Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Bigger doesn't imply better. Bigger often is a sign of obesity, of lost control, of overcomplexity, of cancerous cells

Russiagate: Special Prosecutor Mueller and his fishing expedition reminds Iraq WDM scam

Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime ~ Lavrentiy Beria

 "'A mountain had gone into labor and was groaning terribly. Such rumors excited great expectations all over the country. In the end, however, the mountain gave birth to a mouse." The Mountain in Labour - Wikipedia

News Final report of Special procecutorl Mueller Recommended Links Strzokgate Obama administration participation in the intelligence services putsch against Trump "Trump is insane" meme Russiagate -- a color revolution against Trump Internet research agency story as fiasco of Russiagate Wiretaps of Trump and his associates during Presidential elections
Barr testimony and counter investigation Post-Russiagate remorse -- the second Iraq WDM fiasco DNC and Podesta emails leak: blaming Vladimir Putin Steele dossier Andrew McCabe -- the brain behind the color Revolution against Trump Brennan elections machinations James "We are not weasels" Comey Parteigenoose Mueller, 911 cover-up, and Trump witch hunt Hillary Clinton email scandal
Coordinated set of leaks as a color revolution tool Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit Rosenstein John "911 Coverup" Mueller "Seventeen agencies" memo about Russian influence on elections The problem of control of intelligence services in democratic societies Manafort and his Ukrainian connections Anti Trump Hysteria MSM as attack dogs of color revolution
Michael Flynn removal MSM as attack dogs of color revolution MSM as fake news industry NeoMcCartyism Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite MadCow desease of neoliberal MSM "Trump is insane" meme Mistressgate: Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal affairs History of American False Flag Operations
Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few Trump vs. Deep State Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak The Real War on Reality US and British media are servants of security apparatus Media as a weapon of mass deception Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair Media-Military-Industrial Complex National Security State
Elite Theory And the Revolt of the Elite The Deep State The Iron Law of Oligarchy Principal-agent problem New American Militarism Militarism and reckless jingoism of the US neoliberal elite Skeptic Quotations Politically Incorrect Humor Hypocrisy and Pseudo-democracy
Prosecutors are often in error, but never in doubt

Never underestimate the joy people derive from hearing something they already know.

~Enrico Fermi

When asked what he meant by a miracle: Oh, anything with a probability of less than 20%.

~Enrico Fermi

To hear the Western media talk, the Russian Federation has become the most powerful and influential nation on Earth. Russia can influence elections in faraway lands, and change the minds of people through Facebook ads, as long as the catering is done by a good Russian company, of course.

But wait, that’s probably not what the Western media wants to say. They want to tell us that Russia is a problem because it has the amazing ability to do all these things.

It must be that catering company. Something they put in the food makes the people who eat it into super mind-control agents.

Lavrov Russia ready for partnerships based on mutual respect


Introduction

The gambit of appointment of the  Special Prosecutor was a pretty slick operation performed by Brennan and people who were supporting him at this time, including Rosenstein. Comey firing was just a pretext; if it did not happen, they would find another reason to appoint the Special Prosecutor to investigate Trump. Along with paralyzing Trump administration Mueller has basically criminalized foreign criticism of the Democratic party and neocons. Open season on Russia, but not even one peep about the Dems crimes. In other words the Special Prosecutor Muller emerged as Grand Inquisitor accusing Trump of religious heresy not following neocon perception in foreign policy, especially regarding Russia. Mueller was known as capable and flexible servant of  the Deep State,  tested during 911. Some elements of his behaviour can be viewed as a more modern variation of  Lavrentiy Beria's playbook,  when any person who is "inconvenient" for authorities can be charged with some completely bogus, invented crime and go to jail, possibly for a very long term ( see No DENYING that now!!! The Obama administration spied on TRUMP campaign John Kiriakou - YouTube )

Mueller is going to investigate the life of Trump until they find something/anything he can hang around his neck. If there is nothing to hang, something will be invented via false flag operation, if this was not done already (Steele dossier spearheaded by  Brennan and Comey; see also Strzok comment to Lisa Page about "insurance") . Who in the United States of American could pass that kind of scrutiny? After all Trump and Kushner were real estate developers. If you dig hard enough having a dozen of prosecutors and unlimited amount of money probably any real estate developer in the USA can be put in jail. 

One of the  most interesting fact about Mueller is that he  was the person responsible for investigation of 911 as the director of FBI. So destruction of evidence, protection of Saudis royal family all happened  not just under  his  watch, but under his direct supervision.   Theories about the 9/11 attacks run in the extreme; however, it is clear from the official investigations that the US intelligence community -- particularly the CIA and the FBI -- hid evidence before and after the fact and have a great deal of accounting for their horribly poor performance. Both CIA and FBI honchos simply suppressed the warnings in the interest of career advancement. In addition to that, inventive, aggressive clandestine HUMINT against Al-Qaida (supported by Saudies) and Israel(which was interested in event like 911 to enhance  their own regional influence)  were disapproved by the same crowd. Robert Mueller, who came in as FBI Director weeks before 9/11, went out of his way to conceal evidence from the Congressional inquiry.  He argued for the burying of the 28 pages which partially were declassified by Trump.  Protecting the FBI from embarrassing disclosures took precedent over getting at the truth about the 9/11 attacks.  The fruits of that perfidy have carried forward in ways that were clearly not imagined at the time of the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent coverup.  Mueller also closely supervised botched Anthrax investigation. It may take years or even decades before the full story of the 9/11 attacks is unraveled.  But it would be a grave disservice to the 3,000 people who died, the survivors, and the families of those killed and injured, to stop the quest for truth due to efforts of such people as Mueller to conceal the evidence.  Each year, the anniversary of 9/11 serves as a reminder.

Those two facts alone tells you a lot about what we can expect from his "investigation" so quickly  launched by Rosenstein after Trump fired Mueller using falsified document nicknamed "Steele dossier" as the main evidence that Russia was trying to recruit Trump and/or members of his inner  circle.  Moreover, in such cases  "personnel is policy" and Muller hires strongly suggests that  the original intention was not an investigation, but a witch hunt with the single goal to depose Trump (it might well be that Muller appointment  was the insurance policy about which Strzok wrote to Lisa Page): 

  1. Aaron Zebley referred in MSM to as Mueller’s “right-hand man” acted as an attorney for Justin Cooper, the IT staffer who installed Clinton’s private email server at her home, and who destroyed her old Blackberry phones with a hammer (as Fox News report states).
  2. Andrew Weissmann, a former partner at the global law firm WilmerHale, attended the Democratic presidential candidate’s election party in November 2016.
  3. Jeannie Rhee, another former WilmerHale partner, represented Ben Rhodes, an ex-Obama National Security Adviser in a 2015 racketeering case, and Clinton herself in a lawsuit seeking disclosure of her private emails
  4. Peter Strzok (after whom Strzokgate was named) who was removed from Mueller’s team was the key person in exonerating Hillary Clinton in emailgate scandal. He also entrapped former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, which led to Flynn conviction. 

And in one year Mueller produce a pretty humiliating  results taking into account resorces which were put in his multimillion investigation: indictment of 13 Russia internet trolls from some sleazy marketing company (Internet research agency) run by former hot dog stand owner from Sanct Petersburg who first used it for PR campaign trying to protect himself from charges that he supplied rotten lunches to Moscow schoolchildren.

With each new indictment from Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller the same question emerges: when will he produce evidence that the president of the United States committed treason? Because that’s what this is really about; Some Russians somewhere may have meddled in the election. But what Mueller has to answer is whether Trump knowingly worked with a foreign adversarial government to help get himself elected in return for some quid pro quo. Mueller is tasked with proving the president, now in his 13th month in office, purposefully acts against the interests of the United States because of some debt to Russia. Here’s what Mueller has, and does not have, so far in his case (WeMeantWell.com):

What Mueller’s Missing

That’s what Mueller has. Here’s what he is missing.

The full force of the U.S. intelligence community has been aimed at finding evidence of Russian government interference in the 2016 election (still largely undemonstrated) for some 18 months, and the Comey/Mueller team aimed at finding evidence of Trump’s collusion with Russia for about a year. It is reasonable to conclude they do not have intelligence that would form a smoking gun, no tape of a high-ranking Trump official cutting a deal with a Russian spy. If such information existed, there would be no need for months of investigation. Same for the Steele dossier, and its salacious accusations. If there was proof any of it was true, we’d be hearing it read aloud during impeachment hearings.

What’s left is the battle cry of Trump opponents since election day: just you wait. The recount will show Hillary won. The Electoral College won’t select Trump. The Emoluments Clause will take Trump down. Or his tax returns. Or the 25th Amendment. Mueller will flip _____. The shoe will drop. Tick tock. And anything that looks like a weak move by Mueller is only an example we don’t yet understand his keen judicial kung fu.

No one knows the future. But so far the booked charges against Flynn and Papadopoulos, and the guilty pleas of others, point toward minor sentences to bargain over (never mind the possibility of a presidential pardon if it came to that), assuming they have relevant information to share in the first place. Manafort says he’ll go to court and defend himself. Mueller has produced nothing that has touched Trump, nothing connecting any meddling to a deal between Trump and Putin.

The core task is not to prove some Russians, or even the Russian government, meddled in the election. A limping to the finish line conclusion to Mueller’s work just ahead of the midterm elections that Trump somehow technically obstructed justice without a finding of an underlying crime would tear the nation apart. Mueller is charged with nothing less than proving the president knowingly worked with a foreign adversarial government, receiving help in the election in return for some quid pro quo, an act that can be demonstrated so clearly to the American people as to overturn an election well-over a year after it was decided.

It is a very dangerous thing to see the glee so many display hoping Trump will be found to be a Russian agent. That pleasure in hoping the U.S. is controlled by a foreign power because it means Trump will leave office early is not healthy for us. Mueller can fix that, but so far the bar is still seemingly pretty high above him. Given the stakes — a Kremlin-controlled man in the Oval Office — you’d think every person in govt would be on this 24/7 to save the nation, not just a relatively small staff of prosecutors ever-so-slowly filing indictments that so far have little to do with their core charge.

In other words "'A mountain had gone into labor and was groaning terribly. Such rumors excited great expectations all over the country. In the end, however, the mountain gave birth to a mouse." The Mountain in Labour - Wikipedia

The Russian company, which like dozens of similar sleazy Internet marketing  companies tried to earn some money by attracting audience with politically charged  messages and probably played some political games too on its own meager resources (with pro-Trump bias actually created automatically, as in this and several other cases pro-Trump messages were getting better audience and more money, and thus stimulating further moves in this direction, creating the impression of hardcore Trump supporters out of sleazy internet marketing firms).

After one year Mueller investigation looks more and and more as a part of color revolution against Trump, a futile ploy to stave off the day of reckoning for the US neoliberal elite by deposing Trump (which definitely is a challenge to neoliberal elite, but not that great challenge, similar but slightly greater than the "change in can believe in" challenge that Obama supposedly represented ;-). But the  day when furious and informed citizens will demand accountability of neoliberals in the  Congress and  past governments  for their legitimate grievances might eventually come, especially after the next financial collapse or other major calamity. That's why neoliberal rats feel the danger and instead of jumping the ship decided to eat Trump alive ;-)

On the other hand Mueller investigation is a perfect tool of fueling  Neo-McCarthyism. Which is an tried and true dirty statecraft technique to seek unity within a state by depicting an external enemy as Satan (God's defeated adversary). Russia perfectly suited the role as it opposed unilateral global domination so substitution of Soviet Union with Russia was only logical and allow to reuse old Russophobia stereotypes like "better be dead then red".  Even contracts with Russian officials are now tantamount to treason. As if this is replay of WWII,  and Russia is equivalent of Imperial Japan, or Nazi Germany.  This is a typical war propaganda mechanism (Depicting the enemy - The British Library_:

 During World War One atrocity propaganda was employed on a global scale. The Great War was the first total war in which whole nations and not just professional armies were locked in mortal combat. This and subsequent modern wars required propaganda to (1) mobilize hatred against the enemy; (2) convince the population of the justness of one’s own cause; (3) enlist the active support and cooperation of neutral countries; and (4) strengthen the support of one’s allies. Having sought to pin war guilt on the enemy, the next step was to make the enemy appear savage, barbaric, and inhumane.

All the belligerents in World War One employed atrocity propaganda associated with the enemy and, as a result, stereotypes emerged that had been largely developed in the period leading up to the outbreak of war.

The recognition of stereotypes is an important part of understanding the use of anti-symbols and the portrayal of the enemy in propaganda. The enemy is of great importance in propaganda, for not only does it provide a target that can be attacked, but also it offers a scapegoat – the easiest means of diverting public attention from genuine social and political problems at home.

But the truth is the USA experience a crisis of neoliberalism as a social system. That's why Trump rejection of globalization during election campaign made him unacceptable to neoliberal (and neocon) camps. In this sense Mueller investigation is a perfect smoke screen which help to project  problems caused in Western societies by neoliberalism (in the USA there are clear signed of the de-legitimization of neoliberal elite, demonstrated by the Trump victory) into Russia as a very convenient scapegoat:

Russia has been made the scapegoat for most of the West’s problems for years now. In November, for example, British PM Theresa May accused Russia of threatening the international order of the world. However, this does nothing to counter the rise in knife-related attacks and stabbings in London and the UK at large. The American Democrat Party, and not a few Republicans, blame Russia for the successful election of Donald Trump, a man who doesn’t play by DC rules, to the presidency.

This witch hunt is modeled after Ken Starr prosecution of Bill Clinton and based on a very fuzzy mandate which is a feature not a bug as it allows "bait and switch" during investigation. Appointment of Mueller (of 911 investigation fame) was the final move in the complex multi-step gambit to depose Trump, which started with Steele dossier, and involves Strzok, 17 agencies memo, wiretapping of Trump team, Comey dismissal (sacrificial pawn), set of damaging and well-coordinated leaks, and, finally, Rosenstein appointment of Mueller

The fact that Mueller politicized the action of Russian Internet scammers (who are, at best,  petty criminals using clickbaits to earn money) suggest that he has nothing more significant to offer hungry US Russophobes. At this point Mueller turned  his investigation into pure political propaganda. The election manipulations which the Clinton forces engaged in to defeat Sanders during the Democratic primaries dwarfs, by orders of magnitude, anything alleged against the Russians by even the most hawkish backers of the Russia probe. Here is one interesting  comment from  discussion of pro-clinton article in The Nation  The Russiagate Intelligence Wars What We Do and Don’t Know

Cara Marianna says: February 19, 2018 at 4:36 pm

Here's what we know:

  1. NO actual physical proof has been presented to the public to substantiate claims that Russia hacked the DNC
  2. There is NO proof (only allegations) of collusion between Trump's campaign and the Kremlin
  3. Social media efforts by Russian trolls to influence the election were minimal in the extreme, laughably amateurish and completely ineffective
  4. Glenn Greenwald has spent the past year documenting in detail the large volume of fake anti-Russian "news" generated by the MSM (see GG at The Intercept)
  5. There is NO connection between the Russian government and the 13 private citizens recently indicted for their pathetic and ineffectual activity as part of a troll farm
  6. Thanks to the paranoid, xenophobic, Russia-bashing nationalistic propaganda that is being promoted by our military-industrial-intelligence-media complex, the U.S. now believes it is acceptable to launch a first strike nuclear attack in retaliation for breeches of cyber security

Read number six again and think about it. The U.S. is ready and willing to launch a preemptive nuclear attack against any nation it accuses of undermining our cyber security - no proof necessary. The Democratic establishment, which has spent the past year engaging in baseless Kremlin-baiting (and very little else), is directly responsible for this insanity.

Trump won't be impeached over Russiagate for the simple reason that Russiagate is nothing but a psyops perpetrated against the American people by the national-security bureaucracy (and their corporate media propagandists) for the purposes of reigniting a second Cold War and maintaining U.S. global hegemony.

Thanks to the hysterical McCarthyism now rampant among Democrats - and that is being used to great effect by Washington's bipartisan neocon warmongers - we may just end up in a nuclear war. The good news: it will be a short war and the Democrats will never have to accept responsibility for Clinton's loss.

I realize that Clinton wing of Democratic Party (soft neoliberals) and their supporters which include a part of intelligence agencies (especially FBI and CIA), Wall Street, a large part of Silicon valley and most MSM  hate Trump. While he capitulated to neocons  after just three months of his Presidency, they still do not view him as the "member of the  club" much like NYC aristocracy shun him. 

But Mueller Russiagate witch hunt (and this is 100% pure witch hunt which also proved that Rosenstein is the agent of Clinton mafia) is suspicious for one simple reason: no intelligent person would assume that Deep State would allow any politician who are not "vetted" as for foreign and domestic policies, to say nothing about Russia connections to be on iether  party ticket. Trump would be derailed instantly if such information would  be avoidable. They would find not one but  a couple of Stormy Daniel which would tell the whole world that  Trump is a sexual pervert ;-). And if this did not work, that so other dirt iether in the form of his supposed connections to mafia and/or shadow financial deal would surface too. 

So all candidates were vetted. That includes both Trump and Sanders ( Hillary was the establishment candidate by definition).  Also Putin as pretty gifted politician would not play the game in which you can only lose supporting one candidate over another, as POTUS has almost  zero influence of the  US forign policy, which is amazingly consistent for the last four US administrations. 

In other words "Russiagate" is a domestic circus to distract shmucks from Hillary political fiasco (and preserve the power of Clinton neoliberal mafia over Democratic party) as well as rally the people against the  enemy patching the cracks that neoliberalism left in the nation unity, is much more reasonable attitude.  The only other reasonable explanation is that some minor Russian functionaries decided to  revenge the blatant USA interference into 2012 Russian Presidential elections and  an attempt to launch a color revolution in this country to prevent reelection of Putin. But this is not the right time, as Russia is still pretty weak after carnage and after horrible economic rape by the West of 1990th needs to recover. As French say " the revenge is a dish that is better served cold." And  most Russian  functionaries are not stupid and do not have the disgusting disease that infects almost all US politicians -- American exceptionalism and the burning desire to attain "full spectrum dominance" in the world. They generally more realistically weight their chances, probably hoping that the end of "cheap oil" in ten to twenty years will put a dent in the US full spectrum dominance and possibly can lead to the collapse the US economy.  That  why recently Hayden recently stressed the important of low oil prices for the US as usual masking it with  anti-Russian rhetoric  (Ex-CIA Chief Hayden U.S. Needs To ‘Wean’ Europe Off Russian Gas The National Interest Blog):

Increasing gas supplies to Europe would not only help prevent future shortages, but it could also push back against the Kremlin. Russia relies on oil and gas exports for approximately half of its fiscal revenue. The current abundance of cheap oil, in conjunction with international sanctions, has taken a toll on Russia’s economy. Hayden thinks taking away the Kremlin’s oil trade would deal a decisive blow.

Former CIA chief James Woolsey also stressed the importance  for the USA to keep oil price in the range $30-$40, the lower the better ( Former CIA Chief Admits US Meddling In Foreign Elections For Their Own Good

But this consideration can't explain why the Deep State went to such length as to launch "color revolution" against Trump administration of which Mueller investigation is the most prominent "enemy action". It should be viewed as a final move of the gambit to depose Trump (with Comey as sacrificed pawn)  which stated with the creation of the Steele dossier, they media witch hunt unleashed by "17 agencies memo" and Strzokgate (which included swiping Hillary "emailgate" dirt under the carpet).  In it unclear why neoliberals and neocons think that Trump is so dangerous to justify such extraordinary step. Or they were drunk with their own impunity ?  Or any attempt  for detente with Russia is like waving a red flag in front of a bull.  Too much taxpayers money are flowing to MIC and intelligence agencies to afford any deviation from the "cold war with Russia" party line.

Few people read (and no major MSM for example reported such an interesting quote from 17 intelligence agencies memo, which explicitly state that  they just assessed the possibility of Russian interference. Whether this group of handpicked analysts were drunk or not (at Brennan expense) is not mentioned  at all ;-):

Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation and precedents.

That sentence is the core to proper understand Russia-gate and Muller investigation. It defines the latter as a part of color revolution against Trump, a shrewd and well prepared maneuver  designed to depose Trump. It also defines Rosenstein as the forth member of the "gang of three" ( Comey, McCabe, Strzok) hell-bent on removing Trump.  Mayberry Machiavellians, all of them,  if you ask me. There were lots of claims, assertions and judgments, but no proof at all that any of the alleged Russian influence on elections really happened to warrant opening of this investigation (which is required for such things as appointment of the Special Prosecutor).  So this appointment was against the law, based on falsified evidence and solidly paints Rosenstein as a co-conspirator.

Neoliberals and neocons might hate Donald Trump so much for several (and slightly different for various factions) reasons (skeletons in the closet; MIC profits, continuation of globalization, to name a few). What unite them is a strong  believe that any pretext is justified in taking him down ("end justifices the means" mentality), even if it put in negative light the USA on international arena. AS Victoria Nuland  famously said "F*ck EU" ;-) 

That's why Clinton Democrats (neoliberal wing of Democratic Party, aka DemoRats) joined efforts with the neoconservatives in the Republican Party to take Trump down. That's why war-mongering against Russia is now established policy for both parties and actually a test for any political commentator who tried to get to any of major MSM. In other words Democratic party now is just the second War Party (as was evident from Hillary campaign) and anti-war left completely disappeared from the USA political landscape. 

Many people who detest Trump also view Russiagate positively as the most effective path to achieve Trump’s impeachment, so this desirable goal in which "ends justifies the means"  which makes this investigation somewhat similar to Ukrainian "EuroMaydan" charges of corruption, a part of color revolution effort by intelligence agencies and controlled by them MSM.   Moreover the atmosphere in the USA is already poisoned and the majority of people believe that Russia interfered in elections.  In other words Iraq yellowcake story was played on unsuspecting American public again and with the same resounding success.

But to me it look like Trump surrendered after just 100 days of anti-Russian smear campaign launched by neocons. So why they still  want to finish him like poor colonel Kaddafi?  That's an interesting question. So it must be more on the plate then just forcing Trump to abandon his election promises in foreign policy (which he already did); there might be some dangerous skeletons in the closet revealing of which the previous administration and their factions in intelligence  services the are afraid to death.

Because their action is as close to sedition as one  can get. In other words they went va bank (a common expression among Russian and German speakers. Va bank means to put everything at risk in order to win. As a result you would win everything or lose everything; similar US term might be "all in").  

In any case now two-third or more of US population is brainwashed into adamantly anti-Russian mindset, increasing the risk of the major war

At the foundation of Mueller fishing expedition is so called Steele dossier. The key in understanding Steele dossier is to view it as in integral part of Russiagate plot to remove Trump, an interesting twist of "Color revolutions" methods. See Steele dossier. It has a very interesting chronology and is closely connected with  Strzok-gate

Similarly Trump wanted to reach some level of detente  with Russia rightly considering the level of hostility achieved under Obama dangerous and counterproductive (to the extent that Obama might be controlled by Brennan it might be not Obama personal fought).  In this sense he also crossed the line (with the only difference that he did it during he election campaign) and at this point all power of neocons and neolib including their factions in intelligence agencies was unleashed for his removal. That's why Steele dossier was created and advertized: as part of anti-Trump coup d'état by the neocons, Clinton neoliberals and parts of the US intelligence services.  In both case the interests of the USA and national security suffers. In a way both neocons and neoliberals  are elements of foreign influence that do not care much about ordinary Americans.

From the beginning it was a set up to find dirt on Trump campaign insiders and if possible to topple Donald Trump’s presidential aspirations. It was actually pretty elegant gambit: after Attorney general recluse himself from Russian probe, Rob Rosenstein jumped into action first recommended firing Comey and then on the basis of this decision by Trump appointed the special prosecutor -- Comey friend and mentor Mueller. Whether firing Comey was a trap set up for Trump (and this is quite probably as Trump can be easily played by appealing to his vanity), or he just make the decision with bad timing (day 1 of his Presidency would be much more appropriate)  or not is immaterial.

turbojarhead -> loveyajimbo , Dec 10, 2017 2:37 PM

They played Sessions like a violin. Sessions recluses himself for a bullcrap Kisnyak speech, where he did not even meet him. Rosenstein then recommends Trump fire Comey -- who wanted to be fired so they would appoint a special prosecutor -- which Rosenstein does -- Mueller, to the acclamation of ALL of Con and the Senate -- including Republicans.

When Trump tries to get out of the trap by leaking he is thinking about firing Sessions, Lispin Lindsey goes on television to say that will not be allowed too happen. If he fires Sessions, Congress would not approve ANY of Trump's picks for DOJ-leaving Rosenstein in charge anyway.

Trump was pissed because they removed his only defender from Mueller -- the head of the DOJ. He knew it was a setup, so went ballistic when he found out about Sessions recusing.

Before and after the 2016 election Trump was under tack from intelligence  agencies. And the list includes not only obvious suspects in CIA and NSA, but also FBI (via liaison with CIA, see Strzokgate) as well as a several senior officials in Obama's Justice Department (Loretta Lynch, Sally Yates, Bruce Ohr), as well as National security advisor Susan Rise and UN ambassador Samantha Power (both were engaged in so called "unmasking" campaign).  to say nothing about Obama (who has high personal animosity to both Trump and Putin) who fueled Russiagate histeria by his expulsion of 35 Russian  diplomats on December 30, 2017, when he was already "lame duck".

Among the players that promoted Steele dossier and used it for "color revolution" against Trump Davis Stockman mentioned (The Russiagate Witch-Hunt Stockman Names Names In The Deep State's Insurance Policy )

Of course, this list is incomplete. CIA, FBI, State Department and Department of Justice all have their strong factions of Clinton loyalists, neocons and globalists.  Add to this large, dominant part of MSM, both newspapers, TV channels and major web sites.  So the critical mass for launching color revolution was present and they just needed a trigger, which was Steele dossier and 17 agencies memo. At this point the color revolution against Trump was launched. And while this operation had many moving parts and alternating players, the mission to unseat Trump never changed. And it remains ongoing with all hoes currently put on the result of 2018 elections (if Democrats regain majority Mueller can definitely to do more and House intelligence committee investigation, which is most damaging to Mueller can be shut). Efforts to find dirt on Trump involved extensive wiretapping (Did Obama order wiretaps of Trump conversations? ):

And likely there were others.

A good overview of Mueller fishing expedition was provided by Mike Whitney on Dec 21, 2017 (unz.com):

While it's clear that this political cage-match is going to persist for some time to come, we'd like to make two points. First, that there was never sufficient

While it's clear that this political cage-match is going to persist for some time to come, we'd like to make two points. First, that there was never sufficient reason to appoint a Special Counsel. The threshold for making such an appointment should have been probable cause, that is, deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein should have shown why he thought there was 'reasonable basis to believe that a crime had been committed.' That's what's required under the Fourth Amendment, and that's the standard that should have been met. But Rosenstein ignored that rule because it improved the Special Counsel's chances of netting indictments

Even so, there's no evidence that a crime has been committed. None. And that's been the main criticism of the investigation from the get go. It's fine for the New York Times and the Washington Post to reiterate the same tedious, unsubstantiated claims over and over again ad nauseam. Their right to fabricate news is guaranteed under the First Amendment and they take full advantage of that privilege. But it's different for professional attorney operating at the highest level of the Justice Department to appoint a Special Counsel to rummage through all manner of private or privileged documents, transcripts, tax returns, private conversations, intercepted phone calls and emails -- of the democratically-elected president -- based on nothing more than the spurious and politically-motivated allegations made in the nation's elite media or by flagrantly-partisan actors operating in the Intelligence Community or law enforcement.

Can you see the problem here? This is not just an attack on Trump (whose immigration, environmental, health care, tax and foreign policies I personally despise.) It is an attempt to roll back the results of the election by bogging him down in legal proceedings making it impossible for him to govern. These attacks are not just on Trump, they're on the legitimate authority of the people to choose their own leaders in democratic elections. That's what's at stake. And that's why there must be a high threshold for launching an investigation like this.

Consider this: On May 17, 2017, when Rosenstein announced his decision to appoint a Special Counsel he said the following:

"In my capacity as acting attorney general I determined that it is in the public interest for me to exercise my authority and appoint a special counsel to assume responsibility for this matter. My decision is not a finding that crimes have been committed or that any prosecution is warranted. I have made no such determination. What I have determined is that based upon the unique circumstances, the public interest requires me to place this investigation under the authority of a person who exercises a degree of independence from the normal chain of command." Rosenstein wrote that his responsibility is to ensure a "full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 election." As special counsel, Mueller is charged with investigating "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump."

That's not good enough. There's no evidence that "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump" were improper, unethical or illegal. Nor do any such presumed "links and/or coordination" imply a crime was committed. Rather, the loosey-goosy standard Rosenstein has applied is an invitation for an open ended fishing expedition aimed at derailing the political agenda of the elected government. This puts too much power in the hands of unelected agents in the bureaucracy who may be influenced by powerbrokers operating behind the scenes who want to disrupt, obstruct, or paralyze the government. And this, in fact, is exactly what is taking place presently.

Naturally, a broad-ranging mandate like Rosenstein's will result in excesses, and it has. Of the four people who have been caught up in Mueller's expansive dragnet, exactly zero have been indicted on charges even remotely connected to the original allegation of "collusion with Russia to sway the presidential election in Trump's favor." Clearly, people's civil liberties are being violated to conduct a political jihad on an unpopular president and his aids.

So, how does one establish whether there's a reasonable basis to believe that a crime has been committed?

The daily blather in the media does not meet that standard nor does the much ballyhooed Intelligence Community Assessment that was supposed to provide ironclad proof of Russian meddling in the elections. The ICA even offered this sweeping disclaimer at the beginning of the report which admits that the intelligence gathered therein should not in any way be construed to represent solid evidence of anything.
Here's the from the report:

"Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation, and precedents."

... ... ...

The fact is, Mueller is no elder statesman or paragon of virtue. He's a political assassin whose task is to take down Trump at all cost. Unfortunately for Mueller, the credibility of his investigation is beginning to wane as conflicts of interest mount and public confidence dwindles. After 18 months of relentless propaganda and political skullduggery, the Russia-gate fiction is beginning to unravel.

Mike Whitney May 24, 2017 analysis of Mueller witch hunt

That's all nice but the truth is that Trump abandoned his agenda in April 2017, a month before appointment of Special Council. Also the intensity of MSM fearmongering and anti-Russian compaign was such that witch hunt by appointment of a special council was kind of inevitable. Trigger might be different, but the net result is the same.  Deep State wanted Special Procecutr for Trump no matter what. That was the plan.  Rod Rosenstein  was just a tool (he is closely connected to Clintons via his wife).
The idea that both Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller belong to the same team is plausible. Mueller is also a close friend of Comey. But as Trump folded what would be the gain from his removal ?  Looks like Deep State has so many skeletons in the closet that it is afraid of any non CIA puppet person as a POTUS (Bush older, Clinton, Bush II and Obana were all closely connected to CIA with Obama essentially a CIA creation (a person without personal history).
Notable quotes:

Appointment of rabid anti-Trump prosecutors was given. Strzok was one of the first on the team

Mueller got this appointment after he was rejected by Trump for the position of the director of FBI. So he  might have personal grudges to hold. In any case the selection of his team tells us a lot about the direction of the investigation as "personnel is policy".  Among the most notorious members of his team were

Peter Strzok

Peter Strzok the man who was instrumental in swiping the dirt of Hillary "emailgate" under the carpet as well as using Steele dossire as a ram to put members of Trump team under surveillance. Later became involved in Strzok-gate scandal and  removed from the investigation. Along with Comey and McCabe he influenced the US Presidential election depriving Sanders from chances to became the candidate from the Democratic Party. 

Peter P. Strzok II (born in 1970, currently 47 year old) was until July 2017  the key figure in Clinton Email investigation and Trump Russiagate investigation as a Deputy Assistant Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and second in command of counterintelligence.  He is the central figure of so called Strzok-gate scandal.

Despite being  a rabid Hillary Clinton supporter (judging from his texts to Lisa Page with whom he allegedly has an affair ) he was assigned as the investigator both Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email server, and allegations of collusion of Trump team with Russians in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election.  which were conducted in highly politized manner ( Anti-Trump FBI Agent Changed Language Of Hillary Email Scandal From Grossly Negligent To Extremely Careless )

Electronic records show Peter Strzok, who led the investigation of Hillary Clinton's private email server as the No. 2 official in the counterintelligence division, changed Comey's earlier draft language describing Clinton's actions as "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless," the source said. The drafting process was a team effort, CNN is told, with a handful of people reviewing the language as edits were made, according to another US official familiar with the matter.

Subsequently, he joined the 2017 Special Counsel investigation but was quietly removed by Mueller in late July 2017. At this time he was demoted in FBI to HR department.

Andrew Weissmann. He is called a legal bulldog of Mueller team. Here is how pro-clinton site thedailybeast.com  chantaterise hims

The FBI’s decision to send a dozen agents on an early-hour raid of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s home struck some observers as an audacious, even unprecedented move for a white collar criminal case.

But to former federal prosecutors familiar with members of special counsel Bob Mueller’s team, it had all the makings of the work of Andrew Weissmann.

A former federal prosecutor from Brooklyn who spent his career going after mobsters, ponzi-schemers, and white collar criminals, Weissmann is known as a tenacious operator who uses strategies that have dazzled some legal experts and disturbed others. They believe his presence on Mueller’s team means the probe may push legal boundaries as it investigates alleged collusion between Trump and Russian interests.

“He fashions himself as a real tactician, in the sense of having a chessboard in front of him and moving pieces around,” said a person who has faced Weissmann in court.

Mueller has known and trusted Weissmann for more than a decade, having made him special counsel at the FBI for a few months in 2005, according to the Houston Chronicle. In 2011, after Weissmann left the bureau for a short stint in private practice, Mueller brought him back and made him the FBI’s general counsel.

“Mueller trusted him to be the FBI’s top lawyer,” said a former federal prosecutor who knows Weissmann. “That’s a pretty big deal.”

While he was general counsel to the FBI, Weissmann was known as quick-moving and decisive.

I am so proud Mueller deputy congratulated Sally Yates after she was fired for refusing to enforce Trump's travel ban  The substantive part of Andrew Weissmann’s email to Yates is just 11 words long.

Judicial Watch today released two productions (335 pages and 44 pages) of Justice Department (DOJ) documents showing strong support by top DOJ officials for former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates’ refusal to enforce President Trump’s Middle East travel ban executive order. In one email, Andrew Weissmann, one of Robert Mueller’s top prosecutors and formerly the Obama-era Chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section, applauds Yates writing: “I am so proud. And in awe. Thank you so much. All my deepest respects.”…

“This is an astonishing and disturbing find. Andrew Weisman, a key prosecutor on Robert Mueller’s team, praised Obama DOJ holdover Sally Yates after she lawlessly thwarted President Trump,” stated Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. “How much more evidence do we need that the Mueller operation has been irredeemably compromised by anti-Trump partisans? Shut it down.”

The Hatch Act, passed in 1939, prohibits civil servants from engaging in political activity, which is directed at the promotion of or advocacy against a political party, group or candidate.  When you consider that Ms. Yates leaked FISA information to the Washington Post without the authority or approval to do so, which is a crime, I would have serious reservations about having anyone supportive of a criminal and who can be viewed as a part of an attempted coup on the new POTUS in the team

Former FBI Director as the Ultimate CIA Man

Reproduced in full from What Mueller won't find caucus99percent

In the 1950s, when the science fiction genre started making itself felt in movies, there was always the pivotal scene where the protagonist discovers the dark secret but no one will believe him: a flying saucer hidden under the sand in a field, truckloads of pod people to replace real people, or that the friendly aliens' book "To Serve Man" wasn't a guide to helping humans, but a cookbook. It's that moment of sudden realization that no one will believe the hero because it sounds too crazy to believe.

Granted, to the uninitiated, coming to a realization so shocking and threatening to your current mental construction of the world can appear like paranoia. It becomes a question of the discoverer's knowledge and senses over what everyone else believes. Everyone else seems to be allowing him or herself to be absorbed into the great growing evil.

Today many of us, certainly readers here at Caucus99, are finding ourselves in similar positions. Our political structure is a lie, the people who are supposed to represent us and our interests don't, our law enforcement protects the property of the rich, not our lives, and often are in cahoots with the criminals from whom we are supposed to be protected. I am sure that many of our old friends and acquaintances have been alienated from some of us here when we began talking about Hillary's track record during the Presidential campaign, for example. In our current pasteboard world, if you are a Republican or Democrat you must assume that your designated political party, maybe with a couple of exceptions, are there to look after you.

And there that crazy friend goes, yelling about cookbooks.

I suppose my introduction to the corruption of those in power, at thirteen, was the assassination of JFK. Not actually the assassination, but the murder of Oswald two days later, in the basement of the Dallas police headquarters. I had slept overnight at a friend's and we came back from shooting basketballs to watch the transfer of Oswald to another facility. That was the moment that I realized all wasn't what it seemed. But, like most kids my age, the Beatles came along in a month or so and I was swept into the world of rock and roll, which kept me occupied until I began noticing girls. Until 1968. I was still noticing girls and rock and roll, but I was also noticing the number of progressives being gunned down by "lone nuts". And I was noticing Vietnam.

I'm not sharing this to explain to you how I became (that loathsome term) a "conspiracy theorist". I just want to explain to you that the democracy of the United States, and all the characters running across the stage in Washington, D.C., are the cookbook.

I wrote an essay here back in April of 2017 explaining how the Russiagate scandal had been designed to give Hillary Clinton a casus belli for her future war against Russia, and that what we were seeing since she lost has been a recycling of it to get Trump in line with the goals of the Deep State. So far nothing much has happened that has moved me from that belief. Now that the Deep State seems to have persuaded our Dear Leader that he can go on being himself as long as he understands the actual hierarchy and doesn't get in the way the Deep State, everything seems to be back on track. At least until Donald's next tweet.

But in order to understand the depth of criminality in our system one has to understand how things are done. After World War II a lot of social awareness began putting pressure on the old system that had driven the world into the Great Depression. FDR had demonstrated that the government could look out for the poor, could give them jobs when there were no other jobs to be had. The GI Bill sent millions of vets to college and helped to create the middle class we used to have. Unions had real power in negotiating wages and terms of service. Government could create a system to help the elderly. The African Americans, coming back home from fighting a war against fascism, refused go to the coloreds only water fountains. In short, the United States were in for some growing pains.

What happened? As I mentioned above there was a rash of murders of progressive political candidates and leaders in the sixties. But in order for the forces behind a return to the old rules to keep a lid on any revolutions there had to be something better than shooting every progressive who raised his head above the lectern. Thus the wave of recruitment of agents and assets in the late sixties by the CIA, FBI and other agencies. Although I didn't know it directly at the time, arriving on campus in 1968 it was evident that there was a "presence" of people looking over the shoulders of student activists.

Which brings me to another great revelation. It's not just politicians and political parties that are serving the Deep State. Any agency that can be corrupted by power will be, eventually.

Which brings us to the courts.

There are certain things that must be preserved for a ruling class to remain legitimate in the eyes of the public. Some people don't think much beyond the flag. But there are other things. The media is better than ever at keeping uncomfortable truths from the majority of Americans. But what happens where the criminality of the Deep State collides with our judicial system?

Let me introduce you to the man of the hour in Washington, Robert Swann Mueller III. Robert was born into the upper crust in our American class system. At one point in his education in private schools John Kerry was a classmate. (Kerry was also a fellow Bonesman with the Bushes.) Mueller met his eventual bride, Ann Cabell Standish, at one of the dances they attended. They married in 1966, three years after John Kennedy's assassination. If you have read much about the JFK assassination you would recognize her middle name. Her grandfather, Charles Cabell, had been second in command at the CIA when John Kennedy was elected President. In the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs fiasco, Kennedy fired three men from leadership positions at the CIA: Director Allen Dulles, Cabell and Richard Bissell. Charles Cabell was Ann's grandfather. Her grand uncle, Earle Cabell, was the mayor of Dallas at the time of Kennedy's murder there. Recently declassified JFK documents revealed that Mayor Cabell was also an asset of the CIA at the time. Small world. You could say that Mueller married into the CIA, except that his great uncle was Richard Bissell. So between his family and his wife's family Mueller had two of the three people that Kennedy fired before he was assassinated by a "lone nut", as well as the mayor who hosted the assassination. The third man fired was Allen Dulles, who sat on the Warren Commission and managed to keep the CIA out of the investigation into JFK's murder. Perhaps Dulles was a guest at the wedding.

Soon thereafter Mueller decided to go to Vietnam because, he said, a classmate had died there and patriotism and so forth. He became an officer and eventually ended up as an aide-de-camp for the 3rd Marine Division's commanding general, General William K. Jones. Something else was going on in Vietnam. The CIA had installed its Phoenix Program. I cannot do justice to the Phoenix Program and won't considering Doug Valentine's work on it is available for everyone, but the Phoenix Program was the CIA's attempt to totally control the Vietnamese population. Besides massacres of villages, the program assassinated suspected leaders and spies for the Vietcong, coerced others into being their agents, and kept up files on all the relevant Vietnamese down to the village level. Like in later wars, the CIA incorporated torture, murder and psychological techniques in order to control their targets. As an aide-de-camp to a commanding Marine general, there is no way that Mueller didn't know about the Phoenix Program. He probably saw daily briefings.

When he came back to the US he studied law and quickly became a federal prosecutor.

One of the things to mark his career was to deny a pardon to Patty Hearst for her part in the whole Symbionese Liberation Army's "terror" campaign. What did the SLA have to do with anything? A short history: Donald DeFreeze, a small-time criminal in Los Angeles agreed to become an informant for the LAPD in order to stay out of jail. After awhile he got tired of ratting out others and asked to get out of the program. Instead, DeFreeze was incarcerated at the Vacaville Medical Facility for criminally insane prisoners in the California penal system. There DeFreeze met Colston Westbrook who gave classes for the "Black Cultural Association", an experimental behavior modification unit inside the prison. Who was Westbrook? He was a CIA agent, trained in psychological warfare and part of the Phoenix Program. DeFreeze was modified by Westbrook and company for two years. Soon thereafter, he was transferred to Soledad Prison, from which he "escaped" and became the infamous "Cinque". Then came the Symbionese Liberation Army, a caricature of a black militant group filled with mostly white people with military backgrounds. The murder of Marcus Foster, a progressive black leader in the San Francisco East Bay, was done by white men in blackface, according to eyewitnesses. The SLA claimed credit for it. The SLA kidnapped Hearst, subjected her to torture, rape, sensory deprivation and mind control tactics, just like the CIA did in the Phoenix Program in Vietnam. Then came the bank robberies.

I bring up the Patty Hearst case because, in 2000, decades after her prison sentence had been commuted, Mueller still opposed her pardon. Guess what he didn't notice when he rejected her pardon? This has been his pattern throughout his career. We'll return to Patty Hearst shortly.

Mueller has presided over many cases where it's been important for the prosecutor to overlook the fingerprints of the CIA. He prosecuted what was known in the San Francisco Bay Area as the "drug tug" case which had connections to an island in Panama. It was a drug smuggling case and had tentacles into things like bank frauds in Northern California. He prosecuted Manuel Noriega's drug-smuggling without noticing Oliver North's drug-smuggling, arms running and money laundering through Panama as a part of Iran-contra.

Mueller would invariably land on cases with Deep State intelligence connections.

For example, he prosecuted Pan Am 103. Initially, and then later confirmed by an insurance investigator's report, the bomb that brought down the airliner was believed to be placed onboard by baggage handlers working at the Frankfurt Airport. They were given the bomb by a terrorist cell who in turn got it from one Monzer al-Kassar, who was a very large heroin dealer, estimated at supplying twenty percent of the US's heroin at the time. A big operator. And, in fact, one of the passengers on the plane was a drug mule for al-Kassar. Al-Kassar also happened to be a part of the Iran-contra operation, supplying weapons for North's Enterprise. The operation was, according to the early reports, carried out by a cell of Palestinian terrorists based in Frankfurt, the Palestinian Liberation Front-General Command, who got the bomb from al-Kassar and put the bomb on that airline.

Mueller, put in charge of the case, pursued an entirely different direction, accusing two Libyans of bombing the plane. At the time Libya and Khadafy were getting blamed for a lot of terrorist activity, but the case against the two was so weak as to hardly be circumstantial.

There were other questions arising from Pan Am 103. A top official in the FBI, Oliver "Buck" Revell, rushed onto the tarmac in London to pull his son and daughter-in-law off of Pan Am 103 before it went on to explode over Lockerbie, Scotland. Also changing flight plans were South African President Pik Botha and his negotiating team. Apparently, someone that Revell and Pik Botha knew gave them the warning.

There was one group that didn't get warned. That was the McKee Team, an assembled group of US intelligence agents tasked to investigate American hostages in Beruit. They allegedly discovered a link between the hostage takers, drug traffickers and the CIA. They were returning to the US, against orders, presumably to spill the beans. This was essentially a clean-up operation, tying up loose strings of the Iran-contra operation. So was Noriega's prosecution.

That's why Mueller got the case. He knew where to look and where not to look.

He also prosecuted ancillary Iran-contra cases. He prosecuted John Gotti for dealing cocaine in the New York City area. The cocaine he sold was part of the the Iran-contra (CIA) plan where Southern Air Transport flew weapons to Latin America for the contras (whom Congress had voted against aiding) and bringing back cocaine from Latin America on its return flights, to include Mena, Arkansas. One of the CIA's pilots, Barry Seal, bragged that he had a "get-out-of-jail" letter written for him by then-Governor Bill Clinton. At the time, Asa Hutchinson was the federal prosecutor for that corner of Arkansas. He also didn't notice all that cocaine. Hutchson later served as George W. Bush's first "drug czar" before going into politics. How coincidental.

Mueller, who had been appointed Assistant U.S. Prosecutor under GHW Bush, became FBI Director under George W. Bush just in time not to see the CIA fingerprints on 9/11, which should not be surprising considering whom he didn't see when he investigated BCCI. As head of our country's biggest law enforcement agency Mueller did not pursue the House of Saud's part in 9/11 even though fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and a number of them could be traced to Saudi intelligence, and the money chain could be traced to Saudis living in the US, some of whom flew out of the US while all other US flights were grounded. He did not investigate Mohammed Atta's time in Frankfort, Germany, where he was employed by a front company for the BND, West Germany's equivalent to the CIA. Nor did Mueller investigate Huffman Aviation where Mo Atta and another hijacker matriculated in flying planes into buildings. Huffman is interesting because while Mo was studying in Huffman's Venice, Florida aviation school a Huffman plane was busted in Orlando with 43 pounds of heroin. Curiously, the pilot walked away from the DEA without being charged and no one was prosecuted at Huffman.

Ask Colleen Rowley about Mueller's leadership in the 9/11 investigation.

Additionally, Mueller oversaw the anthrax letter case, never investigating Battelle Memorial Corporation, which had a building within a mile of the mailbox where the letters had been mailed. (Battelle Memorial's corporate motto is "It Can Be Done".) Instead, he centered FBI investigations on scientists in government labs in Fort Detrick, Maryland, who had neither the expertise nor the equipment to make the weaponized military grade anthrax found in the letters. One scientist sued and won millions. The other allegedly "committed suicide". Battelle is noteworthy because it handles the US military's anthrax program. Mueller had no interest that two of the targets who received anthrax letters were at the time the most vociferous opponents of the Bush Administration's Patriot Act.

Perhaps his greatest accomplishment aiding the Deep State as FBI Director was his shutting down of Operation Green Quest, the FBI's investigation into the funding behind 9/11 and the terrorist network behind it. Names began popping up like Grover Norquist, the Muslim Brotherhood, old Nazis and the royal family of Luxembourg. Nothing to see here. Move along.

A closer examination of Robert Mueller would probably find a lot more of these cases and I encourage others to continue the search. For example, it's been alleged that Mueller sent innocent men to jail for crimes committed by Whitey Bulger for the benefit of someone or something within the government and that this allowed Bulger to continue his criminal activities for years.

***

It's been seventy years since the CIA was created, fifty years since JFK was most likely murdered by them. In order to avoid any consequences for their crimes more and more institutions have had to be infiltrated and corrupted by them. Many of the heroes of the Left have turned out to be purveyors of "modified limited hangouts" which served the Deep State. Ramsey Clark, who was given the mantle of "good guy" by the media of the Left, was active as LBJ's Attorney General in blocking Jim Garrison's investigation into the JFK assassination and was named by Doug Valentine in his THE CIA AS ORGANIZED CRIME as a major proponent of the CIA's OPERATION CHAOS and the FBI's COINTELPRO. While the media spent a good deal of time talking about how great they were in releasing the Pentagon Papers to the public, the hero who exposed the military, Daniel Ellsberg, turns out to have been CIA, operating with CIA black ops in Vietnam. And while the Pentagon Papers exposed our military's great errors in Vietnam the CIA was generally spared. Again. Bob Woodward, our hero of Watergate, had been a courier for the Office of Naval Intelligence only a few years earlier. Thus, the CIA and Deep State, which had soured on Nixon, orchestrated that President's departure.

I raise this because Robert Mueller's current task is the investigation of our sitting President. No matter how much you dislike Trump you can't help but notice that the "evidence" against him conspiring with Putin and Russia is thin gruel. And while Trump, like most politicians who ascend to the big seat, has a lot of questionable, even indictable business connections around him, the great dangers of a Putin-Trump conspiracy trumpeted by the media have been fading because, apparently, there was never a there there. Thus, as Mueller oversees this case, he will find people surrounding Trump who have lied to FBI agents, who have perhaps not registered as foreign agents, and other crimes that routinely happen out of the public spotlight and aren't prosecuted. What was obvious to me from the start, that this was a psyop that involved U.S. intelligence, Ukrainian intelligence, Clinton and the DNC, will not be obvious to Mueller. Thus, as his career has shown, Mueller has been put in place not merely to prosecute those around Trump as a means of pressure on his administration, but to not see the CIA's hand in it.

When one begins examining high-profile court cases in post-1963 America one sees a cast of people who keep popping up. Prosecutors, judges, defense attorneys, coroners, witnesses, reporters, authors. This ensemble keeps reappearing in these show trials. We may not know what Mueller will find, but we know what he won't find.

There was a review at Truthdig back in 2016 of Jeffrey Toobin's book on Patty Hearst, AMERICAN HEIRESS (Toobin himself worked as an associate counsel to Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh during the investigation Iran–Contra affair and Oliver North's criminal trial). In part it reads: "Toobin features the characters who populated the edges of Hearst’s story. Robert Shapiro, who would later work with [F. Lee] Bailey on the O.J. Simpson case, makes a cameo appearance. Lance Ito, the judge in that case, briefly shared a shooting range with a machine-gun toting SLA member. Reverend Jim Jones offered to help with the food distribution effort; that enterprise also employed Sara Jane Moore, who served 32 years for attempting to assassinate President Gerald Ford during his 1975 visit to San Francisco. Congressman Leo Ryan, who represented Randy and Catherine Hearst’s district, endorsed the commutation of Patty’s sentence. “Off to Guyana,” he wrote Patty in 1978. “See you when I return. Hang in there.” Jim Jones’ henchmen shot and killed Ryan before he could board his flight home. Robert Mueller, the U.S. Attorney in San Francisco before taking over as FBI director, strenuously opposed Hearst’s pardon, claiming that her attitude, born of wealth and social position, “has always been that she is a person above the law.”"

When Mueller wrote that line he must have laughed out loud.

Mueller allegiance to the Deep State was tested during 911 coverup

9-11 Whistleblower Rowley on Mueller’s History of “Cover-up” Accuracy.Org

 

COLEEN ROWLEY, rowleyclan [at] earthlink.net, @ColeenRowley
Rowley, a former FBI special agent and division counsel whose May 2002 memo to then-FBI Director Robert Mueller exposed some of the FBI’s pre-9/11 failures, was named one of TIME magazine’s “Persons of the Year” in 2002. She just appeared on The Real News report “Special Counsel Investigating Trump Campaign Has Deep Ties to the Deep State,” about Mueller being appointed to investigate the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia.

While Mueller has been widely described as being of impeccable character by much of official Washington, Rowley said today: “The truth is that Robert Mueller (and James Comey as deputy attorney general — see my New York Times op-ed on day of Comey’s confirmation hearing) presided over a cover-up …”

In her interview, Rowley noted: “The FBI and all the other officials claimed that there were no clues, that they had no warning [about 9/11] etc., and that was not the case. There had been all kinds of memos and intelligence coming in. I actually had a chance to meet Director Mueller personally the night before I testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee … [he was] trying to get us on his side, on the FBI side, so that we wouldn’t say anything terribly embarrassing. …

“When you had the lead-up to the Iraq War … Mueller and, of course, the CIA and all the other directors, saluted smartly and went along with what Bush wanted, which was to gin up the intelligence to make a pretext for the Iraq War. For instance, in the case of the FBI, they actually had a receipt, and other documentary proof, that one of the hijackers, Mohamed Atta, had not been in Prague, as Dick Cheney was alleging. And yet those directors more or less kept quiet. That included … CIA, FBI, Mueller, and it included also the deputy attorney general at the time, James Comey.”

Rowley also noted that Mueller presided over “the ‘post 9-11 round-up’ of innocent immigrants, the anthrax investigation fiasco, as well as going along with a form of martial law (made possible via secret OLC [Office of Legal Counsel] memos written by John Yoo etc. predicated upon Yoo’s theories of absolute ‘imperial presidency’ or ‘war presidency’ powers that the Bush administration was making [Attorney General John] Ashcroft sign off on).”

“While not the worst of the bunch, neither Comey nor Mueller deserve their Jimmy Stewart ‘G-man’ reputations for absolute integrity but have merely been, along the lines of George ‘Slam Dunk’ Tenet, capable and flexible politicized sycophants to power, that enmeshed them in numerous wrongful abuses of power along with presiding over plain official incompetence. It’s sad that political partisanship is so blinding and that so few people remember the actual sordid history.”


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[May 21, 2019] Barr is wrong Obstruction of justice doesn't require another underlying crime - The Washington Post

Mar 01, 2026 | www.washingtonpost.com

Barr is wrong: Obstruction of justice doesn't require another underlying crime - The Washington Post By Daniel Hemel Daniel Hemel is an assistant professor of law at the University of Chicago. March 26

It took special counsel Robert S. Mueller III nearly two years to conclude that President Trump may have -- but may not have -- obstructed justice. It took Attorney General William P. Barr and his deputy, Rod J. Rosenstein, only two days to decide that Trump should not be charged with obstruction. How did Barr and Rosenstein make up their minds so quickly on a question that the special counsel struggled with for so long?

Barr sent a letter to Congress on Sunday that offers little explanation for the decision not to prosecute the president. The letter correctly states the elements of obstruction of justice -- corrupt intent, obstructive conduct and a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding -- and then states that Mueller's report "identifies no actions that, in our judgment," satisfy all three criteria. The letter says nothing more about the last two elements of obstruction, but it does offer this about corrupt intent: "While not determinative, the absence of evidence [of collusion] bears upon the President's intent with respect to obstruction."

That conclusion is questionable for reasons beyond its haste. It's black letter law that a defendant can satisfy the corrupt intent criterion for obstruction even if the defendant himself committed no underlying crime. For example, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit recently ruled that a defendant could be convicted of obstruction "even if [his] primary motivation was to extricate the sister of his childhood friend from a troubled situation." A court in Utah held in 2013 that a defendant could be liable for obstruction where his only apparent motive was to protect a friend from a criminal charge.

Former Detroit mayor Kwame M. Kilpatrick went to jail for obstructing justice in 2008 after he lied under oath about an extramarital affair. And in January, a Navy captain in Florida was indicted on a charge of obstruction of justice after he allegedly misled investigators about his extramarital affair with a civilian employee's spouse. Of course, adultery is not a crime. But interfering with an investigation to cover up adultery certainly is.

[ Trump could still have obstructed justice -- even if he didn't break the law ]

By these standards, it's easy to see what possible motives Trump may have had to obstruct justice, even if no collusion with Russia was involved. He may have wanted, for example, to shield Michael T. Flynn, his first national security adviser, from criminal liability. In February 2017, the president told FBI Director James B. Comey that Flynn "is a good guy," according to Comey , and Trump implored Comey to drop the FBI's investigation of Flynn. Flynn later pleaded guilty to charges that he lied to investigators about his conversations with the Russian ambassador. Trump fired Comey in May 2017.

Or perhaps the president suspected -- correctly -- that the investigation of his longtime personal attorney Michael Cohen would churn up evidence that Trump paid adult-film actress Stormy Daniels to stay quiet about an alleged sexual encounter the two had just months after Trump's wife, Melania, gave birth to Trump's youngest child, Barron. Trump may have feared the political fallout from revelations that he lied to the American people about his business dealings with Russia, and then instructed his eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., to lie about conversations with Russian representatives during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Or maybe Trump simply wanted to cover up the fact that the Russian government intervened on his behalf during the race -- even if that intervention occurred independently of Trump's campaign. Trump has only begrudgingly acknowledged that the intelligence community agrees that Russia wanted him to win; ever sensitive about his loss to Democrat Hillary Clinton in the popular vote, perhaps he worried that evidence of Russian meddling would cast further doubt on the legitimacy of his presidency.

[ One person the Mueller report didn't 'exonerate'? Vladimir Putin. ]

Of course, the fact that Trump would have had many motives to obstruct justice doesn't mean that he actually did so. Obstruction of justice still requires two more elements beyond corrupt intent: obstructive conduct and a sufficient connection to a pending or contemplated proceeding. The second element -- obstructive conduct -- is arguably the most difficult to establish in Trump's case. Reasonable minds may disagree as to whether the president engaged in obstructive conduct when he fired Comey, tried to fire Mueller and possibly encouraged Cohen to lie to Congress , as Cohen has testified. (Trump has repeatedly said Cohen is lying now.)

Trump or his defenders could argue, for example, that he fired Comey not to interfere in an investigation but because he concluded, as he wrote in his termination letter , that Comey was "not able to effectively lead the Bureau." Comments that Trump made later to NBC News's Lester Holt undermined that explanation , but if charges had been brought, a jury may have concluded that Trump lied to Holt and told the truth in his earlier termination message.

So why did Barr emphasize the absence of collusion -- a fact that is, at most, tangentially relevant to whether Trump obstructed justice?

One possibility is that Mueller's report contains additional evidence of obstructive conduct connected with a contemplated or pending proceeding. What initially looks like the weaker elements of the obstruction case against Trump may be stronger than we think.

A less conspiratorial theory is that Barr simply has an idiosyncratic view of obstruction -- a view that appears to be unmoored from any case law. In his June 2018 memo to top Justice Department officials, Barr -- who at the time was a lawyer in private practice -- opined that "the President's motive in removing Comey and commenting on Flynn could not have been 'corrupt' unless the President and his campaign were actually guilty of illegal collusion."

Barr's view was silly then and is silly now.

Even if Trump's only motive for interfering in the FBI's investigation of Flynn was his personal affection for a loyal aide, the president still could have committed obstruction of justice -- friendship, as mentioned above, is motive enough for obstruction. Barr's memo was roundly criticized in December when the Wall Street Journal first reported its existence. Perhaps that criticism led Barr to double down on his strange and legally unsupportable theory.

Ultimately, understanding what is going on in Barr's mind may be as difficult as understanding what's happening in Trump's. It's hard to see why the attorney general would put so much weight on such a legally flimsy reed. But this much seems clear: Barr's conclusion that Trump did not commit obstruction should persuade no one of the president's innocence.

[May 21, 2019] Obstruction of Justice legal definition of Obstruction of Justice

May 21, 2019 | legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

Obstruction of Justice
Also found in: Dictionary , Thesaurus , Acronyms , Wikipedia . Obstruction of Justice

A criminal offense that involves interference, through words or actions, with the proper operations of a court or officers of the court.

The integrity of the judicial system depends on the participants' acting honestly and without fear of reprisals. Threatening a judge, trying to bribe a witness, or encouraging the destruction of evidence are examples of obstruction of justice. Federal and state laws make it a crime to obstruct justice.

Obstruction of justice in the federal courts is governed by a series of criminal statutes (18 U.S.C.A. §§ 1501–1517), which aim to protect the integrity of federal judicial proceedings as well as agency and congressional proceedings. Section 1503 is the primary vehicle for punishing those who obstruct or who endeavor to obstruct federal judicial proceedings.

Section 1503 proscribes obstructions of justice aimed at judicial officers, grand and petit jurors, and witnesses. The law makes it a crime to threaten, intimidate, or retaliate against these participants in a criminal or civil proceeding. In addition, section 1503 makes it illegal to attempt the Bribery of an official to alter the outcome of a judicial proceeding.

Besides these specific prohibitions, section 1503 contains the Omnibus Clause, which states that a person who "corruptly or by threats of force, or by threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice" is guilty of the crime of obstruction of justice. This clause offers broad protection to the "due administration of justice." Federal courts have read this clause expansively to proscribe any conduct that interferes with the judicial process.

To obtain a conviction under section 1503, the government must prove that there was a pending federal judicial proceeding, the defendant knew of the proceeding, and the defendant had corrupt intent to interfere with or attempted to interfere with the proceeding.

Two types of cases arise under the Omnibus Clause: the concealment, alteration, or destruction of documents; and the encouraging or rendering of false testimony. Actual obstruction is not needed as an element of proof to sustain a conviction. The defendant's endeavor to obstruct justice is sufficient. "Endeavor" has been defined by the courts as an effort to accomplish the purpose the statute was enacted to prevent. The courts have consistently held that "endeavor" constitutes a lesser threshold of purposeful activity than a criminal "attempt."

Federal obstruction of justice statutes have been used to prosecute government officials who have sought to prevent the disclosure of damaging information. The Watergate scandal of the 1970s involving President richard m. nixon is a classic example of this type of obstruction. A number of Nixon's top aides were convicted of obstruction of justice, including former attorney general john n. mitchell .A federal Grand Jury named Nixon himself as an unindicted coconspirator for the efforts to prevent disclosure of White House involvement in the 1972 Burglary of Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate building complex in Washington, D.C.

Further readings

Roush, Corey, and Rishi Varma. 1996. "Obstruction of Justice." American Criminal Law Review 33 (spring).

[May 21, 2019] There should be intent in cases of abstraction of justice

May 21, 2019 | www.unz.com

renfro , says: May 21, 2019 at 2:51 am GMT

@tanabear

However, the firing James Comey is completely legal and allowed by the Executive. A prosecutor cannot event a crime of obstruction when the action was perfectly legal

Wrong again ..its obvious none of you know how to find the legal cites on the elements of obstruction. Whether Trump can 'legally' fire someone or not is immaterial .the court (and the law) looks at the INTENT behind the act. Period.

You can legally hire or fire your maid but if your motivation -- intention in either of those acts is to bribe her or threaten her because she knows something about you that could get you in legal trouble. Then it is obstruction.

[May 21, 2019] Why does Barsoomian, possibly a CIA operative, merit any mention? BECAUSE She is Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's WIFE! "

May 21, 2019 | www.unz.com

onebornfree , says: Website May 20, 2019 at 10:13 pm GMT

M. Whitney says: " .That's the question that will throw open the curtains and shed light on the suspicious ties between the DNC, the CIA, the FBI and the media, .."

SWAMPgate: You won't believe how ALL the perps are connected as in joined at the hip!

Excerpt: " ..someone out there cares so much that they've "purged" all Barsoomian court documents for her Clinton representation in Hamburg vs. Clinton in 1998 and its appeal in 1999 from the DC District and Appeals Court dockets. Someone out there cares so much that the internet has been "purged" of all information pertaining to Barsoomian. Historically, this indicates that the individual is a protected CIA operative. Additionally, Lisa Barsoomian has specialized in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the intelligence community.

And, although Barsoomian has been involved in hundreds of cases representing the DC Office of the US Attorney, her email address is Lisa Barsoomian at NIH gov. The NIH stands for National Institutes of Health. This is a tactic routinely used by the CIA to protect an operative by using another government organization to shield their activities.

It's a cover, so big deal, right? I mean what does one more attorney with ties to the US intelligence community really matter?

It deals with Trump and his recent tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum imports, the border wall, DACA, everything coming out of California, the Uni-party unrelenting opposition to President Trump, the Clapper leaks, the Comey leaks, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusal and subsequent 14 month nap with occasional forays into the marijuana legalization mix.

And last but not least Mueller's never-ending investigation into collusion between the Trump team and the Russians.

Why does Barsoomian, CIA operative, merit any mention? BECAUSE She is Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's WIFE! " :

"SWAMPgate: You won't believe how ALL the perps are connected as in joined at the hip!":

http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=122755#more-122755

Regards, onebornfree

[May 20, 2019] The dirty art of politicians entrapment: Blackmail, smear campaigns, various traps via honey or corruption, hookers, gay sex, pedophilia, or what-have-you, all or in combination

Highly recommended!
That remind me how old Kushner tried to smear his relative...
Notable quotes:
"... They are told that the daughter of a Russian billionaire plans large investments in Austria. It was said that she would like to help his party. The alleged daughter of the Russian billionaire, who is actually also Austrian, and her "friend" serve an expensive dinner. Alcohol flows freely. The pair offers a large party donation but asks for returns in form of mark ups on public contracts. ..."
"... The "Russian" female is notably very attractive with a slender build. There is a honey-trap angle here as well. This would likely inspire the boasting (in order to impress her) on the part of the wingnut politician. ..."
"... The far-right is the Troy Horse of transnational corporations and capital and already discredited neoliberal stablishment which comes now disguised under the softening label of "populists". Beware, there seems to be a coordinated effort at several blogs in the ten previous days of the European elections to whitewash the far-right. ..."
"... So this very much hints something more. Right now there is a debate of cocain being visible on the table but this accusation points more towards schnickle with a babe imho. The babe to his right is not that ugly, admittely. ..."
"... As expected the hysteria of "russian" meddling have now publicized to weaken FPÖ in the EU election. Winners? NATO/US parties. ..."
"... Seems indeed to be a honeypot aspect to the entrapment, and it's quite possible Strache stepped down at once to avoid that part to come to light, so that the public revelations would be limited to the economic shenanigans and influence-peddling level. ..."
"... Also, this goes to show that the bulk of our Western politicians, across all the political spectrum, are a bunch of mediocre and quite corrupt fools. For him not to smell that this was a setup from the very first minute, it must be that such proposals are common place all across the board - which will only reinforce my suspicion that our societies, peoples and mankind as a whole would only benefit if we fully wiped out our economic, financial and political establishment and started from scratches. ..."
"... Blackmail, smear campaigns, various traps via honey or corruption, hookers and blow, gay sex, paedofilia, or what-have-you, - all or in combination. Politicians are "all" compromised in these ways. Buck the system or threaten the status quo - whereby it gets somebody's serious attention and the shite hits the fan. ..."
"... The savages in this neoliberal order use the secret services to subvert democracy. Deception and manipulation are the means used to corrupt the public domain. They would push the most pliable and ruthless leaders into office. Catastrophe and violence and disinformation are their most powerful weapons. But I still think that political processes and elections do matter; and what counts is a struggle to improve and reform the system of government. Doing our best to protect and maintain the integrity of electoral processes is something that requires both protests and political campaigns. ..."
"... The very strong implication certainly seems to be that there may be further video of Strache sleeping with the honey pot. He obviously knows what happened that night. If there were video cameras hidden everywhere, that was obviously one of the intentions behind the sting from the outset. ..."
"... B, please do an article on the Nazi penetration of the German security services, Interior Ministry, Army, CDU etc, and links to the NSU affair, shredding of millions of documents by the Interior Ministry when demanded by the courts as evidence, links with the Board members and advisory board members of German big business especially Siemens and Deutche Bank and Bayer, etc. ..."
"... It is a wonder Strache's remark "Journalists are the biggest whores on the planet" and how he says he can subvert an entire media outlet to his political agenda by even firing the few remaining fringe elements. ..."
"... I don't think Strache is as harmless as you portray him, B. You fall for his defence strategy if you attribute all his statements to the influence of alcohol. At that time, the man was very confident that he would soon be at the levers of power, which then materialized. It remains to be proven whether he did not put into practice anything of what he talked about at that house in Ibiza. After all, he was talking about the by far most influential newspaper in Austria. ..."
"... Of course it is true that it is the neoliberal globalisers who have brought us to where we stand today. But that doesn' make people like Strache and Salvini any less dangerous. If they rise to total power, the result will be a naked dictatorship. Strache was beaten with his own weapons, you don't have to be under any illusions. ..."
"... Who could have ordered such an elaborate sting operation? ..."
"... The sophisticated operation using actors and a villa prepared with hidden cameras and microphones shows that this is hardly a normal case of dirty campaigning by political opponents. Most likely, either it was an action by a secret service or someone with deep pockets hired former secret agents. ..."
"... If it was an action by secret services, the most plausible explanation seems to be that Western secret services targeted Strache because FPÖ is one of the parties who is in favor of restoring normal relations with Russia ..."
"... François Fillon comes to mind, a French conservative candidate who also had a quite a friendly attitude towards Russia - shortly before the elections, it was revealed (at least claimed) that Fillon had given his wife ficticious employment, and Fillon lost popularity, which helped Macron enormously. ..."
"... Probably, some of the things Strache said during this sting operation were inacceptable, and Fillon may also not be innocent, but if there is a systematic selective targeting of European politicians who want to normalize relations with Russia by secret services, that would be a huge problem for democracy. ..."
"... In 2016, Joseph Mifsud invited George Papadopoulos to Rome and introduced him to "Putin's niece" with the intent of smearing Trump as "Russian puppet" and destroying his election chances. In 2017, someone (who?) invited Heinz-Christian Strache to Ibiza and introduced him to "Russian billionaire's niece" with the intent of smearing Strache as "Russian puppet" and destroying his party's election chances. Notice a pattern? ..."
"... This is a clear case of Germany interfering in Austrian elections. Austria should deport 60 German diplomats, shut down German embassy in Vienna, and impose sanctions on Germany. Also put a German girl interested in Austrian politics in jail for 18 months. ..."
"... Thinking about it, after revealing e-mail of HRC, Podesta etc. were published, their core supporters were enraged about the dirty trick and did not pay attention to the disclosed content, while for the core opponents of HRC she was already sufficiently vilified so the net change in voting intentions that can be attributed to that incident was modest. ..."
"... Anyone who does not directly have his or her family's nose in the EU trough at this point knows that the policies espoused by transatlantic puppets like Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron push our countries and our continent towards self-destruction. Life in Europe, post-1968 and pre-2013, has been pretty damn good. There's absolutely no good reason for us to rip up our traditions or turn into a continent of immigrants and mobile job seekers. ..."
"... As Strache explains in the video, Austrian dirty tricks are done "via another country". ..."
"... To those who fill that politics of Strache are obnoxious and that justifies entrapment, remembers that methods of that type are not improvised, and that means that there is an apparatus that does it. We noted similarities with provocations against George Papadopoulos. In the latter case the target was cautious, after all, we had to be well aware of such methods. But anyone who is despised by NATO establishment are similar group can be on the receiving end, think about Assange. ..."
May 20, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

During the last days a right wing politician in Austria was taken down by using an elaborate sting. Until Friday Heinz-Christian Strache was leader of the far right (but not fascist) Freedom Party of Austria (FPOe) and the Vice Chancellor of the country. On Friday morning two German papers, the Sueddeutsche Zeitung and Der Spiegel published (German) reports (English) about an old video that was made to take Strache down.

The FPOe has good connections with United Russia, the party of the Russian President Putin, and to other right-wing parties in east Europe. It's pro-Russian position has led to verbal attacks on and defamation of the party from NATO supporting and neoliberal circles.

In July 2017 Strache and his right hand man Johann Gudenus, who is also the big number in the FPOe, get invited for dinner to a rented villa on Ibiza, the Spanish tourist island in the Mediterranean. They are told that the daughter of a Russian billionaire plans large investments in Austria. It was said that she would like to help his party. The alleged daughter of the Russian billionaire, who is actually also Austrian, and her "friend" serve an expensive dinner. Alcohol flows freely. The pair offers a large party donation but asks for returns in form of mark ups on public contracts.

Unknown to Strache the villa is professionally bugged with many hidden cameras and microphones.


A scene from the video. Source: Der Falter (vid, German)

During the six hour long party several schemes get proposed by the "Russian" and are discussed. Strache rejects most of them. He insists several times that everything they plan or do must be legal and conform to the law. He says that a large donation could probably be funneled through an endowment that would then support his party. It is a gray area under Austrian party financing laws. They also discuss if the "Russian" could buy the Kronen Zeitung , Austria's powerful tabloid, and use it to prop up his party.

The evening goes on with several bottles of vodka on the table. Starche gets a bit drunk and boosts in front of the "oligarch daughter" about all his connections to rich and powerful people. He does not actually have these.

Strache says that, in exchange for help for his party, the "Russian" could get public contracts for highway building and repair. Currently most of such contracts in Austria go to the large Austrian company, STRABAG, that is owned by a neoliberal billionaire who opposes the FPOe. At that time Strache was not yet in the government and had no way to decide about such contracts.

At one point Strache seems to understand that the whole thing is a setup. But his right hand man calms him down and vouches for the "Russian". The sting ends with Strache and his companion leaving the place. The never again see the "Russian" and her co-plotter. Nothing they talked about will ever come to fruition.

Three month later Strache and his party win more than 20% in the Austrian election and form a coalition government with the conservative party OeVP led by Chancellor Sebastian Kurz. Even while the FPOe controls several ministries, it does not achieve much politically. It lacks a real program and the government's policies are mostly run by the conservatives.

Nearly two years after the evening on Ibiza, ten days before the European parliament election in which Strache's party is predicted to achieve good results, a video of the evening on Ibiza is handed to two German papers which are known to be have strong transatlanticist leanings and have previously been used for other shady 'leaks'. The papers do not hesitate to take part in the plot and publish extensive reports about the video.

After the reports appeared Strache immediately stepped down and the conservatives ended the coalition with his party. Austria will now have new elections.

On Bloomberg Leonid Bershidsky opines on the case:

Strache's discussion with the Russian oligarch's fake niece shows a propensity for dirty dealing that has nothing to do with idealistic nationalism. Nationalist populists often agitate against entrenched, corrupt elites and pledge to drain various swamps. In the videos, however, Strache and Gudenus behave like true swamp creatures, savoring rumors of drug and sex scandals in Austrian politics and discussing how to create an authoritarian media machine like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban's.

I do not believe that the people who voted for the FPOe (and similar parties in other countries) will subscribe to that view. The politics of the main stream parties in Austria have for decades been notoriously corrupt. Compared to them Strache and his party are astonishingly clean. In the video he insists several times that everything must stay within the legal realm. Whenever the "Russian" puts forward a likely illegal scheme, Starche emphatically rejects it.

Bershidsky continues:

Strache, as one of the few nationalist populists in government in the European Union's wealthier member states, was an important member of the movement Italian Interior Minister Matteo Salvini has been trying to cobble together ahead of the European Parliament election that will take place next week. On Saturday, he was supposed to attend a Salvini-led rally in Milan with other like-minded politicians from across Europe. Instead, he was in Vienna apologizing to his wife and to Kurz and protesting pitifully that he'd been the victim of a "political assassination" -- a poisonous rain on the Italian right-winger's parade.
...
This leaves the European far right in disarray and plays into the hands of centrist and leftist forces ahead of next week's election. Salvini's unifying effort has been thoroughly undermined, ...

This is also a misreading of the case. The right-wing parties will use the case to boost their legitimacy.

Strache was obviously set up by some intelligence services, probably a German one with a British assist. The original aim was likely to blackmail him. But during the meeting on Ibiza Strache promised and did nothing illegal. Looking for potential support for his party is not a sin. Neither is discussing investments in Austria with a "daughter of a Russian oligarch." Some boosting while drunk is hardly a reason to go to jail. When the incident provided too little material to claim that Strache is corrupt, the video was held back until the right moment to politically assassinate him with the largest potential damage to his party. That moment was thought to be now.

But that Strache stepped down after the sudden media assault only makes him more convincing. The right-wing all over Europe will see him as a martyr who was politically assassinated because he worked for their cause. The issue will increase the right-wingers hate against the 'liberal' establishment. It will further motivate them: "They attack us because we are right and winning." The new far-right block Natteo Salvini will setup in the European Parliament will likely receive a record share of votes.

Establishment writers notoriously misinterpret the new right wing parties and their followers. This stand-offish sentence in the Spiegel story about Strache's party demonstrates the problem:

In the last election, the party drew significant support from the working class, in part because of his ability to simplify even the most complicated of issues and play the common man, even in his role as vice chancellor.

The implicit thesis, that the working class is too dumb to understand the "most complicated of issues", is not only incredibly snobbish but utterly false. The working class understands very well what the establishment parties have done to it and continue to do. The increasing vote share of the far-right is a direct consequence of the behavior of the neoliberal center and of the lack of real left alternatives.

Last week, before the Strache video appeared, Craig Murray put his finger on the wound:

The massive economic shock following the banking collapse of 2007–8 is the direct cause of the crisis of confidence which is affecting almost all the institutions of western representative democracy. The banking collapse was not a natural event, like a tsunami. It was a direct result of man-made systems and artifices which permitted wealth to be generated and hoarded primarily through multiple financial transactions rather than by the actual production and sale of concrete goods, and which then disproportionately funnelled wealth to those engaged in the mechanics of the transactions.
...
The rejection of the political class manifests itself in different ways and has been diverted down a number of entirely blind alleys giving unfulfilled promise of a fresh start – Brexit, Trump, Macron. As the vote share of the established political parties – and public engagement with established political institutions – falls everywhere, the chattering classes deride the political symptoms of status quo rejection by the people as "populism". It is not populism to make sophisticated arguments that undermine the received political wisdom and take on the entire weight of established media opinion.

If one wants to take down the far right one has to do so with arguments and good politics for the working class. Most people, especially working class people, have a strong sense for justice. The political assassination of Christian Strache is unjust. What was done during the 2007-8 banking crisis was utterly corrupt and also unjust. Instead of going to jail the bankers were rewarded with extreme amounts of money for their assault on the well being of the people. The public was then told that it must starve through austerity to make up for the loss of money.

While I consider myself to be a strong leftist who opposes the right wherever possible, I believe to understand why people vote for Strache's FBOe and similar parties. When one talks to these people issues of injustice and inequality always come up. The new 'populist' parties at least claim to fight against the injustice done to the common men. Unlike most of the establishment parties they seem to be still mostly clean and not yet corrupted.

In the early 1990s Strache actually flirted with violent fascists but he rejected their way. While he has far-right opinions, he and his like are no danger to our societies. If we can not accept that Strache and his followers have some legitimate causes, we will soon find us confronted with way more extreme people. The neoliberal establishment seems to do its best to achieve that.

Posted by b on May 19, 2019 at 01:10 PM | Permalink


james , May 19, 2019 1:40:31 PM | 1

b - thanks .. i agree "elaborate sting" and "the video was held back until the right moment"... clearly this was a set up.. strache says he is going to pursue this legally..

"working class people, have a strong sense for justice. The political assassination of Christian Strache is unjust." injustices are being done on a constant basis now and being justified by the msm regularly.. i think this is part of the reason people are seeking alternatives - whatever they might be... power to the people..screw the neoliberal agenda and blackmail artists that are so rampant at present...

Bratislav Metulski , May 19, 2019 1:40:51 PM | 2
Funny thing is e.g.- a German comedian Jan Böhmerman knew before. Already in April he said in a Video call live in Austian television duringthe TV-prize-giving of the trophy "Romy" that he couldn´t attend personally to receive the price because right know he was sitting together with some FPÖ-buddies in a Russian oligarch-villa on Ibiza, sniffing cocain, drinking and negotiating the takeover of the "Krone-Zeitung" (the biggest rag in Austira, smth like the "Bild" in Germany or "The sun" in Britain).

Böhmers management released a statement yesterday that Böhermann did know before but didn´t name the source he knew it from.
https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article193725535/FPOE-Vize-Strache-Was-Boehmermann-mit-dem-Video-zu-tun-hat.html

Cui bono?

Paul Damascene , May 19, 2019 1:43:18 PM | 3
Your article here raises a number of important issues. More or less at random:

* If I understand your characterization of your political leanings, based on this and on the perspectives MoA offers, I share many of your views. And whereas there may be a certain Schadenfreude at seeing a right-wing, B-team operator reveal himself, I agree that the forces behind the sting itself are of potentially far greater interest (and danger)..

* For every sting and smear such as this that we see, how many others take place sub rosa, corrupting our political and social landscapes, leaving no evidence that might trigger criticism or resistance?

* I'm not sure of how this plays out legally, but this seems not just to have been a sting, but entrapment, in which (if these were law enforcement agents) we could protest that the only illegal activity being proposed, was by those conducting the sting.

* If this was, as you suggest, authored by the BND, then this would be a clear instance of election "meddling" -- though not of the sort that our shining democracies are now being warned against. (At least President Putin will not be accused of conducting it, for once. That oligarch's daughter could have come from anywhere, but of course Russia.) Russia gets smeared is probably the larger aim, rather than this particularly Austrian politician.

hallelujah hinton , May 19, 2019 1:55:07 PM | 4
The "Russian" female is notably very attractive with a slender build. There is a honey-trap angle here as well. This would likely inspire the boasting (in order to impress her) on the part of the wingnut politician.
somebody , May 19, 2019 1:56:55 PM | 5
I think the word is protofascist. b. you have got a blind spot seeing geopolitics everywhere. Truth is most of this is simply a battle of billionaires. The key to understand the Ibiza video is the product placement. Everybody there drinks Red Bull plus alcohol (I am not sure about the alcohol the loss of control of the politicians who are present suggests cocaine).

The owner of Red Bull is an Austrian billionaire called Dietrich Mateschitz. Mateschitz is a right wing crank building a media empire in Austria including an "investigative platform" called addendum that is something like the Austrian version of Breitbart.

For some reason "addendum" began to shoot against Rene Benzko, an Austrian real estate billionaire, who intends to take over Kronenzeitung.

And guess what, Rene Benzko was mentioned in the video "as a friend", and a large part of the conversation centered on taking over Kronenzeitung something Rene Benzko is involved in.

Strache, Vice Chancellor of Austria, explained in the video for every Austrian to understand, that his party's scheme is based on accepting illegal contributions via a ngo, and lowering taxes in return. According to what he says in the video he also intends to charge for water by selling the right to the Latvian/Russien "niece of a Russian oligarch" or someone else prepared to pay to his party's ngo.

Anybody who is not a billionaire voting for FPÖ after this must be braindead.

Arioch , May 19, 2019 1:58:49 PM | 6
> with United Russia, the party of the Russian President Putin

Putin himself though stresses his non involvement in that party, he also tried to bootstrap organizations that could supplant or even challenge U.R. at least in some niches.

While U.R. probably is party of Russian ruling elites, it is hardly one-man-show of LDPR/Zhirinovsky kind and whether Putin is "gray cardinal" of U.R. is very questionable.

Sasha , May 19, 2019 2:05:52 PM | 7
It is said that children and drunk people always say the truth... Why is it not to be taken into account what he said once drunk enough?

For to be a strong leftist, b, you spend a great effort in discharging this man, while whitewashing the far-right saying they are no danger for our societies and assuring that they are clean, when that is a thing you do not know since they have not had yet the possibility to rule.

They are neither cleaner nor inocuous for our societies. For starters they have chosen as scapegoat the migrants when who is to blame for the wave of migration is the US, NATO and their imperial ambitions, so as to throw poor against poor and that way the elites could continue quietly looting us, while we fight each other. You will never heard anything agsint banks ans elites from anybody in the far-right.

FYI, it is not Matteo Salvini who is forming a coalition of the far-right to conflude to European elections, but it is Bannon from his HQ in a Cisterciense monastery in Italy who is commanding this operation. Salvini is really a piece, having supported Guiado and the Venezuelan coup intend, and said what he would do with the Yellow Vests , "I don't go to the Yellow Vests with Molotov cocktails, if anything, I put them in prison" ...

Then it is AfD, who goes also in the block, whose members have claimed the Germans should be proud of the performance of the German Army during both WW....

Then Vox, financed by MEK and Israeli lobby and promoted by Bannon and the WH, who only wear clear neoliberal economic policies in their, for the rest, confusing program.

The best to test what the far-right will do in Europe is taking a look at what is happening in Brazil during these last days, an attack on education and research as if it was a military target ...This, after the moving of the embassy to Jerusalem and wide support to coup d´etat in Venezuela...He is also widely supported and financed by the US and Zionists.

The far-right is the Troy Horse of transnational corporations and capital and already discredited neoliberal stablishment which comes now disguised under the softening label of "populists". Beware, there seems to be a coordinated effort at several blogs in the ten previous days of the European elections to whitewash the far-right.

Bratislav Metulski , May 19, 2019 2:20:38 PM | 8
@4 hallelujah hinton
https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Neuwahlen-Der-gefeierte-Stratege-Kurz-hatte-keine-Optionen-mehr-4425362.html
Telepolis one of the oldest and biggest non-commercial online news and discussion platforms in Germany states in the following article, commenting on his statement at his resignation declaration:

"Glaubt er, man wäre bei Alkohol nachsichtiger? Offenbar schien er sich betrunken kaum mehr im Griff zu haben - und dies ist wohlgemerkt seine Erklärung für die Äußerungen im Video. Erst gegen Ende beginnt er eigenes Fehlverhalten einzuräumen und bittet insbesondere seine Frau um Verzeihung, mit der er ein wenige Monate altes Kind hat. Kenner Straches ahnten an dieser Stelle bereits, dass dieser sich bereits für Dinge entschuldigt, die zu diesem Zeitpunkt der Öffentlichkeit noch gar nicht bekannt sind."

Does he (Strache) really assume he would get more indulgence by blaming it on the alcolhol? Obviously when being drunken he wasn´t in control of himself anymore - and this is actually his explanation for his statements in the video. Somehow at the end he finally begins admitting own misconduct and especially asks his wife for forgiveness, with which he has a few months old child. Experts on Strache suspected from this moment on, that he apologized for things which at this moment are not known to the public, yet"

So this very much hints something more. Right now there is a debate of cocain being visible on the table but this accusation points more towards schnickle with a babe imho. The babe to his right is not that ugly, admittely.

Jackrabbit , May 19, 2019 2:26:38 PM | 9
somebody @5:
battle of billionaires.... Anybody who is not a billionaire voting for FPÖ after this must be braindead.
Anyone who believes voting will change anything is braindead. Only supporting protest Movements (like Gillet Jeune) and free press/citizen journalism (Wikileaks/Assange) will have any real effect.
Zanon , May 19, 2019 2:30:32 PM | 0
Great piece - I dont see how Strache actually made anything wrong or atleast nothing not normal to politicians that constantly seek out support by big, powerful people. Most likely the deep state in Austria struck FPÖ just like FBI struck Trump.

As expected the hysteria of "russian" meddling have now publicized to weaken FPÖ in the EU election. Winners? NATO/US parties.

Arioch , May 19, 2019 2:36:33 PM | 1
@hallelujah hinton #4

Also notice how she pretended to be a niece.

Not some very close relative like daughter or sister, which may be fearsome, as "russian mafia" oligarch could be expected to "protect" her of ladykillers viciously. But also not some far relative who would be seen alien and have no financial support.

Just enough distance to be safe to hit on and try to share the oligarch's money. It was both honey&gold trap.

Sasha , May 19, 2019 2:38:57 PM | 2
Anyone who believes voting will change anything is braindead.

@Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 19, 2019 2:26:38 PM | 9

If voting would be such a waste, why would had taken so hard and long to achieve voting for minorities and women? Why the parties go to such efforts to campaign and disguise themselves as wolves with sheepskin like the far-right?

Why would certain forces need to go to such editorial coordinated efforts through their several blogs out there to give an impression of certain candidates which is opposite to what they really are? Wikilieaks/Assange are part of this efforts, btw

Clueless Joe , May 19, 2019 2:44:05 PM | 4
Metulski:

Seems indeed to be a honeypot aspect to the entrapment, and it's quite possible Strache stepped down at once to avoid that part to come to light, so that the public revelations would be limited to the economic shenanigans and influence-peddling level.

Also, this goes to show that the bulk of our Western politicians, across all the political spectrum, are a bunch of mediocre and quite corrupt fools. For him not to smell that this was a setup from the very first minute, it must be that such proposals are common place all across the board - which will only reinforce my suspicion that our societies, peoples and mankind as a whole would only benefit if we fully wiped out our economic, financial and political establishment and started from scratches.

Sasha , May 19, 2019 2:44:10 PM | 5
Spanish Colonel ( ret.) Pedro Baños, who was postulated for head of the CNI by the Socialist government of Pedro Sanchez, was object of slander campiagn as "pro-Russian" by the Spanish cluster of Integrity Initiative, only for declarations on the prejudice of sanctions for Spain, and nobody made such noise....
hallelujah hinton , May 19, 2019 3:03:31 PM | 6
Blackmail, smear campaigns, various traps via honey or corruption, hookers and blow, gay sex, paedofilia, or what-have-you, - all or in combination. Politicians are "all" compromised in these ways. Buck the system or threaten the status quo - whereby it gets somebody's serious attention and the shite hits the fan.

Enforcement and and penalties are selective. Selective enforcement. It's how "The Law" operates. Not defending the wingnut pig in the article. I appreciate Sasha's Trojan Horse allegory above.

the pair , May 19, 2019 3:16:52 PM | 7
wow...a bunch of elitist neoliberals with contempt for anyone lacking 10 zeroes on their paychecks and zero useful policies use "russian collusion" to entrap and embarrass a pseudo-right wing politician. who could ever imagine such a scenario? and why learn from the masses you represent when james o'keefe gives you all the inspiration you need?

but at least they blocked the ascension of someone who would trade political favors for money. that kind of nonsense simply won't do in western society.

karlof1 , May 19, 2019 3:24:47 PM | 8
Thanks for this explanation, b! I first saw this reported at Geroman's Twitter and used machine translation of the article he linked, but it lacked the context which you provided. This incident is subsumed within the larger conflict that's trying to keep EU from combining with BRI/EAEU, which means its roots/culprits are NATO/Outlaw US Empire--it points to desperation on their part.
Jackrabbit , May 19, 2019 3:25:34 PM | 9
the pair @17

Some will fail to see the sarcasm. Best to use the /sarc tag.

somebody , May 19, 2019 3:34:51 PM | 0
Posted by: hallelujah hinton | May 19, 2019 1:55:07 PM | 4

Sorry, you don't see the Latvian/Russian woman. You see Gudenus' wife who is from Serbia. Whatever the publishing papers got, it was a copy. More will come out.

Copeland , May 19, 2019 4:01:44 PM | 1
The savages in this neoliberal order use the secret services to subvert democracy. Deception and manipulation are the means used to corrupt the public domain. They would push the most pliable and ruthless leaders into office. Catastrophe and violence and disinformation are their most powerful weapons. But I still think that political processes and elections do matter; and what counts is a struggle to improve and reform the system of government. Doing our best to protect and maintain the integrity of electoral processes is something that requires both protests and political campaigns.
BM , May 19, 2019 4:14:36 PM | 2
So this very much hints something more. Right now there is a debate of cocain being visible on the table but this accusation points more towards schnickle with a babe imho. The babe to his right is not that ugly, admittely.
Posted by: Bratislav Metulski | May 19, 2019 2:20:38 PM | 8

The very strong implication certainly seems to be that there may be further video of Strache sleeping with the honey pot. He obviously knows what happened that night. If there were video cameras hidden everywhere, that was obviously one of the intentions behind the sting from the outset.

---

On the issue of "populism" and right-wing parties I confess I have a problem. I certainly want to see the Establishment thrashed, and especially in next week's EU elections, and there is no question that at the moment the right-wing parties have far more potential to upset the establishment than the left. If "Populist" parties are able to radically upset the EU Parliament, that should bring a much-needed hammer and axe to the anti-populist activities of the EU, and hopefully lead to the breakup of the EU.

On the other hand, unlike B, I do have extremely strong worries about the rising power of the far right and their connections to Nazis and neo-Nazis. I am concerned - even without the involvement of Bannon, but far more so with - that the rise of "populism" is a calculated policy of a Nazi segment of the Establishment that is designed specifically to usher in an international Nazi movement across Europe and Latin America under the leadership of and proxies of the - ever more and more Nazi behaving - US (which itself is in so many very real ways descended from Adolf Hitler's Nazi Party and the Japanese war criminals including Bush's family, tight connections with Nazi war criminals in the CIA, and historical leadership figures in the CIA). The large scale and extremely high level infiltration of hardcore Nazis in the German security services, Interior Ministry, Army, and CDU politics is a ticking timebomb waiting for its moment. There seems to be similar high level Nazi infiltration in many other countries.

We have to be careful what we wish for!

B, please do an article on the Nazi penetration of the German security services, Interior Ministry, Army, CDU etc, and links to the NSU affair, shredding of millions of documents by the Interior Ministry when demanded by the courts as evidence, links with the Board members and advisory board members of German big business especially Siemens and Deutche Bank and Bayer, etc.

Sasha , May 19, 2019 4:21:50 PM | 3
On how there is real danger with these wolves on sheepskin who only try to divide and conquer the working masses of the world, this old article by Ho Chi Minh on the importance of class conscience and the great labor of the University of the East in the former USSR to get workers of the world conscous and united in the common struggle. Also on the importance of having the right to vote:
Colonialism is a leech with two suckers, one of which sucks the metropolitan proletariat and the other that of the colonies. If we want to kill this monster, we must cut off both suckers at the same time. If only one is cut off, the other will continue to suck the blood of the proletariat, the animal will continue to live, and the cut–off sucker will grow again. The Russian Revolution has grasped this truth clearly. That is why it is not satisfied with making fine platonic speeches and drafting "humanitarian" resolutions in favor of oppressed peoples, but it teaches them to struggle; and helps them spiritually, as proclaimed by Lenin in his theses on the colonial question. To the Baku Congress, twenty–one Eastern nations sent delegates. Representatives of Western workers' parties also participated in the work of this congress. For the first time, the proletariat of the conquering Western States and that of the subject Eastern countries fraternally joined hands and deliberated in common on the best means to defeat their common enemy, imperialism .

Following this historic congress, despite internal and external difficulties, revolutionary Russia has never hesitated to come to the help of peoples awakened by its heroic and victorious revolution. One of its first important acts was the founding of the University of the East.(...)

The sixty–two nationalities represented at the University form a "Commune." Its chairman and functionaries are elected every three months by all the students.

A student delegate takes part in the economic and administrative management of the University. All must regularly and in turn work in the kitchen, the library, the club, etc. All "misdemeanors" and disputes are judged and settled by an elected tribunal in the presence of all comrades. Once a week, the "Commune" holds a meeting to discuss the international political and economic situation. From time to time, meetings and evening parties are organized where the amateur artists introduce the art and culture of their country.

The fact that the Communists not only treat the "inferior natives of the colonies" like brothers, but that they get them to participate in the political life of the country, is highly characteristic of the "barbarity" of the Bolsheviks. Treated in their native country as "submissive subjects" or "protéges," having no other right but that to pay taxes, the Eastern students, who are neither electors nor eligible for election in their own country, from whom the right to express their political opinion is withdrawn, in the Soviet Union take part in the election of the Soviets and have the right to send their representatives to the Soviets. Let our brothers of the colonies who vainly seek a change of nationality make a comparison between bourgeois democracy and proletarian democracy.

These students have suffered themselves and have witnessed the sufferings of others. All have lived under the yoke of "high civilization," all have been victims of exploitation and oppression by foreign capitalists . Moreover, they passionately long to acquire knowledge and to study. They are serious and full of enthusiasm. They are entirely different from the frequenters of the boulevards of the Latin Quarter, the Eastern students in Paris, Oxford, and Berlin. It can be said without exaggeration that under the roof of this University is the future of the colonial peoples.

The colonial countries of the Near and Far East, stretching from Syria to Korea, cover an extent of more than 15 million square kilometers and have more than 1,200 million inhabitants. All these immense countries are now under the yoke of capitalism and imperialism. Although their considerable numbers should be their strength, these submissive peoples have never yet made any serious attempts to free themselves from this yoke. Not yet having realized the value of international solidarity, they have not known how to unite for the struggle. Relationships between their countries are not yet established as they are among the peoples of Europe and America. They possess gigantic strength and do not yet realize it. The University of the East, assembling all the young, active, and intelligent leaders of the colonized countries, has fulfilled a great task, namely:

-It teaches to the future vanguard militants the principles of class struggle, confused in their minds by race conflicts and patriarchal customs.
-It establishes between the proletarian vanguard of the colonies a close contact with the Western proletariat, thus preparing the way for the close and effective cooperation which will alone ensure the final victory of the international working class.
-It teaches the colonized people, hitherto separated from one another, to know one another and to unite, by creating the bases of a future union of Eastern countries, one of the wings of the proletarian revolution.
-It sets the proletariat of colonialist countries and example of what they can and must do in favor of their oppressed brothers
.

This is why it is needed to throw the workers from the West against the migrants from the East and South, to avoid the invincible force they would constitute together. This dirty work is made by the far-right in the name of corporate liberal elites. They can play that they fight each other, but as soon as they get seats at the European Parliament, you will find the previous allegedly opponents all together aligned in the same Eurogroup. Time to time.

Bacchante , May 19, 2019 4:38:44 PM | 4
It is a wonder Strache's remark "Journalists are the biggest whores on the planet" and how he says he can subvert an entire media outlet to his political agenda by even firing the few remaining fringe elements. Yet here we can still talk about he was drunk, how his being set up was unjust, and how the poor guy will have to miss his lovers' right cause in Italy. Those vulgar masses are at it again! There can be no justification about the masses' support of far-right causes and the clowns like him. If you think otherwise it is the likes of moonofalabama next in line to be "fired", or eliminated. Legitimize their causes and it is Germany in 1920s all over again.

Two wrongs do not make a right, unfortunately.

Walter , May 19, 2019 4:56:04 PM | 5
"Left/right", I agree, is nearly without semantic value. Nevertheless class interests remain...how is it that this is so? Think about that, comrades.

And then consider wsws report about "At the annual meeting of the Bundeswehr reserve in autumn 2016, Veith announced: "I dream that in 2026 there will be a provincial regiment in each state with a charismatic commander, a troop flag and an organization of between 800 and 2,000 reservists to support the police and the Bundeswehr in emergency situations." " see> "German government prepares troops for domestic missions" @ wsws.org

Considering the overall aspects, it's rational to expect all parties in Europe to make plans, is it not? Of course the working class is not permitted to make such plans...is it?

Pnyx , May 19, 2019 5:04:18 PM | 6
I don't think Strache is as harmless as you portray him, B. You fall for his defence strategy if you attribute all his statements to the influence of alcohol. At that time, the man was very confident that he would soon be at the levers of power, which then materialized. It remains to be proven whether he did not put into practice anything of what he talked about at that house in Ibiza. After all, he was talking about the by far most influential newspaper in Austria.

Of course it is true that it is the neoliberal globalisers who have brought us to where we stand today. But that doesn' make people like Strache and Salvini any less dangerous. If they rise to total power, the result will be a naked dictatorship. Strache was beaten with his own weapons, you don't have to be under any illusions.

I agree with you that this is not the big setback for the right the mainstream parties dream of. But it won't help the fascists in spe in the future either.

Adrian E. , May 19, 2019 5:25:25 PM | 7
Who could have ordered such an elaborate sting operation?

A first association might be the dirty, deceptive campaigning SPÖ used against Sebastian Kurz (ÖVP) - the Silberstein affair -, but I think the methods that were chosen are too different to make a common source likely, Strache was targeted in a much more sophisticated way. The Silberstein affair may, however, be the reason why the tapes have partially been published now rather than before the last Austrian elections - at that time, dirty campaigning might have been discredited too much for the tape to have the desired effect,

The sophisticated operation using actors and a villa prepared with hidden cameras and microphones shows that this is hardly a normal case of dirty campaigning by political opponents. Most likely, either it was an action by a secret service or someone with deep pockets hired former secret agents.

If it was an action by secret services, the most plausible explanation seems to be that Western secret services targeted Strache because FPÖ is one of the parties who is in favor of restoring normal relations with Russia.

François Fillon comes to mind, a French conservative candidate who also had a quite a friendly attitude towards Russia - shortly before the elections, it was revealed (at least claimed) that Fillon had given his wife ficticious employment, and Fillon lost popularity, which helped Macron enormously.

Probably, some of the things Strache said during this sting operation were inacceptable, and Fillon may also not be innocent, but if there is a systematic selective targeting of European politicians who want to normalize relations with Russia by secret services, that would be a huge problem for democracy.

In the case of Strache and FPÖ, a different motive may also be plausible. There are connections between FPÖ and neonazis, and there are, in my view, legitimate concerns that Strache is too close to such far-right networks. I don't think it is good when right-wing populists whose rise is mainly due to the unpopularity of the neoliberal elites are equated with Nazis too quickly.

But in the case of FPÖ, this is less far-fetched than in the case of other European right-wing parties - historically, Nazis played an important role in FPÖ in post-war Austria, and it is one of the current right-wing parties that probably has more connections to the extreme right (e.g. via Burschenschaften) than others. I could imagine that someone might have ordered and financed the sting operation out of antifascist principles. While I may recognize the motivation as ethical and even partially agree with it, I don't think the right means were chosen, and such dirty methods can backfire.

Michael Droy , May 19, 2019 5:33:51 PM | 8
"While I consider myself to be a strong leftist who opposes the right wherever possible, I believe to understand why people vote for Strache's FBOe and similar parties"

Quite. It seems to me that only the Right and the Left have a clue right now, because they have an instinctive mistrust of what they are told in the media.
People like "b" and Craig Murray are to be thanked for explaining that to us middling voters.

You miss the most glaring "injustice". That which shows that GDP in most western countries had doubled in the last 30 odd years, that earnings for the top quartile have gone up by factors of 3 or 4. But that median earnings in US are unchanged, and in say UK are only up 10% or so (unless one is seeking to buy one's own house or flat).

All the improvements in inequality from 1930s to 1980s have been reversed in full. "Populists" (or better "anti-elitists") are driven mostly by sheer anger at how a small group had taken all the Economic gains of the last 35 years.

somebody , May 19, 2019 5:35:30 PM | 9
Posted by: Pnyx | May 19, 2019 5:04:18 PM | 26

I don't know what b. saw in the video what I saw was a discussion of an Orban like take over of Austria by FPÖ.

In other news people are arguing the following
- who will profit most - ÖVP
- why was the video not published after it was produced in 2017 - because ÖVP wanted a coalition with FPÖ
- why was it published now - ÖVP has been renting advertising space for weeks for an election in September (renting before the video came out), Sebastian Kurz will be the saviour who will get the disappointed FPÖ vote
add
- why the emphasis on Kronenzeitung,
who were the people producing the video
why Red Bull everywhere - Red Bull media empire billionaire Dietrich Mateschitz publicly announced that he would back Sebastian Kurz in 2017

ÖVP/Kurz/Mateschitz have moved so far to the right that there is not much space for FPÖ anyway. His problems will return when he needs another coalition.

brian , May 19, 2019 5:37:28 PM | 0
'The FPOe has good connections with United Russia, the party of the Russian President Putin, and to other right-wing parties in east Europe'

other?

Erelis , May 19, 2019 6:09:06 PM | 1
While the right wing parties in Europe don't have a problem with Putin, it does seem that much of the Western European establish has gone full McCarthyite hysterical where they see any contact for any reason with a Russian is automatically criminal. Aside from being a setup it relied the underlying false flag of presenting the woman as a Russian (and hence guility of some crime against the Austrians).

In fact, a suggestion for a column--personal impressions on whether everyday Europeans are falling for anti-Russian propaganda. Polls in the US indicate that Americans simply do not care (they could believe it, but not effecting their daily lives).

S , May 19, 2019 6:36:42 PM | 2
1. The ER (United Russia) party was founded by Sergey Shoygu, Yuriy Luzhkov, and Mintimer Shaymiev. Its chairman is Dmitriy Medvedev, not Vladimir Putin. Putin is not even a member of ER. Putin is the leader of ONF (All-Russia People's Front), which is a nation-wide discussion platform for politicians, professionals, and NGOs.

2. Russian billionaire Igor Makarov denies having a niece: "I was the only child in the family." ( Forbes.ru , in Russian).

3. In 2016, Joseph Mifsud invited George Papadopoulos to Rome and introduced him to "Putin's niece" with the intent of smearing Trump as "Russian puppet" and destroying his election chances. In 2017, someone (who?) invited Heinz-Christian Strache to Ibiza and introduced him to "Russian billionaire's niece" with the intent of smearing Strache as "Russian puppet" and destroying his party's election chances. Notice a pattern?

4. This is a clear case of Germany interfering in Austrian elections. Austria should deport 60 German diplomats, shut down German embassy in Vienna, and impose sanctions on Germany. Also put a German girl interested in Austrian politics in jail for 18 months.

Piotr Berman , May 19, 2019 6:37:32 PM | 3
Thinking about it, after revealing e-mail of HRC, Podesta etc. were published, their core supporters were enraged about the dirty trick and did not pay attention to the disclosed content, while for the core opponents of HRC she was already sufficiently vilified so the net change in voting intentions that can be attributed to that incident was modest.

Leaving aside the discussion of of various factors in that election, this public reaction is typical. Actually, in both cases the core supporters may be energized by the suspicion that this trick was performed by a foreign government. I do not think that there is a particular hostility toward Germany in Felix Austria, but the to the right wing Merkel government is like red cape for a bull. The women who unleashed a wave of refugees. On top of that, traditionally major parties of Austria gained reputation of dirty patronage, so the voters who care about that issue probably do not vote for them.

I do not expect Austrians to demand expulsions of German diplomats -- interference in our democracy -- or other sanctions, but nevertheless it stinks. Making sting operations on politicians has corrupt potential even if it is done by domestic law enforcement, but foreign intelligence services really do not have any excuse.

Thinking about it, the stings against George Papadopoulos described in his book were remarkably similar.

Piotr Berman , May 19, 2019 6:45:53 PM | 4
Great minds think alike, S!

That said, Austrians have a reputation of good manners etc., they will not unload their frustration on a girl. BTW, why there are suspicions of Germany being involved? Again, even extremist Austrians probably would like to have some proof before doing anything. I guess, America is indeed exceptional.

Uncoy , May 19, 2019 6:49:33 PM | 5
For all those of you whining about the corruption of Strache, this is how business and politics is done in Austria. Strache was just talking about the FPÖ's fair share after an election which they would win.

This all starts with Austrian's Presidential Election of 2016. The FPÖ won the presidential election a couple of years ago in May 2016. After the bell, postal votes overturned it! – postal votes more than 90% in favour of the establishment candidate Van der Bellen. Some constituencies full of Van der Bellen votes turned out to have 148% turn out. There was a court case by the FPÖ about procedure and hinting at ballot falsification. The case was judged by a (non-corrupt but under serious pressure) judge to have enough merit that the elections had to be annulled and the election rerun six months later . Austria went without a president at all for six months!

For six months the mainstream Austrian media campaigned non-stop against the FPÖ and Norbert Hofer. Huge efforts were made for voter turnout (it included huge bussing of potential anti-FPÖ constituencies and bribing pensioners to vote against the FPÖ via parties and cakes). With all of that, Van der Bellen scraped in on 4 December 2016, by 348,231 votes. Despite the non-stop anti-FPÖ propaganda and banging on drums, votes for Hofer's fell by less than 100,000 (95,993 votes to be exact). It's just that with six months to prepare the establishment had found enough "dead souls" to win the second round.

In the parliamentary elections of 15 October 2017, the FPÖ were set to win a strong majority in parliament. To defeat the FPÖ and Strache, the conservatives (Völkspartei) were forced to elect a male model non-university graduate 30 year old sex symbol with no work experience outside of politics as party leader. Of course Sebastian Kurz was mainly a figurehead for establishment figures in the venerable Völkspartei. Kurz does have a mind of his own though (I had the opportunity to interact with him personally at a local political discussion group in 2015) and it's hard to know exactly how much of his policy is dictated to him and how much is off his own bat.

Going back to Austrian corruption, there are enormous sums at stake. There is a long entrenched system of corruption in the establishment parties, the Völkspartei and the SPÖ. Strabag does win most of the government contracts. Favour is regularly granted on quid pro basis. The media landscape is very partisan and mostly for sale. Kurz's spiritual predecessor as a powerful head of the Völkspartei if not direct predecessor Wolfgang Schüssel was forced to retire from politics in 2011 due to never-ending corruption scandals. Schüssel's longstanding finance minister Karl-Heinz Grasser was caught carrying bags of cash to Lichtenstein and is still under investigation. If his mother-in-law were not the richest woman in Austria (Swarovski Crystal) and devoted to her daughter (Grasser's wife), he would long ago have been in jail.

Politically, Grasser knows where a lot of the bodies are buried from the Schlüssel political machine so either he has to be kept out of jail or he may take others down with him. In elite Austrian circles turning informant would be considered unsportsmanlike so there's an uneasy truce still fought to this day in the courts where Grasser is kept out of jail via procedural methods (detect a pattern) and Grasser doesn't rat out the others.

Strache's sin is not planning to use the advantages which accrue to the governing Austrian party but getting caught out talking about it. Strache is something of a lout, not terribly loyal (he was the Brutus who threw Jörg Haider under the bus in 2005 in a palace putsch). He's a smoker in power who used his power to overturn some very positive anti-smoking laws. But he's less corrupt than any of his equivalents in the Völkspartei and is only a nose ahead of the his equivalents in the SPÖ. His politics and policies of Austria for Austrians are pretty simple. Hence people vote for these policies.

Here's a sample of the SPÖ's wares in the 2010 Vienna elections:

The FPÖ has historically been weakest in Vienna but in 2010 they took 27% of the vote in this SPÖ stronghold, their first step in what has been a steady march to power.

Anyone who does not directly have his or her family's nose in the EU trough at this point knows that the policies espoused by transatlantic puppets like Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron push our countries and our continent towards self-destruction. Life in Europe, post-1968 and pre-2013, has been pretty damn good. There's absolutely no good reason for us to rip up our traditions or turn into a continent of immigrants and mobile job seekers. We instinctively abhor what is happening to our nations. By nature Strache is inclined this way himself (he's no great thinker) and has the good sense to ride the wave.

somebody , May 19, 2019 7:11:44 PM | 6
Posted by: Piotr Berman | May 19, 2019 6:45:53 PM | 34

As Strache explains in the video, Austrian dirty tricks are done "via another country".

somebody , May 19, 2019 7:21:16 PM | 7
For all those of you whining about the corruption of Strache, this is how business and politics is done in Austria. Strache was just talking about the FPÖ's fair share after an election which they would win.

So why did he step down?

Here's a sample of the SPÖ's wares in the 2010 Vienna elections:

You mean FPÖ wares .

Hoarsewhisperer , May 19, 2019 7:29:57 PM | 8
...
"This stand-offish sentence in the Spiegel story about Strache's party demonstrates the problem:"

In the last election, the party drew significant support from the working class, in part because of his ability to simplify even the most complicated of issues and play the common man, even in his role as vice chancellor.

"The implicit thesis, that the working class is too dumb to understand the "most complicated of issues", is not only incredibly snobbish but utterly false..."

I can't agree that Spiegel's attitude to Strache's party is condescending toward the working class. Right-wing parties tend to spout a lot of aggressively authoritarian spin tank bullshit to encourage voters to tune out when a R-w politician is telling them what to think. If Strache is adept at separating fact from fiction and superfluous verbiage, then people would appreciate his candor.

In a Democracy, and in theory at least, politicians are supposed to represent and defend the views of the people who voted for them, not vested intere$t$. Or so we've been led to believe...

I'll always remember Spiegel as the folks whose photo-journalists torpedoed Crooked Hillary's feeble-minded Cheonan (NK-SK) bullshit. That story vanished overnight. It's not even referred to in NK smear campaigns. Dead & buried.

somebody , May 19, 2019 8:15:54 PM | 9
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | May 19, 2019 7:29:57 PM | 38

In a Democracy, and in theory at least, politicians are supposed to represent and defend the views of the people who voted for them, not vested intere$t$. Or so we've been led to believe...

You are making this theory up.

Let's take the American constitution .

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,

That's it.

The German constitution is absolutely clear that members of parliament represent all of the people (ie different views and interests) and are bound by their own judgement and conscience only.

As we are discussing Austria, lets see what the Austrian constitution says. Austria has "linguistic and cultural diversity" and the protection of its grown native peoples in its constitution, this means Slovenian, Croatian, Czech, Slovakian, Roma and Hungarian. So the Austrian constitution has a concept of a multinational state where different peoples grow and are protected even if the Viennese "Stammtisch" does not like them.

There is no "democratic theory" that suggests representatives should follow the uninformed and prejudiced views of their electorate against their better judgement.

Strache seems to have specialized in "fake news" - ie mostly invented stuff claiming Muslims, immigrants or whoever were treated in a better way than native Austrians or threatened native Austrians.

It is a very convenient technique when you plan to cut social services, you have someone to blame.

Piotr Berman , May 19, 2019 9:05:45 PM | 0
To those who fill that politics of Strache are obnoxious and that justifies entrapment, remembers that methods of that type are not improvised, and that means that there is an apparatus that does it. We noted similarities with provocations against George Papadopoulos. In the latter case the target was cautious, after all, we had to be well aware of such methods. But anyone who is despised by NATO establishment are similar group can be on the receiving end, think about Assange.

[May 19, 2019] How Russiagate replaced Analysis of the 2016 Election by Rick Sterling

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... What he said is, 'I Donald Trump am going to be a champion of the working class I know you are working longer hours for lower wages, seeing your jobs going to China, can't afford childcare, can't afford to send your kids to college. I Donald Trump alone can solve these problems.' What you have is a guy who utilized the media, manipulated the media very well. He is an entertainer, he is a professional at that. But I will tell you that I think there needs to be a profound change in the way the Democratic Party does business. It is not good enough to have a liberal elite. I come from the white working class and I am deeply humiliated that the Democratic Party cannot talk to the people where I came from." ..."
"... when the Clinton team first learned that Wikileaks was going to release damaging Democratic National Party emails in June 2016, they "brought in outside consultants to plot a PR strategy for handling the news of the hack the story would advance a narrative that benefited the Clinton campaign and the Democrats: The Russians were interfering in the US election, presumably to assist Trump." ..."
"... After losing the election, Team Clinton doubled down on this PR strategy. As described in the book Shattered (p. 395) the day after the election campaign managers assembled the communication team "to engineer the case that the election wasn't entirely on the up and up . they went over the script they would pitch to the press and the public. Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument." ..."
"... A progressive team produced a very different analysis titled Autopsy: The Democratic Party in Crisis . They did this because "the (Democratic) party's national leadership has shown scant interest in addressing many of the key factors that led to electoral disaster." The report analyzes why the party turnout was less than expected and why traditional Democratic Party supporters are declining. ..."
"... Since the 2016 election there has been little public discussion of the process whereby Hillary Clinton became the Democratic Party nominee. It's apparent she was pre-ordained by the Democratic Party elite. As exposed in the DNC emails, there was bias and violations of the party obligations at the highest levels. On top of that, it should now be clear that the pundits, pollsters and election experts were out of touch, made poor predictions and decisions. ..."
"... The 2016 election is highly relevant today. Already we see the same pattern of establishment bias and "horse race" journalism which focuses on fund-raising, polls and elite-biased "electability" instead of dealing with real issues, who has solutions, who has appeal to which groups. ..."
"... The establishment bias for Biden is matched by the bias against Democratic Party candidates who directly challenge Wall Street and US foreign policy. On Wall Street, that would be Bernie Sanders. On foreign policy, that is Tulsi Gabbard. With a military background Tulsi Gabbard has broad appeal, an inclusive message and a uniquely sharp critique of US "regime change" foreign policy. ..."
"... Blaming an outside power is a good way to prevent self analysis and positive change. It's gone on far too long. ..."
May 19, 2019 | dissidentvoice.org
An honest and accurate analysis of the 2016 election is not just an academic exercise. It is very relevant to the current election campaign. Yet over the past two years, Russiagate has dominated media and political debate and largely replaced a serious analysis of the factors leading to Trump's victory. The public has been flooded with the various elements of the story that Russia intervened and Trump colluded with them. The latter accusation was negated by the Mueller Report but elements of the Democratic Party and media refuse to move on. Now it's the lofty but vague accusations of "obstruction of justice" along with renewed dirt digging. To some it is a "constitutional crisis", but to many it looks like more partisan fighting.

Russiagate has distracted from pressing issues

Russiagate has distracted attention and energy away from crucial and pressing issues such as income inequality, the housing and homeless crisis, inadequate healthcare, militarized police, over-priced college education, impossible student loans and deteriorating infrastructure. The tax structure was changed to benefit wealthy individuals and corporations with little opposition. The Trump administration has undermined environmental laws, civil rights, national parks and women's equality while directing ever more money to military contractors. Working class Americans are struggling with rising living costs, low wages, student debt, and racism. They constitute the bulk of the military which is spread all over the world, sustaining continuing occupations in war zones including Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and parts of Africa. While all this has been going on, the Democratic establishment and much of the media have been focused on Russiagate, the Mueller Report, and related issues.

Immediately after the 2016 Election

In the immediate wake of the 2016 election there was some forthright analysis. Bernie Sanders said , "What Trump did very effectively is tap the angst and the anger and the hurt and pain that millions of working class people are feeling. What he said is, 'I Donald Trump am going to be a champion of the working class I know you are working longer hours for lower wages, seeing your jobs going to China, can't afford childcare, can't afford to send your kids to college. I Donald Trump alone can solve these problems.' What you have is a guy who utilized the media, manipulated the media very well. He is an entertainer, he is a professional at that. But I will tell you that I think there needs to be a profound change in the way the Democratic Party does business. It is not good enough to have a liberal elite. I come from the white working class and I am deeply humiliated that the Democratic Party cannot talk to the people where I came from."

Days after the election, the Washington Post published an op-ed titled " Hillary Clinton Lost. Bernie Sanders could have won. We chose the wrong candidate ." The author analyzed the results saying , "Donald Trump's stunning victory is less surprising when we remember a simple fact: Hillary Clinton is a deeply unpopular politician." The writer analyzed why Sanders would have prevailed against Trump and predicted "there will be years of recriminations."

Russiagate replaced Recrimination

But instead of analysis, the media and Democrats have emphasized foreign interference. There is an element of self-interest in this narrative. As reported in "Russian Roulette" (p127), when the Clinton team first learned that Wikileaks was going to release damaging Democratic National Party emails in June 2016, they "brought in outside consultants to plot a PR strategy for handling the news of the hack the story would advance a narrative that benefited the Clinton campaign and the Democrats: The Russians were interfering in the US election, presumably to assist Trump."

After losing the election, Team Clinton doubled down on this PR strategy. As described in the book Shattered (p. 395) the day after the election campaign managers assembled the communication team "to engineer the case that the election wasn't entirely on the up and up . they went over the script they would pitch to the press and the public. Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument."

This narrative has been remarkably effective in supplanting critical review of the election.

One Year After the Election

The Center for American Progress (CAP) was founded by John Podesta and is closely aligned with the Democratic Party. In November 2017 they produced an analysis titled " Voter Trends in 2016: A Final Examination ". Interestingly, there is not a single reference to Russia. Key conclusions are that "it is critical for Democrats to attract more support from the white non-college-educated voting bloc" and "Democrats must go beyond the 'identity politics' versus 'economic populism' debate to create a genuine cross-racial, cross-class coalition " It suggests that Wall Street has the same interests as Main Street and the working class.

A progressive team produced a very different analysis titled Autopsy: The Democratic Party in Crisis . They did this because "the (Democratic) party's national leadership has shown scant interest in addressing many of the key factors that led to electoral disaster." The report analyzes why the party turnout was less than expected and why traditional Democratic Party supporters are declining. It includes recommendations to end the party's undemocratic practices, expand voting rights and counter voter suppression. The report contains details and specific recommendations lacking in the CAP report. It includes an overall analysis which says "The Democratic Party should disentangle itself – ideologically and financially – from Wall Street, the military-industrial complex and other corporate interests that put profits ahead of public needs."

Two Years After the Election

In October 2018, the progressive team produced a follow-up report titled " Autopsy: One Year Later ". It says, "The Democratic Party has implemented modest reforms, but corporate power continues to dominate the party."

In a recent phone interview, the editor of that report, Norman Solomon, said it appears some in the Democratic Party establishment would rather lose the next election to Republicans than give up control of the party.

What really happened in 2016?

Beyond the initial critiques and "Autopsy" research, there has been little discussion, debate or lessons learned about the 2016 election. Politics has been dominated by Russiagate.

Why did so many working class voters switch from Obama to Trump? A major reason is because Hillary Clinton is associated with Wall Street and the economic policies of her husband President Bill Clinton. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), promoted by Bill Clinton, resulted in huge decline in manufacturing jobs in swing states such as Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Of course, this would influence their thinking and votes. Hillary Clinton's support for the Trans Pacific Partnership was another indication of her policies.

What about the low turnout from the African American community? Again, the lack of enthusiasm is rooted in objective reality. Hillary Clinton is associated with "welfare reform" promoted by her husband. According to this study from the University of Michigan, "As of the beginning of 2011, about 1.46 million U.S. households with about 2.8 million children were surviving on $2 or less in income per person per day in a given month The prevalence of extreme poverty rose sharply between 1996 and 2011. This growth has been concentrated among those groups that were most affected by the 1996 welfare reform. "

Over the past several decades there has been a huge increase in prison incarceration due to increasingly strict punishments and mandatory prison sentences. Since the poor and working class have been the primary victims of welfare and criminal justice "reforms" initiated or sustained through the Clinton presidency, it's understandable why they were not keen on Hillary Clinton. The notion that low turnout was due to African Americans being unduly influenced by Russian Facebook posts is seen as "bigoted paternalism" by blogger Teodrose Fikremanian who says, "The corporate recorders at the NY Times would have us believe that the reason African-Americans did not uniformly vote for Hillary Clinton and the Democrats is because they were too dimwitted to think for themselves and were subsequently manipulated by foreign agents. This yellow press drivel is nothing more than propaganda that could have been written by George Wallace."

How Clinton became the Nominee

Since the 2016 election there has been little public discussion of the process whereby Hillary Clinton became the Democratic Party nominee. It's apparent she was pre-ordained by the Democratic Party elite. As exposed in the DNC emails, there was bias and violations of the party obligations at the highest levels. On top of that, it should now be clear that the pundits, pollsters and election experts were out of touch, made poor predictions and decisions.

Bernie Sanders would have been a much stronger candidate. He would have won the same party loyalists who voted for Clinton. His message attacking Wall Street would have resonated with significant sections of the working class and poor who were unenthusiastic (to say the least) about Clinton. An indication is that in critical swing states such as Wisconsin and Michigan Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary race.

Clinton had no response for Trump's attacks on multinational trade agreements and his false promises of serving the working class. Sanders would have had vastly more appeal to working class and minorities. His primary campaign showed his huge appeal to youth and third party voters. In short, it's likely that Sanders would have trounced Trump. Where is the accountability for how Clinton ended up as the Democratic Party candidate?

The Relevance of 2016 to 2020

The 2016 election is highly relevant today. Already we see the same pattern of establishment bias and "horse race" journalism which focuses on fund-raising, polls and elite-biased "electability" instead of dealing with real issues, who has solutions, who has appeal to which groups.

Mainstream media and pundits are already promoting Joe Biden. Syndicated columnist EJ Dionne, a Democratic establishment favorite, is indicative. In his article " Can Biden be the helmsman who gets us past the storm? " Dionne speaks of the "strength he (Biden) brings" and the "comfort he creates". In the same vein, Andrew Sullivan pushes Biden in his article " Why Joe Biden Might be the Best to Beat Trump ". Sullivan thinks that Biden has appeal in the working class because he joked about claims he is too 'hands on'. But while Biden may be tight with AFL-CIO leadership, he is closely associated with highly unpopular neoliberal trade deals which have resulted in manufacturing decline.

The establishment bias for Biden is matched by the bias against Democratic Party candidates who directly challenge Wall Street and US foreign policy. On Wall Street, that would be Bernie Sanders. On foreign policy, that is Tulsi Gabbard. With a military background Tulsi Gabbard has broad appeal, an inclusive message and a uniquely sharp critique of US "regime change" foreign policy. She calls out media pundits like Fareed Zakaria for goading Trump to invade Venezuela. In contrast with Rachel Maddow taunting John Bolton and Mike Pompeo to be MORE aggressive, Tulsi Gabbard has been denouncing Trump's collusion with Saudi Arabia and Israel's Netanyahu, saying it's not in US interests. Gabbard's anti-interventionist anti-occupation perspective has significant support from US troops. A recent poll indicates that military families want complete withdrawal from Afghanistan and Syria. It seems conservatives have become more anti-war than liberals.

This points to another important yet under-discussed lesson from 2016: a factor in Trump's victory was that he campaigned as an anti-war candidate against the hawkish Hillary Clinton. As pointed out here , "Donald Trump won more votes from communities with high military casualties than from similar communities which suffered fewer casualties."

Instead of pointing out that Trump has betrayed his anti-war campaign promises, corporate media (and some Democratic Party outlets) seem to be undermining the candidate with the strongest anti-war message. An article at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) says, " Corporate media target Gabbard for her Anti-Interventionism, a word they can barely pronounce ."

Russiagate has distracted most Democrats from analyzing how they lost in 2016. It has given them the dubious belief that it was because of foreign interference. They have failed to analyze or take stock of the consequences of DNC bias, the preference for Wall Street over working class concerns, and the failure to challenge the military industrial complex and foreign policy based on 'regime change' interventions.

There needs to be more analysis and lessons learned from the 2016 election to avoid a repeat of that disaster. As indicated in the Autopsy , there needs to be a transparent and fair campaign for nominee based on more than establishment and Wall Street favoritism. There also needs to be consideration of which candidates reach beyond the partisan divide and can energize and advance the interests of the majority of Americans rather than the elite. The most crucial issues and especially US military and foreign policy need to be seriously debated.

Blaming an outside power is a good way to prevent self analysis and positive change. It's gone on far too long.

Rick Sterling is an investigative journalist who grew up in Canada but currently lives in the San Francisco Bay Area of California. He can be reached at rsterling1@gmail.com . Read other articles by Rick .

[May 17, 2019] Bob Goldstone letter

Looks like a clear attempt to entrup Trump Jr
May 17, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Rob Goldstone wrote:

Good morning

Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.

The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.

This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.

What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?

I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.

Best

Rob Goldstone

On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:53, Donald Trump Jr. wrote:

Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?

Best,

Don

[May 17, 2019] Andrew Weissmann, Top Mueller Prosecutor Who Built Paul Manafort Case, to Step Down

Mar 16, 2019 | www.thedailybeast.com

Andrew Weissmann -- who built the case against Paul Manafort and one of the most prominent members of Robert Mueller's team -- is reportedly stepping down from the special counsel investigation. It's the latest indication that Mueller's work is nearly complete. NPR reports that Weissmann will also leave the Justice Department and now plans to study and teach at New York University while working on preventing wrongful convictions. Manafort was sentenced to about 7 1/2 years in federal prison following two cases that stemmed from Mueller's investigation.

However, neither case involved alleged collusion with Russia.

One source told NPR that Weissmann's departure is a clear sign that Mueller's work is finally winding up -- it follows the departure of the most senior FBI agent working on the Mueller probe, Special Agent in Charge David Archey, who has started a new job as head of the FBI's office in Richmond, Virginia.

[May 15, 2019] Russia-gate s Monstrous Offspring

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... "Instead," McConnell went on, "the previous administration sent the Kremlin a signal they could get away with almost anything, almost anything. So is it surprising that we got the brazen interference detailed in special counsel Mueller's report?" ..."
"... Yes, Russia kicked most US NGOs out of the country. With good reason. Most of them were deliberately undermining the host country (this is not limited to Russia, they do that in most of their host countries, especially those we want to mess with). The National Endowment for Democracy is a classic case in point. The counter point here isn't RT. It's a news outlet that has proven to be far more reliable than the US corporate media. Does Russia send NGOs around the world to infest other countries with their vision of government? ..."
"... It is exactly as Mr. Lazare says, Americans think that their country can do no wrong. ..."
"... Several of my late husband's FB friends fall well into these categories and they really believe, wholeheartedly, the propaganda against Russia (and to some extent against China – Huawei, 5G, and so on), almost to the point of paranoia. The Demrat politicos and their corporate-capitalist-imperialist funders together with the despicable, groupthinking Orwellian media have done a real number on these people – usually the ones who *vote.* ..."
"... Most are Democrats who embrace the 'neoliberal groupthink' you referred to. There was a time I believed one of the conclusions of a famous study on authoritarian personalities that claimed the vast majority of authoritarians (active and passive) were Republicans. Just as the Democratic Party has morphed into the 80's Republican Party, so too have these liberals. Their cognitive dissonance is more powerful than any I have encountered in my lifetime. Their core belief system now includes incrementalism, lesser-evilism and an overwhelming sense of goodness that at least they are 'doing something positive' by supporting all Democrats at all costs. ..."
"... I don't get why, supposedly intelligent, informed people are wondering why Russia is being blamed for so much. Let me remind you that the extremely powerful Israel Lobby is VERY BUSY supporting the agenda of the right wing Likud government in Israel. ..."
"... One of the goals of Likud is the Zionist agenda that includes Greater Israel which requires Israel to acquire more water and land in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, Iran is a very strong supporter of the Palestinians and Syrian President Assad and Iraqi independence from US domination. ..."
"... Why, on this good earth, does anyone pay any attention to Schumer and Schiff and McConnell? Shills, do nothing crackpots and traitors to this nation; when you see that's what they are, you have to ignore them. ..."
May 14, 2019 | consortiumnews.com

Russia-gate has shed any premise of being about Russian interference, writes Daniel Lazare, but the idea that America may in anyway be responsible for its own fate is of course unthinkable.

By Daniel Lazare
Special to Consortium News

Americans used to think that Russia-gate was about a plot to hack the 2016 election. They were wrong. Russia-gate is really about an immense conspiracy to do four things:

This was the takeaway from Mitch McConnell's devastating " case closed " speech last week in which the Senate majority leader jeered at President Barack Obama for mocking Mitt Romney's claim (seven years ago now) that Russia was America's "number one geopolitical foe ." As Obama famously replied during that presidential debate: "The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War's been over for 20 years."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/N0IWe11RWOM?feature=oembed

But that was so 2012. Now, says McConnell, it looks like Romney was right:

"We'd have been better off if the administration hadn't swept [Russian President Vladimir] Putin's invasion and occupation of Georgia under the rug or looked away as Russia forced out western NGO's and cracked down on civil society. If President Obama hadn't let Assad trample his red line in Syria or embraced Putin's fake deal on chemical weapons, if the Obama administration had responded firmly to Putin's invasion and occupation of Ukraine in 2014, to the assassination of Boris Nemtsov in 2015, and to Russia intervention in Syria -- maybe stronger leadership would have left the Kremlin less emboldened, maybe tampering with our democracy wouldn't have seemed so very tempting.

"Instead," McConnell went on, "the previous administration sent the Kremlin a signal they could get away with almost anything, almost anything. So is it surprising that we got the brazen interference detailed in special counsel Mueller's report?"

Lies and Distortions

Like so much out of Congress these days, this was a farrago of lies and distortions. It wasn't Moscow that started the 2008 Russo-Georgian War, but Tbilisi . While Russia has indeed cracked down on U.S.-backed NGO's, Washington has done the same by forcing Russia's highly successful news agency RT to register as a foreign agent and by sentencing Maria Butina, a Russian national studying at American University, to 18 months in prison for the crime of hobnobbing with members of the National Rifle Association. The charge that Syrian President Bashar al Assad "trampled" Obama's red line by using chemical weapons is hardly as clear-cut as imperial propagandists like to believe – to say the least – while the agreement between Putin and former Secretary of State John Kerry to rid Syria of chemical weapons was not fake at all, but an example, increasingly rare unfortunately, of diplomacy being used to prevent an international crisis from getting out of hand.

And so on ad nauseum . But what could Democrats say in response given that they've spent the last three years trying to out-hawk the GOP? Answer: nothing. All they could do was try to turn tables on McConnell by charging him with not being anti-Russian enough. Thus, New York's Sen. Chuck Schumer accused him of " aiding and abetting " Moscow while Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin accused him of running interference for Putin because he "feels the Russians were on the side of the Republicans in 2016 and just might be again in 2020."

Democrats Feed the Super Hawks

The result: a Democratic consensus that Russia can't be trusted and that America must put itself on a war footing to prevent Putin from "toppl[ing] the mighty oak that has been our republic for two hundred years," as Schumer put it. It's an across-the-board agreement that the long-awaited Mueller report has only strengthened by regurgitating the intelligence-community line that "[t]he Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion" and then cherry-picking the facts to fit its preconceived thesis. (See " Top Ten Questions About the Mueller Report ," May 6.)

Democrats claim to oppose National Security Advisor John Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Vice President Mike Pence, but the anti-Russian hysteria they promote strengthens the hand of such super-hawks. It makes military conflict more likely, if not with Russia then with perceived Russian surrogates such as Venezuela or Iran.

Schiff increasingly unhinged.

Simultaneously, it backfires on Democrats by making them look weak and foolish as they argue that even though the Mueller report says "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government," somehow "significant evidence of collusion" still exists, as an increasingly unhinged Rep. Adam Schiff maintains . In the Alice-in-Wonderland world of congressional Democrats, no evidence does not mean no evidence. In fact, it means the opposite.

Voters are unmoved. Ten times more Americans – 80 versus 8 percent – care about healthcare than about Russia according to a recent survey . When CNN pollsters asked a thousand people in mid-March to name the issues that matter most, not one mentioned Russia or the Mueller probe . If they didn't care when collusion was still an open question, they care even less now that the only issue is obstruction plus a phony constitutional crisis that desperate Democrats have conjured up out of thin air.

Trump the Chief Beneficiary

Besides Fox News – whose ratings have soared while Russia-obsessed CNN's have plummeted – the chief beneficiary is Trump. Post-Mueller, the man has the wind in his sails. Come 2020, Sen. Bernie Sanders could cut through his phony populism with ease. But if Jeff Bezos's Washington Post succeeds in tarring him with Russia the same way it tried to tar Trump, then the Democratic nominee will be a bland centrist whom the incumbent will happily bludgeon. Former Vice President Joe Biden – the John McCain-loving , speech-slurring , child-fondler who was for a wall along the Mexican border before he was against it – will end up as a bug splat on the Orange One's windshield.

Trump ready to take on challengers. (Caricature/DonkeyHotey via Flickr)

Beto O'Rourke, the rich-kid airhead who declared shortly before the Mueller report was released that Trump, "beyond the shadow of a doubt, sought to collude with the Russian government," will not fare much better. Sen. Elizabeth Warren meanwhile seems to be tripping over her own two feet as she predicts one moment that Trump is heading to jail , declares the next that voters don't care about the Mueller report because they're too concerned with bread-and-butter issues, and then calls for dragging Congress into the impeachment morass regardless.

Such "logic" is lost on voters, so it seems to be a safe bet that enough will stay home next Election Day to allow the rough beast to slouch towards Bethlehem yet again.

Assange Convicted in Eyes of Press

Then there's Julian Assange, currently serving a 50-week sentence in a supermax prison outside of London after being ejected from the Ecuadorian Embassy. By claiming that the WikiLeaks founder was "dissembling" by denying that Russia was the source of the mammoth Democratic National Committee leak in July 2016, Special Counsel Robert Mueller has effectively convicted him in the eyes of Congress and the press.

The New York Times thus reports that Mueller has " revealed " that Russian intelligence was the source while, in a venomous piece by Middlebury College professor Allison Stanger, The Washington Post declared that Assange "is neither whistleblower nor journalist," but someone who helped Russian intelligence interfere in "the American electoral process."

Schumer thus greeted Assange's April 11 arrest by tweeting his "hope [that] he will soon be held to account for his meddling in our elections on behalf of Putin and the Russian government," while, in a truly chilling statement , Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia declared that "[i]t will be really good to get him back on United States soil [so] we can get the facts and the truth from him."

Now that Julian Assange has been arrested, I hope he will soon be held to account for his meddling in our elections on behalf of Putin and the Russian government.

-- Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) April 11, 2019

Assange is guiltier than ever. If Washington gets its hands on him, he'll no doubt be hauled before some sort of Star Chamber and then clapped in a dungeon somewhere until he confesses that Russian intelligence made him do it, even though a careful reading of the Mueller report strongly suggests the opposite. (See " The 'Guccifer 2.0' Gaps in Mueller's Full Report ," April 18.)

Assange languishing behind bars, war breaking out in Latin America or the Persian Gulf, Trump in the Oval Office for four years more – it's the worst of all possible worlds, and the Democratic Party's bizarre fixation with Vladimir Putin is what's pushing it.

Ultimately, Russia-gate is yet a variation on the tired old theme of American innocence. If something goes wrong, it can't be the fault of decent Americans who, as we all know, are too good for our deeply flawed world. Rather, it must be the fault of dastardly foreigners trying to hack our democracy. It's a deep-rooted form of xenophobia that has fueled everything from the criminalization of marijuana (smuggled in by evil Mexicans) to the 1950s Red Scare (a reaction to Communism smuggled in by evil Russians), and the war on terrorism (the work of evil Muslims). The idea that America may in anyway be responsible for its own fate is of course unthinkable.

But Russia-gate may be the greatest delusion of all. After decades of celebrating Donald Trump as the essence of American flash and hustle, the corporate media have decided that the only way he could have gotten into the White House is if Putin put him there. The upshot is a giant conspiracy to force Americans to turn their back on reality, an effort that can only end in disaster for all concerned, Democrats first and foremost.

Daniel Lazare is the author of "The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy" (Harcourt Brace, 1996) and other books about American politics. He has written for a wide variety of publications from The Nation to Le Monde Diplomatique and blogs about the Constitution and related matters at D aniellazare.com .


Tick Tock , May 15, 2019 at 11:30

Sorry Folks but both Mr Lazare's text and the majority of the comments here clearly illustrate that the major problem for America and its Citizens is that they are way too full of themselves and easily manipulated because of that. Seriously, the vast majority of the Worlds population Could Not Give a Rat's Ass about America except when they are being attacked either with Real Bombs or Economically.

No normal Human Being wants to be Israel's Stooge. You have to think you are are really important for someone in another Country to want to select your leaders. Oh yes that is what the US Deep State does and now it's been clearly exposed it does the same thing at home.. Of course if your motto is that "You are god's chosen people!", it could get you into trouble now and then with the rest of God's People. Like Bob Dylan wrote a few years ago, "I used to care!" Only a fool would care now.

Jeff Harrison , May 15, 2019 at 11:23

This is where we learn the importance of an objective press and one that can bring all the threads of a story together. And it's also most likely to be a disaster.

Yes, Russia kicked most US NGOs out of the country. With good reason. Most of them were deliberately undermining the host country (this is not limited to Russia, they do that in most of their host countries, especially those we want to mess with). The National Endowment for Democracy is a classic case in point. The counter point here isn't RT. It's a news outlet that has proven to be far more reliable than the US corporate media. Does Russia send NGOs around the world to infest other countries with their vision of government?

The US/EU fomented the coup in Ukraine that resulted in Crimea deciding they didn't want to be associated with Ukraine any longer. Did the US press tell the truth here? No. They made it sound as if Crimea was a part of Ukraine when, in fact, the Turkic Muslims of Crimea were never a part of the Christian Slavs of Ukraine. They also didn't explain the terms by which Khrushchev administratively slapped the two together in 1957 which give the Crimeans the ability to opt out.

It is exactly as Mr. Lazare says, Americans think that their country can do no wrong. We don't see the coups we foist on other countries. We don't see the lies and fake news we spread in other countries we wish to undermine. They don't see the consequences of our abuse of our economic power. The myopia is powerful in this one as my representatives tried to tell me that Venezuela was a prosperous and happy country before Chavez and that their current travails are as a result of the socialism and not two coup attempts and a long string of sanctions from the US. We are remarkably good at blaming the victim.

There's a good chance that this will rise up and bite us in the ass and the American people will have no idea why ..

AnneR , May 15, 2019 at 08:52

Mr Lazare, while I would certainly agree with much you have written, on one point at least I am much less certain: that most Americans care less about Russia than about health care.

While this might be true for the majority of the population who are in the lower middle, working classes and poor, I am much less certain about the "well" educated, comfortably off, well health insured, middling and upper bourgeoisie. The sort who, even when on Medicare, are on the upper rungs of it (paying extra for better and more expansive treatment; and I do mean Medicare here). The sort who frequently have been privately educated.

Several of my late husband's FB friends fall well into these categories and they really believe, wholeheartedly, the propaganda against Russia (and to some extent against China – Huawei, 5G, and so on), almost to the point of paranoia. The Demrat politicos and their corporate-capitalist-imperialist funders together with the despicable, groupthinking Orwellian media have done a real number on these people – usually the ones who *vote.*

These same people evince absolutely, and I mean absolutely, NO concern or interest in the constant war-making and warmongering, the illegal invasions, electoral meddling/coups/"regime" changes, destruction of peoples that this country (and its allies) engage in. Not happening here, therefore not anything to do with "us."

I know that my late husband would be utterly devastated knowing that some of his students, with whom he worked assiduously to develop real critical thinking (via much difficult reading in historiography, sociology and philosophy, discussion and writing), have fallen hook, line and sinker for the neoliberal groupthink supporting the corporate-capitalist-imperialist (and of course, orientalist) line. One can only imagine that they were already well primed for this mindset.

MattZ , May 15, 2019 at 11:43

Anne -- your post resonates deeply with me. I would guess you and I are of similar ages and have similar friends and acquaintances. We certainly share the exact same experiences with these people. They are proud 'liberals' (lately donning the 'progressive' robe with equal exuberance). None are members of the elite one-percenters, but all belong to what Nader refers to as the 'contented class', that 9% buffer zone between the elite and the increasingly miserable lower 90%-ers.

Most are Democrats who embrace the 'neoliberal groupthink' you referred to. There was a time I believed one of the conclusions of a famous study on authoritarian personalities that claimed the vast majority of authoritarians (active and passive) were Republicans. Just as the Democratic Party has morphed into the 80's Republican Party, so too have these liberals. Their cognitive dissonance is more powerful than any I have encountered in my lifetime. Their core belief system now includes incrementalism, lesser-evilism and an overwhelming sense of goodness that at least they are 'doing something positive' by supporting all Democrats at all costs.

Appallingly, their new heroes are historically-proven liars, psychopaths and Deep State organizations like the CIA and FBI. Their Trump Derangement Syndrome has destroyed all ability to think critically or accept transparent and obvious truths. They accept no criticism of their actions and attack those who question them. To them, the 'end' of removing Trump justifies any evil.
Gaia help us all.

Skip Scott , May 15, 2019 at 08:04

The root of the Democrats problem is they feed from the same trough as the GOP. They can't do anything substantial about health care or the declining middle class because they'd piss off their donors. Since they can't stand for "the working man" any longer, they are trying to cobble together "Identity Politics" and "Political Correctness" to eke out a majority. Good luck with that! They can give us non gender specific restrooms with our Forever War! Why aren't we feeling the love?

I think the time has never been more ripe for a serious third party challenge than 2020.

Realist , May 15, 2019 at 10:42

Perfect thumbnail obituary for the Democratic Party, Skip. It got hijacked by corporatists who saw an opportunity to push the GOP agenda from both directions. Maybe that's what Hillary meant by "stronger together."

Herrman , May 15, 2019 at 07:56

If you want to be entertained and titillated turn on the national evening news shows. The 2020 election circus has already begun. Don't watch that, switch channels and watch the obstruction of justice infotainment. Want news, read between the lines of the major newspapers. Go to PBS to be rescued, good luck.

Has it always been thus. Maybe, but it's a much better show today.

Shock and awe. Can't wait for the next one.

O Society , May 15, 2019 at 04:52

https://opensociet.org/2018/10/20/the-real-danger-of-russiagate-always-has-been-the-martyrdom-of-trump/

If I could figure out long ago Russia-gate was going to lead to Trump's reelection (see above link), you would think Brennan/ Clinton/ Pelosi could figure it out too. Which begs the questions:

Is Trump good for business for the Democratic party financial patrons? Do they really want him impeached? Did the Pied Piper strategy ever end? Does Bernie Sanders scare them so much they'd rather promote Trump than have Sanders in the Oval Office?

Realist , May 15, 2019 at 10:35

Your last explanation is the one that Jimmy Dore seems to favor. The party string pullers are obviously desperate when they back one near-octogenarian (Crazy Joe Biden) for the nomination against another near-octogenarian (Sanders). Counter move by the GOPers may be to run Tricky Dick Nixon's head-in-a-bottle for the office, like in Futurama.

Realist , May 15, 2019 at 02:05

Wow, gotta hand it to McConnell. That man can shamelessly pack multiple whoppers into every single sentence uttered in his public speaking. Quite a tour de force of pure undiluted bullshit by the turtle. With his rhetorical skills to deliver talking points at a newly realised zenith, there's sure to be a job for him on Madison Avenue when he's finally kicked to the curb as happens to every politician when a better snake oil salesman inevitably comes along.

John Sanguinetti , May 15, 2019 at 00:05

I don't get why, supposedly intelligent, informed people are wondering why Russia is being blamed for so much. Let me remind you that the extremely powerful Israel Lobby is VERY BUSY supporting the agenda of the right wing Likud government in Israel.

One of the goals of Likud is the Zionist agenda that includes Greater Israel which requires Israel to acquire more water and land in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, Iran is a very strong supporter of the Palestinians and Syrian President Assad and Iraqi independence from US domination.

Russia, with it's very effective support for Assad and collaboration with Iran is blocking progress on the Zionist agenda. So, putting pressure on Russia is a way of trying to force them to back off from their support for Syria and Iran or at least to scare them with the power of our military and a crazy unpredictable leader who might do anything. Israel has besides it's VERY STRONG and active lobbies in the US and UK a large and VERY Active 5th column that spends a LOT of money and effort influencing the people who run our government.

CitizenOne , May 14, 2019 at 23:43

I believe it but with some editing of the authors original four things. I have deleted the case against Assange as a sideshow that does nor resonate with Americans any more than the nightly rumor mill about celebrities. Here goes.

Americans used to think that Russia-gate was about a plot to hack the 2016 election. They were wrong. Russia-gate is really about an immense conspiracy to do four things:

No. 1: Ratchet up tensions with Russia to ever more dangerous levels;

No. 2: Show that Democrats are even more useless than people imagined;

No. 3: Win the 2020 elections and reelect Trump and preserve the republican majority in the Senate and win back the democrat controlled House

No. 4: Wage wars in oil rich nations being Iran and Venezuela to fulfill the agenda of the energy companies via military action.

While McConnell rails against Obama for his weaknesses we have the historical record that Obama declared Venezuela as a national security threat, levied massive sanctions against Russia for their presumed invasion of Ukraine, launched a war against the Syrian government, preserved and supported our wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq.

We see today that Chuck Schumer is still committed to the theory that Russia is the single reason that the democrats lost the last election which is absurd and is rejected by not only a significant number of liberal journalists but also by a majority of Americans. Why do the democrats continue to promote conspiracy theories that the majority of Americans reject as nonsense?

The republicans have the democrats over a barrel and will push it over and watch the democrats wallow in the mud with much amusement.

This could not have have happened to the democrats without a complete lack of foresight or even a slightest attempt to rely on the truth to guide them.

From day one after the election, the democrats swallowed the bait hook line and sinker and now the hook is buried deep in their gullets and they still insist that they are free swimming fish on a mission to prove Russia was responsible for the last election. With every gulp they swallow the hook deeper apparently unaware that they are about to be reeled in and captured by their unfounded beliefs that the bait is is a real meal they can sustain themselves on. Just like a fooled fish they are on the hook.

The announcement that the AG is launching an investigation led by republicans to investigate the Russia Gate investigation will most certainly tarnish democrats and stain their efforts that will be seen as even more dull as the tarnish they try to put on Trump. Even uninformed citizens will ask what is up with the democrats who are trying to bring down Trump even though their reliable news sources tell them that Russia Gate is all a lie.

Meanwhile the democrats who have declared come up not only short on ideas but appear to be suicidal.

Elisabeth Warren has declared war on monopolies in an era where unlimited spending by corporations is legally protected as free speech. How can she hope to win by pledging to breakup monopolies that are well equipped to outspend her in their bid for survival?

The democrats have failed to do the math and their strategies for appealing to the masses will be shot down by the right wing controlled "free press". It is not a liberal press. It is the enemy of liberals controlled by wealthy liberal hating, libertarian loving billionaires. Public vows by democrats who pledge to destroy it will be met with the full force of their arsenal which includes complete control over the microphone that steers debate and is the chief influence of elections. As Mark Twain put it, " It is unwise to wage a war of words against men who buy ink by the barrel".

Howard Dean met his end when the major media outlets conspired to elevate "The Dean Scream" to levels questioning his sanity. The nearly constant barrage of over 4,000 replays of the Dean Scream leading up to the democratic primaries effectively put an end to his bid for nomination.

But why did all of the the major media outlets conspire to conduct a character assassination of the Howard Dean movement? Just two weeks before the Dean Scream was endlessly broadcasted by the media with news commentators chiming in that he was likely an insane man who must be exposed and stopped in his tracks he made a fatal flaw. He made a campaign speech where he said that if he was elected he would impose regulations on the media. Boom Boom out went the lights.

How can any democrat win when they oppose corporations that include the media corporations in America? How can Elisabeth Warren wither the name calling that she will suffer as Trump claims she has a Pocahontas syndrome while also alienating the largest campaign contributors with her pledge to destroy them? How will her insistence that she has Indian blood possibly win her fans when the majority of Americans will mock her. They have been honed on the strop of right wing money into believing that everything they hear and see is factual even though it is not factual or real. Such is the suicidal gamble of the soon to be defeated democratic party.

Why they continue to go down the path toward blind alleys where they will be trapped and defeated baffles me.

geeyp , May 15, 2019 at 11:32

Why, on this good earth, does anyone pay any attention to Schumer and Schiff and McConnell? Shills, do nothing crackpots and traitors to this nation; when you see that's what they are, you have to ignore them.

jmg , May 14, 2019 at 19:57

Daniel Lazare: "( ) it must be the fault of dastardly foreigners trying to hack our democracy. It's a deep-rooted form of xenophobia that has fueled everything ( ) The idea that America may in anyway be responsible for its own fate is of course unthinkable."

Yes, that's the way it is. About WikiLeaks, as they have repeated many times:

"Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who is a close associate of Assange, called the CIA claims 'bullshit', adding: 'They are absolutely making it up.'

"'I know who leaked them,' Murray said. 'I've met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it's an insider. It's a leak, not a hack; the two are different things.'"

-- The Guardian, 2016-12-10
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/10/cia-concludes-russia-interfered-to-help-trump-win-election-report

[May 13, 2019] Angry Bear Senate Democratic Jackasses and Elmer Fudd

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Looks like Robert Mueller was a dirty cop hired to confirm fairy tales of Russian collusion peddled by a Clinton wing of Dems (DemoRats) sing Trump. And he enjoyed the full support of several intelligence agencies brass (especially FBI brass; initially Stzkok was one of his investigators) ..."
"... Before that Mueller was in charge of 9/11 and Anthrax scare investigations. So he is a card caring member of the neoliberal elite which converted the USA into what can be called the "National Security State" ..."
"... In order for a person to obstruct justice, there must be some justice to obstruct. Hence, if the alleged obstructer did not commit the underlying crime being investigated, then his so-called obstruction did not impair justice; it just impaired a fruitless investigation ..."
"... the USA squabble over Parteigenosse Mueller Final Report between two factions of neoliberal elite makes the USA a joke in the eyes of the whole world ..."
"... Hopefully, a more sound part of the USA elite, which Barr represents, will put some sand into those wheels. His decision to investigate the origin of Russiagate produced almost a heart attack for Pelosi. And the fact that he decided to skip his auto-da-fé at the House adds insult to injury. Poor Pelosi almost lost her mind. ..."
"... Out of democratic challengers IMHO only Tulsi Gabbard can probably attract a sizable faction of former Trump supporters and she is the most reviled, ignored, and slandered by DNC liberals and neocons alike candidate. ..."
"... The truth is that the color revolution against Donald Trump (a soft coup if you wish) failed. Now he badly needs to win in 2020 to avoid an indictment in NY State when he leaves the Presidency. It is just a matter of survival for him. ..."
"... Neoliberal Democrats will help him by putting their weakest pro-war candidate like the aged, apparently slightly demented neocon Joe Biden. With his rabid neoliberal past, neocon foreign policy past, Ukrainian skeletons in the closet and probably participation in the Obama administration dirty and criminal attempt to derail Trump using intelligence agencies as the leverage. ..."
"... Just like is the case with Boeing the situation for neoliberal democrats does not look promising. The world is starting to crash all around them. ..."
May 04, 2019 | angrybearblog.com

likbez, May 4, 2019 8:24 pm

The F.B.I. surveillance didn't come out until after the election. Therefore it couldn't impact the election. McConnell threatened to shriek "partisan politics!" if Obama said anything publicly about the Russian issue. Obama didn't. Claims of partisan behavior? Bullshit.

What about proven attempts of entrapments and inserting spies into Trump campaign?

Mifsud and Halper's stories come to mind (Halper's story has an interesting "seduction" subplot with undercover FBI informant Azra Turk). FBI and Justice Department brass acted as dirty mafia style politicians. McCabe and Brennan are two shining examples here. Probably guided personally by Obama, who being grown in a family of CIA operatives probably know this color revolutions "kitchen" all too well.

BTW Hillary did destroy evidence from her "bathroom server" while under subpoena.

Looks like Robert Mueller was a dirty cop hired to confirm fairy tales of Russian collusion peddled by a Clinton wing of Dems (DemoRats) sing Trump. And he enjoyed the full support of several intelligence agencies brass (especially FBI brass; initially Stzkok was one of his investigators)

Before that Mueller was in charge of 9/11 and Anthrax scare investigations. So he is a card caring member of the neoliberal elite which converted the USA into what can be called the "National Security State"

Which looks like classic Mussolini Italy with two guiding principles of jurisprudence applied to political enemies:

(1) To my friends, everything; to my enemies, the law (originated in 1933) .
(2) Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime (that actually comes from Stalinism period of the USSR, but the spirit is the same) .

It was actually Barr who saved Trump from obstruction of justice charge. He based his defense on the interpretation of the statuses the following (actually very elegant) way:

In order for a person to obstruct justice, there must be some justice to obstruct. Hence, if the alleged obstructer did not commit the underlying crime being investigated, then his so-called obstruction did not impair justice; it just impaired a fruitless investigation

Of course, that upset DemoRats who want President Pence to speed up the destruction of the USA and adding a couple of new wars to list the USA is involved.

Mueller was extremely sloppy and one-sided in writing his final report. Which is given taking into account his real task: to sink Trump. As Nunes aptly observed about his treatment of Mifsud as a Russian agent :

"If he is, in fact, a Russian agent, it would be one of the biggest intelligence scandals for not only the United States, but also our allies like the Italians and the Brits and others. Because if Mifsud is a Russian agent, he would know all kinds of our intelligence agents throughout the globe

likbez , May 4, 2019 10:11 pm

run75441,

Yes, of course, in the current neo-McCarthyism atmosphere merely passing the salt to a Russian guest at a dinner party makes you "an unregistered foreign agent" of Russia bent on implementing Putin's evil plans and colliding with Russian government ;-).

It looks like you are unable/unwilling to understand the logic behind my post. With all due respect, the situation is very dangerous -- when the neoliberal elite relies on lies almost exclusively as a matter of policy (look at Kamala Harris questioning Barr -- she is not stupid, she is an evil, almost taken from Orwell 1984, character), IMHO the neoliberal society is doomed. Sooner or later.

Currently, the USA squabble over Parteigenosse Mueller Final Report between two factions of neoliberal elite makes the USA a joke in the eyes of the whole world and Democrats look like Italian Fascists in 30th: a party hell-bent of dominance which does not care about laws or legitimacy one bit and can use entrapment and other dirty methods to achieve its goals.

Hopefully, a more sound part of the USA elite, which Barr represents, will put some sand into those wheels. His decision to investigate the origin of Russiagate produced almost a heart attack for Pelosi. And the fact that he decided to skip his auto-da-fé at the House adds insult to injury. Poor Pelosi almost lost her mind.

Neoliberals and neoconservatives joined ranks behind Russiagate and continue to push it because otherwise they need to be held accountable for all the related neoliberal disasters in the USA since 1980th including sliding standard of living, disappearance of "good" jobs, sky-high cost of university education and medical insurance, and the last but not least, Hillary fiasco.

Trump ran to the left of Clinton in foreign policy and used disillusionment of working close with neoliberal Democratic Party to his advantage promising jobs, end of outsourcing, end of uncontrolled immigration, and increased standard of living. He betrayed all those promises, but, still, that's why he won.

And that why the neoliberal establishment must present his election as de facto illegitimate, because otherwise they would be forced to admit that the bipartisan consensus around both financialization driven economics (casino capitalism) and imperial, war on terror based interventionism that are the foundation of the USA neoliberal elite politics since Clinton has been a disaster for most ordinary Americans -- of all political persuasions.

Out of democratic challengers IMHO only Tulsi Gabbard can probably attract a sizable faction of former Trump supporters and she is the most reviled, ignored, and slandered by DNC liberals and neocons alike candidate.

The truth is that the color revolution against Donald Trump (a soft coup if you wish) failed. Now he badly needs to win in 2020 to avoid an indictment in NY State when he leaves the Presidency. It is just a matter of survival for him.

Neoliberal Democrats will help him by putting their weakest pro-war candidate like the aged, apparently slightly demented neocon Joe Biden. With his rabid neoliberal past, neocon foreign policy past, Ukrainian skeletons in the closet and probably participation in the Obama administration dirty and criminal attempt to derail Trump using intelligence agencies as the leverage.

Just like is the case with Boeing the situation for neoliberal democrats does not look promising. The world is starting to crash all around them.

[May 13, 2019] EXPLOSIVE FOIA Documents Show Evidence of Weissmann/Mueller Entrapment Scheme

Notable quotes:
"... Before digging into the details it is important to note this is a DOJ/FBI entrapment operation being conducted in 2017 by the special counsel ; this is not prior to the 2016 election. The detail surrounds a series of events previously discussed { Go Deep } where George Papadopoulos was approached by a known CIA operative named Charles Tawil. ..."
"... In interviews Papadopoulos said he was uncomfortable with the way the encounters had taken place. He became suspect of Tawil's motives; something didn't feel right. Instead of keeping the cash, Papadopoulos gave the money to an attorney in Greece before traveling back to the U.S. on July 27th, 2017. ..."
"... Upon arrival at Dulles airport on July 27th, 2017, Robert Mueller had FBI agents waiting. Papadopoulos was stopped and his bags were searched; however, he did not have the cash because he smartly left it in Greece with his lawyer. Papadopoulos was detained overnight by FBI agents, and questioned. ..."
"... [W]hen he was arrested [detained] at Dulles Airport on July 27 after coming off a flight from Munich, prosecutors had no warrant for him and no indictment or criminal complaint . The complaint would be filed the following morning and approved by Howell in Washington. ..."
"... All of it suggests something of a scramble, rather than a carefully prepared plan to take Papadopoulos into custody. ( more ) ..."
"... Papadopoulos has stated the special counsel threatened him with charges of acting as a unregistered agent for Israel. There's a clear picture here . ..."
"... #1) Papadopoulos was lured to Israel and paid in Israel to give the outline of a FARA premise (ie. Papadopoulos is an agent of Israel). #2) Bringing $10,000 (or more) in cash into the U.S., without reporting, is a violation of U.S. treasury laws. Add into that aspect the FARA violation and the money can be compounded into #3) laundering charges. ..."
"... Andrew Weissmann was conducting an entrapment scheme that would have ended up with three violations of law: (1) Treasury violation; (2) FARA violation; (3) Money laundering . All it needed was Papadopoulos to carry the undeclared cash into the U.S. ..."
"... Lastly, to repeat, this entire scenario was constructed by the DOJ/FBI team operation in 2017. The members of the Special Counsel were running the entrapment operation; the FBI agents were participating in the operation. This is not *investigating* criminal conduct; this is manufacturing criminal conduct. ..."
"... Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was in charge of the Mueller Special Counsel. ..."
"... The only way DAG Rosenstein and Robert Mueller didn't know about the operation is if they both claim that Andrew Weissmann was completely rogue and in control over the FBI agents. ..."
May 11, 2019 | theconservativetreehouse.com

Recently release FOIA documents into the special counsel team of Robert Mueller reveal the remarkable trail of a 2017 entrapment scheme conducted by Prosecutor Andrew Weissmann to target George Papadopoulos.

[Hat Tip to Undercover Huber and Rosie Memos who have been reviewing documents .]

Before digging into the details it is important to note this is a DOJ/FBI entrapment operation being conducted in 2017 by the special counsel ; this is not prior to the 2016 election. The detail surrounds a series of events previously discussed { Go Deep } where George Papadopoulos was approached by a known CIA operative named Charles Tawil.

In 2017 George Papadopoulos and his wife Simona were approached in Greece by a known CIA/FBI operative , Charles Tawil. Mr. Tawil enlisted George as a business consultant, under the auspices of energy development interests, and invited him to Israel.

On June 8th, 2017, in Israel under very suspicious circumstances, where Papadopoulos felt very unnerved, Mr. Tawil hands him $10,000 in cash for future consultancy based on a $10k/month retainer .

On June 9th, 2017, according to his book, Papadopoulos and Tawil fly back to Cyprus.

... ... ...

In interviews Papadopoulos said he was uncomfortable with the way the encounters had taken place. He became suspect of Tawil's motives; something didn't feel right. Instead of keeping the cash, Papadopoulos gave the money to an attorney in Greece before traveling back to the U.S. on July 27th, 2017.

Upon arrival at Dulles airport on July 27th, 2017, Robert Mueller had FBI agents waiting. Papadopoulos was stopped and his bags were searched; however, he did not have the cash because he smartly left it in Greece with his lawyer. Papadopoulos was detained overnight by FBI agents, and questioned.

[ ] Stanley said Papadopoulos arrived on a Lufthansa flight from Munich that touched down at about 7 p.m . on July 27, and the FBI intercepted him as soon as he got off the plane.

"He was arrested [detained] before he got to Customs and he was then held at the airport before being brought to a law enforcement office," Stanley recalled. ( link )

According to Politico :

[W]hen he was arrested [detained] at Dulles Airport on July 27 after coming off a flight from Munich, prosecutors had no warrant for him and no indictment or criminal complaint . The complaint would be filed the following morning and approved by Howell in Washington.

And when prosecutors filed the complaint the next day they got a spoken order from Howell to seal it, but followed up with a written request that they could take to the magistrate in Alexandria, where they showed up almost an hour later than she expected.

All of it suggests something of a scramble, rather than a carefully prepared plan to take Papadopoulos into custody. ( more )

Here's where the recent revelations come in. According to Andrew Weissmann's schedule on June 13th, 2017, he was in conversations surrounding the basis of a Cyprus Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT):

(Page #5 of FOIA pdf)

So overlaying the timeline:

6/8/17 US intelligence asset Charles Tawil gives George $10K cash in Israel 6/9/17 George Papadopoulos flies to Cyprus w $10K 6/13/17 Andrew Weissmann starts series of "Cyprus MLAT" meetings with FBI 6/13/17 Andrew Weissmann phone call w/ FBI Money Laundering and Asset Recovery "MLARS" section of FBI.

It would appear Weissmann was well aware of the Cyprus "Tawil operation" and engaged in communication regarding Cyprus. Additionally, he was discussing "Money Laundering and Asset Recovery" w/ FBI. [MLARS Link ]

Taken in combination with hindsight of the search for the cash, and lack of a pre-existing warrant at the airport, this is clear evidence of a coordinated operation to entrap Papadopoulos.

Remember, the preferred approach toward targeting Paul Manafort, Mike Flynn and George Papadopoulos surrounded FARA (Foreign Agent Registration Act) lobbying violations. Papadopoulos has stated the special counsel threatened him with charges of acting as a unregistered agent for Israel. There's a clear picture here .

#1) Papadopoulos was lured to Israel and paid in Israel to give the outline of a FARA premise (ie. Papadopoulos is an agent of Israel). #2) Bringing $10,000 (or more) in cash into the U.S., without reporting, is a violation of U.S. treasury laws. Add into that aspect the FARA violation and the money can be compounded into #3) laundering charges.

[A "laundering" charge applies if the money is illegally obtained. The FARA violation would be the *illegal* aspect making the treasury charges heavier. Note: the use of the airport baggage-check avoids the need for a search warrant.]

Andrew Weissmann was conducting an entrapment scheme that would have ended up with three violations of law: (1) Treasury violation; (2) FARA violation; (3) Money laundering . All it needed was Papadopoulos to carry the undeclared cash into the U.S.

However, because Papadopoulos suspected something, and left the money in Greece with his lawyers, upon arrival at the airport the operation collapsed in reverse . No money means no treasury violation, no laundering and no evidence of the consultancy agreement (which would have been repurposed in the DOJ filing to mean lobbying for Israel via Mr. Tawil who would have become a confidential informant and witness).

That operational collapse is why the FBI agents were "scrambling" at the airport and why they had no pre-existing criminal complaint. The entrapment's success was contingent upon the cash.

Lastly, to repeat, this entire scenario was constructed by the DOJ/FBI team operation in 2017. The members of the Special Counsel were running the entrapment operation; the FBI agents were participating in the operation. This is not *investigating* criminal conduct; this is manufacturing criminal conduct.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein was in charge of the Mueller Special Counsel.

The only way DAG Rosenstein and Robert Mueller didn't know about the operation is if they both claim that Andrew Weissmann was completely rogue and in control over the FBI agents.

Oh, wait, what does the Mueller report say about the FBI agents and their chain-of-legal guidance and command?

... ... ...

With events happening in June/July 2017 Rod Rosenstein, Robert Mueller, former FBI legal counsel Jim Baker, former Deputy FBI Director McCabe, together with current FBI legal counsel Dana Boente and current FBI Director Wray were what? Hoodwinked?

Yeah, ok. Sure.

I digress.

[May 13, 2019] Brennan has no vision or compass or pronciples. Like a dog, he will hunt and maul anything that is approved by the Power

It might well be that Trump treatment of 9/11 as unsolved investigation was one of the red flag for establishment (and personally Brennan) which led to launching of Russiagate.
Notable quotes:
"... But why was Brennan so anti-Syria and anti-Ukraine? What personal motives did he have? ..."
"... Can someone please explain what it was about Donald Trump at the time that this all began, that Brennan would set all of this in motion? ..."
"... For one thing, Trump, early in his campaign stated that he had suspicions regarding official explanations of 9/11. ..."
May 13, 2019 | www.unz.com

Priss Factor , says: Website May 11, 2019 at 2:12 pm GMT

But why was Brennan so anti-Syria and anti-Ukraine? What personal motives did he have? Why target two regimes esp hated by Jews?

It seems he's like McCain. A mean nasty son of a bitch who likes to play world politics. It's his bullying nature. But he has no vision or compass. Like a dog, he will hunt and maul anything that is approved by the Power. And that Power is Jewish.

Dogs love to hunt but only get to hunt what the master orders it to. If the master orders the dog to love rabbits and hunt raccoon, it will do just that. If the master orders it to love raccoon and hunt rabbits, it will do that. In the end, the dog doesn't care what it hunts as long as it's given a chance to hunt something.

Same with these goy cuck dogs. Their lives feel fulfilled only in Big Power bully mode. They need to beat up on something. But they have no vision or compass, no agency. They look over their shoulders to the Power to tell them what to love(Israel and Saudis) and what to hate(Iran and Syria and Russia).

Dogs growl at dogs, not at their masters. When Trump came around, Brennan didn't see him as the new master but as a bad dog(or even wolf) displeasing his master, the Jews. Like McCain, a very loyal dog. Also, a dog feels jealousy that the master may take to a new dog over him.

Alas, Trump has been neutered and tamed by Jews.

R Boyd , says: May 11, 2019 at 4:45 pm GMT
Can someone please explain what it was about Donald Trump at the time that this all began, that Brennan would set all of this in motion?
Carroll Price , says: May 12, 2019 at 12:26 pm GMT
@R Boyd For one thing, Trump, early in his campaign stated that he had suspicions regarding official explanations of 9/11.
Digital Samizdat , says: May 11, 2019 at 9:40 pm GMT
@R Boyd Why? Because of Trump's stated desire to pull out of Syria and to work for a détente with Russia, for openers.
Cassander , says: May 11, 2019 at 10:58 pm GMT
"The real architect of the Trump-Russia treachery was the boss-man at the nation's premier intelligence agency, the CIA."

–Which begs the question whether the 'real architect' was authorized by his superior in the WH. How could he not have been?

FB , says: Website May 12, 2019 at 4:44 am GMT
Excellent hard nosed article by Mike

I have to think that the pyramid goes higher still Brennan working for Hillary and Hillary working for the combined plutocratic imperialist elite that make up the core of the Clinton Foundation's billions these scumbags will never be touched for buying Killary, but maybe Killary will end up in an orange jumpsuit, right beside her gopher Brennan

And maybe Trump finally has his hands untied to start doing the things he promised time will tell

anon [354] Disclaimer , says: May 12, 2019 at 4:55 am GMT

Mike Whitney:

But evidence of wrongdoing is not proof that Comey was the ringleader, he was just the hapless sad sack who was left holding the bag. The truth is, Comey was just a reluctant follower. The real architect of the Trump-Russia treachery was the boss-man at the nation's premier intelligence agency, the CIA.

suspect you are correct

Brennan seems like the real evil, Comey just a doofus

The Scalpel , says: Website May 12, 2019 at 5:33 am GMT
@R Boyd "Can someone please explain what it was about Donald Trump at the time that this all began, that Brennan would set all of this in motion?"

He was not truly compromised thus controlled by the spooks. So they were trying to achieve that, and it appears based on Trump's behavior, that they did achieve that

[May 13, 2019] Stone is demanding to see everything related to the case, all evidence, everything in discovery!

May 13, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Real Estate Guru , 2 hours ago link

UPDATE!:

ROGER STONE IS KICKING MUELLER'S *** RIGHT NOW!! THIS IS BRILLIANT!! in 2 COURT CASES...

Stone is demanding to see everything related to the case, all evidence, everything in discovery! Since there was no case, how to you hold him responsible for doing anything wrong? Stone knew this all along, and he wanted them to charge him. Now he has Mueller by the balls!!! If the DNC server was hacked, yet the DOJ and FBI never have seen the server or investigated it, and which they never even asked for it, how can there be a case against anybody? It was never hacked, and they know it. Therefore how could the Russians give the info to Trump? This is all made up, and that is why they can't find anything against Trump because he had nothing to do with it. Now Stone is going to make them prove it before anything goes further. No Russians, No Trump. Brilliant!

X-22 REPORT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h1jxM3_svY

The First Rule , 1 hour ago link

Don't get too excited; the Judge is an Obama Judge - Amy Berman.

MUELLER DID INCREDIBLE ACROBATICS TO HAVE THIS LAND W/HER. Otherwise, Stone would already be free.

Stone is having to fight both the prosecution and her while navigating this Witch Hunt.

runningman18 , 25 minutes ago link

The Q stuff is fake beyond belief. Trump is not going to stop the banksters or arrest anyone. They run the White House and Trump is a puppet. He's surrounded by them 24/7. Anyone that thinks he's "keeping his enemies close" is a ******* idiot.

Francis Marx , 2 hours ago link

If the US can't achieve their agenda in Afghanistan and all the other countries it has invaded, I think Venezuela would be just the same.

I Am Jack's Macroaggression , 2 hours ago link

A *** shrink with a political axe to grind dispensing diagnoses all over the Left wing media, who actually suggests attacking a nakedly biased and dishonest MSM is a sign of 'sociopathy.'

This is rubbish. Trump may be a narcissist, but he isn't a sociopath.

As it happens in much of the above the good doctor, with all his pseudo-science, is aptly describing Hillary Clinton.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mlz3-OzcExI

Blackdawg7 , 2 hours ago link

'To the victor go the spoils.' Not only is Trump entirely in charge of US foreign policy per the constitution, he's also the CinC. Despite political expediency, Trump needs not go to war with any other nation on this Earth for the duration of his presidency if he doesn't believe that it's not in the US's national interest. Now, he just needs to ignore the chickenhawk Liberals and their echo-chamber media, as well as his own staff made of of chickenhawk neocons. Delete all of their voices from consideration and he's still got enough sane support in the Senate to stave off any threatened or real impeachment proceedings until he terms out in 2024.

[May 12, 2019] Dems voluntarily decided that they can't handle the possible bits of truth that unredacted Mueller report might contain (should we call it Mueller Dossier?)

May 12, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

House Judiciary Chair Jerry Nadler (D-NY) held Attorney General William Barr in contempt on Wednesday for failing to turn over the full Mueller report and its underlying evidence - yet not a single Democrat in Congress has elected to look at the 99.9% unredacted 'volume 2' section of the Mueller's findings provided to Congress by the DOJ, which specifically covers the obstruction portion of Mueller's investigation (Section "A" of the report covering alleged conspiracy with Russia was offered 98.5% unredacted).

On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters " Not a single Democrat has even taken the time to go and look at it ," adding " They're asking for information they know they can't have. The attorney general is actually upholding the law," referring to a recent ruling by a federal judge which requires that Barr redact grand jury material.

[May 12, 2019] Why Hasn t A Single Democrat Looked At The 99.9% Unredacted Mueller Report Provided To Congress

May 12, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

On Sunday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) told ABC' s 'This Week' that Mueller is ready to testify before Congress .

"The American people have a right to hear what the man who did the investigation has to say and we now know we certainly can't rely on the attorney general who misrepresented his conclusions," sais Schiff. " So he is going to testify. "

Rand Paul calls bullshit on the whole thing

Responding later on the show to ABC 's George Stephanopoulos, Senate Foreign Relations Committee member Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said that all of the Trump investigations have all been " politically motivated. "

"One of the things that Adam Schiff and the other partisans don't understand is that if you're accused of a crime by a grand jury and they don't indict you, the prosecutor doesn't go all over town saying we thought he did this, we thought he did this, this is all the evidence," said Rand, adding that "most Americans would disagree" with federal prosecutors who claim that President Trump would be prosecuted if he weren't in office.

" People are horrified by the idea that you could put someone in jail for obstructing justice on something where you didn't commit the crime ," said Paul.


Real Estate Guru , 34 minutes ago link

UPDATE!:

ROGER STONE IS KICKING MUELLER'S *** RIGHT NOW!! THIS IS BRILLIANT!! in 2 COURT CASES...

X-22 REPORT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h1jxM3_svY

JBLight , 28 minutes ago link

They're getting hit from all sides. Obama White House tracking the FOIA requests? As mentioned in the report, Obama was the gatekeeper for the Dark State on all of this and more.

Teamtc321 , 22 minutes ago link

Opening Discovery is going to be a Bitch for the Mueller Kracken Clan Cover up.........

Ouch.................. Roger is going in Swinging hard...........

Nice..................

Equinox7 , 15 minutes ago link

I believe Roger Stone was a trick laid out to bring out the truth of full disclosure from Mueller. Through open discovery, everything will have to be brought out. Roger Stone is becoming the nightmare that the Democrats and Mueller will beg to go away. Mueller is trapped, and he can't drop the Roger Stone charges now. The hoax is going to be exposed.

The Democrats mascot is a donkey, i.e. a jackass. The Democratic Party is full of dumb jackasses, literally.

JBLight , 51 minutes ago link

A pic of Comey on CNN the other day:

https://pmcdeadline2.files.wordpress.com/2019/05/https_cdn.cnn_.com_cnnnext_dam_assets_190509201055-james-comey-town-hall-2.jpg?w=681&h=383&crop=1

This guy has not slept in days. How does it feel to be running scared? To try with all your might to get in front of the truth bombs that are about to drop? That's what all of these assholes are doing, damage control.

JBLight , 1 hour ago link

They're dead in the water, the dark ones.

Roger Stone is fighting back now and has demanded that the DOJ present evidence that the Russians hacked the DNC.

Discovery is a beautiful thing.

Teamtc321 , 57 minutes ago link

I have been trying to locate why Mike Flynn has still not been sentenced for his entrapment, phony charge of a process crime............

Very interesting.............

Teamtc321 , 40 minutes ago link

I sure hope Mike Flynn is fully exonerated, after listening to the Dan Bongino Podcast on what they did to entrap Mr. Flynn, my blood has boiled ever since.

These are some slimy, crooked POS.

# 865 at about 27 minutes, is very interesting to say the least.

Bongino's overall clip was very worth the listen also imo if you haven't caught it.

Ep. 865 Mike Flynn Was Set Up! The Dan Bongino Show 12/5/2018.

From < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbQXnTOSg9E&t=1890s

JBLight , 50 minutes ago link

His entrapment will be fully known. He's a good man and that pendulum of karma is already knocking these assholes' heads off.

Teamtc321 , 39 minutes ago link

I sure hope so and completely agree, Mr. Flynn is a good man.

[May 11, 2019] Intel and Law Enforcement Tried to Entrap Trump by Larry C Johnson

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Breaking news today, courtesy of the New York Times , is that a man with a long history of working with the CIA and a female FBI Informant, traveled to London in September of 2016 and tried unsuccessfully to entrap George Papadopolous. The biggest curiosity is that US intelligence or law enforcement officials fully briefed British intelligence on what they were up to. ..."
"... The FBI disingenuously claims they ran Azra Turk at Papadopolous because they were alarmed ostensibly by Russia's attempts to disrupt the 2016 election. But Papadopolous was not seeking out Russian contacts. He was being baited. It was Mifsud and others tied to British and US intelligence who were bringing up the "opportunity" to work with the Russians. ..."
"... The boomerang from the Democratic Party's failed attempt to connect Donald Trump to Russia's 2016 election meddling is picking up speed, and its flight path crosses right through Moscow's pesky neighbor, Ukraine. That is where there is growing evidence a foreign power was asked, and in some cases tried, to help Hillary Clinton . ..."
"... In written answers to questions, Ambassador Valeriy Chaly's office says DNC contractor Alexandra Chalupa sought information from the Ukrainian government on Paul Manafort 's dealings inside the country, in hopes of forcing the issue before Congress. ..."
"... It's not just the left. I listened to Michael Tracey's interview with George Papadopoulos and was stunned to learn about the web of Deep State actors and how our Five Eyes allies were intimately involved in subverting our Presidential election. Papadopoulos even talks about U.S. military attachés, DIA guys, in on this coup. Listen to this Michael Tracey* interview and you will be shaken: https://youtu.be/ZjGLCCP_lPg ..."
"... Neoliberals and neoconservatives (ie zionists) were behind it and continue to push it. Trump ran to the left of Clinton on both domestic and foreign policy. That's why he won, and why the establishment must present his election as de facto illegitimate, because otherwise they would be forced to admit that the bipartisan convergence around both finance driven economic policy and war on terror interventionism that has described elite politics since Clinton has been a disaster for most ordinary Americans -- of all types and political persuasions -- and needs to be destroyed root and branch. ..."
"... What's the likelihood that Carter Page was a plant in the Trump campaign? After all, he had a history with the US IC and was used as bait in an FBI case to prove Russian operatives' recruiting efforts. It's thought he's the Under Cover Employee alluded to in this case, which resulted in the successful prosecution of Russian spies: ..."
"... Here's a National Review exclusive report in which a transcript of FBI's Deputy Assistant Director Jonathan Moffa's testimony reveals several Confidential Human Sources (including Christopher Steele), and more interestingly foreign "liasons" (Mifsud?) were employed by the bureau in this operation: ..."
May 04, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Intel and Law Enforcement Tried to Entrap Trump by Larry C Johnson

The preponderance of evidence makes this very simple--there was a broad, coordinated effort by the Obama Administration, with the help of foreign governments, to target Donald Trump and paint him as a stooge of Russia.

The Mueller Report provides irrefutable evidence that the so-called Russian collusion case against Donald Trump was a deliberate fabrication by intelligence and law enforcement organizations in the United States and the United Kingdom and organizations aligned with the Clinton Campaign.

Breaking news today, courtesy of the New York Times, is that a man with a long history of working with the CIA and a female FBI Informant, traveled to London in September of 2016 and tried unsuccessfully to entrap George Papadopolous. The biggest curiosity is that US intelligence or law enforcement officials fully briefed British intelligence on what they were up to. Quite understandable given what we now know about British spying on the Trump Campaign.

The Mueller investigation of Trump "collusion" with Russia prior to the 2016 Presidential election focused on eight cases:

  1. Proposed Trump Tower Project in Moscow
  2. George Papadopolous --
  3. Carter Page --
  4. Dimitri Simes --
  5. Veselnetskya Meeting at Trump Tower (June 16, 2016)
  6. Events at Republican Convention
  7. Post-Convention Contacts with Russian Ambassador Kislyak
  8. Paul Manafort

One simple fact emerges--of the eight cases or incidents of alleged Trump Campaign interaction with the Russians investigated by the Mueller team, the proposals to interact with the Russian Government or Putin originated with FBI informants, MI-6 assets or people paid by Fusion GPS, not Trump or his people. There is not a single instance where Donald Trump or any member of his campaign team initiated contact with the Russians for the purpose of gaining derogatory information on Hillary or obtaining support to boost the Trump campaign. Not one.

Simply put, Trump and his campaign were the target of an elaborate, wide ranging covert action designed to entrap him and members of his team as an agent of Russia.

Let's look in detail at each of the cases.

THE PROPOSED TRUMP TOWER PROJECT IN MOSCOW, according to Mueller's report, originated with an FBI Informant--Felix Sater.

Here's what the Mueller Report states:

In the late summer of 2015, the Trump Organization received a new inquiry about pursuing a Trump Tower project in Moscow. In approximately September 2015, Felix Sater . . . contacted Cohen (i.e., Michael Cohen) on behalf of I.C. Expert Investment Company (I.C. Expert), a Russian real-estate development corporation controlled by Andrei Vladimirovich Rozov.

Sater had known Rozov since approximately 2007 and, in 2014, had served as an agent on behalf of Rozov during Rozov's purchase of a building in New York City. Sater later contacted Rozov and proposed that I.C. Expert pursue a Trump Tower Moscow project in which I.C. Expert would license the name and brand from the Trump Organization but construct the building on its own. Sater worked on the deal with Rozov and another employee of I.C. Expert. (see page 69 of the Mueller Report).

Mueller, as I have noted previously , is downright dishonest in failing to identify Sater as an FBI informant. Sater was not just a private entrepreneur looking to make some coin. He was a fully signed up FBI informant. Sater's status as an FBI snitch was first exposed in 2012. Sater also was a boyhood chum of Michael Cohen, the target being baited in this operation. Another inconvenient fact excluded from the Mueller report is that one of Mueller's Chief Prosecutors, Andrew Weissman, signed the deal with Felix Sater in December 1998 that put Sater into the FBI Informant business .

All suggestions for meeting with the Russian Government, including Putin, originated with Felix Sater. The use of Sater on this particular project started in September 2015.

[For more on Sater please see my previous posts, Felix Sater--The Rosetta Stone for the FBI/CIA Conspiracy Against Trump? , Felix Sater and the Steele Dossier .]

GEORGE PAPADOPOLOUS

Papadopolous was targeted by British and U.S. intelligence starting in late December 2015, when he is offered out of the blue a job with the London Centre of International Law and Practice Limited (LCILP) . The LCILP has all of the hallmarks of an intelligence front company. LCILP began as an offshoot from another company  --  EN Education Group Limited  --  which describes itself as "a global education consultancy, facilitating links between students, education providers and organisations with an interest in education worldwide".

EN Education and LCILP are owned and run by Nagi Khalid Idris, a 48-year-old British citizen of Sudanese origin. For no apparent reason Idris offers Papadopolous a job as the Director of the LCILP's International Energy and Natural Resources Division. Then in March of 2016, Idris and Arvinder Sambei (who acted as an attorney for the FBI on a 9-11 extradition case in the UK), insist on introducing Joseph Mifsud to Papadopolous.

It is Joseph Mifsud who introduces the idea of meeting Putin following a lunch in London:

"The lunch is booked for March 24 at the Grange Holborn Hotel,. . . . "When I get there, Mifsud is waiting for me in the lobby with an attractive, fashionably dressed young woman with dirty blonde hair at his side. He introduces her as Olga Vinogradova." (p. 76)

"Mifsud sells her hard. "Olga is going to be your inside woman to Moscow. She knows everyone." He tells me she was a former official at the Russian Ministry of Trade. Then he waxes on about introducing me to the Russian ambassador in London." (p. 77)

"On April 12, "Olga" writes: "I have already alerted my personal links to our conversation and your request. The embassy in London is very much aware of this. As mentioned, we are all very excited by the possibility of a good relationship with Mr. Trump. The Russian Federation would love to welcome him once his candidature would be officially announced."

And it is Mifsud who raises the possibility of getting dirt on Hillary:

"Then Mifsud returns from the Valdai conference. On April 26 we meet for breakfast at the Andaz Hotel, near Liverpool Street Station, one of the busiest train stations in London. He's in an excellent mood and claims he met with high-level Russian government officials. But once again, he's very short on specifics. This is becoming a real pattern with Mifsud. He hasn't offered any names besides Timofeev. Then, he leans across the table in a conspiratorial manner. The Russians have "dirt" on Hillary Clinton, he tells me. "Emails of Clinton," he says. "They have thousands of emails."

Here again we encounter the lying and obfuscation of the Mueller team. They falsely characterize Mifsud as an agent of Russia. In fact, he has close and longstanding ties to both British and US intelligence ( Disobedient Media lays out the Mifsud mystery in detail ).

Mifsud was not alone. The FBI and the CIA also were in the game of trying to entrap Papadopolous. In September of 2016, Papadopolous was being wined and dined by Halper (who has longstanding ties to the US intelligence community) and Azra Turk, an FBI Informant/researcher ( see NY Times ).

The FBI disingenuously claims they ran Azra Turk at Papadopolous because they were alarmed ostensibly by Russia's attempts to disrupt the 2016 election. But Papadopolous was not seeking out Russian contacts. He was being baited. It was Mifsud and others tied to British and US intelligence who were bringing up the "opportunity" to work with the Russians.

CARTER PAGE

The section of the Mueller report that deals with Carter Page is a total travesty. Mueller and his team, for example, initially misrepresent Page's status with the Trump campaign--he is described as "working" for the campaign, which implies a paid position, when he was in fact only a volunteer foreign policy advisor. Mueller also paints Page's prior experience and work in Russia as evidence that Page was being used by Russian intelligence, but says nothing about the fact that Page was being regularly debriefed by the CIA and the FBI during the same period. In other words, Page was cooperating with US intelligence and law enforcement. But this fact is omitted in the Mueller report.

Mueller eventually accurately describes Page's role in the Trump campaign as follows:

In January 2016, Page began volunteering on an informal, unpaid basis for the Trump Campaign after Ed Cox, a state Republican Party official, introduced Page to Trump Campaign officials. Page told the Office that his goal in working on the Campaign was to help candidate Trump improve relations with Russia. To that end, Page emailed Campaign officials offering his thoughts on U.S.-Russia relations, prepared talking points and briefing memos on Russia, and proposed that candidate Trump meet with President Vladimir Putin in Moscow.

In communications with Campaign officials, Page also repeatedly touted his high-level contacts in Russia and his ability to forge connections between candidate Trump and senior Russian governmental officials. For example, on January 30, 2016, Page sent an email to senior Campaign officials stating that he had "spent the past week in Europe and had been in discussions with some individuals with close ties to the Kremlin" who recognized that Trump could have a "game-changing effect . .. in bringing the end of the new Cold War. The email stated that " [t]hrough [his] discussions with these high level contacts," Page believed that "a direct meeting in Moscow between Mr. Trump and Putin could be arranged.

The Mueller presentation portrays Carter Page in a nefarious, negative light. His contacts with Russia are characterized as inappropriate and unjustified. Longstanding business experience in a particular country is not proof of wrong doing. No consideration is given at all to Page's legitimate concerns raising about the dismal state of US/Russia relations following the US backed coup in the Ukraine and the subsequent annexation of Crimea by Russia.

Page's association with the Trump campaign was quite brief--he lasted seven months, being removed as a foreign policy advisor on 24 September. Page was not identified publicly as a Trump foreign policy advisor until March of 2016, but the evidence presented in the Mueller report clearly indicates that Page was already a target of intelligence agencies, in the US and abroad, long before the FISA warrant of October 2016.

While serving on the foreign policy team Page continued his business and social contacts in Russia, but was never tasked by the Trump team to pursue or promote contacts with Putin and his team. In fact, Page's proposals, suggestions and recommendations were either ignored or directly rebuffed.

The timeline reported in the Mueller report regarding Page's trip to Russia in early July raises questions about the intel collected on that trip and the so-called "intel" revealed in the Steele Dossier with respect to Page. Carter admits to meeting with individuals, such as Dmitry Peskov and Igor Sechin, who appear in the Steele Dossier. Page's meetings in Moscow turned out to be innocuous and uneventful. Nothing he did resembled clandestine activity. Yet, the Steele report on that visit suggested just the opposite and used the tactic of guilt by association to imply that Page was up to something dirty.

The bottomline for Mueller is that Page did not do anything wrong and no one in the Trump Campaign embraced his proposals for closer ties with Russia.

DMITRI SIMES

The targeting and investigation of Dmitri Simes is disgusting and an abuse of law enforcement authority. Full disclosure. I know Dmitri. For awhile, in the 2002-2003 time period, I was a regular participant at Nixon Center events. For example, I was at a round table in December 2002 on the imminent invasion of Iraq. Colonel Pat Lang sat on one side of me and Ambassador Joe Wilson on the other. Directly across the table was Charles Krauthammer. Dmitri ran an honest seminar.

The entire section on Dmitri Simes, under other circumstances, could be viewed as something bizarre and amusing. But the mere idea that Simes was somehow an agent of Putin and a vehicle for helping Trump work with the Russians to steal the 2016 election is crazy and idiotic. Those in the FBI who were so stupid as to buy into this nonsense should have their badges and guns taken away. They are too dumb to work in law enforcement.

Dmitri's only sin was to speak calmly, intelligently and rationally about foreign policy dealings with Russia. We now know that in this new hysteria of the 21st Century Russian scare that qualities such as reason and rationality are proof of one's willingness to act as a puppet of Vladimir Putin.

TRUMP TOWER MEETING (JUNE 9, 2016)

This is the clearest example of a plant designed to entrap the Trump team. Mueller, once again, presents a very disingenuous account:

On June 9, 2016, senior representatives of the Trump Campaign met in Trump Tower with a Russian attorney expecting to receive derogatory information about Hillary Clinton from the Russian government. The meeting was proposed to Donald Trump Jr. in an email from Robert Goldstone, at the request of his then-client Emin Agalarov, the son of Russian real-estate developer Aras Agalarov. Goldstone relayed to Trump Jr. that the "Crown prosecutor of Russia ... offered to provide the Trump Campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia" as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." Trump Jr. immediately responded that "if it's what you say I love it," and arranged the meeting through a series of emails and telephone calls.

The meeting was with a Russian attorney, Natalia Veselnitskaya.

The Russian attorney who spoke at the meeting, Natalia Veselnitskaya, had previously worked for the Russian government and maintained a relationship with that government throughout this period oftime. She claimed that funds derived from illegal activities in Russia were provided to Hillary Clinton and other Democrats. Trump Jr. requested evidence to support those claims, but Veselnitskaya did not provide such information.

Ignore for a moment that no information on Hillary was passed or provided (and doing such a thing is not illegal). The real problem is with what Mueller does not say and did not investigate. Mueller conveniently declines to mention the fact that Veselnitskaya was working closely with the firm Hillary Clinton hired to produce the Steele Dossier. NBC News reported on Veselnitskaya:

The information that a Russian lawyer brought with her when she met Donald Trump Jr. in June 2016 stemmed from research conducted by Fusion GPS, the same firm that compiled the infamous Trump dossier, according to the lawyer and a source familiar with the matter.

In an interview with NBC News, Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya says she first received the supposedly incriminating information she brought to Trump Tower -- describing alleged tax evasion and donations to Democrats -- from Glenn Simpson , the Fusion GPS owner, who had been hired to conduct research in a New York federal court case.

Even a mediocre investigator would recognize the problem of the relationship between the lawyer claiming to have dirty, damning info on Hillary with the firm Hillary hired to dig up dirt on Donald Trump. This was another botched set up and the Trump folks did not take the bait.

EVENTS AT THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION

This portion of the Mueller report is complete farce. Foreign Ambassdors, including the Russian (and the Chinese) attend Republican and Democrat Conventions. Presidential candidates and their advisors speak to those Ambassadors. So, where is the beef? Answer. There isn't any. That this "event" was considered something worthy of a counter intelligence investigation is just one more piece of evidence that law enforcement and intelligence were weaponized against the Trump campaign.

POST-CONVENTION CONTACTS WITH RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR KISLYAK

Ditto. As noted in the previous paragraph, trying to criminalize normal diplomatic contacts, especially with a country where we share important, vital national security interests, is but further evidence of the crazy anti-Russian hysteria that has infected the anti-Trumpers. Pathetic.

MANAFORT

If Paul Manafort had rebuffed Trump's offer to run his campaign, he would be walking free today and still buying expensive suits and evading taxes along with his Clinton buddy, Greg Craig. Instead, he became another target for DOJ and intel community and the DNC, which were desperate to portray Trump as a tool of the Kremlin. Thanks to John Solomon of The Hill, we now know the impetus to target Manafort came from the DNC :

The boomerang from the Democratic Party's failed attempt to connect Donald Trump to Russia's 2016 election meddling is picking up speed, and its flight path crosses right through Moscow's pesky neighbor, Ukraine. That is where there is growing evidence a foreign power was asked, and in some cases tried, to help Hillary Clinton .

In its most detailed account yet, Ukraine's embassy in Washington says a Democratic National Committee insider during the 2016 election solicited dirt on Donald Trump's campaign chairman and even tried to enlist the country's president to help.

In written answers to questions, Ambassador Valeriy Chaly's office says DNC contractor Alexandra Chalupa sought information from the Ukrainian government on Paul Manafort 's dealings inside the country, in hopes of forcing the issue before Congress.

Manafort was not colluding, but the Clinton campaign and the Obama Administration most certainly were.

Take these eight events as a whole a very clear picture emerges--US and foreign intelligence (especially the UK) and US law enforcement collaborated in a broad effort to bait the Trump team with ostensible Russian entreaties in order to paint Trump as a tool of the Kremlin. That effort is now being exposed and those culpable will hopefully face justice. This should sicken and alarm every American regardless of political party. Will justice be served?

notlurking , 03 May 2019 at 08:16 AM

we're not in Kansas anymore.....
Joe100 , 03 May 2019 at 08:43 AM
Great work!

I just read the following about special visas approved for some of the FBI "operatives" (from SD at CTH): "It wasn't just the CIA that was using spies to "dirty up" Trump associates. The FBI was doing it too. There was the infamous Natalia Veselnitskaya who is known for her part in the Trump Tower meeting. She had been banned from the country but got a special visa signed off by Preet Bahara of the FBI, Southern District of New York. Henry Greenburg, the known FBI informant who tried to entrap Roger Stone, also got a special visa. And I'm sure there are many more "

Gerard M , 03 May 2019 at 09:06 AM
IMO, there is no coming back from this. Apart from this Deep State coup attempt, we have seen that democracy is a shame, it's all theater. The Establishment (which includes GOP) is constantly working to undermine Trump and thwart his plans to do what the American people want and elected him for. What I've found quite disturbing is that the controlling puppet masters have not let up in trying to remove or neutralize Trump. As if they can't wait even 4 years to again fully stack the deck and regain total control. They are not willing to concede that 2016 was a political black swan event involving a celebrity billionaire American icon. And conceding and allowing this fluke to be rectified I'm 4 short years is worse than their pushback exposing the political system as a rigged game.

The events of the last 2.5 years have radically altered my views. I no longer have any faith in democracy (voting), the government, the federal courts, law enforcement, et al. And I can't see me regaining any faith in them. What I have seen in the past 2.5 years is kind of like finding out my wife of decades, whom I idolized, has been cheating with my friend from childhood, whom I would've laid down my life for. And all the other people close to me not telling me.

I now only have faith in only God and beagles.

Fred -> Gerard M... , 03 May 2019 at 10:40 AM
It's not the black swan event that concerns the guilty but the fear of just retribution by those who see just how black hearted the left has become.
Gerard M said in reply to Fred ... , 03 May 2019 at 12:25 PM
It's not just the left. I listened to Michael Tracey's interview with George Papadopoulos and was stunned to learn about the web of Deep State actors and how our Five Eyes allies were intimately involved in subverting our Presidential election. Papadopoulos even talks about U.S. military attachés, DIA guys, in on this coup. Listen to this Michael Tracey* interview and you will be shaken: https://youtu.be/ZjGLCCP_lPg

*Tracey, btw, is on the left. But like Glenn Greenwald and others on the left he is an honest journalist interested in the truth.

Ligurio said in reply to Fred ... , 03 May 2019 at 02:16 PM
The "left" was not behind and does not buy into this Russia psyop. Neoliberals and neoconservatives (ie zionists) were behind it and continue to push it. Trump ran to the left of Clinton on both domestic and foreign policy. That's why he won, and why the establishment must present his election as de facto illegitimate, because otherwise they would be forced to admit that the bipartisan convergence around both finance driven economic policy and war on terror interventionism that has described elite politics since Clinton has been a disaster for most ordinary Americans -- of all types and political persuasions -- and needs to be destroyed root and branch.

To see how and why the "left" differs from corporate identity-politicking liberals in the above regard consider how it is that Tulsi Gabbard is both the Dem candidate most respected by principled Trump supporters on this site and others and the Dem candidate most reviled, ignored, and slandered by DNC liberals and neocons alike.

The enemy to principled conservatives and the left in this country is the bipartisan establishment corporate neoliberalism of the RNC and DNC alike.

Fred -> Ligurio... , 03 May 2019 at 08:53 PM
That's as convenient a lie as any other.
akaPatience , 03 May 2019 at 11:56 AM
What's the likelihood that Carter Page was a plant in the Trump campaign? After all, he had a history with the US IC and was used as bait in an FBI case to prove Russian operatives' recruiting efforts. It's thought he's the Under Cover Employee alluded to in this case, which resulted in the successful prosecution of Russian spies:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/evgeny-buryakov-pleads-guilty-manhattan-federal-court-connection-conspiracy-work

Anonymous said in reply to akaPatience ... , 03 May 2019 at 04:05 PM
Page is just a goofball grifter. He's not a plant. That is silly. When they saw names like Page and Manafort the Democrats pounced because they knew the could cast aspersions.

I'm not sure about Mifsud. I think it would be hard for Mueller to knowingly indict Papadop if Mifsud were an asset of the US (or even known to be an asset of allies). I think it is more likely Mifsud was a free agent.

All these guys Mifsud, Page, Papadop were grifters, not doing real work. Just running around trying to make a buck by claiming to facilitate meetings. It's a shame it bit them and not a crime to do what they did. At the same time, I can't help but see some kharmic justice. GET A JOB, you poly sci lightweights!

walrus said in reply to Anonymous... , 03 May 2019 at 06:11 PM
This anonymous commentator has never spent time in senior levels of business or government. There is a whole class of people who do not see themselves as Grifters but more as "ideas men".

The best offer valuable perspectives on the world, can really open doors and otherwise add value. At the other end of the spectrum are con men. Political campaigns and large corporations of any sort attract these people in droves. The skill in management is to sort the wheat from the chaff. Trump is good at that.

akaPatience -> Anonymous... , 03 May 2019 at 06:56 PM
Yes, Page often comes off as a bit crazy and incoherent. But he may be crazy like a fox. In the end he was never charged with ANYTHING and it's my understanding he represented himself legally throughout the investigation, opting not to hire counsel. I find it odd that others were prosecuted for process crimes but he escaped even THAT fate.

His participation in the Trump campaign, limited as it was, was nevertheless KEY in finally obtaining a FISA warrant after other attempts failed.

Consider it silly if you want. I view him at least worthy of suspicion. His hapless demeanor could be his schtick , when his education, experience and IC connections are taken into consideration.

Anonymous said in reply to akaPatience ... , 04 May 2019 at 06:09 PM
Page represents himself poorly even when he knows a lot is on the line. Look at how frustrated Gowdy got with him. Clearly Page didn't learn much from plebe year in terms of 5 basic responses. Compare the difference with Barr for instance.

While the Trident program is a big deal, every now and then USNA has mids that are diligent about getting good grades but not very smart. I knew one my year. Page is clearly in that vein. Don't miss that he didn't get into any elite program after graduation (SWO is the default). And that he was a poly sci major. The saying is "poly sci, QPR high" (QPR is quality point rating or GPA). Of course this is not to say there aren't some good SWOs or poly sci majors. But there's a definite correlation I'm noting. It fits with what his reputation is.

Furthermore, the guy has had an uneventful career, bouncing around. He went to a lower bulge bracket (not Goldman) and didn't seem to stick. And his Russian colleagues said he was an idiot and a boaster. We're not talking i-banker smart. Wouldn't trust him to do an NPV or other economic analysis. And then after that we have the grifting and the shmoozing.

Kid is a lightweight. A slightly less coffee-boy coffee boy.

catherine said in reply to Bill H ... , 03 May 2019 at 07:02 PM
''They cannot convict based on a law that was passed after the act was committed''

Money laundering has always been against the law of course....the NY law just firmed up the due diligence that is suppose to be done in transactions. I don't think there is a statute of limitations on things like fraud, tax evasion and money laundering but I will check it out to see

walrus said in reply to catherine... , 03 May 2019 at 04:37 PM
Catherine, in current PC thinking, merely passing the salt to a Russian guest at a dinner party makes you "an unregistered foreign agent" of Russia bent on implementing Putin's evil plans.

As for certifying real estate deals, the same crowd would view buying someone a MacDonalds hamburger as attempted bribery.

catherine said in reply to walrus ... , 03 May 2019 at 07:34 PM
''As for certifying real estate deals, the same crowd would view buying someone a MacDonalds hamburger as attempted bribery.''

Hardly. 7 million dollar cash deals for a condo thru a shell company is a red flag however..as is buying property for 1 million and selling it unimproved the next year for 2 million...or buying a house in LA 11 million and selling it 9 months later for 8 million. That 'in between money" is someone's pay off....that's how it works.

Money laundering is epidemic in the US and Europe....Israeli mafia, Russian oligarchs, African dictators looting their country's treasury and running it through a real estate washing machine deal. Far be from me to sweep the fairy dust out of Trump supporters eyes but, as I said, Trump's troubles are far from over. We will see what comes out in the future.

VietnamVet , 03 May 2019 at 05:40 PM
The soft coup against Donald Trump failed. He has to run hard and sure to win in 2020 to avoid an indictment in NY State when he leaves the Presidency. Corporate Democrats will do their damnedst again to put forth their weakest pro war candidate like the aged, apparently demented, Joe Biden. This fiasco and the recent coup attempt in Venezuela make the Keystone Cops appear competent.

I put this all down to Washington DC being completely isolated inside their credentialed bubble. It is just like corporate CEOs, who think they know exactly what they are doing. But, in reality, they are destroying the stabilizing middle class by extracting and hording wealth and turning mid-America into their colony. Globalist and nationalist oligarchs are after each other's throat over who controls the flow of money.

We live on a very finite world dependent on one sun in an expanding universe. Just like Boeing, Bayer or Volkswagen, the splintering world is starting to crash all around them. Even as they deny it, this is a multi-polar world now. It is not going back without a world war which would destroy civilization and could make the world uninhabitable for humans.

Bill H -> VietnamVet... , 04 May 2019 at 01:26 AM
And the best that our government can do is warn us not to wash our chicken before cooking it because washing merely spreads the salmonella that our food industry is unable to prevent from infecting it.
English Outsider -> VietnamVet... , 04 May 2019 at 01:15 PM
The trouble is that those CEO's do know exactly what they are doing. Making money the only way possible in a business environment in which outsourcing can sometimes be the only thing that pays.

The idea was that Trump was going to change that environment. Bannon calls its "economic nationalism" but in truth it's now just economic survival. Survival for those whose jobs are outsourced. Survival for the country as a whole, ultimately. That was Trump's core programme. It was the programme that made him different from all other Western politicians, "populist" or status quo. Do you see any sign that it's being implemented, or has that programme too got bogged down in the swamp?

Mad Max_22 , 03 May 2019 at 06:44 PM
Will justice be served? A good question.

If we are speaking about criminal justice, there is some chance that we will see persons such as Jim Comey, who persists in his smug higher calling act, prosecuted for what was a clear cut violation in divulging classified material through a lawyer intermediary to the NYT. I suspect the higher calling bit has been prompted in part because he knows that he screwed up both on the facts and in law and he is justifying his screw up to himself, and possibly also rehearsing his defense, with the rationale that he was only trying to do the right thing. Yeah, he may have had the facts all wrong, the Russians, etc, etc, but the worst that can be said is that he had been competent, there was no intent. That defense doesn't do much for the FBI's once held reputation for competence, but that appears to be gone anyway.

With regard to what will be turned up concerning the actual roots of the travesty, the heavily politicized faux investigation into the Clinton e mails and targeting of the Trump campaign on a predicate that is somewhere between nebulous and non existant, I think a criminal prosecution arising from that investigation, even if it is serious, is unlikely for two main reasons. First, what will be the charged violations? As best I can see right now, they will have to entail some imaginative application of fraud statutes, defrauding the FISC, defrauding the US, informants and assets lying to their handlers, or process crimes like Bob Mueller's partisan posse relied upon (ugly); and second, something like the Comey defense will interpenetrate all the individuals and entities involved: we may have been incredible bunglers, but that is the worst of it. We really believed these charlatans who conned us into this debacle. Sorry, but we thought we were doing the right thing.

Now if we are talking about seeing some kind of political or moral justice, I'm not too optimistic we will get much satisfaction there either and we will probably have to wait for history. The reason is that Barr will conduct this investigation by the rule book. That means that what we see developed through the process, indictment, prosecution, etc, is likely all,that we will ever see. Barr is very unlikely to produce a politcized manifesto to be employed as a smear weapon like the once reputable Mueller did.

Anyway, until we see a special FGJ empanelled, some search warrants executed, some tactical immunities offered, everything is on the come.

Jack , 03 May 2019 at 08:26 PM
All,

What probability do you assign that any top official will be indicted and prosecuted? I mean Brennan, Clapper, Comey & Lynch.

Second, what probability do you assign that Trump will declassify the relevant documents and communications like the FISA application,the originating EC, the tasking orders for FBI/CIA spying, etc.

blue peacock said in reply to Jack... , 04 May 2019 at 12:27 PM
Jack,

The question really comes down to Trump. Does he really want to expose the Swamp and pay the price or just use it for rhetorical & political purposes? When considering probabilities and looking at his track record in office on foreign policy relative to his campaign stance, I would say the probability is less than 30% that Brennan & Clapper will be indicted.

David Habakkuk -> blue peacock... , 04 May 2019 at 03:07 PM
bp,

The question is only very partly what Trump wants, in some abstract sense. Situations like this commonly have a strong escalatory logic. So one needs to ask whether or not he has rational reason to believe that unless he can destroy those who have shown themselves prepared to stop at nothing to destroy him, they will eventually succeed.

If the answer is yes - and while I think it may very well be, I am not prejudging the issue - then a key question becomes whether Trump will conclude that his most promising loption is to go after the conspirators by every means possible.

Involved here are questions about who he is listening to, and how competent they are.

But the escalatory processes are not simply to do with what Trump decides. In particular, a whole range of legal proceedings are involved. The referral in relation to Nellie Ohr is likely to be the fist of a good few. In addition, Ed Butowsky's lawsuits, and those against Steele, have unpredictable potentialities.

blue peacock said in reply to David Habakkuk ... , 04 May 2019 at 07:11 PM
David

The intelligence & law enforcement apparatus in collusion with the media and the establishment of both parties went after him hard. As Larry notes here, they went to considerable effort to entrap those related to his campaign to impugn him. Mueller spent $35 million trying to find an angle. Even after the Mueller report stated there was no collusion they're sill after him. So that's not going to end any time soon.

Trump may have good instincts but his judgment of people so far to staff his administration is not very inspiring. He had Jeff Sessions as his AG and he let him hang in there for nearly two years while Mueller ran riot. He's surrounded himself with neocons on foreign policy. It seems his only real advisor is Jared. Everyone else he's got around him are from the same establishment that's going after him. He hasn't taken advise from Devin Nunes, who has done more to uncover the sedition than anyone else. If he had he would have by now declassified all the documents & communications. The impression I have is his primary motivation is building his brand & less about governance and wielding power. Take for example his order to withdraw from Syria. Bolton & the Pentagon are thumbing their noses at him.

Well, there have been several criminal referrals prior to the recent one on Nellie Ohr. There's the McCabe referral and the 8 referrals by Devin Nunes. I've not read any report of the empaneling of a grand jury yet. I agree with you that these law suits have the potential for great embarrassment, however to hold those responsible for the sedition accountable will require iron will & intense focus on the part of Trump to get his AG to assign prosecutors who don't have the axe to "protect" the "institution" and to create an opportunity for public awareness of the extent that law enforcement & intelligence became a 4th branch of government. My opinion is that his skill is in his instinctual understanding of the current political zeitgeist and his ability to manipulate the media including social media to project his brand. He's not an operational leader making sure his team executes his vision & strategy.

akaPatience , 04 May 2019 at 07:11 PM
Here's a National Review exclusive report in which a transcript of FBI's Deputy Assistant Director Jonathan Moffa's testimony reveals several Confidential Human Sources (including Christopher Steele), and more interestingly foreign "liasons" (Mifsud?) were employed by the bureau in this operation:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/fbi-official-testimony-surveillance-trump-campaign/

[May 11, 2019] Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire by KENNETH P. VOGEL and DAVID STERN

Notable quotes:
"... Almost as quickly as Chalupa's efforts attracted the attention of the Ukrainian Embassy and Democrats, she also found herself the subject of some unwanted attention from overseas. ..."
"... Chalupa, though, indicated in an email that was later hacked and released by WikiLeaks that the Open World Leadership Center "put me on the program to speak specifically about Paul Manafort." ..."
"... In the email, which was sent in early May to then-DNC communications director Luis Miranda, Chalupa noted that she had extended an invitation to the Library of Congress forum to veteran Washington investigative reporter Michael Isikoff. Two days before the event, he had published a story for Yahoo News revealing the unraveling of a $26 million deal between Manafort and a Russian oligarch related to a telecommunications venture in Ukraine. And Chalupa wrote in the email she'd been "working with for the past few weeks" with Isikoff "and connected him to the Ukrainians" at the event. ..."
"... A DNC official stressed that Chalupa was a consultant paid to do outreach for the party's political department, not a researcher. She undertook her investigations into Trump, Manafort and Russia on her own, and the party did not incorporate her findings in its dossiers on the subjects, the official said, stressing that the DNC had been building robust research books on Trump and his ties to Russia long before Chalupa began sounding alarms. ..."
Jan 11, 2017 | www.politico.com

Manafort's work for Yanukovych caught the attention of a veteran Democratic operative named Alexandra Chalupa, who had worked in the White House Office of Public Liaison during the Clinton administration. Chalupa went on to work as a staffer, then as a consultant, for Democratic National Committee. The DNC paid her $412,000 from 2004 to June 2016, according to Federal Election Commission records, though she also was paid by other clients during that time, including Democratic campaigns and the DNC's arm for engaging expatriate Democrats around the world.

A daughter of Ukrainian immigrants who maintains strong ties to the Ukrainian-American diaspora and the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, Chalupa, a lawyer by training, in 2014 was doing pro bono work for another client interested in the Ukrainian crisis and began researching Manafort's role in Yanukovych's rise, as well as his ties to the pro-Russian oligarchs who funded Yanukovych's political party.

In an interview this month, Chalupa told Politico she had developed a network of sources in Kiev and Washington, including investigative journalists, government officials and private intelligence operatives. While her consulting work at the DNC this past election cycle centered on mobilizing ethnic communities -- including Ukrainian-Americans -- she said that, when Trump's unlikely presidential campaign began surging in late 2015, she began focusing more on the research, and expanded it to include Trump's ties to Russia, as well.

She occasionally shared her findings with officials from the DNC and Clinton's campaign, Chalupa said. In January 2016 -- months before Manafort had taken any role in Trump's campaign -- Chalupa told a senior DNC official that, when it came to Trump's campaign, "I felt there was a Russia connection," Chalupa recalled. "And that, if there was, that we can expect Paul Manafort to be involved in this election," said Chalupa, who at the time also was warning leaders in the Ukrainian-American community that Manafort was "Putin's political brain for manipulating U.S. foreign policy and elections."

he said she shared her concern with Ukraine's ambassador to the U.S., Valeriy Chaly, and one of his top aides, Oksana Shulyar, during a March 2016 meeting at the Ukrainian Embassy. According to someone briefed on the meeting, Chaly said that Manafort was very much on his radar, but that he wasn't particularly concerned about the operative's ties to Trump since he didn't believe Trump stood much of a chance of winning the GOP nomination, let alone the presidency.

That was not an uncommon view at the time, and, perhaps as a result, Trump's ties to Russia -- let alone Manafort's -- were not the subject of much attention.
That all started to change just four days after Chalupa's meeting at the embassy, when it was reported that Trump had in fact hired Manafort, suggesting that Chalupa may have been on to something. She quickly found herself in high demand. The day after Manafort's hiring was revealed, she briefed the DNC's communications staff on Manafort, Trump and their ties to Russia, according to an operative familiar with the situation.

A former DNC staffer described the exchange as an "informal conversation," saying "'briefing' makes it sound way too formal," and adding, "We were not directing or driving her work on this." Yet, the former DNC staffer and the operative familiar with the situation agreed that with the DNC's encouragement, Chalupa asked embassy staff to try to arrange an interview in which Poroshenko might discuss Manafort's ties to Yanukovych.

While the embassy declined that request, officials there became "helpful" in Chalupa's efforts, she said, explaining that she traded information and leads with them. "If I asked a question, they would provide guidance, or if there was someone I needed to follow up with." But she stressed, "There were no documents given, nothing like that."

Chalupa said the embassy also worked directly with reporters researching Trump, Manafort and Russia to point them in the right directions. She added, though, "they were being very protective and not speaking to the press as much as they should have. I think they were being careful because their situation was that they had to be very, very careful because they could not pick sides. It's a political issue, and they didn't want to get involved politically because they couldn't."

Shulyar vehemently denied working with reporters or with Chalupa on anything related to Trump or Manafort, explaining "we were stormed by many reporters to comment on this subject, but our clear and adamant position was not to give any comment [and] not to interfere into the campaign affairs."

Both Shulyar and Chalupa said the purpose of their initial meeting was to organize a June reception at the embassy to promote Ukraine. According to the embassy's website, the event highlighted female Ukrainian leaders, featuring speeches by Ukrainian parliamentarian Hanna Hopko, who discussed "Ukraine's fight against the Russian aggression in Donbas," and longtime Hillary Clinton confidante Melanne Verveer, who worked for Clinton in the State Department and was a vocal surrogate during the presidential campaign.

Shulyar said her work with Chalupa "didn't involve the campaign," and she specifically stressed that "We have never worked to research and disseminate damaging information about Donald Trump and Paul Manafort."

But Andrii Telizhenko, who worked as a political officer in the Ukrainian Embassy under Shulyar, said she instructed him to help Chalupa research connections between Trump, Manafort and Russia. "Oksana said that if I had any information, or knew other people who did, then I should contact Chalupa," recalled Telizhenko, who is now a political consultant in Kiev. "They were coordinating an investigation with the Hillary team on Paul Manafort with Alexandra Chalupa," he said, adding "Oksana was keeping it all quiet," but "the embassy worked very closely with" Chalupa.

In fact, sources familiar with the effort say that Shulyar specifically called Telizhenko into a meeting with Chalupa to provide an update on an American media outlet's ongoing investigation into Manafort.

Telizhenko recalled that Chalupa told him and Shulyar that, "If we can get enough information on Paul [Manafort] or Trump's involvement with Russia, she can get a hearing in Congress by September."

Chalupa confirmed that, a week after Manafort's hiring was announced, she discussed the possibility of a congressional investigation with a foreign policy legislative assistant in the office of Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), who co-chairs the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus. But, Chalupa said, "It didn't go anywhere."

Asked about the effort, the Kaptur legislative assistant called it a "touchy subject" in an internal email to colleagues that was accidentally forwarded to Politico.

Kaptur's office later emailed an official statement explaining that the lawmaker is backing a bill to create an independent commission to investigate "possible outside interference in our elections." The office added "at this time, the evidence related to this matter points to Russia, but Congresswoman Kaptur is concerned with any evidence of foreign entities interfering in our elections."

•••

Almost as quickly as Chalupa's efforts attracted the attention of the Ukrainian Embassy and Democrats, she also found herself the subject of some unwanted attention from overseas.

Within a few weeks of her initial meeting at the embassy with Shulyar and Chaly, Chalupa on April 20 received the first of what became a series of messages from the administrators of her private Yahoo email account, warning her that "state-sponsored actors" were trying to hack into her emails.

She kept up her crusade, appearing on a panel a week after the initial hacking message to discuss her research on Manafort with a group of Ukrainian investigative journalists gathered at the Library of Congress for a program sponsored by a U.S. congressional agency called the Open World Leadership Center.

Center spokeswoman Maura Shelden stressed that her group is nonpartisan and ensures "that our delegations hear from both sides of the aisle, receiving bipartisan information." She said the Ukrainian journalists in subsequent days met with Republican officials in North Carolina and elsewhere. And she said that, before the Library of Congress event, "Open World's program manager for Ukraine did contact Chalupa to advise her that Open World is a nonpartisan agency of the Congress."

Chalupa, though, indicated in an email that was later hacked and released by WikiLeaks that the Open World Leadership Center "put me on the program to speak specifically about Paul Manafort."

In the email, which was sent in early May to then-DNC communications director Luis Miranda, Chalupa noted that she had extended an invitation to the Library of Congress forum to veteran Washington investigative reporter Michael Isikoff. Two days before the event, he had published a story for Yahoo News revealing the unraveling of a $26 million deal between Manafort and a Russian oligarch related to a telecommunications venture in Ukraine. And Chalupa wrote in the email she'd been "working with for the past few weeks" with Isikoff "and connected him to the Ukrainians" at the event.

Isikoff, who accompanied Chalupa to a reception at the Ukrainian Embassy immediately after the Library of Congress event, declined to comment.

Chalupa further indicated in her hacked May email to the DNC that she had additional sensitive information about Manafort that she intended to share "offline" with Miranda and DNC research director Lauren Dillon, including "a big Trump component you and Lauren need to be aware of that will hit in next few weeks and something I'm working on you should be aware of." Explaining that she didn't feel comfortable sharing the intel over email, Chalupa attached a screenshot of a warning from Yahoo administrators about "state-sponsored" hacking on her account, explaining, "Since I started digging into Manafort these messages have been a daily occurrence on my yahoo account despite changing my password often."

Dillon and Miranda declined to comment.

A DNC official stressed that Chalupa was a consultant paid to do outreach for the party's political department, not a researcher. She undertook her investigations into Trump, Manafort and Russia on her own, and the party did not incorporate her findings in its dossiers on the subjects, the official said, stressing that the DNC had been building robust research books on Trump and his ties to Russia long before Chalupa began sounding alarms.

Nonetheless, Chalupa's hacked email reportedly escalated concerns among top party officials, hardening their conclusion that Russia likely was behind the cyber intrusions with which the party was only then beginning to grapple.

Chalupa left the DNC after the Democratic convention in late July to focus fulltime on her research into Manafort, Trump and Russia . She said she provided off-the-record information and guidance to "a lot of journalists" working on stories related to Manafort and Trump's Russia connections, despite what she described as escalating harassment.

About a month-and-a-half after Chalupa first started receiving hacking alerts, someone broke into her car outside the Northwest Washington home where she lives with her husband and three young daughters, she said. They "rampaged it, basically, but didn't take anything valuable -- left money, sunglasses, $1,200 worth of golf clubs," she said, explaining she didn't file a police report after that incident because she didn't connect it to her research and the hacking.

But by the time a similar vehicle break-in occurred involving two family cars, she was convinced that it was a Russia-linked intimidation campaign. The police report on the latter break-in noted that "both vehicles were unlocked by an unknown person and the interior was ransacked, with papers and the garage openers scattered throughout the cars. Nothing was taken from the vehicles."

Then, early in the morning on another day, a woman "wearing white flowers in her hair" tried to break into her family's home at 1:30 a.m., Chalupa said. Shulyar told Chalupa that the mysterious incident bore some of the hallmarks of intimidation campaigns used against foreigners in Russia, according to Chalupa.

"This is something that they do to U.S. diplomats, they do it to Ukrainians. Like, this is how they operate. They break into people's homes. They harass people. They're theatrical about it," Chalupa said. "They must have seen when I was writing to the DNC staff, outlining who Manafort was, pulling articles, saying why it was significant, and painting the bigger picture."

In a Yahoo News story naming Chalupa as one of 16 "ordinary people" who "shaped the 2016 election," Isikoff wrote that after Chalupa left the DNC, FBI agents investigating the hacking questioned her and examined her laptop and smartphone.

Chalupa this month told Politico that, as her research and role in the election started becoming more public, she began receiving death threats, along with continued alerts of state-sponsored hacking. But she said, "None of this has scared me off."

•••

While it's not uncommon for outside operatives to serve as intermediaries between governments and reporters, one of the more damaging Russia-related stories for the Trump campaign -- and certainly for Manafort -- can be traced more directly to the Ukrainian government.

Documents released by an independent Ukrainian government agency -- and publicized by a parliamentarian -- appeared to show $12.7 million in cash payments that were earmarked for Manafort by the Russia-aligned party of the deposed former president, Yanukovych.

The New York Times, in the August story revealing the ledgers' existence, reported that the payments earmarked for Manafort were "a focus" of an investigation by Ukrainian anti-corruption officials, while CNN reported days later that the FBI was pursuing an overlapping inquiry.

Clinton's campaign seized on the story to advance Democrats' argument that Trump's campaign was closely linked to Russia. The ledger represented "more troubling connections between Donald Trump's team and pro-Kremlin elements in Ukraine," Robby Mook, Clinton's campaign manager, said in a statement. He demanded that Trump "disclose campaign chair Paul Manafort's and all other campaign employees' and advisers' ties to Russian or pro-Kremlin entities, including whether any of Trump's employees or advisers are currently representing and or being paid by them."

A former Ukrainian investigative journalist and current parliamentarian named Serhiy Leshchenko, who was elected in 2014 as part of Poroshenko's party, held a news conference to highlight the ledgers, and to urge Ukrainian and American law enforcement to aggressively investigate Manafort.

"I believe and understand the basis of these payments are totally against the law -- we have the proof from these books," Leshchenko said during the news conference, which attracted international media coverage. "If Mr. Manafort denies any allegations, I think he has to be interrogated into this case and prove his position that he was not involved in any misconduct on the territory of Ukraine," Leshchenko added.

Manafort denied receiving any off-books cash from Yanukovych's Party of Regions, and said that he had never been contacted about the ledger by Ukrainian or American investigators, later telling POLITICO "I was just caught in the crossfire."

According to a series of memos reportedly compiled for Trump's opponents by a former British intelligence agent, Yanukovych, in a secret meeting with Putin on the day after the Times published its report, admitted that he had authorized "substantial kickback payments to Manafort." But according to the report, which was published Tuesday by BuzzFeed but remains unverified. Yanukovych assured Putin "that there was no documentary trail left behind which could provide clear evidence of this" -- an alleged statement that seemed to implicitly question the authenticity of the ledger.

The scrutiny around the ledgers -- combined with that from other stories about his Ukraine work -- proved too much, and he stepped down from the Trump campaign less than a week after the Times story.

At the time, Leshchenko suggested that his motivation was partly to undermine Trump. "For me, it was important to show not only the corruption aspect, but that he is [a] pro-Russian candidate who can break the geopolitical balance in the world," Leshchenko told the Financial Times about two weeks after his news conference. The newspaper noted that Trump's candidacy had spurred "Kiev's wider political leadership to do something they would never have attempted before: intervene, however indirectly, in a U.S. election," and the story quoted Leshchenko asserting that the majority of Ukraine's politicians are "on Hillary Clinton's side."

But by this month, Leshchenko was seeking to recast his motivation, telling Politico, "I didn't care who won the U.S. elections. This was a decision for the American voters to decide." His goal in highlighting the ledgers, he said was "to raise these issues on a political level and emphasize the importance of the investigation."

In a series of answers provided to Politico, a spokesman for Poroshenko distanced his administration from both Leshchenko's efforts and those of the agency that reLeshchenko Leshchenko leased the ledgers, The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine. It was created in 2014 as a condition for Ukraine to receive aid from the U.S. and the European Union, and it signed an evidence-sharing agreement with the FBI in late June -- less than a month and a half before it released the ledgers.

The bureau is "fully independent," the Poroshenko spokesman said, adding that when it came to the presidential administration there was "no targeted action against Manafort." He added "as to Serhiy Leshchenko, he positions himself as a representative of internal opposition in the Bloc of Petro Poroshenko's faction, despite [the fact that] he belongs to the faction," the spokesman said, adding, "it was about him personally who pushed [the anti-corruption bureau] to proceed with investigation on Manafort."

But an operative who has worked extensively in Ukraine, including as an adviser to Poroshenko, said it was highly unlikely that either Leshchenko or the anti-corruption bureau would have pushed the issue without at least tacit approval from Poroshenko or his closest allies.

"It was something that Poroshenko was probably aware of and could have stopped if he wanted to," said the operative.

And, almost immediately after Trump's stunning victory over Clinton, questions began mounting about the investigations into the ledgers -- and the ledgers themselves.

An official with the anti-corruption bureau told a Ukrainian newspaper, "Mr. Manafort does not have a role in this case."

And, while the anti-corruption bureau told Politico late last month that a "general investigation [is] still ongoing" of the ledger, it said Manafort is not a target of the investigation. "As he is not the Ukrainian citizen, [the anti-corruption bureau] by the law couldn't investigate him personally," the bureau said in a statement.

Some Poroshenko critics have gone further, suggesting that the bureau is backing away from investigating because the ledgers might have been doctored or even forged.

Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, a Ukrainian former diplomat who served as the country's head of security under Poroshenko but is now affiliated with a leading opponent of Poroshenko, said it was fishy that "only one part of the black ledger appeared." He asked, "Where is the handwriting analysis?" and said it was "crazy" to announce an investigation based on the ledgers. He met last month in Washington with Trump allies, and said, "of course they all recognize that our [anti-corruption bureau] intervened in the presidential campaign."

And in an interview this week, Manafort, who re-emerged as an informal advisor to Trump after Election Day, suggested that the ledgers were inauthentic and called their publication "a politically motivated false attack on me. My role as a paid consultant was public. There was nothing off the books, but the way that this was presented tried to make it look shady."

He added that he felt particularly wronged by efforts to cast his work in Ukraine as pro-Russian, arguing "all my efforts were focused on helping Ukraine move into Europe and the West." He specifically cited his work on denuclearizing the country and on the European Union trade and political pact that Yanukovych spurned before fleeing to Russia. "In no case was I ever involved in anything that would be contrary to U.S. interests," Manafort said.

Yet Russia seemed to come to the defense of Manafort and Trump last month, when a spokeswoman for Russia's Foreign Ministry charged that the Ukrainian government used the ledgers as a political weapon.

"Ukraine seriously complicated the work of Trump's election campaign headquarters by planting information according to which Paul Manafort, Trump's campaign chairman, allegedly accepted money from Ukrainian oligarchs," Maria Zakharova said at a news briefing, according to a transcript of her remarks posted on the Foreign Ministry's website. "All of you have heard this remarkable story," she told assembled reporters.

•••

Beyond any efforts to sabotage Trump, Ukrainian officials didn't exactly extend a hand of friendship to the GOP nominee during the campaign.

The ambassador, Chaly, penned an op-ed for The Hill, in which he chastised Trump for a confusing series of statements in which the GOP candidate at one point expressed a willingness to consider recognizing Russia's annexation of the Ukrainian territory of Crimea as legitimate. The op-ed made some in the embassy uneasy, sources said.

"That was like too close for comfort, even for them," said Chalupa. "That was something that was as risky as they were going to be."

Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk warned on Facebook that Trump had "challenged the very values of the free world."

Ukraine's minister of internal affairs, Arsen Avakov, piled on, trashing Trump on Twitter in July as a "clown" and asserting that Trump is "an even bigger danger to the US than terrorism."

Avakov, in a Facebook post, lashed out at Trump for his confusing Crimea comments, calling the assessment the "diagnosis of a dangerous misfit," according to a translated screenshot featured in one media report, though he later deleted the post. He called Trump "dangerous for Ukraine and the US" and noted that Manafort worked with Yanukovych when the former Ukrainian leader "fled to Russia through Crimea. Where would Manafort lead Trump?"

The Trump-Ukraine relationship grew even more fraught in September with reports that the GOP nominee had snubbed Poroshenko on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, where the Ukrainian president tried to meet both major party candidates, but scored only a meeting with Clinton.

Telizhenko, the former embassy staffer, said that, during the primaries, Chaly, the country's ambassador in Washington, had actually instructed the embassy not to reach out to Trump's campaign, even as it was engaging with those of Clinton and Trump's leading GOP rival, Ted Cruz.

"We had an order not to talk to the Trump team, because he was critical of Ukraine and the government and his critical position on Crimea and the conflict," said Telizhenko. "I was yelled at when I proposed to talk to Trump," he said, adding, "The ambassador said not to get involved -- Hillary is going to win."

This account was confirmed by Nalyvaichenko, the former diplomat and security chief now affiliated with a Poroshenko opponent, who said, "The Ukrainian authorities closed all doors and windows -- this is from the Ukrainian side." He called the strategy "bad and short-sighted."

Andriy Artemenko, a Ukrainian parliamentarian associated with a conservative opposition party, did meet with Trump's team during the campaign and said he personally offered to set up similar meetings for Chaly but was rebuffed.

"It was clear that they were supporting Hillary Clinton's candidacy," Artemenko said. "They did everything from organizing meetings with the Clinton team, to publicly supporting her, to criticizing Trump. I think that they simply didn't meet because they thought that Hillary would win."

Shulyar rejected the characterizations that the embassy had a ban on interacting with Trump, instead explaining that it "had different diplomats assigned for dealing with different teams tailoring the content and messaging. So it was not an instruction to abstain from the engagement but rather an internal discipline for diplomats not to get involved into a field she or he was not assigned to, but where another colleague was involved."

And she pointed out that Chaly traveled to the GOP convention in Cleveland in late July and met with members of Trump's foreign policy team "to highlight the importance of Ukraine and the support of it by the U.S."

Despite the outreach, Trump's campaign in Cleveland gutted a proposed amendment to the Republican Party platform that called for the U.S. to provide "lethal defensive weapons" for Ukraine to defend itself against Russian incursion, backers of the measure charged.

The outreach ramped up after Trump's victory. Shulyar pointed out that Poroshenko was among the first foreign leaders to call to congratulate Trump. And she said that, since Election Day, Chaly has met with close Trump allies, including Sens. Jeff Sessions, Trump's nominee for attorney general, and Bob Corker, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, while the ambassador accompanied Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, Ukraine's vice prime minister for European and Euro-Atlantic integration, to a round of Washington meetings with Rep. Tom Marino (R-Pa.), an early Trump backer, and Jim DeMint, president of The Heritage Foundation, which played a prominent role in Trump's transition.

•••

Many Ukrainian officials and operatives and their American allies see Trump's inauguration this month as an existential threat to the country, made worse, they admit, by the dissemination of the secret ledger, the antagonistic social media posts and the perception that the embassy meddled against -- or at least shut out -- Trump.

"It's really bad. The [Poroshenko] administration right now is trying to re-coordinate communications," said Telizhenko, adding, "The Trump organization doesn't want to talk to our administration at all."

During Nalyvaichenko's trip to Washington last month, he detected lingering ill will toward Ukraine from some, and lack of interest from others, he recalled. "Ukraine is not on the top of the list, not even the middle," he said.

Poroshenko's allies are scrambling to figure out how to build a relationship with Trump, who is known for harboring and prosecuting grudges for years.

A delegation of Ukrainian parliamentarians allied with Poroshenko last month traveled to Washington partly to try to make inroads with the Trump transition team, but they were unable to secure a meeting, according to a Washington foreign policy operative familiar with the trip. And operatives in Washington and Kiev say that after the election, Poroshenko met in Kiev with top executives from the Washington lobbying firm BGR -- including Ed Rogers and Lester Munson -- about how to navigate the Trump regime.

Weeks later, BGR reported to the Department of Justice that the government of Ukraine would pay the firm $50,000 a month to "provide strategic public relations and government affairs counsel," including "outreach to U.S. government officials, non-government organizations, members of the media and other individuals."

Firm spokesman Jeffrey Birnbaum suggested that "pro-Putin oligarchs" were already trying to sow doubts about BGR's work with Poroshenko. While the firm maintains close relationships with GOP congressional leaders, several of its principals were dismissive or sharply critical of Trump during the GOP primary, which could limit their effectiveness lobbying the new administration.

The Poroshenko regime's standing with Trump is considered so dire that the president's allies after the election actually reached out to make amends with -- and even seek assistance from -- Manafort, according to two operatives familiar with Ukraine's efforts to make inroads with Trump.

Meanwhile, Poroshenko's rivals are seeking to capitalize on his dicey relationship with Trump's team. Some are pressuring him to replace Chaly, a close ally of Poroshenko's who is being blamed by critics in Kiev and Washington for implementing -- if not engineering -- the country's anti-Trump efforts, according to Ukrainian and U.S. politicians and operatives interviewed for this story. They say that several potential Poroshenko opponents have been through Washington since the election seeking audiences of their own with Trump allies, though most have failed to do do so.

"None of the Ukrainians have any access to Trump -- they are all desperate to get it, and are willing to pay big for it," said one American consultant whose company recently met in Washington with Yuriy Boyko, a former vice prime minister under Yanukovych. Boyko, who like Yanukovych has a pro-Russian worldview, is considering a presidential campaign of his own, and his representatives offered "to pay a shit-ton of money" to get access to Trump and his inaugural events, according to the consultant.

The consultant turned down the work, explaining, "It sounded shady, and we don't want to get in the middle of that kind of stuff."

[May 10, 2019] The Three Purposes of Russiagate by Paul Craig Roberts

Notable quotes:
"... As Kunstler puts it, "The Special Prosecutor's main bit of mischief, of course, was his refusal to reach a conclusion on the obstruction of justice charge. What the media refuses to accept and make clear is that a prosecutor's failure to reach a conclusion is exactly the same thing as an inability to make a case, and it was a breach of Mr. Mueller's duty to dishonestly present that failure as anything but that in his report -- and possibly an act of criminal prosecutorial misconduct" on Mueller's part. ..."
"... But this is not the only dishonesty in Mueller's report. Although Mueller's report clearly obliterates the Russiagate conspiracy theory peddled by the military/security complex, the Democrats, and the presstitutes, Mueller's report takes for granted that Russia interfered in the election but not in collusion with Trump or Trump officials. Mueller states this interference as if it were a fact without providing one drop of evidence. Indeed, nowhere in the report, or anywhere else, is there any evidence of Russian interference. ..."
"... Mueller simply takes Russian interference for granted as if endless repeating by a bunch of presstitutes makes it so. For example, the Mueller report says that the Russians hacked the DNC emails, a claim for which no evidence exists. Moreover, it is a claim that is contradicted by the known evidence. William Binney and other experts have demonstrated that the DNC emails were, according to their time stamps, downloaded much more quickly than is possible over the Internet. This fact has been carefully ignored by Mueller, the Democrats and the presstitutes ..."
"... Indictments do not require evidence, and Mueller had none. Moreover, Mueller could not possibly know the identities of the Russian intelligence agents who allegedly did the hacking. This was of no concern to Mueller. He knew he needed no evidence, because he knew there would be no trial. The indictment was political propaganda, not real. ..."
"... The myth of Russian interference is so well established that even Glenn Greenwald in his otherwise careful and correct exposition of the Russiagate hoax buys into Russian interference as if it were a fact. Indeed, many if not most of Trump's supporters are ready to blame Russia for trying, but failing, to ensnare their man Trump. ..."
"... The falsity of Russiagate and the political purposes of the hoax are completely obvious, but even Trump supporters tip their hats to the falsehood of Russian interference so that they do not look guilty of excessive support for Trump. In other words, Russiagate has succeeded in constraining how far Trump's supporters can go in defending him, especially if he has any remaining intent to reduce tensions with Russia. ..."
"... Russiagate has succeeded in criminalizing in the American mind any contact with Russia. Thus has the military/security complex guaranteed that its budget and power will not be threatened by any move toward peace between nuclear powers. ..."
"... Just as Mueller indicted Russian intelligence agents without evidence, he could have indicted Trump without evidence, but a case against a president that is without evidence is not one a prosecutor wants to take to court as it is obviously an act of sedition. ..."
"... That the Democrats and the presstitutes want Trump indicted for obstructing a crime that did not occur shows how insane they have been driven by their hatred of Trump. What is operating in the Democratic Party and in the American media is insanity and hatred. Nothing else. ..."
"... Journalists who lie for the Establishment have no need of the First Amendment. Perhaps this is why they have no concern that Washington's attack on Julian Assange will destroy the First Amendment. They are helping Washington destroy Assange so that their self-esteem will no longer be threatened by the fact that there is a real journalist out there doing real journalism. Mueller Report ..."
Apr 01, 2023 | ahtribune.com

Russiagate has three purposes.

  1. One is to prevent President Trump from endangering the vast budget and power of the military/security complex by normalizing relations with Russia.
  2. Another, in the words of James Howard Kunstler, is "to conceal the criminal conduct of US government officials meddling in the 2016 election in collusion with the Hillary Clinton campaign," by focusing all public and political attention on a hoax distraction.
  3. The third is to obstruct Trump's campaign and distract him from his agenda when he won the election.

Despite the inability of Mueller to find any evidence that Trump or Trump officials colluded with Russia to steal the US presidential election, and the inability of Mueller to find evidence with which to accuse Trump of obstruction of justice, Russiagate has achieved all of its purposes.

Trump has been locked into a hostile relationship with Russia. Neoconservatives have succeeded in worsening this hostile relationship by manipulating Trump into a blatant criminal attempt to overthrow in broad daylight the Venezuelan government.

Hillary's criminal conduct and the criminal conduct of the CIA, FBI, and Obama Justice (sic) Department that resulted in a variety of felonies, including the FBI obtaining spy warrants for partisan political purposes on false pretexts from the FISA court, were swept out of sight by the Russiagate hoax.

The Mueller report was written in such a way that despite the absence of any evidence supporting any indictment of Trump, the report refused to clear Trump of obstruction and passed the buck to the Attorney General. In other words, Mueller in the absence of any evidence kept the controversy going by setting up Attorney General Barr for cover-up charges.

It is evidence of Mueller's corruption that he does not explain just how it is possible for Trump to possibly have obstructed justice when Mueller states in his report that the crime he was empowered to investigate could not be found. How does one obstruct the investigation of a crime that did not occur?

As Kunstler puts it, "The Special Prosecutor's main bit of mischief, of course, was his refusal to reach a conclusion on the obstruction of justice charge. What the media refuses to accept and make clear is that a prosecutor's failure to reach a conclusion is exactly the same thing as an inability to make a case, and it was a breach of Mr. Mueller's duty to dishonestly present that failure as anything but that in his report -- and possibly an act of criminal prosecutorial misconduct" on Mueller's part.

But this is not the only dishonesty in Mueller's report. Although Mueller's report clearly obliterates the Russiagate conspiracy theory peddled by the military/security complex, the Democrats, and the presstitutes, Mueller's report takes for granted that Russia interfered in the election but not in collusion with Trump or Trump officials. Mueller states this interference as if it were a fact without providing one drop of evidence. Indeed, nowhere in the report, or anywhere else, is there any evidence of Russian interference.

Mueller simply takes Russian interference for granted as if endless repeating by a bunch of presstitutes makes it so. For example, the Mueller report says that the Russians hacked the DNC emails, a claim for which no evidence exists. Moreover, it is a claim that is contradicted by the known evidence. William Binney and other experts have demonstrated that the DNC emails were, according to their time stamps, downloaded much more quickly than is possible over the Internet. This fact has been carefully ignored by Mueller, the Democrats and the presstitutes.

One reason for ignoring this undisputed fact is that they all want to get Julian Assange, and the public case concocted against Assange is that Assange is in cahoots with the Russians who allegedly gave him the hacked emails. As there is no evidence that Russia hacked the emails and as Assange has said Russia is not the source, what is Mueller's evidence? Apparently, Mueller's evidence is his own political indictment of Russian individuals who Mueller alleged hacked the DNC computers. This false indictment for which there is no evidence was designed by Mueller to poison the Helsinki meeting between Trump and Putin and announced on the eve of the meeting.

Indictments do not require evidence, and Mueller had none. Moreover, Mueller could not possibly know the identities of the Russian intelligence agents who allegedly did the hacking. This was of no concern to Mueller. He knew he needed no evidence, because he knew there would be no trial. The indictment was political propaganda, not real.

The myth of Russian interference is so well established that even Glenn Greenwald in his otherwise careful and correct exposition of the Russiagate hoax buys into Russian interference as if it were a fact. Indeed, many if not most of Trump's supporters are ready to blame Russia for trying, but failing, to ensnare their man Trump.

The falsity of Russiagate and the political purposes of the hoax are completely obvious, but even Trump supporters tip their hats to the falsehood of Russian interference so that they do not look guilty of excessive support for Trump. In other words, Russiagate has succeeded in constraining how far Trump's supporters can go in defending him, especially if he has any remaining intent to reduce tensions with Russia.

Russiagate has succeeded in criminalizing in the American mind any contact with Russia. Thus has the military/security complex guaranteed that its budget and power will not be threatened by any move toward peace between nuclear powers.

The Democratic Party and the presstitutes cannot be bothered by facts. They are committed to getting Trump regardless of the facts. And so is Mueller, and Brennan, and Comey, and a slew of other corrupt public officials.

A good example of journalistic misconduct is James Risen writing in Glenn Greenwald's Intercept of all places, "WILLIAM BARR MISLED EVERYONE ABOUT THE MUELLER REPORT. NOW DEMOCRATS ARE CALLING FOR HIS RESIGNATION." Quoting the same posse of "hang Trump high" Democrats, Risen, without questioning their disproven lies, lets the Democrats build a case that Mueller's report proves Trump's guilt. Then Risen himself misrepresents the report in support of the Democrats. He says there is a huge difference between Barr's memo on the report and the report itself as if Barr would misrepresent a report that he is about to release.

Length is the only difference between the memo and the report. This doesn't stop Risen from writing: "In fact, the Mueller report makes it clear that a key reason Mueller did not seek to prosecute Trump for obstruction was a longstanding Justice Department legal opinion saying that the Justice Department can't indict a sitting president." This is something Mueller threw in after saying he didn't have the evidence to indict Trump. It is yet another reason for not indicting, not the reason. Risen then backs up his misreport with that of a partisan Democrat, Renato Mariotti who claims that Mueller could have indicted Trump except it is against US Justice Department policy. Again, there is no explanation from Risen, Mariotti, or anyone else how Mueller could have indicted Trump for obstructing what Mueller concludes was a crime that did not happen.

Just as Mueller indicted Russian intelligence agents without evidence, he could have indicted Trump without evidence, but a case against a president that is without evidence is not one a prosecutor wants to take to court as it is obviously an act of sedition.

That the Democrats and the presstitutes want Trump indicted for obstructing a crime that did not occur shows how insane they have been driven by their hatred of Trump. What is operating in the Democratic Party and in the American media is insanity and hatred. Nothing else.

Risen also alleges that the unproven Russian hacks were passed over by Barr in his memo on the report. Not only is this incorrect, but also Risen apparently has forgot that the investigation was about Trump's collusion with Russia to do something illegal and the investigation found that no such thing occurred. Risen, like the rest of the presstitutes and even Greenwald himself, takes for granted that the unproven Russian hacks happened. Again we see that the longer a lie is repeated the more it becomes true. Not even Greenwald can detect that he has been bamboozled.

At one time James Risen was an honest reporter. He won a Pulitzer prize, and he was threatened with prison by the Department of Justice when he refused to reveal his source for his reporting on illegal actions of the CIA. But Risen discovered that in the new world of journalism, telling the truth is punished while lying is rewarded. Risen, like all the others, decided that his income was more important than the truth.

Journalists who lie for the Establishment have no need of the First Amendment. Perhaps this is why they have no concern that Washington's attack on Julian Assange will destroy the First Amendment. They are helping Washington destroy Assange so that their self-esteem will no longer be threatened by the fact that there is a real journalist out there doing real journalism. Mueller Report

MORE...

Paul Craig Roberts has had careers in scholarship and academia, journalism, public service, and business. He is chairman of The Institute for Political Economy.

[May 09, 2019] FBI s Steele Story Unravels - Claims Debunked, Leaks Suspected Before FISA Application

Notable quotes:
"... As we noted yesterday based on an earlier Hill report on the Kavalec-Steele notes, Steele was flagged for admitting that his research was political and facing an Election Day deadline, as his client was "keen to see this information come to light prior to November 8." ..."
"... Kavalec also flagged several places in her notes in which she suspected that Steele might be leaking information to the press . "June -- reporting started," she wrote. "NYT and WP have," she added, in an apparent reference to The New York Times and The Washington Post. ..."
"... She then quoted Steele as indicating that he was "managing" four priorities -- "Client needs, FBI, WashPo/NYT, source protection," - a clear indication that media outreach was part of his job. ..."
"... Except that the FBI's FISA request from October 2016 - which relied almost entirely on Steele's work - was marked "verified application" prior to the FBI's submission to the court. ..."
May 09, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

According to newly unearthed memos which were retroactively classified by the DOJ, a high-ranking government official who met with Christopher Steele in October 2016 determined that information in the Trump-Russia dossier was inaccurate , and likely leaked to the media, according to The Hill 's John Solomon.

Ten days before the FBI used the now-discredited dossier to apply for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to spy on Trump campaign aide Carter Page, Steele met with Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec, who took handwritten notes of the encounter.

Steele told Kavalec that Russia had a "technical/human operation run out of Moscow targeting the election," which recruited US emigres to "do hacking and recruiting. Steele added that "Payments to those recruited are made out of the Russian consulate in Miami."

Except that's a lie - as Kavalec debunked the assertion in a bracketed comment: " It is important to note that there is no Russian consulate in Miami. "

Kavalec, two days later and well before the FISA warrant was issued, forwarded her typed summary to other government officials. The State Department has redacted the names and agencies of everyone she alerted.

But it is almost certain the FBI knew of Steele's contact with State and his partisan motive . That's because former Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland says she instructed her staff to send the information they got from Steele to the bureau immediately and to cease contact with the informer because "this is about U.S. politics, and not the work of -- not the business of the State Department, and certainly not the business of a career employee who is subject to the Hatch Act." - The Hill

What makes this particularly damning is that the FBI swore on October 21, 2016 to the FISA judges that Steele's "reporting has been corroborated and used in criminal proceedings," and that the FBI deemed him to be "reliable" and was "unaware of any derogatory information pertaining" to the former British spy who was working for Fusion GPS - the firm paid by the DNC and the Clinton campaign to come up with dirt on Donald Trump.

As we noted yesterday based on an earlier Hill report on the Kavalec-Steele notes, Steele was flagged for admitting that his research was political and facing an Election Day deadline, as his client was "keen to see this information come to light prior to November 8."

Notes and testimony from senior Justice Department official Bruce Ohr make clear Steele admitted early on that he was "desperate" to get Trump defeated in the election, was working in some capacity for the GOP candidate's opponent, and considered his intelligence raw and untested. Ohr testified that he alerted FBI and other senior Justice officials to these concerns in August 2016. - The Hill

Kavalec also flagged several places in her notes in which she suspected that Steele might be leaking information to the press . "June -- reporting started," she wrote. "NYT and WP have," she added, in an apparent reference to The New York Times and The Washington Post.

She then quoted Steele as indicating that he was "managing" four priorities -- "Client needs, FBI, WashPo/NYT, source protection," - a clear indication that media outreach was part of his job.

Those same notes suggest Steele spun some wild theories to State, including one that the Russians had a "plant in DNC" and had assembled an "HRC dossier," apparent references to the Democratic National Committee and Clinton.

She expounded in her typed memo. "The Russians have succeeded in placing an agent inside the DNC," she quoted Steele as saying.

Steele offered Kavalec other wild information that easily could have been debunked before the FISA application -- and eventually was, in many cases, after the media reported the allegations -- including that:

Those rumors were debunked by Special counsel Robert Mueller's April report, despite barely mentioning Steele and a passing reference to his infamous dossier being "unverified."

Except that the FBI's FISA request from October 2016 - which relied almost entirely on Steele's work - was marked "verified application" prior to the FBI's submission to the court.

Eventually, Steele was fired to the FBI for leaking to the media and then lying about it - however that happend after the FISA warrant was approved - and according to The Hill , the court was not notified about it until a few months later, well after the election.

In short, the FBI undoubtedly lied to their teeth to the FISA court in order to obtain a warrant to surveil Carter Page and the Trump campaign.


San Pedro , 28 minutes ago link

The FBI..the enforcer of the "Just Us" system. "Justice" is dead thanks to the ooobama.

booboo , 28 minutes ago link

The Woods Procedure will reveal how it was vetted, who signed off on the verification and how it moved up the chain. Declassify it all Mr. Trump.

https://ethicsalarms.com/2018/02/07/the-woods-procedures/

" This is no "nothingburger," and any official, pundit or Facebook friend who says otherwise is spinning, in denial, not too bright, or James Comey. There has to be an independent investigation of the conduct of the FBI now. Every American should support that.

alter , 29 minutes ago link

The FBI tried their best to illegally bring down the US President....if they are not stopped, what else will they do?

Dumpster Elite , 31 minutes ago link

The FBI..this Country's Secret Police, Gestapo, KGB...whatever you prefer. The Deep State enforcement arm. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a complete fool.

brokebackbuck , 31 minutes ago link

The USA is such a shitshow right now. A month ago hillary suggested that china hack trumps tax returns, then this week they leaked. Surprise? russia, china; america is its own worst enemy. watch.

ebworthen , 33 minutes ago link

Obama and the Clinton's behind the Witch Hunt, guaranteed.

Not to mention the deep state members of K Street and the M.I.C.

alter , 34 minutes ago link

The FBI is anti-American and completely corrupt, the entire agency should be disbanded. Nobody will ever trust it again. It is just another corrupt arm of the DNC.

Equinox7 , 35 minutes ago link

This should come as no surprise to anyone who has been awake to the truth and not listening to the Deep State propaganda on the fake news media outlets.

Yes, what was described above is definitely treason. The real question is not Did it happen , but instead, At who's direction did all of this conspire and occur ?

In my opinion, this goes all the way to the top in the Obama regime. The collusion angle in all of this I believe occurred between the 5 Eyes Network of countries controlled by the Deep State. So I believe foreign allies where attempting to interfere in US elections.

Anunnaki , 36 minutes ago link

Another smoking gun. The FBI refused to pay Steele bc the stuff he was giving them was unsubstantiated garbage.

Equinox7 , 27 minutes ago link

Sure..... Anunnaki.

It is so unsubstantiated , that Comey and the FBI decided to use the garbage to lie to a FISA judge in the FISA court to get a warrant to spy on citizen and candidate Trump. Then the spying was being reported back to Obama in daily FBI briefings about his political adversary. I find it doubtful that Comey and company didn't pay Steele under the table for lies, knowing the whole time Steele was lying.

brokebackbuck , 21 minutes ago link

of course steele got paid, because they needed to make sure nelly got paid

sanctificado , 45 minutes ago link

"I've talked to the members of the Israeli government at the highest levels. I know who they want elected here. It's not Hillary Clinton." – Former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani

The Collusion wasn't with the Russians , but with APARTHEID Israhell.

But NO ONE will investigate that.

M.A.G.A. is out

K.A.K.A. is in (Keep America Kabalah Again)

http://cufpa.wordpress.com/2018/01/07/trumps-jewish-agenda/

yatri99 , 45 minutes ago link

"Ten days before the FBI used the now-discredited dossier to apply for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant to spy on Trump campaign aide Carter Page, Steele met with Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Kathleen Kavalec, who took handwritten notes of the encounter." Kavalec worked under Nuland, and Nuland worked under John Kerry, who has been suspiciously below the radar in all this. I'd like to see his testimony before congress.

Hadenough1000 , 49 minutes ago link

Comey sounds exactly like avenatti and cohen

doesn't he??

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/9/james-comey-donald-trump-indictment-possible-after/

I cant wait for the no knock raid at this illegal leakers house

fersur , 52 minutes ago link

Steele may be still collecting payments, he may have been involved with writing 'The Mueller Report' !

Just interesting gossip from an attractively rabbit-hole, soon we will know more none-the-less !

[May 09, 2019] Trump DID commit obstruction of justice... he refused to force HIS Dept of Justice to indict Hillary, Comey, Brennan and Clapper

Highly recommended!
Apr 19, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

loveyajimbo , 3 hours ago link

Trump DID commit obstruction of justice... he refused to force HIS Dept of Justice to indict Hillary, Comey, Brennan and Clapper for their obvious major felonies.

And YES... he could have.

[May 08, 2019] Ilargi Mueller Never Wanted The Truth Zero Hedge

May 08, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Ilargi: Mueller Never Wanted The Truth

by Tyler Durden Tue, 05/07/2019 - 14:40 16 SHARES Authored by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog,

ran an article about omissions from the Mueller report and/or investigation. It's instructive, but there is more. First, some bits from that article: Major Mueller Report Omissions Suggest Incompetence Or A Coverup

Robert Mueller's 448-page "Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election" contains at least two major omissions which suggest that the special counsel and his entire team of world-class Democrat attorneys are either utterly incompetent, or purposefully concealing major crimes committed against the Trump campaign and the American people.

First, according to The Federalist's Margot Cleveland (a former law clerk of nearly 25 years and instructor at the college of business at the University of Notre Dame) – the Mueller report fails to consider whether the dossier authored by former MI6 spy Christopher Steele was Russian disinformation, and Steele was not charged with lying to the FBI.

"The Steele dossier, which consisted of a series of memorandum authored by the former MI6 spy, detailed intel purportedly provided by a variety of Vladimir Putin-connected sources. For instance, Steele identified Source A as "a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure" who "confided that the Kremlin had been feeding Trump and his team valuable intelligence on his opponents, including Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton."


Other supposed sources identified in the dossier included: Source B, identified as "a former top-level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin"; Source C, a "Senior Russian Financial Officer"; and Source G, "a Senior Kremlin Official." -The Federalist

As Cleveland posits: "Given Mueller's conclusion that no one connected to the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to interfere with the election, one of those two scenarios must be true -- either Russia fed Steele disinformation or Steele lied to the FBI about his Russian sources."

Mueller identified only two principal ways Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election: "First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and then released stolen documents."


Surely, a plot by Kremlin-connected individuals to feed a known FBI source -- Steele had helped the FBI uncover an international soccer bribery scandal -- false claims that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia would qualify as a "principal way" in which Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.

[..] the only lawmaker to even mention this possibility has been Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), who raised the issue with Attorney General William Barr last week: "My question," said Grassley, "Mueller spent over two years and 30 million dollars investigating Russia interference in the election. In order for a full accounting of Russia interference attempts, shouldn't the special counsel have considered whether the Steele dossier was part of a Russian disinformation and interfere campaign?" [..] Barr said that he has assembled a DOJ team to examine Mueller's investigation, findings, and whether the spying conducted by the FBI against the Trump campaign in 2016 was improper.

Mueller's second major oversight – which we have touched on repeatedly – is the special counsel's portrayal of Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud as a Russian agent – when available evidence suggests he may have been a Western agent.

Weeks after returning from Moscow, Mifsud – a self-described Clinton Foundation member – 'seeded' the rumor that Russia had 'dirt' on Hillary Clinton with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos on April 26, 2016, according to the Mueller report.

As Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) noted on Fox News on Sunday, "how is it that we spend 30-plus-million dollars on this, as taxpayers and they can't even tell us who Joseph Mifsud is?" " this is important, because, in the Mueller dossier, they use a fake news story to describe Mifsud. In one of those stories, they cherry- pick it," Nunes added.

[..] As conservative commentator and former US Secret Service agent Dan Bongino notes of Mifsud, "either we have a Russian asset who's infiltrated the highest echelons of friendly Intelligence Services, or we have a friendly who was setting up George Papadopoulos."

This poses questions about Mueller, Mifsud and Steele and many other people and organizations involved, but the central question remains unaddressed: did Russia truly meddle and interfere in the 2016 election?

me width=

We don't know, we have only Mueller's word for that, and he's ostensibly based it on reports from US intelligence, which has very obvious reasons to smear Russia. That Mifsud is presented as a Russian agent, with all the doubts about that which we have seen presented, doesn't help this point.

That Steele hadn't visited Russia since 1993 when he complied his dossier is not helpful either. His information could have originated with "the Russians", or with US intelligence, and he would never have been the wiser. That is, even IF he was a straight shooter. What are the odss of that?

And of course the strongest doubts about Russian meddling and interference, along with offers of evidence to underline and reinforce these doubts, have been offered by Julian Assange and the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) group.

But as I've repeatedly said before, after Mueller had to let go of the "Russia collusion with the Trump campaign" accusation, he was free to let the "Russian meddling aided and abetted by Julian Assange" narrative stand, because he didn't have to provide proof for that, as long as he didn't communicate with either the Russians (easy), the VIPS (whom he stonewalled) or Assange (who's been completely silenced).

https://www.dianomi.com/smartads.epl?id=4855

So we have -at least- 4 major omissions in the Mueller investigation and report:

1) the Mueller report failed to consider whether the dossier authored by former MI6 spy Christopher Steele was Russian disinformation (and Steele was not charged with lying to the FBI).

2) Mueller's portrayal of Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud as a Russian agent – when available evidence suggests he may have been a Western agent.

3) Mueller declined to talk to the VIPS, who offered evidence that the DNC servers were not hacked but content was copied onto a disk at the server's location

4) Mueller refused to hear Julian Assange, who offered evidence that it was not the Russians that had provided WikiLeaks with the emails.

Mueller was supposedly trying to find the truth about Trump's ties to Russia/Putin, and he refused to see and hear evidence from two organizations, WikiLeaks and the VIPS, which he absolutely certainly knew could potentially have provided things he did not know. Why did he do that? There's only one possible answer: he didn't want to know.

Why not? Because he feared he would have had to abandon the "Russian meddling and interference" narrative as well. If, as both WikiLeaks and the VIPS insisted, the emails didn't come from "the Russians", all that would have been left is an opaque story about "Russians" buying $100,000 in Facebook ads. And that, too, is awfully shaky.

That's an amount Jared Kushner acknowledged he spent every few hours on such ads during the – multi-billion-dollar – campaign. Moreover, many of these ads were allegedly posted AFTER the elections. And we don't even know it was Russians who purchased the ads, that's just another story coming from US intelligence.

It is not so hard, guys. "Omissions" or "oversight" is one way to put it, but there are others. Assange could have cleared himself of any claims of involvement in meddling and perhaps proven Guccifer 2.0 was not "Russian". His discussions with the DOJ, preparations for which were in an advanced stage of development, were killed in 2017 by then-FBI head James Comey and Rep. Mark Warner.

Mueller never wanted the truth, he wanted to preserve a narrative. The VIPS, too, threatened that narrative by offering physical evidence that nobody hacked the emails. Mueller never reached out. Mueller, the former FBI chief, who must know who these men and women are. Here's a list, in case you were wondering:

Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

And then you lead a Special Counsel investigation, you spend 2 years and $30 million, you get offered evidence in what you're investigating, and you just ignore these people?

And there are still people who want to believe that Robert Swan Mueller III is a straight shooter? They must not want to know the truth, either, then.

Here's wondering if Bill Barr does, who's going to investigate the Mueller investigation. Does he want the truth, or is he just the next in line to push the narrative?

Is there anyone in power left in America who has any courage at all to expose this B-rated theater?

Tulsi Gabbard has been reviled for talking to Assad. Why not talk to Assange as well, Tulsi? How about Rand Paul? We know he wanted to talk to Assange last year. Anyone?

* * *

Support The Automatic Earth on Patreon


He–Mene Mox Mox , 3 minutes ago link

With Julian Assange now in the custody of the British, it is very doubtful anyone, including Mueller, is going to get anything out of him at this point, unless he is unconditionally guaranteed to be released. Besides, when much of this information about the Russian collusion started to materialize in 2016, he was already in the Ecuadorian Embassy evading arrest since 2012. It was the other people who worked in Wikileaks who had extracted the information about all of this, not Julian Assange. And even if he knew all the particulars, it would have been very foolish of him to keep anything within the embassy, in the event of his capture, the British would find out about who actually made the releases, who his connections were, and the depth of what they uncovered. Julian was smart enough to know this, and when the police did finally arrive to haul him out of the Ecuadorian embassy, Julian was the only thing they got.

But it was the "Russian speaking" Ukrainians, who tried to influence the elections, and they paid the Bidens, the Clintons, and the Podesta brothers handsomely. Clinton alone got $26 million from the Ukrainians.

The Steele Dossier appears to have originated from the Ukrainians too. Ukraine Prosecutor General Yurii Lutsenko opened a probe into the so-called "black ledger" files that led to Manafort's abrupt departure from the Trump campaign. The investigation commenced after an unearthed audio recording showed that a senior Ukrainian anti-corruption official apparently admitted to leaking Manafort's financial information in 2016 -- including his ties to pro-Russian actors in the Ukraine -- to benefit Clinton.

Also, A 2017 investigation by Politico found that Ukrainian officials not only publicly sought to undermine Trump by questioning his fitness for office, but also worked behind the scenes to secure a Clinton victory.

Politico also found, the Ukrainian government worked with a DNC consultant to conduct opposition research against Trump, including going after Manafort for Russian ties, helping lead to his resignation. The big question is, was that consultant happened to be Christopher Steele, (former head of the Russia Desk for British Intelligence himself), and Fusion GPS? Peter Strzok had to know something about this, because he was the Chief of the Counterespionage Section who wanted to protect Clinton and Biden, and he was in direct contact with Michael Gaeta, head of the FBI's Eurasian Organized Crime Squad Team, which specializes in investigating criminal groups from Georgia, Russia, and Ukraine. Believe it or not, the FBI actually proposed paying Steele to continue gathering intelligence after Election Day", but Steele "ultimately never received any payment from the FBI for any 'dossier'-related information". Strzok had to have a hand in proposing the payment too. Strzok was apart of Mueller team, until Mueller found out about Strzok's romantic connections with Lisa Page. But it became obvious at that point, Mueller's investigation was going to be railroaded by the FBI and not thorough.

gdpetti , 12 minutes ago link

Same 'preserve the narrative' as with the 'investigation' of 9-11... C'mon... we all know this BS showtrial crap from our past, from other empires past... not new... same with all empires based in controlling their people thru propaganda.... and all of this is the 'outing of the OWO', so the puppet show can end and set the stage for the NWO... no puppets needed.. nor our 'markets'... nor these fake 'investigations'.

PGR88 , 12 minutes ago link

The list goes on. Mueller indicated a Russian company that didn't even exist when the alleged "interference" happened.

His list of Russian operatives of another company was simply a list of names taken from a Russian Government telephone directory.

The whole thing was a deep-state clown show.

hooligan2009 , 21 minutes ago link

great article

there was never any russian government interferencethe in US presdiential election

but

to repeat (again), the mueller report served two purposes.

1. to erect a smoke screen and cast doubt on trump/republicans over the mid-terms to advatage the howler monkeys.

2. to divert attention from the crimes of the howler monkeys, pre-eminently clinton, over the prior 15 years. (heinous crimes - Seth Rich heinous in a conspiracy to feed at the tax payers trough via "pay to play".

does the author really think that the alphabet soup was the only set of agencies inflitrated, compromised and exploited by the howler monkey cabal?

try education, immigration, health, housing, drugs, in the US and russia, ukraine, libya, afghanistan and south america (including haiti).

you want the bread crumbs? investigate the extent of the work done by the clinton foundation.

you could start with the australian government donation of 25 million to the clinton foundation, orchestrated by alexander downer (who entrapped papadopoulos in a london bar).

Occams_Razor_Trader_Part_Deux , 25 minutes ago link

1) the Mueller report failed to consider whether the dossier authored by former MI6 spy Christopher Steele was Russian disinformation (and Steele was not charged with lying to the FBI).

Hold on- whether the Steele dossier is "Russian information" or "Russian disinformation " is irrelevant- but it is a clear case of collusion on Hillary's part!

Posa , 25 minutes ago link

The problem Mueller has with the Steele dossier, is that if Russia did feed disinformation to Steele with the goal of interfering with US elections, then CLINTON would have been CRIMINALLY CONSPIRING with the Russians to do what Drump was accused of, since the Clinton CAMPAIGN PAID FOR the Steele dossier...

BUT if Steele made it all up (likely), Clinton would have been guilty of colluding (ie criminally conspiring) with a foreign intelligence agency (Britain's MI6) to interfere with the US elections AND Mueller's own narrative about GRU direct interference in the election would be tarnished as well.

In other words, Mueller was trapped by his own lies and his loyalty to Clinton.... Mueller should be indicted for writing a misleading report and colluding with the Clinton camp

Survival Shield X2 , 32 minutes ago link

and the DNC servers not inspected ? Crowd Strike says they were hacked by Russians so they are ?

and no looking at Seth Rich Murder ?

Load of scammy horse **** !!!

Posa , 22 minutes ago link

CrowdStrike was the only unredacted source for any of Mueller's dubious claims ... a scandal in itself... might as well directly quote Killary

tunetopper , 1 hour ago link

Its clear now- Mueller wasnt going to investigate anything that would lead back to spying and Barr doesn't have a report that he can use to justify an investigation into spying. Voila' - status quo preserved- Deep State preserved!

Pro_sanity , 1 hour ago link

Ilargi: Mueller Never Wanted The Truth

All sane people knew that going in. Most were hoping a narrative might emerge to prove that wrong. None were disappointed. An utter miscarriage any sane person would say.

Anunnaki , 1 hour ago link

You know him as "Russia"

https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2019/04/fake-news-media-suffers-body-blow-on-case-linked-to-seth-rich-by-larry-johnson.html#more

[May 07, 2019] Mueller was trying to set-up a trap for Trump to commit "procedural violation" like lying to FBI The dirty trick that worked for Flynt

Nothing could exonerate Trump MORE than Mueller himself testifying under oath and answering question from Republican lawmakers. His report is full of gaping holes and the whole investigation can now be definitely classified like a partisan witch hunt. Mueller , for example failed to explore the role in British intelligence in Russiagate, the role of Ukraine and attempts to set up members of Trump team. He was laser focused on "obstruction of justice" change.
The only unanswered question here is why Mueller did that: Trump folded to neocons and MIC in April 2017 a month before Mueller was appointed. May be Mueller is just another pathological narcissist who enjoy spotlight.
May 07, 2019 | thehill.com
Robert Mueller fought the release of former FBI Director James Comey 's memos out of fear President Trump and other witnesses in the Russia investigation would use them to alter their stories, according to a court transcript obtained by CNN .

Mueller's prosecutors argued in January 2018 that the memos, which were eventually made public in April of that year, could present a conflict for their investigation if released. At the time, Mueller's team was negotiating with Trump's legal team over a potential interview.

"Special Counsel is attempting to determine the facts that transpired in and surrounding those meetings," one of Mueller's prosecutors, Michael Dreeben, said at the time, according to CNN.

"In any investigation of this kind, the recollections of one witness, if disclosed to another potential witness, have the potential to influencing, advertently or inadvertently, the recollections of that witness," he added.

Dreeben told the court that Comey's memos of his interactions with Trump were crucial in the special counsel's probe and included much more detail than Comey's public statements. He added that Mueller's office was concerned that Trump had acted to obstruct the probe.

"In this instance, a person whose conduct is within the scope of the investigation is the President of the United States," Dreeben said in court.

Mueller ultimately interviewed several Trump associates, including then-chief of staff Reince Priebus , then-acting Attorney General Sally Yates , adviser Stephen Miller and others in the administration. However, the president never agreed to meet with Mueller for a sit-down interview and declined to submit written answers to questions about potentially obstructive acts.

CNN and other media outlets last year fought for access to Comey's memos under a Freedom of Information Act request. A federal judge ordered the Justice Department on Tuesday to provide a transcript of the court hearing with Mueller's prosecutors to CNN as part of the suit.

Congress received redacted versions of Comey's memos in April that were later made public. Mueller wrote in his report that he accumulated "substantial evidence" to support Comey's notes, though he declined to make a prosecutorial judgement regarding obstruction of justice.

[May 07, 2019] comment guidelines

Notable quotes:
"... Graham to Mueller: Give testimony if you dispute Barr "Please inform the Committee if you would like to provide testimony regarding any misrepresentation by the Attorney General of the substance of the phone call," Graham wrote to Mueller in a letter dated Friday. ..."
"... Chris Hedges: The Demonization of Russia is Driven by Defense Contractors ..."
"... So now a birther like Corsi, who can't provide evidence for his guess, is a legit source? WTF? Mueller is an Iraq war liar. If Risen wants to be treated seriously on the contents of the Mueller report, then Risen needs to retract ALL of his Reality Winner leak articles for the Intercept and apologize publicly for them. ..."
"... Having said all that, OF COURSE reflexive anti-Russian bigotry is the norm for much of America, and of course Clintonites play to it. And of course it is both evil and potentially dangerous. And of course the Clintons do not care. ..."
"... Enormous wrongness on Russiagate will ruin reputations to the same degree huge wrongness on WMDs and Iraq did (except for the one sacrificial lamb that was Judith Miller), which is to say there will be no reputational harm in elite venues. Russiagate hysterics, as with the Iraq war cheerleaders, will fail upwards. (Likely a symptom of late stage capitalism.) ..."
"... Michael Tracey ‏Verified account @mtracey "According to former Trump lawyer John Dowd, Trump complained that the Mueller investigation would often be brought up by world leaders during unrelated discussions, hindering Trump's ability to conduct foreign affairs. Another ramification of this fiasco that gets overlooked" ..."
"... To delegitimize him, that was the goal. It was never about collusion. ..."
"... Kim Jong Un learned a valuable lesson. Don't negotiate with US because they lie. ..."
"... They cant let Russiagate go since they have yet to completely criminalize real journalism ..."
May 07, 2019 | theintercept.com

to ensure our community remains a place for robust but civil discussion. Click here to read about the latest features in our most recent update.


1 day ago

Hillary and the Swamp won and Trump is their puppet. They are loving Russiagate as they feed at the MIC trough. Except for Tulsi, Ilhan and Ro they are all Kochsuckers

2 days ago

Ah ha! I assume the Sprawling American Spy Game has finally, honestly and truly, located the Sprawling Russian Spy Game, behind which was hiding Iraq's stockpiles of WMD. Or something.

2 days ago

Are you all forgetting the REAL FOREIGN influence in America's politics? Israel and AIPAC

2 days ago

Barr Launches Wide-Ranging Probe Into 2016 FBI Spying "We now know that he was being falsely accused..."

https://www.zerohedge.com/

Barr's Review of FBI 'Spying' on Trump Campaign Has Wide Reach

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-03/barr-s-review-of-fbi-spying-on-trump-campaign-has-a-wide-reach

2 days ago

Check MATE.......

Graham to Mueller: Give testimony if you dispute Barr "Please inform the Committee if you would like to provide testimony regarding any misrepresentation by the Attorney General of the substance of the phone call," Graham wrote to Mueller in a letter dated Friday.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/03/lindsey-graham-mueller-1301140

You mean Meuller?.....who lied about WMD and ignore illegal spying and torture and worse?

1 day ago

His weak protest seems to indicate he doesn't want to lose his "admired" status. Yet, he could have leaked some real beef.. Nothing hindered him from transmitting the WMD scam.


2 days ago

Chris Hedges: The Demonization of Russia is Driven by Defense Contractors

https://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2019/04/05/chris-hedges-the-demonization-of-russia-is-driven-by-defense-contractors/

2 days ago

Incorrect. By late 2017, the FBI had confirmed that they had no evidence of Russian election interference. The long Mueller investigation made the same conclusion. What had been presented from the start were allegations -- not evidence. They never decided on just what they think Russia actually DID. Voting machines weren't hacked, there was no barrage of foreign propaganda, no trumped-up scandals against Clinton -- nothing. Would our own Dem Party leaders tell a huge, dangerous lie against Russia? Well, consider the Republican lies about "Iraq's stockpiles of WMD."

As for the 2020 election, that, too, will have nothing to do with Russia. In fact, we've talked about the key issue for years. Most votes come down to economic issues. Democrats split apart their own voting base in the 1990s, middle class vs. poor. The Obama years confirmed that this split is permanent. In 2016, roughly half of all registered voters rejected both Clinton and Trump, for some of the same reasons (they voted third party or withheld their votes). In the end (note to Russiagaters:) Clinton did get the most votes, but Trump got the most electoral votes -- something a foreign country couldn't hack into, influence, steal, etc. Learn how our voting system works.

2 days ago (Edited)

That's not true at all. Zero prosecutions for collusion or even any cases related to Russia. Not one. Even the FBI agents said Gen Flynn didn't lie

2 days ago (Edited)

Description: Fancy Bear is a Russian cyber espionage group. Cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has said with a medium level of confidence that it is associated with the Russian military intelligence agency GRU.

Wikipedia

you believe cloudstrike?

"The report was ambiguously worded, leading some media to conflate the thinly circulated knockoff program identified by CrowdStrike with the legitimate app itself. The app's creator, Yaroslav Sherstyuk, denied his program had been compromised and pushed back against "deluded" coverage. The Ukrainian military issued a statement saying CrowdStrike got it wrong. Skeptics and conspiracy theorists seized on the confusion as proof that CrowdStrike either didn't know what it was doing or was trying to frame the Russian government."

2 days ago (Edited)

Logic 101 fail, Tommy.

If Trump says it's raining in Washington and the National Weather Service says it's raining in Washington, if somebody believes that it is raining in Washington it does not mean that anyone believes Trump.

1 day ago

Logic failure 101

if cloudstrike is where they get their intelligence that's called bias and tainted

2 days ago

That WAS investigated, and the investigation concluded what many had figured out by summer, 2017. There was no evidence of Russian interference (by any other word) with the election. Check the 2016 election results for yourself, and please answer a question. In spite of so much Dem voter opposition to the Clinton right wing, Hillary Clinton got the most votes. So, why did Russia go to such extremes to try to get Clinton elected? Seriously. Trump is president because he got the most electoral votes -- something a foreign entity couldn't influence, hack into, steal, etc. And could any of this mess have anything to do with the Clintons' business interests in Ukraine?

3 days ago
"Jerome Corsi, a conservative author with close ties to Trump ally Roger Stone, told Mueller that he believed his actions prompted the quick WikiLeaks release, but Mueller's report says investigators couldn't corroborate Corsi's story."
So now a birther like Corsi, who can't provide evidence for his guess, is a legit source? WTF? Mueller is an Iraq war liar. If Risen wants to be treated seriously on the contents of the Mueller report, then Risen needs to retract ALL of his Reality Winner leak articles for the Intercept and apologize publicly for them. Futher more this piece is nothing more than guesses based on thin nearly dissolving evidence, so subject to contradiction by a slight change, and conflation. Again, Corsi? Rush Limbaugh is more credible often.
2 days ago

Mueller stood by as the Bush administration was caught red handed lying to congress about War and torture and illegal spying... The democrats hero....and they pretend to care about the rule of law?.....

3 days ago

Orwellian Cloud Hovers Over Russia-gate. Ray McGovern calls out the void of evidence at the heart of the Senate hearing with Attorney General Barr on Wednesday. https://consortiumnews.com/2019/05/03/orwellian-cloud-hovers-over-russia-gate/

4 days ago

Why in the world do people think they're going to get Trump out of office through the impeachment process? Why do people think that those who will control the outcome - Republicans - will see impeachable offenses where they do and do something about it? Can you honestly see the Senate participating in some sort of historic, bipartisan coming together with the House to rid America of the man who's enriching them like no president has done before?

Did I read that Elizabeth Warren wants to impeach simply to make a show of Trump's improprieties? I couldn't disagree more with that. Don't spend my tax dollars on a show hearing. Don't waste my money on something that people who've been paying attention already know. If it takes an impeachment hearing for people to realize that Trump's a fucking creep, it's too late, anyway.

3 days ago

I'm ok with letting evidence determine the outcome. But that wasn't my point, which is that, regardless of whatever is found, the Republicans aren't about to help throw Trump out of office. That simply isn't going to happen short of evidence that's too gargantuan to ignore, and that may not even do it. Many here seem to think that impeachment will lead to some sort of monster revelation, which is the only thing that's going to get Trump out of office. I wouldn't count on it.

I'm glad you mentioned Watergate, because the Republicans of today wouldn't impeach Nixon, just like their not going to impeach Trump. You're giving these people way too much credit in thinking they'll play ball on an impeachment. This is a new breed of Republican we're dealing with and they're not going to give a rat's ass what an impeachment would reveal unless it's nuclear. Why hasn't something nuclear shown up after a two year investigation into the possible existence of nuclear material?

There may well be an impeachment, and maybe there should be one. It's just not going to get Trump removed from office.

3 days ago

Mueller had 3 years and found nothing. Now is the time to look at the FBI and Hilary's conspiracy and lies and crimes and how this whole witch hunt got started .As you said "no one is above the law" !

5 days ago (Edited)

Poor Sonja, still stuck on the silly canard that you can only investigate Trump and the 2016 election if you're looking for an excuse for HRC's loss.

She should be reminded that at the time Mueller was launched, both houses were controlled by Republicans, and Mueller was the only investigation we had, and that it was based on Trump's incessant lying and the perjuring of his associates with respect to that election and Russia.

Many of us can admit that HRC ran a poor campaign and that Trump still committed impeachable offenses during that campaign. All investigations into Trump's finances that will occur over the coming months have been greatly facilitated by Mueller.

Bernie shares no such illusions with Sonja. He wants more investigations into that election.

Elizabeth Warren shares no such illusions. She wants impeachment.

Here is Warren last night on The Last Word :

WARREN: So, look, I read the report, as you said. And when I got to the end of the report, there were three things that were very, very clear. The first is that a hostile foreign government attacked our 2016 election with the purpose of helping Donald Trump. The second is Donald Trump welcomed that help . And the third is that when our federal government tried to investigate after Donald Trump was inaugurated, he did everything he could to try to stop that investigation, to try to derail that investigation, to try to send that investigation somewhere else.

And the actions that he took are well documented. It's all right there in the report. I got to the end of that report and I said, look, this is not about politics, this is about the responsibility of Congress as a co-equal branch of government, and I think it's time to open impeachment proceedings.

3 days ago

I've always said let's wait for the investigation. Every time. I've always said I suspected the Trump-Russia connection was about MONEY, about getting a piece of the Russian building boom, not about any interference with the election.

I've also said that the Russian interference was very likely not aimed at electing Trump so much as it was aimed at conducting a little experiment in psyops on Americans -- an experiment which yielded much interesting data all right. I doubt anyone in on it ever thought how well it would go.

Of course, Russian agents were not the only actors. Some got in on the game for money:

https://www.wired.com/2017/02/veles-macedonia-fake-news/

I've also said that anyone who claims to be wildly incensed by what the Rooskies et al. did needs to look at the problems in our society -- with education, first and foremost, and with the utterly dysfunctional media. You know, most of what the Rooskies (or the Veles kids) did was First Amendment protected, in the sense that our government cannot punish their speech? You do get that part, right? There is no law against pretending to speak for ARMY OF JESUS, for God's sake.

Doesn't our vulnerability to sheer bullsh_t, FAR beyond anything most of us ever thought possible, concern you at all?

If you can impeach Trump for obstructing the Mueller investigation, and ensure the cure isn't even worse than the disease, I'm fine with that. I doubt that's possible. I know you haven't thought it through.

It is not clear to me whether an impeachment would even be understood by the typical addled citizen.

I have no idea what motivates your delirium any more, or your apparent obsession with certain posters here. What do you think happened? What do you think should happen?

3 days ago (Edited)

Having said all that, OF COURSE reflexive anti-Russian bigotry is the norm for much of America, and of course Clintonites play to it. And of course it is both evil and potentially dangerous. And of course the Clintons do not care.

There's nothing Clintons won't stoop to.

Remember the race for the nomination against Obama? (To think he picked her, and Biden. What a scam.)

3 days ago

Barr's Review of FBI 'Spying' on Trump Campaign Has Wide Reach

"Barr told the Senate Judiciary panel that he has assembled a team to determine whether there was any improper "spying" on the Trump campaign in 2016, including whether intelligence collection began earlier than previously known and how many confidential informants the FBI used. He also suggested his focus was on senior leaders at the FBI and Justice Department at the time."

"To the extent there was overreach, what we have to be concerned about is a few people at the top getting it into their heads that they know better than the American people," Barr said. His review also will examine whether a dossier that included salacious accusations against Trump was fabricated by the Russian government to dupe U.S. intelligence agencies and the FBI, Barr told the Senate panel on Wednesday. "We now know that he was being falsely accused," Barr said of Trump. "We have to stop using the criminal justice process as a political weapon."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-03/barr-s-review-of-fbi-spying-on-trump-campaign-has-a-wide-reach

5 days ago (Edited)

Your marked propensity to push GUILT BY ASSOCIATION at every opportunity provides useful information.

It shows us what life would really be like if the Hillary types you DO support were to gain more power.

5 days ago

you're right it does provide a useful rule of thumb...if you're constantly siding with guys named Donny and Tucker and Rudy you might want to reconsider your position -- or else you're really no better than they are.

3 days ago

EXACTLY!!

And they think Trump is dangerous?

3 days ago

Siding with evidence and facts seems to be against your rule of thumb

5 days ago

proving something didn't happen. what fun. We're stuck with the Russian Urban Myth, perhaps, for forever. Those lovely Thanksgiving dinners until the whole generation passes away.

you point out Hill's retaining of the "Russian Dossier" the likely point that the DNC was never actually hacked. The placing of Stepan Halper into Trump's campaign/etc It's all water off a duck's back. Here's another one that the Cult of Mueller shall eventually be forced to burn.

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/04/24/special-counsel-mueller-disingenuous-and-dishonest/

6 days ago

https://www.truthdig.com/videos/the-russiagate-conspiracy-theorists-just-cant-let-go/

Aaron Maté has been the best on this issue, he really has.

6 days ago (Edited)

This is who Aaron Maté asked us to believe:

Bill Barr: The "Cover-Up General"
"At the center of the criticism is the chief artic­ulator of Bush's imperial presidency," we wrote in 1992, "the man who wrote the legal rationale for the Gulf War, the Panama invasion, and the officially sanctioned kidnapping of foreign nationals abroad"

To even the most avid scandalmonger, these may sound like the ravings of a fe­vered Orwellian imagination. But in fact they are all part of a litany of wrongdoing leveled at George Bush's Justice Depart­ment in the past two months alone. And at the center of the criticism is the chief artic­ulator of Bush's imperial presidency, the man who wrote the legal rationale for the Gulf War, the Panama invasion, and the officially sanctioned kidnapping of, foreign nationals abroad -- Attorney General Wil­liam P. Barr.

What does that tell you about Aaron Maté?

https://www.villagevoice.com/2019/04/18/attorney-general-william-barr-is-the-best-reason-to-vote-for-clinton/

5 days ago (Edited)
@aaronjmate

Mueller letter will spark new coverup claims. The outcry will ignore, per DOJ, that Mueller didn't think Barr's letter was "inaccurate", but was concerned about media coverage. Oh, & it'll also ignore the contents of the Mueller report that later came out.

It has been reported tonight by the WaPo and NYTimes that Mueller did indeed object to Barr's characterization of his report and he memorialized it in a letter to Barr. Most everyone except Maté and Greenwald knew the Barr letter was dubious at best. Now Maté is actually buying the DOJ spokesperson's characterization of Mueller's letter (see bold). Remember when Maté and Greenwald were doing wildly premature victory laps based on that letter? They both assured us at the time that it was game over, that it was all a scam based on that highly suspect letter. Why would Barr lie knowing that Mueller would object was their reasoning. Well, if they had bothered to research Barr they would not have been surprised, they would have known that he was after all:
. ..the man who wrote the legal rationale for the Gulf War, the Panama invasion, and the officially sanctioned kidnapping of, foreign nationals abroad...
(see link above)

At the very least they would have been wise to have reserved judgement -- instead they shamefully wrote and Tweeted about how they were right all along based on Barr's letter.

5 days ago

Should we "believe" Mueller? Should we believe anyone?

5 days ago

"Here is just one example of Sonja's hero Maté talking sh*t and gleefully accepting Barr's testimony as fact. "

I can just sense your overflowing spite.
Aaron has been thorough and consistent from the get-go.
And, no, this is not a victory for any of us.
As Noam Chomsky stated, the Democrats promotion of Russiagate may have given Trump 2020.
Masha Gessen, Thomas Frank, Naomi Klein, Matt Taibbi, and Reagan's former man in Moscow, AMB Matlock all contend Russian meddling has been way overplayed.

Comey was comical when he spoke of those Russkies, scampering about, doing their nasty deeds, doing it right out in the open, not even bothering to cover their tracks.. And why did Russia, with a military one-tenth of ours, poke us in the eye? It was either Hayden, Brennan, or Clapper who explained: "Because the US makes Russia look pitiful, in comparison".. The jealous Evil Vlad wakes up every morning, plotting to bring us down to Russia's level.

5 days ago
I'm so old I remember when the Narrative was that Barr and Mueller were friends and it was inconceivable that Barr would mischaracterize Mueller's report. And since Mueller hadn't objected, obviously (and everybody knows this) Barr got it just right. No reasonable person could possibly think otherwise.
I never said this. Since you've "seen this so many times," link to one post (or article or blog or tweet) that says it. What I suspect is that the people who embrace your narrative, as well as those who support Hillary and the DNC, are just pretending to have more money than they really have. That's usually what it is.
5 days ago

Lela,
My 1970's highshool nemesis later became US Deputy Sec of Defense for the old Soviet satellites. I find nothing amusing with Red-Baiting; especially with the INF Treaty being scuttled, the massive arms buildup in Europe, and our tragic new arms race. I had hoped for a US-Russia collaboration on climate change.

6 days ago (Edited)

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/mueller-report-ends-a-shameful-period-for-the-press/

https://www.truthdig.com/videos/the-russiagate-conspiracy-theorists-just-cant-let-go/

The second link includes a video interview by Chris Hedges of Aaron Maté:

They explore how the liberal fixation on "Russiagate" has handed Donald Trump a massive gift ahead of the 2020 election, and how the Democratic Party has failed to offer a meaningful alternative to his political movement.
6 days ago (Edited)

It is Loser Pelosi and the deep systemic rot in the democratic party which is opposing impeachment.

By opposing impeachment you are also validating them.

6 days ago

I never said I opposed impeachment.

I oppose the DNC having nothing to offer. Except of course insipid posturing, of the sort that caused such indignation that many voters stayed home, and some even voted for Caligula.

6 days ago


And what would that make Bernie (more Russia investigations) and Elizabeth Warren (impeachment)? You used to ridicule Pelosi for being a hack -- now you see her as the apparent arbiter of good sense. Go figure.

6 days ago (Edited)
now you see her as the apparent arbiter of good sense
not at all ... as you point out at every opportunity, i couldn't care less if trump gets impeached or not

impeachment doesn't address the deep systemic rot of the democratic party, which i do care about

"There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love." ― Martin Luther King, Jr.
6 days ago

This.

6 days ago

Ohhh... don't sell yourself short Johnny boy... you've redacted the most important part of your quote, remember?

I couldn't care less [...] if Trump is re-elected i n 2020. - Johnanderson

6 days ago

if the DNC ever nominates a real democrat my position may change

6 days ago (Edited)

special considerations russia has received from its puppet trump:

https://www.state.gov/e/eb/tfs/spi/ukrainerussia/03/15/19 Transatlantic Community Imposes Sanctions on Russia; Deputy Spokesperson Robert Palladino; Washington, DC 12/19/18 Sanctions Announcement on Russia; Office of the Spokesperson; Washington, DC 12/18/18 Russia Fact Sheet 01/30/18 Background Briefing on the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) Section 231; Via Teleconference 10/27/17 CAATSA Section 231(d) Defense and Intelligence Sectors of the Government of the Russian Federation

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/26/europe/full-list-of-russian-diplomats-expelled-over-s-intl/index.htmlUnited States: The White House said it was expelling 60 Russian diplomats identified as intelligence agents and also announced the closure of the Russian Consulate in Seattle. It represents the most forceful action that President Donald Trump has taken against Russia to date.

Of those being expelled, 48 of the alleged intelligence agents work at the Russian Embassy in Washington and 12 are posted at the United Nations in New York, senior administration officials said.

6 days ago (Edited)

Even though a host of impeachable offenses emerged in the report, there are very good reasons for not proceeding to impeachment at this point in time, johnaderson , not the least of which is the spineless Republicans would block it in the Senate.

Another valid reason is that the Mueller report is the gift that keeps on giving -- it has spawned dozens of investigations and grand juries -- let them run their course.

And my pointing out that the offenses are actually impeachable does not mean I want to proceed with impeachment now -- I am countering the silly narrative advanced by Mona and Co. that this somehow resoundingly clears Trump of inappropriate behavior with respect to collusion and obstruction.

6 days ago
you have previously argued that impeachment makes sense even if the senate opposes it
I've said over and over again that these offenses are impeachable , i.e, worthy of being included in articles of impeachment. I did say at one point that I increasingly respect Elizabeth Warren's position that the Democrats should impeach for solely for the record -- i.e. to show that this behavior should not be condoned. But right now I think that is still premature -- let Trump play defense as the myriad of new investigations gain momentum, and when they reach a critical mass that not even the Republicans (and faux progressives) can ignore, then impeach.
6 days ago

It sure looks the MSM's biased coverage is handing the nomination to Biden who will lose to Trump.

6 days ago

Still cannot understand what the Russians did to influence the election.

Hacking DNC emails to show the primary was rigged? I am supposed to care that the dems got caught cheating? I say great, more exposure of corruption the better. The Russians did us a service.

Facebook ads, fake rallies? You have to be kidding. Was a mere drop in a very large bucket of activity. Sounds to me like a group of people being paid for doing work that could not possibly matter.

So Russian spies are trying to mess with us. Yawn.

Does the US influence elections? I'm pretty sure we do. And what does the US do when it really does not want a certain person to be the president of a country? Screw your elections. How about a missile strike from a drone.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8839964/Col-Gaddafi-killed-convoy-bombed-by-drone-flown-by-pilot-in-Las-Vegas.html

Or how about bombing the crap out of a country to overturn the results of that countries last election. Based on - wait for it - false information from the US intelligence community about some nonexistent weapons of mass destruction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationale_for_the_Iraq_War

Surveillance? How about surveillance on the actual leader of one of the most important countries in the world. Tapping the phone of Merkel. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/08/nsa-tapped-german-chancellery-decades-wikileaks-claims-merkel

The US is engaged in activity several orders of magnitude greater than what the Russians are alleged to have done. The way in which this minor Russian meddling has been blown out of proportion to how the world actually works is frightening.

6 days ago (Edited)

Forget, Russia -- at the end of the day, this is about Donald Trump and his behavior. We can all agree that the US has been engaged in their share of reprehensible behavior. Ask yourself what would have happened if Angela Merkle's political opponent was cheering the US's effort to tap her phone. Ask what would happen if this opponent publicly called for the US to tap her phone. Ask yourself what would happen if this adversary gained great political advantage from the release of this information. Ask yourself what would happen if this political adversary was involved in a mega real estate deal that would have profit him millions of Deutschmarks with interests that had direct economic ties to the US president during an election , and he not only concealed this and denied this during an election, he doubled down and brazenly lied about it until a LOI was published. Actually, that doesn't even begin to explain how wrong Trump's behavior is -- the US is actually a German ally!

6 days ago

At the end of the day, it's about distraction from the undemocratic, and illegitimate election process we have in this country.

  1. Never mind that the anointed candidate is as corrupt and dirty as the phony cartoon candidate that wasn't supposed to win.
  2. Never mind that she has two faces, one for the PTB and one for the chumps.
  3. Never mind that the party she represents lied and cheated its own members.
  4. Never mind that their agenda is to protect the status quo, not represent the majority in this country.

It is NOT about Donald Trump, although that's what has been sickeningly over promoted while the Schumers and Pelosis of the world continue to give him his judges and his 3x too big war budget.

It's about malfeasance of the unDemocratic party and their effort to "hold the effing center"

6 days ago

The desperately reckless harm Russiagate Central -- MSNBC -- has caused

Glenn Greenwald ‏ Verified account @ggreenwald Follow Follow @ggreenwald

More Jingoistic fear, using a dreary script taken from the Cold War, saved an entire cable network and enriched its hosts beyond what can be imagined. But the harm will endure permanently among a whole new generation of liberals who paid attention to politics for the first time [supporting example at link

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1123232222088245249 ]

6 days ago

Matt Taibbi read the Mueller Report!

Let's start with what isn't in Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Report on The Investigation Into Russian Interference In the 2016 Presidential Election: There's no blackmail, no plan by Vladimir Putin of "at least five years" to cultivate Donald Trump, no hundred-million-dollar bribe offered by Rosneft chief Igor Sechin to Carter Page, and no "regular exchange" of intelligence between Russia and Trump, who according to British ex-super spy Christopher Steele had been informing on Russian oligarchs' activities in America, for Putin, dating back at least "8 years."

There is also no trip to Prague by Trump lawyer Michael Cohen; no quid pro quo of any kind , no Trump "sidelining Russian intervention in Ukraine" as a campaign issue in exchange for DNC leaks; no "well-developed conspiracy of cooperation" between Russia and the Trump campaign using Page and others as intermediaries; and no "extensive sexual services from [Russian] prostitutes."

"Russiagate was journalist QAnon (Part 1) - The Mueller report reveals: three years of news coverage was insane conspiracy theory" https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-was-journalist-qanon-part
6 days ago

"Read the report!"

Insist the Russiagate dead-enders when asked for specific evidence of their baseless, hysterical claims. They cannot get specific , so constantly revert to :

"Do your own research!" is a common phrase used by conspiracy theorists and pseudoscience promoters of various creeds in response to people who are skeptical of their claims. This phrase is a form of the escape hatch (Argumentum ad googlam) used by a charlatan who wants to win the argument but does not want to bear the burden of proof. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Do_your_own_research
5 days ago (Edited)

Both impeachment and trial are purely political. They have nothing to do with the law. If you have the votes, it happens. If not, not.

Exhibit A: The Andrew Johnson impeachment and trial. He was impeached and tried for UPHOLDING the Constitution. He got off because the Senators from Kansas were bribed for their votes.

The impeachment was illegal BUT was actually a good idea. Johnson was condoning murder and supporting the South's efforts to terrorize citizens. He had to be neutralized.

Exhibit B: The Clinton impeachment.

Arguing law in such cases is meaningless.

6 days ago

But I have some more specifics for you , Felix. From Aaron's dispositive debunking of your conspiracy theories:

6. THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING REALLY WAS JUST A "WASTE OF TIME" The June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower was widely dubbed the "Smoking Gun." An e-mail chain showed that Donald Trump Jr. welcomed an offer to accept compromising information about Clinton as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump."

But the pitch did not come from the meeting's Russian participants, but instead from Rob Goldstone, a British music publicist acting on their behalf. Goldstone said that he invented "publicist puff" to secure the meeting, because in reality, as he told NPR, "I had no idea what I was talking about."

Mueller noted that Trump Jr.'s response "showed that the Campaign anticipated receiving information from Russia that could assist candidate Trump's electoral prospects, but the Russian lawyer's presentation did not provide such information [emphasis mine]."

The report further recounts that during the meeting Jared Kushner texted then-Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort that it was a "waste of time," and requested that his assistants "call him to give him an excuse to leave." Accordingly, when "Veselnitskaya made additional efforts to follow up on the meeting," after the election, "the Trump Transition Team did not engage."

I've read the Report, and Aaron is accurate. Since you claim to also have read it, do you take any issue with Aaron here?
6 days ago (Edited)

TI Rule No. 5:

Only Glenn Greenwald gets to use incendiary war metaphors:

The Deep State Goes to War With President-Elect Glenn Greenwald

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/11/the-deep-state-goes-to-war-with-president-elect-using-unverified-claims-as-dems-cheer/

6 days ago

Felix translated: "I can't cite three specific examples of Russian "attacks" -- with supporting evidence -- and am so pissed people keep demanding it!"

6 days ago

Oh, and Felix, below I incorporated this by reference and endorsed it as my own understanding and views: Aaron Maté's "The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory - The real Russiagate scandal is the damage it has done to our democratic system and media." https://www.thenation.com/article/russiagate-trump-mueller-report-no-collusion/

I do understand that none of you Russiagate dead-enders wish to address Aaron's definitive debunking of your conspiracy theories. Really, I do. But t here is no better analysis of the Mueller Report (which I've repeatedly read) available anywhere.

6 days ago

Where do you get this nonsense, Alberto?

Keep lining CNN pockets, be my guest. But don't be shocked, shocked if we are stuck with Trump again, while they snicker all the way to the bank.

6 days ago

Someone based in Russia paying 8 thousand dollars for some facebook ads does not constitute an attack. Especially not in the context of a multibillion dollar election. And especially when most of the ads only appeared when the election was over and did not even consistently support or attack any particular candidate. Podesta's emails exposing the real Hillary Clinton were given to Wikileaks by a DNC staffer, sickened by their treatment of Bernie.

If you are aware of something else that could be considered an actual attack by Russia then please name it and give some details.

6 days ago

https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/why-the-reader-is-worth-saving/Content?oid=69839657

-- Another worthy independent media piece

The embarrassing implosion of the Russiagate story, following two years of wall-to-wall coverage in the mainstream press, is yet another reminder why we can't rely on corporate media to deliver the news. For two years, corporate news outlets such as CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, and the Washington Post have peddled gossip and misinformation about how Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election. None of this coverage had anything to do with the lives of most Americans, 80 percent of whom live paycheck to paycheck; if they have health insurance, they can't afford to get sick and pay their deductible. America's mainline media is owned and controlled by six corporations. It should come as no surprise that media outlets beholden to corporations do not always serve the needs of ordinary people; nor are they effective watchdogs of a political system financed by the very same corporate interests. The Russiagate affair consumed so much attention that MSNBC went almost a year without mentioning the war in Yemen, where the U.S. is actively helping the richest country in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia, destroy the poorest one, killing tens of thousands of Yemeni people through its brutal bombing campaign and the famine that that campaign is causing. Another story drowned out in the sea of Russiagate coverage is that the United States is presently helping to overthrow the elected government of Venezuela in a brazen coup attempt -- and on behalf of U.S. corporate interests eager to exploit the nation's oil resources. As Noam Chomsky observed, our media's endless obsession with a few Facebook ads purchased by Russians has made the U.S. a laughingstock to the hundreds of millions of people who live in countries where the U.S. has actually overthrown their democratically elected leaders and installed puppets who serve American corporate interests.
6 days ago

That's not what the article says.

If you can't understand it, maybe you should blame the steady diet of CNN for your debilitated state. They have done you a greater disservice than you are able to perceive.

1 week ago

The detritus above is cured by Aaron Maté here: "The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory - The real Russiagate scandal is the damage it has done to our democratic system and media." https://www.thenation.com/article/russiagate-trump-mueller-report-no-collusion/ Maté definitively addresses these points:

1. RUSSIAGATE WITHOUT RUSSIA 2. RUSSIAGATE'S PREDICATE LED NOWHERE 3. SERGEY KISLYAK HAD "BRIEF AND NON-SUBSTANTIVE" INTERACTIONS WITH THE TRUMP CAMP 4. TRUMP TOWER MOSCOW HAD NO HELP FROM MOSCOW 5. AND TRUMP DIDN'T ASK COHEN TO LIE ABOUT IT 6. THE TRUMP TOWER MEETING REALLY WAS JUST A "WASTE OF TIME" 7. MANAFORT DID NOT SHARE POLLING DATA TO MEDDLE IN THE US ELECTION 8. THE STEELE DOSSIER WAS FICTION 9. THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN HAD NO SECRET CHANNEL TO WIKILEAKS 10. THERE WAS NO COVER-UP
1 week ago

About Point 1, Aaron writes:

The report contains no evidence that anyone from the Trump campaign spoke to a Kremlin representative during the election, aside from conversations with the Russian ambassador and a press-office assistant, both of whom were ruled out as having participated in a conspiracy (more on them later). It should be no surprise, then, to learn from Mueller that, when "Russian government officials and prominent Russian businessmen began trying to make inroads into the new administration" after Trump's election victory, they did not know whom to call. These powerful Russians, Mueller noted, "appeared not to have preexisting contacts and struggled to connect with senior officials around the President-Elect. " If top Russians did not have "preexisting contacts and struggled to connect with" the people that they supposedly conspired with, perhaps that is because they did not actually conspire.
1 week ago

(Bumping one of my first comments from yesterday to top because so very many below absurdly claim to believe vindicated skeptics are the ones who need to read the Report. Aaron Maté won an Izzie for his Russigate reporting and has read the Report at a granular level. I, who have read the Report more than once, hereby incorporate all of Maté's piece by reference as my own analysis and views. I've yet to see any of the Russiagate dead-enders tackle Aaron's definitive work here in debunking their conspiracy narrative.)

1 week ago

" It's a tour de force"

It absolutely is.

But what is clearly happening is that the legions of journalists who fueled the Russiagate panic -- including Jim Risen -- will suffer no adverse consequences for having done so. Nor will Aaron greatly benefit for having been right. (Journalists who win Izzies, as Arron did for his Russiagate reporting, are esteemed in progressive circles, but are not generally rewarded with high status jobs.)

Enormous wrongness on Russiagate will ruin reputations to the same degree huge wrongness on WMDs and Iraq did (except for the one sacrificial lamb that was Judith Miller), which is to say there will be no reputational harm in elite venues. Russiagate hysterics, as with the Iraq war cheerleaders, will fail upwards. (Likely a symptom of late stage capitalism.)

1 week ago

Why Didn't Mueller Investigate Whether Steele Dossier Was Russian Disinfo?

"Perhaps the most glaring omission is Mueller's failure to consider that the infamous "Steele Dossier" - which used Kremlin sources - could have been Russian disinformation itself. "

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-27/strassel-why-didnt-mueller-investigate-whether-steele-dossier-was-russian-disinfo

1 week ago

Mueller didn't investigate the Steele Dossier because he didn't use it. Every mention of the Steele Dossier in the Mueller Report refers to panicky Trumpies worrying about the dossier but Mueller himself only refers to it as unverified allegations. Are you sure you've read the Mueller Report, Comrade?

1 week ago

The Steele Dossier was what started the witch-hunt and the FBI used it to illegally spy on Trump. Isikoff Stunned That His Carter Page Article Was Used To Justify Spy Warrant

Isikoff was shocked, he said, because his very article was based on information that came from Christopher Steele, the former British spy who wrote the dossier. He said it was "a bit beyond me" that the FBI would use his article in the FISA application. (RELATED: Spy Warrant Relied On Dossier And News Stories Planted By Fusion GPS)

"Obviously the information that I got from Christopher Steele was information the FBI already had," he said, noting that Steele began sharing information from his dossier in July 2016. Isikoff acknowledged the potential problem with the DOJ and FBI citing his article to support the FISA against Page. "It's self-referential," he said of the article and its reliance on the dossier. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dailycaller.com/2018/02/02/isikoff-stunned-carter-page

1 week ago (Edited)

There was no crime. The dossier was completely unsubstantiated and bogus. They used it to blackmail Trump and illegally spy on his campaign. even Isakoff says so

Reporter who broke Steele dossier story says ex-British agent's claims 'likely false'

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/2347833002

so Who are the criminals?

1 week ago

"Every mention of the Steele Dossier in the Mueller Report refers to panicky Trumpies worrying about the dossier but Mueller himself only refers to it as unverified allegations."

LOL The revisionism of you Russigaters is absolutely hilarious. (And what chutzpah from a guy who keeps insisting others haven't read the Report -- you obviously have not!)

So, from a fine journalist who thoroughly studied the Mueller Report:

8. THE STEELE DOSSIER WAS FICTION The Steele dossier -- a collection of Democratic National Committee-funded opposition research alleging a high-level Trump-Russia criminal relationship -- played a critical role in the Russiagate saga. The FBI relied on it for leads and evidentiary material in its investigation of the Trump campaign ties to Russia, and prominent politicians, pundits, and media outlets promoted it as credible.

The Mueller report, The New York Times noted last week, has "underscored what had grown clearer for months some of the most sensational claims in the dossier appeared to be false, and others were impossible to prove." Steele reported that low-level Trump aide Carter Page was offered a 19 percent stake in the state-owned Russian oil company Rosneft if he could get Trump to lift Western sanctions. In October 2016 the FBI, citing the Steele dossier, told the FISA court that it "believes that [Russia's] efforts are being coordinated with Page and perhaps other individuals associated with" the Trump campaign. The Mueller report, however, could "not establish that Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election." The Steele dossier claimed that Michael Cohen visited Prague to meet Russian agents in the summer of 2016. In April 2018, McClatchy reported to much fanfare that Mueller's team "has evidence" that placed Cohen in Prague during the period in question. Cohen later denied the claim under oath , and Mueller agreed, noting that Cohen "never traveled to Prague." After reports emerged in August 2016 that the Trump campaign had rejected an amendment to the Republican National Committee platform that called for arming Ukraine, Steele claimed that it was the result of a quid pro quo. The Mueller report "did not establish that" the rejection of the Ukraine amendment was "undertaken at the behest of candidate Trump or Russia."


Christ on a crutch, Mike, but if you are going to accuse others of not having read the Report, you should take greater care not to betray that you are actually referencing yourself .

Now, go read Aaron Mate's definitive debunking of your Russiagate delusions, from which I quoted above: "The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory" https://www.thenation.com/article/russiagate-trump-mueller-report-no-collusion/

1 week ago

Michael Tracey ‏Verified account @mtracey "According to former Trump lawyer John Dowd, Trump complained that the Mueller investigation would often be brought up by world leaders during unrelated discussions, hindering Trump's ability to conduct foreign affairs. Another ramification of this fiasco that gets overlooked"

That was the entire point.To hinder his ability to implement policy and diplomacy. To delegitimize him, that was the goal. It was never about collusion.

Here's a ramification that is overlooked. Qaddafi co-operated with the US by dismantling his WMD program, then his nation was destroyed and he was brutally murdered by extremist lunatics while Hillary laughed.

Kim Jong Un learned a valuable lesson. Don't negotiate with US because they lie.

1 week ago (Edited)

P.S. In response and as an addendum to my own post, whoever has predicted that Trump is fully swamp-i-fied and will attack Iran in one form or another within one year of his being re-elected (that is, one year before or one year after) wins the door prize.

Just today Israel handed out some oil exploration contracts to a Dick Cheney related firm in the occupied Golan Heights. The Iranian Rev. Guard was recently declared a terrorist group. Saudi Arabia just executed 37+ people for what amounts to homophobia - with ZERO push back from the US State Department or Trump, and of course the Kashoggi thing is all but forgotten.

Criminal mastermind Netanyahu just managed to get re-elected yet again. All signs point toward another costly ME (or dare I say, South American) war which will likely coincide with a serious recession given that the economic reports and outlook are being propped up on meaningless metrics by the right leaning corporate media. When you do a deep dive and look at what really matters, it's pretty clear that without a war, there's a recession, or worse, on the way.

1 week ago

They cant let Russiagate go since they have yet to completely criminalize real journalism.....why do you think they arrested Manning again?

Assange Exposes Democrat Fascists, Torturers & Warmongers

https://youtu.be/tbWiPe--U3E

Tulsi Gabbard: Most Attacks I Get Are From Democrats | Surprisingly Scorching Speech
https://www.reddit.com/r/tulsi/comments/bi344m/tulsi_gabbard_most_attacks_i_get_are_from/

1 week ago

Glenn Greenwald ‏Verified account @ggreenwald

Ronald Reagan, 1983, on the moral and patriotic duty to stand up to the evil Russians, and never suggest equivalencies between the actions of Washington and Moscow, since one is Good, the other Evil:

Ronald Reagan Evil Empire Speech (Excerpt)

https://youtu.be/M0NXs_uWPgg


1 week ago

"Idiot changes platform to favor Putin,"

Didn't happen. Changes in the platform weren't Trump's:

1) The Mysterious Change to the 2016 Republican Party Platform Concerning Ukraine During the 2016 Republican National Convention, the party quietly altered its platform, removing language calling on the United States to provide "lethal defensive weapons" to Ukraine to protect itself against Russian aggression.

Many speculated that the change may have been directed by Trump to please Russia. The Mueller team determined this was not the case, writing: "The investigation did not establish that one Campaign official's efforts to dilute a portion of the Republican Party platform on providing assistance to Ukraine were undertaken at the behest of candidate Trump or Russia."

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/6-scandals-the-mueller-report-puts-to-rest-824441/
1 week ago

"You should read the Mueller Report."

Aaron Mate has read and deeply analyzed the Mueller Report: https://theintercept.com/2019/04/28/mueller-report-trump-russia-questions/?commentId=21ab14b9-5404-4e8a-8bbc-1cf326c9ad5f

1 week ago

Is that a dead horse?.....I cant tell anymore...

Aaron Maté ‏Verified account @aaronjmate Apr 26

New from me: Russiagate promoters led their audiences to believe in a Trump-Russia conspiracy & that Mueller would prove it. Mueller did the opposite: his report amounts to an indictment of the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory, and that's the real scandal:

The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory The real Russiagate scandal is the damage it has done to our democratic system and media. By Aaron MatéTwit

https://www.thenation.com/article/russiagate-trump-mueller-report-no-collusion/

And this thread and take down of the now certifiable Maddow and her lies,a nice list.

Aaron Maté ‏Verified account @aaronjmate Replying to @maddow

1/ If YouTube were to recommend your show, it'd be recommending the leading purveyor of now debunked Trump-Russia conspiracy theories, falsehoods & innuendo of the last 2+ years. Here's a sample:

https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1122551982332481537

1 week ago

Aaron Maté's 22-tweet thread detailing myriad of Rachel Maddow's unhinged, baseless and hysterical assertions about...RUSSIA111!!11!!

https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1122551982332481537

[May 06, 2019] Mueller's Dirty Cops Leak Innuendo to Keep Russia Hoax Alive

That was a knife in Barr's back from his "friend" Mueller.
Apr 04, 2019 | www.breitbart.com
The disgraceful team of partisan investigators hired by Dirty Cop Robert Mueller just disgraced themselves further through a series of unforgivable leaks to the fake news media.

Obviously angry over the fact President Trump is so innocent they could not even come up with a way to frame him, "Some of Mueller's investigators," the far-left New York Times reports, "have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated."

Told associates *wink-wink* -- Oops, I had no idea *wink-wink* it would make the front page of the Times ! *digs toe in dirt*

These sleaze bags are also leaking (through more "associates!") to the far-left Washington Post.

"Members of Mueller's team have complained to close associates that the evidence they gathered on obstruction was alarming and significant," the Post reports. "'It was much more acute than Barr suggested,' said one person, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the subject's sensitivity."

Of course, and just like the entire Russia Collusion Hoax, none of these complaints makes a lick of sense because it was not just Barr who signed off on the four page Mueller Report summary that cleared Trump of collusion and obstruction; Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein also signed off on the summary and Rosenstein, if you recall, is the original Dirty Cop who appointed Mueller in the first place.

What's more, when you are talking about a special counsel, this kind of exoneration is almost always unprecedented. In the past, these investigations have always hit pay dirt, always -- by hook or crook -- found a way to justify their existence, which was no doubt Mueller's plan when he hired only partisan Democrats to join his hunt.

But these Dirty Cops found nothing on Trump, nada, bupkis -- a big, fat, stinkin' zero.

Oh, sure they found some old crimes no one cared about until the accused went to work for Trump.

Oh, sure they found a few Russians who spent a few bucks on Facebook ads, most of them in opposition to Trump.

Oh, sure they destroyed the life of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn by threatening his son over a contrived process crime.

Trump, however, is so freakin' innocent they couldn't even rig a frame for him, so now Mueller's Dirty Stinkin' Cops are pouting and bitter and vengeful and violating every known legal ethic to smear Trump in the court of public opinion by way of the sleaziest kind of innuendo imaginable.

You see, these Dirty Cops know how it works

Every legal ethic and everything that makes America America says that if an individual has not been charged with a crime, the legal system does not download on that person, does not release information about the investigation against this person, does not try to makes a case against this person's reputation in the court of public opinion.

If you recall, this is what disgraced former FBI Director James Comey did to Hillary Clinton. This is why everyone believed she was going to be charged over her email server -- because Comey downloaded on her, publicly laid out her crimes before telling us she would not be charged.

No matter what you think of Hillary or the crimes she committed, no matter how unjust the decision was to let her off the hook, if someone is not going to be charged it is unethical and un-American for a lawman to do what Comey did -- to lay out his case against her.

So what Mueller's Dirty Cops are trying to do here is put Trump and Barr in a Catch 22.

You see, if Barr does the right thing, if he is an honorable attorney general (and American), when he does release what he can of the 400 page Mueller Report next week, other than the top-line findings (no collusion, no obstruction) nothing else will be made public about Trump or anyone else who was not charged with a crime.

We don't do that in this country.

But now that Mueller's Dirty Cops have left this trail of slime, the Russia Collusion Hoax can live on forever!

Don't you see, there's more! More, I say! More!

In a tweet late Wednesday, Trump's legal counsel, Rudy Giuliani, got it exactly right after the leaks hit the fake media.

"The NYT story about unspecified troubling findings in report is as accurate as the NYT saying Mueller's staff didn't leak," Giuliani wrote. "Who leaked this Mueller's unethical staff. This proves they are Angry Democrats who couldn't find or create evidence to support collusion or obstruction."

me title=

During a Fox News appearance, he went even further:

[These leaks] makes the point that we've been making for two years: Despite all of the media reports about how holy and sanctimonious the Mueller team is, they are a bunch of sneaky, unethical leakers, and they are rabid Democrats who hate the president of the United States.

And I can't tell you how much false information they leaked during the course of the investigation. How many people are going to be indicted that didn't get indicted? How many -- how many blockbusters were there? Starting with Papadopoulos and ending with Cohen, who turns out to be a serial liar. I mean, how could you have any confidence in this?

If only through his presence and victory, Trump has accomplished an invaluable service in exposing the Justice Department, the F.B.I., the corporate media, and the intelligence community as an un-American cabal of venal, power-mad, entitled thugs with no respect for the rule of law or the Constitution.

Never again will these sleazy bastards be trusted, because they cannot be trusted. The corruption, the arrogance, the incompetence, the desire to rule over us, to overturn elections that do not come out their liking

From Iraq to Trump -- these monsters can all go straight to Hell.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC . Follow his Facebook Page here .

[May 06, 2019] CIA Director Gina Haspel is Complicit with the Attempted Overthrow of Trump

May 06, 2019 | aim4truth.org

When we saw these tweets from George Papadopoulos, we thought we could help him out with some answers. If you can get them to George, please do.

Has congress figured out why Peter Strzok's former boss, Bill Priestap, was in London (of all places) the days before Alexander Downer was sent to spy on me and lie about our meeting? If not, time to get a move on it.

-- George Papadopoulos (@GeorgePapa19) March 12, 2019

Britain is in a political crisis. To push Brexit hard, declassifying the spy role of the David Cameron government on Trump and his team is paramount. Congress can not overlook the vital importance of London as the center of the coup attempt.

-- George Papadopoulos (@GeorgePapa19) March 12, 2019

What was I REALLY under surveillance for then? Explosive https://t.co/AVGlfwi5ld

-- George Papadopoulos (@GeorgePapa19) March 13, 2019

Our reply to George:

preistap bill.JPGBill Priestap was the Director of the FBI national security division and would have gone to the London CIA "office" for a meeting. There he would have met with Stefan Halper and Gina Haspel who was, at the time, head of the London CIA office and would have been in charge of the connections with Robert Hannigan (British GCHQ) and John Brennan who planned and executed the wiretapping of Trump Team at Trump Towers. Haspel's communications, when released, will reveal the full scope of the CIA led international attack on the 2016 presidential election.

Gina Haspel would have known about the coup. If she has not reported all of this to the President Trump, she is complicit in the overthrow attempt and is guilty of HIGH TREASON.
Gina haspel 2
Pictured: Evil SES Conspirator

Keep in mind, Peter Strzok was a CIA Regional Director who John Brennan appointed as the head of Crossfire Hurricane, the CIA counter-intelligence operation to "take out" candidate Trump – later it became the Mueller Witch Hunt after 13 different iterations spanning:

the CIA (John Brennan),

FBI (James Comey, Andrew McCabe, James Baker, etc.),

DoJ (Loretta Lynn, Sally Yates, Andrew Weisseman),

State Department (Victoria Nuland, Jonathon Winer, Hilary Clinton, John Kerry),

ODNS (James Clapper),

NSA (Admiral Mike Rogers)

and the White House senior staff (directly to Obama, Biden, Jarret, Rice, Powers, etc.).

Bill Preistap was the supervisor for Strzok and Lisa Page who also worked for John Carlin in the Department of Justice National Security Division under Sally Yates. Then Strozk and Page continued their CIA operation as they were appointed to Mueller's Special Council Investigation.

Gina Haspel worked directly for the instigator of the Crossfire Hurricane operation – John Brennan. It would have been impossible for Haspel not to have known about the British spying from London since it was reported in UK newspaper on a weekly basis. She certainly was controlling Stefan Halper , Josef Mifsud , Stephan Roh , Alexander Downer, Andrew Wood, John McCain, Mark Warner, Adam Schiff and the other conspirators.

All of these facts are well known and reported in open source documents. As the 53 testimonies of the House Intelligence Committee are released, we will see the house of cards all fall down and Gina Haspel will go with it.

Keep in mind Haspel was Michael Gaeta's handler. Michael Gaeta handled the frame-up of George Papadopoulos .

[May 06, 2019] Major Mueller Report Omissions Suggest Incompetence Or A Coverup

Mueller Mifsud blunder is indicative of the quality of this "Investigation". The final results desired were established before any investigating took place.
This is definitely a cover up. Mueller could call Jina Haspel and get all the information about Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud who tried to tie George Papadopoulos to Russia. It is definitely available via regular CIA channels as CIA Director Gina Haspel is Complicit with the Attempted Overthrow of Trump .
Bill Priestap was the Director of the FBI national security division and would have gone to the London CIA "office" for a meeting. There he would have met with Stefan Halper and Gina Haspel who was, at the time, head of the London CIA office and would have been in charge of the connections with Robert Hannigan (British GCHQ) and John Brennan who planned and executed the wiretapping of Trump Team at Trump Towers. Haspel's communications, when released, will reveal the full scope of the CIA led international attack on the 2016 presidential election.
On May 3, 2019 Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) requested information on Friday from the State Department, CIA, FBI and NSA on operative Joseph Mifsud ( May3, 2019)
Notable quotes:
"... So how many companies or agencies that you know of, when you say, hey, I'm quitting, and they say, hey, what about a free four-to-five-day vacation in Rome? We're going to fly you there. We're going to put you up for free. We're going to give you food... And all you have to do is meet this guy Mifsud, right... We're trying to get to the bottom of Mifsud . So, as we talked about it on the last segment, this guy originates the investigation. We know that the Mueller team wrote this Mueller dossier. They used a lot of these news stories that, in fact, sometimes were generated by leaks from the FBI. ..."
"... Robert Mueller never inquired about Peter Strzok and Lisa Page's "insurance policy" when he fired Strzok. When Mueller testifies in front of the House Judiciary Committee, I'm going to ask why he never even asked about what evidence might have been polluted by Strzok and Page. ..."
"... Come ON! YOU KNOW THIS is ********! There was no Russian disinformation and that sounds just like out of the Integrity Initiative in the UK and sponsored by the foreign office that seeks to quell Russian disinformation. ..."
"... This whole thing is DELIBERATE to demonize Russia.. ..."
"... Hillarys conflicts of interests never reveled as Secretary of State can and should be investigated by House Democrats instead of magical fabrications of obstruction of justice by Barr..... ..."
"... Mueller and the other intel guys were there to be an exit strategy for the dems, hide the bodies, and make sure to bungle or destroy any evidence that could be used against them. no duh ..."
"... Steele was a Confidential Human Source on the FBI payroll back in 2016. Steele had a handling agent. I'd sure like to know who the handler was. So, how directly the **** is Steele not a liar? ..."
May 06, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Barr replied that he had yet to "go through the full scope of [Mueller's] investigation to determine whether he did address or look at all into those issues," but that he would "try to assemble all the existing information out there about it, not only for the Hill investigations and the OIG, but also to see what the Special Counsel looked into. So I really couldn't say what he looked into."

Meanwhile, Barr said that he has assembled a DOJ team to examine Mueller's investigation, findings, and whether the spying conducted by the FBI against the Trump campaign in 2016 was improper.

Mueller's second major oversight - which we have touched on repeatedly - is the special counsel's portrayal of Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud was a Russian agent - when available evidence suggests he may have been a Western agent. Weeks after returning from Moscow, Mifsud - a self-described Clinton Foundation member - 'seeded' the rumor that Russia had 'dirt' on Hillary Clinton with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos on April 26, 2016, according to the Mueller report.

As Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) noted on Fox News on Sunday, " how is it that we spend 30-plus-million dollars on this, as taxpayers and they can't even tell us who Joseph Mifsud is? "

"...this is important, because, in the Mueller dossier, they use a fake news story to describe Mifsud. In one of those stories, they cherry- pick it," Nunes added.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/D8EyqAq1Q3k

BARTIROMO: Then he's working for Trump. So how come somebody from Britain, Australia, Italy, they're all reaching out to him? And, by the way, how come this London Center of International Law reached out to Papadopoulos on LinkedIn to go work there, after Ben Carson withdrew?

NUNES: And I think a better question is, is that -- so, Papadopoulos claims that he was quitting this London Center.

So how many companies or agencies that you know of, when you say, hey, I'm quitting, and they say, hey, what about a free four-to-five-day vacation in Rome? We're going to fly you there. We're going to put you up for free. We're going to give you food... And all you have to do is meet this guy Mifsud, right... We're trying to get to the bottom of Mifsud . So, as we talked about it on the last segment, this guy originates the investigation. We know that the Mueller team wrote this Mueller dossier. They used a lot of these news stories that, in fact, sometimes were generated by leaks from the FBI.

Now, I don't think the American people expect 20 DOJ lawyers and 40 FBI agents to write a 450-page report that's built off of news stories that in many cases they generated.

Why I particularly have a problem with this is -- with one of the stories is because they pick a news story, and then they cherry-pick from it. So they use it partly to describe where Mifsud worked, but then they fail to say in that same story that they have given support to by using it in the Mueller dossier , they cherry-pick it. -Via RealClearPolitics

As conservative commentator and former US Secret Service agent Dan Bongino notes of Mifsud, "either we have a Russian asset who's infiltrated the highest echelons of friendly Intelligence Services, or we have a friendly who was setting up George Papadopoulos."

Perhaps Mueller's reportedly scheduled testimony next week will shed more light on why he failed to question the possible role of Russian disinformation with the Steele Dossier , and why he didn't flush out who Joseph Mifsud really is .

Other omissions, meanwhile, are on the table as well...

Rep. Matt Gaetz ✔ @RepMattGaetz

Robert Mueller never inquired about Peter Strzok and Lisa Page's "insurance policy" when he fired Strzok. When Mueller testifies in front of the House Judiciary Committee, I'm going to ask why he never even asked about what evidence might have been polluted by Strzok and Page.


pippi68 , 6 minutes ago link

Hillary paid Perkins Coie to pay Fusion GPS to write a fake dossier and then paid Christopher Steele to try to infuse what they wrote with a little authenticity. To anyone who is not brain dead, the whole dossier read like 4chan fan fiction and was laughable from the very start. The whole thing was an obvious set up to all observers (even the Dems though they will cling to their lies to the very end and continue to double down). Most people are growing tired of their antics and their virtue signalling and moralizing.

pippi68 , 12 minutes ago link

The House Committee will just mute the microphones and prevent anyone from asking a worthwhile probing question to Mueller during the hearing. It will be the usual circus, but totally transparent to all who do not suffer from chronic TDS.

Lord Raglan , 14 minutes ago link

If Mifsud turns out to be a CIA operative or paid FBI agent, all to set up the Trump Campaign, there are probably going to be 50 indictments at least.

MrButtoMcFarty , 15 minutes ago link

SPYGATE trials start in the fall/winter... FBI Departures:

DOJ Departures:

Don't forget the popcorn...it's going to be a beautiful thing.

CatInTheHat , 16 minutes ago link

'why he failed to question the possible role of Russian disinformation with the Steele Dossier , and why he didn't flush out who Joseph Mifsud really is .".

Come ON! YOU KNOW THIS is ********! There was no Russian disinformation and that sounds just like out of the Integrity Initiative in the UK and sponsored by the foreign office that seeks to quell Russian disinformation.

This whole thing is DELIBERATE to demonize Russia..

The only "Russian disinfo came from SKRIPAL who has now been poisoned and taken to a secret location to serve out the remainder of his life so that he never talks again!

LOL123 , 16 minutes ago link

Here is your Hillary Russian agent connected to 2016 election and the true obstruction of justice pirate :

"

CHELSEA CLINTON

On Sep. 22, 2011 , Barry Diller appointed Chelsea Clinton, then a college student, to be a director of IAC/Interactivecorp which has a current market value of $10 billion. At the same time, Diller appointed Sonali De Rycker of Accel Partners LLP London and formerly Goldman Sachs. Accel is the largest inside shareholder in Facebook after Mark Zuckerberg.

See the Dec. 13, 2016 verified SEC list of IAC/Interactivecorp media holdings . It includes many leading dating sites in North America and Europe including:

It should also be noted that on Mar. 11, 2009 , IAC/Interactivecorp received what has been, in effect, a PERMANENT CONFIDENTIALITY EXEMPTION from the SEC from reporting its Google AdSense revenue numbers in its public reporting. This is totally outrageous. See the redacted revenue numbers from Google AdSense on IAC/Interactivecorp's 10-K, Exhibit 10-25 on Mar. 11, 2009 .

As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton had an ethical duty to disclose to the public her conflicts of interest in Chelsea Clinton's appointment as director of IAC/Interactivecorp in 2011. Given Chelsea's ties to Facebook director and venture capitalist Accel Partners, the Clinton's engaged in obstruction of justice in the Leader v. Facebook patent infringement lawsuit as well as the Ceglia v. Zuckerberg contract dispute. Also, Chelsea's relationship to Barry Diller shows that mainstream media was engaging in undisclosed bias for the Clintons and against Donald Trump."

Hillary paid Facebook starting on Nov. 26, 2009 to write a " Template for winning elections" directed by RUSSIAN Dmitry Schevelenko of FACEBOOK.

Hillarys conflicts of interests never reveled as Secretary of State can and should be investigated by House Democrats instead of magical fabrications of obstruction of justice by Barr.....

If this wasn't such comic relief for conservatives it would be written as a template for losers.👎😄🌾

TaxesLiterallyAreTheft , 18 minutes ago link

Mueller and the other intel guys were there to be an exit strategy for the dems, hide the bodies, and make sure to bungle or destroy any evidence that could be used against them. no duh

AK Refugee , 20 minutes ago link

So... if we investigate The Mueller Report, is that a Special-Special Counsel, or a Super-Special Counsel?

Either way, the target is a Counsel investigation that was not so special (read corrupted).

Competent counter-intelligence guards against being caught... these fools were already in over their heads by the time it dawned on them that victory was not assured.

And to that end, there is no one in the intelligence community that would have had an early inkling that HRC could blow (poor choice of words, sorry to creep you out) the election (against any Republican nominee) save for someone with authority (executive), motivation (legacy), and accurate polling. Gee... who could that have possibly been?

King of Ruperts Land , 24 minutes ago link

Mueller and his guys were the cleanup men. They disolved all the bodies with acid and lye and then wiped up with bleach.

Goodsport 1945 , 25 minutes ago link

It's hardly incompetence. There was only one goal - take Trump down. To Hell with the facts.

Golden Showers , 26 minutes ago link

Steele was a Confidential Human Source on the FBI payroll back in 2016. Steele had a handling agent. I'd sure like to know who the handler was. So, how directly the **** is Steele not a liar? The FBI apparently stopped their relationship with Steele as a CHS when Steele told a 3rd party he was an FBI source. Check it out: https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-fbi-records-show-dossier-author-deemed-not-suitable-for-use-as-source-show-several-fbi-payments-in-2016/

I'd say that Mueller didn't want to go into it and would rather not talk about it. How fucked up is that?

steve golf , 31 minutes ago link

Duh! Meuller is protecting the cabal that tried to oust Trump.

mc888 , 38 minutes ago link

Mueller's appointment by Rosenstein was illegal and the stated purpose of said investigation was outside the scope of a Special Counsel.

The purpose of the report is to propagate and lend some credibility to the lies that Russia somehow interfered in our elections, hacked the DNC, and Mifsud was a Russian agent.

These claims have already been conclusively disproven by multiple sources. Mifsud is MI6 hiding in Italy so he doesn't get Skripal'ed.

JethroBodien , 40 minutes ago link

Hmmm. You would think Mueller and his team would vet the authenticity of Steele dossier and look into the bleach biting of Hitlery's e-mail server since both were prima facie evidence in this whole charade. The fact this wasn't done is quite damning in and of itself and suggests the Mueller team was complicit in the entire "Russian Collusion" hoax.

SmittyinLA , 45 minutes ago link

What about the Anthony Weiner "insurance"? https://www.dvcinquirer.com/opinion/2016/11/17/anthony-weiners-life-insurance-file-opens-fbi-investigation-on-the-clinton-foundation/

OLD-Pipe , 43 minutes ago link

"confided that the Kremlin had been feeding Trump and his team valuable intelligence on his opponents, including Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton."

And how is this different from the Venezuela, Syria, Libya, Iran False Flags ???????? Not one time has Hit-Lary personnel written or spoken that the leaked intel about the DNC and Clinton 2019 presidential campaign was False....the whole Russia-Gate is a Cover-up of the Crimes of the DNC and Deep State during the Obozo Administration, during the electoral Process for the 2019 Presidential Elections, by the DNC, Clinton's, and the Deep State - NeoCon's.......Thats why Trump won the Election.... We the People are tired of the never ending **** show in D.C., and We the People voted for anyone running on the Novel Idea of Change!!!!

Bobportlandor , 43 minutes ago link

I wonder when the FBI investigates crimes against the United States and find a nothing burger do they all ways write up a 448 report?

Boris Gudonov , 43 minutes ago link

Everyone in America knows that the Mueller investigation was a fraud predicated on fabricated evidence, that Obama used government intelligence agencies to spy on and entrap the political opposition, and that Crooked Hillary Clinton and her minions are guilty of numerous crimes, mishandling of classified information being the least of these offenses.

The only thing the whole country is waiting for is to find out what these ******* criminals are going to get away with.

[May 06, 2019] FBI Obtained Page FISA Warrant with 'Different Standard' of Evidence

May 06, 2019 | www.breitbart.com

A largely unreported footnote in Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller's final report raises immediate questions about the Obama-era FISA warrant obtained to monitor the communications of Carter Page, a tangential adviser to Donald Trump's presidential campaign.

Mueller's report explained that his team did not find evidence that can be used to charge anyone from the Trump campaign as acting as an agent of a foreign government. It says the FISA warrant to spy on Page was obtained using a "different (and lower) standard" of evidence claiming Russian involvement.

Mueller's team utilized the standards outlined in the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), which "requires persons acting as agents of foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacity to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal."

The report stated:

The investigation did not, however, yield evidence sufficient to sustain any charge that any individual affiliated with the Trump Campaign acted as an agent of a foreign principal within the meaning of FARA or, in terms of Section 951, subject to the direction or control of the government of Russia, or any official thereof. In particular, the Office did not find evidence likely to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Campaign officials such as Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos, and Carter Page acted as agents of the Russian Government – or at its direction control, or request-during the relevant time period.

That paragraph contained a footnote about the FISA warrant to conduct surveillance on Page, which was obtained based on warrant applications that cited as evidence against Page information from the infamous, largely-discredited, Clinton-funded anti-Trump dossier.

The footnote says the Page FISA warrant was obtained from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) court utilizing a "different (and lower) standard than the one governing" governing Mueller's office.

States the footnote:

On four occasions, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) issued warrants based on a finding of probable cause to believe that Page was an agent of a foreign power. 50 U.S.C. §§ 1801 (b), 1805(a)(2)(A). The FISC's probable-cause finding was based on a different (and lower) standard than the one governing the Office's decision whether to bring charges against Page, which is whether admissible evidence would likely be sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Page acted as an agent of the Russian Federation during the period at issue. Cf United States v. Cardoza, 713 F.3d 656, 660 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (explaining that probable cause requires only "a fair probability," and not "certainty, or proof beyond a reasonable doubt, or proof by a preponderance of the evidence").

In late October 2016, then-FBI director James Comey signed the first of three successful FISA applications to obtain warrants to spy on Page. The second and third were renewal applications since a FISA warrant must be renewed every 90 days.

All three applications reportedly cited as key evidence against Page the dossier produced by the controversial Fusion GPS firm which was paid for its anti-Trump work by Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign and the Democratic National Committee via the Perkins Coie law firm.

According to Republican House characterizations , the FISA applications signed by Comey withheld key information raising questions about the dossier, including that it was financed by Clinton and the DNC and had known credibility issues.

Aaron Klein is Breitbart's Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, " Aaron Klein Investigative Radio ." Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.

Joshua Klein contributed research to this article.

[May 06, 2019] GOP Rep. King Rips Mueller -- Didn't He Have 'Obligation' to Tell Us Sooner There Was No Collusion Breitbart

May 06, 2019 | www.breitbart.com

During a Sunday interview on New York AM 970 radio's "The Cats Roundtable," Rep. Peter King (R-NY) slammed FBI special counsel Robert Mueller for how he handled the almost two-year investigation into alleged collusion between President Donald Trump and Russia in the 2016 presidential election.

King said it "couldn't have taken Bob Mueller that long" to find out if there was collusion.

"The reports we get are that they knew a year ago there was no collusion. Well, didn't [Mueller] have an obligation to tell the president of the United States that? To let the world know? The president has gone off to negotiate with Kim Jong-un. He is involved, obviously, in very sensitive negotiations all the time in the Middle East," King told host John Catsimatidis.

He continued, "I think that the Mueller people had an obligation to tell the president, to tell the country, to tell the world that there was no collusion whatsoever as soon as they found out there was none. This isn't like you're dealing with some local drug dealer or something. You're talking about, whether you like him or not, he is the leader of the country. The leader of the free world. And they let this hang over him for at least a year It was wrong not to make it known."

[May 05, 2019] Martha Stewart to Donald Trump Can there be obstruction of justice with no underlying crime by Louis Jacobson

Mar 25, 2019 | www.politifact.com

In summarizing Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian election interference, Attorney General Bill Barr said there were two major questions the investigation examined: whether there was coordination or collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, and whether President Donald Trump sought to obstruct justice. The report did not establish coordination or collusion.

That lack of proof on collusion is one of the reasons for not pursuing an obstruction-of-justice prosecution, Barr said: There was no underlying crime from Russia connections for Trump to cover up.

While Barr said this wasn't the only factor that played into the decision about whether to prosecute, he explicitly cited it as one of them.

In the 24 hours after the Barr letter was released, we noticed a lot of cable TV debate about whether someone can or can't be tried for obstructing justice if there is no underlying crime. Put another way, can you obstruct justice if there was theoretically nothing to obstruct? We decided to take a closer look.

We checked with 11 legal experts to nail down answers. Essentially all of these experts agreed that obstruction can indeed be prosecuted without an underlying crime -- and has been in the past, notably in the case of Martha Stewart.

Several experts added, however, that there are some important distinctions between these historical precedents and what Mueller found. So the debate (sorry) will likely continue.

What Barr wrote

What is obstruction of justice? It refers to "interference with the orderly administration of law and justice," including "proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees." The relevant type in the Trump example is likely "obstruction of criminal investigations."

Three elements are generally required for a conviction on obstruction of justice: the existence of a pending federal judicial proceeding; the defendant's knowledge of this proceeding; and the defendant's corrupt intent to interfere with, or attempt to interfere with, the proceeding.

Ultimately, Barr and Rosenstein determined that the three elements that are required to prove obstruction were not met.

[May 05, 2019] Barr dings Mueller despite their 30-year friendship

Mueller tried to backstab Barr
"Sneedy" was a correct word
May 02, 2019 | www.youtube.com

Special counsel Robert Mueller could be testifying before Congress as early as May 15, and there is no shortage of questions as Attorney General William Barr takes jabs at his handling of the Russia investigation. CNN's Jessica Schneider takes a closer look at their decades-long friendship, meanwhile Erin Burnett discusses with David Priess and David Rivkin. #CNN #News

Joseph Conrad , 2 days ago (edited)

everyone is a little too friendly ...press & government should not be friendly, law enforcement & government should not be friendly ...its not good, it leads to "friendly favors", when there should be justice & clarity

Bunchoffuckingbullshit , 2 days ago

I worked in a State job for over 30 years. If you've got an issue of a legal nature, you sure as HELL better put it in writing, just to CYOA!!!

[May 05, 2019] The Big Lie That Barr Lied by Andrew McCarthy

Notable quotes:
"... I felt that I should state the bottom line conclusions and I tried to use Special Counsel Mueller's own language in doing that. ..."
"... (The letter was, in fact, strategically leaked to the Washington Post Tuesday night, right before Barr's Wednesday morning Senate testimony.) ..."
"... The fact that Mueller's staff was leaking like a sieve to the Times , the Washington Post , and NBC News does not mean they were sharing with the attorney general what the Times described as "their simmering frustrations." ..."
"... Barr decided that his way of making disclosure -- the findings followed three weeks later by the full report -- was superior to the proposal of Mueller's staff that their own summaries be released. You can disagree with Barr on that, but that's not grounds for a perjury claim. And it raises a point Barr made in his Senate testimony: The regulations do not require any disclosure of the special counsel's report (which is supposed to be a confidential Justice Department document, as is typical of Justice Department deliberations over whether to charge or decline to charge). The decision of what, if anything, to disclose, and how that should be done, is exclusively the attorney general's, not the special counsel's. Mueller's job was to make a prosecutorial judgment -- to charge or decline to charge obstruction. Mueller failed to do that. Since Mueller didn't do his own job, isn't it a bit presumptuous of his staff (through press leaks) to tell Barr how to do his? ..."
"... And now Democrats are using the letter as the launch-pad for The Big Lie that Barr lied, calculating that if they say it enough times, and their media collaborators uncritically broadcast these declarations, no one will notice that they never actually refer to the transcript of what they claim is the false testimony. ..."
"... "Don't know. Mueller is a black hat; on the Dem/ Globalist team - a fixer. ..."
May 05, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Andrew McCarthy via NationalReview.com,

The attorney general's testimony was clearly accurate...

I originally thought this was too stupid to write about. But stupid is like the plague inside the Beltway -- one person catches it and next thing you know there's an outbreak at MSNBC and the speaker of the House is showing symptoms while her delirious minions tote ceramic chickens around Capitol Hill.

So I give you: the Bill Barr perjury allegation.

We are all entitled to our own opinions. But are we entitled to our own facts? Daniel Patrick Moynihan's bon mot says no, but Washington makes you wonder. Like when spleen-venting about the supposedly outrageous, unbelievable, disgraceful invocation of the word "spy" to describe episodes of government spying is instantly followed by a New York Times story about how the spying -- er, I mean, court-authorized electronic surveillance -- coupled with the tasking of spies -- er, undercover agents -- green-lighted by a foreign spy -- er, intelligence service -- was more widespread than previously known.

If I were a cynic, I'd think people were trying to get out in front of some embarrassing revelations on the horizon. I might even be tempted to speculate that progressives were trotting out their "Destroy Ken Starr" template for Barr deployment (which, I suppose, means that 20 years from now we'll be reading about what a straight-arrow Barr was compared to whomever Democrats are savaging at that point).

The claim that Barr gave false testimony is frivolous. That is why, at least initially, Democrats and their media echo chamber soft-pedaled it -- with such dishonorable exceptions as Mazie Horono, the Hawaii Democrat who, somehow, is a United States senator. It's tough to make the perjury argument without any false or even inaccurate statements -- though my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano did give it the old college try.

As recounted by The Hill , he twisted himself into a pretzel, observing -- try to follow this -- that the attorney general "probably misled" Congress and thus "he's got a problem" . . . although this purported dissembling didn't really seem to be, you know, an actual "lie" so . . . maybe it's not a problem after all. Or something.

I assume that in his black-robe days, Judge Nap would have known better. When meritless perjury cases are thrown out of court, judges are often at pains to explain that the questioner who elicited the purportedly false testimony bears the burden of clarity; the terms of the question dictate the evaluation of the answer. In this instance, Barr's April 9 testimony before the House Appropriations Committee was true and accurate; if a misimpression set in after, it is because the relevant questioning by Representative Charlie Crist (D., Fla.) has been ignored or distorted.

Moreover, because perjury is a serious felony allegation, judges and legal analysts never rely on a general, selectively couched description of the testimony -- much less on the likes of Speaker Nancy Pelosi's because-I-said-so refrain that Barr "lied to Congress" and "that's a crime." The testimony must be examined, with emphasis on the words that were used (the questions as well as the responses), and anything we can glean about the witness's demeanor (stingy? dodgy? forthcoming?).

The mindless, no-need-to-check-the-record allegation against Barr goes like this: The AG testified on April 9 that he had no idea why Special Counsel Mueller was upset over the way Barr's March 24 letter described Mueller's report; but, in fact, Barr knew exactly why Mueller was upset because he had received the latter's March 27 letter complaining about Barr's missive.

Now, here is the exchange on which the perjury allegation is based, with my italics highlighting key portions:

CRIST: Reports have emerged recently, General, that members of the special counsel's team are frustrated at some level with the limited information included in your March 24th letter . . . that it does not adequately or accurately necessarily portray the report's findings . Do you know what they're referencing with that?

BARR: No, I don't. I think -- I think . . . I suspect that they probably wanted more put out , but, in my view, I was not interested in putting out summaries or trying to summarize because I think any summary, regardless of who prepares it, not only runs the risk of, you know, being under-inclusive or over-inclusive, but also, you know, would trigger a lot of discussion and analysis that really should await everything coming out at once. So I was not interested in a summary of the report. . . . I felt that I should state the bottom line conclusions and I tried to use Special Counsel Mueller's own language in doing that.

When we look at the actual words of this exchange, Barr's testimony is clearly accurate. And I don't mean accurate in the hyper-technical, Clintonesque "depends on what the definition of is is" sense. I mean straightforward, unguarded, and evincing a willingness to volunteer information beyond what the question sought.

Crist did not ask a general question about Mueller's reaction to Barr's letter; he asked a specific question about the reaction of Mueller's "team" to the Barr letter's description of "the report's findings." Regarding the March 24 letter's rendering of this bottom line -- namely, Russia meddled, Trump did not collude, and Mueller failed to resolve the obstruction question -- Barr said he did not know what Mueller's staff was complaining about.

Barr has known Mueller for nearly 30 years; when Mueller was the Criminal Division chief in the Bush 41 Justice Department, he reported to Barr, who was attorney general. It should come as no surprise, then, that Barr was not getting his information from Mueller's staff; he was getting it from Mueller directly . Nor should it come as any surprise that, before releasing his March 24 letter to the public, Barr gave Mueller an opportunity to review it; nor that Mueller declined that opportunity -- given that he knows Barr well, and knew Barr would not misrepresent the report (especially given that the report would soon be public).

Three days after Barr announced the report's conclusions, Mueller sent his letter, undoubtedly written by his staff. Mueller could simply have called Barr on the phone, as he has done a million times; but the staff's partisan Democrats wanted a letter, which makes for much better leak material. (The letter was, in fact, strategically leaked to the Washington Post Tuesday night, right before Barr's Wednesday morning Senate testimony.) The day after receiving Mueller's March 27 letter, Barr called Mueller and pointedly asked whether he was claiming that Barr's March 24 letter articulating Mueller's findings was inaccurate. Mueller responded that he was making no such claim -- he was, instead, irritated by the press coverage of Barr's letter. Mueller suggested the publication of additional information from the report, including the report's own executive summaries, to explain more about why he decided not to resolve the obstruction issue. But he did not claim Barr had misrepresented his findings. (See Barr's Senate testimony , starting at 39-minute mark.)

Again, Barr's contact was with Mueller, not Mueller's team. His exchanges with Mueller gave Barr no basis to know about any objection to his description of the report's findings -- from Mueller or anyone else. The fact that Mueller's staff was leaking like a sieve to the Times , the Washington Post , and NBC News does not mean they were sharing with the attorney general what the Times described as "their simmering frustrations."

That is what Barr said in answer to Crist's question about the report's findings. But to avoid the misimpression that he was parsing words deceptively, Barr volunteered his perception that Mueller's staff wanted more information from the report to be publicized. That was consistent with what can be inferred from Barr's phone call with Mueller on March 28. And it was not news: Crist's questions were based on the aforementioned press accounts of leaks from Mueller's staffers. They were irked at the bad press they were receiving over Mueller's abdication on the question whether there was a prosecutable obstruction case, and they had groused that there was much more to their report than Barr's letter conveyed. Of course, Barr never disputed this; as he repeatedly explained, he undertook to render the conclusions, not summarize the entire 448-page report.

Barr decided that his way of making disclosure -- the findings followed three weeks later by the full report -- was superior to the proposal of Mueller's staff that their own summaries be released. You can disagree with Barr on that, but that's not grounds for a perjury claim. And it raises a point Barr made in his Senate testimony: The regulations do not require any disclosure of the special counsel's report (which is supposed to be a confidential Justice Department document, as is typical of Justice Department deliberations over whether to charge or decline to charge). The decision of what, if anything, to disclose, and how that should be done, is exclusively the attorney general's, not the special counsel's. Mueller's job was to make a prosecutorial judgment -- to charge or decline to charge obstruction. Mueller failed to do that. Since Mueller didn't do his own job, isn't it a bit presumptuous of his staff (through press leaks) to tell Barr how to do his?

Could what happened here be more obvious?

Mueller received fawning press for two years on the expectation that he would slay Trump. Then, on March 24, Democrats and the media learned not only that there was no collusion case (which was no surprise) but that Mueller had been derelict, failing to render a judgment on the only question he was arguably needed to resolve: Was there enough evidence to charge obstruction? Journalists proceeded to turn on their erstwhile hero. This sent him reeling, and it brought to full boil the anger of Mueller staffers, who wanted to charge Trump with obstruction based on the creative (i.e., wayward) theory they had been pursuing -- namely, that a president can be indicted for obstruction based on the exercise of his constitutional prerogatives if prosecutors (including prosecutors who are active supporters of the president's political opposition) decide he had corrupt intent. The staffers put their pique in a letter that could be leaked, and Mueller was sufficiently irked by the bad press that he signed it. And now Democrats are using the letter as the launch-pad for The Big Lie that Barr lied, calculating that if they say it enough times, and their media collaborators uncritically broadcast these declarations, no one will notice that they never actually refer to the transcript of what they claim is the false testimony.

Democrats are unnerved. Attorney General Barr is pursuing an inquiry into the Obama administration's decision to conduct a foreign counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign. The time is now, they figure, to reprise the Ken Starr treatment: the ad hominem withering of an accomplished, highly capable official -- in this instance, one who is daring to press questions that would have been answered two years ago if an incumbent Republican administration had spied on -- er, monitored -- a Democratic presidential campaign.

Tags Politics


Dickweed Wang , 13 minutes ago link

Mueller responded that he was making no such claim -- he was, instead, irritated by the press coverage of Barr's letter.

Then why the **** didn't the guy come right out and say that? You know why? Cause he's a chicken **** weasel, that's why.

Cman5000 , 48 minutes ago link

Mueller gave himself and his team an out. He goes before Congress May 15th it's going to be an utter disaster for Dems that day. The End

StarGate , 31 minutes ago link

Don't know. Mueller is a black hat; on the Dem/ Globalist team - a fixer.

His report shows they were not investigating these last 2 years but rather composing the "Insurance Plan".

Mueller smoked up the origins of the Russian collusion - failing to clarify the Misfud story that FBI claimed was the foundation of the investigation. He did not investigate the Steele Dossier or clean up the FISA abuse issue. His team failed again to examine the DNC server and rather just parroted the Crowdstrike propaganda.

The Mueller team used the fake leaked News stories as a substitute for investigating the facts.

Real Estate Guru , 19 minutes ago link

... ... ...

"Don't know. Mueller is a black hat; on the Dem/ Globalist team - a fixer.

His report shows they were not investigating these last 2 years but rather composing the "Insurance Plan".

Mueller smoked up the origins of the Russian collusion - failing to clarify the Misfud story that FBI claimed was the foundation of the investigation. He did not investigate the Steele Dossier or clean up the FISA abuse issue. His team failed again to examine the DNC server and rather just parroted the Crowdstrike propaganda.

The Mueller team used the fake leaked News stories as a substitute for investigating the facts."

... ... ...

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

Rod Rosenstein is toast!! .....another one bites the dust!

Rosenstein resigns yesterday...AG Barr testifies in front of the Senate tomorrow....it is all over for the dems folks! Then comes the Comey report and his indictment within a week, then the FISA declass, then the IG Report which will be MASSIVE!!!, then the Huber Report with his 720 prosecutors working on the 90,000 indictments that will become unsealed!

... ... ...

TRUMP confirms all of this on Hannity right here... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2-r0Y9bLwQ

... ... ...

Here is the lineup of what happened by the traitors in the coup

... ... ...

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/04/26/full_video_sean_hannity_interviews_trump_on_biden_russia_probe_fisa_abuse_comey.html

These people are going to hang. The coup has been stopped. The deep state is surrounded. OUR BORDER IS BEING MANNED WITH OUR MILITARY EVEN AS YOU READ THIS! Trump is building the Wall! The entire thing is going to be seen on public TV this summer. Trump said you will see:

The FISA declass...which will take down the House! That means Obama, Hillary, Comey, Lynch, Rosenstein, Biden, all of the perps who you already know in the FBI, Brennan , Clapper, McCabe, Mueller, the democrats, Waters, Schiff, Nadler, Swalowswell, Nadler, Pelosi, the lousy lying MSM...all of them! And lots more!

Trump said he is going to declass everything! The FISA, AND A WHOLE LOT MORE!!!

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/04/26/full_video_sean_hannity_interviews_trump_on_biden_russia_probe_fisa_abuse_comey.html

Everything! Trump is going after them, and they are surrounded. No place to hide, Hillary! No place to hide, Obama and all of your creeps. You are going to jail, or the hanging tree. One way or another, you are done!

FISA declass.

OIG Report Horrowitz.

302's

*HUGE COMEY REPORT COMING OUT IN TWO WEEKS! INDICTMENTS COMING!!- Prosecutor Joe Digenova! Leaking classified information to the press, lying to the FISA COURT!!

... ... ...

Hillary-"if Trump gets in we will all hang!", as she screamed at everybody on election night!

... ... ...

*Bill Maher just turned on Adam Schiff....says "he is stalking Trump!"...

*Washington Times reporter Bob Woodward says "the Steele Dossier is a bunch of garbage!"

... ... ...

X-22 Reports

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

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hn8E3ZkrnY4

rwe2late , 50 minutes ago link

Basically,

Trump is put on the defensive and hobbled.

Mueller found he couldn't prove Trump colluded.

But the claim is still made that Trump could have colluded and might in the future.

So whenever Trump does anything, he will be "expected" to prove he wasn't unduly influenced.

Rather impossible, and even more so on issues where US & Russia & others have common interests.

(Even those who oppose Trump and the MIC will be accused of being Putin's stooges.

Welcome to renewed paranoid Cold War red-baiting)

rwe2late , 33 minutes ago link

Yes

unjust, unfair, unreasonable, hypocritical, and diversionary accusations but

putting Trump on the "defensive" nonetheless ever since inauguration,

and continuing so long as Trump is compelled to respond to the

collusion-obstruction-Russophobia

StarGate , 58 minutes ago link

Easy to surmise the goal of the Mueller SC was to smear the Prez with shadow Russian accusations thru the 2018 elections, then submit a report with obstruction scenarios that the Dem House could use to impeach.

Mueller's team was angry that AG Barr outfoxed them and concluded 'NO Obstruction' based upon the Law.

The Dem House is now stuck. Barr deflated their impeachment plan.

All they have left is: rant, pant and hyperventilate for the cameras.

rwe2late , 1 hour ago link

I think the allegation made against Barr will be basically that he "lied' by omission .

According to the Trump-deranged Russophobes,

Barr could have made a case for impeachment if he had used the redacted

parts of the report instead of hiding them (as Mueller's letter is deceptively used to claim),

and if Barr had not been "biased" in favor of Trump.

The allegation is a fabrication of course, when even the redacted parts were available to senior committee members.

However, from a PR point of view, thanks to the limited reasoning power of many citizens,

Trump/Barr is supposedly expected to "disprove" hypothetical negatives to the public

[i.e. that redacted non-public parts of the report could not have been used toward impeachment,

that Barr was not "biased",

and that nothing in the published report could properly be used by Congress to further "investigate" toward impeachment when anything could be used by Congress as "suspicious" warranting further "investigation".]

All of the allegations comprise just another "pack of lies", fake issues,

a smokescreen diversion away from the brazen theft.

Unfortunately, the paranoia and prejudices will continue to be manipulated to serve

the neoCON-MIC and neoLiberal financial agendas.

StarGate , 49 minutes ago link

Disagree that Kamala painted a tight corner. She is all about histrionics, dramatic accusations to appear "tough". She is the sado-masochistic Senator inquisitor.

If you examine her questions they are usually irrelevant. As here. The point of the SC was to examine the evidence, not the AG. The AG reviews the report presented to determine if it is sufficiently salient.

AG Barr is a careful thinker. Kamala is a 'gotcha' inquisitor. AG Barr was looking at the trap Kamala was setting and figuring out how not to step into it while also answering direct.

Note Kamala cuts off her victims' answer whenever they avoid her traps.

StarGate , 1 hour ago link

Obviously the Democrats and their broadcast News Mafia conspire together on what dirty trick to promote next.

They are running out of options.

Their 2 front runners for the Prez are potential stroke material near octogenarians. Their congressional stars are radical jihadists.

And they've used the "Impeach" word so often, no one is listening.

navy62802 , 1 hour ago link

These are the actions of people who are deathly afraid of the investigations AG Barr is conducting. Probably because those investigations threaten to catch multiple high-ranking politicians and other government officials in a treasonous campaign to destroy the elected president.

EDIT: In fact some of the very people mounting this anti-Barr campaign might even be implicated in the illegal scheme to conspire with multiple foreign governments against the elected president.

chubbar , 1 hour ago link

Judge Nap sure did a 180 on his loyalties didn't he? He used to be a Trump supporter. Now he goes out of his way to **** on him and twist facts to make it look like Trump is doing something nefarious. FOX is in the process of destroying itself. You'll know it's complete when they fire Hannity and Tucker. The Murdoch sons suck ***!

[May 05, 2019] Barr "It's Not a Crime" for Trump to Demand Staffers Lie to Investigators

May 05, 2019 | www.vanityfair.com

"So you can, in this situation, instruct someone to lie?" Feinstein asked.

"We felt that in that episode the government would not be able to establish obstruction," Barr replied. "If you look at that episode . . . the instruction said 'Go to [ Rod ] Rosenstein, raise the issue of conflict of interest and Mueller has to go because of this conflict of interest.' So there's not question that whatever instruction was given to McGahn had to to do with conflict of interest . . . To be obstruction of justice the lie has to be tied to impairing the evidence in a particular proceeding. McGahn had already given his evidence and I think it would be plausible that the purpose of McGahn memorializing what the president was asking was to make the record that the president never directed him to fire. And there is a distinction between saying to someone, 'go fire him, go fire Mueller' and saying 'have him removed based on conflict. '"

At this point, Feinstein, speaking for all of us, asked, "And what would that conflict be?"

To which Barr responded, "The difference between them is that if you remove someone for conflict of interest, another person would be presumably . . . appointed," failing to acknowledge that had McGahn complied with Trump's request, the president would have likely continued to find "conflicts of interest" with every new special counsel.

Maybe Barr, the nation's top law-enforcement official, just isn't qualified to judge! "I'm not in the business of determining when lies are told to the American people," he told Senator Richard Blumenthal at another point in the hearing. "I'm in the business of determining when a crime has been committed." And if the lie is the crime? Look, we're splitting hairs.

Elsewhere in the hearing, Barr:

[May 05, 2019] Did Mueller substituted Russia for Israel in his report

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... "What if you substituted 'Israel' for 'Russia'?" (The moderator, who apparently knows me, had to look right at me with my hand raised whenever he called on someone but never called on me). ..."
"... "Has there ever been an investigation on the scale of the Mueller investigation into possible collusion with Israel?" ..."
"... The surprising thing about the Mueller report is that he found nothing. That’s impossible because when the government wants to find something, they find it. Why Mueller pulled the plug, I can’t say. ..."
May 05, 2019 | www.unz.com

Second hour: Journalist and TV host Ken Meyercord (also based in Washington, DC) writes:

"I attended an event at the Brookings Institution yesterday on the Mueller Report. As is sadly customary at DC think tanks, the panelists and the moderator were all of one mind. Nevertheless, one panelist, a former US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia (a court notorious for rubber-stamping any charge the government brings against those who disrupt the smooth functioning of our foreign policy apparatus), made a curious analogy, arguing that the contacts Trump and his associates had with Russians would be culpable even if the contacts were with some other, less hostile country:

https://youtu.be/E96084YuYyE?t=812 .

His remark got me to thinking, so in the Q & A I sought to ask him "What if you substituted 'Israel' for 'Russia'?" (The moderator, who apparently knows me, had to look right at me with my hand raised whenever he called on someone but never called on me).

I don't know what his response would have been; but if he said it would still apply, I would have followed up with "Has there ever been an investigation on the scale of the Mueller investigation into possible collusion with Israel?"

"The more I think about it, the more intriguing I find Mr. Rosenberg's remark. He seemed to think the sheer number of contacts by Trump folks with Russians proved culpability. It might be interesting to compare Trump's contacts with the Russians during the campaign with his contacts with Israelis. I suspect the latter were more numerous and of greater significance. Certainly, Trump's acts as President would seem to indicate he's more Netanyahu's puppet than Putin's: moving the embassy to Jerusalem, cutting off aid to the Palestinians, recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. Imagine if Putin proposed naming a village in Russia after Trump in appreciation, as Netanyahu has proposed doing in the Golan Heights!

"P.S. Ueli Maurer is the President of the Swiss Confederation."

Rational , says: May 1, 2019 at 5:02 pm GMT

THE WHOLE MUELLER INVESTIGATION WAS A SCAM.

The entire Western media is the enemy of the people. The Demogangsters and the mediocrats, Public Enemy #1, were angry that Trump won the election, so they fabricated a scam called contacts with Russians.

They are saying that Trump and his people talked to the Russians as private citizens before the election, so it is illegal.

What? Talking to Russians is illegal? Really? Says who?

They will not tell you the law that was allegedly broken, because the law that was allegedly broken itself is illegal.

It is the Logan Act which “criminalizes negotiations by unauthorized persons with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act

This law is a joke, because Trump never “negotiated” with any foreign govt. on behalf of the USA, and Russia is not having a dispute with the USA.

Most importantly, the Logan Act is unconstitutional.

That is why nobody has been prosecuted under it–for decades!

So any American who posts on rt.com or on an Iranian website suggesting peace is technically violating the Logan Act.

Any newspapers that publishes articles about Iran or Russia or Syria and suggesting peace or war is technically violating the Logan Act.

So why are all they not in jail?

Because the Logan Act is unconstitutional and it violates the first amendment.

Go, say, “I will talk to the Russian govt. all I want and promote world peace.”

Only in America—the criminal Democrats have investigated an innocent man for a non-existent crime of violating an unconstitutional law.

Rational , says: May 1, 2019 at 8:51 pm GMT
ADDENDUM: NOBODY HAS EVER BEEN CONVICTED UNDER THE LOGAN ACT.

This is stated in the wikipedia article I put the link for above.

In fact, the wikipedia article also talks about its unconstitutionality.

Sin City Milla , says: May 2, 2019 at 5:11 am GMT
@Rational

Only in America—the criminal Democrats have investigated an innocent man for a non-existent crime of violating an unconstitutional law.

While I would not say this happens only in America, this sort of thing is actually long-standing policy in the US. As long ago as 1944 in Wickard vs. Filburn, the Democrat Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a man for not merely raising food on his own land, but for failing to offer the food for sale, on the rationale that the non-sale affected Interstate Commerce as much as if he had offered it for sale. Since then it has been ‘constitutional’ to find federal jurisdiction over even private vegetable gardens grown exclusively for domestic consumption. Under this theory, even breathing oxygen places one under federal jurisdiction because it is followed by exhaling CO2.

One of the most surprising things I discovered when I began to practice law was the fact that no one is ‘innocent’. I.e, there is always some law somewhere that is being ‘broken’ no matter what one does, which means that if the government wants someone, they can always convict him because the government can always find some law he has broken. I’m speaking ironically, of course. Many of these laws should be unconstitutional. Just don’t bet that SCOTUS will ever rule that way because, as Gorsuch recently pronounced, “that’s all been settled.”

The surprising thing about the Mueller report is that he found nothing. That’s impossible because when the government wants to find something, they find it. Why Mueller pulled the plug, I can’t say.

[May 03, 2019] Sen. Hawley to Barr: If Unelected Bureaucrats Can Start Partisan Probes We Don t Have A Democracy Anymore

May 03, 2019 | www.realclearpolitics.com

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) asked Attorney General William Barr about the unprecedented counterintelligence investigation of the Trump presidential campaign at Wednesday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

HAWLEY: Let's talk a little more about spying. Counterintelligence investigations like the one we now know the FBI launched against candidate Trump and President Trump, those are designed to thwart spying and sabotage, is that correct?
BARR: That's correct.

HAWLEY: To your knowledge has the FBI ever launch aid counterintelligence investigation of another president that you're aware of?

BARR: Not to my knowledge.

HAWLEY: So it's safe to say that to your knowledge this move was completely unprecedented?

BARR: to my knowledge.

Hawley asks Barr about the hatred investigators had for Trump supporters:
HAWLEY: Speaking of particular individuals who were involved, I have to say I've listened to this testimony all day today, and to me, maybe the most shocking thing I've heard is this. The chairman read it earlier. August 26, 2016 -- this is a text message from Peter Strzok, a top counterintelligence investigator, who we now know started this counter-spy investigation against the president of the United States.

Peter Strzok says, "Just went to a southern Virginia Wal-Mart. I could Smell the Trump support." Smell is capitalized. "Just went to a southern Virginia Wal-Mart. I could Smell the Trump support."

In my view, do you want to know what's really going on here? Do you want to know why the counterintelligence investigation really happened? Do you want to know why we're all really sitting here today? That's why, right there, is because an unelected bureaucrat, an unelected official in this government who clearly has open disdain, if not outright hatred for Trump voters like the people of my state, for instance. I could "Smell" the Trump support? Then tried to overturn the results of a democratic election. That's what's really going on here. That's the story. That's why we're here today.

I cannot believe that a top official of this government with the kind of power that these people had would try to exercise their own prejudices, and that's what this is, it's open, blatant prejudice, would try to use that in order to overturn a democratic election. And to my mind, that's the real crisis here, and it is a crisis. If there is not accountability, if this can go on in the United States of America, then my goodness gracious, we don't have a democracy anymore.

[May 03, 2019] Lindsey Graham: When The Mueller Report Is Put To Bed, We re Going To Investigate How All Of This Started

May 03, 2019 | www.realclearpolitics.com

"Once the Mueller report is put to bed, and it will be soon, this committee is going to look long and hard at how all of this started," Graham said. "We're going to look at the FISA warrant process. Did Russia provide Christopher Steele the information about Trump, that turned out to be garbage, that was used to get a warrant on an American citizen and if so, how did the system fail? Was there a real effort between Papadopoulos and anybody in Russia to use the Clinton e-mails stolen by the Russians, or is that thought planted in his mind? I don't know, but we're going to look."

[May 03, 2019] Halper introduced her as his "assistant", he should have no problem telling everybody where this lady who tried to seduce Papadopoulos is now

May 03, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Cheap Chinese Crap , 16 minutes ago link

There's a very easy way to pin this down. Since Halper introduced her as his "assistant", he should have no problem telling everybody where she is now.

If he is unable to produce her or show any proof that she was his own assistant-- he's a spy. period.

Real Estate Guru , 18 minutes ago link

UPDATE:

X-22 Report just out

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

Rod Rosenstein is toast!! .....another one bites the dust!

Rosenstein resigns yesterday...

... ... ..

TRUMP confirms all of this on Hannity right here...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2-r0Y9bLwQ

Q said tonight that this is the order of the tsunami of documents/testimony coming out in the next few days/weeks:

  1. AG BARR testifies in front of Congress on MAY 1,2
  2. The Comey Investigation is coming out in less than 14 days...indictments are coming
  3. The FISA declass comes out after that in May. This will take down Obama and everyone else
  4. The Horrowitz IG Report comes out right after that....it will be devastating to all the players in this mess

... ... ...

Here is the lineup of what happened by the traitors in the coup

... ... ...

-The democrats were involved in all of this...from Schiff to the rest of them in Congress.

The FISA declass coming out Monday?...

Hannity, Tucker, and Laura Ingrahm were all out on Friday. Something BIG is up, folks!!!

Stay tuned...!!!

Obama, Biden, and Hillary are TOAST!! OBAMA RAN THE WHOLE SHOW FROM THE WHITE HOUSE!!!!

"IT'S HANGIN' TIME!!"

" New Spygate Revelation: The Corruption Is Leading Right Back To The 'Scandal-Free' Obama White House!!"

ObamaGate: No Misdemeanors, Only High Crimes

Sens. Charles Grassley & Ron Johnson Release Letter to Attorney General William Barr, Demand Details About Investigation Into Obama's Illegal Spying on Trump Campaign [FULL LETTER]

"Those that yell the loudest are the ones going down" -Q

: Schiff, Waters, BRENNAN , Comey, Hillery, etc!!

Here it is folks, for those who have not seen it...the full interview of Trump last night where Trump himself lays it all out. "When do birds sing? Springtime!" - Q

That means right now!!

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/04/26/full_video_sean_hannity_interviews_trump_on_biden_russia_probe_fisa_abuse_comey.html

These people are going to hang. The coup has been stopped. The deep state is surrounded. OUR BORDER IS BEING MANNED WITH OUR MILITARY EVEN AS YOU READ THIS! Trump is building the Wall! The entire thing is going to be seen on public TV this summer. Trump said you will see:

The FISA declass...which will take down the House! That means Obama, Hillary, Comey, Lynch, Rosenstein, Biden, all of the perps who you already know in the FBI, Brennan , Clapper, McCabe, Mueller, the democrats, Waters, Schiff, Nadler, Swalowswell, Nadler, Pelosi, the lousy lying MSM...all of them! And lots more!

Trump said he is going to declass everything! The FISA, AND A WHOLE LOT MORE!!!

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/04/26/full_video_sean_hannity_interviews_trump_on_biden_russia_probe_fisa_abuse_comey.html

Everything! Trump is going after them, and they are surrounded. No place to hide, Hillary! No place to hide, Obama and all of your creeps. You are going to jail, or the hanging tree. One way or another, you are done!

FISA declass.

OIG Report Horrowitz.

302's

*HUGE COMEY REPORT COMING OUT IN TWO WEEKS! INDICTMENTS COMING!!- Prosecutor Joe Digenova! Leaking classified information to the press, lying to the FISA COURT!!

Gang of 8 documents

Documents and testimony from 53 closed door investigations.

Senate Intel investigations

House Intel investigations

The AG Barr report

Huber's leaking report and the 90,000 sealed indictments

3 large prison barges are going back and forth from New York to Gitmo... WHY?

Barr's testimony on March 1, 2 that will be a bombshell

Q was right all along!

The FISA court Judges have just turned over the documents showing that they were lied to by Comey, Rosenstein, etc.

New Spygate Revelation: The Corruption Is Leading Right Back To The 'Scandal-Free' Obama White House

Trump is closing every avenue of escape, money laundering, pedo stuff, criminal CEO's, politicians, etc.

Trump has ALL of Hillary's emails, including those that Obama had

Trump will declass 911, JFK, aliens, who Obama really is, his citizenship status of the country he was born in, everything!

Trump has Wikileaks sources....; )) ...soon he will have Assange

Trump has all of their communications....; )) ALL OF THEM!

Obama had thousand of Hillary's emails (49,000) and ran the entire op from his office in the White House

Hillary-"if Trump gets in we will all hang!", as she screamed at everybody on election night!

Trump has the NSA and the other 17 intel orgs that nobody knows about that have everything.... ; )))

Trump has it all! Trump also has clawed back $Trillions of stolen funds they took

The dems will be retiring en masse soon...Trump will take back the House in 2020

Court TV is coming back this summer. Hillary wanted that. Now you will be watching HER being indicted!

The libtard morons are going to go berserk folks! The show is beginning officially as of last night. There is no place to hide for them. The MSM is in full meltdown and the perps are panicking all over the planet!

*Bill Maher just turned on Adam Schiff....says "he is stalking Trump!"...

*Washington Times reporter Bob Woodward says "the Steele Dossier is a bunch of garbage!"

... ... ...

Proud-Christian-White-American-Man , 1 minute ago link

Real Estate Guru: Great compilation of really bad news for the globalist traitors who sold the US out to the Chicoms and really good news for the Patriots!

But beware cornered and desperate enemies

They are the most vicious and unpredictable

Great segment today on Infowars about being ready for war https://www.infowars.com/watch/?video=5ccb7b6ef9b2ae001264aedb

The war on Zero Hedge against the Chicom trolls will soon go to the next level On a gut level the Steverino999's , his other screen names and the reset of the trolls know that when Patriots fully regain control of the US government it won't be pretty for them

Yes, Real Estate Guru and other fellow Patriots it is wonderful to see the battle turning for liberty and against globalist chicom tyranny ( and their henchmen) but Please do not be complacent there is much yet to be done before these sewer rats are flushed away from body politic of the US

Stand up for liberty!

LEEPERMAX , 21 minutes ago link

JOHN BRENNAN'S CIA WAS BEHIND EVERY MOVE IN THIS ATTEMPTED COUP

(and everyone will soon know it)

[May 03, 2019] The Obama administration for more than four years before the 2016 election allowed four contractors working for the FBI to illegally surveil American citizens

Notable quotes:
"... That report is going to be a bombshell. It is going to open up the investigation on a very high note, and there are going to be criminal referrals in it. ..."
"... The FISA court abuse is the center of this entire abuse of governmental power, and the chief judge in that court has already ruled that the FBI broke the law and that the people at the head of the justice department, Sally Yates, John Carlin, the assistant attorney general for national security all knew about it and lied to the FISA court about it... ..."
"... He [Rogers] discovered the illegal spying. He went personally to the FISA court and briefed the Chief Judge and worked with her for months to uncover the people who did it. The FISA court has already told the Justice Department who lied to that court and that has been given to [Attorney General] Bill Barr already. ..."
May 01, 2019 | www.realclearpolitics.com

It is about the rule of law and privacy. The Obama administration for more than four years before the 2016 election allowed four contractors working for the FBI to illegally surveil American citizens -- illegally. The FISA court has already found that. There is the Horowitz report coming out in May or possibly early June. There's another report that everyone has forgotten about involving James Comey alone. That will be out in two weeks. That report is going to be a bombshell. It is going to open up the investigation on a very high note, and there are going to be criminal referrals in it.

The FISA court abuse is the center of this entire abuse of governmental power, and the chief judge in that court has already ruled that the FBI broke the law and that the people at the head of the justice department, Sally Yates, John Carlin, the assistant attorney general for national security all knew about it and lied to the FISA court about it...

There's a hero in this story and it is not a lawyer. There is a hero. His name is Admiral Mike Rogers. He was the head of the National Security Agency.

He [Rogers] discovered the illegal spying. He went personally to the FISA court and briefed the Chief Judge and worked with her for months to uncover the people who did it. The FISA court has already told the Justice Department who lied to that court and that has been given to [Attorney General] Bill Barr already.

[May 02, 2019] Mueller's Own Mysteries

The investigation was weak and biased: the real McCarthyism witch hunt. Mueller Mifsud blunder now will be played by Nunes and other republicans to the fullest extent possible, althouth this is only a tip of the iceberg of Mueller corruption. Other parts are too dangerous to expose and will be swiped under the carpet.
Notable quotes:
"... Mueller begins, on Page 1, with this assertion: "The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion." Maybe so, but Mueller, who is not averse to editorializing and contextualizing elsewhere in the report, gives readers no historical background or context for this large generalization. ..."
"... Readers might wonder if, had Hillary Clinton won the 2016 election, there even would have been a Russiagate and Mueller investigation. ..."
"... Mueller repeatedly attributes to Trump campaign members and Russians who interacted in 2016, potentially in sinister or even criminal ways, a desire for "improved U.S.-Russian relations," for "bringing the end of the new Cold War," for a "new beginning with Russia." ..."
"... As reflected in the text and footnotes, Mueller relies heavily on reports by US intelligence agencies , but without treating the recorded misdeeds of those agencies, particularly the CIA under John Brennan , in promoting the Russiagate saga. ..."
"... Mueller reports that Mifsud "had connections to Russia" (p. 5), although a simple Google search suggests that Mifsud was indeed an "agent" but not a Russian one, as widely alleged in media accounts. ..."
"... Toward the end of the first volume (pp. 144, 146), Mueller produces a truly stunning revelation, though he seems unaware of it. After the 2016 US presidential election, the Kremlin "appeared not to have preexisting contacts with senior officials around the President-Elect." Even more, "Putin spoke of the difficulty faced by the Russian government in getting in touch with the incoming Trump Administration . Putin indicated that he did not know with whom formally to speak and generally did not know the people around the President-Elect." ..."
"... So much for all the shameful Russiagate allegations of Trump-Putin collusion, conspiracy, even treason. Surely it means the United States needs another, different investigation, one into the actual origins and meaning of this fraudulent, corrosive, exceedingly dangerous, and still unending American political scandal. ..."
May 01, 2019 | www.thenation.com

Special prosecutor Robert S. Mueller III's two-volume " Report on the Investigation Into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election " is not an easy read -- not unlike those manuals that come boxed with "easy to assemble" multipart children's toys on Christmas Eve. Nonetheless, considering the exceedingly damaging effects Russiagate has had on America at home and abroad for nearly three years, the report will long be studied for what it reveals and does not reveal, what it includes and does not include.

Because of my own special interest in Russia, I read carefully the first volume, which focuses on that country's purported role in the scandal. I came away with as many questions about the report as about the role of Moscow and that of candidate and then President Donald Trump. To note a few:

So much for all the shameful Russiagate allegations of Trump-Putin collusion, conspiracy, even treason. Surely it means the United States needs another, different investigation, one into the actual origins and meaning of this fraudulent, corrosive, exceedingly dangerous, and still unending American political scandal.

This commentary is based on Stephen F. Cohen's most recent weekly discussion with the host of The John Batchelor Show . Now in their sixth year, previous installments are at TheNation.com .

[May 02, 2019] Checkmate - How President Trump s Legal Team Outfoxed Mueller by Will Chamberlain

Highly recommended!
May 02, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Will Chamberlain via HumanEvents.com,

In June 2018, Bill Barr, then in private practice at Kirkland & Ellis, wrote a detailed legal memorandum to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. This memo came to light in December, when Barr was nominated for Attorney General.

Reading Barr's June 2018 memo alongside the last twenty pages of the Mueller Report is a curious experience.

Together, they read like dueling legal briefs on the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) ; the type of material one would expect to see from adversarial appellate litigators.

So-why did Robert Mueller dedicate 20 pages of his report to a seemingly obscure question of statutory interpretation? Why did Bill Barr write a detailed legal memorandum to Rod Rosenstein about that very same statute?

And how, exactly, did Bill Barr know that that § 1512(c)(2) was central to Mueller's obstruction theory – in June 2018, when he was still in private practice at Kirkland?

After some consideration, I arrived at a theory that I believe answers these three questions, and others as well. For example – why was AG Jeff Sessions asked for his resignation the day after the midterms? Why was Bill Barr the only name ever seriously floated for AG? And is it merely a coincidence that six weeks after Barr's confirmation, the Mueller probe came to an end?

...

This is a story about a legal chess match played for the highest stakes imaginable: Trump's Presidency – and whether it would be under the cloud of an endless special counsel investigation – hinged on the result.

John Dowd, Ty Cobb, Jay Sekulow, and the rest of President Trump's personal legal team were on one side. Mueller, Andrew Weissmann, and the Special Counsel's office were on the other.

The dispute was a year-long struggle over the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2).

No judge ever ruled on who was right about the meaning of this obstruction statute. No formal decision was ever rendered.

All the same, Trump's legal team prevailed on February 14, 2019.

That's the day William Pelham Barr was confirmed as United States Attorney General.

So why, exactly, was the interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) so contested?

Let's start by looking the statute, excerpted here:

(c) Whoever corruptly --

(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or

(2) otherwise obstructs, influences or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so [is guilty of the crime of obstruction]. (Emphasis added).

Why was this so important to Mueller?

...

In hindsight, however, it's clear that Barr was the assassin Democrats feared.

Within six weeks of his confirmation, the Mueller probe was over...

Read the full story here...

[May 01, 2019] 15 Questions Robert Mueller Must Answer by Peter Van Buren

Mueller task was to sink Trump. It was not to find truth. That's why the report is so weak and contains multiple blunders.
May 01, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Why the cryptic wording on the Steele Dossier? Why wasn't Trump given an opportunity to defend himself in court? May 1, 2019

CreativeCommonsFlickr/RyanReilly and ActionSportsPhotography/Shutterstock You know that movie with Bruce Willis and the kid who says "I see dead people"? In the end, it turns out everyone is already dead. Now imagine there are people who don't believe that. They insist the story ends some other way. Spoiler alert: the Mueller Report ends with no collusion. No one is going to prosecute anyone for obstruction. That stuff is all dead. We all saw the same movie.

Yet there seem to still be questions from those who don't get it. And while it's doubtful that the stoic Robert Mueller will ever write a tell-all book, or sit next to Seth Meyers and Trevor Noah to dish, he may be called in front of Congress. If he is, here's some of what he should be asked.

1) You didn't charge President Donald Trump with "collusion," obstruction, or any other new crime. Tell us why. If the answer is "the evidence did not support it," please say so.

2) Your Report did not refer any crimes to Congress, the SDNY, or anyone else. Again, tell us why. If the answer is "the evidence did not support it," please say so again.

3) Despite making no specific referrals, the Report does state, "The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President's corrupt exercise of the powers of the office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law." Why did you include such a restating of a known fact? Many have read that line to mean you could not indict a sitting president and so you wanted to leave a clue to Congress. Yet you could have just spelled it out -- "this is beyond my and the attorney general's constitutional roles and must/can only be resolved by Congress." Why didn't you?

4) Similarly, many believe they see clues (a footnote looms as the grassy knoll of your work) that the only reason you did not indict Trump was because of Department of Justice and Office of Legal Counsel guidance against indicting a sitting president. Absent that, would you have indicted? If so, why didn't you say so unambiguously and trigger what would be the obvious next steps?

5) When did you conclude there was no collusion, conspiracy, or coordination between Trump and the Russians such that you would make no indictments? You must have closed at least some of the subplots -- the Trump Tower meeting, the Moscow Hotel project -- months ago. Did you consider announcing key findings as they occurred? You were clearly aware that there was inaccurate reporting, damaging to the public trust. Yet you allowed that to happen. Why?

6) But before you answer that question, answer this one. You made a pre-Report public statement saying Buzzfeed's story that claimed Trump ordered Michael Cohen to lie to Congress was false. You restated that in the Report, where you also mentioned that you privately told Jeff Sessions' lawyer in March 2018 that Sessions would not be charged. Since your work confirmed that nearly all bombshell reporting on Russiagate was wrong (Cohen was never in Prague, nothing criminal happened in the Seychelles, and so on), why was it only that single instance that caused you to speak out publicly? And as with Sessions, did you privately inform any others prior to the release of the Report that they would not be charged? What standard did you apply to those decisions?