Jump to content
The Education Forum

Secret Service participation in 1/6 coup attempt


Recommended Posts

Ben,

    We had a lengthy debate about Russia-gate here on the forum a year or two ago.  It started on a thread about Mark Zaid that got moved to one of the other boards, if I recall correctly. 

    Without belaboring the point on this thread, let me just say that my own belief is that Trump is a Russian asset who has been enmeshed with Russian oligarchs and the Russian mafia for years.  I think Putin and the FSB nailed Trump with some kind of kompromat prior to 2016, then intervened in our 2016 election to put their compromised asset in the White House.

   IMO, Trump and Manafort successfully stonewalled the Mueller investigation, then Barr halted, suppressed, and misrepresented it to the American public.  Perhaps we'll eventually get the facts.

   As for the Biden tangent, please stop the what about-ism.  This thread is about Trump and January 6th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 200
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Ben,

    We had a lengthy debate about Russia-gate here on the forum a year or two ago.  It started on a thread about Mark Zaid that got moved to one of the other boards, if I recall correctly. 

    Without belaboring the point on this thread, let me just say that my own belief is that Trump is a Russian asset who has been enmeshed with Russian oligarchs and the Russian mafia for years.  I think Putin and the FSB nailed Trump with some kind of kompromat prior to 2016, then intervened in our 2016 election to put their compromised asset in the White House.

   IMO, Trump and Manafort successfully stonewalled the Mueller investigation, then Barr halted, suppressed, and misrepresented it to the American public.  Perhaps we'll eventually get the facts.

   As for the Biden tangent, please stop the what about-ism.  This thread is about Trump and January 6th.

W.---

OK, we have different views on Trump.  

Not sure about the "what about-ism" accusation. We are trying to get to the bottom of the 1/6 scrum. 

If what happened to Trump was a "re-installation of regime operation"---in my view, a live possibility---then Biden's neoliberal, globalist views are germane. Why was Biden installed? 

Certainly you cannot get much more globalist than the China-funded Penn Biden Center and the neo-liberal globalist views abundantly, fulsomely and exuberantly displayed there. Or on Nancy Pelosi's webpage. 

Biden-Pelosi are avid globalists, and support internationalism, alliances and the hypermobilized and worldwide US military. In effect, the global guard service for multinationals, on steroids from the Smedley Butler days. 

Trump was an oddball in such matters, perhaps corrupt on some scores as you say. The regime wanted a compliant president back in the Oval Office. Trump spoke of unilateralism, and leaving Afghanistan, Germany and S Korea. Trump lacked the intellect and discipline to accomplish much.

There is no Penn Trump Center advocating global interventionism. 

BTW, in the old days, we were told Russia was bad, bad, bad due to its being a communist nation.

Today, Russia is capitalist-kleptocrat nation---some say the same thing about the US. But we are still at odds with Russia? 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Trump spoke of unilateralism, and leaving Afghanistan, Germany and S Korea. Trump lacked the intellect and discipline to accomplish much.

There is no Penn Trump Center advocating global interventionism. 

 

There have been claims that Trump was not militarily aggressive or interventionist. I see no truth in that. He stated intent to take and keep Syria's oil, with military deployed in Syria to accomplish that end. He sought to invade Venezuela and take its oil, and the only reason he did not was because he was told it could not be done. There is that famous banquet of Latin American leaders in which Trump went around asking each one how they would feel about Trump taking over Venezuela--every single one, without exception, answered negatively, to his disappointment. Trump came into office threatening in the most unbelievably inflammatory language nuclear war on North Korea. He talked about relocating the entire population of Seoul, followed by giving an order to withdraw family members of US personnel from South Korea, an order which was simply not carried out even though Trump gave it, for fear on the part of generals and diplomats that it would spook North Korea into thinking an attack was imminent. Trump later did seem interested in a peace settlement with North Korea though it never happened.

Trump actually threatened a US ally, Iraq, with crippling "sanctions like they've never seen" (this to a country which has had hundreds of thousands of children's lives lost from sanctions) because the Iraqi parliament had asked the US to leave Iraq, which to Trump was a horrible affront meriting extremely severe punishment, wife-beater logic. Trump threatened millions of innocent civilians on the other side of the world with horrible suffering and consequences, collective punishment, for asking a guest to leave their space.

Trump has repeatedly, from beginning to end, criticized previous administrations for not taking and keeping Iraq's oil

There were fears that Trump would launch a war following the election.

But it is cited: Trump did not enter into any major wars. True, but not for not trying, in the case of Venezuela (which had done nothing against the US; zero self-defense rationale for invading Venezuela). He wanted to invade Venezuela. He did not get his wished-for invasion of Venezuela, and other military adventurisms such as forcibly taking control of other nations' oil supplies on the other side of the world, for the same reason his attempt to stay in power after losing the election did not succeed, because he was not able to do so, because he had not attained full control of the executive branch. He did not have his own generals in place who would carry out any orders he would give. That is the only reason the Trump presidency is not remembered for having gotten into wars, or staying in the presidency by force indefinitely after losing the election.

I keep thinking of one sincere young woman I remember way back in 2016 who, with utmost earnestness, said she had thought and thought about it every which way, and had come to the conclusion that Trump was simply not a good man.  

Trump's "America First" was not about being peaceful in the world, but about getting what a bully wants in the world.

There is no Penn Trump Center advocating peaceful resolution of international conflicts through the rule of law. With Trump, there are only two options I see: a fascist out of power, or a fascist in power. That's it, as far as Trump is concerned. The same dynamics that were operable with General Edwin Walker and right-wing politics in the early 1960s. 

 

Edited by Greg Doudna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

 

There have been claims that Trump was not militarily aggressive or interventionist. I see no truth in that. He stated intent to take and keep Syria's oil, with military deployed in Syria to accomplish that end. He sought to invade Venezuela and take its oil, and the only reason he did not was because he was told it could not be done. There is that famous banquet of Latin American leaders in which Trump went around asking each one how they would feel about Trump taking over Venezuela--every single one, without exception, answered negatively, to his disappointment. Trump came into office threatening in the most unbelievably inflammatory language nuclear war on North Korea. He talked about relocating the entire population of Seoul, followed by giving an order to withdraw family members of US personnel from South Korea, an order which was simply not carried out even though Trump gave it, for fear on the part of generals and diplomats that it would spook North Korea into thinking an attack was imminent. Trump later did seem interested in a peace settlement with North Korea though it never happened.

Trump actually threatened a US ally, Iraq, with crippling "sanctions like they've never seen" (this to a country which has had hundreds of thousands of children's lives lost from sanctions) because the Iraqi parliament had asked the US to leave Iraq, which to Trump was a horrible affront meriting extremely severe punishment, wife-beater logic. Trump threatened millions of innocent civilians on the other side of the world with horrible suffering and consequences, collective punishment, for asking a guest to leave their space.

Trump has repeatedly, from beginning to end, criticized previous administrations for not taking and keeping Iraq's oil

There were fears that Trump would launch a war following the election.

But it is cited: Trump did not enter into any major wars. True, but not for not trying, in the case of Venezuela (which had done nothing against the US; zero self-defense rationale for invading Venezuela). He wanted to invade Venezuela. He did not get his wished-for invasion of Venezuela, and other military adventurisms such as forcibly taking control of other nations' oil supplies on the other side of the world, for the same reason his attempt to stay in power after losing the election did not succeed, because he was not able to do so, because he had not attained full control of the executive branch. He did not have his own generals in place who would carry out any orders he would give. That is the only reason the Trump presidency is not remembered for having gotten into wars, or staying in the presidency by force indefinitely after losing the election.

I keep thinking of one sincere young woman I remember way back in 2016 who, with utmost earnestness, said she had thought and thought about it every which way, and had come to the conclusion that Trump was simply not a good man.  

Trump's "America First" was not about being peaceful in the world, but about getting what a bully wants in the world.

There is no Penn Trump Center advocating peaceful resolution of international conflicts through the rule of law. With Trump, there are only two options I see: a fascist out of power, or a fascist in power. That's it, as far as Trump is concerned. The same dynamics that were operable with General Edwin Walker and right-wing politics in the early 1960s. 

 

Greg D.

Verily, Trump was a nut, from the moon. Fascist? Maybe in the modern definition, although Trump's lionization of the military, or imperial foreign policy, seems rather muted by DC standards.

What say then of LBJ, Nixon, Bush, Bush jr? The Reagan defense build-up, Iran-Contra? If Trump is fascist, what term do you apply to the aforementioned? 

My point (perhaps belabored) is that Trump was not a member of the national security state-globalists, or any DC elite. He was an outsider, a former Reality TV show host, a carnival barker. 

You are correct, the national security state (the executive branch) did not report to Trump, and probably worked to undermine him. 

I may have a different opinion of you on the blob of globalists running US foreign policy, that I consider a paid-for front for multinationals.  

"Peaceful resolution of international conflicts through rule of law?"

Another oddity: It was Trump's Secy State Pompeo, who nearly alone on the global stage talked about Beijing and the CCP. Before the Trump Administration, all the globalist-academic-media blah-blah was on how China was "liberalizing" (this must still be the narrative at the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy & Global Engagement). 

Strange how the world turns...who would have thought the half-wit Trump could change the global conversation on the CCP? 

Anyway, I am just an old man living in the mudflats of central Thailand (it is monsoon season). No worries, DC is back to being run by the people who always run DC. I have no say in the matter. 

Just my two cents. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ben: When Biden's neoliberal, globalist views are germane. Why was Biden installed? 

Wrong!, Talk about drinking the Trump Kool aid. He wasn't installed, he was elected, by a strong margin. Yes Biden has contributors who are globalists, and Trump is a globalist. You seem to be another who got lost in a cave in Thailand. The world is globalist Ben. Whether you and i like it or not. These are facts.

In any of this anti globalist ideology you attributed to Trump, you were probably just biting the bait set up by Steve Banon. Are you really prepared to have a discussion about World globalism Ben? Maybe have the UK renounce the fruits you've in part been living off of all your life, and go off, honestly  on their own with scant resources, maybe a little fossil fuel at the worst possible time? They saw their problems centuries ago and created an empire that you've benefited from.  (Or maybe they didn't see their problem and were just naturally aspiring, greedy and warlike) heh heh
 
When I first came here. Many were still living the cold war paradigm  and there was no talk really of the corporate state. Every thing was the "government deep state" that derailed JFK 50 years ago. So as Greg as noted, What happened to the government deep state? They effectively 1)checked many of Trumps impulses toward being  a global bully, stopped several global confrontations, some that would have resulted in the loss of perhaps many lives, and 2)wouldn't play ball with his hopes for a fascist takeover of the U.S.. Oh, how could it be so!

We can call that "the reinstallation of the old regime" or a thwarting of an inept fascist coup or just a return to some normalcy. Again we could just say it's between picking the lesser of 2 evils, if you choose. But any hope of any lasting improvement hardly starts with a fascist takeover. And if you don't think a fascist takeover is worth avoiding Ben, well maybe I'm privileged, but all I can say  is, when an old duff like you tells me he has nothing to lose...I believe him!

heh heh,
 
 
Edited by Kirk Gallaway
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...