Jump to content
The Education Forum

The inevitable end result of our last 56 years


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 11.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Removing Pence to Andrews AFB on January 6th would not have constituted incapacitation.  At most, it would have delayed Pence's certification of Biden's election-- probably to buy Trump and his Bannon/Eastman goon squad more time to work on Pence to implement their Eastman coup plan.

Leaving aside the fact that the Eastman legal advice, dodgy and hare-brained as it may be, does not in any way constitute a “coup plan”, you have in the months previous theorized an alternate concept, which I referred, relying on an incapacitation or removal of Pence from the scene. Here is a sampling of your posts:

a coup plan to block Pence from certifying the election results by having the Secret Service move hm to Andrews AFB on January 6th.”

“…a Trump plot to physically remove him from the Capitol on January 6th”

“… a deliberate effort to prevent the certification of the election and possibly assault or even murder (Pence).”

“…ancillary Trump plan may have involved creating a pretext to remove Mike Pence from the Capitol”

What I am noticing generally, as with Russiagate threads (where you are on record often praising and endorsing the Steele Dossier), is the theorizing is derived from matters that are wildly misrepresented, based on hyperbolic supposition, or made up entirely. Often cued from mainstream media reports. It does not contribute to a healthy or informed political culture. And yet on other topics you are entirely articulate and informed… 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    No one has won one of these prestigious awards since Rob Wheeler did a year or two ago, but I would like to nominate Jeff Carter and Benjamin Cole for 2021 Donald J. Trump Golden Toilet Awards for their tireless forum deposits in defense of former U.S. President Donald Trump... 🤥

 

The Donald J. Trump Golden Toilet Award

Trump Golden Toilet – HOBBLE

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

So...who is more likely to stage what is essentially a coup, or to manipulate events and perceptions prior to elections, while gaining media cooperation?

1. Trump & Co. 

2. The national security state

Ben, you've also said this.

Ben:  (the Democrats  are)tight with , the national security-Deep State
 
So by juxtaposition, you're making a red blue comparison here. Let's examine that.
This is the silly elephant in the room. A sloppy thinking, bait and switch theory that Ben seems to be buying. If the NSS is on the side of the peaceful transfer of power in  a legitimate election, and the overwhelming majority agree, it's absurd to say the NSS is controlled by the Democrats. In this case, it's aligned with the will of the people.
 
Since that argument is more fears and feelings and hold holds no weight.  The next thing to do is the very thing the corporate powers don't want you to do is "Follow the money".
 
The defense contributions including the National Security "deep state" run about 55% to 45%  for the Republicans, and as you might know many corporate funders fund both sides of the aisle to hedge their bets so that's why it's as close as it is. Trump as he bragged, initiated the biggest peacetime increase in our lifetime. In the previous Obama administration Obama gave less than the defense department requested in 7 of 8 of his years in office. Trump gave what was requested in all 4 years asked except I believe in his last year,Trump was slightly under which could be explained as budgetary constrictions in the transition. These are facts.
 
We have never had a Presidential  conflict of personal interests in government as Trump ever before. Is it so unbelievable that that would raise red flags in government? Not at all!
 
So to those who are so willing to inject the specter  of the " JFKAC , that is the NSS as a menacing pro active force", during the Trump years, If we use the NSS whistle blowing that lead to the first  Trump impeachment where the overwhelming majority in Congress thought Trumps actions were either 1)worthy of removal from office or 2)very highly improper but didn't rise to the level of  removal, anyone who would fault the exposure of such actions as an overstep of the NSS is off their rockers.
 
What we saw in the Trump Presidency is not so much the stridency of the "NS deep state" but it's malleability to the executive branch. In that we can at least say there's certainly no shortage  of examples of shady attempts  by the Trump administration to use the government, and his position in government  which was obviously no surprise as that was also the proven case with Ukraine's Zelensky, but according to Josh Bolton's book, despite all Trump's rhetoric, Trump was willing to offer concessions to our greatest trade rival, China's Xi, if he would investigate Biden, and for brevity sake we'll leave partial  forum favorite Putin out of it for now. We could also talk about Trump using his office,to phone up the Georgia AG to throw out the results of a legitimate election.
 
Then there's Sec. of State, Mike Pompeo (who you've expressed great admiration for ,Ben) went to the CIA with his plan to kidnap Julian Assange! (Who you extol as a hero.) Can you imagine a greater violation of First Amendment rights? And yet you were notably silent. Where was your usual knee jerk First Amendment outrage, Ben?  Pompeo then made a speech, trying to establish a legal foundation to kidnap Assange but not specifically talking of a plot. But for some reason it didn't happen. So it was Trump Sec of State going to intelligence to propose a plan to kidnap Assange, and doesn't come away with a plan. We obviously can't  say why it never transpired. But probably because the CIA said it wasn't wise! So who was the greater threat there?
 
 One can be  entangled  in superficial appearances. But there were plenty of other reasons why anybody from any department of government might not be thrilled with Trump other than the sort of boring, boilerplate assertion by Trumpies that Trump was a peaceful non warmongering,  non kidnapping president that wouldn't go with the NSS grand plan which again explodes into myth as Biden accomplished in 8 months to get of Afghanistan, a feat that Trump couldn't do in 4 years!
 
So there's no reason to assume that one party controls the NSS. And to further explode this myth  I'll make a prediction that if a non Trump Republican gets in office in 2024, no matter what the disenfranchise Trump supporters think, the traditional relationship between the Republican Presidents and their NSS will probably resume.  History shows, to assume any Republican would give up such levers of power is absurd. Sorry!
 
 
 
.
Edited by Kirk Gallaway
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hadn’t been following this “coup” narrative until just these last days. All the narrative threads have been crafted and disseminated by the same media interests who presented the Russiagate lies, using the exact same methods. The Trump campaign telegraphed that it was planning to use legal avenues to challenge results months ahead of last year’s election. The efforts ultimately went nowhere because the court filings showed they had no case. Trump’s lawyers drew up legal schemes, based on sketchy interpretations of Electoral procedures, and those efforts also went nowhere, because the schemes relied on participation by people like Pence who could not be convinced there was any merit to the advice. So the legal and legislative foundation of the US political system worked as expected and was never under any kind of threat. Yet a coup narrative has been spun out of nothing. Trump’s ineffective legal advisors met at a local hotel last December, and now the WaPo is describing their meetings as taking place in a “command bunker” or a “war room.” That’s ridiculous, but also irresponsible and manipulative.

An angry mob bursts into the Capitol - to do what? What happened? Nothing did, a procedure was delayed for a few hours, and then it proceeded and the US democratic system remained intact, and was actually never seriously challenged or threatened. The mob had no plan and was following no plan, they had their temper tantrum and then dissipated. Yet all these shameless stories of the republic teetering on a precipice, based mostly on empty boasts or harebrained aspirations expressed by persons who had no power or influence.

The result will be new legislation restricting public access to federal buildings and more police powers to target what is now called “Domestic Terrorism”, definition of which will be ambiguous. The new powers will be directed at political dissent and activists - as it always has been, but to a greater degree and with less Constitutional civil rights protections. Protest events such as the March on the Pentagon back in 1967 will never happen again, and any attempt to do so will see the organizers facing long prison terms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff, I'll go with you on the point of various media outlets posing questions like. "to think how close we came". Implying that we were bordering an overthrow. Trump and the people around him would never have succeeded.  But there would have been 2 to 3 days of utter chaos, that could have been very destabilizing, bringing all the nuts out of the woodwork, claiming they've been stolen.

I don't know if you're just asleep up there in Canada, but I've been to a few places, and in every country on earth that will precipitate a clampdown, and a much more immediate  police action than your future prediction in your last sentence. So even though it wouldn't topple the government. You're perception of the threat, seems very  cavalier.

So Jeff, from what you've gathered, do you think Trump could be guilty of crimes here, that in a just society should put him in prison?   

Edited by Kirk Gallaway
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

So...who is more likely to stage what is essentially a coup, or to manipulate events and perceptions prior to elections, while gaining media cooperation?

1. Trump & Co. 

2. The national security state

1. Actually happened.

2. Vague theory you promote to encourage Americans to distrust democratic authority, and thus embrace authoritarianism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Jeff, I'll go with you on the point of various media outlets posing questions like. "to think how close we came". Implying that we were bordering an overthrow. Trump and the people around him would never have succeeded.  But there would have been 2 to 3 days of utter chaos, that could have been very destabilizing, bringing all the nuts out of the woodwork, claiming they've been stolen.

I don't know if you're just asleep up there in Canada, but I've been to a few places, and in every country on earth that will precipitate a clampdown, and a much more immediate  police action than your future prediction in your last sentence. So even though it wouldn't topple the government. You're perception of the threat, seems very  cavalier.

So Jeff, from what you've gathered, do you think Trump could be guilty of crimes here, that in a just society should put him in prison?   

hi Kirk

it seemed to me that all the nuts were already at the rally, and the Capitol authorities had the means and manpower to quickly regain control if they chose to do so. Most of the people inside the Capitol building were doing little more than taking selfies, which may have appeared chaotic but was not “destabilizing”.

Trump is ultimately responsible for the killing of the Iranian general, and the others nearby, which was a serious breach of international law. But the US does not recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC and so he will never be prosecuted for that. Otherwise, Trump’s legal position is an internal US domestic issue which I have no opinion. It is my understanding that the NYC business milieu in which Trump operates is corrupt. However, the US legal system is designed to prevent “fishing expeditions” by legal authority, and a specific legal case against Trump has not yet been presented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff, We know, of course, what happened. I probably should have given the most likely negative scenario, had Trump been more successful.

Jeff: It seemed to me that all the nuts were already at the rally, 

I don't think so. If Pence was sequestered from the Capitol, and as Kellogg had feared was persuaded not to return. The optics of Nancy Pelosi certifying the election in his place probably would have precipitated a nationwide backlash that Fox and other right wing outlets would have hailed as a "Great patriot revolt to the stealing of an election"..

That would have been inextricably polarizing and destabilizing, and possibly prompting a police response that would be even further destabilizing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

1. Actually happened.

2. Vague theory you promote to encourage Americans to distrust democratic authority, and thus embrace authoritarianism.

Matt:

1. I do not think the national security state conducting what is essentially a coup is a "vague theory" and many say that is what the JFKA was. So there is historical precedent for Deep State coups. 

2. The Trump & Co. "insurrection" did not happen, as the historical record shows. Biden is now president. None of the Jan. 6 occupiers of the Capitol have been charged with colluding or conspiring with Trump officials. Not one has been charged, and the Bidenites are running the Justice Department. 

Let's see ---according to the M$M, the Wuhan virus lab leak theory has been debunked, the Steele Dossier was real and the Biden laptop was fake "Russian disinformation." 

And the M$M says was an "insurrection" on Jan. 6.

Call me skeptical of the M$M and the narratives spun by Liz Cheney. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ben- you should check your definitions; just because it failed doesn't mean it was any less of a coup attempt. It was 100% a coup attempt.

You are well spoken and extremely polite and you most certainly have my gratitude for that. However to me your motives here often appear to be not so much about the JFKA, but primarily claiming that no one can believe anything the American government or trusted American journalists say. Whether coincidental or not, there is quite literally no difference between your message and that of a foreign intelligence agent that is attempting to cause damage to the United States.

Now that is certainly not meant to infer an accusation of you being that. I am merely pointing out that the propaganda methods you use here are precisely the same as such a person would use.

I sincerely mean no insult with this statement, as everyone is entitled to say what they want here in the U.S., and speaking as an independent thinker, no person's opinion has ever had any influence on my thinking anyway, unless it was backed by verifiable facts.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

Ben- you should check your definitions; just because it failed doesn't mean it was any less of a coup attempt. It was 100% a coup attempt.

You are well spoken and extremely polite and you most certainly have my gratitude for that. However to me your motives here often appear to be not so much about the JFKA, but primarily claiming that no one can believe anything the American government or trusted American journalists say. Whether coincidental or not, there is quite literally no difference between your message and that of a foreign intelligence agent that is attempting to cause damage to the United States.

Now that is certainly not meant to infer an accusation of you being that. I am merely pointing out that the propaganda methods you use here are precisely the same as such a person would use.

I sincerely mean no insult with this statement, as everyone is entitled to say what they want here in the U.S., and speaking as an independent thinker, no person's opinion has ever had any influence on my thinking anyway, unless it was backed by verifiable facts.

Cheers

Matt A-

 

Alack and alas, I am not a foreign intelligence agent, though I could use the money. 

Moscow and Beijing: Please read! I will stop posting unless you fork over $1000 monthly! 

Matt: one could contrue you as a Deep State plant. But I do not. I think we just have different takes on the US political scene, and media coverage thereof. 

Remember Brian Sicknick! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

Ben- I'm not sure how I could be a Deep State plant while simultaneously accusing CIA people of participating in the death of JFK, but then again, a creative mind can always dream up a good new conspiracy theory, right? :) 

Matt:

You may have a false public mask, and so may I.

No matter---we can both rest 100% assured that Liz Cheney is a Deep State apparatchik first, last, foremost and always.  

 

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...