|
|
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 | |||||||
| Home | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section
|
|
Switchboard | ||||
| Latest | |||||
| Past week | |||||
| Past month | |||||
 |
 |
 |
Jan 11, 2017 | consortiumnews.com
Sen. John McCain admitted Wednesday that he gave the FBI a dossier detailing claims of a Russian blackmail plot against President-elect Donald Trump.
The Arizona lawmaker, a longtime Trump critic, made the public statement as questions piled up about his alleged role in spreading an unverified and error-riddled document that Trump has denounced as "a complete and total fabrication."
"Late last year, I received sensitive information that has since been made public," McCain said. "Upon examination of the contents, and unable to make a judgment about their accuracy, I delivered the information to the Director of the FBI. That has been the extent of my contact with the FBI or any other government agency regarding this issue."
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
Have you ever wondered why mainstream media outlets, despite being so fond of dramatic panel debates on other hot-button issues, never have critics of the Russiagate narrative on to debate those who advance it? Well, in a recent Real News interview we received an extremely clear answer to that question, and it was so epic it deserves its own article.
Real News host and producer Aaron Maté has recently emerged as one of the most articulate critics of the establishment Russia narrative and the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory, and has published in The Nation some of the clearest arguments against both that I've yet seen. Luke Harding is a journalist for The Guardian where he has been writing prolifically in promotion of the Russiagate narrative, and is the author of New York Times bestseller Collusion: Secret Meetings, Dirty Money, and How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win.
In theory, it would be hard to find two journalists more qualified to debate each side of this important issue. In practice, it was a one-sided thrashing that The Intercept 's Jeremy Scahill accurately described as "brutal".
The term Gish gallop , named after a Young Earth creationist who was notoriously fond of employing it, refers to a fallacious debate tactic in which a bunch of individually weak arguments are strung together in rapid-fire succession in order to create the illusion of a solid argument and overwhelm the opposition's ability to refute them all in the time allotted. Throughout the discussion the Gish gallop appeared to be the only tool that Luke Harding brought to the table, firing out a deluge of feeble and unsubstantiated arguments only to be stopped over and over again by Maté who kept pointing out when Harding was making a false or fallacious claim.
In this part here , for example, the following exchange takes place while Harding is already against the ropes on the back of a previous failed argument. I'm going to type this up so you can clearly see what's happening here:
Harding: Look, I'm a journalist. I'm a storyteller. I'm not a kind of head of the CIA or the NSA. But what I can tell you is that there have been similar operations in France, most recently when President Macron was elected ? -
Maté: Well actually Luke that's not true. That's straight up not true. After that election the French cyber-intelligence agency came out and said it could have been virtually anybody.
Harding: Yeah. But, if you'll let me finish, there've been attacks on the German parliament ? -
Maté: Okay, but wait Luke, do you concede that the France hack that you just claimed didn't happen?
Harding: [pause] What? -- ?that it didn't happen? Sorry?
Maté: Do you concede that the Russian hacking of the French election that you just claimed actually is not true?
Harding: [pause] Well, I mean that it's not true? I mean, the French report was inconclusive, but you have to look at this kind of contextually. We've seen attacks on other European states as well from Russia, they have very kind of advanced cyber capabilities.
Maté: Where else?
Harding: Well, Estonia. Have you heard of Estonia? It's a state in the Baltics which was crippled by a massive cyber attack in 2008, which certainly all kind of western European and former eastern European states think was carried out by Moscow. I mean I was in Moscow at the time, when relations between the two countries were extremely bad. This is a kind of ongoing thing. Now you might say, quite legitimately, well the US does the same thing, the UK does the same thing, and I think to a certain extent that is certainly right. I think what was different last year was the attempt to kind of dump this stuff out into kind of US public space and try and influence public opinion there. That's unusual. And of course that's a matter of congressional inquiry and something Mueller is looking at too.
Maté: Right. But again, my problem here is that the examples that are frequently presented to substantiate claims of this massive Russian hacking operation around the world prove out to be false. So France as I mentioned; you also mentioned Germany. There was a lot of worry about Russian hacking of the German elections, but it turned out? -- ?and there's plenty of articles since then that have acknowledged this? - ? that actually there was no Russian hack in Germany.
In the above exchange, Maté derailed Harding's Gish gallop, and Harding actually admonished him for doing so, telling him "let me finish" and attempting to go on listing more flimsy examples to bolster his case as though he hadn't just begun his Gish gallop with a completely false example .
That's really all Harding brought to the debate. A bunch of individually weak arguments, the fact that he speaks Russian and has lived in Moscow, and the occasional straw man where he tries to imply that Maté is claiming that Vladimir Putin is an innocent girl scout. Meanwhile Maté just kept patiently dragging the debate back on track over and over again in the most polite obliteration of a man that I have ever witnessed.
The entire interview followed this basic script. Harding makes an unfounded claim, Maté holds him to the fact that it's unfounded, Harding sputters a bit and tries to zoom things out and point to a bigger-picture analysis of broader trends to distract from the fact that he'd just made an individual claim that was baseless, then winds up implying that Maté is only skeptical of the claims because he hasn't lived in Russia as Harding has.
jeremy scahill 0
@jeremyscahill
This @aaronjmate interview is brutal. He makes mincemeat of Luke Harding, who can't seem to defend the thesis, much less the title, of his own book: Where's the 'Collusion' - YouTube
11:03 AM-Dec 25, 2017
Q 131 11597 C? 1,148The interview ended when Harding once again implied that Maté was only skeptical of the collusion narrative because he'd never been to Russia and seen what a right-wing oppressive government it is, after which the following exchange took place:
Maté: I don't think I've countered anything you've said about the state of Vladimir Putin's Russia. The issue under discussion today has been whether there was collusion, the topic of your book.
Harding: Yeah, but you're clearly a kind of collusion rejectionist, so I'm not sure what sort of evidence short of Trump and Putin in a sauna together would convince you. Clearly nothing would convince you. But anyway it's been a pleasure.At which point Harding abruptly logged off the video chat, leaving Maté to wrap up the show and promote Harding's book on his own.
You should definitely watch this debate for yourself , and enjoy it, because I will be shocked if we ever see another like it. Harding's fate will serve as a cautionary tale for the establishment hacks who've built their careers advancing the Russiagate conspiracy theory , and it's highly unlikely that any of them will ever make the mistake of trying to debate anyone of Maté's caliber again.
The reason Russiagaters speak so often in broad, sweeping terms? - saying there are too many suspicious things happening for there not to be a there there, that there's too much smoke for there not to be fire? - ? is because when you zoom in and focus on any individual part of their conspiracy theory, it falls apart under the slightest amount of critical thinking (or as Harding calls it, "collusion rejectionism"). Russiagate only works if you allow it to remain zoomed out, where the individually weak arguments of this giant Gish gallop fallacy form the appearance of a legitimate argument.
Well, Harding did say he's a storyteller.
* * *
Thanks for reading! My work here is entirely reader-funded so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following me on Twitter , bookmarking my website , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . Our Hidden History 4 days ago (edited) That Harding tells Mate to meet Alexi Navalny, who is a far right nationalist and most certainly a tool of US intelligence (something like Russia's Richard Spencer) was all I needed to hear to understand where Luke is coming from.
He's little more than an intelligence asset himself if his idea of speaking to "Russians" is to go and speak to a bunch of people who most certainly have their own ties back to the western intelligence agencies.
That's not how you're going to get the truth about Russia. He's all appeals to authority - Steele's most of all, even name dropping Kerry. To finally land on "oh well if you would read my whole book" is just getting to the silly season. Also "well this is the kind of person Putin is" is a terrible argument. This isn't about either Putin or Trump really, its about the long history of US-Russia relations and all that has occurred. Also, the ubiquitous throwing around of accusations of the murder of journalists in Russia is a straw man argument, especially when it is just thrown in as some sort of moral shielding for a shabby argument.
Few in the US know about these cases or what occurred, or of the many forces inside of Russia that might be involved in murdering journalists just as in Mexico or Turkey. But these cases are not explained - blame is merely assigned to Putin himself. Of course if someone here discusses he death of Michael Hastings, they're a "conspiracy theorist", but if the crime involves a Russian were to assign the blame to Vladimir Putin and, no further explanation is required.
|
|
|
Dec 30, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Jen , Dec 28, 2017 2:49:47 PM | 1
Finally an opportunity comes to offer B and MoA commenters a nice little Christmas present, courtesy of ZeroHedge who have in the past reposted some of B's articles on their site.Anonynmous , Dec 29, 2017 6:16:02 AM | 34True, ZH reposted this priceless gift from Caitlin Johnstone's own site but she seems to have given her permission for the reposting.
Why priceless? - well who doesn't want to see the ever smug Luke Harding and his idiotic and baseless arguments about Russian intrigue and inteference in US and European politics taken down in a well-deserved thrashing by Aaron Mate?
Priceless to read the transcript and priceless to watch.
What Happens When A Russiagate Skeptic Debates A Professional Russiagater
Jen / 1Anonynmous , Dec 29, 2017 11:03:36 AM | 46Luke Harding gets exposed for the fraud he really is and in such a way then!
If b has time I think he should make a post just about that interview/harding because he seems to fool alot of people with these claims he is making.Re: On Luke Harding interview, give the guy who exposed him some credit if you have Twitter,Tony_0pmoc , Dec 29, 2017 12:31:06 PM | 50
https://twitter.com/aaronjmateIts is people like him, b etc that makes the big work these days researching and exposing the corruption of this world.
Anonymous @ 46I did watch the Luke Harding interview, largely as a result of Caitlin Johnstone, who I have enormous respect for. However, I do not do Twitter. Incidentally, Julian Assange of all people, brilliantly exposed Luke Harding (and the Guardian) in 2015. You can smell the sense of betrayal.
http://www.newsweek.com/assange-how-guardian-milked-edward-snowdens-story-323480
|
|
|
Dec 30, 2017 | theduran.com
Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson spoke with US House investigators in a closed-door meeting Tuesday, and confirmed what many in the non-establishment media already knew that Fusion GPS never verified the Dossier claims before passing on the ridiculous document to the corrupt establishment press.
According to The Gateway Pundit , Herridge also said that her source told her that Glenn Simpson was "upset" when Comey re-opened Hillary's email investigation at the end of October and wanted to push back.
And he did
On October 31st, 2016 with just days to go until election day, David Corn of Mother Jones broke the story of a 'veteran spy' who gave the FBI information on Trump's alleged connections to Russia. Christopher Steele, British spy and author of the garbage dossier was not named in this Mother Jones report. Only hints of the dossier were published; the salacious claims were omitted.
Hillary Clinton was disappointed the entire dossier hadn't been published in full prior to the election. After all, she paid millions of dollars for the smear document.
The author of the dossier, Christopher Steele was also desperate to get the salacious document out to the public. He told David Corn of Mother Jones, "The story has to come out."
A week later, Hillary Clinton and the Democrats were in utter shock when Trump won the presidential election. Desperate to delegitimatize him, BuzzFeed published the entire dossier on January 10th, right before the inauguration.
According to the Washington Post , the FBI agreed to pay the British Spy who compiled the garbage dossier after the election to continue to dig up dirt on Trump and Russia.
The FBI pulled out of this arrangement once the author of the dossier, Christopher Steele was publicly identified in media reports.
Comey FBI also used the largely debunked Trump dossier, which alleged Russian ties to the President's campaign associates, to convince a judge to grant them a FISA warrant, allowing them to secretly monitor Trump campaign official Carter Page.
Guy , November 16, 2017 2:02 PM
obidiah_slope , November 16, 2017 11:57 AMTotally BUSTED ! Scam artists that they are. So how much money is the wild goose chase going to cost American taxpayers. When are they going to start indicting some of these scumbags, this is getting old already.
john vieira , November 17, 2017 1:49 AMSmug looking bastard isn't he?
Remember..."It is honourable to deceive the 'infidel'." This is just an 'inkling' of how far our mainstream media and 'establishment politicians' have waded into this 'cesspool'....
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2017 | www.thenation.com
Luke Harding's new book, Collusion: Secret Meetings, Dirty Money, and How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win , doesn't claim to have definitive proof that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia to win the election. Still, Harding, who served as The Guardian 's Moscow bureau chief for four years before being thrown out of the country for his critical reporting on Vladimir Putin's government, presents a powerful case for Russian interference, and Trump campaign collusion, by collecting years of reporting on Trump's connections to Russia and putting it all together in a coherent narrative.It's the sheer breadth of connections, many of them dating back 20 years or more, between Trump and his associates and Russians with close ties to the Kremlin that put the lie to Trump's repeated claims that he has no ties to Russia.
If all of these dealings were on the up-and-up, Trump and his crew wouldn't have gone to such great lengths to obscure them. Couple that with the intelligence community's conclusions about Russia's active-measures campaign, and the fact that, as both a candidate and as president, Trump has consistently staked out positions that perfectly align with Moscow's, and it's clear that this is all far from a partisan "witch hunt."
In an interview with The Nation , Harding was quick to acknowledge that there's a lot that we don't know. "I think when it comes to following the money, we only have maybe 10 or 15 percent of the story," he said. "I think 85 percent of that story is still submerged."
Nonetheless, he says that what we do know so far is significant.
I think this is a huge story. Without wanting to come across as hyperbolic, I think it's bigger than Watergate because this isn't one set of Americans doing dirty tricks to another set of Americans, as was the case back in the '70s. This is one set of Americans basically contracting with a powerful foreign power to help it cripple an opponent, Hillary Clinton. The stakes are much larger.
I think [Vladimir] Putin has kind of done this quite cleverly. He's not some kind of evil villain in a cave flipping red switches. He's essentially an opportunist who has very adroitly taken advantage of problems in the West, and divisions in American society -- whether they're cultural or racial or political -- and he's sought to exploit and instrumentalize them for his own purposes.
There are also really interesting questions about how far back Russia's relationship with Donald Trump goes. One thing my book makes clear, or seeks to make clear, is that the Russians play a very long game. They've been interested in Donald Trump for a very long time.
|
|
|
Sep 09, 2015 | off-guardian.org
Luke Daniel Harding (born 1968) studied English at University College, Oxford. While there he edited the student newspaper Cherwell . He worked for The Sunday Correspondent , the Evening Argus in Brighton and then the Daily Mail before joining The Guardian in 1996. He was the Guardian's Russia correspondent from 2007-11.
Aside from his more publicly known achievements, it's worth noting Harding was accused of plagiarism by Mark Ames and Yasha Levine of the eXile for publishing an article under his own name that lifted large passages almost verbatim from their work. The Guardian allegedly redacted portions of Harding's article in response to these accusations.
According to his own testimony , Luke Harding is the guy who realised he was in the siloviki cross hairs one day when, during his stay in Moscow as the Guardian's bureau chief, he came home and found one of his bedroom windows open.
A less situationally-aware person would have made the fatal mistake of thinking one of his kids or his wife had done it, or he'd done it himself and just forgotten, or that his landlord had popped in to air the rooms (a bit of a tendency in Russia apparently). But Luke was sure none of his family had opened the window. So it had to have been the FSB.
You see, Luke isn't confined as we are by the constraints of petty mundanity. That was why it had been so clear to him, even without any evidence , that the FSB had murdered Litvinenko. And that was why Luke took one look at that open window and realised the entire Russian intelligence machine was out to get him .
The dark symbolism of the open window in the children's bedroom was not hard to decipher: take care, or your kids might just fall out. The men – I assume it was men – had vanished like ghosts.
And that was only the start of the vicious campaign that was to follow. Tapes were left in his cassette deck, when he knew he hadn't put them there. An alarm clock went off when he knew he hadn't set it. Luke was filled with " a feeling of horror, alarm, incredulity, bafflement and a kind of cold rational rage."
Things developed rapidly. Luke went to visit a woman called Olga who warned him to take care, because he was "an enemy of Putin." He was sure someone had hacked his email account. Whenever he said the name "Berezovsky" his phone line would go dead, so he started using the word "banana" instead. A person from the Russian president's office called and asked for his mobile number. Unable to imagine a single good reason why a Russian government official would need a cell phone number for the Guardian's Russia bureau chief, he refused.
That wily Putin wasn't going to catch him that easily. The game of cat and mouse had begun.
A middle-aged woman with a bad haircut knocked at his door at 7am, and walked away when he opened it. Had she just gone to the wrong door? Of course not, it was the FSB taunting him. At the airport on his way back to London a man with a Russian accent (in Moscow!) tapped him on the back and told him there was something wrong with his jacket. Noticing the man was wearing a leather coat, which meant he must be from the KGB, Luke immediately rushed to the gents and took off all his clothes to find the "bugging device" the man had planted on him. He didn't find one, but that didn't mean it wasn't there.
When the Russian government launched its prosecution of Berezovsky for fraud, someone from the FSB phoned Luke and asked him to come in and make a statement about the interview he'd conducted with the man a short time before. They also advised him to bring a lawyer, which seemed sinister to Luke. A man called Kuzmin interviewed him for 55 minutes. Luke got quite thirsty, but wouldn't drink the fizzy water he was offered, because he was pretty sure it had been tampered with. Surprisingly Kuzmin didn't interrogate him as expected, but Luke decided this was because the FSB were trying to intimidate him. They probably didn't need to do an interrogation, thought Luke, since they'd been breaking in to his flat almost every day for like – ever , switching on his alarm clock and probably also bugging his phone.
After the western-backed Georgian invasion of South Ossetia Luke was amazed to note there was widespread antagonism toward western journalists in Moscow. And the FSB just would not leave him alone. Worried by this "campaign of brutishness" he decided to keep a log of the dreadful things they were doing. Reading this we find not only did they continue to regularly open his windows, they once turned off his central heating, made phantom ringing sounds happen in the middle of the night (Luke couldn't find where they were coming from), deleted a screen saver from his computer and left a book by his bed about getting better orgasms.
All this would have broken a lesser man. But Luke didn't break. Maybe that's why in the end, they knew they'd have to expel him like in the old Soviet days. Which is what they did. Well, they didn't renew his accreditation, which is the same thing. They pretended it was because he didn't have the right paperwork for an extended visa and offered him a short extension so his kids could finish up at school. But Luke knew it was actually a Soviet-style expulsion. Because Luke can always see the real game when most of us just can't.
He demanded to know if President Medvedev had been told – personally – that Luke was going home. The person in the press department he was speaking to just sort of looked at him and didn't say anything. Luke was pretty sure he worked for the FSB. So he went home, got on the lecture circuit and wrote a book all about his terrible experiences in Vladimir Putin's neo-Stalinist hell. But just when he thought all his espionage problems were over, they started up again when he began his book about Edward Snowden.
This time it was the NSA, GCHQ and a host of other western agencies stalking him. The PTB obviously realised that Luke's book would be much much more of a threat to national security than even Snowden himself, and did everything they could to try to stop him writing it. They followed him around (he knew they were agents because they had iPhones) and even used spy technology to remote-delete sentences from his computer – while he was typing them. Especially when he was writing mean things about the NSA. But after he typed "I don't mind you reading my manuscript but I'd be grateful if you don't delete it", they realised they'd met their match and stopped.
He wasn't sure if the culprits were NSA, GCHQ or a Russian hacker, but one thing it definitely wasn't was a glitchy keyboard.
I mean that would just be stupid.
NOTE: In case any of our readers are (understandably) inclined to think we must be making this up or exaggerating, we encourage them to read about it here and here in Luke's own words. You'll find we have merely summarised them.
Yes, he really does believe everything attributed to him in this article. He really does think the FSB were opening his windows. And he really did run to the public toilet and take all his clothes off because a man tapped him on the back in an airport.
We also recommend you take in this opinion piece by Julian Assange, and this one by a Brit ex-pat in Moscow.
After that feel free to complete the following questionnaire:
Is Luke Harding: "the reporter Russia hated" an "enemy of Putin" a borderline psychotic paranoiac, whose narcissistic delusions have been deliberately encouraged and exploited by an intelligentsia that will use any old crap it can find to further its agenda a bit of a tosser
Comments
PaulC says December 28, 2017
Luke Harding is indeed a piss-poor journalist. He is one of the reasons I gave up on the Grauniad after 20 years; and I persuaded my siblings to look farther afield for real news. Such an irrational man, unless of course you assume that he is not a hack but a low-level CIA stooge.London Grad says December 28, 2017The force once again fails to materialise for Luke as TheRealNews Aaron Maté sends him scurrying back to his conspiracy theories safespace during this brutal interview on Luke's latest fictional release titled "Collusion".Alfred Nassim says October 9, 2016http://therealnews.com/t2/story:20761:Debate:-Where%27s-the-%27Collusion#pop1
Even the Soros-Worshipper cargo cultists running the Guardian must surely realise by now that Luke's becoming a liability.
Luke Harding's article on Grozny and Chechnya is a classic of the sour grapes variety. "The once war-torn country has been transformed, but change has come at a price" https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/22/russia To the best of my knowledge, Chechnya is still enjoying its peace and prosperity – totally unsupportable.Flinx says August 13, 2016You have to remember that without old Luke we'd not have as much fun reading pages like this!!! That's likely the only positive outcome of what he writes but a very important one.Francis says September 11, 2015In this 'insane asylum' light relief coupled with 'some decent perspectives' is a god send. For those that like this page / the humour you might like this site: http://ckm3.blogspot.co.uk/
So, the time has come. Surrounded by the KGB (they no longer exist Ed) Surrounded by the KGB (they no longer exist!! Ed) i, Luke Harding pen this my last will and testament. For though the end has come, (Hurrah! Ed) my enemies made one final mistake, by thinking they could take me alive. They left me the Book, the noble karma sutraJen says September 10, 2015No Walter Mitty I, I carry no arsenic pills about me for such a mournful deed as this. No, I, a writer, a cavalier of the epistolary kind, shall use The Book they left me on my bedside table, the noble Kama sutra. And now, gently removing the cellophane – to my children I bequeath my writing talent, to Pussy Minor disturbance (here he seems to be attempting to outwit the KGB Ed.) my gift for self promotion, and to my wife, Phoebe, my greatest possession, my reputation. And now, gently removing the cellophane, (you see, phoebe, your bootless cries at bedtime fell not on deaf ears, I will use it once, as I promised) and turning the page, I see the very position with which to foil my enemies (who must almost be upon me, for I heard the catflap flap) – "Chicken Butter pasanda, also known as the headless chicken". (How ironic, Ed.) Like the chicken, my head also shall be hidden from view. Here goes! England, though I never knew you (very true, Ed) perhaps you will vouchsafe me a place among the poets? Here goes again! Butter? Tick. Dilate? Tick. Bloody hell, I never realised I had such a big head! Push! Push! They shall not catch me alive!
Like a candle in the wind .oooff! I really shouldn't have had extra beans. England, I do it for thee! But hold, what's this I see? Tracks? Caterpillar tracks? Tank tracks?!! My god! Wait till Shaun sees these, it's the biggest scoop of all time! And it's mine! I must stop this foolshness now. KGB, be damned! Maybe they'll now take me back at the Daily Mail. I must remove my head from my .
(at this point, the recording ends Ed. he will be missed Ed the world will be a sadder place Ed there will be less laughter in the world without him. Phew. Got it. Ed)
Being serious for a change, one has to ask: if Luke Harding is so lousy as a journalist, and The Guardian had to pay some compensation to The eXile for plagiarising Mark Ames and another guy's work, why didn't the paper send Harding back to journalism school to do an ethics course, as The Independent had to do with Johann Hari when he was caught plagiarising other work? Or why didn't The Guardian get rid of Harding?Steven Lacey says September 10, 2015Is LDH with The Guardian for the same reason that American news media like The New York Times and The Washington Post among others always had someone in their offices who couldn't spell or write to save their own lives, much less others' lives, but who rose up the ranks quickly nevertheless – because they were really working for the CIA?
Can you please do Lucas and the horrible Neo Con Weiss. Brilliant !Eric_B says September 10, 2015Luke wrote:Moscow Exile says September 10, 2015I ventured out the next morning. My laptop was in the unlocked safe. (It didn't contain any secrets; merely a work in progress.) A tall American immediately accosted me. He suggested we go sightseeing. He said his name was Chris. "Chris" had a short, military-style haircut, new trainers, neatly pressed khaki shorts, and a sleek steel-grey T-shirt. He clearly spent time in the gym. Tourist or spook? I thought spook.
I decided to go along with Chris's proposal: why didn't we spend a couple of hours visiting Rio's Christ the Redeemer statue? Chris wanted to take my photo, buy me a beer, go for dinner. I declined the beer and dinner, later texting my wife: "The CIA sent someone to check me out. Their techniques as clumsy as Russians." She replied: "Really? WTF?"
WTF indeed. Dude, Chris just fancied you.
Shortly before I was banned from Komment Macht Frei, Mr. Harding popped up in the CiF column in which I had just made a comment ridiculing his "journalism" to state that he believed that I am probably a member of the FSB.Mark Chapman (@MarkCha40189515) says September 9, 2015Luke Harding is not a journalist; he is the perennial centrefold in an imaginary magazine called "Smug Prick". There is an irreconcilable gap between the Luke Harding he sees in the mirror and the chowderhead we all know and mock. The Guardian keeps him on because it does not give a tin weasel why you read, just as long as you read. It does not care if you do so with gritted teeth, murmuring obscenities.Bryan Hemming says September 9, 2015Luke Harding, even tapping his name onto my keyboard makes me think he is watching over my shoulder. Get away! Luke! Get away!Dipset says September 9, 2015In terms of honesty and journalistic integrity when it comes to geopolitics, he is simply the worst journalist I've ever had the misfortune to read. When the whole Ukraine thing started and the Guardian thought all their readers were insular and stupid, they had our hero writing a whole slew of anti-Russia articles .alongside opening their comments section. Bad "mistake" on their part.Eric_B says September 9, 2015It did not take long for readers to start pointing out the hilarious lies, half truths and smears in Mr Harding's articles.
How did he/they respond ?
Not only did he start moderating comments himself, he (and Shaun Walker) had readers banned for highlighting the "inconsistency" in their reporting. Ha! Good luck with that.
It was quite pitiful to see him yesterday on the Grauniad's 'Troll Factory' story maoaning, whining and blaming the readers for not beliveing his "truthful" reporting on Russia haha.
It's going to be fascinating to see how he and his pals report the upcoming battle in Syria between Russia/Syria/Iran/China VS America/ISIS/Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Fun times
yes indeed, hilarious article on the Guardian about how people who dare to dispute their propaganda are either Russian or brainwashed.shatnersrug says April 7, 2016http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2015/sep/08/russia-troll-army-red-web-any-questions
Way to go Guardian, vilify your regular readership. That should really sort out your revenue problems.
Surely it's obvious to all that Luke Harding is an establishment stooge isn't it? He might even be MI5 (not 6 – he's not smart enough)Jim Scott says December 24, 2017Just started reviewing Harding's past articles and agree he is clearly a stooge but I can't decide whether he is Curly Larry or Mo.Nino says September 9, 2015"The dark symbolism of the open window in the children's bedroom was not hard to decipher: take care, or your kids might just fall out. The men – I assume it was men – had vanished like ghosts."Eric_B says September 10, 2015That there is just pure gold, it was written as a serious piece but even if it wasn't it would still be brilliant piece of comedy and sarcasm, but the fact that it's unintentionally funny and not a sarcasm is what makes it one of the greatest arrangements of words ever. Man sees an open window and "deciphers" that it was secret agents who opened it for the whole purpose of leaving him a "message" and then "vanished like ghosts". A whole script from an open window. Perhaps next time they will make an offer he can't refuse? Brilliant sketch, someone mentioned Inspector Clouseau in the comments but I have to say that Clouseau has nothing on this level of deduction skills, self importance and delusions of grandeur, or delusions in general. I read that thing many times now and its still hilarious as first time "The dark symbolism of the open window .."
There is a video of Carl Sagan where he explains how not to do science and logic and uses clouds on Venus as an example how to get a grand and completely wrong conclusion out of nothing, now know as The Venutian Dinosaur Fallacy:
"I can't see a thing on the surface of Venus. Why not? Because it's covered with a dense layer of clouds. Well, what are clouds made of? Water, of course. Therefore, Venus must have an awful lot of water on it. Therefore, the surface must be wet. Well, if the surface is wet, it's probably a swamp. If there's a swamp, there's ferns. If there's ferns, maybe there's even dinosaurs. -Observation: we can't see a thing on Venus. Conclusion: dinosaurs."
I think that Harding perhaps gave us even better example.
Who knows what the terrifying window openers might do on a subsequent visit? Perhaps give Luke and Phoebe an air freshener or even a pot pourri?Rob Baggott says September 9, 2015Luke saw Russian tanks cross the border into Ukraine despite being 26 miles from the border crossing with a Russian aid convoy. Despite there being a 5000 foot elevation between where he actually was to where the border crossing was.Despite there being EU monitors at the border crossing who did not see any tanks.When I pointed this out to Luke,as a comment on his Guardian article,the article comments section disappeared and the placement of Russian tanks at the border changed to a different border crossing.All of my previous comments were purged,any other comments were moderated meaning an effectual ban and Luke carried on as if nothing had happened.Something did happen,he stopped saying he personally saw Russian tanks because he had been busted.In my opinion he is paid handsomely to post,anything,negative against Russia and sometimes he just makes shit up when his wife needs a new kitchen appliance.He is obviously a tosser to boot.BlackCatte says September 9, 2015Actually it was that other bastion of serous journalism Shaun Walker who saw the invisible invasion. Luke would be too scared of getting zapped by mind rays to get that close to a Russian tank.Eric_B says September 9, 2015Yeah that was good old shaun. shaun also saw a Russian vehicle somewhere in ukraine with peacekeeping symbols from Chechnya. there was actually a photo of that one. unfortunately it was impossible to verify where and when the photo was taken and no other such vehicle with those markings has ever been seen before or since in ukraine. the woman who supposedly took the photo had a long history of photographing Russia vehicles in Chechnya.Francis says September 10, 2015Nice to see we're developing a decent comments section as well, keep it up .astabada says September 23, 2015Luke did take pictures of the Russian tanks entering Ukraine, but the FSB promptly deleted any footage.Jennifer Hor says September 10, 2015Luke wouldn't even have taken any photos of the Russian tanks. He would have thought the tanks were sent after him and he would taken off like a rabbit. Even if the tanks were going in the other direction.Moscow Exile says September 11, 2015BTW Luke's wife Phoebe Taplin (also a journalist) wrote a series of books about walking in Moscow at different times of the year according to season and exploring the city's parks and open spaces on foot while they were stationed there. Folks, make of that what you will.
"Moscow walks. Spring" by Phoebe Taplin goes on sale
http://themoscownews.com/ournews/20120503/189687562.htmlMrs. Harding's articles in the now defunct "Moscow News" were always an interesting and informative read, I thought.Katherine Da Silva (@KathyDaSilva2) says September 9, 2015I think he has survived as a journalist which is in a way commendable. However, he irritated Glenn Greenwald, when he interviewed him because Glenn could see the details Luke was interested in writing about were literally going to be the material for a book, and I think Glenn had not finished his own at that point! So a bit exploitive to say the least. It's an irony that the Snowden film produced/directed by Oliver Stone is going to be based on Luke's version not Glenn, guess who gains financially for example.BlackCatte says September 9, 2015Personally I'm not sure Luke has ever been anything definable as a journalist – but he definitely has survived.Yonatan says September 9, 2015Tricky – a mix of 3 and 4 might do it.Rhisiart Gwilym says September 9, 2015On the other hand, you have to give him credit for foresight – moving from the Daily Mail to the Guardian before it was fashionable. Maybe his talents alone explain the lack of substantive difference between these two organs of State.
E L Wisty used to shout "Get away, silly old government!" down his loo, because he knew they were bugging it.Jen says September 9, 2015If I didn't know that Luke Harding was a journalist, I'd have thought he was a comedian in the tradition of Peter Sellers overdoing Inspector Clouseau in too many Pink Panther sequels.Eric_B says September 9, 2015Mr Harding is a huge threat to the ruthless Russian government due to his fearless journalism, but rather than off him with some polonium tea or crumpets they decided to leave a sex manual by his bed.yalensis says September 10, 2015Was the idea that Mr Harding would die from over exertion?
When KGB left the orgasm manual, that was Putin's way of voting #4: "Tosser".Jennifer Hor says September 10, 2015Even the sudden appearance of the Kama Sutra in English by the bedside table would have aroused LDH's suspicions. What, he would have wondered, were the terrifying secrets encoded in the manual?Brad Benson says September 10, 2015Maybe his wife left the book because she was tired of walking through parks in Moscow by herself.
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2017 | www.amazon.com
Amazon Customer , November 29, 2017
If there is a smoking gun that proves that Trump is beholden to Russia, I want to know about it. Having slogged through this book, though, I can tell you that the smoking gun is not here. That is disappointing, because the cover of the book implies that proof of collusion will be provided. Instead, the book provides a series of "it seemed as if something more was going on" types of speculations. It also restates everything you already know about the alleged scandal.
Some readers will be happy with this book -- primarily those who are already certain that Trump is controlled by Russia, despite the lack of evidence to that effect. If you are a liberal looking for confirmation bias, this book will make you nod knowingly.
Other readers should note that this book accepts the controversial "Russian dossier" about Trump on face value, even though the dossier has been debunked by Newsweek, Bob Woodward, and others, while the New York Times (embarrassed by initially treating the dossier as legitimate) has called it "unsubstantiated." This book's perspective on the dossier is to the left of even the New York Times. At one point, the book references the publication Mother Jones as a mainstream news source -- that says everything you need to know about the author's political slant.
This book provides no insight into Donald Trump himself. If you want to learn something about how Trump's mind works, try Scott Adams' excellent book, Win Bigly: Persuasion in a World Where Facts Don't Matter .
Good source of confirmation bias, bad source of new informationBy Amazon Customer on December 16, 2017azon.com/gp/customer-reviews/ROHSECZT4AORE/ref=cm_cr_getr_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0525562516">
This book is very deceptive! beware of confirmation bias!I just got through reading this and I have to say if you are looking for a book with nothing but conjecture and shaky circumstantial evidence built upon a "dossier" filled with VERIFIABLE lies from an operative that was hired by the Clintons, then this will be a delight to read! This book will do nothing but reinforce your confirmation bias!
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Thominus , Dec 27, 2017 2:52:00 AM | 81
@Ike , Dec 27, 2017 3:39:17 AM | 82The New Zealand flagship National Radio channel recently played an interview of the above mentioned plagiarist Luke Harding https://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018624819 It is interesting to compare the free ride he is given by the interviewer, Kim Hill, noticeably anti-Russian, and the far more intelligent approach from Aaron Mate of the Real News.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1731&v=9Ikf1uZli4g
The irony of the NZ interviewer calling RT a Kremlin propaganda outlet while she works for a state run broadcaster and promotes Harding's rubbish book is stunning.
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2017 | www.youtube.com
RVGODZILLA , 4 days ago (edited)How can this guy write a whole book about the "collusion" and not give a single clear proof in the interview. He is a prime example of the Russiagate supporters. Good Job Aaron!
MI55ION , 4 days agoThat was the best interview I've watched in awhile about this trumprussia stuff // Aaron mate you did a stellar fckn job bro! Cheers!
eglaham , 4 days agoAaron is boss in this interview... damn I've watched 5 mins so far and this "author" has shown himself already to be a complete tool. The only opportunist I see here is him cashing in on this anti Russian craze that only serve the interests of Intel agencies and the Democratic party insiders.
Peace Beuponyou , 4 days agoThanks for keeping this joker honest, Aaron!
M V , 4 days agoWell done interview Aaron. I want to see Trump go down, but we do need to have proof. That is called justice. He may have colluded to get dirt on Hilary, just like Hilary getting dirt on Obama and Trump as well but the outcome of our recent presidential election was the fault of the DNC itself. If PROOF comes out on Trumps wrong doing, then that is when you write a book about it. Not a book on trying to build a ridiculous connecting of the dots of similar situations. Yes, looking at past history is important but to make a fabricated scenario is irresponsible journalism. Until we have solid proof of actual tampering then we should do it the right way. I agree that Israel had more collusion and tampering with Trump yet this writer ignores that. Thank you Aaron for asking the real-questions. Much respect to you. Peace.
Sergio Rico , 4 days agoAaron Maté, you are gold. This so-called journalist was condescending and highly unprofessional throughout the interview to point where he most likely cut the line because he couldn't handle being interviewed by a real journalist and seeker of truth. His failure to directly answer Aaron's questions regarding evidence of collusion show his inability to be factual and impartial. The 'evidence' the author presents seems circumstantial at best and unconvincing. Thank you, the Real News Network. Your high standard of journalism is always appreciated by your loyal viewers.
beelovedfuzz , 4 days agoGood job Aaron for doing actual journalism and not simply taking statements with no evidence for granted
manti core , 4 days agoI love you, Aaron. You and the Real New are one of the few who actually challenges this ridiculous narrative. Trump is a horrible man but so is the rest of the US plutocracy. Making him out as some sort of special sort of evil is pathetic. He wasn't hired because of the Russians. He was hired because Americans cannot seem to understand that the changes they want from the economic system here in this country will not happen if they exclusively use voting as their change mechanism. Especially if they keep voting in the two fake opposition parties for all positions. Also, Mr. Harding, we don't need to read your book. We've been hearing this garbage through the mainstream media for over the last year. You are not providing anything new or any actual proof.
magicpony9 , 3 days ago (edited)That is just a brilliant destruction of the Russia hysteria. Harding just fell apart. Well done!
Luke O'Brien , 4 days ago (edited)Aaron: "What evidence is there of this?" Luke: "I was a Moscow correspondent for four years!" Aaron: "What evidence is there of this?" Luke: "Trump is nice to Putin and rude to other world leaders!" Aaron: "What evidence is there of this?" Luke: "What do you think Russian spy agencies do all day if not spy? Huh?"
tom robbins , 4 days agoI despise Trump, but where the fuck is Harding's evidence for collusion? He responds to direct questions with, "weeell..." and goes onto talking about obscure meetings with musical producers or vague connections with Russian business men. Or, worse still, reminding us how awful Putin is (what does that prove in regards to collusion?). And how dare he claim that he's living in the "empirical world," when he can't substantiate his headline - collision. Stunningly, he even suggests later on that skeptical people can't appreciate Putin! Cash-in, little more. Good job, Aaron.
rollofnickles , 4 days agoStoryteller told on himself
Niding , 4 days agoLuke is full of shit as he pushes hacking of the 2016 election. William Edward Binney[3] is a former highly placed intelligence official with the United States National Security Agency (NSA)[4] turned whistleblower who resigned on October 31, 2001, after more than 30 years with the agency. He was a high-profile critic of his former employers during the George W. Bush administration, and later criticized the NSA's data collection policies during the Barack Obama administration. In 2016, he said the U.S. intelligence community's assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election was false. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Binney_(U.S._intelligence_official) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv0-Lnv0d0k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoeJeWfoSpQ
Marta K. , 4 days agoAarons calm, but critical, questioning/demand for evidence is very refreshing. It has to be very uncomfortable for a guest that is acustomed to mainstream neo-libs/con journalists.
Kristen Saunders , 3 days agoI just ❤️ that look on Aaron's face at 11:47 ! Like "dude, you can't be serious... are you serious?"
Cartoonishly Inept , 4 days agoGreat interview! Awesome push back with facts! This should be done EVERYTIME!
441rider , 4 days agoSo this guy's whole body of evidence can be summarized as because Russia engages in espionage then that proves the collusion? Great interview Aaron, he wasn't expecting you to call out his bullshit, thought he didn't seemed at all phased by it. 10:30 "I'm a story teller." I think that sums this guy up pretty nicely.
MI55ION , 4 days agoFunny he lost his cool so fast and went into teacher mode, LOL! Good job interviewer this is how "stories" get vetted no matter how favorable they are to you position. :o)
frosty buckets , 4 days agoShit just got real... one of the finest interviews I've seen in a while. Bravo Aaron, bravo! ));
Michael Maxfield , 4 days agoThis is why I watch real news network. They are willing to debate the issues
Richard Gere , 4 days agoWatching this interview was like a breath of fresh air. You NEVER see a "journalist" challenge their guests on network TV (probably because guests are pre-screened to fit the prevailing orthodoxy). If we just had an army of Aarons doing the news, I think the world would be in a lot better shape.
Paul Randall , 4 days agoGood job, Aaron, thank you. It's not the first time I've been impressed by your objective questioning and reasoning that may offend a guest but leads to the truth. Good, unbiased journalism seems very rare these days
Baal Baphomet , 4 days agoBravo Aaron! This interview made me even happier I was able to scrounge up a few bucks to throw your guys way recently. Harding seems a raging establishment shill, with his connections and past (journalist based in Russia, big opposition fan, Oxford educated, Guardian) I would be shocked if he isn't at the least friendly with Mi5/6.
And I wouldn't be surprised if he had done work for them, which means he effectively still works for them (you never leave the intelligence club, you keep getting fat wads of cash on occasion while understanding that very bad things will happen if you turn on them). Again and again, he presented arguments which were whole cloth bullshit, either 'facts' that were proven untrue (like the bare-faced lie about Russian interference in the French elections) with laughable ease by Aaron, or threw a word salad of tales of nefarious Russia being nefarious to somehow 'prove' something completely unrelated, that Russia got Trump elected with a bunch of random, laughably tiny, obtuse efforts (a couple of ads on FB, some supposed Twitter trolls, RT, Pokeman f-ing Go (!) ) which are all that has been openly claimed.
And there is NO REAL EVIDENCE for that crap either, just the word of the always trustworthy spooks (a hand selected group from 3 agencies, btw) and some heavily leaned on establishment toadies in Silicon Valley. This book (I am guessing here- no, I have not nor will I waste my time reading it) appears to be a disgusting cash grab on the level of 'What Happened?', selling self-serving vacuous BS to credulous morons looking to feel better about the epic failure of their disgusting, characterless idol. Also will undoubtedly be a big hit with the McCain wing of right wing nuts, who have been itching for the fun of a REAL WAR (oh boy oh boy oh boy! mass tank clashes in Poland! carrier battle groups attacking Vladivostok!!!) with the always evil Reds... errr, Russians.
Disinformation trolls like this guy are willing to put in their two cents toward making that happen. How the fuck they look themselves in the mirror, especially if the have young people they care about, baffles me. But considering the Oxford background and government connections, his kids sure as hell won't be digging a trench frantically in ESTONIA (which I also have heard of, btw, you pompous, pompous puke). THANK YOU REAL NEWS! MORE LIKE THIS PLEASE!! :)
Michael , 4 days agothis is another nothing burger by a member of the UK MSM this time who should know better - Citing Chris Steele as a source for info is a complete joke - this guy needs to go back to Journo school .
Lissen Tome , 4 days agoWhat a great debate by Aaron. Slapped that jackass so many times & revealed how deceptive & outright false his position is. He has no evidence & is so condescending/arrogant despite the baselessness of his position.
Noss Cern , 4 days agoI'm not even a trump fan and dude there is no collusion this guy's a shill
arcanaco , 4 days ago (edited)I find blinking isn't usually a good sign - I do think Trump has had Russian money, some of it laundered, through his properties for decades and Russians probably have enough to place pressure on him in the same way Hillary could be compromised by Uranium One, he might have considerable debts owing. However Trump like Tillerson/Exxon and many others just want to get into Russia and start doing deals.
They are over this Brezinzski like need to crush Russia for all time that the deep state has got lined up.
I see Russiagate as a reverse Birther - Obama might be a US citizen but he grew up in Indonesia so lets give him shit for it - All of Wall street has been taking Russian money for years, but if ur President? - so now they can slowly dig up innuendo and possibly evidence of dodgy transactions all the while minimizing Wikileaks and the systemic corruption it revealed - I think its mainly a containment strategy while keeping Trump isolated and its working well but for people paying attention we are seeing the system at work and what its capacities are, how much empty propaganda can be pushed even after something like the Iraq war. Also part of a pattern with past outlier presidencies where there is a concerted push to restrict them to one term and in this case amplified by embedded Clinton allies.
Paddy Flaco , 3 days agoWait. Did he say Steele was involved in the Ukraine Coup? :))
miclewis55 , 4 days ago (edited)A kitten trying to climb out of a wood chipper. This was not easy to watch. It bordered on abuse. The assault on this conspiracy opportunist parasite was a fine example of real investigative journalism. By publishing this nonsense and then agreeing to go on an interview about it in public, he subjects himself to the most brutal humiliation.
Anticapitalist X , 4 days agoLuke is part of the UK metropolitan liberal elite. Still in shock that HRC was rejected by the US voters . Still in shock that UK deplorables voted for Brexit . His monumental arrogance is such that he believes we were too stupid to understand the issues and therefore were 'guided' by Russian propaganda. Aaron exposes Lukes lack of evidence perfectly.
John Mina , 4 days agoKudos to Aaron Mate and the Real News for asking Harding serious questions; the upshot is that this Harding character did not have shit to prove that Russia meddled with the US election. Good job Aaron Mate and the Real News.
Well done Aaron. This guy is a liar, plain and simple.
|
|
|
Sep 15, 2012 | marknesop.wordpress.com
Moscow Exile says: September 15, 2012 at 11:58 am
Something went wrong there!
Here's Tisdall on Russia:
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/may/08/putinputsthebootin?INTCMP=SRCH
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/30/russia-armenia-azerbaijan-nagorno?INTCMP=SRCH
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/19/vladimir-putin-russia?INTCMP=SRCH
- http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/27/mikhail-khodorkovsky-vladimir-putin?INTCMP=SRCH
And on and on
Tisdall's weekly spiel about the Evil Empire and its Dark Lord made many CiFers comment that he must report regularly to Chatham House, London, at weekends for briefings, after which he'd knock out some good, blood-curdling copy about Russia in order to please his masters.
I don't think that's far from the truth actually. As a matter of fact, I think many British "journalists" – Tisdall and Harding being prime examples thereof – primarily work for the British not-so-secret secret service, that they were recruited at university and were slotted into journalist employment to do their business of propagandizing. That might explain why Harding is such a god awful journalist that has had on occasion to take recourse to a spot of cut and paste plagiarism.
Tisdall and Harding being prime examples thereof – primarily work for the British not-so-secret secret service, that they were recruited at university and were slotted into journalist employment to do their business of propagandizing. That might explain why Harding is such a god awful journalist that has had on occasion to take recourse to a spot of cut and paste plagiarism.
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2017 | www.youtube.com
Greg McKenzie , 4 days agoZorro in Hell , 4 days agoThe Problem With Espionage The purpose of espionage is to keep your opponent at a disadvantage by cultivating an alternate reality in their mind that is different from the facts. Whatever the government or agency they work for an agent wants to distort your impressions of them and their own personal capabilities. All agents want you to believe that they don't have the capabilities, contacts, or powers that they actually do posses. By the same token secret agents want you to believe that they DO have capabilities, contacts, or powers that they, in fact, do NOT have. When deception is such an integral part of the game you are playing it makes sense to assume that you know less than you think you do. That's what actual journalism is about -- particularly when dealing with spies and espionage. In this video Aaron Mate' is acting like a real journalist. Luke Harding is not. "Real News" is getting the story right. Thank you! We need more real journalism.
jones1351 , 4 days agoLuke is just a fucking story teller, and thats it! Making money off of a book, in the middle of mass hysteria and group think! Great business move. I think ill write a book and call it "Got Him, Donald Trump will Eventually Go Down"!
Bryan Wallace , 1 day ago (edited)Imho, this guy's full of shit. Not quite ready for a 'Reynolds Wrap' hat, but seeing smoke where there's mist. Takes me back to when there were definitely WMD's in Iraq. To TRN's credit, they did give him a hearing. Which is more than the MSM gives to say, Chomsky or Hedges.
bboucharde , 4 days agoHe speaks Russian and has lived in Russia -- so I guess that settles it. LOL Maybe somebody ought to ask Sarah Palin about it, since you can actually see Russia from parts of Alaska. And the French intelligence report is inconclusive but if you get more context from reading his book, you will see that it may be inconclusive but is actually conclusive. (It's complicated.) And of course, he's lived in Berlin and he knows people there, so that proves the German elections were hacked too. And only the most hidebound skeptic could fail to see the smiley face connection. If you read his book you'll find out all this great context and facts that prove the Russians did it. It's too bad he couldn't provide any of that for us in this interview. (This whole thing has a sort of dog-ate-my-homework feel to it.)
Jared Greathouse , 4 days agoLuke, Now you should investigate the collusion between Russia and the Clinton Foundation---and the direct transfer of Russian funds to Bill Clinton.
dylan , 3 days agoThe main question NOBODY'S been able to answer me is that "What policies has Trump enacted, political, economic, military or otherwise, that benefits the interests of the Russian state?" As far as I can tell, Trump is either indifferent to the interests of the state of Russia, or is hostile, directly or indirectly, to them.
Tochukwu Azubike , 4 days ago (edited)"I'm a storyteller."
Consuelo Concepcion , 4 days agoI tried really hard to follow this story as credible without prejudice and it was just a bunch of babble without any evidence whatsoever.. this is just a re-print and re-title of the Steel dossier updated with MSNBC and CNN reportage
Raymoan Ford , 4 days agoThis entire collusion scheme is occurring because the Democrats can't admit that Hillary ran a horrible campaign and she's a murderer and a war criminal. I'm glad Mate is putting a fire under Harding's arse and trying to make him accountable for these specious speculations. I'm not a fan of either Putin or Trump, but this whole "scandal" has been little more than a massive distraction. I've speculated that the entire election was a CIA psychological operation to influence foreign policy to appease certain elements of the Deep State.
Dan Howard , 4 days agoAaron Mate should have read the book before interviewing the author about the book. LOL.
HongPong , 1 day agoGreat interview! Harding was getting uncomfortable.
Animal Farm , 4 days ago (edited)this interview is a good example of how TheRealNews is careful at what they cover -- and how far a British accent can help to inflate fuzzy claims!
Camcolito , 2 days agoI dislike Trump as much as the next man but when the Guardian publishes this BS it will only bolster Trump when the lies dissolve over time and the facts eventually come out. Sadly you might have never heard of Dr Udo Ulfkotte and his exposure that the CIA has an army of journalists on its payroll, especially in Europe. So why are you not questioning the integrity of this individual in more detail. These are the type of CIA and MI6 stooges that Tony Blair used to promote the illegal war against Iraq. When this CIA stooge says, 08:25 "I think that Russia played a role in last year's election is a matter of fact. This is only what US intelligence agencies believe" he must be assuming the majority of the US population are just ignorant fools. The US Intelligence agencies also believed Iraq had WMDs and the British Intelligence believed Saddam was sourcing nuclear material from Africa. This deceitful idiot Harding still pushes the idea the MI6 published Trump-Putin Dossier when it has been shown it was paid for by the DNC. So would you believe any intelligence agency whose motive is a push for war? And the best way to achieve this goal and have the misinformed population back the corrupted corporate government would be to promote this BS from this sleazy CIA puppet. If you get a chance, have a look at some other YouTube videos of the BS this CIA journalist produces: "The KGB left a sex manual after breaking into my home" or "Putin is Building an Empire" or the ever popular "Putin May Secretly Be One Of The World's Richest Men". Then may I suggest you look at any story on Russia by the truth-tellers, the whistleblowers that have actually been prosecuted for telling the truth in this fascist system: William Binney, Thomas Drake, John Kiriakou, or Ray McGovern. So there will always be some imbeciles that believe this fabrication just as there were some that believed the New York Times and the Washington Post about the Bush-Blair Iraq War rhetoric when the oligarchs' real intentions were so clearly stated by General Wesley Clark in his admission of "7 countries in 5 years". I am interested to know if TRN approached Harding or Harding was offered up to TRN as a CIA stooge to spew their propaganda. It is sad to see the Guardian employ such a hack; sure they are now a mouthpiece for the Empire but they have done some good work over the years. It is clear that Harding writes to influence the apathetic and the stupid; he conflates innuendo and supposition with fact in his attempt to distort perception and for the imbecile with no intellectual honesty; this is very effective. I find it frustrating that TRN attempts to expose this garbage when the oligarchs' MSM would lap it up. You would never hear the BBC or Maddow questioning this MI6-CIA stooge like Aaron Maté did. Aaron has done a competent job; not an effective job like one would expect from Paul Jay at questioning this farce but sadly, this is the best TRN has to offer. There will always be a number of scared and pathetic individuals within the population that will always be incapable of differentiating between fact and fantasy or between truth and lies. These are the Useful Idiots of Empire and they have been used to justify and instigate Imperial aggression since the beginning of time.
J Scott Bryant , 1 day agoMy God this guest is full of it.
Pete Smith , 3 days agoWhat a joke-- rambling, deflecting, with no evidence presented in almost 20 minutes!
Pete Smith , 3 days agoHost - So basically your proof of collusion = Putin is bad? Book author - No...but...yes...but...no...but...(logs off in a strop)
John Snow , 19 hours agoHost - So basically your proof of collusion = Putin is bad? Book author - No...but...yes...but...no...but...(logs off in a strop)
M.K. Styllinski , 17 hours ago (edited)Harding is an ordinary opportunist, useful idiot and evil man.
Klub Svetnikov , 4 days agoMaté wiped the floor with Harding. It's also interesting that Harding appeared to confuse Russian espionage with what is essentially Mossad-driven sexpionage when he mentioned the "swallows." He seems woefully ill-informed when it comes to dual nationality, Russian-Jewish mafia ties with Israel and Anglo-American foreign policy. This is also why Trump has been encircled with Russian corporate interests to a certain degree - they are connected to Russian-Israeli underworld objectives. Hence, the real conspiracy here is via Israeli intelligence working through its traditional syanim in both Russia and the United States.
Jon Stephen , 3 days agoThis lunatic Harding is trying to sell USA and CIA as pillars of truth, democracy and integrity, playing positive role in international affairs. How stupid and sold can a writer get?!
Michael , 2 days agoGood job Aaron! Luke Harding is bathing in the kool aid.
Paul Jackson , 4 days agoCan you imagine if the so-called journalists on MSM interviewed like Aaron. Think corporate MSNBC here, Chris Hayes, and Rachel Maddow.
minkusmaz , 3 days agoGood work again Aaron. Luke Harding and Marcy Wheeler would be such a cute couple, maybe populating the West with a new race of sycophants.
Ahmed Mansour , 2 days agoI love how this guy keeps harping the point that Mate should have read his entire book. This is so sad to watch, our media should be as critical as this, and this shows how far they are from that.
John Johnson , 1 day agoAaron was enjoying this a bit too much 😂😂👌🏽👌🏽. Great work
Aaron Childers , 1 day agoInterviewer: "Your book is called Collusion. What evidence do you present for an act of collusion?" Author: "Well, you see, Russians are bad and they do bad things, and you have to see a pattern of bad things, and Trump is bad, so <waves hands> you know, context." Interviewer: "I didn't hear any actual evidence there" Author: "Did you read my book? Because I say stuff in there that suggests that my title is true. Also, go to Russia and ask Russians, because you can trust them about what they have to say about the US election. Don't listen to me, listen to them." At this point I'm wondering if the author read his own book...
scuddymud2 , 4 days agoThat guy had become unhinged by the end of the interview. This is the same behavior I've seen from Russia-gaters when every talking point they bring up gets immediately debunked. I'm surprised he didn't start ranting xenophobic nonsense about how the interviewer was also a Russian agent. I've seen this conversation play out this way so many times over the past year that the fact we're still talking about this is asinine.
M Rede , 1 day agoThis is Journalism. You need to answer the questions with hard evidence, facts, links and ties. Names, Dates, Times these have to add up. Donate to The Real News!!
Charles Robertson , 4 days agoBrave Luke "kind of" Harding.
fearhungerpride , 4 days ago (edited)Seems Luke wasn't expecting a grilling from an outlet like the real news. He's probably not used to a left-leaning American news outlet that tolerates dissenting opinions on the Russia narrative. A sad reflection on what the atmosphere must be like at the Guardian. Thanks again Aaron.
Chill Bill , 4 days agoThis is a great exchange between a believer of Russiagate and a sceptic. Both guys did a great job pushing their arguments. Shame you don't see this on the msm. They're too busy pushing their editorial lines instead of being challenged.
David Ramsay Steele , 4 days agoImpressive dissection of this guy's factless assertions and parroted MSM hollow-headedness, Aaron.
Nick Mando , 4 days ago"Collusion" is to the left what birtherism was to the right.
Nick Mando , 4 days agoWhat is easier? Russia pulling off collusion OR Russia convincing idiots that they pulled off collusion. I think that both have the same effect on delegitimizing our electoral process, one is just a lot easier.
Loyd Frontham , 4 days agoALSO if the kgb is so good and so well trained at this then why is it so obvious? The perfect crime is one that your enemy thinks you committed yet has no proof of, because spoiler, you didn't commit it.
ThaddeusCorn , 4 days agoThank you, Aaron, for being one of the few reasonable voices in news today.
Ramiiam , 4 days agoGreat job. Good guest and the interviewer didn't just let the guest go unquestioned.
Invisible Man , 18 hours agoAaron Mate is your best journalist, among the new TRN crowd. You could do with more of him, less of people like the Noors.
ZantherY , 4 days ago (edited)I loved Real News for years...but lately ur guys content exposing the blind Russiaphobia has been award winning caliber.
Anthony George , 4 days agoThank you Aaron for being a JOURNALIST unlike the guy trying to well a book, why not every body ids entitle to profit from a nation which from here seem to be populated by MORONS! The Guardian lost its way back in 2001 by toeing the official White House Line, it asked very little questions, it was very thick on speculation (a bit like this moron)!
szymborska , 2 days agoA "story-teller". Yep.
Jonathan Mintram , 4 days agoAaron 1 - Other Guy - 0
Busterpeek21 , 2 days agoWell done Aaron. Your focus on evidence and proof was perfect. That guy makes me feel embarrassed to be British.
Doginu , 4 days agoOne of the best interviews I've seen in awhile! I put it up there with Jimmy Dore's recent interview with Jill Stein.
Karl Malone , 3 days agoIt sounds like your Butt hurt about getting thrown out of Russia..This guy is a Repeater, not a Reporter!
craig robb , 4 days agoBravo Aaron
Jen V , 1 day agonice job aaron, the dude was about5 seconds away from calling you a puppet of putin lol
wleao13 , 4 days agoThis "author" or hack journalist is absolutely ignorant. Clearly he hates Russia and Puti. And is just fine to create lies and stories. This was a great interview by Aaron! Excellent job asking valid, intelligent questions and holding his feet (and fables) to the fire. People creating and spreading this type of propaganda should all be held to the standards Aaron just held this doofus to! When asked real questions, for proof of their statements of fact and confronted with opposing information, you just get stuttering and the same old line of Putin is bad so therefore my lies must be true! No proof yet people r still writing books and profiting from spreading a very dangerous type of propaganda!
oldscorpion13 , 3 days agoLuke 'alex jones' Harding what joke. he claim be a reporter
TheSpiritOfTheTimes , 4 days agoThis is hilarious. Everytime TRN interviews anyone about the Russian case, they - the interviewee - ends up being flustered, frustrated. I am waiting for that obscenities laden outburst one of these interviews
The Solo Activist , 4 days agoVery good Aaron! Finally someone's called out the fabulilt Harding, arguably the worst Anglophone reporter from Russia, and there's stiff competition.
truthcrusades , 4 days agoRefreshing!
Farero Lobos , 9 hours agoI'm getting fed up with this shit. Trump just sent lethal weapons to Ukraine. This guy and his administration have done nothing but escalate tensions with Russia since he took office. Sanctions, banning RT, Syria strike, buzzing Russian jets, the latest Ukraine BS, that Obama refused to do because it would escalate tensions. I wish this guy was Putin's puppet, but he is more likely to give us a nuclear exchange with Russia.
Angel Tibbs , 1 day ago10:29 Please, I beg you, Luke the fluke, decide if you are a journalist or a story teller.
Doginu , 4 days ago"Saddam has WMDs!" - same agencies.
Ian Nixon , 3 days agoIt was the USSR until 1991, then the US Oligarchs pillages the New formed Russia.I don't even think that Psychics would have fathomed Trump ever running for President 35+ years later... Idiot....
Other Voices, Other Choices , 4 days agoTrump is crocked in my opinion, but who cares about my opinion--NO ONE. So why don't we just wait for the evidence to come forward after the investigation. If he is guilty of something then we will know. Clearly Mueller and his team is NOT going to put evidence out in the public if indeed they do have something at this time. So everyone is just speculating, BUT that does not mean the investigation should be over because SOME people feel there is nothing there. That just does not make sense to me. Let the investigation conclude just like they wanted it to conclude when Bill Clinton. By the way, he should read the book (not skim it) and then get quotes to ask. The author is right to call out the interviewer for not reading his book, but wants to talk about---the BOOK! Really?
Trevor R.N. , 2 days ago (edited)Just what is the proof that Trump is Putin's puppet? Is it the NATO troops moving ever eastward in Europe, holding war games on Russia's borders? Is it the extra billions earmarked for nuclear war preparations? Or perhaps the US troops and bases illegally placed in Russia's ally Syria? One has to be an idiot to believe this Russiagate nonsense.
Koot Orand , 4 days agoLuke Harding is so full of shite, I'm surprised it's not oozing out of his pores. He says nothing new in this interview he just rehashes the narrative. Intentionality? Luke is obviously not used to being questioned on his storytelling.
RichardTheThird , 2 days agoThis fella seems to be more interested in advertising his book than answering the questions. These Guardian article writers may as well write for Daily Express or The Sun or any other gutter press
Luther Rhein , 3 days agoI wonder if Luke Harding thought that doing this interview would sell a few copies of his book. If so, he will be disappointed - he doesn't seem to be very knowledgeable, to say the least.
Pete D. , 4 days ago (edited)this guy is pissed of with Putin, and thinks he knows everything just because he is a rich boy from Oxbridge elite, yet this wanker has not a single fact supported with solid evidence. That sums up the state of liberal fascists. Oh God!
zwergie256 , 20 hours agoHarding never voiced any proof or real evidence of collusion. Speculation, speculation, speculation and inference. I'm so tired of this. And yes, Putin's not a nice guy.
Josh Lockie , 2 days agoOmg, how embarrassing. ;))
j bloggs , 17 hours agoThis guy is deep state and super bad at it lol
GreySide , 23 hours ago (edited)Great interview. Shows up Harding for what he is, an establishment shill.
EveyMash , 4 days agoThe guy said go to Russia, meet Navalny (a man with less than 1% support)..lol. go to any country on earth and meet the opposition and see if they will have anything positive to say about the running government.. they are opposition for a reason... smh
bookashkin , 3 days ago (edited)Luke Harding is a conspiracy theorist.
Raph Tjoeb , 2 days agoThey say where there's smoke, there's fire. Sometimes there's fire without smoke. Like Luke Harding's pants.
shamanahaboolist , 4 days agoJesus christ, did this Guardian guy take a fall flat on his face. Reality hit you 'ol fella.
Julius Galacki , 1 day agoGerrymandering and the "Democrats" election fraud against Sanders was the cause of Trump's victory more than anything else.
Andrew Zibuck , 7 hours agoI heard a really, disappointing softball interview on KCRW (NPR affiliate in LA) with this same author where he was presenting correlations as causation and making the same broad generalizations with nary a challenge from Warren Olney (who could be an excellent interviewer) , but rather exclamations of approval. Aaron Mate on the other hand does a fabulous job of showing the Emperor has no clothes. So, big big kudos to him for leaving this fraud in a stumbling, stuttering pout of ineffective arguments. This author is at best making a buck jumping on the Russian hysteria bandwagon, and at worst is part of a concerted propaganda effort by those who would benefit from a new Cold War. One can oppose Trump for not only his vulgarity but more importantly he does, policy-wise. Unfortunately, many of those policies are the same or just a bit more radical than many of the politicians whose style is less overly vulgar and divisive.
kerpital , 1 day agoAt the end Harding implies that definitive proof of collusion would be Trump and Putin in a sauna. That would actually only be proof both men like a good steam.
frosty buckets , 4 days agoIf you remove "kind of" "sort of" "I think that" "I mean" "Uh" from that man's vocabulary, there's nothing left.
War Dynamics , 12 hours agoRussia is a paper tiger .. Let's focus on deescalation and saving humanity from over consumption and climate change .. Russia will follow.
bookashkin , 3 days agoAaron Mate not having any of this guys BS. Great interview.
Michael Maxfield , 4 days agoLuke: There are only two honorable ways to respond to the charge of lack of proof for your bold claims. 1. Point to proof 2. Admit there is no proof. Only a pathetic weasel with zero intellectual integrity would take another course. After this interview I don't even believe you know any Russian beyond "can I have the check please" Oh, and Hillary Clinton is a deranged mad woman. Who else would laugh like a hyena about being accessory to Qaddafi's gruesome murder?
Hollywood Art Chick , 1 day agoI think Mr. Harding completely missed Sergey Nalobin's tongue-in-cheek sense of humor.
deliciousmorton , 16 hours agoMate' is nobody's fool. This is what an interview should be, not a beaming love-fest between "journalist" and guest. It's wonderful to see a strong journalist who's informed and not rubber-stamping BS to crawl up the ass of someone with connections. You go, Aaron!!! Much respect to RT.
Peace and Love , 4 days agoLuke Harding is all over the place.
adammontana9 , 16 hours agoAaron. Probably the best journalistic interview that I have ever seen. Anyone watching this will realise this collusion stuff is nonsense. And yes, i despise Trump and Putin's corruption.
Simon and Gar Farkell , 1 day ago (edited)"The people who promote the "Russian influence" nonsense are political operatives or hacks. Take for example Luke Harding of the Guardian who just published a book titled Collusion: Secret Meetings, Dirty Money, and How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win. He was taken apart in a Real News interview (vid) about the book. The interviewer pointed out that there is absolutely no evidence in the book to support its claims. When asked for any proof for his assertion Harding defensively says that he is just "storytelling" - in other words: its fiction. Harding earlier wrote a book about Edward Snowden which was a similar sham. Julian Assange called it "a hack job in the purest sense of the term". Harding is also known as plagiarizer. When he worked in Moscow he copied stories and passages from the now defunct Exile, run by Matt Taibbi and Mark Ames. The Guardian had to publish an apology." https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/12/27/from-snowden-russia-gate-cia-and-media.html
mrtriffid , 1 day agoThis Real News host could teach "mainstream media" how to ask hard questions.
ParrhesiaJoe , 1 day agoThank you, Aaron, for convincingly exposing a shill for the Imperialist agenda and committed cheerleader for the "deep state." Harding could do nothing more, in the face of demands for evidence, than splutter endlessly on irrelevancies and assertions that the Russians don't like us (gee, I wonder why not?!?!?). Excellent job Aaron: you are a credit to true journalism.
leboulenoire , 1 day agoFantastic interview. All interviews should be like this :)
Gabriel Olsen , 4 hours agoGreat to see a REAL journalist make an absolute FOOL of this story teller. Wonder why you don't see this sort of debate on the corporate media.
Bim Star , 1 day agoThis is the best video on the Russiagate conspiracy theory I have seen all year. I wish people would remember that there is equal evidence that the US kills journalists; when you hear people say that about other countries they're clearly propagandists.
Punk Rock Kick , 3 days agoNailed it.
HorstQueck , 2 days agoThat was awkward viewing.....but you can see why people like me in England went from buying the guardian everyday to being dismayed to see the publication have such a skewed agenda on politics that I now avoid clicking on their online articles. Basically the media here is "London thinks this, so you should too"
Kathy Smith , 1 day agoHarding is a stumbling joker, but he's right when he says that he is a storyteller..
Ghassan Karwchan , 16 hours agoYour sign off with a plug for the propagandist book, despite his abrupt fleeing of your interview, was very civilised. Great job, I enjoyed the squirm and deflecting done by Luke. I think he was well grilled by the time he left.
jjbeerj , 1 day ago (edited)OMG. He totally trashed him, with politeness and class
Matthew Hamann , 1 day ago17:09 "Did they do this with Donald Trump? We don't know". Interview over.
Paul Shippam , 16 hours agoThis is one of the best owns I've ever seen. Well done Aaron Mate, I now hold you in high esteem. Chorus of applause on this side of the interwebs.
Avalaon Adulwulf , 20 hours agoWell done for not reading the whole book Aaron. I hope you didn't pay for it either. Great interview.
jerseygrl5 , 15 hours agoIt should be acrime for so called Journalists to be allowed to propagate this abaloute disgraceful nonsense. The guy is talking about 1987 - a single time Trump visited Russia during the 80's. Next time he wsa there was about 5 years ago for miss universe contest. Yet this is evidence or him being a Russian puppet. Total nonsense! No, this is communists realizing Trump is a sledgehammer to their narrative. They are looking at political wilderness across the west if Trump can do what he wants to do so in desperation they attempt to drag out anything they can to keep their bs narrative going even going back almost 30 years...
tim measures , 4 days agoWell, that's one book I won't be adding to my "Need to read" list.
Joel Rodriguez , 16 hours agothank Aaron mate this guy is just a fiction writer
Auguste Comte , 4 days ago (edited)Oh please, that is the best that guy had, read my book? The notion that russia influenced voters is absurd.
joe564357 , 1 day agoJust to be clear: Russia hacked both DNC and Macron emails, and released them, mixed with false information, in a disinformation campaign. The DNC emails became source of conspiracy on facebook. Macron emails were never allowed to be published in any form.
joe564357 , 1 day ago"Do you have any evidence that the Russian government interfered in the U.S. election or colluded with Trump?" "I can see Russia from my house!!!!"
his202 class , 4 days ago"I'm a journalist and a storyteller." Storyteller, yeah. Journalist, no.
Nick Mando , 4 days agoWhen subjected to some skepticism, Harding's assertions collapse into vague "because the intel agencies told us" nonsense. Hats off to Aaron for knocking down the Russia hysteria once again.
AP CreativesLDN , 4 days ago (edited)It is like Project Veritas only on an international level. Disinformation 101. Also the author clearly has a personal vendetta against Russia.
godkingofspace , 4 days agoThis man is Luke Harding he is owned by the British Conservative Friends of Israel. The biggest lobbyist in Britain. Nice try... Next!
Chris Ramsbottom Isherwood , 1 day agoPretty embarrassing interview with this British guy... When he gives that snarky "oh too bad you didnt read the book.." line i really wanted to hear the interveiwer say "Oh its really too bad you didnt think to memorize one fact about the subject your being interveiwed about..."
teronnie richardson , 4 days agoCheck Mate!
Julie Rowan-Zoch , 1 day agoI see y'all trying to discredit him
Mari Ma Cheri , 3 days agoGreat work, Aaron. Thank you.
Drago Varsas , 1 day agoHow Aaron kept a straight face, I don't know. He looked like he was going to laugh a time or two because of the absurdity of this Luke guy.
Libby Arndt , 6 hours agoWhat bollocks. The guardian has become less than toilet paper lately anyway.
izamugginzweebopalaba , 14 hours ago (edited)Now he leans on whether Aaron has read the whole book or not. I know I won't read it, as the man as not said a convincing word in the entire interview.
lapsus5 , 1 day agoRussiagate is a conspiracy theory. Let's be frank. It presupposes it's conclusion and finds circumstantial and hearsay evidence to support it. "Collusion-rejectionist" Mate points this out time and time again (not only to this guy) and this guy says 'go talk to people; the russians do things this way; everybody knows; you are a fringe character for not agreeing' - it just doesn't hold water. No doubt Trump has shady deals with Russians among others. The idea that such a buffoon been cultivated since the mid-80s by the KGB as a Manchurian Candidate wouldn't make for a plausible pop spy thriller plot - maybe a good satire of one, however.
crushsatan , 4 days agoI hope this fucker's factless conspiracy theory stops people from buying his shitty book.
maskedavenger777 , 4 days ago (edited)sounds like this guy just wrote his book off of watching the news.
TheOldGods , 1 day agoOh as if we don't have kleptocracy here in the States. And the assassination of Seth Richards is no where comparable to Putin's hits?
Se Lu , 4 days agoOmg this guy is unreal! Good job Aaron and thank you Real News for exposing frauds like this poophead
Jen V , 1 day agoIsn't it the authors job to sell his book rather than demand that the interviewer must have read it from cover to cover to question him?
Hello, Jerk! , 1 day agoOMG is Purim a former KGB agent? I had no clue😂😂 why did Putin quit the KGB? I bet he won't address that or tell the truth there, right?
sinisa majetic , 4 days ago"Have you heard of Estonia?"
danmcc22 , 3 days agoOmg this was fun. Btw, we can all agree that Pyutin made Luke to wrote that idiotic book just to toss a doubt how he did not collude with Tryump, because there's no limit of his cunningness.
allgoo19 , 3 days agoLuke's stories, just like the whole collusion theme, is a nothing burger left out of the fridge too long. So now it stinks and needs to be thrown in the garbage where it belongs.
Noosejunkie , 4 days agoHe probably published the book half cooked just for the best timing of the sale. Maybe they need a better guests? This doesn't prove anything that Trump is clear of the allegation.. Far from it. Probe will continue.
nicolas grey , 4 days agoCrappiest interview ever. You don't read the book and then you spout your pre-conceived notions of the its subject matter. Cherry on top, with a pro-Trump bias.
Geoff Whyte , 3 days agoHe obviously didn't bother to read the book , why bother to interview the guy ? They are talking past each other , if he had read the book they could have had a descent debate . This is as bad a Fox News segment . Terrible .
red fury91 , 4 days agoAbsolutely nothing in 28 mins to justify writing a book with evidently a faceless title.
Farero Lobos , 8 hours ago (edited)This clown only response is to stammer and stutter until the regurgitated corporate propaganda eventually spews out of his mouth with very very little confidence lol
G. , 13 hours ago (edited)21:11 Deripaska sits at the right hand of Putin?! Please, I beg you pardon.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48Kk7kobMQY
jacqueline thomson , 1 day agoThis conspiracist has not listened to Putin speak. If he had, he would not be painting such a one-dimensional, comic book character of him. Can we please move on from such naively simplistic analyses of global power structures? Any leader unable to manage Intelligence is at the mercy of a Deep State -- as we have learned time and again in the US. Before cheerleading for World War, start by watching some of the hours and hours of footage showing Putin engaging deeply with citizens and world leaders. Try critiquing that. Maybe learn some history.
ano nymous , 3 days agoIn watching the video interview it is obvious this 'Journalist' has his own Personal Agenda regarding Putin and wants to get Putin any which way he can even if it means lying to the America People. He is no true journalist. Great Interviewer!
freespeech_zone , 4 days ago (edited)Great interview. The stories this guy keeps making up because of lack of evidence is jaw-dropping.
Patricia Leary , 4 days ago (edited)The more I hear "experts" push this stupid Russia-phobic conspiracy theory the less I believe it...This is why I like the Real news and you're worth supporting. You haven't fallen for the mainstream narrative... There are many legitimise things to criticise Trump on. The Trump-Russia conspiracy theory is NOT one of them.
Andi Amador , 4 days agoOpposition Research on oligarch Hillary and Don Jr goes to find out what they've got. That's it? We already know that the DNC emails were an inside job and subsequent DNC coverup to blame Russia. We KNOW that (see VIPs report on consortium.) Stop blaming Russia! Luke Harding is a delusional red-baiting Russophobe. Were I the Guardian, I would sack him! He's an embarrassment! Don't buy his book!
Yuri muckraker , 4 days agoHillary's rush to threaten military action toward Russia over leaked/hacked DNC e-mails, which simply exposed some of their corruption during the Democratic primary process, likely did more to further harm her chances in the general election than any memes or any efforts by anybody else. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jz_dZ2SlPgw
No Way , 4 days agoaaron mate! thank you for putting this Guardian hack into account! brilliant stuff! once more the Real News is exceeding my expectations, this was superb journalism and holding the media gatekeepers an extension of the establishment into account.
HighFieldLux , 2 days agoLuke kinda had his mind made up prior to setting up this interview. Russian collusion? IDK, but let's just see what turns up. Mueller's already indicted some people. The issue with the Russia investigation is the excitement over it on both sides. Everyone needs to just lay back and let it happen regardless of how you feel. Close your eyes and think of England, and maybe something comes out of it. I would rather we were investigating how we got into Iraq and the abuses that happened after we invaded, but no one should be opposed to an investigation where people have already been indicted. Media pushing the war with Russia narrative are being silly, but the same with media saying we shouldn't investigate anything about this. ON the left we also shouldn't expect too much to come from this. Great if we can use this investigation to get Trump out of office for something; if not, useful political theater if the Dems would just recognize the importance of that.
Peter Lermann , 4 days agoAaron is hot!
DootDoot , 4 days ago (edited)How fair to give him a platform. Will you invite Alex Jones next? How about some flat earthers? ahh right, it's only ok when it's mainstream conspiracy theory, sorry, totally forgot
Robert , 4 days agoAaron challenges Russia assertion : Guy goes onto tell some story how he lived there and he just knows "Believe him" Because he lived in Russia for 4 years... ??????????? Goes to assert further... Aaron responds.. "proof" Response to that "Well the history from the 1970's.... " PROOOOOF?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Look. I am fine with the fact that Russia might have interfered with the election. JUST GIVE ME SOME FUCKING PROOF. Until then? Fuck off... There are real problems to deal with.
Jode Ville , 4 days agoLOL I loved Mate's performance in this interview. He totally flipped the script on this crackpot realist. He felt like a dissenting person feels on MSM, if they ever bother to have one on.
John Mastroligulano , 1 day ago (edited)The collusion is with Israel.
ozwhistles , 4 days ago (edited)Telling how this "person" being interviewed spouts of a word like empirical when it comes to an accusation with no supporting evidence so to him if you are accused of something that in itself is empirical evidence?=horse shit propagandist no offense to horses. He first won't accept there is no proof but when asked what the proof is he starts talking about his personal feelings as if they are proof(superiority complex).
MsTree1 , 4 days ago (edited)So? The "real" news is now doing book-promos? Shame on you - this is unmitigated garbage. (edit: after watching the whole article, I'm still not satisfied. The problem with a public "hatchet-job" is you give oxygen to your "victim" and get seen with a hatchet in your hand. That does not look good. And in your victim's dying breaths, he will plant a curse on you via those who saw you with the hatchet. Sun Tzu warns us to not give your enemy no-way-out .. your forces are no match to those fighting for their very lives. It is abundantly clear from the actual evidence that the 2016 election was willfully lost by Hillary Clinton, not won by Trump. This is a result of Clinton being high in the cluster-B spectrum -she gets sexual pleasure from torture and ugly death [Qaddafi] - whereas, Trump is lower on the spectrum: not a sociopath/psychopath, but clearly a narcissist bordering on malignant. And I pause to add that probably ALL global leaders are on the cluster-B spectrum of personality disorder. The thing you have to know about cluster-B in this context, is that those within the cluster-B are outside of normal social influence, such as "honey-traps" etc, because they lack the compassion link to empathy - i.e. they do not respond to the tools which work on healthy humans and tend to only respond to their own "world-view" in which the entire universe is composed of themselves. Next: I tried to influence the US election by donating to Sanders - so who is investigating the Australian "collusion" .. gimme a break - we all wanted Sanders. Clinton gave us the choice of a sociopath against a narcissist - and we chose the narcissist. And there he is doing the work he was made to do - to destroy the entire world-order so we can, at least, start over. With Clinton - we all knew - it was lights-out for all of us. At least with trump, the game is still in play. The lesser of evils. SO stop giving gas to the commercial-distractionists - they are remnants of the lights-out brigade who are eating, drinking, and being merry, because tomorrow, they intend to die .. the self-condemned. And none of them asked me, or any of the others who would like to see life continue. The whole thing disgusts me - dust your feet and leave the show - the finale is not worth sticking around for.)
Tony Smith , 3 days agoPS: NSA is currently monitoring, downloading and repeatedly viewing some of our children for "security reason" ... Youth who are legally earning a living in the US as porn stars on the net in order to eat, get an education pay student loan debt and survive in a nation which gives little F about providing the true security realized via the the provision of privacy, organic food from local heritage seed, pure potable H2O, clean air, access to free Integrated Medicine, free and equal education and a comfortable roof over their heads, NOT based on how much potential they have to move money for the corporatist-elite or the ethnicity of their forefathers. How low will, WE stoop? @TheRealNews Pathetic
Mr. Agnew , 4 days agoNot Israeli collusion then?
Mr. Agnew , 4 days agoThat guy wants a war with Russia
Yarrski , 3 days agoThe funny thing is usa/russia tied havent gotten better at all but are even worse than obamas time
Platewarp , 18 hours agothe little liar got HAD
Dan , 4 days agoHillary lost because most Americans despise her not because of Russian hackers.
Zedwoman , 11 hours agoAaron Mate that was absolutely BRILLIANT!!! You picked his bullshit story apart. Another journalist making money on Russiagate. I can't believe I called him a journalist. Bill Binney has already solved the hacking issue....lets move on. Awesome interview. Keep up the great work...I bow to you.
G shawponee , 1 day agoLuke Harding is pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.
Ahmad Reza Haj Saeedi , 4 days agoI've never heard of the interviewer needing to read the book before interviewing the author? Isn't it the author's "job" to plug his own book and inform the viewers of its contents? It's really obvious that Harding had nothing to counter with- it was awkward to watch as his Russian gate conspiracy fell to shit. Great job Mate!
Robin Jagoda , 1 day agoGood journalism by Aaron. Thanks!
Aniket Ghosh , 3 days agoUgh. Another opportunistic "journalist" trying to capitalize on Russia panic (PUTIN!). Great interview. You gave him plenty of time and room to make his case, and he just couldn't seem to defend his position.
Bryan Hemming , 18 hours ago"Look, I'm a storyteller!"
Bob Cicisly , 4 days agoThe Guardian was once a respectable news outlet. It both saddens and angers me that journalists such as Luke Harding and Shaun Walker, neither of whom seem to have any real grasp on the subjects they cover, are touted by The Guardian as leading experts on Putin and Russia. Almost as embarrassing as anger-making.
Ian Brown , 1 day ago (edited);)). :)) ;)):))
Cygnus X-321 , 3 days agoSadly typical of what the Guardian has become. This reminds me why I can't read it anymore, just too much bullshit and innuendo sold off as fact. Good work, Aaron.
Cygnus X-321 , 3 days ago (edited)Aaron: "Are you inferring that because two Russians used a smiley face that's proof that Manafort's associate was a tool of the Russian government?" 20:23 . HaHaHa!!! I don't miss Louis CK anymore. This is the goddamn funniest shit ever!
fkujakedmyname , 4 days ago (edited)Donald Trump just authorized the sale of sophisticated weapons to Ukraine. This ensures that fighting will intensify on Russia's border. We can thank Russia conspiracy theorists like Rachel Maddow, Marcy Wheeler and Luke Harding for providing a media environment that enabled/pushed Trump to move in this direction. Mission accomplished, propagandists! World War 3 in 2018?
wilson lawson , 3 days ago (edited)the only collusion i saw in 2016 was rothschild zionazis, saudi arabia, isis, israhell,Fox msnbc cnn trump, and clinton against bernie sanders and the people
wilson lawson , 3 days ago (edited)''Kind of, sort of....air quotes...sort of...'' If Trump colluded with anyone it was Netanyahu and other ultra nationalist Zionists inside Washington and Tel Aviv. It certainly is not in the interests of America to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. And who is Gerard Kushner batting for? America...or Israel?
David Hanks , 1 day agoI just discovered theRealNews recently and they're certainly not a fake news echo chamber... impressive.
danny j , 4 days ago"Not sure if that was intentional or not ..." hahaha owned
Shan Ri Ha , 4 days agoThis Harding hack is a perfect example of why The Guardian - a once proudly liberal publication - has become another neoliberal propaganda rag. He also wrote articles cheering ISIL in Syria, literally comparing them to the Republican Brigade who went to Spain to fight against the Franco Fascists in Spain in the 1930s.
Shan Ri Ha , 4 days agoThis guy is a goose.
hoodiewoman louisiana , 4 days agoNo, "you don't have to just take a look", this is more BULLSHIT for book sales. No way Russia colluded in the election, no hacking either. This Russia story was thought up by Podesta back in 2015. Peace
hoodiewoman louisiana , 4 days agoHe's playing "5 degrees of separation from Kevin Bacon." So profound.
Neil Mason , 4 days ago"I'm a writer & I once lived in Russia so I have to be right!" AND he says, "I'm a storyteller." Well, that's the problem. Storytelling is also a synonym for lying.
Philip Hall , 1 hour agoThis guy lives in a fairy tale land! STFU!
Peter Smith , 1 hour agoGood job
lcrooks69 , 1 hour agoAaron, Brilliant journalism. Well done sir that was a masterclass that should be studied in every journalism school across the globe.
Alexis Porter , 2 hours agowow. luke harding is a complete and utter moron. never thought a brit could make a british accent synonymous with stupidity.
mysterbee06 , 3 hours agoThat so-called journalist was so obviously bereft of facts and wore his blatant biases proudly. That kind of crap might play well on MSM shows, but doesn't work very well with a well-informed and neutral interviewer. Well done. "Collusion"? Maybe "My Cold War Fantasy World" would have been a better title for his book.
Kniteknite23A , 3 hours ago (edited)Excellent interviewer, disappointing interviewee. Harding's red herrings, guilt by association, appeals to "context," and repeated well-poisoning do not constitute *evidence*.
Abhishek Agarwal , 3 hours ago@ 23:27 What is this "essentially a lie, kind of untrue" ? lol and "Now We know that...made... allegedly from kind of His activities..."and how does this schmuck expect to sell any books advertising it like this, unless His target group is 17-24 year old niblits.I almost forgot 30 is the new 20. Keep on talking and eventually Your mouth will come out with stuff. Silly~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NS7Gkv4NNA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zP0sqRMzkwo bonus~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJVROcKFnBQ
MISTERASMODEUS , 4 hours agoIt is because of these journalists is why I believe journalism is no longer a professional of finding and presenting the truth. It's more of floating around a narrative to serve the interests of their masters
hoochymama , 5 hours agoBrilliant and adversarial, yet respectful. Difficult combination to defeat.
Angel O , 6 hours agoSubscribed. Amazing job by the interviewer.
Evan Schulz , 6 hours agoSubscribed!
Bob Boldt , 8 hours agoMI6 not sending their best.
Toni Feldstein Chicago Luxury Real Estate , 10 hours agoThe disturbing thing about this interview is Luke Harding not only is unable to respond to Aaron's request for evidence but he doesn't even seem to understand that his conclusions are based on surmise and implications gleamed from irrelevant material. I have to assume Harding has had some education in the journalistic rules of evidence, at least enough to land a prestigious job with the Guardian. And yet he is not only unable to submit forensic evidence of collusion between Trump and Putin but he doesn't seem to understand what would be required to actually identify that evidence to make his case. I have to assume the book only relies on inference and innuendo to establish its case: Putin is a bad man who will resort to anything to achieve his ends, hence he is guilty of resorting to any means to influence a Trump victory. This kind of "evidence" only goes to motivation and says nothing about ability or opportunity. (two of the three linchpins of circumstantial evidence. Of course this kind of shoddy thinking is nearly endemic today among not only journalists and pundits, who ought to know better, but also among the general public (most of my friends in particular). This epidemic is so vast and persistent that I am afraid it will only be staunched by a thermonuclear war. "We are all capable of believing things which we know to be untrue, and then, when we are finally proved wrong, impudently twisting the facts so as to show that we were right. Intellectually, it is possible to carry on this process for an indefinite time: the only check on it is that sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield." George Orwell
DeNeice Kenehan , 10 hours agoClearly no compelling, unbiased evidence yet.
Nan Bread , 10 hours agoMaybe Aaro Mate can read the rest of the book when he stops laughing.
Allan Ewart , 11 hours agoThis guy is Mr Word Salad, Aaron really twists his balls in the best possible way. What a pathetic shill, you can tell this idiot works for the Guardian. "Where is the evidence of collusion?" "Putin is bad." "Yes but where is the evidence?" "Estonia, France, my friends died, Putin is bad." "Where's the evidence?" "Putin is bad." Idiot.
John Barker , 11 hours agohttps://medium.com/@Scifiscreen/presscoin-the-voice-of-sanity-in-a-world-of-chaos-71176010477f
Johnny Maudlin , 11 hours agoThe interviewee is lost in his fantasy world, and patronizing at that.
Stars Die , 13 hours agoIt's ironic that Mate presents himself (by virtue of the association implied with Real News) as somehow different from the (again implied) not-so-real news and then pursues a pretty familiar "gotcha" approach to this interview. Mate appears more interested in proving himself correct with his skepticism rather than at all curious about the author's point of view as it applies to his work. This is more of the Same News I think. Or at least the same games that talking heads favour. Mate, in addition, seems very amused with himself. That's hardly productive to anyone interested in learning something about the author or the author's premise.
mitrovdan , 13 hours agoWow, this guy really doesn't have much. Surprised he wrote a book out of this stuff.
Alex Bakaev , 13 hours ago (edited)17:58 , BINGO...Maté strikes.
sugarhigh4242 , 14 hours agoI love how Aaron is making this guy squirm with simple, logical questions. Taking the guest's own advice, he should venture out into the reality world out of his book's bubble. The icing on the cake is when the guest starts (around 8 minute mark) flailing his arms like a monkey in a zoo, to the delight of children observing the animal.
Soft Insubordination , 15 hours agoNo offense to my Estonian friends, but Harding using them as an example of the broader hacking trend seems bullshitty to me. I don't think any leftists skeptical of the Russiagate narrative would say that Russia doesn't hack, or Russia doesn't attempt to influence foreign elections. But if you're going to say that Russia has the capacity to do it in the USA, showing they did it in France or Germany would be a decent analog, Estonia (formerly occupied by the USSR and in Russia's sphere of geopolitical influence) is not. Am I missing something?
Charles W R , 16 hours agoI had no idea "rejectionist" was a real term. I'm going to continue to live in a world where it's not a real term.
Charles W R , 16 hours agoFolks, this is a garbage production, no better than S Bannon or S Miller products. Trash this video.
Charles W R , 16 hours agoIt is NOT about Donald Trump. It is about USA and the foundational principles of our democracy. IF there is even a small chance that the formation of our government is influenced by the forces from a hostile nation, this IS the problem. Go to hell Aaron Mate. Idiot Aaron, go to Russia and meet and the HR activists and see what the country is truly like before you interview, mofo idiot Aaron Mate
adammontana9 , 16 hours agoTRNN and Aaron Mate, this is Alt-Right channel.
steven bones , 16 hours agoGreat job Aaron
Ardavon Yazdi , 16 hours agobullshit beyound belief.
peterboy sonicat , 17 hours agoEven if Putin directly helped trump get elected using his own personal computer, these ppl are gonna fuck up proving it up tripping all over themselves with adolescent anticipation and opportunism
John Kelleher , 17 hours agoSounds like the Brits are stirring the pot, bringing the Russian 'axis of evil' back into the mix. Think.. Did we ever have US sovereignty? What really happened back in 1775? Maybe the US is just the military arm of the UK and is still hell bent on achieving global domination after all. And the US has been annexed by them all along. Why else is this Brit demanding that the Russians are still a cold war enemy when Trump obviously has nothing against them? I'm having serious questions as to the strategic alliance and geopolitical relationship we have with Britain because of this guy's views. That being said, there may well have been collusion by the Russians to help Trump get into office. But that alone, still doesn't prove Russia the 'axis of evil' or anything near to being our enemy. It's about global domination. The NWO remember? The Brits/Rothschild banking cartel have been hell bent for it for centuries. Russia? Not so much.
Fred Munoz , 18 hours ago (edited)Mr. Harding is definitely having a hard time finding any collusion and he wrote the book on it!? Instead of addressing our unfair, closed and black box elections we waste time on a guy who can't seem to form a coherent sentence!?
Denis Lee , 18 hours agoAlthough there may have been collusion, Russia did not help Trump win. Hillary's record helped Trump win. After learning of her speech to Wall st., it made it impossible for me to vote for her. How dare she tell them one story and tell us what she thinks we want to hear.
Frank , 18 hours agoWow Aaron Mate. Great interview.
banjo234 , 19 hours agogreat interview Aaron, i also am very skeptical of the whole "Russia did it" meme. great job asking for proof, i didnt hear any either, color me not impressed with the interviewee or his hypothesis,
Andrew Ahonen , 19 hours agoHarding's persona could not be more like Tony Blair if he was trying to do an impersonation. Trust him like you'd trust a rat in your underpants.
Pique Dame , 20 hours agoThe first Cold War was a tragedy. This new one is a Farce.
Tellthetruth n/a , 23 hours agoManafort was a recommendation of Roger Stone, friend of Trump. Manafort and Stone had companies together since the eighties. Harding doesn't know what he is talking about.
Nikolai Szép , 23 hours agoWow, a real journalist. MSM would have covered this conspiracy theory as absolute truth. No questions asked, which is why nobody trusts them. Harding has nothing but speculation and an obvious bias. I wonder who paid him to write the book.
nikita novikov , 1 day agowhat a laughable muppet!
Jim James , 1 day agoThat's is some grade A interviewing. Never seen an argument so thoroughly dismantled.
DM R , 1 day agoThis guy (Harding) can't make a point.
DM R , 1 day agoOoh this Harding dude was squirming in his shoes. At the end, very sweatie, voice is cracking. It's impressive how he's able to lie for so long but he stayed consistent with his questioning
damenji , 1 day agoThis Harding guy is a silly man. Grow up and get some integrity and speak the truth
Kevin Schmidt , 1 day agoHarding do you still believe in Santa Claus, show us the evidence you tool!
Najat Madry , 1 day agoGiven Harding's long chain of illogical arguments in this interview, I suspect his four year stint in Russia was heavily influenced by Russian vodka, from which he has yet to recover.
texshelters , 1 day agoproper journalism
PJ Authur , 1 day agoThat included a lot of criticism of Russia and Putin for a supposed Russian controlled new out let. Again, there is no direct evidence of collusion and no evidence that Russia cost Clinton the election
Syncopator , 1 day ago (edited)I can see both sides. I want the evidence, but can see strong links...
John Keown , 1 day agoThe guy's got nothing. I'd love to see some real proof but this guy is equivocating at every turn. Re: the "France hacks" he says it was "inconclusive" but due to a laundry list of unrelated other examples of Russians possibly doing some nefarious stuff he's willing to accept it as a fact. That is not what I would call "empirical." "Muckraking" would be a better term...
poofendorf , 1 day agothis poor conspiracy author was depthcharged by this artfull and rather demeaning interviewer. it demonstrates the need to be able to back claims unless they are presented as theories. I have not read this book but apparently claims were made as"common knowledge" that could not be supported by "empiracle data". this also points out why no massive claims have been announced by Mueller's team. all conclusions must be backed by solid data. I believe one would be naive to conclude anything from this interview except that claims made in this book are not supported by accepteddata -- yet.
Lee Lull , 1 day agoBy "collusion" he means smiley faces.
BlackTalkRadio , 1 day agoMuch like the circular arguments put forth by the pro Hillary anti Stein people. No matter how much you request the EVIDENCE they keep repeating suspicion, someone said, everyone knows....and CANNOT produce any evidence....and do not understand how that type of response is acutely reminiscent of Joe McCarthy waving of the paper with those names...one never gots to see.
Kay Donnelly , 1 day agoOn the allegation of Russian meddling in the French election, if I remember correctly, it was not Putin who cut a campaign video ad for one of the candidates, I remember correctly, it was Obama who cut a campaign ad for the French Candidate who won.
lapsus5 , 1 day agoHe doesn't prove collusion . Lol
guttural truth , 1 day ago (edited)This was a great interview. Thank you.
R.V. Scheide Jr. , 1 day agoAaron, you fucking badass. Really top notch interview, brilliantly done.
R.V. Scheide Jr. , 1 day agoShould have just said you're a speed reader, Aaron.
R.V. Scheide Jr. , 1 day agoIs he a journalist or a story teller? Those can be two different things.
Terry P , 1 day agoNice job Aaron, not caving to the Russophobic Guardian writer.
garyweglarz , 1 day ago (edited)The reason mainstream media focuses on Russia is because of ratings but it is a huge nothing burger. No proof no real connections and all the "smoking guns" turned out to be cigarette lighters and the lamestream never retracts it or anything just goes on like all is well. Good to see some journalistic integrity. The author was making a leap from "He's a repressive dictator ao he must be guilty" with no evidence at all.
Matt Styles , 1 day ago (edited)Excellent interview Aaron. Crushed it. Your guest has 28 minutes to make at least one salient point and he is unable to do that. Wow! However, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the next Russiagate shill to consent to an interview with you though Aaron. Just saying! :) :) PS - Oh, darn, I forgot and gave you the secret code of two Emoji smilies! Drats!
Sear Tactical , 1 day ago (edited)*slow clap*
MarStoryTime , 1 day agoLuke Harding talks like he presumes all the rest of us just fell off the turnip truck 10 minutes ago. Uh... yeah dude... we DO know the history of the KGB and FSB, and yeah dude, we know about "honey pots" and that KGB and _______________________ (fill in Intel agency of your choice____) did them too... for... oh... lets see... a few centuries anyway. So what are you trying to sell? You constantly keep using past circumstance as "proof" when it is no such thing. You would get thrown out of a court for that... and ANYONE capable of critical thinking knows, all you are selling is "LOGICAL FALLACIES". Hey... I don't dispute that you will surely sell copies of your book to low information Kool Aid drinkers (You going to cite THAT as proof that your book is "true" now as well?)
AttnJack , 1 day agoOf course he just left the conversation at the end. A complete fraud.
Song Mozart , 1 day agoThat was painful and hilarious!
AD T , 1 day agoIs there any empirical evidence of Trump/Putin collusion in this fairy tale? Lol Why does Luke insist we read this without providing real, objective evidence? He expects us to just take his and his "sources'" word for it?
mrtriffid , 1 day agoHarding is so full of BS... good to see him being massacred. Good job!
Nhoj737 , 1 day agoRe-watching this interview, I'm absolutely astounded by the vacuity and ridiculous attempts on the part of Harding to misdirect the conversation at the same time that he tries to prop up his own credibility. This is literally a primer in the 'art' of Imperialist/careerist 'journalism.'
Song Mozart , 1 day agoWhy H.R.C. 'lost'? "And it's deadly. Doubtless, Crosscheck delivered Michigan to Trump who supposedly "won" the state by 10,700 votes. The Secretary of State's office proudly told me that they were "very aggressive" in removing listed voters before the 2016 election. Kobach, who created the lists for his fellow GOP officials, tagged a whopping 417,147 in Michigan as potential double voters." http://www.gregpalast.com/trump-picks-al-capone-vote-rigging-investigate-federal-voter-fraud/
Nhoj737 , 1 day ago"Did they (Putin and Russia) do this with Donald Trump? We don't know."
Greg Van , 1 day ago"it's opportunistic it's very often 04:45 pretty low-budget the kind of hacking 04:47 operation to hack the Democratic Party 04:49 was done by two separate groups of kind 04:52 of Kremlin hackers probably not owning 04:54 kind of huge sums of money and and so 04:58 some of it is kind of improvisational 05:00 the most important thing is that you you 05:02 have people with access which in this . . . " Wikileaks hacked the Democratic Party?
Sleepy Alligator , 1 day agoThe author who's own research is clearly dubious was chomping at the possibility of the host not reading the book. This man is made of straw.
godisgood603 , 1 day agoThe lengths they go to take attention off of the content of the leaks.
Green Energy , 1 day agoJust outed himself, he has absolutely nothing, NADA, what a complete money grabbing douchbag. A TOTAL FAKE
Green Energy , 1 day agoLuke Harding is a tool
Green Energy , 1 day agoOregon's Democrats vote for and support attacks on our civil liberties, love the emergence of censorship in social media and the press, vote for the criminalization of protest, vote for the militarization of police and the unconstitutional massive expansion of the surveillance state. Democrats Hate All Life on Mother Earth. Love torture. Love Killing millions of brown folk overseas. Democrats are steamy piles of Horse Manure. Republicans & Democrats are criminal organizations and are EVIL and war for profit groups; they do the bidding of foreign dictators before they listen to the American People. http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
Paulo Machado , 1 day agoHi NRDC; I have made many monetary contributions to your organization. You are evoking the fear of Trump in this year end fund drive. Fighting against Trump is a democratic stance. Democrats cheated Bernie Sanders and gave us Trump; both parties are corrupt and enemies of all life on earth. Your organization is used for politics chiefly. I will find organizations to donate to that are for the people, not war and corruption and not run by selected leaders picked for their political powers and hate of common man and that actually love Mother earth. Politics is 100% lies and that makes you guys liars and cheats just like the democrats. Oregon Green Energy
Song Mozart , 1 day agoHahahahah. One would expect a journalist/writer, who earns a living writing articles, to be a bit more, ahem, articulate. What a fool!
Song Mozart , 1 day agoHarding, show us the evidence. If you had any real, objective evidence, you would all want to share it. You have shared NOTHING. None of you Russia-gaters share anything other than circumstantial. Nobody who is "skeptical," or who uses logic and critical thinking skills has ever said Russia and Putin weren't shady and oppressive, but that is not the argument.
Lloyd Succes , 1 day agoYou have to believe in fairy tales. Harding would have earned an F in my class.
Danny White , 1 day agoExtraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Glad that Aaron took Luke to task.
00Billy , 1 day agoAh- when something you claim to be true is actually inconclusive, it becomes "contextual". Got it.
Ken Javor , 1 day ago (edited)crushing book sales in 30mins.
Natural Theist , 1 day agoWhy on Earth isn't Mueller investigating radical democrats for embezzling taxpayer money for the Climate Change hoax? Maybe Mueller needs to be investigated for fraud and collusion with North Korea and Iran.
John Pagoto , 1 day agoExcellent job of interviewing! Actually asked important questions, unlike the way mainstream media simply parrots propaganda.
Grant Jarvis , 1 day agoNice job of keeping this insane relentlessly endless narrative of Russian's changing the election in any meaningful way. This is McCarthyism the modern day Maddowism. It's all mainstream wants to talk about. Meanwhile in real life: 1) The majority of the population doesn't have $500 in the bank to cover emergencies. 2) The War Machine continues to ramp up to epic levels 3) The USA continues to employ their regime change diplomacy 4) The Life Expediency in the USA is going down. Opiod's largely to blame 5) The USA is not even in the top ten among providing Quality Healthcare 6) The USA is Number ONE in passing on the HIGHEST COST Healthcare I could go, on it's exhausting....
Raphael Bernard , 2 days ago (edited)Breath of fresh air. A journalist actually questions his interviewee.
Buddy Lee , 2 days agoThis man is delusional there is no evidence of any collusion why is RealNews interviewing this hack...watch Aaron Mate show this hack up. The Guardian is a right wing rag now don't follow it end any association with them. Aaron Mate well done.
Ad year3 , 2 days agoThe DNC/Hillary corruption was revealed in the emails and they have successfully distracted the public with a the dangerous fabrication of Russia collusion when the conversation should be about the corruption of the democratic process. There are too many complicit media and politicians so willing to go along with it but thankfully most Americans are awake to the scheme.
Alien Robot , 2 days ago (edited)In order to read the book I would have to buy the book, get it? An author should be able to articulate their main arguments in an interview. The emoticons colluding was disturbing though.
John Smith , 2 days ago (edited)If you ask for actual facts of collusion you are a 'collusion rejectionist'. Hillarious. Harding is a 'collusion conspiracy theorist'. Harding throws in the murder of Litvinenko as if this, in any way, relates to the US election. It doesn't. Yes, Russian, US and Israeli Intelligence kill people regularly for political reasons. Do I need to give Luke Harding a history lesson? The smiley face emoticon issue, which Harding tried to swerve away from, shows the level of journalistic quality Harding delivers. Harding deals in smear, supposition and innuendo to sell books. The misleading cover and title show his journalistic credibility. He actually raised as evidence of collusion, that Trump wasn't rude to Putin in interviews. Is he serious? What a hack writer. As a side note, the CIA wrote the book in interfering in other country's elections and governments. This indignation is a joke. If this is true they finally got some of their own back. See how it feels?
John Smith , 2 days agoFor the record, this is what these people sound like on Tucker Carlson, too. Tucker had Adam Schiff on and subjected him to real questions rather than the head-nodding interviews Schiff is used to. Needless to say, Schiff hasn't been on Tucker Carlson's show since. Pretty soon they'll start calling people skeptical of the evidence provided thus far "collusion deniers".
psychanaut , 2 days agoNoted right-wing hack Jeremy Scahill has it exactly right. This guy Harding is just an opportunist who knows what the audience wants. And he knows that 99% of the people who cite the book will never read beyond the cover; in fact, he's counting on it. Expect the rest of his little book tour to look like this: CNN, NPR, BBC, The Young Turks, The David Pakman Show (tee hee), Huff Po etc etc
psychanaut , 2 days ago*You really should have read the book though. You could have seen that coming a mile away. Why give him the out? Read the book before you attempt to trap someone with it. You should still marry me though.
Nimo Ali , 2 days agowhoever this Aarons guy is: 1/ you should be my husband 2/wonderful interviewing process
Lola Lee , 2 days agoHarding threw all the red herrings he could find! Just because the man has a British accent doesnt make him above scrutiny. Remember Louise Mensch? This was the sum (or scam) of all fears: the Cold War , "repressive regime, "opposition crackdown" ,Soviet KGB, throw in bits of Russian words.This was funny & painful at the same time. I nearly fell off my chair when Aaron said "emoticons", that part was kinda surreal.Talk to my friends! Go to Russia! I lived in Russia! I talked to the opposition! I speak Russian! I thought he was gonna add: my best friends are Russian! My wife is Russian!Niding is right Luke wasnt prepapred at all.Was it me or was Luke perspiring because he was struggling? Why was he throwing air quotes? Thanks Aaron!
Terrence Alford , 2 days agoBrutal interview and painful to watch. I never believed in the Trump/Russia collusion fake narrative. It doesn't exist. It was made up (FBI insurance policy) against Trump.
David Thompson , 2 days ago (edited)Great job Aaron to hold this author's feet to the fire and discredit his conclusions of Trump/Russian collusion. I hate Trump and would love to see him kicked out of office, but this Russia-gate conspiracy theory so far has no legs and this author is a posture kid for this nonsense.
Ae Rein , 2 days agoThe author repeatedly returns to his talking points when challenged for evidence to support his assertions. This is how ALL INTERVIEWS SHOULD BE CONDUCTED. And the claim that the interviewer had to read the whole book to rightly ask for evidence to support assertions is utterly ridiculous.
William Huston , 2 days agoInspiring work Aaron. Luke had to be thinking "Bugger off, asking for facts"-LOL
Vicki Kennedy , 2 days agoOMG! GREAT JOB!! by Aaron Maté, holding this guy's feet to the fire.
Juan Hdez. Vigueras , 2 days agoDelusional, he has no evidence just hearsay. Just another Bolshevik
nicolas grey , 2 days agoThis is a very biased interview. Mueller will tell the last word on Russia meddling Trump campaign. But you can not question the content of a book you had not read in advance as this young man does. I have followed the issue from the beginning in CNN and other media and I have read the book Collusion, which is worth reading, very informative about. So this debate lead me think this "journalist" may be paid by FSB/Putin.
Goberto Angela , 2 days agoI would say if you are going to critique the Christian idea of God it's essential you read the bible if you are going to do it in any meaningful way . I take it you also have not read the book . This is like debate climate denailists, it's the same tatic , they take some data and misrepresent it to prove an ideological point . What I don't understand is why . And that goes to my first point , why even bother debate it at all ? You say he offered no proof , but he was just defending matte attachs , which if you look into it, are not that credible either . If he thought he was going to debunk all the claims made in the book, he should of read it, as he just looks stupid . But if you have not read it either, it's easy to agree with him, as it's not a genuine debate .
lxathos , 2 days agoAnother Libtard bites the dust, grand claims of collusion without the necessary proof. Going all the way back the 80' and 90' to justify hearsay. This libtard should be put in jail for defamation and slander for not have enough proof for those claims.
paganmaestro , 2 days agohehe.........
Act1veSp1n , 2 days agoLuke's book is already discounted, being peddled for barely half of its list price. The man is a fraud with an anti-Putin vendetta he's trying to settle.
Bobby Cesspool , 2 days agoLuke uses CIA operation, opposition Navalny as a legitimate source....facepalm.
Act1veSp1n , 2 days agoHis entire argument is a gish gallop fallacy......... They're throwing dozens of accusations at Trump, all of them individually weak arguments. If thier were actual fire, they wouldn't need all of the smoke & mirrors.
Bobby Cesspool , 2 days agoRussian KGB sent me here :)
Robert Kettering , 2 days agoWell done.
roman brandle , 2 days agoDem Party media collusion.
sheezle3 , 3 days agoIt seems (opinion = fact ) in the UK , just walk around and ask ordinary Russians what they think . The tactical guilt trip as a defensive tool , when you can't answer question . This is another propagandist colluding with we're not sure who? , believe me anyway , how dare you not believe me .
S.E.L. 25 , 3 days ago (edited)Good job, Aaron, thanks
madrussian1000 , 3 days agoWow!!! That's the best news interview I saw in ages... calmly, respectfully but surely exposing that joke of a journalist for what he is: a fraud. Tnx Aaron!!! Keep on truckin'...
Andre De Angelis , 3 days agoGreat job,Aaron! What a sleazeball this Luke character is, jee wiz!
Kokoro Wish , 3 days ago (edited)How did this clown manage to actually write a whole book based on zero evidence?
Joanne Leon , 3 days agoRussia seem to have gotten almost nothing out of this Presidency. If there was something transactional going on then Russian intelligence if far more incompetent than people are being led to believe.
Clint Warren , 3 days agoThis is how every Russiagate interview should be conducted! Bravo.
Joe shawn , 3 days agoThis is painful to watch.
Dave Klebt , 3 days agoHis answer to the very first Question explains everything, is the collusion ? we have to go way back to 1987. (I thought this was during the campaign) (IGNORE THE NOISE IN THE MEDIA) if you look at it, clinton payed many millions from KGB officers to get info on trump during the campaign.
DanEMO592 , 3 days agoor it could just be a business trip to attract a successful real estate developer to invest in their country.
dylan , 3 days ago (edited)This needs way more views. This is amazing
Thomastine , 3 days agoAaron did such a stellar job reigning this man's charade in 10:55
g00nther , 3 days ago"Uh, yes yes, I understand that, but let me dither on a bit more, offering non-evidence and avoiding your questions."
Martin Jančar , 3 days agoWhat a complete fraud this guy is. This is the book version of the "Steele Dossier", just a bunch of crap telling people what they want to hear to make a quick buck. Bottom feeders.
0tube0user , 3 days agoi am thinking about writing a book about that collusion :-D doesn't seem much of an effort :-D what a BS :-)
Denver Attaway , 3 days ago (edited)Why are we listening? Why did you interview an englishman of questionable character and background about a case that is in investigation and has not found a single connection. This book foremost is for profit and attention for the writer's benefit. Can he produce a single documents to back his statements? My guess is no. Everything he says is hearsay and fiction. The very first question asked is redirected... always when a question is redirected you can bet it's all garbage. He's just another babbling backward British pompous bozo looking to under mind and influence US citizens of our elected president. Brits by nature are globalist. The small island has for century plagued the world with globalist ideals of using people all over the world to enrich themselves. NEVER believe a Brit unless they are speaking ills of their own country which basically has 2 classes, rich and poor.
Ilfart 218 , 3 days agoGreat work Aaron. Its great to see an interview that challenges the guest to rationally explain the basis of proof for this nonsense red herring issue. Harding could not do it without clear suppositions and assumptions - no proof. The Guardian - my how its prestige has fallen.....and that guy wrote the book on the collusion and could not justify his case. That is why his feed cut out - frustration he does not encounter thru corporate media softball.
Zina J , 3 days agoYeah don't trust evidence. Listen to "people" they'll tell ya something shifty is going on. This damn fool is all too common.
Sendan , 3 days agoIt is far too early to write off the investigation into Russian activities in the 2016 election or dismiss how long Russian operatives will cultivate a subject (POTUS Trump). They often do not know how or where the people they cultivate will eventually end up, but they do know that they have a hook in them, for future use. It's how they've done business for decades.
MrDiogenes OfElmhurst , 3 days ago (edited)It was funny how the color of his face steadily changes:) OH NET NET did I put a smile face
Steve Ennever , 3 days agoGood job nailing him, however, " Putin is not a nice person" - what kind of BS is that? Not a nice person, comparing to whom? The Russians seem to like him just fine and that's the only thing that matters.
artcenterjo , 3 days agoBravo Aaron. Bravo.
Frodo Ring , 3 days ago (edited)good on you Aaron Mate!
Hagbard Celine , 3 days agoWhy he loses volume in the most critical parts of the video. He says """:the level of russians at the moment @#$%@#&$%@%#^$$&@^#""""" at minute 8:05
TheRedsRus , 3 days agoreally i cringe listening to that guy - that's how that whole bullshit story implodes when not all parties follow some scripts. thanks aaron - well done. merry xmas @ all.
Leo Jansen , 3 days ago@14.44 he talks about steele and trusted http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-24/wife-fusion-gps-founder-admits-her-husband-was-behind-fake-russiagate-story
TheJagjr4450 , 3 days agoLuke Harding talks a lot of Nonsense and which kind of secret meetings? What the Hell? He just making Money with his Book and the truth doesn´t interst him whatsover!
TheJagjr4450 , 3 days ago (edited)ONE SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE... is all we ask... ONE POSITIVE PIECE.
TheJagjr4450 , 3 days ago (edited)HARDING has no SHAME... the fact that he can blather this moronic nonsense without laughing is mind blowing. Aaron just wants to laugh out loud so many times... Harding loves to offer salacious antidotes regarding how evil Putin is, however there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO EVIDENCE!
Tony Smith , 3 days ago**IF THIS IS AN ACT OF WAR WE MUST HAVE EVIDENCE!** DID HARDING - "the reporter" (used loosely) contact the DNC in order to find out whether they allowed the FBI to inspect or examine the servers. This is PURE PROPAGANDA... Trump's phone calls have been monitored according to retired NSA whistle blowers since 2005. If there was any conversation it would have been leaked there is absolutely NO evidence what so ever of collusion. The FBI has no evidence and STEELE has testified in court that other than Carter Page's trip to Moscow the Dossier is ENTIRELY UNVERIFIED. When the entire thing is shown to have been a hoax will this idiot retract his drivel. PREET BAHARA -Hillary donor - is the US atty who allowed the Russian Lawyer into the country.
hohaia rangi , 3 days agoGuardian have always been estb. Clinton spent $10mn on opponent research w Russian collusion
HighFieldLux , 3 days agoAs soon as he started talking about Russian hacking of DNC he lost credibility. That claim has never been proven.
10:30 "I'm a storyteller." Welp.
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2017 | www.youtube.com
Lear King of Albion , 3 days ago (edited)
freydenker , 3 days agoThis moronic Brit wrote an entire book? Beginning with a visit to trump tower by a soviet era diplomat who made a factual statement about how lovely Trump Tower is? It is a beautiful tower, and had I seen the Donald on the streets of NYC, I would have said the same thing. After a year of no implication.of collusion, we are left with delusion collusion. If the moron wants to make a great case, how about researching the names of tenants of projects to which Trump sold the right to his name? Or the Odessan taxi drivers who sometimes drove past Trump Tower? After 7 minutes, I wondered how the interviewer had any patience for the moron, except to get his worthless and lazy slime argument into the record. Click. The interviewer had patience.
Timothy Musson , 3 days ago (edited)Best joke: "I am not a storyteller" at around 10.00 : ]]]
Jason Parker , 3 days agoAnother guy who, when asked for evidence to back up his assertions, answers with a non-specific hand-wave :'( Nice interview, Aaron - you asked him questions he didn't like, but you did it politely.
Luke, on the other hand, comes across as rude and petty... not a great way to present a viewpoint. BTW, I think it's great that TheRealNews interviews people with various opinions, and isn't afraid to ask them "hard" questions.
Michael Leone , 3 days agoRussian collusion/ interference = FAKE NEWS; Israeli collusion/ interference = BINGO. Every Politician in the whole damn world knows this fact but nobody has the balls to say it, and ''Hello Jerusalem'' Wake up sheeple!!!
proudhon100 , 3 days agoI don't think that guy knows what the word "evidence" means. He probably shouldn't use it methinks...
Ross Kolaric , 3 days agoNow Jill Stein is being caught up in the witch hunt. Everyone's to blame for the election loss . . . except Hillary!
Microsoft Word Technical Support , 3 days agoJust rubbish. Name the book collusion and sell lots of copies. Come on, get real.
omlezna , 3 days agoYou know what's hilarious? This guy didn't even do the basic research required to know the kind of interview he was getting into.
earthie48 Johnson , 4 days agoThank you Aaron, you are now the most respected and honest journalist left in North America! Your professionalism and demeanor exemplify class and honesty, which so diametrically compared to Mr. Harding's lackings thereof, it illuminated how ridiculous and speculative this whole collusion fiction has become. e.g. Green Party Jill Stein's guilt for being at the same table that Putin sat at for mere minutes long enough to be included in a photo, now smeared by the press as a Russian asset. I never saw Aaron raise his hands and ape and gesticulate for added performance. Ultimately, when no evidence was ever presented (as there is none to be found), this hilariously unfunny supposed-journalist, moreover fiction author, invented the new term collusion-rejectionist, and promptly grabbed his mouse to click disconnect and terminate his utter embarassment so expertly elucidated in this interview. Thank You, Happy Holidays and best of luck in 2018 Aaron!
Citizens.Against.Corruption USA , 4 days agoBullcrap! Hillary Clinton and her Cronies, secured Trumps win, by how they cheated Bernie during the 2016 Primary! Trump did not need Russia's, whatever you think they did, Hillary secured the win for Trump because of her DIRTY POLITICS, against the Democratic Base! Hillary and her thugs keep this up, they will secure the Republican Control in Washington, and quite honestly, its what they want! Because I firmly believe that the Clinton's and all whom support them ARE undercover Republicans, out to, and HAVE, destroyed the Democratic Party!
tink2090 , 4 days agoHillary Clinton...COLLUSION!
ValhalaFiveSix , 4 days agoHaving watched this interview, I feel the need to write the phrase: 'what a nutter.'
MsTree1 , 4 days agoThis Luke is either a Shill trying to make a profit by selling to Trump haters or the worst journalist in the world, He has lotsa of innuendo but no hard proof. No evidence of tape that TRump agrees to Quid pro quo with Putin, No documents of a deal, nothing that could convict a spie, just innuendo. "Putin is a bad guy and hates America" That is all he has.
Swinglow Alabama , 4 days agoThis man is quite hilarious in that even if Putin did hack the election all this storyteller relates is predicated on the fact that, WE THE PEOPLE are entirely idiotic in in the US. 'Tis quite condescending @TheRealNews
Antman4656 , 4 days ago (edited)Remember some Tony Blair. Loud and big mouth and a big nought in the end.
Laura Cortez , 4 days agoLUKE= So I think there is proof from my point of view but I don't have any. Only a feeling and theories that can't be proven. No Evidence but Russia is bad. All oligarchs and billionaires work with each other to make more money. Of course Putin and Trump had meetings. So does Jeff Besos and the CIA.
drumsnbass , 4 days agoSo basically he is saying that we should believe that Russia hacked elections in USA, France and Germany just because Putin is Baaaaad.
uche007us , 4 days agoI bet this clown sees Russian agents under his bed at night.
tdr , 4 days agoThis guy is better off appearing on Rachel Maddow show. he would get 0 push back from her
L G , 4 days agoGood God I couldn't watch this silly yellow teeth Brit imperialist from the first few seconds. His accent is insufferable.
Laura Cortez , 4 days agoThat's quite a title for a book that contains no evidence!
Jared Greathouse , 4 days agoNowadays the facts and evidence are not part of the news .. it is enough giving a good speech and choose the correct words and you can even convince the people that the earth is flat ... the same is happening with the Russia gate, think tanks will continue with this no sense until the people give up and start believing in the Russia gate
Darwin Holmstrom , 4 days agoOne question: What kind of nation is modern day Russia? TOTALLY separate question: Did they conduct some insidious assault on American elections (as though corporations don't do this already)? These are totally unrelated issues. The human rights situation in Russia may be- and is- awful. But we can imagine an extremely murderous nation internally that doesn't happen to be much of a threat externally
Jraymiami , 4 days agoSomeone's trying to sell a book by giving it a hyperbolic title .
Canuck516 , 4 days agoOmg these so called "journalists" opportunists are everywhere!!! Bravo Aaron Mate!
DootDoot , 4 days agoI guess to be hired by the Guardian, "opportunism" is a must-have!
Alan Mclemore , 4 days ago27:13 Sums up the entire book... And where the Author got his factless opinion.... How can a writer have such a clear comprehension problem?
Dan Harris , 4 days agoSez Corporatist Hack: "...The Russian media were portraying Hillary as some sort of warmonger madwoman." Hello: That's EXACTLY what she is. She said one of her first acts as President would be to declare a no-fly zone in Syria, which Gen. Dunford, testifying before Congress, said would require going to war with Russia.
But Clinton is a front for the neocon wing of the MIC, and they have been lusting for a new "Cold" War on the obvious grounds that it would increase the already appalling amount of US and world resources they suck up. The war corporations are so driven for profit that a little thing like the possibility of WWIII is of no concern to them. So they tell themselves the story that the Russians would back down and go home; the US would then be able to overthrow Assad so the oil companies could get their damned pipeline across southern Syria; and the Russians, angry at the loss of face, would ramp up their defense spending, which of course would require the US to ramp up theirs even more.
Neat plan for never-ending profits, brought to you by Hillary Clinton and the Warmongers. The problem is that Russia does not fear the US, and knows that it has the raw power to win a conflict in Syria if it wants to respond that strongly (look up "Zircon" hyper-sonic missile, which they have thousands of and against which US aircraft carriers have no defense). And Russia, being legally invited by the legally-elected President of Syria, and knowing the US to be acting illegally, might just decide to respond if the US attacks its planes.
And if they send a carrier to the bottom of the Gulf to stop American fighters from interfering with their legal activities in Syria, then President Clinton would have been faced with a choice: Go nuclear or go home. Which do you think she would have done? It's a damn good thing Trump won, detestable as he is. We are not at war with Russia, and that at least is ahead of where we very likely would have been if the Shill had slimed her way into power.
R Speechley , 4 days agoThe interviewer totally owned that asshole. Awesome journalistic interview.
Alan Mclemore , 4 days agoHarding is a joke, he just talks nonsense
ZantherY , 4 days agoSez Corporatist Hack: "I'm a story teller." No doubt about it, because he's told a bunch of stories on this video. The Guardian is worthless corporatist trash, and Luke Harding is a lying propagandist. I wonder who else KOFF*CIA*AHEM is paying his salary?
Joy Wilder , 4 days agoIt sounds as if someone has a book to flog! He should had stuck to CNN or Democracy Now, reporters there aren't likely to ASK anything intelligent!!
mic mccoy , 4 days agoHow many times & ways & years of Luke Harding being proven a fraudulent opportunist does it take for serious media platforms to simply stop paying him any attention??
mic mccoy , 4 days agoLuke Harding got his ass handed to him!!!!!!! Can't believe his book is a best seller as it states nothing provable.
mic mccoy , 4 days agoThis guy Luke Harding calls himself a journalist???? He is trying to sell a book based on no evidence.
scheminsiman , 4 days agoThis guy Luke Harding is a puppet of Main-Stream Media. What a joke!!!!!!
marsmotion , 4 days agoAaron batting out the park these regular talking points so easily, It looked like Harding has never had pushback on this. Twas interesting seeing him on the backfoot.
Rick O'Brien , 4 days agothe guardian, crap reporting innuendo and vague and propaganda....what an ass. thanks aaron, for keeping his feet to the fire and not letting him get away with lying. very satisfying to see these a holes not get away with it for once.
0 1 , 4 days ago (edited)Wow imagine governments having people killed. Outrageous! Can you say drone strikes? This guy Harding in not a serious person. Good job Aaron!
hypo krites , 4 days ago (edited)Everything this guy sites happens all the time with many countries involved. So the question is, why isolate one country? This another case of creating a narrative, and then looking for non existent facts to back up said narrative. Sounds zealous. I cannot finish watching this. Good job Aaron.
Tough interview, while he has a point the book should have been read thoroughly, it was a shame he used that as a point to avoid answering the hard question, "where is the proof?". It was interesting to hear about "Trump's ties to Russia", I think it was a shame the author felt it was acceptable to defer to his mistrust (warranted) and bad feelings towards Putin/Russian power structure in order to seemingly (from my point of view) justify the position.
This interview goes to show how difficult REAL journalism is, and how REAL scholarship is very valuable. While the author has a lot of interesting points, on this issue, I only see this probe/issue as a political wedge used to disenfranchise the presiding elected president, and the best thing about this whole process is a clear illustration about how bankrupt and politically corrupt DC is.
The confidence game DC is pushing needs to be brought down a few levels, and some power needs to go back to the people. We all have our own part to play, and being a victim, I feel is a waste of time, except as a means of holding people accountable.
old fan , 4 days agosmoke and mirrors. The evidence is so over-whelming that if anything was going to be prosecuted the trial would already be completed.
ameighable , 4 days agoThis is getting a lot more complicated than it needs to be. The buzzphrase that most Americans respond to (like Pavlov's dogs) is "Russia meddled in our election!" U.S. elections have always been "meddled" with. It's enough to say Trump, Kushner & their ilk made a lot of lucrative financial deals with Russia that turn out to be 1) conflicts of interest for ANY elected official and 2) abuse of (presidential) power. Isn't that enough?
Marko Kraguljac , 4 days ago (edited)I know that this person is trying to sell a book, but I see the investigation wrapping up. It would be pretty hard to carry on for another year. After all, Mueller has said it has completed all the WH interviews - and the ones at the top of an investigation are always the last ones questioned. Furthermore, in the first three week of November alone, 4,289 sealed cases have appeared in federal dockets throughout the nation - including the territories. There are probably more now. No one knows how many are Muellers, but the 4 unsealed cases are part of the initial group of filings. My prediction - nothing on Trump and Hillary goes to prison finally.
rvaclavek , 4 days ago (edited)Well done Aaron! This was a rare opportunity to dismantle a genuine, probably unwilling cog of corporate subversion and hysteria fueled by money chasing. Morons like this "storyteller" help harmful misunderstandings deepen. Wars and untold misery are started with stories like his.
fahrout4 , 4 days agoIf you live in the empirical world, you just believe the hearsay of the elites. DNC and Podesta hacks were empirically done with an external drive.
Meta Vinci , 4 days agoSo, the Russians are running around the globe hacking elections?
Lenore Olmstead , 4 days agoSeriously, RNN? Why do you give this puppets book play. Good for you Erin for questioning him. He's on the wrong side of this. There are so many connections among Obama FBI, DOJ, State Dept, Clinton and DNC to Fusion GPS that you're have to be a complete moron not to want to investigate THAT collusion to swing and election. They ere spying on trump and associates all last year. If there was collusion the leaky DC swamp would have spilled the beans.With regard to this collusion with Russia, Trump seems pretty clean. The NSA should know exactly who hacked the DNC servers the collect every oversees packet transfer. Given they have not come forward with that evidence I am more inclined to believe it was a leak, especially given Former NSA cryptographer and IC pro Bill Binney pretty much proved it was a leak when he showed the transfer rates were only achievable at a local port. Not over the Internet. Impossible! Trump is an international businessman, some as Clinton's who have just as much shady history with Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs. Follow the money there is a flow of money from Russian banks and players to the Clinton Foundation while she was SoS.
Scott Turner , 4 days agoSo sad you cannot read the book and you cannot listen and dismiss a really serious threat to our elections. You did not even know what happened in Estonia. You demonstrate a real lack of willingness to explore the truth with an open mind.
doubtingmantis , 4 days agoThat was great! The emoticon proof! Hahaha! His tenacity was quasi-religious, especially in the wrap-up and boils down to "There is evidence of collusion, even though I cannot point to any evidence."
Colonel Chuck , 4 days agoLuke's book is speculation. Thanks Aaron for holding his feet to the fire.
CryinFester , 4 days ago (edited)1987 all the way back when it was called the Soviet Union and was communist country. I am an Independent, but get a charge out of all the lying and BS going on in the USA and the 2 parties and their zombie followers. Empires going down and the 2 parties are just puppets for the Military Industrial Congressional Complex/Deep State. Big war coming and need lots of unemployeed young draftees.
Good job, Aaron! What does the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko have to do with Donald Trump colluding with Russia to steal the election from the hideous witch?
|
|
|
Dec 16, 2017 | www.youtube.com
meconnectesimplement , 8 months agoObama and Clinton thought they had the election in the bag. They broke surveillance laws thinking that Clinton would be in the Whitehouse to cover it anyway. Imagine their shock on election day when they realized how many felonies would be exposed when Trump took over.........cover-up.
Look at her face at 2:06 ... Scared and panicking Evelyn Farkas spilled the beans. By saying "I became very worried..." she's obviously trying to justify her behavior in case a legal bomb is dropped on her. This is a side effect of Nunes' dramatized little trip to the White House intelligence secure facilities: as long as they don't know Nunes and Trump's hands, panic will bring more people to come forward and look for some kind of justification and/or protection.
|
|
|
Oct 12, 2017 | russia-insider.com
Joseph Alsop (lead image, centre) and George Kennan (right) started the kind of Russia-hating in Washington which, today, President Vladimir Putin, like the businessmen around him, think of as a novelty that cannot last for long.Alsop was a fake news fabricator, and such a narcissist as to give the bow-ties he wore a bad name. Kennan was a psychopath who alternated bouts of aggression to prove himself with bouts of depression over his cowardice. For them, Russia was a suitable target. The Washington Post was the newspaper which gave their lunacy public asylum. This, according to a fresh history by a university professor from California, started in 1947, long before the arrival in Washington of the anti-communist phobia known after the name of Senator Joseph McCarthy.
Russia-hating was an American upper-class phenomenon, cultivated in the offices, cocktail parties, clubs, and mansions of the deep state, as it emerged out of World War II. It needed a new enemy to thrive; it fastened on Russia (aka the Soviet Union) as the enemy.
McCarthyism was an American lower-class phenomenon. It focused on the loyalty or disloyalty of the upper-class deep-staters. That wasn't the same thing as Russia-hating; Wall Street bankers, Boston lawyers, homosexuals, Jews, communists, were all the enemy. As the Senator from Wisconsin characterized it himself in 1952, "McCarthyism is Americanism with its sleeves rolled." He implied – without a middle-class tie; certainly not an upper-class bow-tie.
Russia was not an enemy which united the two American lunacies, for they hated each other much more than they hated the Russians. The Soviet Politburo understood this better then than the Kremlin does now.Gregg Herken's The Georgetown Set , is so named because it records the activities of Alsop, Kennan and several other State Department, Central Intelligence Agency and White House officials who lived as neighbours in the Georgetown district of the capital city, together with Katharine (Kay) and Philip Graham, proprietor managers of the Washington Post. The district – once a chartered city of Maryland and river port, which was absorbed into the federal District of Columbia in 1871 -- was expensive, relatively speaking then; more so now. The richest of the set, including Alsop, had town houses in Georgetown, and rural retreats in Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut.
They were a set because because, as Herken said succinctly to an interviewer , "they got together every Sunday for supper and, basically, they ran the country from those meetings." As the book elaborates, they thought they were running the world. With a longer time lapse in which to view the evidence, they were also losing it.
Newspapers exposed in the book for collaborating in all the deceits, failures and war crimes of the history have reacted by calling Herken's effort a "provincial corner". The New Yorker opined that the Russia-hating and Russia war-making which Herken retells are dead and gone. "The guests at the Sunday soirées no doubt felt that they were in the cockpit of history. But the United States is a democracy, not a Wasp Ascendancy There was once an atmosphere of willingness that made a system of bribes and information exchanges seem, to the people involved, simply a way of working together for a common cause in a climate of public opinion that, unfortunately, required secrecy. No one got rich from the arrangement. People just lost track of what was inside their bubble and what was outside, as people tend to do. Vietnam was the reality check. 'I've Seen the Best of It' was the title Alsop gave to his memoirs. Things hadn't been the same since, he felt. He was right about that, and we should be thankful." In the New York media business these days it's possible to publish a selfie of pulling your own leg.
The Washington Post has deflected the indictment against itself by describing Herken's work as "a very strange book (A) a rehash of the history of the Cold War as experienced in certain Washington circles and (B) an almost obsessive recapitulation of the life and journalism of Joseph Alsop." Alsop is dismissed as unworthy of a history at all because he was "utterly repellent: arrogant, patronizing, imperious, uninterested in anyone except himself."
That's the truth about Alsop. The truth about the Washington Post is buried in this line by the Post's books editor about the hand that fed him: "it must be very hard for people who did not live through the '50s and '60s to understand how obsessed the American people were with the threat from Moscow." That line appeared in print on November 7, 2014. It was already history, that's to say, a misjudgment. How monumentally mistaken is obvious now.
In covering the period from 1946 to 1975, Herken's research does repeat much of the history of the Cold War which has been told elsewhere. It starts on February 22, 1946, the date of the "Long Telegram", No. 511 -- Kennan's despatch from the US Embassy in Moscow to the State Department, setting out his strategy of so-called containment and much more besides. Read it in the declassified original . Most of the war-fighting and other war crimes which the telegram set in motion under Kennan's 1948 rubrics, "organized political warfare" and "preventive direct action", are reported in Herken's book; so too are Kennan's frequent funks, failures of conviction, reversals of judgment, and pleas for help.
The book ends on December 30, 1974, the date of Alsop's last column. Alsop concluded with the line: "I have never known the American people to be really badly wrong, if only they were correctly and fully informed."
Herken shows how self-deluded and professionally delusional that was -- not because of Alsop's character but because of his sources. Herken documents that they ran upwards from foot-soldiers (also lubricious sailors) to presidents and cabinet secretaries. Herken doesn't think the same of Kennan, who gets to walk off stage, aged 101, sounding more sceptical of overthrowing Saddam Hussein than he ever was in his prime and in power to direct schemes of what we call state terrorism today.
Left to right: Kennan died in 2005, aged 101; Alsop died in 1989 aged 78; Frank Wisner died in 1965 aged 56. The deeper Herken gets into the private papers, the more he refers to his subjects by their diminutives and nicknames – Joe, Oppie, Beetle, Dickie, the Crocodile, Wig, Jack, Wiz, Soozle, Vangie, et al.What is fresh about the sources is that Herken has had access to the private notes, letters and diaries of the Alsop family; the Kennan diaries and letters; and the private papers of Frank Wisner, the first director of covert operations against Russia. Wisner went mad and killed himself, as did Graham. There's no doubt about the suicide outcome of their madness.
In the case of the mad ex-Defence Secretary James Forrestal his fatal jump from the window of the Navy hospital in Bethesda, Maryland, in May 1949 might have been a homicidal push. Herken concludes that Forrestal's death was "the first senior-ranking American casualty of the Cold War." Herken thinks of their madness as anomalies. The history shows they were normalities.
Missing from this history is any reference to official documents, now declassified; press reporting of the time; or interviews with veterans of the same events but on other sides – Russian and Soviet; British; German; French; Polish; Vietnamese; Chinese. This isn't so much a fatal flaw in Herken's (right) book as the reason why his history is repeating itself today. Call this a variation on Karl's Marx's apothegm that history starts as tragedy and repeats itself as farce. Herken's blindness to this is as revealing as the Washington Post's madness, not yet as suicidal as its former proprietor's, today.
So mesmerized is Herken by the moneyed backgrounds of his subjects and sources, and by the amount of black cash from the US Government they spent on operations, he forgets to report what they did to fill their own pockets. The claim by the New Yorker that "no one got rich from the arrangement" – Alsop's fake news fabrications – is false, but Herken touches only in passing on how they made (or kept) their money. Alsop's column, for example, was sold to 200 newspapers, and at one time claimed a readership of 25 million. His family inheritance is recorded, but not its annual revenue value. Alsop's payola included silk shirts from Alfred Kohlberg, a textile importer from China who backed Chiang Kai-shek against Mao Tse-tung, as did Alsop. Alsop's patrons included Convair (General Dynamics), the company building the US Air Force Atlas missile for procurement of which Alsop reported fictions about Soviet missile strength.
In the US power which Alsop, Kennan and Wisner believed without hesitation, Herken is not less a believer. "Anything could be achieved", Herken quotes a New York Times reporter quoting Wisner. When the US force multiple changed, however, and US allies or agents were outgunned, outspent, outnumbered, or outwitted, they were unable to acknowledge miscalculation, attributing defeat instead to the superior force or guile of their adversaries, especially the Russians.
This is madness, and there is good reason for recognizing the symptoms again. In 1958, when Herken says Wisner's paranoid manias were becoming obvious to his friends and colleagues, "Frank put forward a theory that the careless comment which had gotten George Kennan kicked out of the Soviet Union was evidence the Soviets had succeeded in an area where the CIA's own scientists had failed: mind control. Some agency hands alleged that Wisner attributed his own increasingly bizarre behaviour to the Kremlin's sly manipulation."
A cell from the comic "Is This Tomorrow? America Under Communism"(1947). Test your mind, read more: https://archive.org/details/IsThisTomorrowAmericaUnderCommunismCatecheticalGuildFrom Washington in 1958, fast forward to Washington in 2017; for mind control and sly manipulation, read Russian hacking and cyber warfare. From Wisner's and Kennan's balloon drops of leaflets and broadcasts by Radio Free Europe, fast forward to Russia Today Television and Russian infiltrations of Twitter, Google, the Democratic National Committee, and the Trump organization.
It stands to reason (ahem!) that if you think what the US Government and its journalists were doing then was mad, you are might conclude that what they is doing now is just as mad – and not very different. When the incumbent president and his Secretary of State publicly call for IQ tests on each other, all reason has failed. "The nation," as Alsop had written, "had simply taken leave of all sense of proportion." That was in March 1954.If you fast forward to now, there's one difference. Today the lunatic Russia warfighters don't retire. They also don't fade away. Today's sleek successors to mad Wisner and mad Graham sleep easily in their beds a-nights. For what they've done and do, they wouldn't dream of taking shotguns to their heads.
Herken retells the story of the campaign Alsop waged against McCarthyism at the State Department, against McCarthy himself, and the vulnerability Alsop himself presented until the Boston lawyer Joseph Welch put an end to McCarthy on June 9, 1954 : "Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?" Welch famously said. "Have you left no sense of decency?" The recurring history reveals why, even if there are plenty of people to say the same thing today to the Washington Post, New York Times, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the madness will continue repeating itself.
Source: Dances With Bears
Tommy Jensen , October 12, 2017 8:47 AM
Slick Tommy Jensen , October 12, 2017 6:52 PM..and what happened exactly 70 years ago? You said it, not me.....you said Israel!
Carlo - , October 12, 2017 11:18 AMWisner has a son named Frank, who is a pro-Kosovo Albanian/anti-Serb/anti-Russian fiend. Kennan later became a responsibly more calming voice on Russia. Concerning the Capitol Hill establishment -
https://www.strategic-cultu...
Be hard pressed to find a better article on the subject.
Kjell Hasthi Edward Mercer , October 13, 2017 2:35 PMNonetheless, I remember that Kennan was a strong opponent against NATO expansion in the 90's, after the collapse of the USSR. I think there were good reasons to make an alliance against the spread of communism, but after this ended in Europe, of course, NATO should have dissolved just like the Warsaw Pact.
Koroviev,Behemoth&Woland LLP , October 13, 2017 8:39 AMWages are low in Estonia compared to Sweden. So the Swedish corporations will move some factories to Estonia to make more money. That is the "powerhouse". The Estonians will not see much to the money. But they get what is wages in Estonia of course.
Gonzogal , October 12, 2017 4:25 PMWhy did the Warburg Brothers and Jacob Schiff finance the Bolsheviks when the rest of America was instructed to hate the Russians?
Just another one of those unexplained oddities of history.
Tommy Jensen Gonzogal , October 13, 2017 5:05 AMIt is MUCH older than 70 years!
"The Cold War, I would remind readers, started in November 1917 when the Bolsheviks took power in Russia Undiscouraged and terrified of a socialist revolution in Russia, the so-called Entente [Great Britain and France] tossed fat rolls of banknotes to anyone who said he would fight the Soviets. The Entente sent its own forces to the four distant corners of Russia to do the job themselves. This was the 'Allied' intervention which continued until the beginning of 1921 in the west and until 1922 in Eastern Siberia," ~ Professor Michael Jabara Carley of the University of Montreal
"Interestingly enough, the term "Russophobia" was first used by Fyodor Tyutchev (1803 -- 1873), famous Russian poet, diplomat and politician in reference to growing Western hostilities against Russia on the "eve" of the Crimean War (1854-56) between the Russian Empire and an alliance of France, Britain, the Ottoman Empire, and Sardinia.
Historians elaborate that the so-called "Russophobia campaign" actually started as early as the 1820s -- instigated by Britain -- following Russia's glorious victory over Napoleonic France in 1812-13.
"British hostility towards Russia had recurred periodically ever since the late eighteenth century. In had become increasingly apparent, albeit in a gradual and evolutionary fashion, in the years after Waterloo Fear of Russia's aims in Europe and Asia surfaced as early as 1817," American historian Edward M. Spiers wrote in his book "Radical General: Sir George de Lacy Evans, 1787-1870."
"Britons were especially concerned about their dominance in Central Asia and the "Russian threat" to their hegemonic ambitions in the region. According British diplomat Sir Martin Ewans, in the 1820s-30s London deemed that it would be "unwise" to allow the Russian Empire to extend its influence over Caucasus, Persia and Afghanistan. "That Russophobia existed is undeniable," Sir Ewans remarked in his book "Conflict in Afghanistan: Studies in Asymmetric Warfare."
"Remarkably, in the 1860s, Russian ethnologist, philosopher and historian Nikolai Danilevsky slammed the Western propaganda machine for spreading distorted information and blatant lies about the "Russian threat" and imaginary "expansionist ambitions" of the Russian Empire in his book "Russia and Europe." https://sputniknews.com/pol...
Its incredible one country can sit half the planet away "not allowing" another country "to spread its influence" to its neighbours. When this is the case, this country´s culture is pervercy and sick.
|
|
|
Oct 12, 2017 | www.counterpunch.org
The Senate Intelligence Committee has made it clear that it is not conducting an open and independent investigation of alleged Russian hacking, but making a determined effort to support a theory that was presented in the January 6, 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. Committee Chairman Senator Richard Burr (R-N.C.) admitted as much in a press conference last Wednesday when he said:We feel very confident that the ICA's accuracy is going to be supported by our committee.
Burr's statement is an example of "confirmation bias" which is the tendency to interpret information in a way that confirms one's own preexisting beliefs. In this case, Burr and his co-chair, Senator Mark Warner have already accepted the findings of a hastily slapped-together Intelligence report that was the work of "hand-picked" analysts who were likely chosen to produce conclusions that jibed with a particular political agenda. In other words, the intelligence was fixed to fit the policy. Burr of course has tried to conceal his prejudice by pointing to the number of witnesses the Committee has interviewed and the volume of work that's been produced. This is from an article at The Nation:
Since January 23, the committee and its staff have conducted more than 100 interviews, comprising 250 hours of testimony and resulting in 4,000 pages of transcripts, and reviewed more than 100,000 documents relevant to Russiagate. The staff, said Warner, has collectively spent a total of 57 hours per day, seven days a week, since the committee opened its inquiry, going through documents and transcripts, interviewing witnesses, and analyzing both classified and unclassified material.
It all sounds very impressive, but if the goal is merely to lend credibility to unverified assumptions, then what's the point?
Let's take a look at a few excerpts from the report and see whether Burr and Warner are justified in "feeling confident" in the ICA's accuracy.
From the Intelligence Community Assessment:
We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. We have high confidence in these judgments.
This is the basic claim of Russia meddling that has yet to be proved. As you can see, the charge is mixed with liberal doses of mind-reading mumbo-jumbo that reveal the authors' lack of objectivity. There's a considerable amount of speculation about Putin's motives and preferences which are based on pure conjecture. It's a bit shocking that professional analysts– who are charged with providing our leaders with rock-solid intelligence related to matters of national security– would indulge in this type of opinionated blather and psycho-babble. It's also shocking that Burr and Warner think this gibberish should be taken seriously.
Here's more from the ICA:
Putin most likely wanted to discredit Secretary Clinton because he has publicly blamed her since 2011 for inciting mass protests against his regime in late 2011 and early 2012, and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him.
More mind-reading, more groundless speculation, more guessing what Putin thinks or doesn't think. The ICA reads more like the text from a morning talk show than an Intelligence report. And what is it about this report that Burr finds so persuasive? It's beyond me. The report's greatest strength seems to be that no one has ever read it. If they had, they'd realize that it's nonsense. Also, it would have been better if the ICA's authors had avoided the amateur psychoanalysis and stuck to the point, Russia hacking. Dabbling in the former seriously impacts the report's credibility.
To their credit, however, Burr and Warner have questioned all of the analysts who contributed to the report. Check out this excerpt from The Nation:
"We have interviewed everybody who had a hand or a voice in the creation of the ICA," said Burr. "We've spent nine times the amount of time that the IC [intelligence community] spent putting the ICA together. We have reviewed all the supporting evidence that went into it and, in addition to that, the things that went on the cutting-room floor that they may not have found appropriate for the ICA, but we may have found relevant to our investigation." Burr added that the committee's review included "highly classified intelligence reporting," and they've interviewed every official in the Obama administration who had anything to do with putting it together. ("Democrats and Republicans in Congress Agree: Russia Did It", The Nation)
That's great, but where' the beef? How can the committee conduct "100 interviews, comprising 250 hours of testimony and resulting in 4,000 pages of transcripts" without producing a shred of evidence that Russia meddled in the elections? How is that possible? The Committee's job is to prove its case not to merely pour over the minutia related to the investigation. No one really cares how many people testified or how much paperwork was involved. What people want is proof that Russia interfered with the elections or that members of the Trump campaign colluded with Moscow. That's the whole point of this exercise. And, on the collusion matter, at least we have something new to report. In a rare moment of candor, Burr blurted out this gem:
"There are concerns that we continue to pursue. Collusion? The committee continues to look into all evidence to see if there was any hint of collusion. Now, I'm not going to even discuss any initial findings because we haven't any."
Think about that. After "100 interviews, 250 hours of testimony, and 4000 transcript pages" there's not the slightest hint of collusion. It's mindboggling. Why isn't this front page news? Why haven't the New York Times or Washington Post run this in their headlines, after all, they've hyped every other part of this story?
Could it be that Burr's admission doesn't mesh with the media's "Russia did it" narrative so they decided to scrub the story altogether?
But it's not just collusion we're talking about here, there's also the broader issue of Russia meddling. And what was striking about the press conference is that –after all the interviews, all the testimony, and all the stacks of transcripts– the Committee has come up with nothing; no eyewitness testimony supporting the original claims, no smoking gun, no proof of domestic espionage, no evidence of Russian complicity, nothing. One big goose egg.
So here's a question for critical minded readers:
If the Senate Intelligence Committee has not found any proof that Russia hacked the 2016 elections, then why do senators' Burr and Warner still believe the ICA is reliable? It doesn't really make sense, does it? Don't they require evidence to draw their conclusions? And doesn't the burden of truth fall on the prosecution (or the investigators in this case)? Isn't a man innocent until proven guilty or doesn't that rule apply to Russia?
Let's cut to the chase: The committee is not getting to the bottom of the Russia hacking matter, because they don't want to get to the bottom of it. It's that simple.
That's why they have excluded any witnesses that may upset their preconceived theory of what happened. Why, for example, would the committee chose to interview former CIA Director John Brennan rather than WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange? Brennan not only helped select the hand-picked analysts who authored the ICA, he also clearly has an animus towards Russia due to his frustrated attempt to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al Assad which was thwarted by Putin. In other words, Brennan has a motive to mislead the Committee. He's biased. He has an ax to grind. In contrast, Assange has firsthand knowledge of what actually transpired with the DNC emails because he was the recipient of those emails. Has Assange been contacted by the Committee or asked to testify via Skype?
Don't bet on it.
What about former UK ambassador Craig Murray, a WikiLeaks colleague, who has repeatedly admitted that he knows the source of the DNC emails. Murray hasn't been asked to testify nor has he even been contacted by the FBI on the matter. Apparently, the FBI has no interest in a credible witness who can disprove the politically-motivated theory expounded in the ICA.
Then there's 30-year CIA analyst Ray McGovern and his group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). McGovern has done extensive research on the topic and has produced solid evidence that the DNC emails were "leaked" by an insider, not "hacked" by a foreign government. McGovern's work squares with Assange and Murray's claim that Russia did not hack the 2016 elections. Has McGovern been invited to testify?
How about Skip Folden, retired IBM Program Manager and Information Technology expert, whose excellent report titled "Non-Existent Foundation for Russian Hacking Charge" also disproves the hacking theory, as does The Nation's Patrick Lawrence whose riveting article at The Nation titled "A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year's DNC Hack" which thoroughly obliterates the central claims of the ICA.
Finally, there's California Congressman Dana Rohrabacher who met with Assange in August at the Ecuadorian embassy in London and who was assured that Assange would provide hard evidence (in the form of "a computer drive or other data-storage device") that the Russians were not involved in the DNC email scandal.
Wouldn't you think that senate investigators would want to talk to a trusted colleague and credible witness like Rohrabacher who said he could produce solid proof that the scandal, that has dominated the headlines and roiled Washington for the better part of a year, was bogus?
Apparently not. Apparently Burr and his colleagues would rather avoid any witness or evidence that conflicts with their increasingly-threadbare thesis.
So what conclusions can we draw from the Committee's behavior? Are Burr and Warner really conducting an open and independent investigation of alleged Russia hacking or is this just a witch hunt?
It should be obvious by now that the real intention of the briefing was not to provide the public with more information, facts or evidence of Russian hacking, but to use the prestigious setting as a platform for disseminating more disinformation aimed at vilifying an emerging rival (Russia) that has blocked Washington's aggression in Ukraine and Syria, and threatens to unite the most populous and prosperous region in the world (Eurasia) into one massive free trade zone spanning from Lisbon to Vladivostok.
Reasonable people must now consider the possibility that the Russia hacking narrative is an Information Operation (IO) devoid of any real substance which is designed to poison the publics perception of Russia. It is a domestic propaganda campaign that fits perfectly with the "Full Spectrum Dominance" theory of weaponizing media in a way that best achieves one's geopolitical objectives. The American people are again being manipulated so that powerful elites can lead the country to war.
|
|
|
Oct 01, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
The segment started off with Geist introducing the latest reporting on the topic:
GEIST: Twitter says it has shut down more than two-hundred accounts that were tied to the same Russian operatives who bought political ads on Facebook. Of the 450 accounts released by Facebook as part of its investigation, Twitter was able to match 22 of them to its own site. The disclosure by Twitter followed a briefing by company officials to staffers of the Senate and House Intel committees yesterday. Following that meeting, the top Democrat on the Senate committee, Mark Warner, slammed Twitter for its presentation.
SEN. MARK WARNER [D-VA]: [playing clip] The presentation that the Twitter team made to the Senate Intel staff today was deeply disappointing. The notion that their work was basically derivative based upon accounts that Facebook had identified showed enormous lack of understanding from the Twitter team of how serious this issue is, the threat it poses to democratic institutions, and, again, begs many more questions than they offered.
(...)
GEIST: The top Democrat on the House Intel Committee, Adam Schiff, also weighed in on Twitters briefing to his committee, releasing a statement that read, in part: "... it is clear that Twitter has significant forensic work to do to understand the depth and breadth of Russian activity during the campaign. This additional analysis will require far more robust investigation into how Russian actors used their platform as a part of their active measures campaign..."
Without any perceptible degree of skepticism about the Democratic Congressmen's claims, Geist then teed up Nicolle Wallace, host of the MSNBC afternoon show Deadline: White House , to talk about social media and the 2016 election more generally:
GEIST: You do get the sense, Nicolle, that Facebook, Twitter, social media was totally clueless about what was happening on their sites during the 2016 campaign.
WALLACE: It's worse than that [...]. The social media companies are sort of like the worst stereotype of a Republican political organization. They're reactive, theyre opaque, they're defensive, they are very slow to understand the value of transparency. They're totally lawyered up, lobbied up. And they are as a culture, the hubris of thinking that they're all about the public good, when if you take a low-tech analogy, its basically like someone got mugged in your backyard and their position is: well, it's not our problem, I mean, we just bought the lot on which the house was built, not our problem.
Giant Meteor , Sep 30, 2017 7:01 PM
overbet -> Giant Meteor , Sep 30, 2017 7:06 PMLordy, it's a cookbook !
AlaricBalth -> overbet , Sep 30, 2017 7:30 PMHow about $10m fine for citing anonymous sources.
AtATrESICI -> AlaricBalth , Sep 30, 2017 7:37 PMThe MSM does not report news. They provide entertainment for their demographic base of couch riding spectators. Controversy, salaciousness and division increase the amount of eyeballs, which allow these channels of distraction to charge exorbitant fees to advertisers who are selling crap most don't need or want. It's all just "chewing gum" for the eyes.
AtATrESICI -> AtATrESICI , Sep 30, 2017 7:51 PMBut, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia. OMG! What happened?
This shit is a sad fucking joke...
Paul Kersey -> AlaricBalth , Sep 30, 2017 7:41 PMOne more thing. Folks that are Russian hack the election people, believe the .gov story on 911 to the letter. That does not wash with me.
Skeero , Sep 30, 2017 7:04 PM"This isn't new, this is the Kremlin playbook. They have been exacerbating racial tensions in the US [for years]... "
So it's the Russians that have caused racial tensions in the U.S., who knew? Racial voting patterns in this country are almost the same today as they were before the Civil War. In any Presidential election, for instance, 95% of blacks vote Democrat, regardless of who is running, and over 80% of Christian Fundamentalists vote Republican, regardless of who is running.
During this last Presidential election, if you flipped the State of Virginia with the State of Pennsylvania, the election turned on the Mason-Dixon line. Unless the Russians can be blamed for the racism this nation was born into, it's probably absurd to blame today's racial tensions on them.
Blankone , Sep 30, 2017 7:07 PM"Black Lives Matter and targeting, specifically, ethnic groups [...] and allowing people to target, not only for Russian influence, but also target housing ads, employment ads."
Shame on them for trying to get people to get a job!
Dickweed Wang , Sep 30, 2017 7:11 PMHow long until they declare antifa is a Russian sponsored terrorist org.? I know it is not time yet but once the violence of antifa generates general rejection by the middle class due to fear - perhaps then they will throw them under the bus. And use antifa as justification for oppressive policies/laws.
AriusArmenian , Sep 30, 2017 7:41 PMWho the fuck watches shit like this anyway?
xrxs , Sep 30, 2017 7:42 PMInstead of America taking responsibility for its racial tensions it tries to find some foreign demon to make responsible.
Everything negative in America is now the fault of Russia, Iran, or others.
Very convenient.
Just destroy Russia, Iran, etc., then America will be perfect.
Destroy the world and everything will then be perfect.
If this is what is operating in the American unconscious psyche then the world is screwed.
GreatUncle , Sep 30, 2017 7:44 PMThinking about Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent really opened my eyes to what democratization of the media could do. Why are we having this conversation about 2016, and not 2008 or 2012? I have a number of theories about this. I think the endgame here is to create a Great Firewall for major social media platforms to keep people from finding out certain truths (I think you won't be hearing from Wikileaks, for example). It's a dark time, and I'm sad we're here.
Hikikomori , Sep 30, 2017 7:47 PMYaaaaaaaaawwwwwwn ... I don't do social media full stop.
So any government control mechanism actually fails and if anything with all the proactive advertising, fake news and now mostly junk content I know people who are dumping it prefering alternative forms of communication ... like talking to real people.
I never knew ... me dear old mum well retired now curses google and facebook with all the shit they come out with.
Mwhahahahaha ... it's spreading.
To the point just refuse to talk to people who use social media, let them keep their dumbed down universe to themselves.
TomGa , Sep 30, 2017 7:52 PMClearly, we have to destroy our democracy to save it.
Disgruntled Goat , Sep 30, 2017 8:01 PMMSNBC is a network of wackos. So are the ideas they promote as well as the usual suspects they interview. No one takes this network or the nonsense they spew seriously.
Sure, lets invent another huge government bureaucracy in order to maintain the monopoly of a dying, legacy media dinosaur !!!!
Through censorship no less
Its fucking both pathetic and laughable.... the MSM is a Dead Media Walking....
You think Bezos wanted to buy WaPo to enhance its journalistic character? No fucking chance... he took it over in order to save a mouthpiece of the elite that was ready to go TU..... for a huge Qid Pro Quo I might add ( to wit, you may recall that shortly after Bezos took over WaPo, Amazon was suddenly given the ok to accept EBT, with not a peep of protest or a question from Congress. So now, we have welfare queens ordering online and getting wildly expensive Amazon Fresh deliveries IN THE FUCKING GHETTO.... ISNT THIS COUNTRY GREAT !!!!)
What cannot be controlled or co-opted by these fucks must somehow be "regulated" or eliminated.
WELL FUCK THAT!!! Keep stacking pms, lead and brass
|
|
|
Originally from: [Jul 20, 2017] Fracking Around with the Russians by Philip Giraldi
I was particularly bemused by the comment by former CIA Chief John Brennan who denounced Trump's performance during the Group of 20 summit in Hamburg over the lack of a hard line against Putin and his failure to support the "word of the U.S. intelligence community" about Russian interference in the recent election. In an interview Brennan complained "He said it's an honor to meet President Putin. An honor to meet the individual who carried out the assault against our election? To me, it was a dishonorable thing to say."
Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter has demonstrated how the "word" of U.S. intel is not exactly what it might seem to be. And Brennan is not exactly a tabula rasa. As he observed in his comment, his ire derives from the claims over Russian alleged interference in the U.S. election, a narrative that Brennan himself has helped to create, to include his shady and possibly illegal contacting of foreign intelligence services to dig up dirt on the GOP presidential candidate and his associates. The dirt was dutifully provided by several European intelligence services which produced a report claiming, inter alia, that Donald Trump had urinated on a Russian prostitute in a bed previously slept in by Barack and Michelle Obama.
And along the way I have been assiduously trying to figure out the meaning of last week's reports regarding the contacts of Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort with two alleged Russian agents while reportedly seeking the dirt on Hillary. As it turns out, there may not have been any discussion of Hillary, though possibly something having to do with irregularities in DNC fundraising surfaced, and there may have been a bit more about the Magnitsky Act and adopting Russian babies.
Barring any new revelations backed up by actual facts revealing that something substantive like a quid pro quo actually took place, the whole affair appears to be yet another example of a politically inspired fishing expedition. This observation is not necessarily naivete on my part nor a denial that it all might have been an intelligence operation, but it is an acceptance of the fact that probing and maneuvering is all part and parcel of what intelligence agencies do when they are dealing with adversaries and very often even with friends. It does not necessarily imply that Moscow was seeking to overthrow American democracy even if it was trying to advance its own interests.
|
|
|
Jul 19, 2017 | gravatar.com
- Moscow Exile says: July 19, 2017 at 2:44 am Reply
- Moscow Exile says: July 19, 2017 at 2:49 am (Kremlin Controlled) RT:
Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya says Magnitsky Act lobbyist Browder behind Trump Jr. scandal
|
|
|
www.theamericanconservative.com
The best analysis of what is really going on in the world is coming out of the alternative media. Molyneux is one of the heavy hitters in this world - with his 700k Youtube subscribers and similar numbers of podcast listeners, he matters.One of his points is this: How could this possibly be a serious Russian government effort if they have a fat Brit moron convey the message over unencrypted email? Our staff of Russian-trained intelligence experts has to concur.
Say hi to Rob Goldstone. This will be over in a few days, and as before, the dummies who are chasing this idea, will just look stupider than they already do.
Save this video and watch it over your Wheaties tomorrow morning. Molyneux nails it.
Karl Rove said in the middle of year 2000 to VIP lawyers in Washington, that they no more would be occupied with analises of facts but forward with analising the reality Washington defined.
Due to the unipolar position Washington would from early year 2000 define the reality the world should face and spend (waste) their time on analising.
Molyneux is good to hear and see on many subjects, but this subect is in my opinion irrelevant, irrelevant as the Russia hacking US election is, the Assad Chemical attack, the HitlerPutin, the Crimea annexion hoax, the NK threat, man made clima change hoax, etc.
People with true intelligent capabilities should of course not spend their time on finding evidences on and document all Washington´s lies and defined realities.
Both Molyneux, RI and many others must have the right to dismiss obvious lies and propagandas, and go straight to the subject, that anybody with power that lie to us and the public should and must be removed and replaced.
Otherwise we are using our powers, intelligence and energy in an un-constructive way and we never learn, because we jump on the joke and hot air train again again.
|
|
|
www.unz.com
MOSCOW - The Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr. during the presidential campaign denied in an exclusive interview with NBC News that she had any connection to the Kremlin and insists she met with President Donald Trump's son to press her client's interest in the Magnitsky Act - not to hand over information about Hillary Clinton's campaign.
"I never had any damaging or sensitive information about Hillary Clinton. It was never my intention to have that," Natalia Veselnitskaya said.
When asked how Trump Jr. seemed to have the impression that she had information about the Democratic National Committee, she responded:
"It is quite possible that maybe they were longing for such an information. They wanted it so badly that they could only hear the thought that they wanted."
Trump Jr. has confirmed that the meeting occurred, saying in a statement to The New York Times that he attended "a short introductory meeting" with the lawyer, where the topic of conversation was primarily about adoption.
On Monday, Trump Jr. seemed to confirm that he had been offered information about Hillary or her campaign but insisted that nothing untoward in the meeting had occurred.
"Obviously I'm the first person on a campaign to ever take a meeting to hear info about an opponent... went nowhere but had to listen," he tweeted, seemingly sarcastic.
The New York Times on Monday reported that Trump Jr. was told in an email before the meeting that the information Veselnitskaya had was part of a Russian government effort to help his father's candidacy.
But Veselnitskaya flatly denied any connection to the Russian government.
|
|
|
Jul 11, 2017 | www.theamericanconservative.com
During a post-dinner cigar session at his elegant Cleveland mansion, Hanna reported back to McKinley on the results of his mission. Another participant recalled that the excited Hanna seemed "as keen as a razor blade.''
"Now, Major," said the political operative, addressing the governor by his Civil War title, "it's all over but the shouting. You can get both New York and Pennsylvania, but there are certain conditions." He didn't show any discomfort with the conditions, but McKinley was wary.
"What are they?" he asked. Hanna explained that Quay wanted control of all federal patronage in Pennsylvania, while others wanted to dominate government jobs in New England and Maine. But Platt wanted a bigger prize!the job of secretary of the Treasury!and he wanted a promise in writing.
McKinley stared ahead, puffing on his cigar. Then he rose from his chair, paced the room a few moments, and turned to Hanna.
"Mark," he said, "there are some things in this world that come too high. If I were to accept the nomination on those terms, the place would be worth nothing to me, and less to the people. If those are the terms, I am out of it.''
Hanna was taken aback. "Not so fast," he protested, explaining that, while it would be "damned hard" to prevail over the powerful bosses, who would surely not take kindly to a rebuff, Hanna thought it could be done and he welcomed the challenge. The men in the room pondered the situation and came up with a slogan: "The People Against the Bosses.''
McKinley ultimately beat the bosses, stirring a Washington Post reporter to write that "the big three of the Republican Party hoped to find McKinley as putty in their hands. When they failed, they vowed war on him." But now, said the reporter, their war was sputtering. "And over in the Ohio city by the lake, one Mark Hanna is laughing in his sleeve.''
This little vignette from the mists of the political past comes to mind with the latest development in the ongoing saga involving suspected Russian interference in last year's presidential campaign and the search for evidence that President Trump or his top campaign officials "colluded" with Russians to influence the electoral outcome. Now it turns out that the president's son, Donald Jr., met with a Russian lawyer, at the behest of a Russian friend, with an understanding beforehand that the lawyer could provide "official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary [Clinton] and her dealings with Russia and be very useful to your father." For good measure, Donald Jr. took along his brother-in-law, Jared Kushner, a top Trump adviser, and his father's campaign manager at the time, Paul Manafort.
This is no small matter, and it is certain to roil the waters of the ongoing investigations. More significantly, it will roil the political scene, contributing mightily to the deadlock crisis that has America in its grip. White House officials and Trump supporters are defending young Trump with pronouncements that nothing was amiss here; every campaign collects dirt on opponents; nothing done was against the law; we must get beyond these "gotcha" political witch hunts, etc., etc.
Meanwhile. Trump opponents see skulky tendencies, nefarious intent, moral turpitude, and likely illegality. Both sides are trotting out criminal lawyers declaring, based on their prior political proclivities, that no laws were broken!or that laws were clearly broken. The cable channels are crackling with competition over who can be more definitive and sanctimonious on the air!Lou Dobbs and Sean Hannity at Fox in defending the president; or Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews in attacking him on MSNBC.
Meanwhile, the country will continue to struggle with the question of what all this Sturm und Drang actually means. What to think? Whom to believe?
Let's stipulate, for purposes of analysis, that what we see is what there is, that what we know is not a harbinger of worse to come. How should we assess what we know thus far? What should we make of that meeting with the Russian lawyer?
That it was, yes, ethically promiscuous!but, worse, incredibly stupid. One recalls the line, often incorrectly attributed to Talleyrand, in response to a burgeoning scandal at the French court: "It was worse than a crime; it was a blunder.''
Consider that, after months of investigation, with leaks all over the place from those conducting the probe, no serious evidence emerged of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. The collusion story was receding in the national consciousness, and even in the Washington consciousness, with questions of "obstruction of justice" supplanting collusion as the more significant avenue of inquiry. Now the question of collusion is once again in the air.
The fate of Donald Trump Jr. is a puny matter in the scheme of things, but the state of the union is a huge matter. And the young man's stupidity of a year ago will have!indeed, is already having!a significant impact on the president's leadership. He campaigned on a pledge to improve relations with Russia, with an implicit acknowledgment that the West was probably equally responsible, along with Moscow, for the growing tensions between the two nations. He was right about that. Then came the evidence of Russian meddling in the U.S. election and the allegations of collusion, and Trump's effort at improving relations was killed in the crib.
But he didn't give up. At last week's G-20 Summit in Hamburg, in a long meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump sought to get beyond the matter of Russia's U.S. political interference and take up other serious matters of mutual interest to the two countries, with a hope of easing tensions. It was an important development in a crucial area of U.S. foreign policy. Now the president is back on the defensive, his back to the wall, with his opponents positioned to immobilize him on his Russian policy.
Now let's set aside, for just a moment, the previous stipulation that what we see is all there is. It's possible, of course, that this unfortunate meeting actually was part of a much bigger conspiracy that, if disclosed in full, could engulf the administration in revelations of such magnitude as to bring down the president. It's possible, but not likely.
But, in terms of Trump's command of his policy toward Russia, it almost doesn't matter because the new revelations will constrict his range of action irrespective of what may lie behind them. The forces that have wanted to destroy the president, or at least destroy his ability to bring about a détente with Putin, are once again in the saddle. One has to wonder at, perhaps even marvel at, the timing in all this.
Actions, even more than ideas, have consequences. That's what Trump Jr., Kushner, and Manafort ignored when they accepted an invitation to meet with a Russian representative with "official documents" that could harm the candidacy of the Democratic contender.
And that's precisely what William McKinley had in mind when he said he wouldn't enter into unsavory bargains with the Eastern bosses even if it meant giving up his presidential dream. Of course, McKinley was thinking in part about his own personal code of conduct!his inability to live with a decision that was beneath his concept of rectitude. But note that he also invoked the American people when he recoiled at the thought. He wouldn't take an action that he considered inconsistent with his duty to the electorate.
That was a long time ago!and a world away. Today we have the likes of the Trumps!and, for that matter, the Clintons, who leave nearly everyone in their wake when it comes to moral and ethical laxity in matters of public policy. And so it must have seemed perfectly normal for those three men, part of Donald Trump's inner circle of campaign confidantes, to accept the idea of sitting down with someone from a foreign power and talk about how official documents from that power could help upend their opponent. Did Trump himself know about all this as it was unfolding? We don't know, but probably. In any event, it probably wasn't a crime, but it was a hell of a blunder.
... ... ...
Robert W. Merry, longtime Washington, D.C., journalist and publishing executive, is editor of The American Conservative. His next book, President McKinley: Architect of the American Century , is due out from Simon & Schuster in November.
|
|
|
lyman alpha blob , June 30, 2017 at 11:44 amJun 30, 2017 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
...Gaius quotes Matt Taibbi's line of thought that the relentless Trump investigations will eventually turn up something, most likely money laundering. However, it's not clear that that can be pinned on Trump. For real estate transactions, it is the bank, not the property owner, that is responsible for anti-money-laundering checks. So unless Trump was accepting cash or other payment outside the banking system, it's going to be hard to make that stick. The one area where he could be vulnerable is his casinos. However, if I read this history of his casinos correctly, Trump could have been pretty much out of that business since 1995 via putting the casinos in a public entity (although he could have continued to collect fees as a manager). Wikipedia hedges its bets and says Trump has been out of the picture since at least 2011 . He only gets licensing fees and has nada to do with management and operations. So even if Trump got dirty money, and in particular dirty Russian money, it's hard to see how that begins to translate into influence over his Presidency, particularly since any such shady activity took place before Trump was even semi-seriously considering a Presidential bid.By Gaius Publius , a professional writer living on the West Coast of the United States and frequent contributor to DownWithTyranny, digby, Truthout, and Naked Capitalism. Follow him on Twitter @Gaius_Publius , Tumblr and Facebook . GP article archive here . Originally published at DownWithTyranny
http://player.theplatform.com/p/7wvmTC/MSNBCEmbeddedOffSite?guid=n_hayes_drussiafakenews_170627
Start at 2:25. Chris Hayes to Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell: "How long are you allowed to go before you retroactively file as a foreign agent?" Note Swalwell's carefully phrased non-answers, as well as Hayes' seeming failure to know that not registering is a very common practice. (If video doesn't play in your browser, go here and listen, again starting at 2:25.)
"And most pitiful of all that I heard was the voice of the daughter of Priam, of Cassandra" - Homer, The Odyssey , Book 11 PRIAM: What noise, what shriek is this?
TROILUS: 'Tis our mad sister; I do know her voice.
It is Cassandra. -Shakespeare, Troilus and Cressida , Act II, scene 2 "I'll be your Cassandra this week." -Yours trulySo much of this story is hidden from view, and so much of the past has to be erased to conform to what's presently painted as true.
Example of the latter: Did you remember that Robert Mueller and Bush's FBI were behind the highly suspicious (and likely covered-up) 2001 anthrax investigation - Robert Mueller, today's man of absolute integrity? Did you remember that James Comey was the man behind the destruction of the mind of Jose Padilla , just so that Bush could have a terrorist he could point to having caught - James Comey, today's man of doing always what's right? If you forgot all that in the rush to canonize them, don't count on the media to remind you - they have another purpose .
Yes, I'll be your Cassandra this week, the one destined not to be believed . To what do I refer? Read on.
How Many Foreign Agents Register as Foreign Agents? A Number Far Smaller Than "All"
Today let's look at one of the original sins pointed to by those trying to take down Trump, leaving entirely aside whether Trump needs taking down (which he does). That sin - Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort's failing to register as "foreign agents" (of Turkey and Ukraine, respectively, not Russia) until very after the fact.
See the Chris Hayes video at the top for Hayes' question to Rep. Eric Swalwell about that. Hayes to Swalwell: "How long are you allowed to go before you retroactively file as a foreign agent?" What Swalwell should have answered: "Almost forever by modern American practice."
Jonathan Marshall, writing at investigative journalist Robert Parry's Consortium News, has this to say about the current crop of unregistered foreign agents (my emphasis throughout):
The Open Secret of Foreign Lobbying
The alleged hacking of the Hillary Clinton campaign's emails and the numerous contacts of Donald Trump's circle with Russian officials, oligarchs and mobsters have triggered any number of investigations into Moscow's alleged efforts to influence the 2016 election and the new administration .
In contrast, as journalist Robert Parry recently noted , American politicians and the media have been notably silent about other examples of foreign interference in U.S. national politics. In part that's because supporters of more successful foreign pressure groups have enough clout to downplay or deny their very existence . In part it's also because America's political system is so riddled with big money that jaded insiders rarely question the status quo of influence peddling by other nations .
The subject of his discussion is the 1938 Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Under the Act, failure to properly register carries a penalty of up to five years in prison and $10,000 in fines. Marshall notes that while the influence of foreign agents was of great national concern during World War I and World War II, very little is done today to require or enforce FARA registration:
Since the end of World War II, however, enforcement of the Foreign Agents Registration Act has been notably lax. Its effectiveness has been stymied by political resistance from lobby supporters as well as by the law's many loopholes - including Justice Department's admission that FARA "does not authorize the government to inspect records of those not registered under the Act."
A 2016 audit by the inspector general of the Department of Justice determined that half of FARA registrations and 62 percent of initial registrations were filed late , and 15 percent of registrants simply stopped filing for periods of six months or more. It also determined that the Department of Justice brought only seven criminal cases under FARA from 1966 to 2015, and filed no civil injunctions since 1991 .
The result - almost no one registers who doesn't want to.
Here's Russia-savvy Matt Taibbi , who is looking at the whole Russia-Trump investigation and wonders what's being investigated. Note his comments about FARA at the end of this quote:
When James Comey was fired I didn't know what to think, because so much of this story is still hidden from view .
Certainly firing an FBI director who has announced the existence of an investigation targeting your campaign is going to be improper in almost every case. And in his post-firing rants about tapes and loyalty, President Trump validated every criticism of him as an impetuous, unstable, unfit executive who additionally is ignorant of the law and lunges for authoritarian solutions in a crisis.
But it's our job in the media to be bothered by little details, and the strange timeline of the Trump-Russia investigation qualifies as a conspicuous loose end.
[So] What exactly is the FBI investigating? Why was it kept secret from other intelligence chiefs, if that's what happened? That matters, if we're trying to gauge what happened last week.
Is it a FARA (Foreign Agent Registration Act) case involving former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn or a lower-level knucklehead like Carter Page?
Since FARA is violated more or less daily in Washington and largely ignored by authorities unless it involves someone without political connections (an awful lot of important people in Washington who appear to be making fortunes lobbying for foreign countries are merely engaged in "litigation support," if you ask them), it would be somewhat anticlimactic to find out that this was the alleged crime underlying our current white-hot constitutional crisis.
Is it something more serious than a FARA case, like money-laundering for instance, involving someone higher up in the Trump campaign? That would indeed be disturbing, and it would surely be improper – possibly even impeachable, depending upon what exactly happened behind the scenes – for Trump to get in the way of such a case playing itself out.
But even a case like that would be very different from espionage and treason . Gutting a money-laundering case involving a campaign staffer would be more like garden-variety corruption than the cloak-and-dagger nightmares currently consuming the popular imagination.
Sticking narrowly with FARA for the moment, if this were just a FARA case, it would be more than "somewhat anticlimactic to find out that this was the alleged crime underlying our current white-hot constitutional crisis." It would be, not to put to fine a point on it, highly indicative that something else is going on, that other hands are involved, just as the highly suspicious circumstances around the takedown of Eliot Spitzer indicate the presence of other hands and other actors.
My best guess, for what it's worth, is that Trump-Russia will devolve into a money-laundering case, and if it does, Trump will likely survive it, since so many others in the big money world do the same thing. But let's stick with unregistered foreign agents a bit longer.
John McCain, Randy Scheuneman and the Nation of Georgia
Do you remember the 2008 story about McCain advisor Randy Scheunemann, who claimed he no longer represented the nation of Georgia while advising the McCain campaign, even though his small (two-person) firm still retained their business?
And all this while McCain himself was trying to gin up a war between Georgia and Russia that he would benefit from politically :
In the current [2008] crisis, President Mikheil Saakashvili of Georgia fell into a Soviet trap by moving troops into the disputed territory of South Ossetia and raining artillery and rocket fire on the South Ossetian capital city of Tskhinvali, with a still undetermined loss of civilian life. As in 1956, the Soviets responded with overwhelming force and additional loss of life. Once again the United States could offer only words, not concrete aid to the Georgians.
It is difficult to believe that, like the Hungarians in 1956, the Georgians in 2008 could have taken such action without believing that they could expect support from the United States . Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice denies that the Bush administration was the agent provocateur in Georgia. To the contrary, a State Department source said that she explicitly warned President Saakashvili in July to avoid provoking Russia.
If this information is correct, then, by inference, John McCain emerges as the most likely suspect as agent provocateur . First, McCain had a unique and privileged pipeline to President Saakashvili (shown to the right in the photo to the right). McCain's top foreign policy advisor, Randy Scheunemann, was a partner in a two-man firm that served as a paid lobbyist for the Georgian government . Scheunemann continued receiving compensation from the firm until the McCain campaign imposed new restrictions on lobbyists in mid-May. Scheunemann reportedly helped arrange a telephone conversation between McCain and Saakashvili on April 17 of this year, while he was still being paid by Georgia...
McCain has benefited politically from the crisis in Georgia. McCain's swift and belligerent response to the Soviet actions in Georgia has bolstered his shaky standing with the right-wing of the Republican Party. McCain has also used the Georgian situation to assert his credentials as the hardened warrior ready to do battle against a resurgent Russia. He has pointedly contrasted his foreign policy experience with that of his Democratic opponent Barack Obama. Since the crisis erupted, McCain has focused like a laser on Georgia, to great effect . According to a Quinnipiac University National Poll released on August 19 he has gained four points on Obama since their last poll in mid-July and leads his rival by a two to one margin as the candidate best qualified to deal with Russia.
Was Scheunemann a paid lobbyist for Georgia at the time of these events? He says no. Others aren't so sure :
Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a liberal-leaning watchdog group, said Scheunemann still has a conflict of interest because his small firm continues to represent foreign clients. The records that show Scheunemann ceased representing foreign countries as of March 1 also show his partner, Michael Mitchell, remains registered to represent the three nations. Mitchell said Tuesday that Scheunemann no longer has any role with Orion Strategies but declined to say whether Scheunemann still is receiving income or profits from the firm .
If almost no one registers under FARA who doesn't want to, what's the crime if Flynn didn't register? The answer seems to be, because he's Trump appointee Michael Flynn, and FARA is a stick his enemies can beat him with, while they're looking for something better.
The fact that FARA is a stick almost no one is beaten with, matters not at all, it seems. Not to Democratic politicians and appointees; and not to many journalists either.
An Investigation in Search of a Crime
Questioning the Michael Flynn investigation leads us (and Matt Taibbi) down a further rabbit hole, which includes two questions: what's being investigated, and how did this investigation start?
Short answer to the first question - no one knows, since unlike the Watergate break-in, this whole effort didn't start with a crime that needed investigating. It seems to have started with an investigation (how to get rid of Trump) in search of a crime. And one that still hasn't found evidence of one.
Journalist Robert Parry, who himself was a key Iran-Contra investigator, makes the same point :
In Watergate , five burglars were caught inside the DNC offices on June 17, 1972, as they sought to plant more bugs on Democratic phones. (An earlier break-in in May had installed two bugs, but one didn't work.) Nixon then proceeded to mount a cover-up of his 1972 campaign's role in funding the break-in and other abuses of power.
In Iran-Contra , Reagan secretly authorized weapons sales to Iran, which was then designated a terrorist state, without informing Congress, a violation of the Arms Export Control Act. He also kept Congress in the dark about his belated signing of a related intelligence "finding." And the creation of slush funds to finance the Nicaraguan Contras represented an evasion of the U.S. Constitution.
There was also the attendant Iran-Contra cover-up mounted both by the Reagan White House and later the George H.W. Bush White House, which culminated in Bush's Christmas Eve 1992 pardons of six Iran-Contra defendants as special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh was zeroing in on possible indictment of Bush for withholding evidence.
By contrast , Russia-gate has been a "scandal" in search of a specific crime. President Barack Obama's intelligence chieftains have alleged – without presenting any clear evidence – that the Russian government hacked into the emails of the Democratic National Committee and of Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta and released those emails via WikiLeaks and other Internet sites. (The Russians and WikiLeaks have both denied the accusations.)
The DNC emails revealed that senior Democrats did not maintain their required independence regarding the primaries by seeking to hurt Sen. Bernie Sanders and help Clinton. The Podesta emails pulled back the curtain on Clinton's paid speeches to Wall Street banks and on pay-to-play features of the Clinton Foundation.
Hacking into personal computers is a crime, but the U.S. government has yet to bring any formal charges against specific individuals supposedly responsible for the hacking of the Democratic emails. There also has been no evidence that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with Russians in the hacking.
Lacking any precise evidence of this cyber-crime or of a conspiracy between Russia and the Trump campaign, Obama's Justice Department holdovers and now special prosecutor Robert Mueller have sought to build "process crimes," around false statements to investigators and possible obstruction of justice.
I've yet to see actual evidence of an underlying crime - lots of smoke, which is fine as a starting point, but no fire, even after months of looking (and months of official leaking about every damning thing in sight). This makes the current investigation strongly reminiscent of the Whitewater investigation, another case of Alice (sorry, Ken Starr) jumping into every hole she could find looking for a route to Wonderland. Ken Starr finally found one, perjury about a blow job. Will Mueller find something more incriminating? He's still looking too.
Note that none of this means Trump doesn't deserve getting rid of . It just means that how he's gotten rid of matters. (As you ponder this, consider what you think would be fair to do to a Democratic president. I guarantee what happens to Trump will be repeated.)
What Was the Sally Yates Accusation Against Flynn Really About?
Short answer to the second question of my two "further rabbit hole" questions - How did this investigation start? - may be the Sally Yates accusation that Flynn was someone who could be blackmailed.
Here's Parry on that (same link):
In the case of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Trump's first national security adviser, acting Attorney General Sally Yates used the archaic Logan Act of 1799 to create a predicate for the FBI to interrogate Flynn about a Dec. 29, 2016 conversation with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, i.e., after Trump's election but before the Inauguration .
Green Party leader Jill Stein and retired Lt. General Michael Flynn attending a dinner marking the RT network's 10-year anniversary in Moscow, December 2015, sitting at the same table as Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The Logan Act, which has never resulted in a prosecution in 218 years , was enacted during the period of the Alien and Sedition Acts to bar private citizens from negotiating on their own with foreign governments. It was never intended to apply to a national security adviser of an elected President, albeit before he was sworn in.
But it became the predicate for the FBI interrogation - and the FBI agents were armed with a transcript of the intercepted Kislyak-Flynn phone call so they could catch Flynn on any gaps in his recollection, which might have been made even hazier because he was on vacation in the Dominican Republic when Kislyak called.
Yates also concocted a bizarre argument that the discrepancies between Flynn's account of the call and the transcript left him open to Russian blackmail although how that would work – since the Russians surely assumed that Kislyak's calls would be monitored by U.S. intelligence and thus offered them no leverage with Flynn – was never explained.
Still, Flynn's failure to recount the phone call precisely and the controversy stirred up around it became the basis for an obstruction of justice investigation of Flynn and led to President Trump's firing Flynn on Feb. 13.
Do I need, Cassandra-like, to say this again? None of this means that Trump doesn't deserve getting rid of . It just means that how he's gotten rid of matters.
"So Much of the Story Is Still Hidden From View"
I'm not taking Robert Parry as the final word on this, but he's one word on this, and his word isn't nothing. If we were looking down rabbit holes for the source of this investigation, for where all this anti-Trump action started, I don't think Yates' concerns are where it begins.
I think this story starts well before Trump took office , a rabbit hole I don't want to jump into yet, but one with John Brennan 's and James Clapper 's fingerprints - Obama's CIA director, Obama's DNI - all over it. Models of honesty all.
What's down that hole? Who knows.
What I do know is that Manafort and Flynn not registering as foreign agents puts them squarely in the mainstream of Washington political practice. The fact that these are suddenly crimes of the century makes me just a tad suspicious that, in Matt Taibbi's words, "so much of this story is still hidden from view."
I warned you - I'll be your Cassandra this week. crime
TomDority , June 30, 2017 at 6:50 amEd , June 30, 2017 at 9:04 amI would think that a crime in search of an investigation would be Clinton's private server while at state and, the tie in thru the Clinton foundation .just saying.
The big story is that these chicken-little stories all seam to serve as cover for the bought-and-paid for chicken little politicians ..while those elected politicians who give a damp about their office and those they represent are sidelined.
sid_finster , June 30, 2017 at 12:27 pmWhile some might think there is some tie in with donations to the Clinton Foundation and favors granted by the political wing of the Clinton Conglomerate and the sudden dissolution of said donations after the toppling of Dame Clinton by Der Trumpf it appears all such talk originates in the fever swamp of the right wing echo chamber and it's shot caller the GRU.
different clue , June 30, 2017 at 9:12 pmOh, what a load of bullcrap!
Present us evidence that the GRU has any influence, much less is the "shot-caller" with respect to the "right-wing echo chamber".
And why do you thing tyrants, despots, emirs and dictators generously donated so much to the phoney Foundation? Because they wanted to further its good works, just like the Saudis are very worried about AIDS prevention? No, they wanted to buy influence. And Clinton gave them what they wanted. And why did these same tyrants, despots, emits and dictators stop donating once Clinton lost? Because she could no longer deliver.
Thor's Hammer , June 30, 2017 at 9:35 amI cannot tell if Ed's comment is straight or satire or snarcasm or what. The internet is a poor place to try such things.
I am going to take it as a straight comment. The Clintons have been grooming Chelsea for public office and will try desperately to get her elected to something somewhere. That way, they will still have influence to peddle and their Family of Foundations will still be worth something.
I hope Chelsea's wanna-have political career is strangled in the cradle. And hosed down with napalm and incinerated down to some windblown ashes.
Disturbed Voter , June 30, 2017 at 7:09 amThat investigation has been firmly crammed down the rabbit hole and cemented over.
If it had taken place in a nation where laws meant anything it would have likely disclosed:
- Clinton set up a private computer server center to control the information about her background, financial dealings, and political arrangements while serving as Secretary of State in the Obama administration.
- Obama was aware of the arrangement
- Clinton transferred classified and top secrete documents to her private server. This is by definition theft.
- Clinton defied subpoenas, refused to turn over documents, and destroyed evidence. This is by definition obstruction of justice.
- In spite of being informed that the server was not secure, Clinton placed classified and sensitive national security information on the server. This is equivalent to printing the same documents on paper and walking through Central Park throwing them at the squirrels. And it fits the legal definition of treason.
- Failure to prosecute Clinton is graphic proof that the US is not a nation of laws, but rather one where power, bribes and influence peddling determine who the law applies to.
RenoDino , June 30, 2017 at 8:16 amCorruption in high places is the norm. It is childish, all this virtue signaling. I would respect the sore losers more if they were honest they want to put Obama in as President for Life the US is Haiti now. Or the Kissinger faction of the MIC could install one of our TV generals as our version of Gen. Pinochet.
Carolinian , June 30, 2017 at 10:09 am"None of this means that Trump doesn't deserve getting rid of."
I guess this means, he needs to go, but not this way. This way is anti-democratic. But isn't that the point?
Crazy Horse , June 30, 2017 at 12:57 pmDid Obama "deserve getting rid of"? Oh heck yes. You pays your money and you makes your choice. Next chance: 2020.
different clue , June 30, 2017 at 9:15 pmSince he won't be impeached, I assume Gaius meant Trump should be assassinated? In the USA every four years we have the opportunity to battle over the control of voting machine software, voter disqualification and hanging chads. But if we want to change Presidents in mid-stream the traditional method is to have them shot.
Alice X , June 30, 2017 at 8:17 amIt was the filthy Clintonites who gave us Trump to begin with. Let Trump be smeared all over their face and shoved way deep up their noses till 2020. And if the Clintonite scum give us another Clintonite nominee in 2020, then let Trump be elected all over again. I'll vote for that.
Vatch , June 30, 2017 at 9:50 amAs regards the 2008 Georgian situation discussed here, Russia seems to have been referred to as Soviet . Twice. This happened for some years in the '90s but it is rather late to do so these days. Maybe I misunderstood something?
Skip in DC , June 30, 2017 at 8:39 amYou did not misunderstand; yes, the author of that article was sloppy. He was switching back and forth between events of 1956 and 2008, and he failed to adequately proofread what he wrote about 2008.
sid_finster , June 30, 2017 at 12:30 pmGaius offers a realistic and well-put caution for Democrats and journalists taking their eye off the ball of the Mnuchin crowd.
I've a good friend who's exasperated when I utter such blasphemies, asking how I could have missed the constant swell of opinion by Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert, Joe Scarborough, Rachel Meadow, etc
When I reply that prospects outside the courts of comedians and MSNBC infotainment pundits goosing their base are different – and I'm not so sure I'd prefer a less crass and crazed President Pence armed with Trumpster strategies – I'm asked "But what about justice?!!!"
Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown.
No doubt plenty of insulating layers if money-laundering took place via real estate, though its worth plumbing those depths. But given Trump appointees' soft-ball approach to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, I'd guess that's an arena well worth the time of journalists, insulating layers or not. I recall Sheldon Adelson's disdain for the FCPA likely increasing his fervor to dump Democrats.
TheCatSaid , June 30, 2017 at 2:51 pmThe right-on set ask "What about justice?"
Hell, let's see some evidence before we proceed to the sentence and verdict.
DJG , June 30, 2017 at 9:18 amAnd let's apply the justice to everyone , not just the "enemy camp" of whoever happens to be speaking.
And let's apply justice to those at the top first. Only after cleaning out all the top, most privileged layers, then the layers beneath them, should justice be applied to those at the bottom socio-economic layers. IOW, the opposite of the strategy we've seen applied over most of our history in many or most places.
Crazy Horse , June 30, 2017 at 9:49 amYves Smith: Thanks for this. Astute observations. And as I keep reminding people, you can turn on the spigot of MacCarthyism, and you may think that you can turn off that spigot, but you can't. In the case of Joe MacCarthy himself, it didn't truly end till about the time of his premature death from alcoholism.
Hence the observation above in the posting that the rightwingers will pull out the same techniques if a Democrat wins the next election.
One aspect of the now-thoroughly-rotten system in the U S of A is the constant contesting of election results. As Lambert Strether keeps writing, the electronic voting machines are a black hole, and both parties have been engaged in debasing the vote and diminishing the size of the electorate. The gravamen in both parties is that the voters don't know what they are doing and the ballots aren't being counted properly. Maybe we can do something about that
Stephen Douglas , June 30, 2017 at 10:09 amPerhaps we should look at the fairest electoral system in the world as a model. http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=8935
I'm sure readers will be shocked to learn that the electoral system referred to is that used in Venezuela in 2012. And it will be the rare person who can distinguish between a superior system for conducting an election and a result that they don't like.
Vatch , June 30, 2017 at 11:13 amDo I need, Cassandra-like, to say this again? None of this means that Trump doesn't deserve getting rid of.
No. You didn't need to say it even once. Another interesting analysis utterly ruined by the writer's incessant feverish need to virtue signal himself as a Trump hater. Ugh!
You write an article chock-full of information clearly pointing to corruption, venality, un-democratic machinations, and still you feel the need to repeat over and over and over again that does not mean that you don't want to remove Trump. Remove him? Like how, Gaius? And why? Why not remove the people you write about in your article? Why not say 40 times you want to remove them. Undemocratically, of course. As you say in your article, be careful of how the talk about removing people one does not like.
You're a Cassandra alright. And methinks the lady doth protest too much.
Jay , June 30, 2017 at 11:10 amHere's another paragraph from the article:
Note that none of this means Trump doesn't deserve getting rid of. It just means that how he's gotten rid of matters. (As you ponder this, consider what you think would be fair to do to a Democratic president. I guarantee what happens to Trump will be repeated.)
This is an implicit warning about impeachment. I interpret this as a recommendation to vigorously oppose Trump's actions over the next three and a half years, and to effectively campaign against him in 2020. Trump really is a terrible President, but Mike Pence would be terrible, too. And so would Hillary Clinton, but I hope we won't have to worry about her any more.
In case you're wondering why I think that Trump is a terrible President, here's a short summary:
Scott Pruitt
Betsy DeVos
Jeff Sessions
Steven Mnuchin
Tom Price
Neil GorsuchThere are other reasons, but that list should suffice for now.
None of the left-leaning writers who have been pooh-poohing the Russia investigation* have demonstrated a working knowledge of counterintelligence. I've also noticed that they correlate a lack of publicly-known evidence to an actual absence of evidence, which is the purview of the investigation. Investigators will be holding any evidence they discover close to their vests for obvious reasons, but even more so in this case because some of the evidence will have origins where sources and methods will statutorily need to be concealed.
Furthermore, many of these writers appear to be unfamiliar with the case law governing the major features of the case. Yes, money laundering may be a part of the case and a financial blog may emphasize that aspect of the case because that's what they're familiar with, but what we're fundamentally looking at is possible violations of the Espionage Act, as well as the obstruction of justice by certain players to hide their involvement. Not a single one of these articles (or any of the cable news shows) have taken note of one of the juiciest and obscure pieces of evidence that's right there out in the open, if you'd been following this as closely as I have. As much as I admire Gaius Publius and Matt Taibbi, and trust their reporting within their demonstrated and reliable competencies, neither have really written about intelligence activities in a thoroughgoing manner in order to be identified as journalists specializing in matters pertaining to intelligence, espionage, spies. Publius writes about political economy and Taibbi is as "Russia savvy" as your average Russian citizen; maybe less so. And being Russia savvy does not make you FSB savvy. Now if Sy Hersh wrote something about L'Affaire Russe, that would be worth seriously considering.
*I won't even address the seriousness or motives of the people on the right who have been pooh-poohing the Russia investigation. But it is curious for otherwise "GOP-savvy" lefties to align with people who spout Fox News talking points all the live long day, and who are wrong about everything, all the time, and not in a "broken clock tells correct time twice a day" sort of way.
shinola , June 30, 2017 at 2:12 pmIf they had anything concrete on Trump we've have heard about it by now. The spooks have been leaking for months – they aren't going to suddenly clam up if they've discovered something that's actually a crime.
Until someone presents actual evidence, this investigation is nothing more than Democrat payback for Benghazi, which itself was a BS investigation in search of a crime that went on for years. Unfortunately for sHillary, a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while and they did manage to uncover actual criminality in her case (and brushed it right under the rug).
Lambert Strether , July 1, 2017 at 12:45 amJust what makes Putin "the enemy"? Russia disseminates propaganda that (it hopes) will sway the American election in a direction more favorable to their interests! and in other news, the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.
NotTimothyGeithner , June 30, 2017 at 2:15 pm> Russia disseminates propaganda that (it hopes) will sway the American election in a direction more favorable to their interests!
This is what gets me. We're supposed to me a great power, and we're going nuts on this stuff. It's like an elephant panicking at the sight of a mouse. The political class has lost its grip entirely.
Jay , June 30, 2017 at 6:33 pm"but we've been hearing new evidence on a daily and weekly basis. Mueller isn't going to show his hand until the investigation has concluded,"
Ah we've been hearing new evidence, but Mueller is simultaneously keeping it secret wait did you mean we've heard new innuendos?
Lambert Strether , July 1, 2017 at 12:51 amMostly it's been gumshoe reporters getting interviews. No need for inside sources for this story: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/republican-claimed-flynn-tie-clinton-emails-article-1.3289348
Lambert Strether , July 1, 2017 at 12:49 amThis is the story where the main source is dead?
Lambert Strether , July 1, 2017 at 12:55 am> Putin must be delighted to have a vainglorious ignoramus presiding over a US government paralyzed by division
How sad, then, that the Pied Piper email showed that the Clinton campaign wanted Trump for their opponent. Or Was she Putin's stooge? Perhaps the server she left open to the world for three months with no password provided the Russkis with some kompromat ? Really, there's as much evidence for that theory as anything else
sid_finster , June 30, 2017 at 12:34 pm> so must also likewise concede that there may be more there than you suppose
So either there's something there or there isn't. That does seem to exhaust the possibilities. If only Maddow, the Clintonites, whichever factions in the intelligence community that are driving the "drip, drip, drip" of stories, the Jeff Bezos Shopper, cable, and all the access journalists writing it all up would take such a balanced perspective .
sid_finster , June 30, 2017 at 2:26 pmOK, so you are saying that we should trust the word of anonymous leakers from the intelligence community, that is, anonymous leaks from a pack of proven perjurers, torturers, and entrapment artists, all on the basis of supposed evidence that we are not allowed to see.
Because secret squirrel counterintelligence. Ah, now I get it.
ian , June 30, 2017 at 4:39 pmWe don't know who the leakers are. They're anonymous, but they willingly associate themselves with an intelligence community, the very organizations that commit perjury, that engage in torture, that do entrapment, all on a regular basis. Not to mention other crimes for which men have hung, such as gin up up evidence to drive this country towards aggressive war. So nothing to be suspicious of here.
These organizations have been leaking on a regular basis but they have not leaked evidence. That by itself is suspicious, since in a white collar crime case, a serial killer case, etc. we don't usually have a flood of anonymous leaks coming from supposed investigators.
Nor in a garden-variety criminal investigation do we have the suspect laid out in advance, and any leaks are intended to make the suspect guilty in the mind of the public, before charges or brought or a crime is determined.
Lambert Strether , July 1, 2017 at 12:34 amFor that matter, how do we know the leakers even exist? When some media outlet wants to publish some made-up story, they can just attribute it to an anonymous source.
WeakenedSquire , June 30, 2017 at 2:10 pm> name the leakers who have committed perjury, torture, and entrapment.
We can't. They're anonymous.
> Is everyone in the intelligence community a perjurer, a torturer, or engaged in entrapment?
No, just the leadership. Clapper (perjury), Mueller (entrapment), Brennan (torture). Those come to mind immediately; there are doubtless others.
different clue , June 30, 2017 at 9:21 pmNope. Telling us prawns to wait until the evidence is in, or, worse, that only the specialists can be trusted, is one of the tactics of repression that the elite use while they are busy manufacturing and/or hiding said evidence. And surely by now we all know that "specialists" have no clothes.
Lambert Strether , July 1, 2017 at 12:35 amIf you want serious analysis by seriously non-left people who have broken rocks in the quarry of intelligence, you can read Sic Semper Tyrannis. They have offered some hi-valu input on this whole "Putin diddit" deal.
They also offered some hi-valu input on the Hillary server matter. And Colonel Lang had a thing or three to say about the Clinton Family of Foundations . . . including a little-remarked-upon stealth-laundry-pipeline registered in Canada.
different clue , July 1, 2017 at 3:10 amPhilip Giraldi at The American Conservative also does good work.
Lambert Strether , July 1, 2017 at 12:59 amPhilip Giraldi has also written guest-posts at Sic Semper Tyrannis from time to time. The name "Philip Giraldi' is one of the pickable subject-category names on the right side of the SST homepage.
sid_finster , June 30, 2017 at 12:19 pm> Not a single one of these articles (or any of the cable news shows) have taken note of one of the juiciest and obscure pieces of evidence that's right there out in the open, if you'd been following this as closely as I have.
OK, what is it?
Byron the Light Bulb , June 30, 2017 at 1:48 pmAn investigation seeking to find evidence that a pre-selected target has commited a crime is I believe called a "witch hunt".
Yves Smith Post author , June 30, 2017 at 4:27 pmOr, you know, probable cause to investigate based on very public admissions. Production before a grand jury is secret under penalty of criminal prosecution. Once probable cause is affirmed, then the indictments will be under seal for what could be some time. I think it's probable that there may already be indictments against some of the players. DJT may already be a John Doe. The Fed GJ's in DC are three months long, the current one wrapping up third week of August [a guess based on past experience as a 3rd party]. Expect movement early this fall.
Jay , June 30, 2017 at 6:43 pmAs Constitutional scholar Alan Dershowitz pointed out, the DOJ reports to the President. Trump was completely within his authority to give instructions to Comey and fire him. Dershowitz also points out Trump can pardon anyone, including himself. But Trump doesn't read and oddly no one seems to have clued him in on what Dershowitz has said.
Nixon was a completely different case. There had been an actual crime, a break in. Archibald Cox was an special prosecutor appointed by Congress. Firing him raised Constitutional issues.
witters , June 30, 2017 at 8:47 pmYou mean this Alan Dershowitz? http://abovethelaw.com/2016/11/alan-dershowitz-thinks-black-lives-matter-is-anti-semitic-sticks-up-for-steve-bannon/
Katje Borgesius , July 1, 2017 at 12:38 amYes. And?
Yves Smith Post author , July 1, 2017 at 12:49 amIf you really want to go down the rabbit hole, read the complaint in "Kriss et al v. BayRock Group LLC et al" [ 1:10-cv-03959-LGS-DCF ] in NY Southern District. It's a RICO. It goes from the 46-story Trump SoHo condo-hotel on Spring Street to Iceland [?] and beyond. Then check out DJT's deposition in Trilogy Properties "LLC et al v. SB Hotel Associates LLC et al" [ 1:09cv21406 ] and his D&O doc production.
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.
Lambert Strether , July 1, 2017 at 12:36 amHelp me. This is the best you can do?
I've said repeatedly that people should stop hyperventilating about Trump and Russia and if anything should be bothered that he was in business with a crook, as in Felix Sater. I was on this long ago. Sater is Brighton Beach mafia. That means Jewish mafia, BTW; he worked Jewish connections overseas. He's not connected to anyone of any importance in Russia. No one with any sophistication would do business with a felon who turned state's evidence. Means he can't be trusted (by upstanding people, because he's a crook, and by crooks, because he sang like a canary).
Oh, and the former employees lost that suit.
sid_finster , June 30, 2017 at 2:28 pmOr a fishing expedition.
Lambert Strether , June 30, 2017 at 5:02 pmFor "super secret" investigations, the investigators sure leak like sieves. I wonder why.
On the latest one, " GOP Operative Sought Clinton Emails From Hackers, Implied a Connection to Flynn ," unlocked at the WSJ, the main source, long-time Republican oppo researcher Peter W. Smith, left the land of the living on May 14 of this year, at the age of 81. So, on the up side, we've finally got a source with a name. On the down side, he's dead. Do better!
|
|
|
- Trey Gowdy scares the hell out of Brennan by insinuating he unmasked name(s) on his last working day
- Trey Gowdy Makes A Complete Fool of Muslim John Brennan (5-23-17)
- The Day You Left Office Classified Information Appeared On The Front Page Trey Gowdy's Pissed
- Obama's CIA Head Just LIED To Trey Gowdy, Instantly Regrets It - YouTube
|
|
|
Jun 30, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
jfl | Jun 29, 2017 9:35:53 PM | 62
@59 ts
i think it's because the rump 'came in through the bathroom window' ... defying 'both parties'. the uniparty is trying to reassert control, somehow. what would happen if people noticed that the uniparty was not only not needed, was in fact the engine of malfeasance and misrule, what if people decided to 'do it themselves' ... platform, primaries, elections ... the whole nine yards?
so 'the Russians are coming!' anything to reassert a narrative it can control.
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
Northern Star , June 21, 2017 at 1:16 pmAppears to be a moron:yalensis , June 21, 2017 at 3:17 pm
"Former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson from the Obama administration told the House Intelligence committee that Moscow's high-tech intrusion did not change ballots, the final count or the reporting of election results.Johnson described the steps he took once he learned of the hacking of the Democratic National Committee, his fears about an attack on the election itself and his rationale for designating U.S. election systems, including polling places and voter registration databases, as critical infrastructure in early January, two weeks before Donald Trump's inauguration.
"In 2016 the Russian government, at the direction of (President) Vladimir Putin himself, orchestrated cyberattacks on our nation for the purpose of influencing our election - plain and simple," Johnson said."
Nope !! .IS a moron:
"In January 2011, Johnson provoked controversy when, according to a Department of Defense news story, he asserted in a speech at the Pentagon that deceased civil rights icon Martin Luther King, Jr., would have supported the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, despite King's outspoken opposition to American interventionism during his lifetime.[28] Johnson argued that American soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq were playing the role of the Good Samaritan, consistent with King's beliefs, and that they were fighting to establish the peace for which King hoped.[29][30] Jeremy Scahill of Salon.com called Johnson's remarks "one of the most despicable attempts at revisionist use of Martin Luther King Jr. I've ever seen," while Justin Elliott (also of Salon.com) argued that based on Dr. King's opposition to the Vietnam War, he would likely have opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the covert wars in Pakistan and Yemen."
"Johnson provoked controversy when, according to a Department of Defense news story, he asserted in a speech at the Pentagon that deceased civil rights icon Martin Luther King, Jr., would have supported the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq "Jen , June 21, 2017 at 9:25 pmHe lies! My what-if machine (what I have in my basement) tells me that Dr. King would have opposed, in the most militant manner possible, the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars!
You didn't have to consult the alternative-worlds TARDIS machine database to find out that Dr King would have opposed the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq: here's the speech he made opposing the war in Vietnam which may have made him a target for assassination.yalensis , June 22, 2017 at 5:33 pmhttp://kingencyclopedia.stanford.edu/encyclopedia/documentsentry/doc_beyond_vietnam/
I rest my case!marknesop , June 21, 2017 at 7:40 pmhttps://ads.pubmatic.com/AdServer/js/showad.js#PIX&kdntuid=1&p=156204
"In 2016 the Russian government, at the direction of (President) Vladimir Putin himself, orchestrated cyberattacks on our nation for the purpose of influencing our election - plain and simple," Johnson said."He's half-right – the idea certainly is simple. Just like him.
Modern-day political figures seem more and more like some of the characters on "WKRP In Cincinnati"; people who, as the receptionist explained "would otherwise not be able to get jobs".
|
|
|
www.businessinsider.com
Last week, when former FBI Director James Comey gave his long-awaited public testimony about his apparently rough-and-tumble relationship with President Donald Trump, he painted a bleak picture. The essence of Comey's testimony was that the president asked him to drop an investigation of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn - Trump's former national security adviser - and then asked him to do so in return for keeping his job as FBI director and then fired him for not obeying his order.
On the other hand, Comey confirmed that the president personally, as of the time of Comey's firing, was not the target of any FBI criminal investigation. It was not clear from the Comey testimony whether this exoneration was referring to salacious allegations made by a former British intelligence agent of highly inappropriate and fiercely denied personal behavior a few years ago in a Moscow hotel room or whether the exoneration was with respect to widely reported allegations that the 2016 Trump campaign may have helped Russian intelligence agents in their efforts to manipulate the outcome of the presidential election.
Nevertheless, there is no doubt the president is now a target of a federal investigation with respect to his dealings with the then-FBI director. So, how could the tables have turned so quickly on the president, and who turned them? Here is the back story.
Prior to the Watergate era of the mid-1970s, the generally accepted theory of management of the executive branch of government was known as the unitary executive. This theory informs that the president is the chief executive officer of the federal government and is the sole head of the executive branch. He is also the only person in the executive branch who is accountable to the voters, as he, and he alone (along with the vice president, who is largely a figurehead), has been elected by the voters.
As such, this unitary executive theory informs, everyone in the executive branch of the federal government works at the pleasure of the president. Were this not the case, then vast areas of governance could occur and vast governmental resources could be spent by people who are unaccountable to the voters. And when the government is unaccountable to the voters, it lacks their consent. The consent of the governed is the linchpin and bedrock of popular government in America.
There are, of course, today vast areas of government that are not responsive to the people and that lack the consent of the governed. The administrative agencies that write, interpret and enforce their own regulations and the deep state - the secret parts of the financial, intelligence and law enforcement entities of the government that never change, operate below the radar screen and have budgets that never see the light of day - defy the notion that the consent of the governed is the sole legitimate basis for government in America.
Yet the FBI is not in the administrative state or the deep state. It is front and center as the premier law enforcement agency of the United States government. It is far from perfect, and its leaders are as fallible as the rest of us, but we have hired the folks who work there to enforce the federal laws that implicate our freedoms and our safety. And we have hired the president to exercise his discretion as to which laws shall be enforced and against whom.
Thus, under this theory, the president is constitutionally, legally, morally and ethically free to direct any person in the executive branch as to how he wants that person to perform his or her job. And the recipient of such direction is free to resign if the direction appears unlawful. That is at least the theory of the unitary executive.
After the Watergate era, Congress altered the public policy of the country to reflect the independence of the Department of Justice, including the FBI. It did so in reaction to Nixonian abuses. Thus, the post-Watergate theory of the DOJ's role articulates that federal law enforcement is independent from the president.
The Comey testimony revealed serious efforts to reject the public policy of independence and return to the unitary executive. Comey revealed a DOJ under former Attorney General Loretta Lynch in lockstep with the Obama White House and determined to exonerate Hillary Clinton in the espionage investigation concerning her emails, no matter the evidence. He also revealed his own view that President Trump's orders and quid pro quo offer with respect to Flynn were unlawful.
Where does this leave us today?Today we have a White House under siege. The new DOJ criminal investigation that the president is no doubt the subject of will attempt to discover whether he corruptly attempted to interfere with the work of an independent FBI and whether he attempted to bribe its then-director. The White House is also the subject of five congressional investigations involving the Russians and the 2016 election, the firing of Director Comey, and the recusal of Attorney General Jeff Sessions from much of this. And the investigation of Clinton is back from the grave for a third time to determine whether she was exonerated because of a lack of evidence, a lack of will or an Obama political imperative.
These are perilous times for men and women of goodwill and intellectual honesty who are charged with enforcing our laws and running the government. The government should not be terrifying. But it must be fair and transparent. And it must always enjoy the consent of the governed. For without that consent, it is illegitimate.
Copyright 2017 Andrew P. Napolitano. Distributed by Creators.com.
Agent76, June 15, 2017 at 1:26 pm GMT
log Website, June 15, 2017 at 2:01 pm GMTJun 15, 2017 | www.unz.com
Feb 1, 2017 Secrets Of The FBI Finally Revealed and Leaked
In this video, we go over the latest FBI leak of thousands of documents to the intercept that revealed their secret rule book and operations. We go over what was found in those documents and the dangers of these powers that the FBI has.
themann, June 15, 2017 at 2:48 pm GMTDear Judge:
The existence of state secrets means the consent of the governed can never be informed.
Agent76, June 15, 2017 at 3:08 pm GMTSo when exactly did any of us, or our representatives, vote on the income tax? Because I certainly don't remember consenting to it.
Or twelve years of public schooling.
Or the TSA.
Or the entire history of Civil Wrongs laws.Hyperventilating about the actions of one set of corrupt public officials vs. another is a bit far down the list of non consent issues any of us should be concerned about.
willem1, June 15, 2017 at 5:28 pm GMTI was expecting an article more related to this video and its content and narrative.
Dec 3, 2012 Murray Rothbard – The Government Is Not Us
Professor Rothard examines the irrational implications of the premise "we are the government."
"After the Watergate era, Congress altered the public policy of the country to reflect the independence of the Department of Justice, including the FBI The Comey testimony revealed serious efforts to reject the public policy of independence and return to the unitary executive."
The above quotes imply that these two policies are just "theories" of executive authority, and not really enshrined in hard law. However, the article is never clear on whether or not that is the case. If these are just two competing theories, and no law or clear court precedent exists, then what is the legal basis for any investigation/lawsuit? Inquiring minds want to know .
|
|
|
economistsview.typepad.com
John Gruskos June 12, 2017 at 3:59 pm GMT
Jun 12, 2017 | www.unz.com
Robert Roth is exactly right.
The ridiculous "Russian influence" narrative is a cynical ploy to pressure Trump to abandon his America First campaign promises, and instead wage a counter productive regime change war in Syria.
If Trump is not amenable to pressure, they establishment apparently plans to impeach Trump and use Pence as their tool instead.
Either way, this constitutes a coup d'etat.
The American people elected a president who promised an America First agenda, and the establishment is using the threat of an unjustifiable impeachment or unconstitutional use of the 25th amendment to nullify the results of that election.
|
|
|
Feb 18, 2017 | nyt.com
Everybody lies. But American politics has long rested on a shared understanding of what it is acceptable to lie about, how and to whom.
One of the many norms that Donald J. Trump has assaulted since taking office is this tradition of aspirational hypocrisy, of striving, at least rhetorically, to act in accordance with moral values - to be better. This tradition has set the standard of behavior for government officials and has shaped Americans' understanding of what their government and their country represent. Over the last four weeks, Mr. Trump has lashed out against any criticism of his behavior, because, as he never tires of pointing out, "We won."
In requesting the resignation of his national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, however, Mr. Trump made his first public concession to political expectations. Hypocrisy has scored a minor victory in America. This is a good thing.
The word "hypocrisy" was thrown around a lot during the 2016 presidential campaign. Both Mr. Trump and Bernie Sanders accused their respective parties and the country's elites of hypocrisy. As the election neared, some journalists tried to turn the accusation around on Mr. Trump, taking him to task, for example, for his stand on immigration. If Mr. Trump favored such a hard line on immigration, the logic went, should he not then favor the deportation of his own wife, Melania, who was alleged to have worked while in the United States on a visitor's visa?
The charge of hypocrisy didn't stick, not so much because it placed its proponents, unwittingly, in the distasteful position of advocating the deportation of someone for a long-ago and common transgression, but because Mr. Trump wasn't just breaking the rules of political conduct: He was destroying them. He was openly claiming that he abused the system to benefit himself. If he didn't pay his taxes and got away with it, this made him a good businessman. If he could force himself on women, that made him more of a man. He acted as though this primitive logic were obvious and shared by all.
Fascists the world over have gained popularity by calling forth the idea that the world is rotten to the core. In "The Origins of Totalitarianism," Hannah Arendt described how fascism invites people to "throw off the mask of hypocrisy" and adopt the worldview that there is no right and wrong, only winners and losers.
Hypocrisy can be aspirational: Political actors claim that they are motivated by ideals perhaps to a greater extent than they really are; shedding the mask of hypocrisy asserts that greed, vengeance and gratuitous cruelty aren't wrong, but are legitimate motivations for political behavior.
In the last decade and a half, post-Communist autocrats like Vladimir V. Putin and Viktor Orban have adopted this cynical posture. They seem convinced that the entire world is driven solely by greed and hunger for power, and only the Western democracies continue to insist, hypocritically, that their politics are based on values and principles.
This stance has breathed new life into the old Soviet propaganda tool of "whataboutism," the trick of turning any argument against the opponent. When accused of falsifying elections, Russians retort that American elections are not unproblematic; when faced with accusations of corruption, they claim that the entire world is corrupt.
This month, Mr. Trump employed the technique of whataboutism when he was asked about his admiration for Mr. Putin, whom the host Bill O'Reilly called "a killer." "You got a lot of killers," responded Mr. Trump. "What, you think our country's so innocent?"
To an American ear, Mr. Trump's statement was jarring - not because Americans believe their country to be "innocent" but because they have always relied on a sort of aspirational hypocrisy to understand the country. No American politician in living memory has advanced the idea that the entire world, including the United States, was rotten to the core. ...
Hungary's PM Viktor Orban praises Trump for saying countries should put their own interests first
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/donald-trump-nationalist-hungary-pm-viktor-orban-praise-america-first-a7542361.html===
ilsm, February 18, 2017 at 12:27 PM
I am less worried now we got Trump and not apparatchik (experienced in deep state and catering to Jihadis) Clinton.ilsm, February 18, 2017 at 12:25 PMThe faux librul side is all Joe McCarthy phony red scaring and surveillance of the opposition activists sort of like what Army Intell did to hippies protesting the liberals' debacle in Southeast Asia.yuan, February 18, 2017 at 09:36 PMDeep state surveillance and trashing the Bill of Rights is a legacy of the past 8 years.
it's telling that you believe genuine liberalism is positive...ilsm , February 18, 2017 at 04:45 AMVox, what about reporting from a crystal ball requires truth?Peter K. - , February 18, 2017 at 07:37 AMThe Russians are coming, the Russians are coming! Hide under your bed.ilsm, February 18, 2017 at 12:42 PMFlynn could have said something "inappropriate" by a Clintonista definition of "inappropriate", and he "could" be prosecuted under a law designed to muzzle US citizens, that has never been tried bc a Bill of rights argument would win!How do you like the NKVD libruls afraid of Trump bringing fascism who were running a gestapo (the FBI wiring tapping other country's Ministers) on US citizens of the opposing party?
If the fascists are coming they would keep Obama's FBI!
ilsm -> Fred C. Dobbs... February 18, 2017 at 05:35 PM
the dems' deep state have already trodden the Bill of Rights how worse can it get......
fascism is in the US for 8 years or so.
|
|
|
Jun 04, 2017 | www.moonofalabama.org
Cameron clamped down on the British newspapers after the Edward Snowden global surveillance leaks were published in 2014. He specifically threatened the take over of the UK Guardian where a number of the foreign reporters, such as Glenn Greenwald and Nafeez Ahmed, no longer work.
We won't see stuff like the UK special forces embedded with the Libyan jihadist militias.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-16573516
I'm convinced the newswires came out with the reporting on the CIA operation in Benghazi before the authorities were distracted by the even to quash the articles.
Posted by: Les | Jun 4, 2017 1:01:53 AM | 38
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2017 | insider.foxnews.com
Russian Studies Professor Stephen Cohen said the publication of an unverified dossier of information regarding President-elect Donald Trump and Russia is the "endgame in the last chapter in an attempt to destroy Trump's presidency" before he takes office.
Cohen dismissed the dossier as "essentially tabloid stuff" that he could easily purchase from so-called Russian "private intelligence agents out to make a buck". "It's scuttlebutt, it's rumor," he said, "it's junk...[that's] seen in Moscow."
Cohen said mainstream media figures have been calling Trump a 'puppet of the Kremlin' for some time, which he remarked started when they decided to consider him as running with "Putin" rather than "Pence".
People are desperate to wound Trump to stop any type of detente with Russia, Cohen said, "these accusations [themselves] have become a grave American national security threat."
|
|
|
May 29, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
May 27, 2017 10:25 PM 0 SHARES Authored by David Swanson via The Strategic Culture Foundation,Government lies are common when seducing a population to support a war, but the Russian "hacking" claims are unusual in that U.S. officials supply no evidence while the "fact" is just assumed,
When the U.S. public was told that Spain had blown up theMaine,or Vietnam had returned fire, or Iraq had stockpiled weapons, or Libya was planning a massacre, the claims were straightforward and disprovable.
Before people began referring to the Gulf of Tonkin incident, somebody had to lie that it had happened, and there had to be an understanding of what had supposedly happened. No investigation into whether anything had happened could have taken as its starting point the certainty that a Vietnamese attack or attacks had happened. And no investigation into whether a Vietnamese attack had happened could have focused its efforts on unrelated matters, such as whether anyone in Vietnam had ever done business with any relatives or colleagues of Robert McNamara.
All of this is otherwise with the idea that the Russian government determined the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election. U.S. corporate media reports often claim that Russia did decide the election or tried to do that or wanted to try to do that. But they also often admit to not knowing whether any such thing is the case.
There is no established account, with or without evidence to support it, of exactly what Russia supposedly did. And yet there are countless articles casually referring, as if to established fact to the...
"Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election" ( Yahoo ).
"Russian attempts to disrupt the election" ( New York Times ).
"Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election" ( ABC ).
"Russian influence over the 2016 presidential election" ( The Intercept ).
"a multi-pronged investigation to uncover the full extent of Russia's election-meddling" ( Time ).
"Russian interference in the US election" ( CNN ).
"Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election" ( American Constitution Society ).
"Russian hacking in US Election" ( Business Standard )."
"Obama Strikes Back at Russia for Election Hacking" we're told by the New York Times , but what is "election hacking"? Its definition seems to vary widely. And what evidence is there of Russia having done it?
The "Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections" even exists as a factual event in Wikipedia , not as an allegation or a theory. But the factual nature of it is not so much asserted as brushed aside.
Former CIA Director John Brennan, in the same Congressional testimony in which he took the principled stand "I don't do evidence," testified that "the fact that the Russians tried to influence resources and authority and power, and the fact that the Russians tried to influence that election so that the will of the American people was not going to be realized by that election, I find outrageous and something that we need to, with every last ounce of devotion to this country, resist and try to act to prevent further instances of that." He provided no evidence.
Activists have even planned "demonstrations to call for urgent investigations into Russian interference in the US election." They declare that "every day we learn more about the role Russian state-led hacking and information warfare played in the 2016 election." ( March for Truth .)
Belief that Russia helped put Trump in the White House is steadily rising in the U.S. public. Anything commonly referred to as fact will gain credibility. People will assume that at some point someone actually established that it was a fact.
Keeping the story in the news without evidence are articles about polling, about the opinions of celebrities, and about all kinds of tangentially related scandals, their investigations, and obstruction thereof. Most of the substance of most of the articles that lead off with reference to the "Russian influence on the election" is about White House officials having some sort of connections to the Russian government, or Russian businesses, or just Russians. It's as if an investigation of Iraqi WMD claims focused on Blackwater murders or whether Scooter Libby had taken lessons in Arabic, or whether the photo of Saddam Hussein and Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands was taken by an Iraqi.
A general trend away from empirical evidence has been extensively noted and discussed . There is no more public evidence that Seth Rich (a Democratic National Committee staffer who was murdered last year) leaked Democratic emails than there is that the Russian government stole them. Yet both claims have passionate believers.
Still, the claims about Russia are unique in their wide proliferation, broad acceptance, and status as something to be constantly referred to as though already established, constantly augmented by other Russia-related stories that add nothing to the central claim . This phenomenon, in my view, is as dangerous as any lies and fabrications coming out of the racist right.
macki mack - john316jr , May 27, 2017 10:48 PM
IntercoursetheEU - Number 9 , May 28, 2017 12:56 AM"U.S. officials supply no evidence"
They don't need to. Their arm is long enough to do what they want.
http://biblicisminstitute.wordpress.com/2014/07/21/the-long-arm-of-gover...
Bumpo - IntercoursetheEU , May 28, 2017 2:07 AMAnyone with common sense would have tried to influence that election. Clinton's are crooks and we knew that anyway. Big deal
Perimetr - IntercoursetheEU , May 28, 2017 1:33 AMThis dude lost all credibility when he ended the article with "... racist right". Talk about no evidence. We live in an upside down world where protecting one's borders is considered racist, but blaming whitey for all the ills of the world is perfectly fine. Obama, and the Left, with their knee-jerk association of anyone who disagrees with them, are the true racists. Finding collective racism, sexism, etc so easily only proves your own mind-numbing intollerance and rabid sickness of hate and discrimination. Hillary Clinton proved it in spades at her Wellesly College Comencecunt speach. The vitriol outdoes Trump on his worst night.
Aussiekiwi , May 27, 2017 10:39 PM" the Russian "hacking" claims are unusual in that U.S. officials supply no evidence while the "fact" is just assumed,"
Sorry, nothing unusual about hearing lies in the MSM
Bubba Rum Das , May 27, 2017 10:35 PMA general trend away from empirical evidence has been extensively noted and discussed . There is no more public evidence that Seth Rich (a Democratic National Committee staffer who was murdered last year) leaked Democratic emails than there is that the Russian government stole them. Yet both claims have passionate believers.
Well actually there is evidence that Seth Richs was the DEM leak and not the Russians.
http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/murdered-dnc-staffer-seth-rich-...
galant , May 27, 2017 10:48 PMOnce upon a time, there was a Man named Boris, & a Woman named Natasha...
Give Me Some Truth , May 27, 2017 10:48 PM"A general trend away from empirical evidence has been extensively noted and discussed ."
Who needs facts?
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. - Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda, Nazi Germany 1933-45.
chubbar - Give Me Some Truth , May 27, 2017 10:58 PMNotice how no one is apparently really investigating if Assad "gassed his own people." This allegation is a big deal. Did the NYT assign five of its best international reporters to investigating the facts? Is the UN investigating? Are "intelligence" officers who dissent from the official meme being contacted?
That is, at some point, the truth doesn't matter. Nor does any "search for the truth" seem to take place or get any publicity.
Bumpo - chubbar , May 28, 2017 1:44 AMIn fact the US blocked a Russian demand that an investigation be conducted by a neutral 3rd party. Anyone that really follows this story knows it wasn't Assad. The lies aren't even disguised any longer. The only people they are trying to convinceare the people who only watch CNN or MSNBC but those dolts are convinced that Hillary won the election but Russia changed the ballots so there is really no trying to reason with idiots like that.
GestaltNine , May 27, 2017 10:50 PMThe big question is, does Trump know the Assad gassing meme is bullshit, or is he really not that well-informed. I hope and pray he is playing 5-D chess and is just pretending in order to buy himself enough time to drain the swamp in the long run.
indio007 , May 27, 2017 10:52 PMyeah the media in the USA is exposing itself to everyone even the most brain dead lib has got to be questioning what the heck is going on with this Russian garbage, the sheer vapid intensity is such it borders on supernatural
Grandad Grumps , May 27, 2017 11:00 PMRussia interferes in elections a and people in caves on dialysis organize complicated attacks.
lester1 , May 27, 2017 11:21 PMRussian Hacking = Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction = Syrian Chemical Weapons = Muslins with Box Cutters = Gulf of Tonkin = a Miracle Bullet ... the list is endless.
HRH Feant2 , May 27, 2017 11:22 PM"Russia" = DNC email leaker Seth Rich --
The deep state is terrified that investigating Seth's Murder will open up a huge can of worms! The dishonest liberal media will have lost credibility forever --
Giant Meteor - HRH Feant2 , May 27, 2017 11:28 PMWhen I watch CNN and other people in the MSM talking about Russia I ask myself, "what the fuck are these people smoking?" You couldn't make me think the Russians were in control of Donald Trump even if you jacked me up with LSD and the strongest blunts from Colorado!
Seriously, to watch news readers on CNN go into fits of hysteria over Russia is mind numbing.
Can someone Fed Ex a blunt from Colorado? I don't even smoke anymore! FUCK.
HRH Feant2 - Giant Meteor , May 27, 2017 11:42 PMThe fuckers get fed lines, like movie actors. They are so fucking dumb, they don't even know it, (that they are dumb.) A fine example of special ops, brainwashing, probably educated in the finest elite training mills, with no emphasis on critical thnking skills nor original thoughts whatsoever ..
Near as I can figure ..
pippi68 , May 27, 2017 11:43 PMI guess they are willing to be, as Gerald Celente says, presstitutes! Pay them enough and they will say anything!
Small Governmen... , May 28, 2017 12:37 AMThe dems are breaking rule #7 of their manefesto, Saul Alansky's Rule Book for radicals. 7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag." Don't become old news. We most definitely find the muh Russia charade tiresome. The dems are just too unimaginative to make up anything new for us. Hollywood too has proved itself to be out of ideas. Trump is the best amusement possible. You can't possibly guess what he's going to do or say next. Dems and neo-cons, the globalist elites, are totally predictable. They have never had such an adversary. It is a glorious show to behold!
The stench of BS is so strong around Washington DC that I will not go there. Not even with my HAZMAT respirators that can filter out the aroma of a skunk. Skunks are no match for the stinking BS that pervades Washington DC.
I believe this is why you never read stories about "skunk problems" in DC. The skunks have left DC.
What remains in DC is the real stinkers. The people who would have you believe their utterly made up BS.
|
|
|
Apr 02, 2017 | www.youtube.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HQbHGFUxHg
Published on Mar 31, 2017Dr. Nick Begich breaks down what he thinks is why the globalists are so afraid of Russia, relating to it's history and it's progress post communism.
Help us spread the word about the liberty movement, we're reaching millions help us reach millions more. Share the free live video feed link with your friends & family: http://www.infowars.com/show
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Chris Menahan via InformationLiberation.com,NSA whistleblower William Binney told Tucker Carlson on Friday that the NSA is spying on "all the members of the Supreme Court, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Congress, both House and Senate, as well as the White House."
Binney, who served the NSA for 30 years before blowing the whistle on domestic spying in 2001, told Tucker he firmly believes that Trump was spied on."They're taking in fundamentally the entire fiber network inside the United States and collecting all that data and storing it, in a program they call Stellar Wind," Binney said.
"That's the domestic collection of data on US citizens, US citizens to other US citizens," he said. "Everything we're doing, phone calls, emails and then financial transactions, credit cards, things like that, all of it."
https://www.youtube.com/embed/lkChOSdOgcc
"Inside NSA there are a set of people who are -- and we got this from another NSA whistleblower who witnessed some of this -- they're inside there, they are targeting and looking at all the members of the Supreme Court, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Congress, both House and Senate, as well as the White House," Binney said.
"And all this data is inside the NSA in a small group where they're looking at it. The idea is to see what people in power over you are going to -- what they think, what they think you should be doing or planning to do to you, your budget, or whatever so you can try to counteract before it actually happens," he said.
"I mean, that's just East German," Tucker responded.
Rather than help prevent terrorist attacks, Binney said collecting so much information actually makes stopping attacks more difficult.
"This bulk acquisition is inhibiting their ability to detect terrorist threats in advance so they can't stop them so people get killed as a result," he said.
"Which means, you know, they pick up the pieces and blood after the attack. That's what's been going on. I mean they've consistently failed. When Alexander said they'd stop 54 attacks and he was challenged to produce the evidence to prove that he failed on every count."
Binney concludes ominously indicating the origin of the deep state... "They are like the praetorian guard, they determine what the emperor does and who the emperor is..."
Who's going to stop them?
toady -> Bank_sters Mar 25, 2017 9:22 PMI'm continually amazed that anyone thinks they are not being "wiretapped".NAV GUS100CORRINA Mar 25, 2017 7:19 PMOne more time;
Everyone, from the queen to the homeless guy on the corner, is being tracked, recorded, and data mined to the hilt.
- Trump was survieled? No shit!
- Obama was survieled? No shit!
- Merkel was survieled? No shit!
I hope people start to REALLY understand this....
Bringing history more up to date, this is Stalinism, i.e., fascism. As John T. Flynn states, "Fascism is Fabian socialism plus the inevitable dictator." Neo-fascism of course is Stalinism-blame Hitler.
So, is it fascism?
Yes, says Major Todd Pierce (retired) in an interview with Philip Weiss of Mondoweiss - who says NSA whistle blower Bill Binney has "got to be one of the smartest people in the world, I don't think that's an exaggeration. He was one of the smartest people at the NSA.
Says Weiss: "And he agrees with me fully. Because he's seen the NSA. We're a more sophisticated form of what I think has to be called fascism. The term fascism was applied to the way the communists and Stalin got on as well. You bring the term fascist to what it really means, and that ultimately is, ultramilitarism and authoritarianism combined with an expansionist foreign policy. And that's us-what you can see us becoming."
http://mondoweiss.net/2016/09/innocence-worldview-retired/#sthash.XjFDU6km.dpuf
Rubicon727 -> GUS100CORRINA •Mar 25, 2017 7:38 PM
The Roman Empire's death was far more complicated than "moral rot" and its "currency devaluation." Read some history books.
Chris Hedges makes the observation that ALL empires that are scourges of the earth, eventually turn inwards. As the empire begins its fatal decline, the terror they inflicted on outsiders, is then turned against its own citizens.
We now see that happening in America. Banks, corporations, intel/military, etc. are turning inward: destroying meaningful employment, humane health care, and pilfering billions of $s reserved for the 1%.
Just Another Vi... -> FriendlyAquaponics •Mar 25, 2017 8:05 PM
A video worth revisiting......
Reuters ..........
... Obama criticizes Donald Trump endlessly....over Trumps assertions that the election is rigged..,
telling the candidate to "stop whining and go try to make his case to get votes."
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-idUSKCN12I27L
HRClinton -> JLee2027 •Mar 25, 2017 8:15 PM
Who does the NSA work for on the Org Chart?
That's right, the DOD. They can't go completely rogue, without the explicit or implicit approval of the Secretary of Defense and his Deputies.
It is rather phoney and hypocritical of any POTUS - including Pres. Thump - to moan about the NSA, without loping off heads at the DOD and NSA. By that, I include all the Deputies, who do the real work and know the real secrets.
It's time that Thump had a "Come to Jesus" meeting with all these guys. Else he's part of the problem, and no amount of sugar coating can stop a turd being a turd.
TheReplacement -> HRClinton •Mar 25, 2017 9:42 PM
In an honest world, sure.
In reality, no. Like Binney said, they don't have to do anything they don't like because NOBODY can prove they haven't complied with orders. There is nobody who can watch the watchers. They can blackmail anyone.
'Gosh, I have no idea how that child porn got on my computer.'
CIA or NSA knows exactly how it got there. They put it there.
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2017 | www.zerohedge.com
Common_Cents22 , Mar 22, 2017 11:38 PMhorseman , Mar 22, 2017 11:22 PMIs this the same Dennis Montgomery who had some fraud in his past? or was that disinfo to discredit him then as well?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/reno-casino-conman-pulled-greatest-h...
AKKadian , Mar 22, 2017 11:21 PMThis is probably why Nunes went public today. What a shame. If not for Klayman, Nunes would have gone along with the committee.
wcole225 , Mar 22, 2017 11:21 PMThey are spying on everyone. Pelosi, Schumer, Waters Judges. You name it, they are spying on everyone. No exceptions.!!!
deoxy , Mar 22, 2017 11:15 PMAnd the plot thickens. Whoever said may you live in interesting times......had no idea. Can you feel the desperation from the filthy corrupt democrats? The demonic spirits that reside in them are going berserk. The light is starting to shine on them and their evil deeds are more transparent than ever. It's only gonna get better
Not Too Important , Mar 22, 2017 11:06 PMFox better rehire Napolitano before it is too late. But it is too late for the Wall Street Journal comparing Trump to 'a drunk' clinging to 'an empty gin bottle' in scathing editorial.
JamesBond , Mar 22, 2017 11:01 PMNunes saw what he saw, got scared to death, and went directly to the President of the United States, because he can't trust anyone else, anywhere.
He is now facing ruthless fuckers that will kill and kill and kill some more to protect themselves and their masters.
He's thinking he's in waay over his head with this, and there's no way out.
This is a fight between kiddie fuckers that worship Satan, the people that work for them, and the people that don't.
Buckle up, folks, there's no putting this genie back in the bottle.
techpriest -> JamesBond , Mar 22, 2017 11:05 PMWe incidentally lied to some folks.
hustler etiquette -> techpriest , Mar 22, 2017 11:17 PMThe best thing about this presidency so far, is that everything is being laid out on the table. Soon it will be impossible to hide the swamp.
it's better than homeland X game of thrones.
|
|
|
Mar 17, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
im1dc : March 16, 2017 at 04:45 PM , 2017 at 04:45 PMReally? This WH is unhinged from all known and verifiable reality and a clear and present danger to our national security, peace, and prospertiy, imo, of courselibezkova -> im1dc... , March 16, 2017 at 09:23 PM"Sean Spicer just suggested that Obama used British intelligence to spy on Trump. Not so much"
"Sean Spicer just suggested that Obama used British intelligence to spy on Trump. Not so much"
By *Henry Farrell...March 16, 2017...7:12 PM
"In his daily press briefing, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer just repeated a claim that President Barack Obama had used British spies to surveil President Trump. After laying out a number of different media sources which Spicer suggested supported President Trump's contentions that he was wiretapped, he concluded:
Last, on Fox News on March 14th, Judge Andrew Napolitano made the following statement – quote – Three intelligence sources have informed Fox News that President Obama went outside the chain of command. He didn't use the NSA, he didn't use the CIA, he didn't use the FBI, and he didn't use the Department of Justice. He used GCHQ. What is that? It's the initials for the British intelligence spying agency. So simply by having two people saying to them the president needs transcripts of conversations involving candidate Trump's conversations, involving President-elect Trump, he's able to get it and there's no American fingerprints on this. Putting the published accounts and common sense together, this leads to a lot.
This is an explosive accusation.
What's GCHQ?
GCHQ - Government Communications Headquarters - is Britain's equivalent of the National Security Agency. Like the NSA, it engages in extensive international surveillance. It furthermore has a close relationship with the United States. Britain is one of the so-called "Five Eyes," a group of five English-speaking countries including the United States, which engage in close and intensive collaboration and intelligence sharing. Even within that context the United States and Britain have an unusually tight relationship. In the words of Stephen Lander, a former head of Britain's MI5, relations are so close that "consumers [of intelligence] in both capitals seldom know which country generated either the access or the product itself."
Close collaboration can lead to temptation
Some people writing on intelligence and surveillance note that close working relations like this can allow intelligence agencies to evade domestic controls. Jennifer Granick, in her new Cambridge University Press book, American Spies: Modern Surveillance, Why You Should Care, and What To Do About It, notes that Five Eyes countries aren't supposed to spy on each other's citizens. However, she says that the NSA has prepared policies that would allow it to spy on Five Eyes citizens without permission. She furthermore suggests that:
The Five Eyes collaboration appears to extend the NSA's surveillance capabilities, giving the agency a way to spy on Americans without technically breaking US laws that would otherwise prohibit such spying. Edward Snowden described the Five Eyes as a "supra-national intelligence organization that doesn't answer to the laws of its own countries." In other words, if US law doesn't protect the privacy rights of British citizens, and British laws don't protect the rights of Americans, then they can just spy on us, we'll spy on them, and our intelligence agencies will just swap information. This evasion of domestic privacy laws would enable essentially unlimited spying unaffected by either collection or usage rules.
Granick notes that if there are rules that would protect Americans from Five Eyes spying, or about the ways that the NSA, FBI or CIA could use information from foreign partners, we haven't seen them.
But don't jump to conclusions
Granick's arguments point to some important potential problems in close spying relationships. If there are rules to prevent the abuses that she fears, we don't know what they are. However, her concerns are with surveillance of ordinary citizens. It is wildly unlikely that U.S. and British intelligence agencies would secretly collaborate to monitor a U.S. presidential candidate. The political risks to both sides would be quite enormous. While critics like Granick and Snowden worry that intelligence agencies have too much unchecked power, they happily acknowledge that most members of the intelligence community are motivated by a sincere concern for American well-being. If the United States was really using foreign intelligence as a cut-out to spy illegally on the Republican candidate for president, all it would take would be one sincere objector or one worried conservative to create a scandal that would dwarf Watergate. Nor would British intelligence have any obvious motivation to collaborate in such an arrangement. The British government knows that it will have to deal with both Democratic and Republican administrations, and would have no appetite for an intrigue which would have little obvious benefit to Britain, but which could cripple the U.S.-British relationship for decades.
Nor is there any actual proof
Judge Napolitano, a Fox News television personality, does not seem to have good evidence for these extraordinary claims. As he describes it on his own website:
Sources have told Fox News that the British foreign surveillance service, the Government Communications Headquarters, known as GCHQ, most likely provided Obama with transcripts of Trump's calls. The NSA has given GCHQ full 24/7 access to its computers, so GCHQ - a foreign intelligence agency that, like the NSA, operates outside our constitutional norms - has the digital versions of all electronic communications made in America in 2016, including Trump's. So by bypassing all American intelligence services, Obama would have had access to what he wanted with no Obama administration fingerprints.
This statement is notable both for being strategically vague and for not understanding what the NSA does. Spicer quotes a strong claim by Napolitano on Fox News that Obama "went outside the chain of command" and "used GCHQ." Napolitano is much more cautious in the print version, where he claims that unnamed intelligence sources said that GCHQ "most likely" provided transcripts. That's not a claim as to fact, made by someone who claims to have seen the transcripts or had first-hand knowledge of the relationship. It is a (in my opinion highly dubious) suggestion as to plausibility, made by someone who does not claim to have direct knowledge of what happened.
Furthermore, Napolitano doesn't seem to have any very strong understanding of the actual controversies between the defenders and critics of modern surveillance law. For example, Napolitano seems to believe that GCHQ is able to generate transcripts because it has "full access" to NSA computers, which in turn " has the digital versions of all electronic communications made in America in 2016, including Trump's." In fact, if the GCHQ were looking for data on American communications, it would be far better advised to look to its own resources than to the NSA. While critics argue that the NSA collects too much 'incidental' data and metadata on Americans, they do not claim that the NSA has "the digital versions" (whatever that means) of all American communications, or anything like it. Napolitano is not a sound source for explosive political claims.
This statement will hurt intelligence cooperation
President Trump is already engaged in an unprecedented battle with large segments of his own intelligence community. Spicer's statement internationalizes the dispute. U.S. intelligence partners - in the Five Eyes and elsewhere - are already nervous about sharing sensitive intelligence with the Trump administration, since they do not know how it will be used or who it will be shared with. This accusation will greatly exacerbate these fears, suggesting that the Trump administration does not prioritize continued close collaboration with its intelligence partners. Both critics and defenders of cross-national intelligence collaboration agree that there has been an extraordinarily high level of trust among a few select intelligence agencies since World War II. The "Five Eyes" was a club that other states clamored to get into (during the Snowden controversy, Germany tried to use revelations about U.S. spying as a lever to open the door to German participation in the Five Eyes). Now club members have much less reason to trust each other and membership looks substantially less attractive."
*Henry Farrell is associate professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University. He works on a variety of topics, including trust, the politics of the Internet and international and comparative political economy.
"Sean Spicer just suggested that Obama used British intelligence to spy on Trump. Not so much"Looks like British and Dutch. And not necessary Obama himself.
== quote ==
The campaign to link Trump to Russia also increased in intensity, including statements by multiple former and current intelligence agency heads regarding the reality of the Russian threat and the danger of electing a president who would ignore that reality. It culminated in ex-CIA Acting Director Michael Morell's claim that Trump was "an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation."British and Dutch intelligence were apparently discreetly queried regarding possible derogatory intelligence on the Trump campaign's links to Russia and they responded by providing information detailing meetings in Europe.
Hundreds of self-described GOP foreign policy "experts" signed letters stating that they opposed Trump's candidacy and the mainstream media was unrelentingly hostile.
Leading Republicans refused to endorse Trump and some, like Senators John McCain, Marco Rubio and Lindsey Graham, cited his connections to Russia.
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
libezkova : March 13, 2017 at 06:20 PM , 2017 at 06:20 PM
Obama and Brennanhttp://www.counterpunch.org/2014/12/17/obama-and-brennan/
Baker-Mazzetti's opener says it all: " Just hours before he publicly responded last week to the Senate Intelligence Committee report accusing the Central Intelligence Agency of torture and deceit, John O. Brennan, the CIA's director, stopped by the White House to meet with President Obama. Ostensibly, he was there for an intelligence briefing. But the messages delivered later that day by the White House and Mr. Brennan were synchronized, even down to similar wording, and the larger import of the well-timed visit was hardly a classified secret: After six years of partnership, the president was standing by the embattled spy chief even as fellow Democrats called for his resignation. " Nothing could be plainer. As one who remembers well the guilt-by-association days of McCarthyism, I'm not tarring Obama with Brennan's war crimes and that of the Agency, copiously documented in the Senate Report on Torture, and instead am suggesting an active partnership-in-war-crimes, Obama, if anything, giving CIA its head of steam under his watch , as in its role in drone assassination at facilities in Pakistan, Brennan himself installed as Director after Valiant Service as national security adviser, all despite questions of favoring waterboarding raised in confirmation hearings. From a pool of gung-ho national-security experts on which to draw, the others still making up his First Team of advisers (include generals, admirals, members of think tanks with partly disguised neocon credentials), Obama plucked Brennan to lead the intelligence charge through the interstices of government and military culminating in a permanent war economy and psychosis of vision.
Obama is not Brennan's puppet, nor the other way. Both are electrified by mutual contact and support. The reporters note friction between the White House and Langley "after the release of the scorching report," Brennan having "irritated advisers by battling Democrats on the committee over the report during the past year." They do not point out Obama did the same, stalling release, suffocating criticism of CIA hard-ball tactics against the committee, of which later; yet they make up for that with, given that this is NYT, an astonishing statement: "But in the 67 years since the CIA was founded, few presidents have had as close a bond with their intelligence chiefs as Mr. Obama has forged with Mr. Brennan. It is a relationship that has shaped the policy and politics of the debate over the nation's war with terrorist organizations, as well as the agency's own struggle to balance security and liberty ."
What they don't say is that counterterrorism is part of the larger US position of counterrevolution, issuing in confrontations with Russia and China and regime change wherever American interests are challenged. Nor do they say, the Agency's struggle to balance security and liberty was lost before it had fairly begun, assassination and regime change hardly indicative of liberty, a no-contest battle.
|
|
|
Mar 04, 2017 | economistsview.typepad.com
cm -> im1dc... March 04, 2017 at 05:59 PM 2017 at 05:59 PMThe important mission has been accomplished - Trump has become president. What would motivate many people to go out for weekend rallies now?libezkova -> cm... , -1"The important mission has been accomplished - Trump has become president."You are absolutely wrong. Mission is not accomplished. It is not even started.
Trump IMHO was just a symbol of resistance against neoliberalism that is growing in the USA.
He was elected not for his personal qualities, but despite them, as a symbol of anti-neoliberal movement. As the only candidate that intuitively felt the need for the new policy due to crisis of neoliberalism ("secular stagnation" to be exact) impoverishment of lower 80% and "appropriated" anti-neoliberal sentiments.
And he is expected to accomplish at least two goals:
- Stop the wars of expansion of neoliberal empire fought by previous administration. Achieve détente with Russia as Russia is more ally then foe in the current international situation and hostility engineered by Obama administration was based on Russia resistance to neoliberalism (despite being neoliberal country with neoliberal President -- Putin is probably somewhat similar to Trump "bastard neoliberal" a strange mixture of neoliberal in domestic politics with "economic nationalist" on international arena that rejects neoliberal globalization, on term favorable to multinational corporations).
- Reverse or at least stem destruction of jobs and the standard of living of lower 80% on Americans due to globalization and, possibly, slow down or reverse the process of globalization itself.
The problem is there is extremely powerful and influential "fifth column" of globalization within the country and they can't allow Trump to go this path. As Senator Dick Durbin said about banks and the US Congress
== quote ==
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) has been battling the banks the last few weeks in an effort to get 60 votes lined up for bankruptcy reform. He's losing.
On Monday night in an interview with a radio host back home, he came to a stark conclusion: the banks own the Senate.
"And the banks - hard to believe in a time when we're facing a banking crisis that many of the banks created - are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they frankly own the place,"
== end of the quote ==
This is anathema for neoliberalism and it is neoliberals who ruled the country since 1980. So it is not surprising that they now are trying to stage a color revolution in the USA to return to power. See also pretty interesting analysis at
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/03/03/done-paul-craig-roberts/
|
|
|
Jan 01, 2017 | consortiumnews.com
The U.S. government is creating a new $160 million bureaucracy to shut down information that doesn't conform to U.S. propaganda narratives, building on the strategy that sold the bloody Syrian "regime change" war, writes Rick Sterling.The U.S. establishment is not content simply to have domination over the media narratives on critical foreign policy issues, such as Syria, Ukraine and Russia. It wants total domination. Thus we now have the " Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act " that President Obama signed into law on Dec. 23 as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2017 , setting aside $160 million to combat any "propaganda" that challenges Official Washington's version of reality.
... ... ...
The new law mandates the U.S. Secretary of State to collaborate with the Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence and other federal agencies to create a Global Engagement Center "to lead, synchronize, and coordinate efforts of the Federal Government to recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts aimed at undermining United States national security interests." The law directs the Center to be formed in 180 days and to share expertise among agencies and to "coordinate with allied nations."
The legislation was initiated in March 2016, as the demonization of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russia was already underway and was enacted amid the allegations of "Russian hacking" around the U.S. presidential election and the mainstream media's furor over supposedly "fake news." Defeated Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton voiced strong support for the bill: "It's imperative that leaders in both the private sector and the public sector step up to protect our democracy, and innocent lives."
The new law is remarkable for a number of reasons, not the least because it merges a new McCarthyism about purported dissemination of Russian "propaganda" on the Internet with a new Orwellianism by creating a kind of Ministry of Truth – or Global Engagement Center – to protect the American people from "foreign propaganda and disinformation."
As part of the effort to detect and defeat these unwanted narratives, the law authorizes the Center to: "Facilitate the use of a wide range of technologies and techniques by sharing expertise among Federal departments and agencies, seeking expertise from external sources, and implementing best practices." (This section is an apparent reference to proposals that Google, Facebook and other technology companies find ways to block or brand certain Internet sites as purveyors of "Russian propaganda" or "fake news." )
Justifying this new bureaucracy, the bill's sponsors argued that the existing agencies for " strategic communications " and " public diplomacy " were not enough, that the information threat required "a whole-of-government approach leveraging all elements of national power."
The law also is rife with irony since the U.S. government and related agencies are among the world's biggest purveyors of propaganda and disinformation – or what you might call evidence-free claims, such as the recent accusations of Russia hacking into Democratic emails to "influence" the U.S. election.
Despite these accusations - leaked by the Obama administration and embraced as true by the mainstream U.S. news media - there is little or no public evidence to support the charges. There is also a contradictory analysis by veteran U.S. intelligence professionals as well as statements by Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and an associate, former British Ambassador Craig Murray , that the Russians were not the source of the leaks. Yet, the mainstream U.S. media has virtually ignored this counter-evidence, appearing eager to collaborate with the new "Global Engagement Center" even before it is officially formed.
Of course, there is a long history of U.S. disinformation and propaganda. Former CIA agents Philip Agee and John Stockwell documented how it was done decades ago, secretly planting "black propaganda" and covertly funding media outlets to influence events around the world, with much of the fake news blowing back into the American media.
In more recent decades, the U.S. government has adopted an Internet-era version of that formula with an emphasis on having the State Department or the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy supply, train and pay "activists" and "citizen journalists" to create and distribute propaganda and false stories via "social media" and via contacts with the mainstream media. The U.S. government's strategy also seeks to undermine and discredit journalists who challenge this orthodoxy. The new legislation escalates this information war by tossing another $160 million into the pot.
... ... ...
Rick Sterling is an independent investigative journalist. He lives in the San Francisco Bay Area and can be reached at [email protected]
Skip Scott , January 1, 2017 at 12:55 pm
Abe , January 1, 2017 at 10:21 pmHere comes the Ministry of truth.
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is StrengthBig Brother is watching us.
Peter Loeb , January 2, 2017 at 6:44 amThe information war against reputable independent investigative journalism has been in full swing for years. $160 million is just the latest shake of piddle.
In addition to the army of paid journalists in mainstream media, "pro-democracy" and "human rights" NGOs, and assorted limited hangouts we are all too familiar with, there is the new Propaganda 3.0 species of "open source intelligence" scammers, bogus "independent researchers", and corporate-funded fake "citizen investigative journalists" like Eliot Higgins and Bellingcat, all busily churning out fake news.
Uncritical journalists have ignored the deeper layer of deception underlying the Washington Post / PropOrNot imbroglio.
Some "useful idiots" have gone so far as to actively promote the illusion that Bellingcat and other PropOrNot "Related Projects" are "professional" information sources.
In reality, Google-funded Bellingcat is directly allied with the Washington Post and New York Times, the two principal mainstream media organs for "regime change" propaganda, via the Google's new Ministry of Truth: The First Draft Coalition "partner network".
Note that it was the Washington Post that catapulted PropOrNot to prominence.
True independent investigative journalism is the declared enemy of Google's new Minitrue.
In a triumph of Orwellian Newspeak, this Propaganda 3.0 coalition has already demonstrated its ability to "work together to tackle common issues, including ways to streamline the verification process" of Western propaganda narratives.
The devil's hands are very busy.
Linda Doucett , January 1, 2017 at 11:28 pmMUST READ .
Tom Anderson: THE DIRTY WAR ON SYRIA
(Global Research, 2016)
(Available at Amazon and probably elsewhere.)
This well documented book explores the arguments presented in
Rick Sterling's excellent article above in detail. The book is in defense
of Syria.It includes many references (in English), most available on line.---------
NOTE: See requests elsewhere in the Defense Appropriation Act of 2017.
As always, an APPROPRIATION of amounts is required.-------
A basic issue can be raised involving any commitment of the
next President of the United States to policies of this
Administration and Congress. It is well-known that Donald
Trump has not previously shared many of the views on which this
legislation is based.Senator John McCain, primary sponsor, D-Ariz, does share
these views. It needs reminding that that being said, much
of this GOP interest was under the assumption that
Hillary Clinton's election was a foregone conclusion.Though Senator McCain is the sole sponsor of the entire
bill in his role as Chairman of the Armed Services
Committee of the Senate, many Democrats joined in the
many amendments. were co-sponsored by Democratic
Senators.Regarding Syria, many of the issues are dealt with
in Tom Anderson's book noted above.exiled off mainstreet , January 2, 2017 at 2:13 pmBill Cash , January 1, 2017 at 12:56 pmThat is it exactly. The yankee regime has gone over into fascist control of the narrative. Erstwhile "leftists" like Amy Goodman have jumped the shark and joined the imperialist propaganda push. Even the ACLU is sponsoring islamofascists like Khisr Khan, who is an apologist for el qaeda spouting that the Iraq war, a war crime by any objective definition, was 'in defense of constitutional values. Since courts no longer hold the regime accountable, the fact this is blatantly unconstitutional and contrary to the rule of law does not seem to mean much. Hopefully, the new administration, despite the reputation of its leadership, will be less autocratic in practice. As far as I'm concerned, they all have jumped the shark and the last shreds of legitimacy have disappeared. The entire existing regime and its acolytes are war criminals and traitors to the rule of law.
David Ecklein , January 1, 2017 at 1:43 pmYou don't watch Democracy Now much. I've seen all points of view presented there. Perhaps you should examine with a more open mind.
I never supported getting involved in Syria but there was a lot of pressure to do so. It was a big mistake. The history I know says that climate change had much to do with what happened there. A severe drought made conditions untenable for the farmers and they started to revolt. Assad handled what was happening very badly. It was a terrible situation. Assad wan't going to help them but he generally had the support of the rest of the people. Getting involved there was stupid. There was no way for intervention to be successful unless it was humanitarian like helping them to help the farmers Of course intervention is seldom humanitarian and when it is, it's seen as weak an ineffective by the powerful forces that oppose it.There's a real love fest for Trump on this site and I believe you are all going to be bitterly disappointed in the end. Putin obviously has something on Trump and you should be shouting for his tax returns so we can understand that relationship. We know he's received a lot of money from Russia.
Everyone, including you discount David Corn's research about that relationship. No one wants to hear it.Bill Cash , January 1, 2017 at 2:10 pmBill Cash- "We know he's [Trump} received a lot of money from Russia."
There is possibly a malicious insinuation here. Was that to support Trump's political campaign, or was that from business deals – which Trump has in any number of countries?
Bill Cash- "Everyone, including you discount David Corn's research about that relationship [Trump/Russia]."
Include me in your "everyone". If you mean Corn's article in Mother Jones, it is not "research" but forwarded innuendos.
As to whether anyone will be "bitterly disappointed" with Trump, that is beside the point – many of us are deeply concerned with other possible aspects of the coming administration. I am just glad to see Trump or any prominent US political commentator buck the knee-jerk attempt to blame Russia for our own troubles. Jerks like that can be hazardous to our health and possibly our continued existence.
Skip Scott , January 1, 2017 at 2:44 pmYou think climate change is a problem? Trump thinks it's a hoax. Will climate change provoke many Syria's around the world?
Is Trump building a government of, by and for the very rich?
Putin obviously has something on Trump which all of you are ignoring. Now Trump is saying he knows more about hacking than everyone else. There's too much in that relationship to be ignored but you are ignoring it and it will come back to bite us.
Trump wants to dismantle the epa, medicare and social security. That should really help the country.
Enjoy Trump while you can. Keep protecting him.Bill Cash , January 1, 2017 at 3:15 pmWhat proof do you have that Putin has "something" on Trump? It could be that Trump sees opportunities for business with Russia if there are improved relations. Russia has a lot of natural resources waiting to be exploited. The military/security/industrial complex is at odds with that idea because they need their boogeyman.
And why does it always have to be one or the other between Hillary and the Donald? I think they both suck. My only hope is that he disrupts the power of the deep state warmongers and cleans house at the CIA And even there, it is only a hope. I am not blindly optimistic.
I doubt there are many of us here at Consortium news that are enjoying or protecting Trump, but Hillary would have been a disaster as well. Bill Cash is blind not to see that. There was no lesser of two evils in this election, just two different evils.
Blahblahblah , January 1, 2017 at 9:41 pmGet Trump to release his tax returns. Why is he afraid to do that? There is something there h doesn't want us to see.
We know he's received a lot of money from Russia, That's well documented and Putin doesn't allow that without strings. We know he's had dealings with both the mafia and the Russian mob.
You should be screaming for his tax returns but instead you assume his innocence.
You know nothing about me. I do believe Hillary would be better because she believes in global warming but I was a Bernie supporter.
If you know anything about Trump, you know he only acts to help himself, for his own enrichment. If you don't know that, I can't talk to you. You'd have to give me examples of him ever thinking outside himself. There has to be something in the Putin relationship that's good for Trump.
Get his tax returns!!!!!Jessejean , January 2, 2017 at 12:56 amHeh, I'm Russian from Russia. 1. Russia is not building any ministry of truth, many western channels like France 24, BBC, EuroNews and Fox News are part of standard cable TV package here (at least in Moscow and other major cities). 2. Not sure what image you have of our president, but blackmailing leaders of other states is America's thing, that's not what Russians do (we send tanks, threaten or negotiate) – you should stop thinking the whole world acts the same way America does. 3. I doubt Trump got money from Russia, at least not more than Clinton got from Saudi Arabia and others, including Ukraine (the latter donated about US$30 million, the former could have donated up to US$500 million // could you name the amount given by Russia to Trump, which you speak about?). Anyway, is it really okay that future American president are for sale internationally, regardless if it's Trump or Clinton? 4. I doubt Russians hacked you since there's still no single proof (What CIA says and "everyone knows" is not a proof. If you like this type of justice, I suggest you abolish your whole legal system and replace it with Lynch courts). 5. Lastly, you suggest that the U.S. s almost uninvolve din Syria. Is it really so? Who are you supplying weapons to then? Turkish president (Turkey is still NATO member, ally of the U.S.) said he has proof U.S. is supporting terrorists, mainly ISIL and Al Quaida. Al Quaida were the guys who organized 9/11. I hope you're proud to be American and of Obama and Clinton.
????????, ?????? ?? ??? ???????? ??? 8 ??? ?????, ?? ?????????? ????? ?????.
? ??????? ?? ?????? :-)
Zachary Smith , January 1, 2017 at 11:57 pmBlah x3: that was beautiful. It makes me so sick to my stomach that these things can be said about my country and that I know they are true. For years I blamed the FBI. Or Nixon. Or Ronnie, or Col. North and Iran Countra, or the Rethugs. Or the CIA Or DIck and Bush. But when Hillary tried to force herself down our throats in a kind of female felacio (sorry, don't know how to spell that) and Thomas Frank went after Slick Willy with a cleaver and Matt Taibbi exposed Obama's financial machinations and Little Debbie Shitz kneecapped the progressives, I finally saw what the world has been seeing for decades. I love my country, and all I was taught she stood for, and I know you love your country and her amazing history. I don't like Trump, but if he's the poison it takes to heal my country so we can get along with yours, here's to poison. Dos vee donya. ( terrible speller. Sorry)
exiled off mainstreet , January 2, 2017 at 2:19 pmTrump and climate change = Trump an ignoramus.
Hillary and Obama on climate change equaled lots of grand speech-making, no effective actions.
I don't see a significant difference here. And at least in theory, ignorance can be corrected more easily than cynical indifference chasing the easy money..Trump building a government of, by and for the very rich? That's right.
Hillary and the TPP meant government would be handed to corporations.Trump wants to dismantle the epa, medicare and social security. Probably.
Obama was itching for 8 years to strike a Grand Bargain with the Republicans to dismantle Social Security. If I was to waste time looking at Hillary and Social Security, I'd expect to find weasel lawyer talk giving her the same leeway.Putin obviously had something on Trump. Is this in the same class of "reality" as the Russians obviously stealing the 2016 election and preparing to destroy the electrical systems in Vermont?
David Corn: I looked at his archives at Mother Jones. He was always frothing at the mouth against whoever it was who was in the lead in the Republican primary. Mention of Hillary was always a side factor except in one piece which had this title.
You Go to War With the Hillary Clinton You Have
I examined the piece, and found it summarizes as 'the woman isn't worth a crap, but she's all we've got.' Corn was a little more explicit about Hillary's faults in 2008. From one of his pieces then:
I, too, have huffed about Obama's staffing decisions. It remains a mystery to me why Obama would want to bring into his Big Tent the Clinton circus, which frequently features excessive spin, backstabbing, leaking and messy melodrama. Sen. Clinton is a smart woman who has stature and globetrotting experience. But as health-care czar in her husband's administration, she set back that cause, which is near and dear to the hearts of progressives, by nearly two decades.
That's right – Hillary wasn't worth a crap back in 2008 either, only back then Corn was a bit more truthful. I've seen that with others – in their 2008 blog posts they were doing to Hillary what they're doing to Trump now – making an all-out assault. How those people convinced themselves that 2008 totally evil Hillary was transformed into 2016 Saint Hillary still confounds me.
Lin Cleveland , January 1, 2017 at 2:21 pmTrump, if he proves as bad on climate change as feared, can be reversed. If the harpy had gotten in, she would have said the right words on climate change, but put policies via the "trade pacts" under extra-legal corrupt corporate arbitration courts who would have been able to sideline the rule of law in this area and would have established an irreversible corporate regime on climate change. Since courts long ago ceased to hold to rule of law standards basing their decisions on extra-legal state secrets and anti-free-speech considerations, and since such extra-legal "trade pacts" have not even been questioned in US courts, the reality is that this would have meant the end of serious climate change work. This seems to me to be much more concerning than Trump's rhetoric on climate change issues, since, whatever the talk, the factual result of the policy would have been far more odious.
D5-5 , January 1, 2017 at 3:07 pm" There's a real love fest for Trump on this site "
Gregory Kruse , January 2, 2017 at 11:02 amI watched Democracy Now for over a decade–until recently. I tried to tolerate its bias on Syria and wrote to the site several times to no avail. Coverage of Syria was consistently a fairy tale of Assad the evil Hitler versus the good rebels–essentially a Washington Post view. This program has declined. I'm sorry to say it. It is now so unreliable I can no longer watch it. I believe the writer here is accurate and fair on this evaluation.
JohnMMorgan , January 2, 2017 at 12:28 pmThat's what happens when a site has "Democracy" in its name. The term no longer has any coherent meaning.
Bill Bodden , January 1, 2017 at 3:32 pmI agree, the role Democracy Now played in paving the way for the destruction of Libya and now Syria is shameful. Given how divided the left is on Syria, the least DN could and should have done is have weekly debates between top advocates of the different narratives to expose their listeners to both sides. Instead they gave constant repetition of the official propaganda line with only very rarely a little of the other side.
On U.S., Russia and Ukraine it has been more like DN has been MIA.
I think it is entirely appropriate for Rick Sterling to challenge DN in this excellent article.
Gregory Herr , January 1, 2017 at 4:08 pmThere's a real love fest for Trump on this site and I believe you are all going to be bitterly disappointed in the end.
I read Consortium News practically every day, but somehow I missed the "love fest" comments. Can you share an example or two. There were several articles clearly exposing Hillary Clinton's defects, but it would take lots of stretching of points to interpret them as pro-Trump. I and others have made comments along the lines of "when it comes to Clinton and Trump there is no lesser evil." I don't recall anyone challenging comments like that.
Similarly, I and others have made the point that we might escape Hillary Clinton's frying pan but we will land in Donald Trump's fire. Or, another version, we might have dodged Hillary Clinton's bullet but Donald Trump will be the price we will have to pay.
Putin obviously has something on Trump
In this bizarre era of world politics that may or may not be true. It is, however, unlikely to be obvious either way to many visitors to this site. Can you share what causes you to believe it is obvious?
John P , January 1, 2017 at 6:54 pmSevere drought and sanctions that go back to the Bush Administration certainly created some economic hardships. But the conflict in Syria is hardly the outgrowth of a farmers' revolt. The people of Syria are generally educated and politically astute. Naturally occurring political activity not unlike what we sometimes see here in the States (with "movements" such as Occupy) did not have an insurrectionist flavor and few Syrian citizens had armed revolt in mind. Many were simply keen for Assad to step up the pace of the political reform he was a part of. The armed "revolt" that you somehow think Assad handled badly was managed by foreign provocateurs. Assad and the Syrian Arab Army and the Russian Air Force have been protecting the citizens of Syria from vile terrorist mercenaries.
John P , January 1, 2017 at 7:04 pmIn support of some your comments Bill Cash, see – Putin's friendly response to the expulsion of his US diplomats – shown on the British Independent newspaper site. In it they state:
"The President-elect's nomination of Rex Tillerson, chief of ExxonMobil, as Secretary of State, will if confirmed mean that Putin has someone whom he knows well, and has personally awarded the Russian Order of Friendship, in charge of US foreign policy. As for his own business interests, he signed an agreement last summer (just one, it should be said, of several attempts to do so) to build a Trump Tower in Moscow."Also interesting to read is Mondoweiss: "Why Obama waited 8 years to take on Netanyahu"
Happy New year everybody and lets hope we don't get Trumped --
Adrian Engler , January 1, 2017 at 9:19 pmThe web address for the first article above is :
I'm with you Bill Cash
Vera , January 1, 2017 at 1:08 pmI find this idea that better relationships between the US and Russia would be bad for Central and Western Europe very strange. Of course, there are a few neocon hawks in Europe, as well, but mostly, Europeans are very sceptical about strongly anti-Russian US policies in recent years (in many European countries US power and influence is seen as a similar or bigger threat than Russia, see http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/13/europeans-see-isis-climate-change-as-most-serious-threats/epw-russia-china-u-s-threats-web-version/ ). US pressure was needed for the EU to pass sanctions against Russia (of course, Poland and Angela Merkel were in favor, but since there is little popular support for these sanctions outside Poland and the Baltic states, that would hardly have sufficed without US pressure). In Europe, the simplified, dumbed-down presentations of conflicts like the one in Ukraine that are meant to use such complex situations for a one-sided demonization of Russia are less widely accepted. I think there are far more Europeans who saw the constant US pressure for worsening relationships with Russia as a significant threat than people who think that a rapprochement of the US and Russia would be dangerous.
Of course, there are a few very vocal European journalists who belong to "Atlantic" neocon associations who will scream when someone threatens to ease tensions with Russia, but they only represent a very small part of Europeans.Zachary Smith , January 1, 2017 at 1:18 pmdoray , January 1, 2017 at 1:43 pmAs part of the effort to detect and defeat these unwanted narratives, the law authorizes the Center to: "Facilitate the use of a wide range of technologies and techniques by sharing expertise among Federal departments and agencies, seeking expertise from external sources, and implementing best practices ." (This section is an apparent reference to proposals that Google, Facebook and other technology companies find ways to block or brand certain Internet sites as purveyors of "Russian propaganda" or "fake news.")
I suspect "best practices" will include more than simply blocking the alternative information sites like this and Naked Capitalism and the others on the BS PROPORNOT list. Expect other schemes to be tried, each one with effectively unlimited funding.
They're going to do what the murderous twit George "dumbya" Bush spoke of:
"See in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."
I and many others voted for Obama in 2008 because of our utter disgust with the Texas Torturer. The master psychologists who selected Obama knew that would happen, and his fancy talking along with his black skin caused some people I KNEW were racists to vote for him too – just to prove to themselves they weren't. ( a task eased by the alternative of McCain and Palin)
Obama has his fingerprints all over the endless crap discussed in this splendid essay, and the sooner people recognize he is a Bush-Level President the better.
Here is a good introduction to that theme.
http://www strategic-culture.org/news/2016/12/31/obama-failed-presidency.html
My main complaint about the essay at the link is that at the end of it author Eric Zuesse was still in a "defense" mode for the disaster which has been the Obama years.
J'hon Doe II , January 1, 2017 at 1:53 pmThe cartoon that should result from this action would be to show Obama and every member of Congress who voted for this insanity taking a giant steaming dump on the First Amendment. We have arrived at the Fourth Reich.
Will they just block the alternative news, or criminalize those who try and post it?stan , January 1, 2017 at 2:16 pmAlt-Info vs. this Letter to America.
http://www.terrain.org/2016/guest-editorial/letter-to-america-golden/
::
wherefore does your sincerity
lie?
sincerity in heart is truth.backwardsevolution , January 1, 2017 at 5:46 pmYou can read chapter 6 of Mein Kampf to learn the power and techniques of war propaganda. I started watching the propaganda in 1989 when George Bush Sr. invaded panama to capture his buddy Noriega. There was a story about how the U.S. military had found womens panties and cocaine in Noriegas hideout. After he was captured and reporters asked for proof of this, the U.S. military said they could not find the underwear in question and the cocaine turned out to be baking soda. Of course it was all fabrication.
During the leadup to the bombing of Iraq in 1991, the story was that the Iraqi soldiers had gone in a hospital and thrown babies out of their incubators "onto the cold hard floor". Of course, this was a total lie also. Even our president kept repeating it, so he was either stupid or lying. Guess which.
But these are the stories to incite the murderous rage of a people, and prevent people from questioning the attack. When you hear of the smear – someone hiding in a "spider-hole", or someone caught trying to sneak away wearing women's clothing, then you know it is part of the smear campaign and a total lie. It is just a smear, which psychologically makes you not protest the attack, because, well, it could be true, and who wants to stand up in public to protect a sex pervert or a coward.
But the real power of propaganda is in controlling the narrative. Here is the true narrative of our murderous rampage in the middle east.
The wars of the U.S. are the empires fighting over control of territory, with all of the benefits and privileges thereof – take the resources, collect taxes, and control terms of commerce and trade to benefit yourself. Big wars begin when empires fall. This also happens when an elephant falls in the jungle. The lions, hyenas, vultures, etc. all try to grab a piece. Governments do this too, as do crime syndicates and mobsters. Mobsters are always trying to muscle in on the territory of other gangs, and police know that when a powerful mobster falls, there will be wars between the gangs fighting for turf and control of territory and markets.
The U.S. began the destruction of Iraq with the murderous bombing of that country as soon as the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. This attack was planned and prepared for during the Regan military buildup of the 1980s. The U.S. knew the soviet union was going to fall, and they prepared for it. It was decided to "pivot" from the U.S. military defeat in southeast asia to begin an invasion of southwest asia. Zbigniew Brezinsky was the architect of the plan to destablize Afghanistan. The U.S. military would not have done that without a follow up plan, and it takes years to plan and prepare an armada for an invasion. In the time since, we have basically invaded and militarily conquered the middle east, africa, southwestern asia and parts of the old soviet union in eastern europe. It is a war between empires (very large business syndicates). All the day-to-day happenings are trivial irrelavancies in terms of reasons for U.S. foreign policy and military actions. Our future foreign policy to again invade asia was decided before 1980. Think of the president as the CEO, and the board of directors tells him what to do. The board of directors has not changed.
Dwight , January 1, 2017 at 9:32 pmFritz , January 1, 2017 at 11:17 pmAmnesty International lent its name to the incubator baby propaganda, playing an important role in helping Bush Sr. get Senate approval for the 1991 Gulf War. Amnesty International along with Human Rights Watch also played an important role in legitimizing the 1999 Kosovo war by timely, uncritical, and grossly irresponsible parroting of claims about killings at the village of Racak.
Lin Cleveland , January 1, 2017 at 2:19 pmI hate to say: 'well said', generally, because it implies that I am in a position to give you a grade, like a teacher would.
Bart in Virginia , January 2, 2017 at 9:30 am"the Ministry of Truth!" Yes indeed, Mr. Sterling, that's what we're seeing here. The stench of hypocrisy wafting from the East is overwhelming, isn't it? To boot Obama signed this bit of government overreach on my birthday claiming this legislation is to protect "national security interests" and "to protect the American people from 'foreign propaganda' and disinformation." Most U.S. citizens know that politicians tell whoppers on the campaign trail. Remember in 2008 when heroic Hillary told about arriving in Bosnia "under a hail of bullets"? That never happened!
No surprise she supports the bill. "Hillary Clinton voiced strong support for the bill: "It's imperative that leaders in both the private sector and the public sector step up to protect our democracy, and innocent lives." Let's understand what the lady means by "our democracy." She refers to the democracy of the few, the political elites in cahoots with Wall Street who meet behind a curtain to decide U.S. policy. Anyway, as long as we look to "leaders" we'll continue to live in a hierarchy based in money and power–and that is not a democracy! Innocent lives? No, this bill protects the guilty from public scrutiny.
The law also is rife with irony since the U.S. government and related agencies are among the world's biggest purveyors of propaganda and disinformation – or what you might call evidence-free claims, such as the recent accusations of Russia hacking into Democratic emails to "influence" the U.S. election.
O yea! the irony is palpable. One section of the bill stipulates that information "experts" appointed by the government will train prospective journalists. Gee, you mean we don't already have that with ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC? The term "The Fourth Estate" for a free and open press dates back to Edmond Burke in 1875. Of course all along those in power have worked overtime to propagate our own citizens, but the idea of government-trained journalists is a slap in the face to "freedom of the press." All of us who post our fact-based opinions qualify as press. From now on, however, a journalist must have a stamp of approval from the government!
On another not-so "fake news" site I found an article by a retired professor well versed in computer language. Dr. Spring challenges the Russian hacking story, but I don't know enough to understand it all Some of you might.
Was Claim by Department of Homeland Security and FBI About Russian Hacking Fake News? by David SpringKent , January 1, 2017 at 2:36 pm"One section of the bill stipulates that information "experts" appointed by the government will train prospective journalists."
backwardsevolution , January 1, 2017 at 9:45 pmFunny how they never mention the plans for competing pipelines, re: Syria.
Joe Tedesky , January 1, 2017 at 10:50 pmKent – re competing pipelines. I used to think that was the main reason for the war in Syria. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wrote an article entitled "Syria: Another Pipeline War". I'm sure the pipeline from Qatar up through Syria is part of the reason, but another poster commented that he didn't buy this, mainly because the pipeline could have gone up through Iraq and then across Turkey. I looked at a map and, yes, he was correct. It would cost more money, but could easily have been done. No, he contended that there was a much greater reason for the war: Israel.
Kent , January 2, 2017 at 10:42 amI'm leaving you something to read see link below, where the author talks about an energy alliance between Turkey, Israel, and Russia is being discussed between these three countries. The U.S. is not included in these discussions.
Personally I have thought for quite awhile now that this Middle East American NATO driven war has been more about destabilizing Israel's neighbors (Yinon Plan, Clean Break), as opposed to routing energy pipelines.
Read this .
http://journal-neo.org/2016/10/25/russia-turkey-israel-and-a-new-balance-of-power/
Joe Tedesky , January 2, 2017 at 12:41 pmExcellent info there,Joe. Demonstrating once again that Putin is a far better, more creative, and less deluded strategic thinker than our best and brightest. I suspect that Turkey's turn toward a Russian alliance on the energy front is sparked the CIA's (failed) Gulenist coup attempt last summer.
And of course Israel is always Israel.
The recent bizarre assassination of the Russian ambassador in Turkey by the 'security' guy yelling 'this is for Aleppo' was also a tell regarding the US's support, arming, and funding of the proxy mercenaries Daesh/Isis/al Nusra/al Quaeda.
Losing's a bitch, especially when it requires treason and you STILL lose. The Masters of the Universe take a hit and I actually see a small glimmer of hope in that.
Kent , January 2, 2017 at 10:51 amYes the deception and intrigue makes one get dizzy trying to figure out who is really behind all of it. The U.S. needs a new strategy, but it fails to acknowledge it, and with that nothing will change for the good.
CitizenOne , January 1, 2017 at 2:39 pmBWE- True enough about the alternate route, through the new and improved 'Kurdistan' but that would have still left the Syrian/Russian legal alliance in place as a competitor for EU business.
I also think that since Syria was 'on the list' from the get/go, our 'thinkers' in the MI$S complex Mafia weren't creative enough to pivot and adapt. Plus, it would have still left competition noted above.
backwardsevolution , January 1, 2017 at 9:53 pmI was watching the news. It is all about the Russians. The Expulsions, the sanctions, the democrats and the republicans are united against their common enemy the Russians. More sanctions are on the way. If a family member recently passed away you can be assured the Russians murdered them! Why don't they just declare war with Russia and get all the niceties over and done so we can get right down to the war?
Nowhere in this uni-polar single topic narrative of how Russia and Russia alone rigged the election is there a mention of any possible other source of influence on the election. What about the glacially paced multi year investigation into Benghazi? What about Comey's October Surprise with Anthony Wiener's Laptop? What about any other foreign power? What about voter ID laws? What about gerrymandering? What about black box voting? What about Citizens United vs. FEC and McCutcheon vs. FEC and dark money in politics?
These are just some of the things that have dominated all the previous narratives before now on how elections might be rigged minus the foreign hacks by the Russians which was never a concern. Now, all those things are forgotten. Never happened, not a problem. All washed away in an instant with an entirely new theory out of a clear blue sky. The one single question posed by the politicians and the media might just as well be why are we not loading weapons on boats and planes, dropping them off all along Russia's borders and reinstating the draft right now?
There is a word for this. This is Propaganda. The law is a perversion of its alleged purpose of defense of the truth by claiming it will weed out lies. It actually seeks to preserve complete control of the narrative a.k.a., propaganda by shutting out anyone else with a different opinion. They need to go after foreign sources because obviously, there is no need for worry or concern that our domestic media might actually do its job. It is clearly already deep inside the belly of the beast.
Mr. Obama has 20 days left and they cannot possibly go by fast enough as he salts the political landscape in order to tie the incoming administrations hands.
This has to be one of the scariest and damnable things Obama signed into law. Hopefully, it will shortly be rescinded but it seems even the republicans like Mitch McConnell are all on board with preserving the military industrial complex at all costs. War is their stock and trade and there are trillions of dollars at stake here. The Defense Industry needs enemies not friends.
What we are seeing is the Neo-Con Cabal wringing their hands with anxiety that the next war with Russia might be on hold and doing everything they can to make that happen. This is what Eisenhower warned us about. But it is an old problem.
Here are some quotes:
I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war.
Abraham Lincoln – In a letter written to William Elkin less than five months before he was assassinated.
The money power preys on the nation in times of peace, and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces, as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes.
Abraham Lincoln
A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the Nation and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world – no longer a Government of free opinion no longer a Government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men .
Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the U.S., in the field of commerce and manufacturing, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.
Woodrow Wilson – In The New Freedom (1913)
The fact is that there is a serious danger of this country becoming a pluto-democracy; that is, a sham republic with the real government in the hands of a small clique of enormously wealth men, who speak through their money, and whose influence, even today, radiates to every corner of the United States.
William McAdoo – President Wilson's national campaign vice-chairman, wrote in Crowded Years (1974)
When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.
Frederic Bastiat – (1801-1850) in Economic Sophisms
The powers of financial capitalism had (a) far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.
Prof. Carroll Quigley in Tragedy and Hope
In a small Swiss city sits an international organization so obscure and secretive .Control of the institution, the Bank for International Settlements, lies with some of the world's most powerful and least visible men: the heads of 32 central banks, officials able to shift billions of dollars and alter the course of economies at the stroke of a pen.
Keith Bradsher of the New York Times, August 5, 1995
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is eager to enter into close relationship with the Bank for International Settlements .The conclusion is impossible to escape that the State and Treasury Departments are willing to pool the banking system of Europe and America, setting up a world financial power independent of and above the Government of the United States .The United States under present conditions will be transformed from the most active of manufacturing nations into a consuming and importing nation with a balance of trade against it.
Rep. Louis McFadden – Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Currency quoted in the New York Times (June 1930)
D5-5 , January 1, 2017 at 3:18 pmjunius , January 2, 2017 at 12:38 pmThank you for this excellent analysis. Particularly disturbing to me is the success of the propaganda in places I wouldn't expect it, as with Democracy Now, and my neighbors, who seem decent, intelligent people, but entirely done in by the false impressions. I have the feeling the critical views expressed here and in this excellent Consortium site, plus similar sites, represent a small minority of the American public? Or is an awakening in progress causing this newest repressive move, a growing skepticism threatening "national security"? I did read a comment somewhere that fifty percent of the American public is not taken in by the current Russia blaming, but I don't know if this is true.
Bill Cash , January 1, 2017 at 3:20 pmHow about Rolling Stone's October article praising Hillary Clinton as a champion of feminism? I just cancelled my subscription to the New Yorker because the quality of its great cartoons no longer outweighs the ugly rightward shift in its editorial policy.
We seem to be witnessing the completion of the project begun a century ago this year, in 1917, with the establishment of the Committee on Public Information. Also known as the Creel Commission, it was the government agency tasked with convincing the American people that it was a good idea to support one faction in Europe's Great War and to take arms against the other. As laughably naive as that propaganda effort seems now, it was the beginning of the end of independent journalism, which in truth had always been on shaky ground in this country. The Founders were among the most cynical of men. It's not hard to picture them laughing in their sleeves over the farcical First Amendment for well they knew from colonial experience that the "freedom" to publish belongs only to those who can afford the price of a printing press, ink, and paper, and who, most importantly, curry favor from government and business. It remains to be seen what effect the internet will have – and how easily it can be silenced
Bill Bodden , January 1, 2017 at 3:49 pmI'm well aware of the propaganda from our government but if you believe it will be better under Trump, you are living in a fairy tale. As Bernie said, he's a pathological liar.
Whatever benefits Trump determines what he will say. Look under the covers and you find Steve Bannon who runs the trump campaign. If you think the propaganda is bad now, wait until he's in control.
Trump isn't the answer and we need his tax returns. I can see him creating an alliance with Putin and undermining Western Europe.
Skip Scott , January 1, 2017 at 4:23 pmI'm well aware of the propaganda from our government but if you believe it will be better under Trump, you are living in a fairy tale.
Bill Cash: I'm with you on this point, but your reasoning above in other posts was very sloppy making facts out of speculation. Speculation, even if it is plausible, does not qualify as fact. I also agree with other commentators suggesting Trump will probably make Obama look good despite negative opinions of Obama.
Jessejean , January 2, 2017 at 1:20 amHow would creating an alliance with Putin undermine western Europe? You are right that I don't know much about you, but I am with Bill Bodden that you are guilty of shoddy reasoning. As for Global warming, I am sure that it is a serious problem. But Hillary's foreign policy would have had me concerned about nuclear winter. And Hillary is a pathological liar who thinks only of herself and talks out both sides of her mouth. And she is a slave to the deep state and wall street. I think you are dead right about Trump's character, but I think you may be underestimating much of the horrors of the Clintons. How about foreign alliances via the Clinton Foundation- it's pay to play scenario, and the possible impacts on foreign policy? Look at the utter mayhem in the Middle East and the refugee crisis in Europe. Hillary would have promised us more of the same as president.
I was a Bernie supporter as well, but he lost me when he gave up the fight.
Skip Scott , January 2, 2017 at 9:00 amSkip–Bernie didn't give up the fight. He did what he had promised to do and supported the nominee. In other words, he kept his word, even tho it clearly cost him. You abandoned him when the fight became tough, when it wasn't so glamorous, when it shifted over to the hard slog of grassroots organizing and door to door work for some school board member–you know, the kind of work Stokley Charmicheal did for years to help build the Panthers. Don't blame Bernie for your lacking of true heart. It's you.
Brad Owen , January 2, 2017 at 10:44 amWhen Bernie discovered proof thru wikileaks that the DNC was actively working against him, he should have fought for the nomination at the convention, instead of caving to all the corruption (super delegates, etc etc.) If he had failed there, he could have topped the green party ticket with Jill Stein to run as VP. Then he would have succeeded in blowing up the entirely corrupt two party system, if nothing else. He would have had the 15% to make the national debates. He may have even won. Where was the slog of grassroots organizing after he quit the fight? It's come to naught. I had the true heart to stay with him if he hadn't caved. Bernie even supported some faux democrats against genuine
progressive greens in down ballot races. This is not a game, it's real life. It is time for people to stand strong for the issues they care about.Adrian Engler , January 1, 2017 at 6:59 pmI agree Skip. Bernie was the man of the hour. He had the perfect tool to smash the two-party/Wall Street/deep state Establishment: millions of independent citizen donors. Then he threw it all away to actively campaign for the queen of chaos and the Establishment War Party. I was so disgusted and mad that I went Green and never looked back. I now donate 10$ a month, every month, to the Greens hoping to see recreated the Tool that Bernie threw away (and still trying to lasso to the D-side of the Establishment War Party): millions of independent citizens donating 10$ or 20$ a month to the Green Party to build up a war chest to challenge both wings of the Establishment War Party.
John P , January 1, 2017 at 7:05 pmCertainly Trump should not be trusted, among the two very bad (in my view) candidates, I considered Trump the greated evil for domestic US policy, but probably the lesser evil in foreign policy compared to Hillary Clinton's more aggressive neocon policies.
In what ways should a good collaboration of Trump and Putin undermine Western Europe? According to surveys (e.g. http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/06/13/europeans-see-isis-climate-change-as-most-serious-threats/epw-russia-china-u-s-threats-web-version/ ), apart from Poland, relatively few Europeans see Russia as a big threat, and in many countries, US power and influence is actually seen as a similar or even bigger threat than Russia.
I think the demonization of Russia and the presentation of the Russian government as a big threat also has to do with the goal of keeping a strong US influence in Western Europe – and for supporting the influence of US-linked European interest groups. But I doubt that this is going to work. It might work on the US public, but apart from Poland and the Baltic states, demonizing Russia is much more difficult in Europe, and the percentage of people who know more about the conflicts in which Russia is involved than the simplified depictions that are popular in the US is probably much bigger.
James lake , January 1, 2017 at 10:31 pmIn support Bill, see:
Kalen , January 1, 2017 at 3:23 pmYou do realise who owns that news paper you are quoting. It's owned by the Ledbedev family who are oligarchs in the fine tradition. Stole money ran to the west claiming persecution by Putin. It's an anti Putin paper. They are purely online now as the print version of the paper ceased to make a profit.
The only writers worth reading are Robert Fisk and Patrick Cockburn
ger , January 1, 2017 at 3:24 pmJust a note for DN lovers. Since before 2008 the Pacifica Fundation running DN was taken over by Goldman Sachs. Many local stations rebelled and were cut off from money, forcing them into turmoil and like KPFA and KPFK throwed the management off, cut the fat and went fully listener funded. All that while GS bought Amy Goodman a new TV studio with audience who after the show for $2000 had a chance to go to dinner with Amy.
All in the midst of 2008 ensuing collapse. When DN subsequently ignored Puerto Rico general strike and a quarter million street demonstration. I stopped watching and listening DN on radio after 15 years.
Tristan , January 1, 2017 at 3:27 pmThe Police State requires each person to believe their lies. Paraphrasing a comment attributed to a former CIA operative: "When the only narrative available is ours, we will have done our job". The problem for the Police State is even if there is only one person left to speak truth to their lies. that truth will need to be snuffed out. It will take a lot more than $160,000,000.
Brian , January 1, 2017 at 3:46 pmThis article does well to point out the impending doom of our intellectual discourse regarding the nature of the U.S. gov't and its relationship with the citizenry. Already the citizens of the U.S. are more commonly referred to as consumers, thus it follows that the more equal of the equal should control what the consumers are fed.
The dystopian nature of free market globalized capitalism is now finding, or is near to, the apex of what capitalism unfettered can accomplish. Resulting in the frantic "marketing" that this form of capitalism relies on to "sell" itself as the only way to survive this ugly planet. War is the product, propaganda is the marketing, we fools, consumers, are forced to buy the product from afar and those who receive the product pay a price that no human ought to bear.
Since we must recognize the complete corruption of such a condition, those that wish to continue to profit from this are forced to act in ways which protect this profit. If this includes an Orwellian Ministry of Truth, as the CFPDA intends, then that's the remedy that is needed because profit, you know, money, power, ad nauseum. That's it. If there were some greater underpinning to the destruction of whole societies and nations and regions that made some sense in the fabric of improving the well being of the planet's humans, perhaps we could accede to the years of long sacrifice and struggle. But no, this is only about wealth and the accumulation of power that this now provides in our modern world.
The narratives which counter the prevailing religion in the West, the religion of Capitalism unfettered and rapacious, are not given voice. Many don't even understand that there a different ways of organizing a society or a nation that serves the need and well being of its citizens.
This bullshit machine being funded by "our own" government is ensuring just that, that people are not even provided an opportunity to discuss an alternative to the present state of things. Try not to buy the products that this machine produces, as even if we dream of something else, this too is contrary to the designs of the machine. Next is the Ministry of Thought, or perhaps it was first. And the Ministry of Truth is just now only the second to appear manifest.
Bill Bodden , January 1, 2017 at 3:55 pmDec 27, 2016 "Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act" Signed Into Law! (NDAA 2017)
It is true there is breaking news today but you certainly won't hear it from the mainstream media. While everyone was enjoying the holidays president Obama signed the NDAA for fiscal year 2017 into law which includes the "Countering Disinformation and Propaganda Act" and in this video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth shows how this new law is tantamount to "The Records Department of the Ministry of Truth" in George Orwell's book 1984.
Liam , January 1, 2017 at 4:03 pmJohn McCain has long been recognized as a warmonger eager to attack foreign nations. Many Americans will be surprised to learn he is now waging war on the American people. Many other Americans won't have a clue of what this bill means – or even of its existence.
Bob Van Noy , January 2, 2017 at 3:31 pmRegarding all the major propaganda narrative relating to the Syrian War, I put together a massive compendium of photos, videos and linked evidence related to the White Helmets and other ruses. Links here:
Extensive links to important JPR posts exposing the White Helmet terrorists .
Please bookmark and save this large amount of info related to the US/UK backed White Helmets as it is extensive proof that the officials of the aforementioned countries are supporting a fake group that is directly linked to terrorism. The White Helmets killed the real Syrian Civil Defense in east Aleppo, Syria in 2013. The videos and research throughout these posts, which is primarily conducted by UK investigative reporting outfit 21st Century Wire and Venessa Beeley, exposes one of the greatest war lies over told, a massive propaganda effort meant to deceive and coerce the populations of western countries into believing that al-Qaeda linked terrorists are civil humanitarians that save little children.
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/itv-4-video-shows-white-helmet-embedded-w-al-zinki-terrorists-who-beheaded-boy/#post-257679
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/who-are-syrias-white-helmets-terrorist-linked/
- http://www.jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/the-propaganda-war-against-syria-led-by-avaaz-the-white-helmets/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/henningsen-the-white-helmets-are-kony-2012-on-steroids/
- https://www.jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/syria-white-helmets-humanitarians-or-executioners/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/mccain-and-the-syrian-white-helmets-how-a-simple-post-can-connect-the-dots/
- http://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/huge-video-and-data-cache-on-the-fake-ngo-syrian-white-helmet-jihadists/
- http://jackpineradicals.org/showthread.php?10226-The-Syria-White-Helmets-Exposed-as-US-UK-Agents-Embedded-with-Al-Nusra-and-ISIS
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/white-helmets-neutral-heroes-or-pro-war-pr-campaign/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/avaaz-the-online-pro-war-propagandist-and-color-revolution-ngo/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/crosstalkrt-who-are-the-white-helmets-guests-vanessa-beeeleyeva-bartlet/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/syrian-rebel-white-helmets-actually-funded-by-u-s/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/journalist-eva-bartlett-im-back-from-syria-the-media-is-lying-to-you/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/how-the-white-helmets-became-international-heroes-while-pushing-u-s-military-in/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/uk-column-news-on-fake-white-helmets-terrorists-thursday-6-october-2016/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/white-helmets-facilitate-execution-with-al-nusra-highly-graphic-warning/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/syrian-girl-explains-how-the-ceasefire-in-syria-broke-down/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/max-blumenthal-at-alternet-busting-the-fake-syrian-white-helmets-wide-open/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/ngos-plausible-deniability-and-the-new-age-of-information-warfare/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/netflix-and-the-white-helmets-hand-in-hand-with-al-qaeda/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/syrias-white-helmets-war-by-way-of-deception-moderate-executioners/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/understanding-the-truth-about-the-us-war-parties-the-wars-the-media-and-syria/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/aleppo-media-centre-funded-by-french-foreign-office-eu-and-us/
- https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/british-government-and-white-helmets-exposed-on-the-bbc/
J'hon Doe II , January 1, 2017 at 4:04 pmMichael Rohde , January 1, 2017 at 4:58 pmdepth of depraved indifference revealed in the below regarding the US hired interrogator of the captured Saddam.
the segment ought to inform you of critical justice. And Truth.
https://www.democracynow.org/2016/12/28/part_2_cia_interrogator_reveals_saddam
Skip Scott , January 1, 2017 at 5:21 pmSo we have our own Pravda now. Way to go obama. I voted for him twice and this is how he leaves us? Not the ending I envisaged.
Joe Tedesky , January 2, 2017 at 2:34 amI voted for Obama twice as well. I believe in both those cases, he was the lesser of two evils. McCain knows of no problem that sufficient bombing can't fix, and Romney thought the entire American public should become vulture capitalists like himself. Who knows what kind of pressure Obama was under from the deep state. They may well have taken him to the woodshed and told him what he needed to do if he loved living, and loved his wife and daughters.
F. G. Sanford , January 1, 2017 at 5:10 pmMichael, Skip, don't beat yourself so up to bad, it wasn't as though our choices of candidates are ever that good. I blame that on a money driven media system, and a public controlled by a constant narravative void of any critical thinking. This past years election was nothing but immature on zingers and never about having an intelligent debate. So, don't be to hard on yourself, you and I never stood a chance with what we had, or rather didn't have to work with. Our candidate never runs nor do they win. Have a great New Years, I mean that.
Regina Schulte , January 1, 2017 at 5:18 pm"Defeated Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton voiced strong support for the bill: "It's imperative that leaders in both the private sector and the public sector step up to protect our democracy, and innocent lives.""
"Facilitate the use of a wide range of technologies and techniques by sharing expertise among Federal departments and agencies, seeking expertise from external sources, and implementing best practices."
" the U.S. government's new "Global Engagement Center" will seek to ensure that the censorship is even more complete with its goal to "counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation.""
So Hillary supports the bill, but people still think she's a progressive, let alone a Democrat? This should solidify the concept that both parties are beholden to a deeper agenda which has decidedly fascist overtones. When they implement those "best practices", I wonder where book-burning and smashing printing presses will shake out in that "wide range of techniques". I can already imagine where they'll go to get that "external expertise". Probably the same place where they're currently getting "expert training" for our police forces.
These developments contain hallmarks of an empire in decline, clutching at any figment of its imagination to control the narrative and retain its legitimacy. But on the bright side, I'm curious to know how far $160 million could really go to prop up failing entities like the NYT, WaPo, CNN and MSNBC. Wolf Blitzer, Christianne Amanpour, Jill Dogherty, Rachel Maddow, Jake Tapper, Michael Smerconish, Anderson Cooper, Fareed Zakaria, Ben Wedeman, John King, Gloria Borger and Dana Bash are just a few of the faces that can make me instantly change the channel. I used to think Phyllis Bennis, Amy Goodman and Paul Jay were on the level, but they too frequently pull their punches when the truth REALLY needs to be told. Fox news is just totally hopeless. Most of these people are shameless liars, and I don't think I'm the only person who notices. They have "phony" written all over their faces. In the end, free market economics may go a long way to hamper any benefit a mere $160 million transfusion can pump into the dying corpse of mainstream media. And, if they try to shut down Black Agenda Report, I wonder whose side the ACLU will pick? Lots of Ph.D theses and Supreme Court cases are on the horizon from this one! It's still pretty hard to sell a horse with a wooden leg even with skillful marketing.
In the meantime though, the U.S. Government's "Goebbels Engagement Center" is definitely a scary thought. Giddayup, Nellybell, here comes the lynch mob!
Josh Stern , January 1, 2017 at 5:34 pmThe enormity of our government's hypocrisy in all of this defies a sane person's ability to comprehend the current stance we are now placing before the rest of the world. The long list of our spying, regime changes, executions, unwarranted secret operations, destruction of national economies, and the myriad of ongoing other secrecies is a measure of our hubris in thinking that the rest of the world is our oyster. Despite all of our own sins, we dare to accuse other leaders of invading our empirical rights!!!
Gary Hare , January 1, 2017 at 5:45 pmIt would be very interesting to learn more about some of the main mechanisms through which current day US propaganda is scheduled to lead, with nothing bleeding – or even interesting – at mainstream media outlets. Are those decisions coming from the executive editors or from the media owners? I'm not going to hold my breath for the media to report on itself in that capacity, but perhaps some investigative journalists on those staffs will put their anonymously sourced mouths where their sourced mouths usually go and act as informants to allow independent reporters to get the scoop on how this works. Who at NYT, WaPo, CNN, etc. decided to make no true evidence, probably a false story, missing the big picture, no-harm Russian hacking a main story almost every day, giving support fir bloviating idiots in US Congress to declare that Russia must be punished for the things they have previously declared "every nation does".
F. G. Sanford , January 1, 2017 at 6:23 pmIt is quite possible that MSM is sometimes accurate in its reporting, and objective in its analysis. But it has been shown too often to be purveyors of pure propaganda, ignorant of facts that counter such propaganda and cheerleaders for US/NATO aggression, that it has lost all credibility, and so we must question virtually everything it says regarding world affairs. The actions of lawmakers regarding "fake news", and the Obama, Clinton, DMC "we woz robbed" by Putin storyline, is kindergarden stuff, farcical and petulant, and should be treated as such by objective journalists.
Will Trump be any better? I believe there is reason to expect he and his administration to be even worse, but I wait in hope that I am wrong. The world's only "superpower" has become the world's leading laughing stock. Are there any grown-ups in US/NATO politics?Bill Bodden , January 1, 2017 at 6:31 pmI just gotta say something about that "love fest for Trump" comment. Here's how I see it. Trump says stuff, and it may not be true. But he really believes it. Hillary tells lies, but she knows she's lying. She tells them anyway, and insists they're true. I don't have anything but hope. Deep down, I'm relatively optimistic. Hillary's lies could start WWIII. Trump's blustering probably wont. If there's even a shred of a chance he'll listen to reason, he has the coglioni to make some needed changes. Hillary was the puppet. Trump, admittedly, is a bull in a china shop, but with him, I think we still have a future. And, it could be a very bright one if he plays his cards right. It's that simple.
W Hajicek , January 1, 2017 at 6:43 pmThe War Against Alternative Information
In a war there are two sides – the aggressors and their targets.
There are two sides to the targets – those who surrender and collaborate and those who resist to defend their homeland.
Adrian Engler , January 1, 2017 at 7:44 pmSeriously? Defending Mideast dictatorships because things were orderly?
I am dismayed at the prospect of more propaganda coming from the government. However, a more pertinent and enlightening critique of this development would be to inform readers of the history of our government's use of propaganda, and how this new funding, etc., impacts what the government is already doing. That is wholly missing from this article. Instead there is an inexplicable defense of authoritarian regimes, in particular going on for paragraph after paragraph about Syria.
And what was your point? Are you actually just debating recent U.S. focus on regime change, a la Bush? I don't agree with that, but I wouldn't defend Assad or Putin, nor dismiss their use of propaganda.
Sam F , January 1, 2017 at 8:49 pmWho claims that everything was alright in the dictatorships like Iraq and Libya? It is just very likely that there would have been much less violence and suffering if these governments had not been toppled by force. Claiming that there were allegedly good intentions certainly does not justify the suffering and violence that was caused by these interventions.
Likewise, of course, those who arm and finance jihadist militias in Syria can claim that their goal is improving the human rights situation. But is there any credibility of the claim that human rights will improve when the Syrian government is toppled and Islamist extremist groups like the Al Nusra Front (Al Qaeda), Al Zenki and Ashrar Al Sham take power in the parts of Syria that are not already under the control of Daesh? Or should we believe some fairytales like that, after taking power in Syria, Wahhabi militias would step aside and hand over power to some liberal pro-democratic intellectual who had been in exile? The point is that it is certainly not good enough to point out human rights violations of the Assad government to justify policies that would, if they were successful, probably bring to power forces that have even less respect for human rights.
Furthermore, if the fact that the government of a country can be called a dictatorship should be a sufficient reason for overthrowing it (whichever forces come to power afterwards), what should be the criteria? After all, dictatorships are not really rare in many parts of the world, especially the Middle East. Why has the US turned on one secular dictatorship after the other, but never attacked theocratic Sunni regimes like Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states that have an abysmal human rights record? Obviously, the criteria are not based on whether a government is an autocracy or how much it violates human rights, but something else (probably some geostrategic interests).
I think the main points of criticism of the idea that the fact that a government is autocratic gives an outside country like the US the right to topple it are:
1. "Humanitarian" justifications of interventions are worthless when they are likely to lead to more violence and suffering than if the intervention had not been made.
2. Toppling a dictator in a country without a long democratic tradition is not likely to lead to a functioning democracy afterwards. In Western countries, democracy has also taken a long time to develop, it can hardly be brought about by some bombs. In many cases, toppling a dictator either leads to long-term armed fights between competing groups and/or a new dictatorship sooner or later.
3. When we look at autocracies that were toppled and others that were not toppled by the US, it is hardly plausible that the criterion was how autocratic the government was, how much it violated human rights or how low the standard of living was. Since the "humanitarian" arguments are not the real criteria for the decision about which autocracy should be attacked (otherwise, it would be hard to explain why, for instance, Saudi Arabia has not been attacked), it would make more sense to discuss the real reasons for the attacks, whatever they are, than the justifications that are brought forward when the decision to topple a country has been taken.
4. If the idea of the illegality of wars of aggression in international law (except extraordinary circumstances authorized by the UN Security Council) is given up, this could lead to dangerous wars in many regions. Which countries should have the right to attack countries that are determined to be autocracies by the attacker? Would the US tolerate it if India or Russia decided to topple pro-Western autocracies that violate himan rights (e.g. Saudi Arabia)?
Blahblahblah , January 1, 2017 at 9:48 pmYes, the same US propaganda reasoning applied to the US oligarchy, which is a set of autocrats, would require that the US use subversion and military force to remove the Republicans, Democrats, warmongers, AIPAC, imperialist financiers etc..
Starting with drone attacks on mass media, party operatives, bank HQ etc. Then some "shock and awe" and an invasion to subdue its military forces, greeted by the people of the US dancing in the streets. Then denial of employment to all who worked for the US regime, followed by founding a true democracy where money does not buy mass media or elections.
Something tells me that the dark state will not reach that conclusion. So I guess that democracy was never the objective of regime change by the US.
Bill Bodden , January 1, 2017 at 10:56 pmJudging by your name, you have Czech origin. Why are you supporting democracy all over the world from the U.S.? Shouldn' t you be saving the Czech Reublic from bad Zeman? There's no communism there anymore
Oleg , January 1, 2017 at 8:23 pmOne of the problems with regime change whether practices by an outside agency such as the United States and Iraq, Libya, etc. or through an internal revolution is the risk of the cure being worse than the disease.
Blahblahblah , January 1, 2017 at 9:46 pmIt is funny and indeed troubling that the US is busy copycatting the practices of the recent foe that went down exactly because these practices were grossly inefficient. I of course mean the Cold War 1.0 and the former Soviet Union. I remember listening to Voice of America in my youth in search for truth. I never imagined that only a few years later during my lifetime Americans will be looking for truth in Russian news outlets and the US will create "the Global Engagement Center – to protect the American people from "foreign propaganda and disinformation." In fact, resorting to such practices is a huge sign of weakness and decline. It is a pity really that the US are getting that weak that fast. I am not really pro-American but I still remember things that America used to champion around the world (yes, the Freedom of Speech too!), and we all still need these things as much as ever. Too bad they are under threat in the US themselves now. Hopefully Trump will indeed be able to make America great again and stop all this nonsense.
Joe Tedesky , January 1, 2017 at 10:33 pmWhat is most sad is that many American rally for this "the Global Engagement Center". See Bill Cash here.
I see it the same way you do, sinc eI was also born in the USSR.Bill Bodden , January 1, 2017 at 11:05 pmOleg read this link I'm providing, and see if you feel as does the Russian who wrote this magnificent article .
John , January 1, 2017 at 8:36 pmAdrian Engler , January 1, 2017 at 8:46 pmthese are just semi clever diversions leading the average away from the Prime Agenda ..Lol ..ask Merkel she knows
Oleg , January 1, 2017 at 9:24 pmWhat I find scary is how much the dominance of the propaganda discourse has increased. Before the Iraq war, there was widespread dissent, and in most of Europe, support for the war was a minority position. But in the case of Libya and, even more Syria, dissent is tolerated less and almost all media strictly follow the official propaganda line. I find this even more striking because, after all, this is a position that should be rather hard to sell to the public. One should think that it should not be so easy to spread the idea that mostly jihadist militias that were (and mostly still are) allied with Al Qaeda are the good guys that should be supported with money and arms. That even such a difficult position could reach such a dominant position in the Western media discourse shows how effective the propaganda is. I am beginning to think that if the line that Sweden is the biggest threat to world peace was spread, people would sign petitions on change.org for finally occupying Sweden, and there would be talking points about the inaction of the US president because Sweden still has not been occupied by US troops although everyone recognizes that it is an enormous threat to humanity. I am probably exaggerating a bit, but if the relevant interest groups are successful in making many people believe that anyone who does not support jihadist allies of Al Qaeda who behead "traitors" and bombing anti-air defences all over the country is heartless towards Syrians, there are probably many other things that seem absurd and extreme now that could be promoted in a way that soon anyone who does not agree with it is depicted as a bad person.
I find the role of Snopes particularly worrying. Of course, I cannot judge whether everything Eva Bartlett says is true. But her reports are detailed and connected to evidence, while the Snopes texts that dismiss her are written in a sloppy and superficial way. This would not be a problem if Snopes was just one more website where a point of view is expressed (accidentally or not so accidentally one that is very close to the position of the US government). But since it is planned that Snopes should be one of the arbiters with a higher authority that should decide what is true and what is not, this is worrysome. It is not too hard to predict that Snopes would hardly ever flag articles from the Washington Post or the New York Times that are close to the US government as "disputed" even if they are speculative and based on flimsy evidence, but other texts contradicting them will probably regularly be flagged as "disputed". The only question is whether this will be effective or if people will just ignore the "disputed" flags if they are biased in a way that is too obvious (which also means that the flags would be ineffective against real fake news) and, if Facebook starts hiding such "disputed" stories, just move over to other networks.
Stefan , January 1, 2017 at 8:54 pmRegarding Sweden and propaganda: Wag the Dog. 1997 movie. All said then. Sadly, still more true than ever.
Kent , January 2, 2017 at 11:33 amDemocracy Later is more dangerous than the other big propaganda organs.
While the latter ones require very little scrutiny by the observant to recognize as the warmongers that they are
the former (democracy now[sic] ) tries to lure the the careful reader and critic into its well crafted trap of deception – to gather your trust where it matters the least, and couches it's warmongering where it matters the most, most recently in regards to Syria.
Eddie , January 2, 2017 at 2:19 pmStefan,
'Democracy Later' I like that.
Look at DN's funding structure it's not hard to figure out.
http://www.newsofinterest.tv/_sam_noitv/politics/media_issues/bias/left_gatekeepers_smaller.jpg
David F., N.A. , January 1, 2017 at 10:49 pmKent – The link to a supposed 'flow chart' looks suspicious, since there's no links/attributions to sources, and the 'newsofinteterest' website (apparently inactive for ~5 yrs?) didn't appear to be particularly credible in my experience (ie; links to 911 truthers, Laetrile cancer proponents, etc). And to regard Noam Chomsky's political views as somehow significantly influenced by corporate money/government coercion (as the diagram does at the bottom) is laughable - the guy has been a strong, vocal, prolific critic of US imperialism, condemning it since the c1960.
Decades ago he stopped paying a portion of his taxes as a protest against military spending, and subsequently has had his wages garnished by the government. While I don't necessarily agree with all of Chomsky's prescriptions of what to do (e.g.; his judgement that it was best to vote for HC), his descriptions of what HAS happened have been accurate, nuanced, and documented.
Bill Bodden , January 1, 2017 at 11:12 pmThis says it all:
But the U.S. government's near total control of the message doesn't appear to be enough. Apparently even a few voices of dissent are a few voices too many.
The illusions of "freedom" hates us for our First Amendment. Isn't this the true premise behind our
bought-and-paid-for government'smultinational oligarchs' enactment of all these new Patriot Acts (NDAAs and other laws)?For over a year and a half prior to the election several liberal websites started mimicking the msm with their Trump bashing. To me, all these bashings were backhanded endorsements for Clinton. I swear, most, if not all, of the liberal topics, talking points and phrases were exactly identical to the msm's. As apparent as it was this election, this showed that the bluedogs in-charge had been influencing the liberals for quite some time. This is probably why the duopoly issue wasn't strongly addressed back when Nader spoiled Gore's chances in 2000 (hold on, hold on, I have a legitimate excuse: a foundation paid me to say that).
Elizabeth Hanson , January 2, 2017 at 12:14 amObama did promise hope and change, but it is highly unlikely anyone outside the neocon and proto-fascist cabals hoped for this change setting up a Ministry of Truth. What a legacy!!!
Joe Tedesky , January 2, 2017 at 2:16 amWhat a great essay. Thank you to the writer. So many links to explore. I agree wholeheartedly in the analysis. I wrote a very simple essay for my own website which comes to the same conclusions. I include a list of headlines from main stream media regarding the "Russian hacking" and then the headlines from independent media. It was quite stark. Someone is lying.
https://turningpointnews.org/exposing-political-corruption/why-we-need-independent-media
Keep up the great work Consortium news!
Brian , January 2, 2017 at 9:37 amI agree Elizabeth we do need Independent Media. I wish our news was more International Independent, and I think that maybe coming. I see people posting comments on this site from International Countries, so it's already happening. I read some foreign sites myself, but I hope that if allowed to continue that this average person may be able to interact with other peoples of the world, and make some sense of all of this. Maybe I'm a dreamer, but a person can dream can't they?
This 2017 New Years Americans are permitted to blame Vladimir Putin for they're getting obnoxiously drunk while bringing in the New Year with a couple a bottles of Stolichnaya .this maybe void in Vermont, considering.
This Russian hacking scare is scaring some Americans for real, and that ain't good, because with the hysteria comes the loss of more freedoms. Each episode of terror or security related troubled matters comes America's way, means the end of a Right. Our grandchildren of this new century will assume there always was a Homeland Security, because it's always been there as long as they can remember. The most pathetic part of all of this is that it all began to be set in motion over Hillary's loss. I'll end it here, but your essay was spot on and intelligent on top of that.
jo6pac , January 2, 2017 at 11:51 am"Who controls the issuance of money controls the government!" Nathan Meyer Rothschild
June 13, 2016 Which Corporations Control The World?
A surprisingly small number of corporations control massive global market shares. How many of the brands below do you use?
Zachary Smith , January 2, 2017 at 1:09 pmThen there's this.
http://variety.com/2016/film/news/george-clooney-white-helmets-rescuers-syria-1201945608/
Brian , January 2, 2017 at 1:31 pmI just ran into a little essay which suggests to me that The War Against Alternative Information is actually one of many campaigns in a much larger conflict. Regarding the link, the author is somebody I've never heard of, and I hope and pray he doesn't turn out to be a neo-nazi or some similar kind of nut.
Trump sensing Obama's resort to violent retaliation against Russia, and the likelihood he would turn the gun to 'Putin's accomplice', the President-elect decided to take precautionary measures, he replaced Obama's secret service by his private security guards.
... ... ...
There is little doubt that the murder of the Russian Ambassador will be the beginning of a cycle of violent assassinations. It is certain that Putin and Trump will take the appropriate defensive measures.I don't follow Roman Catholic affairs, but last I heard the current Pope hadn't moved into the Vatican. It's my opinion that's the only reason the man is still alive. Still an opinion, but his hyper-caution is something other people ought to imitate.
http://www ..unz.com/jpetras/portrait-of-an-assassin-obamas-revenge/
Stephen , January 2, 2017 at 2:57 pmJan 1, 2017 2017: TRUTH RISING - Melissa & Aaron Dykes
Aaron and Melissa Dykes are truth researchers, truth journalists and truth filmmakers. Their excellent website Truthstreammedia com and You Tube channel by the same name are two must visit destination for anyone who wants to be informed about the REAL issues we face. Truthstreammedia is the antithesis to the "fake news" you'll get from CNN and mainstream media outlets.
I believe the war criminals past and present are terrified that the sleeping masses might finally wake up. Therefore, they are attempting to shut down alternative voices, and continuing their propaganda via their corporate hand maidens.
"There is overwhelming evidence that wars on a number of countries were planned. Yet, this evidence is censored and covered up by many of the so-called "searchers for truth," in the "investigative media." The TV "news" parrots propaganda daily and the "newspapers" do likewise "
[read more at link below]
http://graysinfo.blogspot.ca/2016/12/the-propaganda-peddlers-war-criminals.html
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2016 | www.unz.com
Some perspective: For most of human history, power was rooted in possession of land. After the Industrial Revolution , power lay in controlling in the means of production. But today, the main source of power is control of information.Having the power to control information (what Steve Sailer calls The Megaphone ) gives you the ability to determine what issues will be discussed, what viewpoints are considered legitimate, and who is allowed to participate in polite society. It ultimately allows you to push an entire code of morality on others. And morality is, ultimately, a weapon more terrible than can be found in any arsenal [ Weaponized Morality , by Gregory Hood, Radix, October 12, 2016].
The 2016 election was ultimately a battle between the commanding heights of media (newspapers, networks, and web portals) and what we could call the guerillas of media (/pol, forums, hackers, right wing trolls , and independent media outlets like us). The latter lacked power on their own, but they united behind Donald Trump, a man whose brand was so well-established that the Establishment couldn't ignore him. It was Fourth Generation Warfare –this time over information.
And just as guerillas have been frustrating established armies all around the world on real-world battlefields, so did the online commandos frustrate and eventually overcome the seemingly invincible Fourth Estate.
But this victory wasn't inevitable. From day one, the MSM tried to destroy Donald Trump , including his business empire, because of his stated views on immigration.
Since that failed, they have started turning on his supporters with three tactics.
First , a blatant attempt to pathologize dissent–especially the Alt Right.
Soon after the election, the Leftist Think Progress blog announced that the Alt Right should only be called "white nationalist" or "white supremacist". [ Think Progress will no longer describe racists as "alt-right" , November 22, 2016] The AP dutifully echoed this pronouncement days later, warning journalists not to use the term and instead to stick to pejoratives. [ AP issues guidelines for using the term 'alt-right,' by Brent Griffiths, Politico, November 28, 2016]
This is a literally Orwellian attempt to eliminate Crimethink through linguistic control . Of course, no such guidelines will apply to non-white Identitarian groups such as the National Council of La Raza, which will continue to be called an "advocacy" or "progressive grass-roots immigration-reform organization" [ NCLR head: Obama 'deporter-in-chief, ' by Reid Epstein, Politico, March 4, 2016].
Secondly , a meme has been invented about so-called "Fake News," which will be used to shut down dissident media outlets.
Needless to say, most the rationale for this is not just fake, but comically, obviously, wrong. Thus the Washington Post reported that VDARE.com (and many other sites) was a "Russian propaganda effort" based on no evidence at all. We ask: where is our vodka?
Rolling Stone, which pushed one of the most disgusting hoaxes in modern journalism at the University of Virginia, is having meetings with President Obama to discuss "fake news." The Guardian fell for what appears to be a hoax decrying "online hate" precisely because it is impossible to tell the difference today between the latest virtue signaling craze and satire.
But algorithms are already being introduced to distinguish between "verified" and "non-verified" news sources. It can be assumed only Leftist sites will receive verification on social media. [ Fake news on Facebook is a real problem. These college students came up with a fix in 36 hours , By Colby Itkowitz, Washington Post, November 18, 2016]
There is "fake news" and it is annoying, to be sure. There were plenty of cringey stories about non-existent celebrity endorsements of Trump i n the last cycle. But most "verified" or "mainstream" sources today don't actually report but simply "point and sputter" or actually conceal real news. For example, even after the journalists got what they wanted out of the latest NPI conference , the MSM still couldn't restrain themselves from simply making things out of whole cloth .
Actual attacks on Trump supporters are not covered, while unsourced, unverified claims of a wave of "hate crimes," which mostly consists of handwritten notes most likely written by the supposed "victims" or incidents so trivial normal people wouldn't even notice , dominate the headlines.
This is a far more insidious form of "fake news" than anything "the Russians" are promoting. And what about the lie of " hands up, don't shoot ?"
Another example: supposedly mainstream outlets are comfortable leveling wild charges Steve Bannon is somehow a "white nationalist." Bannon on the evidence is actually a civic nationalist who has specifically denounced racism and, if anything, is showing troubling signs of moving towards the "DemsRRealRacist"- style talking points which led Conservatism Inc. to disaster. There are absolutely no statements by Bannon actually calling for, say, a white ethnostate.
In contrast, Rep. Keith Ellison, candidate to head the DNC, actually has c alled for a black ethnostate. [ Keith Ellison once proposed making a separate country for blacks , by Justin Caruso, Daily Caller, November 26, 2016]. However, this has not prevented him from being "normalized" and celebrated by the "mainstream" media.
The logical conclusion of all of this:
Thirdly , the Trump victory is clearly leading to increased attempts at outright repression.
Or, as VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow told the NPI conference: "What we are going to see in the next few years is an intensified Reign Of Terror."
For example, Buzzfeed's latest masterpiece of journalism: the shocking revelation that reality stars Chip and Joanna Gaines attend a church that disagrees with homosexual marriage [ Chip and Joanna Gaines' Church Is Firmly Against Same-Sex Marriage , by Kate Aurthur, Buzzfeed, November 29, 2016]. You know–like every Christian church for about 2000 years. The obvious agenda: to get the show canceled or the Gaines to disavow their own pastor.
This is the goal of most "journalism" today–to get someone fired or to get someone to disavow someone. The Southern Poverty Law Center ( $PLC to VDARE.com) makes a lucrative income from policing speech . ( Right, a graph of their endowment fund.)And journalists today are no different than the $PLC. They do not report, they do not provide information, and rather than ensuring freedom they are the willing tools of repression.
And this repression only goes one way.
If you wouldn't invite some communist demonstrator into your meeting, why would you invite an MSM journalist? They have the same beliefs, the same motivations, and increasingly, they rely on the same tactics. Aside from the occasional throwing of feces (as Richard Spencer learned at NPI), the preferred tactic of "Antifa" consists of pearl-clutching blog posts.
The repression is accelerating. Reddit is now moving to censor pro-Trump content on its site [ Breaking: Unethical @reddit CEO vows to crack down on "toxic users" as right wing subreddit protests censorship , by Charles Johnson, Got News, November 30, 2016]. Having been purged from Twitter, many free speech supporters are moving to GAB, so The New York Times is trying to get that shut down too [ The Far Right Has a New Digital Safe Space , by Amanda Hess, November 30, 2016]. And Kellogg pulled its ads from Breitbart, after Trump's election, because it said it did not "align with its values as a company". [ Breitbart at 'war' with Kellogg's over advertising snub , BBC, December 1, 2016].
Since the election, journalists have been paying tribute to their own courage, promising to hold Trump accountable. But there is no greater enemy to free speech than reporters. Shutting down the networks and shuttering the newspapers would be a boon to independence of thought, not an obstacle.
For his own sake, to defend his own Administration, Trump has to delegitimize the MSM, just as he did during the campaign. He should continue to use his Twitter account and speak straight to the people. He should not hold press conferences with national MSM and speak only to local reporters before holding rallies. If Twitter bans him, as Leftists are urging, he should nationalize it as a utility and make it a free speech zone.[ Twitter has become a utility , by Alan Kohler, The Australian, October 17, 2016]
And Trump's supporters need to act the same way. Stop giving reporters access. Stop pretending you can play the MSM for your own benefit. Stop acting like these people are anything other than hostile political activists whose only interest in life is to make yours worse.
Stop giving them what they want.
Your career, family, and entire life may depend on it. And so does the life of the nation.
James Kirkpatrick [ Email him] is a Beltway veteran and a refugee from Conservatism Inc.
|
|
|
Dec 28, 2016 | www.unz.com
Anon December 12, 2016 at 9:33 pm GMT
This post by Leftie on facebook offers glimpse into chasm on the other side.
It's Progs vs Globs. ProGlob is coming apart.
"The lockstep zombies for the sleaze and global mayhem of the Clinton Machine and Dem Party gangsters are on the march. These liberals for US Empire are showing their reverence and fanboy love for the CIA and FBI and McCarthyism.
They either cheered or shrugged when the Clinton thugs stole the primary from Bernie (with his obsequious assent) or snored when Obama/Clinton staged coups and installed fascists in Honduras and Ukraine but oh how they bellow and shake their fists at the *alleged* hacking by Russia that amounts to providing info on just how sleazy the Democratic Party is.
The "fake news" (it's called free speech you fucking assholes) that the Rooskies pumped into our helpless and confused brains is a threat to the Republic but "capitalism means freedom and democracy", WMD's, yellow cake, mobile weapons labs, babies torn from incubators, the international monolithic communist conspiracy, Gaddafi supplying viagra to his troops, the headchoppers Obama gives arms and sends into Syria to destroy yet another nation are "moderates", KONY 2012, the filthy Hun is coming to kill us all in 1917, "Duck and cover!!" Gulf of Tonkin, Ho Chi Min's soldiers are going to spring from their canoes on the beaches of Malibu to rape your wife and make you wear pajamas, "superpredators" and on and on etc etc etc
THAT form of fake news is not only acceptable it is to be embraced and taught to our fucking children. If the NYT or WaPo tells us all bad things come from Putin these shock troops for the Democratic Party click their heels and salute.
The risk of WWIII is not enough to deter these fucking maniacs from doing all they can to keep their team in power. Meanwhile their leaders want to "work with" Trump and "give him a chance." Who are the fascists in this shit show?? Such a clusterfuck of incoherence.
If it's true the "Russians" (who be that by the way?) did what the professional liars in the intelligence agencies say they did it doesn't even amount to a parking violation compared to the billions and billions of dollars spent by the US over the last 70 years rigging and crushing democracy (literally with murder) across the globe.
And the whole obscene carnival engulfing the nation is of course to be blamed on the racist knuckle-dragging "basket of deplorables.""
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com
A little simple logic demolishes the CIA's claims. The CIA claim they "know the individuals" involved. Yet under Obama the USA has been absolutely ruthless in its persecution of whistleblowers, and its pursuit of foreign hackers through extradition. We are supposed to believe that in the most vital instance imaginable, an attempt by a foreign power to destabilise a US election, even though the CIA knows who the individuals are, nobody is going to be arrested or extradited, or (if in Russia) made subject to yet more banking and other restrictions against Russian individuals? Plainly it stinks.
The anonymous source claims of "We know who it was, it was the Russians" are beneath contempt.
Urban Redneck -> Chris Dakota, Dec 11, 2016 6:07 PMThe CIA has lots of evidence (both collected and manufactured) which is then misconstrued through politiczed analysis and dissemination to serve their own and their primary customer's personal interests.manofthenorth -> Urban Redneck, Dec 11, 2016 6:15 PMBack during the Reagan administration, someone casually told me "We spend more on disinformaion than we do on information" - I doubt things have changed that much since then.
Also during the Reagan years;Overdrawn -> Laddie, Dec 11, 2016 8:15 PMWilliam Casey (CIA Director), "We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."?
It wasn't a hack, it was a leak. It says so in the article.Badsamm -> bigdumbnugly, Dec 11, 2016 7:30 PMon 19th October CNN said the 2016 Election couldn't be hacked.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=cnn+2016+presidential+election+cannot+be+hacke...
Correct me if Im wrong; but i thought the law prohibits the CIA from operations and investigations on home soil. That is the job for the FBI. Why is the CIA commenting on computer systems that were hacked in the US of A? There are at least a dozen other agencies (just as worthless) that this would fall under their jurisdiction._mike123_ -> bigdumbnugly, Dec 12, 2016 12:02 AMpost turtle saver -> bigdumbnugly, Dec 12, 2016 12:31 AMIf the Russians had anything to do with the hacked emails, which are only accusations, they did the American people a great service by exposing the evil of the DNC, HRottenC and their MSM minions, none of whom could care less about their ethics violations. They are only upset because they were caught. Their supporters have been had by their own kind and their leaders are now redirecting their exposure onto the Russians and Trump to keep their sheep misdirected from the real problems, HRC and Obama.
we all know what happened to the boy who cried "wolf" when none were there... by the time there actually _were_ wolves, no one believed him...nmewn -> Billy the Poet, Dec 11, 2016 7:24 PMthe CIA has lost the plot and cried "wolf" too many times for anyone to believe them anymore... if an organization has lost trust of national security affairs it should be DISBANDED
Well it is a wide open "bear trap"...lol...(to use a metaphor) sitting there out in the open un-camouflaged for everyone with two brain cells left in their heads to see...and at some point someone is going to ask...chindit13, Dec 11, 2016 6:54 PM...so why did Debbie Wassername-Schultz resign if the hacks were untrue about her non-neutrality toward Bernie Marx in favor of Hillary Crony? Is this not a usurpation of the peoples will and an affront to "democracy" everywhere?
How is it that a "charity" is only a "charity" as long as the people running this "charity" remain in power? Everyone suddenly becomes "less charitable" because she lost? Why is that? Can't they say cronyism and be done with it?
Yezzz, let the progressive tears flow, they taste wonderful ;-)
The Brit Ambassador has the wrong target, because he was caught by Fake News.imprehensibli , Dec 11, 2016 7:15 PMThe entire story is based on a leak from Senate Staff on SSCI alleging what they were told in a briefing by CIMC. What SSCI was told is that there is no evidence of who was the hacker. Because Russia is one of many possibilities, somebody on SSCI who leaked to WaPo concluded for himself that the hacker was Russia. That is not what they were told. The vitriol should be directed toward WaPo and their Senate SSCI source.
As the Obama Administration falls apart, expect the various players to begin to look out for themselves. Do not be surprised if in the next few days, Brennan or someone else at the agency sets the record straight and throws some 'shade' on WaPo and Obama.
Obama is hanging everyone out to dry in the futile attempt to save his own 'legacy'. Whoever might have been a loyal soldier and who fell on his sword if requested to do so is not going to do it anymore. Obama is a child who cannot accept that he has been an abject failure, so he is getting desperate to create some false historical record.
Canadian Journalist Eva Bartlett DESTROYS MSM FAKE NEWS ON SYRIA (please watch - important): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebE3GJfGhfAStemmer -> imprehensibli, Dec 11, 2016 10:09 PMI remember Zerohedge reporting on a meeting last year with US Senator McCain and Arab terrorists that included photos . These terrorists were on the US most wanted list. Too bad that Canadian reporter did not mention that.SgtShaftoe, Dec 11, 2016 7:23 PMI'd say this entire campaign is far too clunky and clumsy to be executed by the CIA The CIA has done some incredibly evil shit in the past so I wouldn't put something like this past them, however they are far more professional generally than this from my limited exposure and what I've researched about activities of the agency.lakecity55, Dec 11, 2016 8:30 PMThe "CIA" has outlived its usefulness. It needs to be broken up and disbanded. Truman signed its charter. The original intent was to assemble and study Information, period. Truman later remarked he would never have done so had he known it would go amok. Instead, it became a weapon of the Deep State. It is now a direct threat to the American Republic.kuwa mzuri, Dec 11, 2016 8:36 PMOur spy and security apparatus didn't defeat the Soviet Union's "evil empire" so much as it emulated it, using Orwell and Huxley as roadmaps, rather than warnings.Fathead Slim -> kuwa mzuri, Dec 11, 2016 11:12 PMTrue, the fall of the Soviet Union came as a complete surprise to US Intelligence agencies.fearnot, Dec 11, 2016 10:06 PMMaybe it wasn't the Russians. Who else could it possibly be? Not the CIA! Not in good ol USA. Maybe it was Aliens! After all the UK Mail thought as much with Kennedy. Or maybe Bush and his clan are the Aliens. All I can say is Trump better never let the CIA instead of Secret Service guard him and his motorcade!joego1, Dec 11, 2016 10:24 PMThe CIA Kennedy assassination theory is a prominent John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theory. The CIA's potential involvement was frequently mentioned during the 1960s and 1970s when the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was involved in plots to assassinate foreign leaders, particularly Fidel Castro.[1][2] According to author James Douglass, Kennedy was assassinated because he was turning away from the Cold War and seeking a negotiated peace with the Soviet Union.[3][4] Accusations and confessions of and by alleged conspirators, as well as official government reports citing the CIA as uncooperative in investigations, have at times renewed interest in these conspiracy theories.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theory
The DNC leaks came from Seth Rich who was Arkansided; https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/4v3bpg/dnc_leaker_silenced_...Faeriedust, Dec 11, 2016 10:34 PMOther leaks came from patriot U.S. intell; https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=steve+pieczenik+leaks+cam+f...
Case closed; Fire the CIA
Ah, yes. The CIA The folks who claimed that Sony was hacked by North Korea, when a private security firm was able to directly finger the disgruntled ex-employees responsible.tarabel, Dec 11, 2016 10:37 PMLet's break this down some more. The CIA is run by neocons, who are upset that their stooge Hillary lost the election and Trump, the elected President-to-be, is making a direct pivot towards accomodation with their arch-enemy Vladimir Putin.
Meanwhile, the FBI is stacked with political employees and their career hirees installed under GW Bush, and leans strongly against the Democrats, to the point of deliberately leaking damaging evidence against the Democratic candidate the week before the election . . . granted that there wouldn't have been any information to leak, if Hillary had followed the laws and policies of her federal position.
Meanwhile, the receivers of the DNC leaks know who they got the information from, and swear publicly that that also was an inside leak. But if it were an inside leak, then it couldn't call the results of the election into question. Only interference by a Foreign Power can do that.
But to the extent that the Russians DID lobby against Hillary, they did so completely openly. If you read an article in Russia Today in favor of Trump or against Hillary, you can hardly claim to be deceived.
The Russians are allowed to have an opinion; we can't stop that. What they aren't allowed to do is to vote, or to contribute money to the candidates' campaigns (here we will lightly skip over the millions donated to Hillary's campaign by Israeli dual citizens, the Saudis, the Australians, Nigeria, VietNam, India, Haiti . . .).
What did you expect them to say? "Uh, yes, Mr. President, it was us, actually." Of course they are going to point the finger elsewhere. Especially to someplace that cannot be pressured. You would too, if placed in the same position. Same for the Nameless One. Does she want to admit that her own bureaucracy prefers that she not sit on the throne, or does she like the idea of blaming a sinister foreign entity for her loss?gregga777, Dec 11, 2016 10:49 PMAnd even if Russia did it, it's not like they made anything up. Come on, people. Realpolitik.
The CIA (Central Insanity Agency) IS the United States government. It controls all of the other so-called independent intelligence agencies. Would the CIA lie to overturn the 2016 Presidential elections? Well, the CIA are the very same people who: <Crassius, Dec 11, 2016 11:02 PM
- for decades have had hundreds of nationally and internationally prominent so-called journalists on the CIA payroll and controlled the stories reported by Western Mainstream Conporate News Media;
- assassinated President John F. Kennedy because they were furious about the failure of their insane Bay of Pigs fiasco, the peaceful resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis, etc., etc., etc.;
- faked the Gulf of Tonkin intelligence to get the United States Congress to pass the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution giving the bloodthirsty Generals and Admirals and President Lyndon B. Johnson the false flag incident to drastically escalate the Vietnam War–closely located to the Golden Triangle's highly coveted rich heroin supplies–and all of the attendant decades of lying about that war;
- destabilized Afghanistan to encourage invasion by the Soviet Union;
- created, supported and armed the Sunni Mujahideen, which morphed into Al Qaeda following the Gulf War, to fight against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan;
- encouraged President Jimmy Carter to admit the Shah of Iran to create the pretext for decades of enmity between Iran and the United States and destroy Jimmy Carter's Presidency;
- encouraged Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait to give President George H. W. Bush the pretext to declare war on Iraq;
- were behind the 9/11/2001 false flag attacks on the World Trade Center towers, and their destruction with controlled explosives demolitions charges, and the Pentagon and then lied that it was all an Al Qaeda plot;
- lied about Al Qaeda's role in 9/11/2001 to justify the invasion of Afghanistan with its highly coveted, rich poppy fields for heroin production;
- lied about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify President George W. Bush's war of aggression against Iraq;
- created, finances, arms and supports ISIS;
- plans and carries out false flag operations to influence public opinion;
- lie about whatever whenever it suits their agenda;
- controls the 'narratives' in the Feral gangster government's organs of state propaganda (mainstream & social media and entertainment oligopoly);
And far, far more. But, I got tired of typing and I don't want to bore the readers. The point being that they are ALL professional liars and the love of truth and the American Republic is not in them.
Yes, of course the CIA would lie to overturn the 2016 Presidential elections.
If the Russians did it, is Obama twisting the knife in the Clinton's back? The email leaks were a false flag attack against the Clintons perpetrated by Obama to remove them from the power matrix, and install himself as head of the Democrat party, free from their influence, and free to move that party in the direction he wants as it's defacto leader.holdbuysell, Dec 11, 2016 11:02 PMBlaming the leaks on the Russians gains obfuscation of Obama's chief foreign policy failure as President.... drawing a red line, then failing to act when it was crossed, which signaled to the world that he was an impudent little bitch that could be ignored in a world that understands only one thiing..... strength.
obelix, Dec 12, 2016 3:52 AMJohn Swinton, Chief editorial writer of the New York Times from 1860 to 1870: "There is no such thing as a free press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who would dare to write his honest opinions. The business of the journalist is to destroy truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of Mammon, and to sell himself, his country, and his race, for his daily bread. We are tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are jumping jacks; they pull the strings, we dance; our talents, our possibilities, and our lives are the property of these men. We are intellectual prostitutes."
Clinton's is a common defense of the CIA: namely, the American people should stop criticizing the CIA because they don't know what it really does. This, of course, is the heart of the problem in the first place. An agency that is above criticism is also above moral behavior and reform. Its secrecy and lack of accountability allows its corruption to grow unchecked.obelix, Dec 12, 2016 3:54 AMFurthermore, Clinton's statement is simply untrue. The history of the agency is growing painfully clear, especially with the declassification of historical CIA documents. We may not know the details of specific operations, but we do know, quite well, the general behavior of the CIA These facts began emerging nearly two decades ago at an ever-quickening pace. Today we have a remarkably accurate and consistent picture, repeated in country after country, and verified from countless different directions.
The CIA's response to this growing knowledge and criticism follows a typical historical pattern.(Indeed, there are remarkable parallels to the Medieval Church's fight against the Scientific Revolution.) The first journalists and writers to reveal the CIA's criminal behavior were harassed and censored if they were American writers, and tortured and murdered if they were foreigners.
However, over the last two decades the tide of evidence has become overwhelming, and the CIA has found that it does not have enough fingers to plug every hole in the dike. This is especially true in the age of the Internet, where information flows freely among millions of people. Since censorship is impossible, the Agency must now defend itself with apologetics. Clinton's "Americans will never know" defense is a prime example.
Another common apologetic is that "the world is filled with unsavory characters, and we must deal with them if we are to protect American interests at all." There are two things wrong with this. First, it ignores the fact that the CIA has regularly spurned alliances with defenders of democracy, free speech and human rights, preferring the company of military dictators and tyrants.smacker, Dec 12, 2016 4:27 AMThe CIA had moral options available to them, but did not take them.
Second, this argument begs several questions. The first is: " Which American interests?" The CIA has courted right-wing dictators because they allow wealthy Americans to exploit the country's cheap labor and resources. But poor and middle-class Americans pay the price whenever they fight the wars that stem from CIA actions, from Vietnam to the Gulf War to Panama.
The other begged question is: "Why should American interests come at the expense of other peoples' human rights?" The CIA should be abolished, its leadership dismissed and its relevant members tried for crimes against humanity.
Our intelligence community should be rebuilt from the ground up, with the goal of collecting and analyzing information. As for covert action, there are two moral options.
The first one is to eliminate covert action completely. But this gives jitters to people worried about the Adolf Hitlers of the world. So a second option is that we can place covert action under extensive and true democratic oversight. For example, a bipartisan Congressional Committee of 40 members could review and veto all aspects of CIA operations upon a majority or super-majority vote.
Which of these two options is best may be the subject of debate, but one thing is clear: like dictatorship, like monarchy, unaccountable covert operations should die like the dinosaurs they are.
Craig Murray: "[...] the mad CIA allegations against Russia and now claiming – incredibly – that the CIA believe the FBI is deliberately blocking the information on Russian collusion. " I wasn't aware of this CIA allegation against the FBI, it's quite astonishing.smacker, Dec 12, 2016 4:39 AMThe FBI and CIA are both utterly corrupt, as is every other faction of the Obola Administration including the Marxist slimeball himself at the very top, but what we see here are factions throwing allegations against each other.
Craig Murray: "[...] this rubbish has been the lead today in the Washington Post in the US and the Guardian here, and was the lead item on the BBC main news. " No one should be surprised that The Guardian is up to its neck in publishing ... garbage written by Jonathen Freedland. After all it's been "the progressive Left's" house newspaper for years and is known as " The Grauniad " by dissenters.The Fing News, Dec 12, 2016 4:50 AMWhat is truly bad is that the BBC are coming out of the closet and once again revealing their own Left-wing Establishment bias by running fake news stories on its TV news channel.
This is the same CIA that talked about WMD's in Iraq! They will continue being the good Clinton stooges they are. More lies from CIA!
|
|
|
Dec 11, 2016 | , discussion.theguardian.com
Mauryan , 9 Dec 2016 18:29Interesting - Obama never ordered an independent probe into 9/11 or invasion of Iraq or on the Wall Street Collapse. Somehow Russian hacking seems to be more draconian than all the above.Karahashianders -> Mauryan , 9 Dec 2016 18:48And Russians somehow got into the brains of the disgruntled white population, and controlled Trump's brain so that he would be voted to power. Then they still control Trump's brain so much that he is wanting to let NATO countries pay for their security, make Japan, South Korea and everyone else where US maintains its bases to pay for themselves.
And then suddenly there is a news of a thousand Russian athletes doing well in 2012 London Olympics due to enhanced drugs. Until now, no one knew about this or heard about it.
It is not that I am supporting Russia all of a sudden. It is just that I am not supporting the attempt to create enemies out of thin air and make them monstrous as needed, while covering even more sinister schemes that need public attention.
Obama is part of the same system too that runs everything from behind the curtains. He still is a good man. But he has only some much room to function within and survive.
A good man is not capable of bombing 7 countries in 8 years' time. People are too naive to believe that someone could look as nice and sound as nice as Obama and push to advance the agenda of some of the most evil and power-hungry megalomaniacs on the planet.Woodenarrow123 , 9 Dec 2016 18:28It was Wikileaks that did it.200gnomes -> Woodenarrow123 , 9 Dec 2016 18:39I don't know if the Russians provided Wikileaks with the actual emails or not but Wikileaks like so many news organisations before them released info obtained illegally that they thought the public had a right to know.
Now Assange has effectively been imprisoned in an Embassy in London for around 5 years on bogus charges and his reputation was damaged by the same charges - Obviously Obama does not want to give any credit to Assange and he knows he has played a part in this outrageous persecution.
This would also a could time to remind fellow commentators here about the Nuland - Pyatt conversation that was recorded by Russia and released. This conversation showed the the involvement of two high ranking US Politicians in the armed coup in Ukraine where an elected albeit corrupt leader was forced to flee the country.
wikileaks did it because the MSM refuses to do it.joeblow9999 , 9 Dec 2016 18:28NOTHING in the DNC or Hilly campaign emails has been refuted by anyone. The corrupt DNC and Hilly got caught.neighbor65003 , 9 Dec 2016 18:23This is literally like a pedophile complaining to the police because someone stole their illegal porn. Absolutely shameful.
US intelligence? is this the same intelligent agency that gave us Iraq WMD report? They have no credibilityDaveCP , 9 Dec 2016 18:22After reading the first two pages of comments here, it is tempting to believe the bear contributes to these forums on quite an organised scale.diddoit -> DaveCP , 9 Dec 2016 18:27I fail to see what possible fear anyone could have from whatever evidence exists being seen by, at least, those with a vested interest.
diddoit -> DaveCP , 9 Dec 2016 18:38The period in the United States known as the Second Red Scare, lasting roughly from 1950 to 1956 and characterized by heightened political repression against supposed communists, as well as a campaign spreading fear of their influence on American institutions and of espionage by Soviet agents.
The third Red Scare? *clutches teddy bear*
Only one slight problem ...there aren't any reds in charge in Russia anymore.
My point being, there is no great ideological clash anymore. Assange volunteered the fact the email data didn't come from the Russians. And whether Trump is better than Hillary is open to debate.DaveCP -> diddoit , 9 Dec 2016 18:42My perspective from across the ocean has always been that the McCarthy philosophy was the least admirable episode in recent US history. I doubt many people want to return to that but surely, demonstrable evidence in either direction is the only antidote to accusations and conspiracy theories, and is needed now more than ever in this supposed 'post truth' era. Reply Sharethinkandleap1234 , 9 Dec 2016 18:22I assume that Obama is being told to do this, and probably by the same people who backed the Clinton individual for POTUS. The American people must be exceedingly dumb if they fall for this rubbish.jamese07uk , 9 Dec 2016 18:18It's almost as if the West, or at least Western Elite circles who have strived to saturate the airways with Russia-the-bogey-man material since the year dot, can they, on the back of this one-sided propaganda machine, wheel-out blame directed towards Russia for .... well almost anything they desire.Boris66 , 9 Dec 2016 18:15Problem is, are the public still eating out of their hands!?
Brext and the Trump victory is suggesting - not all of us by a long way.
If only Barack Hussain Obama had not taken it upon his self to interfere in our referendum with his clear 'Back of the queue' threat, it may have been possible to not think he is a hypocrite.john D , 9 Dec 2016 18:14I was more worried about Soros and democracy NGOs then i was of russian hackers this election.wtfbollos , 9 Dec 2016 18:13what a joke, america has been 'interfering' (i.e. bombing and destroying) how many countries since 1945?? incredible hypocrisy and sickening double-standards.IronBorn , 9 Dec 2016 18:13War propoganda. Will the White Helmets be saving Russian civilians too? I suspect this is one last roll of the dice by the 'democrats' to keep Trump out of office.sejong , 9 Dec 2016 18:09Obama is foolishly upping the ante, not on Putin, but on Trump. Trump's instinct will be to put a 10x hurt on Obama for this. Don't punk Trump.timolin , 9 Dec 2016 18:06They are desperate to discredit the winner. It is as ineffective as any of his failed policies. He is completely useless.AveAtqueCave , 9 Dec 2016 18:04In other words, Obama admits he hasn't kept America secure versus 21st-century threats.WoodenNickel , 9 Dec 2016 18:04Obama has said the intelligence agencies had the proof that Russia interfered with the election. With all their proof why order a review? Can't wait until Obama leaves office.Clotsworth , 9 Dec 2016 17:59what, is the USA the new Latin America, and Russia the new CIA ? forever meddling surreptitiously to undermine and overthrow other sovereign nation states democratic processes ? that's just so unfairsmellycat , 9 Dec 2016 17:57Oh dear. Russia causes regime change in America. What a laugh. What goes around comes around.Max South -> smellycat , 9 Dec 2016 21:10It is a funny joke, but on the essence I would advise to read investigative report "The New Red Scare" in Harpers. The evidence of Russian government having anything to do with any hacks is literally non-existing.FMinus , 9 Dec 2016 17:57The US, heckler of the world for decades, stirring trouble wherever the dart falls, and yet Russian hackers and North Korean hookers are to blame for 99.9% of the worlds problems. Reality is, if the US didn't move past its own borders for 10 years the world would be already a much, much better place.IanB52 , 9 Dec 2016 17:57The Guardian probably shouldn't go along in helping build the new McCarthyist, Cold War narrative, especially when it's just a bunch of US politicians and media figures repeating politically expedient, but factually unsupported claims. The Western media is trying to be Hearst Newspapers in the Spanish-American war.AveAtqueCave , 9 Dec 2016 17:55This is explicitly bad because it allows the suppression of dissent, of creating blacklists, the military industrial complex to further consolidate power, and to blame all sorts of domestic failures on shadowing foreign influence. This is exactly what countries like Iran and North Korea do. Bravo guys, for keep this story going for almost half a year with no substantial proof whatsoever.
But when Judith Miller, the NYT, George Bush and Hillary Clinton used fake news to kill hundreds of thousands, Obama told us to get over it, to "look forward and not backward." What a waste of 8 years.Ginen , 9 Dec 2016 17:54Obama's last exercise in futility.hadeze242 -> Ginen , 9 Dec 2016 18:04he suddenly discovered, 2-3 wks ago, that he was enthusiastic about space technology and exploration. He (that is his ghost writers) published a 1 p. article about his love of space. Fact is, first thing great-mind Obama did 8yrs ago is gut NASA's budget. He never mentioned space once in 8 yrs. Suddenly, he is a fan. Creepy ... how does he deal with his hypocritical self every morning?ShoppingKingLouie , , 9 Dec 2016 17:53Political theatre. He will be out of office before anyone will even be asked to take office.Benjohn6379 , 9 Dec 2016 17:51Its hilarious that The Guardian tries to frame US Intelligence as a single cohesive unit. Its a splintered multi-headed hydra that will never act on this. Once again Obama brings righteous powerful leadership to the act of being ineffective.
"Cold War 2: Tear Down This Firewall"worryingmother -> Benjohn6379 , 9 Dec 2016 18:14Starring:
Shirtless Putin
Legacy Obama
Hillary "I'm Not Trump" Clinton
Donald "OG Troll" Trump
Super Elite Genius Ninja Russian Hackers
The Poor Defenseless Victim DNC
John "Let's All Just Laugh at The Risotto Recipe and Not Pay Attention to any of my Other Emails" Podesta
80's synth "rock" and really bright neon clothingAnd featuring: Lou Diamond Phillips as.....Guccifer 2.0
Like Rocky Horror, but more psycho. Where has Lou Diamond Phillips been, anyway.calderonparalapaz , , 9 Dec 2016 17:45News Media Reports of governments hacking foreign govts and private Companies:Ryan Wei , 9 Dec 2016 17:45CNN
http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/16/technology/nsa-hacking-tools-snowden /Bloomberg News
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-05-23/how-the-u-dot-s-dot-government-hacks-the-worldThe Intercept: The NSA would know about Russian Hacking
https://theintercept.com/2016/07/26/russian-intelligence-hack-dnc-nsa-know-snowden-says /UK Gauardian
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/09/nsa-spying-brazil-oil-petrobrasRT News
https://www.rt.com/usa/us-hacking-exploits-millions-104 /UK Mirror: hacking German Govt
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/angela-merkels-phone-hacked-american-2485433The United States has attempted to push its democratic ideologies on countries all over the world, using means much more direct than hacking. Yet they cannot take a fraction of what they dish out. If Russia is indeed intervening to aid nationalists around the world, then Russia is a friend and should be welcomed with open arms. Trump should do the same, and used the powers of the United States to undermine [neoliberal] leftists around the globe.John malkovich -> CrankyMac , 9 Dec 2016 19:49No its by the letter actually. Libya, Yemen backed by US, Pakistan, Tunisia had some financial and military backing. Obama is the drone king. And Ukraine well have you heard of Victoria nuland before? Regime change in Ukraine cost the taxpayer 5 billion dollars
|
|
|
Dec 06, 2016 | www.paulcraigroberts.org
The "war on terror" has simultaneously been a war on truth. For fifteen years-from 9/11 to Saddam Hussein's "weapons of mass destruction" and "al Qaeda connections," "Iranian nukes," "Assad's use of chemical weapons," endless lies about Gadaffi, "Russian invasion of Ukraine"-the governments of the so-called Western democracies have found it essential to align themselves firmly with lies in order to pursue their agendas. Now these Western governments are attempting to discredit the truthtellers who challenge their lies.
Russian news services are under attack from the EU and Western presstitutes as purveyors of "fake news" . Abiding by its Washington master's orders, the EU actually passed a resolution against Russian media for not following Washington's line. Russian President Putin said that the resolution is a "visible sign of degradation of Western society's idea of democracy."
As George Orwell predicted, telling the truth is now regarded by Western "democratic" governments as a hostile act. A brand new website, propornot.com, has just made its appearance condemning a list of 200 Internet websites that provide news and views at variance with the presstitute media that serves the governments' agendas . Does propornot.com's funding come from the CIA, the National Endowment for Democracy, or George Soros?
I am proud to say that paulcraigroberts.org is on the list.
What we see here is the West adopting Zionist Israel's way of dealing with critics. Anyone who objects to Israel's cruel and inhuman treatment of Palestinians is demonized as "anti-semitic." In the West those who disagree with the murderous and reckless policies of public officials are demonized as "Russian agents." The president-elect of the United States himself has been designated a "Russian agent."
This scheme to redefine truthtellers as propagandists has backfired. The effort to discredit truthtellers has instead produced a catalogue of websites where reliable information can be found, and readers are flocking to the sites on the list. Moreover, the effort to discredit truthtellers shows that Western governments and their presstitutes are intolerant of truth and diverse opinion and are committed to forcing people to accept self-serving government lies as truth.
Clearly, Western governments and Western media have no respect for truth, so how can the West possibly be democratic?
The presstitute Washington Post played its assigned role in the claim promoted by Washington that the alternative media consists of Russian agents. Craig Timberg, who appears devoid of integrity or intelligence, and perhaps both, is the WaPo stooge who reported the fake news that "two teams of independent researchers" - none of whom are identified - found that the Russians exploited my gullibility, that of CounterPunch, Professor Michel Chossudosky of Global Researh, Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, Justin Raimondo and that of 194 other websites to help "an insurgent candidate" (Trump) "claim the White House."
Note the term applied to Trump - "insurgent candidate." That tells you all you need to know.
You can read here what passes as "reliable reporting" in the presstitute Washington Post .
See also .
Glenn Greenwald of The Intercept, which somehow escaped inclusion in The 200, unloads on Timberg and the Washington Post here .
Western governments are running out of excuses. Since the Clinton regime, the accumulation of war crimes committed by Western governments exceed those of Nazi Germany. Millions of Muslims have been slaughtered, dislocated, and dispossessed in seven countries. Not a single Western war criminal has been held accountable.
The despicable Washington Post is a prime apologist for these war criminals. The entire Western print and TV media is so heavily implicated in the worst war crimes in human history that, if justice ever happens, the presstitutes will stand in the dock with the Clintons, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, Obama and their neocon operatives or handlers as the case may be.
|
|
|
Oct 24, 2016 | economistsview.typepad.com
Dan Kervick -> Sandwichman ...
I wonder if the various powers that be assembled some kind of "Committee to Defend the Liberal Order" when Trump began to make noises about re-assessing Nato. Reply Monday, October 24, 2016 at 02:11 PMlikbez -> Dan Kervick..., October 24, 2016 at 06:34 PM
Dan,Dan Kervick -> likbez... October 24, 2016 at 01:14 PM , 2016 at 01:14 PM> ...some kind of "Committee to Defend the Liberal Order" when Trump began to make noises about re-assessing Nato.
A very interesting and pretty plausible hypothesis... That actually is the most deep insight I got from this interesting discussion. In such case intelligence agencies are definitely a part of "Committee to Defend the Liberal Order" which is yet another explanation of their strange behavior.
Thank you --
I can't claim that a mere mortal like me actually has the slightest clue what is really going on. All I will hazard is that, whatever it is, it's a bunch of scams, lies and public manipulation schemes.Where this kind of high level foreign policy is involved, the US government and intelligence services blew their cred with me long ago. I disbelieve them now on as a strong and resilient prior.
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Bush family tranditionaly is very well connnected with CIA and they are not fund of Trump, that's for sure...
Pavel October 12, 2016 at 2:28 pm
OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL October 12, 2016 at 3:02 pmre WikiLeaks: adding to the endless hypocrisy and double standards over Trump's "grabbing pussy" remarks and HRC & Co's behaviour:
* Hillary herself wondered about extrajudicially killing Assange by droning. In what world is that considered permissible?
* It seems that the Clinton campaign's Catholic "outreach" person was involved in a prostitution ring. So that's all good.
I'm starting to think Trump might yet pull this off. The Clinton camp must be terrified and trying desperately to see what else might come out. If only Bernie had agreed to run with Jill Stein… I honestly think they might have won. In any case the Republican party is going down in flames, and after the Podesta leaks the Dems will have absolutely ZERO credibility and not much of a mandate. 2018 and 2020 will be interesting indeed, assuming HRC hasn't started WW3 by then.
Speaking of which, Ray McGovern warns against the sabre-rattling over Syria and the calls for "no fly zones" in CounterPunch today:
We analysts were responsible for picking up warnings from Moscow and other key capitals that the U.S. news media often missed or downplayed, much as the major news outlets today are ignoring the escalation of warnings from Russia over Syria.
For instance, Russian defense spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov warned on Oct. 6 that Russia is prepared to shoot down unidentified aircraft – including any stealth aircraft – over Syria. It is a warning that I believe should be taken seriously .
It's true that experts differ as to whether the advanced air defense systems already in Syria can bring down stealth aircraft, but it would be a mistake to dismiss this warning out of hand. Besides, Konashenkov added, in a telling ex-ante-extenuating-circumstance vein, that Russian air defense "will not have time to identify the origin" of the aircraft.
In other words, U.S. aircraft, which have been operating in Syrian skies without Syrian government approval, could be vulnerable to attack with the Russian government preemptively warning that such an incident won't be Moscow's fault.
–Russian Throws Down the Gauntlet: Fly at Your Own Risk
Bush & Cheney & Co were horrific enough with their neocon games in the Mideast, but their actions seem mild compared with the latest anti-Russian lunatic talk by Clinton and her neocon pals. Really scary.
Jess October 12, 2016 at 4:25 pmYes the entire situation with out-of-touch imperialist aristocrats blindly blundering their way to
SarajevoAleppo has a very reminiscent feel to it…an easy chapter to write in the future history books.This should terrify everyone. I wish we would elect someone who says we should sit down and talk to our biggest rivals, not just provoke them to world war. But oh I forgot he said vulgar things about women 15 years ago.
hunkerdown October 12, 2016 at 8:33 pm"Why do so many men claim that's what men do typically (not universally)?"
Because it's usually true of most men at one time or another in their lives. For all the talk (and the reality) about women being treated as second rate, they do have enormous power; the power to reject. And reject they do. You can be the nicest guy in the world, but if you're not her type, if there's no chemistry or you're not her "caliber", down in flames you go. It's not necessarily mean on her part, it's just reality. And it's not just looks or money that is a consideration. You can be a nice, successful guy at a time in her life when she's attracted to the rebellious, slightly "dangerous", exciting "bad boy".
This can be frustrating. And it's magnified when you grow up being taught that you can do anything if you just try hard enough. But that's just it; you can't. Guys want to be rich and successful (like Trump) or rich/successful/famous, because that's the inside track to the most elite women. Except that even then, it's no guarantee. Look at all the women who wouldn't get involved with Trump if they were marooned on an island and he was the only man. All his fame, all his money, and They. Just. Aren't. Interested. And it's the same with virtually every guy whose name isn't Tom Brady. So like I said, it breeds frustration - sometimes soul-crushing frustration - which is displayed in crude anger.
crittermom October 12, 2016 at 9:27 pmJess, and, thanks to political correctness, there are a dwindling number of venues where one might seek to build lateral relationships, especially of the romantic or life partner sort, and a dwindling amount of discretionary time to spend in those venues. Never mind the most elite women - ten-year-olds with bottle-blonde updos and optional silicone-enhanced "chopped chicken parts" are actually kinda gross - the less elite but still very aspirational Modern woman's standards and policies are too high (unrealistic, as the less aspirational might put it) for the life partner market to clear without externalizing something.
"Because it's usually true of most men at one time or another in their lives."
And therefore SIN, or whatever the symbol manipulators might prefer to call it, and therefore PENANCE (payable in 3 easy installments), and THEN absolution. We do know how path dependence cramps the American liberal's style and their group narcissism.
"When we're an empire, we create our own reality."
JTMcPhee October 12, 2016 at 9:54 pmJess–
It works both ways. Men also have the power to reject, & they do.Your own wording of "that's the inside track to the most elite women" (my emphasis) seems to say that a woman must be beautiful in figure and face to attract a man.
So what's different about a woman wanting a man who is nice looking with a nice body?
None.
It's just two different views, depending on gender.Regarding what Trump supposedly said/did many years ago, even as a woman, I still find the fact Hellary's husband was engaged in sexual misconduct in the oval office-while president -even more disgusting.
I saw/see that as a huge slap in the face and a big FU to the entire nation that he would conduct himself in such a way while being the leader of our country!
He couldn't even keep it zipped while sitting in the WH? How dare he!At least Trump wasn't our freakin' PRESIDENT when he said/did those things.
Yet Bill's behavior is still a 'hush-hush' subject because he's a Clinton, it seems. (Or because people don't want to be on that 'Clinton' list and disappear?)
No, I do not support Trump or his actions or manners or ego.
But since it's being made such a big deal, then I'd like to see all the facts about Bill brought up again in the way he acted while leading this country.THEN maybe all these 'distractions' would end and we could get down to policies!
Until then, which it appears will never happen, this 'election' is a sick joke, at best.human October 12, 2016 at 4:52 pmJust for fun and some context, "Philandering Presidents": http://www.funtrivia.com/en/World/Philandering-Presidents-13741.html
Pavel October 12, 2016 at 5:10 pmIt's a great big, diverse world out there. Saudi women can be beheaded for saying, "no," and western women are castigated for saying, "yes."
Once again, it's all about the distraction.
OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL October 12, 2016 at 4:55 pmYes, but at least Hillary has come out boldly against the Saudi persecution of women, gays, and other races, has denounced the Saudi genocide in Yemen, and fought vigorously as Secretary of State to ensure arms including cluster bombs and white phosphorus were not sold to a regime with such a dreadful human rights record. And the Clinton Foundation displayed their "whiter than white" sense of ethics by returning the millions of dollars of Saudi donations.
And Trump's words from 11 years ago were much worse than anything the Saudis did, in any case.
I have a hierarchy of reactions to issues and I just can't seem to put vulgar language above the ultimate vulgarity of world war for profit.
Try as I might, I can't seem to care more about people with hurt feelings than people with their heads blown off because a Saudi billionaire or arms manufacturer just had to have some more ka-ching. There is nothing more vulgar than that.
|
|
|
www.zerohedge.com
fishpoem Jacksons Ghost Aug 12, 2016 11:38 AM
Yep. Yet another convenient "accident," eh? https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/may/01/john-rwd-jones-obituary
NumberNone Jacksons Ghost Aug 12, 2016 11:39 AM
It wasn't yesterday but it was determined to be suicide by train...because a brilliant attorney could not think of any easier way to commit suicide than throw himself in front of a moving train.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/archives/news/1138414/britains-top-human-rights...
SokPOTUS Jacksons Ghost Aug 12, 2016 11:51 AM
Happened April 22, 2016; but yes. Unless this is yet a second Assange lawyer to hit a train in the face this year....
http://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/renowned_lawyer_who_represented_julian_assange_died_after_being_struck_by_train_in_west_hampstead_1_4507283 OverTheHedge Jacksons Ghost Aug 12, 2016 1:00 PM
I can forsee a number of FBI agents also being hit by trains in the near future.
Lots of new job openings for young millennial who want to make a difference.
Sigh
ebear OverTheHedge Aug 12, 2016 3:30 PM "
I can forsee a number of FBI agents also being hit by trains in the near future."
If they've had the proper training they won't be standing near the track or watching the train as it approaches. If they've had the proper training, the person who tries to push them will go under the train.
Martial arts, firearms, pursuit and evasive driving, general situational awareness - all part of FBI training. Not as easy as bumping a lawyer or journalist.
N0TME Jacksons Ghost Aug 12, 2016 1:10 PM
Died in an apparent suicide? I say pushed, but what do I know.
http://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/renowned_lawyer_who_represented_julian_assange_died_after_being_struck_by_train_in_west_hampstead_1_4507283
ebear I've never understood people who stand toes to the line when a train enters the station. You know it's going to stop, so what's the rush? Situational Awareness demands that you stand well back from any potential danger, near an exit, facing the entrance, etc.
Police and military are well aware of these principles - even in defensive driving you have the slogan "where is the present danger?" Walk facing oncoming traffic, step out and away from dark doorways, back alleys, bridge pillars etc.
Take the stairs sometimes, take the elevator other times - drive to work one route, drive a different route home - mix them up. Take a taxi, get out at a random location and take a bus the rest of the way. Eat at different restaurants at different times. Do not establish a pattern. At all times carry a firearm.
These principles should be part of basic lawyer training, especially when taking on dangerous cases. Same goes for journalists. There are professional courses that deal with these subjects. Take one.
Whatever your goals in life, you can't achieve them if you don't survive. Last night I passed a fatal traffic accident where it was obvious the person turning left was killed by someone running a red light. Don't move off on the green right away.... pause and look around. That person is dead because he didn't follow that basic rule. So much for his life goals.
I'm preaching to the choir here, but maybe someone who doesn't know will read this and it will help them survive. As the Donald said, it's all about winning and you can't win if you don't survive.
Google matched content |
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: March, 29, 2020
