3 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Trump brutally mocked over plan to issue membership cards to loyal supporters

By John Wright August 05, 2021

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-cards/

 

"”We're about to launch our Official Trump Cards, which will be reserved for President Trump's STRONGEST supporters," the PAC wrote in the email, asking supporters to vote for their favorite of four proposed designs.

Those who voted by clicking on one of the four proposed designs were, naturally, redirected to a fundraising page.

"We recently met with the President in his Florida office and showed him four designs," the email continued. "Originally we were planning on releasing just one design, but when President Trump saw the cards on his desk, he said, 'These are BEAUTIFUL. We should let the American People decide - they ALWAYS know best!'" the email said.”

"All four of the designs say "Official Trump card" and bear the logo of his Save America PAC. They include the former president's signature above text saying, "Authorized by president Donald Trump," as well as a place for the name of the "member," along with an ID number and the date when their membership began."

“On Twitter, several users pointed out that the eagle on one of the designs bares an eery resemblance to the Reichsadler or "imperial eagle," which was combined with a swastika in the official German national emblem adopted by by Adolf Hitler.”

Steve Thomas

The poopoo image association and resemblance is uncanny...and creepy.

Trump has always presented a fascist bent.

That statement reportedly made by his former wife Ivana about him having but a few books, one of which was speeches by Hitler...rings true to me. I would also guess that Trump's father Fred was sympathetic to the same political and social views.

18 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

 

     Imagine LBJ announcing in 1968 that "Oswald didn't kill Kennedy..."

    

WN. He kind of did in this September, 1969 interview with Walter Cronkite. 

Or in the least that Oswald didn't act alone.

Almost all the above for me.

I was 12 years old and outdoors playing basketball in our junior high P.E. class here in Pacific Grove, Ca. when a fellow student ran out from the main school buildings across the street and yelled to our teachers and us  "the president has been shot!" 

Pacific Grove is a little town ( 15 to 20,000 residents ) nestled right between Monterey and Pebble Beach on the California Coast line. 125 South of San Francisco. 

Everything froze right then and there. We were hustled back into our gym showers and told to meet in our home rooms.

Everyone was speechless. Many teachers were openly weeping.

We were soon sent home early. Before noon our time I remember.

Walking the two miles home I went through our small downtown area as I always did.  Almost no traffic or noise. Store doors were open. I heard television commentary through them.

Got home. My stay at home mom was glued to the TV. We didn't speak. I went upstairs to watch my old barely working black and white junker TV.

I watched the JFK news steady from that point until Sunday morning when I watched Jack Ruby whack Oswald...on live TV!

It was at that very point that I ( even as a 12 year old ) immediately and instinctively felt something was very, very wrong with this entire sequence of events. Watching handcuffed and escorted Oswald be led so openly right to the gun thrusting hand of Jackie Kennedy grieving and avenging, Jews have guts, you guys couldn't do it so I did Jack Ruby and hearing that shot and seeing and hearing Oswald double up and cry out made me jump up from my bed and spontaneously yell "NO WAY, NO WAY, NO WAY!" over and over again.

From that day in 1963, I always felt this sick feeling of mistrust. Mistrust of the official explanation about the JFK killing and that of Lee Harvey Oswald.

But bare existence making it life is all consuming at times and was so for me until my 30's 40's and even through my 50's. Just didn't spend much time on anything but my exhausting physical labor work.

I read what I could which wasn't much. I too listened to May Brussell who lived and broadcast right here in Carmel.

I was fascinated with the Jim Garrison investigation. Watching Johnny Carson try to destroy Garrison's credibility in front of millions of viewers of his national TV show angered me. I looked upon Jim Garrison as a truly patriotic and heroic American as well as a highly intelligent and great speaker...courageously seeking the truth, no matter if the high and mighty may fall.

But, like Ty mentioned in his thread starting post, I knew no one who shared my passion for trying to find the truth regards the JFK event or who seemed to care about it or see the importance of this effort.

Even my wife was never that interested in the subject. So, you are left alone in your curiosity and concern about who did JFK and how Jack Ruby got into that DPD building basement to do the most important criminal suspect in America's history.

Oliver Stone's film JFK was a sea change in my mind. How he was able to get that film out there into A list distribution ( loading it with so many famous actors really helped ) was an amazing achievement in my mind, even though he was the most viciously attacked film director I have ever seen, then and since.

That film got 10's of millions of Americans rethinking their previous thoughts about the JFK event and the official Warren Commission findings that a single lone Castro loving nut just got lucky with his perfect parade route turkey shoot perch location and cheapest and worst accuracy rifle whose scope was misaligned.

The theater was packed every showing for a week. I went twice and saw this in person. The audience was mesmerized the entire film. Stone put together a film that was so powerful it really effected it's viewers.

It brought back the true emotional power of the event. Something most Americans had been numbed to with help from our main stream media which until Stone's film had purposely never addressed it in any truly serious, honest and meaningful way.

Stone's JFK masterfully combined almost surreal looking film shots ( many black and white and in slow motion ) and editing and marching drum beat and other ominous sound score effects to bring viewers to the edge of their seats before the death shot sequence. I saw many film watchers jump nervously ( like I did the first viewing ) when the sound of the JFK killing shots rang out.

I know most viewers of that film in it's initial national theater run came away believing and trusting the Warren Report even less than they had before. 

Stone is a masterful film story teller. We all know this fact. His films will be viewed and studied and discussed for many many generations ahead of us. I think his JFK more than any other.

When I discovered this forum site it was manna to my lifelong interest in the JFK assassination. Still is. Many members here are heroes in my book of important "just cause" things in my life - pursuing the truth of the JFK assassination.

If Ruby charged through the press line like a football running back, he used big William "Blackie" Harrison as his open running room providing offensive lineman.

Harrison is right there in front of Ruby and Croy is right next to Harrison on his right in the seconds before and during Ruby's charge.

The worst security actions on the part of Harrison and Croy. As Oswald is being walked toward them, instead of watching the press crowd behind them ( where Harrison would have immediately spotted out-of-place Ruby )  all they are doing is looking at Oswald.

And here again we have some obscure police reservist nobody who just happens to be right there in the thick of two of the top three killing events of that weekend. Tippit's murder scene and Oswald's in the DPD basement.

Surprised Croy wasn't also one of the officers wrestling with Oswald in the movie theater take down!

Roscoe White is an intriguing story.

It's all just coincidence that this man who confessed to being a special ops hit man of sorts overseas in his military duties, and who happened to have the same duty stations as Oswald, also just happens to decide to choose Dallas as his residence in 1963, marries a Jack Ruby employee and gets an odd trainee position with the Dallas PD just a month or two before 11,22,1963?

He quits the Dallas PD job which he seemed out of place in in the first place. He moves his family several times, comes into an unexplained monetary windfall and then is mysteriously killed in an explosion at his workplace? And his pastor claimed White confessed to him that he had killed overseas and also here at home in the states right before he died as a result of his explosion injuries?

White ranks right up there in the most suspicious character category in the big event picture imo.

9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

If they sabotage us, it will be in the editing. 

The producer, Jason Kopp, asked us decent questions and gave them to us in advance.

He even let me show declassified documents on camera from the ARRB.

We will see.

Yes, I should have mentioned slanted editing.

Sorry, but I am not at all sensing or trusting that Fox news is not the same old wag the dog truth distorting, divisive and inflaming propaganda machine they have always been.

They have been crazy and corrupt Trump's main defending and promoting mouthpiece nonpareil for the last 4 and 1/2 years.

Fox News has for decades now been the most powerful and successful divide, confuse, inflame and conquer propaganda machine America has ever seen.

The fact that they occasionally report on stories of a conspiratorial nature that more liberal news media would not, does little to counter the damage to our society they have done in their decades of dividing, distorting and inflaming.  I can't give them any trust, respect and credibility quarter at all.

Suspicious. Fox News?

Unless they plan on sabotaging Stone and you with no win answer questions designed to hurt your personal and film credibility?

Like Johnny Carson did ( tried to do ) to Jim Garrison when he had Garrison on his national late night talk show.

Just don't trust the right wing wag the dog propaganda machine that is Fox News.

On 8/2/2021 at 5:26 AM, Steve Roe said:

Complete and utter nonsense. 

First the DPD ( along with the Secret Service, FBI and MI) failed in the security of JFK in the ultimate failure way.

Supposedly, one little minimum wage earning malcontent who just happened to have the perfect parade route higher up open window turkey shoot location and opportunity at the perfect time and with just about the worst, cheapest rifle one could own...defeated them all!

The rest of the nation was furious with the city of Dallas ( known as the power wealth center of the most extreme right wing, JFK hating groups ) and their police department which everyone knew were of this extreme right wing mentality and rabid segregationist sentiment as well,  in this failure.

Then, to top off their epic security failure regards JFK, they failed again just two days later in the security of the most important criminal suspect in American history - Lee Harvey Oswald!

How's THAT for a legacy of epic double whammy negligence and failure?  

Beyond incompetence. To a degree that begs rational suspicion.

So devastating was the killing of Oswald in learning the truth about Lee Harvey Oswald that to this day Americans still don't trust their government and our leaders like they did before 11,22,1963. JFK's killing along with Oswald's just two days later right inside of the DPD building with two armed escorts handcuffed to him by a sleazy strip joint owner overly chummy with way too many in the DPD truly damaged the trust factor psyche of most of our society for generations.

Like I've always said, anyone involved in planning Oswald's security resulting in his PD basement shooting should have been fired the very next day. Chief Curry number 1.

My final belief is that Jack Ruby was allowed into that basement and getting a position just feet from Oswald at the front of the press line. He was standing just inches next to one of his best police buddies just as he leaped out to hit Oswald. Big William "Blackie" Harrison. Coincidence?  Please.

On 7/30/2021 at 5:55 PM, Paul Brancato said:

I wouldn’t be surprised if there wasn’t a police officer shooting from behind the picket fence, and my bet it that it was Tippit. It’s the best explanation for his movements afterwards, and for his death. 

Tippit? Or Roscoe White?

1 hour ago, Stu Wexler said:

So a thought, as there are people here from overseas where the documentary is getting quite a bit of attention:  what can possibly be done to leverage the attention to get foreign governments and institutions to release what they may have on the assassination?  We have pretty good accounts (and it is just plain common sense) that foreign security and intelligence agencies cooperated with and may well have conducted independent investigations into the crimes. Interpol perhaps also has files. Can we get a something going on that front?

W

Great thought and questions.

10 hours ago, Joseph McBride said:

What a terrible title. It buys the lie about Ruby's

motive, the lie his lawyer told him to use. And it's

one of those titles that puts its conclusion in the

title itself, so why then does one have to read the book? People

today want to know what a book or film contains before

they read or see it, because they are neophobic and worried

about spending, etc. Hence trailers that give away the whole

plot except for the ending (and then people who don't object

to this complain about "spoilers" in reviews).

Exactly.

That awful title is such a give away as to the phony agenda for the book.

Like "Case Closed", "Reclaiming History", "On The Trail of Delusion: Jim Garrison: The Great Accuser."

Where the titles themselves ( and given wide public exposure ) are propaganda pieces on their own.

More Mockingbird stuff?

I wish I were a writer to share my conclusions about Ruby killing Oswald with help from the Dallas PD. 

 I would title it "The Killing Of Lee Harvey Oswald by Hit Man - Jack Ruby."

As Dallas sheriff department dispatcher Billy Grammar on duty the night of November 23rd, 1963 stated in a public interview:

That this night before Ruby shot Oswald, he received a call of warning that "we are going to kill him" ( meaning Oswald)

and he swore the caller was Jack Ruby. A man he knew well for years!

2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

The truth.

12 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

One of the earliest things anyone ever said to me about the JFK assassination was "Guys like Lee Oswald don't just 'make friends' with guys like George DeMohrenschildt." 

Jeanne married George de Mohrenschildt in June 1959. The following year, George's only son died of Cystic Fibrosis. George wrote in his autobiography: "I asked my wife Jeanne to give up her successful designing profession and join me on an expedition on foot by the trails of Mexico and all of Central America." After the couple used all their savings in the trip to Mexico and Central America they returned to Dallas. 

Middle age George and Jeanne DeMohrenschildt decide to take on this incredibly physically challenging adventure of "walking" from our southern border all the way down through Central America to Panama!

And along the way of this real life machete hacking through the jungle Indiana Jones trek, they coincidentally just happened to make a side trip to some Mexican city airport to meet and greet some curious status arriving Russian diplomat?

What a daredevil fun loving couple! 

Well friends and family...we're off to hike through the jungles of Central America. See you in 6 months!

And I thought camping overnight in Big Sur, California in our 50's was a virility bragging big deal for my wife and me?

2 hours ago, John Butler said:

This is a list of people with intelligence connections, and had a connection to Lee Harvey from the article: From Oswald’s Intelligence Connections: How Richard Schweiker clashes with Fake History.  Written by Paul Bleau

For a further discussion of these folks see the article.  This is one helluva contact list for a wannabe spy.

1.     David Ferrie

2.     Gerard Tujague

3.     Richard Case Nagell

4.     Colonel Nikolai Eroshkin

5.     Kerry Thornley

6.     Rosaleen Quinn

7.     Gerry Patrick Hemming

8.     Gregory Golub

9.     Richard Synder

10. John McVikar

11. Priscilla Johnson

12. Leo Setyaev

13. Robert Webster

14. Marina Oswald

15. Francis Gary Powers

16. Spas Theodore Raikin

17. Andy Anderson

18. Eleanor Reed

19. John Fain

20. George Bouhe

21. Max Clark

22. George DeMohrenschildt

23. Ruth Paine

24. Michael Paine

25. James Hosty

26. Victor Thomas Vicente

27. Tony Cuesta

28. Orlando Bosch

29. Novo Brothers

30. John Martino

31. William Monaghan

32. Dante Marichini

33. Guy Bannister

34. Clay Shaw

35. William Gaudet

36. Dean Andrews

37. Sergio Arcacha Smith

38. Carlos Brinquier

39. Carlos Quiroga

40. Celso Hernandez

41. Frank Bartes

42. Jesse Core

43. John Quigley

44. Warren DeBrueys

45. Arnesto Rodriquez

46. Orestes Pena

47. David Smith

48. Wendell Roache

49. Ed Butler

50. Bill Stuckey

51. Leopoldo

52. Angel

53. Bernardo De Torres

54. Sylvia Duran

55. Eusebio Azcue

56. Antonio Veciana

57. Manel Rodriquez Orcarberrio

58. Pedro Charles

59. John Hurt

60. Jack Ruby

61. Thomas Eli Davis

It's actually laughable.

For a guy who was supposedly an uncommunicative, offish, unfriendly recluse with no friends and seemingly unemployed half the time,  Oswald really got around and knew and had at least some contact with way more persons than an average, high school education only 24 year old.

Did Oswald actually have some personal contact with Gerry Patrick Hemming in Japan? Contact that wasn't just some fluke thing where they happened to be seated next to each other in a near bye nightclub or enlisted men's club on base?

Or did Hemming make this encounter up?

If not, then wouldn't this meet up be proof that Oswald was more than just a flight control operator at Atsugi?

4 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

Mr. RANKIN. Was there anything else close to the rifle that you recall?
Mrs. OSWALD. Next to it there were some next to the rifle there were some suitcases and Ruth had some paper barrels in the garage where the kids used to play.

Either there was never a rifle, or Marina was a thoughtless mother that did not care if there was a rifle on the ground near where her child, and Ruth's children played. 

BTW, try wrapping a small blanket around a rifle and see what it feels like when carried. It kinda feels like a rifle wrapped in a blanket.

Exactly.

1 hour ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

W. Niederhut writes:

Mark Stevens replies:

Mark's point hasn't been denied, which implies that Mr Niederhut agrees with him. I don't know whether the exact proportions are 98 to 2, but I presume it's accurate to say that only a small minority of experts think that the World Trade Center towers were destroyed by explosives.

Very few of us, however, are experts in structural engineering or architecture. As a general principle, what should non-experts do when faced with a question whose answer requires scientific or technical expertise? What is the rational course of action for those who do not possess the expertise to properly assess the evidence for themselves?

Surely the non-expert is obliged to reflect the balance of expert opinion. This has to be done provisionally, with the understanding that the balance of expert opinion might change in the future. If expert opinion does change, the non-expert should then be obliged to reflect the new balance of expert opinion.

This principle applies to the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings just as much as it applies to other topics in which overwhelming expert opinion is opposed by small but vocal minorities, such as climate science, or mass vaccination, or evolution by natural selection, or whether the Earth is round or flat. If resolving the question requires expertise, and one doesn't have the appropriate expertise, the only rational course is to reflect expert opinion. Non-experts who don't do so are irrational.

Pointing to this or that article on a 9/11 truthers' website means little, no matter how well-qualified the article's author might be. Why should any non-experts accept what that article says, if a large majority of other, equally well-qualified experts think it's wrong?

Likewise, it is unreasonable to expect Mark Stevens to argue against some 9/11 truther's account of the science (I assume that Mark, unlike W. Niederhut, is not an expert in anything to do with structural engineering). All Mark has to do is to point at the majority expert opinion. If Mr Niederhut wants someone to answer his technical questions, he needs to ask his fellow experts.

*  *  *

When I looked briefly into the 9/11 stuff years ago, what struck me was that the 'inside job' argument relied fundamentally on the idea that the buildings had been sabotaged.

There are two big differences between this scenario and the JFK assassination. First, there's the question of expertise. Whether or not the towers could have fallen as a result of being hit by planes is a question that only the relevant experts can answer (and it seems they have done so). Working out what happened in the JFK assassination, on the other hand, relies mainly on evaluating witness statements and documentary evidence. There are some scientific aspects, but none of them are fundamental.

The second difference is one of plausibility. It seems somewhat unlikely, to put it mildly, that a team of Bad Guys could plant explosives and cut into steel joists, tasks that would have taken many hours and generated plenty of noise and disruption, in buildings containing thousands of people, in one of the busiest cities in the world, without being spotted ("Hey, guys, why is our stationery cupboard full of sticks of dynamite? And what's he doing with that angle grinder?") .

It seems perfectly feasible, on the other hand, that a rifle could be planted in the book depository, or that a gunman could surreptitiously enter and leave the building, which had several unattended rear entrances, at a time when the majority of the people who worked there were outside, watching the president go by. And it surely wouldn't be hugely difficult to organise a small team of gunmen to shoot someone who is sitting in the back of a slow-moving, open-topped car. Finally, there have been innumerable examples throughout history of political figures who were killed by their political opponents for political reasons. It's almost the default explanation for a political assassination.

The only aspect of JFK assassination conspiratorial thinking that resembles the 9/11 version is the far-fetched stuff such as presidential body-snatching squads, or teams of people seizing and altering most of the home movies and photographs, or doppelganger Oswalds following each other around Dallas.

But you don't need any of that poorly supported, superfluous crud to explain the assassination as a political act carried out by more than one person. In contrast, there doesn't seem to be any way of explaining 9/11 as an inside job without coming up with something as inherently implausible as blowing up the buildings.

Who did a solid and adequately funded scientific polling of these so called experts to come up with a 98 to 2% result with 98% stating they didn't see anything suspicious with the building collapses, especially building 7?

If thousands put their names to published papers on the conspiracy side ( which they actually did ) you mean to say 50X that number of other experts did the same with other non-conspiracy published papers

All these 100,000 conspiracy refuting experts were shown films of the collapses and asked to submit their findings?

That poll and it's proclaimed numbers seems as phony as Trump's election fraud claims.

To me, the "fact" that 1,000 or 2,000 or even more valid experts in the relative fields were willing to put their names and their reputations out in the public realm and on the line to express their suspicions regards the building collapses ( again especially building 7 ) says alot.

I'm one of the totally ignorant public in these areas of study, but my common sense says the collapse of building 7 seemed as perfectly footprint, all at once free falling as any controlled demolition videos I have seen since the story was first widely reported. 

Heck, it seems even more accomplished than many controlled ones in those videos. Not all of even the controlled demolitions fell as uniformly and footprint perfect as WTC building 7 ... imo.

Lee did not accompany Marina and Ruth back to Irving.

He was not there to help unload all of his and Marina's belongings off of and out of the station wagon and into the garage.

Marina being pretty well along in her pregnancy may not have been able to do much with the heavier stuff. Ruth would have done more it seems.

Maybe Michael Paine was asked to help do this and did so?

Leading me to ask these questions:

After the assassination the Paine residence searching police asked Marina if Lee owned a gun/rifle. Marina said yes. They were led to the garage.

At some point Marina pointed to a blanket on the garage floor, correct? 

Did she do so knowing before 11,22, 1963 this blanket was one Lee had wrapped around the gun? 

If Marina did know the gun was in this particular blanket before that day, wouldn't she have seen the gun carrying blanket at some point in the loading of it into Ruth's car in NOLA ...or when it was unloaded into Ruth's garage?

Or did she see the blanket later when she perhaps had to go through the unloaded items to get what she needed from the entire garage pile?

If she did see the blanket/rifle in the garage pile ( sharp eyed Ruth and Michael would have too you would think ) and you would also think she would have been very self-conscious about it's presence.

Marina didn't like the fact that Lee had a gun like this in the first place and would also know that  Ruth and Michael being Quakers ( Ruth anyway ) would have been abhorred upon seeing this gun.

Ruth never said she knew the gun was in the Oswald belongings before the police search, did she? If she did she would have made this discovery a big part of her often stated reasons for disliking Lee to the extreme.

Or, was the gun ( and the blanket it was wrapped in ) stuffed deeply into a large military type duffle bag as Oswald owned and never removed from this until the empty blanket was found?

Did Marina ever explain the moving provenance of Lee's rifle?

As she, Ruth and Lee were loading up Ruth's car in NOLA did Marina know right then that Lee's rifle was in such a blanket and duffle bag?

Did Marina ever tell the police this fact, and say she had never seen the rifle out of such a bag until she saw the blanket on the floor of the Paine garage the afternoon of 11,22,1963?

Marina sounded like she knew the blanket the gun was wrapped in. When and how long before the garage search? 

Hard to believe that Lee and Marina would take such a risk of upsetting Quaker Ruth by leaving the rifle out and visible only inside a single and not large blanket and not further hidden in another bag or such.

The Paine garage was a single car one. Not large at all. Michael had at least one large wood or metal fabricating machine in it and he and Ruth's belongs were in there too.  Quite crowded looking in the first press pictures.

Ruth and Michael must have had reasons to go into the garage many times after unloading Lee and Marina's belongings inside.

Ruth and Michael Paine were also suspicious of Lee from the get go.

I would think suspicion minded, eagle-eyed Ruth would have given anything out of the ordinary of Lee's belongings in the garage at least a sneak peak. Files? A lying around and rolled up blanket would be easily seen. And maybe moved to get to other items in the pile  Marina may have needed throughout her stay before 11,22,1963.

Did the police ask Marina where and when she last saw the blanket before it was pointed out on the garage floor?

Or how long before 11,22,1963  did she know the gun was wrapped in the blanket in the first place? 

Seems Marina's clear knowledge of the blanket and it's rolled up use before 11,22,1963 is a more important aspect of the case than is often cited ... imo anyway.

5 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Pence left the Senate floor with his wife and daughter so  you're to believe that Pence was separated from them before the Secret Service was to take Pence away because they are not mentioned in the article as witnesses. You would think there would be some record of where Pence was to go and who gave the specific orders.But as I say, even if the order was directly linked to Trump, he could say he was doing it out of concern for Pence's safety. Politically, it's not incumbent on Pence to reveal his  suspicions of Trump's motive on removing him from the Capitol and he'll just say it was his duty to stay there and certify the election.

And if he was asked questions about his suspicions  of Trump's motives in an investigation, his political ambition would just make him lie straight faced about that, as we know he can! To incriminate Trump would dash his political hopes.

Absolutely.  

The Russians always knew and appreciated the value of beautiful young Russian women in the spy game.

Honey pots?

A far cry from the U.S. promoted pictures of most Russian women looking like big boned, weather beaten oxen in dust covered Babushkas behind field plows.

I do not think it was mere coincidence that Marina was placed in Oswald's social world and specifically the party dance that evening.

A truly attractive young woman can make herself be seen and available to targeted men if this is intended.

Marina was the hottest young thing in Minsk. A brilliant blue eyed beauty, even to our standards.

I'm sure Oswald couldn't believe his hot and bothered luck when this doe eyed Cinderella just appeared in front of him at the communal dance.

If Oswald had returned to the U.S. with a Russian wife who looked like one of those plow pushers in the standard U.S. photos of typical Russian women, nobody would have given them much thought or attention in regards to helping them and inviting them to parties and into their homes like they did with the pretty young thing Marina, imo.

I first saw and watched Marina in her first televised interview on national TV. The "Marina, what do you do all day?" one. The "I don't want to believe, but facts tell me Lee killed Kennedy" one.

I was achingly smitten. What a beauty! That young Lee Remick face! Those big and intelligent thought expressive yet scared eyes.

I'm sure her natural innocent looking beauty for all to see helped generate a good portion of the huge donation fund that began pouring in right after that interview.

If Marina truly was a Russian spy game honey pot, I have to give her handlers credit for finding such a beauty for this role.

12 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Agreed W. Ken Starr has always been one of these slimeballs who has used religion and a credo of the  dominancy of the male, to defend sexist, misogynist policies.

As to Cavanaugh, I looked and there is only one justice in U.S. Supreme Court history who has been impeached and that was in 1804!

It's that sort of reluctance to admit that our much ballyhooed Democratic form of government is capable of making mistakes  that virtually assures Cavanaugh will never have to worry about being impeached and Trump won't end up doing any prison time, even though many countries have had former heads of states successfully prosecuted for high crimes.

 

https://www.salon.com/2021/07/21/ken-starr-a-pedophiles-best-friend_partner/

Trump should be prosecuted for refusing to order any assistance in quelling the January, 6th Capital building attack and siege. Instead watching it grow into a murderous mob action for two hours, apparently with glee.

Of all the most well known JFK killing predictions the most detailed as exactly happened one was by wealthy, violent segregation activist Joseph Milteer just two to three weeks before Dallas, 11,22,1963.

Milteer is on tape telling Miami police informant Will Somerset:

"Oh, yes. It's in the workings." Answering Somerset's question of whether "they are really going to try to kill him ( JFK? )

Sommerset: "How they gonna do it?"

Milteer: "from an office building with a high powered rifle."

Milteer: They'll pick up a patsy a few hours later.

How...HOW... AND WHY in the world was Milteer not immediately picked up and gruelingly interrogated once the Miami PD released this two week prior tape of him to the federal authorities describing the method and action of JFK's killing down to details beyond coincidence?

Somerset even claimed Milteer called him right after JFK was killed ( same day or next?) bragging about his earlier JFK killing claim for it's veracity!

Dallas was the super wealthy power center of the most rabid haters of JFK in America.

The Murchison family of Dallas "celebrated" JFK's death according to 35 year long Virginia Murchison house keeper May Newman who was right there in the family gatherings. Newman: "Like the champagne and cavier flowed for a week" after JFK's death. Newman claimed the only person who was grieving for JFK and his widow...was her!

For those who aren't inclined to click on links:

John Martino's Confessions

John Martino: electronics expert, mob associate, anti-Castro activist, author of I Was Castro's Prisoner, promoter of stories about Lee Harvey Oswald, and confessor to involvement in the JFK assassination.

Flo, they're going to kill him. They're going to kill him when he gets to Texas.

The wife of John Martino, after denying to the HSCA that her husband had foreknowledge of JFK's assassination, told author Anthony Summers about her husband's statement the morning of the murder and the series of phone calls he received that afternoon.

John Martino, whose statements are the starting point for Larry Hancock's book Someone Would Have Talked, was deeply enmeshed in anti-Castro activities in the early 1960s. An electronics expert, particularly specializing in the gambling machines employed in Havana casinos run by organized crime. Martino was arrested in Havana in July 1959 and spent three years in prison there. On his return to Florida, he became associated with Frank Sturgis, Eddie Bayo, and other anti-Castro activists. Martino also mentioned the not-well-known CIA officer Dave Morales in his book, I Was Castro's Prisoner.

In the spring and summer of 1963, Martino was heavily involved in the Bayo-Pawley raid (aka Operation TILT), an operation intended to smuggle out of Cuba two Russian officers who, it was said, wanted to defect and alert the world to the presence of Soviet missiles remaining in Cuba after the Missile Crisis. A team was landed but never returned.

Martino and an associated named Nathaniel Weyl were active in the aftermath of JFK's assassination, spreading a variety stories intended to tie Lee Harvey Oswald to Fidel Castro.

Martino's confession was not confined to his wife and son Eddie. In 1975 he told Newsday reporter John Cummings about his involvement in the JFK murder, serving as a courier, delivering money, etc. He told a similar story to his business partner Fred Claasen that same year, as recounted in Tony Summer's book Conspiracy:

The anti-Castro people put Oswald together. Oswald didn't know who he was working for--he was just ignorant of who was really putting him together. Oswald was to meet his contact at the Texas Theatre. They were to meet Oswald in the theatre, and get him out of the country, then eliminate him. Oswald made a mistake...There was no way we could get to him. They had Ruby kill him.

22 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said:

 

Take a break and listen to this beautiful song.

 

 

Yes Doug.

Ever since I first heard this song on the radio decades ago, it is still truly an epically sad and moving piece.

All 3 men, all with a sense of moral humanitarian equality guidance and purpose, brutally, bloodily, savagely brought down by bullets...all in their under 50 prime - JFK 46, RFK 43, MLK just 39.

A removal of the only men in our society who were not only courageously willing to promote these values into our "official" societal policies ( contrary to the corrupted military, Industrial, intelligence and even organized crime power groups in control ) and that had gained the popular support of a majority of Americans. They had to go.

And when they were taken out, so went a collective hope, trust, faith, inspiration and innocence with most of our society. With no one since ever coming close to these good and moral men's popular backing influence. No more saviors.

And every savage shooting by a lone gunman with no connections to anyone else. As Gerald Posner stated "Case Closed."

Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker, authors of the new book I Alone Can Fix It, chronicling former President Trump’s tumultuous last year in office, joined Anderson Cooper 360 Wednesday, where they shared exclusive audio from an interview with Trump for the book. In the audio, which was chock full of rehashed falsehoods and conspiracies, Trump revealed that he and the January 6 insurrectionists at the Capitol shared a common goal.

“I wanted — I mean, personally, what I wanted is what they wanted,” Trump said. “They showed up just to show support, because I happen to believe the election was rigged at a level like nothing has ever been rigged before.”

Trump went on to once again lament the fact that former Vice President Mike Pence didn’t personally overturn the election the day of the insurrection, a power that a Vice President does not have under the Constitution.

It seems obvious and easily provable that Donald Trump watched the violent mob January 6th insurrection live on TV from it's beginning and was also being kept well informed of it's happening and ever increasing intensity ( with much destruction, traumatic fear, injury and even death just as regular Americans could see for themselves on TV as well ) and yet "purposely" delayed using his power, authority and especially his constitutional duty "responsibility" to immediately stop it.

Any rational person in this country knows Trump clearly and aggressively incited that mob to violently attack our most sacred institution Capital Building full of members of our congress and police. Including his own Vice President!

The action of Trump in purposely delaying his means to quell and stop the extremely violent January 6th mob attack on our Capital building and everyone in it to save lives, property damage and serious emotional trauma to them, is the most outrageous high level crime he committed in his entire presidency imo.

Trump not being charged with aiding and abetting these murder and mayhem causing attackers along with purposely abrogating his authority to stop their terrorist attack for personal political gain or any other reasons is just another of the most headshaking crazy "why nots" of our current times.

If Trump not only watched what 10's of millions of Americans were watching on national TV in real time from the very beginning of the terrifying violent siege and for the next two hours after, and then purposely refused to take any action to stop it for that time until much damage and injury and even killing occurred ( and allegedly even ignored pleas to take quelling action sooner by his own family?) what would or should anyone call this action?

If Trump were actually charged with crimes in his purposeful non-action to stop the Capital building attack and had to face a trial by jury, I would think the jurors would consider Trump's quoted public documented statement above saying "he wanted what the Jan 6th, Capital Building attackers wanted" as just about the most self incriminating piece of testimony that would force them to find him guilty of aiding and abetting. Especially in a civil trial involving claimants who filed personal liability lawsuits against him for his responsibility in the injuries and even deaths of the January 6th Capital Building attack and seige.