Cliff Varnell
-
Posts
8,627 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Cliff Varnell
-
-
57 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:
BTW Cliff, what is your stance on the defects on the front of JFK's clothing?
Cuts made in the RR.
-
2 hours ago, Adam Johnson said:
An american chiropractor or radiographer made a short film in the 90's and posted it to youtube, i have posted a link to it on this forum in other threads a few years ago. He takes a subject JFK's height 180cm and weight 170lbs (which is not easy JFK was tall and thin with not a huge amount of muscle mass), the Dr takes a metallic disk places it on the location of the bullet hole on JFK's shirt glues it in place. The subject puts on the shirt then a suit jacket and the doctor takes a series of x-rays of the subjected seated(like in the limo) he gets subject to place his right arm out and resting on limo door/window frame, he gets subject to wave with right arm.
Long story short the x-rays all show that the metal disc rides up the back of JFK has he raises his arm, further up again as he raises and waves his arm.
Adam, if I could show that you’ve been taken in by a fraud — would you ever admit it, and stand corrected?
-
52 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:
Cliff, you have a customer.
I don’t engage in fake debate anymore.
If someone thinks the mid-level of the back of the neck is 4 inches below the bottom of the shirt collar — or thinks the earth is flat, or the Holocaust never happened, or the moon is made of cream cheese — let them wallow in their delusions.
If Mr. Johnson wants to grossly exaggerate the curvature of the upper back, let him.
Nothing stops a determined nay-sayer from nay-saying.
-
32 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:
Re: The Aaron Mate video posted above. (For reference originally broadcast December 23, 2017.)
Aaron never fell for the collusion hoax story and pushes back nicely against the interviewee, who looks especially moronic in retrospect.
Here is a more recent interview with Aaron Mate on the Jimmy Dore show. (May 12, 2020)
In the Jimmy Dore video, Aaron should have taken a deserved victory lap for being right since before December 2017. Instead, he just laid out a bunch of facts.
And the fact is no one can yet prove a criminal conspiracy between Trump and the Russians!
So in Trump-think that cancels out all the well-documented secret cooperation.
QuoteRe: Firing of State Dept. IG Litnick (link above.)
There was also this one: In early April, President Donald Trump fired Michael Atkinson, the inspector general of the intelligence community.
And this one Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services
This one too. Trump removes inspector general who was to oversee $2 trillion stimulus spending
There may have been a few more firings of Inspector Generals over the past few months that I missed.
I'm sure the usual crew here will cry over the "audacity" or overall level of "meanness" of Trump's House Cleaning moves.
If anyone wants to argue that the Federal Government is not a fetid swamp of corrupt and compromised self-dealers after three Bush terms, two Clinton terms and two Obama terms, then please let me know.
So that’s the rationale for a Fascist putsch.
QuoteFinally, if anyone can get comfortable with the idea that Building 7 did not collapse by itself, then you should be able to get comfortable with the idea that the people who know how Building 7 collapsed, really do not want you (the public) to know how it collapsed.
The same holds true, for the JFK Assassination, however, those with the most to loose from letting the truth get out, are mostly dead by now.
Another false equivalence...
-
Just now, Robert Wheeler said:
I thought it was to destroy the Amazon franchise by removing the subsidies the Post Office gives them.
I like your idea too.
Two birds Mr. Trump. Well played.
That’s Reichsfurher Trump to you, sir.
-
16 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:
Not to criticize Joe, but this looks like another one of those threads where Niederhut and Ness throw sh*t against the wall and regurgitate the talking points fed to them by interest groups and franchises that are in the process of being
Ah. So that’s what they call a Fascist Purge these days.
Trump is trying to gain control of the postal service in order to deep-six mail-in ballots from blue precincts in swing states.
A fan of one man rule likes that idea, right, Robert?
-
1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:
Just to be sure no one misses this.
Just be sure that no one misses the Trumpenlinks definition of “collusion”: provable criminal conspiracy. Since there’s been no proven criminal conspiracy Aaron Mate, Jim DiEugenio et al dismiss the enormous amount of secret co-operation between Trump and the Russians.
Because Trump was successful in keeping the Mueller investigation out of his finances — and keeping Stone Manafort Flynn on his team — no criminal conspiracy has yet been proven.
Lots of secret cooperation is collusion. Trumpenlinks need to quit abusing the word.
-
6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:
This is odd to me. At this forum we look askance as using the NY Times, or the Post, on controversial issues of history--the JFK case, 9-11--but somehow, in this case, they are supposed to be authoritative.
Funny coming from a writer who readily repeats Bill Barr talking points on the Mueller investigation and the Flynn case.
6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:And we do not just post the link, we post the actual article, like somehow that gives it some kind of imposing expertise?
It’s more likely to be read.
6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:It does not. Propaganda is propaganda. And that is what this is.
So say all the Trumpers.
6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:Anything to get Trump. And I mean anything.
Some of us don’t think Overt Fascism is a suitable replacement for Neo-Liberalism.
Democratic Socialism only has a chance with Democrats in power.
-
15 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:
.Cliff’s endorsement of the original C/I operation is fair enough, but it is also true that “no derogatory information” to suggest that Flynn was compromised turned up after a four month investigation by an FBI Field Office team, and no such information was developed after his contacts with Kisylak - I.e. he had been entirely cleared of suspicion.
“No derogatory information” isn’t the same as “exoneration.”
Flynn was still a private citizen when he conferred with Kislyak over lifting sanctions — how is that not innately suspicious?
15 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:The “materially false statements and omissions” had no bearing on the conclusions of the C/I team, and so were deemed materially irrelevant, meaning the charge against Flynn should not have been pursued in the first place.
Deemed irrelevant by whom?
-
Federal judge mulls contempt charge against Michael Flynn
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/13/judge-appoints-retired-judge-to-represent-flynn-prosecution-256509 -
Trump administration slammed for ‘unmasking’ list: ‘A disgraceful abuse of the declassification system’
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/trump-administration-slammed-for-unmasking-list-a-disgraceful-abuse-of-the-declassification-system/On CNN Wednesday, national security analyst Carrie Cordero excoriated the Trump administration and the GOP for their release of a list of Obama administration officials possibly involved in the “unmasking” of ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.
“My take on this is that this is a 100 percent contrived scandal,” said Cordero. “From everything I’ve seen as far as the documents that have been released and the information that’s been reported, all of the rules were followed. This was an individual who was captured and overheard on a lawful surveillance of a valid foreign intelligence target as far as we can surmise from the documents. The rules as far as requesting national security agency approval to unmask or reveal his name was done appropriately.”</q>
-
2 minutes ago, Ty Carpenter said:
You think they will get a deal done and play this year? I'm cautiously optimistic, but they have a history of bungling negotiations.
If canceling the 2020 season would keep the DH out of the NL I’d say wait’ll next year.
It’s one on the most exciting plays in sports — pitcher gets key hit!
More strategic dimension to the NL game, imo.
They wanna pay off more old guys who can’t run anymore
-
In 1918 Woodrow Wilson sent a bunch of sick soldiers to Europe and set off the Spanish Flu Pandemic. His advisors advised against it. He did it anyway.
Rockefeller/Harriman/Walker Eugenicists must have applauded the rigorous culling of the human herd to the tune of 50-100 million dead.
It couldn’t have happened without Wilson’s criminal incompetence. Should be called the Wilson Flu.
The covid is a Eugenicist’s wet dream. Old folks and blacks. But it couldn’t have taken it’s current hold in the US without Trump’s criminal incompetence.
-
It takes a lot of corrupt doctors and scientists to pull off this Fauci-is-evil scenario, doesn’t it?
-
Release of Flynn memo backfires on GOP ‘Obamagate’ pushers as experts point out ‘this was all legal’
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/release-of-flynn-memo-backfires-on-gop-obamagate-pushers-as-experts-point-out-this-was-all-legal/But experts were quick to note that the memo itself blows a huge hole in Trump’s narrative, by showing how Obama administration officials acted completely legally and through proper channels to investigate a national security risk. </q>
-
18 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:
Dear Cliff, Kirk, Bob, William & Warren;
Did you see many of the dates on the unmasking requests were before the Kilsyak call?
Do you think maybe General Flynn took you for a ride?
"What a beautiful Black Sky"
I don’t know Michael Flynn. I wouldn’t accept a ride from him, anyway.
-
NSA letter exposes Rand Paul’s flailing, failed attempt to take down Joe Biden with conspiracy theory ‘unmasking’
-
10 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:
Cliff, it is apparent you have only a superficial understanding of these matters because you are making common cause with law enforcement procedures which were roundly condemned back in the 1970s.
Jeff, it is apparent you have only a superficial understanding of my point.
I take full responsibility for the misunderstanding.
We should condemn the FISA process, the FBI interrogation protocols, the politicization of FBI investigations. But to claim there was no legitimate national security interest when a former top intelligence official takes money from foreign governments prior to ascending to the National Security Advisor post is naive in the extreme.
Your inability to see that Trump is trying to transform the loyalty of the Justice Department from the rule of law to the rule of Trump is unfortunate.
-
8 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:
The Lawfare blogger does not share relevant information.
First, the conversations with Kisylak did not reveal a quid pro quo or any kind of “deal”, and were not in themselves inappropriate or illegal, or relevant to Flynn’s counter-intelligence probe - which had uncovered “no derogatory information” whatsoever.
Why did Flynn lie about it twice?
8 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:The contact with the chief Russian diplomat was not in itself a reasonable source of suspicion. As the FBI in concert with the office of DNI conceded when they grasped at the Logan Act straw.
So why did Flynn lie about it?
8 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:Second, the Logan Act was a non-starter because, as part of a presidential transition team, Flynn was not a “private citizen” under the terms of the Act.
Did Flynn plead guilty to violating the Logan Act?
8 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:Third, the controversy with Pence had no influence on the McCabe/Comey decision to not close the CI file as it occurred a full ten days later. Keeping the file open was justified solely by the Logan Act.
So why did he lie to Pence?
8 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:Fourth, the Motion to Dismiss specifically rejected the “counter-intelligence purpose” of the Flynn interview, rather than “ignore” it as the author claims.
Splitting hairs?
8 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:Fifth, the FBI defied clear instruction that Flynn, as national security advisor, needed to be informed of a C/I investigation, and any interview with him had to be arranged through the White House Counsel.
I’d love to see you denounce all the FBI defiance of protocol in 2016.
8 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:All of the above inform the central arguments of the Motion To Dismiss.
A couple of thousand former prosecutors disagree.
-
I don’t know anyone who’s caught the covid, but nonetheless it’s cost me something near and dear — Major League Baseball is bringing the designated hitter to the National League.
It’s not a tragedy but I still find it tragic.
-
16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:
Let me be specific about my last comment.
The FBI did not tell Flynn about Rule 1001, that is about being liable for a crime if he misrepresented the facts.
Standard operating procedure.
16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:They then discouraged him from calling a lawyer. This was part of the concept of misleading him about the point of the interview.
So that justifies Flynn lying to both the FBI and VP Pence?
16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:There are no notes. When there should have been one guy writing them. The early 302's have disappeared, and it took over three weeks to do the final one with people revising it who were not there.
Does one have to draw a picture to connect the dots?
That doesn’t change the fact Flynn lied.
16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:If Flynn had been advised of Rule 1001 he would have most likely called a lawyer. The FBI did not want any counsel there. Isn't that obvious?
The FBI then fouled the evidentiary trail by not taking notes (or making them disappear), and then revising the 302 and letting others participate in it.
This was the point of McCarthy's articles and why they are valuable. That the FBI consciously violated established procedure in order to nail Flynn. And it was preplanned.
The FBI consciously violated established procedure repeatedly to deny Hillary Clinton the Presidency.
DiEugenio can’t even bring himself to admit the obvious.
16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:It was and ends justifying the means strategy.
As I have said, I did not like Dick Nixon, but when I found out what the CIA had done to get him, I objected to that also.
Nixon tried to gain political leverage over the CIA in order to make the Agency more loyal to him.
Trump is playing the same game with both the intel and law enforcement communities.
He’s got a fine cheerleader in Jim DiEugenio.
-
Why the Flynn Interview Was Predicated
https://www.lawfareblog.com/why-flynn-interview-was-predicatedThe Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is flawed in many ways, but one of its weakest arguments is that the investigation of Flynn was not properly “predicated.” This argument not only lacks merit—it also opens the door to the same frivolous argument from future defendants in other criminal cases. And it creates a dangerous incentive that could dissuade the FBI from fulfilling its duty to fully investigate criminal and national security threats.
Predication is a requirement under the Attorney General’s Guidelines for Domestic FBI Operations, the FBI’s internal guidelines for conducting investigations. To begin an investigation, the bureau must have a predicate—essentially, a factual basis to believe that a crime or national security threat exists. The level of predication required varies with the category of investigation, which ranges from assessments (the least involved level of probe) to preliminary investigations to full investigations. Predication is required to prevent the targeting of subjects for political or other improper reasons, an important reform after abuses of investigative powers in the 1960s and 1970s, but the bar is low. Even the highest level of cases, full investigations, requires as predication only “an articulable factual basis for the investigation that reasonably indicates” a threat to the national security.
Depending on the category under which a case is opened, the guidelines permit investigative techniques with varying degrees of invasiveness. For example, electronic surveillance may be used in a full investigation but not in an assessment or preliminary investigation. Importantly, all three categories permit FBI agents to interview a subject.
Attached as an exhibit to the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss is the FBI’s opening documentation for the investigation into Flynn—a subfile of the umbrella investigation into Russian election interference, known as Crossfire Hurricane. When large investigations are opened, subfiles are often opened on individual targets for purposes of administrative efficiency and division of labor. Dated August 2016, the FBI documentation stated that there was an articulable factual basis that Flynn “may wittingly or unwittingly be involved in activity on behalf of the Russian Federation which may constitute a federal crime or threat to the national security.” The file noted further that “Flynn was an advisor to the Trump campaign, had various ties to state-affiliated entities of Russia, and traveled to Russia in December 2015.”
According to the Justice Department inspector general, the Flynn investigation was properly predicated as a full investigation. In his report on the FBI’s conduct in the Russia investigation, the inspector general stated, “[T]he quantum of information articulated by the FBI to open these individual investigations [that is, the investigations into Flynn as well as Carter Page, George Papadopoulos and Paul Manafort] was sufficient to satisfy the low threshold established by Department and FBI predication policy, particularly in the context of the FBI’s separate and ongoing investigative efforts to address Russian interference in 2016 U.S. elections.”
Key to the Justice Department’s argument in its motion to dismiss is the fact that, after four months of investigation without finding any derogatory information, the FBI was prepared to close its case on Flynn. A draft internal FBI document dated Jan. 4, 2017, shows that the bureau had sketched out a memo closing the probe, though the document includes the usual caveat that if new information were identified, the FBI would consider reopening the investigation.
But before the case was actually closed, the FBI learned that Flynn had spoken to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in late December 2016. According to the Justice Department’s motion, the FBI had transcripts of the relevant calls, likely obtained through surveillance of Kislyak authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. By this time, Flynn had been named as Trump’s national security adviser.
In those calls, Flynn had asked Russia not to retaliate for sanctions imposed by the Obama administration as punishment for election interference. Flynn had also asked Russia to vote against a United Nations resolution regarding Israeli settlements. On their face, these calls potentially undermined the foreign policy of the United States. What’s more, on Jan. 15, 2017, Mike Pence, then the vice president-elect, made public statements that contradicted the transcripts of Flynn’s calls— a fact that, as documented in the Mueller report, “alarmed senior DOJ [Department of Justice] officials.” And so, the FBI decided to keep the investigation open. FBI agents interviewed Flynn on Jan. 24, four days after Trump took office. During that interview, Flynn falsely denied his statements regarding sanctions and the U.N. vote. He later pleaded guilty to one count of false statements for telling these lies.
The Justice Department now insists that the Kislyak call did not establish adequate predication for the FBI to conduct this interview. But there was no need for new predication for the interview—because predication had already been established. The case was still open after having been properly predicated, as found by the inspector general. Conducting an interview would have been a perfectly appropriate investigative step even if the FBI had not come across any new information. Interviews are frequently conducted at the end of a case to fill in gaps in evidence, explain events, assess a potential threat or satisfy agents that they have not missed any important facts. In the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails, for example, Clinton’s FBI interview was the last step in the investigation before it was closed—and then reopened months later.
But even if new predication were somehow required, the content of Flynn’s calls, along with his apparent lies to Pence, provided a sufficient factual basis for further inquiry. The Justice Department motion argues that predication was lacking because the only potential crime at issue was the Logan Act, forbidding private citizens to negotiate with foreign governments—which has rarely been invoked, and which the Justice Department acknowledged at the time of the Flynn investigation would be difficult to prosecute. But this focus on the Logan Act completely ignores the counterintelligence purpose of the investigation, which was to determine whether Flynn posed a national security threat. By lying to Pence about facts known to Russia, Flynn had compromised himself as national security adviser. Flynn, who had access to the nation’s most sensitive secrets, was now susceptible to blackmail by a hostile foreign adversary. Surely this constitutes “an articulable factual basis for the investigation that reasonably indicates” a threat to the national security.
Even if one were to accept the Justice Department’s absurd arguments that fresh predication was needed and that this new information was insufficient for a full investigation, the Kislyak call certainly would have been enough for a preliminary investigation—which may be predicated on the basis of the lower standard of “information or an allegation indicating the existence” of a threat to the national security.
Or, at the very least, this new information justified an assessment, which requires no predication at all. An assessment requires only an “authorized purpose” to “obtain information about, or prevent or protect against” threats to the national security. According to the Attorney General’s Guidelines, assessments are appropriate when techniques such as interviews “can avoid the need to proceed to more formal levels of investigative activity, if the results of an assessment indicate that further investigation is not warranted.” Under any of these standards, an interview was appropriate.
In the short term, the Justice Department has harmed not only its own reputation for integrity through filing the motion to dismiss but also public confidence that the law applies equally to everyone, including the president’s friends. It is telling that prosecutor Brandon Van Grack, who worked on the case for more than two years, withdrew on the day the motion was filed and that no career prosecutor signed the filing.
But what about the long-term consequences? When I worked at the Department of Justice as a national security prosecutor, there was a phrase we often used to describe the dangers of inaction: “He who does nothing does nothing wrong.” The phrase suggests shirking one’s duty for fear of making a mistake, exactly the wrong instinct when national security is on the line. Justice Department and FBI employees who have watched the drama of the Flynn case unfold may feel a chilling effect from watching the department not only unwind a case but also attack the reputations of public servants who made difficult decisions under unprecedented circumstances. As national security threats arrive in the future, there is a risk that the incentive is no longer to take swift action but, instead, to do nothing wrong.
-
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to co-chair Biden campaign climate task force
-
ADDENDUM:
Thesis via J.G. Ballard -- If it wasn't recorded it didn't happen.
Anti-Thesis via Peter Dale Scott -- The files missing from a historical record are the most significant.
Synthesis: Such significance stays banked until an account surfaces with a ring of truth to cash it out.
JFK's Shirt
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
You wouldn’t knowingly tell a lie about the evidence in order to protect your 29 year old Pet Theory — would you?