Jump to content
The Education Forum

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


Recommended Posts

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.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.”

 

 

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

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 by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

"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.

 

Andrew McCarthy’s dissection of the Steele Dossier and its misuse in creating waves of suspicion directed against persons associated with the Trump administration  was published last summer. It received a lot of attention as it undercut many common assumptions, particularly as articulated through the mainstream media. McCarthy argued that the Steele Dossier relied heavily on hearsay evidence, largely unverified at the time it was used to secure a FISA warrant directed at Carter Page.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/carter-page-fisa-applications-fbi-steele-dossier/

This prompted a pushback of legal arguments in the press to counter McCarthy’s points, seekingt to portray the granting of the FISA warrant as normal and justified - including the reliance on hearsay:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/why-team-trump-wrong-about-carter-page-dossier-secret-warrant-n893666

former officials say the use of hearsay is common in warrant applications, because the FBI wants to tell the judge as much as possible about what is known about the target. No judge, however, would grant a surveillance warrant based entirely on hearsay…”

Here is a similar opinion, from a legal panel writing for The Daily Beast:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-would-have-been-derelict-not-to-use-the-steele-dossier-for-the-carter-page-fisa-warrant?ref=author

The reason why hearsay information is permitted in warrant applications is simple: it is hard enough for law enforcement to develop sources who can infiltrate criminal organizations or foreign threats to our national security.  If the FBI were required to not only learn of the information from its own sources but also confirm that information with the sub-sources, it would not be able to do its job.  Instead, the FBI is legally entitled to rely upon the assertions of a previously credible source, such as Steele, in relaying information from other sub-sources to whom the FBI does not have direct access.“

McCarthy argues that Steele is not, in fact, a “source”, rather a “purveyor” of collected information consisting mostly of second hand hearsay from unidentified persons. McCarthy argues the FBI was required to properly vet or  verify the information. The legal team writing for Daily Beast argue that verification is simply a technical matter:

Under FISA, ‘verification’ simply requires both the FBI and lawyers in the Department of Justice to verify that the facts as set forth in the affidavit are supported by evidence obtained as part of the investigation.”   

That is, under this technical standard, the hearsay evidence described in the warrant application needs to correspond with the obtained hearsay evidence as appears in the Steele Dossier. Then it is considered “verified”. The panel then argues that because the FBI asserts Steele is "credible", then the use of hearsay presented to the judges is "legally entitled".

This leads back to the reassurance that “no judge would grant a surveillance warrant based entirely on hearsay.” The claim is made  other evidence unrelated to the dossier corroborates the dossier’s main allegations (and) is sufficient to support a finding of probable cause. “ But this can be considered a very disingenuous argument, and I’ll follow up on that.

If interested in these issues, it is worthwhile reading McCarthy’s piece followed by the two rebuttals, and weigh the conflicting legal arguments yourself.

Here is a description of what was in the Steele Dossier at the time of the first FISA application:

https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/07/an-updated-trump-dossier-cheat-sheet-by-publius-tacitus.html#more

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It’s generally understood that Martin Luther King’s civil rights were grossly violated by an FBI-led surveillance regime generated by suspicion of communist infiltration conjured by King’s association with Stanley Levison. It was recognized as these abuses were uncovered that suspicion, in itself, could be subject to pre-existing bias or malicious intent, and could not stand as legal justification for violation of civil rights. That history informs consideration of how Trump campaign associate Carter Page became subject to a FISA warrant which permitted the FBI to engage in full electronic surveillance of him and his associates.

Representative Adam Schiff stressed that the FISA probable cause requirement, in the warrant application directed at Carter Page, was met by demonstrating four points: evidence of Russian election interference; Russian links to Trump campaign officials; Page’s history with Russian intelligence; Page’s suspicious activities in 2016.  The first two points have no direct connection to the targeted suspect, and the fourth point refers to the hearsay evidence as appears in the Steele Dossier.

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/ig/ig00/20180205/106838/hmtg-115-ig00-20180205-sd002.pdf

The third point refers to events from 2013. Carter Page had longstanding legitimate business activity in Russia tied to the energy industry. In 2013, he was in contact in the US with Russians who were, unknown to him, suspected espionage agents. He was interviewed by the FBI, and at no time was he described as under suspicion or uncooperative. This apparently benign activity will be later spun at the FISA court as “contact” with “Russian intelligence.”  This appears to be the sole “corroborating” evidence in addition to the Steele Dossier hearsay. McCarthy makes good case that it is, and nothing referred by Schiff infers secret as yet unrevealed information beyond the aforementioned four points.

FBI agent describes Page (Male1) in 2013, see page 13: http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/2015_0126_spyring2.pdf

McCarthy dissects Schiff’s House report:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/schiff-memo-russia-investigation-harms-democrats-more-than-helps-them/

Using online search engines, a simple search for Carter-Page-Russian-espionage-2013 will bring up dozens of mainstream media news stories which paint Page’s contacts in 2013 in the most sinister terms, when in fact the record is completely benign.

Schiff also claims that FISA was not used to spy on Trump or his campaign, but the allegations against Page are concerned with exactly the Trump campaign’s supposed Russian links, as confirmed by the fact two of the four points supporting probable cause have to do with these supposed links and the Trump campaign, not with Page.

It does appear that a warrant to conduct full surveillance on a US citizen was granted largely on the basis of hearsay evidence, and that there are ongoing efforts, not least in the mainstream media, to justify and normalize these practices. The issues are compounded by the fact the targeted individual had links to a then current presidential campaign, which may have been the true target of the surveillance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 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.

He may be her mentor, but he actively advises Trump, in and out of White House all the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

He may be her mentor, but he actively advises Trump, in and out of White House all the time.

Is this claim by Andrew Prutsok true?

If so, how can someone give Trump a thumbs up and Hillary Clinton a thumbs down for the same thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Is this claim by Andrew Prutsok true?

Kissinger, a longtime Putin confidant, sidles up to Trump

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-kissinger-russia-putin-232925

Did Henry Kissinger Say Donald Trump Is the ‘One True Leader’?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/henry-kissinger-trump-one-true-leader/

Henry Kissinger didn’t press Donald Trump to work with Russia to ‘box in’ China, institute says

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/2165108/henry-kissinger-didnt-press-donald-trump-work-russia-box-china

51 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

If so, how can someone give Trump a thumbs up and Hillary Clinton a thumbs down for the same thing?

Because these Trump apologists are naive and under-informed.

Hillary wouldn't have hired John Bolton or dropped out of the Iran nuke deal.  Under Trump we have both.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

Andrew McCarthy’s dissection of the Steele Dossier and its misuse in creating waves of suspicion directed against persons associated with the Trump administration  was published last summer. It received a lot of attention as it undercut many common assumptions, particularly as articulated through the mainstream media. McCarthy argued that the Steele Dossier relied heavily on hearsay evidence, largely unverified at the time it was used to secure a FISA warrant directed at Carter Page.

That isn't news.  Steele said the material was unverified.  The FISA judges were all Republican.  James Comey and Robert Mueller -- Republican.

To claim that these investigations are politically motivated is ridiculous.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

To say that there is a deep state coup against someone implies that underhanded stuff has been done to bring someone down.

Most of us know how that worked around JFK and LHO -- they blew JFK's brains out of his head, set a patsy up to take the fall, fabricated incriminating evidence, ignored or altered exculpatory evidence,  bullied, threatened, perhaps even killed, etc.

The only claim I've seen that anything like this has been the case in the current special counsel investigation of 2016 Russian meddling and collusion in the campaign, is claims by people that the Deep State used flimsy evidence to get a FISA warrant.  What part of these cases hinges on what James Comey, McCabe, Strozk or Page say (apart from potential obstruction)? I'd like to see evidence of how what the FBI did made Trump Jr., Kushner and Manafort meet with Russians to get dirt on Hillary Clinton? How did they make Roger Stone reach out to Guccifer 2.0 and Wikileaks about hacked Democratic emails? These are things the president's men did on their own. 

Also, I'd bet anything I could get my hands on that the president and his tower -- which is like little Moscow -- have been under fed surveillance since the 1980s, at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

He may be her mentor, but he actively advises Trump, in and out of White House all the time.

 

3 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

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.

 

Music was better when we all thought the Russians were going to drop a bomb on our heads at any time. In other news, we are down to 2 Monkees as Peter Tork has died.

Reminded me of The Meatmen song "1 Down 3 to Go."

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2019 at 12:58 PM, James DiEugenio said:

I guess that mentorship helped her in the Libya debacle

Jim, This was Bernie's response in the follow-up debate (link below): ""She talked about getting the approval or the support or the mentoring of Henry Kissinger," Bernie Sanders said. "Now, I find it kind of amazing, because I happen to believe that Henry Kissinger was one of the most destructive secretaries of state in the modern history of this country." (Link below.) Just imagine what the mentoring consisted of. Genocide 101. Overthrowing Democratically Elected Governments. Torture as an Effective Tool of Political Repression. Etc.

 

 

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...