureau report, in which two weeks after the burglary, apparently they had taken the key back down and determined it fit the desk of the secretary of whom some of that [burglars’] material was laying on.” [pp. 30-32] Thus, Shoffler admitted that in contravention of universal and standard police procedure he retained personal possession of two primary pieces of evidence from the crime scene, the notebook and the key, which should have been listed and bagged at the crime scene. There is further discussion of the matter in the same sworn deposition: “Q. Mr. Shoffler, you personally obtained some of the evidence, or not obtain, but collected some of the evidence from the Watergate burglars on the morning of June 17, ’72; is that correct? “A. The notebook and the key, yes, sir. “Q. That’s it? “A. From the burglars? “Q. Yes. “A.Yes, sir. “Q. Those are the only items of evidence that you personally collected from the burglars? “A. I was a listing officer. Officer Barrett was a seizing officer. “Q. So, Officer Barrett did not collect the notebook and key, you did? “A. Correct. “Q. Everything else was collected by Officer Barrett? “A. That’s correct. “Q. How did you handle the notebook and the key when you took it from the person of Mr. Martinez so as not to contaminate it? “A. I maintained possession of it and I properly disposed -- deposited it at the precinct. And my last recollection was it was collected by the FBI. “Q. What was inside the notebook that was attached to the key? “A. I provided – the only recollection that I can provide, there was some sort of chart or like a little diagram or line X, whatever you want to describe it as. There were -- something else was written on it, I don’t recall what it was, and there was a key taped to it with gray tape. [pp. 459-460] “Q. Did you ever testify about the key when you testified before the Senate Watergate Committee? “A. I was not asked. “Q. Is there any reason why you didn’t bring it up? “[lawyer for St. Martin’s Press] He just said he wasn’t asked. “Q. Is there any other reason? “A. The room was full of cameras, a bunch of senators, and they wanted to get on with the show and the police were asked – and I was asked one or two questions, did you – were you there? Did you arrest them? Have a nice day. [p. 538] “Q. Have you ever discussed it with Don Campbell [one of the original three Watergate prosecutors]? “A. Numerous times. “Q. And when did you first discuss the key with Mr. Campbell? “A. Around the time that I started getting real interested. “Q. Which was 1973? “A. ’73, ’74, somewhere in there. “Q. And when was the last time you discussed the key with Mr. Campbell? “A. Oh, I don’t recall. Maybe a year ago. “Q. Do you recall what you said to him a year ago about it? “A. Just that I was still attempting to find out – I was curious that there was no major interest generated. It seems to me that anyone who is still puzzled over a burglary that occurred 20 something years before, as to the motive of the burglary, yet a key that is found on one of the burglars under the circumstances I described, fitting a desk in there, didn’t seem to generate interest. I was puzzled about that.” [pp. 542-543] Like a pyromaniac who cannot resist going back to watch the fire he has set, Shoffler kept returning to the subject of the key, which was the linchpin of his triangulation plan that set up the burglars. Like a serial killer who always left his signature piece of evidence as a way to taunt law enforcement, Shoffler was puzzled why his brilliant scheme involving the key did not attract the attention and interest it obviously deserved.

Times' story about the last days of Epstein https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/17/nyregion/epstein-suicide-death.html

Joe: I was not suggesting in any way that you cease posting in the Education Forum. Such a thought would never occur to me about you or any other forum member. You have knowledge of a great many interesting things outside the topic of the JFK assassination, knowledge that you have accumulated over a lifetime. Combine this with your talented writing skills and you have the makings of a potentially fascinating blog that would publish your commentary as the occasion demanded. You would not be tied down to a schedule, only posting in the blog when you felt motivated to do so when struck by something that was newsworthy. Doug

CRIMSON ROSE By Robert Merritt What was “Crimson Rose,” the two words overheard by Rita Reed when she listened in on the telephone conversation on May 31, 1972? Crimson Rose, an acronym, stood for a 400 page CIA document whose title was “Confidential Report on Intelligence of Military Secret Operations on Nixon” and whose subtitle was “Report of Operations of Secret Surveillance and Eavesdropping.” It was marked “Eyes Only.” Both Military Intelligence and the CIA had wire-tapping operations located in the Columbia Plaza Apartments in the week prior to the Watergate case breaking open. The CIA also had an office that was located at 2430 E Street, N.W., within walking distance of both the Watergate and Columbia Plaza Apartments. Authors Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin in their 1991 book, Silent Coup: The Removal of the President recounted in detail a military intelligence spy ring that reported to the Joint Chief of Staff in the Pentagon that penetrated the White House and that was opposed to Nixon’s foreign policy goals. The secret CIA report dealt with the military intelligence spy ring. Its official title spoke volumes about its contents. Military Intelligence devised a plan to steal the sole copy of the report from the bowels of the CIA. It was desperate to do so because it feared that the report would fall into the hands of the Church Committee or the Pike Committee, the two committees of Congress that were investigating the intelligence community in the wake of Watergate. Carl Shoffler played a key role in carrying out the plan. In 1975 Mitchell Rogovin, General Counsel to the CIA and formerly with Arnold & Porter, was lured by someone he knew and trusted to dinner at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington. In the course of the dinner his drink was spiked, causing him to passing out almost completely. Several men assisted him to a freight elevator that I operated which transported them to a floor above. He was then carried into a room and quickly stripped naked. He was positioned on a bed with a beautiful woman. Graphic Photographs were taken of him and the woman in different sexual positions. Subsequently, he was shown the photographs and told that unless he retrieved and delivered the Crimson Rose report from within the CIA the incriminating photographs would be leaked. He was also threatened that his son would be set up and falsely charged with selling illegal drugs if he did not cooperate. Presented with these demands, Rogovin managed to retrieve the Crimson Rose report and give it to the military agents involved, who included Shoffler. Rogovin resigned from his post as CIA General Counsel the next year.

Tampa crime boss Santo Trafficante Jr. plays a central role in thriller ‘Mafia Spies’ Thomas Maier’s detail-packed but entertaining book recounts the CIA’s plot to kill Castro with the help of Mafia bosses. https://www.tampabay.com/books/tampa-crime-boss-santo-trafficante-jr-plays-a-central-role-in-thriller-mafia-spies-20190816/?fbclid=IwAR1QdBLrcfuICq_svT85lTGHczGOa-5LScK1x8y1GhLZI3eJ8lMwLIF7DCk

I am attempting to verify the quote below from The New York Times. I remember reading in1962 a speech by General MacArthur that was reprinted in U.S. News & World Report in which he declared that the next great war would be fought in outer space. "We deal now not with things of this world alone. We deal now with the ultimate conflict between a united race and the sinister forces of some other planetary galaxy." General Douglas MacArthur New York Times June 1962 UPDATE: The source of General MacArthur's quote is Peter Levenda's book Sinister Forces: A Grimoire of American Political Witchcraft. Book One: The Nine. p. 180. However, the exact date in June 1962 is not provided.

Joe: I just read your commentary above. You are a talented writer with each sentence being thought-provoking. Why not start your own blog and let non-forum people benefit from your insights?

Paul: I included the link in my article in which Dark Journalist interviewed Robert Merritt in Feb. 2018 about his three meetings with Nixon in July 1972. But here it is again: https://www.darkjournalist.com/s-merritt.php Courts are empowered to seal cases, documents and other related legal matters. This is a common practice. Congress can request that a matter in question be unsealed but the court has complete discretion in deciding whether to grant the request or not. John Dean could have taken his copy of the Huston Plan and delivered it to Congress. Instead he delivered it to Chief Judge John Sirica. This was because both Dean and Sirica were central figures in the implementation of the Huston Plan. By giving it to Sirica and not to Congress Dean knew the Plan would be put under court seal where it sits undisclosed today. Dean also knew Sirica would appreciate what he did because it protected the Judge from exposure and accordingly Dean was treated with kid gloves by the judge and served about four months "incarceration' for his crime in covering up Watergate. Dean's "incarceration" brings to mind the "incarceration" that the Florida judge imposed on Epstein in which he was only "locked up" at night and was free during daytime. Dean, too, enjoyed being free in the daytime but was "locked up" at night. I believe Nixon, a Quaker, was a mystic and did take his order from above and followed it to the T. Nixon was following the order when he used Merritt as the person to get his envelop to Kissinger in 1972. The other envelop, the one hidden in the White House Library by Nixon in 1972, bore on its outside "To be opened in 2018,." which was when it was discovered and opened. Merritt, fearful he was dying, used me and my autobiography to get the story told publicly of what Nixon had said to him and of the two envelops. Merritt lost faith in the FBI when the agents he was assigned to work with forbade him in the spring of 1972 to attend his mother's funeral in West Virginia. He defied their order and attended her funeral. At the time the FBI was concentrating all is resources on capturing the leaders of the Weather Underground and did not want Merritt to get distracted from this assignment by going home to West Virginia to his mother's funeral. It was this that led to the break between him and the Bureau. Merritt told me that for eight years thereafter he cursed God every day for taking of his mother from him. Then one day he was seated on the steps of St. Mathews Cathedral in Washington and had the urge to enter it. Once inside he saw a statue of Christ on the cross and above it a bush. As he watched the bush came alive as if on fire and he heard his mother's voice. She told him in a gentle but stern voice to get over her death. She said his life had an important purpose and he should get on with his life and fulfill that purpose. Then her voice ceased and the bush returned to its normal state. I have known only one other person who had a similar experience. He was a detective with the New York Police Department and was known to be scrupulously honest and dedicated in his work. All of this is foreign in conception to most people in this day and age. However, if next year is to be cataclysmic for America and the world then one might expect a mystic such as Nixon to make such a prediction. Cataclysmic means violent change or upheaval. We shall not have to wait long to see if Nixon's early warning about 2020 comes true.

You must have skipped that class in U.S. history and thus missed how President Roosevelt skillfully orchestrated the destruction of the neo-Nazi movement that was active in the years just preceding WWII. Hopefully you will not skip seeing when the American public awakens to President Trump's glorification and promotion of the present neo-Nazi movement and takes its wrath out against him on Election Day in November 2020 if he has not been removed from office before then.

We need someone who can channel FDR to get his advice on how to handle Trump and his new neo-Nazi political crusade.

ABC National News recently reported a brief item that the U.S. Assistant Attorney General had been informed by the warden that the suicide watch on Epstein had been cancelled. That was the full extent of the news report. The Assistant Attorney General would have reported this promptly to U.S. Attorney General Barr who in turn would have informed President Trump. It was at this "green light" point in time that the carefully planned murder of Epstein likely sprung into action.

[Trump's rallies today smack of the same White Nationalism that preceded World War II. He has said he wants it so that the People will obey his every command.] America Made Lady Liberty a Hypocrite Invoking the poem at her base is the wrong response to Trump’s latest move to keep out nonwhite immigrants. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/14/opinion/statue-of-liberty-trump-immigration.html

Chilling video. We have been down this road before and rallied to survive. https://anightatthegarden.com/

Epstein had broken bones in his neck. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/autopsy-finds-broken-bones-in-jeffrey-epsteins-neck-deepening-questions-around-his-death/ar-AAFPxjP?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=UE07DHP

Jeffrey Epstein's Death Was On 4Chan Before Officials Announced It — And Authorities Had To Look Into It About 38 minutes before news outlets first reported Jeffrey Epstein's death in prison, a 4chan user published a detailed post about it. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/janelytvynenko/fdny-review-jeffrey-epstein-4chan-post?utm_source=dynamic&utm_campaign=bfsharefacebook&ref=mobile_share&fbclid=IwAR1QUJZ0-AxCD_g8oXNfzHRs6PK_G3zwf4jzMzwceY0nS8TFXwCW_kuT-Zk

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/14/jeffrey-epstein-accuser-sues-financiers-estate-and-ghislaine-maxwell

This article by Robert Merritt appears in Watergate Exposed that I co-wrote which published by Trine Day in 2010: The secret key to the Watergate break-in When Carl Shoffler arrested the five Watergate burglars on June 17, 1972 at 2:30 AM, he claimed that he found one key on the person of the burglar known as Eugenio Martinez. He asserted that the key was taped on the front of a notebook found on Martinez and that he subsequently inscribed his own notes in his detective’s pad about what he had found relating to the arrests. Martinez’ notebook, bearing Shoffler’s initials with the key taped on it, was later placed in the U.S. National Archives, where it sat for almost two decades before being noticed. This key was the subject of an A&E Investigative Report broadcast in 1992 with the title of “Key to Watergate.” Officer Shoffler was interviewed in the program. Here is the link to the A& E Investigative Report: https://www.watergate.com/john-dean/key-to-watergate Shoffler lied in his official police report on the burglars’ arrest. In actuality there were two keys involved and he removed both keys, not just one, from Eugenio Martinez. The key that he removed and disclosed was a key to the desk of a secretary at the Democratic National Committee. The key that he failed to disclose was a blank safe deposit box key that he had arranged to have placed in the secretary’s desk prior to the break-in as part of his plan to set up the burglars. I have personal knowledge about the second key. About a week before the arrests took place Carl asked me to go to a local locksmith and purchase a blank safe deposit key, which I did. When I returned to our apartment Carl produced a one page document that had encrypted writing on it. He explained to me that the writing was gibberish. He handed the one page document to me using only his fingernails. After I took the document he asked that I fold it so that it would fit inside a white no. 10 business envelop, which he also provided to me using only his fingernails. He directed me to place the document and the key inside the envelop. As I did so I purposely pressed my thumb down hard on the document so that if it later became an issue my thumb print could be traced, as well as all my other fingerprints on the paper, key and envelop. I licked the envelop and sealed it with the encrypted document and key inside. Shoffler then directed me to insert the envelop into an inside pocket of the jacket he was wearing. Why did I purposely leave my fingerprints? Because I had begun not to trust Shoffler fully after the sudden disappearance of my close friend, Rita Reed. If something had happened to Rita because she knew too much, then I figured something could happen to me. My fingerprints on the key, document and envelop were a form of insurance for me, or so I thought. When he employed his triangulation wiretapping after June 3 he led the burglars to believe that a safe deposit key and paper inside an envelope in the secretary’s desk would lead them to a treasure trove of vitally important documents. Possession of the documents would ensure the victory of President Nixon in his re-election campaign and bestow other political benefits. Shoffler, using his wiretap triangulation, also managed to persuade the burglars to move the planned break-in date from June 18 to June 17, which was his birthday. He did so without the burglars being aware that the conversation that they had wiretapped detailing the safe deposit key in the secretary’s desk and June 17 date was a set up conversation orchestrated by him and had no connection to the offices of the Democratic National Committee. In the orchestrated conversation Shoffler indicated that the key to open the secretary’s desk was under her telephone on top of her desk. There is an open question even today whether the burglars’ wiretap operation was wiretapping the Democratic National Committee. It may be that their wiretap operation was instead wiretapping the prostitution ring being operated from an apartment in the Columbia Plaza Apartments across the street from the Watergate complex. The prostitution ring allegedly serviced referrals by telephone from someone inside the Democratic National Committee. The burglar having the most knowledge about the burglars’ wiretap operation was James McCord. After Shoffler returned to my apartment at 7 A.M. on June 17, he roused me from sleep and embraced me and kissed me. He was obviously elated. He said to me, “Thanks to you my operation was a total success. I arrested five burglars. But you must promise me never to tell what you know.” He then showed me the blank safe deposit key that he had withheld from the arrest record, which he had arranged to be planted beforehand in the secretary’s desk. He told me that Martinez was hiding both keys – the first one to open the desk and the second the safe deposit key -- in one of his hands at the time of the arrests and that he physically forced Martinez to surrender both keys. He also showed me the envelop that I had sealed earlier with the key and encrypted writing inside. It had been opened. He told me that he was going to destroy the envelop, encrypted document and key. He then left my apartment, telling me that he was going to grab breakfast at the nearby Hartnett Hall restaurant and then proceed to the courthouse to assist in the arraignment of the burglars. As the A&E video clearly shows, the investigation of the actual break-in on June 17 was given sparse attention in contrast to the thorough investigation given the cover-up that followed, whose aim was to remove Nixon from office. Howard Liebengood, Counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee, asserts in the video that “I must tell you that I am disturbed about the Watergate break-in and that I am convinced that what we don’t know about the Watergate break-in may well be more important than what we do know twenty years after.” In the months that followed the arrests, Shoffler in conversations with me would repeatedly refer to the team of burglars of Liddy, Hunt, McCord and the four Cuban-Americans as his “little duckies.” He was especially contemptuous of Liddy and chortled when Liddy, after he was found guilty, boasted that he planned to remain quiet. In reality Shoffler was fearful that if Liddy did talk, he would provide sufficient information and clues that would lead to discovery of Shoffler’s role in setting up the burglars, a role that Liddy was unaware of. Liddy’s plan to remain quiet fit in perfectly with Shoffler’s own plan, which had duped the burglars from its beginning. He later expanded his “little duckies” pejorative category to everyone involved in the Watergate saga – President Nixon, the Senate Watergate Committee, the Watergate Special Prosecution Force, the media, etc. -- as being his “duckies.” He said, “It is like shooting ducks sitting in a pond with a blindfold on.” Since he held the ace card in clandestinely setting up the burglars, Shoffler could direct its ultimate outcome from behind the scenes. In fact shortly after he made the arrests Shoffler telephoned the Washington Post and reported what had occurred. This inaugurated a relationship with the Post. Shoffler was the primary Deep Throat, out rivaling Mark Felt in his disclosures to the Post. I believe that Mark Felt had knowledge that a planned break-in of some sort was in the works. It was he who directed FBI Agents Tucker and O’Connor to visit and quiz me about the rumor they had picked up that I knew something about a planned break-in. Their visit came a day or two after I informed Shoffler and his two associates on June 3 of what Rita Reed had told me. Why did Felt and the FBI agents never acknowledge their prior knowledge that a break-in had been in the offing? I strongly suspect they felt that their doing so would lead directly to me and once I became a central figure in Watergate I would be forced to disclose to the investigative authorities the numerous crimes that I had committed under the FBI’s COINTELPRO. Disclosure of these crimes might have meant Felt, Tucker and O’Connor would have faced prosecution for directing these crimes be done. (As it turned out, Felt was later indicted in 1978 and stood trial for certain activities that he had engaged in as part of COINTELPRO.) So it was in the interest of the FBI that I remain silent and out of the public spotlight after the break-in case broke on June 17. In viewing the video, special attention should be given to Shoffler’s eye movements, facial expressions, body language, and oral statements. He boasted to me on numerous occasions that, as a military intelligence agent, he had been trained to lie without being detected. However, a careful watching of him being interviewed shows that he was not a total master at doing this. In his burning quest to become the celebrity known as the most famous policeman in the world, Shoffler designed a secret plan that forced a sitting president from office, destroyed the faith of the American people immeasurably in their system of government, and launched a bitter political partisanship that has divided the country ever since. It boggles the mind that a single individual could have so changed the course of history, but this is what Shoffler, in his own way an evil genius, accomplished.

Robert Merritt wrote this in Watergate Exposed that was published in 2010 by Trine Day: The secret key to the Watergate break-in When Carl Shoffler arrested the five Watergate burglars on June 17, 1972 at 2:30 AM, he claimed that he found one key on the person of the burglar known as Eugenio Martinez. He asserted that the key was taped on the front of a notebook found on Martinez and that he subsequently inscribed his own notes in his detective’s pad about what he had found relating to the arrests. Martinez’ notebook, bearing Shoffler’s initials with the key taped on it, was later placed in the U.S. National Archives, where it sat for almost two decades before being noticed. This key was the subject of an A&E Investigative Report broadcast in 1992 with the title of “Key to Watergate.” Officer Shoffler was interviewed in the program. Here is the link to the A& E Investigative Report: https://www.watergate.com/john-dean/key-to-watergate Shoffler lied in his official police report on the burglars’ arrest. In actuality there were two keys involved and he removed both keys, not just one, from Eugenio Martinez. The key that he removed and disclosed was a key to the desk of a secretary at the Democratic National Committee. The key that he failed to disclose was a blank safe deposit box key that he had arranged to have placed in the secretary’s desk prior to the break-in as part of his plan to set up the burglars. I have personal knowledge about the second key. About a week before the arrests took place Carl asked me to go to a local locksmith and purchase a blank safe deposit key, which I did. When I returned to our apartment Carl produced a one page document that had encrypted writing on it. He explained to me that the writing was gibberish. He handed the one page document to me using only his fingernails. After I took the document he asked that I fold it so that it would fit inside a white no. 10 business envelop, which he also provided to me using only his fingernails. He directed me to place the document and the key inside the envelop. As I did so I purposely pressed my thumb down hard on the document so that if it later became an issue my thumb print could be traced, as well as all my other fingerprints on the paper, key and envelop. I licked the envelop and sealed it with the encrypted document and key inside. Shoffler then directed me to insert the envelop into an inside pocket of the jacket he was wearing. Why did I purposely leave my fingerprints? Because I had begun not to trust Shoffler fully after the sudden disappearance of my close friend, Rita Reed. If something had happened to Rita because she knew too much, then I figured something could happen to me. My fingerprints on the key, document and envelop were a form of insurance for me, or so I thought. When he employed his triangulation wiretapping after June 3 he led the burglars to believe that a safe deposit key and paper inside an envelope in the secretary’s desk would lead them to a treasure trove of vitally important documents. Possession of the documents would ensure the victory of President Nixon in his re-election campaign and bestow other political benefits. Shoffler, using his wiretap triangulation, also managed to persuade the burglars to move the planned break-in date from June 18 to June 17, which was his birthday. He did so without the burglars being aware that the conversation that they had wiretapped detailing the safe deposit key in the secretary’s desk and June 17 date was a set up conversation orchestrated by him and had no connection to the offices of the Democratic National Committee. In the orchestrated conversation Shoffler indicated that the key to open the secretary’s desk was under her telephone on top of her desk. There is an open question even today whether the burglars’ wiretap operation was wiretapping the Democratic National Committee. It may be that their wiretap operation was instead wiretapping the prostitution ring being operated from an apartment in the Columbia Plaza Apartments across the street from the Watergate complex. The prostitution ring allegedly serviced referrals by telephone from someone inside the Democratic National Committee. The burglar having the most knowledge about the burglars’ wiretap operation was James McCord. After Shoffler returned to my apartment at 7 A.M. on June 17, he roused me from sleep and embraced me and kissed me. He was obviously elated. He said to me, “Thanks to you my operation was a total success. I arrested five burglars. But you must promise me never to tell what you know.” He then showed me the blank safe deposit key that he had withheld from the arrest record, which he had arranged to be planted beforehand in the secretary’s desk. He told me that Martinez was hiding both keys – the first one to open the desk and the second the safe deposit key -- in one of his hands at the time of the arrests and that he physically forced Martinez to surrender both keys. He also showed me the envelop that I had sealed earlier with the key and encrypted writing inside. It had been opened. He told me that he was going to destroy the envelop, encrypted document and key. He then left my apartment, telling me that he was going to grab breakfast at the nearby Hartnett Hall restaurant and then proceed to the courthouse to assist in the arraignment of the burglars. As the A&E video clearly shows, the investigation of the actual break-in on June 17 was given sparse attention in contrast to the thorough investigation given the cover-up that followed, whose aim was to remove Nixon from office. Howard Liebengood, Counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee, asserts in the video that “I must tell you that I am disturbed about the Watergate break-in and that I am convinced that what we don’t know about the Watergate break-in may well be more important than what we do know twenty years after.” In the months that followed the arrests, Shoffler in conversations with me would repeatedly refer to the team of burglars of Liddy, Hunt, McCord and the four Cuban-Americans as his “little duckies.” He was especially contemptuous of Liddy and chortled when Liddy, after he was found guilty, boasted that he planned to remain quiet. In reality Shoffler was fearful that if Liddy did talk, he would provide sufficient information and clues that would lead to discovery of Shoffler’s role in setting up the burglars, a role that Liddy was unaware of. Liddy’s plan to remain quiet fit in perfectly with Shoffler’s own plan, which had duped the burglars from its beginning. He later expanded his “little duckies” pejorative category to everyone involved in the Watergate saga – President Nixon, the Senate Watergate Committee, the Watergate Special Prosecution Force, the media, etc. -- as being his “duckies.” He said, “It is like shooting ducks sitting in a pond with a blindfold on.” Since he held the ace card in clandestinely setting up the burglars, Shoffler could direct its ultimate outcome from behind the scenes. In fact shortly after he made the arrests Shoffler telephoned the Washington Post and reported what had occurred. This inaugurated a relationship with the Post. Shoffler was the primary Deep Throat, out rivaling Mark Felt in his disclosures to the Post. I believe that Mark Felt had knowledge that a planned break-in of some sort was in the works. It was he who directed FBI Agents Tucker and O’Connor to visit and quiz me about the rumor they had picked up that I knew something about a planned break-in. Their visit came a day or two after I informed Shoffler and his two associates on June 3 of what Rita Reed had told me. Why did Felt and the FBI agents never acknowledge their prior knowledge that a break-in had been in the offing? I strongly suspect they felt that their doing so would lead directly to me and once I became a central figure in Watergate I would be forced to disclose to the investigative authorities the numerous crimes that I had committed under the FBI’s COINTELPRO. Disclosure of these crimes might have meant Felt, Tucker and O’Connor would have faced prosecution for directing these crimes be done. (As it turned out, Felt was later indicted in 1978 and stood trial for certain activities that he had engaged in as part of COINTELPRO.) So it was in the interest of the FBI that I remain silent and out of the public spotlight after the break-in case broke on June 17. In viewing the video, special attention should be given to Shoffler’s eye movements, facial expressions, body language, and oral statements. He boasted to me on numerous occasions that, as a military intelligence agent, he had been trained to lie without being detected. However, a careful watching of him being interviewed shows that he was not a total master at doing this. In his burning quest to become the celebrity known as the most famous policeman in the world, Shoffler designed a secret plan that forced a sitting president from office, destroyed the faith of the American people immeasurably in their system of government, and launched a bitter political partisanship that has divided the country ever since. It boggles the mind that a single individual could have so changed the course of history, but this is what Shoffler, in his own way an evil genius, accomplished.

Jeffrey Epstein Death: 2 Guards Slept Through Checks and Falsified Records https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/nyregion/jeffrey-epstein-jail-officers.html

From the article: But we don’t know that he is dead. This report on Intellihub might be a fabrication posted to attract readers. Or it might be a false report put out by the deep state to distract attention from a suspicious suicide. James Jesus Angleton, head of CIA counter-intelligence, once told me that when the CIA pulls off something, it muddies the waters by placing different and conflicting stories in the media. The result, he said, is that there is too much to investigate, and people end up arguing with one another over which story is correct, and the facts of the event are never investigated. Today with the Internet all sorts of stories can be put into play in order to cover an event in confusion. When you hear someone trying to discredit a view by calling it a “conspiracy theory,” be suspicious. The CIA invented “conspiracy theory” in order to control the explanation of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination by discrediting skeptics of the official explanation. https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/08/12/the-epstein-mystery/