Kirk Gallaway

Ben, I use to think you're repetition was because, let's face it none of us are getting younger, so I could put up with 2 consecutive posts where you talk about your Uncle Jerry "smelling a rat". Then i realized in the JFK section you're concerned about your performance level, that you're not at all repetitive. You contribute, thoughtfully, and earnestly, and have some of your own ideas and theories. . You're even a bit of a climber, regularly kissing Jim Di's ass. heh heh Seriously, Why the 2 personalities?

Overcoming early rejection in his life path in becoming a Canadian exchange student to the Soviet Union . Jeff has overcompensated and now fathoms himself as the forum Russian Putin expert confidently assuring us he was the man inside Putin's head and under no circumstances would Putin invade Ukraine. I knew the next season's drama would be victim Putin struggle with oppressive Nato that left him no choice but to coldly and brutally demolish any structure or human being standing on Ukraine's surface. I'll often defer to intelligent people who have read voluminously about a given topic and ask questions to get a firm understanding of their take. I still do, but I've revised my outlook here on this forum, that being the most knowledgeable means absolutely nothing if the initial aim aim is just confirmation of existing beliefs and theories. W:At least Jeff isn't repeating Ben's daily memes about NATO and Biden weakly dithering, etc., etc., etc. Isn't that the truth?, at least Jeff's writing style is concise, and fun to read, even if I may not agree. Ben style of writing is is so repetitive and boring. For the next months on end we'll continue to hear that Biden and dithering , flat footed, when granted he's following a rather boring Nato institutionalist path against direct intervention, it nonetheless reflects the majority thought as it is now. Ben as a typical member of a conspiracy forum can take the most moderate milquetoast political decisions and make them into hyphenated conspiracy notions.This is about as conspiratorial as a democracy reflecting the will of it's people and their elected representatives fear of not being re elected.Just as the majority want to seriously prosecute Trump for his crimes including 1/6 insurrection and it's leaders and foot soldiers. Ben hyphenated the opposition to Trump as the "Government Deep state-NSS", when in reality it reflected a solid majority who want criminals to be prosecuted. Just as now Ben will hyphenate this to death saying it Globalist Biden path. In reality, this is controlled by governments. No corporations initially wanted to be involved in this, and no corporations who are part of this are going to back out. As long as there's a politic fervor,their hands are tied. They can't bear the consequences of how it will look. Realizing this true relationship would actually be empowering but that entails too much future responsibility and no one really wants that.

I think Putin had more titanic aspirations, but now can slim this down to these 3 goals (above).With these he can declare victory and say he liberated Eastern Ukraine from Nazis. Nato can declare victory and spin it that that the 3 day war ending in the capture of the capitol failed and Ukraine remained 80% in tact without even even so much as Nato's direct intervention into Ukraine. Of course where does that leave Ukraine? Any loss of territory outside of finally conceding Crimea will be seen by Ukraine as loss and betrayal by the West and they'll be very vocal about it. The ultimate victory for the West would be the overthrow of Putin by the Russian people and leaving Ukraine's territory before the war in tact. This is seen as unlikely but the most effective means to that specific end is the Russian oligarchs and middle classes feeling the pinch of sanctions, though the progress of that will always be unclear. The West also has some hope in invading the iron curtain of communication and informing the everyday Russian people of atrocities and persuading them that this war is not going on as has been portrayed to them, thereby slowly winning a PR war. In the mean time, Nato will continue to provide more of the demonstrably effective weaponry, which they are very able to do. As long as Ukrainians show the will to fight. Then the question is, with the exposure of the complete decimation of Ukraine, the misery suffering and displacement, will their be popular support to mess with this equation, and extend this into a regional war including Nato? I think it's generally acknowledged that it's not wise to push Putin in a corner any more than he already is. The prospect however remote is still existent that the Russian people could remove Putin. But they won't if Russia is seen by it's people as being under greater assault. And no one wants to face the prospect of a Putin fearing being prosecuted for war crimes or even a Putin facing the prospect of a humiliating war that he doesn't come to a rational conclusion that it is in his best interests to remove himself from.

Pretty much says it all.

I wasn't going to bring this into this thread, but now that Bob has. You recommended this Jim. At first I liked Stone talking about his early journey. I talked about this in much more detail in the other thread. Later he gets into Ukraine, Stone is blaming this horrific Russian invasion on the U.S. Stone is actually doubling down on Putin's "denazifying" rhetoric. No protestation as to the brutality and killing of civilians. Rationalizing Putin threatening to use nuclear weapons because he says the U.S. is pushing him. Biden's part of the neocon warmongering. The U.S. is pushing Russia into regime change, and that's an awful thing! Because we'll get some peace monger who is more pro U.S. like Yeltsin!, who will "cannibalize" Russia, and make Russia go against it's interest, (to the oligarchy?) as if economically they couldn't be a more failed basket case than they presently are. At one point, he sort of comes unglued and tries to look cocky with sort of a forced bravado but just comes off very insecure, making fun of the way people look and makes a lot of guilt by association. The Abby Martin interview was such a set up. I always hate it when the host is trying to impress and reinforce the guest of their solidarity in world view. Some may get great comfort from that. To me, it's always boring. Obviously Stone can say whatever he wants, and to some, there will be only be an eye rolling that "that's Oliver" because they appreciate his film accomplishments. But you're really giving a cudgel to those who discredit us. The outcome is you're not going to attract people nearer to the middle who could actually help bring the JKAC toward mainstream credibility, but you attract a lot of the newfound Trump, Q. "perpetual conspiracy crowd" who may sell some books but ultimately will cause the JFKAC to be linked to the "fringies" of this era..

When Biden expressed confidence that Afghanistan wouldn't fall for a long time once we left.. I didn't for a second believe it. I was positive the Taliban would take over within a month. How long was it, a week? I can't remember. I remember Doug recently posted an article from Kissinger, who I consider a war criminal. It sounded like it was 6 years old. He explained that we must be understanding to Russia's historic claims to Ukraine, then on the other he said we should nicely ask Russia to give back Crimea, and of course keep the status quo as the Eastern region staying with Ukraine,( I don't think he even mentioned that, that was just understood!) and have Ukraine agree to not to join Nato, like that would enough, if we handled it nicely! I'll play devil's advocate. Despite our sometimes exhilarating combat updates. Bottom line: These are 3 points of contention, 1) Russia giving back Crimea. 2) Russia now giving back the Eastern region. 3)Ukraine agreeing not to join Nato. It's pretty obvious now, there's no way Russia is going to give back Crimea. That's just lost, and given that Russia now largely controls the Eastern region. Why would they give that up? The agreement for Ukraine not to join Nato is the only demand Zelensky has expressed he's willing to comply with. The effects of sanctions is somewhat longer term. If Ukraine insists on wanting to keep their Eastern territory. Wouldn't that prolong the war into years, unless the equation is severely altered? Obviously that would be an incredible Ukraine victory, rolling back the gains Putin has made, and would have to involve a great loss of Russian morale over time. But the way it is now. Russia could leave Western Ukraine alone and accomplish their war aims. What is to stop Russia from continuing to shell civilian targets and carpet bomb whole cities until there's no one standing?They obviously don't care. ***** Good article W!. Fox News buzzwords are relentless. Dossier Dossier Dossier! And of course, what choice would Ben have to not also adopt it as his mantra? Just that perfect apt phrase where they can shut the door and overlook all the other evidence that came before it.

Let's face it, now that a war has started there's a lot of BS going on from each side about what is truly happening. If Ukraine was marginally losing the War, I would expect our side to only emphasize facts to support they are winning. Over a month ago, before the invasion. Chris posted an article here, and maybe it was Paul who recommended it, so I read it. The author was Scott Ritter who I liked because he was at the forefront of exposing Bush's War in Iraq and asking questions about WMD. I was interested on how he'd weigh in. He said Nato would do nothing if Putin invaded and that NATO was a broken power with each country serving their own selfish interests. I believe he pointed out the noted example of Germany needing that pipeline from Russia and so the sanctions will do absolutely no good at all. And he acknowledged that the the West has no intention of a ground war with Russia in Ukraine, so Nato is stuck, and Putin will deliver a fatal blow to Nato as any sort of deterrent in the future. I thought that was an interesting opinion. But Ritter's attitude was sort "Attaboy Vlad! Which told me he could probably justify a Putin invasion. Putin's invasion, surprised many people, and it caused some in the anti Nato community , like Matt Taibbi to change his mind about Putin and declare he was wrong. It's pretty obvious Ritter's conclusion about Nato's response was 180 degrees off. But I wondered where Ritter would stand now given this brutal invasion. As it turns out Ritter is apparently a military strategist and is definitely a Russian partisan. He said Russia has played this perfectly. He notes that Russia has only 200,000 troops engaged and says they are out manned by Ukraine with 600,000 (where did he get that figure, how can anyone know?). He says Russia has engineered a feint, which I didn't know what it meant but in essence it is creating a diversion that could sacrifice some troops in order to misdirect the Ukrainians and Ritter says it's been hugely successful, and will give Putin and Russia a victory. People did skeptically respond in the thread that the loss in troops and tanks was much greater than any military would accept in a feint, and echoed the story line we've been hearing that the Russians expected Kiev to fall in 3 days, and have greatly miscalculated Ukraine resistance. Currently, with the civilian bombing and destruction of Maripol, the Russians are building a bridge down to Crimea and will benefit at solidifying that bridge if any temporary cease fire takes effect. But the latest western feed is that Putin surrounded himself with "yes men' and wasn't aware how miserably his military campaign in Ukraine has gone, and so will have to re calibrate. So what ultimately, is the truth? It's become apparent to me that there are a number of right wing westerners who've accepted Putin's invasion and are cheering it on, such as Ritter. This has all became great sport to them and there's no mention at all about depth of human suffering and displacement. Another one such right winger is Glenn Greenwald, who sarcastically says, "Watch how the West will spin this as a great victory, when Ukraine concedes Crimea, Donbass to Russia and agrees to not join Nato!" I then found out that Ritter writes for RT. A fact I didn't know, and one poster offered that Ritter was convicted in a sex charge with a minor in 2011, which I also know nothing about. I see this related article in the NYtimes. I'm always being asked to subscribe. Maybe some day I will. I understand there's a way for third parties to send articles by which they won't be blocked. If anybody know how, and could send this article to me. I would greatly appreciate it. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/28/opinion/putin-culture-war.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20220330&instance_id=57094&nl=the-morning&regi_id=61798350&segment_id=86957&te=1&user_id=48552702f942aacb0810b9de5ca41c55 .

Bob:In what world do we live in where informants and undercover cops don't exist? You think that's unusual? Exactly, Ground U.S. to Ben. If you took polls, you'd find out the vast majority of average Americans want undercover agents on the ground at the Capitol on 1/6. That's not evidence of anything, but as it turned out prudent judgment. Bob: Sometimes things are exactly what they appear to be As disappointing as this may sound to some. 95% of the time things are what they appear to be. You look at that group of people at the Capitol on 1/6. Use logic. Is it any real surprise they eventually broke into the Capitol with their own leaders, through their own volition,. without Ray Epps, or FBI agents leading them? How is that not the most obvious conclusion?? Why is Occam's razor so seldom applied? Bob:The marks are so far into the con at this point they can't possibly admit to themselves they've been played for fools. That's the definition of the ideal con game I'm not sure I'd put Ben in the category of a person who couldn't admit he was played. But I think in general the notion of Trump was assimilated almost as if in a dream as a comrade and a fellow victim to a vast conspiracy that is taking control of their lives. This affiliation is very powerful to those who hold it. Bob: Trump wasn't set up. He was recognized for what he was. Well put!, that's exactly what it was. A good majority first spotted Trump as a con, even if you didn't Ben. People in power spotted it when they came in contact with him. Putin spotted him as weak person who could easily be compromised. It's false to assume that the people who resisted Trump are some evil "deep state" faction of the government, whose aim was to usurp the rights of everyday citizen's and take power away from the people. They represent people of sound mind and thinking everywhere. They are us. The solid majority

Understood Paul, when I say "invoked", I didn't mean in a legal sense. Only that there's always been a stigma about the President weighing in on Supreme Court decisions, as being inappropriate to separation of powers. I can't think of a specific incident, but it could be that with Trump , that has already gone out the window. I'm only trying to tell you the pittance that you can expect. However. I think if the Democrats want to show up for the midterms, they do have to start distinguishing themselves from the Republicans. Maybe that's what they're trying to do with these 2 issues they are rolling out today. Adam Schiff is introducing a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. Congressman Schiff Introduces Constitutional Amendment to Overturn Citizens United This has no realistic chance of passing as it would need approval by 3/4 of the State legislature. But the Democrats should start forcing issues to show the party against wealth inequality and influence is the Democrats and the party favoring the super wealthy is the Republicans. https://schiff.house.gov/news/press-releases/congressman-schiff-introduces-constitutional-amendment-to-overturn-citizens-united ******* Biden's proposing a 20% billionaire tax. It affects the taxation of everyone over 100 million in assets. Despite claims that the Democrats are in bed with Tech, it would have a great effect on Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerburg, Elon Musk, and Bill Gates. Apparently there are 4 mega wealthy Republicans that this would effect in Congress as well. It will be interesting to see how watered down this would become and why. President Joe Biden to propose new 20% minimum billionaire tax https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/26/president-joe-biden-to-propose-new-20percent-minimum-billionaire-tax-.html

As far as the President calling it out, I guess they'll always invoke the separation of powers. And the fact that it's Thomas's wife, and not Thomas. But still politicians should speak out about it, But it looks like the best we can get out of it, is a demand that he recuses himself in the future. It's hard to determine just what issue would get people demonstrating in front of the court for weeks at a time, but that does heighten public awareness of the problem. I'm for throwing the book at the lot of them. Once again it's aspiring U.S. immigrant Ben in breathless disbelief that there's actually inequities in the American justice system. That's not what he was told in Thailand! As for buffalo wings, a bit too fancifully white for me, not very real. I have more compassion for a black whose already served twice his sentence for possession of a pot seed.

Ben, you're all over the map, but you didn't deal with anything I wrote. A little hypocritical Ben. If you're so compassionate about Russia's historic ties to the Ukraine, how come you're the biggest "hawk" here and essentially championing America's interests. That's all in your mind. Nobody's accusing anybody.Maybe your reaction is because I don't have hallowed heroes? Let's see, "Putin a thug" , I didn't misquote you, I said "a thug in a scrum". Just to avoid silly arguments like that, I referred to Russiagate only in a historic context. It was at the beginning of the Trump Presidency, a polarizing event by which some never returned to a clear assessment of events afterward. Which was sort of a commentary on everything that eventually transpired. Re Dulles, then you agree with me.

Ben, What might be lost in the humor of the first picture. Is that you've taken a hard core stance that Trump could nor be influenced by Putin. You and others. But you've never looked at the broader picture. This started at the beginning of Trump Presidency as result of Russia Gate and an early perception that it was fueled by the "Deep state" and the MSM. And it became a matter of stubborn resistance, and they've been stuck ever since. For 20 years prior to Trump' running for President, he'd only on occasion weigh in on political events of the day. They were either big issues , such as 911 and the second War on Iraq, (where he was first in favor and then bailed),or they were small "hot button issues", involving local crime, or tabloid NY Post type stuff he'd weigh in on. He was always trying to make points on the hot topics. Trump never talked of Nato before he ran for President. That was too involved a topic for him to touch. When you understand Trump's involvement with Russian Oligarchs as a money launderer. When you understand Trump's massive debts and terrible business mismanagement. And why Putin's derision of Nato, and Trump's turnaround. Before the invasion, respect for Nato was at an all time low. The morale and unity was awful and each nation had carved out their own niches of their own national interests.The phony thing that Stone, Greenwald, Mate, Di Eugenio, Carter accepted was that Putin's kool aid about encroaching on Russia's territory , but NATO had only accepted 2 new wimpy countries in 18 years! Putin didn't publicly even make it known that he disapproved of a stronger Nato until 2007 and never mentioned it personally to Obama until 2014! It was completely the opposite, Putin saw an opportunity to invade Ukraine, not out of any great security threat. He knew the U.S. would never unilaterally invade Ukraine. It wasn't a matter of Biden "giving away the store" by saying the U.S. would not invade. He had one goal in mind, to force Nato's hand, and forever render Nato useless. Many so called experts in the west thought that is exactly what would happen.This would have been infinitely easier if Trump had won in 2020, according to plan, but he didn't. That's what's going on. People can disagree, but I'd say there's a stronger case made for this than at least that Alan Dulles specifically was at the forefront of a plot to kill JFK.

It is absolute garbage, Ben's always a sucker for big words. Talk about journeying into the realm of pseudo intellectualism! I guess, in Ben mind. He was trying to fight fire with fire. We have to keep Ben focused, or he'll spill off on endless Fox news tangents. But it's always important to keep in mind, W. that 5 of us collectively don't have the time to keep Ben up to the speed on life in America. We can only hope for some sort of osmosis. Keep in mind, 2 of Ben's repeated journalistic heroes, Glenn Greenwald and Aaron Mate are hardcore Putinista non apologists. So he's come somewhere. Even though I think his rather mild characterization of Putin as a "thug" in a "scrum" and not a war criminal means he still feels he has to do some fence sitting. That's politics! To Ben,

There are other instances that came to the fore where Thomas should have recused himself but the Scotus declined to take the case, with one case where Thomas and Alito issued a brief statement actually suggesting the majority acted too soon in shutting the case down. So Thomas was not even shying away from a decision where he should have recused himself. **** From this NY Times article: "Justice Thomas Ruled on Election Cases. Should His Wife’s Texts Have Stopped Him?" https://nyti.ms/36o1cJX : But Justice Thomas did participate in a ruling in January on an emergency application from Mr. Trump asking the court to block release of White House records concerning the attack on the Capitol. The court rejected the request, in a sharp rebuke to the former president. Only Justice Thomas noted a dissent, giving no reasons. He also participated in the court’s consideration of whether to hear a related appeal, one in which Mr. Meadows filed a friend-of-the-court brief saying that “the outcome of this case will bear directly” on his own efforts to shield records from the House committee investigating the attacks beyond those he had provided. The Supreme Court last month refused to hear the case, without noted dissent. There was no indication that Justice Thomas had recused himself. In December 2020, around the time of the text messages, Justice Thomas participated in a ruling on an audacious lawsuit by Texas asking the court to throw out the election results in four battleground states. The court rejected the request, with Justices Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. issuing a brief statement suggesting the majority had acted too soon in shutting the case down. In February 2021, Justice Thomas addressed election fraud in a dissent from the Supreme Court’s decision to turn away a challenge to Pennsylvania’s voting procedures. “We are fortunate that many of the cases we have seen alleged only improper rule changes, not fraud,” he wrote. “But that observation provides only small comfort. An election free from strong evidence of systemic fraud is not alone sufficient for election confidence.”

Clarence Thomas' wife told Mark Meadows that 'the Biden crime family' and 'ballot fraud co-conspirators' would be 'living in barges off GITMO to face military tribunals for sedition,' texts show That woman is obviously out of her mind. But they all are. Internet porn came a little too late for Clarence Thomas. Otherwise we might have been able to nab him 30 years ago! heh heh Of course the real issue is that Clarence Thomas didn't recuse himself and was the only justice to rule against release of Trump's records. There seems to be a built in phony excuse in the system that everything is so unprecedented, that there will never be enough evidence to dislodge any member of these exclusive clubs, and high ranking criminals won't be prosecuted. ****** The bottom line with Putin is still that he wants the same things. He hasn't really backed down about that. He wants Crime a recognized and now wants Donbass and wants Zelensky to agree not to join Nato. I don't see how this going to change anything. There's seems to be a rejuggling of forces, but they're still fighting and moving west to Lviv. .

Well, Ben thanks for posting that link. As it turns out, we were both right. I searched your first 2 AP paragraphs and got the March 24 AP release by the same 3 authors. You quoted from the March 25th edition.These 2 paragraphs are identical except in the earlier March 24,edition, it says "Attorney General William Barr declared Sunday." attributing the opening 2 sentences as a quote from William Barr. https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-ap-top-news-elections-politics-north-america-f4f1ea3c16884b49ae853e12e78e42ad The only other difference curiously is different titles. March 24th:Trump didn't coordinate with Russia, report declares--March 25th.: Mueller finds no Trump collusion, leaves obstruction open The headline difference is easily explained. But on the 25th they curiously retract the William Barr quote and make it their own.??? Hmmm.. Well obviously they're full of sh-t, and shouldn't be quoted in the first place, or even paid attention to for that reason, as well as the many other reasons we've enumerated. ******* Re: Ukraine Ben:Ron.--Yes. This is what I am afraid of. The US leaders have become so enamored of convenient M$M narratives regarding Russian failures that the idea the lunatic Putin may be in for a long slog is overlooked. I'm not sure you're getting this Ben. Putin initially wanted to capture Kiev, Zelensky and create a regime change. Now he's saying that all he ever wanted was the Dumbass region and he left the rest of the country in shambles just to be sure there wouldn't be any resistance to that goal. Which sounds completely derelict and absurd. But this is definitely a backing down of sorts, and it appears they are standing back from Kiev for now. Not that we should necessarily trust anything he says.

What I'm telling you is I tested your AP quote verbatim, and that's not the AP quote. There aren't 2 quotes. Your quote omitted that William Barr said it, and you attributed it as a fact from the AP. Ben re: Buffalo Horns said: And nobody is ever going to find out who gave him $500 so he could take a bus to DC. How did a penniless, homeless Phoenix gadfly end up in DC? Yeah and the natural assumption would be that it came from the Trump organizers of the event! But you're alluding that it came from FBI agents or you wouldn't have mentioned it. This is what I mean by "perpetual conspiracy" BS. You're using innuendo and you have no foundation. Give me more powerful evidence pointing to the FBI, than this picture showing Buffalo Horns talking with Rudy Giuliani. I'm sure you can't. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/giuliani-jake-angeli-capitol-riot/

Ben said: The Associated Press version of events. That's not true Ben. We've been through this before. This isn't the Associated Press version of events. You've parsed this quotation and it's rather misleading. Here is the actual quotation, with the small part you've left out in bold type. WASHINGTON (AP) — Special counsel Robert Mueller did not find evidence that President Donald Trump’s campaign “conspired or coordinated” with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election but reached no conclusion on whether Trump obstructed justice, Attorney General William Barr declared Sunday. That brought a hearty claim of vindication from Trump but set the stage for new rounds of political and legal fighting. You're falsely trying to portray the first part of this statement as "The Associated Press version of events", when in reality it was a quote from William Barr. Probably the most discredited U.S. Attorney General in our lifetime. Or at least John Mitchell 50 years ago. You also don't mention that Mueller said the report "doesn't exonerate Trump." Pat's right though. I've always found your statements regarding American Justice to be very naive, almost as if you're a foreigner with no direct experience with the U.S. legal system and have a naive faith in America's "truth and justice for all." All of of us here are very aware of the inequities of the American Legal system and that people with privilege and power are getting off all the time, as Pat has enumerated. You were quoting William Barr, but are you aware Mueller thought Barr had very poorly summed up his conclusions? You portray something as an agreed upon fact, when in reality, it's a summation quote from a largely discredited AG, who was then disputed by the author who couldn't prosecute, because he didn't have the power to prosecute anyway. When you add up all the variables,the purview, the misquotations, and the disputes, your argument dissolves into vapor.

Ex-prosecutor says Donald Trump is 'guilty of numerous felony violations' NEW YORK — A prosecutor who had been leading a criminal investigation into Donald Trump before quitting last month said in his resignation letter that he believes the former president is "guilty of numerous felony violations" and he disagreed with the Manhattan district attorney's decision not to seek an indictment. https://www.npr.org/2022/03/24/1088443399/ex-prosecutor-says-donald-trump-is-guilty-of-numerous-felony-violations

Virginia Thomas, wife of SCOTUS Justice, Clarence Thomas has now been found to be communicating with Mark Meadows about efforts to overturn the 2020 election, calling it "The Greatest Heist in American history." Thomas on Nov 10 2020. “Help This Great President stand firm, Mark!!!...You are the leader, with him, who is standing for America’s constitutional governance at the precipice. The majority knows Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of our History.” Meadows reply :“This is a fight of good versus evil,” Meadows wrote. “Evil always looks like the victor until the King of Kings triumphs. Do not grow weary in well doing. The fight continues. I have staked my career on it. Well at least my time in DC on it.” https://deadline.com/2022/03/ginni-thomas-texts-to-mark-meadows-donald-trump-1234986540/ The Ginni Thomas and Mark Meadows Texts: This Damn Case Just Gets Stranger By the Hour https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a39531967/ginni-thomas-mark-meadows-texts-2020-election/

Boy, some of these reports I've been hearing here about the fighting in Ukraine, make me want to do some pushups for the Ukraine resistance! Here's another article. As noted in this article, I've heard despite the calls on NATO to establish a NFZ, and risk pushing Putin in a corner. The Ukraine pilots have more than held their own. I do find it pretty remarkable. Why Can’t the West Admit That Ukraine Is Winning? America has become too accustomed to thinking of its side as stymied, ineffective, or incompetent. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/03/ukraine-is-winning-war-russia/627121/

Oh yeah, that's a real possibility Ben. Is it because Biden has an obsession with perpetual conspiracy theorists expats living in the Thai jungles and has heard your repeated disapproval of him and now he'll have to step down because he realizes he'll never be the man you want him to be? You sure that wasn't your dream from a Fox newscast in 2020. They actually said Biden was only running for President to give it to Kamala Harris so the left could trick us into having another black President. heh heh This may be dispiriting for you Ben, because it actually gives you less to be upset about. But one story that has resulted from the end of this Post Cold War Era, that you'd probably get wind of in another 6 months, is that Biden has galvanized a deglobalization of the world economy with the deliberate pulling out of a great many of the multi national corporations from Russia. This has occurred to a magnitude I previously never would have imagined. Of all things, this to me is the most remarkable thing that's happened. I never thought a President or even Nato could do that. In this case it's a great thing.. It represents at least a small reversal and taming of the private sector by the public sector. Something I've advocated. But It's only the beginning and now and now the battle is going to be out in the open. You've rightfully mention Blackrock a number of times. Their CEO Larry Finck is decrying this change in an article he wrote. (boo hoo!) Hate to be the bearer of good news, but I felt I'd jog the 6 month lag time from Thailand with news from modern industrial world. Entitled "It's not "woke" for businesses to think beyond profit". And with your longstanding opposition to "wokeness", I'm sure you agree! Again , heh heh! https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/17/business/dealbook/larry-fink-blackrock-letter.html *************** In these Jackson confirmation hearings. Are these Republicans just out of their minds asking the insane questions? Particularly the second one below, same sex couples shouldn't have the right to marry because it offends Christians? Are we really this screwed up that these guys have a viable party that could take over Congress? It appears nothing will interest the average everyday person to vote in his interest! But "culture wars" is where it's at! I

This is an excerpt from a recent Stone interview where he talks about Putin's invasion of Ukraine. At first he warns us that we're misinformed and to keep an open mind, which is always good advice. It's never completely one sided. Then he goes into a long pro Putin diatribe against the U.S. 10 days ago in this interview Stone is blaming this brutal Russian invasion on the U.S. Stone is actually doubling down on all his Putin "denazifying" rhetoric from "Ukraine on Fire" There's no protestation as to the brutality or killing of civilians going on among the everyday human being citizens of Ukraine. To Stone, It's all about the U.S. and Stone's s settling the score from 2014! Even though his predictions at the time, of a fascist state in Ukraine (based on one faction's embrace of old right wing nationalist figures who collaborated with the Nazis during Stalinist brutal collectivist purges who would probably be 120 right now!) all never came to pass. IMO, At one point, Honestly it doesn't look like Stone even really believes everything he's saying, and any good lawyer could tear him to shreds. He sort of comes unglued and tries to look cocky with sort of a forced bravado but just comes off very insecure, making fun of the way people look..makes a lot of guilt by association, innuendo comparing John Foster Dulles with Nuland and Kagan, but doesn't substantiate. The moderator has an innocent sort of charm. Stone's in friendly territory and the hosts admire him, want to have him on again, and change to self affirming subjects at some critical moments after it's apparent Stone is making name allegations but really firing a lot of blanks. Just a complete Putin apologist. Stone has compassion for and can actually rationalize Putin threatening to use nuclear weapons because he says the U.S. is pushing him even though we abided by our treaties and have no boots on the ground in Ukraine and Putin's had a much more direct presence fighting in Ukraine for 8 years and now is steamrolling through the country. And to Stone, Biden's part of the neocon warmongering. Just imagine, Oliver would see Ben as the deep state "Atilla the Hun". heh heh He says the U.S. is pushing Russia into regime change, and that's an awful thing! Because we'll get some peacemonger who is more pro U.S. like Yeltsin!, who will "cannibalize" Russia (Stone says grinning) and make Russia go against it's interest, (to the oligarchy?) as if economically they couldn't be a more failed basket case than they presently are. And of course in any case, to Stone, there's no mention Putin bears any responsibility for the shambles he's created of Ukraine and no mention of the deaths and human displacement. For Stone, It's game time baby!, . They're all just pawns in the Stone's master geopolitical scorecard anyway. Just imagine if Russia rolled over Ukraine in a week. Stone and others would probably say that Ukraine gave up because Russia and Ukraine are "brothers", and the only thing that was pushing them apart was the omnipotent, always evil U.S. Deep State. When in reality, it would have been a shear brute force pummeling their teeny neighbor into submission just like in Georgia. Is he a hardened sinner, or just an old fossil who can't learn any new tricks other than to prepare for the rest of his life being dominated by the U.S. Deep State? I hear this interview and I start to think maybe Alan Dulles had become too senile to really pull off the murder of a U.S. President, though maybe just senile enough to enlist as his most visible, high profile, critical, public people to front his patsy narrative, from his mistress's best friend's family? It is convenient. heh heh https://youtu.be/3ieQ4kd-iEE

Obviously I don't have to tell you W. that Putin decriminalized Domestic violence with support of his Russian Orthodox Church in 2017. "Under the new law, a person can beat his spouse or child until she’s bloodied and bruised, and as long as her injuries don’t require a hospital stay," There have numerous cases since of violent child rape in Russia by priests in Russia. I was brought up a Catholic and I know of a few people who were sexually abused by Catholic Priests.. https://slate.com/human-interest/2017/02/russia-decriminalized-domestic-violence-with-support-from-the-russian-orthodox-church.html

Thank you for you response Ben, Our marketing research people added that segment specifically for you, in order to keep you agitated and thus alert and solicit a response. We've coined it our "All Conspiracy Narcissist" version. (ACN) heh heh (joke) It's segue.