Trump being called a Truther

[Tracy Riddle]

The last several days I've heard various corporate media talking heads (specifically Chris Matthews and Chris Hayes) call Donald Trump a 9/11 Truther ("accusing Bush of bringing the towers down!"). I'm not sure what kind of game they're playing. Perhaps it's an attempt to hurt Trump by linking him to "those crazy people." Establishment heads have been exploding because Trump actually stated well-documented facts (Bush didn't do his job before 9/11, ignored warnings, did not keep us safe, lied about Iraq and WMD). This hardly make him a "Truther," but it's bizarre how the Establishment keeps trying to rewrite history. They know very well how most Americans have very short memories.

[David Guyatt]

Interesting Tracy. To me this suggests considerable sensitivity about 9/11 and the need to keep it in the realms of conspiracy theory and linking it Trump seems almost certainly an attempt to destroy his credibility due, I imagine, to a fear that if he wins he will immediately change the direction the US is going. Hitherto I have been enormously suspicious of Trump, but might have to modify that opinion? On the other hand we all know that the elite have many tools to bring people into line and to ensure the corrupt system they've put in place is maintained. But it's still early days.

[R.K. Locke]

FWIW I am still convinced that Trump is only there to help his friends the Clintons.

[Tracy Riddle]

I've suspected the same thing, RK. And then you look at how Morning Joe Scarborough and Mika (daughter of Zbigniew) on MSNBC have been boosting Trump every way they can. it's hard to not to see that the whole thing is some kind of elaborate theater.

[Drew Phipps]

Don't forget that Trump is a Birther, too. At least as far as Cruz is concerned.

And Cruz and Rubio (and I presume other right wing/Tea Party types) have raised the spectre of a Scalia conspiracy.

It's amusing that its easy for these politicians to see conspiracies in every nook and corner while running for office (I'm guessing to bring out voters), or when they are pressed by scandal (ahem - Hilary); yet, conveniently forget the existence of these conspiracies when it comes time to disclose the documents to the public that might prove or disprove their existence.

Is it good that public discussion of these "conspiracies" continues? Will it make more likely government release of still sealed JFK records, 9/11 records, etc.? Or is the ultimate effect of this discourse simply going to be the humiliation of those politicians unwise enough to invoke them?

[Tracy Riddle]

http://28pages.org/2016/02/19/trump-secr...di-arabia/
Trump: "Secret Papers" May Link 9/11 to Saudi Arabia February 19, 2016 editor28pages 28 pages, 9/11, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Iraq, Jeb Bush, Jill Stein, Rand Paul, Saudi Arabia, secret papers

911 WTC aerial2Defending his attention-grabbing assertions that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was an enormous mistake facilitated by the George W. Bush administration's misleading of the American people, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump this week indirectly referred to 28 classified pages said to link the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to the 9/11 attacks. "It wasn't the Iraqis that knocked down the World Trade Center. We went after Iraq, we decimated the country, Iran's taking over…but it wasn't the Iraqis, you will find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center, because they have papers in there that are very secret, you may find it's the Saudis, okay? But you will find out," Trump said at a Wednesday campaign event in Bluffton, South Carolina. Trump's implied promise to declassify the 28 pages sets him apart from the remaining Republican and Democratic presidential aspirants, filling a gap created when Rand Paul suspended his campaign. Last summer, Paul introduced Senate Bill 1471, which, if passed, would direct the president to release the 28 pages, and he pledged to release them himself if elected to the White House. Green Party candidate Jill Stein has also called for their release. (Then-Senator Hillary Clinton co-signed a 2003 letter to President Bush demanding the release of the 28 pages, but has been silent on the topic since.)

Jeb on the 28 Pages: From Shrugs to Sarcasm When asked about the 28 pages last summer, Jeb Bush said he'd never heard of them. This month, asked if he would like to see the 28 pages his brother classified, Bush sarcastically replied, "Yeah, I'd like to see 'em. You got 'em?" Among the many who would like to "see 'em": 9/11 family members and survivors whose lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been imperiled by what former Senator Bob Graham calls a "pervasive pattern of covering up the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11, by all of the agencies of the federal government, which have access to information that might illuminate Saudi Arabia's role in 9/11."

Vague Reference Dampens Impact Trump's comments brought renewed attention to the classified, 28-page chapter in the 2002 report of a joint congressional intelligence inquiry into 9/11. However, the impact would have certainly been greater had he specifically referred to "28 pages" rather than cryptically referencing "secret papers"which he did time and again on the campaign trail, in an interview with Fox News and during CNN's Thursday night town hall. Given the dearth of mainstream media coverage of Trump's Saudi Arabia reference, it's clear his vague allusion to "secret papers" left journalists baffled. For example, though Mediaite's Tommy Christopher was among the first to report it, his brief piece struck a snarky tone, made no reference to the 28 pages, and concluded with a dismissive statement that "no evidence has ever been presented that the government of Saudi Arabia was behind the attacks of 9/11."

Following his lead, most of those sharing the Mediaite story on social media ridiculed the notion that there are "secret papers" implicating the Saudis. However, former Senator Graham, who co-chaired the intelligence inquiry that produced the 28 pages, said "they point a very strong finger at Saudi Arabia as being the principal financier of 9/11." Two of the 9/11 hijackers received financial, lodging and other assistance from a Saudi citizen who lived in San Diego and who is widely thought to have been an operative for the kingdom. There are also serious questionsand a FOIA lawsuitswirling around a wealthy Saudi family that had ties to Mohammed Atta and which fled Sarasota two weeks before 9/11.

[Anthony Thorne]

For what it's worth - and take it with big grains of salt, but it's verbatim - a friend of mine in Melbourne, a film cinematographer, knows a young lady (from US film shoots) who works in Trump's office as an assistant - either Trump's main assistant, or one of his assistants.

My friend is aware of the whole 'false flag candidate' theory (mentioned by Justin Raimondo on Antiwar.com, and suggested here, basically that Trump is spoiling the Republican campaign to allow Hillary to win etc), and he asked her what her thoughts were on the idea, i.e is Trump a serious candidate or not?

She said that when Trump started the process, he was doing so in a 'what the heck? Might as well try' manner and didn't take it that seriously.

She also said that, more recently, as he's begun winning, the atmosphere and attitude from Trump had changed somewhat, to "You know what? I might actually be able to do this!" - i.e Trump never expected he'd get as far as he had, and now takes the idea more seriously than he had.

[R.K. Locke]

Interesting to note that a number of neocons dislike Trump to the extent that they are supporting Hillary instead.

http://www.nationalinterest.org/feature/...agan-15329

[Tracy Riddle]

Rubio is obviously the neo-cons' puppet - he whines about how Trump doesn't support Israel enough when Trump has the nerve to say he would try to be fair to both sides. If Trump has done anything good so far, it's to wreck the Bush dynasty, and rip the GOP coalition apart. I think a lot of GOP elites are in serious denial about how much war weariness there is among the rank and file of their own party.

[Alan Ford]

For what it's worth - and take it with big grains of salt, but it's verbatim - a friend of mine in Melbourne, a film cinematographer, knows a young lady (from US film shoots) who works in Trump's office as an assistant - either Trump's main assistant, or one of his assistants.

My friend is aware of the whole 'false flag candidate' theory (mentioned by Justin Raimondo on Antiwar.com, and suggested here, basically that Trump is spoiling the Republican campaign to allow Hillary to win etc), and he asked her what her thoughts were on the idea, i.e is Trump a serious candidate or not?

She said that when Trump started the process, he was doing so in a 'what the heck? Might as well try' manner and didn't take it that seriously.

She also said that, more recently, as he's begun winning, the atmosphere and attitude from Trump had changed somewhat, to "You know what? I might actually be able to do this!" - i.e Trump never expected he'd get as far as he had, and now takes the idea more seriously than he had.

An interesting read, Mr. Thorne, thanks for sharing.

Personally, I'm also in the camp that believes Mr. Trump is merely playing his designated role to enhance a Clinton (Hillary) win in 2016.

I've already told family & friends as early as last November not to be surprised--when all is said and done--that Clinton taps Jeb Bush as her running mate later this Summer, so together they can put petty partisan politics aside for the sake of "uniting the country" under a well orchestrated theme of OneAmerica, or essentially something along those lines, in essence tricking the populace into believing they are the nation's last best hope (of course, toss in the antics of Mr. Trump and he just makes it that much easier for their well hatched plan to work). I still feel that way four months later, and would be surprised if these two prominent political families do not unite on "America's behalf" before the political season ends. Time will tell.