@joe shikspack ...that's terrifying for personal reasons.

I've read about CIA mind-control research ("mind-RAPE" would be a better term for it; they get into your head, and trash the place like a malware virus) - not just MKULTRA, but specifically post-9/11 stuff...and the way I've been treated, SPECIFICALLY on DailyKos for the final year I was there (2016-2017), adds up to something very similar to their brainwashing techniques. Some of the arguments I wound up in there made me feel...violated.

My observation was actually always that Kos himself seemed pretty hands-off, even if his own articles were obnoxious - but I've long been comfortable believing that site had an astroturfer squad. Some of the personages on there I REALLY want to know about (TrueBlueMajority comes immediately to mind).

My life's been on a steady decline ever since the day after sElection Day of 2004, but occasionally since then, I've found myself plummeting to further lows suddenly and for reasons I have trouble tracking, these past 3 years being among them.

I feel like I'm being turned into the next Ted Kaczynski. Read about what they did to him, if you haven't heard: He could have been another Newton/Einstein/Hawking, but Project MKULTRA DESTROYED him. They wiped their asses with his mind and threw him out.

I've always felt, obviously to an unhealthy extent, that the political is personal...but now I'm getting increasingly paranoid. Why shouldn't I be? The idea that the government's been brainwashing you is, of course, a well-known paranoid delusion...but what happens when the CONFIRMED FACTS get too close to the circumstances that would justify such a delusion...?

any chance that the "ex-cia agent" is actually markos moulitsas? (evil grin)

@bobswern Hope all is well with you.

And I have come to believe that you cannot believe anything that comes from someone/something of authority, which definitely include the MSM. My only regret is that it took me far too long to understand that.

...than the reality that I've seen -- "up close and personal" -- a hell of a LOT of these types of episodes arise over the course of a lengthy career. My advice to all is very simple, at least when it comes to political media: Question everything! Take nothing at face value. And, if folks reading this comment have any doubts about the fact that "both sides do it" (and this has been an ongoing, inconvenient truth since, almost, forever in this country) in the U.S., just meander over to this Wikipedia page for some accurate history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendon_Group

Nowadays, and for far too many decades, the greater truth is that--when it comes to far too many issues; not all issues, but many of them--there's only one "side" in mainstream U.S. political media, in terms of how "political news" is widely "reported" in the MSM.

@Pluto's Republic

books by making Mueller the longest-serving director of the FBI since loony J. Edgar Hoover. (Why they cast Leonardo Di Caprio as that loathesome turd is beyond me.) In general, though, Obama just loved re-appointing Clintonites and Republican Bushites (Was there any other kind of Bushite? Seems only Democratic Presidents love crossing party lines to fill slots in their administrations. Even FDR did that and he had zero reason so to do.)

No doubt, Obama felt that he had to appoint Clintonites and Republican Bushites to fulfill his campaign promise of Hope and Change. /s

Thanks, Obama!

(Most clever thing the "half Governor" of Alaska ever said or is ever likely to say: "How's that Hopey, Changey thing workin' for ya?")

BTW, the following quotation about the FBI is attributed to Mueller:

What we bring to the table is not only our 56 field offices in the United States and our number of resident agencies, but also we have 45 legal attaches overseas.

Only fifty-six field offices in the United States?
Why no field office in Obama's 57th state?

Forty-five legal attaches overseas?
Even assuming I could figure out exactly what the hell a legal attache might actually be, why can't an agency that is supposed to be a domestic agency work with the CIA as to things that arguably require an overseas presence of any kind? Perhaps that would just not be sufficient duplication to pad the fat federal budget for enjoyment of US taxpayers?

The FBI Legal Attaché works with the law enforcement and security agencies in their host country to coordinate investigations of interest to both countries. The role of Legal Attachés is primarily one of coordination, as they do not conduct foreign intelligence gathering or counterintelligence investigations. The rules for joint activities and information sharing are generally spelled out in formal agreements between the United States and the host nation.

Typical duties of a Legal Attaché include coordinating requests for FBI or host country assistance overseas; conducting investigations in coordination with the host government; sharing investigative leads and information; briefing Embassy counterparts from other agencies, including law enforcement agencies, as appropriate, and Ambassadors; managing country clearances; providing situation reports concerning cultural protocol; assessing political and security climates; and coordinating victim and humanitarian assistance.

https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/the-fbis-legal-attache-...

Jaysus. Makes my eyelashes hurt, that does.
Thank goodness I have Obamacare. /s

WikiLeaks issued a hard denial from its Twitter account. “Remember this day when The Guardian permitted a serial fabricator to totally destroy the paper’s reputation. @WikiLeaks is willing to bet The Guardian a million dollars and its editor’s head that Manafort never met Assange.” In a reference to a German magazine that retracted the publication of an infamous forgery in 1983, WikiLeaks continued, “This is going to be one of the most infamous news disasters since Stern published the ‘Hitler Diaries.’”

This from a Vanity Fair editorial.

And this, too:

A denial from Manafort, meanwhile, landed in reporters’ inboxes a little before 3:30 P.M. “This story is totally false and deliberately libelous,” the statement reads. “I have never met Julian Assange or anyone connected to him. I have never been contacted by anyone connected to WikiLeaks, either directly or indirectly. I have never reached out to Assange or WikiLeaks on any matter. We are considering all legal options against The Guardian who proceeded with this story even after being notified by my representatives that it was false.”

Who is even slightly surprised after all we have seen in the past two years?

The Guardian has been dirty since the Ed Snowden affair.

Let us not forget that the UK is on the hook here. They are the ones who spied on the Trump campaign and produced the Steele dossier. They compromised Papadopoulos and created all of the fake evidence for the FISA warrants. They are the foreign country that meddled in the 2016 US Presidential election. Their mendacity put Trump in the White House.

And what of Mueller? He is dirty beyond belief and has accomplished nothing. Nor is this his first rodeo. His filth and collusion goes back 30 years and there is an army of journalists with an avalanche of articles ready to pounce. Mueller and his work product will hide behind National Security and never see the light of day — to his immense relief.

"Targeting Michael Flynn & Shielding the Radical Cleric Gulen: Special Counsel Robert Mueller MUST Step Down," by Sibel Edmonds is but one example.

The Deep State has become reckless trying to get in front of this reality. This is going to roll right over them.

@Pluto's Republic And yet there is a small headline in yes, the Guardian which I checked just for the hell of it and to see their spin, that Mueller is the "straightest arrow in America" or some such bullshit. Gag worthy and I'm glad I had swallowed my tea before I saw it.

WikiLeaks issued a hard denial from its Twitter account. “Remember this day when The Guardian permitted a serial fabricator to totally destroy the paper’s reputation. @WikiLeaks is willing to bet The Guardian a million dollars and its editor’s head that Manafort never met Assange.” In a reference to a German magazine that retracted the publication of an infamous forgery in 1983, WikiLeaks continued, “This is going to be one of the most infamous news disasters since Stern published the ‘Hitler Diaries.’”

This from a Vanity Fair editorial.

And this, too:

A denial from Manafort, meanwhile, landed in reporters’ inboxes a little before 3:30 P.M. “This story is totally false and deliberately libelous,” the statement reads. “I have never met Julian Assange or anyone connected to him. I have never been contacted by anyone connected to WikiLeaks, either directly or indirectly. I have never reached out to Assange or WikiLeaks on any matter. We are considering all legal options against The Guardian who proceeded with this story even after being notified by my representatives that it was false.”

Who is even slightly surprised after all we have seen in the past two years?

The Guardian has been dirty since the Ed Snowden affair.

Let us not forget that the UK is on the hook here. They are the ones who spied on the Trump campaign and produced the Steele dossier. They compromised Papadopoulos and created all of the fake evidence for the FISA warrants. They are the foreign country that meddled in the 2016 US Presidential election. Their mendacity put Trump in the White House.

And what of Mueller? He is dirty beyond belief and has accomplished nothing. Nor is this his first rodeo. His filth and collusion goes back 30 years and there is an army of journalists with an avalanche of articles ready to pounce. Mueller and his work product will hide behind National Security and never see the light of day — to his immense relief.

"Targeting Michael Flynn & Shielding the Radical Cleric Gulen: Special Counsel Robert Mueller MUST Step Down," by Sibel Edmonds is but one example.

The Deep State has become reckless trying to get in front of this reality. This is going to roll right over them.

@Wink

What they claim changes nothing. They claim climate change is a hoax.

claim R-gate story true, that Trump Team stole HRC emails to help tRump win election. Such claims change the game. Looks like Hillbots may have been right all along. {gasp}

@Wink @Wink @Wink
It doesn't make the issue of corruption of the Democratic party, or the hijacking of 2016 Democratic primary process or the travesty that was the Nevada 2016 state Democratic caucus go away. There was enough dislike of Hillary from the beginning to have made a difference in the Wisconsin or Michigan general elections. Hillary did idiotically put classified documents on her email server. And maybe Trump was a lot better at whipping up a crowd than the Clintons had planned. Bernie was the only clean person. Trump is bad news for America.

claim R-gate story true, that Trump Team stole HRC emails to help tRump win election. Such claims change the game. Looks like Hillbots may have been right all along. {gasp}