Jump to content
The Education Forum

Mark Zaid, JFK and Trump


James DiEugenio
 Share

Recommended Posts

Robert Wheeler said: 

"If I understand what you are saying, the Blue Blooded Bush's considered the Kennedys "vulgar" because they were new money, and recent immigrants, and Catholic.

The Blue Blooded Bush's are now horrified by the exponentially outrageous vulgarity of the Trump family because their money is also new, they are also recent immigrants (none of Trumps grandparents were born in the USA), and at a total disregard for proper "breeding", even allow family members to marry Jews and Slavs. "

Exactly, Robert. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, Douglas Caddy said:

[An article about two courageous lawyers and their patriotic client]

Lawyer for Ukraine whistleblower sends White House cease and desist

From the article: In his letter, Bakaj cites Trump's recent comments to reporters that they'd "be doing the public a service" if they reported the name of the whistleblower as well as his comments in September that whoever provided the whistleblower with information about his call with the Ukrainian President is "close to a spy," adding that in the old days spies were dealt with differently.

"These are not words of an individual with a firm grasp of the significance of the office which he occupies, nor a fundamental understanding of the significance of each word he articulates by virtue of occupying that office," Bakaj wrote.

The letter to Cipollone also states that "should anyone be physically harmed, my co-counsel, Mark Zaid, and I will not hesitate to take any and all appropriate action against your client. Those who are complicit in this vindictive campaign against my client, whether through action or inaction, shall also be responsible, be that legally or morally."

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/lawyer-for-ukraine-whistleblower-sends-white-house-cease-and-desist-letter-to-stop-trumps-attacks/ar-BBWr2Fl?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=UE07DHP

 

More moronic posturing. Schiff already named Eric Ciaramella as the Whistleblower last week in a public release of testimony transcripts.

No one would have cared or noticed until Schiff released a second version with Ciaramella’s name redacted. 

Between Schiff's incompetence and Zaid’s tweets about coups, and working for the Company, it looks like The Powers That Be ran out of actual talent months ago. 

As things fall apart I don’t think the Alien card will be played again.

Bill Clinton though; he’s not looking too healthy these days. Now that would dominate the news cycle for a solid two or three weeks. 

Edited by Robert Wheeler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

The Russian government didn’t publish 35,000 Facebook ads. An online marketing firm based in St Petersburg did. Connections between the firm and Russia’s government is also conjecture, and has not been factually established.

Who was their customer then Jeff? What would factually establish anyone as the group who funded the effort? Just curious... You may also want to know that clients NEVER do ad buys. The agency ALWAYS does ad buys because that's how they make money. Your argument is essentially the same as saying "Marboro isn't responsible for those TV spots! Ogilvy is! Blame them for cancer!"

Who is the beneficiary of the ad buy?

BTW:

Organic Activity: Facebook (this does NOT in include Instagram)

Source: Tactics and Tropes of the IRA prepared for the SSCI


The IRA leveraged the majority of Facebook’s features, including Ads, Pages, Events,  
Messenger, and even Stickers. Over the past two years, Facebook has undergone a significant  
transformation in how it discusses influence operations on the platform, and it deserves  
commendation for that evolution in thinking. However, the earliest public comments by the  
platform attempted to diminish the IRA operation as just ‘a few hundred thousand dollars of  
ads’. This inaccurate assessment has stuck among people who remain skeptical of the IRA  
operation’s significance; we hope that this report on the reach of the hundreds of thousands of  
organic posts puts that to rest.  
The Facebook data provided included posts from 81 unique Pages, of which 33 had over 1000  
followers. Of these 33, fourteen major pages focused on Black audiences, five were aimed  
at Left-leaning audiences, one was a travel-focused older page, and thirteen targeted Right-
leaning audiences. Overall, 30 targeted Black audiences and amassed 1,187,810 followers;  
25 targeted the Right and amassed 1,446,588 followers, and 7 targeted the Left and amassed  
689,045 followers. The remaining 19 were a sporadic collection of pages with almost no posts  
and approximately 2000 followers across them.  
As mentioned in the opening section of this report, there were 76.5 million engagements across  
3.3 million Page followers. These included 30.4 million shares, 37.6 million likes, 3.3 million  
comments, and 5.2 million reactions across the content. Since Facebook did not provide data  
about any sockpuppet accounts involved in the distribution of the content or the existence of “fake  
Likes” from these accounts, we are operating under the assumption that this engagement was  
from real people, and that this content was pushed into the Newsfeeds of their Friends as well.
There was a long tail of failed attempts and weak engagement. The Top 20 Pages show  
substantially more success across the four types of engagement (likes, shares, comments,  
reactions) than the remaining 61. Of the top ten Pages by engagement, 50% focused on Right-
leaning audiences; despite the significant efforts made to target the Black community on  
Facebook, only two Black-targeted pages cracked the top 10 by engagement.  
The Page with content that garnered the most Likes was Being Patriotic (Right-targeted; 6.3  
million Likes). The most comments appeared on Stop All Invaders (Right-targeted, 773,305  
comments), most reactions on Blacktivist (Black-targeted, 1.4 million reactions), most shares  
from Heart of Texas (Right-targeted, 4.8 million shares).

How do you compare the above with your claim that IRAs Facebook campaign was insignificant?

Maybe later I'll get to the part about proxy severs used to spoof the originating ip addresses of untold numbers of other users, accounts and domains. I'm sure there's bits about that in the report. I think early on some arrests were made of people trying to set up physical servers in the US and getting deported? And not to Mexico.

Edited by Bob Ness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

Overall, 30 targeted Black audiences and amassed 1,187,810 followers;  
25 targeted the Right and amassed 1,446,588 followers, and 7 targeted the Left and amassed  
689,045 followers.

I get what you are trying to describe but when you use the words "amass", "Facebook", and "followers", in the same sentence, the post goes from dismissively hyperbolic to satirically enjoyable.

All I can think of is one of the battles in the Lord of the Rings or a narrative account of the Battle of Normandy, or Stalingrad, Waterloo, Lugdunum, etc.

  • "A one million Orc army of Saruman's most fervent followers strong stood amassed on the Plains of Facebook..." 
  • By the end of the first day, almost 160,000 Allied Soldiers had amassed on the beaches of Northern France. That night, General Von Schweppenburg plead with Central Command to move the three available Click ready xxxxx Divisions forty kilometers south of the Belgian border. Von Schweppenburg was in a bind though, General Jodl would not send reinforcements until he had amassed at least 300,000 Facebook followers. 

An exhausted lieutenant brought more bad news at 1:00 AM on June 7th; 

"General Von Schweppenburg, your last Facebook Post only got 500 likes."   

The General looked up at the lieutenant from the Map spread out on the large Oak Table. He did not have to say anything.

"Russian xxxxx farms east of the Urals are clicking "dislike" at an incredible rate", the Lieutenant stuttered. 

"We will never amass 300,000 Facebook followers at this rate", Schweppenburg said to no one in particular; "dammit Facebook Ads!", the war weary general lamented in his booming Bavarian accent. 

 

 

xxxxx = t.r.o.l.l. 

 

Edited by Robert Wheeler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

       I know from 35 years of clinical psychiatric experience that it is extremely difficult to help delusional people recognize and overcome their systematized delusions, but here are two important historical references for the people here who still cling to the delusional belief that the "Deep State" and their associates in the U.S. mainstream media sabotaged Donald Trump in 2016.  The notion is simply absurd-- the precise opposite of what happened in 2016.

 

Don’t blame the election on fake news. Blame it on the media

https://www.cjr.org/analysis/fake-news-media-election-trump.php

1585507.jpg

New York Times acknowledges it buried the lead in pre-election Russia-Trump story

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2018/05/16/new-york-times-acknowledges-it-buried-the-lead-in-pre-election-russia-trump-story/

 

 

 

Edited by W. Niederhut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/7/2019 at 4:53 AM, Douglas Caddy said:

Robert: Like Trump,  you chose to deflect discussion of the issue presented and instead raise a totally unrelated one. It no longer works for Trump and doesn't work for you.

Apologies. Who could forget the 2017 Women's march.

In any event, the thread is about attorney Mark S. Zaid.

Some think he is an advocate for Whistle Blowers.

Others think he works for US intel. agencies while pretending to work for the Whistle Blower.

What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 BN Although you may think Trump is being picked on by a cabal of neo-liberal thugs that are staging a "coup" the fact is he's reaping the fruits of what his own behavior has sown.

WN:  David Korn at Mother Jones published the only 2016 pre-election story in the entire U.S. media about the Steele Dossier, on October 31st.  

Can you guys be serious about the above?  As they say, everyone is entitled to an opinion.  But you cannot create your own facts in order to do so.

The accusations of Trump being a stooge of the Russians precede October 31st by a period of months. HIllary Clinton began it during the debates. And  the whole Guccifer thing began in July of 2016

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-suspects-russia-hacked-dnc-us-officials-say-it-was-to-elect-donald-trump

Is it only a coincidence that the sting on George P began around that time also?

As a person who studies history, i try to look for origins and patterns.  What is important to recall about those two events is this: the Steele Dossier was in the making at the time, but in the background. In other words, it was a triple header to push the Russia angle in the summer of 2016.

If you want to ignore this, then fine, that is your choice.  But in my opinion, it gravely weakens your argument that somehow Trump brought this on himself. Six months before he took office? 😲

The rigorous avoidance of these facts, and the obeisance to the MSM spin again recalls what the MSM did on Watergate.  How can it not? 

I mean didn't you guys read Secret Agenda?  That is not a rhetorical question, and I would like an honest answer.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

The accusations of Trump being a stooge of the Russians precede October 31st by a period of months. HIllary Clinton began it during the debates. And  the whole Guccifer thing began in July of 2016

There was another Summer 2016 operation against Trump that never really got off the ground or much attention. I do believe that parts of the operation were re-purposed for the Charlottesville protests in Fall 2017.  

One of the key players in the Summer 2016 operation was a guy named Michael Bagley. This past summer (2019) he was picked up by the Feds for laundering narco-kingpin money. Of course the MSM did not notice.

[I've been meaning to look if he is related to any of the three Admiral Bagleys (Dad and two sons were all Admirals in WW2) or Pete Bagley (son of one brother) or his daugther Christina Roca-Bagley. (If anyone knows or wants to do some ancestry digging, please share.)]

...

Jorjani, whose father was an Iranian immigrant (Jorjani was born in NYC), supposedly was contacted in the summer of 2016 by a mysterious Mr. "X" with a proposal to assist in Jorjani's efforts to promote regime change in Iran. 

"To sum up: the London-based X and his associates control (in some shadowy, unofficial way) or at least influence the Blackwater-linked private intelligence firm Jellyfish. General Michael Flynn, who became Trump’s first National Security Adviser, worked unofficially for Jellyfish while crafting Trump’s policies for Iran and the Arab world."

https://dstate-analytics.blogspot.com/2019/07/person-of-interest-michael-bagley_98.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More on the Steele DOssier and its validity:

Mr. Steele also acknowledged that his final December memo, the only one that dealt with Mr. Gubarev, contained information he never vetted.

“The contents of the December memorandum did not represent (and did not purport to represent) verified facts, but were raw intelligence which had identified a range of allegations that warranted investigation given their potential national security implications,” he wrote.

He added, “Such intelligence was not actively sought; it was merely received.”

The unverified “raw intelligence” included Mr. Cohen reported trip to Prague.

BuzzFeed posted the complete dossier on Jan. 10 as Mr. Trump was about to assume the presidency. Mr. Gubarev is suing the online news site for libel in federal court in Florida and wants to know who supplied the document to BuzzFeed.

Mr. Steele’s libel defense is not truth. He argues that he warned Fusion and reporters against making his memos public and never authorized their disclosure.

Mr. Steele’s handiwork got only a qualified endorsement from the ex-head of MI6, the British intelligence service where Mr. Steele once worked before founding his private investigating firm.

 

BTW, we all know about Cohen in Prague plotting with the Russians right? 

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:

I get what you are trying to describe but when you use the words "amass", "Facebook", and "followers", in the same sentence, the post goes from dismissively hyperbolic to satirically enjoyable.

I quoted a source verbatim.

Doesn't change the numbers. My point is the ad buy was minuscule compared to the organic campaign. These numbers are only for Facebook. If you include Google, Reddit, Youtube, Twitter, Instagram, and all the rest they can wrangle numbers from "amass" isn't an exaggeration. The cumulative numbers would be "staggering".

Add on ghost domains, comment spamming, multiple proxy servers and so on whose traffic numbers aren't as accessible and the scope of the effort can't just be waved off with "the ad buy was 30k" and accomplished by a few Filipinos with a 486. That's my point.

Edited by Bob Ness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

 BN Although you may think Trump is being picked on by a cabal of neo-liberal thugs that are staging a "coup" the fact is he's reaping the fruits of what his own behavior has sown.

WN:  David Korn at Mother Jones published the only 2016 pre-election story in the entire U.S. media about the Steele Dossier, on October 31st.  

Can you guys be serious about the above?  As they say, everyone is entitled to an opinion.  But you cannot create your own facts in order to do so.

The accusations of Trump being a stooge of the Russians precede October 31st by a period of months. HIllary Clinton began it during the debates. And  the whole Guccifer thing began in July of 2016

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-suspects-russia-hacked-dnc-us-officials-say-it-was-to-elect-donald-trump

Is it only a coincidence that the sting on George P began around that time also?

As a person who studies history, i try to look for origins and patterns.  What is important to recall about those two events is this: the Steele Dossier was in the making at the time, but in the background. In other words, it was a triple header to push the Russia angle in the summer of 2016.

If you want to ignore this, then fine, that is your choice.  But in my opinion, it gravely weakens your argument that somehow Trump brought this on himself. Six months before he took office? 😲

The rigorous avoidance of these facts, and the obeisance to the MSM spin agains recalls what the MSM did on Watergate.  How can it not? 

I mean didn't you guys read Secret Agenda?  That is not a rhetorical question, and I would like an honest answer.

Jim,

      I bought a copy of Secret Agenda this summer, but I haven't read it yet-- it's in the stack of books on my reading list.  I understand the gist of the entrapment of Nixon.

     As for the MSM and the 2016 election, the data (from the Harvard studies and the Columbia Journalism Review) shows clearly that the MSM sabotaged Hillary-- newspapers, cable, and network news (see references above.)

      I observed it happening at the time, the weekly NYT headline stories -- based on anonymous FBI "leaks" about Hillary's Emails, etc. -- and found it quite puzzling. 

     Meanwhile, Dean Baquet deliberately blocked any pre-election NYT coverage of the Trump/Russia story and NOTHING was published about the Steele Dossier in the MSM prior to the election, other than the David Korn piece at Mother Jones.  This is the precise opposite of what we would have observed if the Deep State (and MSM) had conspired in 2016 to sabotage Donald Trump.

      

 

    

Edited by W. Niederhut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

 The accusations of Trump being a stooge of the Russians precede October 31st by a period of months. HIllary Clinton began it during the debates. And  the whole Guccifer thing began in July of 2016.

How so Jim? I suppose if you only include official investigations or Op research you can make this claim but anyone who had heard of Trump new that his son, VP of the Trump Org, had claimed most of their money came from Russia. There were several ties to Russian businesses and individuals as well as pushes to get into Moscow real estate and so on. Trump being a Russian stooge isn't exactly loony-toons is it? Since that time he apparently was extorting the Ukrainian government and withdrew from Syria much to the pleasure of you know who.

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

As a person who studies history, i try to look for origins and patterns.  What is important to recall about those two events is this: the Steele Dossier was in the making at the time, but in the background. In other words, it was a triple header to push the Russia angle in the summer of 2016.

If you want to ignore this, then fine, that is your choice.  But in my opinion, it gravely weakens your argument that somehow Trump brought this on himself. Six months before he took office? 😲

I was pretty clear on why I thought he brings it on himself. I intentionally left out his questionable mental fitness for the job. His history and behavior are disqualifying for a manager of Dairy Queen much less POTUS. Would you give your money to him to invest in charities? Would he be your choice to chaperone your kids at the Senior Ball? Would you buy a time share from this man? How about have him fly the airplane you're on? He has more relevant experience flying a 737 than he did for the job of POTUS prior to the election. Just to be clear: I wouldn't hire ME for any of those things either! I'm not a good choice to fly your 737 (I used to fly even) but at least I know that and aren't going to run for President. You can relax about that.

His past and current behavior virtually guaranteed what we're seeing now and it was so obvious even the republicans (who are now his best pals!) knew it at the time.

Re: Secret Agenda    No I haven't. Why do you think it's relevant (serious question)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Jim,

      I bought a copy of Secret Agenda this summer, but I haven't read it yet-- it's in the stack of books on my reading list.  I understand the gist of the entrapment of Nixon.

     As for the MSM and the 2016 election, the data (from the Harvard studies and the Columbia Journalism Review) shows clearly that the MSM sabotaged Hillary-- newspapers, cable, and network news (see references above.)

      I observed it happening at the time, the weekly NYT headline stories -- based on anonymous FBI "leaks" about Hillary's Emails, etc. -- and found it quite puzzling. 

     Meanwhile, Dean Baquet deliberately blocked any re-election NYT coverage of the Trump/Russia story and NOTHING was published about the Steele Dossier in the MSM prior to the election, other than the David Korn piece at Mother Jones.  This is the precise opposite of what we would have observed if the Deep State (and MSM) had conspired in 2016 to sabotage Donald Trump.

      

 

    

Harry Reid was running around screaming like a ninny to Comey et al to release the Steele information too. Comey refused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

   I know from 35 years of clinical psychiatric experience that it is extremely difficult to help delusional people recognize and overcome their systematized delusions, but here are two important historical references for the people here who still cling to the delusional belief that the "Deep State" and their associates in the U.S. mainstream media sabotaged Donald Trump in 2016.  The notion is simply absurd-- the precise opposite of what happened in 2016.

Yes it is difficult, especially when one belongs to an archaic organization of white russians that have an eternal hatred for everything russian after the revolution. I imagine that makes it very difficult to be objective in a subject that involves Russia and Putin.

 

8 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

As for the MSM and the 2016 election, the data (from the Harvard studies and the Columbia Journalism Review) shows clearly that the MSM sabotaged Hillary-- newspapers, cable, and network news (see references above.)

WN, your citations are almost always specious. The CJR piece was literally written with David Mayer de Rothschild. To put it mildly, this is not a good source for information regarding the "deep state".

14 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

Re: Secret Agenda    No I haven't. Why do you think it's relevant (serious question)?

Yes. A republican president being manipulated by the CIA (deep state if you will) is directly relevant and Jim Hougan did a fantastic job with it. Like WN, your analysis largely stems from animosity towards the personality of Trump, which I think all of us share, and MSM propaganda. Why hasn't the MSM done a thorough vetting of the Clinton/Wasserman scandal and attempted to destroy their careers? Instead, Scultz is now in Congress somehow.

 

Its the DNC...

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/11/04/its-the-dnc-stupid-democratic-party-not-russia-has-delegitimized-the-democratic-process/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

More on the Steele DOssier and its validity:

Mr. Steele also acknowledged that his final December memo, the only one that dealt with Mr. Gubarev, contained information he never vetted.

“The contents of the December memorandum did not represent (and did not purport to represent) verified facts, but were raw intelligence which had identified a range of allegations that warranted investigation given their potential national security implications,” he wrote.

He added, “Such intelligence was not actively sought; it was merely received.”

The unverified “raw intelligence” included Mr. Cohen reported trip to Prague.

BuzzFeed posted the complete dossier on Jan. 10 as Mr. Trump was about to assume the presidency. Mr. Gubarev is suing the online news site for libel in federal court in Florida and wants to know who supplied the document to BuzzFeed.

Mr. Steele’s libel defense is not truth. He argues that he warned Fusion and reporters against making his memos public and never authorized their disclosure.

Mr. Steele’s handiwork got only a qualified endorsement from the ex-head of MI6, the British intelligence service where Mr. Steele once worked before founding his private investigating firm.

 

BTW, we all know about Cohen in Prague plotting with the Russians right? 

Jim said: The accusations of Trump being a stooge of the Russians precede October 31st by a period of months. HIllary Clinton began it during the debates. And  the whole Guccifer thing began in July of 2016.

I agree with Bob, Total B.S You're referring to the debate moment when Hillary said "Well I'm sure Putin would like to have a puppet as President" and Trump says "I'm not a puppet!"The sons ties to Russia were well know, and I can give you the quote, if you want.

****************.

I don't think there's an argument we haven't heard before.. We know Cohen never went to Czechoslovakia. We know Steele didn't want it made public. It's like "who is the original whistle blower"? When now many public officials have corroborated under oath what he said, and the President DOESN'T DENY IT! CASE CLOSED!

I'm not a big" will of the framer's" guy. You can say the Constitution doesn't matter, but this precisely a case where you know the framer's would have absolutely none of Trump's actions! They were xenophobic as Hell from getting out from under George lll !!!. The kind of financial interminglings  that routinely go on in the present world economy would make the framer's head spin! Trump is the most compromised and the most corrupt President in U.S. history. Nixon isn't even close!  The amount of conflict of interest and grey area has increased 100 fold from Nixon's time!

Ok,but for our guys who think the real story is the "deep state" corruption on poor helpless Trump. Jim you do have a guy who you should be getting behind. And yet you never mention him. He is AG Bill Barr and he's investigating the FBI overstepping. You're  always so gloomy, but there is hope for you.

In these up coming hearings, you now have Jim Jordan coming over to the Intelligence committee as a strategy to discredit the Ukraine gate officials! What more do you want?. When I see Jordan in action, he reminds me a lot of you on this topic. He can't  say 50 words without referring to the "Steel Dossier" (refer to above)  or "Hillary" or the "Deep State" .  You should be following him. He is your guy!  Matt Gaetz is another star who believes like you.Devin Nunes. And that guy from Georgia in the Mueller hearings who said he wasn't going to talk too fast and then barraged old Mueller with fast, tricky questions. And maybe have Lindsey Graham successfully spin it to the public as he did in the Canvanaugh hearings. You might  remember after Blase Fords first testimony at the break Chris Wallace said on Fox that" The Republicans are going to have a hard time refuting Ford's testimony because Blase Ford is credible". But old Lindsey came on at the half and righteously said that this whole thing was a "sham", and somehow redeemed the Republicans to get their boy through.! This is the cast of characters that you're counting on.

You're a complete fool if you think you're going to get  a complete public recognition expose of the "Deep State". What you want is for the Republicans to so discredit these officials that the average Joe Q. Public throws up his hands and says. "I don't know who to believe anymore" and passes on impeachment.I'm not sure how damaging that would be to the Democrat presidential hopes in 2020, but of course, it can't be good. But it certainly works in with your total political dysfunctionality. Ultimately this is just going to be another unresolved mystery for you, but in this case, a very needless one.

Realize who your advocates are, and get behind them!

 
 

 

 

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
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...