[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

FBI recovers funds for victims of scammed banker

Mark Felton: Can Russia Attack Britain?

Notre Dame Apologizes After Telling Hockey Fans Not To Wear Green, Shamrocks, 'Fighting Irish'

Dear Horse, which one of your posts has the Deep State so spun up that's causing 4um to run slow?

Bomb Cyclone Pacific Northwest

Death Certificates Reveal FBI 'Revised' Murder Stats Still Bogus

A $110B bubble on $500M earnings. History warns: Bubbles always burst.

Joy Behar says people like their show because they tell the truth, unlike "dragon believer" Joe Rogan.

Male Passenger Disappointed After Another Flight Ends Without A Stewardess Frantically Asking If Anyone Can Land The Plane

Could the Rapid Growth of AI Boost Gold Demand?

LOOK AT MY ASS!

Elon Musk Responds As British Government "Summons" Him To 'Disinformation' Hearing

MSNBC Contributor Panics Over Trump Nominating Bondi For AG: Dangerous Because Shes Competent

House passes dangerous bill that targets nonprofits, pro-Palestine groups

Navy Will Sideline 17 Support Vessels to Ease Strain on Civilian Mariners

Israel carries out field executions, massacres in north Gaza

AOC votes to back Israel Lobby's bogus anti-Semitism definition

Biden to launch ICE mobile app, further disrupting Trump's mass deportation plan: Report

Panic at Mar-a-Lago: How the Fake Press Pool Fueled Global Fear Until X Set the Record Straight

Donald Trumps Nominee for the FCC Will Remove DEI as a Priority of the Agency

Stealing JFK's Body

Trump plans to revive Keystone XL pipeline to solidify U.S. energy independence

ASHEVILLE UPDATE: Bodies Being Stacked in Warehouses & Children Being Taken Away

American news is mostly written by Israeli lobbyists pushing Zionist agenda

Biden's Missile Crisis

British Operation Kiss kill Instantly Skripals Has Failed to Kill But Succeeded at Covering Up, Almost

NASA chooses SpaceX and Blue Origin to deliver rover, astronaut base to the moon

The Female Fantasy Exposed: Why Women Love Toxic Love Stories

United States will NOT comply with the ICC arrest warrant for Prime Minister Netanyahu:

Mississippi’s GDP Beats France: A Shocking Look at Economic Policy Failures (Per Capita)


Editorial
See other Editorial Articles

Title: Democracy at risk in U.S., Great Britain
Source: [None]
URL Source: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/Voices ... 97092823/?st_rec=3241498472966
Published: Jun 26, 2017
Author: Harlan Ullman
Post Date: 2017-06-26 23:50:15 by Tatarewicz
Keywords: None
Views: 216
Comments: 2

UPI... Make no mistake: Two explosive charges were set off in Washington and Great Britain last week that have created the beginnings of what could become political avalanches of gargantuan proportion. The riveting testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was an accelerant to the smoldering investigations of the Trump administration over Russian interference and potential collusion in the 2016 presidential elections.

These investigations could, and the operative word is could, become 21st century successors to the Watergate scandal that forced President Richard Nixon to resign his office in 1974 especially if these turn out to be surrogates for the continued incompetence shown by the White House and the damage it is inflicting on the nation.

In Great Britain, the snap elections ordered by Prime Minister Theresa May shocked more than just the Conservative Party, which expected to increase single-digit control of Parliament by as much as 50-60 seats. Instead, the Tories lost their slim majority, winning only 318 of 650 seats. A coalition government will now be formed. And that coalition government has no clear mandate over how it will extricate itself from the European Union after 52 percent of Britons voted last June in favor of Brexit.

In his sworn testimony, Comey called President Donald Trump a liar in mischaracterizing the reasons for his firing as FBI chief and painted a picture of a chief executive who could not be trusted to tell the truth. Hence, Comey has reinforced the basis of what could be criminal charges filed against the administration. Other portions of his 2 1/2-hour public appearance were also significant. First, Comey was adamant in asserting that Russia had actively interfered in the U.S. political process and would continue to do so. For anyone doubting this interference, including the president, Comey's statements were compelling.

Second, Comey revealed that former national security adviser Michael Flynn was the subject of a criminal investigation. Comey also inferred that people in this position could be squeezed to provide evidence of wrongdoing against their superiors. This cannot be good news for the White House.

Third, if Comey's testimony was accurate, Attorney General Jeff Sessions is in trouble. Comey swore that Trump cleared the Oval Office so he could have a private session with the FBI director. The last two to leave were Sessions and Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and perhaps closest adviser. Comey also said he asked the attorney general to keep himself between the FBI director and the president in order to maintain the bureau's independence. Sessions, according to Comey, did not respond.

The issue that will not fade away, of course, is whether or not the president obstructed justice in "hoping" Comey would drop the investigation of Flynn. Since indicting a sitting president is probably constitutionally forbidden, determining obstruction or other criminal conduct is inherently a political not a legal matter. Until special counsel Robert Mueller finishes his investigation that will take months, there can be no definitive answer to the question of did the president commit any wrongdoing or crime in carrying out his duties both before and after his inauguration. However, if a political avalanche or tsunami results, Comey's testimony will be a principal ignition point. And until Mueller concludes his investigation, the administration remains in jeopardy.

About May, as with her predecessor former Prime Minister David Cameron who decided on holding the Brexit referendum and lost, she greatly miscalculated in calling an early election. This misjudgment cost the Conservatives three more years of a Parliamentary majority. While the Conservative senior leadership is unlikely to dump May as Margaret Thatcher was pre-emptively replaced by John Major in late 1990, May is now politically weakened.

After the terrorist attacks at a Manchester rock concert and again in London that shook the island nation and the uncertainties in negotiating Brexit, Conservatives understand that the party must demonstrate a high degree of stability and confidence in dealing with these difficult times. With a coalition government, that will not be easy, although Prime Minister David Cameron managed an alliance with the Independent Party under less tortuous circumstances. However, these twin shocks in Washington and Britain do not presage happy outcomes.

The American democracy is in crisis. The combination of a political system of checks and balances that seems permanently deadlocked and a political environment that is poisonously septic raises the question of whether a government designed by the best minds of the 18th century can survive the rigors of the 21st, especially when the future survival of the administration may be at stake. A similar question applies to Great Britain in which strategic mal-judgment has produced what will be the folly of Brexit and the unnecessary loss of a clear-cut parliamentary majority at a time of great uncertainty and danger.

How America and Great Britain deal with these political ground zeroes could be the most significant challenges for both countries since the Cold War ended. Every political system has potentially fatal flaws. The Soviet Union is the premier example. Neither America nor Britain is in danger yet of imploding. However, unless or until good and sound government is restored, both democracies will remain at risk.

Harlan Ullman has served on the Senior Advisory Group for Supreme Allied Commander Europe (2004-16) and is senior adviser at Washington D.C.'s Atlantic Council, chairman of two private companies and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. His next book, due out this year, is "Anatomy of Failure: Why America Loses Wars It Starts," which argues failure to know and to understand the circumstances in which force is used guarantees failure. Follow him on Twitter @harlankullman.


Poster Comment:

Jew money and campaign organization already determines government policy in both countries; voting is just a feel-good illusion.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Tatarewicz (#0)

Harlan Ullman has served on the Senior Advisory Group for Supreme Allied Commander Europe (2004-16) and is senior adviser at Washington D.C.'s Atlantic Council, chairman of two private companies and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe.

Bought and paid for neo-communist. Oy vey!

spirit  posted on  2017-06-27   1:16:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Tatarewicz (#0)

On May 1 [2008], the body of Deborah Jeane Palfrey was found hanging from a metal bar in a shed near the Tampa home of her mother, 76-year-old homemaker Blanche Palfrey. Police reports told of a notebook containing two suicide notes at the scene. Jeane, as she was called—she was better known as the “D.C. Madam.”—had been convicted two weeks earlier in the U.S. District Court in Washington of racketeering, money laundering, and two counts of using the mail for illegal purposes.

For well over a year, Palfrey, 52, had been saying to the press, to supporters, to book publishers, to anyone who would listen, that she was going to set a precedent: unlike so many former madams who had fallen victim to the law—indeed, unlike Brandy Britton, a mother of two and former University of Maryland professor who had once worked as an escort for Palfrey and who killed herself, in January 2007, rather than face trial—she was going to win this fight. She refused to admit that her agency had been anything but a fantasy-sex service. If employees had had actual illicit sex, they had done so without her knowing, she claimed.

The name of the agency was Pamela Martin & Associates, and, according to at least two of the young women who worked for it, it was well known to be the highest- quality operation of its kind in Washington, D.C., thanks to Palfrey’s professionalism. In her brisk, businesslike telephone manner, Palfrey, who ran the service from her home, in Vallejo, California, would demand that employees dress smartly in a style that reflected her own penchant for neat pantsuits, sensible heels, and discreet jewelry—what she called the “Ann Taylor look.” She stipulated that they not drink or take drugs during appointments and that they be punctual. Her “gals,” as she called them, had to be over 23, and they had to have college degrees and day jobs. And, according to Palfrey, they had to sign contracts promising not to copulate or perform oral sex with clients, but they could do “pretty much anything else.”

The women would typically earn $300 plus tips for a 90-minute appointment; they would then send half of the base fees to Palfrey, in postal money orders of under $800, allegedly to help avoid detection. For the most part, the women were careful not to let drop to clients any clues as to their real names or day jobs—“nobody wants a stalker,” explains one—but they included a naval-academy instructor, a blonde legal secretary at the noted law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, a real- estate agent, and a financial consultant, who went by the professional name of Rosslyn and who looks like a brunette Farrah Fawcett in her prime. Since retiring from Pamela Martin, Rosslyn tells me, she misses the designer clothes she bought with her supplemental income.

The men who used the agency ranged from C.E.O.’s to store clerks, from terminally ill men and those with seriously ill wives to men on the verge of marriage who wanted one last fling. They included, we now know, former deputy secretary of state Randall Tobias, 66; Pentagon adviser and author Harlan K. Ullman, 67; and U.S. senator David Vitter, 47, a Republican from Louisiana. We know this because, in October 2006, Palfrey learned that the Internal Revenue Service had placed a lien on the Victorian home she was attempting to sell in Vallejo, California, near San Francisco, and had frozen her $2 million in assets. The house had been searched by Troy Burrus, an I.R.S. agent, and Maria Couvillon, a postal inspector from Alexandria, Virginia, who had posed as potential buyers before obtaining a warrant. According to court records, they had begun investigating Palfrey around June 2004. In what appears to be a peculiarly elementary error, Burrus and Couvillon left without 46 pounds of Pamela Martin & Associates phone records, which were gathering dust in the basement. Still, they found sufficient evidence to pursue charges of racketeering and mail fraud. A grand jury was convened in 2006. Approximately 14 former Pamela Martin employees testified, identified in court documents as Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 2, and so forth, and on March 1, 2007, Palfrey was indicted for running a prostitution enterprise. She told Vanity Fair she was offered a plea deal that included four months’ imprisonment, but she turned it down. She kept to the claim that if illegal sex took place, then her employees had broken their agreements with her. In court the women said otherwise, that she merely spoke to them in “euphemisms” to hide the true nature of what was going on.

After her indictment, Palfrey threatened to sell the agency’s phone records to the highest bidder; then, in March 2007, she gave four years’ worth of them to ABC News. As part of her defense, in court papers she filed that same month, she outed Ullman as a client. According to her civil lawyer, Montgomery Blair Sibley, she selected the Pentagon adviser because he had come up with the phrase “shock and awe,” later used for the government’s war effort in Iraq—a fact that would show the prominence and quality of her clientele. Palfrey also said she never liked Ullman, whom she referred to as “Mr. U.” “He was an unpleasant person,” she said.

www.vanityfair.com/ news/2008/05/madam200805

spirit  posted on  2017-06-27   1:30:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]