Kirk Gallaway

I hear you about your fears about the National Security State. I can tell you the threat has been downgraded because it was pretty touch and go for a few years when I was young. As far as "the MIC based economy". Of course you know Trump is planning a big step up in military spending and boosting our nuclear arms capability so they're already pretty much getting their way.. Of all Trump's plans, that is probably one of the biggest slam dunks, because the Republicans control both houses and there is a considerable number of right wingers now in Congress who think that almost the only legitimate role of government is defending the Nation State.

Hi Michael, Well I guess we can't know for sure about anything until he gets into office.I think the question is how sinister are our present day intelligence agencies? We know they have no qualms about spying on us, if they feel like it. But they have a much greater capacity to spy on us than they ever did in the 60's. Do you believe they have the conclusive info about the Russians they say they have? If not, what do you think their goals are?

A substantial number of us believe Intelligence had a hand in the Assassination of JFK. I assume most people think we need intelligence organizations, or why would we be paying so much money for them? So we have the intelligence agencies conclusively coming out today saying in pretty decisive terms that the Russians interfered in our election and hacked the DNC with the specific purpose of trying to ensure a Trump victory, with the obligatory caveat that there is no conclusive evidence that they threw the election to Trump.( Of course,how could there be?) How serious is this? How serious is it that the President Elect has been discounting this when he benefited (though granted it's not conclusive it's a game changer) from this insidious influence? Or do you feel this is JFK history repeating itself with Trump? If you still believe it's all BS and they're spying on each other all the time anyway.. And you don't trust the CIA or your intelligence agencies, or abstractly, the National Security State.What is they're aim in starting up another Cold War? What's their overall plan?

Ok I get it. Hillary Clinton lost by 2.86 million votes because of...globalism? Oh I'm.sorry I got mixed up, wrong metric, or ....whatever it is! Would somebody like to define what a "globalist 'is? Is it any corporation or business or individual that wants to make money in another country? Is being anti globalist just mean you want to keep jobs in the USA, or bring jobs back or what else? We lost 5 million manufacturing jobs in the Great Recession, was this all due to bad trade treaties? Ok, if you're a Democrat and you were going to have to blame one Democrat figure, it would be Bill Clinton's Presidency. But it's sort of a complex issue, isn't it? I think the more you understand it the more you realize that Trump with his token tweets and taxpayer payoffs isn't going to get back 5 million jobs. And none of his appointments give confidence that there will be any appreciable difference either. You have to wonder right now if he's going to earnestly handle this problem without inciting a major trade war. My guess is that he'll stop short and try to jive his way out with high profile tweets. .If we were to bring jobs back from overseas . It would be uplifting to think that Americans would choose to pay say 15% more for American made consumer electronics, my bet is that they wouldn't and they won't be asked to. Jim, I know it's been a hard road for you. Just 9 months ago you preferred Hillary over Bernie. Then you learned about the global trade agreements and then found out that Hillary was the very face of globalism! I'm sure it was quite a betrayal. She did try to make it up to you Jim, and reversed her support on the TTP. You have to appreciate how hard it was her, she literally had to remake herself from years of relentless programming from those vicious globalists. But I understand, you were too hurt, and it was too late. Ok, I'm being a bit dramatic but your sense of betrayal and vengeance toward the Clinton's only stokes my embellishment! Of course Trump despite his high profile tweets, has his ties made in China, has 144 businesses in 25 countries all over the globe and is by any definition a globalist. Is he only going to be tough on industries he's not in? Trump's s nominee for head cop on Wall Street, that is the head of the Securities Exchange Commission is Jay Clayton. He'll instigate Trump's plan to deregulate Wall Street and make his own job easier. Clayton was an exchange lawyer for the law firm Sullivan and Cromwell. Gee, where I have heard about them before? They were the firm that Allen Dulles got his start , and joined his brother John Foster. This firm has represented the founding members of the world globalist community. I think that might qualify! And he'll certainly use a lot of government money to protect his interests at home and abroad because after all, he's quite a target. Trumps treasure Secretary appointment Steve Mnuchin made a killing from buying out the distressed mortgages from Indymac under the name One West. Is anyone the least concerned about a Kleptocracy? They've now found the majority of their notes were backdated which is against the law in the State of California. For some reason the California Attorney General department chose not to prosecute. The Attorney General was Kamala Harris who is now the Senator from California and I believe will be in the committee to approve Mnuchin's appointment. Wow, that should be interesting!

Yeah Jim, I'm sorry your Julian Assange write in campaign for 2016 Time's Man of the Year didn't work out. i can't imagine why. I agree, it must be rigged!

Your article is old Doug..There is no discrepancy. Roughly the same amount of people voted for the 2 major party candidates in 2008 as 2016.Roughly 130 million people in 2008. 129 million in 2016. But then you're forgetting to add 7 million more for the 2 alternative parties and the Utah guy.. Clinton received 65,844,610 votes, or 48.2% of the total vote. Trump received 62,979,636 votes, or 46.1% of the total vote. (That’s a difference of 2.86 million votes, not 212,000 votes.) The remaining 5.7% of the vote went to other candidates, like Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, Evan McMullin, and, I don’t know, write-ins for flesh-eating bacteria. http://fusion.net/story/377098/final-popular-vote-count/

Yeah, he thought blackmailing politicians and illegal surveillance was pretty heady stuff. Now they're throwing elections.

Dave,You know I love your collection! I particularly like these phone calls. I think you should get more of those. As to be expected the audio is pretty scratchy at times.I had forgotten you were the source of the March and May phone between JFK and RFK where JFK refers to his CIA appointee John Mc Cone as behaving like a "horses ass" and how he's using his public statements to embarrass the administration. There are a number of good LBJ conversations, particularly with RFK, such as the the classic one where RFK mentions to LBJ that he suspects that Hoover is spreading rumors to LBJ that RFK wants to overthrow the government at 1:32. I know this was the low hanging fruit at one point. and it's hard to find gems. You're a great fan of old MSM, I was watching it there right along side you.. At this point, I'd suggest exploring more the interpersonal interaction in the communications between any of the 60's political, governmental icons. I think that can generate a lot of interest.. Anyway, congratulations on consolidating your work!

Yow! Let me count the ways! Could this be the most stolen election of all time? The FBI had the Weiner laptop on Oct.3rd! But you're lead to believe they couldn't find one Clinton e mail and bring it to the attention of Comey for over 3 weeks! So the 8 days they took to inspect it could have been completed by mid October! All the while you remember we were told on Oct 28th that they couldn't possibly review all the e-mails by the time of the elections! And Weiner's wife still doesn't know how the Clinton e-mails got on her husbands laptop! and the Guliani connection again!

That would be something, Ron. But I wouldn't hold my breathe on that. All his appointments are either Generals or Business leaders. Trump poses no threat to the Multi national elites. On the contrary they'd like him. He's the most pro business President we might ever have. The only wild card could be his conduct of foreign policy.

Glenn, It sounds like you lost focus on Sandy's issue of campaign rhetoric and now you're trying to make this about Hilary's lies or alleged improprieties. But we've already had this debate in great detail a while back. I contributed what I could. I'm not sure where you were but I personally see no reason to re- litigate it.

??? No, It's your fault and probably would say something about your character that you couldn't even trust your best friend. So Hillary willfully told who? who told everyone else, but it's not his fault? Glenn, it probably took Sandy all of 10 minutes to come up with his list of appalling campaign rhetoric by Trump. (Which honestly Glenn, having followed the election process most all of my life was by far the most appalling,not to mention the bullxxxxted campaign I can ever remember.) And you've made the case that Hillary's rhetoric was as bad and now it's taken you 3 weeks and you still haven't come up with anything! My guess is your best point will be the "deplorables" comment and you're not going to stack up in quality or quantity to Sandy's list.

I assumed that was through Nixon.Nixon at one point was plotting to poison Anderson. Anderson publicly said later that the Kennedy assassination was carried out by the Mafia.Or so he said.

Yeah I saw Joannides wasn't listed. Tom , who knows? Trump certainly has a conspiracy theorist contingency and has opened the door a bit with his Rafael Cruz allegations. He does express non mainstream views and would like to embarrass the MSM. There are people are expecting Trump to be an advocate of open and honest government. We'll see. Larry, Thanks for the detailed response and the time you've taken.

Please tell me if I'm wrong. So the present status is that they have met the requirements and are currently counting votes in Wisconsin, but there's no estimate how long that will take? And they are counting in Pennsylvania, but with the legal hurdles and increased cost burdens, it would seem that there is little hope of coming in with an action that would effect the vote by the electors? (which I figure to be on Dec. 19th.)

I checked it out. That's true 75% of Stones presentation was a Pro Trump,anti Hillary speech. Which come to think of it makes sense, since the sum total of research contribution he's made to the Kennedy assassination could be put on a post card. And that's only if you believe his story that he was the only person in history Nixon singled out to reveal his belief that LBJ did it and he didn't think it noteworthy to tell anyone else for half his life before he revealed it. About the only resistance he encountered was in the Q&A , after making reference to LBJ's shameless womanizing, someone asked if in all the time he spent with Trump did he find Trump had much in common with LBJ. In which Stone brilliantly sidesteps denying seeing any of that side of Trump but then viciously comparing LBJ (who of course murdered JFK) and Hillary. I guess Roger saw that article on line about Hillary going to Epstien's pedophile island with Bill to get herself laid. In fairness, he did say Nixon "wasn't perfect" and Trump "isn't perfect" which made me think anything short of the bar of "perfect" is OK. Except maybe if it's Hillary or LBJ. Then he cleverly ends revealing his soft, personal side, calling for prayer, for Trump. Vince, did I notice in passing Stone referred to you as Vince Palmyrie?

Wow, Larry thanks for the update! From a layman's view. I've never quite understand how this process works. Do they only respond to specific documents or groups of documents that are requested? Obviously as they say, there are no smoking guns there. I assume it was once very easy to destroy documents that could be very damaging, but it's almost impossible for obfuscating agencies to cross reference everything so we get these little grains of clues and are left to schlep out the rest?

I had heard that. He was initially a lefty who was into a world government after WWll , he was under suspicion by Mc Carthy at one point. He met Dulles and Dulles gave him a job. I've seen just the video sequence and a few interviews. I've read none of St. Johns writings. (by the way, WTF is with "Saint" anybody have any ideas?) It didn't seem to me in the interview that St. John was much of a Kennedy assassination buff. He suggested the Corsican mob, and his Father said it could have been. JMO but I think this was a partial hangout designed to give St. John an income stream. Douglas may disagree, but I think EHH was covering for his boss and the agency, so he decided to blame LBJ as the mastermind(though he does only state that as his belief)knowing that some in the conspiracy circles at that time were trying to mount a case against LBJ. The other accomplices he includes, Harvey, Phillips, Sturgis, Morales, were all his associations and had been prime suspects so giving them away after their deaths was no problem. That was the first time I had heard of Meyer as an accomplice who was so overwhelmed with jealousy toward JFK for having an affair with his ex-wife. That was the plot's thin link to LBJ, so I find that a bit suspect. I thought I had read that St. John now believes it was Dulles and the CIA, which means he suspects his Dad's story.

Hey first off, the site looks great Jim! It's always been one of my favorite sites, but did need a facelift. Bravo to all! Dave, Ron--I had a Maris card from Kansas City. Thought Barry Pepper was a good casting choice. Wasn't that crazy about the HBO special. I think of the Cardinals and the Cepeda for Sadecki trade and wince! I knew it was wrong at the time. We had Mays, Mac Covey, Cepeda, and Hart! Check out all the Hall of Famers in the 67' All Star Game! http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ALS/ALS196707110.shtml

Of course, this is very dangerous, and I don't meant make light of it but..... Did you know Trump tried to sue Bill Maher? And do you know what that was about?

IMO, Castro tried to go with us, and why wouldn't he? We were the premiere economic power in the world. He met directly through Nixon the Eisenhower, Dulles, multi national Industrial complex, who weren't going to give an inch on nationalization. IMO Castro probably knew complete nationalization wasn't really practical and wouldn't have nationalized near as much as he did, but ultimately he was left no choice. There's no doubt in my mind, if things had been handled more carefully, there would have been no defection to the Soviet bloc, no Cuban Missile crisis, no assassinated President. His actions after seizing control parallel many such revolutions of that time. He seized control decisively, brutally and repressively. Straight to the 3rd world Socialist model he forbid many Doctors, professionals and producers from leaving to countries where they could make a lot more money, and have a much higher standard of living, and thwarted incentive to the point that many of his reforms toward a Centralized economy never had a chance of working. That they continued these policies over the years except for very minor incremental market reform some attribute to Castro keeping the people down to ensure his complete control. Whatever the true intention, it didn't make a lot of sense. His best legacy was that he provided for all the best education and health care system in Latin America.Though I've never been to Cuba, I traveled extensively for months through Mexico and Central America in the 70's and 80's and with a few small exceptions there was extreme poverty, very little safety net, and great illiteracy. Go to Honduras, ( particularly with the scourge of drug gangs)then go to Cuba, you might prefer Cuba. Go to Costa Rica, maybe not. If you're a wealthy industrialist, and you go to Cuba, you'd have to be eying that cheap, dirt poor economy and educated work force like a hawk. Like Trump in 1998. http://www.newsweek.com/2016/10/14/donald-trump-cuban-embargo-castro-violated-florida-504059.html

Well put Michael, I didn't think Glenn was going to get that "e" thing. I was thinking of offering clues such as "Endowed" as by our creator. That's self righteous hubris that's part of our makeup can be dangerous and has been used as a pretext (Germany in the 20th Century comes to mind) to take great license. And I agree, in our past has lead to the killing of a President and into Vietnam. As far as the Electoral College there were some more exceptional of us who thought that the less exceptional of us votes shouldn't count as much and that elections may need to be brokered.

While Conservatives would assail Mark Zuckerburg as being part of the "liberal media'. It's now evident that Facebook and other social media through their algorithms provided the infrastructure for these whacky Clinton conspiratorial allegations that fueled the Trump movement. They've now acknowledged some blame because of their inability to distinguish between truthful articles and completely fabricated ones.The sad truth is that on both sides people tend to read just the sources that lean in the directions of their bias. I think Hillary Clinton was a terrible candidate. I think the Clintons are liars (like most current day politicians)and very conflicted, (though I'm not sure how many other politicians are as conflicted). However, I'm not sure how much she's done that is illegal. But it should be illegal, and the fact politicians are allowed to do some overwhelming conflicts of interests that are actually legal really is our fault as citizens. I'm not very well versed on the subtleties of the law involving Hillary, but I think when Cliff sticks to just the case against Hillary, he does a pretty good case of defending her against illegal charges, that coupled with the factor that nobody(including up to now the FBI) has been able to make anything stick. Still I understand that there are probably a lot of people who don't subscribe to these incredibly villainous stories about the Clinton's that still don't trust her and would have a very hard time voting for her. I very much agree with Tom Neal who echoed what had been said thoughtfully earlier by Joe Bauer. The future of the Supreme Court is an issue Liberals, but I think a number of Conservatives here could agree upon. If you want openness in government, which is why you are here on this forum, and you want to take back your government from huge corporations and big money interests, you are much less safe with a more conservative Supreme Court. You have only to look at Citizens United. A person I thought was a very thoughtful conservative Ross Douthat , a strong Gun Rights advocate thought Citizens United was "right wing judicial overreach". If Trump nominates justices that further favors his wealthy class we'll be further disenfranchised. Then imagine if he tries to push back a women's right to choose by nominating a justice that would want to overturn Roe Vs. Wade, it doesn't seem likely, but it will divide the Nation inseparably. Unless you're the most virulent Hillary hater, and obviously there's a few of them, who can site sources over internet. But IMO, the future of Supreme court is reason enough.

Ok Glenn, You don't know nuthin' about taxes, but it did mean something to our exalted founding Father's and maybe you should know something more about who pays the bills. You've brought up a point I was going to bring up Pat. With this current electoral system, California is a donor state where both parties just go to get money on their way to Florida or Ohio. The blue states pay a higher percentage of the tax revenue supporting these basket case states which are overwhelmingly red states. Glenn, I think Georgia might be solvent but there are about 5 states immediately west of you that are just backwards and helped along by the federal government tax contributions of largely blue states. These are the facts and yet in the recipient states, you listen to the average guy talk about his distrust of the federal Government which is completely disingenuous. Also, it seems to me that CA's teats have fairly well dried up lately. Not sure anyone's sucking off of them, or even looking at them. Glenn, where have you been??. It's the 6th biggest economy in the world! That's including separate countries! I won't talk about the crazy evaluations in Silicon Valley because they're completely overblown. But do you realize the Central Valley in California is the most productive agricultural valley in the world? 9 of the 10 most agriculturally productive counties in the U.S. are in California. Not saying, we don't have massive problems with potential drought, which isn't just a problem for California but the entire country as such a high percentage of the nations fruits and vegetables come from California and there are a number of crops that are only grown in California and are exported throughout the world. And don't get me wrong. There are huge pension problems because for example we pay prison guards over twice what they pay in Texas. And it's very expensive to live here. But back to the electoral process, whatever the intention of our founding fathers, my vote isn't worth a sh-t except as a protest vote and I'm supposed to drive home from the polls be transfixed on Florida and what new way they'll come up with to mangle the democratic process. I stated very simply that the Fed Gov's job is not to help the less fortunate. But probably as a less fortunate state, you are being helped a little by the grace of others. In California, maybe we could use a few more Republicans and they might demand a rebate from you all.