W. Niederhut

Flouting ethics, and laws, and precedents has been Donald Trump's modus operandi for decades-- even before he first hired Roy Cohn to defend him in the big Federal lawsuit regarding racial discrimination in rentals of Trump-owned housing in New York in the 1970s. What will be truly shocking to see, if it ever happens, is not Trump breaking more laws, but Trump actually being held accountable for breaking the law.

I knew that JFK had been concerned about the anti-Palestinian agenda of American Zionists in the Middle East, and didn't want Ben Gurion to acquire nukes, but I didn't know about RFK's position on AIPAC. As for Obama, I was surprised and disappointed that he retained Robert Gated as Secretary of Defense, and cooperated so readily with the MIC agenda in the Middle East-- drone warfare in Yemen, Timber Sycamore, etc. I read somewhere (?) that Leon Panetta told Obama early on that, "(you) can't just say, 'No,' to these guys" (i.e., the CIA & Joint Chiefs.) But Obama and Netanyahu, apparently, could hardly stand to be in the same room with each other, and Netanyahu was bitterly opposed to Obama and John Kerry's Iranian nuclear disarmament deal. See, for example; www.nytimes.com/2019/09/04/magazine/iran-strike-israel-america.html?login=email&auth=login-email

Jim, The one positive thing I saw in Trump's candidacy in 2016-- compared to Hillary-- was his position on disengaging from our Neocon war agenda in Syria and the Middle East. He even hinted during the GOP primary debates that he was a 9/11 Truther, saying, "When I'm President, the American people are finally going to learn who really destroyed the World Trade Center on 9/11." I was surprised, and hopeful. But, as with so many of his 2016 promises, (e.g., a "terrific healthcare plan," no cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc.) Trump has done a 180 on his professed opposition to the Neocon agenda in the Middle East. True, he did pull the plug on funding for CIA Operation Timber Sycamore in July of 2017, but his first trips abroad were to Riyadh and Tel Aviv. Then he bombed Syrian government positions in response to the two false flag "chemical weapons" attacks, and withdrew from the Iranian nuclear disarmament deal. He moved our U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and recognized Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights. Now he's stumbling into a U.S. war against Iran-- something that Douglas Feith and the Neocons have been trying to foment since Feith left the Pentagon in disgrace 15 years ago, for his role in falsifying intelligence to start the Iraq War. Michael Wolff's claim, in Fire and Fury, that Trump was bribed by Sheldon Adelson, Paul Singer, et.al., to become a "Neocon mule," seems to be accurate, in retrospect. And, meanwhile, Trump never said a word after 2016 about "who really destroyed the World Trade Center on 9/11."

Jim, I voted against Reagan twice, Dubya twice, and Trump-- the Trickle Downers. But, to answer your question, one notable difference between Trump and the other two Tricklers, IMO, is that-- for better or worse-- Reagan and Dubya, at least, hired and delegated the tasks of the Executive Branch to erstwhile brain trusts. In contrast, Trump staffed his administration with poorly qualified, wealthy grifters, then fired anyone who dared to disagree with his idiotic policy decisions. Now Trump is flying by the seat of his sh--- -stained golf shorts, without the advice of a functional Cabinet, National Security Council, or State Department. He gets his intelligence briefings from Fox and Friends.

Amen. Furthermore, what is the point in studying history if we can't even apply a proper understanding of history to our contemporary crises? The alternative is to allow morons who can't remember anything to repeat the horrific mistakes of the past-- fascism in the 1930s and 40s, Vietnam, the Iraq War, etc.

Jim, Not sure what you are referencing here. My comments about Sibel Edmonds and Osama Bin Laden are from her Classified Woman text. But there is ample data from other sources regarding Bin Laden's (and "Al Qaeda's") doubtful connections to PNAC's 9/11 op. 1) Robert Mueller said that the FBI "never found a single scrap of paper" linking Bin Laden to the 9/11 attacks. 2) The mainstream U.S. media completely blacklisted the reports of Bin Laden's denials of involvement in 9/11. Why? 3) Conversely, the MSM aggressively promoted the fabricated evidence (video and audio) of Bin Laden "confessing" to involvement in 9/11. Why? 4) Unscathed Muslim passports were, obviously, planted at the WTC and Pentagon-- having miraculously survived explosions that completely vaporized the fuselage, seats, luggage, and passengers at the Pentagon crash site, and explosively pulverized two million tons of concrete at the World Trade Center.

Jim, There is compelling evidence, IMO, that Osama Bin Laden was a CIA-affiliated patsy in the PNAC 9/11 op-- the Great American Psy Opera-- used as PNAC's boogeyman to launch the "War on Terror" against Muslim "bad guys" in the Middle East. Sibel Edmonds, certainly, believed as much-- on the basis of her work as an FBI translator (Turkish, Farsi, Azerbaijani) after 9/11. The U.S. media, certainly, suppressed any coverage of Osama Bin Laden's public denials of any involvement in 9/11, (to Al Jazeera and the Pakistani media) and our MSM also actively promoted the forged (and mis-translated) tapes and videos in which Bin Laden, allegedly, claimed responsibility for 9/11. Nor is there any credible evidence that Bin Laden's CIA-trained "Al Qaeda hijackers" ever hijacked any airplanes on 9/11. On the contrary, Raytheon had successfully tested their GPS remote-piloting technology for Boeing jetliners by August of 2001. The PNAC 9/11 black operators didn't need any poorly trained Saudi goatherds to fly Boeings into their targets at the World Trade Center and in Washington, D.C. on 9/11. But they did need some media-fabricated Muslim patsies to blame for their "New Pearl Harbor." So, if true, Obama and the CIA had no reason to interrogate Bin Laden-- if, in fact, he was even living at the ISI Abbottabad complex. On the contrary, they had all the reasons in the world to deep six him promptly.

If I may, here is my perspective, as a relative newcomer here, on this lengthy, interesting thread. 1) It's a rare opportunity to observe how a number of true experts on the subject of U.S. "Deep State" history perceive and interpret the available evidence in Trump's Ukraine-gate and Russia-gate scandals. 2) I remain surprised and puzzled by the arguments claiming that Trump's Ukraine-gate and Russia-gate scandals are nothing burgers-- only efforts by the "Deep State" to undermine his bizarre, disastrous Presidency. 3) I disapprove of the persistent ad hominem invective-- on both sides. It only muddies the waters in the quest for clarity. 4) I am suspicious of those who call for their adversaries to be "ignored." If the truth is attained by the dialectal process of an honest exchange of ideas, how does ignoring arguments achieve that worthy end? It smacks of censorship-- walling off the truth. I think it was Nietzsche who once said that he had learned more from his intellectual "enemies" and critics than from his friends.

TRUMPSTER EUPHEMISMS OF 2019 Q. What do Trump cult members call a hearing where Trump and his crooked associates are questioned about crimes they have committed? A. A "perjury trap."

Parry was dead wrong on this one, Jeff, at least regarding the December 29th phone call that Flynn lied to the FBI about, committing a second felony. You'd better finally read the Mueller Report. If you read it, you will realize that Flynn's illegal December 29, 2016 phone call to Kislyak had EVERYTHING to do with Russia hacking the 2016 U.S. election to install Putin's Orange Asset in the White House. Why? Because Flynn was trying to directly undermine U.S. foreign policy-- the imposition of sanctions against Russia in response to their cyber warfare against our U.S. democracy. Flynn's associate, McFarland confirmed this clearly in her 12/16 Email where she mentioned not wanting to alienate the Kremlin, which had just helped Trump win the election. Your persistent denial of the 2016 Russian election hack, and Trump's obvious status as a compromised Russian asset is simply bizarre. I'll ask again. How do you explain Trump's disgraceful public denials -- in Helsinki and elsewhere-- of the fact that the Kremlin hacked our 2016 elections? How do you explain Trump's bizarre fracturing of our relationships with our closest allies in the G-7 and NATO? His reluctance to enforce bipartisan sanctions against Russia relating to the illegal annexation of the Crimea?

Jim, I'm no fan of Comey, by any stretch, but he wasn't fired by Trump in the spring pf 2017 because of his (Email-gate) violation of the Hatch Act in October of 2016, nor because of the FISA application snafus in the Carter Page case. That's a false narrative. Trump fired Comey (and McCabe) because he was trying to shut down the FBI investigation of Flynn's December 2016 violation of the Logan Act. Trump even admitted as much to Lavrov and Lester Holt! The new Mueller Report Illustrated does a good job of laying out these facts in a chronological narrative, and can be read in 30 to 40 minutes. (I still think that you and Oliver Stone should publish a Destiny Betrayed Illustrated format like this for the general public.)

Jim, Have you read the Mueller Report yet? The case against Trump for serious, recurrent obstruction of justice and witness tampering in Russiagate is overwhelming! I'm, frankly, amazed that Trump was not promptly impeached last summer for serial obstruction of justice in the Russiagate scandal. (Mueller indicated that he didn't indict Trump on ten counts of obstruction of justice because he was expressly forbidden by DOJ guidelines from indicting a sitting POTUS.) It was Congress's job to finish what Mueller was not permitted to do in the Russiagate case-- remove a criminal from the White House. One reason for the delay in a Russiagate-related impeachment is that Bill Barr has aggressively blocked the release of the unredacted Mueller Report to Congress-- which is still tied up in the courts. The other is that the Trump/Barr/Fox/GOP disinformation campaign about the Mueller Report has undermined public awareness and appropriate outrage about Trump's serial felonies in the Russiagate scandal. But the evidence of Trump's obstruction of justice in the Russiagate scandal is obvious, and the persistent GOP denial about Trump's Russiagate crimes is nothing less than bizarre. Whatever happened to the true narrative about Russiagate? It's a classic case of repeating the lie until gullible people believe it's the truth. Republican attempts to defend Trump and Barr’s 'no obstruction' decree are pathetic https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/06/12/republicans-pathetic-defense-donald-trump-obstruction-of-justice-column/1432533001/ June 12, 2019

He could be on to something. Didn't a Kennedy family member also get killed by skiing into a tree a few years ago?

I wonder if Jeff Carter has taken 30 minutes yet to read through the truly damning Mueller Report Illustrated. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/politics/mueller-report-illustrated/chapter-one/ The felonious Russiagate conduct of Trump, Manafort, Dowd, Sekulow, Cohen, and Giuliani is so glaringly obvious in the chronological sequence of the Report that a person would have to bury their head in the Fox News/Trumpaganda sand to avoid seeing it. As an example, after Dowd, Sekulow, Giuliani, et.al., had repeatedly floated pardons for Flynn, Manafort, Gates, and Cohen to obstruct the Mueller investigation, Trump actually denounced Michael Cohen, publicly, for "flipping," instead of "staying strong" and committing perjury, as Manafort did! (Manafort told Gates early on, "We'll be taken care of," and he lied persistently, even after cutting a plea deal to cooperate with Mueller.) In other words, Trump publicly advertised his campaign of obstruction of justice and witness tampering in the Russiagate scandal! Hello, Trumptopia... 🙄 Meanwhile, Jeff's hero, Vlad-the-Journalist-Impaler, has continued his relentless attacks on "liberal" democracy, at home and abroad. https://themediatimes.com/russian-authorities-storm-kremlin-critics-moscow-office/

Ron, Speaking of skiing, I drove up to Keystone last Friday (the 20th) for the first time this season. As I was checking in with my 2019 season pass, I looked up at the board and had to do a double take... Single Day Adult Lift Tickets-- $169 😟 Seniors (over 65) $159 I was stunned. We used to buy lift tickets for day trips to Winter Park and Loveland for $25 -- and not all that long ago. Fortunately, season passes are still affordable for the vanishing middle class, (I paid $389 in September) but alpine skiing at Colorado resorts is becoming a sport for the 1%. It's a shame. Extreme wealth inequality in the U.S. is approaching 1929 levels.

Joe, I hope that you recover well in the weeks ahead. The problem with the human spine is that the mammalian vertebrae evolved over millions of years for quadrupeds, who roamed the earth in a horizontal position. Our bipedal hominid ancestors were latecomers on the evolutionary timescale. This "design" problem with the bipedal hominid spine has been compounded in modern times by our sedentary lifestyles, because prolonged sitting (and standing) compresses the spine. I had to contend with this problem during my career as a psychiatrist-- often sitting in my office chair for hours at a time. What has worked well for me during the past decade has been a strategy of reducing the vertical (gravitational) compression of my lumbar spine by using a good reclining office chair, and a recliner at home called "The Perfect Chair," which can tilt back to a zero gravity position. My low back pain has virtually disappeared since I retired last year, unless I have to sit for more than an hour in a straight back chair. (I also use an inversion table at home for low back pain, but these are contraindicated for some spine problems, especially post-surgically.)

I just read the Mueller Report Illustrated this morning-- free at WaPo for subscribers-- which Amazon is now selling as a $15 paperback. It's an easy 30-45 minute read. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/politics/mueller-report-illustrated/chapter-one/ Simon & Schuster did a good job of presenting the graphic details of Trump's persistent obstruction of the Russia-gate investigation(s) in a chronological narrative format. So many damning details, beginning with Trump and Michael Flynn's attempted subversion of the December 2016 U.S. government sanctions against Russia-- imposed in response to the Kremlin's 2016 election hack -- and the ensuing Trump cover up, which Chris Christie likened to Trump getting gum on his shoe. The narrative timeline is helpful in grasping the big picture of Trump's serial Russia-gate felonies. Among the many damning details were John Dowd and Jay Sekulow floating Trump pardons for Rick Gates, Paul Manafort, and Michael Cohen, to obstruct witness testimony in Mueller's investigation.

In a nutshell, it's the fallacy of over generalization-- drawing a conclusion that does not follow from your data. "John Smith once defended a murderer, therefore any client he defends must also be a murderer."

That's a logical fallacy, Robert. The fact that Zaid was, apparently, complicit in covering up the Company's role in the JFK assassination does not imply that his defense of a CIA whistle blower involved in exposing Trump's Ukraine-gate extortion scam is part of a CIA cover up. Nor does it imply that the CIA is complicit in Trump's Ukrainian extortion scam. As an analogy, the fact that an attorney named John Smith once defended a murderer named Bob Jones does not imply that any future clients of John Smith are necessarily murderers.

Well, what else would we expect from a Senator who co-sponsored the "Birther Bill," and staunchly opposes the theory of evolution, the international scientific consensus on climate change, the Affordable Care Act, LGBT rights, and net neutrality? 'Murica don't need to protect no stinkin' whistle blowers... 🙄

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jfk-letter-promising-santa-safe-during-cold-war-on-display/ar-BBYkHhF

And a special holiday greeting to the Education Forum scholars from Merde-a-Lago !!

Any thoughts about the managerial "mechanism" of this MSM blacklisting of JFKA truth (and 9/11 truth) and ongoing MSM promotion of the Warren Commission Report? Who in hell is coordinating and implementing this massive 56 year-old systemic disinformation campaign in the U.S.? (I was brooding about this subject while studying the selection of JFKA (fake) "history" books at the book store in Dealey Plaza last week.) The censorship, certainly, seems real, but it also seems almost incredible that something this pervasive could occur, for decades, in the mass media of a nominally "free," democratic society. Is it merely an epi-phenomenon of shared ignorance, delusion, and/or confirmation bias on the part of journalists, editors and publishers, or is it something more sinister and deliberately "conspiratorial" on the part of American media moguls? If there really is a multi-decade conspiracy of silence of this magnitude in our corporate MSM, something's gotta give.

This depressing article was published at Lawfare last January but is trending now as the most popular of the week, for obvious reasons. Can the Senate Decline to Try an Impeachment Case? https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-senate-decline-try-impeachment-case

Yes, the corporate MSM blackout of Bernie's candidacy continues, but Common Dreams published a lead article tonight about the Sanders/AOC rally in Venice. https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/12/21/promising-radical-realignment-our-priorities-ocasio-cortez-tells-los-angeles-crowd