Jump to content
The Education Forum

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


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

I think the insider/outsider perspective is of some value in assisting to see the current moment clearly. It is one reason why this discussion is not entirely off-topic on this board.

To say the FBI “threw” the election to Trump is implying intent - I.e. Comey wanted Trump to win. That is obviously not accurate, and continuing to frame discussion that way leads to faulty premises.

The faulty premises are all yours.

There may have been an FBI conspiracy involving the 2016 election. But not the one you think.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/06/18/there-may-have-been-an-fbi-conspiracy-involving-the-2016-election-but-not-the-one-you-think/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.3e44a05d7c71

The Real F.B.I. Election Culprit

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/13/opinion/trump-peter-strzok-fbi-election.html

The following was written before the election:

'The FBI is Trumpland': anti-Clinton atmosphere spurred leaking, sources say

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/03/fbi-leaks-hillary-clinton-james-comey-donald-trump

Another pre-election article:

Meet Donald Trump’s Top FBI Fanboy

https://www.thedailybeast.com/meet-donald-trumps-top-fbi-fanboy?source=twitter&via=desktop

Quote

Comey implied in the Colbert interview that his hand was forced and officially releasing the information was the least worst option available. Unfortunately, the Democratic candidate had plenty of skeletons in the closet and huge negatives among the voters, and so was vulnerable to exactly what happened.

Trump had even more skeletons in the closet, had even bigger negatives among the voters, and was under FBI investigation for conspiring with the Russians.  But that's not what the FBI and the mainstream media focused on during the last 11 days of the election.

The last 11 days was a non-stop anti-Clinton barrage.

Quote

The anti-Russia propaganda is cooked up in think tanks like the Atlantic Council, Brookings, Chatham House, etc,  then repeated uncritically in the major media outlets, combined with very nasty ad hominem attacks.

How much American cable news do you watch, Jeff?

Donald Trump and his inner circle have lied about the 100+ contacts they've had with Russian assets during the campaign and the transition.

Trump lied about seeking a Trump Tower in Moscow and conspired with his son to lie about the New York Trump Tower meeting with a half-dozen Russians.  When these lies were exposed and reported upon in the mainstream media -- we're supposed to believe it was all planted by the Atlantic Council?

Quote

It is a proven demonization strategy which has played out in much the same fashion at least five times in the past quarter century. The focus on Russia is promoting paranoid delusions similar to Cold War theories of Soviet conspiracies, and is being used in efforts to censor or marginalize certain political viewpoints, particularly in social media.

The Steele information, generally agreed to have been unverified opposition research, was improperly used to secure a FISA warrant in October 2016 which, in effect, put the entire Trump campaign subject to the full dragnet of NSA capabilities. That is probably the most serious violation of Constitutional rights and the integrity of the electoral system in this situation, and it follows on the Snowden revelations of the massive illegal spying programs themselves.

According to Edward Snowden it should have taken the FBI a half hour to determine that the Clinton e-mails in the possession of sex pervert Anthony Weiner were duplicates of what they'd already examined.

They took 8 days, instead, and effectively threw the election to Trump.

 

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

9 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

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.)

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.

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.

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

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

 

 

 

Edited by Robert Wheeler
link to OIG report added
Link to post
Share on other sites

 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.


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Kirk Gallaway
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

 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.


 

  •  

Sanders would be President today, as long as he did not pick Hillary as VP. #loangunmenstrikesagain

Link to post
Share on other sites

Color Coded Summary Narratives

The MSM’s Narrative

  • Oswald Acted Alone.
  • There was No Deep State.
  • There is No Deep State.
  • Trump is Guilty

The Trump Defender Narrative

  • Oswald Did Not Act Alone
  • There was a Deep State.
  • There is a Deep State.
  • Trump was Framed.

The Internally Inconsistent JFK Assassination Forum Narrative

  • Oswald Did Not Act Alone
  • There was a Deep State.
  • There is No Deep State.
  • Trump is Guilty
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Rob Couteau
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...