Cliff Varnell

Thanks for the history lecture Ben, but you didn’t address my point. You claim the MSM is controlled “99%” by enemies of Donald Trump and yet the MSM spent the ENTIRE last 11 days of the 2016 presidential campaign bashing Hillary. The Deep State installed Trump, which defies your analysis.

Trump ain’t President. He poses no existential threat to either the military or secret service. Trump poses an existential threat to the Establishment Republican wing of the Deep State.

Trump insisted on personal loyalty from everyone who worked for him. Within days he called James Comey of the FBI — the man most responsible for Hillary’s defeat — to dinner and asked for his personal loyalty. This is contrary to American government tradition — people swear allegiance to the Constitution, not one man. That’s a fascist dictatorship. Trump wanted to pull out of NATO and be the apple of Putin’s eye. Yes, that alienated the military brass and they kept him bottled up. But neo-con war hawks loved his Middle East policies. 90% of the people who worked for Trump are critical. And they’re going to whack the 4 times indicted, civilly convicted rapist for that? They ignored his orders. As a motive for assassination it’s weak sauce.

Keyvan, this may be useful. The Skull and Bones wing of The Deep State probably whacked JFK, imo. The people who hate Trump the most are establishment Republicans. May I posit a scenario where Bushes did both?

What gives you that idea? Trump pulled out of the Iran nuke deal and whacked their #2 guy — clearly inviting war. Trump bombed the hell out of Somalia and backed the Saudi actions in Yemen. Leveled Raqqa. He moved the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. His treaty with the Taliban proved to be utterly insincere. See above.

The US Gov’t has long been faction-ridden. There are factions in the military hostile to Trump and a whole lot who worship him. Same with every American law enforcement/intel/military institution. There is no one in the Biden Administration who’d seek to whack Trump. They are all settled in front of cable news with popcorn digging the indictments. The scenario is senseless. Much more plausible is a Republican faction with The Deep State plotting to take that stone out of their shoe. https://www.rawstory.com/trump-2024-donors/ <q> According to the Times' Rebecca Davis O’Brien, "Many of the Republican Party’s wealthiest donors share that view, and the growing sense of urgency about the state of the G.O.P. presidential primary race," adding, "That has left major Republican donors — whose desires have increasingly diverged from those of conservative voters — grappling with the reality that the tens of millions of dollars they have spent to try to stop the former president, fearing he poses a mortal threat to their party and the country, may already be a sunk cost." O'Brien wrote that interviews with donors, fundraisers and insiders, "revealed hand-wringing, magical thinking, calls to arms and, for some, fatalism." </q>

Would a military-style ambush of a motorcade in 2023 Dealey Plaza be feasible given the cameras everyone has?

The only people who want to see Trump whacked are right wingers like Carlson. Such an event solves their “Trump Problem” — electoral disaster in ‘24 where the likely Republican candidate will likely have multiple felony convictions. Instead, he’d be the Martyred Hero Who Died For Us — Tucker’s wet dream. The last assassination of an American politician by conspiracy was Rep. Leo Ryan at Jonestown in 1978.

Right wingers hijacked those terms, re-defining them to fit fascististic narratives. Lemme guess where that %1 went... October 28 to November 8, 2016 when CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News ran 24hour bash Hillary coverage of the last days of the campaign. Am I right, Ben?

HOW THE DEEP STATE CAME TO AMERICA: A HISTORY https://warontherocks.com/2019/02/how-the-deep-state-came-to-america-a-history/ <q><emphasis added> [T]he “deep state” became a part of the American lexicon...in early February 2017, just weeks after the inauguration of President Donald Trump, that news reports first mentioned the term’s increased use within the president’s inner circle. Over the following months the president and supporters of his administration publicly embellished upon the deep state’s meaning and significance, making it into a catchphrase for perceived internal adversaries within Washington. </q>

Dulles? I see him on the third separate crew — The Cover-Up. Dulles had a personal reason to cover up the JFKA— the elder Ruth Paine was family friends with Mary Bancroft, Dulles’ girlfriend. That puts Dulles two degrees of separation from proximity to the hostess of a Commie Kennedy Killer. Is that something he signed up for?

Chain of command: Averell Harriman to Prescott Bush to GHW Bush. I posit George as the liaison to two separate operations: Kill Kennedy — Carl Jenkins and a perhaps unwitting Charles Siragusa Kill Oswald — D.A. Phillips and Ed Lansdale

My best guess in the perp department is Carl Jenkins (AMWORLD). In the 50’s he trained Thai Border Police to interdict opium caravans, and taught the Kuomintang (nationalist Chinese refugees in the Golden Triangle) how to keep their opium caravans from interdiction. Who better to plan an ambush of a slow moving motorcade?

To maintain an American military presence in SE Asia, which was threatened by Diem and Kennedy both. I’m of the view a pan-institutional international cabal sought to wrest control of global heroin production from the Corsican Mafia, to replace Turkey as the center for smack production with the Golden Triangle. I strongly suspect this effort involved the Sicilian-American Mafia and their elite WASP allies like Harriman and the Bushes.

From Spanning the Century: The Life of W. Averell Harriman, by Rudy Abramson, pg 624: <quote on, emphasis added> Some of Averell's friends, including [Roger] Hilsman, who had heard Bob Kennedy muse about the possibility of Harriman as secretary of state, thought there was still a chance that Averell might yet get the Foggy Bottom job he long coveted. But that had been before the notorious coup cable [243 authorizing Diem coup 8/24/63]. Though the President had avoided criticism of Averell in the episode, Harriman knew Kennedy's confidence in him was shaken. After working his way to the seventh floor, he was suddenly viewed as a problem. Almost overnight, he looked ten years older. Privately, the President and the attorney general talked of finding a way to rehabilitate him, to find a job that would get him out of the Vietnam business. There was a need to put more emphasis on hemispheric matters, and the President thought that one way to solve two problems might be to create a new post of undersecretary for Latin American affairs for him. As deeply as the administration had involved itself in the machinations against Diem, Kennedy still appeared stunned when the long-anticipatred coup ended with the assassination of Diem and Nhu on November 1. The United States could technically claim that it had been a Vietnamese affair; but the administration had conditioned the atmosphere, beginning with the Harriman-Hilsman cable to Lodge. <quote off> Harriman had the same motivation for whacking Kennedy as he did Diem.

In that case — see y’all on the 60th!

Because he wanted to take the “commie conspiracy” scenario off the table only leaving the Lone Nut scenario. He didn’t want to wait. He wanted to put an end to rumors. After his meeting with LBJ the gov’t put its shoulder to the Lone Nut scenario.

“A capitalist will sell you the rope to hang him.” — the Soviets coined that phrase for Harriman. He ran the Lend-Lease program aiding the Soviets in 1940-1. At the same time his Union Banking Corp financed 45% of Hitler’s raw material purchases. He was Churchill’s favorite Yank. Harriman played all ends against the middle.

Only in your scenario which I don’t buy at all.

Look suspicious to whom? LBJ welcomed the lone assassin scenario, don’t you think? I don’t follow. Why wouldn’t he know the entire plot? To reinforce the lone assassin scenario and convince Johnson to order Cliff Carter to call Dallas assistant DA Bill Alexander and tell him to drop the business about an international communist conspiracy. See above. There were plans on the table to bomb the hell out of Cuba. Of course there was. See above. If Harriman claimed the Soviets had nothing to do with it before he knew that was a fact — wouldn’t that indicate his ultimate loyalty was to the Soviet Union? Everyone in the government fell in line with the Lone Nut theory.

If Oswald had been gunned down instead of Tippit I dare say Adlai Stevenson would have denounced the Soviets at the UN while the US Air Force bombed Cuba back to the Stone Age.

What’s reckless about it? He told the truth — the Soviets weren’t involved. He lied about consulting other Kremlinologists. We do know what — the United States had first strike nuke dominance over the Soviets until 1965 (see The Perils of Dominance by Gareth Porter.) In this scenario Averell Harriman unilaterally on the spot decided he had to protect the entire US government — the entire world! — from suspecting the Soviets even though he had no idea whether they were involved or not. He risked committing treason? This is the same horsesht LBJ fed Earl Warren.

If he ordered the assassination he needed to know. How would he know the Soviets were not involved unless he knew who was? Oswald didn’t go to Cuba.

The Tale Told by Two Tapes by Vincent Salandria <quote on> [National Security Adviser] McGeorge Bundy was in charge of the [White House] Situation Room and was spending that fateful afternoon receiving phone calls from President Johnson, who was calling from Air Force One when the lone-assassin myth was prematurely given birth. (Bishop, Jim, The Day Kennedy Was Shot, New York & Funk Wagnalls, 1968, p. 154) McGeorge Bundy as the quintessential WASP establishmentarian did not take his orders from the Mafia and/or renegade elements. <quote off> The President Has Been Shot, Charles Roberts (p. 141) A reporter for Newsweek, Roberts was on AFI and saw McGeorge Bundy at Andrews Air Force Base, where Air Force One landed. <quote on> I remember looking at (McGeorge) Bundy because I was wondering if he had any word of what had happened in the world while we were in transit, whether this assassination was part of a plot. And he told me later that what he reported to the president during that flight back was that the whole world was stunned, but there was no evidence of a conspiracy at all. <quote off> Who would have given orders to McGeorge Bundy to repeat the lie that there was no evidence of conspiracy found in Dallas? Bundy couldn't have made that determination sitting in the Situation Room. Turns out there was another "quintessential WASP establishmentarian" who turned up telling a great big lie: the #3 man at the State Department, W. Averell Harriman. The Assassination Tapes, Max Holland, pg 57: <quote on> At 6:55 p.m. Johnson has a ten minute meeting with Senator J. William Fulbright and diplomat W. Averell Harriman to discuss possible foreign involvement in the assassination, especially in light of the two-and-a-half-year sojourn of Lee Harvey [in Russia]...Harriman, a U.S. ambassador to Moscow during WWII, is an experienced interpreter of Soviet machinations and offers the president the unanimous view of the U.S. government's top Kremlinologists. None of them believe the Soviets have a hand in the assassination, despite the Oswald association. <quote off> A Very Human President, Jack Valenti (1973, p3) <quote on> Shortly before 7:00 P.M., I escorted Senator J. William Fulbright, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Ambassador Averell Harriman into the office. I fidgeted outside, in the middle of what would have appeared to be an objective onlooker to be a melange of confusion. No one of the Johnson aides, Marie Fehmer, his secretary; the late Cliff Carter, his chief political agent; Bill Moyers, nor any of the rest, was quite certain of what lay ahead. We were all busy on the phone and trying to assemble what measure of office discipline we could construct. <quote off> Spanning the Century: The Life of W. Averell Harriman, by Rudy Abramson, pg 625: <quote on> [Harriman] spent the afternoon helping [George] Ball [#2 man at the State Dept], who was, if anyone truly was, running the United States government, since [Dean] Rusk [Secretary of State] and several other Cabinet members were airborne, coming home after turning back from a flight to the Far East. As darkness fell, Averell drove out to Andrews Air Force Base with Ball and Alexis Johnson, joining the official mourning party standing silently on the floodlit ramp as the President's casket was lowered from the rear door of Air Force One. <quote off> The Wise Men, Walter Isaacson & Evan Thomas, pg. 640: <quote on> [The Diem] coup [in South Vietnam] was messy. Diem's body was found riddled with bullets and stab wounds. John Kennedy himself was shot to death three weeks later. Bill Sullivan [Harriman's chief of staff] found Averell Harriman that afternoon sitting on the edge of his chair, in front of a television set, holding his head in his hands. <quote off> That Lee Harvey Oswald had been in the Soviet Union was announced on the news at 4:25pm EST. Sundown in Washington DC occurred at 4:50pm EST. How could Harriman gather "the US government's top Kremlinologists" in such a short period of time? And all of them reached the same snap decision on the basis of next to no information? In 1963 the top three Kremlinologists were George Kennan, Charles Bohlen, and Harriman himself. According to his biography, Charles Bohlen was traveling in Europe that day; according to his biography, George Kennan spent the day quietly in Princeton with Robert Oppenheimer. Harriman went out to Andrews around sundown with George Ball and Alexis Johnson -- neither of whom were Kremlinologists. The idea anyone could draw the snap conclusion of Soviet innocence is absurd -- unless that person knew who pulled off the plot. Vincent Salandria: "Notes on Lunch with Arlen Specter on January 4, 2012" <quote on> I explained [to Specter] that the day after the Kennedy assassination I met with my then brother-in-law, Harold Feldman. We decided that if Oswald was the killer, and if the U.S. government were innocent of any complicity in the assassination, Oswald would live through the weekend. But if he was killed, then we would know that the assassination was a consequence of a high level U.S. government plot. Harold Feldman and I also concluded that if Oswald was killed by a Jew, it would indicate a high level WASP plot. We further decided that the killing of Oswald would signal that no government investigation could upturn the truth. In that event we as private citizens would have to investigate the assassination to arrive at the historical truth. <quote off> Jack Ruby was Jewish. In 1963 Averell Harriman (Skull & Bones 1913) and McGeorge Bundy (Skull & Bones 1940) were the top two WASPs in the US government.

I’m aware of what RussiaGate is. You were referring to a period prior to the election and cited a fictional “frenzy”. RussiaGate only made two news cycles over the last five months of the campaign, nothing over the last 70 days. That’s a frenzy? The only frenzy prior to the election was the Hillary e-mail story. And the unchallenged House testimony of Shawn Henry of Crowdstrike, the company that investigated the hack of DNC e-mails in 2016, in regard to the Russian hacker Fancy Bear. <q> MR. SCHIFF: lt provides in the report on 2016, April 22nd, data staged for exfiltration by the Fancy Bear actor. MR.HENRY: Yes, sir. So that, again, staged for, sure which, I mean, there’s not -- the analogy I used with Mr. Stewart earlier was we don't have video of it happening, but there are indicators that it happened. There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case, it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don't have the evidence that says it actually was. </q> Russians did indeed hack the DNC in order to “set up” the e-mail exfiltration by non-State actors.