Cliff Varnell

James Comey politically assassinated Hillary Clinton.

The overkill on her e-mail drowned out the pussy grabbing tape.

If drifting off-topic were a crime I’d be doin’ 20 to life...

That goes for me too, Ron.

16 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

What a difference a word makes - I didn’t say a corner on, I said a corner of, and I can see how the word corner wasn’t good - I should have said a piece. Anyway, your intuition is all you got. 

Yes, that’s what I said at the beginning...

28 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Castro kicked the mafia and casinos out. That didn’t make a lot of economic sense, but he did it just liked he kicked out United Fruit and others. I’ve never heard or seen any evidence that Castro had a corner of the worlds heroin trade, and I don’t recall reading that Batista did either.

Paul, I’m not talking about Castro having a “corner” on the world’s heroin trade. Where did that come from? I specifically said “boutique operation.”

You are aware that Meyer Lanksy and Santos Trafficante had turned Havana into a narco-trafficking center in the 50’s, right?

Quote

Cuba may be strategically located, but you could say that about other islands too.

Yep. And after they got kicked out of Cuba the Lansky-Trafficante operation moved dope thru the Dominican Republic and Haiti until finding more favorable arrangements in the Bahamas.

Quote

Why wouldn’t Castro do that? Because his goals were not Capitalist. 

That’s like saying Castro didn’t sell sugar because engaging in commodity trading is “capitalist.”

Wiki: “Cuba and the Soviet Union signed a long-term trade agreement in January 1964 that allowed for the export of 24 million tons of sugar at a fixed price of 6.11 cents per pound from 1965 to 1970.”

Commies do business, too...

9 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

Appellate court dismisses the Flynn case for good.

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/06/ultra-trumpy-judge-slammed-by-legal-experts-for-ordering-flynn-case-thrown-out/

https://drugwarfacts.org/node/3900
In Hong Kong in 2015 (the most recent year for which data are available), the wholesale price of heroin ranged from $47,603.70 to $51,152.10 per kilogram.</q>

50 grand a key in 2015.  Assuming all things equal in the drug market, that’s 6 grand in 1963 dollars.  The wholesale price of China white would likely double or triple by the time it hit Zapata Off-Shore drilling platforms in the Caribbean.

A boutique wholesale heroin operation in 1963 turning 20 keys a month netted about $3 million a year (more than $25 mil in today’s dollars) — in hard currency.

Mao eradicated the opium trade but that doesn’t mean he eradicated all the opium.

20 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

 I just never thought there was good evidence. 

To quote Joe Cabot in Reservoir Dogs:

”You don’t need proof when you have instinct!”

90 miles off the coast of the world’s biggest narcotics market, why wouldn’t Castro run a boutique drug operation?

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

Cliff - I am skeptical. Isn’t it clear that it was the KMT not Mao that was dealing Dope. Just like Afghanistan where it was the US supported government and not the religious zealots and the Taliban that facilitated the opium trade. 

Color me cynical, Paul. I don’t put dope dealing beyond any government.

2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Cliff - you have previously claimed Castro was moving heroin. Could you back that up?

Just a guess, Paul.  I’ve never claimed it as a fact.

Over the years there have been various allegations about Castro running cocaine.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/drugs/archive/cubaandcocaine.

hthttps://nypost.com/2015/05/03/former-bodyguard-unmasks-fidel-castros-corrupt-double-life/

Back in the early 60’s there were articles in American newspapers accusing Castro of running dope, but that may have been mere propaganda.

My understanding is that in the early days of the Cuban revolution Red China and the USSR competed for influence.  Pound for pound, the most cost-efficient foreign aid would have been a steady supply of H.

6 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Instead he was allowed to flourish for 5 more decades. Hogwash.

My best guess is that after Kennedy was whacked Castro wised up and started moving his Red Chinese donated heroin supply through CIA channels — GHW Bush’s Zapata Off-Shore.

Just a guess...

Once the autopsy was completed the cover-up went into high gear, thus destroying the credibility of Humes et sl.

1 hour ago, Micah Mileto said:

I don't see what that has to do with the chain of custody.

 She was supposed to have custody of the extant photos for the purpose of developing them — which she denies, this breaking the chain of custody.

If Saundra Kay Spencer didn’t develop the extant autopsy photos — who did?

Quote

From what I understand, the pictures and body samples from the autopsy have an alleged chain of custody until 4/26/1965.
 

What’s your proof that’s JFK in those photos?

Who developed them?

Quote

Also, are there contemporaneous documents on Saundra Spencer being the one handling the photos?

So the AARB got it wrong?

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=797#relPageId=12

HSCA Vol. 7 (emphasis added):

Among the JFK assassination materials in the National Archives is a series of negatives and prints of photographs taken during autopsy. The  deficiencies of these photographs as scientific documentation of a forensic autopsy have been described elsewhere. Here it is sufficient to note that:

1. They are generally of rather poor photographic quality.

2. Some, particularly close-ups, were taken in such a manner that it is nearly impossible to anatomically orient the direction of view.

 3. In many, scalar references are entirely lacking, or when present, were positioned in such a manner to make it difficult or impossible to obtain accurate measurements of critical features (such as the wound in the upper back)from anatomical landmarks.

4. None of the photographs contain information identifying the victim;such as his name, the autopsy case number, the date and place of the examination.

In the main, these shortcomings bespeak of haste, inexperience and unfamiliarity with the understandably rigorous standards generally expected in photographs to be used as scientific evidence. In fact, under ordinary circumstances, the defense could raise some reasonable and, perhaps, sustainable objections to an attempt to introduce such poorly made and documented photographs as evidence in a murder trial.  Furthermore, even the prosecution might have second thoughts about using certain of these photographs since they are more confusing than informative. Unfortunately, they are the only photographic record of the autopsy.

 Not all the critics of the Warren Commission have been content to point out the obvious deficiencies of the autopsy photographs as scientific evidence. Some have questioned their very authenticity.  These theorists suggest that the body shown in at least some of the photographs is not President Kennedy, but another decedent deliberatelymutilated to simulate a pattern of wounds supportive of the Warren Commissions' interpretation of their nature and significance.  As outlandish as such a macabre proposition might appear, it is one that, had the case gone to trial,might have been effectively raised by an astute defense anxiousto block the introduction of the photographs as evidence. In any event, the onus of establishing the authenticity of these photographs would have rested with the prosecution. </q>
 

Saundra Kay Spencer is on record as having developed the extant autopsy photos.

One problem...in her 6/4/97 ARRB testimony she stated:

<quote on>

Q: Did you ever see any other photographic material related to the autopsy in addition to what you have already described?

A: Just, you know, when they came out with some books and stuff later that showed autopsy pictures and stuff, and I assumed that they were done in—you know, down in Dallas or something, because they were not the ones that I had worked on.

<quote off>

So the woman on record as having developed the autopsy photos denies having developed them.

The autopsy photos are worthless.

5 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

We can agree on some of it, Rick. 

The Parkland witnesses on average recalled a hole, not flap, but hole, at the rear of the top of the head. And the Z-film and autopsy photos show this wound to be above the right ear. So there's a dilemma. Which is more likely to be correct? The recollections of emergency room doctors or the autopsy photos taken of the deceased? The medical establishment is clear on this--it always defers to the autopsy report and photos. 

Not if the autopsy photos were not produced according to proper autopsy protocol and there is no chain of possession.

That’s the DNC under your bed, Robert.

Be careful.

This one’s for you.

Two guys on the upper floor of the plot: McGeorge Bundy and W. Averell Harriman.

The President Has Been Shot, Charles Roberts  (p. 141) A reporter for Newsweek, Roberts was on AFI and met McGeorge Bundy at Andrews.

<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>

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>

This was the genesis of the Lone Nut Cover Story.  Bundy called LBJ on AF1 and told him the lone assassin was in custody.  As soon as Johnson got to the White House he found out that all of his government’s top Kremlinologists concluded the Soviets were innocent.

But there was no such discussion among top Soviet experts on 11/22/63.

By reputation the top 3 Soviet hands were Charles Bohlen, George Kennan, and Harriman himself. According to his biography, Bohlen was traveling by train in Europe. According to Kennan’s biography, he spent the day quietly with Robert Oppenheimer up in Princeton.

By title, the US gov’t’s top Soviet guys were Llewelyn Thompson, Ambassador At Large for Soviet Affairs, and Dean Rusk, Secretary of State.

From their Warren Commission testimonies:

Mr. DULLES:  Did you have any conversations at any time while you were Ambassador or after you returned to the United States with any Soviet official with regard to the Oswald case?

Ambassador THOMPSON: I discussed with the Soviet Ambassador the desire of the [Warren] Commission to receive any documentation that they might have available, but I did not in any way discuss the case itself, nor did the Soviet official with whom I talked. 

Mr. DULLES:   And do you know of any conversations of that nature that any other official of the Department had in connection with the Oswald case?

Ambassador THOMPSON: I do not myself know of any. 

Mr. DULLES: You probably would, would you not, if that had taken place-of any importance? 

Ambassador THOMPSON: Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. DULLES: Your testimony is you have no knowledge of any other conversations other than that of the Secretary of State [Dean Rusk], in connection with communications to and from the Soviet Government on this case? 

Ambassador THOMPSON: That is correct.  I know of no other cases where it was discussed with Soviet officials. </q>

Thompson acknowledged discussions with Dean Rusk, but nothing about Harriman or other "top Kremlinologists".  Rusk didn't return to Washington until after Harriman's meeting with Johnson.

Here's what Rusk told the Warren Commission (Vol 5):

<quote on>. 
Secretary RUSK: As the Commission may remember, I was with several colleagues in a plane on the way to Japan at the time the assassination occurred. When we got the news we immediately turned back. After my mind was able to grasp the fact that this event had in fact occurred, which was the first necessity, and not an easy one, I then, on the plane, began to go over the dozens and dozens of implications and ramifications of this event as it affects our foreign relations all over the world. I landed briefly in Hawaii on the way back to Washington, and gave some instructions to the Department about a number of these matters, and learned what the Department was already doing. But one of the great questions in my mind at that time was just that question, could some foreign government somehow be involved in such an episode. I realized that were this so this would raise the gravest issues of war and peace, but that nevertheless it was important to try to get at the truth-to the answer to that question-wherever that truth might lead; and so when I got back to Washington I put myself immediately in touch with the processes of inquiry on that point, and as Secretary of State had the deepest possible interest in what the truthful answer to those questions would be, because it would be hard to think of anything more pregnant for our foreign relations than the correct answer to that question. </q>
 

Bundy lied about there being “no evidence of a conspiracy at all” and Harriman lied about an instant consensus on Soviet complicity.

This one’s for you, Robert Wheeler.

58 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:

When does Biden start to campaign?

You call what Trump produced today “campaigning”?

Trump campaign predicted 100,000 people at his Tulsa rally.

Looks at least 85,000 short. Maybe closer to 90,000. Trump campaign says Black Lives Matter protestors and the media scared his people away.

Snowflakes!

2 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

The Democrats do not have a candidate.

You don’t have an argument.

Quote

If Trump loses, you bet I will "cry" foul.
 

The operative word here is “‘cry’”.

Quote

4000 gun purchase permits in one coastal, typically "red" voting, Jersey town in past three months according to the chief of police. Normally 15 to 20 per month.

So what? Bunch of entitled snowflakes.

Quote

Am I a Q follower. No, Q has quoted me though. I have tried to figure out how Q works on 4-Chan, but it is way too confusing to navigate. I do see Q related Twitter posts though.

White power groups. No, that is just weak Paul. It's a cop-out. If you met me personally, you would feel uncomfortable lumping me in with those types.

You support a white supremacist government.

When the shoe fits...

Quote

and 2nd amendment gun freaks. Until this year, I never owned, or felt the need to own, a firearm.

None of the above apply to me.

If Trump loses though, things are going to get very ugly, as they should.

Another fascist threat.

Quote

Most of you guys (not just you Paul) are in a bubble.

You accept that a conspiracy killed JFK, RFK and MLK too; you have questions about the official Watergate MSM narrative; it does not surprise anyone here that the CIA sold Heroin in the 60's and Cocaine in the 80s (both in the 70s), and laugh at the suggestion that WTC 7 collapsed because  of office fires.

The idea that the FBI and CIA conspired to frame General Flynn to get to Trump is beyond comprehension.

Especially given the fact that James Comey enabled Trump to steal the election in cahoots with GOP voter disenfranchise programs.

Quote

 

 

The idea that Shiff's impeachment debacle was nothing less than a second try at Trump is unfathomable for most here. Why?

Because Trump brought it all on himself.

Did Adam Schiff force Trump to fire Comey?

Did Nancy Pelosi force Trump to attempt an extortion of Ukraine?

Quote

If JFK to 9/11 was a continuum, did it end on 9/12?

The ruling elites are multi-polar. As bad as the neo-liberal Globalists are — the Trumpian proto-Nazi Bible-thumpers are worse.

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

Yes Cliff - it was the fortuitous timing two days before Super Tuesday. Might not have mattered, but it was clearly coordinated.

The DNC is a vastly over-rated villain.

Buttigieg and Klobuchar were broke.

 https://heavy.com/news/2020/03/what-happens-campaign-funds-candidate-drops-out/

49 minutes ago, Douglas Caddy said:

I am with you on this. Paul. Furthermore, the first two primaries were in Iowa and New Hampshire that have small black populations and have a dominant white population that is not that familiar with black persons.

Obama creamed Clinton in Iowa in 08.

Quote

That put highly qualified black candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination in a situation where they could not win and thus lost momentum to get the nomination.

Kamala Harris dropped out on December 3 and Cory Booker bailed on January 13.

Don’t blame Iowa and New Hampshire!

Quote

I would have supported these black candidates over Biden who in my opinion is a weak candidate and will be less than a mediocre president if elected.

Only if we do a less than mediocre job of forcing him to do the right things.

14 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

I didn’t say that. I said the DNC somehow coordinated other candidates dropping out just before Super Tuesday. Voters undeniably had less choice. 

Seems to me the voters of New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina induced Buttigieg and Klobuchar to drop out. They got creamed, the money went dry.

14 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

This may not be relevant, but I am curious - do you think Biden was the strongest choice? 

Sanders/Abrams in an alternative universe...

14 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

 

I am voting Democratic, but I am under no illusions about them.

Of course not! They have to be forced to do the right stuff!  Nothing progresses without heavy grassroots push.

Then there are the judges. Right wingers have a much better grasp on the significance of the executive impact on the judiciary.

Trumpenlinks would have us believe there are no substantive differences between D’s and R’s, but the differences in judges are huge.

14 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

 

They look good by comparison to a Trump and todays Republicans, especially on Domestic issues. It was the DNC who tried to prevent Stacey Abrams in 2016 from getting the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, and they are trying to primary OAC as well. Yes the Democrats get the Black vote, and yes Black women are a major force. But only a rejuvenated Democratic Party with more progressive candidates (think 2018 midterms) and policies will ultimately help black lives, no matter how they view Biden. And I will keep my fingers crossed that Biden is responsive to his black supporters if he becomes president. 

We have to make him respond.

4 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Ok, interesting exchange. But really, it’s the DNC that made it happen for Biden, somehow maneuvering others candidates to drop out the weekend before Super Tuesday in a coordinated fashion - Klobuchar, Mayor Pete, maybe someone I’m forgetting. 

Millions of black voters picked Biden because of the DNC?