Kavanaugh-Starr Coverup In Foster Death Not Going Away.

by Jerry Alatalo

“The intention makes the crime.” – ARISTOTLE 

Attorney Allan Favish continues seeking the truth of what happened in 1993 and the death of Vincent Foster, particularly the role played by a then 29-year old attorney and newly sworn-in United States Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

lthough the number of men and women determined to reach the truth about what happened to Bill Clinton White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster leading to Foster’s death in July 1993 is very small, they understand the enormous stakes involved in letting go for the future of the country, – so they are staying on in the legal, public awareness battle.

Vincent Foster’s death under suspicious circumstances in 1993 made his passing that of the highest positioned American government official or public figure since the equally controversial assassinations of United States President John F. Kennedy (JFK) in 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968, and Robert F. Kennedy, brother of JFK, also in 1968 – while running for president.

What makes the deaths of the Kennedy brothers, Martin Luther King Jr. and Vincent Foster stand out as a special category is the subsequent high level of national debate among citizens regarding the truthfulness of so-called “government narratives” claiming to have “solved” the cases. Many point to James Douglass and his book “JFK and the Unspeakable” as the go-to book for the truth, reinforcing the idea held by many that JFK’s murder was a coup d’etat, and that America has been a far lesser nation ever since.

William Pepper is held up by many as the man who was most responsible for bringing the shocking truth about Martin Luther King Jr., particularly after he led the extremely under-reported 1999 Memphis, Tennessee civil trial in which a jury, after hearing testimonies from 70 witnesses, absolved James Earl Ray posthumously of the murder.

Perhaps someday – hopefully soon – attorney Allan Favish will join James Douglass, William Pepper and others in the category of human force behind getting to the bottom of America’s most disturbing death-related debates and divisions-producing controversies. Many would add the esteemed academic David Ray Griffin to the select category as well, albeit the debate/controversy is somewhat different from one individual’s death: his work in leading the way for 9/11 truth involves state-sponsored covert mass-murder.

One need only to acknowledge the very high levels of partisan, divisive debates which occurred across America during the recent Senate hearings over the nomination by Donald Trump of Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court to realize the need for resolving controversial matters calmly, reasonably, and wisely.

Those men and women mentioned at the start refusing to let the Kavanaugh-Starr-Foster scandal go and forget about it are unanimous in their criticism of the Senate Supreme Court nomination process that just ended, for the obvious reason that neither republican or democrat senators so much as mentioned the alleged cover-up of critical facts surrounding Vincent Foster’s 1993 death.

For Americans unawares of the Kavanaugh controversy over Vincent Foster’s 1993 death, there has been an enormous amount of information compiled in the 25 years since the event. Three sources of relevant information providing perhaps the deepest legal insights – on the 2004 case and decision by the Supreme Court – into this matter are freely available at attorney Allan Favish’s website:

  1. Brief to the Supreme Court on the merits of respondent Allan J. Favish | http://allanfavish.com/images/PDF/ajf_merits_brief.pdf
  2. Opinion of the Supreme Court | http://allanfavish.com/images/PDF/US%20Supreme%20Court%20Opinion.pdf
  3. Response to the Supreme Court’s opinion regarding the Vincent Foster death scene photographs | http://allanfavish.com/index.php/vincent-foster/148-response-to-supreme-court-s-opinion-re-death-scene-photos

More information, including that compiled since that 2004 Supreme Court decision, is available at FBICover-up.com.

In the following interview of attorney Allan Favish with host Cliff Kincaid, Mr. Favish suggests that were straightforward, honest investigations done with respect to the 1993 death of Vincent Foster by Ken Starr, Brett Kavanaugh and others responsible from the start, that perhaps there would be no “Washington, D.C. swamp” today.

The term became popularized by – in supremely and cruelly ironic fashion – the same man whose nomination placed Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court of the United States … Donald Trump.

Ironic, also, is that while running for president in 2016 Donald Trump became sharply criticized for asserting there was “something fishy” about events surrounding the death of Vincent Foster.

Mr. Favish, then, wonders how long the “Washington, D.C. swamp” would survive if there were a new, 100% transparent investigation into Vincent Foster’s death today.

Most importantly, one wonders if Americans will ever even know.

(Thank you to USA Survival at YouTube | Posted: October 15, 2018)

Advertisements

Lies Are How America Justifies War

“Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”

“Thou shalt not kill.”

“And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.”

***

Thank you, Geoffrey O’Neill.

Truth and Shadows

The 2003 Iraq invasion has destroyed that country. (Photo: Aljazeera)

The U.S. has bombed, invaded, assassinated leaders, overthrown governments, and killed millions since WW2

By Geoffrey O’Neill (Special to Truth and Shadows)

If most of us knew the real motives for the use of American military force around the world, we would never put up with it. And that’s why they don’t tell us.

The U.S. has been at war for 224 out of 242 years since the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776, an astounding 93 per cent of the time. And since World War 2 in particular, every instance of American aggression – by

View original post 4,425 more words

Featured

Brett’s Brown Honda.

by Jerry Alatalo

In America, murder has no statute of limitations

ill anyone in the legislative, executive or judicial branches of the United States government call for remedial action in response to concerns raised over Brett Kavanaugh’s alleged cover-up of Vince Foster’s 1993 murder? Nobody knows how many Americans share those concerns, but in the (3) months since the video below of a talk between host Cliff Kincaid and researcher-journalist Hugh Turley became published, close to 17,000 people have watched it.

One might only guesstimate how many of those 17,000 people were left believing Brett Kavanaugh indeed participated in covering up the murder of Vince Foster, and disappointed the official narrative remains after (25) years that Foster committed suicide. It’s likely those who’ve come to accept there was a cover-up have shared their perceptions with family, friends and associates through all the routine means available. But again, the accumulated total is simply unquantifiable.

The highly ironic and compelling aspect of this particular discussion is that Mr. Cliff Kincaid isn’t exactly what you’d call a “lefty, commie, libtard…” (words seen millions of times in online political battle comments in recent weeks)  – in fact, quite the (complete) opposite – but a man holding tightly to very conservative views, making his and others in his political sphere’s push for the truth on this controversial matter that much more powerful.

While a minimum estimate of Donald Trump supporters who have concerns on this matter might be in the 8-10,000 range or more (we’re only talking about those conservatives who’ve watched this video; more videos are online, some receiving hundreds of thousands of views, so certainly there are significant numbers of others, probably in the millions), the question becomes one of what actionable options government officials have available for responding to citizens’ serious doubts about Kavanaugh’s appropriateness for serving on the Supreme Court.

In other words this matter cannot be swept under the rug, nor should it. The situation requires prompt and reasonable law enforcement action to resolve the concerns of a significant number of American citizens, not to mention that the person or persons who murdered Vince Foster have yet to become caught, prosecuted and punished – if these allegations are proven.

Miguel Rodriguez sent his letter of resignation (read it at website below) to Ken Starr after he: 1) felt the certain, real pressure to conform to the Foster suicide narrative, 2) noticed severe problems with evidence and mis-recording of facts, and, 3) finally, made up his mind not to participate in what he later described as cover-up of a murder. Mr. Rodriguez then tried to get his seriously disturbing story out to the American people, reaching out to over (100) media organizations.

Ken Starr named 28-year old Yale Law School graduate Brett Kavanaugh associate prosecution attorney to replace Miguel Rodriguez in the investigation into the death of Vince Foster.

Perhaps it’s best to just forget about this historical event; it was, after all, (25) years ago. Brett Kavanaugh has already been sworn in as the newest Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. But, then again … it is murder which is the subject being discussed here. There is no statute of limitations for the crime of murder in the United States.

Is there anyone in America with the moral courage necessary to successfully push back against the “ultimate power”?

***

(Description of video) “Possible Trump Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh “is part of the ongoing cover-up of the murder of the [Clinton] White House deputy counsel” Vincent Foster. So charges researcher and journalist Hugh Turley. In this explosive video, learn how the Swamp operates in bipartisan fashion to cover up crimes, including murder, and how Deep State agents are deployed to intimidate witnesses and alter evidence. Turley worked with AIM’s Reed Irvine and Cliff Kincaid on this case for years, only to face a cover-up from the liberal AND conservative media.”

The discussion was 1st posted on July 4, 2018 at USA Survival – YouTube channel.

For more information, please visit FBICover-up.com

These (3) men are 100% confident their 20-page addendum to the Starr Report, the adding of which was fought against by Ken Starr himself, provides undeniable proof of the cover-up of Vince Foster’s 1993 murder. The 20-pages are available to read in PDF format at the website, for anyone interested in this matter.

 

Trump’s Idlib Story: Another “What’s Aleppo?”-Or What?

by Jerry Alatalo

hile running for U.S. president on the Libertarian Party ticket in 2016, former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson suffered wide public embarrassment and criticism for answering a question on national television about Aleppo, Syria with: “What’s Aleppo?”

Aleppo is Syria’s 2nd largest city, and at the moment of Governor Johnson’s political blunder its citizenry was heavily involved in fighting for survival against a variety of ruthless-killer terrorists.

Did Donald Trump display a “Gary Johnson moment” a week ago during his press conference at the United Nations in New York City? If he did, or did not … it seems Reuters was one of the few world media organizations to even report on Trump’s very puzzling, questions-raising Idlib statements.

***

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trump-syria/trump-says-learned-about-syrias-idlib-from-supporter-at-recent-rally-idUSKCN1M638H

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump suggested on Wednesday he had never heard of the rebel-held Syrian region of Idlib under threat from Syrian government and Russian forces until a supporter brought it up at a recent rally about a month ago.

….Speaking at a news conference in New York, Trump took credit for convincing Russia, Iran and Syria to hold off on the attack after he warned them in a Sept. 4 Twitter post that they would be making a “grave humanitarian mistake to take part in this potential human tragedy.”

“Syria’s a mess and I was responsible (for stopping the offensive) and I hope it stays that way,” he said. “When I put out on social media a few weeks ago about Idlib province, I said, ‘Don’t do it’.”

Trump went on to explain that he had just learned about the situation in Idlib after a woman in the crowd at a rally brought it up.

“I was at a meeting with lots of supporters and a woman stood up and she said there is a province in Syria with 3 million people right now. The Iranians, Russians and Syrians are surrounding that province and they are going to kill my sister and kill millions of people in order to get rid of 25,000 or 30,000 terrorists.

“I said that’s not going to happen. I didn’t hear of Idlib province. I came back and picked up the Failing New York Times and opened it up … not the front page, but there was a very big story and I said wow that’s the same story the woman told me and I found hard to believe and I said how, why would anyone do that?”

Trump said the story had indicated the offensive could start the next day and so he wrote his Twitter post and gave orders to his team, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and White House national security adviser John Bolton, to “not let it happen.”

“That doesn’t mean they can’t be selective, but don’t kill millions of people, and it stopped. Nobody is going to give me credit but that’s OK because the people know, but I’ve had more Syrians thank me for that. … This was about four weeks ago I put that out,” Trump said.

***

It is uncertain whether Trump’s statements as reported by Reuters indicate he had never heard of Idlib … or he was unaware that Syrian military forces, with help from Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, were about to take the city back from terrorists.

If this was the 1st time Trump became aware of Idlib, then he distressingly repeats the embarrassing experience of Gary Johnson in 2016 when Johnson asked “What’s Aleppo?”. That seems an absolute impossibility for the man who’s been president of the United States for some 20 months.

On the other hand, and nearly equally as concerning if the case, Trump might know about Idlib, but have been actually unaware that Syrians and their allies were intending to retake the city of Idlib with its population of approximately 3 million from terrorists.

For the President of the United States to have become informed of a major anti-terrorist military situation in Syria from a supporter at one of his rallies, which then was confirmed by Trump by reading the New York Times, has one asking the obvious: “What kind of National Security, State Department and Defense Department advice is the leader of the free world receiving?”

This seems as impossible as the theory he’s repeating the embarrassment of Gary Johnson and Aleppo.

Is there another explanation, such as Trump’s sharing a story about Idlib which is completely fictional … and if so, why? Could Trump be telling what really happened, and his advisers are keeping him completely out of the loop? Is Trump trying to give the public the impression his advisers are intentionally keeping him in the dark, as part of some covert psychological operation?

Given the propensity of Trump to go on Twitter and convey oft-controversial messages about hugely consequential matters concerning international relations, – especially situations of war and peace … literal life and death, this event is enormously disturbing in light of its potential negative outcomes if left unresolved.

Whatever the explanation for his “Idlib moment”, from any perspective there is a clear, unbelievably important, profoundly dangerous problem of communications inside the administration of Donald Trump.

***