Brennan elections machinations

News Russiagate -- a color revolution against Trump by neocons and DemoRats Recommended Links Steele dossier Do the US intelligence agencies  influence the US Presidential elections ? The problem of control of intelligence services in democratic societies Coordinated set of leaks as a color revolution tool DNC and Podesta emails leak and  subsequent false flag operation to  blame Vladimir Putin Wiretaps of Trump and his associates during Presidential elections
Strzokgate American intelligence services putsch against Trump Brennan elections machinations "Seventeen agencies" memo about Russian influence on elections Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit Michael Flynn removal   Clapper role in putsch Rosenstein role
Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak Anti Trump Hysteria 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 Hillary Clinton email scandal Special Prosecutor Mueller and his fishing expedition History of American False Flag Operations
Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few Trump vs. Deep State NeoMcCartyism 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 Corporatist Corruption Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism Bernie Sanders betrayal of his supporters Elite Theory And the Revolt of the Elite
Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war 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

As David Stockman  observed (The RussiaGate Witch-Hunt Stockman Names Names In The Deep State's Insurance Policy )

There was a sinister plot to meddle in the 2016 election, after all. But it was not orchestrated from the Kremlin; it was an entirely homegrown affair conducted from the inner sanctums---the White House, DOJ, the Hoover Building and Langley----of the Imperial City.

Likewise, the perpetrators didn't speak Russian or write in the Cyrillic script. In fact, they were lifetime beltway insiders occupying the highest positions of power in the US government.

Here are the names and rank of the principal conspirators:

To a person, the participants in this illicit cabal shared the core trait that made Obama such a blight on the nation's well-being. To wit, he never held an honest job outside the halls of government in his entire adult life; and as a careerist agent of the state and practitioner of its purported goods works, he exuded a sanctimonious disdain for everyday citizens who make their living along the capitalist highways and by-ways of America.

Trey Gowdy Caught Obama's CIA Head Not Telling The Truth - YouTube

There was a serious of suspicious and well coordinated leaks of classified information that point out to intelligence agencies Under the smoke screen of Russian influence Trump campaign official were spied upon. Whether the pretext was Steele dossier or some other disinformation is immaterial. 

Unprecedented rate of leaks about Trump and his associates is really disturbing, but is nothing new.  Intrusion of intelligence agencies into political process  happened before. One telling example is JFK assassination.  Interference in foreign election is also a proven fact: As early as 1948 CIA role "fixed" Italian elections. So in way chickens just came home to roost.  

War between CIA and Pentagon is well know due to events in Syria, where they sometimes found themselves on the opposite sides of barricades. There is also always some level of inter-fighting between different US intelligence agencies, for example NSA vs. CIA.

Connections between Bush clan and CIA are well documented. Strange biography of Barack Obama also raises interesting questions. And Clintons also seems to be connected to the US intelligence one way or the other due to their Arkansas past.  Amazing level confidence of Bill Clinton (and to a lesser extent Hillary Clinton)  that he/she is above the law is probably connected with this fact.  The might do have "Lord-protector" for their misdeeds.

In this sense anti-Russian campaign and accusations of Russia in interfering into the US election (after the US interfered in Russian election of 2011-2012, trying to stage a color revolution in this country)  might be just a smoke screen to hide the US intelligence agencies interference with the election process. 

BTW it is not completely clear why Russia would prefer Trump to Hillary. Here is one post that addresses this issues (Economist's View What’s Behind a Rise in Ethnic Nationalism Maybe the Economy, Oct 14, 2016):

likbez -> pgl... , Friday, October 14, 2016 at 07:43 PM
Paradoxically Pravda in old times did have real insights into the US political system and for this reason was widely read by specialists. Especially materials published by the Institute of the USA and Canada -- a powerful Russian think tank somewhat similar to the Council on Foreign Relations.

As for your remark I think for many people in the USA Russophobia is just displaced Anti-Semitism.

JohnH remark is actually very apt and you should not "misunderestimate" the level of understanding of the US political system by Russians. They did learn a lot about machinations of the neoliberal foreign policy, especially about so called "color revolutions."

Hillary&Obama has had a bloody nose when they tried to stage a "color revolution" in 2011-2012 in Russia (so called "white revolution). A typical US citizen probably never heard about it or heard only about "Pussy riot", Navalny and couple of other minor figures. At the end poor ambassador Michael McFaul was recalled. NED was expelled. Of course Russia is just a pale shadow of the USSR power-wise, so Obama later put her on sanctions using MH17 incident as a pretext with no chances of retaliation.

They also successfully implemented regime change in Ukraine -- blooding Putin nose in return.

But I actually disagree with JohnH. First of all Putin does not need to interfere in a way like the USA did in 2011-2012. It would be a waist of resources as both candidates are probably equally bad for Russia (and it is the "deep state" which actually dictate the US foreign policy, not POTUS.)

The US political system is already the can of worms and the deterioration of neoliberal society this time created almost revolutionary situation in Marxists terms, when Repug elite was not able to control the nomination. Democratic establishment still did OK and managed to squash the rebellion, but here the level of degeneration demonstrated itself in the selection of the candidate.

Taking into account the level of dysfunction of the US political system, I am not so sure the Trump is preferable to Hillary for Russians. I would say he is more unpredictable and more dangerous. The main danger of Hillary is Syria war escalation, but the same is true for Trump who can turn into the second John McCain on a dime.

Also the difference between two should not be exaggerated. Both are puppets of the forces the brought them to the current level and in their POTUS role will need to be subservient to the "deep state". Or at least to take into account its existence and power. And that makes them more of prisoners of the position they want so much.

Trump probably to lesser extent then Hillary, but he also can't ignore the deep state. Both require the support of Republican Congress for major legislative initiatives. And it will be very hostile to Hillary. Which is a major advantage for Russians, as this excludes the possibility of some very stupid moves.

Again, IMHO in no way any of them will control the US foreign policy. In this area the deep state is in charge since Allen Dulles and those who try to deviate too much might end as badly as JFK. I think Obama understood this very well and did not try to rock the boat. And there are people who will promptly explain this to Trump in a way that he understands.

In other words, neither of them will escape the limit on their power that "deep state" enforces. And that virtually guarantee the continuity of the foreign policy, with just slight tactical variations.

So why Russians should prefer one to another? You can elect a dog as POTUS and the foreign policy of the USA will be virtually the same as with Hillary or Trump.

In internal policy Trump looks more dangerous and more willing to experiment, while Hillary is definitely a "status quo" candidate. The last thing Russians needs is the US stock market crush. So from the point of internal economic policy Hillary is also preferable.

A lot of pundits stress the danger of war with Russia, and that might be true as women in high political position try to outdo men in hawkishness. But here Hillary jingoism probably will be tightly controlled by the "deep state". Hillary definitely tried to be "More Catholic then the Pope" in this area while being the Secretary of State. That did not end well for her and she might learn the lesson.

But if you think about the amount of "compromat" (Russian term ;-) on Hillary and Bill that Russians may well already collected, in "normal circumstances" she might be a preferable counterpart for Russians. As in "devil that we know". Both Lavrov and Putin met Hillary. Medvedev was burned by Hillary. Taking into account the level of greed Hillary displayed during her career, I would be worried what Russians have on her , as well as on Bill "transgressions" and RICO-style actions of Clinton Foundation.

And taking into account the level of disgust amount the government officials with Hillary (and this is not limited to Secret Service) , new leaks are quite possible, which might further complicate her position as POTUS.

In worst case, the first year (or two) leaks will continue. Especially if damaging DNC leaks were the work of some disgruntled person within the USA intelligence and not of some foreign hacker group. That might be a plus for Russians as such a constant distraction might limit her possibility to make some stupid move in Syria. Or not.

As you know personal emails boxes for all major Web mail providers are just one click away for NSA analysts. So "Snowden II" hypothesis might have the right to exist.

Also it is quite probably that impeachment process for Hillary will start soon after her election. In the House Republicans have enough votes to try it. That also might be a plus for s for both Russia and China. Trump is extremely jingoistic as for Iran, and that might be another area were Hillary is preferable to Russians and Chinese over Trump.

Also do not discount her health problems. She does have some serious neurological disease, which eventually might kill her. How fast she will deteriorate is not known but in a year or two the current symptoms might become more pronounced. If Bill have STD (and sometime he looks like a person with HIV; http://joeforamerica.com/2016/07/bill-clinton-aids/) that further complicates that picture (this is just a rumor, but he really looks bad).

I think that all those factors make her an equal, or even preferable candidate for such states as Russia and China.

The way Trump "lewd" tale surfaced (aka Steele dossier) also creates more questions about role on CIA in the elections. Same about Trump surveillance authorized by Obama administration as well as possible unauthorized surveillance outsource to MI6, which was serving as CIA sidekick.


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Jul 19, 2018] Putin Asked Trump Permission to Interrogate Obama's Ambassador

Notable quotes:
"... McFaul: "Russia made the whole story up." Typical projection. And Browder only became a critic of Putin (the russian justice system) after his criminal enterprise was uncovered. ..."
"... As a "red blooded, Bible believing American", one who has served under oath, and know the duties and penalties, I suggest it's perhaps the best "diplomatic move" seen since Mr. Putin took up the Secretary of State's offer, took Syria's chemical weapons, and took up truly ridding the Nation of terrorists, both those of Saudi, and those my own government made. ..."
Jul 19, 2018 | russia-insider.com

This is pure brilliance on Russia's part. It wont happen, but it draws attention to the Browder story, and discredits McFaul by association. Very smart. Update : It appears Michael McFaul is really getting nervous, tweeting like a teenager on meth tonight:

"I hope the White House corrects the record and denounces in categorical terms this ridiculous request from Putin. Not doing so creates moral equivalency between a legitimacy US indictment of Russian intelligence officers and a crazy, completely fabricated story invented by Putin"

me title=

With The White House flip-flopping back and forth on what was actually said - and meant to be said - in Helsinki, Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders dropped the latest tape-bomb to blow the establishment's mind during to today's press conference.

Sanders reported that President Trump is open to a proposal from Vladimir Putin to let Russian authorities question the former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, Michael McFaul .

While Trump reportedly made no commitments to Putin, the Russian president offered to allow Special Counsel Robert Mueller to observe interrogations of the 12 Russian intelligence agents indicted by a U.S. grand jury last week for hacking Democratic Party email accounts.

Trump called it an "interesting idea" and an "incredible offer" at the news conference.

Sanders left the press corps dangling by concluding that:

"The president will work with his team and we'll let you know if there's an announcement on that front."

As The Hill reports, Russia state-owned outlet RT reported that Russia wanted to question McFaul and the author of the so-called Steele dossier, Christopher Steele, among others in its investigation into American financier Bill Browder.

Browder is a prominent critic of Putin who lobbied on behalf of the Magnitsky Act, which imposed sanctions against Russia.

McFaul has denounced the possibility of his being questioned by Russian officials, and has called on Trump to condemn the proposal .

"Putin has been harassing me for a long time," McFaul said on Twitter on Wednesday.

"That he now wants to arrest me, however, takes it to a new level. I expect my government to defend me and my colleagues in public and private ."

And went on...

Does he seem nervous to you?


Source: Zero Hedge Putin Asked Trump Permission to Interrogate Obama's Ambassador This is pure brilliance on Russia's part. It wont happen, but it draws attention to the Browder story, and discredits McFaul by association. Very smart. Tyler Durden 11 hours ago | 1,727 41 MORE: Politics Update : It appears Michael McFaul is really getting nervous, tweeting like a teenager on meth tonight:

"I hope the White House corrects the record and denounces in categorical terms this ridiculous request from Putin. Not doing so creates moral equivalency between a legitimacy US indictment of Russian intelligence officers and a crazy, completely fabricated story invented by Putin"

With The White House flip-flopping back and forth on what was actually said - and meant to be said - in Helsinki, Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders dropped the latest tape-bomb to blow the establishment's mind during to today's press conference.

Sanders reported that President Trump is open to a proposal from Vladimir Putin to let Russian authorities question the former U.S. ambassador to Moscow, Michael McFaul .

While Trump reportedly made no commitments to Putin, the Russian president offered to allow Special Counsel Robert Mueller to observe interrogations of the 12 Russian intelligence agents indicted by a U.S. grand jury last week for hacking Democratic Party email accounts.

Trump called it an "interesting idea" and an "incredible offer" at the news conference.

Sanders left the press corps dangling by concluding that:

"The president will work with his team and we'll let you know if there's an announcement on that front."

As The Hill reports, Russia state-owned outlet RT reported that Russia wanted to question McFaul and the author of the so-called Steele dossier, Christopher Steele, among others in its investigation into American financier Bill Browder.

Browder is a prominent critic of Putin who lobbied on behalf of the Magnitsky Act, which imposed sanctions against Russia.

McFaul has denounced the possibility of his being questioned by Russian officials, and has called on Trump to condemn the proposal .

"Putin has been harassing me for a long time," McFaul said on Twitter on Wednesday.

"That he now wants to arrest me, however, takes it to a new level. I expect my government to defend me and my colleagues in public and private ."

And went on... Does he seem nervous to you?


Source: Zero Hedge

ole • 11 hours ago ,

McFaul: "Russia made the whole story up." Typical projection. And Browder only became a critic of Putin (the russian justice system) after his criminal enterprise was uncovered.

mis dos centavos • 11 hours ago ,

Considering McFaul is just another Pyatt, all his 'Russia made up" nonsense is hardly worth an afterthought. He's in dirt up to his ears.

mis dos centavos mis dos centavos 11 hours ago ,

Only reason he couldn't get to square one pulling off a Pyatt was because he had no banderite fascist-style goon squads in Russia under his command.

mis dos centavos mis dos centavos 11 hours ago ,

Think about that one, Mr. McFoul. It's not only Russia that can read you like a book.

mis dos centavos mis dos centavos 9 hours ago ,

I did like this one review of your insightful book, Mr. McFoul. If I send you the review, will you sign it? I'd be honored. Russia's Unfinished Revolution: Political Change from Gorbachev to Putin By Michael McFaul, Cornell University Press, 2001
http://exiledonline.com/mik...

This book is a four-hundred page testimonial to the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the American Russia-watching mafia. In its pages, Michael McFaul condemns himself again and again with staggering non-sequiturs, self-serving lies, crude misrepresentations of his own past and the recent history of Russia, and repeated failures to meet even the most basic standards of academic rigor.

tom 11 hours ago ,

Mr McFaul seems to be unfamiliar with the concept of law and a justice system. If he is indicted by the Russian courts and required for questioning, why is that any different from Russian "suspects" being indicted by US courts and required for questioning? Until the justice system has made its inquiries and run its course, no one can know for sure whether Mr McFaul is guilty of crimes or not. So why does he demand total immunity from justice in such a peremptory, entitled way?

Surely it can't be because he feels that Americans are in any way "superior", "exceptional", or immune from justice? Surely Mr McFaul isn't a crude common-or-garden racist? Surely...?

jsinton tom 8 hours ago ,

The rub here is the ambassador enjoys diplomatic immunity from prosecution for events that might have occurred during his tenure in Moscow from Russian courts. If the Trump DOJ decides he should face the music then he has no immunity.

Bad boy!! Otto!! tom 6 hours ago ,

Your third question answers your second question almost perfectly. Because he feels that Americans are in every way "superior", "exceptional", and should be immune from justice, no matter how heinous the crimes they have committed. There fixed it for ya. :-)

Brian Eggar 5 hours ago ,

What a circus and what a lot of clowns. As they say, nobody is above the law or at least they shouldn't be. I would say that Mr McFaul does protest too much and judging by his rattled statements appears that he has something to hide. Getting back to basics where is the $400K and how did it get there and did any go missing on the way?

David James 7 hours ago ,

Bonobo Administration exempt from Law, Prosecution or scrutiny---via the CIA.

Truth • 11 hours ago ,

McFaul is a bag boy shabbos goy for the Jooz that are trying to re-steal (1917, 1991, 2014) Russian wealth. Browder was a discarded Rothschild foreskin.

Constantine BMWA1 6 hours ago ,

Earl Browder was lauding Soviet Russia and its successes. He didn't fleece the Russian people. His grandson is a parasite that hates Russia and has siphoned his ill-gotten gains from the country. No comparison.

Kjell Hasthi 8 hours ago ,

The interesting side of the story is Trump can say yes as president. Not much Michael McFaul can do then? It will turn MSM Media upside down. Btw. NSA can give tips to the Russians about what to ask. They know everything. Assad probably would also like to question McCain regarding illegal stay in Syria

Tommy Jensen Kjell Hasthi 5 hours ago ,

What I like most of all is Trump´s comment "an interesting idea and an incredible offer". ha ha ha ha ha ha. It will probably not be possible to realize, but it shows Trump is not stupid at all.

Merijn 10 hours ago ,

Pay Back Time: Puppeticians will be taken out... One at the time...the Longer the Fun will Last...Russia just make all their Lies Visible... it is a very Strong Weapon... People are Tired and fed up with Liars, Traitors & Deceivers... Yesterday they caught our Foreign Minister Blok with some nice Statements...He's like a gut-Shot animal at the moment...one more Trick and He is Exit....just keep an eye on him...

https://www.aljazeera.com/n...
Stef Blok... You are a complete idiot... take your stuff and Buzz Off...the IMF or the European Union always can use Some Retarded Ex-Puppeticians Like You...

Ray Douglas 4 hours ago ,

I wouldn't advise Trump to go to Dallas.

Koroviev,Behemoth&Woland LLP 5 hours ago ,

View Hide

Snowglobe 20 minutes ago ,

Lee Stranahan Exposes Bill Browder, The Man Mentioned By Putin In Helsinki Summit Play Hide

Solzhenitsyn fan • an hour ago ,

Putin is not 8 Dan for nothing! Absolutely brilliant!

In the news:
https://www.smh.com.au/worl...

"Trump invited Putin to Washington for summit: White House". Washington: President Donald Trump invited Russian leader Vladimir Putin to Washington for a summit in the northern autumn. "In Helsinki, @POTUS agreed to ongoing working level dialogue between the two security council staffs," White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said in a tweet on Thursday. "President Trump asked @AmbJohnBolton to invite President Putin to Washington in the fall and those discussions are already underway.

Sanders announced the invitation less than an hour after the Republican-led Senate effectively rebuked President Donald Trump for considering Russia's request to question US officials, giving voice to growing unease over the president's relationship with Putin following their summit in Helsinki on Monday...

Bobbie Taylor an hour ago ,

Russia should be allowed to question McFaul. We should honor the treaty. Unfortunately, the intelligence agencies have more power than the president at this point. They want to assassinate him.

Haut 4 hours ago ,

Everything about this guy just smells, Foul Lol

John McClain 4 hours ago ,

As a "red blooded, Bible believing American", one who has served under oath, and know the duties and penalties, I suggest it's perhaps the best "diplomatic move" seen since Mr. Putin took up the Secretary of State's offer, took Syria's chemical weapons, and took up truly ridding the Nation of terrorists, both those of Saudi, and those my own government made.

I was afraid for a bit, Syria was going to be broken, and I've served beside Syrian Army in Beirut, I respect them highly, consider them among the best professionals, as the world can easily see they are, and I hate what a criminal cadre are doing to my Country, while we enjoy our sit/coms and beer, and eat snacks and get fat.

God Bless Russia and President Putin, "it take's a man to make a man", is an old saying, and the same is true for Nations, I expect.
Semper Fidelis,
John McClain
Vanceboro, NC, USA

Snowglobe 4 hours ago ,

LOL! Thank you Mr. Putin! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Keep poking these idiots with a stick. :-)

Tommy Jensen Lycan Thrope 5 hours ago ,

There is only one solution for uncle Sam.
View Hide

Maria Angelica Brunell Solar Lycan Thrope 4 hours ago ,

You did not understand the proposal. Russian police interrogates the indicted Russian officials, and Mueller and team can be given permission to enter Russia and watch the interrogations. American police interrogates Browder and accomplices, and Russian police can be given permission to enter the US and watch the proceedings. Completely fair and transparent, according to existing Treaty between the 2 countries. Nobody can be extradited, because there is no extradition treaty between the countries.

Leon • 6 hours ago ,

If Russia is doing killing and poisoning, how come Soros and Browder are not killed, if anybody deserves - here are two biggest criminals and both of them are Joos.

[Jul 19, 2018] America Overrules Trump No Peace with Russia by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

Notable quotes:
"... The governments of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, if their countries are to survive, must give up their deluded hopes of reaching agreements with the United States. No such possibility exists on terms that the countries can accept. ..."
"... American foreign policy rests on threat and force. It is guided by the neoconservative doctrine of US hegemony, a doctrine that is inconsistent with accepting the sovereignty of other countries. ..."
"... The Russians -- especially the naive Atlanticist Integrationists -- should take note of the extreme hostility, indeed, to the point of insanity, directed at the Helsinki meeting across the entirety of the American political, media, and intellectual scene ..."
"... There is no support for Trump's agenda of peace with Russia in the US foreign policy arena. The president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, spoke for them all when he declared that "We must deal with Putin's Russia as the rogue state it is." Russia is a " rogue state" simply because Russia does not accept Washington's overlordship. ..."
"... There is no support even in Trump's own government for normalizing relations with Russia unless the neoconservative definition of normal relations is used. By normal relations neoconservatives mean a vassal state relationship with Washington. That, and only that, is "normal." Russia can have normal relations with America only on the basis of this definition of normal. Sooner or later Putin and Lavrov will have to acknowledge this fact. ..."
"... A lie repeated over and over becomes a fact. That is what has happened to Russiagate. Despite the total absence of any evidence, it is now a fact in America that Putin himself put Trump in the Oval Office. That Trump met with Putin at Helsinki is considered proof that Trump is Putin's lackey, as the New York Times and many others now assert as self-evident. That Trump stood next to "the murderous thug Putin" and accepted Putin's word that Russia did not interfere in the election of the US president is regarded as double proof that Trump is in Putin's pocket and that the Russiagate story is true. ..."
Jul 19, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

The governments of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, if their countries are to survive, must give up their deluded hopes of reaching agreements with the United States. No such possibility exists on terms that the countries can accept.

American foreign policy rests on threat and force. It is guided by the neoconservative doctrine of US hegemony, a doctrine that is inconsistent with accepting the sovereignty of other countries. The only way that Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea can reach an agreement with Washington is to become vassals like the UK, all of Europe, Canada, Japan, and Australia.

The Russians -- especially the naive Atlanticist Integrationists -- should take note of the extreme hostility, indeed, to the point of insanity, directed at the Helsinki meeting across the entirety of the American political, media, and intellectual scene. Putin is incorrect that US-Russian relations are being held hostage to an internal US political struggle between the two parties. The Republicans are just as insane and just as hostile to President Trump's effort to improve American-Russian relations as the Democrats, as Donald Jeffries reminds us .

The American rightwing is just as opposed as the leftwing. Only a few experts, such as Stephen Cohen and Amb. Jack Matlock , President Reagan's ambassador to the Soviet Union, have spoken out in support of Trump's attempt to reduce the dangerous tensions between the nuclear powers. Only a few pundits have explained the actual facts and the stakes.

There is no support for Trump's agenda of peace with Russia in the US foreign policy arena. The president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, spoke for them all when he declared that "We must deal with Putin's Russia as the rogue state it is." Russia is a " rogue state" simply because Russia does not accept Washington's overlordship. Not for any other reason.

There is no support even in Trump's own government for normalizing relations with Russia unless the neoconservative definition of normal relations is used. By normal relations neoconservatives mean a vassal state relationship with Washington. That, and only that, is "normal." Russia can have normal relations with America only on the basis of this definition of normal. Sooner or later Putin and Lavrov will have to acknowledge this fact.

A lie repeated over and over becomes a fact. That is what has happened to Russiagate. Despite the total absence of any evidence, it is now a fact in America that Putin himself put Trump in the Oval Office. That Trump met with Putin at Helsinki is considered proof that Trump is Putin's lackey, as the New York Times and many others now assert as self-evident. That Trump stood next to "the murderous thug Putin" and accepted Putin's word that Russia did not interfere in the election of the US president is regarded as double proof that Trump is in Putin's pocket and that the Russiagate story is true.

[Jul 19, 2018] The Russian US Election Meddling Big Lie Won't Die by Stephen Lendman

Notable quotes:
"... Propaganda works, proved effective time and again – why it's a key tool in America's deep state playbook. ..."
"... Virtually anything repeated enough, especially through the major media megaphone, gets most people to believe it – no matter how preposterous the claim. ..."
"... Normalized relations with Russia and world peace are anathema notions in Washington. Bipartisan neocons infesting the US political establishment want none of it. America's hegemonic aims matter most – wanting dominance over planet earth, its resources and populations. Endless wars of aggression, color revolutions, and other unlawful practices harmful to human rights and welfare are its favored strategies. ..."
Jul 19, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

Propaganda works, proved effective time and again – why it's a key tool in America's deep state playbook.

Virtually anything repeated enough, especially through the major media megaphone, gets most people to believe it – no matter how preposterous the claim.

Not a shred of evidence suggests Russia meddled in America's political process – nothing.

Yet an earlier NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed most Americans believe the Russia did it Big Lie. A months earlier Gallup poll showed three-fourths of Americans view Vladimir Putin unfavorably.

Americans are easy marks to be fooled. No matter how many times they were deceived before, they're easily manipulated to believe most anything drummed into their minds by the power of repetitious propaganda – fed them through through the major media megaphone – in lockstep with the official falsified narrative.

America's dominant media serve as a propaganda platform for US imperial and monied interests – acting as agents of deception, betraying their readers and viewers time and again instead of informing them responsibly.

CNN presstitute Poppy Harlow played a clip on air of Reuters reporter Jeff Mason asking Putin in Helsinki the following question:

"Did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?"

Putin said: "Yes," he wanted Trump to win "because he talked about bringing the US-Russia relationship back to normal," as translated from his Russian language response.

Here's the precise translation of his remark:

"Yes, I wanted him to win, because he talked about the need to normalize US-Russia relations," adding:

"Isn't it natural to have sympathy towards a man who wants to restore relations with your country? That's normal."

Putin did not address the fabricated official narrative notion that he directed his officials to help Trump win. Yet CNN's Harlow claimed otherwise, falsely claiming he ordered Kremlin officials to help Trump triumph over Hillary.

He did nothing of the kind or say it, nor did any other Kremlin officials. No evidence proves otherwise – nothing but baseless accusations supported only by the power of deceptive propaganda.

Time and again, CNN, the NYT, and rest of America's dominant media prove themselves untrustworthy.

They consistently abandon journalism the way it's supposed to be, notably on geopolitical issues, especially on war and peace and anything about Russia.

After rejecting, or at least doubting, the official narrative about alleged Russian meddling in the US political process to aid his election, Trump backtracked post-Helsinki – capitulating to deep state power.

First in the White House, he said he misspoke abroad – then on CBS News Wednesday night, saying it's "true," deplorably adding:

Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election, and he "would" hold Russian President Vladimir Putin responsible for the interference – that didn't occur, he failed to stress.

Here's his verbatim exchange with CBS anchor Jeff Glor :

GLOR: "You say you agree with US intelligence that Russia meddled in the election in 2016."

TRUMP: "Yeah and I've said that before, Jeff. I have said that numerous times before, and I would say that is true, yeah."

GLOR: "But you haven't condemned Putin, specifically. Do you hold him personally responsible?"

TRUMP: "Well, I would, because he's in charge of the country. Just like I consider myself to be responsible for things that happen in this country. So certainly as the leader of a country you would have to hold him responsible, yes."

GLOR: "What did you say to him?"

TRUMP: "Very strong on the fact that we can't have meddling. We can't have any of that – now look. We're also living in a grown-up world."

"Will a strong statement – you know – President Obama supposedly made a strong statement. Nobody heard it."

"What they did hear is a statement he made to Putin's very close friend. And that statement was not acceptable. Didn't get very much play relatively speaking. But that statement was not acceptable."

"But I let him know we can't have this. We're not going to have it, and that's the way it's going to be."

There you have it – Trump capitulating to America's deep state over Russia on national television.

From day one in power, he caved to the national security state, Wall Street, and other monied interests over popular ones.

The sole redeeming part of his agenda was wanting improved relations with Russia and Vladimir Putin personally – preferring peace over possible confrontation, wanting the threat of nuclear war defused.

Despite tweeting post-Helsinki that he and Putin "got along well which truly bothered many haters who wanted to see a boxing match," his remarks on CBS News showed he'll continue dirty US business as usual toward Russia.

Anything positive from summit talks appears abandoned by capitulating to deep state power controlling him and his agenda.

Normalized relations with Russia and world peace are anathema notions in Washington. Bipartisan neocons infesting the US political establishment want none of it. America's hegemonic aims matter most – wanting dominance over planet earth, its resources and populations. Endless wars of aggression, color revolutions, and other unlawful practices harmful to human rights and welfare are its favored strategies.

Will Americans go along with sacrificing vital freedoms for greater security from invented enemies – losing both? Will US belligerent confrontation with Russia inevitably follow? Will mushroom-shaped denouement eventually kill us all?

*

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org ( Home – Stephen Lendman ). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net .

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III. http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html "

[Jul 19, 2018] The Magnitsky Hoax by Philip Giraldi

A more serious question is: Was Browder MI6 agent or not? His conversion from the US to UK citizenship is highly unusual.
Notable quotes:
"... "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes," ..."
"... Red Notice: A True Story of High Finance, Murder and One Man's Fight for Justice ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
Jun 28, 2016 | www.unz.com

... ... ...

... I had the privilege of attending the first by invitation only screening of a documentary "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes," produced by Russian filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov. The documentary had been blocked in Europe through lawsuits filed by some of the parties linked to the prevailing narrative but the Newseum in Washington eventually proved willing to permit rental of a viewing room in spite of threats coming from the same individuals to sue to stop the showing.

Nekrasov by his own account had intended to do a documentary honoring Magnitsky and his employers as champions for human rights within an increasing fragile Russian democracy. He had previously produced documentaries highly critical of Russian actions in Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine, and also regarding the assassinations of Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko in London as well as of journalist Anna Politkovskaya in Moscow. He has been critical of Vladimir Putin personally and was not regarded as someone who was friendly to the regime, quite the contrary. Some of his work has been banned in Russia.

After his documentary was completed using actors to play the various real-life personalities involved and was being edited Nekrasov returned to some issues that had come up during the interviews made during the filming. The documentary records how he sought clarification of what he was reading and hearing but one question inevitably led to another.

The documentary began with the full participation of American born UK citizen William Browder, who virtually served as narrator for the first section that portrayed the widely accepted story on Magnitsky. Browder portrays himself as a human rights campaigner dedicated to promoting the legacy of Sergei Magnitsky, but he is inevitably much more complicated than that. The grandson of Earl Browder the former General Secretary of the American Communist Party, William Browder studied economics at the University of Chicago, and obtained an MBA from Stanford.

From the beginning, Browder concentrated on Eastern Europe, which was beginning to open up to the west. In 1989 he took a position at highly respected Boston Consulting Group dealing with reviving failing Polish socialist enterprises. He then worked as an Eastern Europe analyst for Robert Maxwell, the unsavory British press magnate and Mossad spy, before joining the Russia team at Wall Street's Salomon Brothers in 1992.

He left Salomon in 1996 and partnered with the controversial Edmond Safra, the Lebanese-Brazilian-Jewish banker who died in a mysterious fire in 1999, to set up Hermitage Capital Management Fund. Hermitage is registered in tax havens Guernsey and the Cayman Islands. It is a hedge fund that was focused on "investing" in Russia, taking advantage initially of the loans-for-shares scheme under Boris Yeltsin, and then continuing to profit greatly during the early years of Vladimir Putin's ascendancy. By 2005 Hermitage was the largest foreign investor in Russia.

Browder had renounced his U.S. citizenship in 1997 and became a British citizen apparently to avoid American taxes, which are levied on worldwide income. In his book Red Notice: A True Story of High Finance, Murder and One Man's Fight for Justice he depicts himself as an honest and honorable Western businessman attempting to function in a corrupt Russian business world. That may or may not be true, but the loans-for-shares scheme that made him his initial fortune has been correctly characterized as the epitome of corruption, an arrangement whereby foreign investors worked with local oligarchs to strip the former Soviet economy of its assets paying pennies on each dollar of value. Along the way, Browder was reportedly involved in making false representations on official documents and bribery.

As a consequence of what came to be known as the Magnitsky scandal, Browder was eventually charged by the Russian authorities for fraud and tax evasion. He was banned from re-entering Russia in 2005, even before Magnitsky died, and began to withdraw his assets from the country. Three companies controlled by Hermitage were eventually seized by the authorities, though it is not clear if any assets remained in Russia. Browder himself was convicted of tax evasion in absentia in 2013 and sentenced to nine years in prison.

Browder has assiduously, and mostly successfully, made his case that he and Magnitsky have been the victims of Russian corruption both during and since that time, though there have been skeptics regarding many details of his personal narrative. He has been able to sell his tale to leading American politicians like Senators John McCain, Ben Cardin and ex-Senator Joe Lieberman, always receptive when criticizing Russia, as well as to a number of European parliamentarians and media outlets. But there is, inevitably, another side to the story, something quite different, which Andrei Nekrasov presents to the viewer.

Nekrasov has discovered what he believes to be holes in the narrative that has been carefully constructed and nurtured by Browder. He provides documents and also an interview with Magnitsky's mother maintaining that there is no clear evidence that he was beaten or tortured and that he died instead due to the failure to provide him with medicine while in prison or treatment shortly after he had a heart attack. A subsequent investigation ordered by then Russian President Dimitri Medvedev in 2011 confirmed that Magnitsky had not received medical treatment, contributing to this death, but could not confirm that he had been beaten even though there was suspicion that that might have been the case.

Nekrasov also claims that much of the case against the Russian authorities is derived from English language translations of relevant documents provided by Browder himself. The actual documents sometimes say something quite different. Magnitsky is referred to as an accountant, not a lawyer, which would make sense as a document of his deposition is apparently part of a criminal investigation of possible tax fraud, meaning that he was no whistleblower and was instead a suspected criminal.

Other discrepancies cited by Nekrasov include documents demonstrating that Magnitsky did not file any complaint about police and other government officials who were subsequently cited by Browder as participants in the plot, that the documents allegedly stolen from Magnitsky to enable the plotters to transfer possession of three Hermitage controlled companies were irrelevant to how the companies eventually were transferred and that someone else employed by Hermitage other than Magnitsky actually initiated investigation of the fraud.

In conclusion, Nekrasov believes there was indeed a huge fraud related to Russian taxes but that it was not carried out by corrupt officials. Instead, it was deliberately ordered and engineered by Browder with Magnitsky, the accountant, personally developing and implementing the scheme used to carry out the deception.

To be sure, Browder and his international legal team have presented documents in the case that contradict much of what Nekrasov has presented in his film. But in my experience as an intelligence officer I have learned that documents are easily forged, altered, or destroyed so considerable care must be exercised in discovering the provenance and authenticity of the evidence being provided. It is not clear that that has been the case. It might be that Browder and Magnitsky have been the victims of a corrupt and venal state, but it just might be the other way around. In my experience perceived wisdom on any given subject usually turns out to be incorrect.

Given the adversarial positions staked out, either Browder or Nekrasov is essentially right, though one should not rule out a combination of greater or lesser malfeasance coming from both sides. But certainly Browder should be confronted more intensively on the nature of his business activities while in Russia and not given a free pass because he is saying things about Russia and Putin that fit neatly into a Washington establishment profile. As soon as folks named McCain, Cardin and Lieberman jump on a cause it should be time to step back a bit and reflect on what the consequences of proposed action might be.

One should ask why anyone who has a great deal to gain by having a certain narrative accepted should be completely and unquestionably trusted, the venerable Cui bono? standard. And then there is a certain evasiveness on the part of Browder. The film shows him huffing and puffing to explain himself at times and he has avoided being served with subpoenas on allegations connected to the Magnitsky fraud that are making their way through American courts. In one case he can be seen on YouTube running away from a server, somewhat unusual behavior if he has nothing to hide.

A number of Congressmen and staffers were invited to the showing of the Nekrasov documentary at the Newseum but it is not clear if any of them actually bothered to attend, demonstrating once again how America's legislature operates inside a bubble of willful ignorance of its own making. Nor was the event reported in the local "newspaper of record" the Washington Post , which has been consistently hostile to Russia on its editorial and news pages.

A serious effort that a friend of mine described as "hell breaking loose" was also made to disrupt the question and answer session that followed the viewing of the film, with a handful of clearly coordinated hecklers interrupting and making it impossible for others to speak. The organized intruders, who may have gained entry using invitations that were sent to congressmen, suggested that someone at least considers this game being played out to have very high stakes.

The point is that neither Nekrasov nor Browder should be taken at their word. Either or both might be lying and the motivation to make mischief is very high if even a portion of the stolen $230 million is still floating around and available. And by the same measure, no Congressman or even the President should trust the established narrative, particularly if they persist in their hypocritical conceit that global human

Notheroldguy , August 8, 2017 at 9:12 pm GMT

Gee, I know G. was a spook of some kind and I always read his articles wherever they turn up.. but how could he get this wrong unless on purpose: Magnitsky was no lawyer. He was an accountant and he was a co-conspirator in the frauds being perpetrated that resulted in the charges. He died alright but there is some shading to the thesis that the fraudsters had him bumped off because they knew he was a weak link. They bribed somebody in the prison to deny him medical care. Hey, much like they did to Milosevic knowing they couldn't convict him of their trumped up charges. Why would G. get wrong such a simple thing to determine? Hmm. I wonder..
anon Disclaimer , August 8, 2017 at 9:45 pm GMT
Why would you continue the falsehood of calling Magnitsky a lawyer? He was not a lawyer. Ever. He is and was an accountant and will remain that until Judgement Day. On the other other hand, calling him a lawyer is perhaps an even greater insult than calling him an accountant.

[Jul 19, 2018] Have Mueller and Rosenstein Finally Gone Too Far by Thomas Knapp

Notable quotes:
"... They secured and and announced the indictments "with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States." ..."
"... That language is from 1799's Logan Act (18 U.S.C. § 953). Its constitutionality is suspect and no one has ever been indicted under it in the 219 years since its passage. Rosenstein and Mueller aren't likely to be the first two, and may not even technically have violated its letter. But I'd be hard put to name a more obvious, intentional, or flagrant act in violation of its spirit. ..."
Jul 16, 2018 | original.antiwar.com
Friday the 13th is presumably always someone's unlucky day. Just whose may not be obvious at the time, but I suspect that "Russiagate" special counsel Robert Mueller and Deputy US Attorney General Rod Rosenstein already regret picking Friday, July 13 to announce the indictments of 12 Russian intelligence officers on charges relating to an embarrassing 2016 leak of Democratic National Committee emails. They should.

Legally, the indictments are of almost no value. Those indicted will never be extradited to the US for trial, and the case that an external "hack" – as opposed to an internal DNC leak – even occurred is weak at best, if for no other reason than that the DNC denied the FBI access to its servers, instead commissioning a private "cybersecurity analysis" to reach the conclusion it wanted reached before hectoring government investigators to join that conclusion.

Diplomatically, on the other hand, the indictments and the timing of the announcement were a veritable pipe bomb, thrown into preparations for a scheduled Helsinki summit between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

House Republicans, already incensed with Rosenstein over his attempts to stonewall their probe into the Democratic Party's use of the FBI as a proprietary political hit squad, are planning a renewed effort to impeach him. If he goes down, Mueller likely does as well. And at this point, it would take a heck of an actor to argue with a straight face that the effort is unjustified.

Their timing was clearly intentional. Their intent was transparently political. Mueller and Rosenstein were attempting to hijack the Trump-Putin summit for the purpose of depriving Trump of any possible "wins" that might come out of it.

They secured and and announced the indictments "with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States."

That language is from 1799's Logan Act (18 U.S.C. § 953). Its constitutionality is suspect and no one has ever been indicted under it in the 219 years since its passage. Rosenstein and Mueller aren't likely to be the first two, and may not even technically have violated its letter. But I'd be hard put to name a more obvious, intentional, or flagrant act in violation of its spirit.

Rosenstein and Mueller are attempting to conduct foreign policy by special prosecutor, a way of doing things found nowhere in the US Constitution. Impeachment or firing should be the least of their worries. I'm guessing that there are laws other than the Logan Act that could, and should, be invoked to have them fitted for orange coveralls and leg irons pending an appointment with a judge.

That they even have defenders is proof positive that some of Trump's most prominent opponents consider "rule of law" a quaint and empty concept – a useful slogan, nothing more – even as they continually, casually, and hypocritically invoke it whenever they think doing so might politically disadvantage him.

Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism . He lives and works in north central Florida. This article is reprinted with permission from William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism.

[Jul 18, 2018] feinstein.senate.gov INTERVIEW OF GLENN SIMPSON BEFORE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. TUESDAY, AUGUST 22, 2017 WASHINGTON, D.C.

Jul 18, 2018 | feinstein.senate.gov

Glenn Simpson August 22, 2017

Washington, DC -800-FOR-DEPO www.aldersonreporting.com

DEPO www.aldersonreporting.com

Alderson Court Reporting

Page 37 Prevezon who were part of the case. Other people were brought in -- you know, were brought in either by Prevezon or by the lawyers and I didn't always try to pin that down.

Q. In general would the decision whether you would share Fusion's information with them be dependent then upon the attorneys introducing you to them?

A. It would be dependent on the direction of the attorneys. I basically -- you know, in all these cases for reasons of privilege and simply just professionalism you work at the direction of the lawyers and you do what they instruct you to do.

Q. Did anyone from Fusion ever help arrange for other entities to be hired by Prevezon or Baker Hostetler for the Prevezon case?

A. I don't think you could say we arranged for others to be hired. If you're asking me if we made referrals, we would refer -- you know, we made quite extensive -- fairly extensive efforts to get a PR firm hired for the trial that we were expecting and we made a number of referrals in that case, in that matter.

Q. What was the name of that PR firm?

A. There were several. We actually, you know, had a series of screening sessions. I think Weber Shandwick was the one we ended up with.

Q. You mentioned that Fusion was conducting litigation support in regard to the Prevezon case. Could you expand a little more about what type of litigation support activities you undertook?

MR. LEVY: Beyond what he's already told you?

MR. DAVIS: With a little more detail.

BY THE WITNESS:

A. Yes. In the original period of the case the question -- the client's explanation for or response to the government's allegations was that they originated with an organized crime figure in Russia who had been extorting them and who they had reported to the police and who had been jailed and convicted for blackmailing them, and they claimed that that was where these allegations originated, which, you know, seemed remarkable because it was in a Justice Department complaint.

So the first thing, you know, in any case really is to sort of try and figure out whether your own client's story can be supported or whether it's not true, and the lawyers -- you know, we work with a lot of prominent law firms and in many cases the first thing the lawyers need to know is whether their client's story is real, whether it can be supported, you know, because in any new case you don't know whether your own client is telling you the truth.

So originally one of the first things we were hired to do was to check out whether this was, in fact, the case. So they claimed that the allegations originated with a mobster named Demetri Baranovsky, B-A-R-A-N-O-V-S-K-Y, who was, in fact, jailed for running a shake-down operation in which he posed as an anticorruption campaigner for the purpose of extorting money from people by threatening to accuse them of some kind of corrupt activities. As you know, Russia is rife with corruption and there's a lot of anger over corruption.

We were able to ascertain that Mr. Baranovsky was, in fact, associated with Russia's biggest organized crime family, the Solntsevo Brotherhood, S-O-L-N-T-S-E-V-O brotherhood, which is the major dominant mafia clan in Moscow. So as far as it went, the client seemed to be telling the truth. You know, there was extensive record of these events and we found some indications from western law enforcement that western law enforcement did consider Baranovsky to be a lieutenant in this organized crime family. So we did that for a while. Edward Baumgartner helped a lot with that because of his Russian language skills and his ability to interface with the court system in Russia.

And, you know, around the -- similarly, there was a deposition of a customs agent by one of the lawyers who -- you know, in this initial effort to trace the origin of these allegations, where they came from, how they could have ended up with the Justice Department, the first thing we did was interview the client, got their story, and interviewed the agent who worked on the case for the DOJ and that agent said he got all his information from William Browder.

So at that point I was asked to help see if we could get an interview with William Browder. They wrote a letter to Browder and asked him to answer questions and he refused. Then the lawyers wanted to know, you know, whether he could be subpoenaed. So a lot of what I did in 2014 was help them figure out whether he could be subpoenaed in the United States to give a deposition, and the first thing that we did was we researched the ownership and registration of his hedge fund, which was registered in Delaware and filed documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

was registered in Delaware and filed documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

So we subpoenaed his hedge fund. A lot of the early work I did was just documenting that his hedge fund had presence in the United States. So we subpoenaed his hedge fund. He then changed the hedge fund registration, took his name off, said it was on there by accident, it was a mistake, and said that he had no presence in the United States and that, you know -- as you may know, he surrendered his citizenship in 1998 and moved outside the United States. That was around the time he started making all the money in Russia. So he's never had to pay U.S. taxes on his profits from his time in Russia, which became important in the case later.

In any case, he said he never came to the United States, didn't own any property here, didn't do any business here, and therefore he was not required to participate in the U.S. court system even though he admitted that he brought the case to the U.S. Justice Department. So we found this to be a frustrating and somewhat curious situation.

He was willing to, you know, hand stuff off to the DOJ anonymously in the beginning and cause them to launch a court case against somebody, but he wasn't interesting in speaking under oath about, you know, why he did that, his own activities in Russia. So looking at the public record we determined that he did come to the United States frequently, and I discovered through public records that he seemed to own a house in Aspen, Colorado, a very expensive mansion, over $10 million, which he had registered in the name of a shell company in a clear attempt to disguise the ownership of the property. We were able to ascertain that he does use property. We were able to ascertain that he does use that property because he registered cars to that property with the Colorado DMV in the name of William Browder.

So we began looking for public information about when he might be in Aspen, Colorado, and I found a listing on the Aspen Institute Website about an appearance he was going to make there in the summer of 2014. So we -- I served him a subpoena in the parking lot of the Aspen Institute in the summer of 2014 using two people -- two subcontractors. Actually, those other subcontractors were -- their names escape me, but I forgot about those. We can get you that. This is all in the Pacer court record, the public court record.

In any event, the three of us served -- there was another subcontractor working for the law firm whose name I also forget. I did not retain him, but I was asked to work with him on this. He is a private investigator and we can get you his name. In any event, we served him the subpoena and he ran away. He dropped it on the ground and he ran away.

He jumped in his car and went back to his mansion.

At that point he tried to suppress -- tried to quash the subpoena on the grounds it hadn't been properly served. We didn't get a video, but there are sworn affidavits from my servers in the court record about the service. But he objected to it on a number of grounds. A, he continued to insist he had nothing to do with the United States and didn't come here very often even, though we caught him here, clearly has cars in Colorado. He also said that you can't serve a subpoena for a case in that you can't serve a subpoena for a case in New York in the state of Colorado, it's outside the primary jurisdiction. He also began to raise questions about whether Baker Hostetler had a conflict of interest because of some previous work he did with one of the Baker lawyers.

This led to a long, drawn-out discovery battle that I was in the center of because I served the subpoenas and I helped find the information for the first set of subpoenas that lasted, you know, through 2014. This was, you know, a lot of what I did. This was -- the main focus was on trying to get William Browder to testify under oath about his role in this case and his activities in Russia.

All of this -- his determined effort to avoid testifying under oath, including running away from subpoenas and changing -- frequently changing lawyers and making lurid allegations against us, including that, you know, he thought we were KGB assassins in the parking lot of Aspen, Colorado when we served the subpoena, all raised questions in my mind about why he was so determined to not have to answer questions under oath about things that happened in Russia.

I'll add that, you know, I've done a lot of Russia reporting over the years. I originally met William Browder back when I was a journalist at the Wall Street Journal when I was doing stories about corruption in Russia. I think the first time I met him he lectured me about -- I was working on a story about Vladimir Putin corruption and he lectured me about how have Vladimir Putin was not corrupt and how he was the best thing that ever happened to Russia. There are numerous documents that he published himself, interviews he gave singing the praises of Vladimir Putin. At that time I was already investigating corruption in Putin's Russia.

So this made me more curious about the history of his activities in Russia and what that might tell me about corruption in Russia, and as part of the case we became curious about whether there was something that he was hiding about his activities in Russia. So through this period while we were attempting to get him under oath we were also investigating his business practices in Russia and that research -- and I should add when I say "we," I mean the lawyers were doing a lot of this work and it wasn't -- I can't take responsibility or pride of place on having done all this work. We were doing it all together. It was a -- you know, there were a number of lawyers involved, other people.

In the course of doing this research into

25 what he might not want to be asked about from his history in Russia we began to learn about the history of his tax avoidance in Russia and we began to deconstruct the way that his hedge fund structured its investments in Russia and, you know, we gradually accumulated through public records, not all from Russia, that he set up dozens of shell companies in Cyprus and other tax havens around the world to funnel money into Russia and to hold Russian securities.

He also set up shell companies inside of Russia in order to avoid paying taxes in Russia and he set up shell companies in a remote republic called Kalmykia, K-A-L-M-Y-K-I-A, which is next to Mongolia. It's the only Buddhist republic in Russia and there's nothing much there, but if you put your companies there you can lower your taxes. They were putting their companies in Kalmykia that were holding investments from western investors and they were staffing these companies -- they were using Afghan war veterans because there's a tax preference for Afghan war veterans, and what we learned is that they got in trouble for this eventually because one of Putin's primary rules for business was you can do a lot of things, but you've got to pay your taxes.

In fact, William Browder famously said in 2005 at Davos everybody knows under Putin you have to pay your taxes, which is ironic because at the time he was being investigated for not paying taxes. Ultimately they were caught, some of these companies were prosecuted, and he was forced to make an enormous tax payment to the government of Russia in 2006.

I will add that Sergei Magnitsky was working

10 for him at this time and all of this happened prior to the events that you are interested in involving the Russian treasury fraud and his jailing. This precedes all that.

But returning to the detailed discussion of my work, we investigated William Browder's business practices in Russia, we began to understand maybe what it was he didn't want to talk about, and as we looked at that we then began to look at his decision to surrender his American citizenship in 1998. At that point somewhere in there the Panama papers came out and we discovered that he had incorporated shell companies offshore in the mid 1990s, in 1995 I believe it was in the British Virgin Islands, and that at some point his hedge fund's shares had been transferred to this offshore company.

This offshore company was managed -- several of his offshore companies were managed by the Panamanian law firm called Mossack Fonseca, M-O-S-S-A-C-K, Fonseca, F-O-N-S-E-C-A, which is known now for setting up offshore companies for drug kingpins, narcos, kleptos, you name it. They were servicing every bad guy around. And I'm familiar with them from other money laundering and corruption and tax evasion investigations that I've done.

I'll note parenthetically that William Browder talks a lot about the Panama papers and the Russians who are in the Panama papers without ever mentioning that he's in the Panama papers. This is, again, a public fact that you can check on-line.

So that's an overview of the sort of work I was doing on this case. In the course of that I also began reaching back, I read his book Red Notice to understand his story and the story of his activities in Russia. I'll add also that I was extremely sympathetic for what happened to Sergei Magnitsky and I told him that myself and I tried to help him. It was only later from this other case that I began to be curious and skeptical about William Browder's activities and history in Russia.

MR. FOSTER: Can I ask you a follow-up question. I appreciate the narrative answer, but at the very beginning of the narrative you talked about beginning this journey by interviewing -- conducting an interview of the case agent who said he'd gotten all of his information -- the case agent or the attorney, the primary person at the DOJ, you said they got all their information from Bill Browder. Can you tell us who that was and who conducted the interview?

MR. LEVY: Mr. Simpson should definitely answer that question. I just want to make sure for the record that he hadn't finished his answer. He can talk more extensively about the litigation support that he provided for Baker -- MR. FOSTER: We're happy to get into that if he wants to do that. We're just coming up at the end of our hour. MR. LEVY: No problem. MR. FOSTER: and I wanted to get that follow-up in before --

A. I'll just finish with one last thing and I'm happy to answer that question. So in the course of this, you know -- I mean, one of my interests or even obsessions over the last decade has been corruption in Russia and Russian kleptocracy and the police state that was there. I was stationed in Europe from 2005 to 2007 or '8. So I was there when Putin was consolidating power and all this wave of power was coming. So it's been a subject that I've read very widely on and I'm very interested in the history of Putin's rise.

You know, in the course of all this I'll tell you I became personally interested in where Bill Browder came from, how he made so much money under Vladimir Putin without getting involved in anything illicit. So I read his book and I began doing other research and I found filings at the SEC linking him quite directly and his company, Salomon Brothers at the time, to a company in Russia called Peter Star, and I had, as it happens, vetted Peter Star and I knew that Peter Star was, you know, at the center of a corruption case that I covered as a reporter at the Wall Street Journal. When I went back into the history of Peter Star I realized that Bill Browder did business with the mayor's office in Saint Petersburg when Vladimir Putin was the deputy mayor and was responsible for dealing with western businessmen and corporations.

I then went and looked in Red Notice, this was a large deal, it was the biggest deal ever for Salomon at that time, they sold $98 million worth of stock on NASDAQ. There's no mention of William Browder's deal with Peter Star in Red Notice. I can't tell you why, but I can tell you that Peter Star later became the subject of a massive Star later became the subject of a massive corruption investigation, Pan-European, that I exposed a lot of and that led to the resignation of Putin's telecoms minister. So I assume he might not have -- this is kind of a pattern with Browder, which is he tends to omit things that aren't helpful to him, and I think we've seen a good bit of that lately in his allegations against me, which I'm sure you're going to ask me about.

So your question about the ICE agent, he was deposed by John Moscow of the New York office of Baker Hostetler. John is an old associate of mine from my days as a journalist. John's an expert on tax evasion and money laundering. He was the head of the rackets bureau for the district attorney's office in New York.

MR. FOSTER: You're talking about a formal deposition in the litigation?

MR. SIMPSON: Yeah.

MR. FOSTER: I just wanted to clarify that.

MR. SIMPSON: Again, it's in the court record. One of the frustrating things about this whole issue for me is everything I'm talking about or most of it is in the court record. You know, I don't take a lot of credit for my work. So you won't see my name scattered through the court record, but a lot of this is what I did.

MR. DAVIS: I think that's concludes our first hour. Let's take a short break before we begin a new one.

[Jul 18, 2018] Israel Shamir

Notable quotes:
"... The New Republic ..."
"... The documents had been doubted for some linguistic reasons discussed by Gilbert Doctorow who comes to a reasonable conclusion: "Bill Browder['s] intensity and the time he was devoting to anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behaviour of a top level international businessman. It was clear to me that some other game was in play. But at the time, no one could stand up and suggest the man was a fraud, an operative of the intelligence agencies. ..."
"... We do not know whether Browder is, or had been, a spy. This should not surprise us, as he was closely connected to Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky, the financiers with strong ties in the intelligence community. ..."
"... Perhaps he outlived his usefulness, Mr Browder did. He started the Cold war, now is the time to keep it in its healthy limits and to avoid a nuclear disaster or rapid armaments race. This is the task we may hope will be entertained by the next US President, Mr Donald Trump. ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.unz.com

June 20, 2016 2,700 Words 124 Comments Reply Email This Page to Someone
Remember My Information


=>
Bookmark Toggle All ToC Add to Library Remove from Library B Show Comment Next New Comment Next New Reply Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments

List of Bookmarks William F. Browder, Chief Executive Officer Hermitage Capital Management. Copyright by World Economic Forum swiss-image.ch/Photo by Michael Wuertenberg. Credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Chapeau, Mr Browder! Hats off for this incredible man. Last month, he succeeded in stopping a film screening in the European parliament and took off a few articles from American web sites. This week, he turned the only US screening of a film critical to his version of events into a ruckus . No freedom of speech for his enemies! His lawyers prowl around and issue summons to whoever digs in his sordid affairs. His hacks re-wrote his Wikipedia entry, expunging even discussions of the topic: despite hundreds of edits, nothing survived but the official version. Only a few powerful men succeed purifying their record to such an extent. Still, good fortune (a notoriously flighty lady) is about to desert Mr Browder.

Who is this extremely influential man? A businessman, a politician, a spy? The American-born Jewish tycoon William Browder, says The Jewish Chronicle , considers himself Putin's Number One enemy. For him, Putin is "no friend of the Jews", "cold-blooded killer" and even "criminal dictator who is not too different from Hitler, Mussolini or Gadhafi". More to a point, Browder is the man who contributed most to the new cold war between the West and Russia. The roots were there, still he made them blossom. If the US and Russia haven't yet exchanged nuclear salvos, do not blame Browder: he tried. For a valid reason, too: he was hit by cruel Hitler-like Mr Putin into his most susceptible spot, namely his pocket. Or was there even a better reason?

Browder, a grandson of the US Communist leader, came to Russia at its weakest point after the Soviet collapse, and grabbed an enormous fortune by opaque financial transactions. Such fortunes are not amassed by the pure of spirit. He was a ruthless man who did as much as any oligarch to enrich himself.

Eventually he ran afoul of Mr Putin, who was (and is) very tolerant of oligarchs as long as they play by the rules. The oligarchs would not be oligarchs if they would found that an easy condition. Some of them tried to fight back: Khodorkovsky landed in jail, Berezovsky and Gusinsky went to exile. Browder had a special position: he was the only Jewish oligarch in Russia who never bothered to acquire the Russian citizenship. He was barred from returning to Russia, and his companies were audited and found wanting.

As you'd expect, huge tax evasion was discovered. Browder thought that as long as he sucked up to Putin, he'd get away with bloody murder, let alone tax evasion. He was mistaken. Putin is nobody's fool. Flatterers do not get a free ride in Putin's Russia. And Browder became too big for his boots.

It turned out that he did two unforgivable things. Russians were afraid the foreigners would buy all their assets for a song, using favourable exchange rates and lack of native capital, as had happened in the Baltic states and other ex-Communist East European countries. In order to avoid that, shares of Russian blue-chip companies (Gazprom and suchlike) were traded among Russian citizens only. Foreigners had to pay much more. Browder bought many such shares via Russian frontmen, and he was close to getting control over Russian oil and gas. Putin suspected that he had acted in the interests of big foreign oil companies, trying to repeat the feat of Mr Khodorkovsky.

His second mistake was being too greedy. Russian taxation is very low; but Browder did not want to pay even this low tax. He hired Mr Magnitsky, an experienced auditor, who used loopholes in the Russian tax code in order to avoid taxes altogether. Magnitsky established dummy companies based in tax-free zones of Russia, such as pastoral Kalmykia, small, Buddhist, and autonomous. Their tax-free status had been granted in order to improve their economy and reduce unemployment; however, Browder's companies did not contribute to economy and did not employ people; they were paper dummies swiftly bankrupted by the owner.

Another Magnitsky trick was to form companies fronted by handicapped people who were also freed from paying tax. In the film, some of these persons, often illiterate and of limited intelligence, told the filmmaker of signing papers they could not read and of being paid a little money for the millions passing through their account.

(Mr Browder does not deny these accusations; he says there is nothing criminal in trying to avoid taxes. You can read about Browder and Magnitsky tricks here and here , and learn of the ways they attacked companies using minority shareholders and many other neat schemes.)

Eventually Magnitsky's schemes were discovered and he was arrested. Ten months later, in 2009, he died in jail. By that time, his patron Mr Browder was abroad, and he began his campaign against Russia hoping to regain his lost assets. He claimed Mr Magnitsky had been his lawyer, who discovered misdeeds and the outright thievery of government officials, and was imprisoned and tortured to death for this discovery.

The US Congress rushed in the Magnitsky Act, the first salvo of the Cold War Two. By this act, any Russian person could be found responsible for Mr Magnitsky's untimely death and for misappropriation of Browder's assets. His properties could be seized, bank accounts frozen – without any legal process or representation. This act upset the Russians, who allegedly had kept a cool $500 billion in the Western banks, so tit for tat started, and it goes to this very day.

The actual effect of the Magnitsky Act was minimal: some twenty million dollars frozen and a few dozen not-very-important people were barred from visiting the US. Its psychological effect was much greater: the Russian elite realised that they could lose their money and houses anytime – not in godless Putin's Russia, but in the free West, where they had preferred to look for refuge. The Magnitsky Act paved the road to the Cyprus confiscation of Russian deposits, to post-Crimean sanctions and to a full-fledged Cold War.

ORDER IT NOW

This was painful for Russia, as the first adolescent disillusionment in its love affair with the West, and rather healthy, in my view. A spot of cold war (very cold, plenty of ice please) is good for ordinary people, while its opposite, a Russian-American alliance, is good for the elites. The worst times for ordinary Russian people were 1988-2001, when Russians were in love with the US. The oligarchs stole everything there was to steal and sold it to the West for pennies. They bought villas in Florida while Russia fell apart. That was bad time for everybody: the US invaded Panama and Afghanistan unopposed, Iraq was sanctioned to death, Yugoslavia was bombed and broken to pieces.

As the Cold War came back, some normalcy was restored: the Russians stopped the US from destroying Syria, and Russian officials learned to love Sochi instead of Miami. For this reason alone, Browder can be counted as a part of the power which eternally wills evil and eternally works good. The Russian government, however, did not enjoy the cold shower.

The Russians denied any wrongdoing or even political reasons for dealing with Browder. They say Magnitsky was not a lawyer, just an auditor and a tax code expert. They say that he was arrested and tried for his tax avoidance schemes, and he died of natural causes while in jail. Nobody listened to them, until they demanded that Browder testify under oath. He refused. For two years lawyers tried to give him a summons , but he was a quick runner. There are funny videos showing Browder running away from summons.

Some good sense began to seep into American minds. The New Republic wondered : if Browder was indeed the victim of persecution in Russia and had enlisted the U.S. justice system to right the balance, why was he so reluctant to offer his sworn testimony in an American courtroom?

Enter Mr Andrey Nekrasov , a Russian dissident filmmaker. He made a few films considered to be highly critical of Russian government. He alleged the FSB blew up houses in Moscow in order to justify the Chechnya war. He condemned the Russian war against Georgia in 2008, and had been given a medal by Georgian authorities. He did not doubt the official Western version of Browder-Magnitsky affair, and decided to make a film about the noble American businessman and the brave Russian lawyer fighting for human rights. The European organisations and parliamentarians provided the budget for the film. They also expected the film to denounce Putin and glorify Magnitsky, the martyr.

However, while making the film, Mr Nekrasov had his Road to Damascus moment. He realised that the whole narrative was hinging on the unsubstantiated words of Mr Browder. After painstaking research, he came to some totally different conclusions, and in his version, Browder was a cheat who run afoul of law, while Magnitsky was his sidekick in those crimes.

Nekrasov discovered an interview Magnitsky gave in his jail. In this interview, the accountant said he was afraid Browder would kill him to prevent him from denouncing Browder, and would make him his scapegoat. It turned out Browder tried to bribe the journalist who made the interview to have these words expunged. Browder was the main beneficiary of the accountant's death, realised Nekrasov, while his investigators were satisfied with Magnitsky's collaboration with them.

Nekrasov could not find any evidence that Magnitsky tried to investigate the misdeeds of government officials. He was too busy covering his own tax evasion. And instead of fitting his preconceived notions, Nekrasov made the film about what he learned. ( Here are some details of Nekrasov's film)

While the screening in the EU Parliament was been stopped by the powerful Mr Browder, in Washington DC the men are made of sterner stuff. Despite Browder's threats the film was screened , presented by the best contemporary American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, who is 80 if a day, and still going strong. One has to recognise that the US is second to none for freedom of speech on the globe.

What makes Browder so powerful? He invests in politicians. This is probably a uniquely Jewish quality: Jews outspend everybody in contributions to political figures. The Arabs will spend more on horses and jets, the Russians prefer real estate, the Jews like politicians. The Russian NTV channel reported that Browder lavishly financed the US lawmakers. Here they present alleged evidence of money transfers: some hundred thousand dollars was given by Browder's structures officially to the senators and congressmen in order to promote the Magnitsky Act.

Much bigger sums were transferred via good services of Brothers Ziff, mega-rich Jewish American businessmen, said the researchers in two articles published on the Veteran News Network and in The Huffington Post .

These two articles were taken off the sites very fast under pressure of Browder's lawyers, but they are available in the cache. They disclose the chief beneficiary of Browder's generosity. This is Senator Ben Cardin, a Democrat from Maryland. He was the engine behind Magnitsky Act legislation to such an extent that the Act has been often called the Cardin List . Cardin is a fervent supporter of Hillary Clinton, also a cold warrior of good standing. More to a point, Cardin is a prominent member of Israel Lobby.

Browder affair is a heady upper-class Jewish cocktail of money, spies, politicians and international crime. Almost all involved figures appear to be Jewish, not only Browder, Brothers Ziff and Ben Cardin. Even his enemy, the beneficiary of the scam that (according to Browder) took over his Russian assets is another Jewish businessman Dennis Katsiv (he had been partly exonerated by a New York court as is well described in this thoughtful piece).

Browder began his way to riches under the patronage of a very rich and very crooked Robert Maxwell, a Czech-born Jewish businessman who assumed a Scots name. Maxwell stole a few million dollars from his company pension fund before dying in mysterious circumstances on board of his yacht in the Atlantic. It was claimed by a member of Israeli Military Intelligence, Ari Ben Menashe, that Maxwell had been a Mossad agent for years, and he also said Maxwell tipped the Israelis about Israeli whistle-blower Mordecai Vanunu. Vanunu was kidnapped and spent many years in Israeli jails.

Geoffrey Goodman wrote Maxwell "was almost certainly being used as – and using himself as – a two-way intelligence conduit [between East and West]. This arrangement included passing intelligence to the Israeli secret forces with whom he became increasingly involved towards the end of his life."

ORDER IT NOW

After Maxwell, Browder switched allegiance to Edmond Safra, a very rich Jewish banker of Lebanese origin, who also played East vs West. Safra provided him with working capital for his investment fund. Safra's bank has been the unlikely place where the IMF loan of four billion dollars to Russia had been transferred -- and disappeared. The Russian authorities say that Browder has been involved in this "crime of the century," next to Safra. The banker's name has been connected to Mossad: increasingly fearful for his life, Safra surrounded himself by Mossad-trained gunmen. This did not help him: he died a horrible death in his bathroom when his villa was torched by one of the guards.

The third Jewish oligarch on Browder's way was Boris Berezovsky, the king-maker of Yeltsin's Russia. He also died in his bathroom (which seems to be a constant feature); apparently he committed suicide. Berezovsky had been a politically active man; he supported every anti-Putin force in Russia. However, a few months before his death, he asked for permission to return to Russia, and some negotiations went on between him and Russian authorities.

His chief of security Sergey Sokolov came to Russia and purportedly brought with him some documents his late master prepared for his return. These documents allege that Browder had been an agent of Western intelligence services, of the CIA to begin with, and of MI6 in following years. He was given a code name Solomon, as he worked for Salomon Brothers. His financial activity was just a cover for his true intentions, that is to collect political and economic data on Russia, and to carry out economic war on Russia. This revelation has been made in the Russia-1 TV channel documentary Browder Effect , (broadcasted 13.04.2016), asserting that Browder was not after money at all, and his activities in Russia, beside being very profitable, had a political angle.

The documents had been doubted for some linguistic reasons discussed by Gilbert Doctorow who comes to a reasonable conclusion: "Bill Browder['s] intensity and the time he was devoting to anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behaviour of a top level international businessman. It was clear to me that some other game was in play. But at the time, no one could stand up and suggest the man was a fraud, an operative of the intelligence agencies. Whatever the final verdict may be on the documents presented by the film "The Browder Effect," it raises questions about Browder that should have been asked years ago in mainstream Western media if journalists were paying attention. Yevgeny Popov deserves credit for highlighting those questions, even if his documents demand further investigation before we come to definitive answers".

We do not know whether Browder is, or had been, a spy. This should not surprise us, as he was closely connected to Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky, the financiers with strong ties in the intelligence community.

Perhaps he outlived his usefulness, Mr Browder did. He started the Cold war, now is the time to keep it in its healthy limits and to avoid a nuclear disaster or rapid armaments race. This is the task we may hope will be entertained by the next US President, Mr Donald Trump.

This article was first published in The Unz Review .


JL , June 20, 2016 at 9:14 am GMT

" Browder was not after money at all " Uh, no. Browder was notorious for his greed and obsession with money. This is someone who had a program that calculated his personal net worth online and would check it no less than every half hour. Think Gordon Gekko but too cheap to even buy a decent suit. While there may have been some intelligence connections somewhere along the way, as the article states, he went political only when his honey pot was removed. Without Russia, his fund management business quickly tanked.
AmericaFirstNow , Website June 20, 2016 at 10:54 am GMT
US pushing a Zionist PNAC Neocon agenda vs Russia: :

http://america-hijacked.com/2014/02/24/us-has-neocon-agenda-in-ukraine-russia-analyst/

http://tinyurl.com/neoconmeddling

annamaria , June 20, 2016 at 11:20 am GMT
@Kiza

This is priceless: "We do not know whether Browder is, or had been, a spy. This should not surprise us, as he was closely connected to Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky, the financiers with strong ties in the intelligence community."

Could Mr. Browder hope for a better end of life than Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky? And what would be the fate of Mr. Cardin, the famous congressional prostitute? http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/new/?p=3742#.V2fRqzc5FCo

"Israel's Agent of Influence: Senator Ben Cardin shows how it's done:"

"So who does Cardin actually represent? I would suggest that he fits the mold of the classic agent of influence in that his allegiance to the United States is constrained by his greater loyalty to a foreign nation."

Israel Shamir , June 20, 2016 at 5:17 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

In Russia, everybody criticises Putin. No danger at all. Andrey Nekrasov was a foremost critic of Putin, made him no harm. Russia has as much freedom of speech as Europe; still less than the US.

Oscar Peterson , June 20, 2016 at 10:25 pm GMT
Incredible–well, not really–that our mainstream media resolutely refuses to print, much less discuss, the two main pieces of information here:

1. Browder was the one who gained most from Magnitsky's death as evidenced by the interview in which the latter asserted a fear of being killed by Browder.

2. Nekrasov, the film's director, has a history of making films very critical of Putin and the Russian government and state.

US media coverage either omits any mention of these two points or buries allusions to them in the article. The NYT piece on Browder's attempt to block the film's screening at the Newseum in Washington was filed in the "Europe" section of the paper.

Freedom of speech is under assault in the West and, again and again, we see the common denominator of these despicable efforts to suppress key information.

JL , June 21, 2016 at 7:52 am GMT
How funny to hear people question Browder's Jewishness, in the Unz comments section of all places. Lest there be any doubt, he, himself, very much identified as being a Jew, to the extent that he had a Mezuzah on his office doorway and hired only Jewish employees.

Concerning Magnitsky's indeed unusual posthumous trial, this was actually at the behest of his own mother who refused to sign the legal papers closing the criminal case due to his death. This is usually a mere formality. However, the Russian legal system is a stickler for the letter of the law and so the trial went ahead. His mother's motivation was unclear, though it probably had something to do with extra publicity.

tbraton , June 21, 2016 at 2:41 pm GMT
When I first became aware of Mr. Browder a number of years ago, I was curious about his name, since I was aware of Earl Browder, the former head of the American Communist Party when I was growing up. After I subsequently learned of the familial connection, I was highly amused to discover the leap from Communist to capitalist in three generations. But then I recalled that Dr. Armand Hammer, eventually the controlling shareholder of Occidental Petroleum, had a father who was also a doctor, an emigrant from Odessa, and a founder of the Communist Party U.S.A. That was a mere two generations to make the leap from Communist to capitalist.

A few years ago I happened to read an amusing memoir of the girl who was my date to my high school prom but who went on to achieve a modest fame and acquaintance with many prominent Americans and foreigners. (I am being intentionally vague.) When I was dating her in high school and college, I operated under the false assumption that her mother (whom I met) was Jewish and her natural father (whom I never met); I met her stepfather, who was Jewish) was Catholic, which I thought was kind of cool, since I was totally nonreligious. You can imagine my disappointment to learn nearly a half century later that both of her natural parents were Jewish. Elsewhere in her memoir, my friend referred to her mother's sister, who was a member of the Communist Party and got caught up in the Hollywood blacklist and lost her job. (That was the first I heard of it, btw.) Things turned out well for her since she hooked up with and married a wealthy Jewish doctor, who left her a sizable fortune when he died. She eventually moved to Israel where she found nirvana, marrying a much younger man and enjoying late in life "fantastic sex." So, it appears that what motivates many young Communists is the dream of becoming fantastically wealthy and enjoying life as a plutocrat, not the BS of improving life for the downtrodden. If I weren't such a natural skeptic, I would have been very disillusioned, but not as much as I was to discover late in life that her father was Jewish and not Catholic. Apologies to all those women I dated in my 20′s and 30′s whom I regaled with the story of my half-Jewish, half-Catholic prom date.

Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] , Website June 21, 2016 at 7:03 pm GMT

For two years lawyers tried to give him a summons, but he was a quick runner. There are funny videos showing Browder running away from summons.

I thoroughly enjoyed the video:-)

Seraphim , June 22, 2016 at 2:08 am GMT
@tbraton

It became tedious to evoke the murky relations of Bolshevism with the Jewish bank cartel in the financing of Lenin, Trotsky &Co by Jacob Schiff ("a banker who grew up in House of Rothschild Frankfurt, monopolized American rail system, funded the Rockefellers through First City Bank, ADL and the NAACP. Schiff's granddaughter married Al Gore's Son" From his base on Wall Street, he was the foremost Jewish leader from 1880 to 1920 in what later became known as the "Schiff era", grappling with all major Jewish issues and problems of the day, including the plight of Russian Jews under the Tsar, American and international anti-semitism, care of needy Jewish immigrants, and the rise of Zionism" – per Wikipedia), and Warburg ("Paul Warburg was a planner for the U.S. Federal Reserve System which is a collection of private banks, and attended as American representative, the Treaty of Versailles conference, where his brother Max was on the German side of the bargaining table" by Wiki). One can see why Lenin was 'permitted' to pass through Germany!

Schiff financed the Japanese for their attack on Russia ("He extended loans to the Empire of Japan in the amount of $200 million, through Kuhn, Loeb & Co Schiff saw this loan as a means of answering, on behalf of the Jewish people, the anti-Semitic actions of the Russian Empire, specifically the then-recent Kishinev pogrom"), the 1905 Revolution and the 1917 Revolution. "In addition to his famous loan to Japan, Schiff financed loans to many other nations, including those that would come to comprise the Central Powers Schiff made sure none of the funds from his loans ever went to the Russian Empire, which he felt oppressed Jewish people. When the Russian Empire fell in 1917, Schiff believed that the oppression of Jews would end. He formally repealed the impediments within his firm against lending to Russia". It's true that Communist Russia quickly opened the door for foreign investment (NEP) and the looting of Russia.
When Stalin tried to reduce USSR's dependence on foreign investments, he became instantly the monster. It is remarkable that America stood behind Trotsky in the case of the so-called "Show Trials" (The Dewey Commission).
Particularly interesting is that (per Wikipedia);
"Some ten years later, the Dewey Commission was cited in great detail, when in an open letter to the British press dated 25 February 1946, written by George Orwell and signed by Arthur Koestler, C. E. M. Joad, Frank Horrabin, George Padmore, Julian Symons, H. G. Wells, F. A. Ridley, C. A. Smith and John Baird, among others, it was suggested that the Nuremberg Trials then underway were an invaluable opportunity for establishing "historical truth and bearing upon the political integrity" of figures of international standing. Specifically, they called for Rudolf Hess to be interrogated about his alleged meeting with Trotsky and that the Gestapo records then in the hands of Allied experts be examined for any proof of any "liaison between the Nazi Party or State and Trotsky or the other old Bolshevik leaders indicted at the Moscow trials "

tbraton , June 23, 2016 at 12:33 am GMT
@tbraton

BTW I wonder how many people, including posters here, are aware that the U.S., under President Wilson, sent a military expedition to Russia after the Communist takeover there in 1917 and kept them there for about a year and a half. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Expeditionary_Force_Siberia When I was in college in the early 60′s, I bought a paperback of George Kennan's "Russia and the West, Under Lenin and Stalin" (hardcover ed. 1961), the first book of Kennan that I read, and was startled to learn of our military invasion of Russia at the end of WWI and after, something I didn't remember being taught in high school American history a few years earlier. That was about 50 years ago. This past year I got around to reading A. Scott Berg's much acclaimed biography, "Wilson." I didn't remember reading anything in that biography re Wilson's commitment of military forces to Russia. I have just reviewed the index and found one obscure reference to "military intervention in Russia" (p. 590 of hardcover ed.) and George Kennan. More important, I reviewed the Bibliography and found no reference to George Kennan's "Russia and the West, Under Lenin and Stalin." I don't know what to make of the gross omission by a highly-regarded biographer, but it is clear that an effort has been made to downplay this aspect of Wilson's policy, for reasons that escape me.

Kiza , June 23, 2016 at 1:52 am GMT
@tbraton

Maybe because I was educated in a different country I was very well aware of this item of information. It was not only the US, then most of the Western countries from both sides of WW1, including Britain, France, Italy, then also Czechoslovakia (Austria-Hungary), Japan, Germany and so on, which sent troops to Russia on the side of Belaya Gvardiya fighting the Lenin's Bolsheviks, even whilst WW1 was still ongoing. They fought with Belaya Gvardiya in Siberia, Ukraine and Crimea (part of Russia, not part of Ukraine until 1953 when given to Ukraine by the Communist leader Nikita Khrushchev).

This is possibly the best reference about this second, less well known, part of WW1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_movement

The US contingent was supposed to support the Siberain Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_Army but shipped back without fighting.

Sam Shama , June 23, 2016 at 1:56 am GMT
@tbraton

Fascinating, thank you. Reading more, I find that Wilson was motivated to safeguard almost a billion dollars in armaments and equipment [including railway cars] given to Russia by the U.S in the hopes of Russia prevailing over the Central Powers and thereafter adopting the capitalist model. Alas the men and hardware [including frozen machine guns] did not hit the right wavelength with the Siberian winter.

Anatoly Karlin , June 23, 2016 at 2:41 am GMT
@Quartermaster

Just ask Khodorkovsky.

Why don't you ask the ECHR while you're at it?

Seraphim , June 23, 2016 at 5:47 am GMT
Many of us are aware of the 'Allied Intervention in the Russian civil war' which occured in the aftermath of the Peace of Brest-Litovsk while the Entante was still at war with Germany. The chaos which ensued as a result of the misguided policies of the HLH (Hindenburg, Ludendorff, Hoffman), especially the 'Napoleonic complex' of Ludendorff compounded by the greedy desires of many petty German 'Fuersten' for crowns in the East, determined the Allies to intervene, motivated by the following considerations:
- prevent the German or Bolshevik capture of Allied material stockpiles in Arkhangelsk
- mount an attack helping the Czechoslovak Legions stranded on the Trans-Siberian Railroad
– resurrect the Eastern Front by defeating the Bolshevik army with help from the Czechoslovak Legions and an expanded anti-Bolshevik force of local citizens and stop the spread of communism and the Bolshevik cause in Russia.

Now, this is news only for graduates of American schools where history is no more taught. The Wikipedia entry ('Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War') would have been sufficient (for beginners) to set the record straight:

"Severely short of troops to spare, the British and French requested that President Wilson provide American soldiers for the campaign. In July 1918, against the advice of the United States Department of War, Wilson agreed to the limited participation of 5,000 United States Army troops in the campaign. This force, which became known as the "American North Russia Expeditionary Force" (a.k.a. the Polar Bear Expedition) were sent to Arkhangelsk while another 8,000 soldiers, organised as the American Expeditionary Force Siberia, were shipped to Vladivostok from the Philippines and from Camp Fremont in California. That same month, the Canadian government agreed to the British government's request to command and provide most of the soldiers for a combined British Empire force, which also included Australian and Indian troops. Some of this force was the Canadian Siberian Expeditionary Force; another part was the North Russia Intervention. A Royal Navy squadron was sent to the Baltic under Rear-Admiral Edwyn Alexander-Sinclair. This force consisted of modern C-class cruisers and V- and W-class destroyers. In December 1918, Sinclair sailed into Estonian and Latvian ports, sending in troops and supplies, and promising to attack the Bolsheviks "as far as my guns can reach". In January 1919, he was succeeded in command by Rear-Admiral Walter Cowan.
The Japanese, concerned about their northern border, sent the largest military force, numbering about 70,000. They desired the establishment of a buffer state in Siberia, and the Imperial Japanese Army General Staff viewed the situation in Russia as an opportunity for settling Japan's "northern problem". The Japanese government was also intensely hostile to communism.
The Italians created the special "Corpo di Spedizione" with Alpini troops sent from Italy and ex-POWs of Italian ethnicity from the former Austro-Hungarian army who were recruited to the Italian Legione Redenta. They were initially based in the Italian Concession in Tientsin and numbered about 2,500.
Romania, Greece, Poland, China, and Serbia also sent contingents in support of the intervention."
All these troops have been involved, in a way or another, in the Russian Civil War, but by 1920 all have been withdrawn. Only the Japanese stayed in the Maritime Provinces of the Russian Far East until 1922 and in northern Sakhalin until 1925.

There is obviously no space here to talk about the 'Treaty of Rapallo' between Russia and Germany of 1922 and of the 'Genoa Conference' held in Genoa in 1922, where "the representatives of 34 countries gathered to discuss global economic problems following World War I. The purpose was to formulate strategies to rebuild central and eastern Europe, particularly Russia, after the war, and also to negotiate a relationship between European capitalist economies, and the new Russian Bolshevik regime". These were signals for the introduction of NEP (New Economic Policy) and the policy of 'concessions' which was, in Lenin's terms " a strategic retreat from socialism".
Anyhow, I think that a BA is a minimum requirement in order to gain a modicum of understanding of these problems. For sure Wikipedia is not sufficient.

tbraton , June 28, 2016 at 3:31 pm GMT
@Kiza

There is no question the involvement of U.S. troops in Russia following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 is downplayed in the U.S. As I noted, the issue wasn't touched on in my high school history class, and I was surprised to learn of our military involvement in Russia's civil war only when I went to college and bought the small paperback of Kennan's "Russia and the West Under Lenin and Stalin." In fact, I have a one-volume history of the U.S. written by one of the U.S.'s leading historians, Samuel Eliot Morison, who was the highly acclaimed biographer of Christopher Columbus and John Paul Jones and a long-time professor of history at Harvard. He was also the author of the highly acclaimed "History of the United States Naval Operations in World War II," a 15-volume effort. In his "The Oxford History of the American People" (1965, 1122 pages, ending with the 1963 assassination of JFK), he states briefly at p. 878 that "President Wilson went along [with efforts of France and Britain to overthrow the Bolsheviks] to the extent of sending a small American force to Archangel, ostensibly to prevent a cache of military supplies reaching Germany, and participating in a Japanese-directed invasion of Siberia, to see that Japan did not go too far." Rather cryptic reference to a somewhat small military involvement that lasted for more than a year and a half, but, in defense of Morison, his history was a one-volume affair (published by the Oxford University Press) and the American involvement in Russia had no effect on the Russian Revolution, other than to sour the relationship between the new Communist government and the U.S., which did not diplomatically recognize the new regime until FDR became President in 1933.

A. Scott Berg has no such defense. His detailed biography of Wilson runs to 743 pages, and he makes no reference at all to the U.S. military contingent that was sent to Russia in 1918 by Wilson and remained there for more than a year and a half. You would think that Berg could have added a few brief sentences alluding to the military expeditionary force and a brief summary of its impact, but not a word. This from an author who discusses the infamous "Palmer raids" at the end of the Wilson Administration and the bombs which set off those raids. I am just puzzled about the omission and fail to see what agenda is being served, other than it highlights the utter hypocrisy of Wilson with his vaunted "Fourteen Points," which impliedly called for respect of international borders. Wilson was also the hypocrite who won reelection in a close race in 1916 running on a campaign that "he kept us out of war" and the declared war against Germany a month after he was reinaugurated in March 1917.

BilDing , August 2, 2017 at 2:58 am GMT
Alternate title

Benefits of Friends in High Places

Clinton has Congress in a frenzy over a Russian illusion.
Browder has Congress in a frenzy over a Russian illusion.

Is it little wonder that real America has been taken to the cleaners over the past 4 decades?

Robert Magill , August 3, 2017 at 10:00 am GMT

BTW I wonder how many people, including posters here, are aware that the U.S., under President Wilson, sent a military expedition to Russia after the Communist takeover there in 1917 and kept them there for about a year and a half.

Actually this 'invasion' was to help stabilize Russia during the revolution and to block Japan in the far east. Russia and the US had been good friends and allies since we helped Russia during the Crimean War, and with the purchase of Alaska and they had helped us during the US Civil War.
Harry Truman put an end to all that 'good neighbor policy" when he needed a scapegoat to launch the National Security State and prevent another depression. On it goes.

http://robertmagill.wordpress.com

TheJester , August 4, 2017 at 10:38 am GMT
Seems like the entire Browder/Magnitsky hustle is nothing more than Jews protecting Jews in a kind of international crime syndicate. When found out, they even have the network in place to control the narrative about their crimes to the point that trying to hold them accountable quickly morphs into a fundamental violation of their human rights.

"What do you mean you can't rip off a country's assets and hide the loot in offshore accounts? What do you do when you see a $10 bill laying in the street? You take it, of course! What else is a person suppose to do? When opportunity strikes, you make the best of it."

Browder and Magnitshy . How history repeats itself! I recall reading that something similar happened in the Weimar Republic when Germany was stripped of its assets after WWI. Indeed, even then there was an ((( international syndicate ))) in place to control the narrative and protect the shysters.

Don bass , August 4, 2017 at 6:39 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

"""Meaning, Putin gets a healthy cut. If he doesn't get a piece of the action, you will suddenly be found to have evaded taxes, or worse. And, heaven forfend, if you decided to use your wealth to oppose Putin politically, just as Khodorkovsky."""
What evidence do you have for this libellous allegation?? These assertions are made habitually in the western media. However this article on Browder demonstrates who are the parties making such claims and why.

Hibernian , August 5, 2017 at 12:41 am GMT
@Uebersetzer

We're talking about his grandson, an international businessman active in Russia at one time. The WASP grandfather who eventually became CPUSA chief married a Jewish woman and their mathematician son was the international businessman grandson's father.

Try to get your facts straight before you call everybody and his brother a Nazi.

n230099 , August 6, 2017 at 12:03 pm GMT
@Kiza

"The most interesting, previously unknown, detail to me in this article was that Browder's grandfather was the leader of the US Communist Party. "

That's funny. The first thing I thought upon seeing the name and the topic was "oh good grief could it be?'

Kiza , August 10, 2017 at 3:48 am GMT
@Skeptikal

Being English speaking and brought up in the Anglo-world but with good understanding of Russia through Communism, made this Jewish Godfather much more damaging to Russia than the other forced Jewish emigres: Berezovsky, Gusinsky and Khodorovsky.

Browder's ties with Mossad and CIA make him a prototypical Deep-Stater, spreading Anglo-Zionist dominance of the World (Globalism) and getting personally rich in the process. If the Anglo-Zionists manage to bring down Russia (say, kill Putin) then Browder could become the Paul Bremer III of Russia (perhaps titled William Browder I).

Jacques , Website September 10, 2017 at 8:26 am GMT
There a book, a merciless, factual excoriation of the Browder Hoax: The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception by Alex Krainer

https://www.amazon.com/Killing-William-Browder-Deconstructing-Dangerous-ebook/dp/B074TJ5LCK/

Fran800 , February 9, 2018 at 4:38 am GMT
@NewModelArmy

Earl Browder, born into a Kansas Methodist farm family became the head of the Communist party in the U.S. in the 30′s, probably for idealistic reasons. As a Communist, he became an atheist. He went to Russia and married a Russian Jewish woman. Their son, Felix, raised as a Jew by his mother, became a mathematician. Felix Browder married a Jewish woman and their son is the William Browder, subject of this article. William Browder is thus 3/4 Jewish. His one grandfather, from whom he got his name, was born a Christian gentile, but chucked it up to become a Communist leader. Through marriage to Jewish women, his grandson, William, is a ruthless capitalist Jewish oligarch who contributed to scavenging the decaying body of the former Soviet Union.

Sean , July 18, 2018 at 5:26 am GMT

intensity and the time he was devoting to anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behaviour of a top level international businessman.

The writer does not know much about the business world, does he? Browder is still looking to get paid off, and businessmen can be motivated by vengeance (Warren Buffet included). Anyway, Mr. Browder seems far too focused on his wallet and effective an operator on that account to have been directed by MI6.

There is this myth that secret intelligence agents are more competent than lesser mortals (such as policemen). I like reading memoirs and novels about spys as much as anyone, but rich, tax dodging/philanthropic and litigious people like Browder are the real 007s of this world. I dare say there are a few holes in his story.

AnonFromTN , July 18, 2018 at 2:33 pm GMT
I can only tell Mr. Shamir that if he had stolen as much money as Browder, he'd be untouchable, too. Look at any dollar bill. It says "IN GOD WE TRUST". This is THE God Americans trust in. All the other gods are subject to freedom of religion.
HBM , July 18, 2018 at 3:01 pm GMT
@TheJester

Exactly right. Looting Russia– and later working to destroy it for objecting -- is their YHWH-given right. The Jewish criminality and evil Browder embodies is of so great a magnitude that it's difficult for a decent person to process such a creature.

Svigor , July 18, 2018 at 3:29 pm GMT
Funny, I heard (((Big Media's))) glowing take on Browder the other day and figured he must be a piece of shit. I don't base conclusions on such hunches, of course, so I guess I'll have to read the article and check around.

But it's funny how race-realism, countersemitism, and hatred of (((Big Media))) have such predictive power.

[Jul 18, 2018] Lunatic Politics (Part 1) - Russiagate Is A Religion

Michael Krieger @LibertyBlitz "Russiagate is becoming a religion, and the intelligence agencies are its church."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

10:55 AM-Jul 17,2018

by Tyler Durden Wed, 07/18/2018 - 08:00 67 SHARES Authored by Michael Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

As the Snowden documents and David Sanger's great new book and other books make plain, and as U.S. officials are wont to brag, the U.S. intelligence services break into computers and computer networks abroad at an astounding rate, certainly on a greater scale than any other intelligence service in the world. Every one of these intrusions in another country violates that country's criminal laws prohibiting unauthorized computer access and damage, no less than the Russian violations of U.S. laws outlined in Mueller's indictment...

It is no response to say that the United States doesn't meddle in foreign elections, because it has in the past - at least as recently as Bill Clinton's intervention in the Russian presidential election of 1996 and possibly as recently as the Hillary Clinton State Department's alleged intervention in Russia's 2011 legislative elections .

And during the Cold War the United States intervened in numerous foreign elections, more than twice as often as the Soviet Union.

Intelligence history expert Loch Johnson told Scott Shane that the 2016 Russia electoral interference is "the cyber-age version of standard United States practice for decades, whenever American officials were worried about a foreign vote."

The CIA's former chief of Russia operations, Steven L. Hall, told Shane: "If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all." Hall added that "the United States 'absolutely' has carried out such election influence operations historically, and I hope we keep doing it."

Lawfare : Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump's Press Conference With Putin

Nothing gets the phony "Resistance," corporate media and neocons more hysterical than when Trump isn't belligerent enough while meeting with foreign leaders abroad. While the pearl clutching was intense during the North Korea summit, the reoccurring, systematic outrage spectacle was taken to entirely new levels of stupidity and hyperbole during yesterday's meeting with Putin in Finland.

The clown parade really got going after compulsive liar and former head of the CIA under Barack Obama, John Brennan, accused Trump of treason on Twitter -- which resistance drones dutifully retweeted, liked and permanently enshrined within the gospel of Russiagate.

Some people hate Trump so intensely they're willing to take the word of a professional liar and manipulator as scripture.

In fact, Brennan is so uniquely skilled at the dark art of deception, Trevor Timm, executive direction of the Freedom of the Press foundation described him in the following manner in a must read 2014 article :

"this is the type of spy who apologizes even though he's not sorry, who lies because he doesn't like to tell the truth." The article also refers to him as "the most talented liar in Washington."

This is the sort of hero the phony "resistance" is rallying around. No thank you.

It wasn't just Brennan, of course. The mental disorder colloquially known as Trump Derangement Syndrome is widely distributed throughout society at this point. Baseless accusations of treason were thrown around casually by all sorts of TDS sufferers, including sitting members of Congress. To see the extent of the disease, take a look at the show put on by Democratic Congressman from Washington state, Rep. Adam Smith.

Via The Hill :

"At every turn of his trip to Europe, President Trump has followed a script that parallels Moscow's plan to weaken and divide America's allies and partners and undermine democratic values. There is an extensive factual record suggesting that President Trump's campaign and the Russians conspired to influence our election for President Trump," Smith, a top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said in an official statement .

"Now Trump is trying to cover it up. There is no sugar coating this. It is hard to see President Trump siding with Vladimir Putin over our own intelligence community and our criminal investigators as anything other than treason."

Those are some serious accusations. He must surely have a strong argument to support such proclamations, right? Wrong. Turns out it was all show, pure politics.

In an interview with The Seattle Times, Smith expanded on his "treason" comment, saying Trump legally did not commit treason but has committed other impeachable offenses.

"Treason might have been a little bit of hyperbole," Smith told The Seattle Times . "There is no question in my mind that the United States has the need to begin an impeachment investigation."

It says a lot that the resistance itself doesn't even believe its own nonsense. They're just using hyperbolic and dangerous language to make people crazy and feed more TDS.

Here's yet another example of a wild-eyed Democratic Congressman sounding utterly bloodthirsty and unhinged. Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee is openly saying the U.S. is at war with Russia.

From The Hill :

"No question about it," Cohen told Hill.TV's Buck Sexton and Krystal Ball on "Rising" when asked whether the Russian hacking and propaganda effort constituted an act of war.

"It was a foreign interference with our basic Democratic values. The underpinnings of Democratic society is elections, and free elections, and they invaded our country," he continued.

Cohen went on to say that the U.S. should have countered with a cyber attack on Russia.

"A cyber attack that made Russian society valueless. They could have gone into Russian banks, Russian government. Our cyber abilities are such that we could have attacked them with a cyber attack that would have crippled Russia," he said.

This is a very sick individual.

While the above is incredibly twisted, it's become increasingly clear that Russiagate has become something akin to a religion. It's adherents have become so attached to the story that Trump's "wholly in the pocket of Putin," they're increasingly lobbing serious and baseless accusations against people who fail to acquiesce to their dogma.

I was a victim of this back in November 2016 when I was falsely slandered in The Washington Post's ludicrous and now infamous PropOrNot article.

me title=

More recently, we've seen MSNBC pundit Malcom Nance (ex-military/intelligence) call Glenn Greenwald a Russian agent (without evidence of course), followed by "journalist" David Corn calling Rand Paul a "traitor" for stating indisputable facts .

me title=

Calling someone a traitor for stating obvious facts that threaten the hysteria you're trying to cultivate is a prime example of how this whole thing has turned into some creepy D.C. establishment religion. If these people have such a solid case and the facts are on their side, there's no need to resort to such demented craziness. It does nothing other than promote societal insanity and push the unconvinced away.

It's because of stuff like this that we're no longer able to have a real conversation about anything in this country (many Trump cheerleaders employ the same tactics) . This is a deadly thing for any society and will be explored in Part 2.

* * *

If you liked this article and enjoy my work, consider becoming a monthly Patron , or visit the Support Page to show your appreciation for independent content creators.

Like this post? Donate bitcoins: 1ArSt9rxBCHgi9ddV3aJSK1dL97gRLimGS

[Jul 18, 2018] Let's See Who's Bluffing in the Criminal Case Against the Russians The American Conservative

Jul 18, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

It was a remarkable moment in a remarkable press conference. President Donald Trump had just finished a controversial summit meeting in Helsinki with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, and the two were talking to the media . Jeff Mason, a political affairs reporter with Reuters, stood up and asked Putin a question pulled straight out of the day's headlines: "Will you consider extraditing the 12 Russian officials that were indicted last week by a U.S. grand jury?"

The "12 Russian officials" Mason spoke of were military intelligence officers accused of carrying out a series of cyberattacks against various American-based computer networks (including those belonging to the Democratic National Committee), the theft of emails and other data, and the release of a significant portion of this information to influence the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The names and organizational affiliations of these 12 officers were contained in a detailed 29-page indictment prepared by special prosecutor Robert Mueller, and subsequently made public by Assistant Attorney General Rob Rosenstein on July 13 -- a mere three days prior to the Helsinki summit.

Vladimir Putin responded, "We have an existing agreement between the United States of America and the Russian Federation, an existing treaty, that dates back to 1999, the mutual assistance on criminal cases. This treaty is in full effect. It works quite efficiently."

Putin then discussed the relationship between this agreement -- the 1999 Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty -- and the Mueller indictment. "This treaty has specific legal procedures," Putin noted, that "we can offer the appropriate commission headed by special attorney Mueller. He can use this treaty as a solid foundation and send a formal and official request to us so that we would interrogate, we would hold the questioning of these individuals who he believes are privy to some crimes and our enforcement are perfectly able to do this questioning and send the appropriate materials to the United States."

Trump Calls Off Cold War II Ron and Rand Paul Call Out Foreign Policy Hysteria

In the uproar that followed the Trump-Putin press conference , the exchange between Mason and Putin was largely forgotten amidst invective over Trump's seeming public capitulation on the issue of election interference. "Today's press conference in Helsinki," Senator John McCain observed afterwards in a typical comment, "was one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory."

It took an interview with Putin after the summit concluded , conducted by Fox News's Chris Wallace, to bring the specific issue of the 12 indicted Russians back to the forefront and give it context. From Putin's perspective, this indictment and the way it was handled by the United States was a political act. "It's the internal political games of the United States. Don't make the relationship between Russia and the United States -- don't hold it hostage of this internal political struggle. And it's quite clear to me that this is used in the internal political struggle, and it's nothing to be proud of for American democracy, to use such dirty methods in the political rivalry."

Regarding the indicted 12, Putin reiterated the points he had made earlier to Jeff Mason. "We -- with the United States -- we have a treaty for assistance in criminal cases, an existing treaty that exists from 1999. It's still in force, and it works sufficiently. Why wouldn't Special Counsel Mueller send us an official request within the framework of this agreement? Our investigators will be acting in accordance with this treaty. They will question each individual that the American partners are suspecting of something. Why not a single request was filed? Nobody sent us a single formal letter, a formal request."

There is no extradition treaty between the U.S. and Russia, which makes all the calls for Trump to demand the extradition of the 12 Russians little more than a continuation of the "internal political games" Putin alluded to in his interview. There is, however, the treaty that Putin referenced at both the press conference and during the Wallace interview.

Signed in Moscow on June 17, 1999, the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty calls for the "prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes" by both parties "in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty where the conduct that is the subject of the request constitutes a crime under the laws of both Parties."

It should be noted that the indicted 12 have not violated any Russian laws. But the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty doesn't close the door on cooperation in this matter. Rather, the treaty notes that "The Requested Party may, in its discretion, also provide legal assistance where the conduct that is the subject of the request would not constitute a crime under the laws of the Requested Party."

It specifically precludes the process of cooperating from inferring a right "on the part of any other persons to obtain evidence, to have evidence excluded, or to impede the execution of a request." In short, if the United States were to avail itself of the treaty's terms, Russia would not be able to use its cooperation as a vehicle to disrupt any legal proceedings underway in the U.S.

The legal assistance that the treaty facilitates is not inconsequential. Through it, the requesting party can, among other things, obtain testimony and statements from designated persons; receive documents, records, and other items; and arrange the transfer of persons in custody for testimony on the territory of the requesting party.

If the indictment of the 12 Russians wasn't the "dirty method" used in a domestic American "political rivalry" that Putin described, one would imagine that Assistant Attorney General Rob Rosenstein would have availed himself of the opportunity to gather additional evidence regarding the alleged crimes. He would also have, at the very least, made a request to have these officers appear in court in the United States to face the charges put forward in the indictment. The treaty specifically identifies the attorney general of the United States "or persons designated by the Attorney General" as the "Central Authority" for treaty implementation. Given the fact that Jeff Sessions has recused himself from all matters pertaining to the investigation by the Department of Justice into allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 election, the person empowered to act is Rosenstein.

There are several grounds under the treaty for denying requested legal assistance, including anything that might prejudice "the security or other essential interests of the Requested Party." However, it also requires that the reasons for the any denial of requested assistance be put in writing. Moreover, prior to denying a request, the Requested Party "shall consult with the Central Authority of the Requesting Party to consider whether legal assistance can be given subject to such conditions as it deems necessary. If the Requesting Party accepts legal assistance subject to these conditions, it shall comply with the conditions."

By twice raising the treaty in the context of the 12 Russians, Putin has clearly signaled that Russia would be prepared to proceed along these lines.

If the indictment issued by the Department of Justice is to be taken seriously, then it is incumbent upon Rosenstein to call Putin's bluff, and submit a detailed request for legal assistance per the mandate and procedures specified in the treaty -- in short, compel Russia to either put up or shut up.

Any failure to do so would only confirm Putin's assertion that the indictment was a political game to undermine the presidency of Donald J. Trump.

Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. He is the author of Deal of the Century: How Iran Blocked the West's Road to War .


Rob July 17, 2018 at 11:03 pm

Very cogent analysis. Putin, who's incredibly well briefed, knew exactly what he was offering, and thought that by doing so, would force the DoJ/Mueller to either take him up on his offer or otherwise display the overt politicism of the indictments. But the American anti-Trump mindhive is so completely addled, they of course miss the point entirely. The absence of reason among the anti-Trump/anti-Russia collective is truly something to behold – it's scary.
Janek , says: July 17, 2018 at 11:29 pm
The request V. Putin proposed and Scot Ritter writes about, if send to Russia, would be equivalent to 'go and whistle' and would be treated the same way the Russians treat the requests from Poland to return the remains of the Polish plane that crashed in controversial and strange circumstances near Smolensk on April 10, 2010. They, the Russians, did not return the remains of the plane up until today and the place where the plane crashed they bulldozed the ground and paved with very thick layer of concrete.

Such request would only give the Russians propaganda tools to delay and dilute any responsibility from the Russian side and at the end they would blame the USA for the whole mess with no end to their investigation, because they would investigate until the US investigators would drop dead. Anybody who seriously thinks about V.

Putin offer to investigate anything with Russia should first have his head examined by a very good, objective, and politically neutral head specialist.

b. , says: July 17, 2018 at 11:50 pm
"If the indictment issued by the Department of Justice is to be taken seriously, then it is incumbent upon Rosenstein to call Putin's bluff, and submit a detailed request for legal assistance per the mandate and procedures specified in the treaty -- in short, compel Russia to either put up or shut up.

Any failure to do so would only confirm Putin's assertion that the indictment was a political game to undermine the presidency of Donald J. Trump."

That was one long-winded way of recognizing that Putin just told the US biparty establishment behind the manufactured "Russia!" hysteria to put up or shut up.

EliteCommInc. , says: July 18, 2018 at 2:57 am
I don't think that Pres Putin has anything to lose here.

"ARTICLE 4 DENIAL OF LEGAL ASSISTANCE

The Central Authority of the Requested Party may deny legal assistance if:

(1) the request relates to a crime under military law that is not a crime under general criminal law;

(2) the execution of the request would prejudice the security or other essential interests of the Requested Party; or "whether accurate or not the treaty permits a denial of request, if said requests threaten Russian security."

Almost by definition, an investigation interrogation by the US of the personnel in question because said questioning might very well stray into other areas , unrelated to the hacking charge. Now Pres. Putin has played two cards: a treaty is in place that deals with criminal matters between the two states and surely must have known that and should have already made the formal requests in conjunction with the treaty or he didn't know either way, the rush to embarrass the president may very well backfire. As almost everything about this investigation has.

Realist , says: July 18, 2018 at 3:16 am
"The DOJ should call his bluff."

Right! That's not going to happen .the DOJ has no proof .their indictment was a ploy to queer any deal with Russia. Anybody that believes anything the 'intelligence' agencies say, without proof, is an idiot.

[Jul 18, 2018] Russiagate A CIA Concocted Hoax. Trump Knows It. Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

Notable quotes:
"... No Russian interference in America's political process occurred in 2016, earlier, or is being cooked up for the nation's November midterm elections. ..."
"... Trump knows it and said so in Helsinki. When asked if he holds Russia accountable for anything, he said: ..."
"... Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago. ..."
"... VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.globalresearch.ca

Russiagate: A CIA Concocted Hoax. Trump Knows It. By Stephen Lendman Global Research, July 18, 2018 Region: Russia and FSU , USA Theme: Intelligence , Media Disinformation In-depth Report: U.S. Elections

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above

No Russian interference in America's political process occurred in 2016, earlier, or is being cooked up for the nation's November midterm elections.

Trump knows it and said so in Helsinki. When asked if he holds Russia accountable for anything, he said:

"I hold both countries responsible (for dismal bilateral relations). I think that the United States has been foolish. I think we've all been foolish And I think we're all to blame."

Regarding election meddling, he said:

"There was no collusion at all. Everybody knows it. And people are being brought out to the fore. So far that I know, virtually none of it related to the campaign. And they're going to have to try really hard to find somebody that did relate to the campaign."

"My people came to me and some others (T)hey think it's Russia President Putin said it's not Russia. I will say this: I dont see any reason why it would be."

" President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today."

Trump is wrong about most things, not this. No evidence, nothing, proves Russian meddling in the US political process.

If it existed, it would have been revealed long ago. It never was and never will be because there's nothing credible to reveal, Big Lies alone.

Trump's above remarks were in Helsinki. In response to a raging Russophobic firestorm of criticism back home, he backtracked from his above comments, saying he misspoke abroad.

He accepts the intelligence community's claim about Russian US election meddling – knowing it didn't occur.

Russiagate was cooked up by Obama's thuggish Russophobic CIA director John Brennan , media keeping the Big Lie alive.

DNC/John Podesta emails were leaked, not hacked – an indisputable fact media scoundrels suppress to their disgrace.

Former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray earlier explained that

"(t)he source of these emails and leaks has nothing to do with Russia at all," adding:

"I discovered what the source was when I attended the Sam Adam's whistleblower award in Washington."

"The source of these emails (came) from within official circles in Washington DC. You should look to Washington, not to Moscow."

"WikiLeaks has never published any material received from the Russian government or from any proxy of the Russian government. It's simply a completely untrue claim designed to divert attention from the content of the material" and its true source.

The Big Lie alone matters when it's the official narrative. The Russian meddling hoax and mythical Kremlin threat to US security are central to maintaining adversarial relations with America's key invented enemy.

It's vital to unjustifiably justifying the nation's global empire of bases, its outrageous amount of military spending, its belligerence toward all sovereign independent states, its endless wars of aggression, its scorn for world peace and stability, its neoliberal harshness to pay for it all, along with transferring the nation's wealth from ordinary people to its privileged class.

America's deeply corrupted political process is far too debauched to fix, rigged to serve wealth, power and privilege exclusively, at war on humanity at home and abroad.

It's a tyrannical plutocracy and oligarchy, a police state, not a democracy, a cesspool of criminality, inequity and injustice, run by sinister dark forces – monied interests and bipartisan self-serving political scoundrels, wicked beyond redemption, threatening humanity's survival.

Today is the most perilous time in world history. What's going on should terrify everyone everywhere.

Washington's rage for global dominance, its military madness, its unparalleled recklessness, threatens world peace, stability, and survival.

*

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the CRG, Correspondent of Global Research based in Chicago.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

[Jul 18, 2018] Browder was heavily involved in the looting. He is heavy in distributing anti-Russian propaganda in a heavily Jewish controlled media, and he was all in for Clinton.

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com


I Am Jack's Ma -> overbet Mon, 07/16/2018 - 18:56 Permalink

8 of 10, and all top 5 of Hillary's (on the books) donors were Jews - a group that is under 3% of the US population.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/10/top-five-clinton-donors-are-jewish-how-anti-semitic-is-this-fact.html

It has been reported in multiple mainstream and Jewish news sources that Jews contribute about 50% of donations to the Democratic Party.

Wherever one looks in print or tv news media, given that Jews are <3% of the US *and* Russian population, any objective review of

anti-Russian commentators would reveal a massive over-representation of Jews.

https://russia-insider.com/en/politics/its-time-drop-jew-taboo/ri22186

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/06/phil-giraldi/hating-russia-is-a-full-time-job/

After the collapse of the USSR, under Yeltsin, a large handful of 'oligarchs' grew immensely wealthy by buying Russian assets on the cheap. This was part of a privitization drive largely overseen by American economists.

The oligarchs were mostly Jews. The chief economic advisors were largely Jews.

http://www.softpanorama.org/Skeptics/Pseudoscience/harvard_mafia.shtml

https://www.thenation.com/article/harvard-boys-do-russia/

These are *facts*

Responding to my thanks for granting me the audience at such a hectic time, Boris Abramovich commented with a faint smile: "You would be writing the book in any case ..."

I understood that my visit was somewhat imposed on him so I got right to the point:

"Boris Abramovich, the real reason for writing this book is this. As you probably know there is a television show called 'The Puppets.' Puppets of Yeltsin, Yastrzhembsky, Chernomyrdin, Kulikov, and others perform. But the main puppeteer is behind the scenes -- his name is Shenderovich. And in real life there are Yeltsin, Kiriyenko, Fedorov, Stepashin and the others. But the main puppeteer has a long Jewish name: Berezovsky-Gusinsky- Smolensky-Khodorkovsky, and so on.

"This is to say that for the first time in a thousand years, since the first Jews settled in Russia, we hold the real power in this country. I want to ask you straight out: How do you intend to use it? What do you intend to do in this country? Cast it into the chaos of poverty or raise it from the mud? Do you understand that a chance like this comes only once in a thousand years? Do you understand your responsibility to our [Jewish] people for your actions?"

Boris Abramovich responded with some difficulty: "Of course, as you see, financial power is in Jewish hands, but we have never looked at this from the point of view of historical responsibility."

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n6p13_Michaels.html

Putin stopped the fire sale, essentially by dividing the oligarchs, leveraging some against others.

Browder was heavily involved in the looting. He is heavy in distributing anti-Russian propaganda in a heavily Jewish controlled media, and he was all in for Clinton.

And he wants Trump impeached (I recommend reading the article below if you read just 1 link)

Most readers will identify Bill Broder with Hermitage Capital, but few will recall that the investment firm was also funded by one Beny Steimetz, the Israeli oligarch and financier just arrested (August 14) by Israeli and Swiss anti-corruption officials for widescale fraud and money laundering. The Russia privatization shark who was once Israel's richest man is a subject for another report. I only bring him up here to point at two facets of this war on Putin. First, the Jewish connection in all this is something that just needs to come out. Secondly, the ring of profiteers bent on Putin's demise all have gigantic skeletons in their wardrobes. A story citing one Putin hater, when investigated, always leads to ten more. This is no coincidence.

Back to Browder, his Hermitage was at one time was the largest foreign portfolio investor in Russia. That was before Vladimir Putin put a stop to the rape of Russia's legacy and the theft of her assets. This is undeniable fact, and even the lowliest of Russian peasants know it by now. Browder, a Chicago Jew, set out to profit from Russian privatization after Yeltsin, but was thwarted like other sharks when Putin's hammer fell on other mafiosos. RICO suits, libel cases, tax evasion charges, and ties to some of the seediest characters in world finance highlight the man who pushed the now famous Magnitsky Act into US foreign policy play. It's no coincidence that Browder has emerged as a central player in the ongoing investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 elections. The privateer who made billions off Russia privatization turned into a human rights activist, and now he's bent on seeing Donald Trump impeached!

https://m.journal-neo.org/2017/09/16/vladimir-putin-and-russia-versus-zionist-fairytales/

The war on Russia is very heavily a product of Jews pursuing Jewish group interests, internationally.

A man named Henry Ford once wrote a book on the topic. Of all the criticism it received and receives, that it is 'hate,' one will seldom find any effort to dispute its accuracy.

RationalLuddite -> I Am Jack's Ma Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:33 Permalink

Terrific post I Am Jack. And also thank you for emphasising the unholy convergence of vested interests in Putin Russia demonization - the Jewish bankers raping Rusdia in the 90s on a scale not seen since the Mongols hordes, and Western oligarchs seeing a chance to become even more insanely wealthy (hence the London, Wall St, Pentagon, Fed, DC, Brussels etc involvement).

Putin is an extraordinary and immensely intelligent and brave individual who divided and knee-capped the world mafia. THIS is why he is demonised, not because he is some evil Tsar of Mordor. That being said he hasn't done it alone - the people of Russia made huge mistakes by allowing communism in, and economic genocide in the 1990s was wilful influcted upon them, but their resilience is extraordinary.

I hope they are all watching their backs. Putin if all people stated that he is careful about cornering rats with now way out, so i have a feeling that things are going to get unpredictable ...

RationalLuddite -> El Vaquero Mon, 07/16/2018 - 18:26 Permalink

http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/hating-russia-is-a-full-time-job/

Good article. Remember that Bill Browder's grandfather was head of the American Communist Party in the 1930s ...

The Killing of William Browder is compulsory reading if you want to sssure yourself about that lying theiving NPD sack of s*** Browder. Lots on him on Sott etc.

https://youtu.be/ryVavTF6hR0

Yeah - he's got nothing to hide.

I did post about 3 months back that Browder and the trillion dollar rape Russia in the 1990s , the Money Plane etc are the key to understand current events, Putin and what is being covered up now, in my opinion, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to get traction.

Cardinal Fang -> RationalLuddite Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:09 Permalink

Yeah but $400 mill is what he put on the table, you know there is more shit behind this...

[Jul 18, 2018] Russia would like to ask a few questions to the US officials believed to have HELPED Browder funnel 400K to Clinton and probably avoid paying tax on 1.5 billion in Russia AND the US...

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Whoa Dammit -> I Am Jack's Ma Tue, 07/17/2018 - 10:39 Permalink

I'd not seen the AP reporters question that triggered this before. It looks like the reporter was trying to embarrass both Putin and Trump but wound up getting his ass, Clinton's ass, and the asses of the intelligence community handed to him instead.

wafm -> Whoa Dammit Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:39 Permalink

too right. If I remember correctly, it was in the context of Putin saying Russia is open to have FBI guys come to question the 12 GRU guys indicted (no proof yet) by Mueller.

In return, he then said Russia would like to ask a few questions to the US officials believed to have HELPED Browder funnel $400K to Clinton and probably avoid paying tax on 1.5 billion in Russia AND the US...

Browder has to be on top of the US wanted list in the not too distant future or there really is no fuckin justice.

BROWDER IS A FUCKIN TRAITOR, LOCK HIM UP!

[Jul 18, 2018] Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception Alex Krainer: with review by The Saker

Aug 18, 2017 | thesaker.is
The Saker:
Today I want to introduce you to a book whose importance simply cannot be overstated: The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception by Alex Krainer. I consider that book as a *must read* for any person trying to understand modern Russia and where the new Cold War with Russia came from.
Most of you must have heard of the Magnitsky Act or even maybe of William Browder himself. You probably know that Browder was a British businessman who founded Hermitage Capital Management investment fund which Sergei Magnitsky represented as a lawyer and auditor. Finally, you must have heard that Magnitsky died (was killed) in a Russian jail while Browder was placed by the Russian government on a black list and denied entry. For the vast majority of you, that is probably as much thought as you ever gave this topic and I have to confess that this is also true for me. I never bothered really researching this issue because I knew the context so well that this, by itself, gave me a quasi-certitude that I knew what had happened. Still, when I read this book I was amazed at the fantastically detailed account Krainer provides to what is really an amazing story.
In his book Alex Krainer offers us the truth and truly shows us how deep the rabbit hole goes....
The Vineyard of the Saker
Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception – Alex Krainer: with review by The Saker The Saker

See also

As Congress still swoons over the anti-Kremlin Magnitsky narrative, Western political and media leaders refuse to let their people view a documentary that debunks the fable, reports Robert Parry.
Consortium News (Updated Aug. 4, 2017)
A Blacklisted Film and the New Cold War
Robert Parry

[Jul 18, 2018] Russia wants to question Christopher Steele, Michael McFaul, top politicians for aiding Bill Browder -- RT World News

Notable quotes:
"... "Browder's long-standing partners in crime." ..."
"... "on even terms." ..."
"... "meet US authorities half-way" ..."
"... "on the condition" ..."
"... "Realizing that the Russian prosecutors wouldn't let go off him easily, Browder has tried to cultivate connections with political influencers in in the US, and this can be seen through the Ziff brothers, and their support for the Democratic Party in the last election," ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.rt.com

Russia's prosecutor general will demand interviews with American congressmen, security services staff, and other high-profile individuals as it seeks to involve the US in its investigation into convicted financier Bill Browder. Moscow accuses Browder of illegally taking $1.5 billion out of Russia and fabricating evidence that led to the passing of the sanctions-imposing Magnitsky Act. As part of the investigation, the prosecutor general wants to speak to ex-MI6 agent Christopher Steele, author of the notorious Trump dossier, and former ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul, who campaigned on behalf of Browder. Michael McFaul and Hillary Clinton in 2016. / Reuters

Other persons of interest on what Russia said was an incomplete list included David Kramer, former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and president of think tank Freedom House, and the billionaire Ziff brothers, who are described as "Browder's long-standing partners in crime."

This was announced by Aleksandr Kurennoy, the head of the mass media department of the prosecutor general's office in Moscow, who said that Russia was ready to share its findings with US law enforcement agencies "on even terms."

Read more Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks during a joint news conference with U.S. President Donald Trump in Helsinki, Finland, July 16, 2018. © Grigory Dukor If Mueller investigation sends official request to question suspects, Russia will do that - Putin

The announcement follows hot on the heels of a proposal made by Vladimir Putin during his press conference with Donald Trump in Helsinki on Monday, in which he offered to "meet US authorities half-way" and allow the Mueller investigation into Moscow's election meddling to interview suspects in Russia, "on the condition" that Russian investigators could speak to suspects in the Browder investigation. Russia has previously tried to extradite Browder and gain access to others, but without success, though the businessman was briefly arrested in Spain in May, before being set free.

"Realizing that the Russian prosecutors wouldn't let go off him easily, Browder has tried to cultivate connections with political influencers in in the US, and this can be seen through the Ziff brothers, and their support for the Democratic Party in the last election," said Kurennoy, explaining the intertwining of business and politics that has led to the current investigation.

Browder has responded to Putin's words in the Washington Post, claiming that the Russian leader's offer meant he was "rattled" by Browder's accusations of corruption against Moscow officials.

US-born Browder made a fortune as an investor in Russia, starting in the 1990s, but was barred from entering the country in 2005, and has since become an arch-critic of the Kremlin. His allegations over the treatment of one of his staff, Sergei Magnitsky, while in custody, led to the sanctioning of select Moscow officials in the 2012 Magnitsky Act, but the legislation has since been expanded and can be applied to any foreign official, who is deemed to have violated human rights.

Browder was convicted in Russia in absentia in 2013 for fraud and tax evasion, and again, at the end of last year.

The 54-year old investor has also been a prominent voice in the Mueller investigation itself, though it does not concern him directly, and he submitted a scathing testimony about Russia to the US Senate a year ago.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Jul 18, 2018] Grand Deception The Truth About Bill Browder, the Magnitsky Act and Anti-Russian Sanctions by Alex Krainer

Jul 18, 2018 | www.amazon.com

In 2015, Bill Browder published Red Notice - purportedly a true story about his experience in Russia between 1996 and 2005. Upon closer scrutiny however, his story doesn't add up and demonstrably fails to stand up in a court of law. Nonetheless, on the dubious strength of that story, Browder has been able to lobby the U.S. Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act in 2012 which needlessly damaged the relations between the U.S. and Russia. Where he failed in courts of law, however, his campaign of relentless demonization of Russia and of Vladimir Putin has been successful in the court of public opinion in the West. As humanity finds itself on the precipice of yet another great war, what we need are bridges of mutual understanding and constructive engagement, not demonization. This book's modest hope is to contribute to the construction of those bridges.

"I consider [this] book as a must read for any person trying to understand modern Russia and where the new Cold War with Russia came from. ... Krainer offers us the truth and truly shows us how deep the rabbit hole goes. ... Get the book, read it, and then give it to your friends. This is one of the most important books to have come out in the recent years (and an excellent read too!)." --The Saker

"True to form, Alex brings to life the shenanigans and the deception of those who have gone out of their way to stay in the shadows, in this gripping true-life-detective non-fiction thriller." --Daniel Estulin, author of The True Story of the Bilderberg Group

"Krainer's book is an indispensable contribution to understanding the connection between the looting of Russia during the disastrous shock therapy of the Yeltsin years, and the dangerous anti-Russian provocations of today. His insight into the duplicitous role of Bill Browder provides compelling evidence of how unscrupulous greed can lead to much larger crimes." --Harley Schlanger, Schiller Institute

A commodities trader and hedge fund manager by day, Alex Krainer took up writing in an effort to uncover the truth about the pressing social, economic and political issues of the day, and share it broadly with the public. He was born in Croatia, one of the republics of former Yugoslavia, to a Croatian father and a Serbian mother. As a young man in the 1990s he lived through the downfall of the 'Communist Bloc' and served in the Croatian Army during the war in that country. Having observed first-hand the events that led to the destructive and tragic wars in former Yugoslavia, he believes that truth is the single most important requirement needed to preserve peace. This book represents Alex's personal endeavor to contribute an important element of truth toward a peaceful resolution of the dangerous yet needless new Cold War between the United States and Russia so that the relations between these two great nations may develop in the spirit of friendship, mutual cooperation and widespread prosperity.

You can visit Alex's blog at thenakedhedgie.com and the website for this book at thirdalliance.ch.

[Jul 18, 2018] The Killing of William Browder Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception by Alex Krainer

The book is delisted. You can read it at https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKilli free pdf download 218 pages
Jul 18, 2018 | www.amazon.com

David Gortner on April 27, 2018

Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately ...

The book does make a compelling case against much of Browder's version of events in Russia over the years from the fall of the USSR through most of Putin's time as leader of Russia. But there is nothing about democracy in Russia since Putin came to power. How is democracy left out of the equation? Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately afterward but there is no appearance of anything like democracy. We have seen nothing in the leadership of Russia; only Putin since 2000 (alternating with Medvedev). Read more

Darth Nerd on August 31, 2017

Very import to look behind the scenes of the demonization of Russia!

I agree with the reviews posted prior to mine. I only want to add that I feel it is extremely important that Browder's tale, which is based on his word only, be countered. It amazes me how many have swallowed Browder's (and his backers) bait. Alex Krainer shows that there is probably a hook hidden by the bait. The demonization of Putin and Russia seems to me very, very dangerous, and as best I can tell it's completely unfounded. This book shows that it is not only unfounded, it contradicts various facts.

I bought this book because of the news that Browder was blocking distribution and screening of Andrei Nekrasov"s documentary "The Magnitsky Act. Behind the Scenes".

This made me very suspicious that Browder has something to hide. If Nekrasov's documentary is untruthful I feel it would be much better to let it be distributed and then counter it with evidence than with legal bullying and other means to prevent it's distribution.

This book strongly reinforced my suspicions.

Avery on September 16, 2017
Needs a read

This book starts off slow, but the more you read, the more you will realize the menacing extent of Browder's deception. Krainer describes how Browder built a web of deception and lies in order to paint Russia as an evil place and America's enemy. Browder's book preys on America's wounded sense of global supremacy and casts the US as a victim in a country where we served as predators. Anyone who read Browder's book should read this one for sure.

Dostoyevsky on October 25, 2017
Things are not what they seem to be in the USA

A highly intelligent, frank and entertaining take-down of one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the US public and the world - The Magnitsky Act.

The Bill Browder of the title, who has positioned himself both as victim and champion of the downtrodden is revealed as anything but that.
The picture painted of a vulture/hedge fund manager who took advantage of the lawlessness of the Yeltsin years to steal from the poorest of the poor of a broken USSR is chilling.

Browder's carefully cultivated and paid for image in the West (he was planning a movie about himself with the Weinstein brothers) is so at odds with the reality exposed here as to make up a kind of horror story effect out of Bram Stoker. Yet the way Alex Krainer tells it is both compelling and convincing. The thing is, no one else has looked at Browder's story critically. It was accepted as fact, with no corroboration of any sort, by a gullible, and probably complicit, US political establishment.

An even more terrifying question raised by the very existence of this book is: What was the interest of the US Senate and Congress in unquestionably believing this 'scheister,' Bill Browder, and using his outlandish and unsubstantiated claims to restart the Cold War and bring us to the brink of nuclear confrontation?

Get the book while you can. As with a documentary about him by Nekrasov, called 'The Magnitsky Act - Behind the Scenes,' Browder has armies of lawyers trying to squelch any information coming out about him and the events he fabricated. Understandably, since the story he told is so shabby and full of holes that any light cast on it at all begins to crumble the fabric of it.

Mark Boberg on October 23, 2017
Every Concerned American Should read this, then make up his or her own mind!

An interesting alternative view of Russia, Russia's President Vladimir Putin, and Bill Browder. Something every concerned American should read and consider, and then make up his or her own mind. Also some really good background on events in Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union and the subsequent rise and popularity of Pres. Putin.

His explanation of the Deflationary Gap in the Appendix helped to clarify several related ideas that I have picked up or thought of in the past,but never put together clearly the way Mr.Krainer does.

Roman on August 22, 2017
Riveting Expose of one of the Century's Big Hoaxes.

Alex Krainer's second book, "Killing of William Browder: Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception" is a meticulously scrupulous research of a fascinating tale whose protagonist has all the traits of a fiendish movie villain. Needless to point out, in the cacophonic pandemonium of relentless anti-Russian propaganda that permeates both political and mass-media scene in the West throughout 2017, Bill Browder, by trade a vulture investor, is depicted as akin to a holy warrior against the Devil himself, the Russian president Vladimir Putin.

In our increasingly insane world a fascinating tale of William Browder's role in pushing the Magnitsky Act, that was passed in the U.S. Senate in order "to punish those suspected of being involved in the death of Russian tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky," might have eluded you. The Magnitsky Act that has passed the Congress on 3rd of January, 2012 resulted in blacklisting of five Russian nationals on 9th of January, 2017 and elevated Bill Browder, at least in his own eyes, to the status of a global human rights activist.

Enters "Killing of William Browder: Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception" and shatters that delusion. Krainer mercilessly dissects Browder's tale in the most minute details and, as he examines Browder's numerous statements, he portrays Browder as he truly is: not a magnanimous human rights champion but rather a wicked purveyor of (other man's) tragedy and salesman of (his own) self-aggrandizing fantasies. Bill Browder seems to me as a somehow cartoonish villain who makes us chuckle even while we shudder.

Krainer writing possesses a great sense of drama and a fine sense of irony. His book reads like a horrific thriller sprinkled with taunting humor. Even when he excoriates Browder's own "Red Notice" and his posing, he does it with penetrating wit: "Browder didn't neglect to throw in more ugly smears on Russia and the Russian people. He assures us that – 'Most Russians don't operate on high-minded principles Everything in Russia was about money. Making it, keeping it and making sure no one took it ' – (that) stands in stark contrast with Bill Browder and his goodfellas who did everything they did out of selfless desire to make the world a better place."

Krainer's study of Bill Browder's book and actions is a riveting, unflinching expose of what might end up being pivotal in revealing one of this decade's big hoaxes.

"Killing of William Browder: Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception" is a monumental work of an extraordinary skilled writer who pulls no punches as he bravely swims upstream.

darbycook on October 4, 2017
Who knew I'd like a subject matter this dry

Who knew I'd like a subject matter this dry, but I found myself LMFAO so many times I can't keep count. Beautifully done, Mr. Krainer!

Y. on September 29, 2017
Must read!

Well researched. Insightful and thought provoking

Amazon Customer on August 30, 2017
Excellent!

A well researched and interesting read. Recommended for those that would like to understand much more of the browder myth.

David Gortner on April 27, 2018
Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately ...

The book does make a compelling case against much of Browder's version of events in Russia over the years from the fall of the USSR through most of Putin's time as leader of Russia. But there is nothing about democracy in Russia since Putin came to power. How is democracy left out of the equation? Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately afterward but there is no appearance of anything like democracy. We have seen nothing in the leadership of Russia; only Putin since 2000 (alternating with Medvedev).

Daniel Good on December 30, 2017
It is amazing that Browder has been able to prevent the showing ...

It is amazing that Browder has been able to prevent the showing of an important documentary by Andrei Nekrasov on the Magnitsky Act and also prevent the distribution on the Amazon site of this excellent well written intelligent exposé of the fraud perpetrated by him. One wonders who is behind Browder that gives him such power and influence.

Who should Browder fear more: those who are supporting him or Vladimir Putin?

In this book, unavailable on Amazon, can be found:

1. one of the best summaries of the Yeltsin years;

2. a useful review of US-Russia relations in the XIX century; 3. a counter-view of the personality of V.V. Putin; 4. copious footnotes and a very valuable bibliography; 5. a deconstruction of William Browder's thriller, Red Notice.

Only the people who make those decision at Amazon know why the book is not available on their site.

[Jul 18, 2018] From what I know of Browder, he went to Russia in the 90's. Ten years later he owned a good chunk of Russian oil and other assets and pulling in profits of around $125 million per year.

See https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKilli free pdf download 218 pages
Jul 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

This book by Alex Krainer has been delisted by amazon Pft , Jul 17, 2018 11:30:45 PM | 183

I need to read this book by alex krainerthats which has been delisted by amazon. I bet Bill Browder is not a fan

http://mikenormaneconomics.blogspot.com/2017/08/deconstructing-bill-browders-dangerous.html?m=1

[Jul 18, 2018] Putin handed Trump a means of openly investigating Killary s/CIA s manipulation of US politics via the Browder investigation, the crime of manipulating the DNC to remove Bernie can also loop into the mix

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Boing_Snap -> eclectic syncretist Tue, 07/17/2018 - 09:43 Permalink

Putin handed Trump a means of openly investigating Killary's/CIA's manipulation of US politics via the Browder investigation, the crime of manipulating the DNC to remove Bernie can also loop into the mix.

Let's hope Trump follows through and exposes the nest of vipers. The majority of people are now seeing the light, only the people with skin the game or those far too controlled through an excellent propaganda/mass mind control experiment do not.

Edward Bernays and Joseph Goebels could only dream that their methods would go this far.

"But being dependent, every day of the year and for year after year, upon certain politicians for news, the newspaper reporters are obliged to work in harmony with their news sources."
Edward L. Bernays , Propaganda

[Jul 18, 2018] Putin certainly didn't pluck that lying idiot's name randomly

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

RationalLuddite -> overbet Mon, 07/16/2018 - 18:37 Permalink

+50 Overbet. I posted before i read yours. I have tired of trying to convince people that 90s Russia and the thefts then and subsequent covering of crimes is STILL the key to understanding the Deep States obsession and fear of Putin and Russia. Soros, Clinton's, Chubias, the FED's off the books money printing, London money laundering , EU buying the stolen movables etc - they are all there. Browder's animus is also driving much behind the scenes with 'Russiagate'. Look people - you will see. Putin certainly didn't pluck that lying idiot's name randomly.

I urge people to at least read the 90s chapter in the Killing of William Browder (free online PDF) to begin to understand what is going on now.

shrimpythai -> RationalLuddite Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:34 Permalink

https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKilli free pdf download 218 pages

RationalLuddite -> shrimpythai Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:44 Permalink

Thanks heaps Shrimp.

The appendix on Jacob Rothschild alone and Yukos makes it worth the read. But if you read nothing else, read the chapters on Browder's interrogation and Russia in the 1990s - easy reads and give a great introduction to this orgy of psycopathy and mendacity. They are all connected

[Jul 18, 2018] Crowdstrike brings up a couple of interesting questions.

Jul 18, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Reply


begob , July 16, 2018 at 9:16 am

The best evidence rule should result in the DNC server being made available for inspection by the accused at the discovery stage. Naw gaw hap'n?

Besides, the Crowdstrike copy will have to qualify for a hearsay exception, and trustworthiness comes into issue.

Peter VE , July 16, 2018 at 4:51 pm

I am willing to bet money that those servers. or more accurately, their hard drives, will be found to have become mysteriously corrupted and no longer readable. The scene from The Big Easy comes to mind, when a heavy magnet is "accidentally" set next to the incriminating videotape in the police evidence room. That, of course, assumes that they will ever be subpoenaed.
Crowdstrike brings up a couple of interesting questions.
1) Were they so bumbling that they would wait a full month after evidence of "hacking" turned up at the DNC to take action to protect the network? They worked for the DNC, so it's possible.
or
2) Did they use that month to ensure that the proper evidence pointing to the GRU could be found on the duplicate copies of the hard drives which they supplied to the FBI, and set up redirecting intermediary steps somewhere on 3rd country servers? In which case, were they actually working for the FSB, (since we know from our own experience that the worst enemy of any intelligence agency are the ones you compete with for funding)?

Peter VE , July 16, 2018 at 9:46 am

Based on the incredible sloppiness of their work for the DNC, one can only assume that Crowdstrike is actually a GRU operation ;-)

Newton Finn , July 16, 2018 at 9:55 am

Good context here for all things Russophobic:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/07/16/when-did-russia-become-an-adversary/

YY , July 16, 2018 at 10:10 am

Bit of a slog but relevant
https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/07/muellers-latest-indictment-ignores-evidence-in-the-public-domain/

[Jul 18, 2018] Trump needs to order a full intelligence agency review of Clapper's report

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

I Am Jack's Ma -> 1 Alabama Tue, 07/17/2018 - 09:57 Permalink

The hysteria is growing far too dangerous.

Comey and Senator Warner basically are calling for a coup because of the FALSE claim that it is 'treason' to doubt the IC.

Honestly, it's past joking about. The rabid dogs are now snarling in our front yard. Circling the house.

But it wasn't the Intelligence Community that said 'Russia hacked the DNC'... a play that was about getting you to ignore the CONTENT of Hillary/DNC emails. (Thus the quip 'Russia rigged our elections by exposing how our elections are rigged.').

It was Brennan and Clapper and a dozen 'handpicked' analysts from just 3 agencies. Even then the NSA boys only said 'moderate confidence' which is analyst speak for 'we have no real evidence.' The CIA and FBI analysts, relying on the DNC-linked CrowdStrike analysis of a server they never examined, said 'high confidence' which means 'we can't prove this but we totally believe it was Russia's government because wouldn't it be just like those aggressive Russkis?'

Trump needs to order a full intelligence agency review of Clapper's report. Someone lose to him needs to scream this into his ear.

SCREAM IT.

Listen boys, that covers Trump from all directions. A full intelligence agency review no matter what it says helps him. MOREOVER, as part of that, any serious IC assessment of CLAPPER'S report will show that it was contrived. Political. Not how such assessments are normally done.

So even if it's conclusions ended up being correct... the report itself would be exposed as complete bullshit. Which points one to Clapper, and Brennan... and Obama.

Hey listen, playtime is over. Comey and Brennan and the neocons and media are basically using Trump's very reasonable doubt as 'treason' and have turned the rhetoric up to 11. They are suggesting a coup based on Deep State/Dem/MIC lies. This is intolerable and we may be at a point where sending the Marines to CIA headquarters to take documents and arrest some folks is in order. What would the media do - go nuts?

Why didn't Clapper invite DIA to the party?

If its military (SO/SF) versus the spooks - guess who wins?

The CIA is for the most part a collection of drig and guns mafias. They operate outside the law with unlimited funding. Squeeze that funding - grab some of their operators off the fucking street and interrogate them...

You have Senator Cohen actually suggesting a coup because Trump doubts the IC which Schumer said has many ways to 'get you.'

Where's the military?

Ready to defend The Republic, I believe.

I know this because Tyler knows this.

I Am Jack's Ma -> I Am Jack's Ma Tue, 07/17/2018 - 10:20 Permalink

I think the triggering began with

REPORTER AP: President Trump you first. Just now President Putin denied having anything to do with the election interference in 2016. Every U.S. intelligence agency has concluded that Russia did...

So, this is a lie. It's the 'all intel agencies' lie even the NY Times at least at one loint admitted was a lie.

This is super important.

It was a dozen or so 'handpicked analysts' - NOT a full IC review. Now why wouldnt Obama, Brennan and Clapper want a full, actual Intel Assessment?

And Clapper had final edit power. I mean its a fucking joke and the complete lack of MSM scrutiny of the problems tells me the media is truly, no kidding, captured by interests who can completely suppress basic journalism (I know there's long been *bias* - this is deliberately not reporting on a highly unusual intel assessment by a guy who hates Trump relying on a private firm founded by a guy who hates Putin which has extensive ties to the DNC.

It really isnt a Red Team Blue Team thing and you don't have to like Trump. This is about whether a small group of spooks with ties to one party and effective media cobtrol get to undo an election to pursue war in Ukraine and Syria and to justify ever more spending by acting aggressively toward Russia along its borders then framing every response as 'Russian aggression.'

We are in an incredibly dangerous time eith senators and former fbi and cia heads more or less openly calling for a coup because Trump doubts Brennan/Clapper's horseshit report.

I know I repeat myself. I have to. I'm very alarmed by this stuff. Trump needs to order a full IC assessment of Clapper's report and of Russian alleged **hacking** ASAP. (the clickbait stuff is so silly its frankly not worth addressing right now).

Secret Service should also detain and question Cohen and Comey over their remarks. Trump needs to flex a little muscle now with people talking coup.

Whoa Dammit -> I Am Jack's Ma Tue, 07/17/2018 - 10:39 Permalink

I'd not seen the AP reporters question that triggered this before. It looks like the reporter was trying to embarrass both Putin and Trump but wound up getting his ass, Clinton's ass, and the asses of the intelligence community handed to him instead.

wafm -> Whoa Dammit Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:39 Permalink

too right. If I remember correctly, it was in the context of Putin saying Russia is open to have FBI guys come to question the 12 GRU guys indicted (no proof yet) by Mueller.

In return, he then said Russia would like to ask a few questions to the US officials believed to have HELPED Browder funnel 400 mill to Clinton and probably avoid paying tax on 1.5 billion in Russia AND the US...

Browder has to be on top of the US wanted list in the not too distant future or there really is no fuckin justice.

BROWDER IS A FUCKIN TRAITOR, LOCK HIM UP!

[Jul 18, 2018] Everyone messes with everyone in their elections around the world. My first question is why is the media on both sides still pounding the American public with the Russia did it bullhorn. What exactly does Russia gain ? They're 9 times smaller than NATO. China has the most to gain.

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com


I am Groot -> ThePhantom Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:15 Permalink

Everyone messes with everyone in their elections around the world. My first question is why is the media on both sides still pounding the American public with the "Russia did it" bullhorn. What exactly does Russia gain ? They're 9 times smaller than NATO. China has the most to gain.

The Ukrainians were working with Hillary against Trump. The Deep State has the ability to make every act of espionage look like Russia did it. The DNC didn't turn over their server to the FBI. The Awan server disappeared too. Something smells terrible, like Kankles Huma hole.

ThePhantom -> I am Groot Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:26 Permalink

jesus they can accuse you of being a putin puppet if you don't... and how do you defend yourself.. "how dare you insult every branch of our intelligence agencies"( and the lying james clapper!!!! )how dare you...?

MrBoompi -> I am Groot Mon, 07/16/2018 - 22:30 Permalink

Hey Groot, I think these countries hack and spy on each other 24/7. It's bullshit. They appoint a special prosecutor and with the exceptions of the BS Flynn and Manafort charges the only others he's charged are non-americans. Nothing about the elephant in the room, the billion dollar + money laundering schemes and treason of the Obama/Clinton and their lackeys.

[Jul 18, 2018] A strong stench of a false flag operation

Jul 18, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

likbez , July 17, 2018 at 1:43 am

Looks like it was actually China which implemented forwarding of all 30K email to controlled by them account. See sic_semper_tyrannis blog for details. This is a bombshell revelation, if true,

For debunking of the information presented in the indictment see

https://disobedientmedia.com/2018/07/muellers-latest-indictment-ignores-evidence-in-the-public-domain/

To me Mueller fiction sounds like a second rate Crowdstrike "security porn" -- a bragging about non-existent capabilities.

And I agree that the "Le Carre level of details" with names (which are obviously classified) are extremely suspicious. It also invites a nasty retaliation, because it breaks de-facto mode of work of intelligence agencies with each other and undermines any remnant of trust (if such exists in respect to CIA; it probably existed for NSA).

As sessions were encrypted so to decode them you need to steal SSH key, or break SSH encryption. Both are not very realistic, and, if realistic, disclosing such NSA capabilities greatly damages those capabilities.

Also Guccifer 2.0 Internet personality looks more and more to me like a false flag operation with the specific goal to implicate Russians. Mueller is actually pretty adept in operating in such created for specific purpose "parallel reality" due to specifics of his career. So nothing new here. Just a strong stench of a false flag operation

Another weak point is the use of CCcleaner. This is not how professionals from state intelligence agencies operate. Any Flame-style exfiltration software (and Flame was pioneered by the USA ;-) has those capabilities built-in, so exposing your activities in Windows logs is just completely stupid.

[Jul 18, 2018] Clinging to Collusion Why Evidence Will Probably Never Be Produced in the Indictments of 'Russian Agents'

Notable quotes:
"... If you enjoyed this original article please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one. ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

... ... ...

The Russian government on Friday strongly denied the charges. In a statement, the Foreign Ministry called the indictments "a shameful farce" that was not backed up by any evidence. "Obviously, the goal of this 'mud-slinging' is to spoil the atmosphere before the Russian-American summit," the statement said.

The Ministry added that the 12 named Russians were not agents of the GRU.

" When you dig into this indictment there are huge problems, starting with how in the world did they identify 12 Russian intelligence officers with the GRU?" said former CIA analyst Larry Johnson in an interview with Consortium News. Johnson pointed out that the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency was not allowed to take part in the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment on alleged interference by the GRU. Only hand-picked analysts from the FBI, the NSA and the CIA were involved.

" The experts in the intelligence community on the GRU is the Defense Intelligence Agency and they were not allowed to clear on that document," Johnson said.

" When you look at the level of detail about what [the indictment is] claiming, there is no other public source of information on this, and it was not obtained through U.S. law enforcement submitting warrants and getting affidavits to conduct research in Russia, so it's clearly intelligence information from the NSA, most likely," Johnson said.

CrowdStrike's Role

The indictment makes clear any evidence of an alleged hack of the DNC and DCCC computers did not come from the FBI, which was never given access to the computers by the DNC, but instead from the private firm CrowdStrike, which was hired by the DNC. It is referred to as Company 1 in the indictment.

" Despite the Conspirators' efforts to hide their activity, beginning in or around May 2016, both the DCCC and DNC became aware that they had been hacked and hired a security company ("Company 1") to identify the extent of the intrusions," the indictment says.

Dimitri Alperovitch, a CrowdStrike co-founder, is also a senior fellow at the anti-Russian Atlantic Council think tank.

The indictment doesn't mention it, but within a day, CrowdStrike claimed to find Russian "fingerprints" in the metadata of a DNC opposition research document, which had been revealed by DCLeaks, showing Cyrillic letters and the name of the first Soviet intelligence chief. That supposedly implicated Russia in the hack.

CrowdStrike claimed the alleged Russian intelligence operation was extremely sophisticated and skilled in concealing its external penetration of the server. But CrowdStrike's conclusion about Russian "fingerprints" resulted from clues that would have been left behind by extremely sloppy or amateur hackers -- or inserted intentionally to implicate the Russians.

One of CrowdStrike's founders has ties to the anti-Russian Atlantic Council raising questions of political bias. And the software it used to determine Russia's alleged involvement in the DNC hack, was later proved to be faulty in a high-profile case in Ukraine, reported by the Voice of America.

The indictment then is based at least partially on evidence produced by an interested private company, rather than the FBI.

Evidence Likely Never to be Seen

Other apparent sources for information in the indictment are intelligence agencies, which normally create hurdles in a criminal prosecution.

" In this indictment there is detail after detail whose only source could be intelligence, yet you don't use intelligence in documents like this because if these defendants decide to challenge this in court, it opens the U.S. to having to expose sources and methods," Johnson said.

If the U.S. invoked the states secret privilege so that classified evidence could not be revealed in court a conviction before a civilian jury would be jeopardized.

Such a trial is extremely unlikely however. That makes the indictment essentially a political and not a legal document because it is almost inconceivable that the U.S. government will have to present any evidence in court to back up its charges. This is simply because of the extreme unlikelihood that arrests of Russians living in Russia will ever be made.

In this way it is similar to the indictment earlier this year of the Internet Research Agency of St. Petersburg, Russia, a private click bait company that was alleged to have interfered in the 2016 election by buying social media ads and staging political rallies for both Clinton and Trump. It seemed that no evidence would ever have to back up the indictment because there would never be arrests in the case.

But Special Counsel Robert Mueller was stunned when lawyers for the internet company showed up in Washington demanding discovery in the case. That caused Mueller to scramble and demand a delay in the first hearing, which was rejected by a federal judge. Mueller is now battling to keep so-called sensitive material out of court.

In both the IRA case and Friday's indictments, the extremely remote possibility of convictions were not what Mueller was apparently after, but rather the public perception of Russia's guilt resulting from fevered media coverage of what are after all only accusations, presented as though it is established fact. Once that impression is settled into the public consciousness, Mueller's mission would appear to be accomplished.

For instance, the Times routinely dispenses with the adjective "alleged" and reports the matter as though it is already established fact. It called Friday's indictments, which are only unproven charges, "the most detailed accusation by the American government to date of the [not alleged] Russian government's interference in the 2016 election, and it includes a litany of [not alleged] brazen Russian subterfuge operations meant to foment chaos in the months before Election Day."

GRU Named as WikiLeak's Source

The indictment claims that GRU agents, posing as Guccifer 2.0, (who says he is a Romanian hacker) stole the Democratic documents and later emailed a link to them to WikiLeaks, named as "Organization 1." No charges were brought against WikiLeaks on Friday.

Assange: Denied Russia was his source. (CNBC screenshot)

" After failed attempts to transfer the stolen documents starting in late June 2016, on or about July 14, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, sent Organization 1 an email with an attachment titled 'wk dnc linkl.txt.gpg,'" the indictment says. "The Conspirators explained to Organization 1 that the encrypted file contained instructions on how to access an online archive of stolen DNC documents. On or about July 18, 2016, Organization 1 confirmed it had 'the 1Gb or so archive' and would make a release of the stolen documents' this week.'"

WikiLeaks founder and editor Julian Assange, who is in exile in the Ecuador embassy in London, has long denied that he got the emails from any government. Instead Assange has suggested that his source was a disgruntled Democratic Party worker, Seth Rich, whose murder on the streets of Washington in July 2016 has never been solved.

On Friday, WikiLeaks did not repeat the denial that a government was its source. Instead it tweeted: "Interesting timing choice by DoJ today (right before Trump-Putin meet), announcing indictments against 12 alleged Russian intelligence officers for allegedly releasing info through DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0."

Assange has had all communication with the outside world shut off by the Ecuadorian government two months ago.

Since the indictments were announced, WikiLeaks has not addressed the charge that GRU agents, posing as Guccifer 2.0, were its source. WikiLeaks' policy is to refuse to disclose any information about its sources. WikiLeaks' denial that the Russian government gave them the emails could be based on its belief that Guccifer 2.0 was who he said he was, and not what the U.S. indictments allege.

Those indictments claim that the Russian military intelligence agents adopted the personas of both Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks to publish the Democratic Party documents online, before the Russian agents, posing as Guccifer 2.0, allegedly supplied WikiLeaks.

The emails, which the indictment does not say are untrue, damaged the Clinton campaign. They revealed, for instance, that the campaign and the Democratic Party worked to deny the nomination to Clinton's Democratic Party primary challenger Bernie Sanders.

The indictments also say that the Russian agents purchased the use of a computer server in Arizona, using bitcoin to hide their financial transactions. The Arizona server was used to receive the hacked emails from the servers of the Democratic Party and the chairman of Clinton's campaign, the indictment alleges. If true it would mean the transfer of the emails took place within the United States, rather than overseas, presumably to Russia.

Some members of the Veterans' Intelligence Professionals for Sanity argue that metadata evidence points to a local download from the Democratic computers, in other words a leak, rather than a hack. They write the NSA would have evidence of a hack and, unlike this indictment, could make the evidence public: " Given NSA's extensive trace capability, we conclude that DNC and HRC servers alleged to have been hacked were, in fact, not hacked. The evidence that should be there is absent; otherwise, it would surely be brought forward, since this could be done without any danger to sources and methods."

That argument was either ignored or dismissed by Mueller's team.

The Geopolitical Context

US enabled Yeltsin's reelection.

It is not only allies of Trump, as the Times thinks, who believe the timing of the indictments, indeed the entire Russia-gate scandal, is intended to prevent Trump from pursuing detente with nuclear-armed Russia. Trump said of the indictments that, "I think that really hurts our country and it really hurts our relationship with Russia. I think that we would have a chance to have a very good relationship with Russia and a very good chance -- a very good relationship with President Putin."

There certainly appear to be powerful forces in the U.S. that want to stop that.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Wall Street rushed in behind Boris Yeltsin and Russian oligarchs to asset strip virtually the entire country, impoverishing the population. Amid widespread accounts of this grotesque corruption, Washington intervened in Russian politics to help get Yeltsin re-elected in 1996. The political rise of Vladimir Putin after Yeltsin resigned on New Year's Eve 1999 reversed this course, restoring Russian sovereignty over its economy and politics.

That inflamed American hawks whose desire is to install another Yeltsin-like figure and resume U.S. exploitation of Russia's vast natural and financial resources. To advance that cause, U.S. presidents have supported the eastward expansion of NATO and have deployed 30,000 troops on Russia's borders.

In 2014, the Obama administration helped orchestrate a coup that toppled the elected government of Ukraine and installed a fiercely anti-Russian regime. The U.S. also undertook the risky policy of aiding jihadists to overthrow a secular Russian ally in Syria. The consequences have brought the world closer to nuclear annihilation than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962.

In this context, the Democratic Party-led Russia-gate appears to have been used not only to explain away Clinton's defeat but to stop Trump -- possibly via impeachment or by inflicting severe political damage -- because he talks about cooperation with Russia.

Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former correspondent for T he Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe , Sunday Times of London and numerous other newspapers. He can be reached at joelauria@consortiumnews.com and followed on Twitter @unjoe .

If you enjoyed this original article please consider making a donation to Consortium News so we can bring you more stories like this one.


Mary V , July 15, 2018 at 9:39 pm

They can't allow Assange to speak now, because if he should decide to reveal that Seth Rich was the leaker, that would create a whole new set of circumstances. Incredible article, Joe.

Jerry Alatalo , July 15, 2018 at 3:13 pm

Real estate mogul Leona Helmsley is remembered for infamously stating, "Rich people don't pay taxes. Taxes are for the little people."

Similarly, "Rich people hide evidence (real – or alleged (non-existent) for criminal or propaganda purposes) under the umbrella of 'national security'. Evidence is for the little people."

And the great war between truth and lies moves forward

Hank , July 15, 2018 at 9:51 am

As with the last indictment of 'Russian hackers' these GRU officers should retain an American attorney who can then demand Mueller hand over whatever evidence he has (aka: discovery). Last time that happened Mueller was forced to refuse (because he had none). That was embarrassing for Mueller and you'd think he would've learned his lesson not to try the gimmick again. You'd think.

Sam F , July 15, 2018 at 9:07 am

The entire Russia-gate invention is a diversion from Israel-gate, the control of US elections and mass media by zionists. That is the story here, not silly disputes over who did what to reveal DNC emails.

Red_Dog , July 15, 2018 at 8:03 am

1. Lauria is correct when he says, "Some members of the Veterans' Intelligence Professionals for Sanity argue that metadata evidence points to a local download from the Democratic computers, in other words a leak, rather than a hack." But he fails to give the full story. William Binney and some members of the VIPS wrote a memo stating that computer data showed that the files were downloaded locally to a flash drive because of transmission speeds. This memo was challenged in a separate memo by Thomas Drake and other members of the VIPS. To try and resolve the problem The Nation hired an independent computer expert, Nathanial Freitas, to analyze the memos and date. He concluded that the data did fit the Binney analysis. But it also fit several other possibilities that used remote access. So the data could not be used to prove that the files were locally downloaded. https://www.thenation.com/article/a-leak-or-a-hack-a-forum-on-the-vips-memo/

2. Perhaps the most important part of the indictments is not in the Lauria article. 500,000 voters had their data stolen and, because most state-local voter systems are running on outdated and dilapidated computers, it may be impossible to tell if other systems had been hacked. Unfortunately, very few people are considering this part of the indictment. It means that if we want a fair election in 2018 paper ballots should be used. In any case all voting systems must be auditable.

3. Finally, the level of detail and attribution in the indictments indicates to me that the NSA and CIA were consulted. And it was worth providing this detail because of the incredible threat our country is under. The fact that we can now track down hacks with such precision should give others pause.

Skip Scott , July 15, 2018 at 8:18 am

I think you are jumping to a false conclusion about the "level of detail". The NSA and the CIA have now had enough time to cut the entire indictment out of whole cloth. Are we supposed to trust their so called "evidence" at this point, when the entire RussiaGate theater of the absurd was created to cover their ass and hamstring detente with Russia?

Piotr Berman , July 15, 2018 at 5:11 pm

I did not read the indictment, so I do not know if the level of detail rose to heights exhibited by Gen. Colin Powell in his famous "white powder vial" speech. Today we know that the white powder he showed to the entire world could be indeed harmful, as the baby powder of Johnson and Johnson was revealed to have traces of asbestos. But then again, it could be genuinely harmless.

On top of that, Innocence Project revealed that surprising number of successful prosecutions leading to the death penalty were based on hoaxes. For example, the "culprit" was implicated by his blood being found on a seat of the escape car, however when the defense examined the vial of the sentenced person blood that was in police possession, it had DNA of two people -- some blood was removed (presumably, splashed in the escape car) and to mask it, blood of another person was added. This is stuff done without any political motivation, just to get good number of solved cases -- the race and prior criminal record of the "culprit" probably being the bonus.

Creating compelling narratives is what prosecutors do for living. I hope that more often than not these narratives are true, but a true professional is not bound by such constraints.

j. D. D. , July 15, 2018 at 7:44 am

Thank you for a thorough and damning report on the indicttments by the cowardly and thuggish Mueller who, as the author notes, is confident that they nevr be answered in a court of law. Moreover, with all the hullabaloo attached to Robert Mueller's stunt, the fact remains that the DNC and John Podesta emails revealed a stunning and irrefutable truth: Hillary Clinton and the DNC were rigging the election against her Democratic primary opponent, Bernie Sanders. However, I would add two aspects which place into context the timing of Mueller's publicity stunt. First, that it came on the heels of embattled FBI Agent Peter Strzok's appearance before a joint House hearing on Thursday at which Strzok claimed that the Republicans on the House Judiciary and Government Oversight Committees were doing "Putin's work" by continuing to examine the British and Obama Administration/Democratic Party origins of Russiagate. Strzok's charge, obviously choreographed with Congressional Democrats, wasendlessly cycled in the news media. The Democrats otherwise sought to obstruct the discredited FBI agent's testimony by any and all means necessary to the delight of the "resist" social media universe. While the Justice Department's independent IG found that Strzok's prioritization of the Trump Russiagate investigation over the Clinton email investigation was not free from bias, an inconvenient fact largely glossed over in Thursday's staged event, it noted that Strzok and his mistress, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe counsel, Lisa Page, exchanged daily texts vowing to stop Trump's election, disparaging Trump's s supporters, and declaring themselves the saviors of the nation from the current President. The third element,of this assault on the prospect of peace was meant to cooincide with Trump's visit to the UK, i.e.the discovery of a bottle or vial of the so-called Novichok nerve agent allegedly used to poison former British spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter. The bottle was discovered at the home of Charlie Rowley and Dawn Sturgess in Amesbury, England. The British went on an international rampage around the March 4, 2018, Skripal poisoning claiming Putin was conducting a murder of a long-retired British spy on British territory in some form of retaliaton, demanding war-like sanctions against Russia. When their claims failed to achieve substantive credibility, even with the British bioweapons lab, Porton Down, Rowley and Sturgess appeared as new victims of the nerve gas poisoning on June 30th and Sturgess subsequently died. The British press is filled with the imputation that the found vial will somehow be traceable back to Russia, a fact which eluded the original Skripal hoax Yet despite all of this, it appears that the desperate attempt of Mueller and his allies in the US and British intel community to block or ruin the Helsinki summit lack the suficient credibiltiy to succeed.

Gary Weglarz , July 15, 2018 at 1:19 am

I guess I'm showing my age with this comment, but our military & intelligence communities, our politicians and our corporate media's non-stop, fact-free, free-association, paranoid delusional drivel about "Russian election interference" has all the solidity, yet none of the charm, of a bad acid trip circa 1972. Offered the choice I'd certainly opt for the bad acid flashback – especially given what is actually at stake in terms of the prospects for human survival if this absurd and dangerous nonsense continues. The institutions of the West have shown themselves to be completely, totally and utterly corrupt! To bear witness to such complete corruption is absolutely breathtaking! Expecting anything rational, ethical, fact-based or simply honest to emanate from any of our Western institutions at this point requires an almost child-like level of trust – or – lacking that – a willingness to enter into and embrace the world of these mad delusions and their purveyors!

Bjorn Jensen , July 15, 2018 at 12:52 am

This is worth reading as a summary of grand jury proceedings, the prosecutor's case presentatation and the proposal for indictment through the summary of evidence either oral or via documents.

I think it is important to remember that grand juries are comprised of ordinary citizens and are independent of the courts.

http://law.jrank.org/pages/1261/Grand-Jury-Screening-procedures.html

Sam F , July 15, 2018 at 9:02 am

Yes, this era of total corruption of the US government is unprecedented.
The disputes between one corrupt branch and another condemn them all.

mrtmbrnmn , July 15, 2018 at 12:09 am

This is not breaking news anymore, but worth repeating:

The odious NY Times inadvertently stepped on its own shtick (and everyone else's) when it front-paged the FBI's "Operation Hurricane Crossfire" against the Trump campaign. This whole farcedy was conceived as a rolling scheme to regime change Putin when Hillary ascended the throne, with Trump as merely a mug and patsy. When the moo-cow Hillary lost, the plan had to be repurposed to uckfay with Putin AND regime change Trump. If it looks like a Federal crime, smells like a Federal crime and quacks like a Federal crime, well You be the judge. There are so many organs of the Federal Gov and the MSM in on this criminal conspiracy, they are going to need a new wing at Gitmo to house all these scoundrels

Nabi , July 14, 2018 at 10:40 pm

Great right up to the last few paragraphs. Too hard for a logical conservative to swallow that the prime reason we have troops (small assets at that) near the Russia border is because of the greed of Wall Street. Up 'til then not a bad piece.

Joe Lauria , July 14, 2018 at 11:10 pm

Nabi, I suggest you read War is a Racket by General Smedley Butler if you think such a thing is unheard of.

https://www.amazon.com/War-Racket-Antiwar-Americas-Decorated-ebook/dp/B00P8OEFFY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1531624171&sr=8-1&keywords=war+is+a+racket+smedley+butler

Mary V , July 15, 2018 at 9:54 pm

Everyone should read "War is a Racket".

Alcuin , July 15, 2018 at 3:01 am

Yes, greed of Wall Street. And perhaps this is the most important motive. But many former Warsaw Pact countries (or at least the ruling classes and opinion makers in those countries) wanted to become members of NATO because they apparently feared, perhaps not without reason, Russian domination in the future. And there's also the sheer libido dominandi of some people in Washington, not exclusively neoconservatives. So greed, fear, and love of power.

bobzz , July 14, 2018 at 10:08 pm

In all likelihood, we'll never know who killed Seth Rich who probably leaked the emails. The CIA did not have time to create patsies like Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray, or Sirhan Sirhan. So RIP Rich.

jsinton , July 14, 2018 at 9:28 pm

Wouldn't it be a hoot if the alleged GRU agents decide to defend themselves in court against the indictments and demand discovery evidence?

Skip Scott , July 15, 2018 at 8:01 am

The problem with that is that you'd be buying into a stage play that the Deep State players get to direct. Let's not forget about the abilities detailed in the Vault 7 releases. Unfortunately it is just as Karl Rove has stated: they can create "reality" now, and they've had plenty of time to "create" their asses off.

jsinton , July 15, 2018 at 11:41 am

Did you not hear about the St Petersburg click-bait operation that Mueller indicted with great fanfare back in February? Well, the 13 Russians sent lawyers to answer the indictment and plead not guilty, much to the shock of Mueller and the investigation. The problem is when you indict someone, they now have the right to examine the EVIDENCE against them . a process know as "discovery". Mueller has been trying to suppress the evidence in that case ever since. Will the GRU agents send a lawyer? I'd be laughing if they did.

Skip Scott , July 15, 2018 at 12:12 pm

Yes, I recall the click-bait operation and the demand for discovery, and Mueller's being caught by surprise. This time will be a little different:
"Seemingly overlooked by most, Rosenstein said the indictment will now be passed-off (code word for "buried") to the DOJ National Security Division." The public will never even get to see any evidence due to "National Security".

This indictment is nothing but a propaganda ploy timed to undermine the Helsinki summit.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/07/13/rosenstein-delivers-indictments-for-12-russians-then-buries-in-lock-box-of-doj-national-security-division/#more-151777

rosemerry , July 14, 2018 at 4:04 pm

Considering the actions of the USA elsewhere,and the accepted, even encouraged, interference by Israel in all elections in the USA (as Chuck Schumer knows very well!), the whole process is a complete put-up job. Since the emails were true, and Wikileaks is reputed to keep to valid reports, the emphasis on finding a suitable scapegoat for the election of DJT is to steer people away from the genuine actions now destroying the USA.

fred54 , July 14, 2018 at 3:11 pm

They won't have to arrest and extradite the Russians because they will show up in court just like the two indicted Russians did back in May. Mueller had a heart attack and asked the Judge to deny the defendants right in discovery to see the evidence. He thought the Russians wouldn't show and he'd get his judgement exparte without having to produce the non-existent evidence. The Russians knew the evidence didn't exist just like in this latest lie on the part of Mueller where there is no evidence. The judge denied the motion and Mueller had no choice to quietly drop the charges. The same thing will happen here. Only this time the Russians aren't going to be so sanguine.

GM , July 14, 2018 at 7:02 pm

i don't believe that's accurate. Last I heard the judge agreed to deny the defendant discovery to the bulk of the prosecution's purported evidence based on Mueller's fatuous assertions of "national security", though he added that it is temporary and subject to change in the future.

D3F1ANT , July 14, 2018 at 2:35 pm

Democrat smoke and mirrors. Sad that it's worked for so long. This entire Russia collusion fantasy has blown up in their faces though. Not only has it failed spectacularly it's exposed the depth and scope of their corrution and the insidious way in which they've coopted critical components of the Federal government to their exclusive service–at taxpayer expense (DOJ/FBI)! It really is staggering. Especially since its allowed to continue even now!

jsinton , July 15, 2018 at 9:00 pm

Not to mention the credibility of the Deep-State MSM apparatus, which has exposed itself at purveyors of propaganda without investigation

Jeff Harrison , July 14, 2018 at 11:57 am

A couple of things occur to me. One. Have the Russian government respond to the indictments with discovery as occurred with the other inane indictments that Mueller produced. Two. Have Putin respond to the Democrat's demands by demanding the same from the US. On the one hand, the US only has alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election. On the other, Russia has proof of US meddling in essentially every Russian election since the collapse of the old SovU. The US won't like this. It was absolutely hilarious when that blonde bubble head of a State Department spokeswoman complained about VOA, RFE, etc being required to register as foreign agents only to be told by Russia to take RT off the foreign agent list. The Russians could also repay the favor by indicting Americans who interfered in Russian elections. They could start with Slick Willie.

Bob In Portland , July 14, 2018 at 11:41 am

To understand for whom Robert Swan Mueller works for, look at his record. Here: https://caucus99percent.com/content/what-mueller-wont-find

alley cat , July 14, 2018 at 11:07 am

In 1745, Samuel Johnson published a commentary entitled Miscellaneous Observations on the Tragedy of Macbeth :

"Thus the doctrine of witchcraft was very powerfully inculcated; and as the greatest part of mankind have no other reason for their opinions than that they are in fashion, it cannot be doubted but this persuasion made a rapid progress, since vanity and credulity cooperate in its favor. The infection soon reached the Parliament, who, in the first year of King James, made a law, by which it was enacted, Chapter XII: That "if any person shall use any invocation or conjuration of any evil or wicked spirit; 2. or shall consult, covenant with, entertain, employ, feed or reward any evil or cursed spirit to or for any intent or purpose; 3. or take up any dead man, woman or child out of the grave, –or the skin, bone, or any part of the dead person, to be employed or used in any manner of witchcraft, sorcery, charm, or enchantment; 4. or shall use, practice, or exercise any sort of witchcraft, sorcery, charm, or enchantment; 5. whereby any person shall be destroyed, killed, wasted, consumed, pined, or lamed in any part of the body; 6. that every such person being convicted shall suffer death."

"Thus, in the time of Shakespeare, was the doctrine of witchcraft at once established by law and by the fashion, and it became not only unpolite, but criminal, to doubt it; and as prodigies are always seen in proportion as they are expected, witches were every day discovered and multiplied so fast in some places that Bishop Hall mentions a village in Lancashire where their number was greater than that of the houses."

From Through the Looking Glass , by Lewis Carroll:

"I can't believe that!" said Alice.
"Can't you?" the Queen said in a pitying tone. "Try again: draw a long breath, and shut your eyes."
Alice laughed. "There's no use trying," she said: "one can't believe impossible things."
"I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."

Two quick comments on the Russiagate hoax:
1. Julian Assange has always refused to compromise his sources, but did the next best thing by offering a $20,000 reward for the arrest and conviction of Seth Rich's killer(s). There's only one possible reason he would do this.
2. The truth of the leaked information has never been challenged. For those who insist on believing in witches and Russiagate, the 12 Russian defendants are guilty only of defending U.S. democracy, since the content of Clinton's emails helped save the U.S. from a Clinton presidency.

O Society , July 15, 2018 at 7:38 pm

Here you are. Wrote it this afternoon. Thanks for the inspiration!

https://opensociet.org/2018/07/15/russiagate-through-the-lookinglass/

Tom Roche , July 14, 2018 at 10:43 am

Excellent article, but it could be improved by including a link to the indictment text: https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download . It's a 29-page PDF, but it's double-spaced with large margins, so only requires a few minutes to read.

[Jul 18, 2018] Mueller Grand Jury Indictment Does Not Prove Russia Hacked DNC caucus99percent

Notable quotes:
"... @chuckutzman ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | caucus99percent.com

Mueller Grand Jury Indictment Does Not Prove Russia Hacked DNC Steven D on Tue, 07/17/2018 - 1:37pm

="username">detroitmechworks
I'd disagree, since it's one singular action. @chuckutzman While the PTB want to think of it as OOOH, 12 indictments, when he actually just got one group of people to agree with him. Not even ALL of them. Just most of them. And he could get rid of any he didn't think were going to agree with him. Because of course he fucking can.

Ugh, I'll go with my own BS stories than the government's rather boring line of same old shit.

[Jul 18, 2018] Considerable evidence points to Guccifer 2,0 as being an affiliate of the DNC

Jul 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Mark F. McCarty , July 14, 2018 at 9:48 am

At the crux of the indictment is an outright absurdity – Assange announced that he would be releasing Clinton-related material on June 10th, 2016, whereas the indictment claims that Guccifer 2.0 gave him access to the DNC emails on July 14th. Moreover, considerable evidence points to Guccifer 2,0 as being an affiliate of the DNC.

https://medium.com/@markfmccarty/muellers-new-indictment-do-the-feds-take-us-for-idiots-5406ef955406

https://www.reddit.com/r/WayOfTheBern/comments/8yri14/julian_assange_crowdstrike_and_the_russian_hack/

http://g-2.space/

[Jul 18, 2018] Mish Mass Hysteria

Mish - Six Questions: (1) Is this a trial or a witch hunt? (2) Do we need to see the evidence or do we believe known liars? (3) Is Trump guilty of treason? Before we even see proof Putin was involved? (4) Is the CIA incapable of fabricating evidence? (5) Even if Russia interfered in the election, why should anyone have expected otherwise? (6) Has everyone forgotten the US lies on WMDs already?
Notable quotes:
"... Sending lethal arms to Ukraine, bordering Russia, is a really serious adverse action against the interest of the Russian government. Bombing the Assad regime is, as well. Denouncing one of the most critical projects that the Russian government has, which is the pipeline to sell huge amounts of gas and oil to Germany, is, as well. ..."
"... The United States funds oppositional groups inside Russia. The United States sent advisers and all kinds of operatives to try and elect Boris Yeltsin in the mid-1990s, because they perceived, accurately, that he was a drunk who would serve the interests of the United States more than other candidates who might have won. The United States interferes in Russian politics, and they interfere in their cyber systems, and they invade their email systems, and they invade all kinds of communications all the time. And so, to treat this as though it's some kind of aberrational event, I think, is really kind of naive ..."
"... And so, I would certainly hope that we are not at the point, which I think we seem to be at, where we are now back to believing that when the CIA makes statements and assertions and accusations, or when prosecutors make statements and assertions and accusations, unaccompanied by evidence that we can actually evaluate, that we're simply going to believe those accusations on faith, especially when the accusations come from George W. Bush's former FBI Director Robert Mueller, who repeatedly lied to Congress about Iraq and a whole variety of other issues. So, I think there we need some skepticism. ..."
Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Congratulations to President Trump for an Excellent Summit with Putin spawned numerous some I could not tell if they were sarcastic or not.

For example, reader Brian stated " There is zero doubt now that Putin stole the election from Hillary. So much so that she MUST be given the nomination again in 2020. All potential challengers must step aside. To refuse her the 2020 nomination would be evidence of traitorous activities with Putin."'

I congratulated Brian for brilliant sarcasm but he piled on. It now seems he was serious. Mainstream media, the Left an the Right were in general condemnation. Numerous cries of treason emerged from the Left and the Right (see the above link)

It Happened - No Trial Necessary

A friend I highly respect commented " There is simply no question that they did it. You can legitimately claim that it's not important or that there has been no tie to Trump shown. On the Russians' side, they can say, screw off, we were pursuing our interests. But you can't take the view it did not happen. It happened. "

There is a question who did it. Indictments are just that, not proof.

The US fabricated evidence to start the Vietnam war and the US fabricated WMD talk on the second war in Iraq. US intelligence had no idea the Berlin Wall was about to fall. The US meddled in Russia supporting a drunk named Yeltsin because we erroneously thought we could control him.

They Are All Liars

It's a mystery why anyone would believe these proven liars. That does not mean I believe Putin either. They are all capable liars. Let's step back from the absurd points of view to reality.

US Meddling

The US tries to influence elections in other countries and has a history of assisting the forcible overthrow of governments we don't like.

All of the above are massive disasters of US meddling. They are all actions of war, non-declared, and illegal. I cannot and do not condone such actions even if they were legal.

911 and ISIS resulted from US meddling. The migration crisis in the EU is a direct consequence of US meddling. The Iranian revolution was a direct consequence of US meddling.Now we are pissing and moaning that Russia spent a few million dollars on Tweets to steal the election. Please be serious.

Let's Assume

Let's assume for one second the DNC hack was Russia-based. Is there a reason to not be thankful for evidence that Hillary conspired to deny Bernie Sanders the nomination? Pity Hillary? We are supposed to pity Hillary? The outrage from the Right is amazing. It's pretty obvious Senator John McCain wanted her to win. Neither faced a war or military intervention they disapproved of.

Common Sense

Let's move on to a common sense position from Glenn Greenwald at the Intercept.

  1. Debate: Is Trump-Putin Summit a "Danger to America" or Crucial Diplomacy Between Nuclear Powers?
  2. Greenwald vs. Cirincione: Should Trump Have Canceled Summit After U.S. Indictment of Russian Agents?

Greenwald vs. Joe Cirincione

GLENN GREENWALD : In 2007, during the Democratic presidential debate, Barack Obama was asked whether he would meet with the leaders of North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Syria and Iran without preconditions. He said he would. Hillary Clinton said she wouldn't, because it would be used as a propaganda tool for repressive dictators. And liberals celebrated Obama. It was one of his greatest moments and one of the things that I think helped him to win the Democratic nomination, based on the theory that it's always better to meet with leaders, even if they're repressive, than to isolate them or to ignore them. In 1987, when President Reagan decided that he wanted to meet with Soviet leaders, the far right took out ads against him that sounded very much just like what we just heard from Joe, accusing him of being a useful idiot to Soviet and Kremlin propaganda, of legitimizing Russian aggression and domestic repression at home.

GLENN GREENWALD : It is true that Putin is an authoritarian and is domestically repressive. That's true of many of the closest allies of the United States, as well, who are even far more repressive, including ones that fund most of the think tanks in D.C., such as the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia. And I think the most important issue is the one that we just heard, which is that 90 percent of the world's nuclear weapons are in the hands of two countries -- the United States and Russia -- and having them speak and get along is much better than having them isolate one another and increase the risk of not just intentional conflict, but misperception and miscommunication, as well.

JOE CIRINCIONE : Right. Let's be clear. Glenn, there's nothing wrong with meeting. I agree with you. Leaders should meet, and we should be negotiating with our foes, with those people we disagree with. We're better off when we do that. And the kind of attacks you saw on Barack Obama were absolutely uncalled for, and you're right to condemn those.

JOE CIRINCIONE : What I'm worried about is this president meeting with this leader of Russia and what they're going to do. That's what's so wrong about this summit coming now, when you have Donald Trump, who just attacked the NATO alliance, who calls our European allies foes, who turns a blind eye to what his director of national intelligence called the warning lights that are blinking red. About what? About Russian interference in our elections. So you just had a leader of Russia, Putin, a skilled tactician, a skilled strategist, interfere in a U.S. election. To what? To help elect Donald Trump.

GLENN GREENWALD : I think this kind of rhetoric is so unbelievably unhinged, the idea that the phishing links sent to John Podesta and the Democratic National Committee are the greatest threat to American democracy in decades. People are now talking about it as though it's on par with 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, that the lights are blinking red, in terms of the threat level. This is lunacy, this kind of talk. I spent years reading through the most top-secret documents of the NSA, and I can tell you that not only do they send phishing links to Russian agencies of every type continuously on a daily basis, but do far more aggressive interference in the cybersecurity of every single country than Russia is accused of having done during the 2016 election. To characterize this as some kind of grave existential threat to American democracy is exactly the kind of rhetoric that we heard throughout the Bush-Cheney administration about what al-Qaeda was like .

JOE CIRINCIONE : Why does Donald Trump feel that he has to meet alone with Putin? What is going on there? I mean, that -- when Ronald Reagan met with Gorbachev at Reykjavik, at least he had George Shultz with him. The two of them, you know, were meeting with Gorbachev and his foreign minister at the time. This is -- it's deeply disturbing. It makes you feel that Trump is hiding something, that he is either trying to make a deal with Putin, reporting something to Putin. I tell you, I know U.S. intelligence officials -- I'm probably going right into Glenn's wheelhouse here. But U.S. intelligence officials are concerned about what Donald Trump might be revealing to the Russian leader, the way he revealed classified information to the Russian foreign minister when he met privately with him in the Oval Office at the beginning of his term. No, I don't like it one bit.

GLENN GREENWALD : I continue to be incredibly frustrated by the claim that we hear over and over, and that we just heard from Joe, that Donald Trump does everything that Vladimir Putin wants, and that if he were a paid agent of the Russian government, there'd be -- he would be doing nothing different. I just went through the entire list of actions that Donald Trump has taken and statements that he has made that are legitimately adverse to the interest of the Russian government, that Barack Obama specifically refused to do, despite bipartisan demands that he do them, exactly because he didn't want to provoke more tensions between the United States and Russia.

Sending lethal arms to Ukraine, bordering Russia, is a really serious adverse action against the interest of the Russian government. Bombing the Assad regime is, as well. Denouncing one of the most critical projects that the Russian government has, which is the pipeline to sell huge amounts of gas and oil to Germany, is, as well.

So is expelling Russian diplomats and imposing serious sanctions on oligarchs that are close to the Putin regime. You can go down the list, over and over and over, in the 18 months that he's been in office, and see all the things that Donald Trump has done that is adverse, in serious ways, to the interests of Vladimir Putin, including ones that President Obama refused to do. So, this film, this movie fairytale, that I know is really exciting -- it's like international intrigue and blackmail, like the Russians have something over Trump; it's like a Manchurian candidate; it's from like the 1970s thrillers that we all watched -- is inane -- you know, with all due respect to Joe. I mean, it's -- but it's in the climate, because it's so contrary to what it is that we're seeing. Now, this idea of meeting alone with Vladimir Putin, the only way that you would find that concerning is if you believed all that.

JOE CIRINCIONE : So, Trump knew that this indictment was coming down, before he went to Europe, and still he never says a word about it. What he does is continue his attacks on our alliances, i.e. he continues his attacks on our free press, he continues his attacks on FBI agents who were just doing their job, and supports this 10-hour show hearing that the House of Representatives had. It's really unbelievable that Trump is doing these things and never says one word about it. He still has not said a word about those indictments.

GLENN GREENWALD : That's because the reality is -- and I don't know if Donald Trump knows this or doesn't know this, has stumbled into the truth or what -- but the reality is that what the Russians did in 2016 is absolutely not aberrational or unusual in any way. The United -- I'm sorry to say this, but it's absolutely true. The United States and Russia have been interfering in one another's domestic politics for since at least the end of World War II, to say nothing of what they do in far more extreme ways to the internal politics of other countries. Noam Chomsky was on this very program several months ago, and he talked about how the entire world is laughing at this indignation from the United States -- "How dare you interfere in our democracy!" -- when the United States not only has continuously in the past done, but continues to do far more extreme interference in the internal politics of all kinds of countries, including Russia .

GLENN GREENWALD : The United States funds oppositional groups inside Russia. The United States sent advisers and all kinds of operatives to try and elect Boris Yeltsin in the mid-1990s, because they perceived, accurately, that he was a drunk who would serve the interests of the United States more than other candidates who might have won. The United States interferes in Russian politics, and they interfere in their cyber systems, and they invade their email systems, and they invade all kinds of communications all the time. And so, to treat this as though it's some kind of aberrational event, I think, is really kind of naive .

GLENN GREENWALD : It wasn't just Hillary Clinton in 2016 who lost this election. The entire Democratic Party has collapsed as a national political force over the last decade. They've lost control of the Senate and of the House and of multiple statehouses and governorships. They're decimated as a national political force. And the reason is exactly what Joe said. They become the party of international globalization. They're associated with Silicon Valley and Wall Street billionaires and corporate interests, and have almost no connection to the working class. And that is a much harder conversation to have about why the Democrats have lost elections than just blaming a foreign villain and saying it's because Vladimir Putin ran some fake Facebook ads and did some phishing emails. And I think that until we put this in perspective, about what Russia did in 2016 and the reality that the U.S. does that sort of thing all the time to Russia and so many other countries, we're going to just not have the conversation that we need to be having about what these international institutions, that are so sacred -- NATO and free trade and international trade organizations -- have done to people all over the world, and the reason they're turning to demagogues and right-wing extremists because of what these institutions have done to them. That's the conversation we need to be having, but we're not having, because we're evading it by blaming everything on Vladimir Putin. And that, to me, is even more dangerous for our long-term prospects than this belligerence that's in the air about how we ought to look at Moscow.

Indictments and First Year Law

Mish : I now wish to return to a statement my friend made regarding the idea " No question Russia did it ".

From Glenn Greenwald

As far as the indictments from Mueller are concerned, it's certainly the most specific accounting yet that we've gotten of what the U.S. government claims the Russian government did in 2016. But it's extremely important to remember what every first-year law student will tell you, which is that an indictment is nothing more than the assertions of a prosecutor unaccompanied by evidence. The evidence won't be presented until a trial or until Robert Mueller actually issues a report to Congress.

And so, I would certainly hope that we are not at the point, which I think we seem to be at, where we are now back to believing that when the CIA makes statements and assertions and accusations, or when prosecutors make statements and assertions and accusations, unaccompanied by evidence that we can actually evaluate, that we're simply going to believe those accusations on faith, especially when the accusations come from George W. Bush's former FBI Director Robert Mueller, who repeatedly lied to Congress about Iraq and a whole variety of other issues. So, I think there we need some skepticism.

But even if the Russians did everything that Robert Mueller claims in that indictment that they did, in the scheme of what the U.S. and the Russians do to one another and other countries, I think to say that this is somehow something that we should treat as a grave threat, that should mean that we don't talk to them or that we treat them as an enemy, is really irrational and really quite dangerous.

Mish - Six Questions

  1. Is this a trial or a witch hunt?
  2. Do we need to see the evidence or do we believe known liars?
  3. Is Trump guilty of treason? Before we even see proof Putin was involved?
  4. Is the CIA incapable of fabricating evidence?
  5. Even if Russia interfered in the election, why should anyone have expected otherwise?
  6. Has everyone forgotten the US lies on WMDs already?

Irrational and Dangerous

I don't know about you, but I have no reason to believe known liars and hypocrites. I disagree with Trump all the time, in fact, more often than not. The amount of venom on Trump over this is staggering. Adding a missing word, I stand by my previous statement: " Nearly every political action that generates this much complete nonsense and hysteria from the Left and Right is worthy of immense praise."

If you disagree please provide examples. The only two I can come up with are Pearl Harbor and 911. In both, the US was directly attacked. For rebuttal purposes I offer Vietnam, Syria, Iraq, Russia, Iran, WWI, treatment of Japanese-American citizens in WWII, and McCarthyism. Greenwald accurately assesses the situation as "really irrational and really quite dangerous." Indeed. And if indictments and accusations were crimes, we wouldn't need a jury.


Free This -> clymer Tue, 07/17/2018 - 07:25 Permalink

No bitch here but you, bulgars!

If the DNC servers were hacked, they are evidence, where is the fucking evidence now? At the bottom of the Hudson River with concrete shoes that's where! Where are the Anwan servers, Podesta's, Wieners....where are Hillary's emails?

Fuck this is getting out of hand. All of the top spooks in the alphabet agencies are complicit, DOJ too, right up to the skinny faggot in the rainbow house!

Getting close to the time for some real fucking justice in America!

Sic Semper Tyrannis

Here is an update to the map I posted yesterday about where not to be, not sure I agree one way or the other, you decide:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn5Io6mZqXM

And Preper Nurse on wild medcines:

Don't forget to watch "Lifesaving Advice From Dirty Rotten Survival's Dave Canterbury" I posted yesterday, of all watch that.

One way to zero in iron sights on your AR-15:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=934LFFsC5Dw

And my all time favorite Uncle Ted, baby, what an interview, a must watch as well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5NelZNtw_U

freedommusic -> HockeyFool Tue, 07/17/2018 - 07:37 Permalink

Rule 101 of the upside down - project un to others the crimes that YOU commit...

eclectic syncretist -> 847328_3527 Tue, 07/17/2018 - 09:09 Permalink

Even if it were found to be true that Russia (and not Seth Rich) was the source of the info that revealed to the American people (and the world) that the DNC conspired to rig its own primary election, my response would be one of gratitude for shining a light on the cockroaches.

Laowei Gweilo -> Miskondukt Tue, 07/17/2018 - 09:35 Permalink

the zeal with which MSN and especially CNN Wolf Blitzer now defend the 'Intelligence Community' as a singular infallible flawless entity is incredible ...

... in the context of the war they waged on that very same 'Intelligence Community' in light of it being wrong about WMD in Iraq

... or the Snowden-gate about it spying on Americans.

most two-faced biased blindly-agended-based manipulative thing I've ever seen on CNN

inosent -> Snaffew Tue, 07/17/2018 - 10:48 Permalink

Russian hack? hahaha, as if. Everybody knows it was an inside job. That sort of thing with all the emails is inside -> Seth Rich is a good place to look.

BESIDES! LET'S NOT FORGET ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THOSE EMAILS!!!

This guy in the article above that says Hellary "must" be given the nomination because Russia 'hacked' the election. Great! I'll be very happy to see that nasty bitch go down a second time, based on the substance of her twisted, hypocritical, and consummately evil character.

Super Sleuth -> css1971 Tue, 07/17/2018 - 13:55 Permalink

BILL BROWDER: The CIA Asset and Neocon Zionist Who Was Used to Restart the Cold War with Russia

---

http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=101126

" Deep State agent Bill Browder operated at the very nexus of the
U.S. and U.K. Intelligence Communities that conspired to produce
both the fake Russiagate and very real Spygate ."

-- Intelligence Analyst & Former Military Officer

janus -> Super Sleuth Tue, 07/17/2018 - 15:24 Permalink

***It is a tale, full of sound and fury, told by idiots, signifying nothing***

how can we be expected to take any of this shit seriously?

-- avowed globalist-communists opposed to any nation's sovereignty, repulsed at the faintest wiff of patriotism scolding us for our lack of patriotism?

-- political parties, intelligence agencies, the media and much of the judiciary attempting to undermine the democratic process for over a year and a half, delegitamize a Presidency, vilify half the nation, stoke the flames of enmity...now they kvetch about our skepticism?

no, langley, we do not trust you. no, media, your agitprop has no currency.

of all the reasons for hillary's defeat, no one ever mentions the fact that she campaigned on a platform of war...WWIII, no less. starting in May/June of 2016, cankles started pounding the war drums. in a scenario so stale and overused as to threadbare, the left initiated the process of demonizing russia and russians.

Trump supporters are not only pro-American, they/we are anti-war. forever spinning in a manic and frenzied swirl of hysterics, the left often loses sight of this...but as much is to be expected, in that the left doesn't think, they instead parrot the tropes fed to them on a daily basis, forever unable to assemble the fragments of these disparate priorities into a cogent whole. but if they were able to arrange this mess into coherence, the image would terrify them with its ghastliness. the left openly and earnestly serves the forces of evil -- in fact, they are the forces of evil. they depend on the idiocy and credulity of their minions to keep this reality obscured. fortunately for the left, their supporters are sufficiently dull and benighted to keep the truth forever blighted.

maybe we should play the victoria nuland tapes again...as a refresher:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QxZ8t3V_bk

we not only interfered with Ukranian/Russian politics, we overtly overthrew a democratically elected government, attempted to provoke Russia to respond militarily, started a civil war in the Ukraine, (downed a commercial airliner in a disgusting FF), funded and trained Nazis and left the nation in shambles. these are the same people calling Trump a traitor. these are the same forces who demand faith and fidelity.

it's gone...no one trusts (((you))) anymore...we know you're nothing but a bunch of bloodthristy satanists...your time is in eclipse, the more you struggle, the tighter the constraints.

"fuck the EU (for balking at WWIII)" Victoria Nuland, Clinton apparatchik, globalists, communist, satanist, kike.

janus

I Am Jack's Ma -> MoreSun Tue, 07/17/2018 - 14:44 Permalink

Zionists are a large part of the problem (and remember what Biden said) but not at all the whole problem. Don't hyperfocus - the 'Deep State' is chock full of non-Jewish warmongers and traitors. In fact the top traitors are guys like Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Clapper, Clinton, Obama, and Strozk.

Creative_Destruct -> King of Ruperts Land Tue, 07/17/2018 - 10:23 Permalink

" The US fabricated evidence to start the Vietnam war and the US fabricated WMD talk on the second war in Iraq. US intelligence had no idea the Berlin Wall was about to fall. The US meddled in Russia supporting a drunk named Yeltsin because we erroneously thought we could control him."

YUP! AMEN.

It's amusing to me that the Leftist's NOW have a blind-faith trust in government, whereas during the Vietnam war, and at the start of the Iraq war the opposite was (justifiably) the case.

And remember, the [neoliberal] Left was all OVER how we manipulated Russia into an Oligarchy:

https://www.thenation.com/article/harvard-boys-do-russia/

Radical Marijuana -> HopefulCynical Tue, 07/17/2018 - 12:34 Permalink

"Marxists" ???

Follow the money to its source.

There is nothing in either the dictionary definition of "Marxism," nor the social facts, which justifies using that label for the ruling classes, the pyramidion people of the globalized social pyramid systems.

The root of the runaway "mass hysteria" is the long history of the control over the public money supplies being captured by the best organized gangsters, the banksters. There is an overwhelming amount of historical evidence regarding how that happened. See Excellent Videos on Money Systems .

Some of that evidence indicates some of those banksters were behind the promotion of messianic Marxism through the Russian Revolution which resulted in the Soviet Union. (Less compelling evidence indicates similar factors were at play in the later Chinese Revolution.)

The original Marxism was relatively scientific, for its time and place in history. However, it was messianic Marxism which became the ideologies of so-called "communist" movements, all of which necessarily ended up being dominated by their own kinds of best available professional hypocrites, resulting in even steeper social pyramid systems than previously.

It is RIDICULOUS to label the banksters as "Marxists." The comment posted above by HopefulCynical only begins to make some sense AFTER one substitutes some label which refers to the banksters , rather than to some ideologies which those banksters used to covertly advance their overall agenda.

Ideologies which become publicly significant are always systems of organized lies, which operate robberies. There is actually only one political system: organized crime. Therefore, contemporary geopolitical events make more sense after one recognizes who are the best organized gangsters , which are dominating civilization, including dominating the mass media's public presentation of those events.

While President Trump is correctly presenting the degree to which the mainstream media is based on "fake news," President Trump deliberately does not engage in deeper analysis of that phrase "fake news," but rather, used his oratory skill to capture that phrase, and thereby turn it against those who originally intended to use that phrase against President Trump.

The comment above by HopefulCynical was overwhelmingly up-voted by its readers. Tragically, the indicates the degree to which so many people want to believe in bullshit.

"The Marxists who've run America (and the rest of the world) into the ground for so many decades ..."

It was NOT "Marxists," but rather the banksters, who've run America (and the rest of the world) ... for so many decades. In particular, since 1971, when the American Dollar lost its last connection with the material world, after the last vestiges of money backed by precious metals were cut, the banksters have been able to astronomically amplify their frauds, as enforced by governments, to become about exponentially more fraudulent.

That about exponentially increasing fraudulence, as demonstrated by debt slavery systems generating numbers which have become debt insanities, is at the root of the runaway manifestation of "mass hysteria" in America (and the rest of the world.)

The debt slavery systems were made and maintained by the international bankers, as the best organized gangsters, the banksters, whose persistent and prolonged participation in the funding of all aspects of the political processes (including schooling and mass media) has resulted in the public powers of government being primarily used to back up the privatized interests of big banks, and the big corporations that grew up around those big banks being able to issue the public money supplies out of nothing as debts.

Those real social facts do NOT correspond to the dictionary definition of Marxism, nor to any other goofy ideologies which were popularized to conceal the real social facts, and permit public discussion of those facts to be drowned under the bullshit of false fundamental dichotomies and the related impossible ideals.

There continues to be a lot of awful nonsense presented in articles and comments published on Zero Hedge , because of the degree to which the authors of those like to continue to believe in their favourite kinds of impossible ideals, by mislabeling what they do not like in erroneous ways, which ignore both the actual facts and definitions of those labels.

BANKSTERS' "psychopathic dreams of total control" require that it will be possible for systems based on being able to enforce frauds can continue to become about exponentially more fraudulent. However, endless exponential growth is absolutely impossible.

Rising popular awareness and resistance to the banksters is manifesting through various political movements. However, so far, those movements continue to mostly be forms of controlled "opposition." Anyone who continues to misuse the labels such as "capitalism versus communism," or abuses the label "Marxist," etc., is still actually a form of controlled "opposition," because of the degree to which their thinking and communication is still based on taking for granted the biggest bullies' bullshit, which has become the banksters' bullshit .

After the banksters kicked the shit out of Russia during the 20th Century, Russia has returned having learned something from those experiences. The results are that Russia is slightly more able and willing to advance its national interests against the international banksters. That is the main reason why Russia is being demonized by those who are still almost totally the banksters' puppets.

President Trump appears to be a relative anomaly, whose social successfulness was based on the apparently increasing anomalies, due to the systems based on enforced frauds becoming about exponentially more fraudulent. It was that diffuse awareness of mass media propaganda being systematic lying, serving the interests of the owners of those mass media, that was one of the factors which enabled President Trump to win the election.

Some of his most significant campaign promises were to diminish the demonization of Russia, and thereby diminish the threat of war with weapons of mass destruction spinning out of control, which continues to potentially be the greatest of threats, which are somewhat under human control, but which look like those are going more and more out of control.

However, in my opinion, President Trump tends to NOT go beyond superficially correct analysis of the accumulating apparent anomalies, whose root causes are the systems of enforced frauds being amplified by about exponentially advancing technologies to become about exponentially more fraudulent, which factors are at the root of the accumulating "mass hysteria."

The best overall ways to approach understanding current geopolitical events are that the excessively successful applications of the methods of organized crime through the political processes are resulting in civilization manifesting runaway criminal insanities, which situation is so serious that people who attempt to reduce that insanity are attacked by those who want to increase that insanity.

The deeper reasons for the underlying issues are that there must be some death control systems, precisely because endless exponential growth is absolutely impossible, and therefore, death control systems develop to stop that happening, which drives those death control systems to become murder systems which maximize maliciousness.

The longer term consequences of the social successfulness of maximized maliciousness are that the biggest bullies' bullshit almost totally dominates civilization, including the layers of controlled "opposition" that surround the central core of the best organized gangsters, which have become the banksters . Hence, most of those who believe that they are "resisting" continue to think and communicate in ways which still take for granted most of that bullshit .

VWAndy -> Radical Marijuana Tue, 07/17/2018 - 12:57 Permalink

Yep. These false ideologies are just cover stories to keep people from focusing on the corruption.

Turns out Hypocrisy is the only form of government we have ever known.

[Jul 18, 2018] This indictment is nearly identical to the Jan. 6, 2017 ODNI Report, which came from a handful of unnamed analysts from the CIA and FBI. There is very little new information in well over a year. Right there, this raises red flags. Who were these analysts?

Looks like both Rosenstein and Mueller are pawn in a larger game...
Jul 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com
Pandas4peace , July 14, 2018 at 8:40 am

Two points:
1. This indictment is nearly identical to the Jan. 6, 2017 ODNI Report, which came from a handful of unnamed analysts from the CIA and FBI. There is very little new information in well over a year. Right there, this raises red flags. Who were these analysts?

2. Did Mueller/Rosenstein consult with any foreign policy advisors? Does meddling in the president's national security affairs put the country at ris?

It's a dangerous game and a slippery slope. For the sake of the country, they better be right.

[Jul 18, 2018] Mueller should be prosecuted for violating the Logan Act. The timing of this is an illegal attempt to interfere with Foreign Policy.

Jul 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

O Society July 14, 2018 at 6:20 am Rosenstein makes the announcement. 8 minutes into this video he states:
There are no allegations in the indictment any American knew they were in contact with Russians or with a Russian operation,
any American committed a crime in relation to this,
or that the operation changed or influenced the election.

http://youtu.be/mYXCsxf9TsE

Fist thoughts:
If there is no allegation (evidence) the operation influenced the election, then why do we care about any of this?
Seems odd no Americans did anything worthy of investigating. Exonerating the DNC/ DCCC of all wrong doing?
How does Rosenstein (or anyone in the FBI) know Russians did this "hack" without having access to examine the DNC computers? Are we going by what CrowdStrike says they found? John McCarthy , July 14, 2018 at 5:08 am

Mueller should be prosecuted for violating the Logan Act. The timing of this is an illegal attempt to interfere with Foreign Policy.

Mike Lamb , July 14, 2018 at 6:12 am

Right on!
Apparently Mueller couldn't get a U-2 to fly over Russia and get shot down (which in 1960 scuttled a summit between President Eisenhower and Soviet Premier Khrushchev).

[Jul 18, 2018] Fugitive Cop Says He's Behind the DNC Leaks

Notable quotes:
"... Webb (for what it's worth): "They're really not Trump's Russians; they're really not Putin's Russians -- they're really Rosenstein and Comey's Russians." ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Marko , July 14, 2018 at 6:40 am

How coincidental that just the day before the announcement of the indictments , The Daily Beast published an extensive hit-piece on John Mark Dougan , who has admitted setting up the DCLeaks website that was used to release some of the earlier leaks :

"Fugitive Cop Says He's Behind the DNC Leaks. It's His Latest Hoax.
A Florida cop turned hacker who fled to Russia to escape the FBI claims Seth Rich leaked him DNC documents. But his story is full of holes."

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fugitive-cop-says-hes-behind-the-dnc-leaks-its-his-latest-hoax?ref=scroll

Also , True Pundit suspects some of the language used in the indictments was cribbed from a related lawsuit filed by George Webb :

"Mueller Plagiarizes Right-Wing YouTube Journalist's Lawsuit Against Podesta in New Russian Indictments; DOJ's Big Splash Appears Fabricated"

https://truepundit.com/mueller-plagiarizes-right-wing-youtube-journalists-lawsuit-against-podesta-in-new-russian-indictments-dojs-big-splash-appears-fabricated/

Gen Dao , July 14, 2018 at 8:09 am

George Webb is not a right-winger. He is a Bernie supporter. LOL. Still, the similarity of the wording suggests that the indictment is meant not only as an attempt to bolster the Russiagate fiction but also to defend Hillary and Podesta against charges of corruption, rigging the Dem primary, and incompetence and perhaps allow Hillary to run in 2020 or at lease to choose who the Dem candidate will be. It is also, of course, meant to sabotage detente with Russia and damage both Trump and Bernie Sanders. Sanders is probably regarded as even more dangerous than Trump by the deep state and by the corrupt, no-talent leaders of the pathetic Dem party -- just look at Shumer's ridiculous and unpatriotic demand that Trump cancel the summit. The current Dem leaders have absolutely nothing positive to offer the American people in terms of foreign policy and do nothing but repeat neocon nonsense, but the deep state supports the Dems at the moment because they want to see Trump impeached and Bernie make a fool of himself by criticizing Russia with no evidence. Bernie lost a lot of support with his recent uninformed Russophobic statement. The strong implied focus on defending Podesta and by further implication Hillary, obvious from the similarities with the Webb lawsuit, shows the real aim of the indictments. As Lauria points out, it's all for internal consumption. But there are several apparent contradictions in the indictment, and those contradictions will be no doubt be pointed out in the coming days by computer experts, so this indictment may have no lasting effect outside of people who are already True Believers in Russiagate. Even so, the failure to interview Assange and Craig Murray is truly shocking and disappointing.

Alcuin , July 14, 2018 at 10:49 am

George Webb has talked with Bill Binney and despite being somewhat eccentric should not be dismissed out of hand. He is rumored to be former Mossad. From his videos of the last three days (days 15, 16, 17) it appears that he thinks Russian-born hackers living in the USA were indeed involved, but that they were not working for the Russian government but rather for various Americans (including well-known American politicians), concentrating on economic espionage.
Remember that Assange when questioned repeatedly emphasized that that the emails did not come from Russian "state" actors. Putin recently seems to have wanted to imply the same point.
According to Webb the hackers received their training from Russian military intelligence.
Webb also ties the hacking and espionage to the wider picture of pipeline politics in Europe and the Middle East. Even if Webb is wrong, or if he represents Israeli interests, it's an interesting view that is worth investigating.

Alcuin , July 16, 2018 at 2:18 am

Webb (for what it's worth): "They're really not Trump's Russians; they're really not Putin's Russians -- they're really Rosenstein and Comey's Russians."

Ben , July 14, 2018 at 8:13 am

Forensic analysis from forensicator:

https://theforensicator.wordpress.com/
http://g-2.space/

His analysis of the metadata indicates the information was copied to a USB.

[Jul 18, 2018] The Publicly Available Evidence Doesn't Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

Notable quotes:
"... Crowdstrike's Danger Close report , which was supposed to be the nail in the coffin that proved the GRU was involved in the DNC hack, has been repudiated by the Ukrainian government, the IISS whose data they misused, and the builder of the military app that they claimed was compromised. ..."
"... The Reality Winner leak of a classified NSA document contained a graphic that used different colors of lines to qualify the data (confirmed, analyst judgment, contextual information). The line that connected the "actors" who sent out the spearphishing email to various electoral organizations with the GRU was yellow (analyst judgment) and included the words "probably within"; meaning that this was not a communications intercept. ..."
"... There are many other problems with the DNC investigation starting with the fact that no government agency actually did the forensics work. It was done by a company with strong ties to the Clinton campaign and an economic incentive to blame foreign governments for cyber attacks on evidence that was either flimsy or non-existent. ..."
"... Does any of this mean that the Russian government didn't do it? No. It only means that there is insufficient public evidence to say that it did. ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | medium.com

Three days ago, the Washington Post ran this article by Philip Bump  --  " Here's the public evidence that supports the idea that Russia interfered in the 2016 election ".

This gist of the article was, since we can't know what the classified evidence is that supports the U.S. government's finding in favor of Russian government intereference, there is plenty of public evidence which should convince us.

Bump is wrong about that. The public evidence isn't enough to identify Russian government involvement, or even identify the nationality of the hackers involved. That doesn't mean that the Russian government isn't responsible. It means that we don't know enough to say who is responsible based solely on the publicly known evidence, including classified evidence that's been leaked.

Here's a recap:

The X-Agent malware used against the DNC is not exclusive to Russia. The source code has been acquired by at least one Ukrainian hacker group and one European cybersecurity company, which means that others have it as well. "Exclusive use" is a myth that responsible cybersecurity companies need to stop using as proof of attribution.

The various attacks attributed to the GRU were a comedy of errors ; not the actions of a sophisticated adversary.

The FBI/DHS Grizzly Steppe report was a disaster ( here , here , here , and here ).

Crowdstrike's Danger Close report , which was supposed to be the nail in the coffin that proved the GRU was involved in the DNC hack, has been repudiated by the Ukrainian government, the IISS whose data they misused, and the builder of the military app that they claimed was compromised.

The Arizona and Illinois attacks against electoral databases that were blamed on the Russian government were actually conducted by English-speaking hackers .

The Reality Winner leak of a classified NSA document contained a graphic that used different colors of lines to qualify the data (confirmed, analyst judgment, contextual information). The line that connected the "actors" who sent out the spearphishing email to various electoral organizations with the GRU was yellow (analyst judgment) and included the words "probably within"; meaning that this was not a communications intercept.

There are many other problems with the DNC investigation starting with the fact that no government agency actually did the forensics work. It was done by a company with strong ties to the Clinton campaign and an economic incentive to blame foreign governments for cyber attacks on evidence that was either flimsy or non-existent.

Does any of this mean that the Russian government didn't do it? No. It only means that there is insufficient public evidence to say that it did.

[Jul 18, 2018] That information was no more the private property of the DNC and Clinton Campaign than a plan to rob a bank belongs to the robbers. Isn't that so, Mr. Mueller?

Jul 18, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

ill-gotten goods are undeserving of protection of law. The DNC and Podesta had no legitimate expectation of privacy in their combinations to defraud the public and steal elections.

It's been imputed that the Russians did this to damage the reputation of Hillary Clinton. To take the alleged damage to reputation angle to its conclusion, truth is an entirely sufficient defense to any charge of libel. What was revealed by an alleged hack was the truth, something that is entirely lacking in the rest of this affair.

As for the alleged theft and public release of email, ill-gotten goods are undeserving of protection of law. The DNC and Podesta had no legitimate expectation of privacy in their combinations to defraud the public and steal elections.

The Russian GRU is accused of revealing that the people who run the DNC and Clinton campaign committee colluded with each other to steal the nomination. The allegedly hacked emails show what they really did and thought during the fraudulent nomination of Hillary Clinton. It might be argued, that whomever revealed the truth actually did a public service for the American people. An odd sort of "act of war," that.

Finally, individual officials and military officers have a limited immunity and are not normally indicted by foreign states for intelligence activities such as electronic surveillance and hacking across borders. That is where the element of harm comes in. The only real precedent for this is the Rainbow Warrior case. In 1985, French intelligence officers blew up and sank a Greenpeace ship by that name anchored in Auckland, NZ harbour, killing a passenger, a Dutch photographer. A UN arbitrator held in that case the French agents were not immune under customary international law to prosecution in a New Zealand court and could be individually tried and jailed, but only because of the death of the victim as part of "a criminal act of violence against property in New Zealand . . . done without regard for innocent civilians." Greenpeace was additionally awarded damages in the UK under international Maritime Law because the vessel was a British-flagged ship.

Also bear in mind, the US and UK both provide immunity to their own intelligence officers and law enforcement officers for hacking and related computer crimes committed against foreign powers. The UK takes that a step further and exempts police officers for domestic hacking:

See, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/15/intelligence-officers-ha...

This is a dangerous precedent, and the likely result is to ignite retaliation and further exacerbate U.S.-Russian tensions. The entire staffs of the NSA, GCHQ and GRU could be similarly "prosecuted," but what will that accomplish? Even if every word of the indictment is fact, the indictment itself violates the norms of international law and this latest "Russiagate" escalation by Mueller seems intended to ratchet up the New Cold War.

That is why "Russiagate" is a legal sham, in my opinion. Even if the alleged Russian hack of the DNC email actually happened as claimed, and even if the hack was with bad intent, there was no real crime or harm in the release of that information. That information was no more the private property of the DNC and Clinton Campaign than a plan to rob a bank belongs to the robbers. Isn't that so, Mr. Mueller?

[Jul 18, 2018] Tomorrow, I am going to get in contact with Special Counsel Robert Mueller and tell him that I have found the real people behind the hacking of the 2016 US election and they aren't Russian they are Chinese!

Jul 18, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

The Rev Kev , July 16, 2018 at 8:25 am

Tomorrow, I am going to get in contact with Special Counsel Robert Mueller and tell him that I have found the real people behind the hacking of the 2016 US election and they aren't Russian – they are Chinese! I am prepared to give names and so to give everybody the scoop, here they are-

Li Keqiang, Zhang Dejiang, Yu Zhengsheng, Zhou Qiang, Cao Jianming, Li Yuanchao, Han Zheng, Sun Chunlan, Hu Chunhua and Liu He.

They are all real names of real Chinese government officials but unfortunately, as they are Chinese, they cannot be extradited out of China in the same way that Russians can't be extradited out of Russia. And like Special Counsel Robert Mueller, I have no real proof that they did it and cannot bring them to a US court for trial so you will all have to take my word for it so we're cool, right?

[Jul 18, 2018] Has Mueller Caught the Hackers

Notable quotes:
"... Rosenstein, Mueller and Strozk are clever, privileged boys who have always been able, to bamboozle their way out of a jam. So we have this scary, claptrap yarn about twelve ethereal "Russian Agents" ((1) Boris (2) Natashia (3) ..) who, being in Russia, can never be extradited or interrogated. Therefore, the narrative can be endlessly developed. The only constraint is the imagination of the second-rate story writers. An ongoing serial wow ..."
"... Credit to Isikoff for having the courage to face a skeptic, even if his attitude is indignant that Mate ain't buying what he's selling. ..."
"... The Guardian ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

clarky90 , July 16, 2018 at 8:14 am

Rosenstein, Mueller and Strozk are clever, privileged boys who have always been able, to bamboozle their way out of a jam. So we have this scary, claptrap yarn about twelve ethereal "Russian Agents" ((1) Boris (2) Natashia (3) ..) who, being in Russia, can never be extradited or interrogated. Therefore, the narrative can be endlessly developed. The only constraint is the imagination of the second-rate story writers. An ongoing serial wow

I believe that Seth Rich was the leaker. What are the FBI/CIA/DOJ doing to investigate Seth's murder? Not much.

However, the FBI/CIA/DOJ, ARE consumed with The Hunting of the Russian Snark ."It's a Snark!" was the sound that first came to their ears,
And seemed almost too good to be true.
Then followed a torrent of laughter and cheers:
Then the ominous words "It's a Boo -- "

Then, silence. Some fancied they heard in the air
A weary and wandering sigh
That sounded like "-jum!" but the others declare
It was only a breeze that went by.

They hunted till darkness came on, but they found
Not a button, or feather, or mark,
By which they could tell that they stood on the ground
Where the Baker had met with the Snark.

In the midst of the word he was trying to say,
In the midst of his laughter and glee,
He had softly and suddenly vanished away --
For the Snark was a Boojum, you see.

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43909/the-hunting-of-the-snark

I have watched Rosenstein, Mueller and Strozk testifying over the last months. Creeps. I wouldn't leave a pet Labradoodle in their care, much less entrust them with the defense of "Our" Democracy

DJG , July 16, 2018 at 8:20 am

An important point:

AARON MATE: I have no idea. Whoever it is, I think Guccifer is very sloppy. And given how sophisticated we're told Russian military intelligence is supposed to be, they didn't do a very good job of covering their tracks.

Maté makes an excellent observation here. Further, if you go to Guccifer's site, his style is U.S. hipster English. It is possible that the Russians are that adept at U.S. hipster English, or have suborned some hipster from Brooklyn, or, maybe, that Guccifer is an American who has some other agenda.

Interestingly, in all of this hacking, we haven't heard what happened to Hillary Clinton's 30,000 yoga e-mails, which would be a masterpiece of contemplation of yoga, on the level of Patanjali's Yoga Sutras. We read repeated allegations that the Clinton Family server was hacked. How is it that the injured party here is only the Democratic National Committee?

And how many of these dangerous Russians will be extradited to the U S of A? You can't have a finding of fact without a trial, and conveniently for aggrieved people like Isikoff, there isn't going to be a trial.

Quanka , July 16, 2018 at 8:47 am

Aaron Mate does a fine job in this interview of pushing back against unproven claims. No hysteria, no yelling. But point by point he just takes Isikoff to task, calmly. He even manages two separate digs without staking a high moral ground: Isikoff's own previous reporting on (lack of) WMD, and a clip from a lying Robert Mueller in front of congress in 2003.

So I was very impressed with this interview. As someone who's taught myself the read the lies in the MSM this was a clinic in how to get a major journalist (Isikoff) to make concessions that essentially wipe out his argument without getting into a yelling match.

JohnnyGL , July 16, 2018 at 1:48 pm

He's done some of the best reporting on this story that I can recall. Credit to Isikoff for having the courage to face a skeptic, even if his attitude is indignant that Mate ain't buying what he's selling.

It kills me that the only 'evidence' supporting Russia-gate is the public statements and testimony of a bunch of high level government officials that are 1) proven liars and 2) have reason to believe they'll never be held to account for these lies.

If you saw Strzok's testimony the other day, you'd have seen a number of Dems absolutely willing to lay down in front of oncoming traffic to 'protect' the FBI. If my reps were that dedicated to protecting me from the horror of facing a series of probing questions, I'd feel pretty comfortable that I was untouchable, too!

Brooklin Bridge , July 16, 2018 at 5:08 pm

Credit to Isikoff for having the courage to face a skeptic, even if his attitude is indignant that Mate ain't buying what he's selling.

Good catch! I noticed this also, though I'm not as sure it's to Isikoff's credit. Mate has positively ripped to shreds at least one other Isikoff like stooge (Luke Harding of The Guardian ) in this interview: https://therealnews.com/stories/wheres-the-collusion-2 which really makes one wonder why Isikoff accepted such a challenge. (I include the link for the benefit of others – it looks like you are already aware of it). After all, he has basically nothing the other one didn't have other than perhaps a conviction he knows some secret alchemy that: when lies reach a certain volume, or quantity, or momentum, they miraculously transform to truth.

If anything, I suspect Isikoff is simply as full of himself as Luke Harding. Their basic argument (it must be true because of the sheer volume and detail of all the allegations) is exactly the same with Isikoff only having the advantage of yet another heaping helping of allegation pudding that he knows full well will never see the light of verification.

As an aside, did you notice Isikoff's sour sign off? I think he was quite aware Mate had served him some serious egg on the chin and was none too happy about it. Just my take on it.

[Jul 18, 2018] Mueller's Latest Indictment Contradicts Evidence In The Public Domain Disobedient Media

Notable quotes:
"... NOTE: There will likely be various amendments made to this article over the next 24 hours. ..."
"... So, in fairness, there is actually circumstantial evidence to suggest an overlap as Guccifer 2.0 clearly had Podesta's emails and it looks like the spearphishing attack used to snare Podesta's emails was identical to one that was attributed to the acquisition of emails published by DCLeaks. ..."
"... (NOTE: CrowdStrike decided to start investigating the NGP-VAN breach within a week of Podesta's emails being acquired, three months after the December 2015 incident) ..."
"... (using the publicly accessible default server in France) ..."
"... (in which he used ":)" at a far higher frequency) ..."
"... (in one of the documents, change tracking had been left on and recorded someone in a PST timezone saving one of Guccifer 2.0's documents after the documents had being manipulated in the Russian timezones!) ..."
"... (which was actually inconsistent with aspects of English language that Russians typically struggle with). ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | disobedientmedia.com

July 15, 2018 July 15, 2018 Adam Carter

NOTE: There will likely be various amendments made to this article over the next 24 hours.

On July 13th, 2018, an indictment was filed by Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III.

This author is responding to the indictment because it features claims about Guccifer 2.0 that are inconsistent with what has been discovered about the persona, including the following:


The first piece of malware at the DNC identified by Crowdstrike as relating to "Fancy Bear," was compiled on 25 April, 2016. This used a C2 (command and control) IP address that, for the purposes of the APT group, had been inoperable for over a year. It was useful mostly as a signature for attributing it to "Fancy Bear."

Two additional pieces of malware were discovered at the DNC attributed to the same APT group. These were compiled on 5 May 2016 and 10 May 2016 while Robert Johnston was working with the DNC on CrowdStrike's behalf to counter the intrusion reported at the end of April and install Falcon.

References to the evidence covering all of this are available in the article: " Fancy Fraud, Bogus Bears & Malware Mimicry ".

This could be inferred from a number of things. DCLeaks was re-registered on 19 April 2016, however, what they published included Republicans and individuals that were not connected to the DNC. In fact, DCLeaks didn't start publishing anything relating to Clinton campaign staff until June/July 2016. There was also the fact that the daily frequency of emails in the DNC emails released by WikiLeaks increased dramatically from around 19 April 2016 , however, this wasn't indicative of the start of hacking activity but rather caused by a 30 day email retention policy combined with the fact that the emails were acquired between May 19th and May 25th.

There has been no technical evidence produced by those who had access to the DNC network demonstrating files were being manipulated or that malware was engaging in activity prior to this and by CrowdStrike's own admissions, many of the devices at the DNC were wiped in June. As such, it's unclear where this may have come from.

There's an issue here with the conflation of Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks. Why would Guccifer 2.0 have had an account at DCLeaks with which he had restricted access and could only manage a subset of the leaks (and only those relating to the DNC) while DCLeaks featured leaks covering those unconnected to and even opposing the DNC?

It also appears there may have been an effort to have people perceive Guccifer 2.0 as being associated with someone that claimed to have root access to DCLeaks too, however, this could only be demonstrated through the use of multimedia props.

It makes no sense that the GRU would have even used Guccifer 2.0 in the manner we now know he operated – it only caused any harm to Trump and served to undermine leaks due to the deliberate placement of Russian metadata that would give a false perception of Russians mishandling those documents (including the Trump research document found in Podesta's emails).

However, there is one interesting thing that does connect Podesta being phished with DCLeaks. As spotted by Stephen McIntyre – the syntax in the spearphishing emails for both Podesta and Rhinehart (whose leaked emails were published at DCLeaks) were identical .

So, in fairness, there is actually circumstantial evidence to suggest an overlap as Guccifer 2.0 clearly had Podesta's emails and it looks like the spearphishing attack used to snare Podesta's emails was identical to one that was attributed to the acquisition of emails published by DCLeaks.

Is there a reason for ambiguity when referencing WikiLeaks?

While he clearly had access to the Podesta emails (NOTE: CrowdStrike decided to start investigating the NGP-VAN breach within a week of Podesta's emails being acquired, three months after the December 2015 incident) , Guccifer 2.0 used those materials to fabricate evidence on 15 June 2016 implicating Russians and which, coincidentally appeared to support (but ultimately helped refute) multiple assertions made by CrowdStrike that the Trump Opposition report (actually sourced from Podesta's emails) was targeted by Guccifer 2.0 at the DNC in April 2016 – and that the theft of this specific file from the DNC – which, again, could not have been stolen from the DNC – had set off the " first alarm " indicating a security breach.

On 6 July 2016, Guccifer 2.0 released a batch of documents that were exclusively attachments to DNC emails that would later be released by WikiLeaks.

Guccifer 2.0 certainly didn't make a genuine effort to "conceal a Russian identity," far from it. The persona made decisions that would leave behind a demonstrable trail of Russian-themed breadcrumbs, examples include:

How have these identities been connected to the respective GRU officers? This query applies to additional identities mentioned throughout the indictment.

Where have these pseudonyms been cited in any of the research or evidence published in the past two years? Most seem to be new and were never referenced by the firms specifically investigated the relevant phishing campaigns in the past.

Unfortunately, the indictment itself provides no reference for us to ascertain what the individual attributions are based on.

We already know "X-Agent" has been used by Ukrainian hackers and its source code has been in the wild since 2013, it's entirely feasible others have acquired it's source code too.

How do we know for sure Morgachev was developing a version of it and that this is related to the DNC?

Again, everything found on Google relating to "blablabla1234565" is in relation to the indictment, where were these details during the past 2 years, where have they come from and how has X-Agent development/monitoring been traced back to this individual?

It's unlikely technical evidence of his testing was left behind in deployed malware.

Again, "Djangomagicdev" appears to be new .

There is a "realblatr" profile at https://djangopackages.org/profiles/realblatr/ but this doesn't indicate anything relevant to this and other results for "realblatr" seem to be about the indictment.

We know that whoever had the Podesta emails had far more damaging content on Hillary than that produced by Guccifer 2.0 or DCLeaks and we know Guccifer 2.0 had access to Podesta's emails. If it was the GRU and they wanted to harm Hillary, they had FAR better material do that with than what they chose to release.

DCLeaks featured leaks from those that were not involved in the US presidential election. Guccifer 2.0 only released content relating to the Democratic party and only content that was of little harm to the DNC leadership and Clinton's campaign.

Yandex.com is the domain usually given to people outside of Russia that use the Yandex service, in Russia it's yandex.ru by default.

This was something covered by Jeffrey Carr in " The Yandex Domain Problem ".

These started to appear in July, though it's still unclear how/why it was these individuals responsible.

[Jul 18, 2018] If Putin's people have wanted to "undermine our democracy", they must be enjoying a good laugh. Because Mueller and his team are doing a far better job of that than anything alleged in the indictment could have done.

Notable quotes:
"... I have read the entire indictment, more than once. As a lawyer, I suspect that little to none of what it asserts about supposed illegal activities could possibly be proven beyond a reasonable doubt according to the rules of evidence (unless some judge decides that actual evidence need not be presented, on "national-security" grounds, in which event the whole case would be exposed as nothing but a "show trial" or "kangaroo court"). The indictment appears to be little more than political theater, timed to embarrass Trump and Putin. Even Mueller cannot expect that there will ever be an actual trial of the defendants he has named. ..."
"... Even Stalin's show trials (to use a "Russian" analogy) were more credible than what Mueller has produced in the two indictments of Russians which he has obtained so far. ..."
"... More revealing is that the FBI supposedly is able to break through a maze of computer obfuscation and backtrack a highly convoluted e-conspiracy to named individuals in one of the (if not the) premier espionage outfits in the world -- the GRU -- but finds itself helpless in case after case in tracking down various perpetrators of "ransom ware" who have done significant economic damage to Americans over the last several years. How can one believe both of these observations to be true? ..."
"... Also, the indictment claims that the FBI has also broken through the maze of "anonymity" surrounding transactions in bitcoin (and apparently some other e-currencies). If this is true, that selling point for such currencies has now been exposed as hype. ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Edwin Vieira , July 14, 2018 at 11:18 pm

I have read the entire indictment, more than once. As a lawyer, I suspect that little to none of what it asserts about supposed illegal activities could possibly be proven beyond a reasonable doubt according to the rules of evidence (unless some judge decides that actual evidence need not be presented, on "national-security" grounds, in which event the whole case would be exposed as nothing but a "show trial" or "kangaroo court"). The indictment appears to be little more than political theater, timed to embarrass Trump and Putin. Even Mueller cannot expect that there will ever be an actual trial of the defendants he has named.

If Putin's people have wanted to "undermine our democracy", they must be enjoying a good laugh. Because Mueller and his team are doing a far better job of that than anything alleged in the indictment could have done. Mueller is making "our democracy" the laughing stock of the entire thinking world with this drivel. Even Stalin's show trials (to use a "Russian" analogy) were more credible than what Mueller has produced in the two indictments of Russians which he has obtained so far.

More revealing is that the FBI supposedly is able to break through a maze of computer obfuscation and backtrack a highly convoluted e-conspiracy to named individuals in one of the (if not the) premier espionage outfits in the world -- the GRU -- but finds itself helpless in case after case in tracking down various perpetrators of "ransom ware" who have done significant economic damage to Americans over the last several years. How can one believe both of these observations to be true?

Also, the indictment claims that the FBI has also broken through the maze of "anonymity" surrounding transactions in bitcoin (and apparently some other e-currencies). If this is true, that selling point for such currencies has now been exposed as hype. Will the bitcoin market now react (as it should) in a violently negative manner? If it does not, would that not be a further indication that knowledgeable people consider the indictment fatuous?

[Jul 18, 2018] There really is no credibility left of the FBI. Why should I believe the Russians hacked the DNC and not a disgruntled Bernie Sanders supporter named Seth Rich leaked them to Wikileaks. The former British Ambassador Craig Murray says that is the case

Jul 18, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Mark , 2 hou rs ago

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) said at the time that their personal analysis indicated the data transfer rate was far too high to have occurred over the internet (22.7 Mbps). The organization concluded the 'hack' favoured an external device such as a thumb drive, used by someone who had physical access to the DNC server. That does not necessarily exclude the Russians, but it puts them near the back of a very large pack of possibilities, and VIPS' explanation is far more compelling than the serving intelligence agencies with their 'May haves' and 'Probablys'.

https://consortiumnews.com/...

The story has always been that Russia slipped the information to Wikileaks, who are an arm of Kremlin foreign policy. It could just as easily have been the Chinese, but it is more likely whoever took the data passed it directly to Wikileaks without going through another country. Regardless who took the information, it was all true, and if it made Mrs. Clinton look bad, that is a natural consequence of her having done bad things. The sort of bad things the electorate should know when making its decision. To suggest it should have been kept under wraps until after the election is monstrous, and Clinton made her case much worse by lying about the circumstances over and over in an attempt to keep the truth from the voters until after their decision was registered. It almost worked - she won the popular vote.

Pat Lang Mod -> Mark , 2 hours ago
It is not a question of could it have been the Chinese. It WAS the Chinese.
Biggee Mikeee , 6 hours ago
Just one question.

Is this bigger than Watergate?

smoothieX12 . -> Biggee Mikeee , 5 hours ago
Way bigger, once real bets and implications are considered both for the US and globally.
Fred -> TTG , 3 hours ago
"federal law states that gross negligence in handling the nation's intelligence can be punished criminally with prison time or fines." ....

"Memos show that at least three top FBI officials were involved in helping Comey fashion and edit the statement, including Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, General Counsel James Baker and chief of staff Jim Rybicki."

http://thehill.com/homenews...

I'd say there are plenty of people who need to be charged for their conscious conduct as well as the cover up. The usual suspects seem to be happy to be talking abut Putin rather than putt'n her and her associates in jail.

Eric Newhill , 8 hours ago
I have been expecting this under the theory of a scorned and frightened woman with a career as a lawyer at risk (deals made?). Now there is concrete evidence of political bias by Strzok and others. Inference and speculation based on text message content is over. Not so sure that it derails Mueller though. He can claim that he dropped Strzok when the bias became obvious. However, it certainly brings heavy suspicion onto his special investigation. Very interesting situation.
Barbara Ann -> TTG , 5 hours ago
TTG

Can we infer that you consider Mueller's latest indictment factually correct - specifically wrt the GRU hacking the DNC & DCCC rather than it being a leak & false flag to try and "taint anything WikiLeaks might later publish", as VIPS allege? Very interested in your POV, as I am currently drawn towards Adam Carter's view that G2 is someone deliberately leaving Russian breadcrumbs.

https://disobedientmedia.co...

Harlan Easley -> TTG , 6 hours ago
I enjoy reading your comments on this blog. First, for your experience and second you seem to try to come to conclusions that are fair even if they are not the conclusions you desire.

If the Chinese Government stole Hillary Clinton's emails. That is proof that this whole narrative of "yea she had a server but so what. Nobody penetrated it so it doesn't matter". This is all I have heard for 2 plus years.

Now this. There really is no credibility left of the intelligence agency's if this can be covered over. So why should I believe the Russians hacked the DNC and not a disgruntled Bernie Sanders supporter named Seth Rich leaked them to Wikileaks. The former British Ambassador Craig Murray says that is the case. And if anything he seems almost too honest.

This is becoming a much bigger issue than Left versus Right. Right is right and wrong is wrong. Donald Trump's thought process is to disorganized and ADD to have colluded with the Russians.

If ideology is a cover for crime then this country is over.

[Jul 18, 2018] I can't even buy something from amazon with an account password Password . Yet Podesta can control the entire DNC without one security question?

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

SybilDefense -> inosent Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:58 Permalink

One question could clear this up:

Mr Podesta, how long have you used "PASSWORD" as a password for your access to the DNC?

Ons24-%&@yy zfo-%78 - password the day before the hack, changed daily

Password - password use the day of the hack

I can't even buy something from amazon with an account password "Password". Yet he can control the entire DNC without one security question?

Trusting the gov since Reagan is laughable. Thinking Bush didn't create 9-11 is inexcusable. Simply Believing anything said by Strozck, FBI, CIA, DOJ Clinton clapper, comer Brennen et al is idiotic to the level of drinking koolaid at the church retreat. It just isn't being done (successfully).

Frogs gonna boil.

Say goodbye to your Dem friends or help them see the light of reason. Stupid does not last long in Darwin's evolutional theory.