Cliff Varnell Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 11 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: CV- I suspect Russiagate was hoax-witch-hunt, in part as I respect the opinions of Matt Taibbi and Glenn Greenwald, Greenwald loved Citizen’s United, making billions of dark dollars “free speech”, amplifying the political power of the mega-rich. Taibbi thought the big unexplored story of the 2016 campaign was Uranium One, a bureaucrat non-entity. Both full of sht as a Yuletide turkey. They both claim there was no hostile penetration of the DNC but Crowdstrike found Fancy Bear set up the exfiltration. Can Greenwald and Taibbi offer a technical rebuttal? 11 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: and in my reading of the rather weak Mueller Report. Read the whole thing cover to cover? 11 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: Aaron Mate also calls Russiagate a hoax, although he tends to be quick to judge. So what? Can any of your heroes offer a technical rebuttal to Crowdstrike’s conclusion that Fancy Bear penetrated the DNC? 11 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: There is a lot in the Mueller report that is not confirmed, and a lot about meetings being held between people, as if the meeting alone confirms guilt. Old standby words such as "linked" and "tied" are used. In some ways, the Mueller Report is like the Warren Commission: It is essentially a prosecution, without a defense. Allegations are easy to make. Other and possibly exculpatory narratives are not presented or explored. As I have many times, I presume people innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, after public trial with adequate defense counsel. Recently, both the Durham targets, and now more recently Tom Barrack, have been exonerated, after a public prosecutor dragged them into court and made serious allegations. So, we should believe Trump guilty, based on what are not even charges? This is not a bias on my part. I am not biased by being skeptical or reserved about charges or investigations presented by prosecutors or government bodies. You admit your thinking is shaped by 3 guys. Sounds like a painful case of confirmation bias to me. 11 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: How do you rate the objectivity of the Warren Commission? In 1964, it was regarded as the most august body ever assembled in the US. Let's see how things play out in court. Let’s avoid the pitfalls of hero worship and do our own research and thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 6 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said: Kirk-- Calling for stiff import tariffs...believe me, that is very "anti-corporate" in today's globalist world. Globalist multinationals loath any interference with "free trade" and have been militating for lower international tariffs for generations, and have funded the bulk of academia to worship the same. When I advocate the global US military posture be cut in half...also anti-corporate. They want that global guard service. You didn't address anything I said. i said a number of these things you mentioned earlier were good. Spare me the economics 101 in your first 2 paragraphs above, and if you retained anything from our previous conversations I've always agreed with you about cutting defense. Rather than quoting me, try reading the criticism I've made that you're quoting. it was this statement. Ben:Taxes on productive enterprises---less so, IMHO. They tend to get passed on to consumers anyway. I like people and organizations who make goods (a corporate shill!). OK, oil companies are making money. Other years it might be the windmill guys. Then dairy farmers. as i showed in the graphs ,it's an exceptional situation, the oil companies are making enormous profits, maybe more than ever in our lifetime! Then I also mentioned the increased margins on food, this is at the expense of the working person you claim to be defending. The windfall tax on oil will not be an expense passed on from the oil companies to the consumers. It's completely the opposite. It's in essence, sharing their windfall profits with the consumers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said: Greenwald loved Citizen’s United, making billions of dark dollars “free speech”, amplifying the political power of the mega-rich. Taibbi thought the big unexplored story of the 2016 campaign was Uranium One, a bureaucrat non-entity. Both full of sht as a Yuletide turkey. They both claim there was no hostile penetration of the DNC but Crowdstrike found Fancy Bear set up the exfiltration. Can Greenwald and Taibbi offer a technical rebuttal? Read the whole thing cover to cover? So what? Can any of your heroes offer a technical rebuttal to Crowdstrike’s conclusion that Fancy Bear penetrated the DNC? You admit your thinking is shaped by 3 guys. Sounds like a painful case of confirmation bias to me. Let’s avoid the pitfalls of hero worship and do our own research and thinking. Shawn Henry stated in his testimony that CrowdStrike had indicators of exfiltration (page 32 of the testimony): Shawn Henry eating his words, on advice of counsel? “Counsel just reminded me that, as it relates to the DNC, we have indicators that data was exfiltrated. We did not have concrete evidence that data was exfiltrated from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated." ---30--- This is from Crowdstrike's own website. Indicators but no concrete evidence? And.. "Do you have a comment about the allegation that Russia stole Democratic Party emails from John Podesta and then passed them to WikiLeaks? CrowdStrike was not involved in investigating John Podesta’s email leaks. Henry says on page 62 of this testimony, he “has no relationship with them [the Podesta emails].” ---30--- Well, maybe you are tech guy, and this makes sense to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 9 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said: You didn't address anything I said. i said a number of these things you mentioned earlier were good. Spare me the economics 101 in your first 2 paragraphs above, and if you retained anything from our previous conversations I've always agreed with you about cutting defense. Rather than quoting me, try reading the criticism I've made that you're quoting. it was this statement. Ben:Taxes on productive enterprises---less so, IMHO. They tend to get passed on to consumers anyway. I like people and organizations who make goods (a corporate shill!). OK, oil companies are making money. Other years it might be the windmill guys. Then dairy farmers. as i showed in the graphs ,it's an exceptional situation, the oil companies are making enormous profits, maybe more than ever in our lifetime! Then I also mentioned the increased margins on food, this is at the expense of the working person you claim to be defending. The windfall tax on oil will not be an expense passed on from the oil companies to the consumers. It's completely the opposite. It's in essence, sharing their windfall profits with the consumers! Krik- Oh, maybe some sort of windfall profits tax is OK. Yes, they are making big profits. I am not pleased with the way federal government spends money either. Give the lucre to warmongers and grifters, or the oil boys? What a world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 4 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: Shawn Henry stated in his testimony that CrowdStrike had indicators of exfiltration (page 32 of the testimony): Shawn Henry eating his words, on advice of counsel? “Counsel just reminded me that, as it relates to the DNC, we have indicators that data was exfiltrated. We did not have concrete evidence that data was exfiltrated from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated." There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case, it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don't have the evidence that says it actually was. 4 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: ---30--- This is from Crowdstrike's own website. Indicators but no concrete evidence? Their conclusion was that the exfiltration was “set up.” That’s a penetration apart from the actual exfiltration. 4 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: And.. "Do you have a comment about the allegation that Russia stole Democratic Party emails from John Podesta and then passed them to WikiLeaks? CrowdStrike was not involved in investigating John Podesta’s email leaks. Henry says on page 62 of this testimony, he “has no relationship with them [the Podesta emails].” So what? 4 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: ---30--- Well, maybe you are tech guy, and this makes sense to you. I’m waiting for an argument that Fancy Bear didn’t set up the exfiltration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 7 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said: There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case, it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don't have the evidence that says it actually was. Their conclusion was that the exfiltration was “set up.” That’s a penetration apart from the actual exfiltration. So what? I’m waiting for an argument that Fancy Bear didn’t set up the exfiltration. Fancy Bear..but do not forget Cozy Bear! Cozy Bear also broke into the DNC computers (or maybe did). https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democratic-national-committee/ Who knows what this gibberish means? You are forced to rely on what some cyber-guys say, who have been hired to find something out. Can a cyber-guy say, "Well, the DNC spend a ton of money on us, but we really don't know what happened. And false flag ops are common in this space, so we think data was exfiltrated but we are not sure, and really we are not sure by who." Although...that is what they say. Fine, say the Russians hacked the DNC. In your mind, then the 2016 election was illegitimate? Many Donks are pressing that case, including HRC. Frankly, I hope Biden and Trump both retire ASAP. Egads, is this the best we can come up with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said: Fancy Bear..but do not forget Cozy Bear! Cozy Bear also broke into the DNC computers (or maybe did). https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democratic-national-committee/ Who knows what this gibberish means? It means Fancy Bear penetrated the DNC computers and left them vulnerable to hacking by non-state actors. 1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said: You are forced to rely on what some cyber-guys say, who have been hired to find something out. Can a cyber-guy say, "Well, the DNC spend a ton of money on us, but we really don't know what happened. And false flag ops are common in this space, so we think data was exfiltrated but we are not sure, and really we are not sure by who." They knew the Russians were involved in leaving the DNC e-mails vulnerable to hacking. 1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said: Although...that is what they say. Fine, say the Russians hacked the DNC. In your mind, then the 2016 election was illegitimate? Many Donks are pressing that case, including HRC. Why Hillary Lost: #1 Kris Kobach’s Crosscheck voter purge program. https://www.gregpalast.com/crosscheck-overwhelmingly-purges-legitimate-voters/ #2 James Comey re-opening the Clinton e-mail investigation even though the FBI knew the e-mails were duplicates. #3 Hillary was a poor candidate. #4 Bill went to say Hi to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who’s department was investigating Bill’s wife. She had to recuse from the case, giving Comey a free hand to shiv the Hill 11 days out. #5 Trump turned cable news into a reality TV show and the big media companies loved the ratings and helped extend the show four years. #6 Roger Stone and Julian Assange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 Just now, Cliff Varnell said: It means Fancy Bear penetrated the DNC computers and left them vulnerable to hacking by non-state actors. They knew the Russians were involved in leaving the DNC e-mails vulnerable to hacking. Why Hillary Lost: #1 Kris Kobach’s Crosscheck voter purge program. https://www.gregpalast.com/crosscheck-overwhelmingly-purges-legitimate-voters/ #2 James Comey re-opening the Clinton e-mail investigation even though the FBI knew the e-mails were duplicates. #3 Hillary was a poor candidate. #4 Bill went to say Hi to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who’s department was investigating Bill’s wife. She had to recuse from the case, giving Comey a free hand to shiv the Hill 11 days out. #5 Trump turned cable news into a reality TV show and the big media companies loved the ratings and helped extend the show four years. #6 Roger Stone and Julian Assange. Ok fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 Long knives out for Joe Biden? From The Hill: OPINION>WHITE HOUSE THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL Is a 25th Amendment removal in Joe Biden’s future? BY MERRILL MATTHEWS, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 11/01/22 12:00 PM ET Matthews concludes the Donks could not bear to do a 25th to Biden, especially to install Harris who has been playing the role of a middle-aged Space Cadet. So... "More likely, I think, would be a full-court press by Democratic leaders to convince Biden not to run for reelection. How successful that effort would be is anyone’s guess. People in mental decline are often the last to concede the fact." ---30--- Brutal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 18 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: Long knives out for Joe Biden? From The Hill: OPINION>WHITE HOUSE THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL Is a 25th Amendment removal in Joe Biden’s future? BY MERRILL MATTHEWS, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 11/01/22 12:00 PM ET Matthews concludes the Donks could not bear to do a 25th to Biden, especially to install Harris who has been playing the role of a middle-aged Space Cadet. So... "More likely, I think, would be a full-court press by Democratic leaders to convince Biden not to run for reelection. How successful that effort would be is anyone’s guess. People in mental decline are often the last to concede the fact." ---30--- Brutal. A Blue Tuesday makes this moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 20 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said: A Blue Tuesday makes this moot. Huh? Seems like either way, Joe Biden is declining and needs replacement. Not a funny story---will happen to us all. I have no idea if a red or blue wave is pending.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 25 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: Huh? Seems like either way, Joe Biden is declining and needs replacement. Not a funny story---will happen to us all. I have no idea if a red or blue wave is pending.... At what point in Trump's tenure did his aggressive deterioration of cognitive function similarly alarm you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said: At what point in Trump's tenure did his aggressive deterioration of cognitive function similarly alarm you? CV- You seem to have a binary view of life: Someone must be in the Donk or 'Phant camp. To answer your question, Trump seems to have all his wits (such as they are), but IMHO his character and personality are not suited for the office, or any public office for that matter. I would prefer both establishment parties come up with new options, or that a third party arises. I am deeply skeptical of both parties. My guess is WH CoS Ron Klain is running the show presently. Has the resume of a successful insider, seems like a smart guy. He doesn't need everyone to know his name, low profile. My guess is Klain keeps a generally low profile for the very reason he is basically running the show. I harbor no ill will at all towards Biden. As I say, for each of us, our time will pass. Edited November 8, 2022 by Benjamin Cole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 57 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: CV- You seem to have a binary view of life: Someone must be in the Donk or 'Phant camp. Right. Since you are not saddled with a binary view, what disturbs you about Biden should also unsettle you about Trump. No? You don’t find his frequently slurred speech and off-on-a-tangent, meandering delivery alarming? How can that be, given your declared non-partisanship? 57 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: To answer your question, Trump seems to have all his wits (such as they are), but IMHO his character and personality are not suited for the office, or any public office for that matter. He claims he has a right to possess state secrets at his private residences. Doesn’t impress me as someone with a full set of marbles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 CHRIS HEDGES: THE POLITICIANS WHO DESTROYED OUR DEMOCRACY WANT US TO VOTE FOR THEM TO SAVE IT Opinion: We should have walked out on the Democratic Party and mounted a serious opposition movement while we still had a chance. BY CHRIS HEDGES NOVEMBER 7, 2022 https://therealnews.com/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAmaibBhCAARIsAKUlaKR-vbzb8Pv_DOyGF5HDgwgJZgqUae2hOE0vIHzLJRmEDs9QhGgjGD0aAoyiEALw_wcB Interesting perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts