Thankyou, Tucker Carlson!!

[Joe Bauer]

Ford was the perfect choice to not just pardon Tricky Dick, but to keep control of the whole situation by the same WC/FBI cabal that controlled the JFK event investigation back in 1963/64.

I wonder whether Haig would have pardoned Nixon...or not.

[Kirk Gallaway]

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Ford was the perfect choice to not just pardon Tricky Dick, but to keep control of the whole situation by the same WC/FBI cabal that controlled the JFK event investigation back in 1963/64.

I wonder whether Haig would have pardoned Nixon...or not.

Joe, But it was Nixon who appointed Ford!

If Nixon is fighting for his political life from the "Deep state", wouldn't he just be giving them greater incentive to remove him from office by appointing their presumed "lackey" from the Warren Commission as VP to succeed him? 

[Paul Brancato]

2 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Paul:I always presumed that Agnew’s indictment was part of a move to get him out and put Ford in so that Nixon would be pardoned by someone with credibility. 

I'm not sure why?  I said they've been investigating Agnew since 1966!

Of all possible new VP's, what guarantee would there be that Nixon would pick Ford? There was no obvious conclusion he was going to pick Ford. 

So you think the whole end point was that whoever these powers be,they could be sure that Ford would pardon Nixon?  How could they be sure of that?

I'm trying to understand Ben's assertion.  If Nixon is fighting for his political life from the "Deep state", wouldn't he just be giving them greater incentive to remove him from office by appointing their presumed "lackey" from the Warren Commission as VP to succeed him? 

I'm just trying to logically play out, what it sounds like  your assumptions here. That doesn't mean I necessarily accept them.

I assumed, rightly or not, that it was Nixon’s plan to get Agnew out and Ford in, because he could see the writing on the wall and knew that an Agnew pardon would look bad.

[W. Niederhut]

41 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

I assumed, rightly or not, that it was Nixon’s plan to get Agnew out and Ford in, because he could see the writing on the wall and knew that an Agnew pardon would look bad.

And Ford was also the ultimate Deep State factotum -- as we saw with his Warren Commission performance.

J. Edgar Hoover had him over a barrel with that Ellen Rometsch sex tape.

Then, in January of 1976, Ford appointed "Mr. George Bush of the CIA" Director of the CIA.

Edited March 17, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Paul Brancato]

2 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

And Ford was also the ultimate Deep State factotum -- as we saw with his Warren Commission performance.

J. Edgar Hoover had him over a barrel with that Ellen Rometsch sex tape.

Then, in January of 1976, Ford appointed "Mr. George Bush of the CIA" Director of the CIA.

Thanks for that reminder - George Bush enters the scene and protects the CIA from further damage.

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

I assumed, rightly or not, that it was Nixon’s plan to get Agnew out and Ford in, because he could see the writing on the wall and knew that an Agnew pardon would look bad.

FWIW, Nixon knew he was in deep doo-doo, and used Agnew as a bargaining chip. Essentially, it was agreed upon that Agnew would step aside for his overt corruption, and receive a handslap, in exchange for the Watergate investigators taking a slower course with Nixon. It had become clear that forcing Nixon out and leaving Agnew in power would have been awful for the country--as Agnew was kinda like a Sarah Palin, not someone anyone, including Nixon, actually trusted. This then left the congressional mucky-mucks--not the CIA--but the likes of Teddy Kennedy and Barry Goldwater--to craft an acceptable replacement. Ford was one of them. He got appointed, and this freed Ervin etc to go after Nixon without leaving Agnew in place and having to go through it all over again. 

(Much of this comes from Agnew himself--who felt he'd been railroaded out of town. From the evidence against him to later come out, he was probably lucky as heck, as he may very well have been headed towards prison if not for Nixon's deal.)

[W. Niederhut]

I guess we can all thank Tucker Carlson & Fox Friends for the fact that over half of Republicans recently polled by the Economist believe that the January 6th attack on the U.S. Congress was a form of "legitimate political discourse."  🙄

Hurrah for "freedom of speech and expression" by the right-wing corporate media!

(I'm sure JFK would have approved, eh?)

More than a quarter of Republicans approve of Capitol attack
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/16/quarter-republicans-approve-capitol-attack-trump-legitimate-political-discourse

March 17, 2023

More than a quarter of Republicans approve of the January 6 Capitol attack, according to a new poll. More than half think the deadly riot was a form of legitimate political discourse.

The Economist and YouGov survey said 27% of Republicans either strongly or somewhat approved of the riot on 6 January 2021, which Donald Trump incited in an attempt to overturn his election defeat by Joe Biden.

Nine deaths, including law enforcement suicides, have been linked to the attack. More than 1,000 people have been arrested and hundreds convicted.

The longest sentence yet handed down is 10 years in prison, to a former New York police officer who assaulted Capitol officers. The statutory maximum sentence for seditious conspiracy, the most serious convictions yet secured, is 20 years.

Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection, but acquitted. The House January 6 committee made four criminal referrals regarding Trump to the Department of Justice. The federal investigation continues. 

 

[Matt Allison]

Spiro Agnew was comically corrupt, dirty to the core. And he was also well to the right of Nixon, bordering on fascist-curious.

He was not a victim or a martyr. He _______ around and found out. Consequences.

Edited March 18, 2023 by Matt Allison

[Leslie Sharp]

@John Cotter @Benjamin Cole
 

On the question of Matthew Koch’s banishment, today seems an appropriate day to refer to the ancient …

Irish Brehon Law and the Honor Price

. . .Every freeman was ranked, but rank was not determined by birth.  Instead, a person’s status in society was determined by his honor price.  Everyone had an “honor price”. 

The honor price had several functions in society and in law.  First, it was an assessment of his dignity, or “face”.  Honor price was called lóg n-enech literally “the price of his face".  In the old Irish language, “honor” and “face” are the same word; to make someone red in the face was synonymous with ‘offense against honor’. Among the free classes honor price was a man's most jealously guarded possession, more precious than life.  One of the most stringent punishments for an offence was the loss of one’s honor price.  Loss of honor price meant loss of social status and a decrease in rank.  It was to be avoided at all cost.

Secondly, a person’s honor price represented his or her present status in the community.  It was directly related to his material wealth.  The assessment of a person's property, that is, its character and value, including land, personal property, and clients, was vital to assess his honor price, and the honor price was an essential part of the Irish system of justice. It was symbolically represented by appropriate dress, equipment, manners, size of retinue and reputation.

Finally, the amount of compensation for any wrong depended on the amount of a person’s honor price.  The honor price was the payment due to any free man if his honor or rights were injured by another person.  The honor price fluctuated according to a man's fortunes, and this was important because compensation for wrongs was directly related to it. Consequently, the honor price was the most important element in the legal status of every freeman.  Native Irish law never subscribed to the principle of all citizens being equal before the law.  Thus an offense against a person of high rank entailed a greater penalty than the same offense against a person of lower rank.

If a person injured someone, a penalty was imposed.  When the penalty imposed was a fine, the fine was determined according to the level of the offense.  On the other hand, if the penalty imposed was the payment of a portion of the injured person’s honor price, it was according to the rank and quality of the person to whom it was paid. Thus, the requirement of the payment of a person’s honor price was a more serious penalty than a fine.  At a later stage of development, fixed penalties for specific crimes were established and enforced equally regardless of the rank of the victim.

Edited March 17, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Benjamin Cole]

6 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

I assumed, rightly or not, that it was Nixon’s plan to get Agnew out and Ford in, because he could see the writing on the wall and knew that an Agnew pardon would look bad.

I would have to go back and re-read some books...but on memory...

Really, did Nixon "select" Ford, or did Nixon more or less comply with establishment DC on this score?  My impression is Ford was installed, rather than chosen by Nixon. 

It is clear that Agnew was run out of town first. 

BTW, veep LBJ was so corrupt that LIFE magazine planned a career-ending expose...that was then canned due to the JFKA.

So the idea that Agnew was run out of town only because he was corrupt...well, not sure.  

Why not run LBJ out of town? 

So, ethical concerns are useful PR, except when they are not. 

Also, the Watergate burglary sure has the look of a CIA op.  Hunt, McCord and the operatives were all CIA, with the lone exception of the nut Liddy ( AFAIK). 

Alexander Butterfield, the man who revealed the Nixon taping system, was CIA. 

Woodward, the ONI guy, has his first j-job at the WaPo, the nation's premier political paper....

Really? 

IMHO Nixon was a war criminal. Laos cluster bombs, Agent Orange, Operation Phoenix...egads, horrifying. 

But my narrative is not about the red-blue pissing wars. Or whether Nixon deserved what he got. 

It is about how Presidents are removed from office by the intel state---JFK, Nixon or Trump.  

 

 

 

[Paul Brancato]

2 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

Spiro Agnew was comically corrupt, dirty to the core. And he was also well to the right of Nixon, bordering on fascist-curious.

He was not a victim or a martyr. He f*cked around and found out. Consequences.

He never went to jail 

[Paul Brancato]

1 hour ago, Leslie Sharp said:

@John Cotter @Benjamin Cole
 

On the question of Matthew Koch’s banishment, today seems an appropriate day to refer to the ancient …

Irish Brehon Law and the Honor Price

. . .Every freeman was ranked, but rank was not determined by birth.  Instead, a person’s status in society was determined by his honor price.  Everyone had an “honor price”. 

The honor price had several functions in society and in law.  First, it was an assessment of his dignity, or “face”.  Honor price was called lóg n-enech literally “the price of his face".  In the old Irish language, “honor” and “face” are the same word; to make someone red in the face was synonymous with ‘offense against honor’. Among the free classes honor price was a man's most jealously guarded possession, more precious than life.  One of the most stringent punishments for an offence was the loss of one’s honor price.  Loss of honor price meant loss of social status and a decrease in rank.  It was to be avoided at all cost.

Secondly, a person’s honor price represented his or her present status in the community.  It was directly related to his material wealth.  The assessment of a person's property, that is, its character and value, including land, personal property, and clients, was vital to assess his honor price, and the honor price was an essential part of the Irish system of justice. It was symbolically represented by appropriate dress, equipment, manners, size of retinue and reputation.

Finally, the amount of compensation for any wrong depended on the amount of a person’s honor price.  The honor price was the payment due to any free man if his honor or rights were injured by another person.  The honor price fluctuated according to a man's fortunes, and this was important because compensation for wrongs was directly related to it. Consequently, the honor price was the most important element in the legal status of every freeman.  Native Irish law never subscribed to the principle of all citizens being equal before the law.  Thus an offense against a person of high rank entailed a greater penalty than the same offense against a person of lower rank.

If a person injured someone, a penalty was imposed.  When the penalty imposed was a fine, the fine was determined according to the level of the offense.  On the other hand, if the penalty imposed was the payment of a portion of the injured person’s honor price, it was according to the rank and quality of the person to whom it was paid. Thus, the requirement of the payment of a person’s honor price was a more serious penalty than a fine.  At a later stage of development, fixed penalties for specific crimes were established and enforced equally regardless of the rank of the victim.

Interesting and new to me. For many Native American and Canadian tribes crimes resulted in loss of honor, banishment. 

[Leslie Sharp]

17 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Interesting and new to me. For many Native American and Canadian tribes crimes resulted in loss of honor, banishment. 

I'm aware of that as well, Paul.

Hopefully a scholar on the subject will weigh in, but for now, I actually read the Honor Price in a somewhat different light.  Mr. Koch was  causing some to be "embarrassed" or turn red faced caused by his insults and disgusting remarks, attacking their dignity (did he lodge a permanent image in some minds of me hysterically grabbing for Prozac?!), which weakens their honor which affects credibility and livelihood. Presumably it's comparable to defamation in English Law.   

I could be misinterpreting Honor Price altogether. (homework!)

Edited March 18, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Ron Bulman]

Veterans Bust Through Fox News, Call For Tucker Carlson's Removal (msn.com)

[Benjamin Cole]

Add on:

 

"The Senate confirms Ford's nomination by a vote of 92-3. The House confirms Ford's nomination by a vote of 387-35. In front of a Joint Session of Congress, Ford is sworn in as 40th Vice President by Chief Justice Warren Burger."

---30---

Remember, Nixon could not select anybody. He had to select someone who would be approved by the House and Senate---the DC establishment, so to speak. Those are lopsided votes in Congress for a man who would become America's first unelected President. 

The establishment wanted Ford as president.