Dennis Berube

Thanks for posting this Jim. I usually do not watch Trump on tv because I can't really stomach him, but this was really kind of amazing to watch. Unlike so many political situations where Trumps' approach is ghastly, his demeanor is actually quite effective for the modern audience in rebutting the permanent war psychosis that our country (and now Democratic party) has been sick with since WWII. I'm not sure who else said it on here but, I have to agree that Trump's foreign policy is the main conflict he has with the oligarchical power structure. It is the only context I'm aware of that explains everything we have seen in the last few years in regards to all this fake Russian news garbage. This reminds me of a comment Putin made in his interview with Oliver Stone (who I'm sure Cliff will call a fascist pig) when Stone asked him if he interfered in the 2016 election. Putin's answer was something like "No, of course not, that is all related to Americas domestic political situation". In other words, its a story designed to have a political effect, not a genuine one where the chips fall where they may.

Case closed on Wm...

Lol. I see the issue here, you and wn enjoy getting information from known propaganda outlets, whereas me and jim do not. Russia definitely annexed the Crimea, we disagree on how and why. Lol again. Im beginning to understand why Jim blocked you.

The founder of rocor advocated for armed rebellion against the ussr. If the Russians didnt attempt to mitigate that church I would be stunned and they would be derelict in their duty to protect themselves. Regardless, that story doesnt make your false Ukraine narrative true. It just shows your perspective on this comes from a white russian viewpoint, again, like Cliff, not exactly unbiased. Jim, I completely agree and thats a good concise outline of the situation you gave. The lack of critical analysis on Crimea is confusing here. There simply isnt any solid evidence this took place at all. If you listen to oliver stones long interview with putin, it’s relatively clear that he is well aware of how power works in the US and that the president by himself doesnt change that much in regards to the treatment russia gets from the us. In my opinion, the DNC didn’t expect Trump to win the election and went into this whole mess afterwards as a means to compromise trumps political maneuvers and to keep wall street corporate control of the democratic party without meaningfully changing their overall platform (aka, an explanation for clintons loss that didnt expose how right wing she and the leaders of the DNC actually is/are)

This is not correct and is exactly what the corporate democrats project. In reality, the us led a coup in ukraine in a story that goes back to at least world war 2. Crimea has a large russian population and voted to join russia by something like 95%. https://consortiumnews.com/2016/07/16/the-new-cold-wars-frontline-in-crimea Your attacking someone who has never voted for a republican in his life and i have supported tulsi gabbard since her trip to syria which i believe parallels JFKs early 1950s trip to saigon with edmund guillion. She came back and spoke the truth and has been suppressed by her own party ever since while the rest of the party continues with this pro corporate propaganda. The latest ukraine gate stuff is an entirely different story. The chairman of the house intel committee (schiff) is already conducting a suspicious investigation and fiona hill has been rumored to have ties to hunter biden. It'll be interesting to see what happens but the bottomline is this, does anyone here think Pence is going to improve anything? My take is that pence would be a blank check for the “deep state”. At least trump occasionally goes against these people, if only by mistake and not good intent. I think the Wall street democrats realize they cannot put biden or even warren against trump and win, but they could beat pence. Seeing they refuse to endorse Bernie or Tulsi(to put it lightly), the impeachment is a smart move if they can pull it off. Regardless, history tells us that the removal of a president is almost always a bad thing. Hatred of trump is one thing, believing the state department line on Syria is another. But then again, if that truth was allowed out, Tulsi would suddenly look very different. Very similar to how JFK looked regarding Algeria in 1962.

Russian “linked” is a vague term. They obviously weren’t significant if the mueller report was unable to find anything “there” as the fbi was heard saying. This type of “facts be damned” modern democratic ideology that pervades the msm and the big “leftist” sites like dailykos, huffpost, etc is exactly what the corporate democrats are all about. And exactly the opposite of the type of democrat JFK was. Your Putin paranoia is undone by a view of a map of us military bases in europe bordering russia. Look at that and then tell us how Putin is destabilizing the entire world again.

It makes sense you read and apparently believe the website that is paid for by a non-profit organization whose first president was John Podesta and counts George Soros, CitiBank, Wells Fargo, Northrup Grumman, and many other friends among its donors. I'd call that a slight conflict of interest in terms of independent analysis.

Well it certainly looks like Jim was right then doesn't it? Regardless of who designed it, that is most definitely what RussiaGate has done. Please, useless rhetoric with little real evidence, the deep state installs all presidents in one form or another since JFK

Only by a misinterpretation by a reader apparently. What Jim actually wrote was, " In fact, Trump had now begun an effort to expose what he thought was a “Deep State plot”. One that was designed to terrorize and smear his presidency from the start" What "he thought", meaning Trump. If Clinton won the election we would've likely never heard of the Russia Gate story because Hillary wasn't going to make nice with Russia anyway. If Trump was able to neutralize relations (as he may have without russia gate), it's conceivable that the regime change operations in Syria and Ukraine would be stopped or drastically reduced/normalized. Instead of focusing on two news stories beforehand, maybe examine the near constant coverage AFTER she lost, certainly not a US-Russian detente atmosphere. And then you cite the Steele dossier as some kind of evidence. Sorry, I think believing in the credibility of that at this point is misguided at best. This has nothing to do with my personal political beliefs, can you say the same?

I tend to think of the answer to this question being along the lines of what Prouty would say, it may have started as a conversation between a pool of any number of men with a statement like "JFK is screwing us in Cuba, screwing us in Vietnam, screwed us in '62 with the steel contract, is trying to make peace with the commies, is trying to screw Israel with nuclear weapons.... something needs to be done." From there it could've been all about picking people who have the ability to perform a certain task in furtherance of the crime regardless of what title or position they hold. It's frustrating that the true origins of the plan will probably never be known, but exposing the intelligence/military involvement and cover up is just as useful at this point in history in my opinion.

Cliff, First, it wasn't old news to me, at least in the context that Jim put it in along with the many relevant articles he linked to. I have no "chief enemy" or particular angle on these matters, just trying to follow the trail where it goes. Sometimes, people who hate Trump are unable to be objective about these types of things and I believe that is a net negative. "The end justifies the means" is not a positive slogan to aspire to in my opinion.

Jim, I meant there was no basis for saying the “godfathers” had all those plots going. These guys inflate tiny bits into grand scale statements. Didnt someone run a license plate from the suspects in the chicago plot that went to the treasury department in some way? Yeah, Im sure the mob got that car (heavy sarcasam).

Nice article Jim. I never believed the russia gate nonsense. It always seemed to be a distraction from the illegal activity of the DNC and to cover the complete failure to beat one of the most embarrassing personalities of our time. It was also a way for the “deep state” to prevent any softening of the us-russian relations that trump may have achieved. Zaids presence certainly seems suspicious based on the truth past you elucidated. I am immediately suspicious of anyone that has read about the jfk case and is trumpeting oswald stuff from 1965. I still think Seth Richs murder is unsolved despite a video existing that no one has seen and julian assange strongly hinting that his death was related to the leaks. I believe he offered to testify about who gave him the info if granted immunity, the state/justice department didn't bite, big surprise. Not saying it is definitely related, but i wouldnt be shocked at all if it was. Andrew, Jim mentions in his article that he doesnt believe trump is a threat to the status quo, l agree. In my opinion, Trump is a loose cannon who occasionally acts against the interest of the “deep state”, treating russia like a non enemy for example. Killing him before he took office would be too chaotic and unpredictable to manage i think. There are so many other methods of control which makes the jfk case even more interesting to me and reminds me of the salandria quote about the critics being misled and the story never being designed to hold.

Almost too good to be true. Exactly what is needed. At the same time its kind of disgusting that this responsibility fell to Oliver again almost 30 years after his movie. The story about talbot and clooney says it all about hollywood. thank you jim and oliver!

Lance, I haven't seen much of what you have written, but in one thread you mentioned in some context that you may be the next Von Pein, and I have to agree with you. You also remind me of S.V. Anderson (whoever that actually is) whom I have had exchanges with years ago. Rich, Do you really think the mob is above the CIA in terms of power, influence, and capabilities? Given that the strongest evidence in this case consistently links to the CIA and not the mob, why are we talking about mob did it stuff? " The basis for just writing this is unfounded.

Rich, what is Jim wrong about here? In the context of the JFK assassination Marcello was not a player of any significance. I believe the HSCA said the main reason they suspected possible mob involvement in the murder was because of Jack Ruby. One of the lowest on the totem pole. So even if the mob leaned on Ruby, they had nothing to do with setting up the plot at any higher level. This is another in a long line of things that Jim Garrison nailed before almost anyone. "I don't doubt the mobs involvement... but at a lower level"