Jump to content
The Education Forum

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


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

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

You're right Andrew. Jim might be surprised at how much he may be strange bed fellows with Kissinger as Kissinger has always cozied up to autocrats like Pinochet and Putin.  I' remember statements Kissinger made as to an understanding  that Russia should have free reign to meddle with their previous satellites. And if you ask any native peoples from previous Russian satellites with maybe one or two country exceptions, no one remembers that relationship  fondly at all.

As for Kissinger try to pal up with H. Clinton and Trump, it's the same reason Scaramucci and Banon still hang around after being fired. They see an empty vessel in Trump and hope they can be the chief influence again, when he fires another of his appointments.  Kissinger was once on the top of the world in his field and would do anything to be a power behind the throne again, even at what, 95?.

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

Top Posters In This Topic

9 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

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?

Joe, you don't see the difference?

HRC is a Democrat.  Secondly, Trump does not appear to have followed Kissinger nearly as often as HRC.

It would have been like JFK listening to Foster Dulles.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Rob Couteau said:

RC: "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."

 

Thanks for posting that Rob.

That is one of the most inspiring, uncensored, anti MSM comments I have seen in a presidential debate.

No wonder the DNC wanted to limit the debates and hold them at odd hours.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

You're right Andrew. Jim might be surprised at how much he may be strange bed fellows with Kissinger as Kissinger has always cozied up to autocrats like Pinochet and Putin.  I' remember statements Kissinger made as to an understanding  that Russia should have free reign to meddle with their previous satellites. And if you ask any native peoples from previous Russian satellites with maybe one or two country exceptions, no one remembers that relationship  fondly at all.

As for Kissinger try to pal up with H. Clinton and Trump, it's the same reason Scaramucci and Banon still hang around after being fired. They see an empty vessel in Trump and hope they can be the chief influence again, when he fires another of his appointments.  Kissinger was once on the top of the world in his field and would do anything to be a power behind the throne again, even at what, 95?.

I remember watching that. Good for Bernie bringing that up!   But as I just said Jim. it's a bit more complicated, isn't it?

Apart from his past record.  Both you and Henry like Putin. Isn't that you're number one world issue, good relations with Putin/ Russia? That seems to be the one overriding issue I've always heard from you.

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, James DiEugenio said:

That is one of the most inspiring, uncensored, anti MSM comments I have seen in a presidential debate.

Indeed. I  thought he wiped the floor with her. And rightly so. In his very diplomatic way as well, minus all the smarmy talk and sneers of his opponent. Nothing personal, just the facts. The problem is the populace doesn't read books, has next to nothing of a serious political education, and worst of all gets all their "information" from the media. So someone like Bernie has to cram in all sorts of information into 60-second bytes, and even when he does such a spectaular job people either don't believe it or it flies too fast over their heads like a cruise missile. (Same could be said for getting the information out on the JFK case.) They will gang up on him in the debate and the meme will be "I'm not a socialist. I'm a capitalist." So far that has been said by Beto, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren, almost word for word, and Warren stood up and gave Trump a standing ovation during the SOTU address when he said America is not a socialist country and never will be one. It's pretty pathetic - and it's only February. lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On February 20, 2019 at 10:50 PM, Rob Couteau said:

RC:So far that has been said by Beto, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren, almost word for word, and Warren stood up and gave Trump a standing ovation during the SOTU address when he said America is not a socialist country and never will be one. It's pretty pathetic - and it's only February. lol.

Rob:

I knew about Beto.  I did not know about Harris and Warren stood up and applauded?! :help

The whole thing about AOC and Bernie and a few others is this: They have to widen the Overton Window.  That is how I see them.  After too many years of the spectrum being defined by the likes of the Bushes and Clintons, people like AOC and Bernie will allow us to expand the debate past the center and to the left again e.g. RFK etc.

Who the heck is advising Beto?  He must be planning to run for the senate next year.

 

BTW, can you give me the URL to Harris saying that.  I am preparing a critical essay on her.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rob, I wouldn't put any faith in whether they applaud for Capitalism or not, as they are running for office and most people don't understand that a lot of our economy  is already technically Socialist, unless you are hard core Bernie and that tag means a lot to you. It sort of like Beto talking alternative energy and yet being behind the fossil fuel industry. He can't not be behind oil because he's from Texas.

Elizabeth Warren was first from a business background. But her anti Wall Street rhetoric is actually every bit as strong as Bernie. I just don't see it though.

So someone like Bernie has to cram in all sorts of information into 60-second bytes, and even when he does such a spectaular job people either don't believe it or it flies too fast over their heads like a cruise missile

Hmm,  I think what made Bernie run so effective a campaign was the simplicity of his message. Middle class is getting burned, tax the rich, have free health care and education, cut defense. Most of the current Demo candidates have adopted some variation of that.

Bernie's getting old, but if a lot of young people flocked to him as Grandfatherly figure and defied all the experts, that would be fine with me. He's the one who first articulated it. Otherwise I'd like to see some younger faces with largely his new ideas.

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2019 at 11:34 PM, Rob Couteau said:

Indeed. I  thought he wiped the floor with her. And rightly so. In his very diplomatic way as well, minus all the smarmy talk and sneers of his opponent. Nothing personal, just the facts. The problem is the populace doesn't read books, has next to nothing of a serious political education, and worst of all gets all their "information" from the media. So someone like Bernie has to cram in all sorts of information into 60-second bytes, and even when he does such a spectaular job people either don't believe it or it flies too fast over their heads like a cruise missile. (Same could be said for getting the information out on the JFK case.) They will gang up on him in the debate and the meme will be "I'm not a socialist. I'm a capitalist." So far that has been said by Beto, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren, almost word for word, and

Warren stood up and gave Trump a standing ovation during the SOTU address when he said America is not a socialist country and never will be one.

It's pretty pathetic - and it's only February. lol.

Again, is this true about Warren?

What is going on here?

Are we Bernie platform backers being played here by the likes of Warren, Beto and Harris?

Are they "not" the Bernie policies leaning champions of the middle and poorer classes as they promote themselves to be? 

Rob, so true about the lack of informed knowledge and even interest in the true social, economic and political historical areas of study both nationally and internationally regarding the large majority percentage of our general populace.

I am not close at all to being adequately informed in this way myself, except to the point of at least recognizing and admitting this uninformed reality personally and the dangerous consequences of so many millions of my fellow Americans being "even less informed" and totally oblivious to their ignorance and of their manipulation by the largest funded propaganda machines so deeply embedded in our daily life, society and culture.

Rush Limbaugh gets into the heads of what ... 50 million Americans who listen to his obsessive 24/7  Democrat/Liberal = Boogie Man radio broadcast rants almost daily?

In Limbaugh's 30+ years of mass audience brainwashing with this one main message, he ( more than any other Republican party/policy promoting national audience propagandist ) has been so successful in this endeavor, that in most of rural America the words "Liberal",  "Democrat" and "Leftist" bring instant and extreme fear based revulsion, scorn and even hate in the minds of the majority of people in this geographic part of America towards those they feel have been infected with this liberal Democrat "Walking Dead" zombie level threatening virus.

At my youngest voting age way back during the 1972 presidential election, I remember sensing even then a mass manipulation going on with the Republicans constantly and hugely broadcasting this scary extreme message that "they" were the "Law & Order" party versus the young radicals rioting in the streets party with their almost commie ( with slightly longer side burns) candidate George McGovern portrayed as ready to unleash his violent law disrespecting and free love hippie horde base into the innocent home towns of America to rape, pillage and plunder!

I knew that Nixon and Mafia backed Agnew were the real crooked and corrupt law breakers (which was born out IN SPADES before their terms were even finished  )  and McGovern was the true law respecting and war hero candidate,  yet the huge Republican propaganda machine was so successful in imbuing this extremely scary and frightening alternate reality about the Democrats as dangerous law breaking and unpatriotic radicals, the election reflected this Democratic party boogie man fear with one of the greatest vote sweep disparities ever in a presidential election.

That many Americans were successfully duped into buying into the Nixon and Agnew as the more patriotic and law and order saviors myth ...  versus the true war hero and law abiding McGovern and Sargent Shriver reality.

I still to this day wonder if "any" of those who voted for Nixon and Agnew, mainly because of their self-promoted image as the "Law And Order" candidates, ever reflected on how duped and manipulated they were in believing this false image reality when the truth of Nixon's and Agnew's true deep corruption was exposed and proven beyond doubt.

I recently took a close look at the 2016 Presidential election voting tallies in Michigan by counties.

Out of 83 counties in the state of Michigan, Hillary Clinton won just ... 9 !!!

74 counties went for Trump by huge margins! 

But those 74 counties were all the smaller population and more rural ones.

Hillary took all the more populated counties with large black voter bases and those of the state capital and a few University towns.

I am mentioning this 2016 election vote reality in Michigan because to me it reflects similarities to the 1972 election in people voting their same 1972 type bias's, angers and fears which the likes of Republican party propagandist Rush Limbaugh incessantly keeps feeding them in our current times.

Sadly, we haven't changed much since 1972 in this regards imo.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to post
Share on other sites

JB: Rob, so true about the lack of informed knowledge and even interest in the true social, economic, political historical areas of study both nationally and internationally regarding the large majority percentage of our general populace.

The whole thing about 1972 was the "confiscation" theme by RMN.  

What people do not recall is what AOC so pungently reminded everyone about: from 1936-1980, the top marginal rate was 70 per cent or more.  Under Eisenhower it was about ninety per cent.  And the economy performed very well in the fifties up until about 1968.

The other thing is the tendency to equate socialism with communism.  My God, Adam Kampman is a Democratic Socialist. 

This is what I mean about the Overton Window.  People like Bernie, AOC, and a few others, have  an opportunity to broaden the political spectrum, which the right has controlled ever since the advent of Reagan with his silly, stupid supply side economics. And Joe is correct, the whole nutty Limbaugh operation had a lot to do with that.  Although he is not nearly as dominant today as he used to be back then.  The idea was to brainwash the working and middle classes into thinking that the GOP had their best interests at heart. Remember that whole thing about Phil Gramm and Dickie Flatt?  Gramm was probably the one Washington official who was most responsible for bringing on the crash of 2007-08.  The guy should have been a criminal suspect.  But Obama was not interested in that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

I think what made Bernie run so effective a campaign was the simplicity of his message. Middle class is getting burned, tax the rich, have free health care and education, cut defense. Most of the current Demo candidates have adopted some variation of that.

I think what you are saying is true. My point was that there are so many simpletons out there (as well as brainwashed rightwing fanatics) that even a simplified message will forever elude them. I was not critiquing Bernie or his performance - sorry if that wasn't clear. And he was effective in totally changing the conversation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I did not know about Harris and Warren stood up and applauded?!

Yeah, if you watch the video, at first she hesitates and then stands and applauds. The camera also zooms in on Bernie, who sits, scowls, and sort of shakes his head. There you have it - the wide divergence. You asked for something on Harris:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/430554-kamala-harris-i-am-not-a-democratic-socialist

There's also this on the overall trend among Dem candidates in this direction:

"Big Trend Among Democratic Presidential Candidates: Capitalism"
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/big-trend-among-2020-democratic-candidates-capitalism.html

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

Taxing the rich at much higher rates, Medicare for all are pretty mainstream positions, even among Trump’s base, despite efforts of the media to convince everyone they are radical notions.

Polling wise, you're right Andrew. But the Trump base were more often uninformed voters who were suspicious of "the government", watched Hannity and thought of the government as the "Deep state" . They were being duped by the richer guys like Trump, Hannity, Limbaugh  and  Lou Dobbs and  didn't make the equation that their Social Security checks and their medicare coverage was paid by guess who? The government,  you fools! If you're still too cool for the government, maybe you'd like to give your checks back!  Also now that some have been betrayed and  expected a tax refund to find out they're actually owe $10,000 in tax, they're starting to see that the Trump tax cuts weren't so great after all.

This is why all the talk about the government "deep state" is actually harmful, it's a common tool used by right wing interest to disenfranchise working people from getting the benefits they deserve. They're pretty easily fooled, and probably among the last to admit they've made a mistake. But I'm hoping as people are becoming more aware of these things, the public will get wise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Kamala Harris's father should run for president, he sounds a lot more honest than his daughter, whose stance on legalization has shifted with the winds of political expediency. This is how the story was reported in Jamaica:

http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/lead-stories/20190216/pot-smoking-joy-seekerus-presidential-hopeful-kamala-harris-faces

Edited by Rob Couteau
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

But the Trump base were more often uninformed voters

Not only uninformed, but we're racist too!

The next Democrat nominee for President should come up with a slogan that is better than "Vote for me you stupid Red Neck." 

  • The black voter turnout rate fell from 66.6% in 2012 to 59.6% in 2016.
  • On the lower turnout, 93% voted for Obama in 2012 and 88% voted for Hillary in 2016.
  • Within the black voter subset, men voted 87% for Obama and 80% for Hillary in 2016.

One of the best explanations I heard as to why black men were not enthusiastic about Hillary was that she reminded them of every old white lady teacher who ever told them they were not going to amount to anything.

Projecting smugness about their supposed superior intelligence does not win many votes in the towns between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh and neither does condescending speeches to crowds in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

If you ever look at the Services Agreement the DNC was forced to sign with the Hillary Campaign in September of 2015 (about), you can see why Bernie never had a chance. (At the very least, and not that I would have voted for him, he never came across to me as smug or condescending.)   

 

 

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...