Tucker Carlson did it again

[James DiEugenio]

Is this the scene you are talking about that was cut?

 

 

[Ron Bulman]

9 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Is this the scene you are talking about that was cut?

 

 

You beat me to it!  I posted it in another thread a couple of years ago.

Edited January 22, 2023 by Ron Bulman

[William Paris]

Pompeo has spent a lot of time on Fox.  However, I don’t think he’s been on since TC started his “campaign”.   So…. with the power he has at Fox he should make it clear Pompeo doesn’t t get any airtime until he sits and answers questions.  If he runs in 2024 Pompeo has no shot without Fox.  For now, Tucker owns him

[Benjamin Cole]

6 minutes ago, William Paris said:

Pompeo has spent a lot of time on Fox.  However, I don’t think he’s been on since TC started his “campaign”.   So…. with the power he has at Fox he should make it clear Pompeo doesn’t t get any airtime until he sits and answers questions.  If he runs in 2024 Pompeo has no shot without Fox.  For now, Tucker owns him

Interesting. 

Funny how the airwaves are filled with former intel officials---CNN, MSNBC, CBS you name it---but when someone wants to talk about the JFKA, they all vamoose. 

The WaPo made a former intel guy---Bob Woodward---their big White House-security reporter, and sent Jefferson Morley packing. 

I wonder---you say Pompeo needs Fox. But what if the "liberal" media backs Pompeo? 

 

[Matt Allison]

39 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

You beat me to it!  I posted it in another thread a couple of years ago.

It really is an incredible scene. Possibly my favorite one in an absolutely brilliant film.

Some of my film critic buddies believe Nixon to be an even better movie than JFK; while I mostly view it as the logical sequel.

[Ron Bulman]

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

Some of my film critic buddies believe Nixon to be an even better movie than JFK; while I mostly view it as the logical sequel.

That is a natural, logical sequence.  I think I'll recommend it to my kids.  As they don't read much more than a long post on their phone.  Stone's JFK, then Nixon.  Film might spur their interest.  

[Ron Bulman]

4 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

With regard to Howard Hunt, unless I'm mistaken, Nixon was right there in the thick of it with the planning for what became the Bay of Pigs invasion, and I assume he was already on friendly terms with Hunt before he became President.

I can't assume that myself Matt.  Nixon in that day and time as VP, I'd think would have dealt with Dulles or his immediate subordinates, Hunt was an operative on a lower level. 

However, I wonder.  If by the time of Nixon's reelection, he might have known Hunt's name.  Wasn't Hunt involved in CREEP?

[Matt Allison]

38 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

However, I wonder.  If by the time of Nixon's reelection, he might have known Hunt's name.  Wasn't Hunt involved in CREEP

Oh he most certainly knew Hunt's name

There's this infamous quote from 6/23/1972:

NIXON: "Of course, this is a, this is a Hunt, you will-that will uncover a lot of things. You open that scab there's a hell of a lot of things and that we just feel that it would be very detrimental to have this thing go any further. This involves these Cubans, Hunt, and a lot of hanky-panky that we have nothing to do with ourselves."

[Joseph McBride]

Thanks for that source, Matt. It's not definitive

but suggestive about Helms. I hadn't read the piece before

and am disappointed in David Ansen badmouthing

Stone's JFK film in retrospect, since Ansen bravely

praised it in his review in 1991 in the same issue

when Newsweek trashed it in their cover story.

[Ron Bulman]

43 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

Oh he most certainly knew Hunt's name

There's this infamous quote from 6/23/1972:

NIXON: "Of course, this is a, this is a Hunt, you will-that will uncover a lot of things. You open that scab there's a hell of a lot of things and that we just feel that it would be very detrimental to have this thing go any further. This involves these Cubans, Hunt, and a lot of hanky-panky that we have nothing to do with ourselves."

This is your fault Matt.  I'd not thought of the hanky panky comment in years.

 

[James DiEugenio]

That is such an interesting scene for one reason because neither of those guy sis a method actor.  Yet its very well done.

That has to be Sam's best performance.

[Matthew Koch]

This fits in with Tucker Carlson and his audience and why we are seeing stories like Nixon and The Watergate Burglers: 

https://www.rt.com/news/570287-davos-global-elites-fear/

The Davos establishment reveals whom it truly fears

This year’s World Economic Forum featured calls to “master the future” and blamed right-wing populists for the rising distrust in global elites

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Matthew Koch said:

This fits in with Tucker Carlson and his audience and why we are seeing stories like Nixon and The Watergate Burglers: 

https://www.rt.com/news/570287-davos-global-elites-fear/

The Davos establishment reveals whom it truly fears

This year’s World Economic Forum featured calls to “master the future” and blamed right-wing populists for the rising distrust in global elites

Looks like RT News is censored / blocked in my region. 
 

Nothing like a bit of censorship to build trust. #1984 

[Matthew Koch]

1 minute ago, Chris Barnard said:

Looks like RT News is censored / blocked in my region. 
 

Nothing like a bit of censorship to build trust. #1984 

 

The World Economic Forum at Davos used to be THE place to see and be seen, but the idea of the richest and most influential people in the world hobnobbing around a common agenda for the world has lost its luster as the policies peddled by its attendees spark increased skepticism among average citizens. 

Forum founder Klaus Schwab, the de facto frontman of the organization, has cranked out one distasteful hit after another in recent years. He has spoken of how the organization “penetrates the cabinets” of governments in its recruitment efforts.  He coined the term “The Great Reset,” about which he published a book just a few months into the Covid-19 pandemic in July 2020, advocating that the pandemic be used as inspiration to “reimagine our world” at a time when much of the globe was locked down on orders of their governments – many members of which were Davos regulars. There was little appetite to turn lockdowns into a permanent lifestyle change, but here was Klaus promoting the benefits of burying the old life – all under the pretext of an event that the WEF had already wargamed in October 2019 in New York, just ahead of the crisis, in an exercise called “Event 201.” “The exercise will bring together business, government, security and public health leaders to address a hypothetical global pandemic scenario,” the WEF announced at the time. It’s all just a bit too creepy.

It’s the constant effort of top-down global coordination around murky financial interests laundered through the Davos agenda that irks the common person. The fact that just a single leader of a G7 country attended this year’s event speaks volumes about how poorly it’s now viewed. The premier of the western Canadian province of Alberta, Danielle Smith, said of the WEF after her cabinet’s swearing-in ceremony last October: “I find it distasteful when billionaires brag about how much control they have over political leaders. That is offensive…the people who should be directing government are the people who vote for them. Quite frankly, until that organization stops bragging about how much control they have over political leaders, I have no interest in being involved with them.”

Those invited to preach at the altar during the high mass of globalism this year seemed to know exactly what kind of sermon the crowd wanted to hear. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz was apparently the only G7 leader who thought it would be a good look to be seen hanging out with the unelected masters of the planet while Westerners – and Europeans in particular – grapple with the high cost of their governments’ policies in their daily lives. Scholz doubled down on the same green dreams that put Germany’s economy in peril with no viable backup plan once the European Union had effectively cut off Russian energy through sanctions.

“Most importantly, our transformation toward a climate-neutral economy, the fundamental task of our century, is currently taking on an entirely new dynamic. Not in spite of but because of the Russian war, and the resulting pressure on us Europeans to change. Whether you are a business leader or a climate activist, a security policy specialist or an investor, it is now crystal clear to each and every one of us that the future belongs solely to renewables. For cost reasons, for environmental reasons, for security reasons, and because in the long run, renewables promise the best returns,” Scholz said in his address. 

Meanwhile, Germany is firing its coal power plants back up and reconsidering its nuclear power phase-out. How about worrying about how German industry is going to function in the next year when green initiatives, such as hydrogen imports from Portugal and Norway, aren’t set to even get off the ground until at least 2030? Scholz used his time at the podium at Davos to greenwash the economic uncertainties that Germany faces as a result of the EU’s energy sanctions on Russia. In other words, green hopes and dreams took center stage in this pitch to global investors, thus providing a convenient distraction from the more worrisome current realities.

Greenwashing was joined at Davos by the pitching of anti-democratic initiatives via concern trolling. During a panel discussion dedicated to “disrupting distrust” – which really should have been called “How can we get people to better swallow our nonsense?” – Richard Edelman, the CEO of the eponymous global communications firm, blamed the derailments on right-wingers. “My hypothesis on that is that right-wing groups have done a really good job of disenfranchising NGOs. They’ve challenged the funding sources. They’ve associated you with Bill Gates and George Soros. They’ve said that you’re world people, as opposed to what you are, which is local,” Edelman lamented, ignoring the fact that they wouldn’t have needed to fly their private jets to a “local” event. What he’s really attacking are dissidents, many of whom just happen to be populists and right-leaning. And no doubt the fact that they’re digging into the special interests laundered through many NGOs makes the job of PR pros such as Edelman more challenging.

Edelman is a despicable human being – his job is literally being a professional xxxx!” Tweeted billionaire Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk, whose controversial purchase of the social media platform and subsequent reversal of its heavy-handed censorship policies haven’t exactly endeared him to the Davos crowd. Mocking Schwab’s call to “master the future” in the opening keynote, Musk tweeted, “’Master the Future’ doesn’t sound ominous at all … How is WEF/Davos even a thing? Are they trying to be the boss of Earth!?” Musk then took a Twitter poll that found that 86% of 2.4 million respondents answered ‘no’ to the question of whether the WEF should “control the world.”

A WEF spokesman said that Musk hasn’t been invited to the gathering since 2015. Musk confirmed his lack of interest in attending: “My reason for declining the Davos invitation was not because I thought they were engaged in diabolical scheming, but because it sounded boring af lol.”

Boring, indeed – in the same way that a cult meeting where everyone nods their heads in agreement is a snooze fest. The last time things were even remotely interesting at Davos was when former US President Donald Trump showed up and rejected the Davos mantra of climate change doom. “The message represents a sharp departure from the official playbook at the World Economic Forum, where this year's theme is ‘Stakeholders for a Cohesive and Sustainable World’,” wrote CNN in January 2020. 

Who asked them, though? These elites represent no one’s interests but their own, which are economic and are for the benefit of their shareholders – hence the forum’s name. If the average citizen is now waking up to the fact that anything coming out of Davos should be scrutinized through that lens, then it can only be a good thing for freedom, democracy, and national sovereignty.

 

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Matthew Koch said:

 

The World Economic Forum at Davos used to be THE place to see and be seen, but the idea of the richest and most influential people in the world hobnobbing around a common agenda for the world has lost its luster as the policies peddled by its attendees spark increased skepticism among average citizens. 

Forum founder Klaus Schwab, the de facto frontman of the organization, has cranked out one distasteful hit after another in recent years. He has spoken of how the organization “penetrates the cabinets” of governments in its recruitment efforts.  He coined the term “The Great Reset,” about which he published a book just a few months into the Covid-19 pandemic in July 2020, advocating that the pandemic be used as inspiration to “reimagine our world” at a time when much of the globe was locked down on orders of their governments – many members of which were Davos regulars. There was little appetite to turn lockdowns into a permanent lifestyle change, but here was Klaus promoting the benefits of burying the old life – all under the pretext of an event that the WEF had already wargamed in October 2019 in New York, just ahead of the crisis, in an exercise called “Event 201.” “The exercise will bring together business, government, security and public health leaders to address a hypothetical global pandemic scenario,” the WEF announced at the time. It’s all just a bit too creepy.

It’s the constant effort of top-down global coordination around murky financial interests laundered through the Davos agenda that irks the common person. The fact that just a single leader of a G7 country attended this year’s event speaks volumes about how poorly it’s now viewed. The premier of the western Canadian province of Alberta, Danielle Smith, said of the WEF after her cabinet’s swearing-in ceremony last October: “I find it distasteful when billionaires brag about how much control they have over political leaders. That is offensive…the people who should be directing government are the people who vote for them. Quite frankly, until that organization stops bragging about how much control they have over political leaders, I have no interest in being involved with them.”

Those invited to preach at the altar during the high mass of globalism this year seemed to know exactly what kind of sermon the crowd wanted to hear. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz was apparently the only G7 leader who thought it would be a good look to be seen hanging out with the unelected masters of the planet while Westerners – and Europeans in particular – grapple with the high cost of their governments’ policies in their daily lives. Scholz doubled down on the same green dreams that put Germany’s economy in peril with no viable backup plan once the European Union had effectively cut off Russian energy through sanctions.

“Most importantly, our transformation toward a climate-neutral economy, the fundamental task of our century, is currently taking on an entirely new dynamic. Not in spite of but because of the Russian war, and the resulting pressure on us Europeans to change. Whether you are a business leader or a climate activist, a security policy specialist or an investor, it is now crystal clear to each and every one of us that the future belongs solely to renewables. For cost reasons, for environmental reasons, for security reasons, and because in the long run, renewables promise the best returns,” Scholz said in his address. 

Meanwhile, Germany is firing its coal power plants back up and reconsidering its nuclear power phase-out. How about worrying about how German industry is going to function in the next year when green initiatives, such as hydrogen imports from Portugal and Norway, aren’t set to even get off the ground until at least 2030? Scholz used his time at the podium at Davos to greenwash the economic uncertainties that Germany faces as a result of the EU’s energy sanctions on Russia. In other words, green hopes and dreams took center stage in this pitch to global investors, thus providing a convenient distraction from the more worrisome current realities.

Greenwashing was joined at Davos by the pitching of anti-democratic initiatives via concern trolling. During a panel discussion dedicated to “disrupting distrust” – which really should have been called “How can we get people to better swallow our nonsense?” – Richard Edelman, the CEO of the eponymous global communications firm, blamed the derailments on right-wingers. “My hypothesis on that is that right-wing groups have done a really good job of disenfranchising NGOs. They’ve challenged the funding sources. They’ve associated you with Bill Gates and George Soros. They’ve said that you’re world people, as opposed to what you are, which is local,” Edelman lamented, ignoring the fact that they wouldn’t have needed to fly their private jets to a “local” event. What he’s really attacking are dissidents, many of whom just happen to be populists and right-leaning. And no doubt the fact that they’re digging into the special interests laundered through many NGOs makes the job of PR pros such as Edelman more challenging.

Edelman is a despicable human being – his job is literally being a professional xxxx!” Tweeted billionaire Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk, whose controversial purchase of the social media platform and subsequent reversal of its heavy-handed censorship policies haven’t exactly endeared him to the Davos crowd. Mocking Schwab’s call to “master the future” in the opening keynote, Musk tweeted, “’Master the Future’ doesn’t sound ominous at all … How is WEF/Davos even a thing? Are they trying to be the boss of Earth!?” Musk then took a Twitter poll that found that 86% of 2.4 million respondents answered ‘no’ to the question of whether the WEF should “control the world.”

A WEF spokesman said that Musk hasn’t been invited to the gathering since 2015. Musk confirmed his lack of interest in attending: “My reason for declining the Davos invitation was not because I thought they were engaged in diabolical scheming, but because it sounded boring af lol.”

Boring, indeed – in the same way that a cult meeting where everyone nods their heads in agreement is a snooze fest. The last time things were even remotely interesting at Davos was when former US President Donald Trump showed up and rejected the Davos mantra of climate change doom. “The message represents a sharp departure from the official playbook at the World Economic Forum, where this year's theme is ‘Stakeholders for a Cohesive and Sustainable World’,” wrote CNN in January 2020. 

Who asked them, though? These elites represent no one’s interests but their own, which are economic and are for the benefit of their shareholders – hence the forum’s name. If the average citizen is now waking up to the fact that anything coming out of Davos should be scrutinized through that lens, then it can only be a good thing for freedom, democracy, and national sovereignty.

 

 

It looks to me that ‘the Davos lot’ / WEF are really in the crosshairs of the public at the moment, which is good. Blair’s speech was deplorable.