Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Skepticism and critical thinking is not panacea, but can help to understand the world better

Is national security state in the USA gone rogue ?

There is a country within the country in the USA with around 5 million citizens. It can be called "Classified America."

News Corporatism Recommended Links The Deep State Do the US intelligence agencies  influence the US Presidential elections ? The problem of control of intelligence services in democratic societies Nation under attack meme Steele dossier FBI Mayberry Machiavellians
News Neoliberal war on reality or the importance of controlling the narrative Recommended Links Total Surveillance Inverted Totalitarism Neoliberal Brainwashing -- Journalism in the Service of the Powerful Few Edward Snowden as Symbol of Resistance to National Security State The woulr as the Grand Chessboard of American Empire and its intelligence services Wiretaps of Trump and his associates during Presidential elections
Resurgence of neofascism How FBI swiped under the carpet Hillary Clinton email scandal Brennan elections machinations "Seventeen agencies" memo about Russian influence on elections Machiavellism US and British media are servants of security apparatus Facebook as Giant Database about Users FBI and CIA contractor Crowdstrike and DNC leak saga Special Prosecutor Mueller and his fishing expedition
CIA hacking and false flag cyber operations Media-Military-Industrial Complex Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite  Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war MSM as fake news industry NeoMcCartyism JFK assassination as a turning event in US history History of American False Flag Operations
Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few The attempt to secure global hegemony Frustrated underachievers NGOs as braintrust of color revolutions The Real War on Reality Media as a weapon of mass deception Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair Two Party System as polyarchy Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich
US and British media are servants of security apparatus Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA Media-Military-Industrial Complex Neoconservatism New American Militarism Anatol Leiven on American Messianism Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism The Real War on Reality Elite Theory And the Revolt of the Elite
MSM as an attack dogs of color revolution The Deep State The Iron Law of Oligarchy National Security State Color revolutions Militarism and reckless jingoism of the US neoliberal elite Skeptic Quotations Politically Incorrect Humor Hypocrisy and Pseudo-democracy

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Who will guard the guards themselves?

There is a country within the country in the USA. It can be called "Classified America".  It has population of around 5 million people and controls the other 320 million. Almost 5 million people is more more then 1% of population. And now it becme a formidable political force that strives to become a kingmaker. much like Praetorian Guard in ancient Role it is clearly out of control of elected government and has its own, sometimes nefarious agenda.  All-in-all this is the fastest growing part of media-military-industrial complex.

After creation such powerful agencies as FBI adn CIA inevitable try to to extent and enhance there position and influnece4 and this process logically leads that at some point they start to control bigger and bigger  chunk of the US political life and the institution of Presidency become mostly a decoration, a Potemkin village to provide legitimacy for the ruling elite represented by the "deep state" with the intelligence agencies in the driving seat.   It took CIA less then 20 years to reach this point from its creation by President Truman and 1963.  John Edgar Hoover was the first FBI director who dies in his position in 1972 at the age of 77 with no previous President able to depose him, because of dirt he collected on them.

A January 2016 report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence says more than 4.9 million people in the USA have some sort of government security clearance. About 1.4 million of those have "top secret" clearance.... Most security clearances are held by government workers. They hold 2,757,333 "confidential/secret" clearances and 791,200 clearances designated as "top secret." Contractors claim 582,524 "confidential" clearances and 483,263 "top-secret" ones. There is another general category of people who hold 167,925 "confidential/secret" clearances and 135,506 top-secret. See Security clearances held by millions of Americans for more details.

This "inner state" represented by holders of security clearance controls such areas of US public life as two most important newspapers (NYT, WaPo) several TV channels (MSNBC, CNN) as well as (if we believe recent stories about ) elections. That might well be a sign that  the "national security state" has  gone rogue and the tail is wagging the dog. 

Hierarchy

A security clearance is granted to an individual and generally recognizes a maximum level of clearance. Exceptions include levels above compartmentalized access or when an individual is cleared for a certain type of data. The President of the United States may be given access to any government or military information that they request if there is a proper "need to know", even if they would not otherwise be able to normally obtain a security clearance were they not the President. Having obtained a certain level security clearance does not mean that one automatically has access to or is given access to information cleared for that clearance level in the absence of a demonstrated "need to know".[12] The "need-to-know" determination is made by a 'disclosure officer,' who may work in the office of origin of the information. The specified "need to know" must be connected to the prospective user's mission, or of necessity for the integrity of a specified security apparatus. the system is pretty Bisantium and include multiple levels tha tparciallyh intersect

  1. Controlled Unclassified: "Controlled Unclassified" does not represent a clearance designation, but rather a clearance level at which information distribution is controlled. Controlled Unclassified designates information that may be illegal to distribute. This information is available when needed by government employees, such as the USA's Department of Defense (DoD) employees, but the designation signifies that the information should not be redistributed to users not designated to use it on an operational basis. For example, the organization and processes of an information-technology system may be designated Controlled Unclassified to users for whom the operational details of the system are non-critical.
  2. Public Trust Position: Despite common misconception, this designation is not a security clearance, and is not the same as the confidential designation. Certain positions which require access to sensitive information, but not information which is classified, must obtain this designation through a background check. In the USA, Public Trust Positions can either be moderate-risk or high-risk.[13][14]
  3. Confidential: This is hierarchically the first security clearance to get, typically requiring a few weeks to a few months of investigation. A Confidential clearance requires a NACLC investigation which dates back 7 years on the subject's record and must be renewed (with another investigation) every 15 years.
  4. Secret: A Secret clearance, also known as Collateral Secret or Ordinary Secret, requires a few months to a year to investigate, depending on the individual's background. Some instances wherein individuals would take longer than normal to be investigated are many past residences, having residences in foreign countries, having relatives outside the United States, or significant ties with non-US citizens. Unpaid bills as well as criminal charges will more than likely disqualify an applicant for approval. However, a bankruptcy will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and is not an automatic disqualifier. Poor financial history is the number-one cause of rejection, and foreign activities and criminal record are also common causes for disqualification. A Secret clearance requires a NACLC, and a Credit investigation; it must also be re-investigated every 10 years.[15] Investigative requirements for DoD clearances, which apply to most civilian contractor situations, are contained in the Personnel Security Program issuance known as DoD Regulation 5200.2-R, at part C3.4.2
  5. Top Secret: Top Secret is a more stringent clearance. A Top Secret, or "TS", clearance, is often given as the result of a Single Scope Background Investigation, or SSBI. Top Secret clearances, in general, afford one access to data that affects national security, counterterrorism/counterintelligence, or other highly sensitive data. There are far fewer individuals with TS clearances than Secret clearances.[16] A TS clearance can take as few as 3 to 6 months to obtain, but often it takes 6 to 18 months. The SSBI must be reinvestigated every 5 years.[15] In order to receive TS clearance, all candidates must participate in an oral SF86 review that will later be adjudicated.[citation needed]
  6. Compartmented: As with TS clearances, Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) clearances are assigned only after one has been through the rigors of a Single Scope Background Investigation and a special adjudication process for evaluating the investigation. SCI access, however, is assigned only in "compartments". These compartments are necessarily separated from each other with respect to organization, so that an individual with access to one compartment will not necessarily have access to another. Each compartment may include its own additional special requirements and clearance process. An individual may be granted access to, or read into, a compartment for any period of time.

Among other things Top secret clearance required to access:

Such compartmentalized clearances may be expressed as "John has a TS/SCI", whereby all clearance descriptors are spelled out verbally. For example, the US National Security Agency once used specialized terms such as "Umbra",[17][18][19] This classification is reported to be a compartment within the "Special Intelligence" compartment of SCI.[20] The various NSA compartments have been simplified; all but the most sensitive compartments are marked "CCO", meaning "handle through COMINT channels only".

The US Department of Defense establishes, separately from intelligence compartments, special access programs (SAP) when the vulnerability of specific information is considered exceptional and the normal criteria for determining eligibility for access applicable to information classified at the same level are not deemed sufficient to protect the information from unauthorized disclosure. The number of people cleared for access to such programs is typically kept low. Information about stealth technology, for example, often requires such access.

Area-specific clearances include:


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Jan 21, 2020] BBC faces existential threat. In the 21st century, it has nobody left to lie to -- RT Op-ed

Jan 21, 2020 | www.rt.com

George Galloway was a member of the British Parliament for nearly 30 years. He presents TV and radio shows (including on RT). He is a film-maker, writer and a renowned orator.

Whoever replaces outgoing BBC Director General Tony Hall, be sure that establishment interests will be in safe hands. But multiple scandals the broadcaster has been involved in damaged it quite possibly beyond repair.

... ... ...

Corbyn had to be destroyed at almost ANY cost. Their news and current affairs output (and appointments) over the Corbyn era of 2015-2019 was as crude, and crudely effective, as any screaming, screeching Rupert Murdoch tabloid. Perhaps they were worried the ghost of Sir Alasdair Milne would return to haunt them in the form of his son Seumas Milne, Corbyn's director of communications and strategy and right-hand man. The junior Milne – also Winchester and Oxford – is a considerably harder nut to crack than anyone the BBC had ever had to deal with before

[Jan 21, 2020] HBO hires 'king of fake news' Brian Stelter from CNN to produce documentary on the dangers of fake news

Notable quotes:
"... "disinformation and the cost of fake news." ..."
"... "how post-truth culture has become an increasingly dangerous part of the global information environment," ..."
"... To say Stelter's involvement in the documentary attracted mockery online would be an understatement. "This is like Harvey Weinstein doing a documentary on sexual assault," lawyer and journalist Rogan O'Handley wrote. ..."
"... "HBO has hired Brian Stelter to do a documentary on Fake News. That's like hiring Bernie Madoff to teach accounting. Like hiring Michael Moore to host a fashion show. Not to mention [Stelter] is the dullest human ever on television," ..."
Jan 21, 2020 | www.rt.com

If you were making a documentary on fake news and wanted to get journalists involved behind the scenes, there are a few people you may want to avoid. One of those is CNN host Brian Stelter. The HBO network is rightly being mocked for putting Stelter – the host of a CNN show ironically named 'Reliable Sources' – on the team for an upcoming documentary on fake news.

According to Stelter himself, the documentary will investigate "disinformation and the cost of fake news." The film, for which Stelter was executive producer, will dive into "how post-truth culture has become an increasingly dangerous part of the global information environment," according to WarnerMedia.

HBO just announced something I've been working on for a couple of years: A documentary titled "AFTER TRUTH: DISINFORMATION AND THE COST OF FAKE NEWS." The film will premiere on TV and online this March. Directed by @a_rossi !

-- Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) January 15, 2020

To say Stelter's involvement in the documentary attracted mockery online would be an understatement. "This is like Harvey Weinstein doing a documentary on sexual assault," lawyer and journalist Rogan O'Handley wrote.

"HBO has hired Brian Stelter to do a documentary on Fake News. That's like hiring Bernie Madoff to teach accounting. Like hiring Michael Moore to host a fashion show. Not to mention [Stelter] is the dullest human ever on television," radio host Mark Simone added.

[Jan 21, 2020] Opinion - Joe Biden, Friend Or Foe Of Corruption

Notable quotes:
"... This article was originally published by " ..."
Jan 21, 2020 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

UkraineGate - Inconvenient Facts


Watch

Joe Biden, Friend Or Foe Of Corruption?

Although Joe Biden very often denounces the "cancer of corruption", this first episode shows that he has lied several times, and that his attitude remains very questionable on this subject.

You will discover three characters at the heart of UkraineGate. First, Mykola Zlochevsky, the Ukrainian oligarch through whom the scandal happened. Then, General prosecutor Viktor Shokin, whose resignation was obtained under pressure from Joe Biden, less than ten months after his appointment. And finally, the latter's successor, Yuriy Lutsenko, whom Biden was quick to describe as a "solid man"

Summary – Part 1 – A Not So Solid Prosecutor

https://videos.les-crises.fr/embed/player.php?video=ukgate_short_s1e1_en_43p4orvx0fqmvdye

Full Version

https://videos.les-crises.fr/embed/player.php?video=ukgate_long_s1e1_en_jovv1vhy4zcnqlvof

Part II

Not so "dormant" investigations

This second episode focuses on the investigations of General prosecutor Shokin, described as "dormant" by the Biden clan. It demonstrates the fallacy of the narrative launched by Biden's communication advisors. But you will also discover that Biden's defense - widely reported by the mainstream media without any verification - has been challenged by Viktor Shokin in various interviews, of which we reveal several excerpts that have never been broadcast...

https://videos.les-crises.fr/embed/player.php?video=ukgate_long_s1e2_en_i0q1ez5vjqmetagp

- We will post other sections of this documentary as the become available-

This article was originally published by " UkraineGate " -

[Jan 21, 2020] DemoRats blowed thier change to impech Trump due to thier own dishonesty, jingoism and cowardice

Jan 21, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Alex (the one that likes Ike) fuow 15 hours ago • edited

If that means Uncle Joe, then Trump may bloody well already uncork the champagne. Remember that recent Iranian debacle of his, which is already starting being forgotten? That was the *only* real chance for Democrats to look solid in the Senate when trying to impeach him. The only way to make Republican senators look dishonest and partisan when defending him. An unexpected and unprovoked electoral gift to them from Trump (a would-have-been-serious gift - read Daniel Larison's articles as to how many American voters, no matter their partisan leanings, are anti-war now). How did the DNC manage that gift? Exactly. By directly bringing it to the trash bin without a moment of hesitation and keeping on desperately clinging to the politically stillborn clownery around Ukraine which will allow the Republican senators to laugh their Democratic colleagues out of the stage and seal Trump's victory the very moment the said clownery is brought to the upper chamber of the parliament. Now Democrats look like a poor feller in front of an insurmountable wall, who, having witnessed a door which magically/quantumly appeared in that wall, screamed "To battle!/Arriva!/Kovfefe!", slammed the said door shut, industriously broke the handle so that it could never be opened again in the quantum dimension he exists and resumed his attempts to - how to put it mildly? - shatter the reinforced concrete with his forehead.

So please spare me the righteous posturing. Be honest at least to yourself and admit that America's mainstream parties are owned by the same people, hence the only thing you choose is the ideological agenda on cultural issues you prefer. The battle between them is as much of a battle between good and evil and of the rule of law against the lawlessness as the one between Pol Pot and D'Aubuisson Arrieta.

[Jan 21, 2020] I don't see how Trump has actually governed much differently from any other contemporary Republican. The difference between Trump and, say Ted Cruz, or Marco Rubio, is mostly style, not policy.

Jan 21, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

one vote fuow 21 hours ago

I'm a former Trump voter who could vote for Warren or Sanders but not Biden. Trump has been the biggest disappointment of my political life, and I'll never forgive him for the failures on immigration, but Biden and bis family looks to be at least as personally sleazy and corrupt as the Trumps, if not as outright sickening.
Clyde Schechter fuow 21 hours ago
Well, I'm a non-Democrat leftist (except for conservative leanings on social issues and a vehemently anti-war posture that is a minority view on both the left and right). I have voted for third-party candidates for President most of my life (and I'm a septuagenarian). For reasons of foreign policy and economics, I would probably vote for either Sanders or Warren, at least if they don't get too bonkers on identity politics. But there is no way I would vote for any of the other Democratic contenders, and there is no way I would vote for Trump.

For what it's worth, I think the whole frenzy to defeat Trump no matter what is overblown. Except for the Twitter feed, I don't see how Trump has actually governed much differently from any other contemporary Republican. The difference between Trump and, say Ted Cruz, or Marco Rubio, is mostly style, not policy.

Osse Clyde Schechter 7 hours ago
That last sentence is true. But it is style that really matters to many Democrats. Obama was their ideal President almost entirely because of his style.

And Trump's style is what attracts his hard core supporters.

Alex (the one that likes Ike) fuow 15 hours ago • edited
If that means Uncle Joe, then Trump may bloody well already uncork the champagne. Remember that recent Iranian debacle of his, which is already starting being forgotten? That was the *only* real chance for Democrats to look solid in the Senate when trying to impeach him. The only way to make Republican senators look dishonest and partisan when defending him. An unexpected and unprovoked electoral gift to them from Trump (a would-have-been-serious gift - read Daniel Larison's articles as to how many American voters, no matter their partisan leanings, are anti-war now). How did the DNC manage that gift? Exactly. By directly bringing it to the trash bin without a moment of hesitation and keeping on desperately clinging to the politically stillborn clownery around Ukraine which will allow the Republican senators to laugh their Democratic colleagues out of the stage and seal Trump's victory the very moment the said clownery is brought to the upper chamber of the parliament. Now Democrats look like a poor feller in front of an insurmountable wall, who, having witnessed a door which magically/quantumly appeared in that wall, screamed "To battle!/Arriva!/Kovfefe!", slammed the said door shut, industriously broke the handle so that it could never be opened again in the quantum dimension he exists and resumed his attempts to - how to put it mildly? - shatter the reinforced concrete with his forehead.

[Jan 21, 2020] Iran, Trump, and the neoliberal-neoconservative compact

Jan 21, 2020 | off-guardian.org

The author asks an interesting question: what is the urgency to remove Turmp before the election. Why notwait Novemebr and see if he is removed by voters?

One of the best articles I've seen on both sides of the current scene is Jim Kavanaugh's "Impeachment: What Lies Beneath?" Let us note that this essay was first published at the author's website, The Polemicist, on Dec. 17, 2019.

In the first half of the essay, "The Raw," the author is discussing the remarkable weakness of the impeachment case and articles; the second half of the essay, "The Cooked," begins with the following two paragraphs:

Which makes me wonder. The obviousness of this losing hand, and the fact that the most politically-seasoned, can't-be-that-stupid Democrats seem determined to play it out, have my paranoid political Spidey senses all atingle. What are the cards they're not showing? What lies beneath the thin ice of these Articles of Impeachment?

If the apparent agenda makes no sense, look for the hidden. Something that better explains why Pelosi, et. al. find it so urgent to replace Trump before the election and why they think they can succeed in doing that.

There is one thing that I can think of that drives such frantic urgency: War. That would also explain why Trump's "national security" problem -- embedded in the focus on Ukraine arms shipments, Russian aggression, etc. -- is the real issue, the whistle to Republican war dogs.

But if so, the Ukro-Russian motif is itself a screen for another "national security"/war issue that cannot be stated explicitly. There's no urgency about aggression towards Russia. There is for Iran.

These paragraphs mirror the structure of the essay altogether: beginning with impeachment and ending with Iran. In the next paragraph we see Kavanaugh's prognosis, his proposal for how things might unfold:

So here's my entirely speculative tea-leaf reading: If there's a hidden agenda behind the urgency to remove Trump, one that might actually garner the votes of Republican Senators, it is to replace him with a president who will be a more reliable and effective leader for a military attack on Iran that Israel wants to initiate before next November. Spring is the cruelest season for launching wars."

This was striking to read on December 17 and even more striking to reflect upon as of Friday, January 3. Kavanaugh's arguments make a lot of sense, and perhaps it will turn out that "April is the cruelest month" (as he says at the end of the essay) -- but don't we have to consider that perhaps Trump has once again outplayed both Democrats and Republicans, and, even more, the Deep State?

As Trump said in announcing the drone strike that killed Gen. Soleimani, "We took action last night to stop a war; we did not take action to start a war."

Attacks in/on other countries by the U.S. will not receive praise from me, not any more than did the U.S.-abetted coup in Bolivia. I will say, though, that I sure wish the party of the King of Drones, Barack Obama (who openly bragged about being "very good at killing people") would shut the hell up.

That's not going to happen, of course -- the only thing here that will restrain them is the role of Israel in this.

Again, there's no mystery to any of this -- but what is a mystery to me is why anybody listens to the Democrats on this or any other issue.

Undoubtedly there are elements to this situation I don't see or understand -- but what we all have as a helpful guide is the fact that whatever the Democratic Party leadership says here, and whatever the conventional Left narrative presents on this situation, absolutely cannot be trusted.

[Jan 21, 2020] Bernie Sanders Walks Straight Into the Russiagate Trap

Jan 21, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

Daniel Lazare January 20, 2020 © Photo: Wikimedia The New York Times caused a mini-commotion last week with a front-page story suggesting that Russian intelligence had hacked a Ukrainian energy firm known as Burisma Holdings in order to get dirt on Joe Biden and help Donald Trump win re-election.

But the article was flimsy even by Russiagate standards, and so certain questions inevitably arise. What was it really about? Who's behind it? Who's the real target?

Here's a quick answer. It was about boosting Joe Biden, and its real target was his chief rival, Bernie Sanders. And poor, inept Bernie walked straight into the trap.

The article was flimsy because rather than saying straight out that Russian intelligence hacked Burisma, the company notorious for hiring Biden's son, Hunter, for $50,000 a month job, reporters Nicole Perlroth and Matthew Rosenberg had to rely on unnamed "security experts" to say it for them. While suggesting that the hackers were looking for dirt, they didn't quite say that as well. Instead, they admitted that "it is not yet clear what the hackers found, or precisely what they were searching for."

So we have no idea what they were up to, if anything at all. But the Times then quoted "experts" to the effect that "the timing and scale of the attacks suggest that the Russians could be searching for potentially embarrassing material on the Bidens – the same kind of information that Mr. Trump wanted from Ukraine when he pressed for an investigation of the Bidens and Burisma, setting off a chain of events that led to his impeachment." Since Trump and the Russians are seeking the same information, they must be in cahoots, which is what Democrats have been saying from the moment Trump took office. Given the lack of evidence, this was meaningless as well.

But then came the kicker: two full paragraphs in which a Biden campaign spokesman was permitted to expound on the notion that the Russians hacked Burisma because Biden is the candidate that they and Trump fear the most.

"Donald Trump tried to coerce Ukraine into lying about Joe Biden and a major bipartisan, international anti-corruption victory because he recognized that he can't beat the vice president," the spokesman, Andrew Bates, said. "Now we know that Vladimir Putin also sees Joe Biden as a threat. Any American president who had not repeatedly encouraged foreign interventions of this kind would immediately condemn this attack on the sovereignty of our elections."

If Biden is the number-one threat, then Sanders is not, presumably because the Times sees him as soft on Moscow. If so, it means that he could be in for the same neo-McCarthyism that antiwar candidate Tulsi Gabbard encountered last October when Hillary Clinton blasted her as "the favorite of the Russians." Gabbard had the good sense to blast her right back.

"Thank you @Hillary Clinton. You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain. From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation. We wondered who was behind it and why. Now we know – it was always you, through your proxies and powerful allies in the corporate media and war machine ."

If only Sanders did the same. But instead he put out a statement filled with the usual anti-Russian clichés:

"The 2020 election is likely to be the most consequential election in modern American history, and I am alarmed by new reports that Russia recently hacked into the Ukrainian gas company at the center of the impeachment trial, as well as Russia's plans to once again meddle in our elections and in our democracy. After our intelligence agencies unanimously agreed that Russia interfered in the 2016 election, including with thousands of paid ads on Facebook, the New York Times now reports that Russia likely represents the biggest threat of election meddle in 2020, including through disinformation campaigns, promoting hatred, hacking into voting systems, and by exploiting the political divisions sewn [sic] by Donald Trump ."

And so on for another 250 words. Not only did the statement put him in bed with the intelligence agencies, but it makes him party to the big lie that the Kremlin was responsible for putting Trump over the top in 2016.

Let's get one thing straight. Yes, Russian intelligence may have hacked the Democratic National Committee. But cybersecurity was so lax that others may have been rummaging about as well. (CrowdStrike, the company called in to investigate the hack, says it found not one but two cyber-intruders.) Notwithstanding the Mueller report, all the available evidence indicates that Russia did not then pass along thousands of DNC emails that Wikileaks published in July 2016. (Julian Assange's statement six months later that "our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party" remains uncontroverted.) Similarly, there's no evidence that the Kremlin had anything to do with the $45,000 worth of Facebook ads purchased by a St. Petersburg company known as the Internet Research Agency – Robert Mueller's 2018 indictment of the IRA was completely silent on the subject of a Kremlin connection – and no evidence that the ads, which were politically all over the map, had a remotely significant impact on the 2016 election.

All the rest is a classic CIA disinformation campaign aimed at drumming up anti-Russian hysteria and delegitimizing anyone who fails to go along. And now Bernie Sanders is trying to cover his derrière by hopping on board.

It won't work. Sanders will find himself having to take one loyalty oath after another as the anti-Russia campaign flares anew. But it will never be enough, and he'll only wind up looking tired and weak. Voters will opt for the supposedly more formidable Biden, who will end up as a bug splat on the windshield of Donald Trump's speeding election campaign. With impeachment no longer an issue, he'll be free to behave as dictatorially as he wishes as he settles into his second term.

After inveighing against billionaire's wars, he'll find himself ensnared by the same billionaire war machine. The trouble with Sanders is that he thinks he can win by playing by the rules. But he can't because the rules are stacked against him. He'd know that if his outlook was more radical. His problem is not that he's too much of a socialist. Rather, it's that he's not enough.

[Jan 19, 2020] It is unclear what percentage of Congress are alcoholics, but judging from their statements looks like more then half

The situation in neoliberal MSM probably is close to a real epidemics ;-)
Jan 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Last of the Middle Class , 2 hours ago link

Finally, a group Pelosi can lead and be proud of .

[Jan 19, 2020] debunked by Trump himself

Jan 19, 2020 | www.commondreams.org

when he tweeted that 'it doesn't really matter' if there was such a threat or not.

In a letter to the New York Times the now 100 years old chief prosecutor of the Nuremberg trials, Benjamin B. Ferencz, warned of the larger effects of such deeds when he writes :
The administration recently announced that, on orders of the president, the United States had "taken out" (which really means "murdered") an important military leader of a country with which we were not at war. As a Harvard Law School graduate who has written extensively on the subject, I view such immoral action as a clear violation of national and international law.

The public is entitled to know the truth. The United Nations Charter, the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice in The Hague are all being bypassed. In this cyberspace world, young people everywhere are in mortal danger unless we change the hearts and minds of those who seem to prefer war to law.

The killing of a Soleimani will also only have a short term effect when it comes to general deterrence. It was a onetime shot to which others will react. Groups and people who work against 'U.S. interests' will now do so less publicly. Countries will seek asymmetric advantages to prevent such U.S. action against themselves. By committing the crime the U.S. and Trump made the global situation for themselves more complicated.

It is interesting that the commentary closes with a letter by Benjamin Ferencz, perhaps the last surviving Nuremberg prosecutor. As he indicates, the assassination is a war crime, and, in my view, even the threat of such an assassination is a serious breach of international law. Regimes following such a policy have gone rogue, and cabinet ministers making such a pronouncement that the assassination was carried out as a deterrent are, in effect, confessing to war crimes. In future the reach of the offending regime may be much less than it is now, and, if that occurs, the rogue minister better be careful if he travels outside of his home country.

Posted by: exiled off mainstree | Jan 18 2020 20:00 utc | 5

"By committing the crime the U.S. and Trump made the global situation for themselves more complicate."

USA is not exactly the sole economic superpower, but as long as the allies, EU, NATO, major allies in Asia and Latin America, behave like poodles, USA pretty much controls what is "normal". After Obama campaigns of murder by drone, now Trump raises it to a higher level, and Europe, the most critical link in the web of alliances, applauds (UK) or accepts and cooperates. That can be a useful clarification for US establishment.

So the bottom line is that while it is hard to show constructive goals achieved by raising murder policies to a more brazen level, nothing changes for the worse. Allies tolerate irrationality, cruelty etc. and to some extend, join the fun.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jan 18 2020 20:06 utc | 8

Pompeo: "In all cases, we have to do this."

In all cases they have to murder? That is psycho killer talk. Notice how comfortable the American public is with that.

America disconnected from reality years ago. I rather doubt they could even find their way back if they were to somehow return to their senses.

Posted by: William Gruff | Jan 18 2020 20:07 utc | 9

Deterrence and decapitation strikes ...

Idle speculation on my part, but I am not alone in wondering if the Soleimani assassination accelerated Putin's restructuring agenda. (I'm not suggesting it was generated or even influenced in substance by the strike, just that the timing may have been.) Given the power of the President in Russia, as the CIA itself very well understands, there is perhaps no more tempting target for an overt military assassination strike than President Putin.

Of course, deterrence of rational actors is precisely what would prevent this, but I imagine Russian strategic thinkers have wondered whether or for how long the US remains a rational actor. Moreover, this would be the sort of thing that a fanatical faction could pull off. In some Strangelovean bunker somewhere, there may be those who would actually welcome a last gasp of large-scale warfare before the Eurasian Heartland is lost and the Petrodollar-fueled global finance empire, nominally sheltered in the US, dies away.

Creative destruction ... a last chance to shuffle the cards, and perhaps reset a losing game to zero.

Posted by: Paul Damascene | Jan 18 2020 20:20 utc | 13

Maybe I stupidly posted this in the wrong thread?

Trump is simply a third-rate Godfather type gangster, with a touch of the charm and a lot of the baggage. I think his murder of General Qassem Soleimani was not something he would have done if he had any choice. It was a very stupid move, and Trump is just not that stupid. I really think this was demanded by the 'churnitalists'. These churnitalists are probably the psychos of the predatory arm of the CIA, and their billionaire allies.

See, it all works like this:

These churnitalists (who supposedly provide us with 'protection', or 'security') are the real rulers (because everybody who defies them ends up dead). Now just ask your self: How does rulership actually really work? It's really kind of simple. The only actual way to establish rulership over other people is to prove, again and again, that you can force them to do stupid things, for absolutely no reason. This is called 'people-churning', and all you have to do is just keep churning out low-class 'history' by constantly forcing the weaker ones to do stupid things. Again and again. This happens constantly in a churnitalist gangster society. Even in schools and legislatures, and so on. Haven't you noticed it yet?

Posted by: blues | Jan 18 2020 21:39 utc | 30

[Jan 19, 2020] In 2019, Parnas served as a translator for a legal case involving Dmytro Firtash, one of Ukraine's wealthiest oligarchs with self-admitted mob connections

Jan 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

MushroomCloud2020 , 2 hours ago link

Lev Parnas

In 2019, Parnas served as a translator for a legal case involving Dmytro Firtash , one of Ukraine's wealthiest oligarchs with self-admitted mob connections, [12] who is fighting extradition to the U.S. to face bribery charges. Firtash has lived in Vienna for five years. "Mr. Parnas was retained by DiGenova & Toensing , LLP as an interpreter in order to communicate with their client Mr. Firtash, who does not speak English," the Washington-based law firm said in a statement. [13] However, recordings of Parnas speaking Ukrainian and Russian evidence that he has not retained total fluency in these two languages since coming to the United States. A Swiss lawyer for Firtash loaned $1 million to Parnas's wife in September 2019, according to prosecutors. [14]

In addition to working on joint business and political efforts, Parnas and Fruman have been involved in Jewish charities and causes in the U.S., Ukraine and Israel. [15] Fruman and Parnas are on the board of a Ukrainian-Jewish charity, "Friends of Anatevka", founded by Ukrainian rabbi Moshe Reuven Azman , to provide a refuge for Jews affected by the Russian military intervention in Ukraine . [16] Parnas and Fruman visited Israel in the summer of 2018 as a part of a delegation, led by former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and joined by Anthony Scaramucci , of "right-wing Jewish and evangelical supporters of Trump." While there, the group met with various leaders and personalities including the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, David M. Friedman , Benjamin Netanyahu 's son Yair Netanyahu , as well as billionaire Simon Falic, one of Netanyahu's most generous donors. [17] Huckabee joined the two once again in March 2019 when they were awarded with the "Chovevei Zion" (Lovers of Zion) awards at a gala for the National Council of Young Israel , an event focused on supporting President Trump and Israeli West Bank settlements . Rudy Giuliani and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy were in attendance as well. While in Israel Parnas and Fruman also met with oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi , a wealthy Ukrainian under investigation by the Department of Justice for money laundering. [15]

[Jan 19, 2020] McConnell Should Toss Out This Malicious Impeachment by Patrick J. Buchanan

Jan 17, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Patrick Buchanan

About the impeachment of President Donald Trump she engineered with her Democratic majority, Nancy Pelosi said Wednesday: "It's not personal. It's not political. It's not partisan. It's patriotic."

Seriously, Madam Speaker? Not political? Not partisan?

Why then were all eight House members chosen as managers to prosecute the case against Trump, who ceremoniously escorted the articles across the Capitol, all Democrats? Why did the articles of impeachment receive not a single Republican vote on the House floor?

The truth: The impeachment of Donald Trump is the fruit of a malicious prosecution whose roots go back to the 2016 election, in the aftermath of which stunned liberals and Democrats began to plot the removal of the new president.

This coup has been in the works for three years.

First came the crazed charges of Trump's criminal collusion with Vladimir Putin to hack the emails of the DNC and the Clinton campaign and funnel them to WikiLeaks.

For two years, we heard the cries of "Treason!" from Pelosi's caucus. And despite the Mueller investigation's exoneration of Trump of all charges of conspiracy with Russia, we still hear the echoes:

Trump is Putin's poodle. Trump is an asset of the Kremlin.

All we want, and what the American people deserve, is a "fair trial," Democrats and their media collaborators now insist. But can a fair trial proceed from a manifestly deficient and malicious prosecution?

Consider. In this impeachment, we are told, the House serves as the grand jury, and Adam Schiff's Intelligence Committee and Jerry Nadler's Judiciary Committee serve as the investigators and prosecutors.

But the articles of impeachment on which the Judiciary Committee and the House voted do not contain a single crime required by the Constitution for impeachment and removal. There is no charge of treason, no charge of bribery or "other high crimes and misdemeanors."

So weak is the case for impeachment that the elite in this city is demanding that the Senate do the work the House failed to do .

The Senate must subpoena the documents and witnesses the House failed to produce, to make the case for impeachment more persuasive than it is now.

Not our job, rightly answers Mitch McConnell.

The Senate is supposed to be an "impartial jury."

But while there is a debate over whether Republicans will vote to call witnesses, there is no debate on how the Senate Democrats intend to vote -- 100% for removal of a president they fear they may not be able to defeat.

Consider Trump's alleged offense: pressing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate Burisma Holdings and Hunter Biden.

Assume Zelenskiy, without prodding, sent to the U.S., as a friendly act to ingratiate himself with Trump, the Burisma file on Hunter Biden.

Would that have been a crime?

Why is it then a crime if Trump asked for the file?

The military aid Trump held up for 10 weeks -- lethal aid Barack Obama denied to Kyiv -- was sent. And Zelenskiy never held the press conference requested, never investigated Burisma, never sent the Biden file.

There is a reason why no crime was charged in the impeachment of Donald Trump. There was no crime committed.

Not political, said Pelosi. Why then did she hold up sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate for a month, after she said it was so urgent that Trump be impeached that Schiff and Nadler could not wait for their subpoenas to be ruled upon by the Supreme Court?

Pelosi is demanding that the Senate get the documents, subpoena and hear the witnesses, and do the investigative work Schiff and Nadler failed to do.

Does that not constitute an admission that a convincing case was not made? Are not the articles voted by the House inherently deficient if the Senate has to have more evidence than the House prosecutors could produce to convict the president of "abuse of power"?

Can we really have a fair trial in the Senate, when half of the jury, the Democratic caucus, is as reliably expected to vote to remove the president as Republicans are to acquit him? What kind of fair trial is it when we can predict the final vote before the court hears the evidence?

It is ridiculous to deny that this impeachment is partisan, political and personal. It reeks of politics, partisanship and Trump-hatred.

As for patriotic, that depends on where you stand -- or sit.

But the forum to be entrusted with the decision of "should Trump go?" is not a deeply polarized Senate, but with those the Founding Fathers entrusted with such decisions -- the American people.

In most U.S. courts, a prosecution case this inadequate, with prosecutors asking the court itself to get more documents and call more witnesses, and so visibly contaminated with malice toward the accused, would be dismissed outright.

Mitch McConnell should let the House managers make their case, and then call for a vote to dismiss, and treat this indictment with the contempt it so richly deserves.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.

Mary Myers 2 days ago

I want to know all the dirt. I want the Dems to be able to call their witnesses, and I want Trump's team to call their witnesses. And I want cross examinations. Let's have a real trial so the American people can learn what has been going on. To sweep it all under the carpet by having Mitch McConnell move for dismissal is to suppress the truth. What is wrong with Pat Buchanan? I always thought Buchanan was a truth seeker and a truth teller. So very disappointed in him.
Gary Sellars Mary Myers a day ago
Fools and charlatans should not be encouraged. This faux "impeachment" is simply an exercise in pre-election mischief-making by a Democrat party that simply hopes to damage Trump in the eyes of the voters.
Hank Linderman Gary Sellars a day ago
The "pre-election mischief" was Trump's efforts re Ukraine, Biden, etc.
TISO_AX2 Hank Linderman a day ago • edited
Biden is a good Dem, shaking down Ukraine on behalf of his Navy-rejected druggie son, using US public money. And we have it on videotape.

Crooks need to be exposed. Good on the President for exposing Democrat-Ukraine corruption. He hasn't ended it yet but he has exposed it.

phreethink TISO_AX2 a day ago
So this is your argument: The Bidens were corrupt so Trump gets a pass on violating the law AS FOUND BY THE NONPARTISAN GAO! Yup, sounds reasonable to me. MAGA
Gary Sellars phreethink a day ago
Government agencies are only as "non-partisan" as the political appointees tasked to run them.

No-one cared when Creepy joe Biden did it openly, but its a crime because some choose to believe that Trump did the same? LOL!!! No sorry, that won't wash.

Juts because Biden is seeking to be president that doesn't mean he gets some kind of immunity from investigation for corrupt activities in foreign nations.

If you think that a Dem-funded dodgy dossier on Trump is sufficient to initiate an FBI probe on trump when he is the Repubs nominee, how can you possibly think that Biden is untouchable given his public admission of squeezing the Ukro gov using foreign aid as leverage?????

Hilarious. The cognitive dissonance is strong with this one.

Gary Sellars Hank Linderman a day ago • edited
What pre-election "Trump efforts in Ukraine"? I think you have an inability to follow time-lines.

Manafort was involved in corrupt dealing with shady Oligarchs, but that was before he worked for Trump, and the Bad Orange Man wasn't in the slightest bit involved.

I still find it hilarious that the libs think Trump committed a crime in his conversation with Zelensky, but its OK for Creepy Joe (as Veep) to blackmail Poroshenkos regime to get rid of the prosecutor sniffing around Burisa Holdings and thereby threatening his sons get-rich-quick scheme (and then BRAGGING about it on camera). Un-freakin-believable... :-D

TISO_AX2 Mary Myers a day ago
Why won't the Dems and leftwing media leave him alone then? Rep. Al Green (D-Tx) let that cat out of the bag when he told us that they have to impeach him otherwise he's going to get re-elected. The impeachment gambit is no more complicated than that.
Mary Myers TISO_AX2 a day ago • edited
The Left can't stand Trump because of his Supreme Court nominations, his pulling out of the Climate Accord, and his pro-life positions. That's why they want him stopped and removed from office. That being said, Trump is his own worst enemy because he is so full of himself that he is incapable of behaving in an adult and judicious way.
phreethink Mary Myers a day ago
Absolutely true. 100% But it doesn't change the fact that Trump tried to blackmail Ukraine into announcing an investigation of the Bidens by withholding Congressionally mandated aid.

So, KNOWING the Dems were out to get him, he still does that, and is stupid enough to get caught red handed. Your great leader picks such "winners." Rudy, Lev, and the gang did him right.

If Obama did it, a GOP House and Senate would have run him out of town in a week.

Mary Myers phreethink a day ago
Like, I said, Trump is his own worst enemy. And a lot of Republicans are hypocrites. If Obama behaved as Trump has they'd be all over him with criticism.
TISO_AX2 Mary Myers a day ago
If we could design our own president..he'd be perfect. For us that is. A president is there to do a job. It's laid out in the Constitution. The job desription says nothing about personality type.

Would I like him to say some things differently, sure. Sometimes I cringe. But nothing that he says affects us negatively (unless it's in an emotional or psychological way). Your life, family, your career, your bank accounts, are not hurt by DJTs tweets or sayings or interactions with anyone else in Washington.

So if that's the price to pay to have a leader who works to keep his promises it's a small price, and Americans ought to have the grace and fortitude to handle the daily news without melting down emotionally or psychologically. A good spirit and a joyful outlook are good for your soul.

Joe Frank TISO_AX2 21 hours ago • edited
A quote: "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one."
Charles MacKay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds

Food for thought.

TISO_AX2 Joe Frank 20 hours ago • edited
Things are tough all over. Especially among those who are not on America's side.
Gary Sellars Mary Myers a day ago
If that was the case, just not leave him to hang himself. Instead the corrupt libs indulge in big lies and sedition. The witch hunt is clear and obvious, and it will stiffen Trumps sails as he heads into the 2020 showdown.
Mary Myers Gary Sellars a day ago • edited
Probably. However, the ancients had a saying; "Whoever the gods would destroy, they first make drunk with power."
Gary Sellars Mary Myers a day ago
You're referring to Shrillary I must presume?
Mary Myers Gary Sellars a day ago
"The mills of God's justice grind exceedingly slow, but they also grind exceedingly fine."
TISO_AX2 Mary Myers 20 hours ago • edited
How do you know that God's justice isn't what's behind Donald Trump's success?
Mary Myers TISO_AX2 4 hours ago
We shall see what happens to Mr. Trump in the long run. God is inscrutable. No one can claim to know the workings of God.
TISO_AX2 Mary Myers 4 hours ago
What happens to Mr. Trump in the long run is not our business. He's the POTUS. Anything beyond both the scope of and the time of his presidency is an obsession with his person. Better to leave what's between him and his country out of any ideas of what's between him and God.
Joe Frank Mary Myers a day ago
Well spoken Mary. I find it ironic that the American Conservative would publish a "hit piece" about a supposed "hit job." I come to the American Conservative for thoughtful, insightful ideas, not this. When the president grants himself "absolute immunity," which I would expect Pat Buchanan and American Conservative writers and readers to be outrages at, and I read a piece like this, I wonder how Pat and company can editorialize and comment at a level well below the dignity of this publication?
Joe Frank Joe Frank a day ago
I think this statement is closer to the truth of the matter:

"I think the votes have been decided. As much as anybody will be pretending to be judicious about this, I don't think that there's one senator who hasn't decided how they're going to vote... I think if you're pretty much no longer interested in running for office, or no longer interested in getting Republican votes, you might vote to impeach the president... When it comes to whether or not you're going to impeach a president of your own party, particularly over a policy difference or whether or not he has lack of decorum or whatever, I think that's something that a lot of voters will not excuse."

Rand Paul, Regarding the Impeachment Trial, January 16, 2020

phreethink Joe Frank a day ago
Absolutely agree. And those in the GOP who close their eyes and ears to Trump's attempted blackmail/bribery will answer to the electorate. That's why we need to get this trial going and get it over. Sure would be nice to hear what all the president's men say about it, but that would only provide the first-hand evidence further proving Trump's guilt.

So there's no way they'll have witnesses. They'll try to blame the Dems for not letting Trump delay the whole thing in Court and for refusing to have Hunter and Joe testify, even though that is a sideshow to the attempted blackmail/bribery. This is so obviously a bunch of bull. If the Senate really wanted to hear from Joe and Hunter, they could subpoena them right now, today into a committee hearing on their supposed Ukraine corruption. They haven't, so we know its just a bunch of smoke. The only question is how many voters in the middle are going to let them get away with it.

Gary Sellars phreethink a day ago
Witnesses to say what? The same sort of hearsay and opinion that dominated the House hearings?

Errr... NO. The case will be judged on what the Dems have submitted in their articles of impeachment. They don't get to turn this into a sustained lynch attempt or a never-ending talk-show for liberals and their minions who hate Trump and just want to be heard.

Gary Sellars Joe Frank a day ago • edited
Quite frankly, without evidence of High Crimes, that is the way it should be.
phreethink Joe Frank a day ago
Agree. But Buchanan has become just another Trumper.
Constantinople Mary Myers a day ago
Buchanan was a longtime aide to Richard Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal Nixon. The people who accept this line of argument contend, in effect, that the purpose of the American Revolution and the US Constitution was to replace a hereditary monarchy with an elected one.
Westcoastdeplorable Mary Myers a day ago
I want all the dirt aired as well, but the SENATE is not the proper venue. These traitors need to be indicted, tried, probably convicted, and sent to Gitmo. I hope McConnell shuts this down good and proper.
Mary Myers Westcoastdeplorable a day ago • edited
So how are we to know who the traitors are if there are no witnesses and cross examinations in the Senate? Are you expecting the justice department to come down with a bunch of indictments?
phreethink Westcoastdeplorable a day ago
Under Bill Barr's DOJ the traitors who sought a bribe from Ukraine to benefit Trump's reelection will be prosecuted? HAHAHAHAHAHA. Good one.
TISO_AX2 2 days ago • edited
Indeed. The Senate should consider the case that the House sent them in writing, and only that case. Too bad for Pelosi and Schiff that it's so weak.
phreethink TISO_AX2 a day ago
It's so weak that if it weren't the President, there'd already be an indictment.
timoth3y 2 days ago
Mr. Buchanan has a deep understanding of these matters on both an academic level and from personal experience. It's unfortunate, but the only conclusion to draw is that the numerous falsehoods in this article are not mistakes, but deliberate attempts to deceive the reader.

Whatever one's opinion on the behavior of Trump, the Democratic House or the Republican Senate, we should, at a bare minimum, respect the truth.

1) Impeachment is not a criminal trail. It does not require an underlying crime to be committed, and the rules for impeachment hearings are not the same as those for criminal or civil trails. Furthermore, the GAO has stated that what Trump is accused of is indeed a crime.

2) The Mueller report was not an "exoneration of Trump of all charges of conspiracy with Russia." The report literally said that it was not and Mueller testified to Congress that it was not an exoneration.

3) The claim that "The Senate must subpoena the documents and witnesses the House failed to produce" is absurd. it was the White House that failed to produce to documents that the House subpoenas demanded. Whether you believe there should be witnesses (or a trail at all) in the Senate. Implying that House Democrats is somehow concealing these documents is a lazy lie.

I must put aside Mr. Buchanan's comments regarding what the various senators are "really thinking" because I lack the physic mind-reading abilities that he seems to possess.

However, whatever our opinion on the impeachment and the events that led up to it, can we please stop with the bald-faced lies?

If the Senate decides to dismiss, so be it, but if they publicly swear to God and country that they "will do impartial justice according to the constitution and laws: so help you God?" then we should do our best to ensure they act that way.

Gary Sellars timoth3y a day ago
"The Mueller report was not an "exoneration of Trump of all charges of conspiracy with Russia." The report literally said that it was not and Mueller testified to Congress that it was not an exoneration."

Total rubbish. A lack of evidence IS exoneration. Without evidence, all there is left is a bunch of allegations without proof. Mueller was given the job to hang trump but he couldn't prove the lie to be fact. He won't admit it so he indulges in innuendo to give a little complimentary red meat to his team mates.

This "impeachment" is a disgrace, nothing more than a corrupt exercise in partisan party politics. No high crimes. No high misdemeanors. Nothing but a steaming pile of hearsay, allegations, bias and opinions. Certainly nothing that should ever justify the removal of a legal and constitutionally elected POTUS.

Wezz Gary Sellars a day ago
"Disgrace". Trump has hypnotized his followers to repeat his 5 favorite words mindlessly... in this case it must be the word Trumps mother kept using to admonish him, it's one of his favorite.
Jeffrey Samuels Gary Sellars a day ago
it wasn't lack of evidence. It was the DOJ rule that you can't indict a sitting president that prompted Mueller's response.
TISO_AX2 Jeffrey Samuels a day ago
Yes, it was a lack of evidence. The purpose of a special prosecutor is to prosecute. When they have the evidence then they bring an indictment. If this is not possible for the US President, there would be no purpose for an investigation of a President. And when a prosecutor fails to bring an indictment the accused is presumed innocent.
Mary Myers TISO_AX2 a day ago • edited
There was evidence of collusion. It's in the tapes of the phone calls Gen. Mike Flynn had with the Russian ambassador in December of 2016. It's just that the collusion was not with Russia but was instead a collusion with another country to get Russia to do something that would undermine Obama's policy at the U.N. But to reveal those tapes to the public is politically incorrect, and Robert Mueller wasn't going to go there.
TISO_AX2 Mary Myers a day ago
There was evidence of collusion. It's in the tapes of the phone calls
Gen. Mike Flynn had with the Russian ambassador in December of 2016.

Cite it, please. Let's see what this collusion looks like.

Mary Myers TISO_AX2 a day ago • edited
The Mueller Report (The Washington Post edition) page 538 barely touches on it, but you can get the drift.

"Flynn also agreed that he lied to the FBI about another contact with Kislyak, a December 2016 phone call in which Flynn asked if Russia would delay or vote against a proposed United Nations resolution critical of Israel. Flynn said he made this call at the direction of a "very senior member" of the presidential transition team," identified later as Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner."

Phil Giraldi, who was terminated at TAC, also did an article on this that you can find on www.unz.com . I believe the title of Phil Giraldi's column is "Russiagate is really Israelgate."

TISO_AX2 Mary Myers a day ago
Flynn was plea bargaining to save his family from the heavy hand of uncontrolled government prosecutors. He has since withdrawn the plea so any collusion remains in doubt. This also fits the narrative that the FBI agents did not think Flynn was lying when they interviewed him.
Mary Myers TISO_AX2 a day ago
Well, there is one way to find out for sure, and that would be for the tapes of the Kislyak conversation to be released so we can hear exactly what Flynn said. It sure can't be classified information as he wasn't yet working for the government during the transition period in December of 2016. For some reason they don't want those taped phone conversations to be released even in Judge Emmett Sullivan's courtroom.
Gary Sellars Mary Myers a day ago • edited
You seem to be one of these "True Believers" who simply cannot digest the reality of Muellers report. He searched high and low, and found NOTHING.

No Trump crimes.
No Trump collusion.

Accept the facts and get a life. You'll be happier for it.

Mary Myers Gary Sellars a day ago
At least I read the report. Did you?
Gary Sellars Mary Myers a day ago • edited
You read it, focused on the bits that you wanted, made your mind up on what you wanted it to mean, and then ignored the rest.
Mary Myers Gary Sellars a day ago
No, I found that the report was rather boring, and, of course, there was no proof of any collusion with Russia. The report paints Trump as a stupid, self serving oaf. I am sure you couldn't bear to even read the report and preferred to get your summary of it from FOX News.
Gary Sellars Mary Myers a day ago • edited
"The report paints Trump as a stupid, self serving oaf. "

So? Who cares what Mueller and his Democrat minions think? It wasn't the investigations remit to critique Trump as a person or even as a President.It was to find evidence of collusion and criminal behaviour by Trump and his campaign.

It found NOTHING or the sort. Personal bad behaviour by Manafort in Ukraine doesn't stain trump. Flynn getting caught in a procedural trap by FBI agents looking entrap him doesn't count (and he is recanting his plea bid now, and good for him).

Unsupported innuendo about bad behaviors mean NOTHING. Trump isn't bound to assist the Witch Hunt against him. He has no obligation to help those that are concocting fallacies in an attempt to bring down or sabotage his tenure. Refusal to co-operate with your own lynching by your enemies is not "obstruction". Trump hasn't broken any laws by his refusal to co-operate, and as president, he has a great amount of privilege in this respect (as all previous presidents have had and exercised when required).

Great big nothing-burger. Accept the truth and get over yourself.

[Jan 19, 2020] Russiagate was to hide Clinton's corruption. Ukrainegate is to hide Biden's corruption

Jan 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Dank fur Kopf , 2 hours ago link

You can all go and ignore the whole Trump impeachment, because it's just smoke to try and hide the real fire.

Joe Biden's actual blackmail of the Ukrainian government, when he threatened to withhold $1 billion if the Prosecutor investigating his son, Hunter Biden, wasn't immediately fired.

Russiagate was to hide Clinton's corruption.
Ukrainegate is to hide Biden's corruption.

And because Biden is such an arrogant piece of ..., here's him admitting to it on camera:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3115&v=Q0_AqpdwqK4&feature=emb_logo

Dank fur Kopf , 2 hours ago link

You can all go and ignore the whole Trump impeachment, because it's just smoke to try and hide the real fire.

Joe Biden's actual blackmail of the Ukrainian government, when he threatened to withhold $1 billion if the Prosecutor investigating his son, Hunter Biden, wasn't immediately fired.

Russiagate was to hide Clinton's corruption.
Ukrainegate is to hide Biden's corruption.

And because Biden is such an arrogant piece of ..., here's him admitting to it on camera:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3115&v=Q0_AqpdwqK4&feature=emb_logo

[Jan 18, 2020] Trump Lawyers Frame Impeachment Removal Trial as Violation of Constitution, Election Meddling - Sputnik International

Jan 18, 2020 | sputniknews.com

The US Senate has formally initiated the trial for the removal of US President Donald Trump from office, which kicked off with House officials reading the charges to the upper chamber and the swearing-in of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to preside over the process. Trump's legal team on Saturday released a statement attempting to reject his impeachment by the House, characterising the charges against the US president as a "dangerous attack" on Americans and their right to vote.

"We are on strong legal footing. The president has done nothing wrong and we believe that will be borne out in this process", a source said, ahead of the document's submission to the Senate scheduled later in the day.

Trump's defence team formally responded to the six-page document containing the articles of impeachment and stated their opinion on the merits of the two charges - abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

"The articles of impeachment submitted by House Democrats are a dangerous attack on rights of the American people to freely choose their president. This is a brazen and unlawful attempt to overturn the results of the 2016 election and interfere with the 2020 election, now just months away", the document states.

A spokesman for Trump's legal team suggested that the articles of impeachment are constitutionally invalid. "They fail to allege any crime or violation of law whatsoever, let alone high crimes and misdemeanors", the document said.

The lawyers reportedly stressed that Trump did nothing wrong and predicted that he would not be removed from office during the upcoming Senate trial, adding that the defence team planned to argue that the impeachment articles violate the US constitution.

On Saturday, US lawmakers managing the Senate removal trial filed a brief laying out their arguments supporting charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress against the US president.

The Democratic House of Representatives impeachment managers faced a deadline of 5 p.m. EST (22:00 GMT) on Saturday to file the document before the trial of the US president starts in the Senate next week. Lawmakers argued in the brief that Trump must be removed from the Oval Office to safeguard the integrity of the upcoming presidential election.

On 18 December, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives voted along party lines to impeach Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress for freezing military aid to Ukraine in exchange for Kiev launching a probe of political rival Joe Biden.

U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) bangs the gavel to adjourn the House of Representatives after representatives voted in favor of two counts of impeachment against U.S. President Donald Trump in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., December 18, 2019. © REUTERS / JONATHAN ERNST 'Impeached Forever': Pelosi Slams Trump as Senate Trial Set to Begin Next Week According to the US Constitution, the House has sole power to impeach, which is analogous to an indictment, while the 100-seat Senate, currently controlled by the Republicans, has the sole power of removing a president.

Trump is the third US president to be impeached. Neither of the previous two, Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1999 were forced from office. Another US president, Richard Nixon, resigned in August 1974 before the House could vote on his impeachment, thus avoiding a removal trial in the Senate.

Trump has called his impeachment a "witch hunt" designed to overturn the results of the 2016 election.

An unnamed senior Trump administration official told reporters earlier this week that the president's legal team - made up, in part, of lawyers who formerly worked for deceased paedophile and sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein - expect a "rapid acquittal" and doubt the removal trial will last more than two weeks.

[Jan 18, 2020] Impeachment circus begins in earnest, and will change nothing -- RT Op-ed

Jan 18, 2020 | www.rt.com

... ... ...

The Republican-controlled Senate will almost certainly vote to acquit Trump. No concrete evidence of wrongdoing was revealed during the House Intelligence Committee's inquiry, and none of the second-hand witnesses to Trump's infamous phone call with Zelensky revealed any smoking gun evidence. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has ignored Democrat pleas to admit more witnesses and more evidence, arguing that the House's case be tried as is.

Meanwhile, Republicans ridiculed Pelosi for sitting on the impeachment articles for four weeks, despite Democrat claims that Trump posed a "clear and present danger" to national security, and Pelosi's insistence that removing him was an "urgent concern."

Any doubt that impeachment was a partisan affair was removed by Pelosi on Wednesday night, when she handed out souvenir pens to reporters after signing the articles, posing in front of a lectern with a placard reading "#defendourdemocracy" on it. McConnell described the signing ceremony as "The House's partisan process distilled into one last perfect visual. Not solemn or serious. A transparently political exercise from beginning to end."

Yesterday, the Speaker celebrated impeachment with souvenir pens, bearing her own golden signature, brought in on silver platters. The House's partisan process distilled into one last perfect visual. Not solemn or serious. A transparently political exercise from beginning to end. pic.twitter.com/AshajRLH2F

-- Leader McConnell (@senatemajldr) January 16, 2020

McConnell is not above partisan games either, and has openly pledged to work with the White House to see Trump acquitted.

Which begs the question, what was it all for? If Trump is acquitted, the Democratic Party has no political capital left to launch another impeachment campaign, even if Trump blatantly commits the "high crimes and misdemeanors" necessary to trigger an actual, bipartisan impeachment effort.

Trump then also gets to claim victory, with an acquittal justifying his cries of "witch hunt" and "presidential harassment," further solidifying his base and embarrassing the Democrats in front of undecided voters. Pelosi stated on Sunday that regardless of the trial's outcome, Trump is "impeached for life," but Trump is louder and brasher than Pelosi, and will milk an acquittal for all it's worth.

Even as the trial against him formally opened on Thursday, the president celebrated the passage of his US-Mexico-Canada Agreement, his second trade win in two days. His approval rating also rose to 51 percent, the highest it's been since he was impeached just over a month ago. All of this strengthens his argument against the party he's taken to calling "Do Nothing Democrats."

[Jan 18, 2020] If Trump is removed, will the Speaker of the House not be the Sovereign

Jan 18, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com


After the War of Independence from Great Britain, the US had a very different form of government than the present one. This government functioned under the Articles of Confederation. This government had been formed in 1775 and had served the rebellious colonies fairly well throughout the war and into the initial years of peace and separation from the mother country across the sea.

Some people judged that government to be too loose an arrangement among the constituent states. A sufficient number of so minded people persuaded the states to convene a convention at Philadelphia to consider some amendments to the Articles of Confederation and to report these back as RECOMMENDATIONS to the state legislatures.

That did not happen. Instead the delegates to this convention seized control of the agenda and wrote a document that created a form of government in which there was an Executive Branch empowered in many ways to act without the direction given by the Legislative Branch. This Executive was made to be particularly independent in the conduct of war and and foreign relations. Some restrictions were established in that the military was to be funded by the legislature (if it chose to do so). The military was to be designed by the legislature and officers thereof were to be appointed by the senate on recommendation of the president. In foreign affairs the appointment of ambassadors and the approval of international treaties were made the responsibility of the senate as well, but both in war and in foreign relations the content and conduct of these government affairs were reserved to the Executive Branch. As an example of this, the Congress of the US had no role in running WW2.. The House of Representatives did not "sign off" on Operation Overlord or any other plan. The Congress did make an attempt to control military operations during the Civil War. A Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War was formed from among the most radical Republicans in both houses, but Lincoln largely ignored the machinations of this body.

Trump is to be tried for abuse of power and obstructing Congress. In the first instance he is accused of seeking political advantage by soliciting an investigation of the affairs of Joe Biden in a telephone call to the president of the Ukraine. His motivations in that call are unclear and are contested even among those who listened to the call in an official capacity. Biden was not then a candidate for office. He was a potential candidate. In the second article Trump is accused of Obstructing Congress. No president has ever been impeached on such a charge even though an inherent conflict between the Executive and Legislative Branches was built into the structure of the US Constitution in order to limit the power of both branches. For example; the president may wish to make some change in government practice that the Congress does not want. Many presidents have sought to obviate this difficulty by attaching signing statements to laws passed by Congress. These often say, in effect, "I am signing this but will not execute the will of Congress." No president has ever been impeached for doing that. Obama did that many times.

Speaker Pelosi has succeeded indicting Trump on such grounds and now seeks to control the trial pf the president in the senate through intimidation of members and such devices as accusing the Majority Leader of the Senate of being a Russian agent of influence "Moscow Mitch.". Her justification for that is McConnell's unwillingness to obey her.

Pelosi and company are now trying to remove a president on the grounds mentioned above. If they can do that, they will have succeeded in reverting the power structure within the federal government, reverting it to something much like the government of the Articles of Confederation. In that set up the federal government will become driven by the House of Representatives and will become the sole controlling part of the federal government with the ability to remove an opposition president through a simple majority vote and a rubber stamp trial in an intimidated senate. We will then have become a parliamentary democracy with the Speaker of the House controlling all.

Alan Dershowitz will testify in this wise at Trump's trial. I support his position. pl

[Jan 18, 2020] I was intrigued by its reference to one of the richest men in Ukraine, Dmytro Firtash and wondered as to his links to the 'Biden Burisma business

Jan 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , Jan 18 2020 7:28 utc | 112

evilempire #73

I am having trouble getting replies to you posted but here is a tale on Mogilevitch (2014) that you might find interesting.

I was intrigued by its reference to one of the richest men in Ukraine, Dmytro Firtash and wondered as to his links to the 'Biden Burisma business' if any. Of course he may have links to the progeny of Pelosi too. The entire impeachment episode went ballistic as soon as Trump stated picking over the turds in Ukraine so I suspect that is where the democrazies will come undone.

[Jan 18, 2020] Reinhard Gehlen: the Nazi father of the CIA

Jan 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Sasha , Jan 18 2020 18:41 utc | 158

From those muds...these mires...

Reinhard Gehlen: the Nazi father of the CIA

[Jan 18, 2020] We Need A Full Investigation Bannon Accuses Pelosi, Schiff And MSM Of Colluding

Jan 18, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon has called for a full investigation into coordination between Congressional Democrats and members of the media, after articles of impeachment against President Trump appear to have been deliberately 'slow walked' in order to coincide with two 'bombshell' developments in the Ukraine story.

" Why did they time this? Why did they wait? " asked Fox Business host Trish Regan.

"First off, Rachel Maddow should be a witness of fact now . She should be brought in," replied Bannon - referring to the seemingly coordinated media blitz surrounding Lev Parnas, an indicted former Rudy Goiliani associate whose undated, hand-written notes appear to support the claim that President Trump pressured Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden for corruption.

" We ought to have all the emails and all the text messages between Schiff, between Nancy Pelosi, Phil Griffin at MSNBC News. We ought to bring the whole thing out. How did this get dropped? Why have they been working on this for so long? How did this just come about at the last second? She admitted she's been working on this for months, and the House just got this. The Republicans didn't even see this when the vote when down," said Bannon, adding "This is now a complete farce."

" I think there was collusion between MSNBC, Rachel Maddow, Lev Parnas's attorneys, and the entire process." -Steve Bannon

"So why did this not come forward earlier?" asks Regan.

"You know why, because they wanted to drop their "big reveal," this was going be such a big bombshell. This is all total hearsay from a guy trying to talk his way into a lesser sentence because he's already indicted. It's so obvious what he's trying to do."

Adding to the collusion / 'slow walk' theory is the completion of a report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) requested by Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen, which found that President Trump's pause of US aid to Ukraine violated the law. Of note, virtually every previous administration has received a similar nastygram from the GAO - just not the day after directly related impeachment articles were delivered to the Senate ahead of a trial.

Watch: Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon has called for a full investigation into coordination between Congressional Democrats and members of the media, after articles of impeachment against President Trump appear to have been deliberately 'slow walked' in order to coincide with two 'bombshell' developments in the Ukraine story.

" Why did they time this? Why did they wait? " asked Fox Business host Trish Regan.

"First off, Rachel Maddow should be a witness of fact now . She should be brought in," replied Bannon - referring to the seemingly coordinated media blitz surrounding Lev Parnas, an indicted former Rudy Goiliani associate whose undated, hand-written notes appear to support the claim that President Trump pressured Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden for corruption.

" We ought to have all the emails and all the text messages between Schiff, between Nancy Pelosi, Phil Griffin at MSNBC News. We ought to bring the whole thing out. How did this get dropped? Why have they been working on this for so long? How did this just come about at the last second? She admitted she's been working on this for months, and the House just got this. The Republicans didn't even see this when the vote when down," said Bannon, adding "This is now a complete farce."

" I think there was collusion between MSNBC, Rachel Maddow, Lev Parnas's attorneys, and the entire process." -Steve Bannon

"So why did this not come forward earlier?" asks Regan.

"You know why, because they wanted to drop their "big reveal," this was going be such a big bombshell. This is all total hearsay from a guy trying to talk his way into a lesser sentence because he's already indicted. It's so obvious what he's trying to do."

Adding to the collusion / 'slow walk' theory is the completion of a report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) requested by Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen, which found that President Trump's pause of US aid to Ukraine violated the law. Of note, virtually every previous administration has received a similar nastygram from the GAO - just not the day after directly related impeachment articles were delivered to the Senate ahead of a trial.

Watch:

Steve Bannon weighs in on Lev Parnas, calls Impeachment a 'farce' - YouTube

David Reynolds 20 hours ago It's a coup attempt. The Democrats (and other globalists) are trying to overthrow Trump by any means necessary, because he's totally wrecking the leftist and globalist agenda. usero misa 19 hours ago Democrats pulling the same TRICK with this impeachment BS like Justice Kavanaugh's Senate confirmation hearing. Remember Christine Blasey Ford! Now is Lev Parnas. And like Christine Ford, Lev Parnas has been secretly coached by the Democrats Legal team, reason for their delay tactics.

novictim , 9 minutes ago link

If you going to make Lev Parnas the center of your impeachment witch-hunt, shouldn't you first have to remove the man's ankle bracelet?

NeverDemRino , 9 minutes ago link

Mark Levin EXPOSES Obama/Clinton for their COLLUSION on Sean Hannity here: Obama/Clinton Collusion

Here is the full Sean Hannity Show from 1-16-20 here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rmCUmlIyUU

See how YouTube "Orwellizes" this Sean Hannity Show down to ONE second. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8y6JuUDXC4

and here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx4OVtZPLqg

and here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Seke8j4Irb0

and here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqROj2xpHJs

and here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oz9e-e8R8TM

Seems like the FakeNews/MSM, and JewTube don't want anyone to know about the Obama/Clinton criminality.

blindfaith , 17 minutes ago link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkpsKSyeRL4

a very good introduction to why this guy is another lair, in all kinds of trouble like Avanetti and Cohen were...looking for a deal to be presented to stay out of jail. The interview with Madcow, does not jive with the NYT interview he gave, not does it match up with what the Ukrainians are saying about this. The Ukrainian Head of Foreign Relations gave an interview to CNN, and flat out said no one there knows this guy and he never spoke to anyone including him, and he is NOT to be trusted. But that does not fit in with the Democrats plan, so they will step in it once again.

Then there is this:

(his) undated, hand-written notes appear to support the claim that President Trump pressured Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden for corruption.

go read them , If you don't laugh then you are the problem. If the Democrats want more evidence, look here. If you think this guy was on a double, double secrete mission and met personally with Trump to receive it, then maybe your meds are wrong.

Here is certified "EVIDENCE" for the Democrats just found in the nearby woods.

__________________________________________________________

Adam *****, Nancy Pilosie*, and Fat Nadler* are terrible crazy people* and are not to be trusted*.

*evidence for the "committees"

respectfully submitted this day by,

Rocket J. Squirrel, Esq

novictim , 13 minutes ago link

https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2020/01/16/amanpour-ukrainian-foreign-minister-impeachment-iran-plane.cnn

blindfaith , 7 minutes ago link

Thank you for that....BRAVO. Those damn FACTS always Trump lies the left tries so hard to sow.

[Jan 17, 2020] In the full sprit of bipartisanship

Notable quotes:
"... Why then were all eight House members chosen as managers to prosecute the case against Trump, who ceremoniously escorted the articles across the Capitol, all Democrats? Why did the articles of impeachment receive not a single Republican vote on the House floor? ..."
Jan 17, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Why then were all eight House members chosen as managers to prosecute the case against Trump, who ceremoniously escorted the articles across the Capitol, all Democrats? Why did the articles of impeachment receive not a single Republican vote on the House floor?

[Jan 17, 2020] A Malicious Indictment Mitch Should Toss Out

Jan 17, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

About the impeachment of President Donald Trump she engineered with her Democratic majority, Nancy Pelosi said Wednesday: "It's not personal. It's not political. It's not partisan. It's patriotic."

Seriously, Madam Speaker? Not political? Not partisan?

Why then were all eight House members chosen as managers to prosecute the case against Trump, who ceremoniously escorted the articles across the Capitol, all Democrats? Why did the articles of impeachment receive not a single Republican vote on the House floor?

The truth : The impeachment of Donald Trump is the fruit of a malicious prosecution whose roots go back to the 2016 election, in the aftermath of which stunned liberals and Democrats began to plot the removal of the new president.

This coup has been in the works for three years.

First came the crazed charges of Trump's criminal collusion with Vladimir Putin to hack the emails of the DNC and the Clinton campaign and funnel them to WikiLeaks.

For two years, we heard the cries of "Treason!" from Pelosi's caucus. And despite the Mueller investigation's exoneration of Trump of all charges of conspiracy with Russia, we still hear the echoes:

Trump is Putin's poodle. Trump is an asset of the Kremlin.

All we want, and what the American people deserve, is a "fair trial," Democrats and their media collaborators now insist. But can a fair trial proceed from a manifestly deficient and malicious prosecution?

Consider. In this impeachment, we are told, the House serves as the grand jury, and Adam Schiff's Intelligence Committee and Jerry Nadler's Judiciary Committee serve as the investigators and prosecutors.

But the articles of impeachment on which the Judiciary Committee and the House voted do not contain a single crime required by the Constitution for impeachment and removal. There is no charge of treason, no charge of bribery or "other high crimes and misdemeanors."

So weak is the case for impeachment that the elite in this city is demanding that the Senate do the work the House failed to do.

The Senate must subpoena the documents and witnesses the House failed to produce, to make the case for impeachment more persuasive than it is now.

Not our job, rightly answers Mitch McConnell.

The Senate is supposed to be an "impartial jury."

But while there is a debate over whether Republicans will vote to call witnesses, there is no debate on how the Senate Democrats intend to vote -- 100% for removal of a president they fear they may not be able to defeat.

Consider Trump's alleged offense : pressing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to investigate Burisma Holdings and Hunter Biden.

Assume Zelenskiy, without prodding, sent to the U.S., as a friendly act to ingratiate himself with Trump, the Burisma file on Hunter Biden.

Would that have been a crime?

Why is it then a crime if Trump asked for the file?

The military aid Trump held up for 10 weeks -- lethal aid Barack Obama denied to Kyiv -- was sent. And Zelenskiy never held the press conference requested, never investigated Burisma, never sent the Biden file.

There is a reason why no crime was charged in the impeachment of Donald Trump. There was no crime committed.

Not political, said Pelosi. Why then did she hold up sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate for a month, after she said it was so urgent that Trump be impeached that Schiff and Nadler could not wait for their subpoenas to be ruled upon by the Supreme Court?

Pelosi is demanding that the Senate get the documents, subpoena and hear the witnesses, and do the investigative work Schiff and Nadler failed to do.

Does that not constitute an admission that a convincing case was not made? Are not the articles voted by the House inherently deficient if the Senate has to have more evidence than the House prosecutors could produce to convict the president of "abuse of power"?

Can we really have a fair trial in the Senate, when half of the jury, the Democratic caucus, is as reliably expected to vote to remove the president as Republicans are to acquit him? What kind of fair trial is it when we can predict the final vote before the court hears the evidence?

It is ridiculous to deny that this impeachment is partisan, political and personal. It reeks of politics, partisanship and Trump-hatred.

As for patriotic, that depends on where you stand -- or sit.

But the forum to be entrusted with the decision of "should Trump go?" is not a deeply polarized Senate, but with those the Founding Fathers entrusted with such decisions -- the American people.

In most U.S. courts, a prosecution case this inadequate, with prosecutors asking the court itself to get more documents and call more witnesses, and so visibly contaminated with malice toward the accused, would be dismissed outright.

Mitch McConnell should let the House managers make their case, and then call for a vote to dismiss, and treat this indictment with the contempt it so richly deserves.

[Jan 14, 2020] Impeachment Of President Trump An Imperial War Game by By Barbara Boyd

Highly recommended!
Barbara Boyd correctly called Kent testimony "obsine" becase it was one grad neocon gallisination, which has nothing to do with real facts on the ground.
She attributed those dirty games not only to the USA but also to London.
Nov 22, 2019 | futurefastforward.com

If you want to stop the coup against the President, you must understand how Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton's State Department carried out a coup against the democratically elected government of Ukraine in 2014.

In a November 16 webcast, LaRouche PAC's Barbara Boyd presented the real story behind the present impeachment farce: how the very forces running the attack on President Trump, used thugs as their enforcers, in order to turn Ukraine into a pawn in the British geopolitical war drive against Russia.

https://youtu.be/uBg3vLjWePI

[Jan 14, 2020] Impeachment Of President Trump An Imperial War Game

Nov 22, 2019 | futurefastforward.com
If you want to stop the coup against the President, you must understand how Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton's State Department carried out a coup against the democratically elected government of Ukraine in 2014.

In a November 16 webcast, LaRouche PAC's Barbara Boyd presented the real story behind the present impeachment farce: how the very forces running the attack on President Trump, used thugs as their enforcers, in order to turn Ukraine into a pawn in the British geopolitical war drive against Russia.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/uBg3vLjWePI?feature=oembed&wmode=transparent Must Watch Videos

[Jan 12, 2020] It continue to be highly suspicious of the fact that it is a Ukrainian plane. Ukraine is firmly in the Anglo-Zionist camp,

Jan 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Tom_LX , Jan 11 2020 19:40 utc | 250

The fact that the plane was brought down because of the conflict initiated by Trump makes everything about it very suspicious. Just because Iran states that it is responsible does not disqualify the possibility that they were not made to make this mistake. We do not know the facts as to what the Iranian defense system saw as that Ukrainian plane was flying.

I continue to be highly suspicious of the fact that it is a Ukrainian plane. Ukraine is firmly in the Anglo-Zionist camp, period. Zelensky or not the deal was sealed when V. Nuland finished her work in Kiev. The only reason Ukraine made a deal with Russia is because it is in financial trouble and needs revenue. The West will not keep it afloat. So thinking that suddenly it is conducting its own foreign policy is incorrect.

As an aside. Does a sovereign country bring in a man like this to help it run its country ?

Mikheil Saakashvili - born 21 December 1967) is a Georgian and Ukrainian politician.[7][8] He was the third President of Georgia for two consecutive terms from 25 January 2004 to 17 November 2013. From May 2015 until November 2016, Saakashvili was the Governor of Ukraine's Odessa Oblast.[1][9][10] He is the founder and former chairman of the United National Movement party.
How about this one,
Natalie Ann Jaresko is an American-born Ukrainian investment banker who served as Ukraine's Minister of Finance from December 2014 until April 2016.[1] In 20 March 2017, she was appointed as executive director of the Financial Oversight & Management Board for Puerto Rico.
or this one,
Aivaras Abromavičius is a Lithuanian-born Ukrainian investment banker and politician. On 31 August 2019 Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appointed Abromavičius the Director General of Ukroboronprom.[1] Previously he was Ukraine's Minister of Economy and Trade starting in December 2014 (Abromavičius announced his resignation on 3 February 2016). He did not retain his post in the Groysman Government that was installed in 14 April 2016.[2]

Ukraine is a Captured State.

Thus the possibility exists that that plane may have had some equipment placed in it in Kiev that could trick the Iranian Defense system to think a craft is a danger to it. Kiev would have been a safe place to do it (reasons above). If this were true does anyone here believe that announcing this fact Public opinion would believe it ? I for one don't. Russia knows how that worked out with Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 (MH17). No matter what Iran would have said that would have been spun in the West as attempting to blame someone else. Thanks to this all attention in the Media would have been on Iran which Trump would have loved. Again, Russia knows how this was played out in Malaysia MH17 case. The average CNN viewer in that case would not see how the BUKA Russian was being used as evidence that it was Russia that shot the plane down.

Iran did the right thing in admitted that it was responsible whether it was their fault or not. There was simply no way to win in the case of having being fooled into shooting the plane down.


E Mo Scél , Jan 11 2020 20:36 utc | 259

The FAA banned flights of commercial airplanes over Tehran 2 hours before the plane came down. Note, over Tehran, not over Iran. That's quite specific. Communication was lost when the officer had to make a decision. Communication jamming is part of modern warfare. Maybe this is a thwarted attempt by the US at a "disproportionate response" to Iranian strikes. Maybe this is why Trump is not that excited and had to take drugs before performing his Iran speech.
alaff , Jan 11 2020 21:00 utc | 265
Iran deserves respect, if only because it openly and honestly admitted its responsibility for what happened. This shows the maturity and courage of the political and military leadership of this country.
It is clear that the plane was shot down unintentionally. It is also obvious that Iran was provoked by the actions of the United States.

This is called life. That happens. And not only that. Human factor. We cannot avoid this and 100% eliminate all risks.

In 1914, an idiot killed a monarch, which led to a large-scale war and the death of millions of people. Human factor. Soldiers accidentally make the wrong buttons. Workers at an oil factory smoke in the wrong place, resulting in huge fires. People do not notice an extinct burner on a gas stove, resulting in an explosion, collapse of the house and death of people. Vacationers tourists did not extinguish after themselves a fire in the forest, as a result of which a giant fire covers thousands of hectares of territory. During the invasion of Iraq in 2003, American Patriot systems destroyed a friendly British Tornado fighter bomber (in addition to the destroyed American fighters). In February 2017, the Russian Aerospace Forces mistakenly attacked the Turkish military in northern Syria. In 2001, Ukrainian air defense, conducting military exercises, shot down a Russian passenger plane TU-154 over the Black Sea, 78 people died. So on and so on... The technique and equipment is imperfect. People all the more.

The Iranian situation is very similar to what happened in September 2018. Syrian air defense shot down a Russian military plane, provoked by deliberate actions by Israeli aviation. Just to remind that the Russian side has made it clear who is the true culprit of the tragedy. In the case of Iran, the same thing. It is one thing if the plane crashes as a result of a pilot error or a technical malfunction. But when it is now clear that plane was shot down, and the Iranian air defense acted as it was provoked by the actions of the United States, then the guilt of the United States only increases.

bevin , Jan 11 2020 19:27 utc | 242
Iran bears very little, if any responsibility in this matter.
The United States is entirely to blame-what has occurred is exactly what the
US government was aiming at. It has created an atmosphere of fear and panic
in the knowledge that it would create chaos-that normal government would break down
and mistakes be made.
The US plays with the lives of people. It plays God, a God dedicated to the principle of pure evil.
It plays with people's lives, the lives of the 'ants' that Harry Lime saw from above Vienna,
as a matter of course. In Gaza children with cancer cannot get treatment because the US and Israel
want to make life harder for their parents. The evil objective is to madden the people to the point
that they will rise up and kill those who oppose the Occupation. In Colombia, Bolivia, Honduras, Ecuador
and Brazil-even as we speak Death Squads-trained armed and financed-by the US and Israel stalk those
who want to reform their society. In Venezuela the supply of food and medicine is interrupted as far as
the power of the US and its allies extends.
Around the world where there are evil deeds being carried out, where children are starving, medicines are
withheld, protesters are being assassinated and militias are terrorising the population-the hands of the
United States and its allies are always evident. It was they who imported tens of thousands of wahhabis
into Afghanistan, Russia, China and the battlegrounds that we all know in order to kill, frighten and impoverish
the people. The people of Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Iran, Lebanon and far beyond- all of them have seen their
living standards diminished, their security removed their hopes of happiness systematically thwarted.
In order, evil order, to punish them, not for anything that they have done but in the hope that they will
surrender themselves to the United States and its agents, submit.
The truth is that human history has never seen a regime like that now ruling the United States and attempting
to rule the world. Nothing compares with it, the Nazis were simply malicious pygmies in comparison.
Many people from Trudeau to posters here refuse to admit what is crystal clear and what history will
confirm: all the deaths that come, daily, weekly, yearly from this assumption by the United States of
prerogatives, religion reserves for God; all the deaths that come from this juvenile playing with the lives of
ordinary people are entirely the choice of the US government.
Trudeau bears more responsibility for the deaths of these airline passengers than anyone in Iran. It was his choice to
keep the Embassy doors closed, to withdraw diplomatic representation and to join the US in its sanctions
against the Iranian people. He has made the same choice in Venezuela, where similar accidents may occur (have occurred
as in the sabotage of the power grid). People died then, people die daily and they do so because of choices made by
governments playing with the lives of the people.
Everyone of the victims would be alive today had not the mafia in Washington decided to smash up their society.
And they would almost certainly have been alive still had Trudeau and Freeland-and the four parties in Ottawa- done
, what most Canadians want them to do and disassociate themselves and Canada from the evil games Washington plays.

I hope that no Iranian is tricked into surrendering to evil. I hope that the tone of the Revolutionary Guards-one
of sincere regret and manly apology- does not inform their future moves which must be to re-double their commitment
to the defence of their country and the defeat of the most evil government the world has ever seen.

Ort , Jan 11 2020 19:30 utc | 243
Re: Trudeau's escalating attempts at scene-stealing

The odious, opportunistic popinjay Trudeau seems to have calculated that it's time for him to upgrade his "brand" from "dashing young Bonnie Prince Justin" to "Mature Statesman with Gravitas".

Thus, his predilection for elbowing his way to the head of the Western Hegemony Official Spokesperson line and bumptiously blowing off his big bazoo.

The new beard is a "tell"; some men, especially handsome but "baby-faced" men, are susceptible to an abiding adolescent impulse to grow facial hair in order to appear more mature. It can't be a coincidence that Trudeau's beard correlates with his increased penchant for making (fatuous) bold and aggressive pronouncements on geopolitical crises.

I know that Trudeau has a pedigree that nominally puts him in the top drawer of Canada's political aristocracy. Still, he reminds me a lot of the Venezuelan golpista boy-toy Juan "Random Guy" Guaidó.

Andromeda , Jan 11 2020 20:38 utc | 261
Prometheus - Thank you for your information. I previously thought the transponder signal would identify the plane as a civilian aircraft but one question remains for me: even without IFF would the airtraffic control not (verify the identity)and be in contact with the pilot when the course is changed? Is there no coordination between civlian and military air-control? (especially in such a tense situation)

(the Ukrainain plane turned around - why?)

Still ...despite the admission it is strange that an aviation expert like Peter Haisenko (retired Lufthansa pilot with special technical knowledge who knows Tehran airport well) came to a very different conclusion: (excerpt from German Original - my translation)

Weil mittlerweile bekannt ist, dass die Boeing nach dem ersten Aufprall noch etwa 500 Meter über den Boden geschrammt ist, darf man davon ausgehen, dass sie in flachem Winkel den Boden berührt hat, etwa wie bei einer Landung. Sie ist also nicht „ungespitzt" in den Boden gerammt.

Since it is now known the Boing grazed the ground for about 500 metres after impact it is reasonable to assume that she touched the ground at a flat-angle, like in a regular landing. [...]

Das deutet wiederum darauf hin, dass sich die Piloten in ihrer Notlage gar nicht bewusst waren, wie nahe sie dem Boden bereits sind und völlig unerwartet Bodenkontakt hatten. [...]

This is an indication that the Pilots were not aware of their emergency (how close to the ground they were) and unexpectedly touched the ground. [...]


Fest steht wohl, dass die ukrainische Boeing nach dem Start einen Motorschaden hatte. Und zwar einen soliden, mit Feuer und Totalausfall.

It appears to be certain that the Ukrainian Boeing suffered an engine breakdown after take-off, a severe one with fire and total failure.


Zunächst stelle ich fest, dass es nahezu unmöglich ist, ein Passagierflugzeug in dieser Flugphase abzuschießen. Man müsste schon jemanden mit einer kleinen Boden-Luft-Rakete im erwarteten Abflugkorridor platzieren, der dann dem abfliegenden Jet die Rakete hinterher schießt. Dieses hitzesuchende Projektil könnte dann einen Motor treffen, was aber kein zwingender Grund für einen Absturz ist. Mit einem Motor kann das Flugzeug weiter fliegen, wenn die Rahmenumstände entsprechend aller Vorschriften gesetzt worden sind. Eine größere, aufwendigere Flugabwehreinrichtung scheidet für diese Flugphase und den Ort aus. Nicht nur wegen der geringen Höhe über Grund, sondern auch, weil es solche Anlagen in dieser Gegend nicht gibt. Wenn, dann befinden sie sich im weiteren Umkreis, um Angriffe aus größerer Höhe weit vor der Stadt abzuwehren. Warum ist es dann überhaupt zu dem Absturz gekommen?

https://www.anderweltonline.com/wissenschaft-und-technik/luftfahrt-2020/ist-die-ukrainische-b-737-in-teheran-abgeschossen-worden/

Haisenko asserts that " it is nearly impossible to shoot down a passenger plane in this phase of the flight. In order to do that you'd need to place a (sort of) MANPAD in the expected flight-corridor and the heat-seaking missile could then destroy one of the engines.But this does not automatically lead to the crashing of the plane since it is able to fly with one engine [...] A bigger anti-aircraft system is not suitable for this phase of the flight ... these systems aim to intercept (destroy) targets flying at much higher altitutes and farther away from the cities ... So why did the crash happen?

Obviously he wrote that before the Iranian admission was published and with limited knowledge but still one wonders if electronic warfare played a role and certain parties wanted that plane to crash ... (at least a closer look at the passenger list seems advisable)


Emily , Jan 11 2020 21:01 utc | 266
Bevin 242

That is one of the best posts I have ever read and I have read more than a few.
Never a truer word.
If it needed a precis.......
Madeleine Albright.
The deaths of of 500,000 Iraqi children is a price worth paying.
This from a woman who had played a leading role in the destruction of Yugoslavia and the handing of the Serbian province of Kosovo to the KLA a forerunner of Al Qaeda and ISIS.
Today a narco criminal islamic state - and a base for the bloodletting and birthing of the European Caliphate.
And unlimited proxies for the USA War Of!! Terror across the Middle East.
Pure evil.

harold , Jan 11 2020 21:02 utc | 268
Sadly due to their own incompetence, Iran lost there moral high ground!
A great disappointment to those of us who supported Iran through thick and thin.

I'm not convinced this is a moral issue.

E Mo Scel , Jan 11 2020 21:03 utc | 269
am repeating my first comment for context sake:

The FAA banned flights of commercial airplanes over Tehran 2 hours before the plane came down. Note, over Tehran, not over Iran. That's quite specific. Communication was lost when the officer had to make a decision. Communication jamming is part of modern warfare. Maybe this is a thwarted attempt by the US at a "disproportionate response" to Iranian strikes. Maybe this is why Trump is not that excited and had to take drugs before performing his Iran speech.

Adding:

This would also explain why this is the first time the US did not respond to a state attacking US institutions/military bases. The Us, in fact, did respond: "Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!"

we have (!) targeted (that must mean there were plans for imminent actions in place, it's not saying "we will target") Iranian sites, some at a very high level (!), very fast (!) and very hard.

Their response went horribly wrong. Maybe a US drone was found. Maybe the US jammed communication systems. It's all speculation but it could be that the US response is the cause for the shooting down of the plane. It is a mystery to me why the airport was not closed down that night, esp. in view of the FAA warning that specifically addresses Tehran. The Iranian civil flights authority should have known about this, or is information of this kind proprietary, i.e. not shared across countries/systems? The FAA is a lead aviation agency, it's not as if the aviation agency of Tristan da Cunha had issued such a ban.

The FAA banning US aircraft flying over Tehran after Iran had struck the bases - my gut tells me the US had planned and were executing a response involving a target in Tehran which resulted in the plane being targeted by Iranian air defense systems... the jamming of communication systems (which would have been part of the US response) would be the direct cause for the plane being targeted. If this is true the US has this blood on their hands, not Iran. Again, that's why Trump was clearly under the influence of some drugs. Because that blood is on his hands, or rather, his big mouth and big ego.

...

"Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD."

somebody , Jan 11 2020 21:08 utc | 270
Daily Telegraph with explanations
(before Iran confessed)
How would the passenger plane have been accidentally targeted?

That is less clear, but is one of the challenges facing any missile operator. While military aircraft will plot course to avoid radar, civilian airliners are equipped with transponders that identify the craft and their flight path set and share it with military bases in the area.

Theoretically, the Ukrainian Boeing 737-800 should have been identified as a civilian craft on any radar. But if the Western assessment is true, this incident will join other tragic incidents of civilian planes being shot down by anti-aircraft weaponry.

In 2014, Malaysia Airline Flight 17 was suspected to have been inadvertently shot down by Russian missiles, though Moscow has consistently denied any involvement. And in 1988, a US warship engaging with Iranian gunboats in the Persian Gulf, the USS Vincennes, shot down an Iranian passenger plane after mistaking it for a jet fighter, killing all 290 people on board.

They have a nice map of Iran's rocket range. The map explains the Russian attitude towards Iran which is complex. Iran's rockets do NOT reach the USA but they reach the whole of the Middle East and a large part of Russia.

mikh , Jan 11 2020 21:29 utc | 272
To all the smart asses:Yes Iran should have closed the airport but other have some responsibility too. The Ukraine for example. Allowing planes to fly in to what is practically a war zone. Not that thei have done it before..
Peter AU1 , Jan 11 2020 21:34 utc | 274
Iranian military presentation which shows flight path, at what position in the turn
the aircraft was hit and location of SAM site in relation to the plane.
https://twitter.com/AbasAslani/status/1215942737557671936

The aircraft was hit when it had turned directly towards the Tor unit, at that point a
turn of nearly ninety degrees which I take it was located at the military site.

Bill Smith , Jan 11 2020 21:46 utc | 281
According to this Iran has fired this system at other civilian aircraft. From the news in 2012:

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/03/world/middleeast/wary-of-israel-iran-is-said-to-blunder-in-strikes.html

"Iranian air defense units have taken inappropriate actions dozens of times, including firing antiaircraft artillery and scrambling aircraft against unidentified or misidentified targets," noted a heavily classified Pentagon intelligence report, which added that the Iranian military's communications were so inadequate and its training deficiencies so significant that "misidentification of aircraft will continue."

Peter AU1 , Jan 11 2020 22:14 utc | 291
E Mo Scel 284

The Ukraine plane was the target and the operation was successfull.
this was the only way US could strike Iran without Iran striking US bases throughout the regin plus Israel.
When Trump threatened strikes against 52 cultural sites if Iran retaliated for the killing of Soleimani, Iran said Isreal would also be hit (it has been noticeable US and Isreal have beeing trying pass of US as threatening Iran as indipendent of Isreal).
This is when the Trump admin and Israel would have settled on the takedown of a civian craftby Iran air defence. This makes Iran look fools in the eyes of fools as has occurred here and not the highly professional force they truly are.

Sam , Jan 11 2020 22:21 utc | 292
Iranians have gathered in the streets of Tehran to demand the resignation of Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei after the regime admitted it had mistakenly shot down a civilian passenger plane.

Angry crowds gathered on Saturday night in at least four locations in Tehran, chanting 'death to liars' and calling for the country's supreme leader to step down over the tragic military blunder, video from the scene shows.

What began as mournful vigils for Iranian lives lost on the flight soon turned to outrage and protest against the regime, and riot police quickly cracked down, firing tear gas into the crowd.

'Death to the Islamic Republic' protesters chanted, as the regime's security forces allegedly used ambulances to sneak heavily armed paramilitary police into the middle of crowds to disperse the demonstration.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7876363/Iranian-protesters-Tehran-turn-against-regime-military-admits-shooting-plane.html

I don't blame the Iranians protesting the unnecessary deaths of their compatriots through sheer incompetence and lack of coordination among civil and military officials. They clearly should have grounded all commercial flights. Their air defense units should have at least the basic ability to discern between a commercial jet and military aircraft & missiles. If they are this incompetent or their systems are so poor how do they expect to withstand the onslaught of an air attack by the US that would include thousands of missiles and thousands of sorties a day! Tehran will be flattened.

E Mo Scel , Jan 11 2020 23:19 utc | 313
Peter AU1 291

We agree that there was a US response, and that the plane was involved in this response. You think it was the idea from the beginning to trick Iranian air defense into shooting this particular plane down, I think there was a different target and things did not go according to plan, while the plane played a role. Both of us are speculating. You think the operation was successful, I say no, things went wrong. The US could not continue with their operation as this would have made it obvious they had utilized the plane in some way. It's different from the incident where Syria shot down a Russian military plane when Israeli jets used it as cover - this here was a civilian plane. So, speculation from my side.

It's also to be observed that 146 people on the plane were Iranian citizens; this could speak for your theory as this is a problem for the government of Iran (protests) ("One-hundred forty-six victims held Iranian passport, ten Afghan, five Canadian, four Swede and two Ukrainian. All nine crew members consisting of three cockpit crew and six cabin crew were Ukrainian. Note: A number of victims could have had multiple nationalities, so other news reports might introduce them with different nationalities than the ones in this report. The above list concerns the passport with which they left the Islamic Republic of Iran air border.") https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Iran-CAO-PS752-Initial-Report.pdf

I have no means to know. I am sure, though, that the big mouthed announcement of Trump is real. There was a response. I hope the dams won't hold for this one.

Peter AU1 , Jan 11 2020 23:32 utc | 314
E Mo Scel

Various MSM have stories of victims. The British and Canadian victims I saw in these articles all had Iranian names. Students expats ect returning to Iran for a visit.
One couple to get married in Iran.
Seemed to be a large number of university students including a couple of professors.

Vasco da Gama , Jan 11 2020 23:39 utc | 317
Regarding the FAA NOTAMS restricting airspace a list is provided here . It is not accurate to claim only Tehran was restricted:

KICZ A0001/20 - SECURITY..UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FLIGHT PROHIBITION AGAINST CERTAIN FLIGHTS IN THE BAGHDAD FLIGHT INFORMATON REGION (FIR)
(ORBB) - 07 JAN 23:45 2020 UNTIL PERM. CREATED: 07 JAN 23:49 2020

KICZ A0002/20 - SECURITY..UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FLIGHT PROHIBITION AGAINST CERTAIN FLIGHTS IN THE TEHRAN FLIGHT INFORMATON REGION (FIR) (OIIX) - 08 JAN 00:10 2020 UNTIL PERM. CREATED: 08 JAN 00:07 2020

Notice these cover national airspace, it is not limited to the cities they refer to. The timezones are UTC.

Zanon , Jan 11 2020 23:41 utc | 318
Well Israel and neocons sure have a good laugh how well it turned out for them past week. Not sure how Iran will be able to get back from this anytime soon, now being attacked both from abroad and internally. Not to mention the collaboration between protesters and the west.
Qparticle , Jan 11 2020 23:51 utc | 321
This site and its comments have been an unfortunate repository of ridiculous, reflexive anti-American nonsense over the past few weeks. The speculation about the flight, and inability to accept Iranian responsibility, was one of the more silly charades.

Posted by: Daniel Lennon | Jan 11 2020 16:46 utc | 185

I would add anti-Semitic too....
In my own country can't criticise Mossad actions on the news.. it would be anti-Semitic too...

So here what came from a Forbes article that helped uncover a huge Mossad Operation targeting Cyprus Larnaka airport (their Cypriot allies)
The 2 "ex" agents identified is only probably the tip of the proverbial iceberg...

"A Multimillionaire Surveillance Dealer Steps Out Of The Shadows . . . And His $9 Million WhatsApp Hacking Van"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2019/08/05/a-multimillionaire-surveillance-dealer-steps-out-of-the-shadows-and-his-9-million-whatsapp-hacking-van#5787fb8231b7

Youtube: https://youtu.be/Tl3mpywMYFA

9.5 million smart phones it is estimated were hacked by the Mossad Stingray like tech discuised as plain ambulances alone in Larnaka air port during the time of the operation.

Peter AU1 , Jan 12 2020 1:10 utc | 346
This is looking to be a very complex operation the US and five eyes is pulling off. Rather than simply reacting to events after the killing of Soleimani, the killing was inteded to set up circumstances to induce Iran into firing at a civilian aircraft. The act of war in killing the Iranian military official and diplomat followed by threats against Iranian cultural sites. With Iran air dfences on high alert, all it required was to cut air defence coms and turn an aircraft at the same time. Once that is aclomplashed, making Iran look incompetent in the eyes of the world it is straight into the pre-organised regime change operation.
I hope Russia and China will be giving Iran a bit of an assist in this because they are facing a very dangerous moment. Anything can happen now that US thinks it has Iran on the backfoot. And I think Iran is on the backfoot at the moment. What has happened has shocked them. Zarif and others, saying the plane definitely was not shot down and then realising they were wrong.
Very dangerous period for Iran as US will now press its attack harder, and perhaps in more unexpected ways. Hopefully the crew that fired will not be punished because of this. If they are, air defense crew will be hesitant to make decisions anytime their coms are cut.
The IRGC said they had asked for all flights to be grounded but the request was not acted on. This is the area hopefully the Iranian investigation will focus on.
Peter AU1 , Jan 12 2020 1:38 utc | 353
VK "Right after the assassination of Soleimani, Pompeo went publicly and said Iran was "one step closer to regime change""

The Assassination was the first step. Trump threats against Iran cultural sites the second step. Iran retaliation against the US bases the third step. Downing the civilian aircraft step four. And guess what... regime change operation kicks into gear.

stevelaudig , Jan 12 2020 1:43 utc | 354
But for Trump's murder of Soleimani, the Iranians would not have been so jumpy.
Trump's murder of Soleimani, was a significant factor in making the Iranians jumpy.
These deaths go on Trump's death count card along with all the dead in Syria.

[Jan 10, 2020] Joe Biden under cross examination in senate trail would be Conedy Central show transmitted live

The folks who hatched that particular impeachment plan and pitched it to Nancy Pelosi must have been the same idiots in the DNC who dreamt up the Russiagate scandal and also pursued Paul Manafort to get him off DJT's election campaign team. Dmitri Alperovich / Crowdstrike, Alexandra Chalupa: we're looking at you.
The real Trump move would be to hit the twitter right before the house impeachment vote and announce that he has instructed the House Republicans to vote for impeachment.
Notable quotes:
"... At least this mess made it patently clear the Dem obsession with Russia has been all about preserving their Ukraine pickpocketing operation. ..."
Nov 27, 2019 | www.forbes.com

Forbes.com billwhalen 26 September 2019 Link

I ordered a truckload of pop corn to snack on during the trial in the Senate. Just imagine Joe Biden under cross examination as he flips 'n flops! "Was that me in the Video, I can't recall."

Maracatu | Nov 26 2019 21:56 utc | 18

I can see a Trump marketing consultant designing a campaign centered on the impeachment hearings called "The Swamp Strikes Back". It might be most effective as a comic strip.

Fly | Nov 27 2019 0:30 utc | 33

At least this mess made it patently clear the Dem obsession with Russia has been all about preserving their Ukraine pickpocketing operation.
Just Saying | Nov 27 2019 7:22 utc | 58

All the bull-Schiff comes from Hillary's lingerie. The democrats need to secure a huge laundromat

[Jan 09, 2020] Covert operations, multilevel lies and empire are inseparable

Dec 22, 2019 | angrybearblog.com

likbez , December 22, 2019 6:40 pm

@Terry,

I know Keynes said "In the long run we are all dead"

It might be not that long. The empire and war go together. And now this means the nuclear war, which will be decided on much lower level that we suspect. Ukraine is a real flashpoint as Russia is incensed with the USA stage coup d'état (aka the "Revolution of Dignity", aka Nulandgate ) and feels greatly endangered by it. As Daniel Ellsberg puts it in his 2018 talk at Google ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7cJG9j0NdY ):

But in terms of American traditions, we thought of ourselves as -- we didn't think -- of having run the first war of national liberation. But it could have been called that, the first war of separation for an empire. And we thought of ourselves as anti-imperial. And we still think of ourselves that way, as not an empire like the others. That's false.

That's very clear from the Pentagon Papers where we're deciding who should run Vietnam this year or next year or how they should stay in power, what criminal acts they're entitled to take, how much we need to support them. And so it's very obviously the documents of an empire. In fact, that's what I said to my wife, when she said, at one point, before they came out, does it really matter to get this history out? And I said, well, among other things, it's the first real history of imperial operations since the Nuremberg documents were discovered, covered after the Second World War. And before that, it probably goes back to Punic times, to the Syrian empire, to Sumerian empire, and so probably all the same, but we don't have the documents for it.

And here they are. And yet, even so, I managed to think of it as an aberration. We had somehow gotten ourselves into acting like an empire. Let me say just very briefly now– I could spend the whole time on this. But I'll just say, I've come recently to see what we are as a covert empire. And covert refers to plausibly denial covert operations.

Covert operations, I should say, are defined as operations that are not just secret, that you're not just keeping it safe, but that you lie about plausibly. And to make it plausible, you provide in advance evidence, false evidence, misleading evidence as to what's really going on and who's running it and why it's happening and who did it and so forth, a false flag in some cases, whatever.

But you provide several layers of cover for what's being done to protect the president from the notion that he is murdering, overthrowing governments, installing coup governments in democracies and so forth, as so often in the third world then and now, up until now. Well, you don't want the US to be associated with that. It's happening over there.

And if somehow a US hand surfaces, he or she wasn't working for any agency. And if you find the agency, it wasn't the CIA. And if it was the CIA, it wasn't the president. So you have layer after layer of cover stories with documents. I didn't know this. It didn't come to my attention. This so-and-so did it and so forth. The Vietnam War was run from beginning to end like that. That's how we run our empire.

We deny that we are an empire. And what is an empire? A country that determines the regime of other countries, decides who the police chief was, who shall live and who shall die, what the basic foreign policies are. We do that throughout Central America and always have, often many other parts of the world as far apart as Indonesia, now the Middle East. In general, we decide: Who do we want? Is this guy OK? We don't decide every detail but any more than you decide every detail of a military commander's operations.

But generally, they work. If they don't do what we want, we replace them with somebody else. We deny that we're an empire. We're against empire. When other people do the same sort of thing, they're empires. They're acting imperially. First level of denial on the American part. And then second, how do they get in power? Who has to be killed? What paramilitary forces have to be paid and go in, as into Nicaragua, for example, and other places? So the efforts are also plausibly denied OK, I could spend time. And I don't know if people have it in mind.

See also his book
https://www.amazon.com/Doomsday-Machine-Confessions-Nuclear-Planner/product-reviews/1608196704 . From one of Amazon reviews:

The author makes clear that the accidental nuclear war scenarios laid out in Dr Strangelove, Fail-Safe, The Bedford Incident et al are, in real life, very much more probable than the authorities would have us believe.

The probability of one or other of these being triggered unofficially is terrifyingly high.

Compare with https://news.yahoo.com/russians-heaven-event-nuclear-war-putin-153648833.html

"We have no concept of a preemptive strike," Putin told a forum of international experts in the southern city of Sochi in response to a question from the audience.

"In such a situation, we expect to be struck by nuclear weapons, but we will not use them" first, he said.

"The aggressor will have to understand that retaliation is inevitable, that it will be destroyed and that we, as victims of aggression, as martyrs, will go to heaven.

"They will simply die because they won't even have time to repent,"

[Jan 08, 2020] Assassination of Soleimani was done on false pretences much like Bush II Iraq war justification. Trump abused his power and now needs to be impeached

The neocon cabal of Pompeo, Ester and O'bian needs to be fired immediately and investigated by FBI.
Notable quotes:
"... As for the war powers resolution justification provided by the administration, that legislation was not designed to alter the fundamental constitutional balance, but to restore it, Healy says. Critically, it does not give presidents a free pass to carry out military action for 60 days without congressional approval, as some have suggested. ..."
"... The war powers resolution itself was introduced after Congress discovered Nixon's secret war in Cambodia in 1973. It was designed to allow Congress to terminate any unauthorized actions taken by the executive branch and to require transparency. If the president responds to any "imminent threat" not covered by an existing statute or law authorizing use of force, then the president must within 48 hours report to Congress what actions have been taken. ..."
"... "With the Soleimani strike, the administration is saying they're responding to an imminent threat, but they have not publicly stated what that threat is," said Kate Kizer, policy director at Win Without War, in an interview with TAC. "From reporting, there's not a lot of evidence of an imminent attack. So they should have come to Congress first and said what they were going to do." ..."
"... The Constitution clearly gives the power to declare war to Congress. Article II states that the president can act without Congress only when it is necessary to do so against imminent threats to U.S. territories, possessions, or citizens.​ ..."
Jan 08, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
claims the strike was "authorized" in part by the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which provided the legal basis for the war in Iraq. ​

"Unless Trump is using his presidential sharpie, it's not at all clear how this 17-year-old statute authorizes what seems to be a major escalation that could start a whole new war," said Gene Healy, vice president of the Cato Institute, in an interview with The American Conservative. ​

As for the war powers resolution justification provided by the administration, that legislation was not designed to alter the fundamental constitutional balance, but to restore it, Healy says. Critically, it does not give presidents a free pass to carry out military action for 60 days without congressional approval, as some have suggested.

The war powers resolution itself was introduced after Congress discovered Nixon's secret war in Cambodia in 1973. It was designed to allow Congress to terminate any unauthorized actions taken by the executive branch and to require transparency. If the president responds to any "imminent threat" not covered by an existing statute or law authorizing use of force, then the president must within 48 hours report to Congress what actions have been taken.

In the case of Soleimani, "the Pentagon statement doesn't mention any imminent attacks," notes Healy . Secretary of State Mike "Pompeo says Soleimani was planning an attack that could have killed hundreds of lives, but he's provided no evidence for that. I think it's hardly cynical to verify, instead of blindly trusting, given the track record of this administration and recent past administrations."

"With the Soleimani strike, the administration is saying they're responding to an imminent threat, but they have not publicly stated what that threat is," said Kate Kizer, policy director at Win Without War, in an interview with TAC. "From reporting, there's not a lot of evidence of an imminent attack. So they should have come to Congress first and said what they were going to do."

​That's because there's ​simply ​ " no viable argument " that the 2002 AUMF authorizes force against Iran ​, according to ​ Brian Egan, a former legal adviser to both the State Department ​ and the NSC, and ​Tess Bridgeman, a senior fellow at NYU School of Law and former a ssociate ​c​ ounsel to the ​p​ resident. ​ ​

The 2002 AUMF allows the president to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq " and "enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions against Iraq " ​ ( e mphasis added ).

"Those are plainly not relevant to the situation" today, Egan and Bridgeman write.​

The ​Trump administration also said it does not ​"​ need congressional sign off from a legal standpoint" for the Soleimani strike because ​of the president's authority​ as​ commander-in-chief under Article II of the Constitution ​, CNN reported.

The Constitution clearly gives the power to declare war to Congress. Article II states that the president can act without Congress only when it is necessary to do so against imminent threats to U.S. territories, possessions, or citizens.​

That's why Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Pentagon chief Mark Esper, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley were so emphatic Monday that the U.S. was responding to an "imminent threat."​ But so far, no evidence of that has been provided.

​While a 2018 Office of Legal Council (OLC) opinion offers a very liberal definition of executive authority and provides ​ " very little constraint on modern presidential uses of force," it appears to classify the Soleimani strike as an act of war, since Iran is a nation state that will likely escalate its military retaliation in response to the killing of their uniformed military member.

Indeed, the U.S. has already said it will send 3,500 additional troops to the Middle East "after Iran vowed to exact 'severe revenge.'" ​The U.S. has warned its citizens to leave Iraq​, and Iran has already begun firing at housing for American forces in Iraq: all signs that point to escalation.

Moreover, targeted political assassinations, like the kind used against Soleimani, have been banned by executive order since the Ford administration. Ronald Reagan signed Executive Order 12333, which reads: "No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination."

Soleimani was "not a rogue outlaw, but a military official of a sovereign government we were not at war with, making his killing an assassination," writes Ben Friedman, policy director at Defense Priorities. "His actions, however evil, served Iranian policy."

"The idea that the president can, without going to Congress, take out a top level official of a country we're not in an authorized war with, is crossing a Rubicon," said Healy.

So what happens now?

Congress has several choices to make in the days ahead. It can pass empty, non-binding resolutions, that require the president's sign-off, like the kind suggested by Kaine and Pelosi. Or it can repeal the decades-old AUMFs that have been used to justify continuing U.S. escalations in the Middle East. Congress could also pass bills like those by Representative Khanna and Senator Sanders to strip funding for offensive military action against Iran from the NDAA.

It remains to be seen if Congress will choose substantive actions, like defunding unauthorized wars, over window dressing.

[Jan 08, 2020] Impeachment as a way out for the USa for create Trump Soliemani muder deadlock with Iran

Jan 08, 2020 | www.nytimes.com

Hineni47 NYC area 6h ago

"Unlike with North Korea, it's difficult to imagine any photo op or exchange of love letters defusing the crisis the president has created. " The only thing that might defuse this crisis would be the Senate convicting Trump and removing him from office. It would be a good idea if the House passes another article of impeachment accusing the president of committing an act of war without Congressional authorization.
Sirlar Jersey City 3h ago Times Pick
Threatening to destroy cultural sites of a country is the sign of a deranged madman. I can't believe a US president would dare say something like that. It goes against all the principles America stands for. Nothing will motivate the people of Iran to fight the US more than the threat of destruction to their cultural sites. If we go to war with Iran, this is a Republican war. They own it. When are decent Republicans going to stand up and do the right thing? If they don't, this could be very, very, bad.
PatMurphy77 Michigan 5h ago
The Defense department is already walking back Trump's tweet about bombing Iran culture sites. Unfortunately, it's too late because the damage to our reputation as the "shining light on the hill" has already been destroyed. I'm afraid more than now than I have ever been in my life. Who knows when or where the revenge will occur but I'm fairly certain it will happen and we'll be more isolated than ever before. It's taken centuries to build goodwill and our reputation as a beacon of democracy for the world. We gave the keys to the kingdom to a false prophet and we'll pay for his indiscretions for the rest of my lifetime. God help us all.
stan continople brooklyn 3h ago Times Pick
You've sure got it right with "rapture-mad", and the most frightening thing is that the religious zealotry of Pompeo, Pence, Mulvaney and Barr, inoculates them against any criticism, because they believe they are serving a "higher"power and any criticism is a testimony to their faith. In fact, by turning themselves into martyrs, they get to advance in line for the Rapture. It seems particularly ironic that Evangelicals who support Israel do so because they see God's plan unfolding there. The Jews, just happen to be sacrificial lambs in the grand scheme. so they must must be preserved until the time is ripe for their rightful annihilation, heralding the Second Coming. So, the problem of Pompeo, et al, is not Iran destroying Israel, it's just that they've determined the timing is off.
Eric Ashland 4h ago Times Pick
As for the "wag the dog" theory, sure, Trump sees no difference between his personal fortunes and national interests. But worse, the impeachment rests upon evidence that points to a personal criminality on an international scale, which is the landscape where we find ourselves. The president pardons convicts like Gallagher and Arpaio because they are cruel or bloodthirsty. He admires dictators and ignores the law whenever he can, both as a private individual and a president, and has obstructed a legal investigation into his corruption. Now, on the international stage, by bypassing Congress, he is ignoring the sovereignty of the American people, while incoherently threatening war crimes. Trump is fully blossoming into a man like those he admires, an unrestrained, unprincipled, heavy hitting international tyrant. I'm so disgusted with those whose job it is to check this man, and have abdicated their responsibility, because they want to be like him. Reply 230 Recommend Share
Aaron San Francisco 4h ago Times Pick
I was at a friend's house on election night ready to celebrate Clinton's victory. When the networks suddenly announced that Trump had won Florida, a professor of international relations who was with us ominously predicted, "we are going to war with Iran." And here we are.
PT Melbourne, FL 4h ago Times Pick
America has become a living nightmare. A global power perceived mostly as benevolent by the world is now a danger to all, including itself. Already having killed the Paris Agreement, and Iran Nuclear Treaty, not to mention walking away from a nuclear arms treaty with the Russians, Trump is now ready to wreak real havoc on the world - start a war. Boy will they forget about impeachment now!
Jonathan Baron Staunton, Virginia 5h ago
We haven't authorized the assassination of a military leader since the daring mission to kill Japanese Admiral Yamamoto in 1943. Although he'd been the architect of the Pearl Harbor attack, and we were at war with Japan, this was a departure so significant that it only proceeded after lengthy deliberation. And now, this. Your article fills in precisely how this was so very much not that. But one party is in so cult-deep into this president now that the lies won't stop. Thousands of Iranian have lost their lives in the past month trying to rid themselves of this regime. Not only were those deaths rendered in vain by the assassination of Suleimani, but the Iranian people are also even more yoked to a government they hate. And wasn't the idea of grassroots-driven change in regime a core strategy behind pulling out of the nuclear deal? And it's not okay because Suleimani is "evil." That's both subjective and never a justification for an assassination of a foreign military leader of a nation we're not at war with. As I noted, it was questionable when it was a military leader of nation we were at war with. But, most important, what did we gain from this? Following yet another disasterous military and foreign policy snap decision it only makes the importance of removing Trump from office more urgent. Come for the Constitutional crime but convict because the defendant is also manifestly unfit for the office. People are dying because of it and more will die if he stays. Reply 186 Recommend Share
Joe Portland, ME 3h ago Times Pick
What, then, for an effective response? Outrage is mere fuel: what is the engine? A full year seems too long. The Senate seems hopeless. What does that leave? Must we take to the streets to stop this disaster of a president? All this time spent wondering how this will end makes me feel like a victim of domestic abuse. What a waste. 1 Reply 180 Recommend Share
AnitaSmith New Jersey 4h ago Times Pick
The near silence of the countries frequently referred to as our allies -- before the age of Trump -- is deafening.

[Jan 08, 2020] McConnell Wrangles Republicans For Speedy Trump Acquittal As Schumer Cries Cover-Up

Jan 08, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

McConnell Wrangles Republicans For Speedy Trump Acquittal As Schumer Cries Cover-Up by Tyler Durden Tue, 01/07/2020 - 15:11 0 SHARES

Most Senate Republicans have lined up behind Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's plan for a lightning-fast, witness-free impeachment trial which will end with the acquittal of President Trump - much to the chagrin of Senate Democrats led by Chuck Schumer of New York.

McConnell (R-KY) has been unswayed by former National Security Adviser John Bolton's offer to testify, as well as the recent emergence of emails suggesting Trump's direct involvement in his administration's pausing of US aid to Ukraine after asking President Volodomyr Zelensky to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden ahead of the 2020 US election.

Two Republicans who have on occasion broken with Trump and have criticized McConnell's statements about the trial -- Alaska's Lisa Murkowski and Maine's Susan Collins -- say they back his plan to follow the precedent of Bill Clinton's 1999 impeachment trial by delaying any decision on witnesses.

"I think we need to do what they did the last time they did this unfortunate process, and that was to go through a first phase and then they reassessed after that," Murkowski said.

McConnell likely has the votes to force the issue without cooperation from Democrats . - Bloomberg

McConnell has guaranteed that Senate Democrats won't have the 67 votes required to convict Trump and remove him from office. Meanwhile, he can simply point to Clinton's impeachment as precedent on witness testimony, as it would allow Trump's lawyers and White House impeachment managers to make their arguments and answer questions from Senators before administration figures such as Bolton and acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney have a chance to speak.

There have been no discussions between McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who can go pound sand as talks seem unlikely.

"If every Republican senator votes for a rigged trial that hides the truth, the American people will see that the Republican Senate is part of a large and awful cover-up," said Schumer in a Tuesday screed on the Senate floor.

Chuck Schumer: "Whoever heard of a trial without witnesses and documents? It's unprecedented ... Witnesses and documents? Fair trial. No witnesses and no documents? Cover-up. That simple sentence describes it all." Via ABC pic.twitter.com/eKhKoBjIVP

-- Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) January 7, 2020

According to Trump, Bolton 'would know nothing' about the Ukraine situation.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), meanwhile, has yet to reveal when she plans to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate, thereby making Trump's impeachment official according to House Democratic witness and Harvard Law professor, Dr. Noah Feldman.

Pelosi's allies argue that the Senate turning down Bolton's offer to testify under subpoena suggest that Republicans are involved in covering up evidence against Trump.

"McConnell is making very plain he's not interested in the country learning the full extent" of Trump's misconduct, according to a Tuesday statement by House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff. "And apparently there are any number of senators willing to go along with that head-in-the-sand strategy," he added.


Albertarocks , 9 minutes ago link

Six ways from Sunday Chuck. "Six ways from Sunday." It must really suck to be you these days.

Nov1917Sucks , 10 minutes ago link

The only difference between a Dem and a Repub in Congress is the shear ignorance of their voters. But Trump has exposed his voters to be the biggest dolts of the last century!

BryanM , 17 minutes ago link

If Pelosi could have offed that terrorist Salami to change the subject she would have. She has seriously misjudged this escapade. I'm sure Schiff and Nadler convinced her they could use the MSM to split off some republican votes and gain momentum. Their case is so weak they couldn't even get any the 30+ republicans that are retiring with nothing to lose to split off and vote with the dems. Where's the popcorn?

[Jan 08, 2020] If we assume that Pompeo persuaded Trump to order to kill a diplomatic envoy, Trump is now a dead man walking as after Iran responce Pelosi impeachment gambit now have legs

Highly recommended!
This is truly shocking: Trump assassinates diplomatic envoy he himself arranged for. . If the U.S. lured Soleimani to Iraq with a promise of negotiations with the Iraqis as mediators and then proceeded to kill him, surely that would be an impeachable offense. Particularly in view of the failure to brief Congress. If it was Saudi tricked Soleimani by getting Iraq to "mediate" (Iraq's prime minister was expecting a message by him on the mediation when he was assassinated), Saudi will get targeted.
The US changed the rules of engagement. They had decided to assassinate Soleimani when he was in Syria, having just returned from a short journey to Lebanon, before boarding a commercial flight from Damascus airport to Baghdad. The US killing machine was waiting for him to land in Baghdad and monitored his movements when he was picked up at the foot of the plane. The US hit the two cars, carrying Soleimani and the al-Muhandes protection team, when they were still inside the airport perimeter and were slowing down at the first check-point.
US forces will no longer be safe in Iraq outside protected areas inside the military bases where they are deployed. A potential danger or hit-man could be lurking at every corner; this will limit the free movement of US soldiers. Iran would be delighted were the Iraqi groups to decide to hit the American forces and hunt them wherever they are. This would rekindle memories of the first clashes between Jaish al-Mahdi and US forces in Najaf in 2004-2005.
Jan 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Tom , Jan 5 2020 15:55 utc | 16
Impeachment with GOP support could be just around the corner. And who lost Iraq??? He would be a dead man walking in that case. I can't see the evangelical crowd saving him. President Pence. Might have to get use to that.

Here is a link to a twitter account with a good video of massive crowds on the streets of Mashhad awaiting the arrival of Qassem Suleimani. Very powerful.

https://twitter.com/sonofnariman/status/1213792565075550208


Piotr Berman , Jan 5 2020 16:02 utc | 17

There will be no draining of any swamps. Trump-Kushner just another Bibi lackey.

Posted by: Jerry | Jan 5 2020 15:48 utc | 13

1. Draining swamps was a marker of progress in the past. >>Wiki:But in the late 1960s and early 1970s, researchers found that marshes and swamps "were worth billions annually in wildlife production, groundwater recharge, and for flood, pollution, and erosion control." This motivated the passage of the 1972 federal Water Pollution Control Act.<<

2. To recognize this vital role, parties should adopt more acquatic symbols. Caymans are a bit too similar to alligators, but, say, Alligators vs Snapping Turtles?

Sasha , Jan 5 2020 16:02 utc | 18
A video which says it all...
Gen. #Soleimani, enemy of Daesh and Trump!

Trump has threatened #Iran with destroying its cultural sites but that is not his only similarity with Daesh, they both hated General Soleimani.

https://twitter.com/PressTV/status/1213804505537679362


Bemildred , Jan 5 2020 16:02 utc | 19
Posted by: Tom | Jan 5 2020 15:55 utc | 16

Yes, it might just be that this debacle provides the extra impulse to get him removed. Can't say I can even imagine what that would look like, but there would seem to be a good argument now that he must be restrained somehow. Somebody needs to tell Pompeous to stop digging the hole deeper (shutup) too.

[Jan 07, 2020] McConnell Wrangles Republicans For Speedy Trump Acquittal As Schumer Cries Cover-Up

Jan 07, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

McConnell Wrangles Republicans For Speedy Trump Acquittal As Schumer Cries Cover-Up by Tyler Durden Tue, 01/07/2020 - 15:11 0 SHARES

Most Senate Republicans have lined up behind Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's plan for a lightning-fast, witness-free impeachment trial which will end with the acquittal of President Trump - much to the chagrin of Senate Democrats led by Chuck Schumer of New York.

McConnell (R-KY) has been unswayed by former National Security Adviser John Bolton's offer to testify, as well as the recent emergence of emails suggesting Trump's direct involvement in his administration's pausing of US aid to Ukraine after asking President Volodomyr Zelensky to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden ahead of the 2020 US election.

Two Republicans who have on occasion broken with Trump and have criticized McConnell's statements about the trial -- Alaska's Lisa Murkowski and Maine's Susan Collins -- say they back his plan to follow the precedent of Bill Clinton's 1999 impeachment trial by delaying any decision on witnesses.

"I think we need to do what they did the last time they did this unfortunate process, and that was to go through a first phase and then they reassessed after that," Murkowski said.

McConnell likely has the votes to force the issue without cooperation from Democrats . - Bloomberg

McConnell has guaranteed that Senate Democrats won't have the 67 votes required to convict Trump and remove him from office. Meanwhile, he can simply point to Clinton's impeachment as precedent on witness testimony, as it would allow Trump's lawyers and White House impeachment managers to make their arguments and answer questions from Senators before administration figures such as Bolton and acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney have a chance to speak.

There have been no discussions between McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who can go pound sand as talks seem unlikely.

"If every Republican senator votes for a rigged trial that hides the truth, the American people will see that the Republican Senate is part of a large and awful cover-up," said Schumer in a Tuesday screed on the Senate floor.

Chuck Schumer: "Whoever heard of a trial without witnesses and documents? It's unprecedented ... Witnesses and documents? Fair trial. No witnesses and no documents? Cover-up. That simple sentence describes it all." Via ABC pic.twitter.com/eKhKoBjIVP

-- Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) January 7, 2020

According to Trump, Bolton 'would know nothing' about the Ukraine situation.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), meanwhile, has yet to reveal when she plans to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate, thereby making Trump's impeachment official according to House Democratic witness and Harvard Law professor, Dr. Noah Feldman.

Pelosi's allies argue that the Senate turning down Bolton's offer to testify under subpoena suggest that Republicans are involved in covering up evidence against Trump.

"McConnell is making very plain he's not interested in the country learning the full extent" of Trump's misconduct, according to a Tuesday statement by House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff. "And apparently there are any number of senators willing to go along with that head-in-the-sand strategy," he added.

[Jan 07, 2020] Trump wags the hippopotamus - The Washington Post

Jan 07, 2020 | www.washingtonpost.com

The idea of launching military action to distract from domestic political troubles has been a thing at least since the 1997 film "Wag the Dog" (as in, the tail wagging the dog) gave it a name. Republicans accused President Bill Clinton of it in 1998 when he ordered airstrikes against Sudan and Iraq as impeachment loomed. Trump alleged (wrongly) that President Barack Obama would " start a war with Iran " before the 2012 election.

Trump's assassination of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani has, at least for the moment, shifted attention from the Senate trial. Before the attack, pro-impeachment activists had scheduled a protest inside the Hart Senate Office Building for Monday, but only 45 demonstrators showed up for the event, nearly equaled by the 20 journalists and 15 police officers who greeted them. Though wearing "Remove Trump" and "Trump is Guilty" T-shirts, they were about as disruptive as a tour group.

... ... ...

Now, Trump has lit the Middle East on fire, with only a halfhearted attempt to justify the sudden urgency ("This president waited three years. I mean, we've had Soleimani in our sights for just as long as we've been here," Trump strategist Kellyanne Conway told Fox News on Monday). Thousands of U.S. troops are hurriedly deploying to the region, Iraq is demanding that U.S. troops leave the country , and Iran is threatening retaliation and renewing its nuclear ambitions .

This is precisely why the impeachment trial -- and Bolton's long-sought testimony -- must go forward. The same lawlessness and recklessness that led Trump to extort political help from Ukraine has now brought us, willy-nilly, to the precipice of war, as Trump openly threatens to commit war crimes. If unchecked, he'll do this again -- and worse.

[Jan 04, 2020] Clapper's Credibility by Ray McGovern

Notable quotes:
"... What Clapper chokes on -- and avoids saying -- is that U.S. intelligence had no evidence of WMD either. Indeed, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had put him in charge of the agency responsible for analyzing imagery of all kinds -- photographic, radar, infrared, and multispectral -- precisely so that the absence of evidence from our multi-billion-dollar intelligence collection satellites could be hidden, in order not to impede the planned attack on Iraq. That's why, as Clapper now admits, he had to find "what wasn't really there." ..."
Jan 04, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

Former DNI James Clapper had his own words read back to him by Ray McGovern, exposing his role in justifying the Iraq invasion based on fraudulent intelligence.

... ... ...

Clapper was appointed Director of National Intelligence by President Barack Obama in June 2010, almost certainly at the prompting of Obama's intelligence confidant and Clapper friend John Brennan, later director of the CIA. Despite Clapper's performance on Iraq, he was confirmed unanimously by the Senate. Obama even allowed Clapper to keep his job for three and a half more years after he admitted that he had lied under oath to that same Senate about the extent of eavesdropping on Americans by the National Security Agency (NSA). He is now a security analyst for CNN.

In his book, Clapper finally places the blame for the consequential fraud (he calls it "the failure") to find the (non-existent) WMD "where it belongs -- squarely on the shoulders of the administration members who were pushing a narrative of a rogue WMD program in Iraq and on the intelligence officers, including me, who were so eager to help that we found what wasn't really there." ( emphasis added ) .

So at the event on Tuesday I stood up and asked him about that. It was easy, given the background Clapper himself provides in his book, such as:

"The White House aimed to justify why an invasion of and regime change in Iraq were necessary, with a public narrative that condemned its continued development of weapons of mass destruction [and] its support to al-Qaida (for which the Intelligence Community had no evidence)."

What Clapper chokes on -- and avoids saying -- is that U.S. intelligence had no evidence of WMD either. Indeed, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had put him in charge of the agency responsible for analyzing imagery of all kinds -- photographic, radar, infrared, and multispectral -- precisely so that the absence of evidence from our multi-billion-dollar intelligence collection satellites could be hidden, in order not to impede the planned attack on Iraq. That's why, as Clapper now admits, he had to find "what wasn't really there."

Members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) who have employed Clapper under contract, or otherwise known his work, caution that he is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. So, to be fair, there is an outside chance that Rumsfeld persuaded him to be guided by the (in)famous Rumsfeld dictum: "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

But the consequences are the same: a war of aggression with millions dead and wounded; continuing bedlam in the area; and no one -- high or low -- held accountable. Hold your breath and add Joe Biden awarding the "Liberty Medal" to George W. Bush on Veteran's Day.

' Shocked'


Protection Racquet , November 17, 2018 at 02:46

When did this perjurer before Congress have any credibility? The guys a professional liar.

Mild -ly Facetious , November 18, 2018 at 17:27

The guy is a professional liar,and

a member of The Establishment

"The Anglo-American Establishment"

Copyright 1981/ Books in Focus, Inc,

Vallejo D , November 19, 2018 at 21:15

No shit. I saw the video of Clapper perjuring himself to the US Congress on national television, bald-face lying about the NSA clocking our emails.

I wouldn't believe Clapper if he the sky is blue and grass is green. EPIC liar.

PS: Erstwhile national security state "friend" actually had the nerve to claim that "Clapper lied to protect you." As if. My bet is that ONLY people on the planet who didn't know about the NSA's grotesque criminal were the American taxpayers.

Mild -ly Facetious , November 20, 2018 at 12:38

RECALL THIS EXTRAORDINARY STATEMENT -- from the GW Bush administration

There was, however, one valuable insight. In a soon-to-be-infamous passage, the writer, Ron Suskind, recounted a conversation between himself and an unnamed senior adviser to the president:

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernable reality."

I nodded and murmured something about Enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off.

"That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create reality. And while you are studying that reality – judiciously, as you will – we'll act again creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

Anonymot , November 16, 2018 at 20:56

Mild -ly - Facetious , November 18, 2018 at 19:33

Anonymot , Yes!

Here Is A Sequence of books for those who reside in chosen darkness:

"The Lessons of History" by Will & Edith Durant – c. 1968

"The Anglo-American Establishment" by Carroll Quigley – c. 1981

"Understanding Special Operations" by David T. Ratcliffe – c. 1989 / 99

" The Secret War Against The Jews" by John Loftus and Mark Aarons c. 1994

Douglas Baker , November 16, 2018 at 19:42

Thanks Ray. The clap merry-go-round in Washington, D.C., with V.D. assaulting brain integrity has been long playing there with James Clapper another hand in, in favor of the continuation of those that direct the United States' war on world from Afghanistan to Syria, staying the course of firing up the world as though Northern California's Camp fire sooting up much of the state with air borne particulate matter and leaving death and destruction in its wake.

JRGJRG , November 16, 2018 at 19:29

All this is fine, except it dares not touch the still taboo subject among these "professionals" of how all of this started getting justified in the first place when America attacked itself on September 11, 2001 in New York City and Washington in the most sophisticated and flawed false flag attack in history, murdering thousands of its own citizens Operation Northwoods style, blaming it on 19 Saudi hijackers with box cutters, the most grandiose of all conspiracy theory, the official 911 story.
The incriminating evidence of what happened that day in 2001 is now absolutely overwhelming, but still too incredible and controversial for even these esteemed folks to come to grips with. If we're going to take a shower and clean all this excrement off ourselves, let's do it thoroughly.

JRGJRG , November 16, 2018 at 19:46

In fact, wait! Let's ask the really important question of Clapper.
What was he doing and where was he on 9/11, the "New Pearl Harbor," and what was his role in the coverup and transformation of the CIA in the ensuing years?
Why doesn't Ray ask him about that?

GKJames , November 16, 2018 at 06:46

(1) One needn't be a Clapper fan to say that he was merely a cog in a body politic that (a) lives and breathes using military force to "solve" geopolitical problems; and (b) has always been driven by the national myth of American exceptionalism and the American love of war. The only issue ever is the story Americans tell themselves as to why a particular assault on some benighted country that can't meaningfully shoot back is justified. But for that, there are countless clever people in the corridors of power and the Infotainment Complex always eager to spread mendacity for fun and profit. Sure, hang Clapper, but if justice is what you're after, you'd quickly run out of rope and wood.

(2) What doesn't compute: Clapper is quoted as saying that he and cohort "were so eager to help that [they] found what wasn't really there". That's followed by: "Rumsfeld put him in charge so that the absence of evidence could be hidden . Clapper now admits [that] he had to find 'what wasn't really there'". While Rumsfeld's intent was exactly that, i.e., to prevent a narrative that he and Cheney had contrived, that's not the same as Rumsfeld's explicitly instructing Clapper et al to do that. Further, it mischaracterizes Clapper's admission. He doesn't admit that "he had to find" what wasn't there (which would suggest prior intent). What he does admit is that the eagerness to please the chain of command resulted in "finding" what didn't exist. One is fraud, the other group-think; two very different propositions. The latter, of course, has been the hallmark of US foreign policy for decades, though the polite (but accurate) word for it is "consensus". Everybody's in on it: the public, Congress, the press, and even the judiciary. By and large, it's who Americans are.

(3) Does this really equate the WMD fiasco with the alleged "desperate [attempt] to blame Trump's victory on Russian interference"? Yes, Clapper was present in 2003 and 2016. But that's a thin reed. First, no reasonable person says that Russian interference was the only reason that Clinton lost. Second, to focus on what was said in January 2017 ignores the US government's notifying various state officials DURING THE CAMPAIGN in 2016, of Russian hacking attempts. If, as is commonly said, the Administration was convinced that Clinton would win, how could hacking alerts to the states have been part of an effort to explain away an election defeat that hadn't happened yet, and which wasn't ever expected to happen? And, third, as with WMDs, Clapper wasn't out there on his own. While there were, unsurprisingly, different views among intelligence officials as to the extent of the Russian role, there was broad agreement that there had been one. Once again, fraud vs. group-think.

Skip Scott , November 16, 2018 at 13:46

I think there is a big difference between "group think" and inventing and cherry picking intelligence to fit policy objectives. I believe there is ample evidence of fraud. The "dodgy dossier" and the yellow cake uranium that led to Plame being exposed as a CIA operative are two examples that come immediately to mind. "Sexed up" intelligence is beyond groupthink. It is the promoting of lies and the deliberate elimination of any counter narrative in order to justify an unjust war.

The same could be said of the "all 17 intelligence agencies" statement about RussiaGate that was completely debunked but remained the propaganda line. It was way more than "groupthink". It was a lie. It is part of "full spectrum dominance".

I do agree that "Clapper wasn't out there on his own". He is part of a team with an agenda, and in a just world they'd all be in prison.
It wasn't "mistaken" intelligence, or "groupthink". You are trying to put lipstick on a pig.

GKJames , November 17, 2018 at 07:21

Fraud is easy to allege, hard to prove. In the case of Iraq, it's important to accept that virtually everyone -- the Administration, the press, the public, security agencies in multiple countries, and even UN inspectors (before the inspections, obviously) -- ASSUMED that Saddam had WMDs. That assumption wasn't irrational; it was based on Saddam's prior behavior. No question, the Administration wanted to invade Iraq and the presumed-to-exist WMDs were the rationale. It was only when evidence appeared that the case for it wasn't rock-solid that Cheney et al went to work. (The open question is whether they began to have their own doubts or whether it never occurred to them, given their obsession.) But there is zero evidence that anyone was asked to conclude that Saddam had WMDs even though the Americans KNEW that there weren't any. That's where the group-think and weak-kneed obeisance to political brawlers like Cheney come in. All he had to do was bark, and everyone fell in line, not because they knew there were no WMDs, but because they weren't sure but the boss certainly was.

In that environment, what we saw from Clapper and his analysts wasn't fraud but weakness of character, not to mention poor-quality analysis. And maybe that gets to the bigger question to which there appears to be an allergy: Shouting Fraud! effectively shuts down the conversation. After all, once you've done that, there's not much else to say; these guys all lied and death and destruction followed. But what if the answer is just as likely that the national security state created by Truman has grown into something uncontrollable, beyond legitimate oversight by the people it's supposed to serve? What if the people in that business aren't all that clever, let alone principled? After all, the CIA is headed by a torture aficionada and we haven't heard peep from the employee base, let alone the Congress that confirmed her. That entire ecosystem has been permitted to flourish without adult supervision for decades. Whenever someone asks, "that's classified". What do you do when Americans as a whole are perfectly fine with that?

Sam F , November 18, 2018 at 08:17

But fraud from the top was shown very well by Bamford in his book Pretext For War. Where discredited evidence was retained by intel agencies, as in the Iraq War II case, traitors like the zionist Wolfowitz simply installed known zionist warmongers Perl, Feith, and Wurmser into "stovepipe" offices at CIA, DIA, NSA to send the known-bad "evidence" to Rumsfeld & Cheney.

Skip Scott , November 18, 2018 at 09:27

They seem to conveniently classify anything that could prove illegality such as fraud, or in the case of the JFK assassination, something much worse. They use tools such as redaction and classification not only to protect "national security", but to cover up their crimes.

"But what if the answer is just as likely that the national security state created by Truman has grown into something uncontrollable, beyond legitimate oversight by the people it's supposed to serve?"

I believe this is very much the case, but that doesn't preclude fraud as part of their toolkit. The people at the top of the illegalities are clever enough to use those less sharp (like Clapper) for their evil purposes, and if necessary, to play the fall guy. And although the Intelligence Agencies are supposed to serve "We the People", they are actually serving unfettered Global Capitalism and the .1% that are trying to rule the world. This has been the case from its onset.

Furthermore, I am an American, and I am definitely NOT FINE with the misuse of classification and redaction to cover up crimes. The way to fix the "entire ecosystem" is to start to demand it by prosecuting known liars like James Clapper, and to break up the MSM monopoly so people get REAL news again, and wake people up until they refuse to support the two party system.

GKJames , November 19, 2018 at 10:20

(1) Assuming you could find a DOJ willing to prosecute and a specific statute on which to bring charges, the chance of conviction is zero because the required fraudulent intent can't be proved beyond reasonable doubt. All the defendant would have to say is, We thought WMDs were there but it turned out we were wrong. Besides, the lawyers said it's all legal. And if you went after Clapper only, he'd argue (successfully) that it was a highly selective prosecution. (2) If you're going to create a whole new category of criminal liability for incompetence and/or toadyism and careerism, Langley corridors would quickly empty. It's certainly one way to reduce the federal workforce. (3) The intelligence agencies ARE serving "We the People". There isn't anything they do that doesn't have the blessing of duly elected representatives in Congress. (4) That you, yourself, are "NOT FINE" overlooks the reality that your perspective gets routinely outvoted, though not because of "evil" or "fraud". A Clapper behind bars would do zero to change that. Why? Because most Americans ARE fine with the status quo. That's not a function of news (fake or real); Americans are drowning in information. Like all good service providers, the media are giving their customers exactly what they want to hear.

Skip Scott , November 19, 2018 at 11:25

GK-

(1) It is you who is "assuming" that fraud could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. What if evidence was presented that showed that they didn't really think there were WMD's, but were consciously lying to justify an invasion. I agree that it would be nearly impossible to find a DOJ willing to prosecute within our corrupted government, but if we could get a 3rd party president to sign on to the ICC, we could ship a bunch of evil warmongers off to the Hague. (2) As already discussed, I don't buy the representation of their actions as mere "toadyism". (3) As shown by many studies, our duly elected representatives serve lobbyists and the .1%, not "We the People". Here's one from Princeton: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig (4) From your earlier post: "What do you do when Americans as a whole are perfectly fine with that?" Since I am part of the "whole", your statement is obviously false. And Americans are drowning in MISinformation from our MSM, and that is a big part of the problem. And please provide evidence that most Americans are fine with the status quo. Stating that I get routinely outvoted when many Americans see their choice as between a lesser of two evils, and our MSM keeps exposure of third party viewpoints to a minimum, is an obvious obfuscation.

Sam F , November 16, 2018 at 21:01

I will second Skip on that.
The groupthink of careerists is not "who Americans are."
"Broad agreement" on an obvious fraud is a group lie.

Tom Hall , November 17, 2018 at 10:49

What Clapper did was fraud. What went on in his head was group-think. The two are by no means incompatible. The man admits to outright fabrication-
"my team also produced computer-generated images of trucks fitted out as 'mobile production facilities used to make biological agents.' Those images, possibly more than any other substantiation he presented, carried the day with the international community and Americans alike."
He knew exactly what he was doing.

wootendw , November 15, 2018 at 22:41

"Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. James Clapper, head of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, said vehicle traffic photographed by U.S. spy satellites indicated that material and documents related to the arms programs were shipped to Syria "

Syria and Iraq became bitter enemies in 1982 when Syria backed Iran during the Iran-Iraq War. Syria even sent troops to fight AGAINST Saddam during the first Iraq War. Syria and Iraq did not restore diplomatic relations until after Saddam was captured. The idea that Saddam would send WMDs (if he had them) to Syria is ludicrous.

Zhu , November 15, 2018 at 20:54

Cheney wanted to steal the oil. Bush wanted to fulfill prophecy & make Jesus Rapture him away from his problems. Neither plan worked.

Zhu , November 15, 2018 at 20:50

Our big shots never suffer for their crimes against humanity. Occasionally a Lt. Calley will get a year in jail for a massacre, but that's it.

bostonblackie , November 16, 2018 at 13:54

Calley was placed under house arrest at Fort Benning, where he served three and a half years.

JRGJRG , November 16, 2018 at 19:16

That's like less than 2.5 days served per each defenseless My Lai villager slaughtered, massacred, in cold blood.
What kind of justice is that? Who gets away with murder that way?

Helen Marshall , November 15, 2018 at 17:41

While serving in an embassy in 2003, the junior officer in my office was chatting with the long-time local employee, after viewing the Powell Shuck and Jive. One said to the other, "the US calls North Korea part of the 'Axis of Evil' but doesn't attack it because there is clear evidence that it has WMD including nukes." And the other said "yes, and that's why the US is going to invade Iraq because we know they don't." QED

John Flanagan , November 16, 2018 at 22:25

Love this comment!

Taras 77 , November 15, 2018 at 16:36

Thanks, Ray, for an excellent article!

You are one of few who are calling out these treasonous bastards. I am still .waiting for at least some of them to do the perp walk, maybe in the presence of war widows, their children, and maimed war veterans.

Chris Fogarty , November 15, 2018 at 12:27

Clapper played the central role in deceiving America into abandoning the republic and becoming the genocidal empire now terrorizing Planet Earth. If it is too late; if the criminals have permanent control of our government, there won't be a cleansing Nuremberg Tribunal, and our once-great USA will continue along its course of death and destruction until it destroys itself.

Where are our patriots? If any exist, now is the time for a new Nuremberg.

Zhu , November 15, 2018 at 20:56

The genocidal empire goes back to 1950 the Korean War.

bostonblackie , November 16, 2018 at 13:58

How about 1945 and the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

JRGJRG , November 16, 2018 at 19:08

Keep going. Further back than that.
How about the Spanish American War, justified by the false flag blowing up of the Maine in Havana Harbor, which led to the four-year genocidal war against Filipino rebels and the war against the Cubans?
How about the 19th Century genocide of Native Americans? What was that justified by, except for lust for conquest of territory and racism?
How about America's role with other western colonial powers in the 1900 Boxer Rebellion in China.
The list of American violations of international law is too long to restate here, in the hundreds.
The only way out of this moral dilemma is to turn a new page in history in a new administration, hold our war criminals in the dock, and make amends under international law, and keep them, somehow without sacrificing national jurisdiction or security. America has to be reformed as an honest broker of peace instead of the world's leading pariah terrorist state.

bostonblackie , November 17, 2018 at 16:29

How about slavery? America was founded on genocide and slavery!

Skip Scott , November 15, 2018 at 09:44

I think Ray is being a little overly optimistic about Clapper being travel restricted. Universal Jurisdiction is for the small fry. Even with Bush and Rumsfeld, their changing travel plans was probably more about possible "bad press" than actual prosecution. Maybe down the road, when the USA collapse is more obvious to our "vassals" and they start to go their own way, such a thing could happen. Even then, we've got tons of armaments, and a notoriously itchy trigger finger.

My hope is that the two party system collapses and a Green Party candidate gets elected president. He or she could then sign us on to the ICC, and let the prosecutions begin. I know it's delusional, but a guy's gotta dream.

Robert Emmett , November 15, 2018 at 08:52

It occurs to me that even given Cheney's infamous 1% doctrine, these no-goodniks couldn't even scratch together enough of a true story to pass that low bar. So they invented, to put it mildly, plausible scenarios, cranked-up the catapults of propaganda and flung them in our faces via the self-absorbed, self-induced, money grubbing fake patriots of mass media.

But, geez, Ray, it's not as if we didn't already know about fixing facts around the policy, resignations of career operatives because of politicizing intelligence, reports of Scott Ritter, plus the smarmy lying faces & voices of all the main actors in the Cheney-Rumsfeld generated mass hysteria. I doubt these types of reveals, though appreciatively confirming what we already know, will change very many minds now. After all, the most effective war this cabal has managed to wage has been against their own people.

Perhaps when these highfalutin traitors, treasonous to their oaths to protect the founding principles they swore to preserve, at last shuffle off their mortal coils, future generations will gain the necessary perspective to dismiss these infamous liars with the contempt they deserve. But that's just wishful thinking because by then the incidents that cranked-up this never-ending war likely will be the least of their worries.

In the meantime, the fact that this boiled egghead continues to spew his Claptrap on a major media channel tells you all you need to know about how deeply the poison of the Bush-Cheney era has seeped into the body politic and continues to eat away at what remains of the foundations while the military-media-government-corporate complex metastasizes.

Sam F , November 15, 2018 at 21:03

Ray knows that the well-informed know much of the story, and likely writes to bring us the Clapper memoir confession and summarize for the less informed.

JOHN CHUCKMAN , November 15, 2018 at 07:11

I am always glad to see confirmation in such matters, however, for people who work to inform themselves and think critically, there are no real surprises to be discovered about the invasion of Iraq.

It could be clearly seen as a fraud at the time because there were a number of experts, experts not working for the American government, who in effect told us then that it was a fraud.

What the whole experience with Iraq reveals is a couple of profound truths about imperial America, truths that are quite unpleasant and yet seem to remain lost to the general public.

One, lying and manipulation are virtually work-a-day activities in Washington. They go on at all levels of the government, from the President through all of the various experts and agency heads who in theory hold their jobs to inform the President and others of the truth in making decisions.

Indeed, these experts and agency heads actually work more like party members from George Orwell's Oceania in 1984, party members whose job it is to constantly rewrite history, making adjustments in the words and pictures of old periodicals and books to conform with the Big Brother's latest pronouncements and turns in policy.

America has an entire industry devoted to manufacturing truth, something the rather feeble term "fake news" weakly tries to capture.

The public's reaction to officials and agencies in Washington ought to be quite different than it generally is. It should be a presumption that they are not telling the truth, that they are tailoring a story to fit a policy. It sounds extreme to say so, but it truly is not in view of recent history.

We are all watching actors in a costly play used to support already-determined destructive policies.

Two, the press lies, and it lies almost constantly in support of government's decided policies. You simply cannot trust the American press on such matters, and the biggest names in the press – the New York Times or Washington Post or CBS or NBC – are the biggest liars because they put the weight of their general prestige into the balance to tip it.

Their fortunes and interests are too closely bound to government to be in the least trusted for objective journalism. Journalism just does not exist in America on the big stuff.

This support is not just done on special occasions like the run-up to the illegal invasion of Iraq but consistently in the affairs of state. We see it today in everything from "Russia-gate" to the Western-induced horrors of Syria. Russia-gate is almost laughable, although few Americans laugh, but a matter like Syria, with more than half a million dead and terrible privations, isn't laughable, yet no effort is made to explain the truth and bring this monstrous project – the work equally of Republicans and Democrats – to an end.

Three, while virtually all informed people know that Israel's influence in Washington is inordinate and inappropriate, many still do not realize that the entire horror of Iraq, just like the horror today of Syria, reflects the interests and demands of Israel.

George Bush made a rarely-noticed, when Ariel Sharon was lobbying him to attack other Middle Eastern countries following the Iraq invasion, along the lines of, "Geez, what does the guy want? I invaded Iraq for him, didn't I?"

Well, today, pretty much all of the countries that Sharon thought should be attacked have indeed been attacked by the United States and its associates in one fashion or another – covertly, as in Syria, or overtly, as in Libya. And we are all witnessing the ground being prepared for Iran.

It has been a genuinely terrifying period, the last decade and a half or so. War after war with huge numbers of innocents killed, vast damages inflicted, and armies of unfortunate refugees created. All of it completely unnecessary. All of it devoid of ethics or principles beyond the principle of "might makes right."

It simply cannot be distinguished, except by order of magnitude, from the grisly work of Europe's fascist governments of the 1930s and '40s.

All the discussions we read or see from America about truth in journalism, about truth in government, and about founding principles are pretty much distraction and noise, meaningless noise. The realities of what America is doing in the world make it so.

Sam F , November 15, 2018 at 20:56

Very true.

tpmco , November 16, 2018 at 02:48

Great comment.

john Wilson , November 15, 2018 at 04:47

It seems to me that showing up the blatant lies of the Iraq affair, while laudable, doesn't really get us anywhere. The guilty are never and will never be brought to account for their heinous crimes and some of the past villains are still lying, scheming, and brining about war, terror and horror today.

If the white helmets in Syria, the lies about Libya, the West engineered coupé in The Ukraine, Yemen, etc, aren't all tactics from the same play book used by the criminal cabals of the Iraq time, then we are blind. These days, the liars in the deep state, an expression which encapsulates everything from Intel to think tanks, don't even try to tell plausible lies, they just say anything and MSM cheers them on. Anyone challenging the MSM/government/deep state etc are just ridiculed and called conspiracy theorists, no matter how obvious and ludicrous the lies are.

Sam F , November 15, 2018 at 06:26

In fact "showing up the blatant lies of the Iraq affair" informs others, to whom the MSM can no longer cheer on liars, nor ridicule truth. Truth telling, like contemplation, is essential before the point of action.

Randal , November 15, 2018 at 02:38

I remember a woman reporter saying the reason we invaded Iraq was because Sadam Husien had put a bounty on the Bush family for running him out of qwait. This was a personal revenge to take out Husien before he had a chance at the Bush's. Any way the reporter was silenced very quickly. I personally believe the allegation.

Gary Weglarz , November 15, 2018 at 01:54

You have my complete and total respect Mr. McGovern. That was beautiful! Thank you.

F. G. Sanford , November 15, 2018 at 01:33

"We drew on all of NIMA's skill sets and it was all wrong."

Every time I hear the term, "skill sets", I recall a military colleague who observed, "We say skill sets so we don't have to say morons." They used to say, "The military doesn't pay you to think." Now they say, "We have skill sets." It's a euphemism for robotized automatons who perform specific standardized tasks based on idealized training requirements which evolve from whatever the latest abstract military doctrine happens to be. And, they come up with new ones all the time.

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." This is a phrase Rumsfeld borrowed directly – and I'm not making this up – from the UFO community. It was apparently first uttered by Carl Sagan, and then co-opted by people like Stanton Friedman. He's the guy who claims we recovered alien bodies from flying saucers at Roswell, New Mexico. The scientific antidote to the "absence of evidence" argument is, of course, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." Simply put, absence of evidence really just means "no evidence". A hypothesis based on "no evidence" constitutes magical thinking.

It's probably worth going to Youtube and looking up a clip called "Stephen Gets a Straight Answer Out of Donald Rumsfeld". He admits to Colbert that, "If it was true, we wouldn't call it intelligence." Frankly, Clapper's gravest sin is heading up a science-based agency like NIMA, but failing to come to the same conclusion as General Albert Stubblebine. People who analyze reconnaissance imagery are supposed to be able to distinguish explosive ordnance damage from other factors. But, I guess Newtonian Physics is "old school" to this new generation of magical thinkers and avant-garde intelligence analysts.

Sam F , November 16, 2018 at 10:44

Part of the problem of "intelligence" is its reliance upon images that show a lot of detail but without any definite meaning, and upon guesses to keep managers and politicians happy. So "expert assessments" that milk trucks in aerial photos might be WMD labs became agency "confidence" and then politician certainties, never verified.

When suspect evidence was retained by intel agencies, as in the Iraq War II case, traitors like the zionist Wolfowitz simply installed known zionist warmongers Perl, Feith, and Wurmser into "stovepipe" offices at CIA, DIA, NSA to send the non-evidence to Rumsfeld. See Bamford's Pretext For War.

Gen Dau , November 14, 2018 at 22:20

Thank you, Ray, for a very good article that treats Clapper objectively and not as a demi-god, as most of the MSM and the Democratic establishment does. It is totally unacceptable for a government official, current or former, to answer "I don't know." That is the hideout of irresponsible scoundrels. Questioners should be allowed to ask follow-up questions such as, "If you didn't know, did you try to think about why the President's opinion on this very important question was different from yours? Is simply not knowing acceptable for an intel officer, especially one in a leadership position?" I look forward to your further reports and analyses.

Thanks also to the editors for returning at least the main text to a readable font. But why not go whole hog and make reading everything a pleasure again? Putting the headlines in a hard-to-read and distracting font is especially unfortunate, since some casual visitors to Consortium News may be turned off by the headlines and skip reading the very important articles attached to the headlines.

Daniel , November 15, 2018 at 03:13

You are right, my friend.

Mark A Goldman , November 14, 2018 at 22:17

According to my calculations (admittedly simplistic), the world has past the point of peak oil and in aggregate cannot produce enogh oil to meet present and future demand and that may very well be why the US is doing its best to destroy or damage as many economies in the world as it can even if it has to go to war to do it. Once it becomes well established that we are past peak oil no telling what our financial markets will look like. Would appreciate hearing from someone who has more expertise than I have. https://www.gpln.com

anon4d2s , November 14, 2018 at 22:23

Why are you trying to change the subject? Please desist.

Mark A. Goldman , November 15, 2018 at 13:01

I'm offering you the, or a, motive of why the deep state is pursuing the agendas we see unfolding, which is to say, the crimes, the lies, the treason that the likes of Clapper, Bush, Obama, Clinton and others are pursuing to cover up their reaction to their own fears. Of course 9/11, the false flag coup and smoking gun that proves my point is still the big elephant in the room and will eventually bring us down if the truth is never released from its chains.

Mark A. Goldman , November 15, 2018 at 14:43

I didn't change the subject. I'm offering you an answer as to the motive of why so many officials are willing to trash the Constitution in order to accomplish their insane agendas. It's all about money and power and the terrified Deep State fear of facing the blowback from the lies that have been propagated by the government and media regarding just about everything. Here's another place you might want to look in addition to my website: https://youtu.be/CDpE-30ilBY It's not just about oil. But this is where the rubber's going to meet the road. This is about what's going to hit the fan at any moment and in the absence of the Truth, we are all going to face this unprepared. 9/11 is still the smoking gun. It not just a few liars and cheats we're talking about.

Mark A. Goldman , November 15, 2018 at 23:58

I didn't change the subject. The purpose of the search for WMD was to misdirect the public's attention away from the real purpose of the invasion which was to gain control of Iraq's oil reserves primarily. Misdirection is primary skill used by those in power and very effectively.

Mark A Goldman , November 14, 2018 at 23:23

On my website you might want to review what I wrote here: "Why the Economy Can't Recover" https://www.gpln.com/audacityofhope.htm

Skip Edwards , November 14, 2018 at 22:10

Thanks, as always, go out to Ray for his continued bravery in speaking truth to power. I remember years ago when David McMichaels, Ex-CIA, gave a talk at Ft Lewis College in Durango, CO, about Ronnie Reagan's corruption in what the US was doing to the elected government in Nicaragua. Thanks to both of these men for trying to inform us all about the corruption so rampant in our government. This is further proof that Trump is only a small pimple on top of the infectous boil that is our government.

Sam F , November 14, 2018 at 21:52

Hurray for Ray McGovern! A beautiful and superbly-planned confrontation. We are lucky that Clapper admitted these things in his memoir, but we needed you to bring that out in public with full and well-selected information. You are truly a gem, whom I hope someday to meet.

Sam F , November 14, 2018 at 22:19

An astounding revelation of systematic delusion in secret agencies.

But until now my best source on the Iraq fake WMD has been Bamford's Pretext For War, in which he establishes that zionist DefSec Wolfowitz appointed three known zionist operatives Perl, Wurmser, and Feith to "stovepipe" known-bad info to Rumsfeld et al. Does the memoir shed any light there, and does your information agree?

mike k , November 14, 2018 at 19:58

Spies lie constantly, they have no respect for the truth. To trust a spy is a sign of dangerous gullibility. Spies are simply criminals for hire.

Gen Dau , November 14, 2018 at 22:30

Yes, I also hope our replies will be in a more civil and less reader-hostile font. The same font as the article text would be fine.

dfnslblty , November 15, 2018 at 09:59

I would offer that spies do not lie ~ they gather information.
Spy masters do lie ~ they prevaricate to fit the needs of their masters.

Tomonthebeach , November 15, 2018 at 23:48

To paraphrase in a way that emphasizes the deja vu. Trump lies constantly, he has no respect for the truth. To trust Trump is a sign of dangerous gullibility. Trump is simply a crook for hire, and it would seem that Putin writes the checks.

anon4d2s , November 16, 2018 at 10:48

Gosh, you fooled everyone so easily with standard Dem zionist drivel!
Why not admit that every US politician is bought, including Dems?
Don't forget to supply your unique evidence of Russian tampering.

Mild-ly - Facetious , November 18, 2018 at 16:44

"Clapper's Credibility Collapses"

as does Colin Powell's U.N.BULL Spit Yellow Cake propaganda/

all that's required is a Sales Pitch to everyday striving citizens into

how a brutal strain of aristocrat have come to rule america

and how you must delve into the Back-Stories of, for example,

GHW Bush CIA connection and his presents in Dallas, 1963

credibility collapses abound under weight of 'what really happened'

after Chaney convened summit of oil executives just PRIOR to 9/11?

[Jan 04, 2020] The Three Main Reasons Trump Can't Lose 2020 Dispelling Nonsense Polls and Wishful Thinking

Jan 04, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

Looking at Pelosi's statements and methods, it would appear that the process left Democrats looking extremely partisan to the detriment of getting the business of the country done. That business included the USMCA, the Mexico-Canada Agreement that redefines a host of matters previously mishandled by Bill Clinton's tremendously unpopular NAFTA. Why this seems to be the case – Trump was in the process of getting his USMCA through congress, and with high support from organized labor. As we consistently explain, Democrats rely on organized labor not only for votes, but more critically for their entire ground campaigns, especially making phone calls to other voters, and precinct walking during the campaign and on Election Day. That labor always opposed NAFTA and generally supports the USMCA is critical. The key line in Pelosi's post impeachment charade statement, regarding why they were not actually going to send the articles to the Senate and therefore complete the process of impeaching the president, was that she said specifically that they needed instead to prioritize passing the USMCA.

Imagine that for a moment. Because of the relationship between labor and the Democrat Party, it was necessary for Democrats to appear as its champion, even that it was their idea in the first place. This means that Democrats had the practical wisdom to understand that their impeachment charade did not appeal to blue collar Democrat voters, but in fact would work against them. What they needed in part in the impeachment, apart from implementing their strategy of a thousand cuts, was to energize college educated upper middle-class boomers, which form the bulk of the Rachel Maddow, and Democrat leaning mainstream media consumer demographic. While these people control work-place politics and effectively police water-cooler talk, this back-fires. Voting in the US is secret ballot – and so with this class in control of people's ability to remain employed, unenthusiastic, rehearsed, regurgitated, manufactured 'orange man bad' utterances are more commonly heard than they are truly believed. People say one thing at work to keep their job, and then vote another way on Election Day.

But the USMCA fiasco surrounding the impeachment tells us a lot. Eight years of Bill Clinton and decades of his NAFTA has been symptomatic of the Democrat's anti-labor politics. Democrats from that time onward invested their political capital into developing socialism. However, they didn't develop this in the US, but in China – while in the US a crony class grew up and lined their own pockets from it all. This is something which is perhaps, in a strange turn of events, quite good for China and many other developing parts of the world including Africa. But that has come at the expense not of America's wealthy 'bourgeoisie', but rather its own 'working class'. Bill Clinton was supposed to work to reverse 12 years of Reagan-Bush, whose anti-labor policies amounted to one of the single greatest austerity campaigns in US history. And yet this was only to be outdone by Clinton's outsourcing and off-shoring of jobs, and deregulation of the financial sector.

What has shown to matter least of all, and especially where Trump is concerned, are polls. And even here too, polls – when read correctly – point to a Trump victory.

There are also reasons why left-wing Democrats like documentary film maker Michael Moore also understand that Trump is likely to win. Needless to say, his fixation therefore on an impeachment succeeding, and his blanket support for Nancy Pelosi's absurd and failing strategy, is also why even progressive Democrats like Sanders fail to understand why Trump is unbeatable. Their placing hopes in impeachment isn't so much that impeachment is viable or likely, but from a sober and scientific approach, it's only more likely than an electoral defeat of Trump at the polls given that the party stubbornly insists on promoting Biden and Buttigieg.

"It's the economy, stupid"

Sure, it will always be argued that the improved economy under Trump was in fact either related to impersonal forces of the global economy unrelated to Trump; sun spots, the invisible hand, or Obama policies whose fruits we are now only reaping. But voters never go for this reasoning. Partisans do, but voters don't.

Democrats at best are going to point out that while employment numbers have improved, 'never before have so many earned so little'. And while that's true, we are dealing with a badly bruised and insecure American working class. Things right now appear to be going in the right direction, and so being able to find work even if it's a lower salary than they had before their several-year unemployed stint, they are literally thanking the heavens, the stars, and even Trump, that today they have any job at all. And even here, Trump's tax cuts put a few thousand dollars back in the pockets of households where the average combined income is about $70k. His even larger, but targeted, tax cuts for the rich in certain areas, due to the economic growth these cuts in part inspired, resulted in more tax revenues overall.

And yes, we get it – old black people like Biden . At least mainstream media reports on certain polls, whose methodologies we can't see, report as much. What did that question actually look like? We think the push-poll went something like: "In the coming election, would you support Obama's good friend and Vice President , a gay mayor, a neurotic Jew, a Hindu veteran who may have PTSD, Pocahontas, or a Chinaman good at math? Obama's VP was Biden. Will you vote for Biden? Y/N".

But still this figure is misleading, and doesn't relate to Biden's electability, but is supposed to get past this trope that he's a racist – a meme trending surrounding the first few debates. Older black voters won't turn swing-states, and older black voters aren't part of an energized or energizing electorate for new voters. This means that the media's reportage cycle on this 'factoid' is about virtue signaling to the above mentioned Rachel Maddow demographic that Biden is ' progressive since black people like him '. Oh, you don't like Biden? Well black people like Biden. Don't you like black people?

And our jokingly hypothetical poll question aside, the reality isn't far off. This targeted poll of black voters relates almost entirely back to labor union activism. The DNC controls organized labor, and Biden is the DNC's choice. Black workers are extraordinarily over-represented in the public sector, and the public sector is extraordinarily over-represented in union membership. Older people are more likely to be involved in activism in their labor union, and as a consequence, older black people trend towards Biden more than other candidates. This factoid may trend well right now in media, but will have nothing to do with the outcome of the election except that it will guarantee Trump's victory if Biden is the Democrat nominee.

And so we have it, our three primary reasons Trump will win: the lack of enthusiasm for the DNC's picks, the increasing enthusiasm among Trump supporters which will be contagious (again), and the economic growth which, while favoring the rich, in fact did in this case 'trickle down'.

[Jan 03, 2020] Skripals false flag along with Douma false flag and OPCW role in it, as well as DNC hack and Gussifer 2.0 false flags might be a watershed events in terms of the ability of the neoliberal MSM to control public opinion.

Notable quotes:
"... That is if the MSM get their way! Maybe I am being overoptimistic, but Russia - as a permanent member of the UNSC and a member of the OPCW - will do everything in it's powers to pursue this matter, and it seems quite possible they will be able to force it onto the main agenda within 2020. If that happens it will be impossible for the MSM to push it under the rug. ..."
"... The other aspect it is that the MSM ability to suppress this news is dependent on behaviour of the MSM community in its totality, and the relationship to reader plausibility ..."
"... What determines whether one MSM decides to break the pack and publish news on OPCW? Well, for one thing, MoA articles can influence individual journalists and individual editors! ..."
Jan 01, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

BM , Dec 31 2019 17:18 utc | 15

B, under the "major stories covered" title you should include Skripal, about which you wrote many important articles; I believe ultimately - like OPCW and Russiagate - it will prove to be history-making event in terms of impact on public perceptions of media and the ability of the media to control public opinion. Probably eventually whistleblowers will come forward like the OPCW, and only thin will it have it's maximum impact.

(Well, the original event was 2018 not 2019, but some of the reports were in 2019 anyway)

BM , Dec 31 2019 17:36 utc | 20

My predictions on these issue for next year are:
...
Mainstream media have suppressed all news about the OPCW scandal. This will only change if major new evidence comes to light.

That is if the MSM get their way! Maybe I am being overoptimistic, but Russia - as a permanent member of the UNSC and a member of the OPCW - will do everything in it's powers to pursue this matter, and it seems quite possible they will be able to force it onto the main agenda within 2020. If that happens it will be impossible for the MSM to push it under the rug.

The other aspect it is that the MSM ability to suppress this news is dependent on behaviour of the MSM community in its totality, and the relationship to reader plausibility. There are a few factors that could influence this independently of major new evidence, such as the behaviour of a few outlier MSM's that decide to release information (and whether or not that information then takes off in the public consciousness); pressure that could build up in social media calling for the MSM to respond and attacking MSM credibility; or other forms of pressure from the public calling on the MSM to respond. It is therefore a dynamic that is not entirely predictable.

Both of the above are distinct from the emergence of new major evidence, although both cases would seem likely to provoke new revelations in turn.

What determines whether one MSM decides to break the pack and publish news on OPCW? Well, for one thing, MoA articles can influence individual journalists and individual editors!

[Jan 03, 2020] Intelligence agencies recruit pornographers to lead their disinformation operations, apparently because porn purveyors are so lacking in ethics they will tell public lies about anything

Jan 03, 2020 | www.unz.com

Brabantian , says: Show Comment January 2, 2020 at 6:56 am GMT

Intelligence agencies recruit pornographers to lead their disinformation operations, apparently because porn purveyors are so lacking in ethics they will tell public lies about anything

The alleged 'founder' of Wikipedia ... Wales was 'selected' for this role after being in the pornography-selling business

EU police agencies and the European Commission, have a detailed report on how Wikipedia is a criminally-involved tool for intelligence agencies, using 'Twenty major techniques of CIA – Wikipedia deception'

EU Police Agency and Prosecutor Report on Wikipedia, an Intel Agency Fraud
http://pastebin.com/BeppgiMJ

Another famous ex-pornographer recruited as a CIA propagandist is Glenn Greenwald. When the intel agencies began running the hoax of 'Edward Snowden', he first 'leaked' to the biographer of Bush Vice President Dick Cheney at the CIA's Washington Post

After realising this was too stupid to hold up, the intel agencies switched the front-man role to Rothschild employee & gay ex-pornography-seller Glenn Greenwald of 'hairystuds', Greenwald now funded by CIA billionaire Pierre Omidyar

For those who don't know, even Putin in Russia has hinted out loud he knows Snowden is fake, Putin just playing along in the long string of mutual Russia-USA back-door favours to each other

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/09/21/russia-govt-report-snowden-greenwald-are-cia-frauds/ https://www.henrymakow.com/2018/11/assange-snowden-rat-traps.html

[Jan 03, 2020] If a conflict between USA led NATO and Russia goes thermonuclear,we can all kiss our asses goodbye. Two maybe three hundred million dead outright within an hour or so. What then?? Who the fuck knows.

Jan 03, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

Northern Star

January 2, 2020 at 5:30 pm
"With each passing day of the impeachment crisis, the distance between the official reasons for the conflict in Washington and the real reasons grows wider.

It has become increasingly clear that the central issue is not Trump's attempt to "solicit interference from a foreign country" by "pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the president's main domestic political rivals," as alleged in the whistleblower complaint that triggered the impeachment inquiry.
Rather, the conflict raging within the state centers on Trump's decision to temporarily delay a massive weapons shipment to Ukraine.

The ferocity with which the entire US national security apparatus responded to the delay raises the question: Is there a timetable for using these weapons in combat to fight a war against Russia?

A New York Times front-page exposé published Monday, coming in at 5,000 words and bearing six bylines, makes it clear that Trump's decision to withhold military aid -- over a month before his phone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky -- triggered the conflict that led to the president's impeachment.

As the Times reports, "Mr. Trump's order to hold $391 million worth of sniper rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, night vision goggles, medical aid and other equipment the Ukrainian military needed to fight a grinding war against Russian-backed separatists would help pave a path to the president's impeachment."

"Despite the unforeseen and disastrous consequences of the CIA-backed coup in Ukraine, the United States is determined to continue its efforts to militarily encircle Russia, which it sees as a major obstacle to its central geopolitical aim -- control of the Eurasian landmass, which would give it a staging ground for a conflict with China."

If a conflict between USA led NATO and Russia goes thermonuclear, we can all kiss our asses goodbye. Two maybe three hundred million dead outright within an hour or so. What then?? Who the fuck knows.

However if the conflict remains non thermonuclear -but possibly involving tac nukes -- I can conceive of no scenario in which Russia does not stomp the living shit out of a USA/NATO aggressor. Russia and China allied and working together? Capitulation of the USA/NATO forces within a month tops.

The problem is that we have psychopaths in D.C. and Brussels who actually believe that the peoples of the Eurasian land mass can be subjugated. As long as their insanity is tolerated ,we are all living on borrowed time.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/31/pers-d31.html

Northern Star January 2, 2020 at 5:34 pm
Yup!!!
Like I was saying:

https://www.checkpointasia.net/with-the-demented-advice-biden-is-getting-on-russia-better-buckle-your-seatbelts-if-he-wins-2020/

[Jan 02, 2020] The Art of Doublespeak Bellingcat and Mind Control by Edward Curtin

Notable quotes:
"... Bellingcat is an alleged group of amateur on-line researchers who have spent years shilling for the U.S. instigated war against the Syrian government, blaming the Douma chemical attack and others on the Assad government, and for the anti-Russian propaganda connected to, among other things, the Skripal poisoning case in England, and the downing of flight MH17 plane in Ukraine. ..."
"... The Intercept , along with its parent company First Look Media, recently hosted a workshop for pro-war, Google-funded organization Bellingcat in New York. The workshop, which cost $2,500 per person to attend and lasted five days, aimed to instruct participants in how to perform investigations using "open source" tools -- with Bellingcat's past, controversial investigations for use as case studies Thus, while The Intercept has long publicly promoted itself as an anti-interventionist and progressive media outlet, it is becoming clearer that – largely thanks to its ties to Omidyar – it is increasingly an organization that has more in common with Bellingcat, a group that launders NATO and U.S. propaganda and disguises it as "independent" and "investigative journalism." ..."
Dec 17, 2019 | countercurrents.org

In the 1920s, the influential American intellectual Walter Lippman argued that the average person was incapable of seeing or understanding the world clearly and needed to be guided by experts behind the social curtain. In a number of books he laid out the theoretical foundations for the practical work of Edward Bernays , who developed "public relations" (aka propaganda) to carry out this task for the ruling elites. Bernays had honed his skills while working as a propagandist for the United States during World War I, and after the war he set himself up as a public relations counselor in New York City.

There is a fascinating exchange at the beginning of Adam Curtis's documentary, The Century of Self , where Bernays, then nearly 100 years old but still very sharp, reveals his manipulative mindset and that of so many of those who have followed in his wake. He says the reason he couldn't call his new business "propaganda" was because the Germans had given propaganda a "bad name," and so he came up with the euphemism "public relations." He then adds that "if you could use it [i.e. propaganda] for war, you certainly could use it for peace." Of course, he never used PR for peace but just to manipulate public opinion (he helped engineer the CIA coup against the democratically elected Arbenz government in Guatemala in 1954 with fake news broadcasts). He says "the Germans gave propaganda a bad name," not Bernays and the United States with their vast campaign of lies, mainly aimed at the American people to get their support for going to a war they opposed (think weapons of mass destruction). He sounds proud of his war propaganda work that resounded to his credit since it led to support for the "war to end all wars" and subsequently to a hit movie about WWI , Yankee Doodle Dandy , made in 1942 to promote another war, since the first one somehow didn't achieve its lofty goal.

As Bernays has said in his book Propaganda ,

The American motion picture is the greatest unconscious carrier of propaganda in the world today.

He was a propagandist to the end. I suspect most viewers of the film are taken in by these softly spoken words of an old man sipping a glass of wine at a dinner table with a woman who is asking him questions. I have shown this film to hundreds of students and none has noticed his legerdemain. It is an example of the sort of hocus-pocus I will be getting to shortly, the sly insertion into seemingly liberal or matter-of-fact commentary of statements that imply a different story. The placement of convincing or confusing disingenuous ingredients into a truth sandwich – for Bernays knew that the bread of truth is essential to conceal untruth.

In the following years, Bernays, Lippman, and their ilk were joined by social "scientists," psychologists, and sundry others intent on making a sham out of the idea of democracy by developing strategies and techniques for the engineering of social consensus consonant with the wishes of the ruling classes. Their techniques of propaganda developed exponentially with the development of technology, the creation of the CIA, its infiltration of all the major media, and that agency's courting of what the CIA official Cord Meyer called in the 1950s "the compatible left," having already had the right in its pocket. Today most people are, as is said, "wired," and they get their information from the electronic media that is mostly controlled by giant corporations in cahoots with government propagandists. Ask yourself: Has the power of the oligarchic, permanent warfare state with its propaganda and spy networks increased or decreased over your lifetime. The answer is obvious: the average people that Lippman and Bernays trashed are losing and the ruling elites are winning.

This is not just because powerful propagandists are good at controlling so-called "average" people's thinking, but, perhaps more importantly, because they are also adept – probably more so – at confusing or directing the thinking of those who consider themselves above average, those who still might read a book or two or have the concentration to read multiple articles that offer different perspectives on a topic. This is what some call the professional and intellectual classes, perhaps 15-20 % of the population, most of whom are not the ruling elites but their employees and sometimes their mouthpieces. It is this segment of the population that considers itself "informed," but the information they imbibe is often sprinkled with bits of misdirection, both intentional and not, that beclouds their understanding of important public matters but leaves them with the false impression that they are in the know.

Recently I have noticed a group of interconnected examples of how this group of the population that exerts influence incommensurate with their numbers has contributed to the blurring of lines between fact and fiction. Within this group there are opinion makers who are often journalists, writers, and cultural producers of some sort or other, and then the larger number of the intellectual or schooled class who follow their opinions. This second group then passes on their received opinions to those who look up to them.

There is a notorious propaganda outfit called Bellingcat , started by an unemployed Englishman named Eliot Higgins, that has been funded by The Atlantic Council, a think-tank with deep ties to the U.S. government, NATO, war manufacturers, and their allies, and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), another infamous U.S. front organization heavily involved in so-called color revolution regime change operations all around the world, that has just won the International Emmy Award for best documentary. The film with the Orwellian title, Bellingcat: Truth in a Post-Truth World, received its Emmy at a recent ceremony in New York City.

Bellingcat is an alleged group of amateur on-line researchers who have spent years shilling for the U.S. instigated war against the Syrian government, blaming the Douma chemical attack and others on the Assad government, and for the anti-Russian propaganda connected to, among other things, the Skripal poisoning case in England, and the downing of flight MH17 plane in Ukraine.

It has been lauded by the corporate mainstream media in the west. Its support for the equally fraudulent White Helmets (also funded by the US and the UK) in Syria has also been praised by the western corporate media while being dissected as propaganda by many excellent independent journalists such as Eva Bartlett, Vanessa Beeley, Catte Black, among others. It's had its work skewered by the likes of Seymour Hersh and MIT professor Theodore Postol, and its US government connections pointed out by many others, including Ben Norton and Max Blumenthal at The Gray Zone. And now we have the mainstream media's wall of silence on the leaks from the Organization for the Prohibition on Chemical Weapons (OPCW) concerning the Douma chemical attack and the doctoring of their report that led to the illegal U.S. bombing of Syria in the spring of 2018. Bellingcat was at the forefront of providing justification for such bombing, and now the journalists Peter Hitchens, Tareq Harrad (who recently resigned from Newsweek after accusing the publication of suppressing his revelations about the OPCW scandal) and others are fighting an uphill battle to get the truth out.

Yet Bellingcat: Truth in a Post-Truth World won the Emmy , fulfilling Bernays' point about films being the greatest unconscious carriers of propaganda in the world today.

Who presented the Emmy Award to the film makers, but none other than the rebel journalist Chris Hedges . Why he did so, I don't know. But that he did so clearly sends a message to those who follow his work and trust him that it's okay to give a major cultural award to a propaganda outfit. But then, perhaps he doesn't consider Bellingcat to be that.

Nor, one presumes, does The Intercept , the billionaire Pierre Omidyar owned publication associated with Glen Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill, and also read by many progressive-minded people. The Intercept that earlier this year disbanded the small team that was tasked with reviewing and releasing more of the massive trove of documents they received from Edward Snowden six years ago, a minute number of which have ever been released or probably ever will be. As Whitney Webb pointed out , last year The Intercept hosted a workshop for Bellingcat. She wrote:

The Intercept , along with its parent company First Look Media, recently hosted a workshop for pro-war, Google-funded organization Bellingcat in New York. The workshop, which cost $2,500 per person to attend and lasted five days, aimed to instruct participants in how to perform investigations using "open source" tools -- with Bellingcat's past, controversial investigations for use as case studies Thus, while The Intercept has long publicly promoted itself as an anti-interventionist and progressive media outlet, it is becoming clearer that – largely thanks to its ties to Omidyar – it is increasingly an organization that has more in common with Bellingcat, a group that launders NATO and U.S. propaganda and disguises it as "independent" and "investigative journalism."

Then we have Jefferson Morley , the editor of The Deep State, former Washington Post journalist, and JFK assassination researcher, who has written a praiseworthy review of the Bellingcat film and who supports Bellingcat. "In my experience, Bellingcat is credible," he writes in an Alternet article, "Bellingcat documentary has the pace and plot of a thriller."

Morley has also just written an article for Counterpunch "Why the Douma Chemical Attack Wasn't a 'Managed Massacre'" – in which he disputes the claim that the April 7, 2018 attack in the Damascus suburb was a false flag operation carried out by Assad's opponents. "I do not see any evidence proving that Douma was a false flag incident," he writes in this article that is written in a style that leaves one guessing as to what exactly he is saying. It sounds convincing unless one concentrates, and then his double messages emerge. Yet it is the kind of article that certain "sophisticated" left-wing readers might read and feel is insightful. But then Morley, who has written considerably about the CIA, edits a website that advertises itself as "the thinking person's portal to the world of secret government," and recently had an exchange with former CIA Director John Brennan where "Brennan put a friendly finger on my chest," said in February 2017, less than a month after Trump was sworn in as president, that:

With a docile Republican majority in Congress and a demoralized Democratic Party in opposition, the leaders of the Deep State are the most -- perhaps the only -- credible check in Washington on what Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) calls Trump's " wrecking ball presidency ."

Is it any wonder that some people might be a bit confused?

"I know what you're thinking about," said Tweedledum; "but it isn't so, nohow."

"Contrariwise," continued Tweedledee, "if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic."

As a final case in point, there is a recent book by Stephen Kinzer , Poisoner in Chief: Sidney Gottlieb And The CIA Search For Mind Control, t he story of the chemist known as Dr. Death who ran the CIA's MK-ULTRA mind control project, using LSD, torture, electric shock therapy, hypnosis, etc.; developed sadistic methods of torture still used in black sites around the world; and invented various ingenious techniques for assassination, many of which were aimed at Fidel Castro. Gottlieb was responsible for brutal prison and hospital experiments and untold death and suffering inflicted on all sorts of innocent people. His work was depraved in the deepest sense; he worked with Nazis who experimented on Jews despite being Jewish himself.

Kinzer writes in depth about this man who considered himself a patriot and a spiritual person – a humane torturer and killer. It is an eye-opening book for anyone who does not know about Gottlieb, who gave the CIA the essential tools they use in their "organized crime" activities around the world – in the words of Douglass Valentine, the author of The CIA as Organized Crime and The Phoenix Program . Kinzer's book is good history on Gottlieb; however, he doesn't venture into the present activities of the CIA and Gottlieb's patriotic followers, who no doubt exist and go about their business in secret.

After recounting in detail the sordid history of Gottlieb's secret work that is nauseating to read about, Kinzer leaves the reader with these strange words:

Gottlieb was not a sadist, but he might well have been . Above all he was an instrument of history. Understanding him is a deeply disturbing way of understanding ourselves.

What possibly could this mean? Not a sadist? An instrument of history? Understanding ourselves? These few sentences, dropped out of nowhere, pull the rug out from under what is generally an illuminating history and what seems like a moral indictment. This language is pure mystification.

Kinzer also concludes that because Gottlieb said so, the CIA failed in their efforts to develop methods of mind control and ended MK-ULTRA's experiments long ago. Why would he believe the word of a man who personified the agency he worked for: a secret liar? He writes,

When Sydney Gottlieb brough MK-ULTRA to its end in the early 1960s, he told his CIA superiors that he had found no reliable way to wipe away memory, make people abandon their consciences, or commit crimes and then forget them.

As for those who might think otherwise, Kinzer suggests they have vivid imaginations and are caught up in conspiracy thinking: "This [convincing others that the CIA had developed methods of mind control when they hadn't] is Sydney Gottlieb's most unexpected legacy," he asserts. He says this although Richard Helms, the CIA Director, destroyed all MK-Ultra records. He says that Allen Dulles, Gottlieb, and Helms themselves were caught up in a complete fantasy about mind control because they had seen too many movies and read too many books; mind control was impossible, a failure, a myth, he maintains. It is the stuff of popular culture, entertainment. In an interview with Chris Hedges, interestingly posted by Jefferson Morley at his website, The Deep State , Hedges agrees with Kinzer. Gottlieb, Dulles, et al. were all deluded. Mind control was impossible. You couldn't create a Manchurian Candidate; by implication, someone like Sirhan Sirhan could not have been programmed to be a fake Manchurian Candidate and to have no memory of what he did, as he claims. He could not have been mind-controlled by the CIA to perform his part as the seeming assassin of Senator Robert Kennedy while the real killer shot RFK from behind. People who think like this should get real.

Furthermore, as is so common in books such as Kinzer's, he repeats the canard that JFK and RFK knew about and pressured the CIA to assassinate Fidel Castro. This is demonstrably false, as shown by the Church Committee and the Assassinations Record Review Board, among many others. That Kinzer takes the word of notorious liars like Richard Helms and the top-level CIA operative Samuel Halpern is simple incredible, something that is hard to consider a mistake. Slipped into a truth sandwich, it is devoured and passed on. But it is false. Bullshit meant to deceive.

But this is how these games are played. If you look carefully, you will see them widely. Inform, enlighten, while throwing in doubletalk and untruths. The small number of people who read such books and articles will come away knowing some history that has no current relevance and being misinformed on other history that does. They will then be in the know, ready to pass their "wisdom" on to those who care to listen. They will not think they are average.

But they will be mind controlled, and the killer cat will roam freely without a bell, ready to devour the unsuspecting mice.

Edward Curtin is a writer whose work has appeared widely. He teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts. His website is http://edwardcurtin.com/

[Jan 02, 2020] Joe Rogan Experience #1368 - Edward Snowden

A very disappointing interview. I person that has no doubts about 9/11 doers not reserve our respect. He also might be a fake defector much like Oswald was. As simple as that. Snowden version of history is deeply wrong. He actually talk as a second rate journalist, not as a security specialist. If he thinks that bashing Russia and Putin will save him from being framed as a Russian agent, he is an idiot. It he things that 9/11 official story holds and can't be questioned he is iether a naive idiot or a Deep State stooge.
And repeating banalities about security risks in modern society do not bring you too far iether. That a very short summary of this two and a half hour narcissistic monolog, which for some reason is called interview.
In his interview Snowden mainly repeat things that became banalities and that you can learn for any other book on total surveillance.
What if this was yet another false flag operation? It looks like he was just certified Microsoft engineer, he was not Unix guy.
He views 9/11 disqualify his from providing the explanation of how the USA was converted into national security state.
His view of Putin are probably result of indoctrination in CIA and NSA, but that also means that he is not a deep thinker. Also it is strange after spending in the country several years and did not lean more about Russia and did not even try to learn the language.
BTW while his escape from the USA and attempt to provide materials did managed to focus attention of the public on total severance regime, almost nothing of Snowden materials were published. Almost everything died in the hand of selected journalists... Guardian published small fragments of one PRISM document. That's it. He is no Manning.
Snowden puts too much efforts in trying to justify his actions and at the end that became annoying and suspicious in its own right.
Notable quotes:
"... "patriotism isn't about the loyalty to government. Patriotism isn't a loyalty to anything. Patriotism is constant effort to do good for the people of your country" ..."
"... "I'd be working on umm economic takeover of Guatemala for example" Lol CIA's bread and butter ..."
"... While I'm not saying Snowden is wrong, it's important to realize that this is "his side of the story." ..."
"... Honestly don't know how so many can be shocked by these claims. Did you really think that your government sweetheart is trying to protect you? They collectively have an agenda to keep people asleep. ..."
"... Snowden is a D.S. Cutout. Period. Disinfo Personified. He didn't get out of Hong Kong W/O HELP ..."
"... Is anybody else kinda thrown off by how condescending and patronizing Snowden is towards Joe? ..."
"... I can't believe NSA and CIA hired someone that talks that much... ..."
"... So every politician I disagree with is a dictator or fascist. Seems someone hasn't learned much ..."
"... It was the Russian government that took him in, the alternative would be rotting in a dark off shore CIA prison. I would not bite the hand that saved me. Snowden is a good guy but i think he needs to learn gratitude. ..."
"... If this video is trending, this mean Snowden is a puppet to the NWO. NO WAY THEY WILL ALLOW A VIDEO LIKE THIS TO EVER TREND IN YOUTUBE OR ANY WHERE. ..."
"... there were numerous people warned not to fly/go to wtc on 911. Willie Brown, Salmon Rushdie, Israeli citizens, apparently the French knew as well... But Snowden says they didn't know ..."
"... With all do respect to snowden , 9 11 was an inside job The whole event was controlled. Controlled demolition , controlled airlines to launch them in to the towers. All orchestrated by elements of the CIA , FBI , and NSA ..."
Oct 25, 2019 | www.youtube.com

PDX LockPicker , 2 hours ago

"patriotism isn't about the loyalty to government. Patriotism isn't a loyalty to anything. Patriotism is constant effort to do good for the people of your country"

Forrest LeMay , 2 hours ago (edited)

"People talk about the deep state like it's a conspiracy theory of lizard people, it's not, its something much simpler, the deep state is the career government." - Edward Snowden

Free Ryder , 3 hours ago

"I'd be working on umm economic takeover of Guatemala for example" Lol CIA's bread and butter

Fuzzy Gaming , 2 hours ago

1:57:00 Snowden talks about how the Intelligence agencies can stonewall you and sabotage your presidency... Exactly what President Trump has been saying for years.

Khonh lo , 2 hours ago div class=

What I really got out of this episode is realization that companies and the government can now track where I have been on a particular date at a particular time forever. Its crazy what a time we live in.

Imagine kids born in 2006 or so until they expire. They government or companies can pull up data of their entire life timeline at any point in their lives. Example where were they on 2/15/2010 at 2:15 PM.

Someone born in 1965 can only recall memories of their pass experiences that only they know or the people around can remember whereas now days and beyond, they can pull that information out depending on how specific the query you want to obtain. This is not including all the other data such as relationship they have had, where they had lived, where they had eaten, what they had buy, etc...

postedhere9 , 1 hour ago

Pelosi's involvement in the impeachment sounds oddly familiar to her involvement in this scandal... hmm

Rasikh Ali , 3 hours ago

Mainstream media is only focusing on the alien comment. Scum of the earth.. smh 🤦🏽‍♂️

Mar Z , 1 hour ago

38:00 . CIA and FBI competing for clout . I'm sorry I know this is serious but just imagined them as annoying social media acc trying to get the most likes. But seriously, thanks Joe, you let your guest talk and it was so incredibly insightful!!

Christopher Mulvey , 1 hour ago

When this Edward Snowden thing first happened, the first thing I thought was wow this is a very very smart man but not smart enough to realize how stupid people are and how powerful mainstream media is when it comes to the general public's perception.

The general public doesn't realize that the mainstream news has nowhere near 5million views in 3 days but if it's not talked about on main stream news for a week or if the president does not acknowledge something then it does not exist. That's the truth.

M Somogyi , 2 hours ago

Snowden tries to advertise his book the whole time Rogan asks him a simple question.. Okay, I get it you go into details in the book... Just answer the question. "Oh yeah, let me give you a fast version....". 1 hr later - He still hasn't answered.

Joe Rogan is one patient ass man. Thanks for having such interesting and awesome content on your podcast! :)

Flash Harry , 4 hours ago

"> My obsevation is that if I was in charge of keeping our "They Live" clandestine alien government's secret, then I wouldn't allow that information wrote down on paper in a room with a computer even in it , let alone have it in a computer document.

Not many people should even be aware of the information and When they are they stick to analogue pens and paper other than when they are reverse engineering anything, When specialist use hardware/software it is in TOTAL contained environment .

And that dudes is how ya keeps a secret . Oh and the moon he is wrong with that and you can use the same reasoning, what did they do for example with all of the film tape recordings of all the footage of Apollo landing. Yes they taped over it, all of it. If you have ever seen moon landing footage it's a recording of a recording to hide multitudes of oversights. x

Wowbagger , 3 hours ago (edited)

09:45 Sounds more like escalating the surveillance of the general population was the main goal from the start. A slow subversion made palatable by a perceived threat.

JC Stuart , 1 day ago

"when we become fearful we become vulnerable, to anyone who promises to make things better, even if they will actively make things worse."

Tim Leniston , 2 hours ago

We need to stand up to this somehow. Just think of the chilling effect on anyone who might want to do a public service but fears exposure of some detail in their private life or their explorations or communications which could be used to silence or embarrass them. Bastards!

HyperActive7 , 3 hours ago

I can barely keep my eyes open with Snowden. You'd think to yourself, how come such a sleepy personality individual be so dangerous to the government elite?

Well, the proof is in what he's saying and it is the truth that 9/11 was a mass conspiracy aimed to change America and ruin The Will of The American people. I was his age when all this crap went down and I believed all of it like he and many of my generation did because we didn't have the Alex Jones of the world waking us up to this sick reality which is our government is treasonous against its own people.

Stacy Starnes , 3 hours ago

I guess that what Schumer meant when he said that the intelligence community has a million and one ways to get you. "Drain the swamp".

Benjamin Wright , 1 day ago

"The FBI has joined the chat"

GoogleSearch TheEsseneGospelOfPeace.#JesusGang , 1 day ago

Joe: Google searching "free proxy servers" before this interview

Reegan O'Hara , 4 hours ago

He was given the same speech training as Obama. Same cadence, same pauses, same use of "uhh", "right" and "Look...". The repeating of certain words quickly before finishing the main point is particularly noticeable, i.e. "th- the.." "th- that", "whe- when..."

Destinyxos , 4 hours ago

I feel like lack of communication is so the reason for a lot occupational struggles as well as in the government structures. It makes me sad to see that sharing and informing is just so hard for some people. And that negative energy rubs of on everyone else and I feel like it's a huge spiraling butterfly affect.

But I'm glad to see someone talking about the issues with our society so intensely and so carefully and so factually and I honestly love it. I feel included because of this video and for that, I am great full!

m1force , 1 hour ago

While I'm not saying Snowden is wrong, it's important to realize that this is "his side of the story." This is why fair trials are important.. He complains about the D.C. circuit and perhaps for good reason; I say fine, bring him to the 8th circuit and let's put all the cards on the table.

chilakil , 1 hour ago

I completely believe after following Rogan for a couple of Months that joe is complete controlled opposition

FatalFinality , 1 day ago

Well, this is definitely one of those mornings when being unemployed is convenient.

Tom Hol , 2 hours ago

Honestly don't know how so many can be shocked by these claims. Did you really think that your government sweetheart is trying to protect you? They collectively have an agenda to keep people asleep.

To keep them in their routines so that they don't ask questions. Also throw them a bone every now and then so that they feel as if they are getting rewarded while we extort them, spy on them and use them and then throw them away.

Raul Montes , 4 hours ago

This was longest plug for a book ever...

ck black , 33 minutes ago

Snowden is a D.S. Cutout. Period. Disinfo Personified. He didn't get out of Hong Kong W/O HELP This is pure Agregis B.S.

Mar Z , 35 minutes ago

"The public is not partnered with government. The public does not hold the leash to government. We are subject to them. Subordinate to government" " National security does not equal to public safety. National security is the safety of the state"

Guillermo Baltazar , 3 hours ago

44:20 he kinda dis Obama

Nicco Sanchez , 1 hour ago

Is anybody else kinda thrown off by how condescending and patronizing Snowden is towards Joe? He seems to be throwing low key shade/jabs about his preconceived notions about Joe based off his avatar.

I mean he could have spoken on his initial impression as a little anecdotal segway into how this interview came to fruition, but he seems arrogant to me. Like he feels the average layman is beneath him or of lessor intellectualism. Great interview nonetheless, but I just think Snowden comes off a little uppity (for lack of a better term)😒

Erma4ella Eu , 5 minutes ago

It wasn't Joe Rogan's podcast. It was a Snowden's podcast

Jakob , 1 day ago

Snowden made a "FBI has joined the chat" meme hahahaah

Carlo Anardu , 1 day ago

I can't believe NSA and CIA hired someone that talks that much...

Scott what , 2 hours ago

So every politician I disagree with is a dictator or fascist. Seems someone hasn't learned much

John B , 4 hours ago

It was the Russian government that took him in, the alternative would be rotting in a dark off shore CIA prison. I would not bite the hand that saved me. Snowden is a good guy but i think he needs to learn gratitude.

Scarack Truther , 4 hours ago

If this video is trending, this mean Snowden is a puppet to the NWO. NO WAY THEY WILL ALLOW A VIDEO LIKE THIS TO EVER TREND IN YOUTUBE OR ANY WHERE.

Szimba Zsununnu , 5 hours ago

Ed, you made one mistake: Americans are not "afraid"! US citizens did NOT vote for DT out of fear. They voted out of CONCERN. The average American? Goes to McD's once a month (they're lovin' it), buys their daughter an ice cream at Dairy Queen (or equivalent ice cream place in town), anticipates when is the most convenient day to schedule an oil change, etc. "Fear", "scared", "fearmonger"?

These are nonsensical words the other side likes to spew. Americans are c-o-n-c-e-r-n-e-d about their country. The British (and I speak on behalf of all Americans, British, and so forth - thank you, thank you) opted out of the EU because of CONCERN for their future. Not fear. You're a smart guy Ed, and this interview is very telling, (and we the people think you're gonna get your ass assassinated for speaking so freely like this), and although I only had the patience to sit through the first hour, this is a good video, and a memorable interview.

But just understand -- aside from North Koreans and maybe a Syrian here and there, citizens are not afraid. We are instead courageous. We CARE about the now. We care about the future. We support those that care as well. We're concerned, kiddo. Not fearful. Boris, Donald, Orban, that green-faced Putin opponent Alexei Navalny guy, Nigel, Milo, Geert, PJW, Brigitte Bardot, August Sabbe, Romas Kalanta, Joan of Arc (and countless others) - at risk of their safety / public standing / status quo / whatever - CARE.

Those are the leaders (ASS KICKERS) that we support and vote for. We are members of the human race. We are not afraid.

Grasshopper , 4 hours ago

#1 if people didn't realize this was going on before 2013, then I don't know where your brain was. #2 this guy may correct, but he's an opportunist.

He's spent a lot of time putting this story together. How can he say there are no bodies laying around when Obama was sending up drones that fired missles at cell phones? I worked in the telecom industry starting in the 90s... I was tracking calls on 9/11. I knew who was calling who, and the FBI didn't ask permission to see where the calls were going or coming from.

Z.A.C. , 1 day ago (edited)

He's had John McAfee, Rhonda Patrick, Mike Tyson, Graham Hancock, Neil Degrasse Tyson, Lance Armstrong, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Jay Leno, Anthony Bourdain, David Goggins, Ron White, Jordan Peterson, Everlast, Immortal Technique, Bernie Sanders, Ben Shapiro, George St.Pierre, Elon Musk, Alex Jones, and now Edward Snowden. Just to name a few.

Reuben Handel , 4 hours ago (edited)

But there were numerous people warned not to fly/go to wtc on 911. Willie Brown, Salmon Rushdie, Israeli citizens, apparently the French knew as well... But Snowden says they didn't know

Trey Wilson , 1 minute ago div cl

"Give me one good reason the government would have committed 9/11." - steel beams don't melt jet fuel, also watch this podcast and you'll wish you still lived in the matrix

Invincible Osprey , 4 hours ago

Ed Snowden is creepily still playing his role for the same people behind 9/11 and other False Flags...

J. Copache , 34 minutes ago (edited)

Right now, Chile, my home country, is going through a very difficult and delicate process of civil unrest that has been met with relentless repression at the hands of a government that works in favor of private interests and has been confirmed to commit several and systematic human rights violations, including torture, murder, rape, state terrorism, and the list goes on. Listening to this podcast right now really puts in perspective the extent to wich a State can manipulate, hide and forge information in order to limit civil rights with the excuse of protecting the people.

We NEED guys like Snowden to come forth and show governments around the world that any measures taken to protect order and national interests should always be second to the well-being, civil and human rights of the people that constitute the very foundation of what a country is.

People from the US are lucky to have true patriots like Snowden, willing to go against the rotten systems so deeply ingrained in their institutional complexes in order to uphold the ideals that gave birth to their country in the first place. We need help, and we need clarity. If y'all can, please get informed and divulge what you learn about our situation right now. Get people talking and get people acting.

No government that - literally- fires against its people should be left unchecked. Information is a tool, the greatest one we've got in this day and age, and we the people are more capable than ever of using it in our advantage.

Alek Kelly , 22 minutes ago

At 14:15 , he says he went to journalists with the information and gave them conditions on how that information could be published. Was this a trust or legal based transaction? If it was trust, would Snowden still be as confident in doing it that way in today's media climate?

Joseph Edward , 5 hours ago (edited)

34:50 . Our founding fathers are turning in their graves.

Brian Houck , 6 hours ago

So James Clapper just straight-up lied to Congress under oath and there were no repercussions, yet they did their best to hunt down Ed Snowden and treat him like a dirty dog? What is wrong with this picture? Besides everything, I mean.

Joseph Edward , 6 hours ago

Around 30:00 Snowden said that the highest members of our government have the lowest loyalty. (The ones at the top are the ones selling us out.)

therealjoelsalazar , 6 hours ago

The scary thing is, is that while Snowden is telling us what happened in the past, the government is actively abusing powers while looking for new ways to violate our rights. We need to really look at ourselves as citizens and make sure the people we vote for are actually serving the public no matter what party or tak they're on.

words wpns , 7 hours ago

With all do respect to snowden , 9 11 was an inside job The whole event was controlled. Controlled demolition , controlled airlines to launch them in to the towers. All orchestrated by elements of the CIA , FBI , and NSA

[Jan 01, 2020] Must-read on George Soros's manipulations in Ukraine.

Jan 01, 2020 | www.unz.com

Skeptikal , says: December 30, 2019 at 1:39 am GMT

An expose by F. William Engdahl constitutes what might be considered evidence of Mr. Joyce's assertion.

Must=read, in any case, on George Soros's manipulations in Ukraine.

"An American Oligarch's Dirty Tale of Corruption"

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/52773.htm

[Jan 01, 2020] DiGenova: Comey And Brennan Were 'Coup Leaders'

Brennan probably will take the bullet for Obama...
Jan 01, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

https://www.dianomi.com/smartads.epl?id=4777 DiGenova: Comey And Brennan Were 'Coup Leaders' by Tyler Durden Wed, 01/01/2020 - 19:30 0 SHARES

Former US Attorney Joe diGenova told OANN 's John Hines that former FBI Director James Comey and former CIA Director John Brennan were "coup leaders" in an attempt to reverse the outcome of the 2016 US election.

DiGenova says the Obama Justice Department was corrupted under Attorneys General Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, "with the authority and knowledge of then-president" Obama, and that a 'stupid and arrogant' Susan Rice was dumb enough to document his knowledge in a January 20th, 2017 email.

"And you'll never forget, I'm sure, that famous Susan Rice email on inauguration day of Donald Trump, where she sends an email to the file memorializing that there had been a meeting on January 5th with the president of the United States, all senior law enforcement and intelligence officials, where they reviewed the status of Crossfire Hurricane and the president announced - President Obama - that he was sure that everything had been done by the book.

I want to thank Susan Rice for being so stupid and so arrogant to write that email on January 20th because that's exhibit A for Barack Obama - who knew all about this from start to finish, and was more than happy to have the civil rights of a massive number of Americans violated so he could get Donald Trump." -Joe diGenova

Moreover, diGenova says that after "all this stuff involving Trump and Page and Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn," anyone who couldn't see that the "corrupt investigative process of the FBI and DOJ was basically being used to conduct a coup d'état" is an idiot.

"This was not hard. If you're a good prosecutor you look at the facts in the Trump case, and the Page case, the Flynn case. There's only one conclusion you can come to; none of this makes any sense. None of these people were evil. None of them. They were framed , and the whole process was playing out, and you knew it on July 5th 2016, when James Comey announced - usurping the functions of the Attorney General, that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case against Hillary Clinton. That was ludicrous! She destroyed 30,000 emails that were under subpoena. If you or I did that, we would be in prison today . She got a break because she was Hillary Clinton, and James Comey was trying to kiss her fanny because he wanted something from her when she became president of the United States.

All of these people who watched that news conference and didn't think that it was a disgrace for the FBI. And then subsequently, watched all this stuff involving Trump and Page and Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn - and couldn't see that the corrupt investigative process of the FBI and the DOJ was basically being used to conduct a coup d'état . I mean you have to be an idiot. Any first year assistant US attorney would look at all these facts and say 'there's a coup underway. There's a conspiracy.'

But for those of us thought that, the Washington Post, the New York Times. We were 'conspiracy theorists.' You know what? Pretty damn good theory, it appears today.

" To what extent is the CIA involved in this? " asked Hines.

" Well there's no doubt that John Brennan was the primogenitor of the entire counterintelligence investigation, " replied diGenova. "It was John Brennan who went to James Comey and basically pummeled him into starting a counterintelligence investigation against Trump. Brennan's at the heart of this. He went around the world. He enlisted the help of foreign intelligence services. He's responsible for Joseph Mifsud and other people."

" People do not have even the beginning of an understanding of the role that John Brennan played in this . He is a monstrously important person, and I underscore monstrously important person. He has done more damage to the Central Intelligence Agency - it's equal to what James Comey has done to the FBI. It's pretty clear that James Comey will go down in history as the single worst FBI director in history, regardless of how Mr. Durham treats him."


gold_silver_as_money , 23 minutes ago link

Brennan was just the puppet. The real question is who the power brokers were behind the scenes pulling strings and giving all the government officials cover. That's probably what Durham is/needs to get to the bottom of. Hillary is untouchable until those guys get the book thrown at them. My guess is the Queen is involved, probably the Vatican and Mossad as well.

Leguran , 24 minutes ago link

Full agreement with Joe DiGenova. In addition, I believe President Obama was an instigator of this coup d'état. It could only happen in the intelligence field with his consent. His whole persona is based on his willingness to calculate political gain and he had no qualms or ethics. He was hailed as the first "black" President. His role in this coup was made possible by all the people who thought black people were inferior and needed an opportunity to get ahead. Depending upon how you look at that, that picture is in tatters. Black folks are incredibly fortunate to have President Trump who will not blame b