Kirk Gallaway

I said 3 years, because I know that photo of Khrushev and Castro could only be 60-63, right? My first impression is that they could have been the same guy, 20 years later., but you're telling me that's not true. The poor resolution and fuzziness might make his hair style look different, and curiously that change of hairstyle period wise is exactly what you might expect to see from a 30'ish Russian man with a slicked back look in the early's 60's to a more relaxed poofy look of that same guy in the 80's say. But of course you tell me it's not.

You said " On the left: The same man photographed on the same day in the same place" And I understood that day was Oct 2,1963.( the photo above) right?

They do look alike, but since they're from the same period(3 years), the man on the left looks considerably older.

During the 2016 campaign, The right used the Clinton's association with Epstien to perpetuate fake news stories about both Bill and Hillary using these underage girls for sexual favors. It's interesting to hear Trump associated with him as well as a number of other celebrities. Though the article does absolve all of them of any known wrongdoing.

Joe, Ruth Paine lives in Santa Rosa. To those who don't know that is 50 miles N. of San Francisco, last i heard in a retirement home. This is I believe, her last filmed appearance there. As far as interviewing her. I'm trying to remember but I think it was a LNer named Bill Brown from the JFK Assassination Forum who interviewed her about 5 years ago, who said she asked a standard question before granting interviews. I believe it was asking about General Walker. She wanted to know first before doing an interview if the interviewer was aware of LHO's alleged attempted taking of Walker's life. Which she readily goes into here at the beginning.

America, in it's infinite wisdom has elected a deviant ,irresponsible child. Still it could have worked geniusly for him as he's lowered the bar so much, people rally behind him if he shows the least bit of civility and non partisanship, but are inevitably disappointed when he shows he has no control over his behavior and reverts back. There was a time during the campaign where I sensed he had decided it wasn't worth it and seemed to be on this same path self undoing. However his party is in control, and sees this as a once in a lifetime opportunity to enact personal and corporate tax reform, repatriate corporate dollars, financial, environmental, consumer advocacy deregulation and the dismantling of the safety net, and have thrown all their hopes behind him except for a handful of foreign policy hawks. They've chosen a middle path hoping Trump can just control himself, and hope in the general economic optimism, that they don't find a smoking gun, and they can successfully downplay his huge foreign conflicts of interest, and enact this legislation they've historically wanted for generations. But of course at that point, what use is Trump to them? I'm going to be guilty of posting a second time a satiric short clip from Sam Harris months back that's turning out to be prophetic in his depiction of what a Trump White House would be and his prescription for what our expectation should be.

That sounds pretty juicy Doug. But Palmer's link won't open, at least for me.. So I found maybe an abbreviated version of it I've forwarded here. As Palmer said they do look concerned after meeting with Comey, Feinstein looks particularly serious. They won't comment on the meeting, perhaps because they can't. Palmer finds it very noteworthy, but I'm not sure what to make of it that the Chair, Grassley deferred to Feinstien.

I'm not sure how that minority of the voting public would react to seeing this. It's as if they suspended any serious judgment. There's no consideration that someone would go to that length of deception to promote himself so meaninglessly. But then to fail like a fool over it!

You can't write this stuff! In case you've never seen this. Listen to this recording, Back in the 90's, Trump was recorded, masquerading as a publicist John Miller to talk about Donald Trump and among other things his scintillating dating life. He later admitted it was him, but when confronted with it last year, he denied it.So there's no dispute, it's on Fox! The second clip portrayed humorously by Jon Oliver. Did Trump LEAK 1991 "John Miller" Tape to WaPo? - The Kelly File Did Trump LEAK 1991 "John Miller" Tape to WaPo? - The Kelly File Sue Carswell lost the recording of her "John Miller" (aka Donald Trump) interview 25 years ago. Megyn ... And now a bit more subject matter from that recording creatively and humorously portrayed by Jon Oliver starting at 1:26. John Oliver - Donald Trump and John Miller John Oliver - Donald Trump and John Miller From HBO's Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. All rights belong to HBO. Check out the official channel here...

Trump's verified the leaked tax returns to David Johnston that were showcased on Rachael Maddow's show on MSNB last night are in fact his returns..I think Trump planted those deliberately. Today Trump was asked if he leaked that return and he denied that, calling it "despicable". But when asked if the White House did, he evaded the question. I think it's pretty reasonable to assume Trump didn't sneak out of the White House and plant it in Johnston's mail box. My reasons for thinking the Trump White House planted the leaked returns are: 1)Trump has deliberately used leaks a number of times in the past, about things you'd never think any self respecting person in the world would, which I post in the next thread. 2) Trump's 2005 taxes make him look reasonably good. It was known it was a good year for Trump, so it dispels the liberal suspicion that he really isn't as rich as he said he was. No matter what year, if anyone wants to make a serious investigation of his taxes.They'll need more info than just the 2 pages of his 1040's which is all that was leaked here. 3)Any IRS agent who would have taken the serious risk to leak Trump taxes would also have access to all of his taxes, including the last few years. Why would an agent take that risk to leak 11 year old taxes, that would have the effect of just implying that Trump was a normal millionaire taxpayer. If this was indicative of Trump's tax history, why would be refusing to release his taxes now? I think MSNBC sees a benefit to keeping Trump's non disclosure of his taxes an issue. After all, a poll shows 74% of all Americans think he should release his taxes.But I wouldn't be too sure about that. I think they should let the 24 hour news cycle expire and just let the story do whatever it will do.---JMO

Has Flynn been charged with anything? Well according to Palmer I guess we'll know pretty soon. Let's see if he's right and Flynn is a folding card.

I do remember their summations covered a few things I hadn't seen prior in witness testimony.

I like that Michael. He was very conciliatory toward Hillary. Nixon was a lot more gracious in his later years. He says in 1993 that the National Health care situation in the country is a "National Scandal". I don't think he ever would have thought that almost 25 years later, we still would have done so little, because he was an activist President. Though he looked pretty good here, traveling abroad at 80 years old. His wife died only a few months later and he died a little over a year later. It was February, but I thought maybe it was December, because Katie Couric is dressed like she's just been out caroling.

Agreed, Purely from memory. I remember that being the first time i had ever seen Spence without that silly buckskin jacket that he had been wearing for the previous 15 years.i remember on a number of occasions, I thought Spence could have gone deeper, or asked more questions.I remember he never asked Ruth P. about her sister's employment at the CIA, which Garrison had revealed 20 years earlier and Ruth claimed she didn't know at the time. That's not to mention her Father, who secured a 3 year contract with an agency that had extensive ties to the CIA, though maybe that wasn't known at the time.. Nor did he ask her about not informing LHO that he had secured a second job at Trans Texas Airways for $100 more a month just before his first day at work at the TSBD. While i know this can be a hot topic with some here. I remember Spence using the TSBD picture to make the argument that Lovelady was really Oswald on the steps of the TSBD, and then later having Buell Frazier testify that the man was in fact Lovelady. So he raises doubt that Oswald was on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting, and then refutes it with a subsequent witness. He seemed to miss enunciating and reiterating his central points. I remember at the end of the witness testimony feeling very disappointed in Oswald's defense.

Sam Harris is neuroscientist and an articulate vigorous thinker. He's also gained notoriety as an atheist, with the sort of saintly countenance of a puritan. Though I'm not, Still when we see the idiocy of action that usually follows any utterance where a politician invokes God, discussion of religion, philosophy, atheism, seems quite harmless. But in these 4 segments, he talks of politics, and the election of 2016. Mostly about our President, though spattered throughout the first 3 links, there are unflattering references to Hillary and the Democrats and then in the final link he gives his opinion how, Trump won and the Democrats lost. . The first link is the most fun, a primer on his thoughts about Trump.The second is a more elaborate panning of Trump during the campaign in the Summer of 2016. The third and most elaborate of all (almost a half hour) is his post election analysis of how Trump won, it's implications, and his advised course of action, and the fourth link focuses on, in his opinion how the Democrats ineptly lost.

I hear the sound of unraveling, whatever that sounds like. It's going to become increasingly hard to deny a special prosecutor. Here at 6:00. Bill Maher gets the Republican who has made his reputation more from investigating the Obama administration, than any other, Darrell Issa to say that there should be a special prosecutor.

I watch it too, Paul. I loved it with Brody. I mourned his passing more than any TV character I can remember, but it couldn't last. The last season with Brody's character was largely without Brody because he was in exile in Caracas. Then the next season I thought lost focus a bit. I came back last year with the antagonist being the woman CiA/ Russian double agent. She was a good antagonist focus. I love the cast, Danes, Patinkin,Friend (though he's a bit much sometimes), F. Murray Abrahams, can cast a sinister shadow pretty well. In this last episode, I knew that guy was going to die, he was almost too capable and it seemed inevitable he was going to burn out like a meteor, besides he wasn't enough of a heavy to join the permanent cast. The woman who ended up being a chauffeur for the President Elect had a rather quiet, but imposing presence. Do you think she's on the up and up? Is she going to factor in future episodes?

Then I've read that 87% of Republicans think Donald Trump is doing a good job. I was hardly encouraged. There are so many goodies that Trump gives the Republicans it would almost be like blowing their opportunity of a lifetime. There would seem to be little pressure to hire a special prosecutor. Would Mc Cain and Lindsey Graham really have the courage to play the spoilers? There are obviously people trying to build a case against Trump. It seems like we're going to a conflict of party over country.

Jeff, I don't really like to use "them" either, but it is sort of part of the venue. I relate so much to that HST passage, I feel almost foolish admitting it. That's what age will do to you. Those were even my stomping grounds. I even forgot that passage! heh heh Reminds me of that for some reason If that's your personal observation, I don't know if you should feel that way. You've got the numbers. On a social political level your group is just starting to be felt. For years I watched the main stream media and entertainment ignore my rock and roll, my music, literature, films. They'd sneak in snippets of my "alternative lifestyle" into tv shows just enough that that the mainstream culture could stomach it. That's not even to mention that people got thrown in jail for long periods of time for doing things that I did! Keep in mind, it wasn't until I reached my 40's that another baby boomer was actually elected President. So Jeff, I'd say to you that the high water mark is still ahead.

To the guy who resurrected this thread, I say Jefferey, great post!! I agree with your ageist criticism. I hear a lot of talking about the "Deep State" here but there isn't much articulation by many people of what it is. Almost as if it's better left unsaid and to one's most evil imaginings. If this is such an ongoing threat, does anyone ever think to "know thy enemy". But people just go over and over a 50 year past, which I enjoy too, but they never ask. Are the same forces in aggregate present today? Do they still need to leach off the government defense spending of the most powerful nation on earth as they did in the 50's and 60's? Are they the same type of people with the same goals? Does anyone here really think Trump will be assassinated? I say, If Trump goes it will be because of his own undoing. For people to hail Trump as the second JFK is the most absurd thing I could imagine, and i find sort of offensive.This gets to the bottom of "know thy enemy." Despite whatever populist rhetoric Trump is a globalist with investments in 25 countries. Trump wants financial deregulation,less security deregulation, (fewer cops on Wall Street)relax restrictions on banks, lower taxes across the board, lower corporate taxes, repatriation of foreign dollars, less environmental regulation. Why do you think the stock markets not just here, but around the world are going bonkers, and the banks in particular? Trump's agenda is music to any "Deep States" ears. That is the world financial elite corporate agenda. They make money if there is talk of war, the threat of war, or no war at all. They can always make money through black arms sales and drugs. If Sanders had won the ticket, Sanders would not be alive. Of that, I am certain. Of the two remaining after that, it didn't much matter. They all are aiming towards the same outcome. Right, and who is the real threat to this, of course the socialist who wants, free health care, free public education, a strong environmental platform, decrease in Defense spending and a pulling back of American power abroad. But the truth is, to the international elites, though the trend would be very disturbing, Sanders with Republicans controlling both houses, would mean gridlock, which would be perfectly acceptable to them. But I could imagine such a scenario, if in another 4 years, if the current problems of discontent are still not addressed, and the rich get richer and the poor poorer, and worse yet there were to be yet another financial collapse, and the Democrats were to regain control of both houses in a counter populist uprising and had a charismatic candidate who talked like FDR. That candidate could be in the cross hairs of the "Deep State"or maybe like Roosevelt, they might attempt a coup, like they tried to do with Smedley Butler in 1933.

Cliff, What Doug, I believe is alluding to is that there is a theory that Comey, knows now the extent of involvement of Trump, Flynn, and Manafort in coordinating with Putin to rig the election and has incentive to atone for his series of bad pre election decisions.

You've whet my appetite Cliff. Could you give me a thumbnail sketch of it?

I think that Trump was so deluded, he picked a fight with intelligence,the media and is still picking a fight with the Democrats (?? and what can they do?) thinking that his fringe would help him. Then the Intelligence met with him and showed him what they had. Now it's obvious there's a web of people around him that has been colluding with the Russians who were willing to offer a lifting of sanctions and now all of the press and Intelligence gathering agencies around the world are trying to find out what Trump knew and when he knew it. And whose fault is that? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sean-hannity-question-of-the-day_us_58a3f3b3e4b0ab2d2b1a7c44?

Trump obviously knows what Flynn was up to. Flynn has not admitted lying to Trump, but to Spence. I would assume, they must be able to question Flynn as to what Trump knew.

Yes, well done Pat. I actually eat this stuff up. What gives Republicans conviction is looking at an overall map of the 2016 red and blue states. which the overall land surface area looks like a Republican landslide. As well as county by county. It is interesting that you mention a 4.9% total loss by Republicans in house congressional elections from 2014 to 2016 as I believe I had heard that for all Federal congressional elections, the Democrats had more total votes than the Republicans in federal Congressional races in the 2014.election. Which means in order to be true the Democrats would have considerably outcast them in the Senate campaigns. But maybe the figure was taking in account all campaigns, governorships, state legislators, State attorney generals, controllers, Lt. Gov. etc. As you've pointed out the "split" elections have always been in favor of the Republicans. But It seems almost impossible that we will ever get 3/4 of the State legislatures to reverse it. Although you show very well equal inconsistencies with smaller states as well as larger states. It may be that the overall complexion will always over time be in a state of flux so the inequities never stay long enough to convince a smaller state to give up their privileged position,( which is really what it is.) Obviously California, New York gets screwed, and as you've pointed previously they are the "donor" states tax wise. while it seems the "red" states who complain the most about Federal encroachment are the "recipient" states.It certainly is a gross inequity, as the most populous states are overwhelmingly blue states, (with the exception of Texas and Florida) and are the economic engines of the country. But on the brighter side, which we certainly need in light of your findings. The demographics of Texas are inevitably slowly turning to blue.