The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[Joseph McBride]

Even Alex Jones admitted in court that he just makes up some of

his claims for effect.

Edited May 2, 2020 by Joseph McBride

[Cliff Varnell]

Jeff Morley on the deep state...

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/americas-lawless-president-confronts-its-untrustworthy-intelligence-community/

[Douglas Caddy]

This explains a lot.

Tinker, Tailor, Mobster, Trump

What happens when a Confidential Informant becomes President?

https://gregolear.substack.com/p/tinker-tailor-mobster-trump?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR2da76SBltzs37QLiuah75jig0RdB9lgFEVcjfUUHoLfqXahzbdZD-FupU

 

From Trump to tRUmp: How the Mob’s Man Became Putin’s Puppet

The President of the United States is a Russian asset—property owned by Moscow.

https://gregolear.substack.com/p/from-trump-to-trump-how-the-mobs?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR3hSQaPzFTPLQfpF3384-EOaoILmvmDKab5NxbjYJpv4X-wk9PsIRzmU7Q

[Joe Bauer]

1 hour ago, Douglas Caddy said:

This explains a lot.

Tinker, Tailor, Mobster, Trump

What happens when a Confidential Informant becomes President?

https://gregolear.substack.com/p/tinker-tailor-mobster-trump?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR2da76SBltzs37QLiuah75jig0RdB9lgFEVcjfUUHoLfqXahzbdZD-FupU

 

From Trump to tRUmp: How the Mob’s Man Became Putin’s Puppet

The President of the United States is a Russian asset—property owned by Moscow.

https://gregolear.substack.com/p/from-trump-to-trump-how-the-mobs?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR3hSQaPzFTPLQfpF3384-EOaoILmvmDKab5NxbjYJpv4X-wk9PsIRzmU7Q

I just read the article in the first link.

Most of the information shared about Trump is based on documented fact.

How Trump was ever allowed to become President will be a corruption story of the ages.

Too bad 99.99999% of Americans will never read true life Trump background pieces like this or even know they exist.

 

[James DiEugenio]

Joe:

the more sensational a charge is he stronger the evidence needs to be. I cold not find one footnote in the first article.

In the second, anyone who says that somehow Yeltsin was a democratic leader, and Browder is a credible source on Putin, that guy is not to be trusted.

You learn to look for these things after doing JFK stuff for 30 years.

Again, one should not let one's personal feeling about Trump cloud analysis and judgement.

[Andrew Prutsok]

Why do we need to know more that he bought a mansion in. Florida for $45 million and turned around in a couple years at the height of the housing meltdown and sold it for more than double what he paid, to some Russian dude?

Edited May 2, 2020 by Andrew Prutsok

[Joe Bauer]

On 5/2/2020 at 1:02 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Joe:

the more sensational a charge is he stronger the evidence needs to be. I cold not find one footnote in the first article.

In the second, anyone who says that somehow Yeltsin was a democratic leader, and Browder is a credible source on Putin, that guy is not to be trusted.

You learn to look for these things after doing JFK stuff for 30 years.

Again, one should not let one's personal feeling about Trump cloud analysis and judgement.

Yes, no footnotes. 

I admire, appreciate and respect your 30 years of JFK research and your advice regarding understanding the need for solid fact checking with stated footnote sources in validating pieces like this or not.

I do have strong personal feelings about Trump and the 1% I feel are running things and I am sure these do influence me ( to a degree ) with a tendency to believe most of the corruption reports regards Trump ... so I will keep your advice in mind.

I may be overly emotionally reactive in this way at times, but the more I read biographical pieces ( books, articles, essays and editorials etc. ) and watch documentaries and interviews ( many by seemingly credible authors, producers and speakers ) on Trump and his lifetime actions and associations the more it all seems as troubling as many of these sources suggest.

Relative to the average adult American I feel that I have taken more effort to find and read and watch what I can on Donald Trump and his life than 85% of such.

Obviously being retired I have more time on my hands than most to be able to do this.

Even acknowledging my untrained analytical skills I still think the evidence of Trump's corruptness is overwhelming, coming in more each month it seems and from so many credible ( imo ) sources.

Regards the specific article linked here that we are referring to, I can't say I think this author is credible or that Trump was a confidential informant. This suggestion is not something I automatically believe or feel is even worth considering.

However, regards the other areas of Trump's associations with organized crime figures in his building businesses and that have been reported in so many other venues, I do feel they are believable and not overly sensationalized.

Trump's condo sales and his Atlantic City gambling projects specifically.

Just a couple other Trump corruption suggesting items that I have come across over the years that are admittedly lightweight in their context but have stayed in my mind because of their interesting national TV exposure.

In a 2014 interview of New York City Mafia Capo-Hit Man Sammy Gravano by Diane Sawyer, Gravano states "Donald Trump couldn't build a building there (Manhattan ) if I (Gravano) didn't want him to."

Gravano controlled the cement workers union in Manhattan at that time.

Trump did build at that time. Obviously, according to Gravano, Trump played ball.

In an interview of Donald Trump on the David Letterman TV show, Letterman asks Trump if he ever had to deal with members of organized crime in any of his many business dealings?

Trump at first equivocates and says "there might have been one of those characters", then a few seconds later he adds " I must admit I have met on occasion a few of those people and  they happen to be very nice people. "

"They happen to be very nice people" ...   really?

At the 6:50 minute mark of the interview below.

16:05NOW PLAYING

 

 

Donald Trump on David Letterman 17 October, 2013 Full Interview

 

Trump praises these dangerous corrupt gangsters and yet constantly trashes countless members of our own national press?

If these on record, publicly stated Trump conflict of crazily misaligned respect comments don't trouble you about the man and his true moral value system ...what would?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by Joe Bauer

[Douglas Caddy]

Joe:

 

I hope you have read the second article. It rounds out the first.

 

What a silly argument for someone to make that the first lacks footnotes. The two articles are obviously the work of a writer selected by the Intelligence Community and Law Enforcement to alert the public and Trump part of what they have on him. There is more to come.

 

The writer is giving us information about Trump from the real world as opposed to what writers think it may be. To give you an example, after my autobiography Being There: Eyewitness to History was published by TrineDay, Kris Millegan in an Internet interview disclosed that he gave my book manuscript to Jim Hougan to approve before my book was published. When I heard this I was floored as this was news to me. Who ever heard of such a thing! I have never met Hougan and only once over ten years ago had a brief telephone conversation with him. What does Hougan know about my life? He never even interviewed me for his book, Secret Agenda. My autobiography is based on the real world in contrast to the opinion of a writer who derives his information second hand.

 

Hougan’s book, Secret Agenda, was published 12 years after Watergate.  I recommend it highly to readers for as far as it goes but it missed the big stories about Watergate.  He even clears WMPD Detective Carl Shoffler for his role in bringing down President Nixon based on rhe advance tip that Shoffler had received from his Confidential Informant, Robert Merritt.

 

Retired NYPD Detective James Rothstein marvels at the works of writers who have never lived in the real world but are so opinionated. Rothstein had over 30 informants passing him tips and information on a regular basis. These included prostitutes who passed on what their Johns had told them afterwards in pillow talk. They would send word for him to be around the corner of a street on Times Square at such and such time and he would meet them there in the shadows and they would tell him what they had picked up from their Johns or via the grapevine. Even FBI agents would schedule clandestine meetings around 3 AM with Rothstein to give him information and documents on cases that the FBI had found too hot to handle.

 

This is the real world, not the imaginary world of writers who think truth is determined by foot notes. Hah.

 

Doug

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

Mr. Caddy:

You can make a footnote to anyone or any source.  It can be a prisoner in jail.  

The point I am making is if you do not do so then the source cannot be tested.

In some ways Jim Garrison's book On the Trail of the Assassins is an autobiography.  But its footnoted.

The rule stands, if you make sensational disclosures, you should have strong evidence for it.

 

[David Andrews]

On 5/2/2020 at 8:45 PM, Douglas Caddy said:

 

What a silly argument for someone to make that the first lacks footnotes. The two articles are obviously the work of a writer selected by the Intelligence Community and Law Enforcement to alert the public and Trump part of what they have on him. There is more to come.

 

The writer is giving us information about Trump from the real world as opposed to what writers think it may be. To give you an example, after my autobiography Being There: Eyewitness to History was published by TrineDay, Kris Millegan in an Internet interview disclosed that he gave my book manuscript to Jim Hougan to approve before my book was published. When I heard this I was floored as this was news to me. Who ever heard of such a thing! I have never met Hougan and only once over ten years ago had a brief telephone conversation with him. What does Hougan know about my life? He never even interviewed me for his book, Secret Agenda. My autobiography is based on the real world in contrast to the opinion of a writer who derives his information second hand.

 

 

Assuming that the article is a piece of leaked information, thus necessarily sans footnotes, I would speculate further that in the world the article establishes, Giuliani is also a CI, specifically in the Bernie Kerik/Mob corruption case in which Rudy dodged all liability.

It's worth looking at A. J. Weberman's scurrilous Giuliani book, titled Homothug (shudder!).  Whatever its sins of pointless salaciousness, it remains the only study of the Kerik affair, which unfolded under Giuliani's aegis.  The book is available online in bootleg form.  It has its semi-reputable place in Trump scholarship, given the breadth of the field.

Jim, as in the Cold War, information is sometimes excreted from unsavory orifices.  It's an old intelligence practice.

A Trump/Giuliani article worth reading:

https://gregolear.substack.com/p/bloody-mob-sht-an-interview-with

Edited May 4, 2020 by David Andrews

[Kirk Gallaway]

Homothug Dave? I didn't know you did scurrilous.

I knew there had to be an anagram there, and sure enough. Hog mouth!

I'll leave it at that.

[Bob Ness]

On 5/2/2020 at 7:52 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Mr. Caddy:

You can make a footnote to anyone or any source.  It can be a prisoner in jail.  

The point I am making is if you do not do so then the source cannot be tested.

In some ways Jim Garrison's book On the Trail of the Assassins is an autobiography.  But its footnoted.

The rule stands, if you make sensational disclosures, you should have strong evidence for it.

 

I don't understand. The NJ Gaming investigation report? The Aussie press reports? The Weichelbaum bit? What doesn't qualify as a citation? I don't necessarily think it all adds up to Trump being a CI but the bar to being a CI is pretty low. Sometimes they don't even know. Has Trump done business with the mob? You bet! He's said so more than once.

[David Andrews]

10 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Homothug Dave? I didn't know you did scurrilous.

I knew there had to be an anagram there, and sure enough. Hog mouth!

I'll leave it at that.

He said: as in the Cold War, information is sometimes excreted from unsavory orifices.  It's an old intelligence practice.

PM me for the link.

Edited May 5, 2020 by David Andrews

[James DiEugenio]

Doug Caddy:

What a silly argument for someone to make that the first lacks footnotes. The two articles are obviously the work of a writer selected by the Intelligence Community and Law Enforcement to alert the public and Trump part of what they have on him. There is more to come.

Its not silly at all Doug.

How soon they forget: the Steele Dossier. See, there is little doubt that there was a political movement against Trump from the beginning. It started in his own party.  That is the part of the story that Mr. Wheeler has made some valuable contributions on.  The annointed one with the GOP establishment was Jeb Bush. They did not want an outsider.  So they hired this former MI 6 guy Steele, to do all he could to attack Trump.  From what I know, like Vince Bugliosi, the guy never left his living room to put together that salacious file which included golden showers.

When Bush collapsed, the effort was continued by the DNC under HRC's direction.  And the MSM now went whole hog on it.  So did some of the alternative press.  Its now become part of our culture.  Even though the Mueller inquiry was pretty much a dud.  And the guy was kind of embarrassing before congress.

So the effort has now spread out into other areas.  Like the above.  Maybe its true, maybe its not.  Maybe it is a little of both.  

But if you do not know where it came from then, heck, it might have come from Brennan. Would you trust that guy? Not me.

 

 

 

Edited May 5, 2020 by James DiEugenio

[Kirk Gallaway]

Oh Chrissake, Jim. you just had to come back to this?

Look what's incited Jim  to bite back here.

This is what I meant when I said in another thread. It was the bizarrest thing. That Jim was into Trump only insofar as Trump could further Putin's image in the world.

 

Re financial records: Figure it out! Trump had 20 million dollars by the time he was 21, and inherited over 400 million from his Father over the course of his lifetime. Still, he came back to his Father to bail him out of trouble twice in his career  and ended declaring bankruptcy 6 times! And his son, Donald Trump Junior said in 2006. "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia,”

 

Given all the bankruptcies, to those with even the most threadbare financial literacy. Is it at all hard to imagine that as major banks in America stopped lending Trump money following his many bankruptcies, the Trump organization was forced to seek financing from non-traditional institutions. Like just maybe Russian oligarchs, as his son has said? And of course, we also know that many of these oligarchs also have ties to Putin.

I never found Jim to be much of a financial sleuth, so he doesn't surprise me. Is there any other Trump supporter, apologist, or Deep State sleuth who can revive their childhood drawing book talent in dot connecting?

 

Do those who think the Mueller probe produced nothing (except of course, 34 individual indictments, but none to the President himself, and yet  what kind of pussy investigation is this where 1)Mueller doesn't interview the President directly and  Trump's attorney John Dowd tells Mueller he can't allow the President to testify to Mueller because he knows Trump would surely incriminate himself! 2) Mueller doesn't cross the line and investigate Trump's financial records?*  (Are you sure that's not the Deep State coup?) 

 

Anyway, does anyone who thinks the Mueller investigation produced nothing really think with the  admission by Trump in the Ukraine incident that the premise for establishing the Mueller probe, that the POTUS may have sold out out or compromised our national interests for his  personal interests to our enemies is now 1) more likely to have happened? or 2) less likely to have happened?

Again you have to be able to recognize basic patterns.