Watergate and today's "Official Knowledge"

[Glenn Nall]

I'm watching the Senate Armed Services CMTE hearings. Tim Kaine (current Senator because he's not the Vice-President Elect) referred to Watergate as a "bungled burglary of the DNC HQ, somewhat launched from the White House."

I'm just curious (Mr. Caddy?): if there's such overwhelming proof that a "bungled burglary" is pretty much the last thing Watergate was, why is still what most high-end elected officials think? It's not just Mr. Kaine, by any means; I hear it all the time from these pols. I guess what I'm asking is (and it can only be a guess, of course), are these just "talking points" - the "official version," or are there many pols who really believe the official version because they just don't know xxxx about Watergate and recent political history...?

 

On another, similar, note. Opinion: It's been noted that there are 17 (SEVENTEEN!) Intel Agencies in our Intel "community." SEVENTEEN. As the antipathy between just the FBI and the CIA is historic and well-known, is it safe to say that 17 intel agencies might be too many, and that it's highly likely that few of them would play well together or share their Big Wheels...?

[Douglas Caddy]

Glenn: I did not listen to the Senate Armed Services Committee's hearing today so I am not familiar with Senator Kaine's statement until now. I can only surmise that he said what he said as a summary of what the public thinks happened in Watergate. Of course, just like with the JFK assassination, new information is still emerging about the scandal slowly but surely. The whole story has not been told. For example, this was recently revealed:

https://glomardisclosure.com/2016/12/07/evidence-implicates-jack-anderson-watergate/

I have not seen a list of the 17 intelligence agencies. However, today's Wall Street Journal reports on page A6 that "The President's Intelligence Advisory Board, a White House panel, recommended in a classified report in 2010 that the [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] be downsized and closely focused, according to the Congressional Research Service. The report did not result in legislation."

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/us/politics/armed-services-committee-john-mccain-russia-hacking.html

Edited January 5, 2017 by Douglas Caddy

[Glenn Nall]

1 hour ago, Douglas Caddy said:

Glenn: I did not listen to the Senate Armed Services Committee's hearing today so I am not familiar with Senator Kaine's statement until now. I can only surmise that he said what he said as a summary of what the public thinks happened in Watergate. Of course, just like with the JFK assassination, new information is still emerging about the scandal slowly but surely. The whole story has not been told. For example, this was recently revealed:

https://glomardisclosure.com/2016/12/07/evidence-implicates-jack-anderson-watergate/

I have not seen a list of the 17 intelligence agencies. However, today's Wall Street Journal reports on page A6 that "The President's Intelligence Advisory Board, a White House panel, recommended in a classified report in 2010 that the [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] be downsized and closely focused, according to the Congressional Research Service. The report did not result in legislation."

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/us/politics/armed-services-committee-john-mccain-russia-hacking.html

This second issue was mentioned to Mr. Clapper, and he stated that he's heard no discussion of any rearrangement of the current Intelligence structure. For whatever that's worth.

I think the Times (for whatever that's worth), or maybe the Wash Post (repeat), reported that PEOTUS is looking into "streamlining" these 17 agencies, but I think I heard that was denied by PEOTUS personnel.

For whatever that's worth.