Nov 052019
 
 November 5, 2019  Posted by at 9:11 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,


Pablo Picasso Olga in a hat with feather 1920

 

Trump Refuses To Rule Out Government Shutdown If Impeachment Continues (Ind.)
Trump’s Impeachment Lures Democrats Into a Cold War Mentality (Maté)
How Far Will They Go? (Kunstler)
Nobody Talks About Impeachment on the Campaign Trail (Atl.)
Democratic Party, Not Russia, Has Delegitimized the Democratic Process (Vos)
Ryanair Says ‘Real Risk’ It Will Have No MAX Aircraft To Fly Next Summer (R.)
Ryanair Says Its Boeing 737 MAX Jets Will Not Fly Before Summer 2020 (Ind.)
FBI Tried To Make Iceland A Complicit Ally In Framing Julian Assange (Ind.au)
Julian Assange: The Lynching of the Charismatic Geek (GR)

 

 

It will get a lot crazier than it has so far.

Trump Refuses To Rule Out Government Shutdown If Impeachment Continues (Ind.)

Donald Trump has refused to rule out forcing a government shutdown if Democrats do not stop their impeachment inquiry into him. “We’ll see what happens,” the US president said when asked about the possibility of agencies being shuttered. During the last shutdown in December and January, hundreds of thousands of workers were furloughed or put on unpaid leave, while others in essential services, like hospital care, air traffic control and law enforcement, worked without pay for 35 days. It was the longest ever. Asked about Democrat concerns that he could shut down the government again if they continue to pursue and impeachment inquiry against him, Mr Trump replied: “I don’t think they believe that at all,”


Speaking on the White House lawn, he added: “I wouldn’t commit to anything. It depends on what the negotiations are.” Congress has a deadline of 22 November to reach a funding agreement before triggering a shutdown. Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer last week, said he was “increasingly worried” that Mr Trump could hold the US government hostage as a result of his anger with the impeachment inquiry which was launched last month after a whistleblower complaint from the unidentified US intelligence official who was concerned that the president’s actions on Ukraine were illegal and jeopardised national security.

Read more …

The political agendas of the so-called witnesses.

Trump’s Impeachment Lures Democrats Into a Cold War Mentality (Maté)

In the case of Taylor, arming Ukraine was a condition of his willingness to serve in the job. When the Trump administration asked him to take the position in Kiev, Taylor recalls thinking, “I could be effective only if the US policy of strong support for Ukraine… were to continue.” Taylor even told Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, “If US policy toward Ukraine changed, he would not want me posted there and I could not stay.” No wonder then, that Taylor was upset when he began to hear rumblings that US military assistance to Ukraine was in jeopardy. Another star witness, Vindman, offers a similar outlook. Russia, he says, “has manifested an overtly aggressive foreign policy” necessitating “a deterrent.”

To Vindman, that deterrent is “a strong and independent Ukraine,” which, he believes, is “critical to US national security interests because Ukraine is a frontline state and a bulwark against Russian aggression.” Morrison concurs, declaring that the administration’s policy “was to make sure the United States’ longstanding bipartisan commitment to strengthen Ukraine’s security remained unaltered.” In his view, “security sector assistance… is, therefore, essential to Ukraine.” Given their open dedication to ensuring the continuation of US military aid to Ukraine, it is reasonable to question if the trio’s interpretations of decisions and conversations about freezing military aid were colored by their own policy preferences. As The Washington Post put it, Vindman “told lawmakers that he was deeply troubled by what he interpreted as an attempt by the president to subvert U.S. foreign policy.”

While undoubtedly many Democrats and Republicans share Vindman’s foreign policy views, it should be up to the president, not unelected bureaucrats, to decide US foreign policy. Even if their recollections are accurate, the consequence of embracing their collective worldview is worth considering. We do not need wade far into the intricacies of the Russia-Ukraine conflict to know that the position of Taylor, Vindman, and Morrison—and by extension, the entire liberal political and media establishment now cheering them—is well to the right of what the Democratic Party embodied just one administration ago. The very US military assistance that Trump froze is the same that President Barack Obama refused to provide during his last years in office. Obama feared, as The New York Times noted in 2015, that US weapons sent to Ukraine “would only escalate the bloodshed” in the Donbass and possibly “[end] up in the hands of thugs” (a likely reference to far-right Ukrainians, which proved prescient).

Read more …

“They” as in the FBI and CIA. “Ciaramella has just been hung out to dry by his sponsor, Rep. Adam Schiff in a desperate attempt to dissociate himself from the huggermugger within his House Intel Committee that preceded the falsely blown whistle.”

How Far Will They Go? (Kunstler)

The CIA and the FBI are in a fight for their lives now. The evidence shows pretty clearly that these rogue agencies conducted all the election “meddling” of 2016 and that the RussiaGate hysteria was an engineered smokescreen to hide their tracks and cover their asses when the certainty of a Hillary election triumph nauseatingly resolved unfavorably in the cold, gray dawn of 11/8/16. Despite the chatter about an “insurance policy,” they were quite unprepared for the exposure that loomed. They also badly underestimated the resources of what is now a very sturdy alt.media which has managed to weave the real story of what happened over the past three years into a shocking tapestry of massive subversion and treachery.

A big part of the true story is how amazingly incompetent the RussiaGate coupsters were. Did they really believe they could conceal the ties between their agencies and Glenn Simpson’s Fusion GPS operation, and its feckless front man, British ex-spy Christopher Steele, and the whole outfit’s connection to Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee? Did they suppose they could pass off Stephan Halper and Joseph Mifsud as Russian agents when the two have consorted with US and allied intelligence for decades? The US Department of Defense even holds Mr. Halper’s million-dollar pay stubs and Mr. Mifsud appears in photographs of every Western cloak-and-dagger cocktail get-together of spook officialdom for the last twenty years.

The latest, and most desperate gambit is the UkraineGate whistleblower, a CIA employee blatantly playing errand-boy for his mentor John Brennan and deeply tied to 2016 election shenanigans emanating from Ukraine, featuring his former employer, ex-Vice-President Joe Biden. This shadowy figure, pegged as Eric Ciaramella, 33, may shortly find himself in a grand jury chamber answering for his role in this charade. Ciaramella has just been hung out to dry by his sponsor, Rep. Adam Schiff in a desperate attempt to dissociate himself from the huggermugger within his House Intel Committee that preceded the falsely blown whistle.

Read more …

It’s all the media talk about, but it’s still not a winner. That says a lot.

Nobody Talks About Impeachment on the Campaign Trail (Atl.)

of the 13 candidates there, just one mentioned impeachment: Tom Steyer, the billionaire activist whose political group and TV ads over the past two years have helped mainstream the idea of removing the president. Steyer argues that his long record of being outspoken in favor of impeachment is a key part of why people should support his candidacy, yet his mention of impeachment Friday night got a warm but not overwhelming response. For the rest, despite all their Trump bashing that the crowd ate up—starting with Iowa Democratic Party Chair Troy Price’s introduction with “Let’s beat Donald Trump and send his ass back to Russia!”—impeachment was absent.

Was that the right call? I asked Janet Petersen, the leader of the Democrats in the state Senate, at the end of the night. “Probably,” she said. Iowans care about impeachment, and are paying attention to the national-security and economic-security issues at stake, “but that doesn’t prevent them from paying attention to things that matter, like paying for preschool.” It’s not that the candidates are going easy on the president. They appear to hate Trump and everything he stands for. The most cynical view is that candidates are making a brute-force political calculation, allowing others to speak up so that they can avoid risk. But Pete Buttigieg claims at least part of what’s going on is that candidates, like everyone else, can’t quite wrap their head around everything happening.

“On some level, you could say that the stakes right now, the level of crisis we’re facing, is so great that it’s almost impossible to speak to it through a traditional political process like a campaign,” Buttigieg told me in South Carolina last weekend. “In many ways, we may yet be underreacting.” Of course, part of being a politician is giving people what they want to hear. The candidates aren’t just guessing that they shouldn’t be talking about impeachment—they have teams of advisers and internal polls and focus groups and months of personal interactions that are telling them the topic gets them nowhere, for the same reasons they didn’t talk much on the trail about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report before or after a redacted version of it was released in the spring.

Even Andrew Yang—the candidate who finishes his rallies chanting, “Not left, not right—forward!”—on Friday afternoon threw in this line as he spoke to the crowd in Iowa: “If this is a game of rock-paper-scissors, Donald Trump is the scissors and I am the fucking rock!” But a few minutes later, marching across a bridge in front of hundreds of supporters chanting his name and his slogans, Yang told me that voters don’t want to hear about impeachment, and that he doesn’t think there’s much point in talking about it anyway. “We have to face facts, where not a single Republican crossed the aisle to support the impeachment vote,” he said. “That would certainly suggest that impeachment’s going to run aground in the Senate and this is going to wind up Donald Trump claiming innocence and vindication.”

Read more …

We need a special counsel.

Democratic Party, Not Russia, Has Delegitimized the Democratic Process (Vos)

Establishment Democrats and those who amplify them continue to project blame for the public’s doubt in the U.S. election process onto outside influence, despite the clear history of the party’s subversion of election integrity. The total inability of the Democratic Party establishment’s willingness to address even one of these critical failures does not give reason to hope that the nomination process in 2020 will be any less pre-ordained. The Democratic Party’s bias against Sen. Bernie Sanders during the 2016 presidential nomination, followed by the DNC defense counsel doubling down on its right to rig the race during the fraud lawsuit brought against the DNC, as well as the irregularities in the races between former DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Tim Canova, indicate a fatal breakdown of the U.S. democratic process spearheaded by the Democratic Party establishment.


Influences transcending the DNC add to concerns regarding the integrity of the democratic process that have nothing to do with Russia, but which will also likely impact outcomes in 2020. The content of the DNC and Podesta emails published by WikiLeaks demonstrated that the DNC acted in favor of Hillary Clinton in the lead up to the 2016 Democratic primary. The emails also revealed corporate media reporters acting as surrogates of the DNC and its pro-Clinton agenda, going so far as to promote Donald Trump during the GOP primary process as a preferred “pied-piper candidate.” One cannot assume that similar evidence will be presented to the public in 2020, making it more important than ever to take stock of the unique lessons handed down to us by the 2016 race.

Read more …

How are they ever going to allow the thing to fly, and who will volunteer to be crew or passengers?

Ryanair Says ‘Real Risk’ It Will Have No MAX Aircraft To Fly Next Summer (R.)

Ryanair on Monday said there was a real risk that it would have no Boeing 737 MAX aircraft flying next summer if there are additional delays to the return to service of the grounded aircraft. “We have now reduced our expectation of 30 MAX aircraft being delivered to us in advance of peak summer 2020 down to 20 aircraft and there is a real risk of none,” Chief Executive Michael O’Leary said in a video presentation. “We have already reduced our passenger growth forecast … we may have to cut that again but frankly there is no point in keeping on changing the number until we get more certainty,” he said.

Read more …

“In July it was reported that Ryanair was renaming the Max as the “8200”.

Ryanair Says Its Boeing 737 MAX Jets Will Not Fly Before Summer 2020 (Ind.)

Ryanair will not fly the Boeing 737 Max before next summer, the airline’s chief executive has predicted. Europe’s biggest budget airline has 210 Max aircraft on order in a unique, high-capacity configuration, called the Max 200. Deliveries were due to begin in April 2019. But the plane has been grounded worldwide since March following two fatal accidents – both blamed on an anti-stall system known as MCAS. While Boeing has repeatedly insisted that the system will be made safe and the 737 Max will be flying by the end of 2019, Michael O’Leary said his airline will not operate them for a further six months.


He told the BBC Today programme: “Frankly we’ve now accepted they will be delayed beyond next March. “We now don’t expect to get them until summer next year, and then only 20 of them rather than the original 60 that Boeing had contracted to deliver. It’s a big challenge for us.” In July it was reported that Ryanair was renaming the Max as the “8200”. But the Ryanair boss said: “It’s a very safe aircraft, it’s a great aircraft, it has 4 per cent more seats, it operates with 16 per cent less fuel consumption and will enable us to offer lower fares at lower cost than ever.”

Read more …

Not an entirely new story, but important anyway. And attention for Assange in Australian media is long overdue.

FBI Tried To Make Iceland A Complicit Ally In Framing Julian Assange (Ind.au)

A minister of the interior wakes up one summer morning and finds out that a plane full of United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents has landed in his country, aiming to carry out police investigations without proper permission from the authorities. How many statesmen would have the strength to say, “No, you can’t do this”, to the United States? Former Icelandic Interior Minister Ögmundur Jónasson, in fact, did this — and for the sake of investigative journalism. He understood that something wrong with the sudden FBI mission in Reykjavik, and that this had to do with the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks and its publisher Julian Assange. Initially, it looked like a simple matter of collaboration against cyber attacks.

Mr Jónasson told IA: “In June 2011 I was told that U.S. intelligence had discovered that hackers were preparing an attack on Icelandic governmental institutions. I was asked if we wanted to cooperate with the Americans.” Of course, Iceland was interested in hearing what they had to say and then the idea was to evaluate whether to cooperate and to what extent. Icelandic police officers went to Washington and American officers visited Iceland in order to map the problem out, but no proof of possible attacks emerged. However, in August 2011, a plane full of FBI agents accompanied by prosecutors landed in Reykjavik. Jónasson says: “When I heard of this, I asked my colleagues in the Ministry if, unknown to me, the FBI had been given permission to carry out police work in Iceland. I certainly had not given such a permission and the decision should anyway have been on my table.”

He then spoke with the Chief of Icelandic Police, having been told a meeting had been planned. Jónasson explains: “I knew that the FBI were on the way to Police Headquarters with the intention to map out co-operation linked to the WikiLeaks issue. I requested that no such meeting should take place and that there should be no further contact whatsoever.” The FBI agents were not permitted to carry out any police work in Iceland. But this was not only about defending Iceland´s sovereignty. According to Mr Jónasson, during this process, he had been informed that the FBI showed up in Reykjavik with the aim of framing Julian Assange. While it would be logical to ask for some kind of documentary proof to this effect, Jónasson is clear:

“I am the proof. When I say they came here to frame Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, I don’t say this lightly, I am selecting my words very carefully, I know what I am talking about. I am stating this in accordance with my word of honour that I knew this was the case. I have testified to this effect in front of a parliamentary committee and in the parliamentary assembly, and my words have not been contested”>

Read more …

Coverage of Greta Thunberg’s Asperger is all positive. How about Assange?

Julian Assange: The Lynching of the Charismatic Geek (GR)

Once upon a time, there was a very bright little boy in Australia who grew up as stranger to conventional society. His mother went from husband to husband, from theater to cult, always on the eccentric margins, while the boy’s natural father was left behind. As an adolescent he found his own world in cyberspace, which offered a field for his insatiable curiosity. As he learned about that great world out there and its secrets, he developed his very own rigorous ethic: his vocation was to search for true facts and share them with the public. Living outside the usual social codes, his moral compass was uninhibited by the usual niceties. Truth was truth, deception was wrong, lies on the part of the powerful should be exposed.

The original sin of Julian Assange was the same as that of Galileo Galilei. Galileo sinned by revealing to the people things the elite already knew or at least surmised, but wished to keep secret from the masses, in order not to shake the people’s faith in the official truth. Assange did the same thing with the formation of WikiLeaks The official version of reality was challenged. All lies should be exposed. By far the most sensitive targets of his wide-ranging reality revelations were the lies, the hypocrisy, the inhuman brutality of the United States in its wars of global hegemony. To Assange, these things were simply wrong. At first, WikiLeaks attracted a great deal of popular attention and even acclaim. Julian Assange became famous. He was a geek, but he didn’t look like a geek.

Tall, handsome, striking with his nearly white hair, Julian was something strange: a charismatic geek. He arrived in Sweden with near superstar status. Swedish women contrived to get him into their beds. They bragged about having sex with Julian: he was a trophy lover. But the charismatic geek didn’t know the social codes of the peculiar Swedish forms of virtuous promiscuity. This lacuna was exploited by his enemies in extravagantly unpredictable ways. Julian Assange tried to straighten out what seemed to be a serious misunderstanding before leaving Sweden. But the Swedish side failed to make matters clear and he left for London. In London, he was quickly taken up by the radical chic branch of the British upper class, the champagne and caviar humanitarians. The naïve charismatic geek who didn’t know the social codes no doubt thought he was among friends. He didn’t belong to any political or social movement in the UK, he depended on the beautiful people who for a time found him an interesting outsider, one of their latest causes.

Julian Assange may have been socially naïve, but he very acutely perceived what the imperial powers were working up against him. The totally unjustifiable demand for extradition to Sweden for questioning – unjustifiable because they had declined to question him while he was there and then declined to question him in the UK – appeared to Julian to be an obvious device to enable Sweden to extradite him to the United States, given the total obedience of post-Olof Palme Sweden to the wishes of Washington. Others didn’t see this so clearly, except for the excellent President of Ecuador at the time, Rafael Correa. Correa offered Assange asylum in the tiny Ecuadorian embassy in London. Assange, unconventional, negligent of the codes, but with a clear view of the danger stalking him, jumped the bail set up for him and moved into the embassy.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

Home Forums Things November 5 2019

This topic contains 12 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by  Dr. D 1 week, 6 days ago.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #51059

    Pablo Picasso Olga in a hat with feather 1920   • Trump Refuses To Rule Out Government Shutdown If Impeachment Continues (Ind.) • Trump’s Impeach
    [See the full post at: Things November 5 2019]

    #51060

    V. Arnold
    Participant

    Pablo Picasso Olga in a hat with feather 1920
    What a great drawnig. Very nice.

    It’s November 5th!
    Remember, remember, the fifth of November, the gunpowder treason and plot; I know of no reason why the gunpowder treason should ever be forgot. Guy Fawkes-1605

    The Day of the Dead (Spanish: Día de Muertos) is a Mexican holiday celebrated throughout Mexico on November 5th.
    In Mexican culture, death is viewed as a natural part of the human cycle.

    #51061

    The Day of the Dead plays a major role in the excellent movie Under the Volcano after Malcolm Lowry’s book of the same name.

    #51062

    V. Arnold
    Participant

    I never did see that movie (or read the book); sounds like I missed something…

    #51064

    Dr. D
    Participant

    “Chuck Schumer last week, said he was “increasingly worried” that Mr. Trump could hold the US government hostage”

    Of course there’s a simple solution to all that worry and anger: DO YOUR JOB. If you think there are impeachable offenses, it is your job and DUTY to Impeach and send the matter onward through the process. Though the Heavens Fall. But since no one has integrity, no one believes what they’re saying and then acts on it. That goes for Mr. T as well, who is constantly “Somebody oughta look into all this nonsense in the executive branch.” Yes indeed. You, sir.

    But hardly worth comment because these are not punches, but fighters circling. Should anyone ever do their job, you know, arresting people, maybe then we might write a sports article on it. So far one guy has lost his pension and two cases are still in court. We are still in 15 wars with 300 military bases. The CIA/NSA is still spying on every American every day, and Clapper who lied about it is still unindicted for perjury. …Unlike any of us, I daresay. I’m being spied on like every citizen is, while he lives in safe, private, luxury. Like all Socialist Deep State Regimes. “Thank God for the Deep State!” he says only 6 months after denying there is any Deep State at all. NYTimes says, “What? We were always at war with Estasia.”

    Anyway, Schumer, I believe you mistake yourself. It is not for the House to run the Impeachment. That Trial and investigation legally belongs to the Senate. So you’re trying to be, not just the policeman, not just the Judge, not just the Executive, to micromanage every aspect of that department, but to be the U.S. Senate as well? …Well, claiming power over all branches of the U.S. government and the People, plus the 5th, the Media, still makes you less overreaching than the British Supreme Court which oversees all government, all referendums, and all people planetwide through time and space, including the Queen. So in that way Mr. Schumer, maybe you’re not power-grabby enough.

    Listen: have evidence, which you must or you wouldn’t be attempting to subpoena witnesses like a court, then Impeach. If not, go back to the people’s business. But the courtroom trial belongs EXCLUSIVELY TO THE SENATE. Maybe the Senate should Impeach the whole House of Representatives instead. Why not? It’s no different a power grab than Schiff and Schumer are pulling by replacing McConnell.

    “arming Ukraine was a condition of his willingness”

    Thinking of this as the willingness of UKRAINE to do the CIA’s job. And this is what will get them. Unlike many secret services, which have toppled every government in history, the CIA is not allowed to spy on home citizens. So therefore they need to coordinate with other nations (5 Eyes), and when even unlimited carte blanche is not enough power and overreach, to use their own drug and arms and human trafficking black money to set themselves up inside another government, and direct and use that government as a front operation to openly control and attack their supposed legal overseers back home. Problem: this makes them both not American, as they have made themselves a 3rd party stateless state, roving the earth like a cloud, but also the literal definition of treason: conspiring with a foreign government to overthrow the real, legitimate government you have a claimed allegiance to. This is why Ukraine was set up, far, far larger although not the first time by any means. Why the nation they chose also happened to be the home of the Kazars I leave to history.

    “Did they really believe they could conceal the ties between their agencies and…” everyone else?

    No. And they don’t bother to today. They don’t need to because the media just reports whatever they feel like, completely fact and logic-free. And the people believe it all because they also just feel like it, and love lies more than air as long as they can “win” and get it over on somebody. When you reach that level of morality, there’s really nothing to save you.

    “Iowans care about impeachment,”

    No. No they don’t. Asked about Russia and Russian interference, even a year ago before Mueller closed, the response was statistically close to zero, like 0.1%. The belief that the GOVERNMENT itself, like Congress, was the biggest threat to Americans is like 70%.

    But what did I say a second ago? They just lie and make it up, forgetting that article and statistics were well worn only a few weeks ago. Poof! Gone. Just like Whistleblower #1 and #2. Or the Transcript they pretend we haven’t all read, a few days before a general complained he wasn’t able to get into the White House servers and plant evidence with a rogue edit.

    “Yang told me that voters don’t want to hear about impeachment,”

    This is why Yang is a normal person and not a lunatic. And THAT is why they won’t give him debate time or report him in the news, shutting him out like Bernie, like Gabbard, or like Paul in 2012. Non-lunatic, non #AntiLogos opinions are verboten by the Party. Open debate, opinions, and discussion is like sunlight to vampires. Or as below, also against honesty, fair process, and not screwing their own party members with crooked, illegal, disenfranchising, and election-losing primaries. They need to get their soul back, but the Left and Center are fumbling and have no path yet. The Right has a soul around here somewhere, but maybe they should do what it says once in a while.

    “Ryanair Says Its Boeing 737 MAX Jets Will Not Fly Before Summer 2020 (Ind.)”

    As regulators caused this by making it far too hard to certify a plane, causing Boeing to do anything to make it the “same” rather than go through that endless process, exactly the same they will not allow Boeing to just put on 3 sensors and fix the software, which would get them safely back in the air while developing a different new hull for the new engines. But here we’ll pile on Boeing for it. What do you think they can or should do? Put all the 737s in a parking lot and light them on fire? A mistake was made but it’s just engineering and can be fixed. The planes themselves were never in any danger: any manual pilot could have flown them effortlessly. Only the SOFTWARE was in danger. As usual. Unrelated news: Waymo is now running free self-driving cars which have one sensor and one software. Everyone cheers.

    FBI Tried to Make Iceland a Complicit Ally in Framing Julian Assange (Ind.au)”

    Well this is what the FBI DOES. This is who they ARE. Ever heard of J. Edgar? After 50 non-stop years of this I don’t know where they get more illusion-juice from. Was infiltrating anti-war Hippies and then Quakers not a clue to anyone? Was paying fines for railroading anthrax-scientist and protecting Whitey Bulger not a clue? Nope! They always, always, always, always, always, always, always, always, love power and will do anything power asks, instantly, at any time, without question, then cover for them in news stories for 1,000 years, although the facts could not be more obvious. Oh, and the FBI had no idea Epstein was trafficking a few thousand woman, internationally, for 20 years, as a insider billionaire, to the world’s biggest leaders, including the President either.

    And when you have such men, such boot-spittle toadies who lick the crotch of any apparatchik, however small, is it a Republic? Can you keep it? “Every nation gets the government it deserves.” — Joseph de Maistre

    “They bragged about having sex with Julian: he was a trophy lover.”

    Very first warning flag. Bright red. And so it proved again.

    #51065

    The advantages of silencing Assange: people can claim anything at all that would support any claim at all no matter how absurd. Assange and Wikileaks heave denied any link to Stone, and he himself has too. But it no longer matters with Julian locked up in solitary.

    Literally nothing in this report from NPR is true. But who cares anymore?

    Roger Stone, Trump Friend And Alleged Tie To WikiLeaks, Faces Trial In Washington

    Stone and some of his associates may have been links in a chain that connected Trump in New York City with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in London, who at the time had confined himself in the Ecuadorian Embassy there.

    Assange, in turn, was in contact with Russia’s military intelligence agency, the GRU, which had stolen a trove of embarrassing material from political targets in the United States. WikiLeaks released many of those emails and other documents with disruptive effects on political life in the U.S. — and enjoyed public encouragement by Trump and his campaign. What Mueller’s investigation revealed was how much Trump and aides worked to get more.

    The campaign built into its plans the expectation that there would be more damaging revelations about Hillary Clinton, and Trump’s campaign bosses also sought contact with some people connected with the interference over the course of the election season.

    Charging documents in Stone’s case describe a message from one of Stone’s contacts depicting the person in a photo taken outside the Ecuadorian Embassy — implying that he’d visited Assange — and other messages in which Stone and associates discuss the prospect of more “dumps” from WikiLeaks.

    #51067

    zerosum
    Participant

    How Far Will They Go?


    Clusterfuck Nation – Blog
    November 4, 2019
    ” ….the real story of what happened over the past three years into a shocking tapestry of massive subversion and treachery…..”

    The elites don’t care who knows because they don’t think that the rif-raf can change the system.
    History is on the side of the elites.
    Is France different now that before the French revolution?

    What happened to the yellow vests?
    No change Same-oll, same-oll

    About for the umbrella demonstration in Hong Kong.
    Will the present elites be replaced by other elites?

    There are populous demonstrators in many countries.
    Yep! The elites are entrenched and the rif-raf are failing to make the elites make major social/economic changes.

    #51068

    Dr. D
    Participant

    “may have been links”

    …Or may not. That’s how it’s done now.
    “Was alleged,” …by an un-credible source, a certified liar and lunatic and also transparently wrong…
    “Who has links to,” …Lives in the same city as…
    “The NYT reported that,” …using the same un-credible non-sources and unsubstantiated smears as CNN, who quotes Buzzfeed, who quotes Vox…who quotes the NTY in a giant twit-circle.

    All perfectly true. They’ll report that local man, killed by police, had guns and contraband, not bibles and charity donations. Both are true.

    Never forget: he’s an “austere, venerated gentleman scholar, an unarmed father of three, brutally gunned down without trial.”

    How does this work? It’s all because of YOU, fair reader. YOU put up with this instead of pushing their lies out of society. YOU keep referring to CNN for updates on the Overton window, instead of referring to the truth.

    Since they are indeed so bad that describing their lies and crimes contaminates us, I have sometimes wondered if we should post only solution links, permaculture, insulation, sustainability, tree-planting links. But that would be a different blog indeed.

    #51069

    zerosum
    Participant

    heheheh The 3 monkeys cannot read.
    November 05, 2019
    A Timeline Of Joe Biden’s Intervention Against The Prosecutor General Of Ukraine
    (This is a working thread intended to be updated when new details come to light.)
    The Washington Post provided a timeline of the 2015/206 intervention by then-Vice President Joe Biden against the then-General Prosecutor of Ukraine, Viktor Shokin. Shokin was investigating Mykola Zlochevsky, the owner of the gas company Burisma Holdings which paid Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden at least $50,000 per month for being on its board.
    We used that timeline to show that Biden’s intervention reached its height shortly after the prosecutor confiscated Zlochevsky houses.
    A new report by John Solomon, based on released State Department emails, supports the suspicion that Joe Biden and others intervened against Shokin on behalf of Burisma and on request of his son:

    Click on the link at the right and see the reference.
    https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/11/a-timeline-of-joe-bidens-intervention-against-the-prosecutor-general-of-ukraine.html#more

    #51070

    chettt
    Participant

    Finally Dr. D makes a statement that puts the whole 737 scare affair into it’s proper perspective. The 737 max is the latest iteration of an exceptionally safe and reliable airplane. The problem, as we all now know, was not the plane, not the heavy motors, not even the sensor; the problem was and is the fact that the control philosophy overriding the software development has morphed from one where the control system software was developed to service the pilot’s needs to one where the pilot is just considered a backup system.
    I’d bet that the design team for the first generation 737 control system was headed by a control engineer to provide the pilot with information and assistance to make the flight as safe and comfortable as possible. Software development and coding would have been subordinate and focused on servicing the requirement of the control engineers. But over the last few decades things have changed. Sensors have gotten cheap and tiny. Computer processing has seen both exponential increases in power and decreases in size and cost. People figure that adding some additional code to an existing software package cost nothing except maybe a little programming time and some testing.
    I’d bet that the MACS software upgrade was developed by some software engineer and approved by some manager with a Management/Software Design degree.I say this because the control logic used in this sub loop is a complete rookie mistake that no self respecting control engineer would ever make. The idea of a logic loop that uses a single point of failure to take complete control of critical control systems is absolutely ludicrous. Such a critical loop should at least have had it’s own warning light and a disable switch mounted directly underneath. The pilot would have easily recovered and reported the failed sensor upon landing.
    Keep in mind that this new safety feature was implemented because a computer analysis determined that the plane had a slightly higher chance of stalling under certain circumstances. I don’t know of any reported instances where the system actually was needed and worked as planned. This was not a critical safety system. The pilot could have easily recovered by disabling the MACS. It does not require 3 sensors. 3 sensors would be overkill.

    #51071

    John Day
    Participant

    Ilargi,

    You asked about the DNC email download vs hack 2 days ago, and nobody got back to you.
    The forensics determined that the data left the system much faster than it could through an internet connection, so a direct download to a memory stick, Analysis here:
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51106.htm

    Most people think Craig Murray carried the data stick from Seth Rich to Julian Assange. Murray and Assange keep mum. Murray does say this:

    The Real Muellergate Scandal

    #51072

    zerosum
    Participant

    https://johnsolomonreports.com/
    election, State Department saw Burisma as Joe Biden’s issue, memos show
    November 5, 2019

    Memos newly released through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the Southeastern Legal Foundation on my behalf detail how State officials in June 2016 worked to prepare the new U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, to handle a question about “Burisma and Hunter Biden.”
    In multiple drafts of a question-and-answer memo prepared for Yovanovitch’s Senate confirmation hearing, the department’s Ukraine experts urged the incoming ambassador to stick to a simple answer.

    https://www.scribd.com/document/433598562/Burisma-QA

    Uploaded byJohnSolomon
    Description:
    Questions and answers drafted in June 2016 by the State Department for incoming Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, including what to say about Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma Holdings.Full description

    #51078

    Dr. D
    Participant

    This is a good point, since the State Department, all officials CLEARLY saw a conflict of interest. So much so they took time out to cover the Ambassador’s busy schedule to spend valuable time on it (coach a witness). So even supposing everyone’s innocence, this is why you cannot allow Hunter in the area, because it will create the APPEARANCE of a conflict of interest any time Biden takes action, and THAT then leads to other problems, especially credibility problems. That the State Department and others knew this — and clearly they know this back home considering the Biden/media defense — shows that they knew what they were doing was, at least to some extent, wrong and problem-causing.

    And that would even be with every completely squeaky-clean in the most corrupt nation on earth, a scenario I do not believe at all. Q: How guilty do you have to be to be arrested anymore? A: No one knows. We have yet to arrest anyone.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.