Attorney's file on Roger Stone, LaRouche and Russia influencing the 2016 presidential election

[James DiEugenio]

Andrew:

Again, I think you are missing the point.

Its not about who you like or you don't like.  Its about a shadow government that is going against what our government is supposed to be about.  

From what I can see, Russia gate would not have happened had it not been for the Steele Dossier.  Which was financed by Perkins Cole, representing the HRC campaign. 

Now, Steele also gave the dossier to the FBI and to John McCain.   And this is what started this whole thing.

And it mushroomed after Trump was elected since Buzzfeed published it online.  

If the Steele Dossier is a backed up, solid piece of investigative reporting then why is Trump still in office?

Why has Mueller been at work now for going on two years?

I think the answer to that is pretty obvious.

[Cliff Varnell]

9 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Andrew:

Again, I think you are missing the point.

Its not about who you like or you don't like.  Its about a shadow government that is going against what our government is supposed to be about.  

Which "shadow government"?

It was the right wing bible-thumping shadow government which installed Trump in the first place.

9 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

From what I can see, Russia gate would not have happened had it not been for the Steele Dossier.  Which was financed by Perkins Cole, representing the HRC campaign. 

Now, Steele also gave the dossier to the FBI and to John McCain.   And this is what started this whole thing.

And it mushroomed after Trump was elected since Buzzfeed published it online.  

If the Steele Dossier is a backed up, solid piece of investigative reporting then why is Trump still in office?

The Steele Dossier: A Retrospective

https://www.lawfareblog.com/steele-dossier-retrospective

As we noted, our interest is in assessing the Steele dossier as a raw intelligence document, not a finished piece of analysis. The Mueller investigation has clearly produced public records that confirm pieces of the dossier. And even where the details are not exact, the general thrust of Steele’s reporting seems credible in light of what we now know about extensive contacts between numerous individuals associated with the Trump campaign and Russian government officials.

However, there is also a good deal in the dossier that has not been corroborated in the official record and perhaps never will be—whether because it’s untrue, unimportant or too sensitive. As a raw intelligence document, the Steele dossier, we believe, holds up well so far. But surely there is more to come from Mueller’s team. We will return to it as the public record develops.

9 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Why has Mueller been at work now for going on two years?

I think the answer to that is pretty obvious.

It's pretty obvious Jim DiEugenio has no idea how long it takes to complete complex investigations.

[Jeff Carter]

Cliff

The links  regarding an “FBI conspiracy” essentially confirm that Comey’s hand was forced and he committed a limited hangout. He ultimately released the information, not the shadowy Trump faction in New York. Why would he acquiesce to a renegade faction? These articles -all from the mainstream media - if anything suggest the contemporary FBI is riven by internal political disputes and that none of its  judgments or activity should be considered as anything but partisan. 

Otherwise you are simply spouting reasons to detest Trump and ignore or downplay serious issues regarding civil rights and freedom of expression. I think the notion that the Democrats “preferred to lose with Hilary than win with Sanders” sums up a lot, and there is a profound refusal to deal with that.

[James DiEugenio]

 JC: I think the notion that the Democrats “preferred to lose with Hilary than win with Sanders” sums up a lot, and there is a profound refusal to deal with that.

 

You got that one right.

The evidence is that Sanders would have pounded Trump.

And it was Sanders who gave us people like Pressley and AOC.

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

On 2/19/2019 at 12:47 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Geez Kirk, what took you so long?  

But you came out firing on all pistons as usual, with that civics lesson stuff and predictably dividing Wheeler and Carter and Jim/me off to one side.

Clearly, there is a segment of the FBI that wants to get rid of Trump.  Especially after Comey was canned. I would even say that this extended over to the Justice Department with Sally Yates who also had deep reservations if Flynn was "compromised" by the Russians.

There is little doubt that the Power Elite wanted: 1.) War with Syria, and 2.) Cold War II.(That whole thing in Ukraine was so misrepresented by both the MSM and Washington it was sick.)

For whatever reasons--whether he was compromised or he just was not interested-- Trump did not do it.  

The real irony here that no one wants to address is this: I think HRC would have done both.

Geez Kirk, what took you so long?  

Uh, geez Jim, You're the one who brought this up. The real story is that high FBI officials were considering what constitutional venues there are should it be necessary to remove a sitting President and one had thoughts about wearing a wire. Do you think  the fact that the President so much as admitted on national TV that he fired Comey because of this "Russia thing' might be considered a uh.........lead?  Then of course all the exposed  lies ever since.

 

Jim said:

There is little doubt that the Power Elite wanted: 1.) War with Syria, and 2.) Cold War II.(That whole thing in Ukraine was so misrepresented by both the MSM and Washington it was sick.) 

For whatever reasons--whether he was compromised or he just was not interested-- Trump did not do it.  

The real irony here that no one wants to address is this: I think HRC would have done both.

• Well that settles it! Jim,  if anyone should know, it would be you. Political expert that you are. Were you at all influenced by Jeff's totally fabricated story that Hillary upon assuming the Presidency would launch a major military attack on both China and Russia at this unique juncture (which is never explained)while it can still be done? Sorry to dredge that up but there should be consequences for talking out of your a-s.
• Jim will hold on to some image of Trump as the Peace candidate to further his "deep state" conspiracy narrative.  Although Trump 1)has continued the "power elite" endorsed war and took up in Syria where Obama left off. 2) has actually increased the drone sorties over 22% beyond Obama. 3) has broken the Treaty with Iran.4) Has assisted his buddies, the Arabs in genocide in Yemen. Is that the real irony (or elephant in the room)that no one in your camp wants to address? 

Jim said:

There is little doubt that the Power Elite wanted: 1.) War with Syria, and 2.) Cold War II.(That whole thing in Ukraine was so misrepresented by both the MSM and Washington it was sick.) 

For whatever reasons--whether he was compromised or he just was not interested-- Trump did not do it. 

 

 

So is Jim is finally starting to own up that the POTUS is compromised, and this isn't just a gigantic plot by the Deep State that the majority of us fools have embraced, but he practically alone knew better? This is a major change! ,an awakening from a delusion of grandeur,  and not one I'm sure Jeff or Robert want to hear.

I think Cliff and to a lesser extent Andrew have very successfully parsed the erroneous statements that Jim, Jeff and Robert have said, and given strong answers that I don't expect any of them to rebut. And sure enough outside of one parsing by Robert, they're off to the races on to something else.

 

Edited February 21, 2019 by Kirk Gallaway

[Cliff Varnell]

3 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

One small point to Cliff, it is Sex-Pervert Anthony Weiner (Capitalized and hyphenated.)

The argument in the NY Times article that the NY FBI Office leaked crucial information lacks some critical information. 

Sept. 21, 2016 - Original Breaking Weiner Article - Daily Mail

Sept. 22, 2016 - Prosecutors in US Attorney Preet Bharara’s office have issued a subpoena for Anthony Weiner’s cell phone and other records, - NY Post

Sept. 23, 2016 - disgraced ex-pol handed over an iPhone, iPad and laptop computer to Granite Intelligence on Sept. 23, 2016. - NY Post

Sept. 26, 2016 - Federal agents got permission to seize the electronics on Sept. 26, 2016, and a search of the laptop turned up e-mails between Weiner’s wife, Huma Abedin, and her boss, then-Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. (Same Article as Above.)

Yes, and within a half-hour they could have determined that the e-mails were duplicates that had already been examined.

The New York office of the FBI knew there was nothing in those e-mails.  But they waited a month to turn them over to Comey.  Comey was afraid of his own future under a Clinton presidency so he informed the House Republicans of the Weiner e-mails.  Then he waited 8 days to reveal that the e-mails were duplicates, during which time the mainstream media focused on nothing else.

3 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

Note that the NYPD took possession of the Lap-Top when Weiner was arrested. It is believed the NYPD made a backup as standard operating procedures before handing over to the FBI.

October 28, 2016 - Comey letter to Congress saying the FBI would not pursue a case against Hillary.

The Trump Delusion Syndrome is strong here.

Here's the text of the Comey letter of October 28, 2016:

(quote on)

Dear Messrs Chairmen:

In previous congressional testimony, l referred to the fact that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had completed its investigation of former Secretary Clinton's personal email server. Due to recent developments, I am writing to supplement my previous testimony.

In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation. I am writing to inform you that the investigative team briefed me on this yesterday, and I agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps designed to allow investigators to review these emails to determine whether they contain classified information, as well as to assess their importance to our investigation.
Although the FBI cannot yet assess whether or not this material may be significant, and I cannot predict how long it will take us to complete this additional work, I believe it is important to update your Committees about our efforts in light of my previous testimony.

Sincerely yours,
James B. Comey
Director

(quote off)

Does that sound like he ended the Clinton inquiry?

Of course not.  Quite the opposite.

3 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

Nov. 2 to 4, 2016 - Erik Prince of Blackwater says in interviews  the NYPD review of the Lap-Top shows a variety of crimes were committed by Huma and Hillary.

• Prince alleged the NYPD threatened to release contents of Lap-Top. 
• FBI OIG Report later says an October 26, 2016 call between Loretta Lynch and Andrew McCabe  occurred. On the call, Lynch threatened the NYPD via McCabe that the DOJ would investigate the Eric Garner case (a police brutality matter) if their were more leaks about the Weiner Laptop.

Erik Prince!  The Blackwater criminal, brother of right-wing nutcase Betsy DeVos...yeah, that's a credible witness.  How would Erik Prince know what was in those e-mails?

Trump Delusion Syndrome in full effect.

3 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

The Working Theory is that Comey issued the letter in order to avoid a release by the NYPD of the incriminating evidence against Hillary.

It wasn't the NYPD who had it in for Clinton, it was the New York office of the FBI.  And the e-mails were duplicates, a little fact your Trump Delusion Syndrome won't allow you to process.

3 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

The "limited hangout" was intended to help Hillary, not throw the election to Trump.

And the assassins who murdered JFK pitied him for his poor health and intended to help him out of his misery.

[Cliff Varnell]

9 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

Cliff

The links  regarding an “FBI conspiracy” essentially confirm that Comey’s hand was forced and he committed a limited hangout.

The e-mails were duplicates.  Comey could have figured that out in the time it took him to compose his letter to Congress.

Quote

 

He ultimately released the information, not the shadowy Trump faction in New York. Why would he acquiesce to a renegade faction?

Because he was afraid that a President Clinton would fire his ass for the way he handled the bogus e-mail investigation.

Quote

These articles -all from the mainstream media - if anything suggest the contemporary FBI is riven by internal political disputes and that none of its  judgments or activity should be considered as anything but partisan.

Yeah, the FBI is a hotbed of liberal activism.  Always has been.  Big progressive liberal, that J. Edger Hoover!😫

Quote

Otherwise you are simply spouting reasons to detest Trump and ignore or downplay serious issues regarding civil rights and freedom of expression.

Like the civil rights of people seeking asylum at the US/Mexico border?

Freedom of expression like Saturday Night Live skits mocking Trump -- and for which he demands "retribution"?

Civil rights and freedom of expression are under attack by Trump.

Your Trump Delusion Syndrome prevents you from seeing this.

Quote

 

I think the notion that the Democrats “preferred to lose with Hilary than win with Sanders” sums up a lot, and there is a profound refusal to deal with that.

Because of Trump Delusion Syndrome there is a profound refusal to deal with the fact that Hillary got 3.6 million more votes than Bernie because she had a 55% lead among blacks and Latinos.

Edited February 20, 2019 by Cliff Varnell

[Jeff Carter]

3 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

 

• Well that settles it.l Jim,  if anyone should know, it would be you. Political expert that you are. Were you at all influenced by Jeff's totally fabricated story that Hillary upon assuming the Presidency would launch a major military attack on both China and Russia at this unique juncture (which is never explained)while it can still be done? Sorry to dredge that up but there should be consequences for talking out of your a-s.
•  

Geez, Kirk, all these months later and you are still scratching an itch generated by your own limited sources of information. I made the factually correct observation that there was much concern through the summer and fall of 2016 over candidate Clinton’s proclivities towards hawkish positions and hawkish actions, concern compounded by the equally hawkish advisors and cabinet nominees she was assembling. Anyone who spent time with non-mainstream sources through those months would know that my simple observation was not controversial, and that there was indeed much concerned discussion on this topic. When you challenged this I offered some names to assist your enlightenment, and you responded by wildly misstating my position, mocking the concern expressed by writers you have not read, and demanding I present some kind of dissertation. I’m not wasting time by doing that, as it is perfectly obvious that what I said was correct, which could be confirmed simply by looking into the archives of, for example, Common Dreams (left/progressive) or Antiwar (right/libertarian). I’m sorry you don’t know this, but spiking your comments with gratuitous insults doesn’t make you any less unaware.

 

Cliff, I’m sorry your favoured candidate lost and I’m sorry that your country is in a mess right now. But still fighting the 2016 election two whole years later and adopting a partisan false consciousness over the reasons for the debacle are not helping in any way. Yes, Trump’s an idiot and yes, threatening Alec Baldwin over a TV skit is childish behaviour to say the least….  But did you not notice that over this past summer legal arguments were advanced in the mainstream media holding that “probable cause” to engage total surveillance on any American, and all of his or her associates, could be met solely by hearsay evidence as long as it was endorsed by an authority figure? When did America become East Germany? Maybe you should address that.

[Cliff Varnell]

47 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

Geez, Kirk, all these months later and you are still scratching an itch generated by your own limited sources of information. I made the factually correct observation that there was much concern through the summer and fall of 2016 over candidate Clinton’s proclivities towards hawkish positions and hawkish actions, concern compounded by the equally hawkish advisors and cabinet nominees she was assembling.

That was always my beef with Clinton, which is why I voted for Bernie.

What's the difference between a Democratic hawk and a Republican hawk?

The Democrat has to answer to a dovish base.  The GOPer answers to a hawkish base.

The bible-thumping base of the GOP is hot for war in the Middle East.  Trump is hot for war with Iran, as is his neo-con national security adviser John Bolton.

Trump's base will go along with any war he starts.

A President Clinton would have been to a degree constrained by the dovish instincts of the Democratic base.

Quote

 

Anyone who spent time with non-mainstream sources through those months would know that my simple observation was not controversial, and that there was indeed much concerned discussion on this topic. When you challenged this I offered some names to assist your enlightenment, and you responded by wildly misstating my position, mocking the concern expressed by writers you have not read, and demanding I present some kind of dissertation. I’m not wasting time by doing that, as it is perfectly obvious that what I said was correct, which could be confirmed simply by looking into the archives of, for example, Common Dreams (left/progressive) or Antiwar (right/libertarian). I’m sorry you don’t know this, but spiking your comments with gratuitous insults doesn’t make you any less unaware.

 

Cliff, I’m sorry your favoured candidate lost and I’m sorry that your country is in a mess right now.

I'm sorry Bernie Sanders lost, as well.

Quote

But still fighting the 2016 election two whole years later and adopting a partisan false consciousness over the reasons for the debacle are not helping in any way.

You haven't made an argument that I've adopted a "partisan false consciousness."

Quote

 

Yes, Trump’s an idiot and yes, threatening Alec Baldwin over a TV skit is childish behaviour to say the least…. 

It's more than that.  It's an attempt to rally his base to a violent response.

Quote

But did you not notice that over this past summer legal arguments were advanced in the mainstream media holding that “probable cause” to engage total surveillance on any American, and all of his or her associates, could be met solely by hearsay evidence as long as it was endorsed by an authority figure?

Citation please.

Quote

 

When did America become East Germany?

Around the time the DEA opened files on every American, thus duplicating the surveillance capabilities of the STASI.

Quote

 

Maybe you should address that.

I prefer to address the fact that the National Defense Authorization Act contains an "indefinite detention clause" which allows the military to hold any person indefinitely without informing anyone; that President Obama annually wrote a signing statement declaring US citizens outside the jurisdiction of this clause; that Trump has not signed any such exclusion.

Under Obama we were one signature away from living in a military-police state.

Trump's ambition is to be a dictator and the powers he has given himself are alarming, to say the least....

Edited February 20, 2019 by Cliff Varnell

[James DiEugenio]

Can Kirk really not be aware of the whole South China Sea dispute which HRC did all she could to escalate as Secretary of State?

Pretty easy to find.

And my God, HRC in Libya, in Honduras, her smears of Putin and Russia: she actually compared the Crimean referendum to join Russia to HItler's takeover of Austria and  Czechoslovakia!  There is a real student of history for you.  And she wanted to do the same thing she did in Libya in Syria. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-hillary-clinton-idUSKBN179058)

Are you really denying she was and is a neocon?  The woman who spends Xmas with Mr. Genocide, Henry Kissinger each yuletide season?  The evidence is pretty much overwhelming.  Obama's choice of her as Secretary of State was a blunder of the first magnitude. 

But after he got mugged by the Gang of Three--HRC, Rice and Power--in their disaster in Libya, he decided not to be played again in Syria.

And  how can anyone not see that Putin was correct in helping Assad in Syria?  Tulsi Gabbard was good on this issue. HRC was spouting the PNAC/ Robert Kagan line. Which is why Kagan endorsed her in 2016.  

That endorsement is quite a badge of dishonor in my view.

 

Edited February 20, 2019 by James DiEugenio

[Rob Couteau]

11 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

The woman who spends Xmas with Mr. Genocide, Henry Kissinger each yuletide season?  

During the primary debates she referred to war criminal Henry Kissinger as her "mentor." That tells you all you need to know about how despicable she is.

Edited February 21, 2019 by Rob Couteau

[Cliff Varnell]

47 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:

FBI’s top lawyer believed Hillary Clinton should face charges, but was talked out of it -thehill.com

“I have reason to believe that you originally believed it was appropriate to charge Hillary Clinton with regard to violations of law — various laws, with regard to mishandling of classified information. Is that accurate?” Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor, asked Baker.

Baker paused to gain his lawyer’s permission to respond, and then answered, “Yes.”

Trump revealed highly classified information to Russian foreign minister and ambassador

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-revealed-highly-classified-information-to-russian-foreign-minister-and-ambassador/2017/05/15/530c172a-3960-11e7-9e48-c4f199710b69_story.html?utm_term=.48cc2d2ea39b

 

[Joe Bauer]

On 8/22/2017 at 9:15 AM, Douglas Caddy said:

I am posting my legal file on this subject in the JFK Assassination Topic of the Forum because the events described within it initially came about when Roger Stone contacted me in 2012. He requested any information that I might have on LBJ, which I was pleased to provide. In 2013 Stone published his book, The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ, which became a best-seller. In his book Stone credits me as a primary source for information, as is disclosed in the file. Thus, in a roundabout way JFK five decades after his murder is providing from the grave a nexus of how the 2016 presidential election was rigged. Don’t you think he is pleased at doing this?

 

                                                                                                        ************************************

 

 

DOUGLAS CADDY

ATTORNEY-AT-LAW

HOUSTON, TEXAS

Member, Texas Bar since 1979 and

District of Columbia Bar since 1970

 

 

MEMORANDUM TO THE LEGAL FILE

Subject: Roger Stone, Lyndon LaRouche and Russia influencing the 2016 Presidential election

Date: August 22, 2017

 

     This memo to the file brings up to date what has occurred since I sent my letter of December 10, 2016, to FBI Director James Comey and my subsequent letter of June 27, 2017, to Special Counsel Robert Mueller in regard to the above subject.

 

     In my letter to FBI Director Comey I stated that “I knew Roger Stone of the Trump presidential campaign forty years ago in Washington. Because of this Harley Schlanger of the LaRouche organization, whom I also knew, earlier this year asked me to arrange a meeting between him and Stone. I agreed to do so. Such a meeting took place in February [2016]. I was not present at the meeting.

 

     “It is my impression that as a result of that February meeting the LaRouche organization agreed to use its extensive Russian contacts to open up a back channel for the Trump campaign to communicate directly to Russian intelligence. This ultimately led to Russian intelligence hacking the emails of the Democratic National Committee, which became a major issue in the presidential campaign and continues to do so to this day. Stone may have played a role in Wikileaks being given the hacked emails for distribution to the public.

 

     “Harley Schlanger and other LaRouche leaders interviewed Stone on a LaRouche radio program on a number of occasions during the course of the presidential campaign.”

 

     With my letter to Director Comey I attached a number of emails that I had received from Schlanger and Stone on this matter. Relevant quotations from some of these follow later in this memo. In addition I sent copies of my letter to Director Comey to President Obama and CIA Director Peter Goss as a safeguard that it would not be deep-sixth.

 

     After President Trump fired Director Comey in May 2017, which led to the appointment of Special Counsel Mueller, I wrote Mr. Mueller on June 27, 2017 in part as follows:

 

      “On December 10, 2016, I sent the enclosed letter with its email attachments to FBI Director James Comey about the above referenced matter. I never heard back from him and hence I am writing you. My motivation in doing so is because I fear that our democracy was severely endangered by Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election.  Alarmingly, this Russian threat is unabated. The continued existence of the United States as a free nation is at stake.

 

      “Here is a brief summary of my letter to Director Comey: In January 2016 Harley Schlanger of the LaRouche organization contacted me to request that I set up a meeting for him with Roger Stone of the Trump Campaign. Their meeting was held in Austin, Texas, in February 2016. I was unable to attend but my impression is that as a result of that meeting the LaRouche organization agreed to use its extensive Russian contacts to open up a back channel for the Trump campaign to communicate directly with Russian intelligence.

 

      “Since writing my December 10 letter to Director Comey I have uncovered the following information that may corroborate the contents of that letter:

 

     “A month before Schlanger contacted me to set up the meeting with Stone, a LaRouche delegation sympathetic to Russia attended the RT anniversary dinner in Moscow in December 2015 where Premier Putin was seated next to General Flynn. For confirmation see the bottom of page 15 and top of page 16 of the famous Christopher Steele British Dossier. Schlanger may have been among those who attended. There are essentially five persons who lead the LaRouche organization today: Lyndon LaRouche (age 94), his wife, Helga, Jeffrey Steinberg, Harley Schlanger and Anton Chaitkin.

 

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html

 

       “Jeffrey Steinberg participated in an annual Economic Conference in Moscow in March 2016.

 

https://larouchepac.com/20160328/eir-participates-moscow-economic-forum

 

       “In November 2016, Roger Stone interviewed Lyndon LaRouche on his radio program.

 

https://larouchepac.com/20161121/lyndon-larouche-radio-interview-roger-stone

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBx6uHA05gg

 

       “I am writing you because you possess the investigative power and authority to determine if any of the information provided in this letter and my prior letter to Director Comey merits further investigation. It may or may not. As a private citizen I am in no position to make that determination. However, I believe it is my solemn duty both as a private citizen and an attorney who is a member of the District of Columbia and Texas Bars to call this matter to your attention.”

 

     When I sent my letter to Mr. Mueller, I also sent copies of it to Senator Mark Warner of the Senate Intelligence Committee and Congressman Adam Schiff of the House Intelligence Committee.

 

ABOUT LAROUCHE

   

     Here is the link to obtain update viewpoints from the LaRouche organization:

 

      https://larouchepac.com/updates

 

      Three of the brightest and most knowledgeable persons I have ever met are Jeffrey Steinberg, Harley Schanger and Anton Chaikin. However, it is well known that Lyndon LaRouche is the ultimate decider on all policy matters and his word overrides those in the organization whose views may differ.

 

      The Houston Chronicle of November 7, 1982, published an article titled, “The man who ‘perfected’ Marx: LaRouche collects money, works at making folks over ‘in my own image.’”

 

     The article states that, “former members say LaRouche is omnipotent within the organization.” It further declares that, “According to his 1979 autobiography, The Power of Reason, LaRouche was born into a Quaker family in New Hampshire in 1922 and had only two friends until late in high school. He says the reason for his lack of friends was that his mental capabilities exceeded those of his peers….As a young man, he joined a socialist group where he ‘perfected’ the theories of Marx.’”

 

     I find myself in agreement with some of the policies espoused by the LaRouche organization, such as constructing a modern, transnational “silk road” and reform of the U.S. financial system, including Glass-Steagall reinstatement and creation of a national credit institution for infrastructure and manufacturing. Where I vehemently differ with the group is its alleged role in assisting Russia in influencing the 2016 presidential election.  This issue is paramount above all others.

 

ABOUT ROGER STONE

 

      I first met Roger Stone in 1975 soon after the National Conservative Political Action Committee (NCPAC) was created. Its chairman was Terry Dolan, a really nice guy who questioned the moral leadership of the conservative movement at the time. He was upset that republican Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina was driving around Washington, D.C. in a convertible with a young blond woman at his side. Charles Black, a key leader in NCPAC, was from North Caroline and was a protégé of Senator Helms, a racist demagogue if there ever was one. Stone was another leader. Paul Manafort was on the scene but not prominent in the organization. I was the organization’s legal counsel.

 

      A short story will suffice in my finding out that Stone was a classic sociopath. On one occasion in 1975 Dolan, Stone and I had lunch together in the greater Washington area and had left the restaurant and were walking down the street. We noticed that on the opposite side of the street an elderly woman who suffered from severe curvature of the spine was walking with what appeared to be her two children, a man and a woman in their thirties. The poor woman’s agonizing bent over posture was such that her face was almost parallel with the sidewalk. When Stone saw her he immediately let out a yell of delight and began to walk and prance in the same way as the poor woman was doing. He did so while gesturing towards the trio on the other side of the street so as to attract their attention. I was so embarrassed and shocked at Stone’s gross behavior that I ran into a public garage in an attempt to distant myself from him. About twenty years ago I received a phone call from Fox commentator James Rosen (if my memory is correct) and who asked me what I thought of Stone. I told him about the above disturbing incident.

 

      Charles Black, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone went on to form the political lobbying firm of Black, Manafort and Stone and what they all had in common was being sociopaths. Their quest was for power, access and money and the thought of what was best for our country never entered the picture.

 

      In a sense I bear some responsibility for their rise to prominence. While an undergraduate at Georgetown University in 1958 I co-founded with a college friend, David Franke, the National Student Committee for the Loyalty Oath. We did this because there was no conservative movement in existence at the time and we thought we could start such a movement using college students. Senator Styles Bridges of New Hampshire brought us national exposure by endorsing our organization in a speech on the floor of the Senate. The following year, 1959, Franke and I founded Youth for Goldwater for Vice President, which was another major step toward building a conservative movement. Here is an account of what happened next from the book by Professor John A. Andrew III, The Other Side of the Sixties: Young Americans for Freedom and the Rise of Conservative Politics, (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1997), pp. 217-218:

 

“William F. Buckley and Marvin Liebman met Douglas Caddy and David Franke, both of whom attended as representatives of Youth for Goldwater for Vice President. Together, these four men would turn their disappointment in Goldwater’s loss [at the 1960 GOP convention in Chicago that nominated Nixon] into a national conservative youth movement. Impressed by the passion of Caddy and Franke and their attempts to organize conservative youth in the past, including the creation of the Student Committee for the Loyalty Oath in 1958, Buckley and Liebman decided to mentor them. The loss of Goldwater for the Vice Presidential nomination convinced Buckley that young conservatives in the GOP needed to be fostered from the top down. He believed that young conservatives, with his guidance, could change the American political discourse. Consequently, Buckley hired Franke to intern at the National Review and Caddy worked for Liebman in public relations. Their first major task was to organize a national youth group for conservatives funded by Buckley. In September of 1960, on the Buckley family estate in Sharon, Connecticut, over 100 students from 44 different colleges and universities across the country assembled to devise a plan to capitalize on the growing conservatism of American youth and turn it into an organized political movement. The result created the Young Americans for Freedom, officially chartered on September 11, 1960, and the adoption of the Sharon Statement at the conference. In the Sharon statement, YAF articulated its critique of American society and proclaimed, ‘In this time of moral and political crisis, it is the responsibility of the youth of America to affirm certain eternal truths.’”

 

 https://www.slideshare.net/ClaireViall/rebels-with-a-causethe-growth-and-appeal-of-the-young-americans-for-freedom-in-the-1960s

 

      The founding of YAF in 1960 led to the birth of the modern conservative movement which occurred in the wake of a fantastically successful rally of conservatives at Manhattan Center in New York City in March 1961.

 

      So Black and Manafort and Stone, sad to say, are ethically challenged by-products of the modern conservative movement which decades ago was taken over by opportunists and sociopaths. Stone was active in successfully rigging three presidential elections: In Florida in 2000 for G. W. Bush, in Ohio in 2004 for G. W. Bush and in 2016 for Trump. He has utter contempt for honest elections. Rigging is what he does.

 

      Prior to the creation of NCPAC in 1975, Stone was active in the Nixon 1972 presidential campaign.

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/nbc-news-exclusive-memo-shows-watergate-prosecutors-had-evidence-nixon-n773581

 

      I was the Original Attorney for the Watergate Seven but did not meet Stone until three years after the Watergate case broke.

 

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/21500-memoir-on-being-original-attorney-for-the-watergate-seven-by-douglas-caddy/

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jKBlJQNtek

 

      Liberals rejoiced with Nixon being forced to resign the presidency but the immediate result was the rise of the radical right with Black, Manafort and Stone being formed as a lobbying/PR firm and the extreme right-wing oligarch Joseph Coors founding the Heritage Foundation, headed by Edwin Feulner, and the Committee for a Free Congress, headed by Paul Weyrich

 

     I left Washington, D.C. in 1979 and moved to Texas once I recognized the bizarre and dangerous direction that the conservative movement was coming to embrace.

 

    Thus, it came as a surprise three decades later when in 2012 I was contacted by Roger Stone who requested that I supply him with any material in my possession on President Lyndon Johnson. This came about because I had been the attorney for Billie Sol Estes, LBJ’s silent business and political partner, in Billie Sol’s quest in 1984 to obtain a grant of immunity from prosecution from the U.S. Department of Justice in order that he could tell what he knew about LBJ crimes that took place before and during his presidency.

 

     Stone’s praise-worthy best-selling book, The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ, was published in 2013.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Man-Who-Killed-Kennedy-Against/dp/1629144894/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1503279918&sr=8-1&keywords=the+man+who+killed+kennedy

 

     Stone’s book credits me as a primary source of information. For example, on page 214, he writes, “I did have access and the full cooperation of Billie Sol Estes’ personal attorney Douglas Caddy who supplied interviews, source materials and remembrances for this book.”

 

http://home.earthlink.net/~sixthfloor/estes.htm

 

     It was because of my contribution of information in 2012 to Stone’s JFK book that when Schlanger asked me in January 2016 to arrange for him to meet Stone I was able to do so.

 

SELECTED RELEVANT EMAILS

 

     I provided FBI Director Comey and Special Counsel Mueller with a large number of emails that accompanied my letters to them. Here are excerpts from a few of these:

 

     In an email of Feb. 20, 2016, Stone wrote me: “Thanks for connecting me with Harley Schlanger – he is a great guy and shares our goals. I think we hit it off. I have a back channel to Trump and we are fighting the globalists.”

 

     In email of May 5, 2016, Schlanger wrote me: “I have continued to work with Roger. He and I have done three radio interviews together, and I have set up several more for him, with my contacts. Obviously, he has played quite a brilliant role in the Trump campaign, outflanking completely the lead-footed GOP establishment. While I find some of what Trump says to be good, I’m still and not sure what a Trump presidency would mean.”

 

     In an email of July 25, 2016, to Schlanger, I wrote after the GOP presidential convention: “Well, you picked an exciting time in Germany to find a new home there. On the other hand, the U.S. as you can see from afar, is an exciting place, too, these days as both major parties are melting down. Neither candidate is worth a damn.

 

“After watching Trump's acceptance speech, I realized what a dangerous and hypocritical man he is. He plans to turn domestic and foreign policy over to his VP Pence and spend his time making ‘America Great Again,’ which means acting out his narcissism on steroids. I have lost all respect for Roger Stone and realize my belief that he had changed from his sociopathic past was misplaced.

 

“Roger and his business partner Paul Manafort will undergo minute media and governmental scrutiny in the coming weeks for their past political and business dealings. Manafort is increasingly linked to being a back door to Putin for the Trump campaign. The whole scandal will get radioactive if the Intelligence agencies produce evidence of a tie there.”

 

FINAL THOUGHTS

 

     I have no regrets in writing Comey and Mueller even though I have been regularly harassed for so doing by private detectives employed by an unknown person of interest:

 

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24039-message-to-the-private-detectives-harassing-me/

 

     I had a duty to do so because the on-going investigation is into felonious criminal activity. Here is the definition of Misprision of a Felony, which is applicable in my situation and governs my actions:

 

18 U.S. Code § 4 - Misprision of felony

§ 4.  Misprision of felony

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 684; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(G), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

 

      I do not know whether my two letters will lead or have already led to an investigation by Special Counsel Mueller. Only time will tell. However, this entire venture will merit an interesting chapter in my forthcoming autobiography:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Being-There-Eye-Witness-History/dp/1634241142/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1503340695&sr=1-1&keywords=Douglas+Caddy

[End]

 

 

 

 

 

This thread is so important and relevant.

Doug's prediction of the Stone / Manafort legal situation has come to fruition in spades:

“Roger and his business partner Paul Manafort will undergo minute media and governmental scrutiny in the coming weeks for their past political and business dealings. Manafort is increasingly linked to being a back door to Putin for the Trump campaign. The whole scandal will get radioactive if the Intelligence agencies produce evidence of a tie there.”

 

 

[Cliff Varnell]

2 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

The CIA, Amazon, Bezos and the Washington Post : An Exchange with Executive Editor Martin Baron - Huffpo

Coup de ta  

I'm happy to argue, but in the interest of not getting into some sort of article linking feud, I won't post another link unless I have something constructive to say. (ie. to avoid 50 pages of you and I going back & forth with competing linked articles.) Not accusing, just FYI.

 

Fair enough.  We can duel with 1980's punk rock vids instead.  The Circle Jerks' "Coup D'Etat" is a strong choice.  I was the punk rock promoter in Reno '79-82, and The Jerks were the last show I put on.  I was also in attendance for their notorious, incredibly violent Mabuhay Gardens show in March of 1980.  In the context of our discussion, "Coup D'Etat" is tough to top.

The Soft Boys weren't a punk rock band, but this song is a punk rock masterpiece.  The Circle Jerks and the Replacements covered it, but nothing beats the original.

 

Edited February 21, 2019 by Cliff Varnell

[James DiEugenio]

11 hours ago, Rob Couteau said:

During the primary debates she referred to war criminal Henry Kissinger as her "mentor." That tells you all you need to know about how despicable she is.

Rob, thanks. That is one I didn't know about.  

Kissinger is a guy who has to be the post war champion of genocides: East Timor, Bangladesh, and Cambodia.  Although Cambodia gets the most attention, the one in East Pakistan (Bangladesh) is really striking.  Because in that one, the American chief counsel got pretty much his whole staff to sign onto a memo asking Kissinger to intervene in the mass atrocity that was occurring.  If I recall correctly, Archer Blood got something like 21 signatures--which is really something since they all knew they were risking reprimand.

Not only did Kissinger turn down the request, he and Nixon actually sent planes to West Pakistan to aid the genocide!!  (Gary Bass, The Blood Telegram)

I guess that mentorship helped her in the Libya debacle.

 

Edited February 21, 2019 by James DiEugenio