|
Home | Switchboard | Unix Administration | Red Hat | TCP/IP Networks | Neoliberalism | Toxic Managers |
(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix |
|
|
Some remnants of the USA elite immune system were observable during Barr testimony. So there is a tiny change that initiators of anti-Trump color revolution will be exposed, if not published.
Barr actually proved during testimony as a high level professional, heads above many members of the Senate.
Counter investigation by Barr represents a threat to plotters of the color revolution against Trump and so it not surprising that they try to play all kind of dirty tricks on him.
They started with the letter Mueller sent to Batt, which represent a classic attempt to backstab his "friend".
The letter
I previously sent you a letter dated March 25, 2019, that enclosed the introduction and executive summary for each volume of the Special Counsel's report marked with redactions to remove any information that potentially could be protected by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure that concerned declination decisions; or that related to a charged case. We also had marked an additional two sentences for review and have now confirmed that these sentences can be released publicly.
Accordingly, the enclosed documents are in a form that can be released to the public consistent with legal requirements and Department policies. I am requesting that you provide these materials to Congress and authorize their public release at this time.
As we stated in our meeting of March 5 and reiterated to the Department early in the afternoon of March 24, the introductions and executive summaries of our two-volume report accurately summarize this Office's work and conclusions. The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office's work and conclusions. We communicated that concern to the Department on the morning of March 25.
There is new public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation.
This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations. See Department of Justice, Press Release (May 17, 2017).
While we understand that the Department is reviewing the full report to determine what is appropriate for public release - a process that our Office is working with you to complete that process need not delay release of the enclosed materials. Release at this time would alleviate the misunderstandings that have arisen and would answer congressional and public questions about the nature and outcome of our investigation. It would also accord with the standard for public release of notifications to Congress cited in your letter.
Sincerely yours,
Robert S. Mueller III
|
Switchboard | ||||
Latest | |||||
Past week | |||||
Past month |
May 04, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Intel and Law Enforcement Tried to Entrap Trump by Larry C Johnson
The preponderance of evidence makes this very simple--there was a broad, coordinated effort by the Obama Administration, with the help of foreign governments, to target Donald Trump and paint him as a stooge of Russia.
The Mueller Report provides irrefutable evidence that the so-called Russian collusion case against Donald Trump was a deliberate fabrication by intelligence and law enforcement organizations in the United States and the United Kingdom and organizations aligned with the Clinton Campaign.
Breaking news today, courtesy of the New York Times, is that a man with a long history of working with the CIA and a female FBI Informant, traveled to London in September of 2016 and tried unsuccessfully to entrap George Papadopolous. The biggest curiosity is that US intelligence or law enforcement officials fully briefed British intelligence on what they were up to. Quite understandable given what we now know about British spying on the Trump Campaign.
The Mueller investigation of Trump "collusion" with Russia prior to the 2016 Presidential election focused on eight cases:
- Proposed Trump Tower Project in Moscow
- George Papadopolous --
- Carter Page --
- Dimitri Simes --
- Veselnetskya Meeting at Trump Tower (June 16, 2016)
- Events at Republican Convention
- Post-Convention Contacts with Russian Ambassador Kislyak
- Paul Manafort
One simple fact emerges--of the eight cases or incidents of alleged Trump Campaign interaction with the Russians investigated by the Mueller team, the proposals to interact with the Russian Government or Putin originated with FBI informants, MI-6 assets or people paid by Fusion GPS, not Trump or his people. There is not a single instance where Donald Trump or any member of his campaign team initiated contact with the Russians for the purpose of gaining derogatory information on Hillary or obtaining support to boost the Trump campaign. Not one.
Simply put, Trump and his campaign were the target of an elaborate, wide ranging covert action designed to entrap him and members of his team as an agent of Russia.
Let's look in detail at each of the cases.
THE PROPOSED TRUMP TOWER PROJECT IN MOSCOW, according to Mueller's report, originated with an FBI Informant--Felix Sater.
Here's what the Mueller Report states:
In the late summer of 2015, the Trump Organization received a new inquiry about pursuing a Trump Tower project in Moscow. In approximately September 2015, Felix Sater . . . contacted Cohen (i.e., Michael Cohen) on behalf of I.C. Expert Investment Company (I.C. Expert), a Russian real-estate development corporation controlled by Andrei Vladimirovich Rozov.
Sater had known Rozov since approximately 2007 and, in 2014, had served as an agent on behalf of Rozov during Rozov's purchase of a building in New York City. Sater later contacted Rozov and proposed that I.C. Expert pursue a Trump Tower Moscow project in which I.C. Expert would license the name and brand from the Trump Organization but construct the building on its own. Sater worked on the deal with Rozov and another employee of I.C. Expert. (see page 69 of the Mueller Report).
Mueller, as I have noted previously , is downright dishonest in failing to identify Sater as an FBI informant. Sater was not just a private entrepreneur looking to make some coin. He was a fully signed up FBI informant. Sater's status as an FBI snitch was first exposed in 2012. Sater also was a boyhood chum of Michael Cohen, the target being baited in this operation. Another inconvenient fact excluded from the Mueller report is that one of Mueller's Chief Prosecutors, Andrew Weissman, signed the deal with Felix Sater in December 1998 that put Sater into the FBI Informant business .
All suggestions for meeting with the Russian Government, including Putin, originated with Felix Sater. The use of Sater on this particular project started in September 2015.
[For more on Sater please see my previous posts, Felix Sater--The Rosetta Stone for the FBI/CIA Conspiracy Against Trump? , Felix Sater and the Steele Dossier .]
GEORGE PAPADOPOLOUS
Papadopolous was targeted by British and U.S. intelligence starting in late December 2015, when he is offered out of the blue a job with the London Centre of International Law and Practice Limited (LCILP) . The LCILP has all of the hallmarks of an intelligence front company. LCILP began as an offshoot from another company -- EN Education Group Limited -- which describes itself as "a global education consultancy, facilitating links between students, education providers and organisations with an interest in education worldwide".
EN Education and LCILP are owned and run by Nagi Khalid Idris, a 48-year-old British citizen of Sudanese origin. For no apparent reason Idris offers Papadopolous a job as the Director of the LCILP's International Energy and Natural Resources Division. Then in March of 2016, Idris and Arvinder Sambei (who acted as an attorney for the FBI on a 9-11 extradition case in the UK), insist on introducing Joseph Mifsud to Papadopolous.
It is Joseph Mifsud who introduces the idea of meeting Putin following a lunch in London:
"The lunch is booked for March 24 at the Grange Holborn Hotel,. . . . "When I get there, Mifsud is waiting for me in the lobby with an attractive, fashionably dressed young woman with dirty blonde hair at his side. He introduces her as Olga Vinogradova." (p. 76)
"Mifsud sells her hard. "Olga is going to be your inside woman to Moscow. She knows everyone." He tells me she was a former official at the Russian Ministry of Trade. Then he waxes on about introducing me to the Russian ambassador in London." (p. 77)
"On April 12, "Olga" writes: "I have already alerted my personal links to our conversation and your request. The embassy in London is very much aware of this. As mentioned, we are all very excited by the possibility of a good relationship with Mr. Trump. The Russian Federation would love to welcome him once his candidature would be officially announced."
And it is Mifsud who raises the possibility of getting dirt on Hillary:
"Then Mifsud returns from the Valdai conference. On April 26 we meet for breakfast at the Andaz Hotel, near Liverpool Street Station, one of the busiest train stations in London. He's in an excellent mood and claims he met with high-level Russian government officials. But once again, he's very short on specifics. This is becoming a real pattern with Mifsud. He hasn't offered any names besides Timofeev. Then, he leans across the table in a conspiratorial manner. The Russians have "dirt" on Hillary Clinton, he tells me. "Emails of Clinton," he says. "They have thousands of emails."
Here again we encounter the lying and obfuscation of the Mueller team. They falsely characterize Mifsud as an agent of Russia. In fact, he has close and longstanding ties to both British and US intelligence ( Disobedient Media lays out the Mifsud mystery in detail ).
Mifsud was not alone. The FBI and the CIA also were in the game of trying to entrap Papadopolous. In September of 2016, Papadopolous was being wined and dined by Halper (who has longstanding ties to the US intelligence community) and Azra Turk, an FBI Informant/researcher ( see NY Times ).
The FBI disingenuously claims they ran Azra Turk at Papadopolous because they were alarmed ostensibly by Russia's attempts to disrupt the 2016 election. But Papadopolous was not seeking out Russian contacts. He was being baited. It was Mifsud and others tied to British and US intelligence who were bringing up the "opportunity" to work with the Russians.
CARTER PAGE
The section of the Mueller report that deals with Carter Page is a total travesty. Mueller and his team, for example, initially misrepresent Page's status with the Trump campaign--he is described as "working" for the campaign, which implies a paid position, when he was in fact only a volunteer foreign policy advisor. Mueller also paints Page's prior experience and work in Russia as evidence that Page was being used by Russian intelligence, but says nothing about the fact that Page was being regularly debriefed by the CIA and the FBI during the same period. In other words, Page was cooperating with US intelligence and law enforcement. But this fact is omitted in the Mueller report.
Mueller eventually accurately describes Page's role in the Trump campaign as follows:
In January 2016, Page began volunteering on an informal, unpaid basis for the Trump Campaign after Ed Cox, a state Republican Party official, introduced Page to Trump Campaign officials. Page told the Office that his goal in working on the Campaign was to help candidate Trump improve relations with Russia. To that end, Page emailed Campaign officials offering his thoughts on U.S.-Russia relations, prepared talking points and briefing memos on Russia, and proposed that candidate Trump meet with President Vladimir Putin in Moscow.
In communications with Campaign officials, Page also repeatedly touted his high-level contacts in Russia and his ability to forge connections between candidate Trump and senior Russian governmental officials. For example, on January 30, 2016, Page sent an email to senior Campaign officials stating that he had "spent the past week in Europe and had been in discussions with some individuals with close ties to the Kremlin" who recognized that Trump could have a "game-changing effect . .. in bringing the end of the new Cold War. The email stated that " [t]hrough [his] discussions with these high level contacts," Page believed that "a direct meeting in Moscow between Mr. Trump and Putin could be arranged.
The Mueller presentation portrays Carter Page in a nefarious, negative light. His contacts with Russia are characterized as inappropriate and unjustified. Longstanding business experience in a particular country is not proof of wrong doing. No consideration is given at all to Page's legitimate concerns raising about the dismal state of US/Russia relations following the US backed coup in the Ukraine and the subsequent annexation of Crimea by Russia.
Page's association with the Trump campaign was quite brief--he lasted seven months, being removed as a foreign policy advisor on 24 September. Page was not identified publicly as a Trump foreign policy advisor until March of 2016, but the evidence presented in the Mueller report clearly indicates that Page was already a target of intelligence agencies, in the US and abroad, long before the FISA warrant of October 2016.
While serving on the foreign policy team Page continued his business and social contacts in Russia, but was never tasked by the Trump team to pursue or promote contacts with Putin and his team. In fact, Page's proposals, suggestions and recommendations were either ignored or directly rebuffed.
The timeline reported in the Mueller report regarding Page's trip to Russia in early July raises questions about the intel collected on that trip and the so-called "intel" revealed in the Steele Dossier with respect to Page. Carter admits to meeting with individuals, such as Dmitry Peskov and Igor Sechin, who appear in the Steele Dossier. Page's meetings in Moscow turned out to be innocuous and uneventful. Nothing he did resembled clandestine activity. Yet, the Steele report on that visit suggested just the opposite and used the tactic of guilt by association to imply that Page was up to something dirty.
The bottomline for Mueller is that Page did not do anything wrong and no one in the Trump Campaign embraced his proposals for closer ties with Russia.
DMITRI SIMES
The targeting and investigation of Dmitri Simes is disgusting and an abuse of law enforcement authority. Full disclosure. I know Dmitri. For awhile, in the 2002-2003 time period, I was a regular participant at Nixon Center events. For example, I was at a round table in December 2002 on the imminent invasion of Iraq. Colonel Pat Lang sat on one side of me and Ambassador Joe Wilson on the other. Directly across the table was Charles Krauthammer. Dmitri ran an honest seminar.
The entire section on Dmitri Simes, under other circumstances, could be viewed as something bizarre and amusing. But the mere idea that Simes was somehow an agent of Putin and a vehicle for helping Trump work with the Russians to steal the 2016 election is crazy and idiotic. Those in the FBI who were so stupid as to buy into this nonsense should have their badges and guns taken away. They are too dumb to work in law enforcement.
Dmitri's only sin was to speak calmly, intelligently and rationally about foreign policy dealings with Russia. We now know that in this new hysteria of the 21st Century Russian scare that qualities such as reason and rationality are proof of one's willingness to act as a puppet of Vladimir Putin.
TRUMP TOWER MEETING (JUNE 9, 2016)
This is the clearest example of a plant designed to entrap the Trump team. Mueller, once again, presents a very disingenuous account:
On June 9, 2016, senior representatives of the Trump Campaign met in Trump Tower with a Russian attorney expecting to receive derogatory information about Hillary Clinton from the Russian government. The meeting was proposed to Donald Trump Jr. in an email from Robert Goldstone, at the request of his then-client Emin Agalarov, the son of Russian real-estate developer Aras Agalarov. Goldstone relayed to Trump Jr. that the "Crown prosecutor of Russia ... offered to provide the Trump Campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia" as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." Trump Jr. immediately responded that "if it's what you say I love it," and arranged the meeting through a series of emails and telephone calls.
The meeting was with a Russian attorney, Natalia Veselnitskaya.
The Russian attorney who spoke at the meeting, Natalia Veselnitskaya, had previously worked for the Russian government and maintained a relationship with that government throughout this period oftime. She claimed that funds derived from illegal activities in Russia were provided to Hillary Clinton and other Democrats. Trump Jr. requested evidence to support those claims, but Veselnitskaya did not provide such information.
Ignore for a moment that no information on Hillary was passed or provided (and doing such a thing is not illegal). The real problem is with what Mueller does not say and did not investigate. Mueller conveniently declines to mention the fact that Veselnitskaya was working closely with the firm Hillary Clinton hired to produce the Steele Dossier. NBC News reported on Veselnitskaya:
The information that a Russian lawyer brought with her when she met Donald Trump Jr. in June 2016 stemmed from research conducted by Fusion GPS, the same firm that compiled the infamous Trump dossier, according to the lawyer and a source familiar with the matter.
In an interview with NBC News, Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya says she first received the supposedly incriminating information she brought to Trump Tower -- describing alleged tax evasion and donations to Democrats -- from Glenn Simpson , the Fusion GPS owner, who had been hired to conduct research in a New York federal court case.
Even a mediocre investigator would recognize the problem of the relationship between the lawyer claiming to have dirty, damning info on Hillary with the firm Hillary hired to dig up dirt on Donald Trump. This was another botched set up and the Trump folks did not take the bait.EVENTS AT THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION
This portion of the Mueller report is complete farce. Foreign Ambassdors, including the Russian (and the Chinese) attend Republican and Democrat Conventions. Presidential candidates and their advisors speak to those Ambassadors. So, where is the beef? Answer. There isn't any. That this "event" was considered something worthy of a counter intelligence investigation is just one more piece of evidence that law enforcement and intelligence were weaponized against the Trump campaign.
POST-CONVENTION CONTACTS WITH RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR KISLYAK
Ditto. As noted in the previous paragraph, trying to criminalize normal diplomatic contacts, especially with a country where we share important, vital national security interests, is but further evidence of the crazy anti-Russian hysteria that has infected the anti-Trumpers. Pathetic.
MANAFORT
If Paul Manafort had rebuffed Trump's offer to run his campaign, he would be walking free today and still buying expensive suits and evading taxes along with his Clinton buddy, Greg Craig. Instead, he became another target for DOJ and intel community and the DNC, which were desperate to portray Trump as a tool of the Kremlin. Thanks to John Solomon of The Hill, we now know the impetus to target Manafort came from the DNC :
The boomerang from the Democratic Party's failed attempt to connect Donald Trump to Russia's 2016 election meddling is picking up speed, and its flight path crosses right through Moscow's pesky neighbor, Ukraine. That is where there is growing evidence a foreign power was asked, and in some cases tried, to help Hillary Clinton .
In its most detailed account yet, Ukraine's embassy in Washington says a Democratic National Committee insider during the 2016 election solicited dirt on Donald Trump's campaign chairman and even tried to enlist the country's president to help.
In written answers to questions, Ambassador Valeriy Chaly's office says DNC contractor Alexandra Chalupa sought information from the Ukrainian government on Paul Manafort 's dealings inside the country, in hopes of forcing the issue before Congress.
Manafort was not colluding, but the Clinton campaign and the Obama Administration most certainly were.
Take these eight events as a whole a very clear picture emerges--US and foreign intelligence (especially the UK) and US law enforcement collaborated in a broad effort to bait the Trump team with ostensible Russian entreaties in order to paint Trump as a tool of the Kremlin. That effort is now being exposed and those culpable will hopefully face justice. This should sicken and alarm every American regardless of political party. Will justice be served?
notlurking , 03 May 2019 at 08:16 AM
we're not in Kansas anymore.....Joe100 , 03 May 2019 at 08:43 AMGreat work!Gerard M , 03 May 2019 at 09:06 AMI just read the following about special visas approved for some of the FBI "operatives" (from SD at CTH): "It wasn't just the CIA that was using spies to "dirty up" Trump associates. The FBI was doing it too. There was the infamous Natalia Veselnitskaya who is known for her part in the Trump Tower meeting. She had been banned from the country but got a special visa signed off by Preet Bahara of the FBI, Southern District of New York. Henry Greenburg, the known FBI informant who tried to entrap Roger Stone, also got a special visa. And I'm sure there are many more "
IMO, there is no coming back from this. Apart from this Deep State coup attempt, we have seen that democracy is a shame, it's all theater. The Establishment (which includes GOP) is constantly working to undermine Trump and thwart his plans to do what the American people want and elected him for. What I've found quite disturbing is that the controlling puppet masters have not let up in trying to remove or neutralize Trump. As if they can't wait even 4 years to again fully stack the deck and regain total control. They are not willing to concede that 2016 was a political black swan event involving a celebrity billionaire American icon. And conceding and allowing this fluke to be rectified I'm 4 short years is worse than their pushback exposing the political system as a rigged game.Fred -> Gerard M... , 03 May 2019 at 10:40 AMThe events of the last 2.5 years have radically altered my views. I no longer have any faith in democracy (voting), the government, the federal courts, law enforcement, et al. And I can't see me regaining any faith in them. What I have seen in the past 2.5 years is kind of like finding out my wife of decades, whom I idolized, has been cheating with my friend from childhood, whom I would've laid down my life for. And all the other people close to me not telling me.
I now only have faith in only God and beagles.
It's not the black swan event that concerns the guilty but the fear of just retribution by those who see just how black hearted the left has become.Gerard M said in reply to Fred ... , 03 May 2019 at 12:25 PMIt's not just the left. I listened to Michael Tracey's interview with George Papadopoulos and was stunned to learn about the web of Deep State actors and how our Five Eyes allies were intimately involved in subverting our Presidential election. Papadopoulos even talks about U.S. military attachés, DIA guys, in on this coup. Listen to this Michael Tracey* interview and you will be shaken: https://youtu.be/ZjGLCCP_lPgLigurio said in reply to Fred ... , 03 May 2019 at 02:16 PM*Tracey, btw, is on the left. But like Glenn Greenwald and others on the left he is an honest journalist interested in the truth.
The "left" was not behind and does not buy into this Russia psyop. Neoliberals and neoconservatives (ie zionists) were behind it and continue to push it. Trump ran to the left of Clinton on both domestic and foreign policy. That's why he won, and why the establishment must present his election as de facto illegitimate, because otherwise they would be forced to admit that the bipartisan convergence around both finance driven economic policy and war on terror interventionism that has described elite politics since Clinton has been a disaster for most ordinary Americans -- of all types and political persuasions -- and needs to be destroyed root and branch.Fred -> Ligurio... , 03 May 2019 at 08:53 PMTo see how and why the "left" differs from corporate identity-politicking liberals in the above regard consider how it is that Tulsi Gabbard is both the Dem candidate most respected by principled Trump supporters on this site and others and the Dem candidate most reviled, ignored, and slandered by DNC liberals and neocons alike.
The enemy to principled conservatives and the left in this country is the bipartisan establishment corporate neoliberalism of the RNC and DNC alike.
That's as convenient a lie as any other.akaPatience , 03 May 2019 at 11:56 AMWhat's the likelihood that Carter Page was a plant in the Trump campaign? After all, he had a history with the US IC and was used as bait in an FBI case to prove Russian operatives' recruiting efforts. It's thought he's the Under Cover Employee alluded to in this case, which resulted in the successful prosecution of Russian spies:Anonymous said in reply to akaPatience ... , 03 May 2019 at 04:05 PMPage is just a goofball grifter. He's not a plant. That is silly. When they saw names like Page and Manafort the Democrats pounced because they knew the could cast aspersions.walrus said in reply to Anonymous... , 03 May 2019 at 06:11 PMI'm not sure about Mifsud. I think it would be hard for Mueller to knowingly indict Papadop if Mifsud were an asset of the US (or even known to be an asset of allies). I think it is more likely Mifsud was a free agent.
All these guys Mifsud, Page, Papadop were grifters, not doing real work. Just running around trying to make a buck by claiming to facilitate meetings. It's a shame it bit them and not a crime to do what they did. At the same time, I can't help but see some kharmic justice. GET A JOB, you poly sci lightweights!
This anonymous commentator has never spent time in senior levels of business or government. There is a whole class of people who do not see themselves as Grifters but more as "ideas men".akaPatience -> Anonymous... , 03 May 2019 at 06:56 PMThe best offer valuable perspectives on the world, can really open doors and otherwise add value. At the other end of the spectrum are con men. Political campaigns and large corporations of any sort attract these people in droves. The skill in management is to sort the wheat from the chaff. Trump is good at that.
Yes, Page often comes off as a bit crazy and incoherent. But he may be crazy like a fox. In the end he was never charged with ANYTHING and it's my understanding he represented himself legally throughout the investigation, opting not to hire counsel. I find it odd that others were prosecuted for process crimes but he escaped even THAT fate.Anonymous said in reply to akaPatience ... , 04 May 2019 at 06:09 PMHis participation in the Trump campaign, limited as it was, was nevertheless KEY in finally obtaining a FISA warrant after other attempts failed.
Consider it silly if you want. I view him at least worthy of suspicion. His hapless demeanor could be his schtick , when his education, experience and IC connections are taken into consideration.
Page represents himself poorly even when he knows a lot is on the line. Look at how frustrated Gowdy got with him. Clearly Page didn't learn much from plebe year in terms of 5 basic responses. Compare the difference with Barr for instance.catherine said in reply to Bill H ... , 03 May 2019 at 07:02 PMWhile the Trident program is a big deal, every now and then USNA has mids that are diligent about getting good grades but not very smart. I knew one my year. Page is clearly in that vein. Don't miss that he didn't get into any elite program after graduation (SWO is the default). And that he was a poly sci major. The saying is "poly sci, QPR high" (QPR is quality point rating or GPA). Of course this is not to say there aren't some good SWOs or poly sci majors. But there's a definite correlation I'm noting. It fits with what his reputation is.
Furthermore, the guy has had an uneventful career, bouncing around. He went to a lower bulge bracket (not Goldman) and didn't seem to stick. And his Russian colleagues said he was an idiot and a boaster. We're not talking i-banker smart. Wouldn't trust him to do an NPV or other economic analysis. And then after that we have the grifting and the shmoozing.
Kid is a lightweight. A slightly less coffee-boy coffee boy.
''They cannot convict based on a law that was passed after the act was committed''walrus said in reply to catherine... , 03 May 2019 at 04:37 PMMoney laundering has always been against the law of course....the NY law just firmed up the due diligence that is suppose to be done in transactions. I don't think there is a statute of limitations on things like fraud, tax evasion and money laundering but I will check it out to see
Catherine, in current PC thinking, merely passing the salt to a Russian guest at a dinner party makes you "an unregistered foreign agent" of Russia bent on implementing Putin's evil plans.catherine said in reply to walrus ... , 03 May 2019 at 07:34 PMAs for certifying real estate deals, the same crowd would view buying someone a MacDonalds hamburger as attempted bribery.
VietnamVet , 03 May 2019 at 05:40 PM''As for certifying real estate deals, the same crowd would view buying someone a MacDonalds hamburger as attempted bribery.''Hardly. 7 million dollar cash deals for a condo thru a shell company is a red flag however..as is buying property for 1 million and selling it unimproved the next year for 2 million...or buying a house in LA 11 million and selling it 9 months later for 8 million. That 'in between money" is someone's pay off....that's how it works.
Money laundering is epidemic in the US and Europe....Israeli mafia, Russian oligarchs, African dictators looting their country's treasury and running it through a real estate washing machine deal. Far be from me to sweep the fairy dust out of Trump supporters eyes but, as I said, Trump's troubles are far from over. We will see what comes out in the future.
The soft coup against Donald Trump failed. He has to run hard and sure to win in 2020 to avoid an indictment in NY State when he leaves the Presidency. Corporate Democrats will do their damnedst again to put forth their weakest pro war candidate like the aged, apparently demented, Joe Biden. This fiasco and the recent coup attempt in Venezuela make the Keystone Cops appear competent.Bill H -> VietnamVet... , 04 May 2019 at 01:26 AMI put this all down to Washington DC being completely isolated inside their credentialed bubble. It is just like corporate CEOs, who think they know exactly what they are doing. But, in reality, they are destroying the stabilizing middle class by extracting and hording wealth and turning mid-America into their colony. Globalist and nationalist oligarchs are after each other's throat over who controls the flow of money.
We live on a very finite world dependent on one sun in an expanding universe. Just like Boeing, Bayer or Volkswagen, the splintering world is starting to crash all around them. Even as they deny it, this is a multi-polar world now. It is not going back without a world war which would destroy civilization and could make the world uninhabitable for humans.
And the best that our government can do is warn us not to wash our chicken before cooking it because washing merely spreads the salmonella that our food industry is unable to prevent from infecting it.English Outsider -> VietnamVet... , 04 May 2019 at 01:15 PM
The trouble is that those CEO's do know exactly what they are doing. Making money the only way possible in a business environment in which outsourcing can sometimes be the only thing that pays.Mad Max_22 , 03 May 2019 at 06:44 PMThe idea was that Trump was going to change that environment. Bannon calls its "economic nationalism" but in truth it's now just economic survival. Survival for those whose jobs are outsourced. Survival for the country as a whole, ultimately. That was Trump's core programme. It was the programme that made him different from all other Western politicians, "populist" or status quo. Do you see any sign that it's being implemented, or has that programme too got bogged down in the swamp?
Will justice be served? A good question.Jack , 03 May 2019 at 08:26 PMIf we are speaking about criminal justice, there is some chance that we will see persons such as Jim Comey, who persists in his smug higher calling act, prosecuted for what was a clear cut violation in divulging classified material through a lawyer intermediary to the NYT. I suspect the higher calling bit has been prompted in part because he knows that he screwed up both on the facts and in law and he is justifying his screw up to himself, and possibly also rehearsing his defense, with the rationale that he was only trying to do the right thing. Yeah, he may have had the facts all wrong, the Russians, etc, etc, but the worst that can be said is that he had been competent, there was no intent. That defense doesn't do much for the FBI's once held reputation for competence, but that appears to be gone anyway.
With regard to what will be turned up concerning the actual roots of the travesty, the heavily politicized faux investigation into the Clinton e mails and targeting of the Trump campaign on a predicate that is somewhere between nebulous and non existant, I think a criminal prosecution arising from that investigation, even if it is serious, is unlikely for two main reasons. First, what will be the charged violations? As best I can see right now, they will have to entail some imaginative application of fraud statutes, defrauding the FISC, defrauding the US, informants and assets lying to their handlers, or process crimes like Bob Mueller's partisan posse relied upon (ugly); and second, something like the Comey defense will interpenetrate all the individuals and entities involved: we may have been incredible bunglers, but that is the worst of it. We really believed these charlatans who conned us into this debacle. Sorry, but we thought we were doing the right thing.
Now if we are talking about seeing some kind of political or moral justice, I'm not too optimistic we will get much satisfaction there either and we will probably have to wait for history. The reason is that Barr will conduct this investigation by the rule book. That means that what we see developed through the process, indictment, prosecution, etc, is likely all,that we will ever see. Barr is very unlikely to produce a politcized manifesto to be employed as a smear weapon like the once reputable Mueller did.
Anyway, until we see a special FGJ empanelled, some search warrants executed, some tactical immunities offered, everything is on the come.
All,blue peacock said in reply to Jack... , 04 May 2019 at 12:27 PMWhat probability do you assign that any top official will be indicted and prosecuted? I mean Brennan, Clapper, Comey & Lynch.
Second, what probability do you assign that Trump will declassify the relevant documents and communications like the FISA application,the originating EC, the tasking orders for FBI/CIA spying, etc.
Jack,David Habakkuk -> blue peacock... , 04 May 2019 at 03:07 PMThe question really comes down to Trump. Does he really want to expose the Swamp and pay the price or just use it for rhetorical & political purposes? When considering probabilities and looking at his track record in office on foreign policy relative to his campaign stance, I would say the probability is less than 30% that Brennan & Clapper will be indicted.
bp,blue peacock said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 04 May 2019 at 07:11 PMThe question is only very partly what Trump wants, in some abstract sense. Situations like this commonly have a strong escalatory logic. So one needs to ask whether or not he has rational reason to believe that unless he can destroy those who have shown themselves prepared to stop at nothing to destroy him, they will eventually succeed.
If the answer is yes - and while I think it may very well be, I am not prejudging the issue - then a key question becomes whether Trump will conclude that his most promising loption is to go after the conspirators by every means possible.
Involved here are questions about who he is listening to, and how competent they are.
But the escalatory processes are not simply to do with what Trump decides. In particular, a whole range of legal proceedings are involved. The referral in relation to Nellie Ohr is likely to be the fist of a good few. In addition, Ed Butowsky's lawsuits, and those against Steele, have unpredictable potentialities.
DavidakaPatience , 04 May 2019 at 07:11 PMThe intelligence & law enforcement apparatus in collusion with the media and the establishment of both parties went after him hard. As Larry notes here, they went to considerable effort to entrap those related to his campaign to impugn him. Mueller spent $35 million trying to find an angle. Even after the Mueller report stated there was no collusion they're sill after him. So that's not going to end any time soon.
Trump may have good instincts but his judgment of people so far to staff his administration is not very inspiring. He had Jeff Sessions as his AG and he let him hang in there for nearly two years while Mueller ran riot. He's surrounded himself with neocons on foreign policy. It seems his only real advisor is Jared. Everyone else he's got around him are from the same establishment that's going after him. He hasn't taken advise from Devin Nunes, who has done more to uncover the sedition than anyone else. If he had he would have by now declassified all the documents & communications. The impression I have is his primary motivation is building his brand & less about governance and wielding power. Take for example his order to withdraw from Syria. Bolton & the Pentagon are thumbing their noses at him.
Well, there have been several criminal referrals prior to the recent one on Nellie Ohr. There's the McCabe referral and the 8 referrals by Devin Nunes. I've not read any report of the empaneling of a grand jury yet. I agree with you that these law suits have the potential for great embarrassment, however to hold those responsible for the sedition accountable will require iron will & intense focus on the part of Trump to get his AG to assign prosecutors who don't have the axe to "protect" the "institution" and to create an opportunity for public awareness of the extent that law enforcement & intelligence became a 4th branch of government. My opinion is that his skill is in his instinctual understanding of the current political zeitgeist and his ability to manipulate the media including social media to project his brand. He's not an operational leader making sure his team executes his vision & strategy.
Here's a National Review exclusive report in which a transcript of FBI's Deputy Assistant Director Jonathan Moffa's testimony reveals several Confidential Human Sources (including Christopher Steele), and more interestingly foreign "liasons" (Mifsud?) were employed by the bureau in this operation:https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/fbi-official-testimony-surveillance-trump-campaign/
midnighfairy , 12 hours ago (edited)May 05, 2019 | www.youtube.com
Mylan Miller , 1 day ago"He did not answer the question" Kamala: "Suggest? Suggest? Suggest? Hint? Suggest? Suggest?" Give the man time to think or speak god damn.
Mueller spent 25 Million doing an investigation if Barr can`t take the results as fact then Can we the Tax payer have our 25 million back that was spent on an investigation that is not valid!
MJ_Anon [WWG1WGA] , 1 day agoDeclassification is the next chapter stay tuned folks as Kamala Harris tries to make Barr to recluse himself and making him look bad
missusri , 1 day ago2nd Paragraph United States Declaration of Independence ... "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
–That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
Democrat nastiness and sense of ethics, ha, never meet Trump and his R team's bar.
May 05, 2019 | www.commdiginews.com
... ... ...
By means of the smears and slanders directed at William Barr, the Democrats intended to put their party out in front of a brewing political disaster. The following exchange between Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham and AG William Barr highlights this development.
Graham-Barr exchange
Lindsey Graham: "Do you agree with me that every American should be concerned as to whether or not a warrant was obtained against an American citizen [Carter Page] with unverified information?"William Barr: "Absolutely. I think, you know, the Fourth Amendment is one of our most cherished liberties."
Graham: "So, you think this is an appropriate thing to look at and you will look at it?
Barr: "Yes."
Graham: "Do you share my concern that if you're going to open up a counterintelligence investigation against a presidential candidate [Donald Trump], that you have to have a very good reason?
Barr: "Yes. Absolutely."
Graham: "And a counterintelligence investigation is designed to protect the target of foreign influence, is that correct?" Barr: "That is correct." Graham: "It's not a prosecutorial function, is it? Barr: "No. Unless espionage or some violation of the espionage laws develops."
Graham heads into a Democrat No-Go zone
Graham: "So, would it be odd that the candidate [Trump] was never really briefed by the Department of Justice that [his] campaign might be targeted by a foreign entity?Barr: "That is one of the questions I have. I feel, normally, the campaign would have been advised of this."
Graham: "Can you think of a good reason, right now, why they wouldn't have been?"
Barr: "I'm interested in getting that answer. They [the Trump campaign] had two former US Attorneys in Chris Christy and Rudy Giuliani in the campaign, and I don't understand why the campaign wasn't advised." It was here Graham really got the attention of Democrats on his committee.
Graham: "Apparently, when Sen. [Dianne] Feinstein had a person on her staff that was supposedly connected to the Chinese government, she was briefed. Is that the normal way you do things with a counterintelligence investigation?"
Barr: "That's what I would if I were attorney general and that situation came up, I would say, 'Yes, brief the target of the foreign espionage activity.'"
Feinstein gets uncomfortable
It's at this point that Feinstein became visibly shaken by Graham's penetrating line of inquiry. In 2018, Feinstein admitted the FBI informed her five years earlier of its concerns. Namely, "that an administrative member of my California staff was potentially being sought out by the Chinese government to provide information." She chaired the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2013, when the incident occurred.fter that uncomfortable moment, an aide rushed to Feinstein's side and whispered some comforting words in the rattled senator's ear. Graham, Meanwhile, got back to business.
Graham: "So, you're pledging to this committee and, I guess, to the country as a whole to find out what happened with the [FBI's FISA] warrant application? Find out about the counterintelligence investigation, to make sure that the law was followed and if there was any abuse of the law, to report it to the Congress and the public? Is that accurate?"
Barr: "That's accurate. I just want to satisfy myself that there were no abuse of law enforcement or intelligence powers."
An inquisitive inquisitor
Clearly, it's Barr's curiosity that makes him so dangerous to the Democrats' lawless inner circle. That curiosity, in turn, will likely present him with a trail that leads to one Democrat in particular.
- The one who sold thousands of weapons to Mexico's deadly Sinaloa drug cartel.
- The same Democrat who weaponized the Internal Revenue Service against Tea Party and conservative groups ahead of his 2012 re-election bid.
- The same Democrat that set a domestic spying operation into motion against the 2016 Republican presidential candidate.
- The Democrat who countenanced or even encouraged an espionage caper based on a fabricated dossier filled with disinformation provided by Kremlin sources and written by a British spy for his paymasters. Subsequently, a weaponized FBI presented this fabricated document to a weaponized FISA court. A phony document bought and paid for by the Democratic National Committee and its losing 2016 presidential candidate.
Investigating hope and change guy
Democrats regard William Barr as extremely dangerous. They fear he can expose their long game to deligitimize and destroy the Presidency of Donald Trump . They fear that Barr can turn Trump's anticipated perp walk toward impeachment into a badly needed investigation of weaponized Deep State agencies. Above all, we must understand that Democrat insiders carefully reconstructed these weaponized agencies to work not for the American people and our consitutional republic. Instead, these insiders redirected the efforts of these agencies solely on behalf of the Democratic Party. A Party altered by the man who said on January 15, 2009:
"We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America."
So Barr's investigation of this man's shift of a formerly constitutional government into a weaponized banana-republic is what really scares Democrats and their Republican enablers. To clarify this further, none of them want the American people to see what they've been doing behind the scenes to undermine and destroy the United States.
Most importantly, multiple spies infiltrated the Trump campaign to help this Democrat in his project to remake our nation in a way that most Americans cannot imagine. We know that one of these spies was Stepan Halper. This political insider possessed an excellent cover, as he worked under several Republican administrations.
Also, let's not forget, it was the late "war hero," Senate Republican John McCain, who shopped his copy of the discredited Christopher Steele dossier to his corrupt friends at the FBI. Moreover, that's the same man who waged a pathetically ineffectual 2008 presidential campaign against that specific Democrat who tipped the first domino in the Russia hoax cascade.
That Democrat: The fundamental hoper and changer, Barack Hussein Obama.
May 04, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
Originally from: Orwellian Cloud Remains Over Russia-Gate
Authored by Ray McGovern via ConsortiumNews.com,
... .. ...
Evidence
Back to the Senate hearing on Wednesday: Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), during a line of questioning about evidence of obstruction of justice, asked the attorney general if he personally reviewed the underlying evidence in the Mueller report.
It was crystal clear on Wednesday that Barr had bigger fish to fry, as well as protective nets to deflect incoming shells. He is likely to be preoccupied for weeks answering endless questions about his handling of the Mueller report. It is altogether possible, though, that in due course he plans to look into the origins of Russia-gate and the role of Clapper, Brennan and Comey in creating and promoting the evidence-free dogma that Russia hacked into the DNC -- and, more broadly, that, absent Russia's support, Trump would not be president."No," said Barr , "We accepted the statements in the report as factual record. We did not go underneath it to see whether or not they were accurate. We accepted it as accurate."
Harris: You accepted the report as evidence? You did not question or look at the underlying evidence?
Barr: We accepted the statements in the report and the characterization of the evidence as true."
Harris: "You have made it clear that you did not look at the evidence."
For the moment, however, we shall have to live with "The Russians Still Did It, Whether Trump Colluded or Not." There remains an outside chance, however, that the truth will emerge, perhaps even before November 2020, and that, this time, the Democrats will be shown to have shot themselves in both feet.
* * *
For further background, please see:
Please Make a Donation to Consortium News' Spring Fundraising Drive Today!
LEEPERMAX , 1 hour ago link
wolf pup , 2 hours ago linkOrwellian Cloud my arse . . .
RassiaGate was an ATTEMPTED COUP no more no less.
BendGuyhere , 3 hours ago linkMy latest theory is that our craven "leadership" (I know..), has already long ago decided that the truth won't set this country free, but instead would cause a national collapse.
"The Idiots can't take this. They'll go mad. It'll be bad for the country. It's too much for them to sort, and not go berserk - so we must end this quietly. As per usual we shall determine, after long, long "investigation", that a predicate was "probably" met - because RussiaRussiaRussia had tricked us all! Well most of us, see? We are truly sorry. We had no idea how awful those Russkies are. We had a patriotic duty to determine that our beloved Americans - you! - were not in any harm! Thanks for understanding that we acted as Good Soldiers here. We meant no harm - of course! How could we?" Etc.
A la Clinton and her walk away moment via Comey.
Because it's Best For The Nation-- Narrative. "Move on now; we all just need to come together. Enough of this nationalist hatred of those who only work to support and uphold our US Constitution. Our Everything."
Imo, why bother with predicate when crimes are already documented? Everyone knows what happened here and that the Obamas are where that buck stopped.
It smacks of a DS set up.. again. Once burned, and all.
Lord Raglan , 2 hours ago linkClapper is a disgusting evil troll, yes, but he is not an "intelligence professional" in any sense of the phrase.
Brennan is a LITTLE man, and they are now locked into running interference for Hillary for the rest of their lives.
Amazing the power this tiny demon has over so many people.
sanctificado , 3 hours ago linkthey are both Uni-Party Aparatchucks. Nothing more. Common in totalitarian regimes. Brennan was a total suck up to George Tenant. Probably used to shine his shoes. Don't remember Clapper's mentor.
Real Estate Guru , 4 hours ago linkRussia is an IMPEDIMENT to Apartheid Israhell's design for the region .
Without Russia, ASSAD would be long gone and IRAN would have been bombed to oblivion, and Greater Israhell would have been fulfilled and ruling over the MidEast.
In other words, Russia-gate in Jewish-controlled Western media is simply PAYBACK .
play_arrowJustapleb , 4 hours ago linkHere is what the problem is:
The Mueller Report was not a legal report of wrongdoing, it was nothing but a POLITICAL fantasy to leave the democrats some made-up crumbs to get Trump.
It doesn't take 458 pages to get to "no collusion, no obstruction" folks. It takes one page to state it in plain English. The rest of it is just ********.
The JOB of the Special Prosecutor is to weigh the evidence. When there isn't any, or not anything important enough to convict on, you let it go. If it is not there, you move on. Reasonable people do this. And that is the job of a prosecutor.
The job of a Prosecutor is NOT to list all the ways it would be a crime IF Trump had done something! Trump didn't do anything, that is why they can't find anything in 4 investigations now covering 2 years. Tweeting you are innocent to a faked up and fraudulent bogus charge and coverup is not collusion or obstruction of justice. It is common sense.
Dream on, libtards. You are going down hard and your panic is obvious tonight!
2Q19!
and it is working perfectly. For now.
Can you believe the democrats have successfully spun the idea Barr is "hiding" all this evidence from the public? They know more than anyone else how corrupt and criminal the DNC and Clinton are.
They're bluffing, and the report WILL come out in far less redacted form. It will backfire: the public will gradually learn the Deep State, Clinton, Obama - they tried to overthrow the ballot, not Trump.
May 02, 2019 | www.youtube.com
Special counsel Robert Mueller could be testifying before Congress as early as May 15, and there is no shortage of questions as Attorney General William Barr takes jabs at his handling of the Russia investigation. CNN's Jessica Schneider takes a closer look at their decades-long friendship, meanwhile Erin Burnett discusses with David Priess and David Rivkin. #CNN #News
Joseph Conrad , 2 days ago (edited)
Bunchoffuckingbullshit , 2 days agoeveryone is a little too friendly ...press & government should not be friendly, law enforcement & government should not be friendly ...its not good, it leads to "friendly favors", when there should be justice & clarity
I worked in a State job for over 30 years. If you've got an issue of a legal nature, you sure as HELL better put it in writing, just to CYOA!!!
May 05, 2019 | www.youtube.com
Alex Cravey , 2 days agoHe said it best -- they wanted to get him (Barr) in a trap.....wow
SHERLYNN JUNIOR , 2 days agoPolitico, WaPo, Wall Street journal, and CNN. Echo chamber much?
kd5dvm Kat Daddie , 1 day agoPelosi and Dems : PROVE YOUR CLAIMS
Scat392 , 9 hours ago (edited)I believe Nancy Pelosi is actually starting to believe the rhetoric she speaks.
Mike Rub , 2 days agoNancy Pelosi committed a crime called SLANDER.
Howard Ferguson , 2 days agoAlso colluded on this conspiracy to force President Trump out of office by invoking the 25th Amendment are the former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has admitted to lying under oath to Congress -- and since lied about his earlier admission of that lying.
His recent sworn congressional testimony of not having leaked information about the Steele dossier to the media is again likely to be untrue; the former CIA Director John Brennan has admitted to lying under oath to Congress on two occasions.
He may well face further legal exposure. When he lost his security clearance, he repeatedly lied that Trump was guilty of collusion. Finally, Brennan testified to Congress in May 2017 that he had not been earlier aware of the dossier or its contents before the election, although in August 2016 it is almost certain that he had briefed Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on it in a spirited effort to have Reid pressure the FBI to keep or expand its counterintelligence investigation of Trump during the critical final weeks of the election.
Debra , 1 day agoThe only embarrassment in Washington are these senior citizen politicians that refuse to retire because they're drunk on power.
Pelosi being House speaker is a crime
May 05, 2019 | www.youtube.com
May 2, 2019
Rep. Jerry Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said he will move to hold Attorney General William Barr in contempt "if he stalls or fails to negotiate in good faith." Nadler gaveled into the hearing without Barr and explained that the Department of Justice wrote the committee to say it would ignore a subpoena for the full Mueller report.
May 04, 2019 | www.youtube.com
- James Clapper Knew There Was No Evidence of Trump-Russia Collusion In 2016 https://thefederalist.com/2019/04/24/...
- Fmr. AG Mukasey predicts criminal charge for Clinton https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6t9f... Pinned by H. A. Goodman
My Federalist article up just NOW!! James Clapper Knew There Was No Evidence of Trump-Russia Collusion In 2016 https://thefederalist.com/2019/04/24/james-clapper-knew-no-evidence-trump-russia-collusion-2016/ SHARE!! SUPPORT H. A. GOODMAN'S VOICE AND CHANNEL ON PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=5764561 SUBSCRIBE TO HA2A NOW!! Check out my new AR!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UARnHO_11Qw I explain why it's California compliant! SHARE and SUB to my firearms channel!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UARnHO_11Qw THANK YOU! To contact me or join my newsletter: contactgoodman78 at gmail . com My latest in The Federalist: Comey And McCabe Should Be Charged With A Conspiracy To Defraud Americans
https://thefederalist.com/2019/04/12/comey-mccabe-charged-conspiracy-defraud-americans/ SHARE!!! Get it viral. This is at 174,000 views. GET IT TO 1 MILLION!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxEuFfYO7S8&t=830s WATCH. SHARE. THANK YOU.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYrkJXxZ7DM&t=10s Every Church, Synagogue, and Mosque Needs Armed Worshipers SHARE MY LATEST IN THE FEDERALIST!!! Trump Should Pardon Michael Flynn
https://thefederalist.com/2019/04/02/mueller-found-no-collusion-trump-pardon-michael-flynn/ Share this EVERYWHERE!!! Now! Thank you! My latest in The Federalist: Democrats Won't Condemn
https://thefederalist.com/2019/03/08/democrats-wont-condemn-ilhan-omars-anti-semitism-younger-base-increasingly-hostile-israel/ SHARE MY FEDERALIST ARTICLE!!! Why Bernie Sanders Supporters Should Vote Trump In 2020
https://thefederalist.com/2019/02/28/bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-trump-2020/ SHARE MY ARTICLE in THE FEDERALIST ON AOC'S GREEN NEW DEAL!!
https://thefederalist.com/2019/02/14/green-new-deal-exploit-poverty-stricken-people-across-globe/ How The Green New Deal Would Exploit Poverty-Stricken People Across The Globe SHARE MY JERUSALEM POST OP ED! WHY DEMOCRATS EMBRACE ANTISEMITISM AND ANTI-ISRAEL BIAS
https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Why-Democrats-embrace-antisemitism-and-anti-Israel-bias-579675 WATCH THIS NOW! M249 Full Auto 100 Round Mag Dump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8YDn98WRG0 Fortnite Gun in Real Life. I predicted Clinton would lose to Trump in 2015:
https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/257704-why-sanders-defeats-trump-but-trump-defeats-clinton Favorability Ratings Show Hillary Clinton Is Unelectable and Bernie Sanders Wins a General Election
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/favorability-ratings-show-hillary-clinton-is-unelectable_b_8388316.html Why Sanders defeats Trump, but Trump defeats Clinton https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/257704-why-sanders-defeats-trump-but-trump-defeats-clinton I predicted Mueller Probe would be 2 years of nonsense since Trump did NOT collude w Russia... in 2017:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X824GD3316w I predicted Sessions would be forced out after Midterms: TRUMP REPLACING SESSIONS AFTER MIDTERMS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwj6bPaAe8g&t=259s I predicted Trump would declare a national emergency 8 times:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymZ0FiVMEnw CHECK OUT MY BOOKS ON AMAZON!!! I PREDICTED THE MUELLER PROBE WOULD LEAD TO ZERO COLLUSION IN 2017!!!! READ THE BOOK! DEBUNKING the TRUMP RUSSIA MYTH by H. A. GOODMAN
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B076P456L6/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_5xw7zb12R81AR READ BOOK 2: If you want to learn EXACTLY why Clinton transferred Top Secret emails onto a private server and will receive indictments under Christopher Wray SHARE this everywhere over 100 five star reviews https://www.amazon.com/BUT-HER-TOP-SECRET-EMAILS-ebook/dp/B075QWMQC9 READ BOOK 3: BUT HER DELETED EMAILS
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075YC5PYR/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1506500142&sr=1-1&keywords=but+her+deleted+emails If you enjoy the book, write a review on Amazon! READ BOOK 4:THE AWANS and DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B076BPCYLD/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1507628543&sr=1-1&keywords=awan+brothers SHARE MY JERUSALEM POST OP ED!
https://www.jpost.com/Opinion/President-Trumps-words-do-not-incite-hate-570809 WHY I JOINED THE NRA AFTER WRITING GUN CONTROL ARTICLES https://dailycaller.com/2018/05/30/joined-nra-after-gun-control/
May 04, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com
Gerard M , 03 May 2019 at 09:06 AMIMO, there is no coming back from this. Apart from this Deep State coup attempt, we have seen that democracy is a shame, it's all theater. The Establishment (which includes GOP) is constantly working to undermine Trump and thwart his plans to do what the American people want and elected him for.Fred -> Gerard M... , 03 May 2019 at 10:40 AMWhat I've found quite disturbing is that the controlling puppet masters have not let up in trying to remove or neutralize Trump. As if they can't wait even 4 years to again fully stack the deck and regain total control. They are not willing to concede that 2016 was a political black swan event involving a celebrity billionaire American icon.
And conceding and allowing this fluke to be rectified I'm 4 short years is worse than their pushback exposing the political system as a rigged game.
The events of the last 2.5 years have radically altered my views. I no longer have any faith in democracy (voting), the government, the federal courts, law enforcement, et al. And I can't see me regaining any faith in them. What I have seen in the past 2.5 years is kind of like finding out my wife of decades, whom I idolized, has been cheating with my friend from childhood, whom I would've laid down my life for. And all the other people close to me not telling me.
I now only have faith in only God and beagles.
It's not the black swan event that concerns the guilty but the fear of just retribution by those who see just how black hearted the left has become.Gerard M said in reply to Fred ... , 03 May 2019 at 12:25 PMIt's not just the left. I listened to Michael Tracey's interview with George Papadopoulos and was stunned to learn about the web of Deep State actors and how our Five Eyes allies were intimately involved in subverting our Presidential election. Papadopoulos even talks about U.S. military attachés, DIA guys, in on this coup. Listen to this Michael Tracey* interview and you will be shaken: https://youtu.be/ZjGLCCP_lPgLigurio said in reply to Fred ... , 03 May 2019 at 02:16 PM*Tracey, btw, is on the left. But like Glenn Greenwald and others on the left he is an honest journalist interested in the truth.
The "left" was not behind and does not buy into this Russia psyop. Neoliberals and neoconservatives (ie zionists) were behind it and continue to push it. Trump ran to the left of Clinton on both domestic and foreign policy. That's why he won, and why the establishment must present his election as de facto illegitimate, because otherwise they would be forced to admit that the bipartisan convergence around both finance driven economic policy and war on terror interventionism that has described elite politics since Clinton has been a disaster for most ordinary Americans -- of all types and political persuasions -- and needs to be destroyed root and branch.VietnamVet , 03 May 2019 at 05:40 PMTo see how and why the "left" differs from corporate identity-politicking liberals in the above regard consider how it is that Tulsi Gabbard is both the Dem candidate most respected by principled Trump supporters on this site and others and the Dem candidate most reviled, ignored, and slandered by DNC liberals and neocons alike.
The enemy to principled conservatives and the left in this country is the bipartisan establishment corporate neoliberalism of the RNC and DNC alike.
The soft coup against Donald Trump failed. He has to run hard and sure to win in 2020 to avoid an indictment in NY State when he leaves the Presidency. Corporate Democrats will do their damnedst again to put forth their weakest pro war candidate like the aged, apparently demented, Joe Biden. This fiasco and the recent coup attempt in Venezuela make the Keystone Cops appear competent.English Outsider -> VietnamVet... , 04 May 2019 at 01:15 PMI put this all down to Washington DC being completely isolated inside their credentialed bubble. It is just like corporate CEOs, who think they know exactly what they are doing. But, in reality, they are destroying the stabilizing middle class by extracting and hording wealth and turning mid-America into their colony. Globalist and nationalist oligarchs are after each other's throat over who controls the flow of money.
We live on a very finite world dependent on one sun in an expanding universe. Just like Boeing, Bayer or Volkswagen, the splintering world is starting to crash all around them. Even as they deny it, this is a multi-polar world now. It is not going back without a world war which would destroy civilization and could make the world uninhabitable for humans.
The trouble is that those CEO's do know exactly what they are doing. Making money the only way possible in a business environment in which outsourcing can sometimes be the only thing that pays.Mad Max_22 , 03 May 2019 at 06:44 PMThe idea was that Trump was going to change that environment. Bannon calls its "economic nationalism" but in truth it's now just economic survival. Survival for those whose jobs are outsourced. Survival for the country as a whole, ultimately.
That was Trump's core programme. It was the programme that made him different from all other Western politicians, "populist" or status quo. Do you see any sign that it's being implemented, or has that programme too got bogged down in the swamp?
Will justice be served? A good question.blue peacock said in reply to Jack... , 04 May 2019 at 12:27 PMIf we are speaking about criminal justice, there is some chance that we will see persons such as Jim Comey, who persists in his smug higher calling act, prosecuted for what was a clear cut violation in divulging classified material through a lawyer intermediary to the NYT. I suspect the higher calling bit has been prompted in part because he knows that he screwed up both on the facts and in law and he is justifying his screw up to himself, and possibly also rehearsing his defense, with the rationale that he was only trying to do the right thing. Yeah, he may have had the facts all wrong, the Russians, etc, etc, but the worst that can be said is that he had been competent, there was no intent. That defense doesn't do much for the FBI's once held reputation for competence, but that appears to be gone anyway.
With regard to what will be turned up concerning the actual roots of the travesty, the heavily politicized faux investigation into the Clinton e mails and targeting of the Trump campaign on a predicate that is somewhere between nebulous and non existant, I think a criminal prosecution arising from that investigation, even if it is serious, is unlikely for two main reasons. First, what will be the charged violations? As best I can see right now, they will have to entail some imaginative application of fraud statutes, defrauding the FISC, defrauding the US, informants and assets lying to their handlers, or process crimes like Bob Mueller's partisan posse relied upon (ugly); and second, something like the Comey defense will interpenetrate all the individuals and entities involved: we may have been incredible bunglers, but that is the worst of it. We really believed these charlatans who conned us into this debacle. Sorry, but we thought we were doing the right thing.
Now if we are talking about seeing some kind of political or moral justice, I'm not too optimistic we will get much satisfaction there either and we will probably have to wait for history. The reason is that Barr will conduct this investigation by the rule book. That means that what we see developed through the process, indictment, prosecution, etc, is likely all,that we will ever see. Barr is very unlikely to produce a politcized manifesto to be employed as a smear weapon like the once reputable Mueller did.
Anyway, until we see a special FGJ empanelled, some search warrants executed, some tactical immunities offered, everything is on the come.
Jack,David Habakkuk -> blue peacock... , 04 May 2019 at 03:07 PMThe question really comes down to Trump. Does he really want to expose the Swamp and pay the price or just use it for rhetorical & political purposes? When considering probabilities and looking at his track record in office on foreign policy relative to his campaign stance, I would say the probability is less than 30% that Brennan & Clapper will be indicted.
bp,blue peacock said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 04 May 2019 at 07:11 PMThe question is only very partly what Trump wants, in some abstract sense. Situations like this commonly have a strong escalatory logic. So one needs to ask whether or not he has rational reason to believe that unless he can destroy those who have shown themselves prepared to stop at nothing to destroy him, they will eventually succeed.
If the answer is yes - and while I think it may very well be, I am not prejudging the issue - then a key question becomes whether Trump will conclude that his most promising loption is to go after the conspirators by every means possible.
Involved here are questions about who he is listening to, and how competent they are.
But the escalatory processes are not simply to do with what Trump decides. In particular, a whole range of legal proceedings are involved. The referral in relation to Nellie Ohr is likely to be the fist of a good few. In addition, Ed Butowsky's lawsuits, and those against Steele, have unpredictable potentialities.
DavidakaPatience , 04 May 2019 at 07:11 PMThe intelligence & law enforcement apparatus in collusion with the media and the establishment of both parties went after him hard. As Larry notes here, they went to considerable effort to entrap those related to his campaign to impugn him. Mueller spent $35 million trying to find an angle. Even after the Mueller report stated there was no collusion they're sill after him. So that's not going to end any time soon.
Trump may have good instincts but his judgment of people so far to staff his administration is not very inspiring. He had Jeff Sessions as his AG and he let him hang in there for nearly two years while Mueller ran riot. He's surrounded himself with neocons on foreign policy. It seems his only real advisor is Jared. Everyone else he's got around him are from the same establishment that's going after him. He hasn't taken advise from Devin Nunes, who has done more to uncover the sedition than anyone else. If he had he would have by now declassified all the documents & communications. The impression I have is his primary motivation is building his brand & less about governance and wielding power. Take for example his order to withdraw from Syria. Bolton & the Pentagon are thumbing their noses at him.
Well, there have been several criminal referrals prior to the recent one on Nellie Ohr. There's the McCabe referral and the 8 referrals by Devin Nunes. I've not read any report of the empaneling of a grand jury yet. I agree with you that these law suits have the potential for great embarrassment, however to hold those responsible for the sedition accountable will require iron will & intense focus on the part of Trump to get his AG to assign prosecutors who don't have the axe to "protect" the "institution" and to create an opportunity for public awareness of the extent that law enforcement & intelligence became a 4th branch of government. My opinion is that his skill is in his instinctual understanding of the current political zeitgeist and his ability to manipulate the media including social media to project his brand. He's not an operational leader making sure his team executes his vision & strategy.
Here's a National Review exclusive report in which a transcript of FBI's Deputy Assistant Director Jonathan Moffa's testimony reveals several Confidential Human Sources (including Christopher Steele), and more interestingly foreign "liasons" (Mifsud?) were employed by the bureau in this operation:https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/fbi-official-testimony-surveillance-trump-campaign/
May 04, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
For over two years, anyone who suggested that the Russia investigation was a sham was harshly ridiculed by establishment mouthpieces as a conspiracy theorist. The notion that the Obama Justice Department (led by Eric " wingman " Holder and then Loretta " tarmac " Lynch) could have conspired with other US intel agencies and foreigners to paint Donald Trump as a Russian stooge was considered beyond the pale.Then we found out that virtually the entire FBI's top brass absolutely hate Donald Trump and supported Hillary Clinton; the former of whom the FBI launched a counterintelligence investigation against, while giving Hillary a pass despite the fact that she destroyed evidence from her homebrew basement server while under subpoena. We were asked to believe that the FBI's extreme biases played no role in their investigations, while the left insisted that special counsel Robert Mueller was going to confirm fairy tales of Russian collusion peddled by a Clinton-funded dossier.
And then the Mueller report came out - blowing the Russian collusion narrative out of the water, while painting a damning picture that suggests the entire genesis of the FBI's counterintelligence investigation, Crossfire Hurricane , was a setup .
One of those brave enough to risk his reputation laying out what was going on before the Mueller report dropped is conservative commentator and former US Secret Service agent Dan Bongino - who has repeatedly mentioned the suspicious role of self-described Clinton Foundation member Joseph Mifsud, who seeded the rumor that Russia had 'dirt' on Hillary Clinton to Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos on April 26, 2016 - shortly after returning from Moscow, according to the Mueller report.
Two weeks later , Papadopoulos would be bilked for information by Australian diplomat (another Clinton ally ) Alexander Downer at a London bar, who relayed the Kremlin 'dirt' rumor to Australian authorities, which alerted the FBI (as the story goes), and operation Crossfire Hurricane was thus hatched.
We have now pinned Peter Strzok's boss, Bill Priestap, in London the week of May 6th, 2016 and on the 9th. The day before Alexander Downer was sent to spy on me and record our meeting. Congress must release the transcripts and embarrass the deep state.
-- George Papadopoulos (@GeorgePapa19) April 20, 2019Back to Mifsud...
As Bongino lays out, there are two working theories about Mifsud . The first is that he's a Russian asset who tried to bait the Trump campaign . The second is that Mifsud was working for US intelligence services and seeded Papadopoulos with the 'dirt' rumor in order to kick off the FBI's counterintelligence operation.
. @dbongino on why Mifsud is key in Spygate:
"So either we have a Russian asset who's infiltrated the highest echelons of friendly Intelligence Services, or we have a friendly who was setting up @GeorgePapa19 - That's the real scandal. This was not spying, this was entrapment." pic.twitter.com/wGnV8HHur1
-- M3thods (@M2Madness) May 4, 2019Bongino went into greater detail last month on Fox News - including that Mifsud's lawyer says he's connected to western, "friendly" intelligence :
https://www.youtube.com/embed/2oNPsRGxNhg
We know that Papadopoulos met multiple times with Mifsud in the first half of 2016:
- March 14 2016 – Papadopoulos first meets Mifsud in Italy – approximately one week after finding out he will be joining the Trump team.
- March 24 2016 – Papadopoulos, Mifsud, Olga Polonskaya and unknown fourth party meet in a London cafe.
- April 18 2016 – Mifsud introduces Papadopoulos to Ivan Timofeev, an official at a state-sponsored think tank called Russian International Affairs Council.
- April 26 2016 – Mifsud tells Papadopoulos he's met with high-level Russian government officials who have "dirt" on Clinton. Papadopoulos will tell the FBI he learned of the emails prior to joining the Trump Campaign.
- May 13 2016 – Mifsud emails Papadopoulos an update of "recent conversations".
Note: Papadopoulos and Mifsud reportedly both worked at the London Centre of International Law Practice. - The Markets Work
In short - based on what we know, it appears that Joseph Mifsud was part of a setup by Western intelligence services on then-candidate Donald Trump.
Did You Know:
A Company Whose Director Represents Joseph Mifsud Changed Its Name To "No Vichok Ltd" After The Salisbury Attack
"Novichok" was the nerve agent used to poison fmr GRU agent Sergei Skripal when the UK govt was caught lying about the analysis from Porton Down
-- Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) May 4, 2019( it's true )
Great claims require great evidence, however, which is why Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) has requested a wide swath of documents about Mifsud from several federal agencies.
As the Washington Examiner reports, Nunes - the House Intelligence Committee ranking member, " seeks information about who Mifsud was working for at the time and wrote in a letter that special counsel Robert Mueller "omits any mention of a wide range of contacts Mifsud had with Western political institutions and individuals" in his report on Russian interference in the 2016 election."
As part of Mueller's Russia investigation, Papadopoulos pleaded guilty in October 2017 to making false statements to the FBI about his contacts with Russians and served 12 days in prison late last year.
The special counsel's sentencing memo to the District Court for the District of Columbia said Papadopoulos hindered the FBI's ability to get to Mifsud. "The defendant's lies undermined investigators' ability to challenge the Professor or potentially detain or arrest him while he was still in the United States. The government understands that the Professor left the United States on February 11, 2017 and he has not returned to the United States since then," the memo said.
In his letter, Nunes says it is " still a mystery how the FBI knew to ask Papadopoulos specifically about Hillary Clinton's emails " if the bureau had not spoken with Mifsud. - Washington Examiner
"If he is in fact a Russian agent, it would be one of the biggest intelligence scandals for not only the United States , but also our allies like the Italians and the Brits and others. Because if Mifsud is a Russian agent, he would know all kinds of our intelligence agents throughout the globe," said Nunes during a recent interview with Fox News ' Sean Hannity.
Look deeper at the Report re: Mifsud. One interesting omission --
Why are there zero citations to Mifsud's 302 in the Mueller Report?
-- Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) May 4, 2019
May 04, 2019 | consortiumnews.com
May 3, 2019 • 42 Comments
Ray McGovern calls out the void of evidence at the heart of the Senate hearing with Attorney General Barr on Wednesday.
George Orwell would have been in stitches Wednesday watching Attorney General William Barr and members of the Senate Judiciary Committee spar on Russia-gate. The hearing had the hallmarks of the intentionally or naively blind leading the blind with political shamelessness.
From time to time the discussion turned to the absence of a legal "predicate" to investigate President Donald Trump for colluding with Russia. That is, of course, important; and we can expect to hear a lot more about that in coming months.
More important: what remains unacknowledged is the absence of an evidence-based major premise that should have been in place to anchor the rhetoric and accusations about Russia-gate over the past three years. With a lack of evidence sufficient to support a major premise, any syllogism falls of its own weight.
The major premise that Russia hacked into the Democratic National Committee and gave WikiLeaks highly embarrassing emails cannot bear close scrutiny. Yes, former CIA Director John Brennan has told Congress he does not "do evidence." In the same odd vein, Brennan's former FBI counterpart James Comey chose not to "do evidence" when he failed to seize and inspect the DNC computers that a contractor-of-ill-repute working for the DNC claimed were hacked by Russia.
Call us old fashioned, but we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) still "do evidence" -- and, in the case at hand, forensic investigation. For those who "can handle the truth," the two former NSA technical directors in VIPS can readily explain how the DNC emails were not hacked -- by Russia or anyone else -- but rather were copied and leaked by someone with physical access to the DNC computers.
We first reported hard forensic evidence to support that judgment in a July 2017 memorandum for the president. Substantial evidence that has accumulated since then strengthens our confidence in that and in related conclusions. Our conclusions are not based on squishy "assessments," but rather on empirical, forensic investigations -- evidence based on fundamental principles of science and the scientific method.
Bizarre, Medieval
All "serious" members of the establishment, including Barr, his Senate interrogators, and the "mainstream media" feel required to accept as dogma the evidence-free conventional wisdom that Russia hacked into the DNC. If you question it, you are, ipso facto , a heretic -- and a "conspiracy theorist," to boot.
Again, shades of Orwell and his famous "two plus two equals five." Orwell's protagonist in "1984," Winston Smith, imagines that the State might proclaim that "two plus two equals five" is fact. Smith wonders whether, if everybody believes it, does that make it true?
Actually, the end goal is not to get you to parrot that two plus two equals five. The end goal is to make it so you'd never even consider that two plus two could equal anything other than five.
During the entire Barr testimony Wednesday, no one departed from the safe, conventional wisdom about Russian hacking. We in VIPS, at least, resist the notion that this makes it true. We shall continue to insist that two and two is four, and point out the flaws in any squishy "Intelligence Community Assessment" that concludes, even "with high confidence," that the required answer is "five."
Doubtful Dogma
Wednesday's Senate hearing brought a painful flashback to a similarly widely-held, but evidence-free dogma -- that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. attacked that country. It gets worse: Many of the same people who promoted the spurious claims about WMD are responsible for developing and proclaiming the dogma about Russian hacking into the DNC. The Oscar for his performance in the role of misleader goes, once again, to former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, whose "credits" go back to the WMD fiasco in which he played a central role.
Before the war on Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld put Clapper in charge of analysis of satellite imagery, the most definitive collection system for information on WMD. In his memoir, Clapper admits, with stomach-churning nonchalance, that " intelligence officers, including me, were so eager to help [spread the Cheney/Bush claim that Iraq had a 'rogue WMD program'] that we found what wasn't really there." [Emphasis added]
Last November as Clapper was hawking his memoir at the Carnegie Endowment I had a chance during the Q and A to pursue him on that and on Russia-gate. I began:
"You confess [in Clapper's book] to having been shocked that no weapons of mass destruction were found. And then, to your credit, you admit, as you say here [quoting from the book], 'the blame is due to intelligence officers, including me, who were so eager to help [the administration make war on Iraq] that we found what wasn't really there.'"
"Now fast forward to two years ago. Your superiors were hell bent on finding ways to blame Trump's victory on the Russians. Do you think that your efforts were guilty of the same sin here? Do you think that you found a lot of things that weren't really there? Because that's what our conclusion is, especially from the technical end. There was no hacking of the DNC; it was leaked, and you know that because you talked to NSA."
Evidence
Back to the Senate hearing on Wednesday: Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), during a line of questioning about evidence of obstruction of justice, asked the attorney general if he personally reviewed the underlying evidence in the Mueller report.
"No," said Barr, "We accepted the statements in the report as factual record. We did not go underneath it to see whether or not they were accurate. We accepted it as accurate."
Harris: You accepted the report as evidence? You did not question or look at the underlying evidence?
Barr: We accepted the statements in the report and the characterization of the evidence as true."
Harris: "You have made it clear that you did not look at the evidence."
It was crystal clear on Wednesday that Barr had bigger fish to fry, as well as protective nets to deflect incoming shells. He is likely to be preoccupied for weeks answering endless questions about his handling of the Mueller report. It is altogether possible, though, that in due course he plans to look into the origins of Russia-gate and the role of Clapper, Brennan and Comey in creating and promoting the evidence-free dogma that Russia hacked into the DNC -- and, more broadly, that, absent Russia's support, Trump would not be president.
For the moment, however, we shall have to live with "The Russians Still Did It, Whether Trump Colluded or Not." There remains an outside chance, however, that the truth will emerge, perhaps even before November 2020, and that, this time, the Democrats will be shown to have shot themselves in both feet.
For further background, please see:
VIPS Fault Mueller Probe, Criticize Refusal to Interview Assange VIPS: Mueller's Forensics-Free FindingsRay McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. He was a CIA analyst for 27 years, with special expertise on Russia, and prepared The President's Daily Brief for Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Reagan. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).
Dao Gen , May 3, 2019 at 23:25
Ray, thanks for another powerful, persuasive article. However, I don’t see how Barr could have done much research already on whether or not Guccifer2 was a secret DNC agent or on whether not the Russian government actually did what Mueller simply asserts but hasn’t proved. Harris was surely unfair. It will probably take Barr a long time to investigate unless a VIPS member gives him a tutorial. I hope the VIPS will at least send him a letter suggesting ways he can speed up his investigation. Right now he must be surrounded by mountains of false information.
In addition, there are two areas related to the Russiagate hoax that remain very dark and confusing. Could you and/or VIPS shed any light on these areas?
1. How could Mueller have come up with the names of allegedly guilty Russian intel officers in his indictments? He doesn’t appear to have done any deep research in this area. Were the names taken from a NYT or other article? Could they have been suggested by Crowdstrike? I read that Dmitri Alperovich’s name sometimes appears in the blogs of fascistic and Russophobic Ukrainian hacker blogs. I’ve also read that many former Russian intel officers go to Ukraine because it is easy to get jobs there. Could the names of the Russian intel officers in the Mueller indictments actually be working in Ukraine and generating false information there? The Ukrainian role in possibly helping to create and in spreading Russiagate doesn’t seem to have been researched very deeply yet.
2. Did Brennan help Hillary with her campaign? Obama seems to have helped her. And from whom did Hillary get the obviously fake notion that Russia hacked the DNC server and gave the info to Assange, a nonsensical claim that was announced just before the Dem convention in 2016? Moreover, Fusion GPS seems linked to both Hillary and to the IC. And both Hillary and the FBI seem equally invested in the fake Steele “dossier.” Were the Hillary campaign and Crossfire Hurricane intimately linked, or were they just parallel?
Willy Nilly , May 3, 2019 at 21:01
On topic. In case you haven’t heard this already. It’s a very satisfying tune.
The Day Collusion Died – A parody of American Pie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eqn3iI_h1vgKiwiAntz , May 3, 2019 at 19:02
Fake Conspiracies, Fake Russian meddling, False & Fake investigations to hide criminal behaviour? All this Fakery & Falsehoods equates to, as Ray said, quoting Orwell’s 2+2=5, propaganda to gaslight people into believing this travesty called Russiagate?
George Orwell knew very well how a Nation such as America would collapse under the weight of its own lies, hubris, arrogance & contemptible fascist attitudes?
Truth is the first thing that dies & when try & invert reality to con your own people into believing that might is right, War is Peace, Black is white & Evil is Good, then you know that the rot has well & truly set it & the Empires collapse is inevitable?
Is it any wonder why Countries are flocking to China’s BRI Initiative as they can see for themselves the despicable & desperate actions of the Neoliberal World order controlled by the US, self destructing & self flagellating itself into chaos? A fish rots from its head down & that’s exactly the situation America & its corrupt Political system finds itself in? Rotten to the core!
Dunderhead , May 3, 2019 at 18:32
Question for anyone, has anyone gotten a letter from their state senator declaring that Donald Trump is a Russian agent? Because I have and it is something from another planet.
Bob Van Noy , May 3, 2019 at 18:07
zerohedge is reporting that Attorney General William Barr told the Senate Judiciary Panel this week that he has assembled a team at the Justice Department to probe whether the spying conducted by the FBI against the Trump campaign in 2016 was improper, reports Bloomberg.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-03/barrs-review-2016-fbi-spying-will-have-wide-scope
Jeff Harrison , May 3, 2019 at 17:42
Thanx, Ray. The reality is that we are living in a period of information warfare. The governments of “The West” want to control the narrative so that all us sheeple will move in lockstep with the government approved narrative. I sincerely hope they lose this war. It’s really bad when the likes of Pompous declares that Maduro was ready to get on the airplane but the evil Russkis dissuaded him from fleeing. Fake News. Deliberate lies by the Secretary of State, especially lies that are promptly parroted by our subservient corporate media, are going to have a corrosive effect on the body politic. People won’t believe the government. That includes not just what the government says but who they suggest you should listen to, indeed what fake news is and how to detect it. The deep state is creating a much bigger problem for itself than they seem to realize.
Jeff Harrison , May 3, 2019 at 17:51
The other thing that disturbed me about Barr’s congressional appearance is that we have the likes of Nancy Pelosi going on about Barr lying to Congress and how that’s a crime. Hmmm. Somehow, I don’t remember her spouting off like that when Brennan and Clapper lied to Congress.
Sam F , May 3, 2019 at 20:17
I would like to believe that our fake democracy is “creating a much bigger problem for itself than they seem to realize” at least over the long term, as that would suggest eventual reform.
The only large example I recall is the USSR where the union collapsed without violence, in part due to distrust of government. But they apparently had some serious regional factions (in their central Asian states) which the US does not have. And their government was probably more honest, transparent, and populist than the US. Distrust and even open rebellion here would only lead to more rebranding, mass media propaganda, and other lies.
Robert , May 3, 2019 at 17:30
Excellent, perceptive article. Barr (with continued resistance from Mueller, Democrats, GOP elites, and MSM) has affirmed that there was no Russia collusion or obstruction of justice. He was smart enough to not start investigating the Russian hacking narrative until Trump was cleared.
There is likely to be an investigation into how, based on no evidence, the Mueller investigation was even started. I don’t know how deeply such an investigation would delve, because the FBI (and State Department, CIA, NSA) have been politicized to an unprecedented extent and enormous pressure will be put on Barr to limit the scope.
I do know, however, that there is enormous pressure on Trump from his voter base to get to the bottom of the issue, and weed out all the corruption, including links to UK intelligence individuals involved and Steele. The strong support Trump voters have for Julian Assange may also serve as an incentive to investigate the official, but evidence-free, narrative of Russian hacking of DNC computers.
John Wolfe , May 3, 2019 at 17:14
I don’t want to be the heretic here, but we can still be concerned about the contacts between the Russian Federation and the Trump campaign, right? Just like we were concerned when Nixon sabotaged the LBJ peace overtures in October of 1968, and Reagan the release of the American hostages in October of 1980. As for 2016, there are a few unsettling facts that we must address, such as Manafort’s sharing polling date with the Russian Federation folks well before the election was decided. Did that data control where some at “the troll farm” directed their propaganda?
We can still work to protect the integrity of our electoral process while realizing that the leaked information showed that HRC was even more the lying and duplicitous neocon and neoliberal than we had suspected. We can still demand detente with the Russian Federation, remain cognizant of the gross exaggerations of Maddow and the hawks’ nest that is MSNBC, and at the same time strive for mutual non-interference when either of the two superpowers is picking its leaders.
Furthermore, we should surely be able to agree that any presidential contender must disclose every foreign investment, without regard to the political party or country.
Help me out here. I would like to think that this whole Russia thing is a red herring designed to stir a new Cold War. Are we contending that there was absolutely no Russian Federation help given to the Trump campaign? Let’s suspend the question of coordination for a moment.
Thanks for listening. I support the VIPS and hope to contribute to some of the whistle-blowers who’ve been financially hurt by our burgeoning national security state.
Sam F , May 3, 2019 at 19:26
But it would be irrelevant if a few Russian private citizens contacted the Trump campaign. One would have to compare among the parties such contacts, and proven influences.
It is relevant that Most of HRC’s support came from zionists and KSA with foreign agendas. Why not investigate that now? Why not investigate who the 1% and corporations support?
In two racketeering cases, after over a year of intensive investigation in each case, I have sent voluminous and conclusive detailed proof of internet racketeering, and in the other case political corruption with massive theft of state funds, to the FBI and received no response at all.
The federal judiciary have proven to be absolutely corrupt as well. They both know what party they support where, it depends on who bribes the politicians who appoint them. They only prosecute the crooks of other tribes.
Michael Shanahan , May 3, 2019 at 20:07
With Manafort being watched since 2014 and the current investigation nearly 3 years old, I think you can jettison the idea of a Russian Federation connection.
Devin , May 3, 2019 at 20:39
I appreciate your comment. I have had similar thoughts. While I haven’t seen evidence of direct Kremlin to Trump collusion and don’t expect to ever see any, the anti-mueller report movement seems to be putting wind in the Trump regimes sails for no reason other than to claim some ownership in the exposure of democratic political weaponization and over-exaggeration- something we all know. Nevertheless, the violations of the emoulments clause, the many Trump real estate favors from foreign govs, the rampant disregard for law in total all turn this Russiagate crackdown from the left into cautious support for his continued presidency.
bevin , May 3, 2019 at 22:33
Nobody has produced any evidence that the Russian Federal government made any intervention in the 2016 election. It seems very unlikely that they did, while there is abundant evidence that the British government was involved in several serious interventions, including the Steele Dossier, against Trump.
The basic allegation against Russia is that the GRU hacked the DNC computers in order, presumably, to make Bernie Sanders look good. Large numbers of Democrats appear to have forgotten that Russia is no longer an important part of the Soviet Union. And that the Russian economy and political system are dominated by capitalists who owe their wealth and power to the Clinton administration’s sponsorship of Yeltsin who they imposed on the electorate.
JDD , May 3, 2019 at 16:57
Mr. McGovern,
We thank you for all are doing and have done in the interests of rescuing our republic from the coup attempt at the hands of British and allied Intel agencies, including our own. However, I am more optimistic than you that the truth will soon emerge, if we the people demand it so. The NY Times article on the Papadopolous sting operation is just the beginning of a break in the damn, and should the president soon release the classified documents behind the entire operation, the floodgates will open. And when it does, we will have you, among other VIPS such as Bill Binney, to thank.
Paul , May 3, 2019 at 16:46
Small correction to your image of “1984” the actor’s name is John Hurt, not William Hurt.
Drew Hunkins , May 3, 2019 at 16:39
What’s truly sad is if you head over to Counterpunch’s weekend edition you’ll read a piece by Nader displaying his buying in to some of the tenets of the Russiagate circus rubbish. Disheartening to say the least. Any mainstream corporate Dem could have written what Nader submitted to Counterpunch this weekend.
mike k , May 3, 2019 at 15:31
As in 1984, to expect the truth to play any part in the propaganda of the MSM, or the choreographed antics of the US congress is futile. Citizens who do not do their own research into these crucial matters are left without a clue to what is really happening in their world. But we were trained by our so called educational system from childhood to worship whatever the textbook, or the teacher said, and faithfully regurgitate it at test time – or else. Independent thought was not only neglected, it was frowned upon.
Piotr Berman , May 3, 2019 at 15:27
Ray McGovern is a moral relativists. He wants to analyze evidence, and attacks people who do not. But why should they? They have firm convictions stemming from their well grounded set of values. After some reading I have some idea what those values are.
Paramount value: the worst possible outcome, something that we should all strive to avoid, is to “MAKE PUTIN HAPPY”. Hard to imagine a mark more bleak than “making Putin happy”. So before we look at the evidence, we must ask ourselves: is there a chance that the outcome would make Putin happy? And if yes, what we can do to avoid that calamity? Ray must admit that refusing to doubt determination of so private foreign outfit is a safe choice in that sense. And yet, he scolds our lawmakers and journalists who do their best to avoid it.
Still, life is not easy and sometimes there is no easy way out. Once I was so surprised that I almost fell from my chair: an op-ed in NYT had a favorable mention of Putin. You see, the topic was what inferences we can make about human character from their attitude to dogs. Trump is a dog hater, and he lacks an excuse of having a friendly cat. Among other world leaders Putin treats his dogs exceedingly well, walks with them, plays with them, leaves their care to the most qualified personnel at times when he is too busy. So the choice was of eschewing the opportunity to write something nasty about Trump and writing something that could make Putin smile.
On the bright side, NYT usually avoids making Putin happy for more than a year without interruption. I suspect that one reason that they replaced the graphics in “Markets” section with a highly incomprehensible format because the previous format made Putin happy.
Abe , May 3, 2019 at 15:11
Israel-gate: The pro-Israel Lobby Behind the “Russia-gate” Orwellian Cloud
Robert Mueller’s investigation has finally concluded that there was no collusion between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and Russia to subvert the 2016 US election.
There is however plenty of evidence of foreign interference and collusion in US politics, except it is being ignored by establishment media and politicians because the state doing it is not Russia, but Israel.
Both Hillary Clinton’s and Trump’s presidential campaigns in 2016 were stage managed by the pro-Israel Lobby. Key operatives of the pro-Israel Lobby (including John Bolton and Mike Pompeo) populate the Trump Administration.
Abe , May 3, 2019 at 14:20
– Tell me, what do you do with witches?
– Burn them!
– And what do you burn, apart from witches?
– More witches!robert e williamson jr , May 3, 2019 at 14:13
BTW it’s a DEEP STATE thing!
robert e williamson jr , May 3, 2019 at 14:10
I came across something rather interesting by Mr. Peter Dale Scott, 2014 he wrote a piece for Asia – Pacific Journal. I worked in the Nuclear Accident response business for about 30 years and as a result of the Fukishima debacle I check on news of area to see how the “Half-life” of the accident is coming. But I digress.
What caught my eye was the title “The Fates of American Presidents Who Challenged the Deep State”, Oct. 20 2014 | Vol 12 Issue 43 | No. 4. I recently wrote, ” Where are all those high powered Political Scientists?”. I’m not sure how powerful Mr. Scott is but this piece needs to framed and hung on the wall. In the Oval Office! If “civics were still taught in high schools every Senior should be required to read this until they can pass an oral exam on the paper. Scott’s effort is that powerful and complete.
Anybody hear the story about Alfa Bank, Dick Cheney, Rex Tillerson, Mikhail Fridmen an Israeli citizen, Konstantin Kilmnik, Paul Manafort, Tyumen Oil Co. , Rosneft Oil Co., Kirkland and Ellis , a law firm, Bill Barr and Brian Benczkowski who was confirmed as Head of DOJ’s Criminal Division July of 2018.
No! Well two cyber security computer experts walk into a bar and one says to the other, hey have you heard the one about how to throw an election and . . . . .
You might want to ask yourselves Who knew ,What and Why did they know it.
Anyhow it’s just a thought!
Now go to the Fifth Column New and join Beau in his fight for truth and justice for all. He is not Superman but may well be the next best thing!
robert scheetz , May 3, 2019 at 13:37
“There remains an outside chance, however, that the truth will emerge, ….”
Dear Ray,
I know you have to have hope, regardless how forlorn, to do what you’ve been doing. And while I deeply appreciate your very productive efforts at exposing Truth, …your hope for an effect is Quixotesque, …which, as a Xtian, is deeply affecting as well. But we both know, the “Ministry of Truth”, howsoever specious, will overwhelm the puny lance of Truth. From the Lincoln assassination to 9/11, though the truth is there for anyone with the will to it, the Lie has always proved invincible.
There’s no ground left for illusion. Only a god can save us now.
god bless!
Brian James , May 3, 2019 at 13:35
Mar 25, 2019 Russiagate implodes: Aaron Maté buries the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory. Russiagate has imploded after Robert Mueller’s investigation found no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
hetro , May 3, 2019 at 14:59
This is a good addition to Ray’s report. Aaron M is as usual calm and clear not just on the debunked collusion theory but the damage that activity has done in side-tracking attention from the real harm Trump is doing. There is, however, one disturbing aspect to Aaron’s reporting.
Not long ago on the Jimmy Dore show he claimed to be an “agnostic” about whether Russia hacked the DNC, the very issue Ray is going after here. Previously, in the renowned “obliteration” piece by Glenn Greenwald, he ignored this claim in the Mueller Report (that Russia hacked the DNC and passed the info to Assange). It is disturbing that these stalwarts would hesitate on a critical attitude toward this view of a Russian “hack.”
Ray’s article debunking this propaganda is valuable and necessary. We need to keep challenging this view that Russia is behind the DNC revelations. No, this is the contrivance Hillary Clinton invented in view of what was revealed.
Cara , May 3, 2019 at 18:18
If true that Aaron Maté doesn’t have the balls/integrity to stand up against the lie that the DNC was hacked by Russia the reason is simple: he writes for The Nation. That rag has fallen to a new low and is little more than another propaganda arm of the DNC and neoliberal establishment–a highbrow variant of MSNBC for the properly cultured with the requisite veneer of concern for social justice. All in the service of helping good liberals sleeps soundly at night.
tom , May 3, 2019 at 15:36
Mate and Greenwald are still persona non grata on MSNBC and CNN especially now that they were proved right and consistently exposed the fraud.
Skip Scott , May 3, 2019 at 13:29
“It is altogether possible, though, that in due course he plans to look into the origins of Russia-gate and the role of Clapper, Brennan and Comey in creating and promoting the evidence-free dogma that Russia hacked into the DNC…”
I strongly suspect that this possibility is what brought Mueller back onto the scene. After all, it is said that the best defense is a good offense. They will be coming after Barr with everything they’ve got if he really does try to turn the tables. I wish Barr all the luck in the world, and I hope he has good bodyguards. I also hope he drives an older model car that can’t be remote controlled by the CIA.
Bob Van Noy , May 3, 2019 at 15:39
For what its worth Skip I think you’re exactly right. This “game” has become too important to abandon, so it will be played until one side or the other wins. One hopes that the truth is with the victor, we’ll see…
hetro , May 3, 2019 at 20:20
Skip, maybe we’re seeing some backbone for a change, via Barr. He has made it very clear, calmly, that intelligence services should not be a tool of politics. I suggest this is hopeful for us to see the whole thing unravel in the next few months.
bjd , May 3, 2019 at 13:25
A well-written, biting, concise, and documented analysis of mass lunacy.
Mark Clarke , May 3, 2019 at 12:39
“There remains an outside chance, however, that the truth will emerge…” The truth doesn’t seem to matter.
DW Bartoo , May 3, 2019 at 16:12
Jimmy Dore has interviewed William Binney of VIPS. I recall that Dore was horrified at what Binney revealed about the secret FISA courts. One assumes that viewers were likewise appalled by what was exposed. Perhaps, hetro, it is time for Dore to interview Ray McGovern?
Better yet, a double interview with both Ray McGovern and Arron Mate discussing the “Russia did it” hoax.
Mate has done a magnificent job showing that there was no “collusion” and might well appreciate a discussion that makes clear, as McGovern, with the help of others, has magnificently done showing that no credible evidence exists to verify any of the DNC/FBI
claims primarily because the DNC computers were never “seized and examined” by the FBI.Therefore, there is no way that the FBI or the DoJ can produce actual evidence to verify ANY allegations that Russia did anything to the DNC.
No credible case can be made, on that failure alone, to even accuse Russia of “hacking”.
A point many have long argued.
That Ray McGovern can then also point to forensic evidence of a download and the likelihood physical transfer of the data, absolutely nails the falsity of the whole invented fairytale.
Jimmy Dore, please ask Ray McGovern to appear on your show. You will find it as enlightening as your interview with William Binney!
hetro , May 3, 2019 at 20:08
DW, Jimmy Dore did seem startled with Aaron’s seriously stated “I’m agnostic” on the question, so yes, I think any discussion that would delve into the Russia hacked the DNC with Assange as pawn propaganda is a good idea, and that this emphasis should continue generally.
It could also be tied to a web of deceit–the further unraveling that Barr is currently threatening is very interesting. If interviewed with Ray, it would be good to see Aaron’s response and try to understand why he’s an agnostic (and why did Greenwald step around the issue also?) It would seem to me sufficient to have Assange’s word on this matter, to be convinced it was NOT the Russians hacking (or leaking from) the DNC.
May 04, 2019 | www.unz.com
The Barr argument goes thus way: In order for a person to obstruct justice, there must be some justice to obstruct. Hence, if the alleged obstructer did not commit the underlying crime being investigated, then his so-called obstruction did not impair justice; it just impaired a fruitless investigation...
Tusk , says: May 2, 2019 at 5:27 am GMT
Here's a scenario:donald j tingle , says: May 2, 2019 at 5:54 am GMTPolice come to my house and ask to check inside to make sure I'm not doing anything illegal.
I ask them for a warrant, and bar them from entering as they have no proof I've doing anything illegal.
They then launch an investigation, to see whether it was obstruction of justice for me to stop them for investigating me for nothing (remember, there is no evidence.)They conclude, through their investigation, that I committed no crime as there was, once again, no evidence but are unsure whether me not allowing them into my house to investigate the non-event that they surmised from no evidence was illegal.
What happened to reasonable suspicion or probable cause? It would indeed be a violation of rights for Government agencies to investigate someone for domestic terrorism under no evidence or suspicion. Why then are those same agencies allowed to investigate political opponents under the same premise?
You are completely disingenuous here.
We know from Mueller's report that Russian intelligence agents engaged in sophisticated cyber warfare against the United States, and we did very little to resist them
Paying 160k for Facebook ads constitutes 'sophisticated cyber warfare'?
Did then-President Barack Obama know what the Russians were up to?
I once again find it hard that Obama should have been kept in the loop of Facebook advertising, but I suppose the Neoliberal World Order requires all machinations to be submitted to the Deep State to ensure consistency on what is broadcast via the media.
The fact is Mueller did not find any supposed Russian collusion, so you contradict yourself trying to make a point about Flynn.
I would have thought that through a legal career that you would atleast have a modicum of respect for the law, perhaps even the rule of law, but that is clearly not the case. As evidenced by this line:
The U.S. is planted thick with laws intended to preserve human freedom by keeping the government honest. When the government breaks its own laws and gets away with it, it undermines the personal liberty of us all.
What undermines personal liberty is creating a system that incentivizes ignoring principals such as reasonable cause. Giving the Government enforcers the right to arbitrarily harass people and then penalising them for resisting. Police kicking in doors and arresting those who resist their searches to ensure, withouth any proof mind you, that nothing illegal is going on is the future of such a dangerous precedent.
I urge anyone who read this to instead read Boyd Cathey's article.
http://www.unz.com/article/did-the-russian-really-interfere-in-our-elections/I'm not a fan of Trump. He is patently a con man who has sold a lot of people a bill of goods. He is also in many ways simply not competent in doing his job, as is evidenced by his failure to control his own DOJ.anonymous [340] Disclaimer , says: May 2, 2019 at 10:12 am GMTBut, man, you've lost your mind.
In addition to everything else, you've lost sight of the fact that as head of the unitary executive, of which DOJ is a part, Trump himself is the chief prosecutor. He is different from you and me. It would be within his power and right and indeed his duty to stop an investigation of circumstances in which the knew no crime had been committed, or any investigation he did not believe was in the public interest, whoever the suspect might have been, and whatever anybody else thought about it. In this case the suspect was him and he knew he had committed no crime.
@Rational "Foreigners have a right to freedom of speech too, and that is not illegal." Agreed. The First Amendment and what "Freedom Watcher" used to defend as a "natural right" of free speech speech also means that Americans may read and hear what those foreigners write and say.buckwheat , says: May 2, 2019 at 11:13 am GMTI and others have been reading carefully and commenting on the columns of St. Mueller's altar boy since November 2017. Mr. Napolitano had fully emerged as a Russophobic Establishment tool by February 22, 2018, in a column entitled "Mueller in Hot Pursuit." It may remain the worst in the shameful series because its target is not just President Trump or Russia, but people like you and me. One of my comments in that thread:
******
Well, shucks. No Russophobic dirk to look for this week in the folds of his robe -- Mr. Napolitano is finally full on, swinging the Establishment sword at "the Kremlin" and "its indicted spies." And he's doing it to scare the American people.
"It is a felony for foreign nationals to participate in American federal elections, and it is a felony for any Americans knowingly to assist them." No citation of the statute(s), or of the particular acts among all "Judge" has mentioned within the scope of the subject indictment. He is endorsing the notion that, under the Constitution he pretends to cherish, a non-US citizen and any American "assistant" can be criminally convicted for "phony web posts" or "aggressively revealing embarrassing data about Clinton," i.e., publishing anything deemed relevant to a federal election on the internet. If you suggested after Sunday School there in Nebraska that your friend check out those documents at Wikileaks, then will Mr. Mueller come for you? Well, that depends:
"The other reason for the indictment is to smoke out any American collaborators. He has identified American collaborators, but not by proper name, and the Department of Justice has said -- not in the indictment, in which case it would be bound by what it says, but in a press statement, which binds no one -- that the American collaborators were unwitting dupes of the Russians. My guess is that Mueller's American targets are under electronic and visual surveillance and that he is listening to their (premature) sighs of relief."
So don't worry, Big Brother most likely still loves you, or at least won't send you to your room. As long as you were only an "unwitting dupe," and have stopped playing with the bad kids.
Until Mr. Mueller could get here on his white horse, "the Russians ran unchecked through our computer systems and the American marketplaces of ideas." You see, kids, the First Amendment is no longer prophylactic, something to prevent government from violating your natural rights to speak, hear, and think. Instead, things such as what I'm doing right now are like food stamps, political privileges redeemable only at Uncle Sam's Club.
I hope there's no gentlemen's agreement that precludes some of the other writers published on this website from confronting Mr. Napolitano on this vile column.
********
Anyone who accepts the notion that her pure, American mind needs to be protected from Russian (or any other) foreign contamination has been successfully brainwashed.
If Trump would just appoint this asshole as a Traffic Court Judge in Washington DC he would flip flop in a New York minute. I don't know what kind of drug Nappy is on but they sure have screwed up what few brain cells he had left. Either that or he's been banging Mad Maxine and her ignorance has rubbed off on him.Anon [253] Disclaimer , says: May 2, 2019 at 2:23 pm GMTThe writer is most clearly a paid shill for the Hillary Billary Obama Stay out of Jail Cartel. He is a hard worker because he like them are what used to be called "Over Achievers". You know they work long hours because they are really a little short on the IQ end things. But with the Judge he goes one step further and gives free Sexual Favors just because he enjoys it soooo much! Not the real kind of sex but some kind of visual self humiliating spectacle for the Governing Board of the Hillary Billary Obama Stay out of Jail Cartel to watch and read as he does his Public Demonstration of Unconditional Love for them. Not my choice of entertainment and in fact I suggest it's Pornographic. Remember, you will know Pornography when you see it or read it and I think this Article by the Former Judge is Pornographic. Not that I want censorship, least of all on the Unz Review but perhaps a warning disclaimer for the reader so those under the age of say 62 are notified it could turn their stomach. Those of us 62 and older have seen enough horseshit to recognize the Former Judge Sycophant for what he is and know not to pay any attention to the man behind the screen. Anyhow its just another long winded article about nothing.A123 , says: May 2, 2019 at 11:31 pm GMTI did like comment indicating whether or not there is obstruction if there is no crime and that is the core issue isn't it. We used to call this Made Up Shit.
Is there evidence of Russian interference in the U.S. election in favor of their preferred candidate Hillary Clinton?Tusk , says: May 2, 2019 at 11:50 pm GMTYes. There is a provable money trail between Russia and Hilary.
Why did Mueller intentionally ignore collaboration between Russia and Hillary?
Could it be that Meuller was obstructing justice and covering up Hillary's treason?
Shocking!!!!!!
@Macon Richardson Thank you, unfortunately Mr Napolitano writes as if he wishes to work for CNN or Washington Post, as many other commentors have noticed, which is somewhat jarring to see when Unz carries many other writers that have faithfully dissected the 'Russian narrative' excellently. He seems to be in the grip of delusion if he fully believes what he writes, and I fail to see how someone with a history in the legal field could be this ignorant to the truth.Svigor , says: May 3, 2019 at 5:04 pm GMT@WorkingClassSvigor , says: May 3, 2019 at 5:23 pm GMTWell, not the House it turns out. Barr has learned not to talk to Democrats. I wonder if he knew what he was getting into.
The House FullOfShiff creatures -- er, sorry Democrats were planning to use teams of lawyers to question Barr. I.e., sweat him until they got a process crime, or some such. Just as vampires recognize other vampires, lawyers know not to let themselves be grilled by teams of Congressional lawyers.
That's what defense counsel and the Fifth Amendment are for.
@Tusk This is one of the biggest reasons people hate lawyers. Because the profession is stuffed to the gills with legalistic pieces of shit. We'll leave aside how, if you let them proliferate, and write your laws, you wind up with a legal system designed to provide them with work from here to eternity, because there are so many laws that you're always breaking at least one at any given moment, and they're written for lawyers, not human beings, so you have no idea what they are or how to obey them.jacopo , says: May 3, 2019 at 7:44 pm GMTInstead, we can just look at the type of shit the Injustice Department has been up to in the last few years. We'll leave aside how they let the Clinton Crime family skate when they had them dead to rights on acts that would have gotten any ordinary American thrown into jail.
And just as you say, these people can, with a straight face, call it justice to charge someone with "obstruction of justice" for "obstructing" "justice" when "justice" was actually "injustice" and in pursuit of no genuine underlying crime. And then happily go on TV and harp on how this is all perfectly legit and above board and by the book.
THEN THE BOOK IS A WORTHLESS PIECE OF SHIT, YOU WORTHLESS PIECE OF SHIT, AND IT'S A WORTHLESS PIECE OF SHIT BECAUSE SOME WORTHLESS PIECE OF SHIT LIKE YOU WROTE IT.
There are still a few boomers who don't know that the FBI is led, top to bottom, by fucking lawyers. They think of the FBI as cops, so the shit-stink of "lawyer" hasn't quite totally covered them yet.
The obstruction theory the judge criticizes obscures the real issue: using an obstruction investigation to hide numerous apparent 18 U.S.C. 242 violations on the part of federal officials from being scrutinized by the President and his duly-appointed and -confirmed Attorney General. But harping on Barr's theory serves to distract from looking at law enforcement malfeasance. Under the judge's theory, a President has to sit on his hands as his own Executive Branch officials conspire to remove him from office unlawfully or risk handing them any easy obstruction charge. Who needs elections at that point?user_number_s , says: May 3, 2019 at 11:21 pm GMTFBI opens investigation into a crime that never happened to cover up spying on political opponent. Cant find a way to use CIA / FBI fabricated "evidence" to indict. Therefore obstruction.
www.youtube.com
Apr 02, 2019 | rawconservativeopinions.com
Authored by Roger Simon via PJMedia.com,
It's bad enough, as has been evident for some time, that Donald Trump and his campaign were being spied upon by our own government, but it's highly likely they were also subject to literal entrapment–at least a serious attempt was made.
I don't mean the entrapment of promulgating the salacious Steele dossier both to the public and the FISA court as if it were the truth. That was more of a smear to justify a phony investigation. I mean something more subtle and LeCarré-like coming from the depths of our intelligence communities. It raises once more the question of the power of such agencies in a free society, a conundrum with no easy answers but of great significance to our lives.
For all his New York rough-and-tumble, Trump was an innocent abroad when he arrived in Washington. Way back in January 2017, he was warned by old-timer Chuck Schumer that "intel officials have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you."
The Senate minority leader–Deep Stater par excellence –knew whereof he spoke. But Trump somehow survived the storm, although sometimes it seemed as if he wouldn't. Now, some of the obvious parties –John K. Brennan and James Clapper with their apparatchik miens -- have suddenly found themselves in the crosshairs, as the Washington Times notes:
Special counsel Robert Mueller's finding that there was no Trump campaign conspiracy with Russia to steal the 2016 election has unleashed a tsunami of outrage toward Obama-era intelligence chiefs, particularly former CIA Director John O. Brennan and former FBI Director James B. Comey, who are accused of pushing the allegation during congressional hearings, in social media posts and in highly charged interviews on television over the past two years.
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper also leveled up highly publicized comments that President Trump could even be an "asset" of Russian President Vladimir Putin , part of a slew of remarks that critics say went far beyond the usual partisan sniping that can accompany a change of administrations.
More's afoot here, however, considerably more because the entire American intelligence system and the unique power referred to by Schumer are also now in those same crosshairs, as they should be. But many of the men and women involved are less overtly Stalinist in their style than Mssrs. Brennan and Clapper and slip more easily under the radar.
Notable among these, and perhaps able to reveal much of the McGuffin to the mystery of where this all started and how, is Stefan Halper. Mr. Halper is "an American foreign policy scholar and Senior Fellow at the University of Cambridge where he is a Life Fellow at Magdalene College and directs the Department of Politics and International Studies ." He is also a spook who worked for Nixon, Ford, and Reagan, no less, and was a principle American connection to the UK's MI-6.
Mr. Halper has (ahem) other connections :
A top FBI official admitted to Congressional investigators last year that the agency had contacts within the Trump campaign as part of operation "Crossfire Hurricane," which sounds a lot like FBI "informant" Stefan Halper – a former Oxford University professor who was paid over $1 million by the Obama Department of Defense between 2012 and 2018, with nearly half of it surrounding the 2016 US election.
Hmm . The perspicacious Margot Cleveland had more to say the other day at The Federalist in " Who Launched An Investigation Into Trump's Campaign Before Crossfire Hurricane. "
"Crossfire Hurricane," as most know, is the codename the wannabe hipsters at the FBI gave the Trump-Russia investigation. But more important is the word "before" in Ms. Cleveland's title.
The Post further noted that the academic, since identified as Stefan Halper, first met with Trump campaign advisor Carter Page "a few weeks before the opening of the investigation," and then after Crossfire Hurricane's July 31, 2016, start, he met again with Carter Page and "with Trump campaign co-chairman Sam Clovis," offering the latter his "foreign-policy expertise" for the Trump team. Then in September, Halper "reached out to George Papadopoulos, an unpaid foreign-policy adviser for the campaign, inviting him to London to work on a research paper."
Papadopoulos and Page are the two naifs of the most obvious sort (sorry, guys) we have all seen on television who spent the last couple of years having to defend themselves against absurd charges. Considering the timing, it's pretty obvious they were being set up (i. e. entrapped) on some level well back during the Obama administration.
Who ordered it is the obvious question, but I'm not going to leave it there.
I suggest that an attempt was being made to implant Halper in the Trump campaign, one way or another, not just for spying purposes but actually to help create this collusion of the campaign with Russia–that is, to help manufacture it.
Putting it another way, someone or some group wanted to create -- or, more subtly, to encourage the creation -- of Trump-Russia collusion from the inside in order to destroy Trump before, or failing that, after he was elected.
How's that for a nefarious plot? Worthy of LeCarré or maybe even Graham Greene. But is it true? I wouldn't bet against it. Something close anyway.
By the way, if I am right, this won't be the first time for Halper. And unfortunately for Republicans, the shoe was then on the proverbial other foot. As Glenn Greenwald wrote last year:
Four decades ago, Halper was responsible for a long-forgotten spying scandal involving the 1980 election , in which the Reagan campaign – using CIA officials managed by Halper, reportedly under the direction of former CIA Director and then-Vice-Presidential candidate George H.W. Bush – got caught running a spying operation from inside the Carter administration. The plot involved CIA operatives passing classified information about Carter's foreign policy to Reagan campaign officials in order to ensure the Reagan campaign knew of any foreign policy decisions that Carter was considering.
Republicans can console themselves that their malfeasance was more benign, relatively. This new one was outright sedition involving a foreign power. It is a blow to the heart of our democratic republic. We need Halper, under oath and unredacted. Whether that's possible is another question.
May 04, 2019 | nypost.com
President Trump earlier Wednesday called the probe into Russian election meddling "an attempted coup" that amounted to "treason" -- and urged Barr to investigate the investigators.
"This was an attempted coup. This was an attempted take-down of a president, and we beat them. We beat them. We fight back, and you know why we fight back? Because I knew how illegal this whole thing was. It was a scam," the president said before leaving on a fund-raising trip to Texas.
"What I'm most interested in is getting started hopefully, the attorney general, he mentioned it yesterday. He is doing a great job getting started on going back to the origins of exactly where this all started because this was an illegal witch hunt, and everybody knew it," he said.
"They knew it, too, and they got caught, and what they did was treason. What they did was terrible. What they did was against our Constitution and everything we stand for. So, hopefully, that will happen," the president continued.
May 04, 2019 | nypost.com
Vice President Mike Pence on Friday demanded a probe of the FBI for allegedly spying on the Trump campaign in 2016 -- calling a report that the bureau sent an undercover agent to gather information from adviser George Papadopoulos "very troubling."
"We've got to get to the bottom of how all this started," Pence said in an interview on Fox News. "The American people have a right to know how this investigation even began."
The vice president was responding to a question about a New York Times report that the FBI sent an investigator to meet with Papadopoulos to try to determine if the campaign was working with Russia.
The investigator who met with the adviser at a London bar two months before the election was posing as a research assistant, the Times reported, citing unnamed sources familiar with the operation.
The effort eventually "yielded no fruitful information," the paper reported, but the revelation may provide further ammunition for President Trump, who has denounced what he has termed "spying" against his campaign.
Attorney General William Barr echoed that characterization in testimony during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, saying he would look into the "genesis" of the FBI probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election that was later taken over by special counsel Robert Mueller.
The 22-month investigation led to charges against 34 people, including Papadopoulos, who pleaded guilty to lying to the feds and pledged to cooperate, eventually serving 12 days behind bars.
"As the attorney general said when he testified before Congress, there was spying," Pence said Friday. "We need to understand whether there was a sufficient predicate. We need to get to the bottom of how this all began and if there was a violation of the rules, if the law was broken, the people that were responsible need to be held accountable."
May 04, 2019 | www.rt.com
Attorney General William Barr has formed a team to investigate allegations the FBI and Justice Department spied on the Trump campaign in 2016, as the GOP demands a probe into the scandal they've called "worse than Watergate." " To the extent there was overreach, what we have to be concerned about is a few people at the top getting it into their heads that they know better than the American people ," Barr told the Senate Judiciary Panel on Friday.
" We now know that he was being falsely accused ," the AG said of President Donald Trump. " We have to stop using the criminal justice process as a political weapon ." Barr hinted he was zeroing in on senior figures in the Justice Department and FBI and said he would concentrate on when exactly intel collection had begun, whether it was earlier than previously reported, and how many " confidential informants " the FBI had in Trump's campaign.
Barr's announcement comes amid heated demand for such an investigation among top GOP figures. Republican party chair Ronna McDaniel echoed Trump's denouncement of the prosecutorial " witch hunt ," calling out former President Barack Obama and former FBI Director James Comey for overseeing a scandal she called " worse than Watergate ."
It's beyond clear that Comey's FBI authorized the spying of @realDonaldTrump 's campaign.
This scandal is worse than Watergate, and it was perpetrated by Barack Obama and Joe Biden's administration.
We need a full accounting of what Obama and Biden knew and when they knew it.
-- Ronna McDaniel (@GOPChairwoman) May 3, 2019McDaniel's tweet came a day after the New York Times ran a story detailing how the FBI sent an agent named "Azra Turk" to London to meet with former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos in 2016. Papadopoulos said he'd met with several spies while in London, who probed him for connections between the Trump campaign and Russia. He maintains that he knew Turk to be a spy from their first meeting, and figured her for a CIA operative.
The FBI's counterintelligence operation against Papadopoulos and the Trump campaign is currently being probed by the Justice Department's Inspector General Michael Horowitz, with a report due later this month or in June, according to Attorney General William Barr.
Also on rt.com Papadopoulos describes intel agency's scavenging for scraps on Russian collusion in Trump campaignAmong other things, Horowitz's report will examine the actions of Stefan Halper, a Cambridge University professor and FBI informant who invited Papadopoulos to London and spoke to several other Trump campaign officials to gather information for the bureau. Turk posed as a university assistant to Halper while meeting Papadopoulos in London.
The report will likely also detail the FBI's alleged misuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to obtain a wiretap on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. The warrant was obtained based on unproven allegations contained in the now-infamous Democrat-financed 'Steele Dossier:' Allegations that former FBI Director Comey admitted later that the agency knew were uncorroborated.
President Trump greeted the New York Times' report with interest. "Finally, Mainstream Media is getting involved," he tweeted on Friday. "This is bigger than WATERGATE but the reverse."
Finally, Mainstream Media is getting involved - too "hot" to avoid. Pulitzer Prize anyone? The New York Times, on front page (finally), "Details effort to spy on Trump Campaign." @foxandfriends This is bigger than WATERGATE, but the reverse!
-- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 3, 2019Watergate was the scandal that brought down President Richard Nixon in 1974, after he was accused of sending agents to break into the Democratic party offices and then covering it up.
With Special Counsel Robert Mueller's final report clearing Trump of any collusion with Russia, the investigative pendulum has begun to swing back towards the FBI and the Democrats in Washington. AG Barr sent shockwaves through the Washington establishment last month, when he declared that FBI "spying did occur" on the Trump campaign.
"I think spying on a political campaign is a big deal," Barr told a Congressional hearing.
On Capitol Hill, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-California) has said that he will make several criminal referrals to Barr, while Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) promised to launch his own investigation into the FBI's Trump probe.
"They were so in the tank for Clinton and hated Trump's guts," Graham told McClatchy on Wednesday, referring to the FBI.
Subscribe to RT newsletter to get stories the mainstream media won't tell you.
May 01, 2019 | www.youtube.com
Attorney General Bill Barr agrees with Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz that weaponizing the Department of Justice against a political opponent is an abuse of power no matter who does it. #DailyBriefing #FoxNews
I love it when AG Barr laughs out loud. The left is in full panic mode, they're lashing out at everyone, eating their own tail... let them keep it up until 2020.
May 03, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
Attorney General William Barr told the Senate Judiciary Panel this week that he has assembled a team at the Justice Department to probe whether the spying conducted by the FBI against the Trump campaign in 2016 was improper, reports Bloomberg . Barr suggested that he would focus on former senior leaders at the FBI and Justice Department."To the extent there was overreach, what we have to be concerned about is a few people at the top getting it into their heads that they know better than the American people," said Barr.
Barr will also review whether the infamous Steele dossier - a collection of salacious and unverified claims against Donald Trump, assembled by a former British spy and paid for by the Clinton campaign - was fabricated by the Russian government to trick the FBI and other US agencies. (Will Barr investigate whether Steele made the whole thing up for his client, Fusion GPS?)
"We now know that he was being falsely accused," Barr said of Trump. "We have to stop using the criminal justice process as a political weapon."
Mueller's report didn't say there were false accusations against Trump. It said the evidence of cooperation between the campaign and Russia "was not sufficient to support criminal charges." Investigators were unable to get a complete picture of the activities of some relevant people, the special counsel found.
Although Barr's review has only begun, it's helping to fuel a narrative long embraced by Trump and some of his Republican supporters: that the Russia investigation was politically motivated and concocted from false allegations in order to spy on Trump's campaign and ultimately undermine his presidency . - Bloomberg
As Bloomberg notes, Barr's review could receive a boost by a Thursday New York Times article acknowledging that the FBI sent a 'honeypot' spy to London in 2016 to pose as a research assistant and gather intelligence from Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos over possible Trump campaign links to Russia.
The Trump re-election campaign immediately seized on the Times report as evidence that improper spying did occur. "As President Trump has said, it is high time to investigate the investigators," said Trump campaign manager, Brad Parscale in a statement.
During Barr's Wednesday testimony, Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) told Barr " It appears to me that the Obama administration, Justice Department and FBI decided to place their bets on Hillary Clinton and focus their efforts" when it came to investigating the Trump campaign.
Depending on what Barr finds, his review of the Russia probe could give Trump ammunition to defend himself in continuing congressional inquiries -- and in a potential impeachment for obstructing justice. Barr told senators that Trump's actions can't be seen as obstruction if he was exercising his constitutional authority as president to put an end to an illegitimate investigation.
Barr's efforts follow two years of work by a group of House Republicans who have been conducting dozens of interviews regarding the FBI's and Justice Department's conduct in the early stages of investigation of Trump and his campaign. - Bloomberg
On Thursday, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) issued a criminal referral for Nellie Ohr - a former Fusion GPS contractor who passed anti-Trump research to her husband, then the #4 official at the DOJ.
On Thursday, Meadows said that Barr's "willingness to investigate the origins of the Russia investigation is the first step in putting the questionable practices of the past behind us," and that the AG's "tenacity is sure to be rewarded."
The FBI opened its counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign after a self-professed member of the Clinton Foundation, Joseph Mifsud, fed Papadopoulos the rumor that Russia had "dirt" on Clinton. That rumor would be coaxed out of the former Trump aide by another Clinton-connected individual - Australian diplomat Alexander Downer, who would notify authorities of Papadopoulos' admission, officially launching the investigation.
Barr says he wants to get to the bottom of it.
His review will examine the above chain of events that set the investigation into motion, and whether any US agencies were engaged in spying on or investigating the Trump campaign before the probe was officially launched .
Barr said he's working with FBI Director Christopher Wray "to reconstruct exactly what went down." He said he has "people in the department helping me review the activities over the summer of 2016."
Notably, Barr said his aides will be "working very closely" with the Justice Department's inspector general, Michael Horowitz.
Horowitz is conducting his own investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation and whether there were abuses when the FBI obtained a secret warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in October 2016 to spy on another foreign policy adviser to the campaign, Carter Page. - Bloomberg
Barr will also investigate when the DOJ and FBI knew that the Democratic Party and Clinton was Steele .
More subterfuge, or is this really happening?
Rich Monk , 21 minutes ago link
J S Bach , 24 minutes ago linkBehind closed doors all of these republicans, and democrats are laughing together, drinking, having their steak and lobster dinners while the masses think that something is happening for their side. More theater, more wasting time and money, always taking down America from within, one day at a time! Government means force, violence, lying, thieving, murdering, and those are it's best qualities.
ENDGAME8 , 20 minutes ago linkSo whom does the "probe" consist of? Who's investigating the investigators? This is kinda like the mafia policing itself. In my opinion, this is all show just to make the plebs think some form of justice is afoot. When lengthy prison sentences and executions for treason begin, then we'll KNOW justice is being served. Same thing with the banksters.
The Alliance , 27 minutes ago linkid imagine the replacements are investigating the outgoing “investigators” but that’s just logic.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF "INVESTIGATION"
- James Comey, Director – FIRED
- Andrew McCabe, Deputy Director - FIRED
- Jim Rybicki, Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor – FIRED
- James Baker, General Counsel – FIRED
- Bill Priestap, Director of Counterintelligence (Strzok’s boss) – FIRED
- Peter Strzok, Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence – FIRED
- Lisa Page, Office of General Counsel – FIRED
- Mike Kortan, Assistant Director for Public Affairs – FIRED
- Josh Campbell, Special Assistant to Comey – FIRED
- Michael Steinbach - Head of NAT SEC Div - FIRED
- John Glacalone – (Predecessor to Steinbach) – Head of NAT SEC Div - FIRED
- James Turgal – Assistant Director - FIRED
- Greg Bower – Top Congressional Liaison - FIRED
- Trisha Anderson – Principle Deputy General Counsel - FIRED
- Randy Coleman - Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Div – REMOVED
Schooey , 34 minutes ago linkThey all play for the same (((Globalist))) team. NO ONE is going to jail. They are performers, vamping until the 'event(s)' come to pass, which will 'change the ******* subject,' bigly. NO ONE is going to jail.
Obamaroid Ointment , 36 minutes ago linkThe Mueller/Russia charade has been obvious to anyone with half a brain for over two years. If you still believed it after it was exposed that Hillary paid for the dossier, then you are truly an idiot.
It makes no difference what you think of Trump. I think he is a Zionist tool. But if you have not yet seen that the Mueller/Russia nonsense is 100% Hillary's butthurt doing then you are truly an idiot.
If Justice is not served in this case (and truly served, i.e. Obama impeached and imprisoned) and some scum bag like any of the democrat candidates become president, it is going to be the dark ages in the US, economically, morally and psychologically.
Sandiegoman2 , 45 minutes ago linkOberführer Müeller, McCabe, Moochie, McAuliffe, Moussaoui, MSNBC, Mad Maxipad, Matthews and Madcow Maddow, Maduro, Milano, Mittens, Mao, Merkel, Maher, Marx, McCainiac, McConnell, MS-13, MSM-13, MI6, Massachusetts, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Mexico, Musk, Moffa, Moscow, Moonbats, Martha’s Vineyard, Meathead Reiner, Michael Moron, Malcolm X, Mica and her Moron Joe show, Michael Sussmann, Malaria Obama, Mullah & Ilhan Omars, OWS, Rosie O’Donuts, Moochelle & Barry H Obama, Obamaphones, Obamacare, Oprah, OJ, Oswald, Omarosa, Oakland, Open Borders, DNC, DPRK Kims, Detroit, Democrats, Deep State, David Corn, Dohrn, Dunham, Dorsey, Donald Young, “Butch” Kagan, Debra Katz, Karaffa, KGB, Kalifornia, Kwanzaa, Kaepernick, Khomeini, Khamenei, Khalidi, Kortan, Kristol, Kristallnacht, Kasich, Khan, Kaine, Kennedy, Kwamme Kilpatrick, Khobar Towers, Kevin Jennings, Tsarnaev Bros, TSA, TDS, Torricelli, Tinkles, Tina Tchen, Tesla, Tlaib, Twitter, Tehran, Trayvon, Toscas, Tapper, Dead (finally) Ted Kennedy, Nadler, Nizich, Northam, NEA, NKVD, NPR, NYT, NYC, NBC, NSA, Ninth Circuit, Nine Eleven, Napolitano, NAMBLA, NJ, NFL kneelers, NFL, Slick Willy Hildabeast Chelsea Hubbell-Clintons, Clinton Foundation, Clinton Crime Family, Clinton Body Count, Justin Cooper, Chlamydia, Colbert, Clooney, Clyburn, Conyers, Cummings, Cash For Clunkers, Carter Page, Canada, Clapper, Crowley, China, Caracas, Citgo, Johnny Chung, Charlie Trie, Janet Reno, Jimmies Carter Comey and Carey, Chasten, CNN, CBS, CBC, Cartels, Caliphate, Cali, Canada, California, Client 9, Climate Change, Communists, Crowley, Couric, Cuomo, Colbert, Costa Rica, Cantor, Castro, Ché, Chowdhury, Chavez, Chicago, Chelsea Handler, Chris Stevens, Chuck Todd, Chris Matthews, Cheryl Mills, Christine Ford, Ceausescu, Cloward, Piven, Penn, Priestap, Pravda, Prius, Pizzagate, PDVSA, Pelosi, Pagliano, Papadopoulos, Philadelphia, Keith X Ellison, Erdogan, Emanuel, EU, EBT, EPA, Vince Foster, FBI, FSB, FISA, Fake News, Ferguson, Feminazis, Fonda, Feinstein, Facebook, Fairfax, Food Stamps, Frank Marshall Davis, Father Pfleger, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Federal Reserve, Fast & Furious, Fistgate, Farrakhan, Farzad Fazeli, Flake, Flint, Foxx, Free Government Cheese, Fire Island, Jennifer Flowers, Fusion GPS, GRU, Google, Gaddafi, Gestapo, Gutiérrez, Gulag, Gacy, Gruber, Gonorrhea, Geithner, Goebbels, Griffin, Grahamnesty, Ginsberg, Greg Craig, Government Motors, Glenn Simpson, Boston Globe, Global Warming, Jamie Gorelick, Wasserman-Schultz, Sandy Berger, Jacob Sullivan, Russell Simmons, Nate Spencer, Stasi, Scarborough, Smollett, Soros, Souter, Solyndra, Skolkovo, Swalwell, Subramanian, Syphilis, Steele, Strzok, Streisand, Sarandon, Sandinistas, Sharia, Sharia Obama, Spike Lee, Samantha Bee, San Francisco, Stalin, Struthers, Sharpton, Simpson, Sh¡+holes, Seattle, Siberia, Somalia, Sinaloa, SNL, Safe School Czar Kevin Jennings, Schiff heads, Shemp Smith, Samuel Jackson, Sarah Backus, Sergei Millian, Sanctuary Cities, San Bernadino, Shoe Bomber, Boxer, Booker, Blitzer, Bushes, bin Laden, Ben Rhodes, butt plugged Buttigieg, Bernie Schwartz, Bernie Sanders, Sandy Berger, Slick Willie Brown, de Blasio, Bernake, Bernstein, Behar, Boehner, Brennan, Brzezinski, Breyer, Beto, Bozo, Biden,Bezos, Baldwin, Buffoons, Borat, Boko Harem, Benghazi, Blind Sheik, BLM, Boston Bombers, Bathhouse Barry, Baltimore, Ron Brown, Michael Brown, Michael Mann, Moonbeam Brown, Brokeback Mountain, Barney Frank, WTC, Rev Wright, Bob Woodward, Woodrow Wilson, Wheatley, Weissmann, Weiner, Wray, Warren, WaPo, Waco, Whoopi, Weinberg, Warner, Wahhaj, Waters, Whitewater, Willey, Webb Hubbell, Wise Latina, Lauer, Lisa Page, PBS, Portland, Pol Pot, Perkins Coie, LBJ, Lois Lerner, Lynch, Lewinsky, Leshchenko, Lieawatha, Lenin, Lennon, Lemon, Lindsay Graham, Los Zetas, Los Angeles, LGBTQ, Larry Bland, Larry Sinclair, Lanny Davis, Loral Space Corp, Susan Rice, Reggie Love, Rahm, RINOs, Ryan, Romney, Rubio, Reuters, Rose Law Firm, Ruemmler, Rybicki, Ruby Ridge, Red Hen, Ramadan, Denise Rich, Marc Rich, Seth Rich, Tony Rezko, Rangel, Rosenstein, Richard Nixon, Joy Reid, Richard Reid, Van Hollen, Harry Reid, HIV, Halper, Hamptons, Uncle Ho, Heather Samuelson, HillaryTheHildabeast, Herpes, Herring, Honecker, Holtyn, Holton, Holder, Hostin, Havana, Himmler, Hirono, Hawaii, Honduras, Hollyweirds, Huma Weiner, Iran, Iraq, IRS, ISIS, Vermont, Vick, Van Jones, Valerie Jarrett, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Jesse Jackson, Juárez, Juncker, Jihad, James Baker, EU, El Salvador, UN, USS Cole, Underwear Bomber, UraniumOne, Zuckerberg, Zarif, ABC, ADC, ATF, AIDS, AOC, AP, Acosta, Amnesty, Ayers, Antifa, Ayatollahs, Arafat, Ahmadinejad, Afghanistan, Amazon, Arkansas, Adolf, Allred, Alinsky, Abedin, Atta, Awan, Allison Hrabar, Alcee Hastings, Al Qaida, Al Sharpton, al-Awlaki, al-Zawahiri, Abdulmutallab, Anita Hill, Andrew Weissmann, Andrew Goldstein, Bruce and Nellie Ohr, and more, we’ve seen this national socialist show before.
ENDGAME8 , 27 minutes ago linkAnd the gullible ZH crowd eats it up and shouts "lock them up"
Schooey , 49 minutes ago linkBecause he didn’t trust any one because Bathtub Barry did nothing about “Russian” interference. Absolutely nothing. Why oh why did Obama do absolutely nothing? Because he inserted spies into the campaign and the administration. And you think trump would trust a staff member at that point? And if he would of brought Kushner who he thinks he could trust you would of skewered him. Please keep making the point for all of us. https://youtu.be/ybvmu7kM8z0
We shall see. I'm not getting my hopes up that justice will be served. For one thing, Barr is keeping alive the RU meddled narrative. Now that could be either to pin it on Barry for not stopping it, but it could also be to keep Mueller et al. out of prison by lending legitimacy to the SC.
Barr, Huber and Horowitz ..... We shall see. The fact that Sessions chose Huber and Horowitz does not make me confident that justice will be served. We shall see, shortly I hope.
If justice is not served the Republic is truly dead.
May 03, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by James Howard Kunstler via Kunstler.com,
"Impeachment is too good for him," Nancy Pelosi declared of the president on Thursday after "his lapdog" - as she styled Attorney General William Barr - refused to be whipped by grandstanding Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee. What did Madam Speaker have in mind then? Dragging Mr. Trump behind a Chevy Tahoe over four miles of broken light bulbs? Staking him onto a nest of fire ants? How about a beheading at the capable hands of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN)?
Mr. Barr's stolid demeanor during the Wednesday session was a refreshing reminder of what it means to be not insane in the long-running lunatic degeneration of national politics.
Of course, the reason for the continued hysteria among Democrats is that the two-year solemn inquiry by the august former FBI Director, Mr. Mueller, is being revealed daily as a mendacious fraud with criminal overtones running clear through Democratic ranks beyond even the wicked Hillary Clinton to the sainted former president Obama, who may have supervised his party's collusion with foreign officials to interfere in the 2016 election.
Mr. Barr's hints that he intends to tip this dumpster of political subterfuge, to find out what was at the bottom of it, is being taken as a death threat to the Democratic Party, as well it should be. A lot of familiar names and faces will be rolling out of that dumpster into the grand juries and federal courtrooms just as the big pack of White House aspirants jets around the primary states as though 2020 might be anything like a normal election.
In short and in effect, the Democratic Party itself is headed to trial on a vector that takes it straight into November next year. How do you imagine it will look to voters when Mr. Obama's CIA chief, John Brennan, his NSA Director James Clapper, a baker's dozen of former Obama top FBI and DOJ officials, including former AG Loretta Lynch, and sundry additional players in the great game of RussiaGate Gotcha end up 'splainin' their guts out to a whole different cast of federal prosecutors? It's hardly out of the question that Barack Obama himself and Mrs. Clinton may face charges in all this mischief and depravity.
It's surely true that the public is sick of the RussiaGate spectacle. (I know readers of this blog complain about it.) But it's no exaggeration to say that this is the worst and most tangled scandal that the US government has ever seen, and that failing to resolve it successfully really is an existential threat to the project of being a republic. I was a young newspaper reporter during Watergate and that was like a game of animal lotto compared to this garbage barge of malfeasance.
It's a further irony of the moment that the suddenly leading Democratic candidate, Joe Biden, is neck-deep in that spilled garbage, the story unspooling even as I write that then-Veep Uncle Joe strong-armed the Ukraine government to fire its equivalent of Attorney General to quash an investigation of his son, Hunter, who received large sums of money from the Ukrainian gas company, Burisma, which had mystifyingly appointed the young American to its board of directors after the US-sponsored overthrow of Viktor Yanukovych.
That nasty bit of business comes immediately on top of information that the Hillary campaign was using its connections in Ukraine -- from her years at the State Department -- to traffic in political dirt on Mr. Trump, plus an additional intrigue that included payments to the Clinton Foundation of $25 million by Ukrainian oligarch Viktor Pinchuk. That was on top of contributions of $150 million that the Clinton Foundation had received earlier from Russian oligarchs around 2012.
Did they suppose that no one would ever notice? Or is it just a symptom of the desperation that has gripped the Democratic Party since the stunning election loss of 2016 made it impossible to suppress this titanic, bubbling vessel of fermented misdeeds? It seems more than merely possible that the entire Mueller Investigation was a ruse from the start to conceal all this nefarious activity. It is even more astounding to see exactly what a lame document the Mueller Report turned out to be. It was such a dud that even the Democratic senators and congresspersons who are complaining the loudest have not bothered to visit the special parlor set up at the Department of Justice for their convenience to read a much more lightly redacted edition of the report.
The mills of justice grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine. The wheels are in motion now and it's unlikely they will be stopped by mere tantrums. But the next move by the desperate Resistance may be to create so much political disorder in the system that they manage to delegitimize the 2020 election before it is even held, and plunge the nation deeper into unnecessary crisis just to try and save their asses.
May 01, 2019 | www.realclearpolitics.com
It is about the rule of law and privacy. The Obama administration for more than four years before the 2016 election allowed four contractors working for the FBI to illegally surveil American citizens -- illegally. The FISA court has already found that. There is the Horowitz report coming out in May or possibly early June. There's another report that everyone has forgotten about involving James Comey alone. That will be out in two weeks. That report is going to be a bombshell. It is going to open up the investigation on a very high note, and there are going to be criminal referrals in it.
The FISA court abuse is the center of this entire abuse of governmental power, and the chief judge in that court has already ruled that the FBI broke the law and that the people at the head of the justice department, Sally Yates, John Carlin, the assistant attorney general for national security all knew about it and lied to the FISA court about it...
There's a hero in this story and it is not a lawyer. There is a hero. His name is Admiral Mike Rogers. He was the head of the National Security Agency.
He [Rogers] discovered the illegal spying. He went personally to the FISA court and briefed the Chief Judge and worked with her for months to uncover the people who did it. The FISA court has already told the Justice Department who lied to that court and that has been given to [Attorney General] Bill Barr already.
Apr 26, 2019 | angrybearblog.com
ilsm, April 25, 2019 6:59 pm
Fivethirtyeight author on the opposing line ups for the democrats' Mueller post game show aka impeachment.
From a 'decisions under uncertainty' point of view if I were the democrats I would let this go. They should minimize their maximum regret, however they define it.
An impeachment debate in the House plays to Trump, how can you prosecute Trump his campaign was the target of a Watergate style spy operation. While a 60 democrat senate is unlikely in the next 30 years.
Impeachment would get the "democrats had the FBI spying on GOP campaign" out from the right wing shock jocks onto C-SPAN.
It could convince the public that the Mueller report is a red herring of phony, non evidence of treason factoids for the crime of disagreeing with the neocons and not being into a new cold war; that is Trump was not hard enough on Russia.
Apr 26, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org
karlof1 , Apr 26, 2019 11:21:26 AM | link
Mike Whitney writes about one aspect of Russiagate that several of us have noted--the use of the FBI and CIA to meddle in the 2016 campaign in an attempt to aid Clinton--an aspect that blows up some of the hypotheses floated here. He begins thusly:
- "Did the FBI spy on the Trump campaign?-- Yes
- "Did the FBI place spies in the Trump campaign?-- Yes
- "Do we know the names of the spies and how they operated?-- Yes
- "Were the spies trying to entrap Trump campaign assistants in order to gather information on Trump?-- Yes
- "Did the spies try to elicit information from Trump campaign assistants in order to justify a wider investigation and more extensive surveillance?-- Yes
- "Were the spies placed in the Trump campaign based on improperly obtained FISA warrants?-- Yes
- "Did the FBI agents procure these warrants based on false or misleading information?-- Yes
- "Could the FBI establish 'probable cause' that Trump had committed a crime or 'colluded' with Russia?-- No
- "So the 'spying' was illegal?-- Yes
- "Have many of the people who authorized the spying, already been identified in criminal referrals presented to the Department of Justice?-- Yes
- "Have the media explained the importance of these criminal referrals or the impact that spying has on free elections?-- No
- "Is the DOJ's Inspector General currently investigating whether senior-level agents in the FBI committed crimes by improperly obtaining warrants to spy on members of the Trump team?-- Yes
- "Did the FBI spy on the Trump campaign to give Hillary Clinton an unfair advantage in the presidential race?-- Yes
- "Did the FBI spy on the Trump campaign to gather incriminating information on Trump that could be used to blackmail, intimidate or impeach him in the future?-- Yes
- "Does spying pose a threat to our elections and to our democracy?-- Yes
- "Do many people know that there were spies placed in the Trump campaign?-- Yes
- "Have these people effectively used that information to their advantage?-- No
- "Have they launched any type of public relations offensive that would draw more attention to the critical issue of spying on a political campaign?-- No
- "Have they saturated the airwaves with the truth about 'spying' the same way their rivals have spread their disinformation about 'collusion'?-- No" [Emphasis in Original]
That's a little more than half of what Whitney lists that's quite damning as we must admit. That it's not being discussed anywhere outside of a few social media accounts means Trump could use the "precedent" set by Obama to do the same in 2020. Shouldn't we be concerned about that possibility? How is it that the Deep State made it possible for Trump to win when it did almost everything it could to derail his chances, including the use of Obama, FBI, CIA, MI6, NSA, etc?
Regardless one's feelings about Trump, what was done as Whitney points out is a massive danger to the fundamental aspects of the democratic process, and that's not being shown the light-of-day by BigLie Media. And we can also see why Pelosi and Clinton don't want Impeachment proceedings to occur as the above information would finally become far more overt/public than it is currently.
Apr 24, 2019 | www.unz.com
renfro , says: Next New Comment April 23, 2019 at 4:53 am GMT
Trump biggest regret is going to be that he ever ran for President. Impeached or not impeached all his dirty laundry is going to be exposed. Even if he secured a second term there is no statute of limitations on what he could be prosecuted for .so the minute he steps down from the WH he's going to have to spend everything he's got on lawyers fighting the charges the SDNY is going to bring against him.David Cay Johnston: What Is Trump Hiding in His Tax Returns?
The Pulitzer Prize–winning investigative reporter explains what's likely in Trump's returns.
By Jon WienerTwitter
David Cay Johnston is a Pulitzer Prize–winning investigative reporter who previously worked at The New York Times. He's the founder and editor of DCReport.org.
Jon Wiener: The chair of the House Ways and Means Committee formally requested six years of Trump's personal and business tax returns earlier this month. Trump, of course, refused to comply, and said the law is "100 percent" on his side. Does the IRS have to hand over Trump's tax returns to the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee?
David Cay Johnston: If they follow the law, they absolutely have to hand them over. Under a 1924 anti-corruption law that was passed because of Teapot Dome, a Harding-administration scandal, Congress can look at anybody's tax return at any time. In the 85-year history of this law, the IRS has always responded appropriately to the request and turned over everything that was requested.
Apr 24, 2019 | www.unz.com
annamaria , says: April 23, 2019 at 10:47 pm GMT
@renfro How does Trump tax return look on a balance with the treasonous, anti-Constitutional behavior of Brennan, Comey, Clinton, Obama, Clapper and the presstituting chorus of "liberal" media?Since the tsardom of Dick Cheney, the US Constitution had become quaint. Moreover, the "democracy on the march" and other "humanitarian interventions" initiated by the ultimate coward Bush the lesser and by the ultimate hypocrite and narcissist Obama, have destroyed completely the value of diplomacy and international law with regard to the ZUSA foreign policy.
Your obsession with the petty problem of Trump's taxes does not allow you to take a notice of Brennan's great achievements in Ukraine: the successful regime-change in Kiev and initiation of the civil war with the pro-federalists in eastern Ukraine. Currently, the US Congress and the US citizenry at large have been tasting the unpalatable medicine developed by the CIA during the decades of smothering the weaker countries with "appropriate" regime changes.
The treasonous Russiagate -- up to Comey's willful inactivity towards Clinton's server (and Comey's rejection of Assange' plea that the DoJ wanted at that time) -- is a direct consequence of the perfidious autocratic rule established years ago by the five-deferment Cheney.
The rot has got deep into the system.
Apr 24, 2019 | crookedtimber.org
Jay 04.22.19 at 11:43 pm 63
or maybe they weren't eager for World War 3 with Russia over Syria or the Ukraine?I voted for Trump after previously voting for Ralph Nader. And Obama proved beyond a doubt that Nader was right. Meanwhile Trump has done exactly what I hoped he would do; he has shown that our entire election system is rigged by the CIA (obviously not very thoroughly rigged). Like or hate Trump, only a traitor would not be concerned that the CIA is giving marching order to the media and colluding to derail candidates it does not approve of.
Unless a "democrat" stands up who is willing to talk about unconstitutional wars, unconstitutional bailouts, unconstitutional surveillance and unconstitutional rigging of the two major parties, Trump is far better because he is forcing the public to see how corrupt DC is. We have been in a constitutional crisis since at least the 1990's. Of course if you are too weak and stupid to handle any of that discussion, just bury your head and pretend that "racism" is the only reason Trump won.
Apr 23, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com
The release of the Mueller report has left Democrats in a dilemma. Consider what Robert Mueller concluded after two years of investigation.Candidate Donald Trump did not conspire or collude with the Russians to hack the emails of the DNC or John Podesta. Trump did not distribute the fruits of those crimes nor did anyone on his campaign. On collusion and conspiracy, said Mueller, Trump is innocent.
Mueller did not say that Trump did not consider interfering with his investigation. But that investigation nonetheless went on unimpeded. Mueller's document demands were all met. And Mueller did not conclude that Trump obstructed justice.
On obstruction, then, not guilty, by reason of no indictment.
We are told that Trump ranted to subordinates about firing Mueller. Yet as Attorney General Bill Barr pointed out, Trump had excellent reasons to be enraged. He was pilloried for two and a half years over a crime he not only did not commit but that never took place.
From the fall of 2016 to the spring of 2019, Trump was subjected to scurrilous attacks. It was alleged that his victory had been stolen for him by the Russians, that he was an illegitimate president guilty of treason and an agent of the Kremlin, that he was being blackmailed, and that he rewrote the Republican platform on Vladimir Putin's instructions.
All bull hockey, and Mueller all but said so.
Yet the false charges did serious damage to his presidency and the nation.
Mueller Time is Finally Over CNN Disgraces Itself as the Mueller Report Shatters Media DreamsAnswering them has consumed much of Trump's tenure and ruined his plans to repair our dangerously damaged relations with the world's other great nuclear power.
Yet it is the Trump haters who are now in something of a box.
Their goal had been to use "Russiagate" to bring down their detested antagonist, overturn his election, and put him in the history books as a stooge of Putin who, had the truth be known, would never have won the White House.
Mueller failed to sustain their indictment. Indeed, he all but threw it out.
Yet Trump's enemies will not quit now. To do so would be to concede that Trump's defenders had been right all along, and that they had not only done a grave injustice to Trump but damaged their country with their manic pursuit.
And admitting they were wrong would instantly raise follow-up questions.
If two years of investigation by Mueller, his lawyers, and his FBI agents could not unearth hard evidence to prove that Trump and his campaign conspired with the Russians, what was the original evidence that justified launching this historic and massive assault on a presidential campaign and the presidency of the United States?
If there was no collusion, when did Mueller learn this? Did it take two and a half years to discover there was no conspiracy?
The names tossed out as justifying the original investigation are George Papadopoulos and Carter Page. The latter was subjected to four consecutive secret FISA court surveillance warrants.
Yet neither man was ever charged with conspiring with Russia.
Was "Russiagate" a nothingburger to begin with, a concocted excuse for "deep state" agencies to rampage through Trump's campaign and personal history to destroy him and his presidency?
Senator Elizabeth Warren, a presidential candidate, has called for impeachment hearings in the House Judiciary Committee. But her call seems less tied to evidence of high crimes in the Mueller report than to her own anemic poll ratings and fundraising performance in the first quarter.
It is difficult to see how those Democrats and their media allies, who have invested so much prestige and so many hopes in the Mueller report, can now pack it in and concede that they were wrong. Their interests will not permit it; their reputations could not sustain it.
So where are we headed?
The anti-Trump media and second-tier candidates for the Democratic nomination will press the frontrunners to join their call for impeachment. Some will capitulate to the clamor.
But can Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Beto O'Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, or Kamala Harris, each of whom has an agenda to advance, accept becoming just another voice crying out for Trump's impeachment?
The credibility of the Democratic Party is now at issue.
If Mueller could not find collusion, what reason is there to believe that Congressman Jerry Nadler's Judiciary Committee will find it? And then convince the country they have discovered what ex-FBI director Mueller could not?
With conspiracy and collusion off the table, and Mueller saying the case for obstruction is unproven, the renewed attack on Trump takes on the aspect of a naked and desperate "deep state"-media coup against a president they fear they cannot defeat at the ballot box.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever . To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com.
Ken Zaretzke April 23, 2019 at 1:31 pm
Why did Mueller hire only Democrats for his team–an unusually large team, at that? Was it because he thought nailing Trump on collusion a surefire thing? And as a surefire thing, there was no need to placate Republicans or provide balance? Who advised or pressured him to do that? Maybe the deep stateJohn S , says: April 23, 2019 at 1:46 pmAn investigation of the FBI's Trump-spying caper, with James Comey at the helm, should look into those matters. To some as yet undetermined extent, Mueller and Comey are joined at the hip. Or if they aren't, let the government prove it. If DOJ's Inspector General doesn't do it, we may need another special counsel to conduct a more thorough investigation. And this time, by someone from outside the Beltway, with no professional or social allegiances to individuals within it.
" not guilty, by reason of no indictment."Stuart Ferguson , says: April 23, 2019 at 4:46 pmThe report itself states that, per OLC, the Special Counsel determined not to make a prosecutorial judgment. It also states that the President is not exonerated of the crime of obstruction.
Mr. Buchanan is right: President Trump has been found to be not guilty of working with Russia, but neither the media, nor the neo-cons can possible admit it, or their cause is lost. And one need not personally admire Donald Trump to note the haughty condescension of his opponents, most of whom have been wrong about almost everything for decades.
Apr 23, 2019 | www.unz.com
The real "deplorable" in today's United States is the continuation of a foreign policy based on endless aggression to maintain Washington's military dominance in parts of the world where Americans have no conceivable interest. Many voters backed Donald J. Trump because he committed himself to changing all that, but, unfortunately, he has reneged on his promise, instead heightening tension with major powers Russia and China while also threatening Iran and Venezuela on an almost daily basis. Now Cuba is in the crosshairs because it is allegedly assisting Venezuela. One might reasonably ask if America in its seemingly enduring role as the world's most feared bully will ever cease and desist, but the more practical question might be "When will the psychopathic trio of John Bolton, Mike Pompeo and Elliott Abrams be fired so the United States can begin to behave like a normal nation?"
Trump, to be sure, is the heart of the problem as he has consistently made bad, overly belligerent decisions when better and less abrasive options were available, something that should not necessarily always be blamed on his poor choice of advisers. But one also should not discount the likelihood that the dysfunction in Trump is in part comprehensible, stemming from his belief that he has numerous powerful enemies who have been out do destroy him since before he was nominated as the GOP's presidential candidate. This hatred of all things Trump has been manifested in the neoconservative "Nevertrump" forces led by Bill Kristol and by the "Trump Derangement Syndrome" prominent on the political left, regularly exhibited by Rachel Maddow.
And then there is the Deep State, which also worked with the Democratic Party and President Barack Obama to destroy the Trump presidency even before it began. One can define Deep State in a number of ways, ranging from a "soft" version which accepts that there is an Establishment that has certain self-serving objectives that it works collectively to promote to something harder, an actual infrastructure that meets together and connives to remove individuals and sabotage policies that it objects to. The Deep State in either version includes senior government officials, business leaders and, perhaps most importantly, the managed media, which promotes a corrupted version of "good governance" that in turn influences the public.
Whether the Mueller report is definitive very much depends on the people they chose to interview and the questions they chose to ask, which is something that will no doubt be discussed for the next year if not longer. Beyond declaring that the Trump team did not collude with Russia, it cast little light on the possible Deep State role in attempting to vilify Trump and his associates. The investigation of that aspect of the 2016 campaign and the possible prosecutions of former senior government officials that might be a consequence of the investigation will likely be entertaining conspiracy theorists well into 2020. Since Russiagate has already been used and discarded the new inquiry might well be dubbed Trumpgate.
The media has scarcely reported how Michael Horowitz, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice (DOJ), has been looking into the activities of the principal promoters of the Russiagate fraud. Horowitz, whose report is expected in about a month, has already revealed that he intends to make criminal referrals as a result of his investigation. While the report will only cover malfeasance in the Department of Justice, which includes the FBI, the names of intelligence officers involved will no doubt also surface. It is expected that there will be charges leading to many prosecutions and one can hope for jail time for those individuals who corruptly betrayed their oath to the United States Constitution to pursue a political vendetta.
A review of what is already known about the plot against Trump is revealing and no doubt much more will be learned if and when investigators go through emails and phone records. The first phase of the illegal investigation of the Trump associates involved initiating wiretaps without any probable cause. This eventually involved six government intelligence and law enforcement agencies that formed a de facto task force headed by the CIA's Director John Brennan. Also reportedly involved were the FBI's James Comey, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Department of Homeland Security Director Jeh Johnson, and Admiral Michael Rogers who headed the National Security Agency.
Brennan was the key to the operation because the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court refused to approve several requests by the FBI to initiate taps on Trump associates and Trump Tower as there was no probable cause to do so but the British and other European intelligence services were legally able to intercept communications linked to American sources. Brennan was able to use his connections with those foreign intelligence agencies, primarily the British GCHQ, to make it look like the concerns about Trump were coming from friendly and allied countries and therefore had to be responded to as part of routine intelligence sharing. As a result, Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Gen. Michael Flynn were all wiretapped. And likely there were others. This all happened during the primaries and after Trump became the GOP nominee.
In other words, to make the wiretaps appear to be legitimate, GCHQ and others were quietly and off-the-record approached by Brennan and associates over their fears of what a Trump presidency might mean. The British responded by initiating wiretaps that were then used by Brennan to justify further investigation of Trump's associates. It was all neatly done and constituted completely illegal spying on American citizens by the U.S. government.
The British support of the operation was coordinated by the then-director of GCHQ Robert Hannigan who has since been forced to resign. Brennan is, unfortunately still around and has not been charged with perjury and other crimes. In May 2017, after he departed government, he testified before Congress with what sounds a lot like a final unsourced, uncorroborated attempt to smear the new administration :
"I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals. It raised questions in my mind whether or not Russia was able to gain the co-operation of those individuals."
Brennan's claimed "concerns" turned out to be incorrect. Meanwhile, other interested parties were involved in the so-called Steele Dossier on Trump himself. The dossier, paid for initially by Republicans trying to stop Trump, was later funded by $12 million from the Hillary campaign. It was commissioned by the law firm Perkins Coie, which was working for the Democratic National Committee (DNC). The objective was to assess any possible Trump involvement with Russia. The work itself was sub-contracted to Fusion GPS, which in turn sub-contracted the actual investigation to British spy Christopher Steele who headed a business intelligence firm called Orbis.
Steele left MI-6 in 2009 and had not visited Russia since 1993. The report, intended to dig up dirt on Trump, was largely prepared using impossible to corroborate second-hand information and would have never surfaced but for the surprise result of the 2016 election. Christopher Steele gave a copy to a retired of British Diplomat Sir Andrew Wood who in turn handed it to Trump critic Senator John McCain who then passed it on to the FBI. President Barack Obama presumably also saw it and, according to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, "If it weren't for President Obama, we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set off a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today, notably, special counsel Mueller's investigation."
The report was leaked to the media in January 2017 to coincide with Trump's inauguration. Hilary Clinton denied any prior knowledge despite the fact that her campaign had paid for it. Pressure from the Democrats and other constituencies devastated by the Trump victory used the Steele report to provide leverage for what became the Mueller investigation.
So, was there a broad ranging conspiracy against Donald Trump orchestrated by many of the most senior officials and politicians in Washington? Undeniably yes. What Trump has amounted to as a leader and role model is beside the point as what evolved was undeniably a bureaucratic coup directed against a legally elected president of the United States and to a certain extent it was successful as Trump was likely forced to turn his back on his better angels and subsequently hired Pompeo, Bolton and Abrams. One can only hope that investigators dig deep into what is Washington insiders have been up to so Trumpgate will prove more interesting and informative than was Russiagate. And one also has to hope that enough highest-level heads will roll to make any interference by the Deep State in future elections unthinkable. One hopes.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .
Realist , says: April 22, 2019 at 11:28 pm GMT
renfro , says: April 23, 2019 at 4:28 am GMTThe Deep State plot to undermine the president
The President is part of the Deep State. To understand what the Deep State will and will not tolerate answer these questions.
What do both parties agree on? If they appear to disagree, look to see if anything changes when one party has the power to cause change or does the party in power make excuses to avoid change? Those things that the populus is against but never change or get worse are what the Deep State wants
- The Deep State wants a constant state of tension with 'hostile' countries (Iran, Russia, Venezuela, China, Syria and others). This scares the crap out of ignorant Americans and allows unjustifiable spending on war matériel.
- The Deep State wants a steady supply of cheap foreign labor to provide wealth to the supporters of the Deep State.
- The Deep State wants our financial institutions to never fail (FED 2009) even at the expense of 90% of Americans. The Deep State wants financial institutions to provide financial products to the wealthy which cripples the vast majority of Americans.
- The silly internecine squabbles within the Deep State are a ruse to misdirect the public from important issues like constant war, legal and illegal immigrants taking jobs from Americans and the increased transfer of wealth for the 90% to the supper weathy.
There will never be a wall and illegal immigration will continue to be a problem. All the investigations into Trump, the DNC, Hillary and all the rest will never come to justice. The wealth transfer will not stop
Until Americans realize these diversions for what they are and put an end to it through what ever means necessary
notanon , says: April 23, 2019 at 4:35 am GMTit was successful as Trump was likely forced to turn his back on his better angels and subsequently hired Pompeo, Bolton and Abrams.
Oh plezzze .you sound like you've been drugged. Trump never had any better angels as any reporter and journalist whoever interviewed or investigated him would tell you.
And come on! .You know damn well Adelson sent Bolton and you should also know damn well why the Orange Boy staffed his adm with Zionists. No one in NY except Zionists would associate with Trump.
.
i think some of the conspiracy was about controlling Trump's foreign policy going forward but i also think some of it was people like Brennan worried CIA collusion with Saudi funded jihadist groups since 9/11 (and possibly before) might come out.Hiram of Tyre , says: April 23, 2019 at 4:41 am GMTRight.A plot to undermine another POTUS who does exactly what the previous ones did: bend over to Israel, continues wars, etc.
Trump is only controlled opposition.
Apr 10, 2019 | community.oilprice.com
shadowkin , 04/10/2019 01:49 AM
The irony of the Mueller investigation that was demanded by Democrats because they thought it would show Trump colluded with Russia to win the Presidency is that it has blown up in their faces by exposing in greater detail how Obama and the Deep State attempted first, to throw an election in favor of one candidate, Hillary Clinton, and second, attempted a coup once Trump was elected via investigations and false claims.Once Trump won the election, the Deep State used their accomplices in the msm to convince the American public that Donald J Trump stole the election with the collaboration of the Russians. In this way they sought to remove him by impeachment.
It turns out the Deep State were the ones who were acting as agents of Russia seeking to tear America apart.
Consider:
- John Brennan, Obama's CIA director, by his own admission, played a key role in instigating the investigation of Trump before the election. In the aftermath of the election Brennan has repeatedly called Trump a traitor on social media and old media.
- We now know in August 2016 Brennan gave a private briefing to Sen. Harry Reid. Subsequently, Reid sent a letter to the FBI which included info that clearly came from the now infamous dossier, manufactured by ex-British spy Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS contractor. This dossier would later be included in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant application that was used to justify investigations into Trump, his campaign, and his family. It now appears very likely Brennan later lied under oath that he did not know who commissioned the dossier.
- This dossier was originally funded by none other than Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party.
- Since the conclusion of the Mueller report has come out Brennan, probably fearing an investigation into his actions pre/post election, now says he had "bad information". A more accurate description might be that he was willfully spreading disinformation to bring down a President.
- James Comey himself described this dossier as "salacious" and "unverified" yet he did not bother to have the FBI attempt to verify the contents of the dossier.
- This didn't stop Comey from lying 4 times to the FISA court that ex-British spy Steele was the source of an article by "journalist" Isikoff, which was used to corroborate claims in his own dossier. So Comey, in essence, told the FISA court that the Steele dossier had been corroborated by Steele.
- Some background: Steele also worked for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. So the only person who had any verifiable evidence of working with the Russians in any capacity is an ex-British spy, contracted to manufacture a false dossier on behalf of Hillary Clinton to smear Trump and later weaponized to impeach Trump after he won the election.
- Comey lied to the FISA court so he could obtain, as he did, a warrant to spy on Carter Page (Trump staffer) and the Trump family during the election. Moreover, in addition to Comey, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, former Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe, and former Attorney General Sally Yates were required to sign off on the FISA warrant application. They are either incompetent or were engaged in a conspiracy but regardless, this was a fraud on the FISA court.
- Bruce Ohr, a senior official at the time at the Justice Department, acted as a middleman between the FBI and Steele. He passed along information from his wife Nellie Ohr, also a Fusion GPS contractor like Steele , with, presumably, unverified and false info regarding Trump and his campaign.
- The FBI later terminated Steele's relationship as a confidential informant with them after he revealed this relationship to the press. However, for up to 1.5 years after, Bruce Ohr continued to act as middleman between Steele and the FBI, even after Mueller took over the investigation .
Americans should be marching in the streets at this attempted coup but we are so doped with mindless entertainment that we no longer care. We are becoming a system where as long as you don't challenge the 2 party system you are allowed your freedom to make money and to say whatever you want so long as it doesn't have consequences.
Any more details of Mueller's report due to be released by AG Barr are likely to reveal more of the rotted core of the Deep State and their machinations and not, as Democrats think, damaging info about Trump.
Apr 21, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
As we now shift from the "witch hunt" against Trump to 'investigating the investigators' who spied on him - remember this; Donald Trump was supposed to lose the 2016 election by almost all accounts. And had Hillary won, as expected, none of this would have seen the light of day .
We wouldn't know that a hyper-partisan FBI had spied on the Trump campaign , as Attorney General William Barr put it during his April 10 Congressional testimony .
We wouldn't know that a Clinton-linked operative, Joseph Mifsud, seeded Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos with the rumor that Russia had 'Dirt' on Hillary Clinton - which would later be coaxed out of Papadopoulos by a Clinton-linked Australian ambassador, Alexander Downer, and that this apparent 'setup' would be the genesis of the FBI's " operation crossfire hurricane " operation against the Trump campaign.
We wouldn't know about the role of Fusion GPS - the opposition research firm hired by Hillary Clinton's campaign to commission the Steele dossier. Fusion is also linked to the infamous Trump Tower meeting , and hired Nellie Ohr - the CIA-linked wife of the DOJ's then-#4 employee, Bruce Ohr. Nellie fed her husband Bruce intelligence she had gathered against Trump while working for Fusion , according to transcripts of her closed-door Congressional testimony.
And if not for reporting by the Daily Caller 's Chuck Ross and others, we wouldn't know that the FBI sent a longtime spook, Stefan Halper, to infiltrate and spy on the Trump campaign - after the Obama DOJ paid him over $400,000 right before the 2016 US election (out of more than $1 million he received while Obama was president).
According to the New York Times , the tables are turning, starting with the Steele Dossier.
[T]he release on Thursday of the report by the special counsel , Robert S. Mueller III, underscored what had grown clearer for months -- that while many Trump aides had welcomed contacts with the Russians, some of the most sensational claims in the dossier appeared to be false, and others were impossible to prove . Mr. Mueller's report contained over a dozen passing references to the document's claims but no overall assessment of why so much did not check out.
Now the dossier -- financed by Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee , and compiled by the former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele -- is likely to face new, possibly harsh scrutiny from multiple inquiries . - NYT
While Congressional Republicans have vowed to investigate, the DOJ's Inspector General is considering whether the FBI improperly relied on the dossier when they used it to apply for a surveillance warrant on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. The IG also wants to know about Steele's sources and whether the FBI disclosed any doubts as to the veracity of the dossier .
Attorney General Barr, meanwhile, said he will review the FBI's conduct in the Russia investigation after saying the agency spied on the Trump campaign .
Doubts over the dossier
The FBI's scramble to vet the dossier's claims are well known. According to an April, 2017 NYT report , the FBI agreed to pay Steele $50,000 for "solid corroboration" of his claims . Steele was apparently unable to produce satisfactory evidence - and was ultimately not paid for his efforts:
Mr. Steele met his F.B.I. contact in Rome in early October, bringing a stack of new intelligence reports. One, dated Sept. 14, said that Mr. Putin was facing "fallout" over his apparent involvement in the D.N.C. hack and was receiving "conflicting advice" on what to do.
The agent said that if Mr. Steele could get solid corroboration of his reports, the F.B.I. would pay him $50,000 for his efforts, according to two people familiar with the offer. Ultimately, he was not paid . - NYT
Still, the FBI used the dossier to obtain the FISA warrant on Page - while the document itself was heavily shopped around to various media outlets . The late Sen. John McCain provided a copy to Former FBI Director James Comey, who already had a version, and briefed President Trump on the salacious document. Comey's briefing to Trump was then used by CNN and BuzzFeed to justify reporting on and publishing the dossier following the election.
Let's not forget that in October, 2016, both Hillary Clinton and her campaign chairman John Podesta promoted the conspiracy theory that a secret Russian server was communicating with Trump Tower.
The report was debunked after internet sleuths traced the IP address to a marketing server located outside Philadelphia, leading Alfa Bank executives to file a lawsuit against Fusion GPS in October 2017, claiming their reputations were harmed by the Steele Dossier.
And who placed the Trump-Alfa theory with various media outlets? None other than former FBI counterintelligence officer and Dianne Feinstein aide Dan Jones - who is currently working with Fusion GPS and Steele to continue their Trump-Russia investigation funded in part by George Soros .
Russian tricks? The Times notes that Steele "has not ruled out" that he may have been fed Russian disinformation while assembling his dossier.
That would mean that in addition to carrying out an effective attack on the Clinton campaign, Russian spymasters hedged their bets and placed a few land mines under Mr. Trump's presidency as well.
Oleg D. Kalugin, a former K.G.B. general who now lives outside Washington, saw that as plausible. "Russia has huge experience in spreading false information," he said. - NYT
In short, Steele is being given an 'out' with this admission.
A lawyer for Fusion GPS, Joshua Levy, says that the Mueller report substantiated the "core reporting" in the Steele memos - namely that "Trump campaign figures were secretly meeting Kremlin figures," and that Russia's president, Vladimir V. Putin, had directed "a covert operation to elect Donald J. Trump."
Of course, when one stops painting with broad brush strokes, it's clear that the dossier was fabricated bullshit.The dossier tantalized Mr. Trump's opponents with a worst-case account of the president's conduct. And for those trying to make sense of the Trump-Russia saga, the dossier infused the quest for understanding with urgency.
In blunt prose, it suggested that a foreign power had fully compromised the man who would become the next president of the United States.
The Russians, it asserted, had tried winning over Mr. Trump with real estate deals in Moscow -- which he had not taken up -- and set him up with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel in 2013, filming the proceedings for future exploitation. A handful of aides were described as conspiring with the Russians at every turn.
Mr. Trump, it said, had moles inside the D.N.C. The memos claimed that he and the Kremlin had been exchanging intelligence for eight years and were using Romanian hackers against the Democrats , and that Russian pensioners in the United States were running a covert communications network . - NYT
And after a nearly two-year investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller and roughly 40 FBI agents and other specialists, no evidence was found to support the dossier's wild claims of "DNC moles, Romanian hackers, Russian pensioners, or years of Trump-Putin intelligence trading ," as the Times puts it.
Now that the shoe is on the other foot, and key Democrats backing away from talks of impeachment, let's see if lady justice will follow the rest of us down the rabbit hole.
Yippie21 , 2 minutes ago link
San Pedro , 2 minutes ago linkThis is why the whole FISA court is a joke. What is their remedy if their power is abused? What happens. Well,... the FISA courts was lied to and found out about it in the early 2000's. Mueller was FBI chief. So they got a strongly worded dressing-down, a mark in their permanent record from high school, and NO ONE was fired... no one was sanctioned, no agent was transferred to Alaska.
Fast forward 10 or 12 years and the FBI is doing this **** again. Lying to the court... you know the court where there are no Democrat judges or Republican judges.. they are all super awesome.... and what is the remedy when the FISA court is told they've been lied to by the FBI and used in a intel operation with MI6, inserting assets, into a freaking domestic Presidential campaign!!! and then they WON. Good god.
And what do we hear from our court? Nadda. Do we hear of some Federal Judges hauling FBI and DOJ folks in front of them and throwing them in jail? Nope. It appears from here... that our Federal Justices are corrupt and have no problem letting illegal police-state actions go on with ZERO accountability or recourse. They could care less evidently. It's all secret you know... trust us they say.. Why aren't these judges publicly making loud noises about how the judiciary is complicit , with the press, in wholesale spying and leaking for political reasons AND a coup attempt when the wrong guy won.???
Where is awesome Justice Roberts? Why isn't he throwing down some truth on just how compromised the rule of law in his courts clearly are in the last 10 years? The FISA court is his baby. It does no good for them to assure us they are concerned too, and they've taken action and sent strongly worded letters. Pisses me off. ? Right? heck of rant...
Scipio Africanuz , 4 minutes ago linkWhen did Russians interfere in our elections?? 2016. Who was president when Russians interfered with elections?? oobama. Who was head of the CIA?? Brennan. Who was National Intelligence director?? Clapper. Who was head of the FBI when the Russians interfered in our elections?? Comey. The pattern is obvious. When Trump was a private citizen the oobama and all his cabinet appointees and Intel Managers had their hands on all the levers and instruments of Government..and did nothing . Your oobama is guilty of treason and failing his Oath Of Office...everybody knows this.
King of Ruperts Land , 5 minutes ago linkThis article is still a roundabout gambit to blame Russia.
Fair enough, where's Bill Browder? In England. Browder's allegations were utilized to try and damage Russia, even though Russia (not the USSR), is about the most reliable friend America has.
Russia helped Lincoln, and were it not for that crucial help, there'd be no America to sanction Russia today. The Tsar paid for that help with his dynasty, when Nicholas II was murdered, and dethroned.
Americans are truly ungrateful brutes..
Now, sanctions, opprobrium, and hatred are heaped on Russia, most cogently by chauvinistic racists, who look down their noses at Rus (Russ) and yet, cannot sacrifice 25 millions of their own people, for the sake of others.
Russians are considered subhuman, and yet, the divine spark of humanity resides solely in their breasts. The zionists claim a false figure of 6 million for a faux holocaust, and yet, nobody pays attention to the true holocaust of 25 millions, or the many millions before that disastrous instigated war.
That the Russians are childlike, believing others to be like them, loyal, self sacrificing, and generous, has now brought the world to the brink of armageddon, and still, they bear the burden of proof, though their accusers, who ought provide the evidence, are bereft of any..
Thomas Jefferson it was, who observing whatever he observed, exclaimed in cogent agitation, that "I fear for my countrymen, when I remember that God is Just, and His Justice does not repose forever".
Investigate Jared and Ivanka Kushner, along with Charles Kushner, and much ought be clear, no cheers...
Sanity Bear , 15 minutes ago linkI don't buy that "Few bad apples at the top", "Good rank and file" Argument. I have never seen one. We should assume everyone from the top to the bottom of FBI, DOJ, and State, just to get started, probably every other three better agency is bad. At least incompotent, at worst treasonous.
besnook , 20 minutes ago linkAs there was spying, there must necessarily also have been channels to get the information thus gathered back to its original buyer - the Clinton campaign. Who passed the information back to Clinton, and what got passed?
ClickNLook , 23 minutes ago linkthe NYTt prints all the news a scumbag would. remember Judith Miller, the Zionazi reporter the NYT used to push the Iraq war with all sorts of ********? after the war was determined to be started under a false premise and became common knowledge there were no wmds in iraq the nyt came forward and reported the war was ******** as if they were reporting breaking news.
they have done the same thing here. they pushed the russiagate story with both barrels even though the informed populace knew it was ******** before trump was sworn in as potus. now that the all the holes in the story are readily apparent the nyt comes forward with breaking revelation that something is wrong with the story.
I Am Jack's Macroaggression , 30 minutes ago linkNow we will have another 2 years of investigation and another expensive and meaningless report. WWE Soup Opera continues. Plot sickens.
I Am Jack's Macroaggression , 30 minutes ago linkThere was no 'hack.' That is the big, anti-Russia, pro-MIC lie which all the other lies serve.
DaBard51 , 24 minutes ago linkThere was no 'hack.' That is the big, anti-Russia, pro-MIC lie which all the other lies serve.
His name is Seth Rich.
ClickNLook , 19 minutes ago linkThe Seth Rich investigation; where is it now? Murder of a campaign staffer; tampering with or influencing an election, is it not? Hmmm... When nine hundred years old you become, look this good you will not.
Amy G. Dala , 22 minutes ago linkOnce upon a time there was a Bernie supporter. And his name was Seth Rich. Then there was a "botched robbery", which evidence that was concluded on, I have no idea. Do you? Anyhow, The End.
ComeAndTakeIt , 10 minutes ago linkSeth Rich had the means and the motive. So did Imran Awan, but it would make no sense for Awan to turn anything over to wikileaks . . .he would have kept them as insurance.
Why wouldn't Assange name the source for the DNC emails? Is this a future bargaining chip? And what if he did name Seth Rich? He would have to prove it. Could he?
Bricker , 32 minutes ago linkThey've got Assange now...Maybe they should ask him if it was Seth Rich who gave him the emails?
Maybe even do it under oath and on national television. I don't think it's still considered "burning a source" if your source has already been murdered....
Mike Rotsch , 35 minutes ago linkUntil the real criminals are processed and the media can be restored you don't have a United States. This corruption is beyond comprehension. You had the (((media)) providing kickbacks to the FBI for leaked information. These bribes are how CNN was on site during Roger Stones invasion.
Treason and Sedition is rampant in America and all SPY roads lead to Clapper, Brennan and Obama...This needs attention.
The media is abusive and narrating attacks on a dully elected president
Oleg D. Kalugin, a former K.G.B. general who now lives outside Washington, saw that as plausible. "Russia has huge experience in spreading false information," he said. - NYT
You have got to be ******* kidding me. So now the narrative is, "We were wrong about Russian collusion, and that's Russia's fault"?!
Apr 18, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com
He's turned out to be a ziocon and Bibi's bitch instead. He's surrounded himself with neocons. And he's also Wall St's bitch as his primary concern is stock prices. He wants the Fed to lower already low rates and grow its multi-trillion dollar "emergency" balance sheet even more. The federal government will add a trillion dollars to the national debt each year of his term. Isn't this exactly what the establishment of both parties want?
In any case, the hammer needs to come down hard on the putschists, so that law enforcement & the intelligence agencies don't become an extra-constitutional 4th branch of government accountable only to themselves. We'll see how far the Trump administration will go in holding these seditionists to account?
Apr 16, 2019 | www.unz.com
Anonymous [391] Disclaimer , says: April 16, 2019 at 1:25 pm GMT
We had been inflicted with "Russogate" ad nauseam for the better part of two years and nothing, absolutely nothing, came of it. But no mention of the Zio-gate where the dog and its tail reciprocally meddle in each others' election(s) overwhelmingly in favor of Zio-tail interests. The silence of this issue in the MSM is deafening.
Apr 13, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org
librul , Apr 10, 2019 11:47:32 PM | link
When did Reuters ever call the Trump/Russia Collusion nonsense a "conspiracy theory" as they should have?
Never (big surprise)
But Reuters is quick to call the investigation into the FBI election manipulation a conspiracy theory.
U.S. attorney general's 'spying' remarks anger Democrats
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Attorney General William Barr said on Wednesday he would look into whether U.S. agencies illegally spied on President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign, sparking criticism from Democrats who accused him of promoting a conspiracy theory.Barr, who was appointed by Trump, is already facing criticism by congressional Democrats for how he has handled the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report on the probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election, and his comments about surveillance brought more derision from Democratic senators.
His testimony echoed longstanding allegations by Trump and Republican allies that seeks to cast doubt on the early days of the federal investigation in an apparent attempt to discredit Mueller, law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
Zachary Smith , Apr 10, 2019 11:49:22 PM | link
@ Jackrabbit #67ben , Apr 10, 2019 11:56:00 PM | linkIMO the notion that a few senior Intelligence officials (mostly FBI) tried to overthrow Trump is silly to the point of being laughable.Not to all of us, it isn't. The part I don't understand is the Why of their effort. Did they have some scheme to get rid of Pence too? Or was it all mindless blind hatred because he took down their Goddess Hillary?
ZS @ 68 said in part;"assuming the Corporate Democrats don't force one of their candidates Big Corporations want on the ballot. Which is, of course, most of them."Jackrabbit , Apr 11, 2019 12:02:16 AM | linkI assume what you speculated on above, will happen.
Zachary Smith @68: ... Corporate Democrats ... domestic policies ...librul , Apr 11, 2019 12:06:23 AM | linkThe democratic party is irredeemable as it operates as one arm of the duopoly. I don't see any meaningful distinction between "Corporate Democrats" and progressive Democrats except this: progressive Democrats give the Democratic Party cover to support the establishment.
IMO domestic policy can no longer be considered separately from Empire. "Progressive Democrats" are
forcedencouraged by their Party to support the military and ignore foreign policy.<> <> <> <> <> <> <>
IMO the only grouping that is currently viable/strong alternative is the libertarians. If they could bring conservatives and (real) progressives together, then we could see a real challenge to the "radical center" (which actually rules as center-right).
But conservatives, (real) progressives, and libertarians are underfunded and constantly get played.
@ Zachary Smith | Apr 10, 2019 11:49:22 PM | 71Jackrabbit , Apr 11, 2019 12:08:56 AM | linkZachary Smith @71:ben , Apr 11, 2019 12:34:51 AM | linkNot to all of us, it isn't. The part I don't understand is the Why of their effort.Well of course the WHY baffles you, because the only WHY that makes sense is what I described and that will never be allowed to come out publicly because then people will see that their democracy is a sham.
The "managed democracy" that we have in USA subverts the will of the people to the Empire.
@ 74: Why did Russiagate start in the first place? The short answer is IMO, diversion.Zachary Smith , Apr 11, 2019 12:52:57 AM | linkAnother answer could be, that DJT stood on a stage, and asked another country to find his opponents e-mails.
@ librul #74Grieved , Apr 11, 2019 12:53:10 AM | linkThough I hadn't seen that before, the general theme is in agreement with what I believe is the truth. Even ignorant and thuggish goons like Trump can be victims of a crime, and I believe that's what happened here.
I find it piquant that the vice president of the US attacks a Venezuelan ambassador at the UN and then ramps up his aggression...by retreating.Jackrabbit , Apr 11, 2019 1:01:14 AM | linkPence is so certain that the other guy doesn't belong, that he himself walks away. Every schoolyard would see this behavior for exactly what it is. Animals would understand it clearly also, in terms of pecking order.
How perfect this action is in matching precisely what we've been watching the US do in several military theaters for some time now. The louder and the ruder the bluster, the more certain we can be that it covers pure emptiness. And that the US is tangibly retreating under cover of the smoke.
The cowardice is becoming palpable.
benJohn Smith , Apr 11, 2019 1:02:54 AM | linkWell, why did "America First" Trump ask Russia to do that? (And later ask Wikileaks to release the DNC emails!)
And why did "America First" Trump hire Manafort who had extensive Russian contacts and pro-Russian activities that drew the ire of US officials?
These (and more) played into Russiagate hysteria that followed the election and were not in keeping with Trump's "America First" rhetoric.
Now, long after the election, we see additional strangeness like Roger Stone's claims of a contact at Wikileaks.
Posted by: karlof1 | Apr 10, 2019 6:42:57 PM | 38Zachary Smith , Apr 11, 2019 1:08:09 AM | link"IDF's chief rabbi-to-be permits raping women in wartime." Just how does that differ from Daesh's behavior? Or was it the IDF that told Deash such behavior was okay? I'm pretty certain that rabbi is afoul of fundamental Mosaic Law and thus shouldn't be a rabbi.
----------------------"The Talmud: The Steinsaltz Edition," Ketubot 11b, vol. 7 (NY: Random House, 1991), p. 145:
"If a grown man has intercourse with a little girl less than three years old, all agree that it is not a significant sexual act ""Koren Talmud Bavli," Sanhedrin 54b, vol. 30 (Jerusalem, 2017), p. 41:
"If a man engages in homosexual intercourse with a minor who is under the age of nine, whether actively or passively, he is exempt as with regard to ritual law..."@ Jackrabbit #75Jackrabbit , Apr 11, 2019 1:21:14 AM | linkI"m not sure we disagree very much, for I also believe our "democracy" is thoroughly managed, and "sham" is quite a good word for it. The part I don't understand is why you seem to object to pointing out efforts by the 'managers' to correct the error of a slam dunk election going bad. Hillary was supposed to be in the White House. More than one nation had been making advance payments to the Clinton Foundation to purchase her goodwill. She was the dream for Big Banking, the apartheid Jewish state, and probably a lot more folks. That didn't happen, and some people became unhinged.
Zachary Smith @78:Jackrabbit , Apr 11, 2019 1:29:31 AM | linkThough I hadn't seen that before, the general theme is in agreement with what I believe is the truth.I think that you're not thinking this through.You're question of WHY, is still unanswered.
> WHY did the hold back on Russian-influence allegations during the election?This is not meant to be exhaustive. There are many other questions that you could ask because there's a lot that doesn't add up - unless Russiagate was a Deep State psyop with bi-partisan support (as I've described).
Hillary was suppose to win, sure. But why not ENSURE that win?> WHY did they continue with Russiagate after the election?
They engaged in Treasonous behavior because Hillary was butthurt?
She supposedly got 3 million more votes than Trump; how badly could her ego be bruised?> WHY did the establishment hate Trump so much?
He's delivered all they could want and more.> Why did Russiagate force Trump to bend to Deep State wishes?
Ha! It didn't! Trump has always maintained that there was no Russia collusion. And now the Mueller Report confirms this. Trump's Cold War policy continues the Deep State's same policy - because Trump is part of the team.Zachary Smith @85: efforts by the 'managers' to correct the errorJackrabbit , Apr 11, 2019 1:30:30 AM | linkBecause it makes no sense. If they got their wish and "corrected" the error by overthrowing Trump, there would be a civil war. Which is counter-productive in the extreme.
But they don't need to take such drastic action 'cause Trump does that the Deep States wants anyway! So what are they trying to "correct"?!?
correction: ... what the Deep State wants ...EtTuBrute , Apr 11, 2019 5:08:30 AM | linkAlleged ongoing Military Coup in Sudan today, another just happened in Algeria... Haftar making moves in Libya, could all just be a coincidence, then again, maybe not? Anyone got anything? Wondering what Mr B. thinks..jared , Apr 11, 2019 8:28:18 AM | linkIs Russia a failed state -
https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/424511-managing-russias-dissolutionOr is U.S. (actually the entire Globalist empire) maxing out it's credit card?
And speaking of failed states -
https://southfront.org/us-southcom-head-says-venezuela-military-intervention-might-be-necessary-by-end-of-2019/
Mar 25, 2019 | blog.usejournal.com
In its Russiagate coverage, The New York Times has repeatedly offered a graphic accusing the President's retinue of "more than 100 contacts with Russian nationals." This decision to question the loyalty of people who have had contact with a Russian national -- so, for just knowing or meeting a Russian -- has been a staple of New York Times coverage.
"More than 100 contacts with Russian nationals." It's incredible that this can even be an allegation -- in our paper of record -- there in explainer graphics almost every day, for more than two years now.
It smacks of the famous Senator Joseph McCarthy speeches in the 1950s: "I have in my hand a list of 205 [or 57, or 81] "
And yet no one ever seemed to mind.
After all, as former intelligence chief (and liar to Congress ) James Clapper has asserted on television, "Russians are almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor." Worse, I may have already been co-opted and penetrated without even knowing it! As Clapper said recently on CNN when asked if Trump could be "a Russian asset," it is "a possibility, and I would add to that a caveat, whether witting or unwitting."
Unwitting!
So you can be an unwitting traitor?
Infected with Russian mind-control, like a zombie?
Yes. As mainstream media have argued repeatedly and quite explicitly.
Consider the stunning set of short films on The New York Times op-ed webpages titled " Operation Infektion: How Russia Perfected the Art of War ".
Over a sinister animation of black and white human cells being penetrated by bright red virus particles, the narration begins: "The thing about a virus is it doesn't destroy you head-on. Instead, it brings you down -- from the inside. Turning your own cells into enemies."
This incredible film is well worth watching to see how ill our body politic has become. As the red virus invades cell after cell, the narration goes on: "This story is about a virus -- a virus created five decades ago by a government, to slowly and methodically poison its enemies. But it's not a biological virus, it's more like a political one. And chances are, you've already been infected."
Animation cuts abruptly to Donald Trump.
The evil genius behind this virus? The Leonid Brezhnev-era KGB. (Really! I'm not making this up!)
"If you feel like you don't know who to trust anymore, this might be the thing that's making you feel that way," the narrator says, as the animation shows more and more black and white cells hopelessly succumbing to the red virus -- reds spreading everywhere, bringing us down from within, as it were. "If you feel exhausted by the news, this could be why. And if you're sick of it all and you just want to stop caring, then we really need to talk."
Animation cuts to a human eye, now filled like a zombie's with infected red sclera.
Amazing. I thought I was exhausted by the news and sick of it all because the journalists have all become exhausting and sickening; because whenever I turn on NPR or open up The New York Times , I feel like Jennifer Connelly in "A Beautiful Mind"when she walks into the garage and discovers it's a shrine to paranoid schizophrenia, and realizes with horror that Russell Crowe's back home with the baby about to give it a bath.
But no. "Chances are," I'm already infected by a KGB virus. Cut to face of Donald Trump.
Makes sense. After all, I have personally had "more than 100 contacts with Russian nationals." I guess I better turn myself in. (For anti-viral treatments? Re-education? A struggle session?)
Apr 08, 2019 | economistsview.typepad.com
kurt -> Christopher H.... , March 26, 2019 at 03:28 PM
Barr says Mueller didn't find an "Direct" coordination with "Russian Government officials." That leaves all sorts of room for indirect (through wiki, through Kislyck, through the NRA... etc.). This is wildly different than what you claim here - and your claim is not something you know. I suppose it could be true, but you are believing the guy that covered up the Iran Contra affair and got Oliver North off for his numerous, admitted crimes.JohnH -> kurt... , March 26, 2019 at 05:06 PMIF what you say is true, please explain -
1. Why did Trump, his family and his closest associates lie 100's of times about over 100 contacts with known assets of the GRU?
2. If Mueller "completely and totally exonerated" Trump, why are Trump's lawyers and McConnell keeping the report from the public.
3. How is it possible that Barr thoroughly read and absorbed the report and it's evidence in reportedly only 9 hours including the time it took him to draft his heavily hedged 4 page memo?
4. Why did Mueller go out of his way to nail Manafort for lying about Russian contacts if it was immaterial - he was going to jail for the rest of his life regardless?
5. Why do you discount the publicly available evidence that Trump obstructed justice? Is it okay with you that Trump did it just because it was in the open?
6. Do you care that Russia clearly attempted to influence (and likely did) the 2016 election?kurt is grasping at straws...JohnH -> JohnH... , March 26, 2019 at 05:44 PMIf there was a 'there' there, it would have been leaked weeks or months ago. Democrats are desperate...kurt -> JohnH... , March 27, 2019 at 10:06 AMLeaked by whom? And when when the report is only a few days off.JohnH -> kurt... , March 27, 2019 at 12:14 PMLeaked by someone with inside knowledge and thinks that justice has not been served...happens all the time.kurt -> JohnH... , March 27, 2019 at 10:09 AMExactly what is kurt think Trump is guilty of?
Books have written about Trump criminality, but for some strange reason, Democrats have not been interested in pursuing those crimes. They were only interested in Hillary's preposterous allegation that Trump colluded with Putin.
Perhaps because Trump's other crimes are similar to Democratic corruption...and he may have the goods on folks like Schumer? Mutual assured destruction to pursue crimes that committed over the past 50 years?
can't answer a single question. par for the course.Christopher H. said in reply to kurt... , March 27, 2019 at 08:25 AM"but you are believing the guy that covered up the Iran Contra affair and got Oliver North off for his numerous, admitted crimes."kurt -> Christopher H.... , March 27, 2019 at 10:07 AMI'm believing Mueller who worked on this for 20 months with his team after Comey worked on in from 2016 until he was fired.
Thought you placed your faith in Mueller? Sorry for your loss.
Of course it won't stop you from accusing everyone with being Russian bots.
You have no idea what Mueller said. Only Barr's summary. Which is full of hedge language - which indicates cover up. If it exonerates Trump, why is McConnell blocking the release and back to "but her emails" and Steele Dossier?JohnH -> kurt... , March 27, 2019 at 05:51 PMAmong kurt's questions, he carefully avoids the central question: Did Trump conspire with the Russian government to subvert and American election and help Trump win? Hillary thought so. kurt assured us repeatedly that Trump's guilt was a proven fact, a slam dunk prosecution. Democrats and their media talked about it incessantly for three years, crowding out interest in domestic corruption and other avenues of prosecution...and allowing Democrats flog that issue and avoid developing a coherent message and a popular program to address major problems.Julio -> JohnH... , March 28, 2019 at 07:24 PMThey were all wrong about the central charge that Trump conspired with Putin to subvert the election. Mueller did not find enough evidence to indict or prosecute. That was...repeat, that was Mueller's charge. And he answered that central question, embarrassing and humiliating Democrats and the media that flogged that fake news for three years.
Sure, Trump has not been exonerated on everything. Sure, investigations should continue, focusing on those that have a high probability of finding corruption and criminality...something that Democrats have avoided for years, despite books being written on the subject.
The key question is: why have Democrats avoided investigating Trump on all those areas that could yield prosecution for domestic corruption and criminality and instead focus almost exclusively on a wild goose chase?
Not quite: Democrats have not "avoided" investigating Trump. They had no power to subpoena until now.JohnH -> Julio ... , March 29, 2019 at 07:47 AMBut they definitely talked a lot about Muller, when in fact they should have been talking about corruption and nepotism.
It's true. Democrats had had no subpoena power, but there is always the court of public opinion. Books have been written about Trump's corruption, his sleazy and likely criminal business behavior. Hillary refused to raise the issue much if at all. Pelosi and Schumer avoided anything but Putin...probably because Trump has the goods on them. They needed to fabricate a preposterous charge that wouldn't blow back against them.kurt -> JohnH... , April 03, 2019 at 10:05 AMRead the one and only footnote on Barr's "report." Then get back to me. It is doing all the work and it is obviously a coverup. If you define collusion as only tacit agreement between only government actors, then every spy that has ever been jailed or executed is not guilty.Plp -> kurt... , March 27, 2019 at 07:17 AMSome one ought subvert uncle's global hegemonic powerIf not the patriotic but humanitarian majority domestic electorate
It will have to be who or what ?
foreign strategic rivals
Apr 08, 2019 | consortiumnews.com
Russia-gate's Successor Gambit – Consortiumnews By James Howard Kunstler
Clusterfuck NationHaving disgraced themselves with full immersion in the barren Russia-gate "narrative," the Resistance is now tripling down on Russia-gate's successor gambit: obstruction of justice where there was no crime in the first place. What exactly was that bit of mischief Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller inserted in his final report, saying that " while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him?"
It's this simple: prosecutors are charged with finding crimes. If there is insufficient evidence to bring a case, then that is the end of the matter. Prosecutors, special or otherwise, are not authorized to offer hypothetical accounts where they can't bring a criminal case. But Mueller produced a brief of arguments pro-and-con about obstruction for others to decide upon. In doing that, he was out of order, and maliciously so.
Trump and Barr on Feb. 14, 2019. (Wikimedia Commons)
Of course, Attorney General William Barr took up the offer and declared the case closed, as he properly should where the prosecutor could not conclude that a crime was committed. One hopes that the AG also instructed Mueller and his staff to shut the f up vis-à-vis further ex post facto "anonymous source" speculation in the news media. But, of course, the Mueller staff -- which inexplicably included lawyers who worked for the Clinton Foundation and the Democratic National Committee -- at once started insinuating to New York Times reporters that the full report would contain an arsenal of bombshells reigniting enough suspicion to fuel several congressional committee investigations.
The objective apparently is to keep President Donald Trump burdened, hobbled, and disabled for the remainder of his term, and especially in preparation for the 2020 election against whomever emerges from the crowd of lightweights and geriatric cases now roistering through the primary states. It also leaves the door open for the Resistance to prosecute an impeachment case, since that is a political matter, not a law enforcement action.
Setting up the AG
This blog is not associated with any court other than public opinion, and I am free to hypothesize on the meaning of Mueller's curious gambit, so here goes: Barr, long before being considered for his current job, published his opinion that there was no case for obstruction of justice in the Russia-gate affair. By punting the decision to Barr, Mueller sets up the AG for being accused of prejudice in the matter -- and, more to the point, has managed to generate a new brushfire in the press.
Barr could see this coming from a thousand miles away. I suspect he's pissed off about being set up like this. I suspect further that he knows this brushfire is intended to produce a smokescreen to obscure the rash of grand jury referrals coming down in the weeks and months ahead against the many government employees who concocted the Russia-gate scandal. Personally, I think Mueller himself deserves to be in that roundup for destroying evidence (the Strzok / Page cell phones) and for malicious prosecution against General Michael Flynn , among other things.
The reason Mueller did not bring an obstruction-of-justice charge against Trump is that the evidence didn't support it. He didn't have a case. In a trial -- say, after Trump was impeached or left office -- the discovery process could bring to light evidence that might embarrass and even incriminate Mueller and his staff, and cast further opprobrium on the federal justice agencies. For instance: why did Mueller drag out his inquiry for two years when he must have known by at least the summer of 2017 that the Steele dossier was a fraud perpetrated by the Clinton campaign?
Now the propaganda crusade has been initiated to defame Barr. The idiots running the budding new congressional inquiries are going to pile on him, with the help of the news media. Though he is said to be an "old friend" of Robert Mueller's, I believe they have become adversaries, perhaps even enemies. Mueller is not in a position of strength in this battle. He has now officially exited the stage as his mandate expires, so he has no standing to oppose further consequences in the aftermath of Russia-gate. What remains is a dastardly and seditious hoax as yet un-adjudicated and an evidence trail a mile wide, and no amount of jumping up and down crying "woo woo woo" by Democratic lawmakers Jerrold Nadler, Maxine Waters, and Adam Schiff is going to derail that choo-choo train a'chuggin' down the tracks.
James Howard Kunstler is author of "The Geography of Nowhere," which he says he wrote "Because I believe a lot of people share my feelings about the tragic landscape of highway strips, parking lots, housing tracts, mega-malls, junked cities, and ravaged countryside that makes up the everyday environment where most Americans live and work." He has written several other works of nonfiction and fiction. Read more about him here . This article first appeared on his blog, ClusterfuckNation .
.
KiwiAntz , April 8, 2019 at 18:00
If at first you don't succeed, "try, try, try again? The Resistance, unlike Neo in the Matrix, fails to take the red pill to wake up too real life, in the present & continues to swallow the blue pill to stay in the dreamworld of fake realities & Hoax conspiracies? So the Kabuki theatre must continue, the too big to fail lie of Russiagate can't be allowed to die? The damage this fake conspiracy, collusion delusion is having on the US can't be quantified? The fools who continue to promote this narrative are now tripling down in a state of denial that defies belief! The Mainstream Media is now totally dead & buried, no one believes their lies anymore & people are heading to alt media in droves! Politicians & Politics, especially left wing, are objects of derision & contempt, & although Trump may be innocent, the fact remains that he is a terrible President & a dangerous idiot?? You only need to look at his staff with warmongering imbeciles like Pompeo, Bolton & their kind who are leading America to War, in which their win ratio is zero? The lunatic Russiagate narrative has served & achieved part of its goals & purposes? To hamstrung Trump & paralyse his administration & get him impeached via a coup d'état then to destroy & poison Russian detente,civility & relations? It failed on one level to obtain Trumps removal but succeeded in destroying Russian relations, the most dangerous gambit ever, to taut & ridicule a Nuclear Superpower? But that's the actions of a dying US Empire in decline, arrogance, ignorance, hubris & self delusion, all aptly supported by a corrupt propagandist fourth estate, the American Fakestream Media?
JonnyJames , April 8, 2019 at 17:06
Once again, we see this is all a rather ridiculous charade to distract the public. As Bill Binney & the VIPS pointed out on this website & others: if there was any evidence of "Russian collusion" the NSA would have had it immediately. After two wasted years of distractions & nonsense, of course there is NO evidence.
The irrational reactions of partisan hypocrites are truly bizarre, we need to have a social psychologist explain the madness of crowd mentality here. What's more, so many people STILL fail to acknowledge (or are paid not to) that there is NO evidence. They say wait and see (We're still waiting for Saddam's WMD etc) Tragically humorous
You want REAL collusion and high crimes?: The Trump regime virtually takes orders verbatim on foreign policy from Benjamin Nuttyahoo. However, Israeli diktats enjoy the overwhelming support of both "parties" in Congress and the servile media cartel. Pointing out these extremely obvious & highly problematic facts is not allowed. One cannot talk about Israeli lobby groups not having to register as foreign agents. One cannot talk about indisputable facts with a mountain of evidence in plain sight.
In the words of Rod Serling: "You have entered the Twilight Zone"
Jeff Harrison , April 8, 2019 at 13:20
I believe that the term prosecutor should officially be retired and the more accurate term persecutor should be substituted in its place. The frequency of persecutorial misconduct at all levels of the judicial system makes a mockery of the concept of justice.
JonnyJames , April 8, 2019 at 17:17
Yes indeed.
Justice and "the rule of law" is made a mockery of every day: Dick Cheney/Bush Jr.. Tony Blair & other war criminals walk free. Instead of being in prison for life, they are lavished with praise from media personalities & make big money.
After committing "the largest financial crimes in history, by orders of magnitude", (prof. William K. Black) NOT ONE senior banker has been indicted, let alone prosecuted. Jamie Dimon, for example, is in the media regularly and depicted as a brilliant & great man.Congress & the Exec. routinely ignore & violate the law, including the US constitution & Bill of Rights. At this point when any politician says the words "democracy" & "the rule of law" I sneer & laugh with contempt
Skip Scott , April 8, 2019 at 12:55
It will be interesting to see if the DoJ really does follow up on the RussiaGate scam and attempt to indict the people who created it. Would they really dare to prosecute members of our so-called "intelligence" community? What about Schumer's "six ways from Sunday"?
mike k , April 8, 2019 at 15:26
Schumer is just a little Mafia toady.
JDC , April 8, 2019 at 12:38
The discovery process in any trial of Trump would have also perhaps brought to light that Mueller's conclusion, as relayed by Barr's summary, that Russia hacked the DNC and delivered the documents to Wikileaks has no basis in fact, given what Bill Binney and the other VIPS have shown.
hetro , April 8, 2019 at 12:31
I think what needs clarifying here is the difference between "does not conclude the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him" and the more specific "obstruction of justice" accusation. For me, at least, this is confusing. Trump may well have committed a crime by ordering Cohen to pay off Stormy Daniels, or in other ways similar to the financial sleaze revealed with his associates–but is this not separate from "obstruction of justice"? Further, it would seem to most ordinary mortals Mueller would be embarrassed after more than two years to come up with . . . nothing? So he gives us not guilty of "collusion" and hints at something else, taking the heat off himself (or attempting to)?
Blessthebeasts , April 8, 2019 at 12:23
Is there no end to the perversity of these people?
Apr 07, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Rep. Devin Nunes, op-ed via The Washington Examiner,
As the Russia collusion hoax hurtles toward its demise, it's important to consider how this destructive information operation rampaged through vital American institutions for more than two years , and what can be done to stop such a damaging episode from recurring.
While the hoax was fueled by a wide array of false accusations, misleading leaks of ostensibly classified information, and bad-faith investigative actions by government officials, one vital element was indispensable to the overall operation: the Steele dossier.
<Funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democrat National Committee, which hid their payments from disclosure by funneling them through the law firm Perkins Coie, the dossier was a collection of false and often absurd accusations of collusion between Trump associates and Russian officials. These allegations, which relied heavily on Russian sources cultivated by Christopher Steele, were spoon-fed to Trump opponents in the U.S. government, including officials in law enforcement and intelligence.
The efforts to feed the dossier's allegations into top levels of the U.S. government, particularly intelligence agencies, were championed by Steele, Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson, and various intermediaries. These allegations were given directly to the FBI and Justice Department, while similar allegations were fed into the State Department by long-time Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal.
Their efforts were remarkably effective. Officials within the FBI and DOJ, whether knowingly or unintentionally, provided essential support to the hoax conspirators, bypassing normal procedures and steering the information away from those who would view it critically. The dossier soon metastasized within the government, was cloaked in secrecy, and evaded serious scrutiny.
High-ranking officials such as then-FBI general counsel James Baker and then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr were among those whose actions advanced the hoax. Ohr, one of the most senior officials within the DOJ, took the unprecedented step of providing to Steele a back door into the FBI investigation. This enabled the former British spy to continue to feed information to investigators, even though he had been terminated by the FBI for leaking to the press and was no longer a valid source. Even worse, Ohr directly briefed Andrew Weissmann and Zainab Ahmad, two DOJ officials who were later assigned to special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. In short, the investigation was marked by glaring irregularities that would normally be deemed intolerable.
According to Ohr's congressional testimony, he told top-level FBI officials as early as August or September 2016 that Steele was biased against Trump, that Steele's work was connected to the Clinton campaign, and that Steele's material was of questionable reliability. Steele himself confirmed that last point in a British court case in which he acknowledged his allegations included unverified information. Yet even after this revelation, intelligence leaders continued to cite the Steele dossier in applications to renew the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.
It is astonishing that intelligence leaders did not immediately recognize they were being manipulated in an information operation or understand the danger that the dossier could contain deliberate disinformation from Steele's Russian sources . In fact, it is impossible to believe in light of everything we now know about the FBI's conduct of this investigation, including the astounding level of anti-Trump animus shown by high-level FBI figures like Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, as well as the inspector general's discovery of a shocking number of leaks by FBI officials.
It's now clear that top intelligence officials were perfectly well aware of the dubiousness of the dossier, but they embraced it anyway because it justified actions they wanted to take - turning the full force of our intelligence agencies first against a political candidate and then against a sitting president.
The hoax itself was a gift to our nation's adversaries, most notably Russia. The abuse of intelligence for political purposes is insidious in any democracy. It undermines trust in democratic institutions, and it damages the reputation of the brave men and women who are working to keep us safe. This unethical conduct has had major repercussions on America's body politic, creating a yearslong political crisis whose full effects remain to be seen.
Having extensively investigated this abuse, House Intelligence Committee Republicans will soon be submitting criminal referrals on numerous individuals involved in these matters.
These people must be held to account to prevent similar abuses from occurring in the future. The men and women of our intelligence community perform an essential service defending American national security, and their ability to carry out their mission cannot be compromised by biased actors who seek to transform the intelligence agencies into weapons of political warfare.
-320 for Money , 2 hours ago link
Real Estate Guru , 2 hours ago linkNice group shot of the three stooges. The most dishonest, disloyal, dipshitted psychopaths a country should never have to endure.
I certainly do not know the cure for all the nations ills, but these 3 ***** could do more by dying than they ever did by living.
Fall on your swords swine, save a smidgen of face, you are a disgrace.
Jackprong , 4 hours ago linkAll 3 of them have been confirmed to by lying through their teeth by their own people. They are all going down. We just need the Mueller report to come out to get the ball rolling. Can't do it before the report comes out as they would call it obstruction. So we wait another 9 days, or less, according to AG Barr.
papageorgeo , 5 hours ago linkCould be, PapaGeorge. Maybe this time it's different because it could be argued that the TPTB don't want Trump pulling the same thing on the DNC--and get away with it like the Usual Suspects just did. In legal terms, a bar has been set. BARR? Get it? Buwhahahahahahahahahha!!!
The likelihood of anyone being convicted let alone indicted is rather slim. Why? These people know where too many dead bodies are buried. There is an understanding in their circles that certain individuals on both sides of the spectrum are bulletproof. You can't run such a large criminal enterprise without it being this way. Why else would Mueller not talk to Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Steele, the heads of Fusion GPS, the Russian lawyer who met with Trump Jr., the promoter who set that up, etc., etc.
This whole ordeal was meant to die an uneventful death. It's unlikely Barr will act on any recommendations from Nunes becuase it would start a partisan war that would snare GOP never Trumpers too. It's how Washington works. Like Carlin says - it's a great big club and you ain't in it. They are, and they don't do time
Fred box , 5 hours ago linkThe likelihood of anyone being convicted let alone indicted is rather slim. Why? These people know where too many dead bodies are buried.
There is an understanding in their circles that certain individuals on both sides of the spectrum are bulletproof. You can't run such a large criminal enterprise without it being this way. Why else would Mueller not talk to Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Steele, the heads of Fusion GPS, the Russian lawyer who met with Trump Jr., the promoter who set that up, etc., etc.
This whole ordeal was meant to die an uneventful death. It's unlikely Barr will act on any recommendations from Nunes becuase it would start a partisan war that would snare GOP never Trumpers too. It's how Washington works. Like Carlin says - it's a great big club and you ain't in it. They are, and they don't do time.
<<<House Intelligence Committee Republicans will soon be submitting criminal referrals on numerous individuals involved in these matters<<< We shall see now, won't we? I won't believe this, till I see It!
Apr 07, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
Muellergate & The Discreet Lies Of The Bourgeoisie
by Tyler Durden Sat, 04/06/2019 - 19:00 152 SHARES Via CraigMurray.co.uk,
This cartoon seems to me very apposite...
The capacity of the mainstream media repeatedly to promote the myth that Russia caused Clinton's defeat, while never mentioning what the information was that had been so damaging to Hillary, should be alarming to anybody under the illusion that we have a working "free media".
There are literally hundreds of thousands of mainstream media articles and broadcasts, from every single one of the very biggest names in the Western media, which were predicated on the complete nonsense that Russia had conspired to install Donald Trump as President of the United States.
I genuinely have never quite understood whether the journalists who wrote this guff believed it, whether they were cynically pumping out propaganda and taking their pay cheque, or whether they just did their "job" and chose to avoid asking themselves whether they were producing truth or lies.
I suspect the answer varies from journalist to journalist. At the Guardian, for example, I get the impression that Carole Cadwalladr is sufficiently divorced from reality to believe all that she writes. Having done a very good job in investigating the nasty right wing British Establishment tool that was Cambridge Analytica, Cadwalladr became deluded by her own fame and self-importance and decided that her discovery was the key to understanding all of world politics. In her head it explained all the disappointments of Clintonites and Blairites everywhere. She is not so high-minded however as to have refused the blandishments of the Integrity Initiative.
Luke Harding is in a different category. Harding has become so malleable a tool of the security services it is impossible to believe he is not willingly being used. It would be embarrassing to have written a bestseller called "Collusion", the entire premiss for which has now been disproven, had Harding not made so much money out of it.
Harding's interview with Aaron Mate of The Real News was a truly enlightening moment. The august elite of the mainstream media virtually never meet anybody who subjects their narrative to critical intellectual scrutiny. Harding's utter inability to deal with unanticipated scepticism descends from hilarious to toe-curlingly embarrassing.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/zvwcPOn5Iws
In general, since the Mueller report confirmed that $50 million worth of investigation had been unable to uncover any evidence of Russiagate collusion, the media has been astonishingly unrepentant about the absolute rubbish they have been churning out for years.
Harding and the Guardian's story about Manafort repeatedly calling on Assange in the Ecuador Embassy is one of the most blatant and malicious fabrications in modern media history. It has been widely ridiculed, no evidence of any kind has ever been produced to substantiate it, and the story has been repeatedly edited on the Guardian website to introduce further qualifications and acknowledgements of dubious attribution, not present as originally published. But still neither Editor Katherine Viner nor author Luke Harding has either retracted or apologised, something which calls the fundamental honesty of both into question.
Manafort is now in prison, because as with many others interviewed, the Mueller investigation found he had been involved in several incidences of wrongdoing. Right up until Mueller finalised his report, media articles and broadcasts repeatedly, again and again and again every single day, presented these convictions as proving that there had been collusion with Russia. The media very seldom pointed out that none of the convictions related to collusion. In fact for the most part they related to totally extraneous events, like unrelated tax frauds or Trump's hush-money to (very All-American) prostitutes. The "Russians" that Manafort was convicted of lobbying for without declaration, were Ukrainian and the offences occurred ten years ago and had no connection to Trump of any kind. Rather similarly the lies of which Roger Stone stands accused relate to his invention, for personal gain, of a non-existent relationship with Wikileaks.
The truth is that, if proper and detailed investigation were done into any group of wealthy politicos in Washington, numerous crimes would be uncovered, especially in the fields of tax and lobbying. Rich political operatives are very sleazy. This is hardly news, and if those around Clinton had been investigated there would be just as many convictions and of similar kinds. it is a pity there is not more of this type of work, all the time. But the Russophobic motive behind the Mueller Inquiry was not forwarded by any of the evidence obtained.
My analysis of the Steele dossier, written before I was aware that Sergei Skripal probably had a hand in it, has stood the test of time very well. It is a confection of fantasy concocted for money by a charlatan.
We should not forget at this stage to mention the unfortunate political prisoner Maria Butina, whose offence is to be Russian and very marginally involved in American politics at the moment when there was a massive witchhunt for Russian spies in progress, that makes The Crucible look like a study in calm rationality. Ms Butina was attempting to make her way in the US political world, no doubt, and she had at least one patron in Moscow who was assisting her with a view to increasing their own political influence. But nothing Butina did was covert or sinister. Her efforts to win favour within the NRA were notable chiefly because of the irony that the NRA has been historically responsible for many more American deaths than Russia.
Any narrative of which the Establishment does not approve is decried as conspiracy theory. Yet the "Russiagate" conspiracy theory – which truly is Fake News – has been promoted massively by the entire weight of western corporate and state media. "Russiagate", a breathtaking plot in which Russia and a high profile US TV personality collude together to take control of the most militarily powerful country in the world, knocks "The Manchurian Candidate" into a cocked hat. A Google "news search" restricts results to mainstream media outlets. Such a search for the term "Russiagate" brings 230,000 results. That is almost a quarter of a million incidents of the mainstream media not only reporting the fake "Russiagate" story, but specifically using that term to describe it.
Compare that with a story which is not an outlandish fake conspiracy theory, but a very real conspiracy.
If, by contrast, you do a Google "news search" for the term "Integrity Initiative", the UK government's covert multi million pound programme to pay senior mainstream media journalists to pump out anti-Russian propaganda worldwide, you only get one eighth of the results you get for "Russiagate". Because the mainstream media have been enthusiastically promoting the fake conspiracy story, and deliberately suppressing the very real conspiracy in which many of their own luminaries are personally implicated.
Mar 27, 2019 | www.tabletmag.com
Originally from: System Fail – Tablet Magazine by Lee Smith
It will take weeks for the elite pundit class to unravel all the possible implications and subtexts embedded in Robert Mueller's final report on the charge that Donald Trump and his team colluded with Russia to fix the 2016 election. The right claims that the report exonerates Trump fully, while the left contends there are lots of nuggets in the full text of the final report that may point to obstruction of justice, if not collusion.But here's all you need to know about the special counsel probe:
First, after nearly two years, the special counsel found no credible evidence of collusion. It found no credible evidence of a plot to obstruct justice, to hide evidence of collusion. The entire collusion theory, which has formed the center of elite political discourse for over two years now, has been publicly and definitely proclaimed to be a hoax by the very person on whom news organizations and their chosen "experts" and "high-level sources" had so loudly and insistently pinned their daily, even hourly, hopes of redemption.
Mueller should have filed his report on May 18, 2017 -- the day after the special counsel started and he learned the FBI had opened an investigation on the sitting president of the United States because senior officials at the world's premier law enforcement agency thought Trump was a Russian spy. Based on what evidence? A dossier compiled by a former British spy, relying on second- and third-hand sources, paid for by the Clinton campaign .
Instead, the special counsel lasted 674 days, during which millions of people who believed Mueller was going to turn up conclusive evidence of Trump's devious conspiracies with the Kremlin have become wrapped up in a collective hallucination that has destroyed the remaining credibility of the American press and the D.C. expert class whose authority they promote.
Mueller knew that he wasn't ever going to find "collusion" or anything like it because all the intercepts were right there on his desk. As it turned out, two of his prosecutors, including Mueller's so-called "pit bull," Andrew Weissman, had been briefed on the Steele dossier prior to the 2016 election and were told that it came from the Clintons, and was likely a biased political document.
Weissman left, or was pushed out of, his employment with the special counsel a few weeks ago, after the arrival of a new attorney general, William Barr, who had deep experience in government, including stints at the Justice Department and the CIA. Knowing what we know now, here's what seems most likely to have just happened: Barr looked at the underlying documents on which Mueller's investigation was based. First, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's May 17, 2017, memo appointing the former FBI director to take supervision of the FBI's investigation of Trump. And more importantly, the Aug. 2, 2017, memo from Rosenstein outlining the scope of the investigation.
Among the scope memo's few unredacted lines are allegations regarding Paul Manafort's "colluding with Russian government officials to interfere with the 2016 elections." The only known source for those allegations is the Steele dossier. What that strongly suggests is that under those redactions are other fabricated allegations that were also drawn from the Clinton-funded smear campaign -- a dirty-tricks operation that was led by Fusion GPS founder and conspiracy theorist Glenn Simpson.
And now, after all the Saturday Night Live skits, the obscenity-riddled Bill Maher and Stephen Colbert routines, the half a million news stories and tens of millions of tweets all foretelling the end of Trump, the comedians and the adult authority figures are exposed as hoaxsters, or worse, based on evidence that was always transparently phony.
The Mueller report is in. But the abuse of power that the special counsel embodied is a deadly cancer on American democracy. Two years of investigations have left families in ruins, stripping them of their savings, their homes, threatening their liberty, and dragging their names through the mud. The investigation of the century was partly based on the possibility that Michael Flynn, a combat veteran who served his country for more than three decades, might be a Russian spy -- because of a dinner he once attended in Moscow, and because as incoming national security adviser he spoke to the Russian ambassador to Washington. What rot.
While the length of Mueller's investigative process may have protected the FBI from the president's immediate rage, the release of the report has exposed the deep corruption and personal narcissism of the press and its professional networks of "experts" and "sources." Instead of providing medicine, the press chose instead to spread the disease through a body that was already badly weakened by the advent of "free" digital media . Only, it wasn't free .
* * *
The media criticism of the media's performance covering Russiagate is misleadingly anodyne -- OK, sure the press did a bad job, but to be fair there really was a lot of suspicious stuff going on and now let's all get back to doing our important work. But two years of false and misleading Russiagate coverage was not a mistake, or a symptom of lax fact-checking.
Russiagate was an information operation from the beginning, in which dozens of individual reporters and institutions actively partnered with paid political operatives like Glenn Simpson and corrupt law enforcement and intelligence officials like former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and senior DOJ official Bruce Ohr to smear Trump and his circle, and then to topple him. None of what went on the last two years would have been possible without the press, an indispensable partner in the biggest political scandal in a generation.
The campaign was waged not in hidden corners of the internet, but rather by the country's most prestigious news organizations -- including, but not only, The New York Times , the Washington Post , CNN, and MSNBC. The farce that has passed for public discourse the last two years was fueled by a concerted effort of the media and the pundit class to obscure gaping holes in logic as well as law. And yet, they all appeared to be credible because the institutions sustaining them are credible .
... ... ...
Americans still want and need accurate information on which to base their decisions about their own lives and the path that the country should take. But neither the legacy media nor the expert class it sustains is likely to survive the post-dossier era in any recognizable form . For them, Russiagate is an extinction level event.
Lee Smith is the author of The Consequences of Syria .
Apr 01, 2019 | www.unz.com
Not since the witchcraft hysteria of the Middle Ages have we seen such a display of human idiocy, credulity and absurdist behavior. I refer, of course, to the two-year witch hunt directed against President Donald Trump which hopefully just concluded last week – provided that the Hillaryites, Democratic dopes and secret staters who fueled this mania don't manage to keep the pot boiling.
This column has said from Day 1 that claims Trump was somehow a Russian agent were absurd in the extreme. So too charges that Moscow had somehow rigged US elections. Nonsense. We know it's the US that helps rig elections around the globe, not those bumbling Russians who can't afford the big bribes such nefarious activity requires.
What Muller found after he turned over the big rock was a bevy of slithering, slimy creatures, shyster lawyers, and sleazes that are normally part of New York's land development industry. No surprise at all that they surrounded developer Trump. Son-in-law Jared Kushner hails from this same milieu. The Kushners are pajama-party buddies with Israel's leader, Benjamin Netanyahu.
Now that the Muller investigation found no collusion between the Trump camp and the Kremlin, we Americans owe a great big apology to Vladimir Putin for all the slander he has suffered. Too bad he can't sue the legions of liars and propagandists who heaped abuse on him and, incidentally, pushed the US and Russia to the edge of war.
People who swallowed these absurdist claims really should question their own grasp of reality. Those who believed that the evil Kremlin was manipulating votes in Alabama or Missouri would make good candidates for Scientology or the John Birch Society.
They were the simple fools. Worse, were the propagandists who promoted the disgusting Steele dossier, a farrago of lies concocted by British intelligence and apparently promoted by the late John McCain and Trump-hating TV networks. One senses Hillary Clinton's hand in all this. Hell indeed hath no fury like a woman scorned.
It's so laughably ironic that while the witch hunt sought a non-existent Kremlin master manipulator, the real foreign string-puller was sitting in the White House Oval office chortling away: Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and, behind him, the moneybags patron of Trump and Netanyahu, American billionaire gambling mogul, Sheldon Adelson, the godfather of Greater Israel.
The three amigos had just pulled off one of the most outrageous violations of international law by blessing Israel's annexation of the highly strategic Golan Heights that Israel had seized in the 1973 Arab-Israeli War. This usurpation was so egregious that all 14 members of the UN Security Council condemned it. Even usually wimpy Canada blasted the US.
Giving Golan to Israel means it has permanently secured new water sources from the Mount Hermon range, artillery and electronic intelligence positions overlooking Damascus, and the launching pad for new Israeli land expansion into Lebanon and Syria. Israel is said to be preparing for a new war against Lebanon, Syria and Gaza.
In contrast to this cynical business over Golan, the Trump administration is still hitting Russia with heavy sanctions over Moscow's re-occupation of Crimea, a strategic peninsula that was Russian for over 300 years. So Israel can grab Golan but Russia must vacate Crimea. The logic of sleazy politics.
We also learned last week that according to State Secretary Mike Pompeo, Trump might have been sent by us by God, like ancient Israel's Queen Esther, to defend Israel from the wicked Persians. Up to a quarter of Americans, and particularly Bible Belt voters, believe such crazy nonsense. For them, Trump is a heroic Crusading Christian warrior.
This is as nutty as Trump being a Commie Manchurian candidate. We seem to be living in an era of absurdity and medieval superstition. No wonder so many nations around the globe fear us. We too often look like militant Scientologists with nuclear weapons.
Fortunately, the cool, calm, collected Vladimir Putin remains in charge of the other side in spite of our best efforts to overthrow or provoke him.
Feb 03, 2017 | consortiumnews.com
A Reprise of the Iraq-WMD Fiasco? February 3, 2017 • 39 Comments
Exclusive: Official Washington's new "group think" – accepting evidence-free charges that Russia "hacked the U.S. election" – has troubling parallels to the Iraq-WMD certainty, often from the same people, writes James W Carden.
The controversy over Russia's alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election shows no sign of letting up. A bipartisan group of U.S. senators recently introduced legislation that would impose sanctions on Russia in retaliation for its acts of "cyber intrusions."At a press event in Washington on Tuesday, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, called Election Day 2016 "a day that will live in cyber infamy." Previously, Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, called the Russian hacks of the Democratic National Committee "an act of war," while Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, has claimed that there is near unanimity among senators regarding Russia's culpability.
Despite all this, the question of who exactly is responsible for the providing WikiLeaks with the emails of high Democratic Party officials does not lend itself to easy answers. And yet, for months, despite the lack of publicly disclosed evidence, the media, like these senators, have been as one: Vladimir Putin's Russia is responsible.
Interestingly, the same neoconservative/center-left alliance which endorsed George W. Bush's case for war with Iraq is pretty much the same neoconservative/center-left alliance that is now, all these years later, braying for confrontation with Russia. It's largely the same cast of characters reading from the Iraq-war era playbook.
It's worth recalling Tony Judt's observation in September 2006 that "those centrist voices that bayed most insistently for blood in the prelude to the Iraq war are today the most confident when asserting their monopoly of insight into world affairs."
While that was true then, it is perhaps even more so the case today.
The prevailing sentiment of the media establishment during the months prior to the disastrous March 2003 invasion of Iraq was that of certainty: George Tenet's now infamous assurance to President Bush, that the case against Iraq was a "slam drunk," was essentially what major newspapers and television news outlets were telling the American people at the time. Iraq posed a threat to "the homeland," therefore Saddam "must go."
The Bush administration, in a move equal parts cynical and clever, engaged in what we would today call a "disinformation" campaign against its own citizens by planting false stories abroad, safe in the knowledge that these stories would "bleed over" and be picked up by the American press.
WMD 'Fake News'
The administration was able to launder what were essentially "fake news" stories, such as the aluminum tubes fabrication , by leaking to Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller of The New York Times. In September 2002, without an ounce of skepticism, Gordon and Miller regurgitated the claims of unnamed U.S. intelligence officials that Iraq "has sought to buy thousands of specially designed aluminum tubes intended as components of centrifuges to enrich uranium." Gordon and Miller faithfully relayed "the intelligence agencies' unanimous view that the type of tubes that Iraq has been seeking are used to make centrifuges."
By 2002, no one had any right to be surprised by what Bush and Cheney were up to; since at least 1898 (when the U.S. declared war on Spain under the pretense of the fabricated Hearst battle cry "Remember the Maine!") American governments have repeatedly lied in order to promote their agenda abroad. And in 2002-3, the media walked in lock step with yet another administration in pushing for an unnecessary and costly war.
Like The New York Times, The Washington Post also relentlessly pushed the administration's case for war with Iraq. According to the journalist Greg Mitchell , "By the Post 's own admission, in the months before the war, it ran more than 140 stories on its front page promoting the war." All this, while its editorial page assured readers that the evidence Colin Powell presented to the United Nations on Iraq's WMD program was "irrefutable." According to the Post, it would be "hard to imagine" how anyone could doubt the administration's case.
But the Post was hardly alone in its enthusiasm for Bush's war. Among the most prominent proponents of the Iraq war was The New Yorker's Jeffrey Goldberg , who, a full year prior to the invasion, set out to link Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. Writing for The New Yorker in March 2002, Goldberg retailed former CIA Director James Woolsey's opinion that "It would be a real shame if the C.I.A.'s substantial institutional hostility to Iraqi democratic resistance groups was keeping it from learning about Saddam's ties to Al Qaeda in northern Iraq."
Indeed, according to Goldberg , "The possibility that Saddam could supply weapons of mass destruction to anti-American terror groups is a powerful argument among advocates of regime change," while Saddam's "record of support for terrorist organizations, and the cruelty of his regime make him a threat that reaches far beyond the citizens of Iraq."
Writing in Slate in October 2002, Goldberg was of the opinion that "In five years . . . I believe that the coming invasion of Iraq will be remembered as an act of profound morality."
Likewise, The New Republic's Andrew Sullivan was certain that "we would find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. I have no doubt about that." Slate's Jacob Weisberg supported the invasion because he thought Saddam Hussein had WMD and he "thought there was a strong chance he'd use them against the United States."
Even after it was becoming clear that the war was a debacle, the neoconservative pundit Charles Krauthammer declared that the inability to find WMDs was "troubling" but "only because it means that the weapons remain unaccounted for and might be in the wrong hands. The idea that our inability to thus far find the weapons proves that the threat was phony and hyped is simply false."
Smearing Skeptics
Opponents of the war were regularly accused of unpatriotic disloyalty. Writing in National Review, the neoconservative writer David Frum accused anti-intervention conservatives of going "far, far beyond the advocacy of alternative strategies." According to Frum, "They deny and excuse terror. They espouse a potentially self-fulfilling defeatism. They publicize wild conspiracy theories. And some of them explicitly yearn for the victory of their nation's enemies."
Similarly, The New Republic's Jonathan Chait castigated anti-war liberals for turning against Bush. "Have Bush haters lost their minds?" asked Chait . "Certainly some have. Antipathy to Bush has, for example, led many liberals not only to believe the costs of the Iraq war outweigh the benefits but to refuse to acknowledge any benefits at all."
Yet of course we now know, thanks, in part, to a new book by former CIA analyst John Nixon, that everything the U.S. government thought it knew about Saddam Hussein was indeed wrong. Nixon, the CIA analyst who interrogated Hussein after his capture in December 2003, asks "Was Saddam worth removing from power?" "The answer," says Nixon, "must be no. Saddam was busy writing novels in 2003. He was no longer running the government."
It turns out that the skeptics were correct after all. And so the principal lesson the promoters of Bush and Cheney's war of choice should have learned is that blind certainty is the enemy of fair inquiry and nuance. The hubris that many in the mainstream media displayed in marginalizing liberal and conservative anti-war voices was to come back to haunt them. But not, alas, for too long.
A Dangerous Replay?
Today something eerily similar to the pre-war debate over Iraq is taking place regarding the allegations of Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election. Assurances from the intelligence community and from anonymous Obama administration "senior officials" about the existence of evidence is being treated as, well, actual evidence.
State Department spokesman John Kirby told CNN that he is "100% certain" of the role that Russia played in U.S. election. The administration's expressions of certainty are then uncritically echoed by the mainstream media. Skeptics are likewise written off, slandered as " Kremlin cheerleaders " or worse.
Unsurprisingly, The Washington Post is reviving its Bush-era role as principal publicist for the government's case. Yet in its haste to do the government's bidding, the Post has published two widely debunked stories relating to Russia (one on the scourge of Russian inspired "fake news", the other on a non-existent Russian hack of a Vermont electric utility) onto which the paper has had to append "editor's notes" to correct the original stories.
Yet, those misguided stories have not deterred the Post's opinion page from being equally aggressive in its depiction of Russian malfeasance. In late December, the Post published an op-ed by Rep. Adam Schiff and former Rep. Jane Harmon claiming "Russia's theft and strategic leaking of emails and documents from the Democratic Party and other officials present a challenge to the U.S. political system unlike anything we've experienced."
On Dec. 30, the Post editorial board chastised President-elect Trump for seeming to dismiss "a brazen and unprecedented attempt by a hostile power to covertly sway the outcome of a U.S. presidential election." The Post described Russia's actions as a "cyber-Pearl Harbor."
On Jan. 1, the neoconservative columnist Josh Rogin told readers that the recent announcement of sanctions against Russia "brought home a shocking realization that Russia is using hybrid warfare in an aggressive attempt to disrupt and undermine our democracy."
Meanwhile, many of the same voices who were among the loudest cheerleaders for the war in Iraq have also been reprising their Bush-era roles in vouching for the solidity of the government's case.
Jonathan Chait, now a columnist for New York magazine, is clearly convinced by what the government has thus far provided. "That Russia wanted Trump to win has been obvious for months," writes Chait.
"Of course it all came from the Russians, I'm sure it's all there in the intel," Charles Krauthammer told Fox News on Jan. 2. Krauthammer is certain.
And Andrew Sullivan is certain as to the motive. "Trump and Putin's bromance," Sullivan told MSNBC's Chris Matthews on Jan. 2, "has one goal this year: to destroy the European Union and to undermine democracy in Western Europe."
David Frum, writing in The Atlantic , believes Trump "owes his office in considerable part to illegal clandestine activities in his favor conducted by a hostile, foreign spy service."
Jacob Weisberg agrees, tweeting: "Russian covert action threw the election to Donald Trump. It's that simple." Back in 2008, Weisberg wrote that "the first thing I hope I've learned from this experience of being wrong about Iraq is to be less trusting of expert opinion and received wisdom." So much for that.
Foreign Special Interests
Another, equally remarkable similarity to the period of 2002-3 is the role foreign lobbyists have played in helping to whip up a war fever. As readers will no doubt recall, Ahmed Chalabi, leader of the Iraqi National Congress, which served, in effect as an Iraqi government-in-exile, worked hand in hand with the Washington lobbying firm Black, Kelly, Scruggs & Healey (BKSH) to sell Bush's war on television and on the op-ed pages of major American newspapers.
Chalabi was also a trusted source of Judy Miller of the Times, which, in an apology to its readers on May 26, 2004, wrote : "The most prominent of the anti-Saddam campaigners, Ahmad Chalabi, has been named as an occasional source in Times articles since at least 1991, and has introduced reporters to other exiles. He became a favorite of hard-liners within the Bush administration and a paid broker of information from Iraqi exiles." The pro-war lobbying of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee has also been exhaustively documented .
Though we do not know how widespread the practice has been as of yet, something similar is taking place today. Articles calling for confrontation with Russia over its alleged "hybrid war" with the West are appearing with increasing regularity . Perhaps the most egregious example of this newly popular genre appeared on Jan. 1 in Politico magazine. That essay, which claims, among many other things, that "we're in a war" with Russia comes courtesy of one Molly McKew.
McKew is seemingly qualified to make such a pronouncement because she, according to her bio on the Politico website, served as an "adviser to Georgian President Saakashvili's government from 2009-2013, and to former Moldovan Prime Minister Filat in 2014-2015." Seems reasonable enough. That is until one discovers that McKew is actually registered with the Department of Justice as a lobbyist for two anti-Russian political parties, Georgia's UMN and Moldova's PLDM.
Records show her work for the consulting firm Fianna Strategies frequently takes her to Capitol Hill to lobby U.S. Senate and Congressional staffers, as well as prominent U.S. journalists at The Washington Post and The New York Times, on behalf of her Georgian and Moldovan clients.
"The truth," writes McKew, "is that fighting a new Cold War would be in America's interest. Russia teaches us a very important lesson: losing an ideological war without a fight will ruin you as a nation. The fight is the American way." Or, put another way: the truth is that fighting a new Cold War would be in McKew's interest – but perhaps not America's.
While you wouldn't know it from the media coverage (or from reading deeply disingenuous pieces like McKew's) as things now stand, the case against Russia is far from certain. New developments are emerging almost daily. One of the latest is a report from the cyber-engineering company Wordfence, which concluded that "The IP addresses that DHS [Department of Homeland Security] provided may have been used for an attack by a state actor like Russia. But they don't appear to provide any association with Russia."
Indeed, according to Wordfence, "The malware sample is old, widely used and appears to be Ukrainian. It has no apparent relationship with Russian intelligence and it would be an indicator of compromise for any website."
On Jan. 4, BuzzFeed reported that, according to the DNC, the FBI never carried out a forensic examination on the email servers that were allegedly hacked by the Russian government. "The FBI," said DNC spokesman Eric Walker, "never requested access to the DNC's computer servers."
What the agency did do was rely on the findings of a private-sector, third-party vendor that was brought in by the DNC after the initial hack was discovered. In May, the company, Crowdstrike, determined that the hack was the work of the Russians. As one unnamed intelligence official told BuzzFeed, "CrowdStrike is pretty good. There's no reason to believe that anything that they have concluded is not accurate."
Perhaps not. Yet Crowdstrike is hardly a disinterested party when it comes to Russia. Crowdstrike's founder and chief technology officer, Dmitri Alperovitch , is also a senior fellow at the Washington think tank, The Atlantic Council, which has been at the forefront of escalating tensions with Russia.
As I reported in The Nation in early January , the connection between Alperovitch and the Atlantic Council is highly relevant given that the Atlantic Council is funded in part by the State Department, NATO, the governments of Latvia and Lithuania, the Ukrainian World Congress, and the Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk. In recent years, it has emerged as a leading voice calling for a new Cold War with Russia.
Time to Rethink the 'Group Think'
And given the rather thin nature of the declassified evidence provided by the Obama administration, might it be time to consider an alternative theory of the case? William Binney, a 36-year veteran of the National Security Agency and the man responsible for creating many of its collection systems, thinks so. Binney believes that the DNC emails were leaked, not hacked, writing that "it is puzzling why NSA cannot produce hard evidence implicating the Russian government and WikiLeaks. Unless we are dealing with a leak from an insider, not a hack."
None of this is to say, of course, that Russia did not and could not have attempted to influence the U.S. presidential election. The intelligence community may have intercepted damning evidence of the Russian government's culpability. The government's hesitation to provide the public with more convincing evidence may stem from an understandable and wholly appropriate desire to protect the intelligence community's sources and methods. But as it now stands the publicly available evidence is open to question.
But meanwhile the steady drumbeat of "blame Russia" is having an effect. According to a recent you.gov/Economist poll, 58 percent of Americans view Russia as "unfriendly/enemy" while also finding that 52 percent of Democrats believed Russia "tampered with vote tallies."
With Congress back in session, Armed Services Committee chairman John McCain is set to hold a series of hearings focusing on Russian malfeasance, and the steady drip-drip-drip of allegations regarding Trump and Putin is only serving to box in the new President when it comes to pursuing a much-needed detente with Russia.
It also does not appear that a congressional inquiry will start from scratch and critically examine the evidence. On Friday, two senators – Republican Lindsey Graham and Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse – announced a Senate Judiciary subcommittee investigation into Russian interference in elections in the U.S. and elsewhere. But they already seemed to have made up their minds about the conclusion: "Our goal is simple," the senators said in a joint statement "To the fullest extent possible we want to shine a light on Russian activities to undermine democracy."
So, before the next round of Cold War posturing commences, now might be the time to stop, take a deep breath and ask: Could the rush into a new Cold War with Russia be as disastrous and consequential – if not more so – as was the rush to war with Iraq nearly 15 years ago? We may, unfortunately, find out.
James W Carden is a contributing writer for The Nation and editor of The American Committee for East-West Accord's eastwestaccord.com. He previously served as an advisor on Russia to the Special Representative for Global Inter-governmental Affairs at the US State Department.
Mar 31, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
Taibbi: On Russiagate & America's Refusal To Face Why Trump Won
by Tyler Durden Sat, 03/30/2019 - 15:30 261 SHARES Authored by Matt Taibbi via RollingStone.com,
Faulty coverage of Donald Trump's 2016 campaign later made foreign espionage a more plausible explanation for his ascent to power
Last weekend, I published a book chapter criticizing the Russiagate narrative, claiming it was a years-long press error on the scale of the WMD affair heading into the Iraq war.
Obviously (and I said this in detail), the WMD fiasco had a far greater real-world impact, with hundreds of thousands of lives lost and trillions in treasure wasted. Still, I thought Russiagate would do more to damage the reputation of the national news media in the end.
A day after publishing that excerpt, a Attorney General William Barr sent his summary of the report to Congress, containing a quote filed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller : "[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
Suddenly, news articles appeared arguing people like myself and Glenn Greenwald of the Intercept were rushing to judgment , calling us bullies whose writings were intended to leave reporters "cowed" and likely to " back down from aggressive coverage of Trump ."
This was baffling. One of the most common criticisms of people like Greenwald, Michael Tracey, Aaron Mate, Rania Khalek, Max Blumenthal, Jordan Chariton and many others is that Russiagate "skeptics" - I hate that term, because it implies skepticism isn't normal and healthy in this job - were really secret Trump partisans, part of a "horseshoe" pact between far left and far right to focus attention on the minor foibles of the center instead of Trump's more serious misdeeds. Even I received this label, and I once wrote a book about Trump called Insane Clown President .
A typical social media complaint:
@mtaibbi and all his deplorable followers. The truth will come out and your premature celebrations are embarrassing.
It's irritating that I even have to address this, because my personal political views shouldn't have anything to do with how I cover anything. But just to get it out of the way: I'm no fan of Donald Trump .
I had a well-developed opinion about him long before the 2016 race started. I once interned for Trump's nemesis-biographer, the late, great muckraker Wayne Barrett . The birther campaign of 2011 was all I ever needed to make a voting decision about the man.
I started covering the last presidential race in 2015 just as I was finishing up a book about the death of Eric Garner called I Can't Breathe . Noting that a birther campaign started by "peripheral political curiosity and reality TV star Donald Trump" led to 41 percent of respondents in one poll believing Barack Obama was "not even American," I wrote:
If anyone could communicate the frustration black Americans felt over Stop-and-Frisk and other neo-vagrancy laws that made black people feel like they could be arrested anywhere, it should have been Barack Obama. He'd made it all the way to the White House and was still considered to be literally trespassing by a huge plurality of the population.
So I had no illusions about Trump. The Russia story bothered me for other reasons, mostly having to do with a general sense of the public being misled, and not even about Russia.
The problem lay with the precursor tale to Russiagate, i.e. how Trump even got to be president in the first place.
The 2016 campaign season brought to the surface awesome levels of political discontent. After the election, instead of wondering where that anger came from, most of the press quickly pivoted to a new tale about a Russian plot to attack our Democracy. This conveyed the impression that the election season we'd just lived through had been an aberration, thrown off the rails by an extraordinary espionage conspiracy between Trump and a cabal of evil foreigners.
This narrative contradicted everything I'd seen traveling across America in my two years of covering the campaign. The overwhelming theme of that race, long before anyone even thought about Russia, was voter rage at the entire political system.
The anger wasn't just on the Republican side, where Trump humiliated the Republicans' chosen $150 million contender , Jeb Bush (who got three delegates, or $50 million per delegate ). It was also evident on the Democratic side, where a self-proclaimed "Democratic Socialist" with little money and close to no institutional support became a surprise contender .
Because of a series of press misdiagnoses before the Russiagate stories even began, much of the American public was unprepared for news of a Trump win. A cloak-and-dagger election-fixing conspiracy therefore seemed more likely than it might have otherwise to large parts of the domestic news audience, because they hadn't been prepared for anything else that would make sense.
This was particularly true of upscale, urban, blue-leaning news consumers, who were not told to take the possibility of a Trump White House seriously.
Priority number-one of the political class after a vulgar, out-of-work game-show host conquered the White House should have been a long period of ruthless self-examination. This story delayed that for at least two years.
It wasn't even clear Trump whether or not wanted to win. Watching him on the trail, Trump at times went beyond seeming disinterested. There were periods where it looked like South Park's " Did I offend you? " thesis was true, and he was actively trying to lose, only the polls just wouldn't let him.
Forget about the gift the end of Russiagate might give Trump by allowing him to spend 2020 peeing from a great height on the national press corps. The more serious issue has to be the failure to face the reality of why he won last time, because we still haven't done that.
... ... ...
Trump, the billionaire, denounced us as the elitists in the room. He'd call us "bloodsuckers," "dishonest," and in one line that produced laughs considering who was saying it, " highly-paid ."
He also did something that I immediately recognized as brilliant (or diabolical, depending on how you look at it). He dared cameramen to turn their cameras to show the size of his crowds.
They usually wouldn't – hey, we don't work for the guy – which thrilled Trump, who would then say something to the effect of, "See! They're very dishonest people ." Audiences would turn toward us, and boo and hiss, and even throw little bits of paper and other things our way. This was unpleasant, but it was hard not to see its effectiveness: he'd re-imagined the lifeless, poll-tested format of the stump speech, turning it into menacing, personal, WWE-style theater.
Trump was gunning for votes in both parties. The core story he told on the stump was one of system-wide corruption, in which there was little difference between Republicans and Democrats.
...
Perhaps just by luck, Trump was tuned in to the fact that the triumvirate of ruling political powers in America – the two parties, the big donors and the press – were so unpopular with large parts of the population that he could win in the long haul by attracting their ire, even if he was losing battles on the way.
...
The subtext was always: I may be crude, but these people are phonies, pretending to be upset when they're making money off my bullshit .
I thought this was all nuts and couldn't believe it was happening in a real presidential campaign. But, a job is a job. My first feature on candidate Trump was called " How America Made Donald Trump Unstoppable ." The key section read:
In person, you can't miss it: The same way Sarah Palin can see Russia from her house, Donald on the stump can see his future. The pundits don't want to admit it, but it's sitting there in plain view, 12 moves ahead, like a chess game already won:
President Donald Trump
It turns out we let our electoral process devolve into something so fake and dysfunctional that any half-bright con man with the stones to try it could walk right through the front door and tear it to shreds on the first go.
And Trump is no half-bright con man, either. He's way better than average.
Traditional Democratic audiences appeared thrilled by the piece and shared it widely. I was invited on scads of cable shows to discuss ad nauseum the "con man" line. This made me nervous, because it probably meant these people hadn't read the piece, which among other things posited the failures of America's current ruling class meant Trump's insane tactics could actually work.
Trump was selling himself as a traitor to a corrupt class, someone who knew how soulless and greedy the ruling elite was because he was one of them.
...
The only reason most blue-state media audiences had been given for Trump's poll numbers all along was racism, which was surely part of the story but not the whole picture. A lack of any other explanation meant Democratic audiences, after the shock of election night, were ready to reach for any other data point that might better explain what just happened.
Russiagate became a convenient replacement explanation absolving an incompetent political establishment for its complicity in what happened in 2016, and not just the failure to see it coming. Because of the immediate arrival of the collusion theory, neither Wolf Blitzer nor any politician ever had to look into the camera and say, "I guess people hated us so much they were even willing to vote for Donald Trump."
Post-election, Russiagate made it all worse. People could turn on their TVs at any hour of the day and see anyone from Rachel Maddow to Chris Cuomo openly reveling in Trump's troubles. This is what Fox looks like to liberal audiences.
Worse, the "walls are closing in" theme -- two years old now -- was just a continuation of the campaign mistake, reporters confusing what they wanted to happen with what was happening . The story was always more complicated than was being represented.
Mar 31, 2019 | www.city-journal.org
The idea of irascible Donald Trump as a compliant tool of the Kremlin in Moscow -- some sort of clandestine agent or asset, in spy parlance -- has always seemed off-center. Who has ever been able to control him, this volcano of a man? Does Trump seem capable of keeping secrets, following orders, or maintaining the strict discipline required of a double agent? So, to sober minds, it should come as no surprise that the final report of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III supports no such conclusion. The report, as summarized by Attorney General William P. Barr in a letter to congressional leaders on Sunday, found no conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia to fix the 2016 election in Trump's favor. And that's exactly what Trump has been saying, in his mantra of "no collusion," from the start of this nearly two-year-old investigation.
Surely, then, it's time for a reckoning -- starting with, say, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. In " Donald Trump, the Siberian Candidate ," in July 2016, he suggested that "there's something very strange and disturbing going on here, and it should not be ignored." On Twitter, Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum chimed in that Trump was "the real-life Manchurian candidate." The Krugman-Applebaum references were to Richard Condon's classic Cold War novel, published in 1959, and the subsequent film, The Manchurian Candidate , about an American prisoner of war brainwashed into becoming a Communist sleeper agent. That, America was told, was Donald Trump.
With Trump's election, this argument only intensified. The Intercept found that in a six-week period starting in late February of 2017, shortly after Trump's inauguration, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow homed in on "The Russia Connection," as she called it, with Russia-related fare accounting for more than half of her broadcasts. "If the American presidency right now is the product of collusion between the Russian intelligence services and an American campaign, I mean that is so profoundly big," Maddow declared. Time rendered the thought balloon as a cover illustration, showing the red walls of the Kremlin and the candy-striped domes of St. Basil's Cathedral sprouting from the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue.
The apex of such coverage was attained by Jonathan Chait, in his July 2018 New York opus , on the eve of a meeting between "Prump" and "Tutin" in Helsinki. The headline: "Will Trump Be Meeting With His Counterpart -- Or His Handler? A plausible theory of mind-boggling collusion." The mind-boggling part was Chait's hypothesis that Trump possibly became a Kremlin asset back in 1987, when the real-estate mogul had visited Moscow.
These are just samples of the Trump-as-Putin's-tool theory, now discredited by Mueller's report. The idea was advanced not only by liberal media types but also by anti-Trump conservatives, and it became a talking point in Democratic Party and U.S. foreign-policy establishment circles. John Brennan, Barack Obama's former CIA director, all but called Trump a traitor to America, for being in Putin's pocket. Of course, not all Trump opponents swallowed this improbable if seductive line -- but many did.
Partisan politics are one factor at work in efforts to show Trump as being in cahoots with the Russians. But mere partisanship seems insufficient to explain an abiding belief in Trump as Moscow's pawn. After all, contrary evidence, before the Mueller Report was submitted, was not hard to find. In April 2018, Trump met with German chancellor Angela Merkel in the White House, and gave her a difficult time, according to a story that later ran on the front page of the Wall Street Journal , about her backing of a pipeline to ship natural gas from Russia to Germany. "Angela," Trump said, according to the Journal, "you've got to stop buying gas from Putin." Do those sound like the words of a Kremlin agent?
The root explanation for the belief in a compromised Trump lies elsewhere than partisan politics, and a good place to look is the classic essay by historian Richard Hofstadter, " The Paranoid Style in American Politics ," published in the November 1964 issue of Harper's. Hofstadter was speaking, in the first instance, of the "Radical Right" of his day and its cherished conviction that Communists had infiltrated the highest echelons of the U.S. government. But the main point of his essay was to identify a recurrent pattern in our political life, going back to the republic's early days. "I believe there is a style of mind that is far from new and that is not necessarily right-wing," he wrote in his opening paragraph. "I call it the paranoid style," he explained, "simply because no other word adequately evokes the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind." In using this expression, he took pains to say, he was not speaking in a clinical sense of "men with profoundly disturbed minds." Rather, it was "the use of paranoid modes of expression by more or less normal people that makes the phenomenon significant." Red-baiting Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s was one example; another was leaders of the Populist Party in the 1890s believing in "secret cabals" of "gold gamblers" to ruin America.
"Trump as Kremlin man" now can be added to these dubious annals. Hofstadter, who died in 1970, surely would be surprised. Though he did not see the "paranoid style" as the sole province of the Right, he tended to view most exhibitors of this style as figures and movements closer to the margins of American politics than to its center. A New York Times columnist, say, was not the sort of person he had in mind. Yet his insight into the "modern right wing" as feeling "dispossessed," as living in an America that "has been largely taken away from them and their kind," and therefore liable to the paranoid style, also applies in the current instance. For at least some of his critics, Trump's election was so perplexing and disorienting that it was as if they were living in a foreign country. How could this be happening in "their" America?
They still feel this way. The paranoid style, which can include an inability to live with complexity and ambiguity and an intolerance for adverse outcomes, is characteristic for its resilience. Mueller, the decorated former Marine and former FBI director, is apt to be attacked, in some disbelieving quarters, as a sellout: What isn't he telling us? Even the publication of his full report -- as many Americans, rightly, are demanding -- will not satisfy critics, who will insist that the absence of evidence of collusion is simply an element of the vast conspiracy to cover it up.
A vindicated Trump, for his part, can be expected only to heighten the conspiratorial mood of our times. An irony of this episode is that he, too, is the sort of person apt to believe in intrigues, only in his view of the matter, the dark plot is a scheme by the "Deep State" to keep him from getting elected and, once elected, to stay in power. He may well be loathed by more than a few Washington bureaucrats, but that idea looks like another rabbit hole.
In any event, Democrats in Congress are apt to pursue ongoing investigations into the "Russia connection" with even more intensity, in hopes of uncovering some nugget that eluded Mueller. The goal, as Hofstadter might have described it, is to repossess the country -- and that can't be achieved until Donald Trump leaves the White House.
Paul Starobin , a former Moscow bureau chief of Business Week , is working on a book on the Alaska gold rush of 1900.
Mar 31, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Sid Finster March 28, 2019 at 2:27 pm
You're right, but it never will happen.SteveM , says: March 28, 2019 at 2:35 pmAnyway, Trump is neutered. His appointments and policies are indistinguishable from a meaner, more reckless and more dysfunctional version of Dubya, even down to the Bush-era retreads.
I've stated before that the Pentagon now controls foreign policy. Along with the sanctified Generals, Lunatic Bolton, Fat Pompeo, Nitwit Pence and other civilians are completely wired into the Warfare State architecture parasitically dependent on a Russia = Soviet Union 2.0 model.Ken Zaretzke , says: March 28, 2019 at 3:22 pmThe anti-Russia fear-mongering from the Pentagon's Combatant Commandeers is thick with ominous warnings. (All requiring huge new spends for their War Toys of course.)
New incoming Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mike Milley has already demonstrated his Nut-Job sensibilities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLfkJODepcI
The anti-Russia froth spilling out of a sclerotic Congress suffused with Idiots who want to throw even more Billions at the 5-Sided Pleasure Palace is thick and heavy.
While Trump has proven himself to be a stupid, impotent fop against that war-mongering menagerie.
Re: "Politics in Washington can often guide policy. The question post-Mueller is whether policy will now be front of mind."
Front of the mind or back of the mind, the politics of Russia post-Mueller have already been baked into Washington with the huge bills for the poisonous pathological cake being delivered to the deluded and hapless taxpayers.
No one gets it like Stephen F. Cohen gets it.https://www.thenation.com/article/the-real-costs-of-russiagate/
Mar 31, 2019 | freerepublic.com
citizenfreepress.com ^ | 3/25/19 | Matt Taibbi
Posted on 3/25/2019 6:01:13 AM by a little elbow grease
Nobody wants to hear this, but news that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller is headed home without issuing new charges is a death-blow for the reputation of the American news media.
As has long been rumored, the former FBI chief's independent probe will result in multiple indictments and convictions, but no "presidency-wrecking" conspiracy charges, or anything that would meet the layman's definition of "collusion" with Russia.
The New York Times:
A senior Justice Department official said that Mr. Mueller would not recommend new indictments. The Times tried to soften the emotional blow for the millions of Americans trained in these years to place hopes for the overturn of the Trump presidency in Mueller. Nobody even pretended it was supposed to be a fact-finding mission, instead of an act of faith.
The Special Prosecutor literally became a religious figure during the last few years, with votive candles sold in his image and Saturday Night Live cast members singing "All I Want for Christmas is You" to him featuring the rhymey line: "Mueller please come through, because the only option is a coup."
The Times story today tried to preserve Santa Mueller's reputation, noting Trump's Attorney General William Barr's reaction was an "endorsement" of the fineness of Mueller's work:
In an apparent endorsement of an investigation that Mr. Trump has relentlessly attacked as a "witch hunt," Mr. Barr said Justice Department officials never had to intervene to keep Mr. Mueller from taking an inappropriate or unwarranted step.
Mueller, in other words, never stepped out of the bounds of his job description. But could the same be said for the news media?
(Excerpt) Read more at citizenfreepress.com ...
Mar 31, 2019 | arcdigital.media
It's a brutal week for anyone who expected special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election to be the end of Donald Trump. Per Attorney General William Barr's summary of Mueller's report, there is no evidence to prove that Trump or his campaign conspired with Russian agents to influence the election; while Mueller left the door open to obstruction of justice charges, Barr has decided there are no grounds for those, either. Maybe the "Mueller time" merchandise can now be marketed to Trump fans.
This outcome has left a lot of "Resistance" types distraught and discredited, and it's an entirely self-made disaster. Trump/Russia hype and hysteria on the left have been wildly over the top. It wasn't just fringe conspiracy theorists like British journalist Louise Mensch who claimed Trump was knowingly working for the Kremlin; Jonathan Chait and Max Boot floated the same idea in New York Magazine and The Washington Post , respectively, as did Bill Maher on HBO's Real Time . Pundits, ex-intelligence officials, and some congressional Democrats (notably California's Adam Schiff) repeatedly asserted that the Mueller probe was all but certain to end with major indictments. It seemed like every week, a new " bombshell " signaled "the beginning of the end" for Trump.
But now, the triumphant pro-Trump Republicans and left-wing Trump/Russia skeptics (two groups currently enjoying a bizarre love-in) are engaging in just as much hype and overreach -- and it may end badly for them, too.
For the record: From the start, I have been mostly a Trump/Russia agnostic. In my first piece on the subject in July 2016, for the now-defunct AllThink blog, I wrote:
I don't think anyone is actually claiming that Trump is literally a [Vladimir] Putin agent. It's more that Putin would much prefer to see Trump rather than [Hillary] Clinton in the White House; that Trump is not at all averse to having Putin in his corner; and that top Trump staffers, campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Russia adviser Carter Page, have tangible ties to the Kremlin regime and to Putin's cronies. And that Putin may be using KGB-style dirty tricks to help elect Trump -- such as putting out what the Russians call kompromat on Clinton.(I think this aligns pretty closely with the Mueller report as summarized by Barr.)
Later, I was highly skeptical of the more extreme Trump/Russia claims, including " pee tape " blackmail. In a December 2017 Newsday column, I warned about the damage from biased and sloppy media coverage of the story. In July 2018 , I condemned Trump's conduct when he stood next to Putin at the Helsinki summit and badmouthed the Mueller probe while endorsing Putin's denial of election meddling; I also stressed that "[c]ollusion with the Kremlin is certainly not the only way to explain Trump's actions."
In other words, I am not a Russiagate peddler refusing to concede error and bitterly clinging to my discredited position.
I simply believe that, on the facts, the extreme "Russia Hoax" position (there was never anything to the Trump/Russia story except a conspiracy theory intended to take down Trump) is as untenable as the extreme "Russiagate" position (Trump is Putin's bitch).
I think it's a bit galling for Trump defenders to crow vindication when, only recently, the same people -- including Trump himself -- were viciously attacking Mueller and slamming his investigation as a baseless witch-hunt cooked up by Trump haters and "Deep State" malefactors. And yes, in some cases, it's literally the same people, not just people from the same political camp. For instance, Federalist writer Sean Davis, who has been gleefully flogging the media for their coverage of the scandal, had this to say last October when some Trump zealots attempted to frame Mueller for sexual harassment:
(Davis apparently deleted the tweet later, but it's definitely real, as demonstrated by an embed appearing on RedState .)
Indeed, Fox News Opinion was attacking Mueller on the eve of the release of his findings, in an article that now looks deliciously ironic:
Fast-forward a few days, and anyone who has the temerity to suggest that the Barr summary of Mueller's findings may not be the absolute last word on Trump/Russia is promptly accused of being pathetic and desperate.
We'll know more soon when the full Mueller report is out. But pending its release, here's a quick look at some of the post-Mueller "Russia hoax" myths.
Myth: The Mueller findings prove there was never anything to Trump/Russia. It's simply an anti-Trump conspiracy theory spawned by the Christopher Steele dossier -- a discredited piece of Clinton opposition research -- and fanned by the Trump-hating media.
This is sheer nonsense.
First of all: Discussions of Trump's, and his campaign's, Russian connections began before anyone had heard of the dossier and before the FBI opened its investigation into the matter. The Washington Post ran a piece on the Trump-Putin "bromance" and Trump's extensive financial ties to Russia on June 17, 2016, when Steele, a former British intelligence agent, was just starting to compile his Trump-Russia dossier. An article by Franklin Foer titled " Putin's Puppet " appeared in Slate on July 4, still nearly a month before the FBI started its investigation into Russian election interference and some three months before FBI agents first met with Steele.
Foer discussed Trump's "odes to Putin," the Kremlin-controlled media's vocal support for Trump, the hacking of Democratic National Committee servers by Russian intelligence, Trump's financial connections to Russia, and the fact that "Trump's inner circle is populated with advisers and operatives who have long careers advancing the interests of the Kremlin." At Talking Points Memo in late July , Josh Marshall also highlighted the fact that the one foreign policy issue where Trump's team pushed for change in the Republican Party platform was to tone down language calling for more American assistance to Ukraine in its border conflict with Russia.
Trump's infamous " Russia, if you're listening " remark on July 27 of that year, responding to questions about the DNC hacking by jocularly inviting Russia to find Clinton's missing emails, raised the story to a new level. Unlike many people, I believe he was making a tacky joke, not actually signaling the Kremlin. Even so, it's not difficult to understand why this conduct would be considered suspicious. At best, a presidential candidate was responding to reports that his opponent had been targeted for cyberattacks by an adversarial foreign power by jokingly cheering for the hackers.
Russia Didn't Hack the DNC! (Or Did They ?)
Right- and left-wing conspiracy theories, and why they're wrong arcdigital.mediaThere are plenty of others times Trump behaved in ways that fed the story.
There was his statement to NBC's Lester Holt in May 2017 that he fired James Comey because of the "Russia thing." (Whether we now find Comey an obnoxiously self-important grandstander is totally irrelevant.)
There was, even more shockingly, the revelation that Trump bragged about the firing in a White House meeting with Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov and Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak, calling Comey "a real nut job" and saying that the pressure he had faced over the Russia story was now "taken off." (Is there any way such behavior by the President of the United States would not raise disturbing questions?)
There was his behavior at the Helsinki summit, and numerous instances in which he took a remarkably mild attitude toward apparent criminal activity by the Kremlin. Just last October, in a 60 Minutes interview on CBS, Trump conceded that Putin had probably orchestrated the attempted poisoning of Russian ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in England -- but brushed it off with "it's not in our country." (This is an incident in which Russian intelligence agents tried to kill two Russians on the soil of one of our top allies, in the process accidentally killing one of that country's nationals and injuring two more. As they say: Let that sink in.) In the same interview, Trump also downplayed 2016 Russian election meddling by claiming, with no evidence, that "China meddled too" and "is a bigger problem."
Aside from that, there really were extensive interactions between the Trump campaign and Russians with Kremlin or intelligence ties. There really was -- as the Barr letter on Mueller's findings explicitly states -- a Russian effort to influence the election and undermine Clinton. (Was the intent to damage the generally expected Clinton presidency, or to help elect Trump? It's likely this was viewed as a win-win scenario.) Mueller indicted 13 Russians over that operation. Remember, Mueller's mandate was to investigate all Russian interference in the 2016 election (including the possible role of people inside the Trump campaign in aiding such interference). So to dismiss the Mueller probe as a "conspiracy theory" and/or a waste of money is to show a rather shocking lack of regard for the integrity of our elections.
How To Talk (And Not To Talk) About Violence On "Both Sides"
Neither equivalence nor exculpation will do arcdigital.mediaIt's true that not one American citizen has been indicted for "collusion" (or, to be more accurate, conspiracy; there is no such crime as "collusion"). The prosecutions of Trump associates have been over other, only tangentially related things: Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, for financial crimes connected to consulting work for pro-Russian Ukrainians; Roger Stone (who still faces trial in November) for lying to Congress about his contacts with WikiLeaks, the "whistleblower" organization that published the hacked documents; former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and campaign staffer George Papadopoulos, for lying to the FBI about Russian contacts. Mueller has found -- there's no reason to doubt the accuracy of the Barr letter on this -- that none of the contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives amounted to conspiracy, defined as an agreement to influence the election.
But: first of all, this doesn't mean that the issue wasn't worth investigating. There was very real evidence of suspicious and sleazy contacts. It didn't rise to the level of criminal and treasonous conspiracy. So far, so good.
Secondly, this doesn't mean that anything short of conspiracy is fine. We didn't need Mueller to tell us that Trump welcomed the WikiLeaks disclosures of hacked documents from the DNC and the Clinton campaign; Trump repeatedly said so on the campaign trail in 2016. The Mueller probe did uncover contacts between WikiLeaks and at least two people close to Trump: Stone and Donald Trump Jr. (We don't know whether such contacts at any level would amount to conspiracy under the Mueller report's definition, since WikiLeaks is not definitively classified as a Russian asset.)
The Stone indictment charges that late in the summer of 2016, after news of the DNC hacking -- which U.S. and allied intelligence agencies, along with multiple private cybersecurity firms, identified as the work of Russian operatives -- a senior Trump campaign official asked Stone to find out from WikiLeaks what was in the hacked emails and when they would be made public.
Bloomberg News columnist Eli Lake argues , in his commentary on the Mueller probe conclusion, that this fact actually undercuts the collusion scenario: "If the [Trump] campaign was coordinating with Russia's influence campaign, why would Stone have needed to go to WikiLeaks?" But surely collusion is not limited to full-time coordination. If the unnamed official knew that WikiLeaks was acting as an intermediary for the Russians and directed Stone to find out more about their plans to disclose illegally obtained material damaging to the Clinton campaign, that sounds pretty damning to me -- even if doesn't amount to conspiracy with Kremlin agents.
And that's aside from the Trump Tower meeting. It's a fact that Don Jr. received an email saying that a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer wanted to meet and offer dirt on Clinton as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." It's a fact that he responded, "I love it." (As it turned out, the lawyer had no information and used the meeting to talk about ending sanctions against Russia.) The Barr summary notes that there is no evidence any Trump associate was involved in coordination or conspiracy with the Russian government, "despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign." Yet at least in the case of the Trump Tower meeting, it seems clear that the offer was not rejected; it was enthusiastically welcomed but turned out to be bogus. (Former Trump attorney Michael Cohen claims Don Jr. told his father about this meeting, but there is no solid proof of this.)
Why Is Michael Cohen Doing The Right Thing?
Mueller has charged several Americans with crimes. But only Michael Cohen wants to be seen as making a principled stand arcdigital.mediaIf Trump supporters think this is a vindication, or that this proves the Mueller probe was a pointless conspiracy theory I suppose they're entitled to that view. It seems to me that any reasonable person would conclude that these facts warranted a full investigation to find out whether they amounted to criminal conspiracy.
Myth: The Trump/Russia story was made up as an excuse for Clinton's defeat so that the Democrats could avoid facing the fact that (a) they ran a terrible candidate and (b) a lot of Americans were sufficiently fed up with the political establishment that they voted for Trump.
Did the collusion story serve that purpose for some Democrats? Sure. But again, the Trump/Russia issue first became a story several months before the election, when pretty much everyone expected Clinton to win. Indeed, in his " Putin's Puppet " story in July 2016, Foer wrote, "We shouldn't overstate Putin's efforts, which will hardly determine the outcome of the election." (Famous last words!)
Myth: We know for a fact that Russian interference did not help Trump win.
For some reason, suggesting that Russian meddling may have affected the outcome of the election is often taken as tantamount to saying that Americans did not really elect Donald Trump. But that doesn't follow at all.
No credible person suggests that Russia tampered with the voting tallies (though it's a measure of current levels of political derangement that two-thirds of Democrats believe such tampering "definitely" or "probably" happened). However, Trump won several states by extremely small margins; surely some of those results could have been tipped by the WikiLeaks disclosures, falsely spun as "the DNC fixed the primaries to rob Bernie Sanders and hand the nomination to Hillary." Let's not forget that WikiLeaks began it's second dump of compromising material hours after the disclosure of the "Access Hollywood" audio in which Trump was heard bragging that his star status allows him to "do anything" to women, even "grab 'em by the pussy."
Of course this does not absolve Clinton of running a bad campaign. A good candidate would have been ahead of Trump by a wide enough margin that WikiLeaks would not have made a difference. A good candidate would not have had personal baggage that made it difficult for her to hit Trump on the sexual misconduct allegations. There were numerous factors that contributed to Trump's win. But I don't see how anyone can say with certainty that the Russia/WikiLeaks project wasn't one of them -- especially since Trump exploited those disclosures to the hilt on the campaign trail.
Myth: The mainstream media as a group are utterly discredited because they fell for Trump/Russia hype, while once-derided Trump/Russia skeptics have been vindicated.
This claim is being made not only by conservative Trump supporters like Davis, but by leftists like Michael Tracey, Glenn Greenwald, and Matt Taibbi , whose indictment of the media's Russiagate fail has been widely praised.
There is a lot to criticize. Rachel Maddow should be embarrassed. So should Chait, who once suggested that Trump might be meeting "his handler" in Helsinki.
Why Are Internet Radicals Helping Putin's Russia?
Glenn Greenwald, Caitlin Johnstone, and anti-American myopia arcdigital.mediaBut the critics are wrongly (and, I suspect, intentionally) lumping together several extremely different things: outlandish Trump/Russia conspiracy theories a la Mensch; sloppy "bombshell" reporting that ended up being quickly debunked and retracted (such as the ABC News " scoop " that Trump had directed Flynn to contact Russian officials during the campaign, not after the election); opinions that were always presented as opinions; and factual reporting on the Trump/Russia investigation.
For instance, after I tweeted that Taibbi vastly overstates the media consensus on the "Trump is a Russian asset" narrative, someone tweeted a collage of Washington Post headlines at me in rebuttal.
However, none of those headlines refer to Trump being a Russian asset. The closest is one that says, "Why the FBI might've thought Trump could be working for Russia." But the FBI did briefly investigate that possibility in 2017 before Mueller took over the Russia probe! What's more, the article , by Aaron Blake, is the farthest thing from irresponsible hype. It offers a measured assessment of the facts, pointing out that such claims are "highly speculative," that the brief FBI inquiry "may not mean a whole lot," and that there are other explanations for the behavior that made the FBI suspicious.
And other headlines are simply factual: for instance, "Trump misrepresents judge in Manafort trial as he claims 'no collusion' with Russia." He did .
Or: "Russia's support for Trump's election is no longer disputable." Yes, the Barr letter confirms that too.
Some of Taibbi's criticism is fair (for instance, he makes a strong case that Michael Isikoff of Yahoo News vastly overhyped the Steele dossier before backtracking and suggesting that it's mostly inaccurate; he also rightly spanks Chait for the "What if Trump is a longtime Russian agent" New York Magazine cover story). Some is more dubious. Thus, Taibbi writes:
" Trump Campaign Aides had repeated contacts with Russian Intelligence ," published by the Times on Valentine's Day, 2017, was an important, narrative-driving "bombshell" that looked dicey from the start. The piece didn't say whether the contact was witting or unwitting, whether the discussions were about business or politics, or what the contacts supposedly were at all.In fact, the article explicitly acknowledges these unknowns. It states that the law enforcement officials who had provided the information "did not say to what extent the contacts might have been about business" and whether they had anything to do with Trump. It also notes that several Trump associates (including Manafort, the only person named in the article) had done business in Russia and that "it is not unusual for American businessmen to come in contact with foreign intelligence officials, sometimes unwittingly, in countries like Russia and Ukraine, where the spy services are deeply embedded in society." Finally, it states that the officials interviewed "said that, so far, they had seen no evidence" of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign to influence the election.
One can criticize The New York Times for hyping the "bombshell" in the headline only to admit in the body of the text that it may amount to nothing much. (Did it amount to anything? We don't know; the charges against Manafort are partly related to giving U.S. polling data to an intelligence-linked Russian business associate, Konstantin V. Kilimnik, as part of these contacts.) But Taibbi's failure to note that the article does acknowledge facts contrary to the "narrative" also skews his account.
And here's an even more egregious example:
After writing, " Confessions of a Russiagate Skeptic ," poor Blake Hounsell of Politico took such a beating on social media, he ended up denouncing himself a year later."What I meant to write is, I wasn't skeptical," he said.Leaving aside the sloppiness (it's "Hounshell," and the second article was published six months later, not a year later), Taibbi's account here is way off. Yes, Hounshell got a mostly negative reaction to his piece on Twitter, though it was no pitchfork-wielding mob. But there's no indication his reversal had anything to do with social-media sniping: Hounshell's second piece was a reaction to Trump's odd behavior at the Helsinki summit and his attacks on NATO. ("What I meant " was, of course, a joke.)
Taibbi also makes no mention of instances in which mainstream media did shoot down or push back against false Russiagate narratives. Vox published a piece by Zack Beauchamp in May 2017 cautioning Democrats against falling for Trump/Russia conspiracy theories peddled by the likes of Mensch, attorney Seth Abramson, and national security expert John Schindler. The New York Times ran a piece days before the election headlined, "Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia." Foer's October 31, 2016 Slate article claiming that there was a secret electronic communication channel between the Trump campaign and a Russian bank was debunked the next day by The Washington Post .
Finally, Taibbi's critique rests on a false binary. He writes, "There was never real gray area here. Either Trump is a compromised foreign agent, or he isn't. If he isn't, news outlets once again swallowed a massive disinformation campaign." But in fact, there are plenty of gray areas and many different versions of what "Trump/Russia" means -- from "Trump is a foreign agent" to "Trump was fine with accepting election help from Putin." Plenty of news outlets gave credence to the second scenario, not the first.
The Trump-Russia Investigation is Dead! Long Live The Trump-Russia Investigation!
Mueller's investigation may or may not be about to end, but Trump's Russia woes will continue arcdigital.mediaIt would be good to see a fair and comprehensive analysis of media coverage of Russiagate. But it's not going to come from Davis, Taibbi, or Greenwald. Media groupthink and malpractice should be criticized, but this can be done without lumping all of the "mainstream media" together in a mass indictment of "fake news."
As for the left-wing Russiagate skeptics being vindicated: most of them have staunchly insisted that there is no evidence the Kremlin engaged in an effort to undermine our election. And Glenn Greenwald's position seems to be that even if it did, America was asking for it because we meddle, too. In this scheme of things, then-Secretary of State Clinton expressing sympathy with the Russians who took to the streets in 2011–2012 to protest a rigged election is morally equivalent to Russian agents stealing the private communications of American political organizations.
Myth: The fact that the Trump administration is tough on Russia disproves the Trump/Russia story.
For the record: I don't believe Trump is a "Russian tool." It's clear that he has taken a number of positions that are at odds with Russia's interests, including on Venezuela (from which he said the other day that "Russia has to get out"). His administration includes a number of Russia hawks, from National Security Advisor John Bolton to high-level official Fiona Hill .
On the other hand, it's hard to say how much of Washington's current Russia policy happens in spite of Trump. The White House has repeatedly tried to weaken and spike Russia sanctions, despite a rare bipartisan consensus in Congress for tough policies. He was reportedly highly reluctant to agree to the sale of anti-tank missiles to Ukraine, which he now cites as evidence that he's tougher on Russia than Obama. And he has made some definite Russia-friendly moves -- such as calling for Russia to be readmitted into the Group of 7 when he attended the G7 summit in Quebec last summer.
But, once again, the truth of Russiagate can be quite bad for Trump without Trump being a knowing Putin pawn. If Trump knowingly went along with a Kremlin-directed effort to help his campaign -- even with no quid pro quo -- that may not be criminal conspiracy, but surely it is a betrayal of the American people. (And no, it's not remotely comparable to using opposition research collected in part from intelligence sources within the Russian establishment; to equate the two , as some Trump partisans have done, is tantamount to suggesting that there's no difference between intelligence-gathering and spying for a foreign power.)
In the past two years, there has been a lot of wild, and sometimes outright deranged, speculation on Trump/Russia. A lot of Russiagate zealots got carried away, buoyed by the seeming victories of mounting Trump/Russia revelations ("BOOM"!). Now, they're paying the price.
Right now, the shoe is on the other foot. The anti-Russiagate crowd, dizzy from its apparent triumph, is getting way ahead of the evidence in declaring Russiagate a "hoax" and proclaiming that Trump has been both legally and morally vindicated. It seems a bit foolhardy when, among other things, there are legal proceedings still underway, including Stone trial and a still-active grand jury .
Am I expecting a new "bombshell" that will finally spell the end for Trump? No -- and, for the record, I do not want impeachment. But I do think that after the past three years, one lesson we should all have learned is that no one can predict what twists are coming in the crazy plots of The Trumpman Show .
Mar 31, 2019 | blog.usejournal.com
And then Stephen Cohen of The Nation , another voice of reason, sent me a copy of his book, " War With Russia? " It's a collection of his heretical writings about our new, unnecessary Cold War, and the opening essay , adapted from a talk he gave in Washington D.C., made me ashamed of my silence.
"Some people who privately share our concerns -- again, in Congress, the media, universities and think tanks -- do not speak out at all. For whatever reason -- concern about being stigmatized, about their career, personal disposition -- they are silent. But in our democracy, where the cost of dissent is relatively low, silence is no longer a patriotic option," Cohen wrote, adding, "We should exempt from this imperative young people, who have more to lose. A few have sought my guidance, and I always advise, 'Even petty penalties for dissent in regard to Russia could adversely affect your career. At this stage of life, your first obligation is to your family and thus to your future prospects. Your time to fight lies ahead'."Well, what was my excuse?
Special Prosecutor Robert S. Mueller has now turned in his findings, and there's not much there. For weeks beforehand, mainstream media warned about this -- exhorting readers against succumbing to feeling "disappointed".
Disappointed? I guess, as my friend Taibbi has noted , it would have been an immense relief had the U.S. president been found to be a high-level traitor. We could have all brought picnic lunches to his execution.
Right before the species-ending war with Russia.
In their fanatic loyalty to the narrative, what used to be my favorite media have stridently reminded us that, Mueller aside, "it's not over!" The "focus of the investigation" will move now to the New York prosecutors, to House committees. The American intelligentsia will continue to dream up wild theories -- they'll be Scotch-taped on every vertical surface, connected by bits of yarn and magic marker scribbles and hyperverbal mania.
The question now is, has the Mueller report finally freed up the rest of us to challenge the more insane flights of fantasy? Or is it instead so close to the 2020 presidential elections -- and so legally dangerous for some of the intelligence insiders who have tried to bring down the president -- that skeptical journalists more than ever will be bullied to keep silent?
Rootless Whataboutism
As a test case -- a first step on the road to journalistic recovery -- can I suggest we at least retire the insane, Orwellian term "whataboutism?"
Whataboutism really deserves consideration as a "Word of the Year", and not in a good way. There have been multiple non-ironic media reports about this odious concept, on NPR , in the Huffington Post , in The Washington Post , you name it.
"His campaign may or may not have conspired with Moscow," The Washington Post told us awhile back, "but President Trump has routinely employed a durable old Soviet propaganda tactic 'whataboutism,' the practice of short-circuiting an argument by asserting moral equivalency between two things that aren't necessarily comparable."
NPR's version also claims that whataboutism is a Soviet-tainted practice. "It's not exactly a complicated tactic -- any grade-schooler can master the 'yeah-well-you-suck-too-so-there' defense," NPR says. "But it came to be associated with the USSR because of the Soviet Union's heavy reliance upon whataboutism throughout the Cold War and afterward, as Russia."
Yet in my experience, it's not so much a Soviet tactic as an American one -- specifically, it's a way of demanding a loyalty oath to the anti-Trump resistance.
I have occasionally dared express skepticism about the entire overblown story that Russia was involved in our 2016 elections at all. That's right. I don't buy it. I am not entirely convinced that "Russian bots and trolls" infected anyone's mind by, say, taking positions both for and against gun control after the Parkland high school mass shooting, or by setting up anti-masturbation hotlines , or by giving bad reviews to "Star Wars: the Last Jedi."
I am also not entirely convinced that the Russians, having supposedly decided at the highest levels of their government to try to sink Hilary Clinton's candidacy, couldn't think of anything more clever than to spear-phish campaign manager John Podesta's G-mail.
Nor do I share the concerns of The Times of London that the Russian animated cartoon "Masha and the Bear" is part of a soft propaganda drive to weaken the minds of Estonian children ahead of their eventual annexation by Red Army tanks.
Yet before I can even offer any subtler qualification of all this -- sure, there is Russian-government, let's say, "illicit computer and social media activity" out there, mixed with a lot of other noise signals (click-bait farms, which explains at least some of the infamous Internet Research Agency's activities; ordinary Russians with pro-Kremlin positions and personal Facebook accounts; and yes, people sitting on their beds who weigh 400 pounds), but it has to be weighed against -- I'll be cut off.
"That's whataboutism ," I've been told flatly.
It's actually not -- that doesn't even meet the absurd quasi-official definitions of this new Kafkaesque term -- but that's the whole point. Disagreement is by its very nature whataboutist . Every skeptical question, after all, could technically begin, "But what about ?"
Of course, it's far, far worse if I truly commit a whataboutism and -- God forbid! God forbid! – I express curiosity about The New York Times reporting about millions flowing to the Clintons and associated with the Russian purchase of American uranium mines.
Whataboutism! It's so comparable to the old Soviet thought crimes -- Trotskyite, wrecker, cosmopolitan, rootless cosmopolitanism Every time I hear someone flag a statement as guilty of whataboutism, I mentally add " rootless whataboutism."
People tell me Mueller missed the point. It's about Russian oligarch and Kremlin money, invested in Trump real estate -- it's not over! All hail the Southern District prosecutors! OK, let's see it, I'm open to that possibility. But if all Russian money is tainted just because it's "oligarchical" -- good luck defining that ! -- then is it O.K. for the spouse of then-Secretary of State Hilary Clinton to take $500,000 for a single hour's work, a speech in Moscow, for one of the most famous "oligarch" banks?
"That's whataboutism! NPR and The Washington Post say that's a Soviet-favored tactic! Your loyalty is thus suspect two-fold. Have you had contact with any Russian nationals?"
Communists and Crickets
"EVIDENCE POINTS TO RUSSIA AS MAIN SUSPECT IN BRAIN INJURY ATTACKS ON DOZENS OF U.S. DIPLOMATS" was the report by MSNBC in September 2017, and they flogged that big scoop for months, and have never really apologized for it.
Two dozen American diplomats in Cuba suffered headaches, dizziness and other vague symptoms they blamed on strange sounds -- sounds some of them tape-recorded and supplied to journalists, doctors and the government. "It sounds sort of like a mass of crickets," was the opening line of the Associated Press report about the recordings (which you can listen to yourself here ).
But no. Not crickets. As MSNBC reported, our intelligence services had intercepted Russian communications (!) revealing the sounds were "some kind of microwave weapon," one so sophisticated that our top government minds were at a loss.
We might not know how it works, MSNBC reported, but we did know it was a weapon, and "now Russia is the leading suspect."
"This is not an accident," reported anchorwoman Andrea Mitchell then. "This is not a microwave listening device gone bad. This is an attack -- against American diplomats and intelligence officers, and this was targeting."
What an amazing allegation. The Russian government was beaming a mysterious, high-tech weapon at our citizens ; we had intercepted communications that made this clear.
For more than a year, I and colleagues with Russia-reporting experience would be grilled about this, and would just have to shrug apologetically. We just didn't know what to say. It didn't make a lot of face-value sense -- why exactly would Russian agents, amid all this rabid anti-Russia hysteria, beam a secret brain-frying weapon at two-dozen random American diplomats and their family members in Cuba, for weeks apparently? What would be the logic behind giving these random-seeming people headaches and making them dizzy and even causing "brain injuries similar to concussions"?
As a physician, I also shared the s kepticism of colleagues published about this in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Playing odds, I agreed with those critics that I would have assumed either a mass psychogenic illness or a viral infection more likely etiologies than a secret Siberian death ray. I also read "brain injuries similar to concussions" as, "brain injuries that don't show up on objective testing." (Of course, I've not examined any of these patients or reviewed their cases so it's not for me to say.)
But in our fevered Russophobic environment, no one wanted to entertain alternative scenarios -- after all, we don't even understand this sophisticated weapon, which our intelligence agencies assure us (anonymously) they have intercepted Russian communications bragging about, so how dare we debate the logic behind its use? (Maybe this is how they control the president!)
Then three months ago, American scientists published in a peer-review journal their analysis of the dastardly recordings and identified the sounds : Crickets. Caribbean crickets.
Specifically, the echoing call of the male, short-tailed indies. During mating season.
But did MSNBC apologize, or retract?
Crickets.
Instead, during a historically cold week this winter, MSNBC star Rachel Maddow used the excuse of a government panel about energy security to go on a Jack D. Ripper about Russia someday deciding to freeze middle America to death.
"It is like negative 50 degrees in the Dakotas right now. What would happen if Russia killed the power in Fargo today? What would happen if all the natural gas lines that service Sioux Falls just 'poofed', on the coldest day in recent memories, and it wasn't in our power whether or not to turn them back on?" Maddow asked . "What would you do if you lost heat indefinitely -- as the act of a foreign power! -- on the same day the temperature in your front yard matched the temperature in Antarctica? I mean, what would you and your family do?"Gee, I don't know Rachel. What would my family and I do if Russia launched a nuclear weapon at my front yard? I guess we'd all die. I guess I don't know who to trust anymore, I feel exhausted by the news, sick of it all, I just want to stop caring, and you seem to feel the same, and omigosh Rachel, we've been infected by the red virus!
'They Hate our Freedoms'
James Comey, the former FBI director, testified before the Senate after his firing that the Russians are "coming after America," because, "They think that this great experiment of ours is a threat to them, and so they're going to try to run it down and dirty it up as much as possible."
Right. It's because "they hate our freedoms."
Where have I heard that before?
People had been waiting breathlessly for Mueller's report, but in reality, everything we needed to know was right there in the first report -- the January 6, 2017, grand announcement, the big reveal by our Intelligence Community -- the consensus of CIA, FBI and NSA -- "Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections."
I remember finishing that report at the time and thinking: Holy Cow, they have nothing.
Nothing!
Of the 15 pages with any meat to them in that report, seven were a long, bizarre complaint about the existence and activities of RT (formerly Russia Today ), the Kremlin-sponsored English-language news channel.
Our intelligence agencies reported that RT has become "the most-watched foreign news channel in the UK," had more YouTube viewers than the BBC or CNN , and was surpassing al-Jazeera in New York and Washington D.C. ( Voice of America , which is the U.S. government version of RT , has no sense of humor or passion and so no viewers anywhere outside of Foggy Bottom.)
RT's success was, per the intelligence report, thanks to a combination of lavish Kremlin funding and an alluring editorial slant. The intelligence report quoted RT's editor as saying her station got lots of new viewers after offering sympathetic coverage of the Occupy Wall Street movement. The intelligence report continued:
In an effort to highlight the alleged "lack of democracy" in the United States, RT broadcast, hosted, and advertised third-party candidate debates and ran reporting supportive of the political agenda of these candidates. The RT hosts asserted that the US two-party system does not represent the views of at least one-third of the population and is a "sham." RT's reports often characterize the United States as a "surveillance state" and allege widespread infringements of civil liberties, police brutality, and drone use RT has also focused on criticism of the US economic system, US currency policy, alleged Wall Street greed, and the US national debt. Some of RT's hosts have compared the United States to Imperial Rome and have predicted that government corruption and "corporate greed" will lead to US financial collapse RT runs anti-fracking programming, highlighting environmental issues and the impacts on public healthThis was hilarious of course -- a public snit by our intel communities about Russians racking up big numbers among American viewers in Washington and New York , just by offering mildly critical takes on drone killings and fracking and "alleged Wall Street greed" ("alleged"? Really ?). We were promised a major assessment of any improper Russian influences on our 2016 electoral process and we got -- this? A formal complaint that Russian TV gave Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein too much air time?
All this bitching and moaning about RT -- which, remember, is not some secret plot, but just a public TV station you can go watch on YouTube or not watch -- takes up well more than half of that grand intelligence community assessment. It really speaks volumes about what was on their minds. And again, my conclusion reading it two years ago was: So, they've got nothing.
The one caveat, though, was that there was a classified appendix. There's always a classified appendix. So, who knew what was in that ? After all, immediately and in the two years since, intelligence officials have occasionally been cited -- always anonymously! -- in The Guardian , The New Yorker , and The New York Times -- as claiming to have intercepted communications between the Trump team and the Russian government.
Well, by now, we should realize the appendix is a myth.
First, we now know that at least part of it -- and, I would guess, probably all of it -- was nothing more than the Steele report, the infamous document first posted on BuzzFeed , that collection of anti-Trump opposition research paid for by the Hilary Clinton campaign. (You know -- the pee tape stuff.)
And we now also know, courtesy of Robert Mueller's report, that there are no "intercepted communications" between Russians and the Trump campaign teams. Just like there are no Russian intercepts about secret Siberian brain-frying rays in Cuba, because that, again, was the mating call of a short-tailed Caribbean cricket.
I don't know what's funnier about all of this -- and it is damned funny, really -- the fact that all of this has actually happened , or the fact that I feel the need to come out of journalistic retirement to help point it out.
A President With a Traitor's Heart -- for Six More YearsAnd that's the way it is, and has been, all along for these past two years. There have been non-stop media allegations that, one way or another, our narcissistic, loud-mouthed, overtly racist U.S. president has a traitor's heart. Any errors or inaccuracies -- and there have been a shocking number of retracted "scoops," as well as screwups like the Caribbean crickets that have just been ignored -- are excused in service of this larger truth: Our president has a traitor's heart.
But I already knew that! We all did!
We knew it the moment he said , "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you'll be able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing" -- referencing some official e-mails of Hilary Clinton's that were improperly handled and got deleted. (Among the onion layers of irony to this political season is that Trump pioneered the 21st century witch hunt. There has never been any evidence that Clinton's deleted emails represent anything at all -- yet Trump hammered away at this as if it mattered, until one day it did. And he didn't even suggest investigations, he skipped straight to "lock her up!").
Being racist, or stupid, or sexist, or a bully, or a New York real estate developer -- all of these are deep character flaws. They are not always crimes. (Sexually assaulting someone is always a crime, however, even if you are a TV star and remember your breath mints.)
And yet, again, we already knew all of this. Remember this transcript from The New York Times ?
Trump : I did try and fuck her. She was married and I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping. She wanted to get some furniture. I said, "I'll show you where they have some nice furniture." I took her out furniture -- I moved on her like a bitch. But I couldn't get there.Trump : Yeah, that's her [peeking out a trailer window at a different target, an approaching actress] . I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know, I'm automatically attracted to beautiful -- I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.Billy Bush [a fawning minor TV personality] : Whatever you want.Trump : Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything.Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States.
I share your pain. And I have no doubt he'd trade his own son for majority ownership of a moderately nice golf course. But I'm also, frankly, no longer very interested in him. I'm much more interested in us -- the rest of us.
What happened to us?
Well, I'll amend that slightly. I am of course quite interested in seeing Donald Trump leave office. I suspect, however, that these two-plus years of journalistic malpractice -- a politically-motivated Red Scare at a time when we don't even have any Reds anymore, just Russians -- has locked in his second term. (What's that? Impeachment you say? Oh please. He'd set up a government-in-exile in Mar-a-Lago and then he'd be around for twenty more years instead of six. And he'd have half the nation with him the entire time.) So thank you for that, MSNBC and NPR and New York Times.
# # #
Mar 31, 2019 | www.theburningplatform.com
The tides are shifting. Something's in the wind. And it's not just the fecund vapors of spring. The political soap opera of RussiaGate ended like a fart in a windstorm last weekend, leaving Mr. Mueller's cheerleaders de-witched, bothered, and bewildered. And then a crude attempt was made to cram the Jussie Smollett case down Chicago's memory hole. These two unrelated hoaxes emanating out of Wokester Land may signal something momentous: the end of the era when anything goes and nothing matters .
Welcome to the new era of consequences! All of a sudden, a whole lot of people who have been punking the public-at-large will have to answer for their behavior. Despite the fog of misdirection blowing out of The New York Times , The WashPo , CNN, and MSNBC, it's become obvious that the RussiaGate hoax was kicked off by Hillary Clinton's campaign and a cabal of Obama appointees in several executive agencies. The evidence is public, fully documented, and overwhelming that the so-called Steele Dossier was the sole animating instrument in both the 2016 pre-election effort to incriminate the Golden Golem of Greatness, and the Mueller Investigation launched post-election to cover-up those same political misdeeds of the Clinton campaign, the FBI, the Department of Justice, the CIA, NSA, and State Department.
It's also very likely that Robert Mueller learned that the Steele Dossier was a fraud in the summer of 2017, if not shortly after his appointment in May of that year, and yet he dragged out his investigation for almost two years in order to defame and antagonize Mr. Trump -- and deflect attention from the ugly truth of the matter. It is certain Mr. Mueller knew that the Steele Dossier was purchased by Glenn Simpson's Fusion GPS political "research" company, which was simultaneously in the paid employ of Mrs. Clinton and the Russian political lobbying agency Prevezon (as reported by Sean Davis in The Federalist ). If the FBI brass did not bring that to Mr. Mueller's attention right away, then either their incompetence is epic or they are criminally liable for concealing the hoax.
There is your essential collusion , and a lot of participants are going down because of it. Mr. Mueller himself should be summoned to a grand jury to answer for his deceitful inquisition, his abuse of FISA warrants, and the malicious prosecutions of General Michael Flynn and Trump campaign supernumerary George Papadopoulos. This story is far from over and it is now moving in the opposite direction. Former CIA Director John Brennan is going down for chaperoning the Steele Dossier through congress, the FBI, and the news media. And many others will follow. It will go very hard on the claque of lunatics like Rep. Adam Schiff and MSNBC's Rachel Maddow as the painful consequences unspool. The Democratic presidential hopefuls will have to run shrieking from this giant hairball, but it will roll over them anyway and possibly even flatten their party.
In another instance of justice miscarried, charges in the Jussie Smollett racial attack hoax were dismissed in a hasty, unannounced motion by the assistant to Cook County Prosecutor Kim Foxx, who had pretended to recuse herself from the case, but actually did not follow the proper procedure for doing it. Ms. Foxx has apparently been consorting with members of Jussie Smollett's family and with Michele Obama's former chief of staff, Tina Tchen, a Chicago political operator. It's easy to imagine what they were bargaining about: the fear that Mr. Smollett would have a very hard time serving any sort of prison sentence, given his celebrity status, his sexual orientation, and the laughable idiocy of his crime. It was probably a reasonable fear -- but not a viable excuse for summarily dropping the case. The further excuse that he had already paid the price by hanging out in Jessie Jackson's Operation Push headquarters for two days is also a joke, of course.
The Chicago police chief and mayor objected loudly, as did the Illinois Prosecutors Bar Association, which declared the move was "abnormal and unfamiliar to those who practice law in criminal courthouses across the State." An understatement for sure. What's next for Jussie? The City of Chicago will tote up the cost of investigating his stupid prank and haul him into civil court to compel him to pay for it.
Further and greater consequences will emanate from the Smollett hoax. Despite former Vice-president Joe Biden's recent lamentations over the wickedness of "white man's culture," many American's will show a renewed interest in that hoary old system devised by white folks called Anglo-American law, which includes such niceties as due process. The Jussie Smollett scam may be the end of many intersectional culture heroes getting a free pass on their bad behavior. Won't that be refreshing?
Mar 25, 2019 | www.bloomberg.com
President Donald Trump and a key ally, Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, said Monday that after Robert Mueller closed his Russia probe, they want an investigation of the investigators.
Graham said at a news conference that Attorney General William Barr should appoint a new special counsel to examine why the U.S. government, under President Barack Obama, decided to open an investigation into Russian election interference in 2016, and whether it was an excuse to spy on Trump's campaign.
"Was it a ruse to get into the Trump campaign?" Graham said at the news conference. "I don't know but I'm going to try to find out."
Trump told reporters at the White House that unspecified "people" behind the Russia probe would "be looked at."
The remarks show that Trump and some of his allies have retribution and score-settling on their minds after Mueller found no evidence that the president or his campaign colluded with the Kremlin's election interference. It's unclear whom Trump wants investigated, but possibilities include former FBI Director James Comey, whom he fired in May 2017; Obama's CIA Director John Brennan, whom Trump stripped of his security clearance last year; and other former intelligence and Justice Department officials who have vocally criticized the president.
The stage is also set for dueling and contradictory congressional investigations. In the House, controlled by Democrats, several committees have opened investigations into the president's financial and business affairs, and Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler said Sunday he wants Barr to testify soon on his finding that Mueller didn't produce sufficient evidence that Trump obstructed justice by interfering in the Russia inquiry.
The Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, on Monday blocked a vote on a measure by the Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer of New York, calling for Mueller's report to be made public. McConnell said Barr should have time to consider which portions of the report can be publicly released given concerns about classified information, ongoing investigations and other information protected by law.
Republican AlliesSeveral other Republicans backed Graham and Trump on Monday. Senate Oversight Committee Chairman Ron Johnson of Wisconsin said he'd like to work with Graham "to get those answers for the American public."
"We need to find out what happened," he said in an interview.
Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, tweeted: "Time to investigate the Obama officials who concocted and spread the Russian conspiracy hoax!" Representative Mark Meadows, a North Carolina Republican, said "underlying documents" supporting what became Mueller's probe should be released to the public.
"Let them decide for themselves whether this investigation was warranted -- or whether it was a two-year long episode of political targeting, driven by FBI and DOJ executives who wanted to retaliate against a legitimately elected president," Meadows said in an interview.
Graham said his committee would also look into the FBI's handling of the inquiry into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server, saying that Comey's actions in that investigation "did affect" the 2016 election. Comey held a news conference in July 2016 to announce that Clinton wouldn't be charged with a crime, and then announced less than two weeks before the election that the investigation had been re-opened after additional emails were discovered.
'Evil Things'Trump's indication that unnamed people responsible for the probe would be investigated was vague. He didn't name anyone, and after he made similar remarks on Sunday, White House deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley told reporters that Barr hadn't been directed to open any investigations of Democrats.
"People that have done such harm to our country," Trump complained on Monday. "We've gone through a period of really bad things happening. Those people will certainly be looked at. I've been looking at them for a long time and I'm saying, why haven't they been looked at. They lied to Congress. Many of them. You know who they are. They've done so many evil things."
Trump added that he hasn't considered pardoning anyone convicted in connection to Mueller's probe.
Graham said he planned to talk with Barr on Monday and hoped to hold a public hearing with the attorney general to explain his findings in the Mueller probe. Barr sent a four-page letter to Congress on Sunday summarizing Mueller's findings, which have not been publicly released.
"I'm asking him to lay it all out," Graham said.
Both Trump and Graham said they support Barr publicly releasing as much of Mueller's report as possible. The investigation turned out "100 percent" as it should have, Trump told reporters.
Dossier DistributionTrump has previously singled out individuals over their role in the probe, calling for an investigation into the " other side " of the investigation. He's mentioned Comey, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, former FBI employees Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, and Justice Department attorney Bruce Ohr.
Graham also said he advised his friend and Senate colleague John McCain to give the FBI the so-called Steele dossier on Trump, rebutting the president's accusations that McCain tried to hinder his 2016 election.
Graham told reporters that McCain, an Arizona Republican who died last year, had shown him the unverified collection of intelligence reports on Trump's links to Russia that was put together by a former British spy, Christopher Steele. Steele was commissioned to compile the information by an opposition research firm hired by Democrats.
McCain put the dossier in his safe and handed it over to the FBI the next day, Graham said.
A McCain associate, David Kramer, acknowledged in a deposition in a libel case that he spread word of the dossier to several news organizations.
-- With assistance by Billy House
( Updates with McConnell blocking Schumer measure in seventh paragraph. ) Published on March 25, 2019 12:37 PM
Updated on March 25, 2019 5:58 PM
Mar 25, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
What actually happened with RussiaGate? A cabal of government officials colluded with the Hillary Clinton campaign to interfere in the 2016 election and, failing to achieve their desired outcome, engineered a two-years-plus formal inquisition to deflect attention from their own misconduct and attempt to overthrow the election result.
The Cable News characters, quite a few of them lawyers, were litigating the living shit out of the story on Sunday night in their usual spirit of obdurate rank dishonesty. For instance, Jeffrey Toobin, who plays Attorney General on CNN, went off on the infamous 2016 Trump Tower Meeting in which the president's son, Donald, Jr., met with Russian lawyer Natalia V. Veselnitskaya. Toobin omitted to mention that Ms. Veselnitskaya was, at that very time, on the payroll of Fusion GPS, Hillary Clinton's "oppo" research contractor. In other words, Trump Junior was set up.
That was characteristic of the collusion that actually occurred between the Hillary campaign, the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, the NSA, the UK's MI6 intel agency, and the Obama White House, striving to prevent the election of a TV reality show star, and to disable him afterwards -- also of the news media's role in the whole interminable scam of RussiaGate. Their fury and despair were as vivid the night of March 24, 2019, as on November 8, 2016. And now they will attempt to spark off a sequel.Rachel Maddow, for instance, struggling to maintain her dignity after two years playing Madame DeFarge on MSNBC, tried to console her fans with the prospect of Mr. Trump getting raked over the coals by the DOJ's Southern District of NY prosecutors for crimes as yet unpredicted -- really, whatever they might find if they turn over enough rocks in Manhattan. Perhaps she doesn't know how the justice system actually works in this country: we prosecute crimes not persons. In places like Stalin's Soviet Union and Hitler's Germany, you first choose a person to eliminate and then fit them to a crime. If no crime can be found, one is easily manufactured. In the USA, a predicate crime is required before you can launch a prosecution. Perhaps the actual Attorney General, Mr. Barr, will advise the avid staff of the Southern District of NY how this works.
There remains also, the rather sweeping panorama of misconduct and probable crime among the government (and former government) players in the agencies mentioned above. Does the full Mueller Report mention, for instance, that the animating document claiming that Trump colluded with Russia was manufactured by Mrs. Clinton's employees? And that this document was used time and again improperly and illegally to prolong the inquisition? How could Mr. Mueller not acknowledge that? And if not, what sort of investigation was this?
You are forced to ask: did Mr. Mueller play an honorable role in this epic, multilayered scandal? And is Mr. Mueller himself an honorable character, or something less than that? I believe we'll find out. The other team is coming to bat now -- and just in time for MLB's opening day, too. The Mueller report has been a shocking disappointment to the so-called "resistance," but what about the as-yet-unreleased DOJ Inspector General's report on these very matters ? Or the parallel investigation of federal prosecutor John Huber, who is charged specifically with looking into the malfeasance of the RussiaGate investigators? Or whatever action the Attorney General himself launches in the wake of all this? Or whether Mr. Trump finally declassifies the mountains of documents behind the simple failure to find him guilty of any crime? My favorite college professor and mentor, David Hamilton, once put a curious question to us when we were vexing him for some reason now forgotten: "Why," he asked, "Did Achilles drag Hector around the city of Troy three times?"
We twiddled our cigarettes and pulled our chins.
"Because he was just that pissed," he said.
Groundround , 1 minute ago link
ComeAndTakeIt , 55 minutes ago linkSo, If they would trample Trump's constitutional rights by abusing this bogus fisa warrant system, shouldn't we assume they are 10 times as likely to abuse it to spy on average americans, who have no chance of protecting themselves from the police state they have built since 9-11? Revoke the patriot act. It is unconstitutional anyway, though Trump rewarded the man who helped write it with the Supreme court position. We have a small window to claw back the rights they stripped from us. If we don't do it now, when these programs are called into question, these deep state turds will do whatever they can to consolidate their hold on the US. I'm not too hopeful, myself. Seeing the blatant piracy they are attempting in Venezuela, even after the failures in Iraq and Syria, doesn't do much to console me as to America's future. My relatives came here from England and Germany with little more than the clothes on their backs. It may be time to look for greener pastures if we are going to be a proxy of Israel, and a deep state, stripped of our inherent rights bit by bit until we aren't allowed to leave.
VonSteever , 1 hour ago linkThese shitbags attempted a coup and failed.
Now they're either in complete denial that the coup failed, or are arrogantly attempting to continue it by other means.
I don't think there's a historical precedent anywhere in the world for this level of ridiculous.
elctro static , 48 minutes ago linkThe real scandal here is two fold.
First is the multipart crime committed by Hillary Clinton and her cabal of deep state co-conspirators to rig a primary, which they did against Bernie Sanders, then attempt to steal an election by using various intelligence connections in the FBI and CIA to dig up dirt on candidate Trump in the form of a fake Russia dossier, then petition the DOJ with only parts of it, to get a warrant to spy on him and ultimately discredit him. Then in the event he won, use that dossier to concoct a fake Trump/Russia collusion scandal in order to delegitimize and hopefully reverse the Trump Presidential victory. This was treasonous and seditious to its core and those conspirators should be investigated as thoroughly as Mueller investigated Trump and all of his acquaintances.
The second was the Mainstream media's part in all of this mess. They so eagerly bought into the false narrative and went out of their way, like good little bolsheviks, and disseminated unproven and unsubstantiated "fake news" that was fed to them each morning by democrat operatives and consultants, 24/7/365 . Every mainstream media reporter (and I use that term loosely), and every late night talk host on CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, NY Times, Washington Post, and others, as well as every guest pundit opined without proof, and pounded the table to every lemming who would listen, that Trump had to be guilty and was in fact guilty because, well, they didn't like him. These reporters and pundits spread rumors, called him names such as racist and nazi, etc, etc, with no basis in fact, which was an historically new low, even for state based propaganda. (FOX news, to their credit, did not). This agenda driven media overstepped the boundaries of good reporting and journalistic ethical standards and set the news business back 250 years. What American journalists, reporters and pundits did in the name of the first amendment "free press" was a national and global disgrace.
VonSteever , 35 minutes ago linkWell said. You forget to mention, as did the article, Mueller's seditious criminal past. Worst of all - Madcow and the rest of the MSM did a serious smear job on the Russian government, at a time of already heightened propaganda against a country that could reduce the USA to ashes. Also - there is the collusion of the UK government and the equally ridiculous Skripal affair.
It is profoundly sad none of the ringleaders and real provocateurs will be prosecuted, and things will continue to deteriorate until there is a nuclear war. Because the entire system is rotten to the core and the citizens don't care about truth or justice.
Fuster-cluck , 10 minutes ago linkThanks for your additional comments. While I'm hopeful Hillary and her co-conspirators will be investigated, indicted, tried and found guilty of sedition and treason in breaking laws of at least 6 different acts, I don't believe Republicans have the spine or intestinal fortitude to make their case, even if they have proof beyond any reasonable doubt to the extent a first year law student could argue and win the case open and shut.
Also, I do not believe, even for one Milli-second, that public verbal sparring of political leaders or their hyperbole in the midst of tough negotiations, will ever lead civilized nations of the world to a nuclear war. it is done purely for effect and political strategy in their home nations.
That said, you are correct that the media's continuously negative anti-Trump, anti-America tone for two straight years, did not help trade negotiations or international relations, and in fact, put the US at a distinct disadvantage. It's a small wonder President Trump has achieved all the successes he has in spite of this. He deserves great credit.
artistant , 1 hour ago linkSince this will be military tribunals, there does not need to be much political spine. Just one order from, say, CINC...
duo , 1 hour ago linkThat's the ONLY THING Trump has to show for.
Meanwhile,
as America 's economy crumbles,
Trump is busy giving Israhell stolen land
and carte blanche to go on with CRIMES vs Humanity .
M.A.G.A. is out
K.A.K.A. is in (Keep America Kabalah Again)
buzzsaw99 , 1 hour ago linkMueller knew this was all lies and BS within weeks of taking the job and put on this charade for 2 YEARS and ruined the lives of innocent people. Mueller is not the good guy here at all.
fanbeav , 1 hour ago linkThat was characteristic of the collusion that actually occurred between the Hillary campaign, the FBI, the DOJ, the CIA, the NSA, the UK's MI6 intel agency, and the Obama White House...
awesome!
Ribeye , 1 hour ago linkAfter the IG report is released in April, we need to start real investigations. Congressional and Senate hearings are kabuki! President Trump needs to hire outside lawyers as a special counsel to get to the bottom of this treason! I don't trust anyone in DOJ to do that!
fuglysheepleco , 1 hour ago linkIt's on..Trump just made an extremely strong statement about "this must NEVER happen to ANY President EVER again" in response to a question from a journo..
It's go time...the counterattack is live..
Q just confirmed it..
It's Hammer Time...
This implies they have any concept of decency or shame to begin with.
They've been planning the SpecialCounsel-Russiagate to Congressional-Obstruction pivot since 2017... as continued albatross around Trump & MAGA's neck.
Trump better get voter fraud under control to win 2020.
Mar 25, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com
3. IMO a great opportunity has been lost for improving relations with the Russian thermonuclear power. Only hyper-nationalist madmen like Brennan and Clapper and ignorant Jingos like Bolton and Pompeo can imagine that an improvement in relations with a country which can destroy you was not a good idea. Trump hoped for that and the Russiagate hoax blocked any possibility for improvement. The Russian government unsuccessfully sought to tinker with our election? Yes, and they will again. That is part of the Game of Nations. Grow up, Americans! It is our responsibility to foil such attempts. We have done similar things since we first emerged on the world stage. We can make a list of those events if you like.
... ... ...
5. Nadler, Schiff and Elijah Cummings wish to continue the farcical pursuit of Trump on all sides of earth until he "spouts black blood and roll fin out." As has been said, the House committees headed by these people lack the funds, personnel and authorities to dig up the masses of data which Mueller's office possessed. It is for this reason that they want all the Mueller data. They hope to sift through it to find things that they can claim constitute grounds for a plausible bill of impeachment. Well pilgrims, Barr would be wise to remember that the Mueller report AND all its supporting documents are Executive Branch assets, not assets of the Congress. There is no reason to give the Congress anything that is classified (secret), Grand Jury testimony or information that should be concealed to allow for the functioning of the presidency (Executive Privilege). So, don't give it to them! Let them sue you. Let the Supreme Court decide.
Mar 25, 2019 | jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com
Russiagate was a diversion and a distraction from the real work to be done, that of reforming the political and financial systems and putting an end to this predatory economy and its damaging bubbles. No one in the public was a winner in this."Some time ago I suggested that this implausible and histrionic Russia-gate investigation fomented by the Clintonistas appears to be a thinly-veiled fishing expedition. The target is not any significant 'collusion' to throw the election, but much more likely [to be] obstruction of justice, coming off dodgy private real estate deals and assorted financial arrangements involving money laundering..."
Jesse, 11 January 2018
The criminal investigations will be conducted by the Southern District of New York. And those are underway. Anyone who has followed Donald's career knows how deep into the seamier side of NYC real estate development he has been, with all that this implies.
The Banks must be restrained, and the financial system reformed, with balance restored to the economy, before there can be any sustainable recovery.
Dec 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
charlie_don't_surf , 10 minutes ago link
youshallnotkill , 19 minutes ago linkGet ready Dems, Hell is coming to breakfast.
Bricker , 24 minutes ago linkTrump never ceases to crack me up. While his (terrible) current lawyer, declares on TV that there was collusion but it just didn't last long, Trump calls his former lawyer/fixer at "Rat".
This is just too funny, I mean this is the President of the United States calling his former personal lawyer a "Rat" which of course is a common mob term for a witness testifying against you.
monkeyshine , 1 hour ago linkHow you can tell that MSM is the front man for the CIA...nothing happens until MSM picks up the story
AHBL , 59 minutes ago linkOf course it never happened, just like Manafort didn't make 3 trips to London to meet Julian Assange. These fictions were just used as a pretext for diving into the backgrounds of Trump's political supporters and find crimes to charge them with.
The Cohen raid was particularly egregious, a likely violation of attorney-client privilege. Not suprisingly the American Bar Association is silent.
GoldenDonuts , 47 minutes ago linkSo, Manafort never laundered money and failed to report taxes? Did Flynn never fail to report his work as a foreign agent? Did he also not report income taxes?
Look at all these poor crooks, unfairly being prosecuted for cheating and stealing.
brewing_it , 33 minutes ago linkKeep drinking the koolaid.
Bricker , 57 minutes ago linkAll that could have been prosecuted by a district attorney. They looked at all of Manafort's dealings 10 years ago and passed because he was working with the Podesta Group at the time and thus protected by Hillary Clinton's influence.
The next two years will be insiders admitting fault...Sprinkling 1 at a time every few weeks.
As they back away before 2020 elections. Pucking democrats are the scum of the earth
Google matched content |
Hudson Blankenship @HudsonBlankens3 · Apr 5
Society
Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers : Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy
Quotes
War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes : Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce : Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes
Bulletin:
Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law
History:
Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds : Larry Wall : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS : Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development : Scripting Languages : Perl history : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history
Classic books:
The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month : How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite
Most popular humor pages:
Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor
The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D
Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
|
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site |
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.
Last modified: September, 11, 2020