U.S. And International Politics

[Steve M. Galbraith]

If the supposed "Deep State" wanted to get JFK in 1963, remove him from power, they didn't need to shoot him in broad daylight in the middle of the street with hundreds of people watching. And then have to cover it up for decades (which is impossible to do anyway). That is sheer idiocy and only the most close minded conspiracists think otherwise.

How to get JFK? They could have used "lawfare", the same type of things some used to try and get Trump. Leak damaging information, falsify evidence, use the security powers to undermine him. This absurd conspiracy that people believe in is ridiculous. It can't be done.

Question: So why didn't these supposed all powerful people in the Deep State try that first? Wouldn't that be what you would do before shooting him in this ridiculous plan you think happened?

The idea that one group of people in the Deep State would kill JFK and then the next group of people - and the next, and the next - would coverup for them is...how can anyone believe this? We have Republicans in power exposing the abuses that were done to get Trump. Which is exactly what would have happened with JFK.

The so-called Deep State is the bureaucracy, the administrative state. It's filled with all sorts of people with different views and interests. The idea that it's a monolithic, single "blob" of people is simply false.

But the conspiracy Left and MAGA conspiracy Right foolishly think they do. Which is why we have the Morleys and the Becks and Stones and the Lunas and the DiEugenios and the Bannons in agreement. Two sets of people who otherwise loathe one another.

[Tom Graves]

If the supposed "Deep State" wanted to get JFK in 1963, remove him from power, they didn't need to shoot him in broad daylight in the middle of the street with hundreds of people watching. And then have to cover it up for decades (which is impossible to do anyway). That is sheer idiocy and only the most close minded conspiracists think otherwise.

How to get JFK? They could have used "lawfare", the same type of things some used to try and get Trump. Leak damaging information, falsify evidence, use the security powers to undermine him. This absurd conspiracy that people believe in is ridiculous. It can't be done.

Question: So why didn't these supposed all powerful people in the Deep State try that first? Wouldn't that be what you would do before shooting him in this ridiculous plan you think happened?

The idea that one group of people in the Deep State would kill JFK and then the next group of people - and the next, and the next - would coverup for them is...how can anyone believe this? We have Republicans in power exposing the abuses that were done to get Trump. Which is exactly what would have happened with JFK.

The so-called Deep State is the bureaucracy, the administrative state. It's filled with all sorts of people with different views and interests. The idea that it's a monolithic, single "blob" of people is simply false.

But the conspiracy Left and MAGA conspiracy Right foolishly think they do. Which is why we have the Morleys and the Becks and Stones and the Lunas and the DiEugenios and the Bannons in agreement. Two sets of people who otherwise loathe one another.

Dear Steve M.,

Are you pro-Trump?

If so, how did you get so messed up?

What "abuses" against Trump were committed by the other side to "get" him, politically speaking?

Retaining Christopher Steele to create an 80%-correct raw-intel "Dossier" on him that was, unfortunately, marred by disinfo from his primary source, probable KGB agent Igor Danchenko?

-- Tom

[Royell Storing]

Dear Steve M.,

Are you pro-Trump?

If so, how did you get so messed up?

What "abuses" against Trump were committed by the other side to "get" him, politically speaking?

Retaining Christopher Steele to create an 80%-correct raw-intel "Dossier" on him that was, unfortunately, marred by disinfo from his primary source, probable KGB agent Igor Danchenko?

-- Tom

   "What abuses.....?". How about the Colorado State Supreme Court? They OK'd taking Trump off the POTUS Ballot, and Trump had been convicted of Nothing.

[Tom Graves]

This thread is for discussion on United States politics: which includes local, state, and federal elections, important political issues, political news, and the Biden Administration.

In response to a 7/28/25 article in SJO Daily about former CIA officer Susan Miller and her "take" on Tulsi Gabbard's recent accusation that the Obama Administration had manufactured intelligence assessments about Russian interference in the 2016 election, Michael Griffith posted the following:

"It would be nice if [Susan White] addressed the actual facts in the congressional (sic) report that refutes (sic) everything she says. The report is very specific about what evidence was relied on to make their assessment [that the Russians had waged a massive influence campaign on the Internet to help Trump get "elected"] and it was weak, to put it mildly. Stronger, more reliable evidence that contradicted the [CIA's] findings were (sic) excluded. She’s the professional and the report is public information now. Address it head on."

. . . . . . . .

Comrade Griffith,

What "actual facts" in the Congressional Report that allegedly "refute everything she said" in the article are you referring to?

What "stronger, more reliable information" that contradicts the CIA's findings that the Russians tried to help Trump get "elected" are you referring to?

How was the information that the CIA relied on to make its assessment "weak"?

Do you deny that "former" KGB officer Vladimir Putin had his folks meddle in our election (not by trying to hack our vote-tallying machines and software, but by waging a large-scale anti-Hillary / pro-Trump influence campaign on the Internet) so that The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx") could be elected our "President"?

[Tom Graves]

"What abuses.....?". How about the Colorado State Supreme Court? They OK'd taking Trump off the POTUS Ballot, and Trump had been convicted of Nothing.

Comrade Storing,

The Colorado Supreme Court correctly determined that The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx") was disqualified from being placed on the Colorado ballot due to the fact that he had incited the 1/6 insurrection. The fact that its decision was overturned by the Leonard Leo-packed U.S. Superior Court doesn't change that fact.

Were you at or inside the Capitol on 1/6, Storing?

[Royell Storing]

Comrade Storing,

The Colorado Supreme Court correctly determined that The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx") was disqualified from being placed on the Colorado ballot due to the fact that he had incited the 1/6 insurrection. The fact that its decision was overturned by the Leonard Leo-packed U.S. Superior Court doesn't change that fact.

Were you at or inside the Capitol on 1/6, Storing?

    The above is what You consider "Due Process"? Now I understand why you address me as "Comrade".

[Tom Graves]

The above is what You consider "Due Process"? Now I understand why you address me as "Comrade".

Comrade Storing,

Concerns about "Due Process" are triggered by three things as they relate to an individual: Life, Liberty, and Property

How would Trump's name's not appearing on the Colorado ballot deprive him of any of those things?

I call you "Comrade" because you, "former" KGB officer Vladimir Putin, and The Traitorous Orange Bird ("rhymes with "Xxxx") seem to have the same vision for America.