The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[John Cotter]

52 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

You want a 5-10 line summary of the copious evidence for guys like Mathew Koch, who adamantly refused to watch the Congressional J6 Committee hearings?

1)  Trump planned even before the November 2020 election to declare himself the winner, and claim that the election was stolen, in the event that he lost.  (Source: Steve Bannon)

2)  He then tried to organize slates of false electors in several states that he lost, including Arizona, (per Rusty Bowers) and Georgia (per Brad Raffensperger.)

3)  He refused to concede after the state electors had been certified in December of 2020, and opted, instead, to summon his supporters to Washington D.C. to disrupt the January 6th certification of Biden's election-- with the encouragement of his Willard Hotel coup co-conspirators, including Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Sidney Powell, Mike Lindell, Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, Steve Bannon, and members of Congress. (Source: Twitter, Cipollone, Hutchinson)

4)  He urged his armed J6 mob to "march down to the Capitol" and "fight like hell"-- knowing that members of his angry mob were armed.  When informed that they were armed, Trump said, "Take down the magnetometers.  They're not here to harm me."  (Source: Cipollone, Hutchinson)

5)   He and John Eastman repeatedly pressured Mike Pence to refuse to certify the election results on January 6th, then Tweeted to the mob that Mike Pence had betrayed the country. (Source: Marc Short)

6)   Trump did nothing to protect Congress for three hours, while gleefully watching the violent attack on the Capitol, and dispatching Secret Service agents to remove Pence from the Capitol before the election could be certified.  (Source: Twitter, Cipollone, Hutchinson)

There are your 15 lines...

William, 

My understanding is that what Matthew and Chris asked for related to the "Russiagate" allegations, not to the events on Capitol Hill four years later.

Edited January 29, 2023 by John Cotter

[Benjamin Cole]

As students of the JFKA, my take is we should all be skeptical of government investigations and complicit M$M storylines. We should engage each in interesting conversations about the intel-media state in the current context. 

Matt Taibbi has been doing excellent, real research on the "Russian-bots" story, which has collapsed. 

Those of you old enough know there are times when media and government collude to create a national mood, or official story line. In wartime, for example, atrocities of enemy troops are highlighted, while domestic troops misdeeds are soft-pedaled or buried. 

After the JFKA, the "LHO lone nut with commie affiliations" became the accepted M$M story line. We know now that became the official story line with 24 hours. The CIA may have planned the story line pre-JFKA. 

The whole Russiagate and Russian bots official storyline has collapsed. There is no there, there.

This does not make Trump a nice guy. In fact, I think Trump lacks the character to be a K-mart manager, let alone US President. 

But what happened to Trump is an example of DC and media work---and we should learn by example, as we have in the JFKA.  

An interesting question is why the globalists so loathed Trump.

They do not loath the CCP in Beijing, they don't loath Liz Cheney or George Bush jr., or HRC. They loath Trump. That's a worthwhile conversation. 

https://www.racket.news/p/responding-to-hamilton-68

 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 1/27/2023 at 6:14 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

SL--

Sorry, I was being sarcastic, which does not always survive the cold medium of print. 

Actually the Biden-directed strike in Somalia killed 10 men, in addition to Bilal Al-Sudani, whoever he is. 

I say "some guy"...well, remember, on Biden's watch, the US killed an innocent family of 10 in Kabul in the waning days of the Afcrapistan war? At first, the story is they were the guys who killed 13 US soldiers a few weeks previously. 

I also say "some guy," since when is it the US mission to get involved in Somalia? 

And by being involved and killing those 11 men, I reasonably assume we have made lifelong and bitter enemies of anyone who knew those 10 men...their families, friends, compadres, etc. These foreign entanglements are like tar-babies. 

How many years has the US been assassinating people in Somalia? Seems like forever. 

Is there no nation on Earth into which the US will not stick its nose (at taxpayer expense)? 

 

So, do you think the U.S. should quit fighting global terrorism.

 

[Benjamin Cole]

Just now, Sandy Larsen said:

 

So, do you think the U.S. should quit fighting global terrorism.

 

If fighting global terrorism means getting involved in a (endless?) Somalia civil war, then yes. 

IMHO, "Fighting global terrorism" is how the US got entangled into not one, but two, fantastically expensive but counter-productive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition to untold amounts of human carnage. And now Afcrapistan is run by the Taliban and Iraq by religious extremists. 

I suppose when to target a terrorist is a judgement call. I cannot say there is no time ever to strike a terrorist. But I am thinking more of surgical strikes in response to specific event, and then get out. 

Even that is a dicey call. Suppose we create more enemies by military actions? 

And intel is often inaccurate. One thing I have noticed is that "human intel" sources always tell US intel officers what the US officers want to hear. 

IMHO, these offshore operations are like tar babies. 

 

 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 1/27/2023 at 10:01 AM, Joe Bauer said:

Sandy, 90% of senior high school art class students cannot draw as well as your daughter.

And, it isn't just the line work...it is her ability to capture her desired emotional expression of powerful fear and danger so effectively metaphorically.

A vicious looking, sharp teeth baring, threatening beast!

Her ability to show physical muscle tension in the beast and even her choice and use of color ( very high energy/raging angry reddish orange) just adds to the heightened dramatic effect.

It's one thing to draw a fairly life like image of a living animal or human. Especially their faces and eyes. It's another to capture strong emotion in their facial expressions.

This color drawing of your daughter reveals not only more inner artistic ability and drive to create such work than most, but also reveals how powerful the effect of bullying can be on a child.

On the same level as that of a nightmarish monster at their heels in an awful dream...only the dream is real life!

One incident of bullying in school can be so traumatizing to the victim they never forget it. If it's bad enough or occurs over a long period, it can damage their inner core sense of well-being and self-esteem to serious post traumatic stress mental and physical health crisis levels for the rest of their lives.

When a bully does their thing on another person, especially in front of others, it "humiliates" the target victim.

Being pushed, hit, insulted, made fun of and not being able to fight back because the bullies are almost always bigger and stronger and to know others are seeing this as it happens...has to be one of the most damaging things a child can experience and that one human being can do to another, especially in childhood.

I bullied other children 2 or three times in my elementary school years. In a horrible way.

I regret doing so to this day. To degrees that for the rest of my life (when I remember the incidents and the pain and humiliating hurt look on their faces ) I feel I should pay a karmic price doing so. 

Hope your daughter expresses herself through creative art as much as she can.

Even if it isn't described as talented.

We put too much emphasis on that term sometimes I think.

Even stick figure drawings and finger painting can be wonderful, meaningful and eye pleasing or thought provoking works of art.

Too bad most of our public schools have cut funding for art and music classes and other creative endeavor outlets such as theater for our children.

 

 

 

Thanks all, for your comments on my daughter's drawing ability.

Joe, you are so right about bullying and its many deleterious effects. I was a skinny nerd in junior high school and was bullied mercilessly. On a positive note, it turns out that that has prepared me to understand what my daughter is experiencing and in ways to deal with it.

 

[Steve Thomas]

- Donald Trump -

"With Paul Pelosi, that's a terrible thing, with all of them it's a terrible thing," Trump said. "Look at what's happened to San Francisco generally. Look at what's happening in Chicago. It was far worse than Afghanistan...We have to give the police back their dignity, their respect. They can solve the problem. But today if a police officer says something that's slightly out of line it's like the end of his life, the end of his pension, the end of his family""

Now I know what gobbledygook looks like.

Steve Thomas

[Kirk Gallaway]

Are we going to be seeing endless clips about Jordan Peterson now? I've heard he's marketing an online university around himself now!.

 

For those who don't know,Jordan Peterson has created a cult as a  sort of authoritarian "tough love" disciple to struggling young white male Christians.  In this debate with Sam Harris,at 1:50 :50 he alleges that if he contemplates 40 hours in his man cave. (or wherever!) He can come out and prove Christ's insurrection!

 

IMO, Following that is just being lost, I understand maybe he provided some help to you prior to ever hearing him make these claims.  But at a certain point, when you hear this. It should be an epiphany for you. At this point, you have 2 choices , to stay with him or to split. It doesn't negate what he did for you. I'd say don't sell your self short, but maybe you're not..

 

[Matthew Koch]

🤣💯

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

Here Jordan Peterson and Michael Avenati are given a place at the grown up table and look at the results. Peterson interjects, and injects himself into politics concerning then President Trump. He doesn't even know the difference between  impeachment and conviction. Well ya knooooooooo!     He is'nt even aware of some of Trump's most controversial statements and actions, and  when he makes his case is staring down at the table like a teenager.

 

Ben, I thin you could use a more diverse  spattering of heroes than your continually repeated Greenwald, Taibbi and Mate. I know she's a woman, and we've heard nothing but villainizing of women from you. But Alex Wagner is actually half Burmese. She sort of dressing down Peterson, in a nice way  about his cheap generalization polemics, whoring for new converts.

 

*(yes Matthew I know some idiot Democrats actually were actually talking about Avenati as a candidate. But you're talking to grown ups now.)

 

Ok in this clip , I don't want to make fun of Peterson. I think his emotions  are real. To Chris and Matthew, Do you guys feel he's sticking up for you, here?

 

[Matt Allison]

Kirk- really glad I have no idea who these jokers are. It sounds like they need years of therapy.

[W. Niederhut]

5 hours ago, John Cotter said:

William, 

My understanding is that what Matthew and Chris asked for related to the "Russiagate" allegations, not to the events on Capitol Hill four years later.

John,

     I asked Mathew Koch which of three "reports" he was referring to-- the Congressional J6 Report, Mueller Report, or U.S. Senate Intel Report.  He didn't specify, so I briefly summarized the damning evidence in the J6 Report.

    Here is a fairly concise summary of the damning evidence in the (redacted) Mueller Report.

    Since Mathew never reads the reference links I post, I'll print this out for him.

KEY FINDINGS FROM THE MUELLER REPORT

 

 

The Special Counsel investigation uncovered extensive criminal activity

 

•The investigation produced 37 indictments; seven guilty pleas or convictions; and compellingevidence that the president obstructed justice on multiple occasions. Mueller also uncovered and referred 14 criminal matters to other components of the Department of Justice.

 

•Trump associates repeatedly lied to investigators about their contacts with Russians, and President Trump refused to answer questions about his efforts to impede federal proceedings and influence the testimony of witnesses.

 

•A statement signed by over 1,000 former federal prosecutors concluded that if any other American engaged in the same efforts to impede federal proceedings the way Trump did, they would likely be indicted for multiple charges of obstruction of justice.

 

Russia engaged in extensive attacks on the U.S. election system in 2016

 

•Russian interference in the 2016 election was “sweeping and systemic.” (1)

 

•Major attack avenues included a social media “information warfare” campaign that “favored” candidate Trump (2) and the hacking of Clinton campaign-related databases and release of stolen materials through Russian-created entities and Wikileaks. (3)

 

•Russia also targeted databases in many states related to administering elections gaining access to information for millions of registered voters.

 

(1) SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT S.MUELLER,III, U.S. DEP’T OF JUSTICE, REPORT ON THE INVESTIGATION INTO RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE IN THE 2016 ELECTION Vol. I, 1-5 (2019).

(2) Id. at Vol. I, 1-4, 14-35.

(3) Id. at Vol. I, 1-5, 36-50.

(4) Id. at Vol. I, 50-51.

 

The investigation “identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign” and established that the Trump Campaign “showed interest in WikiLeaks's releases of documents and welcomed their potential to damage candidate Clinton”

 

 

•In 2015 and 2016, Michael Cohen pursued a hotel/residence project in Moscow on behalf of Trump while he was campaigning for President. (5) Then-candidate Trump personally signed a letter of intent.

 

•Senior members of the Trump campaign, including Paul Manafort, Donald Trump, Jr., and Jared Kushner took a June 9, 2016, meeting with Russian nationals at Trump Tower, New York, after outreach from an intermediary informed Trump, Jr., that the Russians had derogatory information on Clinton that was “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” (6)

 

Special Counsel Mueller explicitly declined to exonerate President Trump and instead detailed multiple episodes in which he engaged in obstructive conduct

 

 

•The Mueller Report states that if the Special Counsel’s Office felt they could clear the president of wrongdoing, they would have said so. Instead, the Report explicitly states that it “does not exonerate” the President (10) and explains that the Office of Special Counsel “accepted” the Department of Justice policy that a sitting President cannot be indicted. (11)

 

•The Mueller report details multiple episodes in which there is evidence that the President obstructed justice. The pattern of conduct and the manner in which the

President sought to impede investigations—including through one-on-one meetings with senior officials—is damning to the President.

 

•Five episodes of obstructive conduct stand out as being particularly serious:

 

In June 2017 President Trump directed White House Counsel Don McGahn to order the firing of the Special Counsel after press reports that Mueller was investigating the President for obstruction of justice; (12) months later Trump asked McGahn to falsely refute press accounts reporting this directive and create a false paper record on this issue–all of which McGahn refused to do. (13)

 

After National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was fired in February 2017 for lying to FBI investigators about his contacts with Russian Ambassador Kislyak, Trump cleared his office for a one-on-one meeting with then-FBI Director James Comey and asked Comey to “let [Flynn] go; ”he also asked then-Deputy National Security Advisor K.T. McFarland to draft an internal memo saying Trump did not direct Flynn to call Kislyak, which McFarland did not do because she did not know whether that was true. (14)

 

In July 2017, the President directed former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to instruct the Attorney General to limit Mueller’s investigation, a step the Report asserted “was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the President’s and his campaign’s conduct.” (15)

 

In 2017 and 2018, the President asked the Attorney General to “un-recuse” himself from the Mueller inquiry, actions from which a “reasonable inference” could be made that “the President believed that an un-recused Attorney General would play a protective role and could shield the President from the ongoing Russia Investigation.” (16)

 

The Report raises questions about whether the President, by and through his private attorneys, floated the possibility of pardons for the purpose of influencing the cooperation of Flynn, Manafort, and an unnamed person with law enforcement. (17)

 

(10) Id. at Vol. II, 8.

(11) Id.

(12) Mueller Report at Vol. II, 77-90.

(13) Id. at Vol. II, 113-18.

(14) Id. at Vol. II, 40-44.

(15) Id. at Vol. II, 319-25.

(16) Id. at Vol. II, 319-25.

(17) Id. at Vol. II, 332-45.

 

•Beginning in June 2016, a Trump associate “forecast to senior [Trump] Campaign officials that WikiLeaks would release information damaging to candidate Clinton.” (7)   A section of the Report that remains heavily redacted suggests that Roger Stone was this associate and that he had significant contacts with the campaign about Wikileaks. (8)

 

•The Report described multiple occasions where Trump associates lied to investigators about Trump associate contacts with Russia.Trump associates George Papadopoulos, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn, and Michael Cohen all admitted that they made false statements to Federal investigators or to Congress about their contacts. In addition, Roger Stone faces trial this fall for obstruction of justice, five counts of making false statements, and one count of witness tampering.

 

•The Report contains no evidence that any Trump campaign official reported their contacts with Russia or WikiLeaks to U.S. law enforcement authorities during the campaign or presidential transition, despite public reports on Russian hacking starting in June 2016 and candidate Trump’s August 2016 intelligence briefing warning him that Russia was seeking to interfere in the election.

 

•The Report raised questions about why Trump and associates repeatedly asserted Trump had no connections to Russia. (9)

 

 

(5) Id. at Vol. I, 67-80.

(6) Id. at Vol. I, 110-20.

(7) Id. at Vol. I, 5.

(8) Id. at Vol. I, 51-54.

(9) Id. at Vol. II, 18-23.

 

Congress needs to continue investigating and assessing elements of the Mueller Report

 

 

•The redactions of the Mueller Report appear to conceal the extent to which the Trump campaign had advance knowledge of the release of hacked emails by WikiLeaks. For instance, redactions conceal content of discussions that the Report states occurred between Trump, Cohen, and Manafort in July 2016 shortly after Wikileaks released hacked emails; (18) the Report further notes,“Trump told Gates that more releases of damaging information would be coming,” but redacts the contextual information around that statement. (19) 

 

•A second issue the Report does not examine is the fact that the President was involved in conduct that was the subject of a case the Special Counsel referred to the Southern District of New York–which the Report notes “ultimately led to the conviction of Cohen in the Southern District of New York for campaign-finance offenses related to payments he said he made at the direction of the President.” (20)

 

•The Report also redacts in entirety its discussion of 12 of the 14 matters Mueller referred to other law enforcement authorities. (21)

 

•Further,the Report details non-cooperation with the inquiry by the President, including refusing requests by the Special Counsel for an interview; providing written responses that the Office of the Special Counsel considered “incomplete” and “imprecise” and that involved the President stating on “more than 30 occasions that he ‘does not recall’ or ‘remember’ or ‘have an independent recollection.’” (22)

 

 

(18) Id. at Vol. I, 53.

(19) Id. at Vol. I, 54.

(20) Id. at Vol. II, 77, fn. 500.

(21) Id. at Vol. II, Appendix D.

(22) Id. at Vol. II, Appendix C

 

[Sandy Larsen]

5 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

5 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

So, do you think the U.S. should quit fighting global terrorism.

 

If fighting global terrorism means getting involved in a (endless?) Somalia civil war, then yes. 

 

Thanks for your response.

It's clear that the United States played a major role in creating global terrorism. Much of what you said on how best to fight it makes sense to me.

But why are you singling out our involvement in Somalia as a reason to NOT fight global terrorism? What is special about Somalia?

 

[Benjamin Cole]

54 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Thanks for your response.

It's clear that the United States played a major role in creating global terrorism. Much of what you said on how best to fight it makes sense to me.

But why are you singling out our involvement in Somalia as a reason to NOT fight global terrorism? What is special about Somalia?

 

Oh, no big reason. It was just in the news most recently. Biden last year droned some people dead in Syria also. The US is involved in Iraq still, and also other African nations.

Trump, early in his administration, sent a missile to Yemen that killed 14 women.

This stuff seems to go on and on. 

 

 

[Joseph McBride]

Obama killed about 10,000 people with drones. He

joked to his staff about being a good killer. They

had a day each week when they would meet about

who to whack with drones.

[Sandy Larsen]

In retrospect, the best solution for global terrorism may have been not to create terrorism in the first place. I say "may" because there were probably geopolitical moves that were taken for good reason, and this unfortunately resulted in creating terrorists.

But that's water under the bridge. What's the best way to deal with it now?

If the U.S. is going to actively fight it, it appears that a good approach is with drone strikes. It's relatively inexpensive, the public is okay with it, there are do dead U.S. soldiers, and collateral damage is small.

Is there a better alternative?