Kirk Gallaway

I hope I'm wrong. It is what it's going to be. There will be no tax records showing LHO's spy employment. The content and amount of information would have been released and been identical no matter who won the Presidency. I tend to think the next big government disclosure will be through the courts involving Johannides. Again, I hope I'm wrong.

You know that wasn't a trick question. I thought your post back at Paul's, how do I call it "infiltrators thread" was pretty thoughtful, even if I may not agree with all of it. To me Ron, with this voting thing. You're like a guy at a junior high school dance who is waiting for the most killer girl in school to walk across the gym floor and ask him to dance. You should vote.----JMO

Getting back to the story. as far as our governments official version about Putin. I do believe there was a looting of government resources by a privileged few insiders when the Soviet Union was dismantled. I think it was a great betrayal to the loyal citizens who at last had hope after years of enduring a life of repression and the stifling of their opportunities. Many who had fought to defeat the Germans. If ever there was a definition of a Kleptocracy, I believe they're it. I think these people who were party to it including Putin ended up sapping the life from their newborn country. They are an illegitimate government , but right now, I'm not sure we're much better. I remember Putin teasing us about the results of the 2000 Bush vs. Gore election.. That's what we get for not having a popularly elected President. Where I could grant that people could differ in opinion is the charge that Putin is guilty of having journalists killed is just our propaganda.. But if I had to bet, I'd say yeah, the suckers are guilty. Certainly a number of people on the inside think that.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/02/05/your_super_bowl_election_jokes_are_very_very_bad.html

Ron, I got a pretty good idea what Paul perceives as a threat to our country. I know you have a healthy concern for an enemy threat from without. Internally or externally, What do you see as the biggest current threat to America today?

Great find, Jim.. I can't believe I've never read this before. I think Castro thought it was necessary to bring up every incongruity of the case against Oswald, lest hot heads prevail. The first third of it is sort of typically rambling, redundant, verbose Castro, but then what is remarkable is his command of Oswald's case. Asking the real questions that few others were asking.

Check out each countries individual ads. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tv-satire-europe-donald-trump_us_5894791ee4b0c1284f25556f?ncid=APPLENEWS00001

Good post, Dave. That he would shun our allies and hunker down under pressure to defend Putin just reinforces his conflict. Donald Trump Jr. said Trump's businesses "see a lot of money pouring in from Russia." "And in terms of high-end product influx into the US, Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets;

Testimonial as to Donald Trump's Big Heart- At 8:00---Our President in a moment of sober reflection,talks of God

To any interested, here's DK's final appearance on What's My Line. She doesn't look great, a bit sweaty. She died that night or next morning.

Yeah, I interviewed Chomsky once. Long ago, he just became ensconced in his lifestyle. He made a calculation his standing would suffer.

Boy this Palmer. I want to believe everything he says, but his headlines appears very incendiary. He's an anti Trump partisan no doubt. He may have a great inside track as a few things he's said have turned out true. If we ever find out , and he's right on all these allegations, he'd look like a genius. Paul, I've tried to PM, but apparently you have that turned off?

Thanks Doug, Scraping the bottom of barrel now. This guy was always a cynical, snarky maofao.

I never really liked Seth Myers that much. I didn't think he should have his own extra late night talk show. But I was wrong. He emphasizes what he does well, parody on current news events, and he doesn't do a monologue. I'm not sure why the disparity of screen size. a closer look :" Alternative facts" and the Woman's march Trump, "Alternative Facts" and the Women's March: A Closer Look Seth takes a closer look at the new Trump administration openly lying on its first full day in office. » Subscri... A closer look:Trump talks of voter fraud and executive orders Trump's False Claims and Executive Orders: A Closer Look

That's interesting Joe. The question is whether somebody just went with that info to create some fake news. I remember comparing photos of a young Rafael Cruz to the guy who was with Oswald back then. It was inconclusive but the one common feature I did notice was that their foreheads were similar.

Lance forgive me, but I think I'd like to go back and take something from what was for me your identifying thread. Wow Lance, isn't your talking here about your family's connections to United Fruit and the Dulles's kind of like going to a Black Heritage site, and bragging about the number of slaves your Great Grand Daddy owned? After telling us of his family connections, Lance said. "Dang, you've figured me out. well, my masters have not yet explained exactly how, and I'm a bit fuzzy myself as to exactly what my mission is, but I am confident they know what they are doing." No Lance , you told us, you gave yourself up. I think maybe you're being used as a "dangle", but nobody here's sucking. The use of "masters" is curious spy talk.Though I could understand it could have been used as the only word to mean "boss" by laborers in the UFC in say, Honduras Hey counselor, maybe you should recuse yourself from this site. . heh heh----Just kidding man. I've got no problem with your Trump thing.(fiscal sanity?, are you sane!) But your family affiliation to UFC and JF Dulles is funny. ********* .Wow, it's kind of thrilling writing the catalyst thread. Late last night when I was browsing here, I really didn't expect to see Paul's thread. I suppose you'd say the lefties have come out as result of this unusual impasse that we find ourselves in our nation's history. But really under normal times, I hardly see that at all, except some people are so admiring of the Kennedy's that their political affiliations inevitably spill out. I'm a fan, but I think of my admiration for JFK has to do with his potential and in my mind, what might have been. I was making a very specific reference that might be more apparent to media followers about a specific new group of people who either switched allegiances or are maybe traditional blue state voters who are voting for the first time for Trump. Yes I think they're duped and I can't see any way in 4 years that Trump will be their savior. But honestly I couldn't with Hillary either. Throughout our lifetimes and the last century, could you ever see a Republican controlled Congress institute a "retooling" program. Not any more likely than a serviceable universal Health Care program, or a Social security program or a Medicare program.

I don't know what's eating Michael either. But maybe in this case he just responded because he didn't know that Michael Walton had also responded. Honestly Paul. For people younger than us, I think the JFK assassination has been hijacked by the Right wing. But it is complicated.. The Democrats have been seen as the establishment party because they bailed out the banks and lost their banner of sticking up for the little guy during the Clinton years.. I use all sources, read newspapers but mostly internet. Of course we know the problem with the Internet is there no shortage of fake news, people flock to the sites that reinforce their biases, blah blah.Traditional media outlets, such as MSNBC have adapted a mainstream stance and now they're afraid to touch the JFK assassination. Which leaves open a lead for right wing TV such as Newsmax and Fox.The thinking propagated by the right wing media is that the Government murdered JFK,. and all government is bad. They use the JFK silver certificate to lure their hard currency freaks and JFK's legacy to World Peace to defend their new neo isolationist policies. They try to say that JFK is one of them when in reality, he's nothing like them. He would revile them as being the wealthy class who have now duped the everyday person that he was standing up for and his brother who had grown to truly champion before his death. In the Kennedy' era, the rich wore black hats and the poor had white hats and it was easy to tell them apart. He would have hated the cynical manipulation that now goes on. I know a couple of Trump people. A lot of the Trump demographic is from approximately 35-54, and things aren't going well for a lot of them. What I do see that is alarming that I don't know how it happened and fear is too late to change is this great lack of critical thinking. They typically admire the super wealthy and hate professionals. They once had professional friends they grew up with and even though they didn't have quite have their money or status, they could at least live comfortably enough to not feel that class envy until the Great Recession happened and they found their professional friends found their careers continuing with greater seniority while a great number of them lost their jobs. They've lost a lot of aspirations and no longer envy Hollywood stars, politicians, the super fulfilled and were really thrilled seeing these young college educated women who seemed to flock to Hillary's candidacy, crying when she lost. They've latched on to this Kennedy image, as a super hero, but know nothing about his policies other than he was a champion for World Peace who died at the hands of the government.

I know where your heading Paul. JFK wanted the movie made to show the danger of a military takeover. He talked to Kirk Douglas about his being cast. But it wasn't out until a few months after his death. Interestingly enough the character that played what would be JFK's Curtis Le Maye was Burt Lancaster, who later was one of the plotters in Executive Action, the first dramatic movie about the JFK assassination. I watched it again on youtube a few years ago and I thought the actor Will Geer reminded me of Allan Dulles, but his part as a conspirator was not the same.

I agree Peter, this is fun. I found that passage involving Trump's possible purchase of a stake in Rosneft on pg.30-31 on the Trump Dossier that Doug has mentioned and attached it. They don't mince word as to what they suspect. If Trump is guilty of one of the header points, it would be enough to hang him. Close associate of SECHIN confirms his secret meeting in Moscow with CARTER PAGE (Trump representative) in July. Substance included offer of large stake in Rosneft in return for lifting sanctions on Russia. PAGE confirms this is TRUMP'S intentions.

Michael, I don't know if you fashion your own definitions to words.But "myopic" does not mean pessimistic. You could always refer to an authority, like a dictionary. It's apparent you don't have any idea what I'm referring to. But there are number of Trump policy issue that have come to the foreground. Questions like, should we start a new Nuclear Arms buildup?, should some poor people have access to health care?, Do you believe in climate change?, or is all a bunch of crap?. Do you want the repeal of Roe vs. Wade?, Do you want a wall built with Mexico? Do you want massive exportation of illegal aliens? Do you want to clamp down on people entering this country? Today, Do you want to see institutional continuity in the conduct of government policy? The fact that you overlook all this, yes your wish list seems very myopic or insular or just coming from purely inside Michael's conspiracy world. Some of these issues you may or not care about. But do you know, politicians have polls of Democrats and Republicans and Independents where they list the order of issues they consider important. I can tell you that list of your is not even on the top 30! The people who could be interested enough to go to this site are not even 5% of the population. No matter how important that seems to you or me.

Michael I like some of the things you have to say. I could agree with you that it's not impossible that Trump could do some good things that no one else would be able to do, but when you list them as: shedding light on the JFK assassination, the nefarious intelligence activities of the previous 3 or 4 decades, or, (if your a truther) 9-11. That's a pretty myopic wish list, There's more to running the most powerful nation on earth, than placating a bunch of Cter's. Besides, .I don't know what you base that on other than Trumps mention of bad intelligence getting us into the Iraq War (which he supported)but that war was not really spearheaded by the bad intelligence,but was a completely elective war, planned from the beginning of his Presidency, and inspired by the brilliant mind of GWB and his cronies. I agree completely with Paul, you're dreaming. In running a country there are actual policies, which I've never heard you mention.You referred a couple of times to Trump being a Populist and not a conservative, yet you ignore that all his appointments are either arch conservatives or pro business globalist conservatives.Your so bent on this image you have of a CTer friendly President, you seem to pass off everything he's actually doing.

Sandy, I think it was initially 1)that they didn't think Trump had a chance, so thought it best to keep out of it and let him die on his own. But more importantly 2) Trump was a ratings bonanza unlike any other Presidential candidate. As long as they could milk it , that would be great. The ratings of football in general and the NFL in particular went down because people were following the campaign. That's never happened. After Trump sewed up the nomination. They got into discussions about fact checking, and they saw that Trump had something like 82% misstatements compared to Hillary's 29%. But they became hesitant because I think they felt that at that point if they had made 3 times the issue about it with Trump than Hillary, the public would think they were picking on Trump. All the while their people who were covering the campaigns started to feel intimidated because Trump was singling them out at his rallies, and they felt the rage of his followers. I think when the conventions were over, they realized that without a bomb of a news article, that the more criticism they threw at Trump, with a certain segment of voter, that just solidified Trumps support, and their role as the public watchdog had disintegrated. Sad, very sad! DT Re Matthews, I hear you. I thought Ted Koppel's reaction to the buildup to the War in Iraq was, "Look! We're going to war even though there's no pressure at all to got to war. This is a big story!" Then remember he was "imbedded" with the troops in Iraq on the way to Baghdad? He later admitted that was a mistake but absolutely stonewalled any inference later, that the news media could have done a better job asking pertinent questions such as "Does Sadamn really have WMD?" The news media for years had become too chummy with the politicians they were covering.

Trumps son, Donald Trump Jr. said this:" Russia is one of the hottest places in the world for investment,” Trump said in a 2007 deposition. ... “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,” Trump's son told a real estate conference in 2008, according to an account posted on the website of eTurboNews, a trade publication.Jul 27, 2016 . Whatever intimate contacts may have with Putin, that if true, should eventually sink him.This is not even to mention Trumps conflict of interest already with Russia. In the days of JFK, Trump's holdings in Russia would have been enough to disqualify him from running for the Presidency. There is an obvious conflict of interest that no other candidates have ever had, that people are having to come to grips with, because apparently no one wants to deny a poor billionaire access to the Presidency in the modern multi national corporate day. Now we're being told it's unrealistic for a candidate to sell all of his holdings at the drop of a hat, but this question should have been vetted by the press over a year ago.

I'm not sure how we got off on this, but back to the original question. It would obviously reflect my bias, so my guess is that it started with Bay of Pigs and was iced in Summer /Fall 1963 with JFK "colluding the enemy." Personal contacts with Khrushev during the Missile crisis and discreet contacts being initiated with Castro were under surveillance.

We now know in December, The Russian government has arrested a top cybersecurity officer and accused him of treason it is suspected ,for leaking information about hacking to the U.S., according to a report. The biggest spy scandal in Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/russia-arrests-spy-accused-leaking-info-hacks-u-s-article-1.2956581 Ruslan Stoyanov, head of its computer incidents investigations unit, was also arrested in December. https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/russian-spy-who-allegedly-oversaw-hacking-arrested-for-treason