Jump to content
The Education Forum

New York Magazine Gets Punked


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/06/jfk-accomplished-little-but-his-historic-myth-endures.html

THE NATIONAL INTEREST JUNE 30, 2021

Kennedy’s Presidency Accomplished Little, But His Historic Myth Endures

 
---30---
 
Where to start?
 
And the timing? Why are these articles appearing before Biden has to give the thumb's up or down on releasing all the documents under the JFK Records Act?
 
Let me guess, Chait will not write an article advocating complete release.... 
Edited by Benjamin Cole
clarity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ad on:

But, a recent article by Jonathan Chait suggests that the Trump-Putin relationship goes far deeper than mere admiration. Coupled with Trump's ties to Russia and the indictments people close to him have received, Chait suggests the question to ask is: What if Trump has been a Russian intelligence asset since 1987?

---30---

I am not posting this add-on to trigger yet another Trump debate. If you are pro- or anti-Trump, that is fine.

The point is, the national security state fabricated the Russiagate story, and Chait acted as a mouthpiece---is he is yet another "journalist" security-state flunkie? 

Ergo, Chait is carrying security-state water on the above JFK story and that explains why now, out of the blue, he has decided JFK wasn't so hot? Now that Biden has to decide whether to release the JFK Act documents or not? 

Yes, we need a twerp NY journalist to tell us the real JFK story....

Edited by Benjamin Cole
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The national security state didn't fabricate "Russiagate".  It originated with Hillary Clinton, who knew Trump was totally mobbed up with Russian money, and wanted to use it against Trump. And she was perfectly entitled to do so. 

Do yourself a favor and read the Mueller report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

The national security state didn't fabricate "Russiagate".  It originated with Hillary Clinton, who knew Trump was totally mobbed up with Russian money, and wanted to use it against Trump. And she was perfectly entitled to do so. 

Do yourself a favor and read the Mueller report.

Matt A: I am pro-democracy also. 

You are correct that the Clintons, who are tight with the national security state (Hillary is little warmonger in pantsuits) went after Trump, which is their right and that is hardball politics. So they commissioned a "study" that found Trump was urinating on Russian hookers or vice versa and so on. They gave the study to the national security state.

My point is the national security was planting stories, through useful idiots like Chait. Chait carries water for the national security state.

And now Chait is sullying JFK---right before Biden (another security-state apparatchik) is set to decide whether the JFK Records act is law or not. 

I want to draw your attention to Chait---who does he carry water for? The track record suggests the national security state, which is why Chait is sometimes called the "liberal hawk." 

I loathed President Nixon, but when the CIA does not turn over Bay of Pigs files to the elected president of the US as requested, and gets away with it, then I am concerned.  

There are some very good writers who think the press was totally bamboozled on the Russigate story, and by the national security state.  Matt Taibbi is one. 

See https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million

The real story: Trump will be gone someday. The national security state will still be here. 

What do you think of that little twerp Chait? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been aware of Matt Taibbi's writing since his reporting in Rolling Stone about Goldman Sachs. I used to follow him on Twitter. But his time spent living in Russia led him to be lax in his reporting on the rampant financial malfeasance that occurs there, so I'm afraid I no longer have any faith in his reporting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I am talking about. And this security-state minion Jonathan Chait. 

By Douglas Ernst - The Washington Times - Thursday, July 1, 2021

Glenn Greenwald says we live in a world in which liberals who “loved” his reporting on the dangers of the National Security Agency‘s expansive power now mock Tucker Carlson‘s claims that his communications were monitored.

The co-founder of The Intercept appeared on the Fox News host’s program Wednesday evening to give the issue historical context.

“It’s interesting,” Mr. Greenwald said. “When I did the reporting with Edward Snowden in 2013 and 2014, liberals loved that reporting so much that they gave us every award that they have to offer. The Pulitzer. The Polk. The film that was done about my work with Edward Snowden was given an Oscar. I went up on the Oscar stage. They couldn’t lavish enough prizes and praise on us. And now here we are, after the Trump years, and we know that the Democratic Party and journalism, in general, has aligned with the CIA, the NSA and the FBI, and has aligned and merged with the security state.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

You’re spot on Benjamin. 

Chris B-

Thanks.

My point is this: We should be for freedom of speech, not just when we agree with what is being said. 

We should be skeptical of the national security state, regardless of whether it is targeting one party or the other.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Chris B-

Thanks.

My point is this: We should be for freedom of speech, not just when we agree with what is being said. 

We should be skeptical of the national security state, regardless of whether it is targeting one party or the other.

 

This is the frustrating thing, that people but into blue/red and get pepsi and coke. Every election its a benefit of the doubt where hope-ium takes hold snd we get the same result. The public sit and squabble and think its making a difference, the reality is they just bought into theatre or the WWF. 
its easy to see Dem/Rep party donors, its always the same guys and they back both horses. Anyone not questioning this is a basket short of a picnic. 
 

its highly frustrating people can only see their confirmation bias side of things. Tribal. I guess what I am trying to say is, the party doesn’t matter, the outcome is the same. Its theatre. 
 

 

Edited by Chris Barnard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

Squabbling over red and blue prevents us from addressing the real issues. 

Chris B-

 

Not even! On top of that, we have odious ID politics. 

Yes, if the CIA runs a woke ad, then everything is OK.  

Biden is bombing them in Syria and Iraq with rainbow soldiers. 

And "left-wing" publications are running down the Kennedy legacy in front of Biden's decision to honor the JFK Records Act or not. 

The odd truth remains: Trump was the first president since JFK who was not embedded into the national security state and its allies in the media. That does not make Trump a nice guy or a pillar of honesty, or even admirable. It is just a fact. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Chris B-

 

Not even! On top of that, we have odious ID politics. 

Yes, if the CIA runs a woke ad, then everything is OK.  

Biden is bombing them in Syria and Iraq with rainbow soldiers. 

And "left-wing" publications are running down the Kennedy legacy in front of Biden's decision to honor the JFK Records Act or not. 

The odd truth remains: Trump was the first president since JFK who was not embedded into the national security state and its allies in the media. That does not make Trump a nice guy or a pillar of honesty, or even admirable. It is just a fact. 

 

 

 

I think it would be more accurate to say that Trump was the first president since Jimmy Carter who wasn't embedded in the national security state.

Carter too was set upon by the intelligence community and the media. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Robert Burrows said:

I think it would be more accurate to say that Trump was the first president since Jimmy Carter who wasn't embedded in the national security state.

Carter too was set upon by the intelligence community and the media. 

Oh, I lived in DC in the Carter days. He became the punching bag and was framed as a weakling. Boy, he had bad luck. OPEC oil shortages, the failed rescue mission in Iran, inflation. 

On the other hand, he had been a sub captain in the Navy. There was no Russiagate. 

Carter was an outsider, but not from the moon, like Trump. 

The highlights of the Carter Presidency include Billy Beer and this nugget:

"In 1979, Carter deregulated the American beer industry by making it legal to sell malt, hops, and yeast to American home brewers for the first time since the effective 1920 beginning of Prohibition in the United States.[157] This Carter deregulation led to an increase in home brewing over the 1980s and 1990s that by the 2000s had developed into a strong craft microbrew culture in the United States, with 6,266 micro breweries, brewpubs, and regional craft breweries in the United States by the end of 2017.[158]"

 

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...