Kirk Gallaway

My best wishes as well. Rest up, do only what you're comfortable with. Get well!

I think Obama could have and should have gotten out of Afghanistan in his first term. It would have put the blame on the War, squarely on the people who started it, Bush and the Republicans. As it is now, any online newbie from anywhere can parachute into, and be an expert on the American political scene and make no distinctions and declare the Democrats just another war party. I don't really forgive Obama for that. I think of Obama as the "Jackie Robinson" of the Presidents, and he saw himself as that.. I think it has to do with Obama's psychological make up. I guess anybody can be an armchair psychoanalyst. There's an interesting anecdotal story about Obama. As a student at Harvard when Obama won editor of the Harvard Review, later his leftist allies who voted for him over the conservative candidate became upset with Obama , for bending over backwards to the conservative he beat. Later as President, Obama was honorable and too concerned with being fair and got steamrolled by Mitch Mac Connell. There are numerous incidents of that, including one in the fall of 2016. Being the first black President he didn't want to be seen as uppity. Just my take.

Ben: Concerning his exhaustive research into Amy Klobuchar talking points. BEN:There is more, but your eyes would glaze over. A big section on China (I loathe the CCP, btw). China is a real economic threat. It's the one thing Trump got right. If you loathe the CCP, then why are you putting her down for that? But my eyes are already glazed over. I'm not sure why you chose a midwest Democrat Amy Klobuchar's sort of boiler plate foreign policy statement to mean anything. She actually ran for President in 2020 and was beaten soundly. So she doesn't represent a sizable chunk of the dems. About the only good foreign policy things I can say about her is that she was for the U.S, Iran multi national agreement,( that actually was backed by Putin and Russia if that validates it for you,) and that was opposed by Cheney and was jettisoned by peacenik Trump. She also favored Obama opening up relations with Cuba, again opposed by Cheney, and Trump dumped that as well.. These are substantive issues. Unfortunately in the U.S. there are only 2 parties, so they cover a lot of ideological ground. Ben:If there is anybody opposed to the national security state today, it is the populist wing of the GOP On the surface, that may seem so , but you're confusing the pablum that Tucker is directly feeding you, but Steve Banon was the architect of, as reality. You talk about the "populist wing of the GOP". Do you have anything specific on who you're talking about? Can you name me one person that you'd like to defend? The great majority of the "populists" you're mentioning were never really on record espousing anti national security state views, (maybe the Paul's,) and if you look through their history in public statements, were pro Bush's War in Iraq. They're just blindly following whatever Trump says. There is a character element in all this stuff as well. So there's a bit more going on under the surface. Ben I get from you there's one big issue and that's the U.S. National Security State. Oh and of course "identity politics". But since you were probably the last person here to predict Biden would get out of Afghanistan, you can now see there's a lot more resistance in the U.K. and Europe and throughout the world than just the U.S, "Deep State". But there's also a myriad of other issues that we citizen's of the U.S. face; there's issues of Environmental Protection and climate change. There's a struggle for civil rights and voting rights. In the U.S.. there are severe income inequality issues and some of us are trying to build a more equitable health care system. We're going through a pandemic and there's been a massive economic displacement here and throughout the world. These problems do exist whether Tucker and Glen Greenwad talk about them or not. No I don't agree with that either Ron. So Biden has a choice, but Obama didn't have a choice, because he would have been assassinated.?

Wow! Not the first Stone I thought to roll, but I did think Keith may have had 9 lives! RIP

John said: However, I am not sure Larry is right when he says a capitalist country should be able to compete economically with communist China. It would be true if China was a communist country. However, it is more accurately described as "state capitalist". This is the most effective economic system ever and very difficult to compete with. Most importantly, the government controls "labor costs" and major investment in the economy (it also controls outside investment). This is really a cogent point. It's really a hybrid of Capitalism and a planned economy. For example, Two of the biggest issues in the U.S. now are 1) wealth inequality. The CCP are going after the billionaires and are going to be a lot more successful than the U.S. ever could be. 2) There's a lot of talk by both parties in the U.S. about the power of social media. Europe has taken a more regulatory stance, but The CCP is just sweeping in and taking control in a manner we would consider Draconian, and there's not a long history, or culture of respecting individual rights to offer much resistance. The weakness is it rests on critical decisions, by a very centralized group and if the judgment is wrong it could be, at some time disastrous, as for example it has occasionally been with overbuilding, as there are 100,000 people cities that are completely unoccupied. But up to now, the economy has been such a powerhouse, it can easily be absorbed. The Chinese are everywhere funding foreign infrastructure projects. There is a total of about 800 foreign infrastructures projects in every major continent. In Panama they are talking about the increased Chinese influence. There is still a loyalty or a willingness in Latin America to look upon the U.S. as a big brother. I'm not sure why, but there is a perception that the U.S. could be their natural benefactor if the government didn't from time to time get in the way. But that perception has to be changing. I remember for many decades there was a grueling, bumpy 9 hour bus ride from Guatemala City to a remote region in the Guatemalan rain forest and the Mayan temples of Tikal. I didn't go there over a decade and 15 years ago when I last went, I found that whole route had now been paved. I wondered how the Guatemalan government managed to do that? And I found out it was an infrastructure project funded by the Germans. The Germans? If the U.S. had done more of that rather than just selling arms to perpetuate a 5% middle class that preserved our corporate interests, they had the chance to be the benevolent super power that the West so much looked up to after WWll.

Jim, we had this discussion, maybe a year ago. Didn't you argue that Nixon was the worst for the reasons that Ben stated. The overall loss of life during Nixon's administration was the greatest and he and Kissinger knew early on the war was unwinnable. It's a persuasive argument, the overall loss of life. But anyway, welcome aboard! I agree of the two, W. is worse because he chose to enter a completely elective war, and was under no real pressure from the MIC, and the extent of both his and Nixon's actions were both very far reaching. But you can always argue Nixon inherited the Vietnam War, though his role in history shows a sinister influence before he ever became President. As for Trump, I'd say, he was the least fit for President, and the extent of the damage he's caused to the Nation itself, isn't fully known and can't really be assessed truly for probably the decade. Though it's a good argument to say the loss of life under Trump because of the pandemic will always be hard to determine, but will at least contained to the country, that he was President. And I notice W's chief partner in crime, Tony Blair has now called Biden's actions "imbecilic".

That's funny Adam! For awhile you really had me going there! I can think of another thread here, where utterings like that are almost commonplace. So literally nothing can make me even flinch anymore! ** It's like the U.S. is so empty within, that they're completely given over to the world and idle pleasures come streaming in from without, and are welcomed as a diversion. And wielding the fate of others becomes an amusement which will always find an opportunity toward indulgence. -Maybe Trump was the true American President! heh heh ***** Larry said: Yep, there will never be a shortage of reasons for foreign intervention - strategic, humanitarian, security. And that will generally come to include cultural intervention (projecting our system of democracy and equal rights overseas), regime change, nation building, and all the opportunities that go along with it. After all, its worked so well for us.... Well put! Larry, you can see it now in the myriad of rationalizations to stay. It's like we're coming to grips that we're going to have to jettison our true egalitarian Afghanistan dream of the convenience of home delivery from Amazon, and a Mac Donald's at every corner and a Starbucks on every block. for every Afghani man, woman, and child.

Well Pat's posted this. How are you doing Pat? How is your recovery going? Great interview! Interesting to hear about your unique JFKA journey, and I've always wanted to hear about your encounters with hard core JFKA "experts" or in some cases dogmatists.

There's nothing "macro" about this at all. She's going after Dylan's deep pockets and hopes to settle out of court. As far as the media carrying this story. In this day, it's called "news". You can expect them to report on an ongoing suit against a celebrity like this every time. The reason is that it is of interest to some people. People really eat this stuff up!

Yes I remember that. I thought you might be confusing Cheney's statement as to Sadamm not being directly involved with 911, to Bin Laden. For Cheney to admit that, credibility wise, would be in fact giving away his store. Maybe I missed it but have you found any evidence to back up your assertion that some of the alleged hijackers are still alive?

W. I agree with you. i think Doug is greatly overestimating the Taliban as an international threat. W: Both Dick Cheney and FBI Director Robert Mueller later testified that evidence implicating Osama Bin Laden in the 9/11 attacks "was never forthcoming." What is the source of this? This was in some Senate Subcommittee hearing? ***** The reaction to this withdrawal is pretty much as I predicted. The outrage, the pressure on Biden. The people on the ground, the soldiers who previously fought, the same usual historian media "talking heads" weighing in in the news media. But now positively on the withdrawal, I am starting to hear more stories in reflection of what a miserable boondoggle this entire war was. Despite Biden's claims a month ago, that there wasn't a complete fall to be reckoned with, at least anytime soon. I knew that was BS. But I thought that it might take a month rather than 10 days. Isn't that all the more reason that we shouldn't be there? Obviously the haste by which this has happened has produced some problems. The Taliban is prudent to appear moderate and cooperate with the evacuation. Why step on the tale of a tiger when the tiger's leaving? I was hoping to find the interview to post here of Jim Acosta with Jerry Brown on Saturday where Brown praised Biden's actions as showing courage, and went into one of his good rants about the endless wars, hitting upon JFK, and the CIA's role in the Bay of Pigs briefly and pleading for these cycles of endless war to stop. I thought "not bad for an 83 year old!"

President Ghani of Afghanistan has now fled the capital leaving it completely open for the Taliban. ******* Absolutely right W. As I said, Biden was going to take a lot of heat for this. It's sort of a cheap shot that the Republicans and the media are delivering. You notice none of them are coming out for a massive military action to fight back one last time to salvage the 20 years. Though Biden's going to send more troops to assist in evacuation, which is technically a blunder that they'll also thrash him for. A President does this in the first year of office, so he has plenty of time to recover in the next 3 years. In the case of Biden, he's hoping his covid relief package, infrastructure bill and relative vaccination success, (most people understand Biden's not going to hold much sway over people who simply refuse to get vaccinated) offset the 20 year foreign policy embarrassment. Trump could have done this in his first year and won some begrudging approval from Democrats and would have looked brilliant with Middle America for breaking up the "stalemate" in Washington. But despite his campaign rhetoric, he didn't. Obama, if he had listened to Biden, could have also and lay the historic responsibility of these occupations where it belongs, on the Republicans, who initiated them. But he ended saddling the Democrats to another pro war party, which is a perception with a sizable number of people, that lasts to this day.

W: I'm not one to blame Trump or Biden for trying to get us out of the quagmire, Trump trying to get us out of the quagmire?? If he wanted to, he could have, in his first year in office back in 2017, just like Biden did. Whatever Trump's rhetoric, in the end he's blaming the withdrawal on the Democrats. That tells you how sincere he was about pulling out of Afghanistan. Just as the increased Intelligence and Defense budgets under Trump. W: What concerns me is whether the American public will get an honest, accurate appraisal of the 20 year Afghanistan War fiasco, "Honest, accurate appraisal?" In the final analysis, most people can see it's a 20 year war, that's probably going to end in images similar to the fleeing from Saigon in 1975. That's not going to be perceived as successful. As far as the "Rambo syndrone": The case that we could have bombed our way to victory as some alleged in Vietnam is not going to be swallowed in such a disfragmented ,tribal country and culture that foreign powers have been warring over for centuries. People aren't, at least that stupid. After 1975, Jimmy Carter had a very peaceful administration. Why?, in part it was Carter, and in part, because people didn't want to go war. Then Reagan got in, and it gradually escalated, Beirut , Grenada, bombing Khadaffy, escalating to Iran contra etc.. In the future, the choice to not fight is always there. Keep in mind, the Democrats in the house voted solidly opposing going to war in Iraq. Now we've finally got a few right leaning people who have abandoned the neocons.

Re: Trump, you know I've been thinking about something that might get us out of this mess. It may seem a little far fetched but hear me out. Why don't we produce a "Truman " like movie where Trump still thinks he's President. Trump's followers after watching a few episodes will follow in suit and in a couple of months, we'll be right back to normal! 😃 What do you guys think?

The question by David was: CIA budget cut? Does anyone know their total yearly budget, for any year? The answer is yes, there is a budget, that's approved every year, and is a matter of public record. But that of course doesn't stop a black budget within the budget, and money going to very nefarious things. The biggest parts of the pie are to the National Intelligence budget, (NIP 62.7 billion in 2020.) which includes the CIA, and the Military Intelligence budget (MIP 23.1 billion in 2020). I love this disclaimer by the Director of national Intelligence. In addition, other departments and agencies may engage in certain activities related to intelligence for their own mission needs that are not captured here. I found out some interesting things. During the last 4 Obama years, Intelligence was largely underfunded , actually given less money than they asked for(with one exception on MIP in 2014), and during the Trump years they were almost all over funded. 2017 budget is largely done by the time Trump gets to office. https://www.dni.gov/index.php/what-we-do/ic-budget Of course this doesn't eve take in account, Homeland Security.

Matt's right, nobody cares that much about this other than us. Nobody in any number is going to take to the streets about this So what political pressure can there be? Nobody in government fears us. Those are just the facts. As far as defunding the modern day CIA. It's a pipe dream! No major industrial power is going to dismantle their intelligence apparatus. Period! Ben" But who can be against the full release of the JFK Records? In theory not many Ben. But most people aren't going to get up in a soapbox like you and decry, "Why doesn't the ACLU defend Nazis anymore, like they did in the good old 60s? To give you a realistic idea of the political reality. Which is all that really matters! The JFKA Assassination Conspiracy movement, if you will, does not currently have the political will of the "TQ" in the LGBTQ. It's not in the top 40 in political priorities in either party. We can bitch and moan forever about it and it won't the change the reality. Matt's right, the only thing that can change the status is in the hearts of minds of people. The best shot right now is the success of the movie. Those are facts. This is purely my conjecture. If the CIA, or MIC is so ominous and all powerful, do you really think they would leave behind information that directly lead to them? There would be nothing left in the files, and the general MSM commentary , would be "Ok,. now we've been through all this. And it turns out there's nothing there."

One of the first of the outspoken anti covid vaccine pioneers, who leaves a rabid legacy in many online forums, such as ours, to this day. He courageously first called Faucci "a power tripping freak"., and said that the infectious disease expert and “power trip libb loons” Democrats were conspiring to make it seem like the pandemic was ongoing so they could grab more power.". He said : So,you think it wasn’t a SCAM DEMIC? NOT ONE ELECTED DEMOCRAT ever tested positive.” He called masks “face diapers” and “face pantys.” His name was Dick Farrell. Unfortunately our brave outspoken hero is now dead. He died of what else?, but covid. Amy Leigh Hair, a close friend of Farrel, wrote on Facebook, “COVID took one of my best friends! RIP Dick Farrel. He is the reason I took the shot. He texted me and told me to ‘Get it!’ He told me this virus is no joke! RIP https://www.thedailybeast.com/anti-vaxx-radio-host-and-former-newsmax-anchor-dick-farrel-dies-of-coronavirus

Just to highlight a chronology I read leading up to Jan. 6th, of Trump's actions to thwart the results of the election, apart from any direct effort to overthrow the capitol, and any attempt to disrupt the certification of the election on Jan. 6th.. Nov 4th: Refuses to admit defeat, started with the 'frankly, we did win' Dec 12th: The SCOTUS shoots down the lawsuits that reached it concerning the elections. Dec 14th: Biden has enough electoral college votes from certified state results, he has finally and definitely won at this point. Dec 19th: Trump tweets 'be there, it will be wild'; which seems to be one of the first mentions of the upcoming protest on the 6th by him Dec 27th: Trump calls and fails to change the opinions of Rosenberg and others to turn the DOJ into his agency. Trump realizes everything so far failed, the 6th will be last chance. Jan 2nd, Trump calles Raffensberger in a last attempt to have Georgia overrule its own election results. Jan 3rd, Trump has last meeting with both Rosenberg and Clarke to decide what to do with Rosenberg (to replace him with Clarke, but all senior staff at the DOJ would quit) So what we have is that after the lawsuit got shot down by SCOTUS, in December/early January we see a multiprong attack on our democracy: State and election officials are pressured with personals call by the President to lie on his behalf the DOJ is pressure to make bold untruthful declarations about the election (they refused) the DOJ, FBI and CIA leadership are loyalty tested and threatened with being replaced (they and the military made clear they would quit en-masse if that happened) the GOP loyalists in Congress put pressure on their peers to object to the vote counting on the 6th the rhetoric leading up to the Jan 6th protest becomes more and more with fighting words, there are communications about this between organizers and the White House the protest is more and more planned as an assault on the capitol, with tours and shared maps etc. On nearly all of these points, the Jan 6th committee need to question Meadows and others. My guess is that somewhere in early January, Trump with a small group of trustees make the final decision that they will send the horde towards the capitol on the 6th, as it is their last ditch chance to stay in power. It wasn't just a coup attempt. The Jan 6th protest was a last hail mary of a weekslong campaign by the White House to overthrow the election results by illegal means after they exhausted all legal means. It was the grand final of weeks of illegal behavior by Trump and a group of loyalist around him. And as the article states, it is clear why Trump or his cronies were pushing for pardons for people like Meadows.

I hear there's a new "macho dare" thing going on between some white males where they goad each other into arrogant confidence that their superior immune systems can easily withstand anything the covid virus throws at them. **** I understand from Dennis who speaks very authoritively, that in a couple of years the vaccinated will die because of increased susceptibilities to other illnesses through their hasty decision to get vaccinated. Obviously nobody can dispute that directly because of course that's in the future. But, since it's been tested for over a year, we'll start getting some idea about that in a year. Imagine what that world would then be? It would be populated with a lot of the world's poor who couldn't afford a vaccine and the anti vaxers in the wealthy nations, in effect ruling the world. I can't imagine a sillier group to inherit the earth, and to perpetuate the species... On the surface that would seem like an excellent opportunity to set the world anew with maybe two thirds of the current population. Maybe a one time chance in history to stem pollution and conquer climate change, if they could harbor any such idea.?. In the industrialized nations there would be great opportunities for those with cash ,including the opportunity to scoop up luxury homes and properties at deflated prices, and cheap labor. And maybe after a few years,a Trumpian renaissance of opportunity! But of course. not a chance. The most affluent and powerful of the world population would then be represented by a literal clown car of a social consciousness, a literal clown car of civic mindedness, The resulting contentiousness would end up in a feuding cycle of mistrust, wacko theories and completely insular, misguided policy by adamant ideologues. To entrust the future of the human species to this group would be such a disaster that the ones who first got vaccinated and perished would at last certainly be referred to as "the grateful dead."

Ben: When Biden's neoliberal, globalist views are germane. Why was Biden installed? Wrong!, Talk about drinking the Trump Kool aid. He wasn't installed, he was elected, by a strong margin. Yes Biden has contributors who are globalists, and Trump is a globalist. You seem to be another who got lost in a cave in Thailand. The world is globalist Ben. Whether you and i like it or not. These are facts. In any of this anti globalist ideology you attributed to Trump, you were probably just biting the bait set up by Steve Banon. Are you really prepared to have a discussion about World globalism Ben? Maybe have the UK renounce the fruits you've in part been living off of all your life, and go off, honestly on their own with scant resources, maybe a little fossil fuel at the worst possible time? They saw their problems centuries ago and created an empire that you've benefited from. (Or maybe they didn't see their problem and were just naturally aspiring, greedy and warlike) heh heh When I first came here. Many were still living the cold war paradigm and there was no talk really of the corporate state. Every thing was the "government deep state" that derailed JFK 50 years ago. So as Greg as noted, What happened to the government deep state? They effectively 1)checked many of Trumps impulses toward being a global bully, stopped several global confrontations, some that would have resulted in the loss of perhaps many lives, and 2)wouldn't play ball with his hopes for a fascist takeover of the U.S.. Oh, how could it be so! We can call that "the reinstallation of the old regime" or a thwarting of an inept fascist coup or just a return to some normalcy. Again we could just say it's between picking the lesser of 2 evils, if you choose. But any hope of any lasting improvement hardly starts with a fascist takeover. And if you don't think a fascist takeover is worth avoiding Ben, well maybe I'm privileged, but all I can say is, when an old duff like you tells me he has nothing to lose...I believe him! heh heh,

Jeremy:One advantage the 9/11 truthers have over the anti-vaxxers is that at least they aren't responsible for the spread of preventable diseases or for thousands of avoidable deaths. Well that's undoubtedly true. Jeremy said: I'm not sure Chris is justified in using this forum, which is supposed to be about the JFK assassination, to spread anti-vaxxer propaganda. Oh Jeremy!, you can't be arguing with Chris's god given right to express his "JFK conspiracies and beyond"? ****** I've weighed in only once before on this thread about this. It's called a pandemic. It's been going on since the world began. Do we have to play into the same game where one side can't conceivably understand the other side, and then talks endlessly about their freedom and the dangers of the emerging totalitarian state? Uninfected people who have taken the vaccine don't want to be around people who haven't taken the vaccine and who are willing to risk infecting others and could become infected. Who would have thought? Similarly nations who are battling their own struggle trying to mitigate the pandemic, don't want unvaccinated people from other countries infiltrating their country. Now small businesses, corporations and governments are taking measures to protect their employees. I'm hoping we don't have to have vaccine passports but it could get to that. I'd personally welcome it because I want to travel to foreign countries, and I want to distinguish myself from the unvaccinated and with these more virulent strains. I don't particularly want to share an airplane with them. Now we've lollygagged around long enough for another strain to adapt. This was unavoidable just because of the inequities of wealth between nations. But people here can get vaccinated for free. ( Biden is even willing to pay $100 to everyone who gets vaccinated**) But many will naturally just take their privilege for granted (as well as everyone around them) and will refuse to take the vaccine and be left alone. As far the cries of persecution among the unvaccinated. Their screams of insensitivity are nothing compared to their insensitivity to infecting others. But it's not even based in fact. I think there's been a good sincere effort to not intimidate and inform people about the vaccine. "Calmly try to reason with them, don't call them out." So they've adopted an attitude that they should be wooed like a high priced date. To them the goal is to get everyone vaccinated, and they understand that they can't be in any way coercive, or they'll turn people off. At a certain point, people will run out of patience. We can only hope that the variant soon peaks as it has apparently in the U.K. and India. The only idea I can see where people feel coerced is that in traveling throughout the country recently, I've seen in metropolitan areas of any size the local TV news is pushing vaccinations, and informing people of where they can be vaccinated and talking to people who have lost loved ones to covid, or heroic stories of survivors or the brave first line responders and health care workers who unfortunately now have to mobilize all over again. I'm sure when bombarded 24/7 on the media about the virus , it's easy for them to think it's just a media conspiracy against them. But In reality , it's just reporting the relevant news of the day. And on the local level, how more relevant can a story be, but of a human struggle of a people battling a pandemic? But of course. how commonplace and droll to the perpetual conspiracy theorists! Is all the pain and the misery and human suffering just lost on these individuals who see nothing in this except their loss of their "freedoms", as they just keep crying of their phony persecution. No it's all about them. And in the beginning the great majority of them were denying it as hoax or just something that was overblown by government with a pretext only to take away their rights. They go to their authors or are directed online to authors that confirm there biases and memorize it word for word. Making shoddy cases against the science , with erroneous facts and figures that were just absurd. Then making distancing and wearing masks a political decision, kicking and screaming about the thought of having to make any compromise. Scoffing at people who would wear masks. Then when it didn't go away in 3 months, they finally started to accept it, mostly because they realize that they weren't going to get anything done in public unless they wore a mask. I've experienced a number of people online who talk boldly about resisting government enforced restrictions that are actually hiding the fact that they've been vaccinated. And there are a bunch of celebrities "influencers" who could be fulfilling a useful function in encouraging people to get vaccinated, but when asked if they're vaccinated will say "It's none of your business and your infringing on my right to privacy to even ask! " Just like Rome decayed from within, historians will someday see the West and the U.S. in particular's response to the pandemic as a watershed event, that contrasted the mettle of the populations of the U.S. and China , and actually foretold the future, and it will show that U.S, could have responded intelligently without having to adopt the draconian measures of China, because they after all had the great technological edge to develop vaccines, but the people were so lazy, undisciplined, and not thorough and so willing to believe phony conspiracy theories, that the West compelled itself to suffer losses of life far beyond their Asian counterparts. **In California they are spending 150 million dollars for a lottery to encourage people to get vaccinated. So they are giving away $50,000 dollars apiece to over 3000 people to simply get vaccinated! Will they ever stop persecuting these people?

Benjamin, sometimes to get a fuller idea of context, you have to research your material more than you may like. Browsing your link, i have no less than 7 cases of suspects who were caught with firearms who were released on their own recognizance in just the A-B-C names at the beginning of your Capitol Breach Case document. (one of those was released on bond) At that rate I would guess that there are at least 30 such cases of suspects being released on OR who carried deadly weapons. Are we to assume now those are all FBI agents? Just to clue you, looking at lists like these can ,on the surface show inconsistencies depending on the details of the case. For example most of the the rioters who are charged with assaulting police officers were promptly put in jail when identified, but not every one. Not coincidentally now Tucker Carlson has made such a charge about 20 such "FBI agents" who were fomenting the Capitol riots so you're in your usual company.. My guess is he's probably doing just very basic threadbare research like I just did and assuming every person now out on OR is just automatically an FBI agent! The fact that these guys who carried firearms to the Capitol and are now free on OR, to me is a travesty of leniency, but that's hardly the point you were trying to make.

I wouldn't be at all shocked if there were some infiltration by the FBI into the Trumpers on 1/6. And here's a shocker, I think most of the public expects the FBI to infiltrate right wing and left wing groups, as they do in a lot of the industrialized nations.. But the idea that the FBI fomented the 1/6 capitol riots in a false flag operation is about as paranoid absurd a notion as I could imagine. I guess Ben's next obsession we'll hear over and over again is about "Liz Cheney and the Democrats". Liz Cheney is allying with the Democrats solely to investigate the Capitol riots. Anybody who knows anything about U.S. politics knows that won't increase her National Security profile influence in a Democratic held Congress one wit. The Dems owe her nothing, and she's naively trying to salvage her party. Now we have record of Trump telling the DOJ to declare the election a "fraud', and 'I'll do the rest". So just because over and over he's proven so inept at overturning a Democratically elected government, we should just let him go? But we know he's not going to jail , so we're going to pass it off on some of his lemmings but more vigorously some people who were trying to control those lemmings to "ineptly"try to turn over the government. But again,just like Trump, it doesn't matter how inept they were. ***** I don't totally trust Joe Biden in future foreign policy but I know nobody here was thinking Joe Biden would pull out of Afghanistan. It flies in the face of that whole phony narrative that U.S, Presidents are completely beholden to the MiC "deep state". "Mr. Peace", record Defense spender Trump could also have done it, but he chose not to for whatever reason, including the last person who got his ear. Biden could have been given hell by his party that control both houses of Congress, but he knew he could easily get away with it. It's that simple. They'll be a lot of reporting about possible atrocities by the Taliban of the people who were U.S, allies in their occupation and Biden will take the heat. To say all that heat is from the MIC/ MSM complex is the usual dummying down. Certainly some of it is, and some of it also reflects some more hawkish individuals and organizations but a lot of it is also because it's a news story, and not reporting the inevitable consequences of a long standing U.S foreign policy debacle, and acting like it didn't happen would be completely irresponsible. The overall effect is actually positive in that it adds to a already growing reticence about future U.S. involvements.

I agree with you Matt. I use to like Greenwald and particularly Taibbi. But I don't feel obligated to spew the same old stuff when the reality has changed. These groupies just glom on to these few figures for years and just parrot all their concerns even if the reality changed and these guys themselves have changed.

Well of course it is a strawman, W.. Benjamin, talking of "Buffalo Horns':The colorful, signature character of the Jan. 6 follies. The emblematic figure is still in prison, Yes, colorful and emblematic indeed!. Buffalo horns has so captured Ben's fancy, he again becomes obsessed, this time with Buffalo Horns, who becomes the only figure he has any knowledge about in the entire riots. Benjamin is so smitten that the whole 1/6 world revolves around him. And is leading man in his political theater. Much like Ben's first obsession with the antagonist, Brian Sicknick as "emblematically" typifying the police reaction during the riots as he actually tries to say even if the riots never happened Sicknick was going to die the next day anyway! Sort of like to the covid deniers a year ago who were saying BUT DID HE REALLY DIED OF COVID! So then he pits them together, it's innocent ,though amusingly ludicrous Mr. Bull Horns who is after all just part of a new version of the "Merry Pranksters" against the evil Capitol police who of course the ominous MSM (the hidden "deep"underlying antagonists subtext) tries to portray as victims by misappropriating one of the police deaths to the rioters! Whew, Great drama, Ben. I can't wait to see Act 3. ******* Well, speaking of theater, I don't want sound caddy, but the bloom is certainly off the rose with Glen Greenwad , is it not? Even Matt looks like a bit of a skull these days. I guess that's what happens if you dare oppose the dreaded "Deep State'! Or maybe just the politics of discreditation ?