Jump to content
The Education Forum

Trump and the Unspeakable?


Recommended Posts

Just now, Cliff Varnell said:

I'm not disputing the impact Putin/Assange had on the election.

I'm arguing that GOP voter suppression/FBI interference had a bigger impact.

Why don't you wait for an answer before you get the sads?

 

Cliff,

 

Thanks for your reply, but I thought I'd directed the question and the observation to Paul Brancato.

Maybe I pushed the wrong button (i.e., yours), or something.

 

My bad.

 

--  T.G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

9 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Cliff,

 

Thanks for your reply, but I thought I'd directed the question and the observation to Paul Brancato.

Maybe I pushed the wrong button (i.e., yours), or something.

 

My bad.

 

--  T.G.

No, no!  Obviously you were responding to Paul.

MY bad. 

That's what I get for posting before coffee..,<smiley>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Cliff,

 

I think it's been shown that the original overall plan behind all of the "active measures" employed by the Ruskies before the election was B&D, but was later switched to C ("vote Trump").

Incorporating "anyone but Hillary" all along, of course.

 

--  T.G.

 

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

No, no!  Obviously you were responding to Paul.

MY bad. 

That's what I get for posting before coffee..,<smiley>

 

It's all good, Comrade.

Remember to put the vodka in.

 

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

A diversion in two ways - consumes too much media time, but more importantly a diversion from the voter suppression that is all too real. 

Agreed.  We have bigger problems than Russian interference, as egregious as that may be.

The bible-thumpers are making their big play for an American Theocracy.

Trump can be the most corrupt degenerate of all time and the bible-thumpers will back him still.

He is the tip of the Dominionist spear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

You obviously don't know who Mc Govern is,

Kirk, you shouldn't be so quick to categorize someone. I know very well who McGovern was--my younger brother, who eventually became a law partner of Ted Sorensen, headed New Jersey for McGovern. My father was a Special Agent in the Treasury Department, and was involved in the conviction of members of Congress, Mayors and other politicos in New Jersey in the 1970's. I also attended the Watergate trial in Washington. I'm pretty well versed in the people you mention, and I am particularly well read on John Kennedy's life, administration and death. As I said to Paul , my comment was unsuccessful in trying to abstract my concept of the structural similarities between Watergate and the current Trump investigations. That is no reason to assume anything beyond what I proposed as a thought experiment. You extrapolated qualities and sentiments that had no basis in my post.

 Emotional responses , rather than an abstract visualization of the similarity, made up the responses - yours included. If the FBI tapped Trump Tower based on  information from the DNC, and presented that information to the FISA Court for a warrant, it is similar to the break-in of the Watergate complex, which was also an illegal action against a candidate in a presidential election, likely involving an Intelligence Agency. In this scenario, Hillary = Nixon and Trump = McGovern, for the "modern day Watergate" analogy. I also implied that although  it pained me to even place JFK and Trump in the same sentence,  the idea that both were at odds with the Intelligence Agencies of the Government at the time of their inauguration is a fact. Di Genova suggested (in the link I provided) that Trump was "set up" by the FBI to fail and that action reminded me of the efforts Nixon made (with Eisenhower's approval apparently), to overthrow Castro and that when he wasn't elected in 1960, the relevant Intelligence Agency "set up" the Bay of Pigs to fail for JFK.

These  were  analogous suggestions as a way to step back and see either a pattern or an abstract structure in both administrations. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Russia may be a diversion to get the old guard back in charge. If I am right, Trump will be taken out be the media, before he serves 2 years; and we may end-up with 10 Years of Pence.

I hold the same revulsion for Trump that many people do. But there is no getting around the fact that most politicians and people are multi faceted, we/they wear different hats. One hat that Trump says he wears is that of the deep-state disruptor.

Looks to me like The Deep State is divided into 3 factions.

There are elements devoted to corporate interests -- Globalists.

There are elements devoted to the institution itself -- Institutionalists.

There are elements devoted to the evangelical Khristian Kaucasian Kaliphate, the GOP right wing -- Dominionists.

The Institutionalists are pissed at Trump because he's incredibly incompetent.

The Globalists are cool with Trump because he cut their taxes, and they know they can keep his anti-trade impulses bottled up.

The Dominionists love the guy -- he's their Dear Leader.

These treason weasels are relentless.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-bishop-disability-voters_us_5af5b085e4b0e57cd9f9042f

Quote

I see some evidence of that being true. His recent statements regarding Big Pharma is hugely important. 

Look again.  Big Pharma loved the announcement.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-pharma-drug-prices_us_5af5920de4b032b10bf9eaa7

 

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Agreed.  We have bigger problems than Russian interference, as egregious as that may be.

The bible-thumpers are making their big play for an American Theocracy.

Trump can be the most corrupt degenerate of all time and the bible-thumpers will back him still.

He is the tip of the Dominionist spear.

 

Cliff,

 

What I think you and a lot of other people need to realize is that Soviet/Russian "active measures" (beginning with "Operation Trust" in 1921) have been quite skillfully waged against the West (and against us, in particular, since around 1935, iirc) for over ninety years now, and that their "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations have been artfully interwoven with them since 1958 (i.e., with "Operation Boomerang," the dispatching of the fake double agent Polyakov to the U.S.).

What you will hopefully also come to eventually realize are the cumulative deleterious effects that these hydra-headed Soviet/Russian counterintelligence operations have had on our body politic and our society in general (e.g., the rise of legions of Tin Foil Hat Wearing Conspiracy Theorists, the concomitant loss of confidence in our institutions, the demise of fact-checking with reputable sources, the cynicism, "The Horror, The Horror," the hearts of darkness if you will, etc, etc), all magically working together in a synergistic sort-of-way to, among other things, create opportunistic situations to be taken advantage of. 

 

As evidenced, for example, by the "fruition" of Trump's being installed as a result of ... gasp ... the FSB/GRU - influenced "vote" on November 8, and, of course, the Electoral College's not doing its Constitution-required job to protect us from having a madman/potential tyrant become our president through the election process.

 

 

--  T.G.

 

 

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Robert Harper said:

 the relevant Intelligence Agency "set up" the Bay of Pigs to fail for JFK.

Factually incorrect.

Planning for the Bay of Pigs was taken over by Dean Rusk and McGeorge Bundy soon after Kennedy took office.

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v10/d64

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Cliff,

 

What I think you need to realize is that Soviet/Russian "active measures" (beginning with "Operation Trust" in 1921) have been quite skillfully waged against the West (and against us, in particular, since around 1935, iirc) for over ninety years now, and that their "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations have been artfully interwoven with those since 1958 (i.e., with "Operation Boomerang," the dispatching of the fake double agent Polyakov to the U.S.).

What you also come to realize are the cumulative deleterious effects the these hydra-headed Soviet/Russian counterintelligence operations have had on our body politic and our society in general (the rise of legions of Tin Foil Hat Wearing Conspiracy Theorists, the concomitant loss of confidence in our institutions, the demise of fact-checking with reputable sources, the cynicism, "The Horror, The Horror," the hearts of darkness, etc, etc), all magically working together in a synergistic sort-of-way to create opportunistic situations to be taken advantage of, like November 8, 2016, for example. 

 

--  T.G.

The West has been conducting these operations for the same time period.

Yeah, Putin punked America in 2016.  Buck up,, snowflakes.

We've got bigger devils homegrown.

The Khristian Kaucasian Kaliphate loves Putin, btw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Factually incorrect.

One link does not a theory make. There are many writings on the various intentions behind the Bay of Pigs. To say that Rusk and Bundy "ran" the operation is naive, but I don't expect you to think so. We'll just leave your comment as it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Robert Harper said:

One link does not a theory make.

It's not a theory.

It's a historical fact.

Bundy:

I have been a skeptic about Bissellʼs operation, but now I think we are on the edge of a good answer. I also think that Bissell and Hawkins have done an honorable job of meeting the proper criticisms and cautions of the Department of State.

1 minute ago, Robert Harper said:

There are many writings on the various intentions behind the Bay of Pigs. To say that Rusk and Bundy "ran" the operation is naive, but I don't expect you to think so. We'll just leave your comment as it is.

You mis-quoted me.

"Ran" is your language, not mine.

They took over the planning.

It was Bundy's plan to conduct a false flag attack on Castro's air force two days before the invasion.

You're denying this?

You're denying that Kennedy cut down the false flag B26s from 16 to 8?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thomas Graves said:


So, Paul, you don't think the Russian's hacking of DNC's and Podesta's emails (and giving them to Putin's lackey Assange to distribute), and the divisive fake news and "ads" they placed on social media, and the way they targeted individual viewers of social media with said ads and fake news, etc, etc, etc, had much of an effect in, first, making sure that Hillary didn't win, and second, when they realized it was actually do-able, "pivoting" away from "Anyone But Clinton" to actively trying to help Russian mobbed-up, blackmail-able Trump win?

 

If not, I guess you still don't understand the concept of "active measures" and "strategic deception" counterintelligence operations.

 

(No, Paul, waged against us not by your bugbear, the evil, evil CIA, but by the Soviets/Russians for a very long time, indeed, now...)

 

Sad.  Very sad.

 


--  T.G.

 

 

Tommy - I understand far more than your posts give me credit for. If I leave something unsaid to make my point you need not assume it was from ignorance. I don’t deny what you say, but like Cliff I see Russia meddling in a broader context. Yes they drive wedges in our body politic, which proves the wider point that we are indeed a nation divided by our own history. Russia, with the very clear cooperation of Americans, targeted specific voter blocks in mid western states, and swung an election for Trump. The next two elections should make things much clearer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Looks to me like The Deep State is divided into 3 factions.

There are elements devoted to corporate interests -- Globalists.

There are elements devoted to the institution itself -- Institutionalists.

There are elements devoted to the evangelical Khristian Kaucasian Kaliphate, the GOP right wing -- Dominionists.

The Institutionalists are pissed at Trump because he's incredibly incompetent.

The Globalists are cool with Trump because he cut their taxes, and they know they can keep his anti-trade impulses bottled up.

The Dominionists love the guy -- he's their Dear Leader.

These treason weasels are relentless.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-bishop-disability-voters_us_5af5b085e4b0e57cd9f9042f

Look again.  Big Pharma loved the announcement.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-pharma-drug-prices_us_5af5920de4b032b10bf9eaa7

 

I think your analysis of today’s ‘deep state’. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

 

The West has been conducting these operations for the same time period.

 

 

The West?  

 

Oh, okay, Cliff.  Hmm.  When did Litzi Friedmann recruit Philby?  1934 or so?

And wasn't it Arnold Deutch who recruited Burgess, Maclean, et. al. at Cambridge?  And quite early on, too?

 

Oh yeah, and there was that Roger Hollis fellow at Oxford (but probably recruited by Sorge in China back in the day) .....

 

Just to name a few in your The (Early) West.

 

 

But as regards the Soviets/Russians "Main Enemy" (the good old U.S.A.) ... uhh ...

 

"Operation Trust" (shortly followed by other "active measures" counterintelligence operations) was launched 20 years before even the Office of Security Services' predecessor, the Office of the Coordination of Information, was founded, Cliff.

And the Soviets were lightyears ahead of us in waging highly successful "strategic deception" (aka "operational deception") counterintelligence ops (e.g., 1958 "Operation Boomerang," mentioned above, and Yuri Nosenko's January 1964 "defection" to the U.S.).

 

All in all, the Soviets/Russians had a tremendous head start on our intelligence services and, generally speaking, have run circles around the OSS/CIA and whatever from day one.

Of course, the fact that during much of that time our FBI was run by a director who was very territorial, paranoiac, envious, vain, and gullible (e.g., his reliance on Fedora and Polyakov and his disbelieving of pre mid-1964 Golitsyn) didn't help much.

 

Sounds as though you need to read Bagley's "Spy Wars" and "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," and Riebling's "Wedge," Cliff.

 

--  T.G.

 

 

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...