Is This About the JFK Records? Daily Beast Savages RFK Jr.

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, K K Lane said:

The notion that RFK Jr might become President highlights the transparency problem of the last 6 decades.

Until now, all presidents have more or less been the least transparent possible.   And the HSCA and AARB were certainly "controlled" by folks that didn't want a full-bore investigation.   A potential RFK Jr. presidency would be a game-changer.

First off, this dithering that Biden is doing (as Trump and others did) would stop.  But it goes beyond that because there would, for the first time be active pressure to be more forthcoming - to decide "should we release X" questions in favor of transparency.   Beyond that:

• What if the president actively encouraged "whistleblowers" with promise of protection
• What if the white house actively sought out information from its departments instead of limiting "transparency" to the bare minimum
• What if the president encouraged other countries (e.g. Mexico) to share their files.

The stonewalling that the executive branch does to Congress would be disrupted substantially if the white house itself is pursuing the information.

Agree

[John Cotter]

12 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I posit that RFK Jr.  represents a threat---and a real threat, for obvious reasons---to those who want to keep the JFK Records buried. This is On Topic. 

I agree, Benjamin.

[W. Niederhut]

31 minutes ago, John Cotter said:

I agree, Benjamin.

John,

    This reminds me of people who myopically focus on "single issues" in U.S. elections-- abortion, Second Amendment, etc.--while ignoring the broader, critical issues at stake in our elections.

    Of course, the release of the classified JFK records is an issue for 2024, and beyond, but there is far more at stake with Steve Bannon's RFK dirty trick.

     If RFK's candidacy succeeds in putting a Republican back in the White House, we can anticipate more of the same old destructive GOP/Koch policies-- sabotaging the EPA and climate change mitigation, undermining health care for the poor, more tax cuts for the rich, no gun control, rolling back voting rights, women's rights, etc.

 

Edited April 9, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, K K Lane said:

The notion that RFK Jr might become President highlights the transparency problem of the last 6 decades.

Until now, all presidents have more or less been the least transparent possible.   And the HSCA and AARB were certainly "controlled" by folks that didn't want a full-bore investigation.   A potential RFK Jr. presidency would be a game-changer.

First off, this dithering that Biden is doing (as Trump and others did) would stop.  But it goes beyond that because there would, for the first time be active pressure to be more forthcoming - to decide "should we release X" questions in favor of transparency.   Beyond that:

• What if the president actively encouraged "whistleblowers" with promise of protection
• What if the white house actively sought out information from its departments instead of limiting "transparency" to the bare minimum
• What if the president encouraged other countries (e.g. Mexico) to share their files.

The stonewalling that the executive branch does to Congress would be disrupted substantially if the white house itself is pursuing the information.

KK--

Thanks for commenting, and adding substantively to this thread. 

Yes, the CIA, and affiliated media, and present administration, do not want transparency regarding the JFK Records. 

Both parties are deficient. 

This transcends politics.

[W. Niederhut]

49 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

KK--

Thanks for commenting, and adding substantively to this thread. 

Yes, the CIA, and affiliated media, and present administration, do not want transparency regarding the JFK Records. 

Both parties are deficient. 

 

Sure, Ben.

It's your same old false equivalence song and dance-- as if there are no substantial policy differences between Donks and 'Phants regarding critically important 21st century issues like climate change, environmental protection, wealth inequality, health care, gun control, voting rights, women's rights, banning books, etc.

Are you familiar with the disastrous legacy of the George W. Bush and Trump administrations on issues like tax policy, the EPA, the Kyoto and Paris Accords?

Where would rational, informed people rank the JFK records/CIA issue in importance relative to these substantive policy issues for the future?

And your interpretation of this Daily Beast article is misguided, at best.

They have a valid point about RFK's problematic stance on vaccines and the public health.

Edited April 9, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Sure, Ben.

It's your same old false equivalence song and dance-- as if there are no substantial policy differences between Donks and 'Phants regarding critically important 21st century issues like climate change, environmental protection, wealth inequality, health care, gun control, voting rights, women's rights, banning books, etc.

Are you familiar with the disastrous legacy of the George W. Bush and Trump administrations on issues like tax policy, the EPA, the Kyoto and Paris Accords?

Where would rational, informed people rank the JFK records/CIA issue in importance relative to these substantive policy issues for the future?

And your interpretation of this Daily Beast article is misguided, at best.

They have a valid point about RFK's problematic stance on vaccines and the public health.

W-

There are certainly some policy differences between the two major political parties. 

The internet has oceans and oceans of content and debate in that regard. There are threads within the EF-JFK set aside for such conversations. 

I am focusing on the CIA-linked The Daily Beast hatchet job on RFK Jr. , which called RFK Jr. the "worst possible" presidential candidate...due to his skepticism regarding vaccines?

The generally leftish The Daily Beast has become a single-issue voter publication? 

I do not buy that. 

I posit The Daily Beast is putting torpedoes into RFK Jr. as he is the only candidate who would likely open up the JFK Records.

As to the JFK Records, I cannot distinguish any policy differences between the two major political parties, as suggested by the excellent comment from KK.  

Both major parties evidently have ironclad intentions to bury the JFK Records. 

 

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

W-

There are certainly some policy differences between the two major political parties. 

The internet has oceans and oceans of content and debate in that regard. There are threads within the EF-JFK set aside for such conversations. 

I am focusing on the CIA-linked The Daily Beast hatchet job on RFK Jr. , which called RFK Jr. the "worst possible" presidential candidate...due to his skepticism regarding vaccines?

The generally leftish The Daily Beast has become a single-issue voter publication? 

I do not buy that. 

I posit The Daily Beast is putting torpedoes into RFK Jr. as he is the only candidate who would likely open up the JFK Records.

As to the JFK Records, I cannot distinguish any policy differences between the two major political parties, as suggested by the excellent comment from KK.  

Both major parties evidently have ironclad intentions to bury the JFK Records. 

 

Ben,

    I'm glad that you have finally grasped what I have been telling you for the past several weeks-- i.e., that both political parties, including Trump and Pompeo in 2017, have refused to release the JFK records.

    As for your latest theory that the Daily Beast has criticized RFK, Jr. (for his prominent role in promoting vaccine disinformation during the deadly COVID pandemic) because they are mainly concerned about the release of the JFK records-- it's quite a stretch.

    For one thing, RFK, Jr. is never going to be nominated or elected by the Democratic Party.   He has even been repudiated by the Kennedy family.  RFK, Jr. is mainly being used by Trump's dirty tricksters-- Steve Bannon and Roger Stone-- to undermine the 2024 Democratic nominee for the Presidency.   And there's a great deal at stake there for the public.  (See my comments above for details.)

    I'll leave it at that, and take a break from your latest, of many, JFK records threads here.

    Meanwhile, I'd still like to know why the administrator(s) recently removed our original 2020 thread here about Trump and the JFK records from this board-- which included informative commentaries by James DiEugenio and others--while leaving several of your misleading, anti-Donk threads about the JFK records on this board.

Edited April 9, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[James DiEugenio]

Daily Beast is one of the very worst online sites there is.

They did a hatchet job on Oliver's JFK Revisited.

One of the things they said was that we had all WASP males speaking.

I did not know JFK researchers practice Affirmatve Action.

But even at that, we had two females, Lisa Pease and Deb Conway.

Plus Gary Aguilar was born in Mexico and Henry Lee in Taiwan.

I wanted to reply to that, but Rob WIlson advised me not to.  We should not give something that stupid the time of day.

And let us not forget, they carried that BS stuff from Max Holland about the KGB disinfo that Tim Weiner then parroted. And now Arun Starkey repeats.

Just remember, editor TIna Brown was married to Harold Brown and Harold brought out Case Closed.  And paid for the BS NY TImes ad for the book.

Then TIna hired Posner as their investigative journalist. Until he was exposed as a serial plagiarist.

Edited April 9, 2023 by James DiEugenio

[Kirk Gallaway]

31 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Daily Beast is one of the very worst online sites there is.

Which is probably why Ben has been reading nothing else but the Daily Beast from Thailand!

I come back here and I see this thread about the Daily Beast from Ben, and I'm thinking. "Did Ben, all this time single handedly keep this lame thread alive?

But No, Ben had another thread, about the Daily Beast reviewing that stupid movie about Marilyn Monroe and the Kennedys. We informed him what a lame online site the Daily Beast is, but it's too late, he's hooked!

The Daily Beast is not in the list of top  50 most  visited online news sites. I couldn't check further.

And what's the conspiracy here? No matter what you think, you're living in a bubble if you don't think RFK Jr. isn't going to be assailed for his vaccine policy.

You remember you also thought we were being manipulated against Trump. But no, the majority of us denied Trump the Presidency by 7 million votes!

Now we're trying to bite our tongue about who was being manipulated.

[Benjamin Cole]

34 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Daily Beast is one of the very worst online sites there is.

They did a hatchet job on Oliver's JFK Revisited.

One of the things they said was that we had all WASP males speaking.

I did not know JFK researchers practice Affirmatve Action.

But even at that, we had two females, Lisa Pease and Deb Conway.

Plus Gary Aguilar was born in Mexico and Henry Lee in Taiwan.

I wanted to reply to that, but Rob WIlson advised me not to.  We should not give something that stupid the time of day.

And let us not forget, they carried that BS stuff from Max Holland about the KGB disinfo that Tim Weiner then parroted. And now Arun Starkey repeats.

Just remember, editor TIna Brown was married to Harold Brown and Harold brought out Case Closed.  And paid for the BS NY TImes ad for the book.

Then TIna hired Posner as their investigative journalist. Until he was exposed as a serial plagiarist.

I am happy to find out that James DiEugenio is a WASP. 

Dick Russell has written about CIA-The Daily Beast links. But then, Russell might be a WASP, so he can be dismissed. 

If The Daily Beast was truly a "progressive" or liberal-left publication, I think they might author a piece regarding RFK along the lines of----

"We endorse RFK for president, but hope he continues to review his stances on vaccines, and take advice from broad range of scientists. Vaccines in many regards have proven track records, notably against polio, and many other menaces. But RFK Jr. would be preferable to a range of other Democratic Party candidates and almost all Republican candidates." 

Instead, The Daily Beast called RFK  "the worst possible candidate."

I suspect The Daily Beast hit piece it is due to the RFK Jr. threat to open up the JFK Records. 

RFK Jr. is "the worst possible candidate" on the basis of a single issue? A lesser issue at that?

Something smells bad at The Daily Beast. 

I might actually vote again, if RFK Jr. can win the nomination....

[Kirk Gallaway]

6 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Instead, The Daily Beast called RFK  "the worst possible candidate."

Wrong, if you can't get your quotes down Ben, use the "copy and paste" function. "The title of the article is "RFK Jr. would be the worst possible President Kennedy."

First off, I don't necessarily believe the Daily Beast is CIA because Ben Cole says so. He's also just recently refused to give evidence that Faucci is personally invested in the Wu Han lab, and conveniently quotes another of his alleged CIA sources, Business Insider, when it suits his interest.

Apart from that, would you suppress their right to criticize RFK's vaccine policy simply  because you don't agree with it?

You made me read the article, which I suspect you haven't. The article is focused on the vaccine topic, that's not unusual. It wasn't supposed to be an article about all of RFK's stands on the issues. And that's done all the time. As I suspected, they could probably do a more effective job of attacking RFK Jr's policy, but they're the Daily Beast.

Over all effect at changing existing opinions of a relatively few current Daily Beast readers?  IMO, very little.

[Ron Bulman]

16 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I am happy to find out that James DiEugenio is a WASP. 

Dick Russell has written about CIA-The Daily Beast links. But then, Russell might be a WASP, so he can be dismissed. 

I think your right after all, it was just a scrum.

[Mark Knight]

By the very nature of his posts, Ben has (unknowingly?) argued that this thread is about the "deep state."

Therefore, it's as much about JFK DEEP POLITICS as any on The Education Forum. Had this thread not mentioned the "deep state," and instead focused on the proposed policies of RFK Jr., and a promise to open the JFK records, there would be a better argument for keeping this thread on the JFK ASSASSINATION DISCUSSION forum.