Jump to content
The Education Forum

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


Recommended Posts

The Kennedy assassination features two competing narratives derived from the same dataset: one holds that Oswald was a troubled loser with delusions of grandeur who decided to take out a President, while the other holds that Oswald was a low level intelligence operative who was set up as the patsy.

What I have tried to point out, and Robert as well, is that “Russiagate” also features two competing narratives: one holds the Trump campaign colluded with Russian officials in a successful bid to swing the 2016 election, while the other holds that persons in the FBI, Justice Dept, and hired by the Clinton campaign/DNC ran an operation designed to make it look like the Trump campaign was tied in nefarious ways to Russia and thus the true campaign meddling was a domestic affair.

Point being: past all the bluster and finger-pointing, the weight of the existing evidence and documented events favours the second narrative - as crazy as that must sound. Yes, there has been a lot of “lying”, as should be expected with such a snake-pit of compromised political operatives, but a fair amount of the “lies” documented by Mueller are inconsequential: I.e. Roger Stone said he spoke with someone on the phone, but it was established the communication was in fact via both phone and email. That counts as a lie. Source A says a meeting seven months previous happened on a Tuesday, but in fact it happened on a Thursday - that counts as a lie.

It does appear that an elected president has come under domestic attack from “deep state” forces based in part on foreign policies (I.e. improve relations with Russia) they disagree with. That may sound extreme or absurd - because it’s Trump after all - but that is what happened to JFK, and probably Nixon. Maybe Carter as well.

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

Top Posters In This Topic

58 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

It does appear that an elected president has come under domestic attack from “deep state” forces based in part on foreign policies (I.e. improve relations with Russia) they disagree with. That may sound extreme or absurd - because it’s Trump after all - but that is what happened to JFK, and probably Nixon. Maybe Carter as well.

I think I am done arguing with Andrew so I'll add to your comment.

I agree that the "deep state" attempt to get rid of Trump likely has an origin in foreign policy differences. At this point in history, Russia is the convenient protagonist to maintain the constant state of tension that the "deep state" relies upon, just like Carter was not supposed to act conciliatory towards the USSR and/or Iran, or Nixon and China, or JFK and Vietnam.  Sempre Gladio (Gladio II.)

The necessity of the deep state's reliance on a long term Gladio Strategy is completely mundane. The CIA rat lines (drugs, humans, guns)  dry up and money stops flowing when the battles stop. Heroin shipments out of the Golden Triangle subside fall off if their is no Vietnam war. Arms sales to Afghani freedom fighters (the Taliban) fall off if Carter convinces the Russians to leave Afghanistan. It's easier to traffic Syrian or Bosnian kids if their parents were killed in a local war.

 

 

 

 

 

Annotation 2019-02-26 150207.jpg

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

The Kennedy assassination features two competing narratives derived from the same dataset: one holds that Oswald was a troubled loser with delusions of grandeur who decided to take out a President, while the other holds that Oswald was a low level intelligence operative who was set up as the patsy.

What I have tried to point out, and Robert as well, is that “Russiagate” also features two competing narratives: one holds the Trump campaign colluded with Russian officials in a successful bid to swing the 2016 election, while the other holds that persons in the FBI, Justice Dept, and hired by the Clinton campaign/DNC ran an operation designed to make it look like the Trump campaign was tied in nefarious ways to Russia and thus the true campaign meddling was a domestic affair.

 

Ah ha!  So it was Hillary who maneuvered all those Trump people to met with Russians and then lie about those meetings?

Hillary set-up Manafort to hand over 75 pages of polling data to a Kremlin operative.

Wicked!

Quote

Point being: past all the bluster and finger-pointing, the weight of the existing evidence and documented events favours the second narrative - as crazy as that must sound. Yes, there has been a lot of “lying”, as should be expected with such a snake-pit of compromised political operatives, but a fair amount of the “lies” documented by Mueller are inconsequential:

You have no idea how consequential all those lies were.

Quote

I.e. Roger Stone said he spoke with someone on the phone, but it was established the communication was in fact via both phone and email. That counts as a lie. Source A says a meeting seven months previous happened on a Tuesday, but in fact it happened on a Thursday - that counts as a lie.

It does appear that an elected president has come under domestic attack from “deep state” forces based in part on foreign policies (I.e. improve relations with Russia) they disagree with. That may sound extreme or absurd - because it’s Trump after all - but that is what happened to JFK, and probably Nixon. Maybe Carter as well.

Trump spent the entire campaign plumping for improved ties with Russia, so the "deep state" conspired to destroy him by bringing negative news coverage down on Hillary, thus delivering the election to Trump.

Makes as much sense as the rest of the nonsense you guys push...

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

The Kennedy assassination features two competing narratives derived from the same dataset: one holds that Oswald was a troubled loser with delusions of grandeur who decided to take out a President, while the other holds that Oswald was a low level intelligence operative who was set up as the patsy.

What I have tried to point out, and Robert as well, is that “Russiagate” also features two competing narratives: one holds the Trump campaign colluded with Russian officials in a successful bid to swing the 2016 election, while the other holds that persons in the FBI, Justice Dept, and hired by the Clinton campaign/DNC ran an operation designed to make it look like the Trump campaign was tied in nefarious ways to Russia and thus the true campaign meddling was a domestic affair.

Point being: past all the bluster and finger-pointing, the weight of the existing evidence and documented events favours the second narrative - as crazy as that must sound. Yes, there has been a lot of “lying”, as should be expected with such a snake-pit of compromised political operatives, but a fair amount of the “lies” documented by Mueller are inconsequential: I.e. Roger Stone said he spoke with someone on the phone, but it was established the communication was in fact via both phone and email. That counts as a lie. Source A says a meeting seven months previous happened on a Tuesday, but in fact it happened on a Thursday - that counts as a lie.

It does appear that an elected president has come under domestic attack from “deep state” forces based in part on foreign policies (I.e. improve relations with Russia) they disagree with. That may sound extreme or absurd - because it’s Trump after all - but that is what happened to JFK, and probably Nixon. Maybe Carter as well.

There are not two competing narratives on Trump Russia. Nobody serious believes or espouses your second narrative, at least nobody living outside the Dark Web.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:

I think I am done arguing with Andrew so I'll add to your comment.

I agree that the "deep state" attempt to get rid of Trump likely has an origin in foreign policy differences. At this point in history, Russia is the convenient protagonist to maintain the constant state of tension that the "deep state" relies upon, just like Carter was not supposed to act conciliatory towards the USSR and/or Iran, or Nixon and China, or JFK and Vietnam.  Sempre Gladio (Gladio II.)

The necessity of the deep state's reliance on a long term Gladio Strategy is completely mundane. The CIA rat lines (drugs, humans, guns)  dry up and money stops flowing when the battles stop. Heroin shipments out of the Golden Triangle subside fall off if their is no Vietnam war. Arms sales to Afghani freedom fighters (the Taliban) fall off if Carter convinces the Russians to leave Afghanistan. It's easier to traffic Syrian or Bosnian kids if their parents were killed in a local war.

 

 

 

 

 

Annotation 2019-02-26 150207.jpg

I'd quit too, were I you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Broadly relevant to this thread, found in the CIA Declassified Document Reading Room.

Here is a nice article about a friendly old spy who retired and spent his time publishing a newsletter. I believe the article is from the Washington Post.

Global Private Eye Dwells In Constant Air of Mystery

Reading the article, Ulius Amoss sounds like the kind of guy you would want to have a beer with.

The Spartacus bio kind of paints a different picture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The wages of Christopher Steele:

 

https://newrepublic.com/article/153036/maria-butina-profile-wasnt-russian-spy

The reason I find this article interesting is its by somebody who actually knows something about the case.  I never read anything like this in the so called liberal blogopsphere.  I mean this is Russia Gate?  Manafort and his foreign lobbying, this girl trying to start an NRA in Russia?

Again, I will wait for the Mueller Report and I will read it. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got to tell you, after hearing Michael Cohen's testimony -- all of which the Southern District of New York can corroborate -- I'm coming around. No way somebody of the President's honesty and integrity would have colluded with Russia to win the election. It's just so out of character for him.

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

The wages of Christopher Steele:

 

https://newrepublic.com/article/153036/maria-butina-profile-wasnt-russian-spy

The reason I find this article interesting is its by somebody who actually knows something about the case.  I never read anything like this in the so called liberal blogopsphere.  I mean this is Russia Gate?  Manafort and his foreign lobbying, this girl trying to start an NRA in Russia?

Again, I will wait for the Mueller Report and I will read it. 

 

 

 

As far as whether this is Russia Gate, here's a key line from the piece:

 

According to a source close to the Mueller investigation, the special counsel’s office had declined to pursue the case, even though it would have clearly fit under its mandate.


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/26/2019 at 12:26 PM, Cliff Varnell said:

set-up Manafort to hand over 75 pages of polling data to a Kremlin operative.

The “Kremlin operative” was also Manafort’s business partner in Ukraine, since 2005. There’s nothing sinister about meeting with one’s long-term business partner, or even sinister about sharing polling data since their business was a political consultancy. The polling data has been described as mostly publicly available information mixed with some data private to the Trump campaign. There’s nothing “sensitive” or secret about it.

The other thing about this alleged “operative” is, before joining Manafort’s firm, he worked for almost ten years, in Moscow, at the International Republican Institute. The IRI is a “democracy promotion” organization, financed by the State Department, USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). (See http://cepr.net/publications/op-eds-columns/international-republican-institute-not-promoting-democracy).

Here’s Philip Agee on how the IRI functions as part of the NED network, and how these organizations link with the CIA. -  http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4332.htm

How is it possible the IRI would hire and keep for almost ten years, and he apparently ran the Moscow office for the last four years, a man who FBI agents “assess” has “ties” to the GRU (according to Mueller)?  Is it not a major scandal and intelligence failing which no one is talking about?  Or perhaps the assessment of “ties”  is a lot less than what Mueller is insinuating (and sharing the insinuation publicly). Why would this “operative” after twenty years of enjoying a front-row seat watching USAID/NED activity in Russia and then participating in the effort to turn Ukraine to the EU, followed by his boss/business partner becoming the campaign chief to a US presidential candidate -this is an incredible position for a presumed undercover intelligence operative and that is when he supposedly decides to out himself as a GRU agent to Manafort to propose some kind of quid pro quo between Russia and Trump  at an August 2016 meeting. That’s what Mueller’s investigation is insinuating, or inferring. It appears logically deficient.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

BTW, if Cohen was honest, and it would be pretty stupid if he was not, then he harpooned two parts of the Steele Dossier:

The Golden Shower and the Prague meet up.

I have to say, he made the GOP look pretty silly.

Cohen perjured himself at least 6 times.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/could-michael-cohen-be-prosecuted-for-committing-perjury-again

Even CNN caught one of his lies.

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/02/27/cnns-tapper-all-of-our-reporting-says-cohen-not-telling-the-truth-he-did-want-a-white-house-job/

I thought I saw a tweet go by that said perjury charges will be filed.

Plus - He "colluded" with Adam Schiff (D) California before the hearing.

and,

Apparently he is saying that Lanny Davis is providing legal services pro-bono. (Lanny is looking at being charged with the same foreign lobbyist activities as Manafort. His False Attestation Form is in the public domain.)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

Cohen perjured himself at least 6 times.

Only if you swallow what Jim "Pedophile Protector" Jordan says.

Quote

Any chance yer interested in buying a bridge?  I have an orange one I can get you a deal on.

Quote

Plus - He "colluded" with Adam Schiff (D) California before the hearing.

and,

Apparently he is saying that Lanny Davis is providing legal services pro-bono. (Lanny is looking at being charged with the same foreign lobbyist activities as Manafort. His False Attestation Form is in the public domain.)

 

 

None of Cohen's key assertions were challenged.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
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...