|News||Russiagate -- a color revolution against Trump by neocons and DemoRats||Recommended Links||Steele dossier||Do the US intelligence agencies influence the US Presidential elections ?||The problem of control of intelligence services in democratic societies||Coordinated set of leaks as a color revolution tool||DNC and Podesta emails leak and subsequent false flag operation to blame Vladimir Putin||Wiretaps of Trump and his associates during Presidential elections|
|Strzokgate||American intelligence services putsch against Trump||Brennan elections machinations||"Seventeen agencies" memo about Russian influence on elections||Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit||Michael Flynn removal||Clapper role in putsch||Rosenstein role|
|Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak||Anti Trump Hysteria||Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite||Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners"||Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war||MSM as fake news industry||Hillary Clinton email scandal||Special Prosecutor Mueller and his fishing expedition||History of American False Flag Operations|
|Corporate Media: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few||Trump vs. Deep State||NeoMcCartyism||NGOs as braintrust of color revolutions||The Real War on Reality||Media as a weapon of mass deception||Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair||Two Party System as polyarchy||Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich|
|US and British media are servants of security apparatus||Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA||Media-Military-Industrial Complex||Neoconservatism||New American Militarism||Corporatist Corruption||Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism||Bernie Sanders betrayal of his supporters||Elite Theory And the Revolt of the Elite|
|Control of the MSM during color revolution is like air superiority in the war||The Deep State||The Iron Law of Oligarchy||National Security State||Color revolutions||Militarism and reckless jingoism of the US neoliberal elite||Skeptic Quotations||Politically Incorrect Humor||Hypocrisy and Pseudo-democracy|
As David Stockman observed (The RussiaGate Witch-Hunt Stockman Names Names In The Deep State's Insurance Policy )
There was a sinister plot to meddle in the 2016 election, after all. But it was not orchestrated from the Kremlin; it was an entirely homegrown affair conducted from the inner sanctums---the White House, DOJ, the Hoover Building and Langley----of the Imperial City.
Likewise, the perpetrators didn't speak Russian or write in the Cyrillic script. In fact, they were lifetime beltway insiders occupying the highest positions of power in the US government.
Here are the names and rank of the principal conspirators:
- John Brennan, CIA director;
- Susan Rice, National Security Advisor;
- Samantha Power, UN Ambassador;
- James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence;
- James Comey, FBI director;
- Andrew McCabe, Deputy FBI director;
- Sally Yates, deputy Attorney General,
- Bruce Ohr, associate deputy AG;
- Peter Strzok, deputy assistant director of FBI counterintelligence;
- Lisa Page, FBI lawyer;
- and countless other lessor and greater poobahs of Washington power, including President Obama himself.
To a person, the participants in this illicit cabal shared the core trait that made Obama such a blight on the nation's well-being. To wit, he never held an honest job outside the halls of government in his entire adult life; and as a careerist agent of the state and practitioner of its purported goods works, he exuded a sanctimonious disdain for everyday citizens who make their living along the capitalist highways and by-ways of America.
Trey Gowdy Caught Obama's CIA Head Not Telling The Truth - YouTube
There was a serious of suspicious and well coordinated leaks of classified information that point out to intelligence agencies Under the smoke screen of Russian influence Trump campaign official were spied upon. Whether the pretext was Steele dossier or some other disinformation is immaterial.
Unprecedented rate of leaks about Trump and his associates is really disturbing, but is nothing new. Intrusion of intelligence agencies into political process happened before. One telling example is JFK assassination. Interference in foreign election is also a proven fact: As early as 1948 CIA role "fixed" Italian elections. So in way chickens just came home to roost.
War between CIA and Pentagon is well know due to events in Syria, where they sometimes found themselves on the opposite sides of barricades. There is also always some level of inter-fighting between different US intelligence agencies, for example NSA vs. CIA.
Connections between Bush clan and CIA are well documented. Strange biography of Barack Obama also raises interesting questions. And Clintons also seems to be connected to the US intelligence one way or the other due to their Arkansas past. Amazing level confidence of Bill Clinton (and to a lesser extent Hillary Clinton) that he/she is above the law is probably connected with this fact. The might do have "Lord-protector" for their misdeeds.
In this sense anti-Russian campaign and accusations of Russia in interfering into the US election (after the US interfered in Russian election of 2011-2012, trying to stage a color revolution in this country) might be just a smoke screen to hide the US intelligence agencies interference with the election process.
BTW it is not completely clear why Russia would prefer Trump to Hillary. Here is one post that addresses this issues (Economist's View Whats Behind a Rise in Ethnic Nationalism Maybe the Economy, Oct 14, 2016):
likbez -> pgl... , Friday, October 14, 2016 at 07:43 PMParadoxically Pravda in old times did have real insights into the US political system and for this reason was widely read by specialists. Especially materials published by the Institute of the USA and Canada -- a powerful Russian think tank somewhat similar to the Council on Foreign Relations.
As for your remark I think for many people in the USA Russophobia is just displaced Anti-Semitism.
JohnH remark is actually very apt and you should not "misunderestimate" the level of understanding of the US political system by Russians. They did learn a lot about machinations of the neoliberal foreign policy, especially about so called "color revolutions."
Hillary&Obama has had a bloody nose when they tried to stage a "color revolution" in 2011-2012 in Russia (so called "white revolution). A typical US citizen probably never heard about it or heard only about "Pussy riot", Navalny and couple of other minor figures. At the end poor ambassador Michael McFaul was recalled. NED was expelled. Of course Russia is just a pale shadow of the USSR power-wise, so Obama later put her on sanctions using MH17 incident as a pretext with no chances of retaliation.
They also successfully implemented regime change in Ukraine -- blooding Putin nose in return.
But I actually disagree with JohnH. First of all Putin does not need to interfere in a way like the USA did in 2011-2012. It would be a waist of resources as both candidates are probably equally bad for Russia (and it is the "deep state" which actually dictate the US foreign policy, not POTUS.)
The US political system is already the can of worms and the deterioration of neoliberal society this time created almost revolutionary situation in Marxists terms, when Repug elite was not able to control the nomination. Democratic establishment still did OK and managed to squash the rebellion, but here the level of degeneration demonstrated itself in the selection of the candidate.
Taking into account the level of dysfunction of the US political system, I am not so sure the Trump is preferable to Hillary for Russians. I would say he is more unpredictable and more dangerous. The main danger of Hillary is Syria war escalation, but the same is true for Trump who can turn into the second John McCain on a dime.
Also the difference between two should not be exaggerated. Both are puppets of the forces the brought them to the current level and in their POTUS role will need to be subservient to the "deep state". Or at least to take into account its existence and power. And that makes them more of prisoners of the position they want so much.
Trump probably to lesser extent then Hillary, but he also can't ignore the deep state. Both require the support of Republican Congress for major legislative initiatives. And it will be very hostile to Hillary. Which is a major advantage for Russians, as this excludes the possibility of some very stupid moves.
Again, IMHO in no way any of them will control the US foreign policy. In this area the deep state is in charge since Allen Dulles and those who try to deviate too much might end as badly as JFK. I think Obama understood this very well and did not try to rock the boat. And there are people who will promptly explain this to Trump in a way that he understands.
In other words, neither of them will escape the limit on their power that "deep state" enforces. And that virtually guarantee the continuity of the foreign policy, with just slight tactical variations.
So why Russians should prefer one to another? You can elect a dog as POTUS and the foreign policy of the USA will be virtually the same as with Hillary or Trump.
In internal policy Trump looks more dangerous and more willing to experiment, while Hillary is definitely a "status quo" candidate. The last thing Russians needs is the US stock market crush. So from the point of internal economic policy Hillary is also preferable.
A lot of pundits stress the danger of war with Russia, and that might be true as women in high political position try to outdo men in hawkishness. But here Hillary jingoism probably will be tightly controlled by the "deep state". Hillary definitely tried to be "More Catholic then the Pope" in this area while being the Secretary of State. That did not end well for her and she might learn the lesson.
But if you think about the amount of "compromat" (Russian term ;-) on Hillary and Bill that Russians may well already collected, in "normal circumstances" she might be a preferable counterpart for Russians. As in "devil that we know". Both Lavrov and Putin met Hillary. Medvedev was burned by Hillary. Taking into account the level of greed Hillary displayed during her career, I would be worried what Russians have on her , as well as on Bill "transgressions" and RICO-style actions of Clinton Foundation.
And taking into account the level of disgust amount the government officials with Hillary (and this is not limited to Secret Service) , new leaks are quite possible, which might further complicate her position as POTUS.
In worst case, the first year (or two) leaks will continue. Especially if damaging DNC leaks were the work of some disgruntled person within the USA intelligence and not of some foreign hacker group. That might be a plus for Russians as such a constant distraction might limit her possibility to make some stupid move in Syria. Or not.
As you know personal emails boxes for all major Web mail providers are just one click away for NSA analysts. So "Snowden II" hypothesis might have the right to exist.
Also it is quite probably that impeachment process for Hillary will start soon after her election. In the House Republicans have enough votes to try it. That also might be a plus for s for both Russia and China. Trump is extremely jingoistic as for Iran, and that might be another area were Hillary is preferable to Russians and Chinese over Trump.
Also do not discount her health problems. She does have some serious neurological disease, which eventually might kill her. How fast she will deteriorate is not known but in a year or two the current symptoms might become more pronounced. If Bill have STD (and sometime he looks like a person with HIV; http://joeforamerica.com/2016/07/bill-clinton-aids/) that further complicates that picture (this is just a rumor, but he really looks bad).
I think that all those factors make her an equal, or even preferable candidate for such states as Russia and China.
The way Trump "lewd" tale surfaced (aka Steele dossier) also creates more questions about role on CIA in the elections. Same about Trump surveillance authorized by Obama administration as well as possible unauthorized surveillance outsource to MI6, which was serving as CIA sidekick.
For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section
Oct 19, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Pft , Oct 18, 2018 12:29:54 AM | link
The President has authority under the Global Magnitsky Act to impose sanctions against anyone who has committed a human rights violation. Congress has already requested a HR investigation which Trump must act on and report to them within 4 months
It appears my prediction of Saudi gate may be right. This potentially is good news for Iran and Russia. Perhaps not so good for Trump and Saidis. Israel may not be happy. Perhaps his wife's plane troubles were a warning shot to remind him who is boss. Who knows ?
Haleys resignation beginning to make sense now. The House of Trump and House of Saud may soon fall, and Bibi wont be happy losing Trump and MBS. We all know what they are capable of to get things back on track
Why did the media held back on this so for so long?
Yemen (and Gaza).
CGTN & Al-Jazeera are the only global news outlets consistently and regularly reporting on the US facilitated genocides in Yemen and Jewish-occupied Palestine/Gaza.
The never-ending Khashoggi non-mystery mystery keeps Yemen & Gaza out of the Jew-controlled Western Media headlines. Saudi Barbaria and "Israel" are natural allies because each of them is an artificial Western political construct with a cowardly and incompetent military apparatus and an anti-heroic penchant for slaughtering undefended civilians - for psychopathic reasons.
Talking about psychopathy...
Oz's Christian Zionist PM, Sco Mo, is blathering about following Trump's lead and moving Oz's Embassy in "Israel" to Jerusalem. Sc Mo, who has never had an original idea in his life, still hasn't woken up to the fact that Trump's Jerusalem gambit was a trap for Bibi. So it's hilarious that Sco Mo The Unoriginal, is planning to take a flying leap into the same trap!
Anyone with more than half a brain would realise that...
1. No civilised country has followed Trump's lead.
2. Trump can, and will, reverse his (illegal) Jerusalem decision out of a 'new-found respect' for International Law.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 18, 2018 12:14:08 AM | 83
Posted by: JNDillard | Oct 17, 2018 11:59:34 PM | 81
Posted by: Krollchem | Oct 17, 2018 11:19:22 PM | 79
Whoever is ultimately behind this campaign (which I suspect is a loose association of interest groups spread throughout SA, Turkey, London citi, wall street, whoever) they will not stop until MbS is paraded through the streets in chains or at least his head at the end of a lance. At this point the only question how many days will it take to see his head on a pike?
Posted by: ToivoS | Oct 17, 2018 11:24:27 PM | 80
"Their target that night: Anssaf Ali Mayo, the local leader of the Islamist political party Al-Islah. The UAE considers Al-Islah to be the Yemeni branch of the worldwide Muslim Brotherhood, which the UAE calls a terrorist organization. Many experts insist that Al-Islah, one of whose members won the Nobel Peace Prize, is no terror group. They say it's a legitimate political party that threatens the UAE not through violence but by speaking out against its ambitions in Yemen."
Posted by: Krollchem | Oct 17, 2018 10:26:46 PM | 77
Posted by: Gary Weglarz | Oct 17, 2018 10:22:19 PM | 76
Oct 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
this_circus_is_no_fun , 12 minutes ago linkPaddyo2 , 37 minutes ago link
Some say that declassifying the documents would expose " sources and methods ". Others say that the documents are being kept secret to prevent the DOJ and FBI from becoming embarrassed . I say that both can be true.
If the documents expose the liars and fabrications that went into the entire Russia Gate fraud, then declassifying the documents will indeed embarrass the DOJ and FBI by showing that their " sources " are liars and that their " methods " are fabrications.
See, everything always makes sense in the circus.Anunnaki , 30 minutes ago link
Either Trump is constantly threatened, boxed into a corner, or it IS ALL FOR SHOW!
The best example is now, Trump "walking back the release" because of Aussie and UK complicity. The threatened release of USA dirty laundry, of which there is plenty knowing how our CIA works. Or we are being played once more.
Frankly, I'm beyond sick of these walk backs! IG report! Rosenstein resigns! FISA Declas!!
I'm an independent voter. It's high time I WALK BACK my vote for all Republicans on November 6th UNLESS WE THE People that they represent get a FULL UNREDACTED FISA AND IG REPORT published .
Tell Trump and the Republican party . Protect NOT ONE Criminal. If UK or Aus threaten exposing spies or military secrets then threaten back with annihilation should they endanger Americans.
I'm fed up beyond return with Holder, Brennan et al.Bingo Hammer , 49 minutes ago link
It is all for show.
Our elites don't put each other in jail. That is reserved for the Deplorables.
Remember what Trump said after the election, "The Clinton's are good people."wolf pup , 35 minutes ago link
Obama, Hillary and the DNC pressured the UK's M16 as the No.1 instigator via Steele, its lapdog Australia's intelligence service, then told Alexander Downer to forward "salted" info to US agencies...and 2.5 years later here we arescraping_by , 1 hour ago link
It's always something that causes The Never Ending Wait..
and it always makes decent sense in the short term (memory loss)..
and it always; and for years now, happens.
I can't buy that those involved are powerful, savvy, or more importantly, courageous enough to finally stand the hell UP to the powers that be bullshitting the Citizenry. It's clearly not the case.
And what does Sundance say of the MIA Sessions? Is he really wearing tights and cape under those rumpled wee suits of his, and just snarling to leap out, indictments in hand, to read off tens of thousands of the accused' names? "Stealth Jeff"; actor par excellence? Sessions as Hero? Any day now to be proved The Truth's Hitman?
A GOP-won Midterms would benefit from the declassification of criminal intent that supports the US President. -> Before the vote. Afterward, and if the vote gone badly, lol it'll be as useful as John Brennan's soul. And a "Mueller surprise"; if the declassification happened before the vote, would be tainted beyond its .. surprise.
So why the wait this time - again?
I'm sorry; I don't mean to come across rudely, but "hoping; forever" is exhausting, damaging to fact based living, induces apathy and entirely suits those who have so much to hide, and offers nothing to the targets involved; We, the People.tunetopper , 1 hour ago link
The factions in the FBI/DOJ who want to keep the Russian collusion hoax going are the same ones who protected Hillary from the most outrageous violation of the espionage laws ever to bubble to the surface. Office politics in that axis are a lot like any other large company, with the exception of sending people to prison. So her supporters are still on the job.
The investigation never made first page news, living out here in the alternate press, and now that The Donald seems to walk back obvious Donaldesque moves, it might never come to light. Remember his campaign promise was to prosecute Sec. Clinton, and he settled for firing Comey. So they may get away with most of this yet.
Any time the US government cooperates with the British, we get stuck. The Austrailians are colonials and love it. So the paperwork for the Comey-McCabe-Rosenstien conspiracy might never be published.JethroBodien , 1 hour ago link
When the FBI wants a warrant, its presumed that they are not going to make an even-handed case to the FISA Court. All they have to do is deny that they had sufficient infomation to the contrary. Thats what makes this court an abomination to our freedom. This is why the US Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act are a bunch of crap. We are now finding out that intelligence services knew who concocted 911 (elements within the Saudi Govt along side the wealthy dissident near-royals ie. the Khashoggis and the Bin-Ladens, and possibly the Israelis knew too).trutherator , 1 hour ago link
Everyone, none of this matters. Has everyone forgotten about 9/11 and the conspiracy perpetrated on the American people. Frankly all is not what it seems and most of what we are seeing is simply theatre for the masses.
Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."
~ Woodrow Wilson (1856 – 1924), 28th President of the United States
"The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings...Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe...no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent...For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence–on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed."
― President John F. Kennedycheech_wizard , 1 hour ago link
Remember? The FBI lovers email that said the president wants to "know everything"?
Start there. Did Congress ask either of them where they heard this, and how much of this treachery Obama was complicit in?Dornier27 , 2 hours ago link
Might I reference this:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/07/24/clapper_obama_ordered_the_intelligence_assessment_that_resulted_in_mueller_investigation.htmlbusiness as stusual , 1 hour ago link
Anyone else worried that the President keeps doing an about face or being unable or unwilling to deliver on important issues? Orders papers to be published unredacted then they are not? Hillary walking free. No Wall, no withdrawal from Afghanistan and now backtracking on punishing Saudi Arabia....DjangoCat , 1 hour ago link
Just like the rest, he is owned.Bavarian , 1 hour ago link
" and now backtracking on punishing Saudi Arabia.."
And you think the Russian's really poisoned the Skripals, or that Assad merrily gassed his own people just before entering peace talks, or that the White Helmet people being invited into Canada are not Al Nusra terrorists?
You had better be prepared to believe all that if you think the Saudis are stupid enough to dismember a Washington Post journalist in a Saudi consulate, and to let it be recorded to boot. How dumb can you get? But then, maybe I misjudge you. Maybe you do believe all that. Not me, pal.
PS For extra confirmation, just look at who has decided not to attend Davos in the Desert. Top of the list are the New Yawk banksters.Jim in MN , 2 hours ago link
You want to might ask yourself why the Post ran this story, employed the journalist and published that John Brennan demand that we "punish" Saudi Arabia. You might ask yourself why the NYT pushed the narrative that RR should be fired before mid-terms.
'Misunderstanding all you see' - John LennonWorkingClassMan , 2 hours ago link
Weiner laptop please. Now, please. thxbh2 , 3 hours ago link
Domestic terrorists (the Federal Bureau of Intimidation) generally is dramatic.Hulk , 3 hours ago link
Guess which specific portions of the released documents will be redacted "for national security reasons".DingleBarryObummer , 3 hours ago link
and while we are at it, declassify the whistleblower report generated by the William Binney complaint.
Then put Haydn's treasonous *** in jail too...Hulk , 3 hours ago link
i watched a documentary about that. basically, binney was genius who created a genius system to find terrorists while maintaining the integrity of the constitution (and for relatively cheap cost!). The deep state was like "piss on that," spent 100x more money than they had to, and wiped their *** with the constitution.ardent , 3 hours ago link
dont forget that the FBI fabricated evidence about Binney and three of his colleagues.The criminal case against Binney and his colleagues was then thrown out of court once the fabrication was revealed. This out of control corruption has been going on a long time...lester1 , 3 hours ago link
It's obvious the FUNDAMENTALS of the conflict with Russia
have NOT changed one iota. Even with Trump.Totally_Disillusioned , 3 hours ago link
FBI is a criminal racket!
And where the hell are the "honorable" FBI agents to blow the lid off all the corruption/ conspiracy against the President ??🤔DaBard51 , 3 hours ago link
I've stated for months that rank and file are in the tank w/leadership corruption OR they have been threatened either with harm to themselves of family members if they didn't go along. However at this point, no whistleblowers proves the former.Totally_Disillusioned , 3 hours ago link
Have they opened Weiner's laptop or found Hillary's laptop yet?
A trend... as reported by (!) CNN & NY Times (!)...
When nine hundred years old you become, look this good you will not.Everybodys All American , 3 hours ago link
Strzok testifed several CDs of ALL 680K emails that included crimes against children, classified info was handed over to Comey who merely placed them in his office. Comey has been gone for over six months, why have those CDs not been reviewed and acted on?
There are a LOT of dots and THEY count on YOU not connecting them. I keep a journal.hooligan2009 , 3 hours ago link
Lets suppose its all true. Which we pretty much know if you have been paying attention that the FBI has gone rogue. Then what? Arrests? Mueller? I don't think that's even close to what is needed. We are talking major treason from multiple levels and people through out government.Joe Davola , 3 hours ago link
" the DOJ would be allowed to review the documents first after two foreign allies asked him to keep them classified. "
refers to the British and Australian governments who would be embarassed because rogue agents wishing to arrange for the impeachment of Trump would be exposed.
as such, this would represent a threat to the apolitical use of five eyes security pact for intelligence purposes - a pact intended to detect and prevent EXTERNAL threats to the five eyes nations - rather than instigate POLITICAL control of INTERNAL affairs of the democratic functioning of five eyes countries.
treason and sedition has been exposed within the US - aided and abetted by drunks and sycophants in britain and australia,Madcow , 3 hours ago link
My impression is that FIVE EYES exists so that the individual members can ask one of the other members to spy on their own people without violating constitutional limits on such activity.NoDebt , 3 hours ago link
In my humble opinion, politicians and government bureaucrats should be strictly prohibited from falsely accusing their ideological opponents of criminal activity and then manufacturing fake evidence to support those claims.
No amount of sanctimonious political-correctness justifies Authoritarian rule squarely in opposition to the US Constitution.lester1 , 3 hours ago link
"Americans will be "shocked" by the information behind the FISA redactions"
Not after waiting for this evidence for two ******* years. I'm worn out. Do something about it or **** off.Think for yourself , 2 hours ago link
Trump caved and allowed the deep state members at the FBI to conceal the truth!ypczh , 5 minutes ago link
Exactly @NoDebt. Nearly every day or multiple times a day there's something huge that radically alters the narrative... people are worn out. This is so huge!Bingo Hammer , 55 minutes ago link
Timing is everything and Trump knows it. All heads of the hydra must be cut off at the same time.otschelnik , 3 hours ago link
Not sure about that, as at least 2 crucial allies, the UK and Australia, were pressured by the Obama and Hillary camps to set this whole narrative off...and therefore does he seriously damage those international and key security countries with info or does he compromise to keep the peace? Too much is at play here for Trump expose the truth
I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop.... That's that the UK's GCHQ initiated spying on Popadolous and Trump Tower at the request of Obummer and/or Rice and/or Brennan, BEFORE the FBI/Comey said UNDER OATH that they started in May, and were denied a FISA warrant in June 2016.... that's why they needed the 'golden shower dossier.' That's i-l-l-e-g-a-l.
Oh, and Brennan said he pushed the FBI to initiate an investigation but Nunes said there was no intelligence (EC) which they could base it on. It was a set-up from day 1.
Oct 12, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com
et Al October 11, 2018 at 2:22 amRT.com: US senators demand Magnitsky Act probe, sanctions on Saudi Arabia over Khashoggi disappearance
All kinds of delicious can proceed from this.
The whole Magnitsky Act thing was supposed to be a convenient tool of western foreign policy cloaked in Human Rights sugar to justify punished the usual suspects ad perpituitam, not for attacking allies. It looks like some US politicians actually think it is about human rights! They'll need to practice their best acting to explain why some are on the list and others aren't, along with compliant media and governments.
What we are seeing now are the consequences of classic imperial over-reach – extending one's power so far and so generally that it hoists itself upon its own petard! The implosion of the USA continues afoot, Hillary Clinton being one of its cheerleaders (according to her recent Amappaling interview).
Trump is also promising a rapid USG reaction to India buying S-400s, so it really is time to stock up on the popcorn. I knew for sure that this year would certainly be more interesting than last year, but 2019 should be a corker. Woo.
Oct 08, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com
Vis the Dutch push for a new sanctions regime for Human Rights abusers, apart from global sponsors of Islamic terrorism who also happen to have $$$, the obvious takeaway that only just occurred to me is that the push for a European Magnitsky Act must have failed.
This is exactly the same thing, they just dropped the name. The EU is not united and I don't see the Netherlands as having enough influence in the EU without the UK.
Oct 08, 2018 | original.antiwar.com
As the hoax unravels, the real story of "foreign collusion" comes outThe conspiracy to overthrow a sitting US President extends far beyond our own "Deep State." As I've been saying in this space for quite some time, it's been an international team effort from the beginning. Setting aside the British origins of the obscene "dossier" compiled by "ex"-MI6 agent Christopher Steele, we now have further confirmation of foreign involvement in President Trump's decision to delay (perhaps indefinitely) the declassification of key Russia-gate documents. While US intelligence officials were expected to oppose the move, "Trump was also swayed by foreign allies, including Britain, in deciding to reverse course, these people said. It wasn't immediately clear what other governments may have raised concerns to the White House."
But of course the Washington Post knows perfectly well which other governments would have reason to raise "concerns" to the White House. It's clear from the public record that the following "allies" have rendered the "Resistance" essential assistance at one time or another:
- United Kingdom – This entire episode has Her Majesty's Secret Service's fingerprints all over it. Steele's key role is plain enough: here was a British spook who was not only hired by the Clinton campaign to dig up dirt on Trump but was unusually passionate about his work – almost as if he'd have done it for free. And then there was the earliest approach to the Trump campaign, made by Cambridge professor and longtime spook Stefan Halper to Carter Page. And then there's the mysterious alleged "link" to Russian intelligence, Professor Joseph Mifsud, whose murky British-based thinktank managed to operate openly despite later claims it was a Russian covert operation.
- It was Mifsud who orchestrated the Russia-gate hoax, first suggesting that the Russians had Hillary Clinton's emails, and then disappearing into thin air as soon as the story he had planted percolated into plain view. Some "Russian agent"!
- Australia – Why would the former Australian High Commissioner to the UK seek out George Papadopoulos, a low-level semi-advisor to the Trump campaign, and milk him for information while getting him drunk?
- Israel – So how did Papadopoulos find himself spilling his guts at a bar with a top Australian intelligence figure? The Times reports that "The meeting at the bar came about because of a series of connections, beginning with an Israeli Embassy official who introduced Mr. Papadopoulos to another Australian diplomat in London."
- Estonia – The Times and other outlets report that a "Baltic intelligence agency" was the first to relay "concerns" about Russian influence over the Trump team. I'm willing to bet it was the Estonians, who have always been the most actively anti-Russian actors in the region.
- Ukraine – Democratic National Committee members actually met with Ukrainian government leaders in an attempt to uncover dirt on Trump. Working together with the DNC, Democratic official and Ukrainian lobbyist Alexandra Chalupa received active assistance from the Ukrainian embassy, which became a veritable locus of Clintonian campaign operations.
This is part of the price we pay for our vaunted "empire," and the "liberal international order" the striped-pants set is so on about. As that grizzled old "isolationist" prophet, Garet Garrett, described the insignia of empire at the dawn of the cold war:
"There is yet another sign that defines itself gradually. When it is clearly defined it may be already too late to do anything about it. That is to say, a time comes when Empire finds itself –
"A prisoner of history.
"The history of a Republic is its own history . A Republic may change its course, or reverse it, and that will be its own business., But the history of Empire is a world history, and belongs to many people."
A Republic may restrain itself, wrote Garrett, but "Empire must put forth its power" – on whose behalf? There are many claimants whose wealth, position, and prestige depend on the Imperial largesse. When that claim is threatened, the "satellites" turn against their protector. This is what the Russia-gate covert action -- carried out by coordinated action of our "allies" – is all about. We now have clear evidence of just how far our "client" states are willing go to ensure that the American gravy train of free goodies continues to flow.
Trump's decision to walk back his announcement that the key Russia-gate intelligence would be declassified tells us almost as much as if he'd tweeted it out, unredacted. For what it tells us is that public knowledge of the contents would constitute a major break in relations with at least one key ally.
So here we have it at last, the final truth of Russia-gate: yes, there was indeed foreign collusion in the 2016 election, but it came from the opposite direction than the media are telling us. We weren't attacked by Russia: a few thousand dollars in Facebook ads that nobody saw did not put Trump in the White House. Our democratic process was undermined, not by the supposedly omnipotent Vladimir Putin but by the intelligence agencies of some of our more beloved "allies." We were attacked by a tag -team, both foreign and domestic, intent on ousting a democratically-elected President by any means necessary.
Here is the final irrefutable argument against America as the "world leader," designated champion of the "liberal international order" – we become, as Garrett noted, a prisoner of history. Indeed, we are no longer entitled to write our own history, but must endure the lobbying and aggressive interventions of our ungrateful and spiteful "allies," whose welfare states could not exist without generous US "defense" subsidies.
When those subsidies, subventions, and special privileges are threatened, as they are by the nationalist cheapskate Trump, who would gladly demolish the whole decrepit, dated, and dangerous cold war architecture with a wave of his hand. A US President who puts America first? They can't allow it.
And that's really the essence of the fight, the issue that will determine the woof and warp of American politics in the new millennium. The global Establishment has risen up against the People. There's no telling what the outcome will be, but one thing I know for sure: I know what side I'm on. Do you?
Oct 08, 2018 | www.rt.com
8 Oct, 2018
An intelligence service given free rein to commit 'serious crimes' in its own country is an intelligence service that is the enemy of its people. The quite astounding revelation that Britain's domestic intelligence service, MI5, has enjoyed this very freedom for decades has only just been made public at a special tribunal in London, set up to investigate the country's intelligence services at the behest of a coalition of human rights groups, alleging a pattern of illegality up to and including collusion in murder.
The hitherto MI5 covert policy sanctioning its agents to commit and/or solicit serious crimes, as and when adjudged provident, is known as the Third Direction. This codename has been crafted, it would appear, by someone with a penchant for all things James Bond within an agency whose average operative is more likely to be 5'6" and balding with a paunch and bad teeth than any kind of lantern-jawed 007.
The Pat Finucane Centre , one of the aforementioned human rights groups involved in bringing about this tribunal investigation (Investigatory Powers Tribunal, to give it its Sunday name) into the nefarious activities of Britain's domestic intelligence agency, issued a damning statement in response to the further revelation that former Prime Minister David Cameron introduced oversight guidelines with regard to the MI5 covert third direction policy back in 2012.
Cameron's decision to do so, the group claims, was far from nobly taken:
"It can be no coincidence that Prime Minister David Cameron issued new guidelines, however flawed, on oversight of MI5 just two weeks before publication of the De Silva report into the murder of Pat Finucane. The PM was clearly alive to the alarming evidence which was about to emerge of the involvement of the Security Service in the murder. To date no-one within a state agency has been held accountable. The latest revelations make the case for an independent inquiry all the more compelling."
Pat Finucane, a Belfast Catholic, plied his trade as a human rights lawyer at a time when the right to be fully human was denied the minority Catholic community of the small and enduring outpost of British colonialism in the north east corner of Ireland, otherwise known as Northern Ireland. He was murdered by loyalist paramilitaries in 1989, back when the decades-long conflict euphemistically referred to as the Troubles still raged, claiming victims both innocent and not on all sides.
Unlike the vast majority of those killed and murdered in the course of this brutal conflict, Finucane's murder sparked a long and hard fought struggle for justice by surviving family members, friends and campaigners. They allege – rather convincingly, it should be said – that it was carried out with the active collusion of MI5.
Stepping back and casting a wider view over this terrain, the criminal activities of Britain's intelligence services constitute more than enough material for a book of considerable heft. How fortunate then that just such a book has already been written.
In his 'Dead Men Talking: Collusion, Cover Up and Murder in Northern Ireland's Dirty War', author Nicholas Davies "provides information on a number of the killings [during the Troubles], which were authorized at the highest level of MI5 and the British government."
But over and above the crimes of MI5 in Ireland, what else have those doughty defenders of the realm been up to over the years? After all, what is the use of having a license to engage in serious criminal activity, including murder and, presumably, torture, if you're not prepared to use (abuse) it? It begs the question of how many high profile deaths attributed to suicide, natural causes, and accident down through the years have been the fruits of MI5 at work?
And what about the possibility of MI5's involvement in, dare we use the term, false flag operations?
As someone who abhors the premise of conspiracy theory on principle, the fact that more and more are turning to its warm embrace as an intellectual reflex against what is politely described as the 'official narrative' of events, well this is no surprise when we learn of the egregious machinations of Western intelligence agencies such as Britain's MI5.
What we are bound to state, doing so without fear of contradiction, is this particular revelation opens up a veritable Pandora's Box of grim possibilities when it comes to the potential crimes committed by Britain's domestic intelligence agency, ensuring that a full and vigorous investigation and public inquiry is now both necessary and urgent.
If any such investigation is to be taken seriously, however, it must include in its remit the power to investigate all possible links between Britain's intelligence community and organisations such as, let's see, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group ?
The deafening UK mainstream media and political class silence over the trail connecting 2017 Manchester Arena suicide bomber Salman Abedi and MI6, Britain's foreign intelligence agency, leaves a lingering stench of intrigue that will not out. The work of investigative journalist Mark Curtis on this sordid relationship is unsurpassed.
As Curtis writes,
"The evidence suggests that the barbaric Manchester bombing, which killed 22 innocent people on May 22nd, is a case of blowback on British citizens arising at least partly from the overt and covert actions of British governments."
In the same report he arrives at a conclusion both damning and chilling:
"The evidence points to the LIFG being seen by the UK as a proxy militia to promote its foreign policy objectives. Whitehall also saw Qatar as a proxy to provide boots on the ground in Libya in 2011, even as it empowered hardline Islamist groups."
Finally: "Both David Cameron, then Prime Minister, and Theresa May – who was Home Secretary in 2011 when Libyan radicals were encouraged to fight Qadafi [Muammar Gaddafi] – clearly have serious questions to answer. We believe an independent public enquiry is urgently needed."
In words that echo down to us from ancient Rome, the poet Juvenal taunts our complacency with a question most simple and pertinent: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" Who will guard the guards themselves?
Edward R Murrow puts it rather more bluntly: "A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves."
Sooner or later, people in Britain are going to have to wake up to who the real enemy is.
- UK spies go on the offensive with yet another costly intelligence agency
- 'Murder, torture, sexual assault' - MI5 & informants authorized to commit crimes in UK, court hears
- Wilderness of mirrors: MI6, the Cold War, spies and traitors from Gordievsky to Skripal
John Wight has written for a variety of newspapers and websites, including the Independent, Morning Star, Huffington Post, Counterpunch, London Progressive Journal, and Foreign Policy Journal.
Oct 07, 2018 | action.larouchepac.com
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
- The Congressional investigations into the origins of the ongoing, fake Russiagate coup against your presidency have revealed that the Obama Administration used false information and evidence fabricated in London, by official and unofficial British intelligence agents, to justify an unprecedented FBI counterintelligence investigation of your campaign.
- Former MI6 agent Christopher Steele told his Department of Justice handler, former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, that Steele would "do anything" to prevent Donald Trump's election and was desperate to stop it from happening. Steele was the author of the notorious fake dossier claiming that Donald Trump, having previously been sexually compromised by Vladimir Putin, was working with Putin to defeat Hillary Clinton. Steele's bizarre, amateurish, and totally fake dossier was used by a corrupted FBI to justify steps in its illegal investigation, despite the fact that this dossier was paid for by the Clinton campaign and its facts were unverified.
- According to multiple published reports, Obama's CIA Director, John Brennan, convened an illegal intelligence task force at the CIA to launder and investigate fake dirt on Trump, produced by a British spy circle led by former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove for purposes of destroying the Trump presidential campaign. Brennan did this because, he said, Donald Trump's election would jeopardize the "special relationship" between U.S. and British intelligence agencies. Dearlove played a key role in the faked intelligence which led the United States into the Iraq War.
- LaRouchePAC, through a previous petition to President Trump on August 10, 2017 -- and to Congress on December 29, 2017 -- called for complete exposure of the British attempt to nullify the 2016 U.S. election based on British strategic interests. At the time, virtually no one else thought the British were the source of foreign interference in the 2016 elections. That fact is now widely recognized. The so-called "resistance," both within and without the government, is stalling further release of key documents to Congressional committees in order to win the midterm elections and begin impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives.
- The British are conducting an international campaign to smear and militarily and economically confront Russia and China because the City of London financial and imperial order is economically and morally bankrupt and has no plan to build a future for humanity over the course of the next 50 years. This British campaign is not in the interest of the United States, and, Mr. President, you were elected in substantial part on the promise to end America's useless wars on behalf of British strategic objectives.
- The complete exposure of the British/Obama Administration subversion of the Trump presidency represents a unique opportunity for Americans to take our country back: to, once again, fully embrace the profound difference between the British imperial system and the American system of political economy created by Alexander Hamilton and advanced by Lyndon LaRouche. The British system produces the degradation of the majority of the population for the wealth of the few; the American system produces general prosperity.
Now, therefore, we, the undersigned, call upon you to:
- order the declassification of documents referencing all British-spawned allegations, wherever in our government they may reside, concerning your relationship or that of your campaign workers to Russia and demand that the British produce the same from their files;
- order the declassification of all documents -- including those held by the CIA, Director of National Intelligence, NSA, FBI, Department of Justice, Treasury Department, State Department, Obama White House, and any other relevant agencies -- concerning any alleged ties to Russia by you or individuals associated with your campaign;
- order the declassification of all documents demonstrating, alleging, or suggesting that the Russians did not provide files they hacked from the DNC or John Podesta to Wikileaks; and
- order the declassification of all documents requested of the Department of Justice and the FBI by the House Intelligence, Government Oversight, and Judiciary Committees, and the Senate Judiciary Committee, concerning "Russiagate." This includes the now-delayed DOJ Inspector General's report concerning the Clinton email investigation. All such documents should be delivered to the House Intelligence Committee and the House Judiciary Committee for purposes of producing an unclassified report to the American people concerning the origins and reasons for the "Russiagate" insurrection against the Trump presidency.
End the special relationship with the United Kingdom; end the secret government.
A PDF of this petition can be found here.
Oct 05, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
chet380 , Oct 5, 2018 1:37:53 PM | linkA few months ago, a dozen Russian individuals were charged with cyber-crime offenses that Mueller knew would never be tested at trial b/c the charged individuals would never be extradited. However, the indictment included charges against two Russian corporations that cleverly hired American lawyers to appear on their behalf, and enter pleas of Not Guilty.
This tactic should have set the pre-trial discovery process to begin, causing Mueller to be obliged to turn over evidence supporting the charges as well as any exculpatory information favoring the accused corporations.
As any reference to this case can't seem to be found, can anyone help with info as to the present status of the case?
Oct 04, 2018 | it.slashdot.org
Taco Cowboy ( 5327 ) , Tuesday May 29, 2012 @12:17AM ( #40139317 ) JournalIt's a scam !! ( Score: 5 , Informative)
http://erratasec.blogspot.com/2012/05/bogus-story-no-chinese-backdoor-in.html [blogspot.com]Bogus story: no Chinese backdoor in military chip"Today's big news is that researchers have found proof of Chinese manufacturers putting backdoors in American chips that the military uses. This is false. While they did find a backdoor in a popular FPGA chip, there is no evidence the Chinese put it there, or even that it was intentionally malicious.
Furthermore, the Actel ProAsic3 FPGA chip isn't fabricated in China at all !!jhoegl ( 638955 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @01:30PM ( #40136003 )khasim ( 1285 ) writes: < firstname.lastname@example.org > on Monday May 28, 2012 @01:48PM ( #40136097 )Fear mongering ( Score: 5 , Insightful)
It sells...Particularly in a press release like that. ( Score: 5 , Insightful)
That entire article reads more like a press release with FUD than anything with any facts.
Which US customer?
No facts and LOTS of claims. It's pure FUD.
(Not that this might not be a real concern. But the first step is getting past the FUD and marketing materials and getting to the real facts.)ArsenneLupin ( 766289 ) , Tuesday May 29, 2012 @01:11AM ( #40139489 )Re:Particularly in a press release like that. ( Score: 5 , Informative)
A quick google showed that that this is indeed the chip, but the claims are "slightly" overblown [blogspot.com]Anonymous Coward , Monday May 28, 2012 @02:14PM ( #40136273 )Most likely inserted by Microsemi/Actel not fab ( Score: 5 , Informative)
1) Read the paper http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sps32/Silicon_scan_draft.pdf
2) This is talking about FPGAs designed by Microsemi/Actel.
3) The article focuses on the ProAsic3 chips but says all the Microsemi/Actel chips tested had the same backdoor including but not limited to Igloo, Fusion and Smartfusion.
4) FPGAs give JTAG access to their internals for programming and debugging but many of the access methods are proprietary and undocumented. (security through obscurity)
5) Most FPGAs have features that attempt to prevent reverse engineering by disabling the ability to read out critical stuff.
6) These chips have a secret passphrase (security through obscurity again) that allows you to read out the stuff that was supposed to be protected.
7) These researchers came up with a new way of analyzing the chip (pipeline emission analysis) to discover the secret passphrase. More conventional analysis (differential power analysis) was not sensitive enough to reveal it.
This sounds a lot (speculation on my part) like a deliberate backdoor put in for debug purposes, security through obscurity at it's best. It doesn't sound like something secret added by the chip fab company, although time will tell. Just as embedded controller companies have gotten into trouble putting hidden logins into their code thinking they're making the right tradeoff between convenience and security, this hardware company seems to have done the same.
Someone forgot to tell the marketing droids though and they made up a bunch of stuff about how the h/w was super secure.JimCanuck ( 2474366 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @04:45PM ( #40137217 )Re:Most likely inserted by Microsemi/Actel not fab ( Score: 5 , Interesting)
I don't think anyone fully understands JTAG, there are a lot of different versions of it mashed together on the typical hardware IC. Regardless if its a FPGA, microcontroller or otherwise. The so called "back door" can only be accessed through the JTAG port as well, so unless the military installed a JTAG bridge to communicate to the outside world and left it there, well then the "backdoor" is rather useless.
Something that can also be completely disabled by setting the right fuse inside the chip itself to disable all JTAG connections. Something that is considered standard practice on IC's with a JTAG port available once assembled into their final product and programmed.
Plus according to Microsemi's own website, all military and aerospace qualified versions of their parts are still made in the USA. So this "researcher" used commercial parts, which depending on the price point can be made in the plant in Shanghai or in the USA at Microsemi's own will.
The "researcher" and the person who wrote the article need to spend some time reading more before talking.emt377 ( 610337 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @07:02PM ( #40137873 )Re:Most likely inserted by Microsemi/Actel not fab ( Score: 4 , Insightful)The so called "back door" can only be accessed through the JTAG port as well, so unless the military installed a JTAG bridge to communicate to the outside world and left it there, well then the "backdoor" is rather useless.
With pin access to the FPGA it's trivial to hook it up, no bridges or transceivers needed. If it's a BGA then get a breakout/riser board that provides pin access. This is off-the-shelf stuff. This means if the Chinese military gets their hands on the hardware they can reverse engineer it. They won't have to lean very hard on the manufacturer for them to cough up every last detail. In China you just don't say no to such requests if you know what's good for you and your business.JimCanuck ( 2474366 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @11:05PM ( #40139083 )Re:Most likely inserted by Microsemi/Actel not fab ( Score: 4 , Interesting)Not being readable even when someone has the device in hand is exactly what these secure FPGAs are meant to protect against!
It's not a non-issue. It's a complete failure of a product to provide any advantages over non-secure equivalents.
You clearly have NOT used a FPGA or similar. First the ProASIC3 the article focuses on is the CHEAPEST product in the product line (some of that model line reach down to below a dollar each). But beyond that
... Devices are SECURED by processes, such as blowing the JTAG fuses in the device which makes them operation only, and unreadable. They are secureable, if you follow the proper processes and methods laid out by the manufacturer of the specific chip.
Just because a "research paper" claims there is other then standard methods of JTAG built into the JTAG doesn't mean that the device doesn't secure as it should, nor does it mean this researcher who is trying to peddle his own product is anything but biased in this situation.nospam007 ( 722110 ) * , Monday May 28, 2012 @02:39PM ( #40136445 )Re:What did the military expect? ( Score: 4 , Interesting)
"Even if this case turns out to be a false alarm, allowing a nation that you repeatedly refer to as a 'near-peer competitor' to build parts of your high-tech weaponry is idiotic."
Not to mention the non-backdoor ones.
'Bogus electronic parts from China have infiltrated critical U.S. defense systems and equipment, including Navy helicopters and a commonly used Air Force cargo aircraft, a new report says.'
http://articles.dailypress.com/2012-05-23/news/dp-nws-counterfeit-chinese-parts-20120523_1_fake-chinese-parts-counterfeit-parts-air-force-c-130j [dailypress.com]0123456 ( 636235 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @02:04PM ( #40136219 )Re:Should only buy military components from allies ( Score: 3 , Funny)The US military should have a strict policy of only buying military parts from sovereign, free, democratic countries with a long history of friendship, such as Israel, Canada, Europe, Japan and South Korea.
Didn't the US and UK governments sell crypto equipment they knew they could break to their 'allies' during the Cold War?tlhIngan ( 30335 ) writes: < slashdot@[ ]f.net ['wor' in gap] > on Monday May 28, 2012 @03:30PM ( #40136781 )Re:Should only buy military components from allies ( Score: 5 , Insightful)Second problem.... 20 years ago the DOD had their own processor manufacturing facilities, IC chips, etc. They were shut down in favor of commercial equipment because some idiot decided it was better to have an easier time buying replacement parts at Radioshack than buying quality military-grade components that could last in austere environments. (Yes, speaking from experience). Servers and workstations used to be built from the ground up at places like Tobyhanna Army Depot. Now, servers and workstations are bought from Dell.
Fabs are expensive. The latest generation nodes cost billions of dollars to set up and billions more to run. If they aren't cranking chips out 24/7, they're literally costing money. Yes, I know it's hte military, but I'm sure people have a hard time justifying $10B every few years just to fab a few chips. One of the biggest developments in the 90s was the development of foundries that let anyone with a few tens of millions get in the game of producing chips rather than requiring billions in startup costs. Hence the startup of tons of fabless companies selling chips.
OK, another option is to buy a cheap obsolete fab and make chips that way - much cheaper to run, but we're also talking maybe 10+ year old technology, at which point the chips are going to be slower and take more power.
Also, building your own computer from the ground up is expensive - either you buy the designs of your servers from say, Intel, or design your own. If you buy it, it'll be expensive and probably require your fab to be upgraded (or you get stuck with an old design - e.g., Pentium (the original) - which Intel bought back from the DoD because the DoD had been debugging it over the decade). If you went with the older cheaper fab, the design has to be modified to support that technology (you cannot just take a design and run with it - you have to adapt your chip to the foundry you use).
If you roll your own, that becomes a support nightmare because now no one knows the system.
And on the taxpayer side - I'm sure everyone will question why you're spending billions running a fab that's only used at 10% capacity - unless you want the DoD getting into the foundry business with its own issues.
Or, why is the military spending so much money designing and running its own computer architecture and support services when they could buy much cheaper machines from Dell and run Linux on them?
Hell, even if the DoD had budget for that, some bean counter will probably do the same so they can save money from one side and use it to buy more fighter jets or something.
30+ years ago, defense spending on electronics formed a huge part of the overall electronics spending. These days, defense spending is but a small fraction - it's far more lucrative to go after the consumer market than the military - they just don't have the economic clout they once had. End result is the military is forced to buy COTS ICs, or face stuff like a $0.50 chip costing easily $50 or more for same just because the military is a bit-player for semiconductors__aaltlg1547 ( 2541114 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @02:29PM ( #40136361 )Genda ( 560240 ) writes: < <ten.tog> <ta> <teiram> > on Monday May 28, 2012 @03:46PM ( #40136857 ) JournalRe:Should only buy military components from allies ( Score: 2 )
Anybody remember Jonathan Pollard?Re:Should only buy military components from allies ( Score: 2 )
You do know that the Mossad has been caught stealing and collecting American Top Secrets. In fact most of the nations above save perhaps Canada have at one time or another been caught either spying on us, or performing dirty deeds cheap against America's best interest. I'd say for the really classified stuff, like the internal security devices that monitor everything else... homegrown only thanks, and add that any enterprising person who's looking to get paid twice by screwing with the hardware or selling secrets to certified unfriendlies get's to cools their heels for VERY LONG TIME.NixieBunny ( 859050 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @01:34PM ( #40136025 ) HomepageThe actual article ( Score: 5 , Informative)
The original article is here. [cam.ac.uk] It refers to an Actel ProAsic3 chip, which is an FPGA with internal EEPROM to store the configuration.Anonymous Coward , Monday May 28, 2012 @02:09PM ( #40136249 )Re:The actual article ( Score: 5 , Interesting)
From your much more useful link,We investigated the PA3 backdoor problem through Internet searches, software and hardware analysis and found that this particular backdoor is not a result of any mistake or an innocent bug, but is instead a deliberately inserted and well thought-through backdoor that is crafted into, and part of, the PA3 security system. We analysed other Microsemi/Actel products and found they all have the same deliberate backdoor. Those products include, but are not limited to: Igloo, Fusion and Smartfusion.we have found that the PA3 is used in military products such as weapons, guidance, flight control, networking and communications. In industry it is used in nuclear power plants, power distribution, aerospace, aviation, public transport and automotive products. This permits a new and disturbing possibility of a large scale Stuxnet-type attack via a network or the Internet on the silicon itself. If the key is known, commands can be embedded into a worm to scan for JTAG, then to attack and reprogram the firmware remotely.
emphasis mine. Key is retrieved using the backdoor. Frankly, if this is true, Microsemi/Actel should get complete ban from all government contracts, including using their chips in any item build for use by the government.NixieBunny ( 859050 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @02:44PM ( #40136487 ) HomepageRe:The actual article ( Score: 3 )
I would not be surprised if it's a factory backdoor that's included in all their products, but is not documented and is assumed to not be a problem because it's not documented.
With regard to reprogramming the chip remotely or by the FPGA itself via the JTAG port: A secure system is one that can't reprogram itself.
When I was designing VMEbus computer boards for a military subcontractor many years ago, every board had a JTAG connector that required the use of another computer with a special cable plugged into the board to perform reprogramming of the FPGAs. None of this update-by-remote-control crap.Blackman-Turkey ( 1115185 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @02:19PM ( #40136305 )Re:The actual article ( Score: 3 , Informative)
No source approved [dla.mil] for Microsemi (Actel) qualified chips in China. If you use non-approved sources then, well, shit happens (although how this HW backdoor would be exploited is kind of unclear).
It seems that People's Republic of China has been misidentified with Taiwan (Republic of China).6031769 ( 829845 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @01:35PM ( #40136031 ) Homepage JournalWait and see ( Score: 5 , Informative)
Either the claims will be backed up by independently reproduced tests or they won't. But, given his apparent track record in this area and the obvious scrutiny this would bring, Skorobogatov must have been sure of his results before announcing this.
Here's his publications list from his University home page, FWIW: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sps32/#Publications [cam.ac.uk]Anonymous Coward , Monday May 28, 2012 @01:36PM ( #40136039 )samzenpus will be looking for a new job soon ( Score: 3 , Funny)Even though this story has been blowing-up on Twitter, there are a few caveats. The backdoor doesn't seem to have been confirmed by anyone else, Skorobogatov is a little short on details, and he is trying to sell the scanning technology used to uncover the vulnerability.
Hey hey HEY! You stop that right this INSTANT, samzenpus! This is Slashdot! We'll have none of your "actual investigative research" nonsense around here! Fear mongering to sell ad space, mister, and that's ALL! Now get back to work! We need more fluffy space-filling articles like that one about the minor holiday labeling bug Microsoft had in the UK! That's what we want to see more of!laing ( 303349 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @02:08PM ( #40136243 )Requires Physical Access ( Score: 5 , Informative)
The back-door described in the white paper requires access to the JTAG (1149.1) interface to exploit. Most deployed systems do not provide an active external interface for JTAG. With physical access to a "secure" system based upon these parts, the techniques described in the white paper allow for a total compromise of all IP within. Without physical access, very little can be done to compromise systems based upon these parts.vlm ( 69642 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @03:34PM ( #40136807 )Where was it designed in? ( Score: 3 )
Where was this undocumented feature/bug designed in? I see plenty of "I hate China" posts, it would be quite hilarious if the fedgov talked the US mfgr into adding this backdoor, then the Chinese built it as designed. Perhaps the plan all along was to blame the Chinese if they're caught.
These are not military chips. They are FPGAs that happen to be used occasionally for military apps. Most of them are sold for other, more commercially exploitable purposes.time961 ( 618278 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @03:51PM ( #40136887 )Big risk is to "secret sauce" for comms & cryp ( Score: 5 , Informative)
This is a physical-access backdoor. You have to have your hands on the hardware to be able to use JTAG. It's not a "remote kill switch" driven by a magic data trigger, it's a mechanism that requires use of a special connector on the circuit board to connect to a dedicated JTAG port that is simply neither used nor accessible in anything resembling normal operation.
That said, it's still pretty bad, because hardware does occasionally end up in the hands of unfriendlies (e.g., crashed drones). FPGAs like these are often used to run classified software radio algorithms with anti-jam and anti-interception goals, or to run classified cryptographic algorithms. If those algorithms can be extracted from otherwise-dead and disassembled equipment, that would be bad--the manufacturer's claim that the FPGA bitstream can't be extracted might be part of the system's security certification assumptions. If that claim is false, and no other counter-measures are place, that could be pretty bad.
Surreptitiously modifying a system in place through the JTAG port is possible, but less of a threat: the adversary would have to get access to the system and then return it without anyone noticing. Also, a backdoor inserted that way would have to co-exist peacefully with all the other functions of the FPGA, a significant challenge both from an intellectual standpoint and from a size/timing standpoint--the FPGA may just not have enough spare capacity or spare cycles. They tend to be packed pretty full, 'coz they're expensive and you want to use all the capacity you have available to do clever stuff.Fnord666 ( 889225 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @09:16PM ( #40138557 ) JournalRe:Big risk is to "secret sauce" for comms & c ( Score: 4 , Insightful)This is a physical-access backdoor. You have to have your hands on the hardware to be able to use JTAG. It's not a "remote kill switch" driven by a magic data trigger, it's a mechanism that requires use of a special connector on the circuit board to connect to a dedicated JTAG port that is simply neither used nor accessible in anything resembling normal operation.
Surreptitiously modifying a system in place through the JTAG port is possible, but less of a threat: the adversary would have to get access to the system and then return it without anyone noticing.
As someone else mentioned in another post, physical access can be a bit of a misnomer. Technically all that is required is for a computer to be connected via the JTAG interface in order to exploit this. This might be a diagnostic computer for example. If that diagnostic computer were to be infected with a targeted payload, there is your physical access.nurb432 ( 527695 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @02:43PM ( #40136477 ) Homepage Journalrtfa-troll ( 1340807 ) , Monday May 28, 2012 @03:22PM ( #40136743 )Re:Is it called JTAG? ( Score: 2 )
I agree it most likely wasn't malicious, but its more than careless, its irresponsible, especially when dealing with military contracts.Re:No China link yet, probably a US backdoor ( Score: 2 )There is no China link to the backdoor yet.
The page with a link to the final paper actually does mention China. However, it's an American design from a US company. I suspect we will find the backdoor was in the original plans. It will be interesting to see however.
Oct 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Today, Bloomberg BusinessWeek published a story claiming that AWS was aware of modified hardware or malicious chips in SuperMicro motherboards in Elemental Media's hardware at the time Amazon acquired Elemental in 2015, and that Amazon was aware of modified hardware or chips in AWS's China Region.
As we shared with Bloomberg BusinessWeek multiple times over the last couple months, this is untrue. At no time, past or present, have we ever found any issues relating to modified hardware or malicious chips in SuperMicro motherboards in any Elemental or Amazon systems. Nor have we engaged in an investigation with the government.
There are so many inaccuracies in this article as it relates to Amazon that they're hard to count. We will name only a few of them here. First, when Amazon was considering acquiring Elemental, we did a lot of due diligence with our own security team, and also commissioned a single external security company to do a security assessment for us as well. That report did not identify any issues with modified chips or hardware. As is typical with most of these audits, it offered some recommended areas to remediate, and we fixed all critical issues before the acquisition closed. This was the sole external security report commissioned. Bloomberg has admittedly never seen our commissioned security report nor any other (and refused to share any details of any purported other report with us).
The article also claims that after learning of hardware modifications and malicious chips in Elemental servers, we conducted a network-wide audit of SuperMicro motherboards and discovered the malicious chips in a Beijing data center. This claim is similarly untrue. The first and most obvious reason is that we never found modified hardware or malicious chips in Elemental servers. Aside from that, we never found modified hardware or malicious chips in servers in any of our data centers. And, this notion that we sold off the hardware and datacenter in China to our partner Sinnet because we wanted to rid ourselves of SuperMicro servers is absurd. Sinnet had been running these data centers since we launched in China, they owned these data centers from the start, and the hardware we "sold" to them was a transfer-of-assets agreement mandated by new China regulations for non-Chinese cloud providers to continue to operate in China.
Amazon employs stringent security standards across our supply chain – investigating all hardware and software prior to going into production and performing regular security audits internally and with our supply chain partners. We further strengthen our security posture by implementing our own hardware designs for critical components such as processors, servers, storage systems, and networking equipment.
Security will always be our top priority. AWS is trusted by many of the world's most risk-sensitive organizations precisely because we have demonstrated this unwavering commitment to putting their security above all else. We are constantly vigilant about potential threats to our customers, and we take swift and decisive action to address them whenever they are identified.
– Steve Schmidt, Chief Information Security Officer
Trumptards are IDIOTs
CashMcCall , 5 hours agoCashMcCall , 5 hours ago
TRUMPTARDS have an enormous amount of surplus time on their hands to forward their Harry Potter Styled Conspiracies.
APPLE AND AMAZON DENIED THE STORY. STORY OVER... GET IT CREEPY?Urban Roman , 5 hours ago
While TRUMPTARDS were posting their Conspiracy Theories and the "TrumpEXPERTS" were embellishing the ridiculous story with their lavish accounts of chip bug design, I was enjoying a Bloomberg windfall.
Having confirmed early that the story was False since AMAZON and APPLE BOTH DENIED IT... and their stock was not moving, I turned to Supermicro which was plunging and down over 50%. I checked the options, and noted they were soft, so I put in bids for long shares and filled blocks at 9 from two accounts.
The moronic TRUMPTARD Conspiracy posts continued, Supermicro is now up over 13.
That is the difference between having a brain in your head or having TRUMPTARD **** FOR BRAINS...Chairman , 5 hours ago
On second thought, this story is just ********. Note that the BBG story never mentions the backdoors that were talked about for over a decade, nor did they mention Mr. Snowden's revelation that those backdoors do exist, and are being used, by the surveillance state.
Since the Chinese factories are manufacturing these things, they'd have all the specs and the blobs and whatever else they need, and would never require a super-secret hardware chip like this. Maybe this MITM chip exists, and maybe it doesn't. But there's nothing to keep China from using the ME on any recent Intel chip, or the equivalent on any recent AMD chip, anywhere.
The purpose of this article is to scare you away from using Huawei or ZTE for anything, and my guess is that it is because those companies did not include these now-standard backdoors in their equipment. Maybe they included Chinese backdoors instead, but again, they wouldn't need a tiny piece of hardware for this MITM attack, since modern processors are all defective by design.DisorderlyConduct , 4 hours ago
I think I will start implementing this as an interview question. If a job candidate is stupid enough to believe this **** then they will not work for me.Kendle C , 5 hours ago
Well, hmmm, could be. To update a PCB is actually really poor work. I would freak my biscuits if I received one of my PCBs with strange pads, traces or parts.
To substitute a part is craftier. To change the content of a part is harder, and nigh impossible to detect without xray.
Even craftier is to change VHDL code in an OTP chip or an ASIC. The package and internal structure is the same but the fuses would be burned different. No one would likely detect this unless they were specifically looking for it.AllBentOutOfShape , 5 hours ago
Well written propaganda fails to prove claims. Everybody in networking and IT knows that switches and routers have access to root, built in, often required by government, backdoors. Scripts are no big thing often used to speed up updates, backups, and troubleshooting. So when western manufacturers began shoveling their work to Taiwan and China, with them they sent millions of text files, including instructions for backdoor access, the means and technology (to do what this **** article is claiming) to modify the design, even classes with default password and bypass operations for future techs. We were shoveling hand over foot designs as fast as we could...all for the almighty dollar while stiffing American workers. So you might say greed trumped security and that fault lies with us. So stuff this cobbled together propaganda piece, warmongering ****.skunzie , 6 hours ago
ZH has definitely been co-oped. This is just the latest propaganda ******** article of the week they've come out with. I'm seeing more and more articles sourced from well known propaganda outlets in recent months.PrivetHedge , 6 hours ago
Reminds me of how the US pulled off covert espionage of the Russians in the 70's using Xerox copiers. The CIA inserted trained Xerox copy repairmen to handle repairs on balky copiers in Russian embassies, etc. When a machine was down the technician inserted altered motherboards which would transmit future copies directly to the CIA. This is a cautionary tale for companies to cover their achilles heel (weakest point) as that is generally the easiest way to infiltrate the unsuspecting company.CashMcCall , 6 hours ago
What another huge load of bollocks from our pharisee master morons.
I guess they think we're as stupid as they are.smacker , 7 hours ago
But but but the story came from one of the chosen money changers Bloomberg... everyone knows a *** would never lie or print a false story at the market openStinkbug 1 , 7 hours ago
With all the existing ***** chips and backdoors on our computers and smartphones planted by the CIA, NSA, M$, Goolag & friends, and now this chip supposedly from China, it won't be long before there's no space left in RAM and on mobos for the chips that actually make the device do what we bought it to do.I Write Code , 7 hours ago
this was going on 20 years ago when it was discovered that digital picture frames from china were collecting passwords and sending them back. it was just a test, so didn't get much press.
now they have the kinks worked out, and are ready for the coup de grace.ChecksandBalances , 7 hours ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/9lac9k/china_used_a_tiny_chip_in_a_hack_that_infiltrated/?st=JMUNFMRR&sh=10c388fbFedPool , 7 hours ago
This story seemed to die. Did anyone find anything indicating someone on our side has actually got a look at the malicious chip, assuming it exists? Technical blogs have nothing, only news rags like NewsMaxx. If 30 companies had these chips surely someone has one. This might be one huge fake news story. Why Bloomberg would publish it is kind of odd.underlying , 7 hours ago
Probably a limited evaluation operation to gauge the population's appetite for war. Pentagram market research. They're probably hitting all of the comment sections around the web as we speak. Don't forget to wave 'hi'.
Heya warmongers. No, we don't want a war yet, k thanks.Urban Roman , 5 hours ago
Since were on the topic let's take a look at the scope hacking tools known to the general public known prior to the Supermicro Server Motherboard Hardware Exploit; (P.S. What the **** do you expect when you have Chinese state owned enterprises, at minimum quasi state owned enterprises in special economic development zones controlled by the Chinese communist party, building motherboards?)
Snowden NSA Leaks published in the gaurdian/intercept
Wikileaks Vault 7 etc....
Spector/Meltdown vulnerability exploits
Random list compiled by TC bitches
This does not include the private/corporate sector hacking pen testing resources and suites which are abundant and easily available to **** up the competition in their own right.
i.e., https://gbhackers.com/hacking-tools-list/Moribundus , 8 hours ago
Exactly. Why would they ever need a super-micro-man-in-the-middle-chip?
Maybe this 'chip' serves some niche in their spycraft, but the article in the keypost ignores a herd of elephants swept under the carpet, and concentrates on a literal speck of dust.Dr. Acula , 8 hours ago
A US-funded biomedical laboratory in Georgia may have conducted bioweapons research under the guise of a drug test, which claimed the lives of at least 73 subjects...new documents "allow us to take a fresh look" at outbreaks of African swine fever in southern Russia in 2007-2018, which "spread from the territory of Georgia into the Russian Federation, European nations and China. The infection strain in the samples collected from animals killed by the disease in those nations was identical to the Georgia-2007 strain." https://www.rt.com/news/440309-us-georgia-toxic-bioweapon-test/
"In a Senate testimony this past February, six major US intelligence heads warned that American citizens shouldn't use Huawei and ZTE products and services." - https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/2/17310870/pentagon-ban-huawei-zte-phones-retail-stores-military-bases
Are these the same intelligence agencies that complain about Russian collusion and cover up 9/11 and pizzagate?
Oct 03, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
James Baker, a former top FBI lawyer, told congressional investigators on Wednesday that the Russia probe was handled in an "abnormal fashion" and was rife with "political bias" according to Fox News , citing two Republican lawmakers present for the closed-door deposition.
"Some of the things that were shared were explosive in nature," Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., told Fox News. "This witness confirmed that things were done in an abnormal fashion. That's extremely troubling."
Meadows claimed the "abnormal" handling of the probe into alleged coordination between Russian officials and the Trump presidential campaign was "a reflection of inherent bias that seems to be evident in certain circles." The FBI agent who opened the Russia case, Peter Strzok, FBI lawyer Lisa Page and others sent politically charged texts, and have since left the bureau. - Fox News
Baker, who worked closely with former FBI Director James Comey, left the bureau earlier this year.
Lawmakers did not provide any specifics about the interview, citing a confidentiality agreement signed with Baker and his attorneys, however they said that he was cooperative and forthcoming about the beginnings of the Russia probe in 2016, as well as the FISA surveillance warrant application to spy on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.
"During the time that the FBI was putting -- that DOJ and FBI were putting together the FISA (surveillance warrant) during the time prior to the election -- there was another source giving information directly to the FBI, which we found the source to be pretty explosive," said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.
Meadows and Jordan would not elaborate on the source, or answer questions about whether the source was a reporter. They did stress that the source who provided information to the FBI's Russia case was not previously known to congressional investigators. - Fox News
According to Fox , Baker "is at the heart of surveillance abuse allegations, and his deposition lays the groundwork for next week's planned closed-door interview with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein."
As the FBI's top lawyer, baker helped secure the FISA warrant on Page, along with three subsequent renewals .
Rosenstein is scheduled to appear on Capitol Hill on October 11 for a closed-door interview, according to Republican House sources, "not a briefing to leadership," and comes on the heels of a New York Times report that said Rosenstein had discussed secretly recording President Trump and removing him from office using the 25th Amendment.
Rosenstein and Trump pushed off a scheduled meeting into limbo amid speculation of his impending firing.
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters Wednesday the meeting remains in limbo.
Oct 03, 2018 | www.chicagotribune.com
But in blaming "revenge on behalf of the Clintons" for the sexual misconduct allegations against him, the Supreme Court nominee is drawing new attention to his time on the Kenneth Starr team investigating Bill Clinton. And in doing so, he's shown he can deliver a Trump-like broadside against detractors even if it casts him in a potentially partisan light.
As a young lawyer, Kavanaugh played a key role on Starr's team investigating sexual misconduct by then-President Bill Clinton, helping to shape one of the most salacious chapters in modern political history.
Kavanaugh spent a good part of the mid-1990s jetting back and forth to Little Rock, Arkansas, digging into the Clintons' background, according to documents that were made public as part of his nomination to the Supreme Court
Oct 02, 2018 | www.unz.com
Nicephorus says: September 29, 2018 at 7:58 am GMT 2,000 Words
We still have to wait to see whether Judge Kavanaugh's appointment will go through, so the most important practical consequence of this shameful exercise in character assassination is as yet unknown. I'm pretty sure he'll eventually be appointed.
But, I think some critical theoretical aspects of the context in which this battle was waged were definitively clarified in the course of this shameful and hugely destructive effort by the Democrat leadership to destroy Judge Kavanaugh's reputation in pursuit of narrow political advantage. On balance, although Judge Kavanaugh and his family were the ones who had to pay the price for this bitter learning experience, all of us should be the long-term beneficiaries of this contest's central but often hidden issues being brought to light and subjected to rational analysis. I want to show what I think these hidden issues are.
What this sordid affair was all about was the zombie-like return-from-the-dead of a phenomenon exposed and pretty much completely invalidated more than thirty years ago, which never should have been permitted to raise its ugly head before an assembly of rational, educated Americans: the "Recovered Memory" (aka "False Memory") Syndrome movement of the 1980s, in which numerous troubled, frequently mentally off-balance, women (and a few men) came forward to declare that they had been the victims of incestual sexual abuse most often actual sexual intercourse at the hands of mature male family members; usually fathers but sometimes uncles, grandfathers, or others.
Their testimony was usually highly emotional and impassioned, leaving an impression very similar to that conveyed last night by Dr. Ford. Many hearers were completely convinced that these events had occurred. I recall having a discussion in the 1990s with two American women who swore up and down that they believed fully 25% of American women had been forced into sexual intercourse with their fathers. I was dumbfounded that they could believe such a thing. But, vast numbers of American women did believe this at that time, and many perhaps most may never have looked sufficiently into the follow-up to these testimonials to realize that the vast majority of such bizarre claims had subsequently been definitively proven invalid.
The "Recovered" (or "False") Memory Syndrome movement emerged in the midst of the steadily radicalizing Feminist Movement in the United States, probably at the very apogee of its extreme evolution, and was a movement in which Freudian therapy was central and Freudian therapists came to play the leading role.
It was only after they had been subjected to extensive pseudo-scientific Freudian "therapy," in which sex always lay prominently at the center, that virtually all of these women came forward with these stories. A major controversy, which arose within the ranks of the Freudians themselves over what was the correct understanding of the Master's teachings, lay at the core of the whole affair. A nd, in this dispute the American ultra-Feminists chose to believe and preach the worst, most salacious, and most vicious possible interpretation of Dr. Freud's highly speculative, evidence-less, and as subsequent study has overwhelmingly shown completely contrived diagnoses.
It's now known that Dr. Freud's journey to the theoretical positions which had become orthodoxy among his followers by the mid-20th century had followed a strange, little known, possibly deliberately self-obscured, and clearly unorthodox course. Beginning with a conviction that cocaine could provide a substantial therapeutic base for solving psychological problems, Freud seems himself to have become for a period a regular consumer of that drug, but subsequently altered the focus of his therapy to hypnosis. After realizing certain limitations to this approach, he shifted again, turning to the so-called "Talking Cure" rooted in provoking word associations, which provided the basis for the classic Freudian method of popular imagination with the patient reclining on a couch and the good Dr. seated behind with his notebook and pen in hand. This is the method he retained for the rest of his life.
The primary fault which has been cited for Freud's methods generally, but which has been particularly critiqued in both hypnosis and the "Talking Cure" as a reason for their invalidation, is the claim that both at least inadvertently incorporate the high probability of suggestion from the therapist. In this view, patient testimony moves subtly, and probably without the patient's awareness, from whatever his or her own understanding might originally have been to the interpretation implicitly propounded by the analyst. Analysis thus follows a circular course, the analyst's theoretical surmise being first subtly communicated to the patient, then confirmed by the patient's casting of his (or, more often her) own ideas within the framework which had been suggested by the analyst. In the end, nothing new is actually discovered. The patient merely replicates the expressed Freudian doctrine.
The particular doctrine at hand was undergoing a critical reworking at this very time, and this important reconsideration of the Master's meaning almost certainly constituted a major, likely the predominating, factor which facilitated the emergence of the Recovered Memory Syndrome movement. Freudian orthodoxy at that time included as an important seemingly its key component the conviction of a child's (even an infant's) sexuality, as expressed through the hypothesized Oedipus Complex for males, and the corresponding Electra Complex for females. In these complexes, Freud speculated that sexually-based neuroses derived from the child's (or infant's) fear of imagined enmity and possible physical threat from the same-sex parent, because of the younger individual's sexual longing for the opposite-sex parent.
This Freudian idea, entirely new to European, American, and probably most other cultures, that children, even infants, were the possessors of an already well-developed sexuality had been severely challenged by Christian and some other traditional authorities, and had been met with repugnance from many individuals in Western society. But, the doctrine, as it then stood, was subject to a further major questioning in the mid-1980s from Freudian historical researcher Jeffrey Masson, who postulated, after examining a collection of Freud's personal writings long kept from popular examination, that the Child Sexual Imagination thesis itself was a pusillanimous and ethically-unjustified retreat from an even more sinister thesis the Master had originally held, but which he had subsequently abandoned because of the controversy and damage to his own career its expression would likely cause. This was the belief, based on many of his earlier interviews of mostly women patients, that it wasn't their imaginations which lay behind their neuroses. They had told him that they had actually been either raped or molested as infants or young girls by their fathers. This was the secret horror hidden away in those long-suppressed writings, now brought into the light of day by Prof. Masson.
Masson's research conclusions were initially widely welcomed within the psychoanalytical fraternity/sorority and shortly melded with the already raging desire of many ultra-Feminist extremists to place the blame for whatever problems and dissatisfactions women in America were encountering in their lives upon the patriarchal society by which they claimed to be oppressed. The problem was men. Countless fathers were raping their daughters. Wow! What an incentive to revolutionary Feminist insurrection! You couldn't find a much better justification for their man-hate than that. Bring on the Feminist Revolution! Men are not only a menace, they are no longer even necessary for procreation, so let's get rid of them entirely. This is the sort of extreme plan some radical Feminists advocated. Many psychoanalysts became their professional facilitators, providing the illusion of medical validation to the stories the analysts themselves had largely engendered. Those women patients, and a few men, became their victims, but in turn became the perpetrators in the savaging of numerous men's lives, as these men were subjected to the most vicious accusations imaginable. Most of these accusations were, in retrospect, clearly fantasies in a ruthless mid-20th century male-witch hunt.
This radical ideology is built upon the conviction that Dr. Freud, in at least this one of his several historical phases of interpretative psychological analysis, was really on to something. But, subsequent evaluation has largely shown that not to be the case. The same critique which had been delivered against the Child Sexual Imagination version of Freud's "Talking Cure" analytical method was equally relevant to this newly discovered Father Molestation thesis: all such notions had been subtly communicated to the patient by the analyst in the course of the interview. Had thousands, hundreds of thousands, even millions of European and American women really been raped or molested by their fathers? Freud offered no corroborating evidence of any kind, and I think it's the consensus of most competent contemporary psychoanalysts to reject this idea. Those few who retain a belief in it betray, I think, an ideological commitment to Radical Feminism, for whose proponents such a view offers an ever tempting platform to justify their monstrous plans for the future of a human race in which males are subjected to the status of slaves or are entirely eliminated.
But, the judicious conclusions of science often perhaps usually fail to promptly percolate down to the comprehension of common humanity on the street, and within the consequent vacuum of understanding scheming politicians can frequently find opportunity to manipulate, obfuscate, and distort facts in order to facilitate their own devious and often highly destructive schemes. Such, I fear, is the situation which has surrounded Dr. Ford. The average American of either sex has absolutely no familiarity with the history, character, or ultimate fate of the Recovered Memory Syndrome movement, and may well fail to realize that the phenomenon has been nearly entirely disproved.
Into this popular intellectual desert walks Dr. Ford, both whose personal history and her strange physical mannerisms in testimony before the Senate clearly indicate she has unfortunately suffered some form of serious psychological disturbance.
Seemingly alienated from her own parents and most immediate family members, she has made her home as far away from the Washington, DC area where she was born as possible within the territorial limits of the continental United States. The focus of her professional research and practice in the field of psychology has lain in therapeutic treatment to overcome mental and emotional trauma, a problem she has acknowledged has been her own disturbing preoccupation for many decades. In 2012 she underwent some sort of psychological counseling with her husband, though the details as far as I know have not emerged. But, it hardly seems likely coincidental that her first documentable expressions of antipathy to Judge Kavanaugh occurred in that year, when it was announced that Judge Kavanaugh was considered the likely Supreme Court appointee should Mit Romney win the Presidential election. Her expressions of antipathy to him have only grown from there.
Dr. Ford is clearly an unfortunate victim of something or someone, but I don't believe it was Judge Kavanaugh. Almost certainly she has been influenced in her denunciations against him by both that long-term preoccupation with her own sense of psychological injury, whatever may have been its cause, and her professional familiarization with contemporary currents of psychological theory, however fallacious, likely mediated by the ministrations of that unnamed counselor in 2012. Subsequently, she has clearly been exploited mercilessly by the scheming Democratic Party officials who have viciously plotted to turn her plight to their own cynical advantage. As in so many cases during the 1980s Recovered Memory movement, she has almost certainly been transformed by both the scientifically unproven doctrines and the conscienceless practitioners of Freudian mysticism from being merely an innocent victim into an active victimizer doubling, tripling, or even quadrupling the pain inherent in her own tragic situation and aggressively projecting it upon helpless others, in this case Judge Kavanaugh and his entire family. She is not a heroine.
PiltdownMan , says: September 29, 2018 at 9:01 am GMTA recovered memory from more than five decades ago. Violet Elizabeth, a irritating younger child who tended to tag along, often wore expensive Kate Greenaway dresses. Her family was new money. William was no misogynist, though. He liked and respected Joan, who was his friend. The second William book is online.Coemgen , says: September 29, 2018 at 10:35 am GMT
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/17125/17125-h/17125-h.htmRules-of-thumbMarkinLA , says: September 29, 2018 at 12:49 pm GMT
-- -- -- -- -- -- -
1. A good offense is the best defense.
2. An ambush backed up by overwhelming force is a good offense.
3. Use of weapons and tactics, of which the defender is unprepared for, is a good offense.
Are Republicans et al. unable to understand basic military strategy? Do we lack the ability to conceive of new tactics and weapons to use against Democrats and Globalists?I realize that it is unacceptable to attack this poor helpless victim so the "it can't be corroborated" card has to be played. However, who else notices how carefully manicured these charges are such that they can never be falsified? This is the actual proof she is a liar and this whole thing is staged.Clyde , says: September 29, 2018 at 12:58 pm GMT
She always takes everybody on some emotional ride right up to the point where she could be exposed but never with enough information so somebody could come out of the woodwork and prove she is a liar.
We also have the infamous letter where we are repeatedly reminded she mailed it BEFORE Kavanaugh was picked. Of course, we only have Feinstein's word for that since nobody saw it until after this crap started. The delay was used to push up the story with new revelation about Mike Judge in a grocery store that shied away from her again with no specific date so Judge could prove she is a liar. This all reeks of testimony gone over and coached by a team of lawyers.
We also have all of our own recollections of high school insecurities and male-female interactions. What freshman or sophomore girl didn't get all giddy at the thought of the older guys hitting on her so she could tell all her friends about her older boyfriend and possibility of going to the prom as a lower classman? All he had to do (assuming he wasn't repulsive physically and he was a bit of a jock) was make the usual play of pretending to be interested and he likely would have been at least getting to first base at the party.
From her pictures she was no Pamela Anderson and would likely have been flattered. The idea that you rape someone without trying to get the milk handed to you on a silver platter is ridiculous.
This is another female driven hysteria based on lies like the child molestation and satanic cult hysterias of years past. Those were all driven by crazy or politically motivated women who whipped up the rest of the ignorant females.@Anon
Outside doors enter public areas kitchen sunroom living rooms not bedrooms. An outside door into a master bedroom with attached bathroom is a red flag that it's intended for an illegal what's called in law apartment
Your post is very perceptive and just might be how it all went down. With the complications of couples' counseling over her demand for the bizarre double main entry doors. (lulz) Though I would think any family that built an illegal in-law apartment into their Palo Alto house and deployed it, would be ratted out by their neighbors.
Oct 02, 2018 | www.unz.com
Anon  Disclaimer says: September 29, 2018 at 8:28 am GMT 400 Words
I think I've figured out why they had to go to couples counseling about an outside door and why she came up with claim that she needed an outside bedroom door because she'd been assaulted 37 years ago. The Palo Alto building codes for single family homes were created to make sure single family homes remained single family and weren't chopped up into apartments.
Outside doors enter public areas kitchen sunroom living rooms not bedrooms. An outside door into a master bedroom with attached bathroom is a red flag that it's intended for an illegal what's called in law apartment
There's a unit It's a stove 2 ft counter space and sink. The stoves electric and plugs into an ordinary household electricity. It's backed against the bathroom wall. Break through the wall, connect the pipes running water for the sink. Add an outside door and it's a small apartment.
Assume they didn't want to make it an apartment just a master bedroom. Usually the contractor pulls the permits routinely. But an outside bedroom door is complicated. The permits will cost more. It might require an exemption and a hearing They night need a lawyer. And they might not get the permit.
So she wants the door. Husband says waste of money and trouble. Contractor says call me when you're ready. So they go to counseling Husband explains why the door's unreasonable. Therapist asks wife why she " really deep down" needs the door. Wife makes up the story about attempted rape 35 years ago flashbacks If only there were 2 doors in that imaginary bedroom she could have escaped.
Kacanaugh was nominated. CIA searched for sex problems in his working life. Found nothing Searched law school and college found nothing. In desperation searched high school found nothing. Searched CIA personnel records which go back to grade school and found one of their own employees was about Kavanaugh's age and attended a high school near his and the students socialized.
She's 3rd generation CIA. grandfather assistant director. Father CIA contractor who managed CIA unofficial band accounts. And she runs a CIA recruitment office.
I'm puzzled why CIA is so against Kavanaugh?
Sep 29, 2018 | www.unz.com
wren , says: September 29, 2018 at 10:37 am GMTIt seems that Flake was not only emotionally abused by those ladies in the elevator, he was played as well.
Hopefully the FBI will investigate this collusion between Soros and the Democrats and Ms. Katz to influence the results of the judicial nomination process.
Sep 27, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.orgBM , Sep 26, 2018 12:04:25 PM | link
Last Friday the New York Times published a story that reflected negatively on the loyalty of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein towards President Trump. Rosenstein, the NYT claimed, suggested to wiretap Trump and to remove him by using the 25th amendment. Other news reports contradicted the claim and Rosenstein himself denied it.
The report was a trap to push Trump towards an impulsive firing of the number two in the Justice Department, a repeat of Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre . The Democrats would have profited from such an ' October surprise ' in the November 6 midterm elections. A campaign to exploit such a scandal to get-out-the-votes was already well prepared .
The trap did not work. The only one who panicked was Rosenstein. He feared for his reputation should he get fired. To prevent such damage he offered to resign amicably. He tried this at least three times:By Friday evening, concerned about testifying to Congress over the revelations that he discussed wearing a wire to the Oval Office and invoking the constitutional trigger to remove Mr. Trump from office, Mr. Rosenstein had become convinced that he should resign, according to people close to him. He offered during a late-day visit to the White House to quit, according to one person familiar with the encounter, but John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff, demurred.
Also over the weekend, Mr. Rosenstein again told Mr. Kelly that he was considering resigning. On Sunday, Mr. Rosenstein repeated the assertion in a call with Donald F. McGahn II, the White House counsel. Mr. McGahn -- [...] -- asked Mr. Rosenstein to postpone their discussion until Monday.
By about 9 a.m. Monday, Mr. Rosenstein was in his office on the fourth floor of the Justice Department when reporters started calling. Was it true that Mr. Rosenstein was planning to resign, they asked.
At the White House the deputy attorney general slipped into a side entrance to the West Wing and headed to the White House counsel's office to meet with Mr. McGahn, who had by then been told by Mr. Kelly that Mr. Rosenstein was on his way and wanted to resign.
McGhan punted the issue back to Kelly and finally Rosenstein spoke with Trump. Trump did not fire him nor did he resign. It is now expected that he will stay until the end of the year or even longer :President Trump told advisers he is open to keeping Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on the job, and allies of the No. 2 Justice Department official said Tuesday he has given them the impression he doesn't plan to quit.
The trap did not work. Neither did Trump panic nor did the White House allow the panicking Rod Rosenstein to pull the trigger. The people who set this up, by leaking some dubious FBI memo to the NYT , did not achieve their aims.
There are only six weeks left until the midterm elections. What other October surprises might be planned by either side?
Posted by b on September 26, 2018 at 11:20 AM | PermalinkThis account gives an interesting twist, that Trump wants to keep Rosenstein as leverage.
BM , Sep 26, 2018 12:04:25 PM | linkAdrian E. , Sep 26, 2018 12:22:47 PM | linkI think it is not in the interest of Trump to do anything that could look like hampering the Mueller investigation. It might be in his interest to try to force Mueller to show what he has bevore the midterm elections, but that could also be seen as a form of hampering.karlof1 , Sep 26, 2018 12:42:35 PM | link
I think there are already lots of indications that the whole Russiagate collusion story was fabricated. The messages between Peter Strzok und Lisa Page point towards this direction, and it seems that different stories that were used for Russiagate were connected.
It seems that the Steele dossier played a crucial role for getting warrants for spying on the Trump campaign and for starting the media campaign about Trump-Russia "collusion". Obviously, the Steele dossier is a rather implausible conspiracy theory (allegedly, Russia made preparations for Trump's candidacy years earlier when hardly anyone thought Trump would have the slightest chance of being nominated by a major party), contains no evidence for the allegations, and the elements that can be verified are either banal and don't show collusion or they are false (e.g. Trump's lawyer going to Prague, it seems he has an alibi, and there are leaks that there was another person named Michael Cohen, without a connection to Trump, who flew to Prague, so Steele probably had access to flight data, but did not do further verifications).
A further strand of "Russiagate" is the story around Papadopoulos. First, it should be noted that it hardly shows foreknowledge of the DNC leaks when someone may have speculated that Russia may have e-mails from Hillary Clinton - at that time, the deleted mails from Clinton's private server were talked about a lot, and one of the concerns that was often mentioned was that Clinton's private server may have been hacked by Russia or China. None of the versions of what Papadopoulos was allegedly told by Mifsud and told Downer specifically mention DNC or Podesta e-mails. Second, the people involved had close connections to Western intelligence services. Mifsud had close ties with important EU institutions and was connected with educational institutions used by Western intelligence agencies (mainly Italian, British, FBI). If he really was a Russian spy, there would have been larger consequences, and the FBI would hardly have let him go after questioning him. According to a book by Roh and Pastor who have known Mifsud for a long time, he denies having told Papadopoulos anything about damaging material about Hillary Clinton (Mifsud also said that in an interview), and Mifsud suspects Papadopoulos of being a provocateur of Western intelligence services - Papadopoulos forcefully tried to create connections between the Trump campaign and Russians, but both sides were not willing to go along (a representative of a Russian think tank which Papadopoulos asked to invite Trump answered that the Trump campaign should send an official request, which never followed). Papadopoulos was in (probably frequent) contact with FBI informer Stefan Halper, and it may be that Papadopoulos was an unwitting provocateur because of events Stefan Halper arranged. The Australian diplomat Downer has connections to the Clinton foundation (he helped arranging large payments by Australia) and Western secret services. Third, what has exactly been said by whom is disputed. As mentioned, Mifsud denies mentioning anything about damaging material on Hillary Clinton to Papadopoulos (the only one who claims this is Papadopoulos), and Papadopoulos denies mentioning e-mails to Downer. It seems, Papadopoulos were only half-willing participants in the setup arranged by Stefan Halper whose goal was to have some background for the message that could be received from Downer. Papadopoulos' wife has shared a picture of Stefan Halper and Downer together, which also fits the idea that this story was set up by FBI informant Halper with Downer.
The visit of the Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya was arranged by Fusion GPS, and she met with him before and after the meeting she met with Glen Simpson.
Of course, we are just in the beginning, there is certainly enough concrete material for starting an investigation (unlike with the alleged Trump-Russia collusion), but many details are still open. Those who presumably set up the collusion story went from offensive to defensive, even if that might not be clear if someone reads particularly biased media. Now, the time until the midterms certainly is not enough for conducting and concluding such an investigation. But it should be enough for unclassifying and publishing some documents that shed further light on these events.
The time for more decisive action against those who set up Russiagate may be after the midterm elections, and how easy that will be probably partly depends on the election result. Therefore, I suppose that Trump and other Republicans will strongly press for important documents being unclassified and published before the elections.Trump admin and GOP Congress are doing almost everything possible to alienate the majority of the public on a wide spectrum of issues that's also helped threaten the positions of Republicans masquerading as Democrats. The fallout from the 2016 Primary and subsequent disclosures about Clinton and DNC corruption and law breaking--meddling in elections and caucuses--has emboldened numerous people--particularly women--who were previously politically apathetic, not just to run for office, but also to work to get like-minded candidates elected. Sanders called for an insurrection--and yes, he's still sheep dogging--and it's emerged and isn't totally controlled by the DemParty despite its efforts: The cat's out of the bag.donkeytale , Sep 26, 2018 1:44:18 PM | link
Now I expect the usual attacks using the trite adage that voting doesn't matter. Well, guess what, Trump's election proves that adage to be 100% false. There's only one path to making America Great and that's by getting the neoliberals and neocons out of government; and the only way to do that is to run candidates with opposing positions and elect them--then--once in office, they need to oust the vermin from the bureaucracy--Drain the Swamp, as Trump put it. I know it can be done as it's been done before during two different epochs of US History. And the System was just as rigged against popular success than as it is now.Karlof1 I agree w you 100%. Voters can make a difference and change is still possible however unlikely and rare. The problem is voter complacency which is fed by cynicism. Ironically younger liberal voters tend to be the most complacent especially at the midterm elections. This year complacency doesn't appear to be an issue so we will probably see a Dem House in January if not also a Dem Senate.uuu , Sep 26, 2018 2:39:10 PM | link
My take on Rosenstein is he went to the WH to force Trump to accept his resignation or fire him or keep him and thus shut him up either way because even as large a fool as Trump can't be so stupid as to fire RR before the midterms. A trap laid by the Deputy AG not the media imho to also take heat off Mueller.Trump could shock the world by being on his best behavior for a few weeks. (j/k don't hold your breath).karlof1 , Sep 26, 2018 3:15:48 PM | link Russ , Sep 26, 2018 3:26:10 PM | link
Just a little review:
In November, Dems are expected to take the House of Representatives by a modest margin. The House, not the Senate determines impeachment. Impeachment is like an indictment -- the Senate would then have a "trial" of sorts, and then to convict, you need 2/3 majority of Senators. Nobody expects that.
Nixon actually resigned out of shame after being impeached. Clinton didn't. Trump gives zero f**ks so this outcome isn't even worth discussing.
The Senate is more important. It is just barely within reach for Democrats if everything goes in their favor. If they win every single seat that is competitive, Democrats get 51/100 seats, plus 2 independents who side with them, but minus a couple of Democrats-in-name-only who regularly vote with Republicans (West Virginia's Manchin for example). Recall that the Vice President (Pence) is the tie-breaking vote in the Senate.
More realistically, in a still optimistic scenario, Democrats will lose one or more of the competitive races, and end up with 49-50 votes in the Senate. (they are expected to win big in 2 years in 2020, due to many more Republicans facing re-election then).Only someone morbidly partisan within the Corporate One-Party would bother seeking the impeachment of a fungible geek like a US president. Indeed, those fixated on impeachment evidently have no rationale beyond Trump Derangement Syndrome. To replace Trump with Pence would be no improvement and most likely would make things worse. Trump and Pence share the corporate globalization ideology and goals, but Trump's more chaotic execution is more likely to lead to chaotic, perhaps system-destructive effects more quickly than a more disciplined execution. The same is true of any Democrat we could envision replacing Trump in 2020.div>
That's why it was a good thing that Trump won in 2016: He's more likely to bring about a faster collapse of the US empire and of the globalization system in general. Not because these are his goals, but because his indiscipline adds a much-needed wild card to the deck.
Needless to say, humanity and the Earth have nothing to lose, as we're slowly but surely being exterminated once and for all regardless.
Sep 26, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
An aide to George Soros, Michael Vachon, has confirmed a February report that the left-wing billionaire financier has funded an ongoing effort by Fusion GPS and ex-Feinstein staffer and former FBI agent, Dan Jones, to privately continue the Trump-Russia investigation, according to the Daily Caller 's Chuck Ross.
- George Soros has admitted to funding an ongoing private Trump-Russia investigation conducted by Fusion GPS and a former FBI agent and staffer for Dianne Feinstein
- In February, it emerged that Soros and a group of "mystery donors" had funded a $50 million "war chest" - as revealed in a House Intel Committee report
- The former FBI agent and Feinstein staffer, Dan Jones, reportedly claimed to be working with former MI6 agent Christopher Steele as part of the ongoing investigation
Vachon made the admission to the Washington Post 's David Ignatious - who has previously been accused of being a deep-state conduit.
Ignatius notes at the end of a Tuesday article downplaying GOP assertions that the Obama administration and Clinton campaign actually colluded with Russia to defeat Trump; "Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson declined to comment for this article. Soros's spokesman, Michael Vachon, told me that Soros hadn't funded Fusion GPS directly but had made a grant to the Democracy Integrity Project, which used Fusion GPS as a contractor. "The Democracy Integrity Project - according to the Caller, was formed in 2017 by Jones.effort was originally revealed in February and reported on by The Federalist , after a series of leaked text messages between Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) and lobbyist Adam Waldman suggested that Daniel J. Jones - an ex-FBI investigator and former Feinstein staffer, was " intimately involved with ongoing efforts to retroactively validate a series of salacious and unverified memos published by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent, and Fusion GPS. "
The Post column confirms what a Washington, D.C., lawyer named Adam Waldman told The Daily Caller News Foundation about a conversation he had with Jones in March 2017.
Waldman was an attorney for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. He also worked in some capacity for Christopher Steele, according to text messages he exchanged with Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence panel.
In what the Post's Ignatius noted was an "incestuous" relationship, Steele, a former MI6 officer, has done work for the Kremlin-linked Deripaska in the past .
Waldman told TheDCNF that Jones approached him on March 15, 2017 through text message asking to meet.
"Dan Jones here from the Democracy Integrity Project. Chris wanted us to connect," he wrote, seemingly referring to Steele. At a meeting two days later, Waldman said that Jones told him that he was working with Steele and Fusion GPS and that their project was being funded by Soros and a group of Silicon Valley billionaires . - Daily Caller
In short, Jones is working with Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele to continue their investigation into Donald Trump, using a $50 million war chest just revealed by the House Intel Committee report.
Jones also runs the Penn Quarter Group - a "research and investigative advisory" firm whose website was registered in April of 2016, days before Steele delivered his first in a series of Trump-Russia memos to Fusion GPS . Jones also began tweeting out articles suggesting illicit ties between the Trump campaign and Russia as early as 2017.
Steele's work during the 2016 election culminated in the salacious and unverified 35-page "Steele dossier" used to obtain a FISA warrant against then-President Trump (which, as we reported on Friday, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper leaked the details to CNN 's Jake Tapper prior to the seemingly coordinated publication by BuzzFeed ).
An April House Intel Report notes that in March 2017, Jones told the FBI that he was working with Steele and Fusion GPS, with funding to the tune of $50 million.
"In late March 2017, Jones met with FBI regarding PQG, which he described as 'exposing foreign influence in Western election,'" reads the House Intel report. "[Redacted] told FBI that PQG was being funded by 7 to 10 wealthy donors located primarily in New York and California, who provided approximately $50 million ."
"[Redacted] further stated that PQG had secured the services of Steele, his associate [redacted], and Fusion GPS to continue exposing Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election," reads the report, which adds that Jones " planned to share the information he obtained with policymakers and with the press ."
And the Daily Caller 's Chuck Ross noted at the time, Jones "also offered to provide PQG's entire holdings to the FBI" according to the report, citing a "FD-302" transcript of the interview he gave to the FBI.
Of note, during Congressional testimony last year when Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) asked Glenn Simpson, co-founder of Fusion GPS, if he was still being paid for work related to the dossier , Simpson refused to answer . And while the dossier came under fire for " salacious and unverified " claims, a January 8 New York Times profile of Glenn Simpson confirmed that dossier-related work continues.
Sean Davis of The Federalist reported in February that Jones' name was mentioned in a list of individuals from a January 25 Congressional letter from Senators Grassley and Graham to various Democratic party leaders who were likely involved in Fusion GPS's 2016 efforts. The letter sought all communications between the Democrats and a list of 40 individuals or entities, of which Jones is one.
Still no word on whether Jones and Fusion GPS - funded by Soros - have been able to find a connection between Trump and Russia, but we're sure they'll keep plugging away.
insanelysane , 8 minutes agoHyzer , 3 minutes ago
More fake dossiers? After the Kav fiasco of fake accusations, who the **** is going to believe in anything else coming from Steele and Fusion and company?Boscovius , 8 minutes ago
The New York Times for one.medium giraffe , 11 minutes ago
For good or bad, the Founders gave Treason a very strict definition. It probably won't apply to very many of these fucko's. But yes, Sedition is most certainly on the menu.???ö? , 13 minutes ago
"You underestimate the power of the Dark Side. If you will not fight, then you will meet your destiny."
-Darth SorosGrumbleduke , 14 minutes ago
That's probably called SEDITION.
are these assholes some kind of an exile government?
Where were they exactly exiled from, then? How about you yanks send some democracy bombs their way, for a change?
Look at them as sacrificial lambs: the world would cheer, give you props and support like after 9/11. Meanwhile new psychos with unimaginable wealth and cold-heartedness will quietly take over. Don't you worry, we'll all get fucked hard.
One way or another - this clown show won't last for long.
You think your/"our" children will ever forgive us?
Sep 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by Elias Hazou via TheDuran.com,
Before getting down to brass tacks, let me say that I loathe penning articles like this; loathe writing about myself or in the first person, because a reporter should report the news, not be the news. Yet I grudgingly make this exception because, ironically, it happens to be newsworthy. To cut to the chase, it concerns Anglo-American financier Bill Browder and the Sergei Magnitsky affair. I, like others in the news business I'd venture to guess, feel led astray by Browder.
This is no excuse. I didn't do my due diligence, and take full responsibility for erroneous information printed under my name. For that, I apologize to readers. I refer to two articles of mine published in a Cypriot publication, dated December 25, 2015 and January 6, 2016.
Browder's basic story, as he has told it time and again, goes like this: in June 2007, Russian police officers raided the Moscow offices of Browder's firm Hermitage, confiscating company seals, certificates of incorporation, and computers.
Browder says the owners and directors of Hermitage-owned companies were subsequently changed, using these seized documents. Corrupt courts were used to create fake debts for these companies, which allowed for the taxes they had previously paid to the Russian Treasury to be refunded to what were now re-registered companies. The funds stolen from the Russian state were then laundered through banks and shell companies.
The scheme is said to have been planned earlier in Cyprus by Russian law enforcement and tax officials in cahoots with criminal elements.
All this was supposedly discovered by Magnitsky, whom Browder had tasked with investigating what happened. When Magnitsky reported the fraud, some of the nefarious characters involved had him arrested and jailed. He refused to retract, and died while in pre-trial detention.
In my first article, I wrote: "Magnitsky, a 37-year-old Russian accountant, died in jail in 2009 after he exposed huge tax embezzlement "
False . Contrary to the above story that has been rehashed countless times, Magnitsky did not expose any tax fraud, did not blow the whistle.
The interrogation reports show that Magnitsky had in fact been summoned by Russian authorities as a witness to an already ongoing investigation into Hermitage. Nor he did he accuse Russian investigators Karpov and/or Kuznetsov of committing the $230 million treasury fraud, as Browder claims.
Magnitsky did not disclose the theft. He first mentioned it in testimony in October 2008. But it had already been reported in the New York Times on July 24, 2008. In reality, the whistleblower was a certain Rimma Starova. She worked for one of the implicated shell companies and, having read in the papers that authorities were investigating, went to police to give testimony in April 2008 six months before Magnitsky spoke of the scam for the first time (see here and here ).
Why, then, did I report that about Magnitsky? Because at the time my sole source for the story was Team Browder, who had reached out to the Cyprus Mail and with whom I communicated via email. I was provided with 'information', flow charts and so on. All looking very professional and compelling.
At the time of the first article, I knew next to nothing about the Magnitsky/Browder affair. I had to go through media reports to get the gist, and then get up to speed with Browder's latest claims that a Cypriot law firm, which counted the Hermitage Fund among its clients, had just been 'raided' by Cypriot police. The article had to be written and delivered on the same day. In retrospect I should have asked for more time a lot more time and Devil take the deadlines.
For the second article, I conversed briefly on the phone with the soft-spoken Browder himself, who handed down the gospel on the Magnitsky affair. Under the time constraints, and trusting that my sources could at least be relied upon for basic information which they presented as facts, I went along with it. I was played. But let's be clear: I let myself down too.
In the ensuing weeks and months, I didn't follow up on the story as my gut told me something was wrong: villains and malign actors operating in a Wild West Russia, and at the centre of it all, a heroic Magnitsky who paid with his life the kind of script that Hollywood execs would kill for.
Subsequently I mentally filed away the Browder story, while being aware it was in the news.
But the real red pill was a documentary by Russian filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov, which came to my attention a few weeks ago.
Titled 'The Magnitsky Act Behind The Scenes', it does a magisterial job of depicting how the director initially took Browder's story on faith, only to end up questioning everything. The docudrama dissects, disassembles and dismantles Browder's narrative, as Nekrasov by no means a Putin apologist delves deeper down into the rabbit hole.
The director had set out to make a poignant film about Magnitsky's tragedy, but became increasingly troubled as the facts he uncovered didn't stack up with Browder's account, he claims.
The 'aha' moment arrives when Nekrasov appears to show solid proof that Magnitsky blew no whistle.
Not only that, but in his depositions the first one dating to 2006, well before Hermitage's offices were raided Magnitsky did not accuse any police officers of being part of the 'theft' of Browder's companies and the subsequent alleged $230m tax rebate fraud.
The point can't be stressed enough, as this very claim is the lynchpin of Browder's account. In his bestseller Red Notice, Browder alleges that Magnitsky was arrested because he exposed two corrupt police officers, and that he was jailed and tortured because he wouldn't retract.
We are meant to take Browder's word for it.
It gets worse for Nekrasov, as he goes on to discover that Magnitsky was no lawyer. He did not have a lawyer's license. Rather, he was an accountant/auditor who worked for Moscow law firm Firestone Duncan. Yet every chance he gets, Browder still refers to Magnitsky as 'a lawyer' or 'my lawyer'.
The clincher comes late in the film, with footage from Browder's April 15, 2015 deposition in a US federal court, in the Prevezon case. The case, brought by the US Justice Department at Browder's instigation, targeted a Russian national who Browder said had received $1.9m of the $230m tax fraud.
In the deposition, Browder is asked if Magnitsky had a law degree in Russia. "I'm not aware that he did," he replies.
The full deposition, some six hours long, is (still) available on Youtube . As penance for past transgressions, I watched it in its entirety. While refraining from using adjectives to describe it, I shall simply cite some examples and let readers decide on Browder's credibility. Browder seems to suffer an almost total memory blackout as a lawyer begins firing questions at him. He cannot recall, or does not know, where he or his team got the information concerning the alleged illicit transfer of funds from Hermitage-owned companies.
This is despite the fact that the now-famous Powerpoint presentations hosted on so many 'anti-corruption' websites and recited by 'human rights' NGOs were prepared by Browder's own team.
Nor does he recall where, or how, he and his team obtained information on the amounts of the 'stolen' funds funnelled into companies. When it's pointed out that in any case this information would be privileged banking secrecy and so forth Browder appears to be at a loss.
According to Team Browder, in 2007 the 'Klyuev gang' together with Russian interior ministry officials travelled to Cyprus, ostensibly to set up the tax rebate scam using shell companies. But in his deposition, the Anglo-American businessman cannot remember, or does not know, how his team obtained the travel information of the conspirators.
He can't explain how they acquired the flight records and dates, doesn't have any documentation at hand, and isn't aware if any such documentation exists.
Browder claims his 'Justice for Magnitsky' campaign, which among other things has led to US sanctions on Russian persons, is all about vindicating the young man. Were that true, one would have expected Browder to go out of his way to aid Magnitsky in his hour of need.
The deposition does not bear that out.
Lawyer: "Did anyone coordinate on your behalf with Firestone Duncan about the defence of Mr Magnitsky?"
Browder: "I don't know. I don't remember."
Going back to Nekrasov's film, a standout segment is where the filmmaker looks at a briefing document prepared by Team Browder concerning the June 2007 raid by Russian police officers. In it, Browder claims the cops beat up Victor Poryugin, a lawyer with the firm.
The lawyer was then "hospitalized for two weeks," according to Browder's presentation, which includes a photo of the beaten-up lawyer. Except, it turns out the man pictured is not Poryugin at all. Rather, the photo is actually of Jim Zwerg, an American human rights activist beaten up during a street protest in 1961 (see here and here ).
Nekrasov sits down with German politician Marieluise Beck. She was a member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (Pace), which compiled a report that made Magnitsky a cause celebre.
You can see Beck's jaw drop when Nekrasov informs her that Magnitsky did not report the fraud, that he was in fact under investigation.
It transpires that Pace, as well as human rights activists, were getting their information from one source Browder. Later, the Council of Europe's Andreas Gross admits on camera that their entire investigation into the Magnitsky affair was based on Browder's info and that they relied on translations of Russian documents provided by Browder's team because, as Gross puts it, "I don't speak Russian myself."
That hit home I, too, had been fed information from a single source, not bothering to verify it. I, too, initially went with the assumption that because Russia is said to be a land of endemic corruption, then Browder's story sounded plausible if not entirely credible.
For me, the takeaway is this gem from Nekrasov's narration:
"I was regularly overcome by deep unease. Was I defending a system that killed Magnitsky, even if I'd found no proof that he'd been murdered?"
Bull's-eye. Nekrasov has arrived at a crossroads, the moment where one's mettle is tested: do I pursue the facts wherever they may lead, even if they take me out of my comfort zone? What is more important: the truth, or the narrative? Nekrasov chose the former. As do I.
Like with everything else, specific allegations must be assessed independently of one's general opinion of the Russian state. They are two distinct issues. Say Browder never existed; does that make Russia a paradise?
I suspect Team Browder may scrub me from their mailing list; one can live with that.
oncemore1 , 6 minutes agoSlipstream , 6 minutes ago
Soros and Browder are the same tribe. FULLSTOP.Usura , 8 minutes ago
Wow. That's a big **** up. But at least this guy is a journalist with ethics. He got it wrong and has said so, to set the record straight. This should be a case taught in every journalism school in the world. Unfortunately, I don't see the Magnitsky Act being repealed any time soon.Thordoom , 12 minutes ago
Bill Browder is a lying ***herbivore , 23 minutes ago
Andrei Nekrasov now has webpage dedicated to The Magnitsky Act Behind the Scenes.
You can watch it here online.
Please support his movie.Thordoom , 33 minutes ago
I watched the documentary too. The depositions of Browder were devastating to any notion of him as truth-teller. And yet, he managed to dupe politicians and media around the world.resistedliving , 52 minutes ago
The only good thing Yeltsin did in his miserable life was to say " **** you " to Bill Clinton in the end when he found out how they wanted to set him up with that 7 billion of IMF money they stolen in order to put Boris Berezovsky in the charge of Russia as a president for hire and stole anything that was not welded down. Yeltsin knowing that the only way for Russia to survive was to put Vladimir Putin in charge to clense the unclean filth that infested Russia in the 90sThordoom , 40 minutes ago
Don't trust Browder and his self-interests much but trust this guy less.
Browser knows he'll never see that money again and has spent his own funds on his one man missionRationalLuddite , 31 minutes ago
Stupid moron he is spending Knohorkovsky's money and HSBC bank money. Half of the UK and US government officials and intl officials and Harward boys are deeply involved in this looting of Russian people in the 90s.WTFUD , 29 minutes ago
Classic Reverse blockade lie by you Restedliving. Good luck moving the middle on Browder . He's just not that bright in lying so I suppose your Talmudic exegesis honed Accusatory Inversion is worth a try.
Please keep it up. Seriously. "Agitprop"😄😄😄😄
You are like a Browder red-pill dispenser with every incoherent mendacious utterance. Thank you mate :*The Paucity of Hope , 54 minutes ago
Bruiser Browser Browder, ex light-heavyweight champion of La-La Potemkin Village, Ninnyapolis, USA.
Shouldn't Fakebook be banning the US Government for a plethora of Fake News? Then again it's a nice fit for these 2 entities, a cosy relationship.Ahmeexnal , 57 minutes ago
Nekrasov's movie has been disappeared, but was excellent. Also, look at The Forecaster, about Martin Armstrong. It talks about Hermatage Capital and was blocked in the US and Switzerland for several years.chunga , 38 minutes ago
Browder must hang!
Not a single person in the US gov will even acknowledge this. None. Not one.
At the same time the US domestic affairs revolve around unsubstantiated stories of SC nominee penis wagging, special prosecutors investigating **** actress affairs/bribery with POTUS, FBI, DOJ off the rails, while at the same time asserting a moral authority to sanction and/or attack other countries as though it's an obligation or entitlement.
Sep 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
by Tyler Durden Mon, 09/24/2018 - 21:25 119 SHARES Authored by Elizabeth Vos via DisobedientMedia.com,
Disobedient Media has closely followed the work of the Forensicator , whose analysis has shed much light on the publications by the Guccifer 2.0 persona for over a year. In view of the more recent work published by the Forensicator regarding potential media collusion with Guccifer 2.0, we are inclined to revisit an interview given by WikiLeaks Editor-In-Chief Julian Assange in August of 2016, prior to the publication of the Podesta Emails in October, and the November US Presidential election.During the interview, partially transcribed below, Assange makes a number of salient points on the differentiation between the thousands of pristine emails WikiLeaks received, and those which had surfaced in other US outlets by that date. Though Assange does not name the Guccifer 2.0 persona directly throughout the interview, he does name multiple outlets which publicized Guccifer 2.0's documents.
The significance of revisiting Assange's statements is the degree to which his most significant claim is corroborated or paralleled by the Forensicator's analysis. This is of enhanced import in light of allegations by Robert Mueller (not to mention the legacy media), despite a total absence of evidence, that Guccifer 2.0 was WikiLeaks's source of the DNC and Podesta emails.
This author previously discussed the possibility that Assange's current isolation might stem in part from the likelihood that upon expulsion from the embassy, Julian Assange could provide evidential proof that the DNC emails and Podesta emails published by WikiLeaks were not sourced from Russia, or backed by the Kremlin, all without disclosing the identity of their source.
Julian Assange told RT :
"In the US media there has been a deliberate conflation between DNC leaks, which is what we've been publishing, and DNC hacks, of the US Democratic Party which have occurred over the last two years, by their own admission what [Hillary Clinton] is attempting to do is to conflate our publication of pristine emails – no one in the Democratic party argues that a single email is not completely valid. That hasn't been done. The head of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, has rolled as a result.
And whatever hacking has occurred, of the DNC or other political organizations in the United States, by a range of actors – in the middle, we have something, which is the publication by other media organizations, of information reportedly from the DNC, and that seems to be the case. That's the publication of word documents in pdfs published by The Hill, by Gawker, by The Smoking Gun. This is a completely separate batch of documents, compared to the 20,000 pristine emails that we have at WikiLeaks.
In this [separate] batch of documents, released by these other media organizations, there are claims that in the metadata, someone has done a document to pdf conversion, and in some cases the language of the computer that was used for that conversion was Russian. So that's the circumstantial evidence that some Russian was involved, or someone who wanted to make it look like a Russian was involved, with these other media organizations. That's not the case for the material we released.
The Hillary Clinton hack campaign has a serious problem in trying to figure out how to counter-spin our publication because the emails are un-arguable There's an attempt to bring in a meta-story. And the meta-story is, did some hacker obtain these emails? Ok. Well, people have suggested that there's evidence that the DNC has been hacked. I'm not at all surprised its been hacked. If you read very carefully, they say it's been hacked many times over the last two years. Our sources say that DNC security is like Swiss Cheese.
Hillary Clinton is saying, untruthfully, that she knows who the source of our emails are. Now, she didn't quite say "our emails." She's playing some games, because there have been other publications by The Hill, by Gawker, other US media, of different documents, not emails. So, we have to separate the various DNC or RNC hacks that have occurred over the years, and who's done that. The source: we know who the source is, it's the Democratic National Committee itself. And our sources who gave these materials, and other pending materials, to us. These are all different questions. "
The core assertion made by Assange in the above-transcribed segment of his 2016 interview with RT is the differentiation between WikiLeaks's publications from the altered documents released by Guccifer 2.0 (after being pre-released to US media outlets as referenced by Assange). This finer point is one that is corroborated by the Forensicator's analysis, and one which it seems much of the public has yet to entirely digest.
Disobedient Media previously wrote regarding the Forensicator's publication of Did Guccifer 2 Plant his Russian Fingerprints? :
"Ars Technica found "Russian fingerprints" in a PDF posted by Gawker the previous day. Apparently, both Gawker and The Smoking Gun (TSG) had received pre-release copies of Guccifer 2.0's first batch of documents; Guccifer 2.0 would post them later, on his WordPress.com blog site. Although neither Gawker nor TSG reported on these Russian error messages, some readers noticed them and mentioned them in social media forums; Ars Technica was likely the first media outlet to cover those "Russian fingerprints."
The Forensicator's analysis cannot enlighten us as to the ultimate source of WikiLeaks's releases. At present, there is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that Guccifer 2.0 was, or was not, WikiLeaks' source. There is no evidence connecting Guccifer 2.0 with WikiLeaks, but there is likewise no evidence to rule out a connection.
It is nonetheless critically important, as Assange indicated, to differentiate between the files published by Guccifer 2.0 and those released by WikiLeaks. None of the "altered" documents (with supposed Russian fingerprints) published by Guccifer 2.0 appear in WikiLeaks's publications.
It is also worth noting that, though Assange's interview took place before the publication of the Podesta email collection, the allegations of a Russian hack based on Guccifer 2.0's publication were ultimately contradicted by a DNC official, as reported by the Associated Press. Disobedient Media wrote:
" Ultimately, it is the DNC's claim that they were breached by Russian hackers, who stole the Trump opposition report, which directly belies their allegation – because the document did not come from the DNC, but from John Podesta's emails."
Again: The very document on which the initial "Russian hack" allegations were based did not originate within the DNC Emails at all, but in the Podesta Emails, which at the time of Assange's RT interview, had not yet been published.
Disobedient Media also noted in relation to the Forensicator's Media Mishaps report:
"The fact the email to which the Trump opposition report was attached was later published in the Podesta Email collection by WikiLeaks does not prove that Guccifer 2.0 and WikiLeaks shared a source on the document. However, it does suggest that either the DNC, the operators of the Guccifer 2.0 persona, or both parties had access to Podesta's emails. This raises questions as to why the DNC would interpret the use of this particular file as evidence of Russian penetration of the DNC."
This creates a massive contradiction within the DNC's narrative, but it does not materially change Assange's assertion that the pristine emails obtained by WikiLeaks were fundamentally distinct and should not be conflated with the altered documents published by Guccifer 2.0, as the WikiLeaks publication of the Podesta emails contain none of the alterations shown in the version of the documents published by Guccifer 2.0.
Though no establishment media outlet has reported on this point, when reviewing the evidence at hand and especially the work of the Forensicator, it is evident that the Guccifer 2.0 persona never actually published a single email. The persona published documents and even screenshots of emails – but never the emails themselves. Thus, again, Guccifer 2.0's works are critically different from the DNC and Podesta email publications by WikiLeaks.
The following charts are included to help remind readers of the timeline of events relative to Guccifer 2.0, including the date specific documents were published:
Image Courtesy Of The Forensicator
Image Courtesy of the Forensicator
This writer previously opined on the apparent invulnerability of the Russiagate saga to factual refutation. One cannot blame the public for such narrative immortality, as the establishment-backed press has made every effort to confuse and conflate the alterations made to documents published by Guccifer 2.0 and the WikiLeaks releases. One can only hope, however, that this reminder of their distinct state will help raise public skepticism of a narrative based on no evidence whatsoever.
It is also especially important to reconsider Julian Assange's statements and texts in light of his ongoing isolation from the outside world, which has prevented him from commenting further on an infinite array of subjects including Guccifer 2.0 and the "Russian hacking" saga.
Winston S. contributed to the content of this report.
platyops , 22 minutes agoNature_Boy_Wooooo , 33 minutes ago
The name was Seth Rich. They robbed him for his watch and money but forgot to take the watch and money. Yes that makes as much sense as Dr. Ford and her imagination party!
Dems lie and maybe kill people but they do lie for sure!Surftown , 2 hours ago
All signs point to a young Bernie Sanders supporter at the DNC named Seth Rich.Endgame Napoleon , 1 hour ago
Brennan is Guccifer 2.0 using NSA Toolkit ( hacked and released) to feign Russia -- to promote the fake Russia interference narrative leading to the FISA warrant justification, or better yet, to the Direct Obama FISA approval/override to approve surveillance of Mr Trump.bh2 , 2 hours ago
There are a bunch of competing smartphone apps, letting you convert Word docs to PDFs, believe it or not.
Maybe, they only work in limited form, but you can write a resume (or whatever) into the app, saving it in Word, converting it to PDF and sending it to your email.
Real programmers seem to scoff at the technical precision of those apps, so maybe, they are not as sophisticated as they appear to non-techies.
The sequencing of this is weird. If I read it right, it sounds like several publications received the "converted" versions -- the screenshots or PDFs -- of some emails before Wikileaks released the actual, non-converted emails.
Who released those to the media organizations, and how did they have access to the machine containing the emails, enabling them to make screenshots, convert them to PDFs or whatever they did to provide representations of the emails, not the actual emails that Wikileaks later released?JimmyJones , 2 hours ago
Actually, William Binney et al demonstrated the email transfer could not have been effected outside the four walls of the DNC because the required network speeds did not exist at that time to any external location, least of all one located outside the US.
The only way that transfer could happen in the time logged was onto a device located on the DNC LAN.
Seth Rich is the person Assange all but directly named as the source.
These two things, taken together, provide a compelling refutation of the DNC fairy tale that the emails were pilfered by Russia (or any other outside actor).medium giraffe , 2 hours ago
Bunny said the download speed was indicating a USB thumb drive was usedEndgame Napoleon , 1 hour ago
IIRC the transfer speed was similar to a USB bus speed, meaning it wasn't even transferred over a local network, but by a USB flash device directly connected to a DNC PC or laptop.
The US Congress is so unprofessional, allowing this circus about high-school parties to commandeer a SCOTUS confirmation hearing, but did you ever hear any of them trying to get to the bottom of this complex stuff, calling in technical experts to explain this evidence to voters?
Sep 24, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Greece , Sep 22, 2018 3:05:11 PM | link
Well, well, Mr.Trump talks the talk but never walks the walk it semms...
If only poor Kennedy would be so lucky...
Nobody to point fingers at for wiring the president...
Did they wire Kenny Mr.Trump?
You did a big show about putting out stuff that would reveal what happened with kennedy, but instead the people were fed the ussual BS plus some "new" irrelevant" stuff.
Was it just a show to push for more power for your favorite Mr.Netanyahou?
How did they eavesdrop Kenny Mr.Trump?
Sep 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
uncle tungsten , Sep 22, 2018 6:34:26 PM | 32
More notions on USA election so excuse a repeat post all. I figure an enormous number of voters reeled in horror at the prospect of a Hillary Clinton president and voted for Trump. Will that horror revert to more democrat support now?
Are those swing voters now uncertain if the $hillary will stage a come back. Nothing absolute has been stated and the demoncrats go through the motions of 'thinking about' another stooge like creepy Joe Biden. The USA is not liberated from the 'Clinton option' yet.
More to the point though is that repeatedly implied and sometimes stated 'certainty' that the DOJ/FBI under its new Trumpian management has a thousand grand jury indictments pending to be actioned in October or something. The Trumpers are certain that their hero is about to slay the many headed dragon and they have been anticipating that move for some time. Sure there appears to be sufficient evidence to draw and quarter a couple of seriously stupid clowns.
Given Trumps kneeling to the British Skripal poisoning 'hate russia' hoax I suspect there is no chance he will go after Christopher Steele or any of the senior demoncrat conspirers no matter how much he would love to sucker punch Theresa May and her nasty colleagues. If Trump backs the British looneys in the UN security council in a day or two we can all be sure he is now a puppet on a British string and that point will be seen by USA voters.
Any leader that lets a foreign nation, Britain, try to destroy his family, presidential campaign and now presidency by assembling and publishing a dirt dossier without response is a coward. If Trump wont stand up to Hillary Clinton, Theresa May, or any of the dossier conspirators, then he is useless. The USA voters see that no matter what the spin but the swing voters more than any other actually discriminate and make judgements based on actions .
They are in a quandary and only Trump can cement their support by going after the perpetrators NOW and telling the EU loonies like Britain and France to F off with their belligerent war mongering. I wouldn't count on it.
Sep 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
UK Begged Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs; Cited "Grave Concerns" Over Steele Involvement
by Tyler Durden Sun, 09/23/2018 - 11:15 4.6K SHARES
The British government "expressed grave concerns" to the US government over the declassification and release of material related to the Trump-Russia investigation, according to the New York Times . President Trump ordered a wide swath of materials "immediately" declassified "without redaction" on Monday, only to change his mind later in the week by allowing the DOJ Inspector General to review the materials first.
The Times reports that the UK's concern was over material which "includes direct references to conversations between American law enforcement officials and Christopher Steele," the former MI6 agent who compiled the infamous "Steele Dossier." The UK's objection, according to former US and British officials, was over revealing Steele's identity in an official document, "regardless of whether he had been named in press reports."
We would note, however, that Steele's name was contained within the Nunes Memo - the House Intelligence Committee's majority opinion in the Trump-Russia case.
Steele also had extensive contacts with DOJ official Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie, who - along with Steele - was paid by opposition research firm Fusion GPS in the anti-Trump campaign. Trump called for the declassification of FBI notes of interviews with Ohr, which would ostensibly reveal more about his relationship with Steele. Ohr was demoted twice within the Department of Justice for lying about his contacts with Fusion GPS.
Perhaps the Brits are also concerned since much of the espionage performed on the Trump campaign was conducted on UK soil throughout 2016 . Recall that Trump aid George Papadopoulos was lured to London in March, 2016, where Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud fed him the rumor that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton. It was later at a London bar that Papadopoulos would drunkenly pass the rumor to Australian diplomat Alexander Downer (who Strzok flew to London to meet with).
Also recall that CIA/FBI "informant" (spy) Stefan Halper met with both Carter Page and Papadopoulos in London.
Halper, a veteran of four Republican administrations, reached out to Trump aide George Papadopoulos in September 2016 with an offer to fly to London to write an academic paper on energy exploration in the Mediterranean Sea.
Papadopoulos accepted a flight to London and a $3,000 honorarium. He claims that during a meeting in London, Halper asked him whether he knew anything about Russian hacking of Democrats' emails.
Papadopoulos had other contacts on British soil that he now believes were part of a government-sanctioned surveillance operation. - Daily Caller
In total, Halper received over $1 million from the Obama Pentagon for "research," over $400,000 of which was granted before and during the 2016 election season.
In short, it's understandable that the UK would prefer to hide their involvement in the "witch hunt" of Donald Trump since much of the counterintelligence investigation was conducted on UK soil. And if the Brits had knowledge of the operation, it will bolster claims that they meddled in the 2016 US election by assisting what appears to have been a set-up from the start .
Steele's ham-handed dossier is a mere embarrassment, as virtually none of the claims asserted by the former MI6 agent have been proven true.
Steele, a former MI6 agent, is the author of the infamous and unverified anti-Trump dossier. He worked as a confidential human source for the FBI for years before the relationship was severed just before the election because of Steele's unauthorized contacts with the press.
He shared results of his investigation into Trump's links to Russia with the FBI beginning in early July 2016.
The FBI relied heavily on the unverified Steele dossier to fill out applications for four FISA warrants against Page. Page has denied the dossier's claims, which include that he was the Trump campaign's back channel to the Kremlin. - Daily Caller
That said, Steele hasn't worked for the British government since 2009, so for their excuse focusing on the former MI6 agent while ignoring the multitude of events which occurred on UK soil, is curious.
StychoKiller , 54 minutes agotexantim , 1 hour ago
I find it interesting that the Theresa May Govt in UK has the temerity to interfere with US politics (until they got caught out!), yet can't find the spine to stand up to the EU. If I were Trump, not only would the shoe be dropping re: UK Govt involvement in US politics, but said shoe would be making an imprint across her face! (stoopid twat!)BitchesBetterRecognize , 1 hour ago
I say release the docs and put sanctions on UK.Baron von Bud , 2 hours ago
So the Motherland ******* up with the ex-colony yet again, huh?
THE UNITED KINGDOM along with ISRAEL & SAUDI ARABIA have always been the ones behind US Politics making, pulling the strings behind the curtains since the Petrodollar Inception, The Greater Israel project & the NWO initiative - only this time around Trump was not the UK's pick...
Oh, but those "civilized" Allies backstabbing each other for more power grip on the USA....Malvern Joe , 3 hours ago
England dominates the offshore money laundering havens where the super rich hide their money and evade taxes. They need to be brought down. No more African dictators looting their nation's resources and hiding the money first in offshore banks and then in JP Morgan and Brit banks.
Many hedge funds are deep into this game. I'd wager on Carlyle Group and the Bush clan. Billions of people can't get ahead because the super rich are ******* crooks running the banks and governments. They don't pay taxes but force a small dry cleaner to pay 45% in fed/state taxes. These criminals include Hillary Clinton and many members of congress. Feinstein, Pelosi, Maxine and many more of both parties need to be investigated. How do they get so rich on a congressman's salary. Deep into tax evasion and payoffs? Release the documents and let MI6 hang.Bricker , 3 hours ago
It is a test. If Trump doesn't go ahead with declassification, we know for sure he is no better than the globalists and neocons whose goal has always been to destroy and depopulate America. It would represent the biggest sellout of this country since the creation of the Fed in 1913, He will go down as the biggest fraud ever and his base will deport his *** to the sums of India where he can defecate in public.Moving and Grooving , 3 hours ago
You dont get to supply a rogue agent, that was probably told to do it in the first place, and then tell Trump not to do it out of harm, harm is all you BRIT DEEP STATES deserveBan KKiller , 4 hours ago
'focusing on the former MI6 agent while ignoring the multitude of events which occurred on UK soil, is curious'
Not at all. It's obvious - the problem ISN'T Steele. They're living in fear, as are many in DC and elsewhere, that Trump is going to pry the lid open and reveal at least some of their activities. If killing him would fix the problem, they would. It's too late, considering what Trump is threatening to do. I wonder if he'll back down, at least some?
The sheer corruption of the Global Government is on display here, revealing itself, if you watch for it. Whether planned or not, the last 6 months or so have been astonishing to watch. The entire media has been shown to be liars, academia is shown to be an expensive provider of unprepared students, the corporate world is furiously rent-seeking and finding new ways to destroy humanity, and government is too busy selling Americans out to write a budget. In all countries around the world, adjusting for national status. Lawsuits in the west, machetes in the third world.John C Durham , 4 hours ago
U.K. does not want the jurisdiction. U.S. spies lure you overseas then...compromise you.Anunnaki , 4 hours ago
Duh. This Started In London! Britain is the "foreign country" involved in our elections. Wake up everyone. It's LONDONGATE .PeaceForWorld , 4 hours ago
May gonna owe Vlad an apology when Skripal is revealed to be Steele's source. Steele himself hadn't been to Russian in 15 years. Will he get life in prison for attempted murder?Buddha71 , 4 hours ago
"t's hard to tell who's telling the truth and who isn't in this whole Russia narrative. Fact is, NOBODY is telling the truth. That is what I've determined after doing my own research.": https://youtu.be/2AA5BIfGj3g
I really like this woman "Shut the **** up!". She is a former Bernie supporter just like me. She has turned against Democrats just like me. She doesn't trust any of the Establishment parties.
trump made promises before being elected, then lied and sold America out, just like every other corrupted assklown politician. he is no different than clinton bush obama, just as arrogant, just as corrupt, and just as much a traitor. he has broken the promises upon which he was elected, just like all the other fkn liars before him. no different. just a pos. he has not made america great again, just more of the same, unemployment is a lie, it is closer to 17%.
Sep 19, 2018 | www.realclearpolitics.com
Former CIA director and MSNBC contributor John Brennan called on FBI director Christopher Wray, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to "push back" on any directive from the White House that may have a "negative impact" on the Mueller investigation.
Brennan called on "individuals of conscience" in the administration to remember that they took an oath of office not an oath to Donald Trump. Moments prior Brennan admonished people who are abusing their powers to "protect" Trump.
"I think that they should continue to push, push, push, and if Mr. Tump and the White House does not relent, then they have some decisions to make, and whether or not they are going to the just not follow that direction and be fired or to resign," Brennan said of the trio.
"A number of individuals are trying to protect Mr. Trump and abusing their authorities and their powers, whether it be in Congress or within the executive branch," Brennan said on MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell Reports . "And this is something that I am hoping that individuals of conscience are going to stop and prevent because I am concerned that this is just one indication that Mr. Trump is going to increasingly look for steps to take in order to further to try to subvert the Mueller investigation."
"I think that they should continue to push, push, push, and if Mr. Tump and the White House does not relent, then they have some decisions to make, and whether or not they are going to the just not follow that direction and be fired or to resign, but if they really believe this is going to have serious impact, the national security law enforcement, and judicial process, they have an obligation since they took the oath of office to the constitution of the United States and not Mr. Trump to uphold their responsibilities and their agency and the departments' authorities," Brennan said.
Brennan called it critically important that Americans accept the results of the Mueller probe.
"It is critically important for all of the American citizens to learn the results of that investigation, and whether or not it implicates Mr. Trump and others, we have to be ready to accept those findings as apolitical, and not something that is being done for political purposes," he said.
Actually, Brennan...there is nothing unconstitutional about what Trump is doing. Nothing at all, not one thing. Your call for circumvention is however seditious and you should be prosecuted for your actions. But beyond that, your fear and your blathering makes me smile from ear to ear because it means you are scared that the truth about you and your ilk WILL come one. "Sunlight is the best disinfectant". It is precious watching you squirm!
KCMarkLeader -> JackDan
Arguing the Constitution with Brennan is like arguing the Bible with an Atheist.
hansenwtLeader -> KCMark
Except Brennan will be in charge of something again in the next Democrat Presidency....if you vote Democrat....Anyone that remotely acts like Brennan, (not a partisan argument)...should never ever be allowed near the levers of control of this country....the 2016 election has proven this.
So, why should WE THE PEOPLE not be able to see what Brennan and his ilk have either been leaking selectively at us or hiding to subvert a lawful election.
We're talking about FISA warrants of a Presidential campaign's staff.
Why should we not see this? Why should the truth not all come out?
What possible reason can Brennan have to keep THIS out of public knowledge?
JackDanLeader -> Edgarson
The only logical reason is because Brennan does not want to go to jail. Well too bad Brennan!
In other words, this man is telling the FBI NOT to release anything that belongs to We The People.
JackDanLeader -> SUTOPEL
In other words he is openly advocating for government officials to disobey a presidential order, which is either sedition or treason. I'll let Brennan pick which one.
Sep 23, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
The armed forces are watching the present chaos in the US between the revolutionary "Progressives" and the counter-revolutionary "Deplorables." Our versions of Belisarius, Narses and Mundus are calculating the odds of an eventual calming of the discord. They cannot think that the odds are very good.
Political war could easily lead to the real thing. pl
"The 1980s are coming home to roost."Araminta Smade , a day ago
Literally the best pithy summary of the current trends on the right and the left that I have read since since the current arc started with the 2008 Great Recession.With respect can I say that I would have thought a more accurate historical parallel would have been the late Roman Republic where the Populares (deplorables) were in conflict with the Optimates (progressives). The latter used every measure they could devise, including assassination, to prevent their opponents passing legislation that might improve the lot of the people. This of course was simply capping the Volcano and when it eventually erupted it destroyed them all and Imperial Rome arose out of the ashes. So it will be here. Democracy in the United States is perishing in the internecine warfare of Washington DC. Eventually Caesar will arise and put an end to the Republic.PRC90 , a day agoThe 82nd Airborne v. Antifa ? Some would crawl over broken glass to be in that very short event, but I suggest it will never happen.GreenZoneCafe , a day ago
However, two Generals, and a Eunuch (plenty of candidates for that job) bearing gold v. The Resistance ? Will your own Theodora, or her step-daughter, call 'Stand To !' ?
The parallels are very interesting. Provided that the FBI can arrest a bunch of internal high level subversives and crooks (not hard to find..) as an initiating event, and a USSC member or two provides a legal opinion as a basis for action, and the Constitution is followed, and the affair ends with a Presidential and Congressional election to reset the board, it could turn out very well.
Timing ? I think Trump will win in 2020, whether he makes it to 2024, who knows ? One thing I'm confident of is that the POTUS after Trump will need to heed the people who elected Trump if their issues are still unresolved - and if not then hold on for the ride.I think things will settle down once Trump's gone. Pence is kind of bland, and his politics would be nothing new, warmed over Reagan/Bush. A new war on Iran would be a wild card.Pat Lang Mod -> GreenZoneCafe , a day ago
There might be a real crisis in ten years or so based on demographic shifts. What some people call "the left" will start flipping states like Georgia and Texas, just as Virginia and NC are being flipped.
National power would be lost to the GOP in current form. They might retool and recover by reorienting to their traditional smallholder base from the earlier 20th century and abandon the cultural and racial posturing.
If there's another presidential election crisis like 2000, the possibility of trouble is real. I also wonder about these Special Operations types would could see the injustice of supermen like them being ruled by civilians.
Juan Cole made a related speculation on his blog today.
https://www.juancole.com/20...Trump will not be gone. why would you think he will be gone?GreenZoneCafe -> Pat Lang , 20 hours agoA combination of the final results of the Mueller investigation and the House passing to the Democrats. In the alternative, Trump firing Mueller and a Democratic House.Mark Logan , a day ago
Pence is much more reliable for The Powers that Be, the Borg, etc.
Sep 09, 2018 | www.realclearpolitics.com
CNN: Former Trump campaign aide Michael Caputo weighs in on who he believes wrote the anonymously authored op-ed published in the New York Times that was highly critical of President Donald Trump.
Caputo also said the real writer of the piece is a ghostwriter in terms of looking for the person behind the piece. Caputo said he believes the person is a woman.
"The language of the op-ed is useless to look at because it's a ghostwriter," he said.
"I think, first of all, this person will never admit it. In my mind, the author of this op-ed believes that she is a hero to the American people," Caputo also said.MICHAEL CAPUTO, FMR. TRUMP ADVISOR: I'm fairly certain I know who it is. I've been going through this parlor game like everybody else has and I am also completely 100% certain that the person who wrote this is on the list of people who said they didn't write it.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: Alright. So who do you think it is?
CAPUTO: I'm not going to go into that. My attorney tells me it's a bad idea. But I can tell you think...
WHITFIELD: You consulted your attorney. You said I think I know who this is based on certain language that was and you consulted your attorney and your attorney says don't reveal it?
CAPUTO: Right. Based on language. Based on the fact that I believe these kinds of people leave a trail of crumbs when they are trying to deceive people around them. This is the way it is always is. And if the president looks at key departments of his government that has been purged of all Trump supporters that is a good place to start, and that actually exists. Trump supporters have been purged from this government for 18 months. Last week I spent the evening with several friends of mine from the Trump campaign: all of them have been forced out of the Trump administration. ...
I don't think this person is in the White House... this person really has to be high up. It's got to be a deputy, secretary-level, or higher, otherwise The New York Times is misleading people.
WHITFIELD: Do you believe it is someone who has taken an oath?
CAPUTO: I believe so...
The White House political office and others have kind of shrugged off the idea about losing the House and maybe being impeached because the Senate won't do anything. They won't convict the president on the charges of impeachment. But I think when we find out who this person is, and the president team should find out, we're going to find out this person has real deep and abiding ties to Congress and this op-ed is one step closer not just to impeachment but conviction...
I started with this. Who is the person who I believe hates the president the most? Who is the person in the administration who has screamed about him in their own private office and gone forward and purged their entire office of Trump people? ...
I think, first of all, this person will never admit it. In my mind, the author of this op-ed believes that she is a hero to the American people.
Sep 23, 2018 | www.unz.com
annamaria , says: July 14, 2018 at 4:56 pm GMTSic Semper Tyrannis has published a response to the Rosenstein fantastic "Indictment of Trolls" (Part II): "Something Rotten About the DOJ Indictment of the GRU," by Publius Tacitus http://www.turcopolier.typepad.comannamaria , says: July 14, 2018 at 5:06 pm GMT
"Assistant Attorney General Rosenstein announced a bizarre indictment against Russian military intelligence operatives today that, rather than confirming the case of "Russian meddling" in the U.S. 2016 Presidential election raises more questions. Here are the major oddities:
1. How did the FBI obtain information about activity on the DNC and DCCC servers when the DNC/DCCC refused to give the Feds access to the servers/computers?
2. Why does Crowdstrike get credit as being a competent computer security firm when, according to the indictment, they completely and utterly failed to stop the "hacks? "
3. Why does the indictment refuse to name Wikileaks by name as the Russian collaborator? Here is the bottomline–if US officials knew as early as April that Russia was hacking the DNC, why did it take US officials more than six months to stop the activity? The statement of "facts" contained in the indictment also raises another troubling issue–what is the source of the information? For example, if the FBI was not given access to the DNC/DCCC servers and computers then how do they know what happened on specific dates as alleged in the complaint?"
-- Why does the US national security hang on the opinions and concoctions of a visceral Russophobe Dm. Alperovitch (a ziocon) who is an "expert" (together with the badly uneducated Elliot Higgins) at the thoroughly corrupted and zionized Atlantic Council?
-- What kind of antisemite has been working hard to make the US Jewry at large suspected in a massive conspiracy and treason against the United States of America?Here is the context for the "Indictment of Trolls" (Paty II): https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/62c97j/the_awan_brothers_compromised_at_least_80/
"The Awan brothers compromised at least 80 congressional computers and got paid 5 million to do it. We may never know the extent of the breach.
After compromising the Congress' networks for 12 years they do a quick cleanup by breaking in to 20 congressional offices, store data in an off site server before running of to Pakistan and the D.C. Police are investigating. But wait there's more
Imran Awan has a longtime relationship with some members of Congress, including working for Meeks and Becerra starting in 2004 and joining Wasserman Schultz's office in 2005. The IT staffer position expanded to include more than 30 representatives, including work under congressional members who were members of top secret level congressional committees (DHS, Foreign affairs, Select intelligence committee).
Although personal office computers are not supposed to be used for Intelligence Committee business or classified material, accessing these computers is a high priority for foreign intelligence services because of the information they could glean about the committee's work from unclassified emails.
• The brothers are suspected of serious violations including accessing members' computer networks without their knowledge and stealing equipment from Congress, over billing congress for work and parts, transferring data to a remote server, and bypassing normal security protocols for IT staff. Their Democrat benefactors allowed the breech of policy for the sake of convenience.
• The Awans operated an external server, which is against all protocols concerning secured government information.
Further, there were instances where House information was discovered in an external "cloud" server. The contractors in question reportedly were sending and storing House-related information in that off-site server.
• The Awans had special access to the White House and for Visas.
• Multiple Democratic lawmakers have yet to cut ties with House staffers under criminal investigation for wide-ranging equipment and data theft."
– Hey, Mueller! Hey, Rosenstein! Do your job.
Sep 23, 2018 | www.realclearpolitics.com
KCMarkLeader -> JackDan
Arguing the Constitution with Brennan is like arguing the Bible with an Atheist.
hansenwtLeader -> KCMark
Except Brennan will be in charge of something again in the next Democrat Presidency....if you vote Democrat....Anyone that remotely acts like Brennan, (not a partisan argument)...should never ever be allowed near the levers of control of this country....the 2016 election has proven this.
Sep 22, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
blue peacock -> Patrick Armstrong , 3 days agoThe letter from the Democrats on the Gang of 8 to Coats, Rosenstein and Wray is something. Asking them to be insubordinate by refusing the order of the President to release unredacted documents & communications. What were the verbal assurances these apparatchiks gave the Democrats? Did they agree to withhold information from their boss?
As Col. Lang has stated numerous times the President is the ultimate classification authority except for atomic secrets. Coats, Rosenstein & Wray I'm sure know that. If they disagree with his declassification order they can always resign. Insubordination is a fireable offense.
Sep 21, 2018 | www.wsws.org
The New York Times published a fraudulent and provocative "special report" Thursday titled "The plot to subvert an election."
Replete with sinister looking graphics portraying Russian President Vladimir Putin as a villainous cyberage cyclops, the report purports to untangle "the threads of the most effective foreign campaign in history to disrupt and influence an American election."
The report could serve as a textbook example of CIA-directed misinformation posing as "in-depth" journalism. There is no news, few substantiated facts and no significant analysis presented in the 10,000-word report, which sprawls over 11 ad-free pages of a separate section produced by the Times.
The article begins with an ominous-sounding recounting of two incidents in which banners were hung from bridges in New York City and Washington in October and November of 2016, one bearing the likeness of Putin over a Russian flag with the word "peacemaker," and the other that of Obama and the slogan "Goodbye Murderer."
It acknowledges that "police never identified who had hung the banners," but nonetheless goes on to assert that: "The Kremlin, it appeared, had reached onto United States soil in New York and Washington. The banners may well have been intended as visual victory laps for the most effective foreign interference in an American election in history." The article begins with an ominous-sounding recounting of two incidents in which banners were hung from bridges in New York City and Washington in October and November of 2016, one bearing the likeness of Putin over a Russian flag with the word "peacemaker," and the other that of Obama and the slogan "Goodbye Murderer."
It acknowledges that "police never identified who had hung the banners," but nonetheless goes on to assert that: "The Kremlin, it appeared, had reached onto United States soil in New York and Washington. The banners may well have been intended as visual victory laps for the most effective foreign interference in an American election in history."
Why does it "appear" to be the Kremlin? What is the evidence to support this claim? Among the 8.5 million inhabitants of New York City and another 700,000 in Washington, D.C., aren't there enough people who might despise Obama as much as, if not a good deal more than, Vladimir Putin?
This absurd passage with its "appeared" and "may well have" combined with the speculation about the Kremlin extending its evil grip onto "United States soil" sets the tone for the entire piece, which consists of the regurgitation of unsubstantiated allegations made by the US intelligence agencies, Democratic and Republican capitalist politicians and the Times itself.
The authors, Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti, complain about a lack of "public comprehension" of the "Trump-Russia" story. Indeed, despite the two-year campaign of anti-Russian hysteria whipped up in Washington and among the affluent sections of the upper-middle class that constitute the target audience of the Times , polls have indicated that the charges of Russian "meddling" in the 2016 presidential election have evoked little popular response among the
Sep 22, 2018 | larouchepac.com
Friday afternoon, the New York Times once again took up the coup against Donald Trump, not as a news matter, but as a witting psychological warfare instrument for those bent on trying to illegally remove this President from office. They report, with great fervor, that shortly after FBI Director James Comey was fired by Trump, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein discussed using the 25th Amendment to remove the President from office, and himself wearing a wire to record the President at the White House. Rosenstein is supervising the Mueller Special Counsel investigation of the President. Rosenstein has heatedly denied the Times story.
This leak occurs in a context where the coup itself is unraveling. The President ordered the declassification of foundational documents in the coup itself on Monday, September 17, including tweets from Robert Mueller's central witness, Jim Comey. According to press accounts, "our allies" called to complain, most certainly the British and the Australians who instigated this coup together with Barack Obama and John Brennan. In addition, the so-called gang of eight Senators and Congressmen who get briefed by the intelligence community had their knickers in a full knot. On Friday, shortly before the Times story broke, the President delayed release of the documents, placing their release in the hands of Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, while insisting that the documents be reviewed and released in an expedited fashion. He also reserved the right to move forward himself if the matter was not handled with expedition. This was a sound move by Trump and the documents will be released.
Also this week, Mueller's first victim, former Trump Campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos began press appearances detailing how he was set up by the British and the CIA in the evidence fabrication phase of the Russiagate investigation, during the Spring of 2016. There is a sitting grand jury in Washington D.C. hearing evidence concerning fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. According to various sources, that grand jury is also hearing evidence about criminal abuses of the FISA court process and media leaks.
The press reporting to date on the story points to Andrew McCabe or Robert Mueller as the source of the leak to the New York Times .
McCabe's memos are reportedly the source of the story and he has provided those to Mueller.
There is no doubt that Rosenstein has been a corrupt force throughout the ongoing coup against the President.
The question, which allies of the President should be asking, however, is why is this occurring now? In this strategic context? From the grey lady ragsheet that is the chief propaganda arm of the coup?
The President should demand that the Inspector General Horowitz immediately obtain and review the McCabe memos and interview everyone involved in the referenced in the Times and any follow-on meetings under oath, as well as investigating the source of the leak to the New York Times , providing him an immediate report for his consideration by early next week.
Sep 22, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com
et Al September 21, 2018 at 1:28 pmEuractiv with AFP: Belgian inquest implicates UK in phone spying
A confidential report by Belgian investigators confirms that British intelligence services hacked state-owned Belgian telecom giant Belgacom on behalf of Washington, it was revealed on Thursday (20 September).
The report, which summarises a five-year judicial inquiry, is almost complete and was submitted to the office of Justice Minister Koen Geens, a source close to the case told AFP, confirming Belgian press reports
The matter will now be discussed within Belgium's National Security Council, which includes the Belgian Prime Minister with top security ministers and officials.
Contacted by AFP, the Belgian Federal Prosecutor's Office and the cabinet of Minister Geens refused to comment .
NO. Shit. Sherlock.
So the real question is that if this has known since 2013, why now? BREXIT?
Sep 21, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Journalist Sara Carter told Sean Hannity during his Wednesday radio show that the FBI has two sets of records in the Russia investigation, and that "certain people above Peter Strzok and above Lisa Page" were aware of it - implicating former FBI Director James Comey and his #2, Andrew McCabe.
Hannity : Sara, I'm hearing it gets worse than this–that there is potentially out there–if you will, two sets of record among the upper echelon of the FBI–one that was real one that was made for appearances . Is there any truth to this?
Carter : Absolutely, Sean . With the number of sources that I have been speaking with as well as some others that there is evidence indicating that the FBI had separate sets of books.
I will not name names until all of the evidence is out there, but there were certain people above Peter Strzok and above Lisa Page that were aware of this . I also believe that there are people within the FBI that have actually turned on their former employers and are possibly even testifying and reporting what happened inside the FBI to both the Inspector General and possibly even a Grand Jury.
( h/t Cristina Laila @ Gateway Pundit ) Tags Entertainment Culture
Sep 21, 2018 | www.amazon.com
3.0 out of 5 stars
span class="a-size-base a-colorFear: Trump in the White HouseBy Jason on September 19, 2018
w.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R26ONK8S0HS7J2/ref=cm_cr_getr_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B075RV48W3">Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
First, let me say I voted for Trump as a "Disrupter" and to that end he has exceeded expectations.
The book starts out great through the first 5 or 6 chapters, but then becomes a bit convoluted. The bottom line of the book and reality is that Trump is surrounded by apprentice scoundrels, and that he is the boss scoundrel.
He demands loyalty but gives none. As a Former Marine I would not follow him into battle; I would never have the opportunity because he and his sons would never go into harm's way.
The best of the book was the hinted forthcoming bombshells, that never exploded. Woodward dropped the ball on this one, and as an author myself, it's nice to see even the big boys, Simon & Schuster, have editing issues.
Jay Fitzpatrick author of "The Patsy".
Sep 20, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
karlof1 , Sep 19, 2018 3:02:55 PM | link
Caitlin Johnstone on Russiagate : "The real target of Russiagate isn't Trump, it's you." If you haven't read her essay about controlling the narrative, you can find it here.
Sep 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Shifting from Sessions to the much-maligned FBI, Trump said the agency was "a cancer" and that uncovering deep-seated corruption in the FBI may be remembered as the "crowning achievement" of his administration, per the Hill .
"What we've done is a great service to the country, really," Trump said in a 45-minute, wide-ranging interview in the Oval Office.
"I hope to be able put this up as one of my crowning achievements that I was able to ... expose something that is truly a cancer in our country."
Moreover, Trump insisted that he never trusted former FBI Director James Comey, and that he had initially planned to fire Comey shortly after the inauguration, but had been talked out of it by his aides.
Trump also said he regretted not firing former FBI Director James Comey immediately instead of waiting until May 2017, confirming an account his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, gave Hill.TV earlier in the day that Trump was dismayed in 2016 by the way Comey handled the Hillary Clinton email case and began discussing firing him well before he became president.
"If I did one mistake with Comey, I should have fired him before I got here. I should have fired him the day I won the primaries," Trump said. "I should have fired him right after the convention, say I don't want that guy. Or at least fired him the first day on the job. ... I would have been better off firing him or putting out a statement that I don't want him there when I get there."
The FISA Court judges who approved the initial requests allowing the FBI to surveil employees of the Trump Campaign also came in for some criticism, with Trump claiming they used "poor Carter Page, who nobody even knew, and who I feel very badly for...as a foil...to surveil a candidate or the presidency of the United States." Trump added that he felt the judges had been "misled" by the FBI.
He criticizing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court's approval of the warrant that authorized surveillance of Carter Page, a low-level Trump campaign aide, toward the end of the 2016 election, suggesting the FBI misled the court.
"They know this is one of the great scandals in the history of our country because basically what they did is, they used Carter Page, who nobody even knew, who I feel very badly for, I think he's been treated very badly. They used Carter Page as a foil in order to surveil a candidate for the presidency of the United States."
As for the judges on the secret intelligence court: "It looks to me just based on your reporting, that they have been misled," the president said, citing a series of columns in The Hill newspaper identifying shortcomings in the FBI investigation. "I mean I don't think we have to go much further than to say that they've been misled."
"One of the things I'm disappointed in is that the judges in FISA didn't, don't seem to have done anything about it. I'm very disappointed in that Now, I may be wrong because, maybe as we sit here and talk, maybe they're well into it. We just don't know that because I purposely have not chosen to get involved," Trump said.
Trump continued the assault on Sessions during a brief conference with reporters Wednesday morning. When asked whether he was planning to fire Sessions, Trump replied that "we're looking into lots of different things."
To be sure, Sessions has managed to hang on thus far. And if he can somehow manage to survive past Nov. 6, his fate will perversely rest on the Democrats' success. Basically, if they wrest back control of the Senate (which, to be sure, is unlikely), Sessions chances of staying on would rise dramatically. But then again, how much abuse can a man realistically endure before he decides that the costs of staying outweigh the benefits of leaving?
DingleBarryObummer , 19 minutes agoSparkey , 31 minutes ago
Sessions works for Trump, because Trump is running the uniparty russia-gate stormy-gate anti-trump show. Sessions was intentionally placed there to stonewall and make sure the kabuki goes on. Rosenstein is a Trump appointee. This **** garners sympathy for him as the persecuted underdog, rallies his base; and distracts from the obvious zio-bankster influence over his admin and his many unfulfilled campaign promises. He's deceiving you. Why do you think Giuliani acts like such a buffoon? It's because that's what he was hired for. All distractions and bullshit. He will not get impeached, Hillary is not going to jail, nothing will happen. The zio-Banksters will continue to stay at the top of the pyramid, because that's who trump works for, NOT you and me.
"While Trump's fascination with the White House still burned within him [re: 2011], he also had The Apprentice to deal with--and it wasn't as easy as you might think. He loved doing the show and was reluctant to give it up. At one point, he was actually thinking of hosting it from the oval office if he made it all the way to the White House. He even discussed it with Stephen Burke, the CEO at NBCUniversal, telling Burke he would reconsider running if the network was concerned about his candidacy." -Roger Stone
"To some people the notion of consciously playing power games-no matter how indirect-seems evil, asocial, a relic of the past. They believe they can opt out of the game by behaving in ways that have nothing to do with power. You must beware of such people, for while they express such opinions outwardly, they are often among the most adept players at power. They utilize strategies that cleverly disguise the nature of the manipulation involved. These types, for example, will often display their weakness and lack of power as a kind of moral virtue. But true powerlessness, without any motive of self-interest, would not publicize its weakness to gain sympathy or respect. Making a show of one's weakness is actually a very effective strategy, subtle and deceptive, in the game of power." -Robert GreeneSecret Weapon , 43 minutes ago
This is why the 'little' people love President 'The Donald' Trump, he says the things they would like to say, but have no platform to speak from, Mushroom man The Donald has no fear he has got Mushroom power, and he has my support in what ever he does!TrustbutVerify , 48 minutes ago
Is Sessions a Deep State firewall? Starting to look that way.
Sessions recused himself from the "Russia Collusion" investigation. Now that it is known to have been an extension of Democratic election rigging, and DC bureaucratic "Resistance," he could be initiate a broad sweep investigation into Washington, DC based bureaucratic bias and corruption.
I suspect Sessions will last until after the mid-term elections. Then Trump will fire him and bring someone like Gowdy in to head the DOJ and to bring about investigations.
And, my gosh, there seems to be so much to investigate. And to my mind prosecute.
loop, 49 minutes ago
"I've never seen a President - I don't care who he is - stand up to them (Israel). It just boggles the mind. They always get what they want. The Israelis know what is going on all the time. I got to the point where I wasn't writing anything down. If the American people understood what a grip these people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms.
Our citizens certainly don't have any idea what goes on."
- U.S. Navy Admiral and former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Thomas Moorer
mendigo, 59 minutes ago
Cool stuff. But really the cancer goes much deeper. That is the scary part. Trump is now largely controlled by the Borg.
Government employees and elected officials have a choice: can either play along and become wealthy and powerful or have their careers destroyed, or worse.
Sep 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
by Tyler Durden Mon, 09/17/2018 - 09:34 27 SHARES Authored by Tom Luongo,
"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."
-- The Empire Strikes Back
Since Vladimir Putin brought up Bill Browder's name in Helsinki, events have escalated to a fever pitch. Russia is under extreme attack the U.S./European financial and political establishment.
And part of that push is coming from Browder himself. In July, just a week after Helsinki, Browder opened up a money laundering complaint against Denmark's largest bank, Danske , alleging over $8 billion in money 'laundered' from Russia, Moldova and Azerbaijan through its Estonian Branch.
The details here are important so bear with me.
Danske's report on these allegations are due on Wednesday.
No matter what they say, however, the die has been cast.
Danske is being targeted for termination by the U.S. and possible takeover by the European Central Bank.
There's precedent for this but let me lay out some background first.The Oldest Trick
Browder's complaint says the money laundered is in connection with the reason why he was thrown out of Russia and the $230 million in stolen tax money which Browder's cause célèbre , the death of accountant Sergei Magnitsky, hangs on.
That crusade got the Magnitsky Act passed not only in the U.S. but all across the West, with versions on the books in Canada, Australia the EU and other places.
Danske's shares have been gutted in the wake of the accusation.
The U.S. is now investigating this complaint and that shouldn't come as much of a shock.
The Treasury Department can issue whatever findings it wants, and then respond by starving Danske of dollars, known as the "Death Blow" option the threat of which was plastered all over the pages of the Wall St. Journal on Friday.
Note this article isn't behind the Journal's pay-wall. They want everyone to see this.
Browder filed complaints both in Demmark and in Estonia, and the Estonian government was only too happy to oblige him.The Devil Played
To see the whole picture I have to go back a littler further.
Back in March, Latvian bank, ABLV, was targeted in a similar manner, accused of laundering money. Within a week the ECB moved in to take control of the bank even though it wasn't in danger of failing.
It was an odd move, where the ECB exercised an extreme response utilizing its broader powers given to it after the 2008 financial crisis, like it did with Spain's Banco Popular in 2017.
Why? The U.S. was looking for ways to cut off Russia from the European banking system. And the ECB did its dirty work.
I wrote about this back in May in relation to the Treasury demanding all U.S. investors divest themselves of Russian debt within thirty days.
It threw the ruble and Russian debt markets into turmoil since Russian companies bought a lot of euro-denominated debt after the Ruble Crisis of 2014, having been shut off from dollars.
ABLV was a conduit for many Russian entities to keep access to Europe's banks, having been grandfathered in as clients when the Baltics entered the Euro-zone.
So, now a replay of ABLV's seizure is playing out through Browder's money laundering complaint against Danske.Was Convincing Everyone
The goal of this lawsuit is two-fold.
The first is to undermine the faith in the Danish banking system. Dutch giant ING is also facing huge AML fines.
This is a direct attack on the EU banking system to being it under even more stringent government control.
The second goal, however, is far more important. As I said, the U.S. is desperate to cut money flow between the European Union and Russia, not just to stop the construction of Nordstream 2, but to keep Russia's markets weak having to scramble for euros to make coupon payments and create a roll-over nightmare.
Turkey is facing this now, Russia went through it in 2014/15.
In response to the Ruble's sharp drop this year on improving fundamentals, the Bank of Russia finally had to raise rates on Friday .
So, attacking a major bank like Danske for consorting with dirty Russians and using Mr. Human Rights Champion Browder to file the complaint is pure power politics to keep the EU itself from seeking rapprochement with Russia.
Anti-Money Laundering laws are tyrannical and vaguely worded. And with the Magnitsky Act and its follow-up, CAATSA, in place, they help support defining money laundering to include anything the U.S. and the EU deem as supporting 'human rights violations.'
Seeing the trap yet?
Now all of it can be linked through simple accusation regardless of the facts. The bank gets gutted, investors and depositors get nervous, the ECB then steps in and there goes another tendril between Russia and Europe doing business.
And that ties into Browder's minions in the European Parliament, all in the pay of Open Society Foundation, issued a threat of invoking Article 7 of the Lisbon Treaty to Cyprus over assisting Russia investigate Browder's financial dealings there.
Why? Violations of Mr. Browder's human rights because, well, Russia!
What's becoming more obvious to me as the days pass is that Browder is an obvious asset of the U.S. financial and political oligarchy, if not U.S. Intelligence. They use his humanitarian bona fides to visit untold misery on millions of people simply to:He Didn't Exist
1) cover up their malfeasance in Russia
2) wage hybrid war on anyone willing to stand up to their machinations.
Because when looking at this situation rationally, how does this guy get to run around accusing banks of anything and mobilize governments into actions which have massive ramifications for the global financial system unless he's intimately connected with the very people that operate the top of that system?
How does this no-name guy in the mid-1990's, fresh 'off the boat' as it were, convince someone to give him $25 million in CASH to go around Russia buying up privatization vouchers at less than pennies on the dollar?
It simply doesn't pass a basic sniff test.
Danske is the biggest bank in Denmark and one of the oldest in Europe. The message should be clear.
If they can be gotten to this way, anyone can.
Just looking at the list of people named in the Magnitsky Act, a list given to Congress by Browder and copied verbatim without investigation, and CAATSA as being 'friends of Vladimir' it's obvious that the target isn't Putin himself for his human rights transgressions but anyone in Russia with enough capital to maintain a business bigger than a chain of laundromats in Rostov-on-Don.
Honestly, even some in the U.S. financial press said it looked like they just went through the Moscow phone book.
But, here the rub. In The Davos Crowd's single-minded drive to destroy Russia, which has been going on now for close to two generations in various ways, they are willing to undermine the very institutions on which a great deal of their power rests.
The more Browder gets defended by people punching far above his weight, the more obvious it is that there is something wrong with his story. Undermining the reputation of the biggest bank in Denmark is a 'playing-for-keeps' moment.
But, it's one that can and will have serious repercussions over time.
It undermines the validity of government institutions, exposing corruption that proves we live in a world ruled by men, not laws. That the U.S. and EU are fundamentally no different in their leadership than banana republics.
And that's bad for currency and debt markets as capital always flows to where it is treated best.
But, it's one that can and will have serious repercussions over time. The seizure of ABLV and 2017's liquidation of Spain's Banco Popular were rightly described by Martin Armstrong as defining moments where no one in their right mind would invest in a European banks if there was the possibility of losing all of your capital due to a change in the political winds overnight.
Using the European Parliament to censure Cyprus via Article 7 over one man's financial privacy, which no one is guaranteed in this world today thanks to these same AML and KYC laws, reeks of cronyism and corruption of the highest degree.
If you want to know what a catalyst for the collapse of the European banking system looks like, it may well be what happens this week if Danske tries to fight the spider's web laid down by Bill Browder and his friends in high places.
* * *
To support more work like this and get access to exclusive commentary, stock picks and analysis tailored to your needs join my more than 170 Patrons on Patreon and see if I have what it takes to help you navigate a world going quickly mad.
hanekhw , 1 minute agogeno-econ , 1 hour ago
Browder, the Clintons, Soros and the EU were made for each other weren't they? They've been screwing us publicly for what, over two generations? And without a condom! We've gotten how many FTDs (financially transmitted diseases) from these people? They never unzip their flys.hanekhw , 16 minutes ago
According to Browder, Putin is worth over $100 Billion most of it stashed away in foreign banks through intermediates and relatives. If true, it will bring down Putin and many western banks. Perhaps a Red Swan is about to take off exposing an unsustainable .financial system and corrupt political enterprise on both sides of the divide sur to cause chaos. Ironically, Putin who represents Nationalism in Russia is under attack by Globalists accusing Putin of Capitalistic Greed utilizing western banks Suicidal !zeroboris , 24 minutes ago
Browder, the Clintons, Soros and the EU were made for each other weren't they? They've been screwing us publicly for what, over two generations? And without a condom! We've gotten how many FTDs (financially transmitted diseases) from these people? They never unzip their flys.monad , 8 minutes ago
They use his humanitarian bona fides
Browder's bona fides? LOLVanilla_ISIS , 18 minutes ago
Minion (((Browder))) snitches on his masters. Nowhere to hide.roadhazard , 14 minutes ago
Someone should just kill this dude. Browder has certainly earned it.Panic Mode , 15 minutes ago
But what about the money laundering.pndr4495 , 42 minutes ago
You better run. Your buddy McCain is gone and see who else will fight for you.markar , 47 minutes ago
Somehow - Mnuchkin's desire to sell his Park Ave. apartment fits into this tale of intrigue and bullshit.TahoeBilly2012 , 1 hour ago
Send this guy Browder a polonium cocktail. It's on me.Clogheen , 37 minutes ago
((Browder)) ??geno-econ , 1 hour ago
Yes. Did you really need to ask?Max Cynical , 1 hour ago
According to Browder, Putin is worth over $100 Billion most of it stashed away in foreign banks through intermediates and relatives. If true, it will bring down Putin and many western banks. Perhaps a Red Swan is about to take off exposing an unsustainable .financial system and corrupt political enterprise on both sides of the divide sur to cause chaos. Ironically, Putin who represents Nationalism in Russia is under attack by Globalists accusing Putin of Capitalistic Greed utilizing western banks Suicidal !LA_Goldbug , 1 hour ago
I watch the banned documentary...The Magnitsky Act - Behind the Scenes.
Here's a link... https://seed02.bitchute.com/40940/lQ3qEwX66pIL.mp4
Browder seems like a real scumbag.Thaxter , 1 hour ago
Only the slimiest rats get into the club of "Can Do No Wrong" and these types of gigs.blindfaith , 22 minutes ago
This documentary is first class, a really absorbing look into the mind of the sociopath Browder, a pathological, absolutely shameless liar and a very stupid and weak person. To understand the influence that this insignificant invertebrate yields, look to his father, Earl Russell Browder, who was the leader of the Communist Party in the United States during the 1930s and the first half of the 1940s.Jim in MN , 1 hour ago
Look no further than our own political circus to see that mighty hands pull the strings. Like all strings, they will fray and break...eventually.BandGap , 1 hour ago
Yes well the Big Question for us now is the degree to which the President is in control of any of this.
Recall, dear ZH fighters, how we worked out a sound strategy for the Trump Administration in the early days. Key aspects were to leave the generals and the bankers alone for a couple of years. This would allow immigration, trade, health care and deregulation including tax reform to form the early core wins, along with Supreme Court nominees of course.
Lo, cometh the Deep State and its frantic attempts to both save and conceal itself.
One key tentacle was to rouse the intelligence community into an active enemy of the POTUS. This partially fouled up the 'leave the generals alone' strategy.
Another is to try to force war with the emergent Eurasian hegemony comprised of China and Russia. This is seen all across the 'hinterland' of Russia.
The USA has no vital strategic interests in Eurasia at this juncture of history. Everyone should be clear on that.
The USA's logical and sane policy stance is to support peace, free and fair trade, and stable democracy, including border controls and the rule of law through LEADING BY EXAMPLE.
So for Trump to continue to allow the financial sector Deep State traitors to operate against a peaceful Eurasia is becoming increasingly intolerable.
Where to from here?LA_Goldbug , 40 minutes ago
Keep opening it up to scrutiny.
This article opened my eyes, I did not fully understand why Russia was all over Browder except the stealing aspect, but bigger yet, why he was being protected by the EU/US.
No wonder Putin wants to work with the Donno. Taking Browder out and exposing this manipulation works for both sides.I am a Man I am Forty , 1 hour ago
If Browder is a surprise to you then look at Khodorkovsky (there is more of these types from he came from).
Good start is here,
http://thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Others-Doc-Economics&Finance/+Doc-Economics&Finance-GovernmentInfluence&Meddling/BankstersInRussiaAndGlobalEconomy.htmgmak , 1 hour ago
This guy is so shady. He's playing some dangerous games.TheBigOldDog , 1 hour ago
Huh? Could this be written more poorly?akrainer , 1 hour ago
Houston, we have a problem..LA_Goldbug , 1 hour ago
The twice banned book, "Grand Deception" deconstructing Browder's very dangerous game is here, since Amazon delisted its two previous editions:
Pdf / Kindle / Nook
PaperbackJacquesdeMolay , 1 hour ago
"He Didn't Exist
Because when looking at this situation rationally, how does this guy get to run around accusing banks of anything and mobilize governments into actions which have massive ramifications for the global financial system unless he's intimately connected with the very people that operate the top of that system?"
Exactly. He was sent by the Anglo-Zionist Tribe otherwise he would be a nobody.JacquesdeMolay , 2 hours ago
Also, a very good book on the topic: "suppressed and banned by the CIA's supplier, Amazon, The Grand Deception: The Browder Hoax is a highly intelligent, frank and entertaining take-down of one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the US public and the world – The Magnitsky Act. Krainer's study of Bill Browder's book and actions is a riveting, unflinching expose of what might end up being pivotal in revealing one of this decade's big hoaxes."
Skullduggery: Confessions of a CIA Asset Bill Browder
Sep 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
Pft , Sep 17, 2018 12:00:07 AM | link
The west going on attack mode against Cyprus to protect Browder. Cyprus is cooperating with Putin on his financial dealings which all flowed through Cyprus. Lots of skeletons there that implicate many more important people than Browder
Sep 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org
dltravers , Sep 16, 2018 11:46:17 PM | linkanoncommentator@50
Graham seems slightly more well behaved since McCain left the Senate. The stare down of Graham was excellent.
I hold to the theory that the Generals backed Trump and the CIA backed Hillary. Adding to that theory I submit that it was the reason why the former regime targeted Flynn first. As head of the DIA he may have had a big role in neutralizing some of the other intelligence agencies in their election meddling. He was the most dangerous person to the former regime.
I do not hold the the mass indictments theory. With that many Grand Juries going someone would see something unless they are being held on military bases with military people on the juries. The whole system would melt down if that happened. The MSN would be all over this spinning the military dictator line, especially with the upcoming election.
If the Republicans lose Congress the Trump Russia investigations will continue for another two years along with the tiring blather from the MSM.
Aug 23, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com
My strong impression is that nobody on the British side vetted the dossier for publication. A striking feature of the early news coverage is that there appeared to be total confusion, with some of the reporting suggesting that the sources quoted wanted to hang him out to dry, others that they wanted to defend him.
An interesting aspect is that not only were anonymous sources linked to MI6 quoted on both sides of the argument -- which could have been explained by disagreements within the organisation: in different stories, not however far apart in date, its head, Sir Alex Younger, was portrayed as holding radically different views.
When CNN publicised the existence of the dossier on 10 January 2017, the same day that it was published by 'BuzzFeed', it suggested that the author was British. The following day, the WSJ named Steele.
On 13 January, Martin Robinson, UK Chief Reporter for 'Mail Online', published a report whose headlines seem worth quoting in full:
'I introduced him to my wife as James Bond': Former spy Chris Steele's friends describe a "show-off" 007 figure but MI6 bosses brand him "an idiot" for an "appalling lack of judgement" over the Trump "dirty dossier": Intelligence expert Nigel West says friend is like Ian Fleming's famous character; He said: "He's James Bond. I actually introduced him to my wife as James Bond'; Mr West says Steele dislikes Putin and Kremlin for ignoring rules of espionage; Angry spy source calls him 'idiot' and blasts decision to take on the Trump work; Current MI6 boss Sir Alex Younger is said to be livid about reputation damage.'
(See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/... . )
On 15 January, however, Kim Sengupta, Defence Editor of the 'Independent', produced a report headlined: 'Head of MI6 used information from Trump dossier in first public speech; Warnings on cyberattacks show ex-spy's work is respected.'
(See https://www.independent.co.... .)
A great deal of evidence, I think, suggests that practically all those involved in 'Russiagate' were caught totally unprepared by Trump's victory, that they then went rushing around like headless chickens, and that part of this process involved a decision being taken to publish the dossier, without consulting British intelligence. If people like Younger were not consulted, then it would seem to me unlikely that Steele was.
This leads me on to another puzzle about the dossier to which I have been having a difficulty finding a solution. Long years ago I was reasonably familiar with libel law in relation to journalism. Anyone who 'served indentures', as very many of us did in those days, had to study it. Later, I got involved in a protracted libel suit -- successfully, I hasten to add -- in relation to a programme I made, and had the sobering experience of having a top-class libel barrister requiring me to justify every assertion I had made.
In the jargon then, a crucial question when an article, or programme, was being 'vetted' before publication was whether it represented a 'fair business risk.' This involved both the technical legal issues, and also judgements as to whether people were likely to sue, and how if they did the case would be likely to pan out.
On the face of things, one would not have expected that people at 'BuzzFeed' would have gone ahead and make the dossier public, without having it 'vetted' by competent lawyers. And I have difficulty seeing how, if they did, the advice could have been to publish what they published.
I have some difficulty seeing how the advice could have been to include the memorandum with the claims about the Alfa Group oligarchs, unless either these could be seriously defended or it was assumed that contesting them effectively would involve revealing more 'dirty linen' than these wanted to see aired in public.
And I have immense difficulty seeing how any competent media lawyer would not have recommended, at the minimum, the redaction of the names of Aleksej Gubarev and his company from the final December 2016 memorandum. This would have made legal action unlikely, without greatly diminishing the effect of the claims.
Trying to make sense of why such an obvious precaution was not taken, I find myself wondering whether, in fact, the reason may have been that the people responsible for the dossier may have actually believed this part of it at least.
If that is so, however, the most plausible explanation I can see is that while other claims in the dossier may well be total fabrication, either by the people at Fusion and Steele or by some of their questionable contacts, this information at least did come from what Glenn Simpson, Nellie Ohr et al thought were reliable Russian government sources.
But if this was so, and if what they thought was accurate information was actually disinformation, the likely conduit would not have been through Steele, but from FSB cybersecurity people to their FBI counterparts.
I think that the cases involving Karim Baratov and Dmitri Dokuchaev and his colleagues may be much more complex than is apparent from what looks to me like patent disinformation put out both on the Western and Russian sides.
It it is I think material that intelligence agencies commonly include a great variety of people, ranging from very able analysts and operators to complete dolts. So, the CIA has employed both Philip Giraldi and John Brennan, MI6 both Alastair Crooke and also Christopher Steele and Alex Younger.
It is however somewhat revealing that one now finds Giraldi and Crooke appearing on a Russian site, 'Strategic Culture Foundation', while Brennan and Younger are treated as authoritative figures by the MSM.
If you want to get a clear picture of quite how low-grade the latter figure is, incidentally, it is worth looking at the speech to which Kim Sengupta refers.
(See https://www.sis.gov.uk/medi... .)
A favourite line of mine comes in Younger's discussion of the -- actually largely mythical -- notion of 'hybrid warfare': 'In this arena, our opponents are often states whose very survival owes to the strength of their security capabilities; the work is complex and risky, often with the full weight of the State seeking to root us out.'
Leaving aside the fact that this is borderline illiterate, what it amazing is Younger's apparent blindness to clearly unintended implications of what he writes. If indeed, the 'very survival' of the Russian state 'owes to the strength of [its] security capabilities', the conclusions, seen from a Russian point of view, would seem rather obvious: vote Putin, and give medals to Patrushev and Bortnikov.
My strong suspicion is that 'Russiagate' is a kind of nemesis, arising from the fact that key figures in British and American intelligence have, over a protracted period of time, got involved in intrigues where they are way out of their depth. The unintended consequences of these have meant that people like Brennan and Younger, and also Hannigan, have ended up having to resort to desperate measures to cover their backsides.
Posted at 01:19 PM in Habakkuk , Intelligence | PermalinkJack , 4 days agoPatrick Armstrong -> Jack , 3 days ago
There are many aspects to this story that don't make any sense to me if one looks at it from a rational perspective. One of course being concerns about libel litigation and the related legal discovery that you note. The second being no real contingency planning in the event Hillary loses the election. Admittedly they must have bought the media line and Nate Silver's forecast of a greater than 75% probability of a Hillary win.
The purported "arms length" relationships don't make any sense. There's Fusion GPS and Glenn Simpson playing a central role. They hire Nellie Ohr, a possible CIA asset and the wife of Bruce Ohr, the 4th highest ranking official at the DOJ.
Glenn Simpson also hires Christopher Steele who he knows from previous "spook" associations. Steele had numerous and continuous communications including telephone, Skype, email and personal meetings with Bruce and Nellie Ohr during all this. They even have discussions about Deripaska and about his visa application to visit the US. Bruce is a conduit to Strzok at FBI. Glenn Simpson also is part of these discussions with Steele and the Ohrs.
Simpson also arranges for Steele to brief "reporters" like David Corn and others at the NY Times, WaPo, WSJ, Politico and others. Then there is Mifsud and Halper. Apparently both are CIA and FBI assets. They are communicating with Carter Page and Papadopolous, who in turn is drinking and yapping with Aussie ambassador Downer.
You have Brennan ginning up concerns giving super secret and individual briefings to the Gang of 8 in Congress. There's Democratic Senator Mark Warner, the minority leader on the Senate Intelligence Committee texting and calling Adam Waldman, Deripaska's US attorney about setting up clandestine meetings with Steele. There's Sen. Harry Reid passing on the Steele "dossier" to Comey.
Not to be left behind there's Sen. McCain doing the same. His top aide even travels to London to meet Steele. And then there's Strzok and his mistress Lisa Page busily spending every waking moment texting each other about every twist and turn in all the political games being played. Of course there's Admiral Rogers investigating unusual searches by FBI officials and contractors on the NSA database. And he briefs President-elect Trump at Trump Tower which prompts the entire transition team to move to Trump's golf course in NJ.
Oh, there is also Nellie Ohr setting up ham radio to avoid detection in her communications with Steele. Then we have everyone leaking and spinning to their "cohorts" in the premier media like the NY Times, CNN and WaPo.
Comey even has his buddy a professor and ostensibly his legal counsel on the payroll of the FBI as a contractor with access to all the sensitive databases leaking to the media.
Andy McCabe has his legal counsel Lisa Page spin stories around his wife's huge campaign contributions from Clinton consigliere McAuliffe.
In fact the IG report on the Clinton "investigation" states that many at the FBI were accepting "gifts" from various media personalities for a quid pro quo.
As if all this was not enough there's AG Loretta Lynch, meeting with Bill Clinton on a tarmac ostensibly to discuss their grandkids. Not to forget there were these "unmaskings" of surveillance information by Susan Rice, Samantha Power.
There's Rod Rosenstein, Bruce Ohr's direct boss who testifies he knew nothing about Ohr being a conduit to Strzok for Steele. Of course he knew nothing but signed the FISA application on Carter Page. Then there are the FISC judges who never believed their mandate required them to verify the evidence before issuing sweeping surveillance warrants. Now all this is what I as an old farmer and winemaker have read. Those more in tune would easily add to these convoluted machinations.
I don't know how to make sense of all this. All I see is the extent of effort to prevent Donald Trump from being elected and after he won from governing. The most obvious observation is that the leadership in our law enforcement and intelligence agencies are so busy politicking spinning and leaking they have neither the time or the inclination let alone competence to do their real job for which they get paid a handsome wage and sterling benefits.
At this point I don't buy that Christopher Steele dug up real intelligence from his contacts at the highest levels of the Russian government, which caught Brennan, Clapper, Comey and Lynch's pants on fire, who then launched a formal investigation of Russia collusion with Trump. Many things just don't pass the smell test. Now of course I have no qualifications nor experience in spookdom.
If you have any speculative theories that connects some of the dots it would be my great pleasure to read.English Outsider -> Patrick Armstrong , a day ago
I agree that it (and Skripalmania) are almost impossible to make sense of unless you think of a bunch of highly politicised not very bright people sinking deeper and deeper into what looked like a bright idea at the time.
Confident that their horse is going to win the race and that the media will cover it all up and nobody will ever hear anything about anything. Now that the unexpected happened, they're just spinning and denying faster hoping the Dems win in Nov and stop all the investigations. And, they're getting nervous wondering who's going to sell out whom next. Up and down, around and around. Gerbils -- there really isn't anything very consistent, planned or thought-out.
In this respect, this piece attempts to make sense (on a very large scale) of their panic. https://www.strategic-cultu...Patrick Armstrong -> English Outsider , 5 hours ago
"I agree that it (and Skripalmania) are almost impossible to make sense of unless you think of a bunch of highly politicised not very bright people sinking deeper and deeper into what looked like a bright idea at the time."
I believe your summary of what's happening is more accurate than Alastair Crooke's as set out in the article linked to.
But bright or not, what are these people in the IC doing being "highly politicised"? Does that not render them considerably less efficient?
I ask because, if one tries to look at it in a non-partisan way, the Western IC seemed to be a failure when it came to predicting Russian reactions in the Donbass, the Crimea, and it seems in Syria. I link this to various comments from Colonel Lang indicating that true experts were replaced over the years by less experienced and knowledgeable people. Does being "highly politicised" mean that they're not up to much when it comes to minding the shop?Jack -> Patrick Armstrong , 3 days ago
I thought I detected a protest against the politicisation of the US in the world some years ago. And we must not forget that Gen Flynn (DIA) and Adm Rogers (NSA) acted strongly against this. Flynn was the first casualty of the Trump/Russia hysteria and the Clapper claque tried to fire Rogers.
https://russia-insider.com/...Patrick Armstrong -> Jack , 2 days ago
Usually the incumbent party loses the mid-term election. The Democrats lost big in Obama's first mid-term. The Republicans won the House and gained six senators. While the punditry claims a Blue Wave and Nate Silver is giving the Dems the odds. I'm not so sure. I think the GOP will increase their majority in the Senate putting any conviction of Trump out of question.
I was born in the Depression and have seen vitriolic politics but never have seen such a massive opposition by the media, the pundits and the establishment of both parties. Over 500 print publications endorsed Hillary. Only some 20 endorsed Trump. Yet he confounds the pundits by winning the election. Clearly many voters are at odds with the political media class.Rob -> Patrick Armstrong , a day ago
Yeah. My bet is that the Repubs hold onto both. 1) the economy is getting better 2) what do the Dems have to offer other than this crazy Trump/Russia thing?Pat Lang Mod -> Rob , a day ago
Economy will slow down sharply in 2019 but there should be enough momentum to help with the mid-terms. Trump needs to stop with the endless sanction stuff. The House does look like a close one.Rob -> Pat Lang , a day ago
what is the evidence for a slowdown in 2019?David Habakkuk -> Jack , 3 days ago
With all the caveats that apply to financial forecasting copper, monetary indicators and equity markets are all flagging a slowdown is upon us.fanto -> David Habakkuk , 2 days ago
At a very general level, a 'speculative theory' which I have been mulling over for some time was rather well set out in a commentary in 'The Hill' on 9 August by Sharyl Attkisson, which opens:
'Let's begin in the realm of the fanciful.
'Assume, for the sake of argument, that powerful, connected people in the intelligence community and in politics worried that a wildcard Trump presidency, unlike another Clinton or Bush, might expose a decade-plus of questionable practices. Disrupt long-established money channels. Reveal secret machinations that could arguably land some people in prison.
'What exactly might an "insurance policy" against Donald Trump look like?'
And Attkisson goes on to outline precisely the developments that appear to have happened.
(See http://thehill.com/opinion/... .)
I think there is an ideological background to this, on which the piece by Alastair Crooke himself former MI6 to which Patrick Armstrong links, and the piece by James George Jatras to which Crooke links, are both to the point. The 'end of history' crowd thought they were inhabiting a realised utopia, and cannot cope with the fact that their dream is collapsing.
In relation to the millenarian undercurrents on which Crooke focuses, however, it is also worth noting that a traditional conservative suspicion has been that millenarianism is naturally linked to antinomianism: the belief that the moral law is not binding on the elect. And in turn, according to a familiar skeptical view, antinomianism can easily end up in in straightforward rascality.
On the rascality to which Attkisson is pointing I am working on how parts of the picture can be fleshed out. A few preliminary points raised by your remarks.
As you note, 'There's Rod Rosenstein, Bruce Ohr's direct boss who testifies he knew nothing about Ohr being a conduit to Strzok for Steele.' So, we know that Ohr and Steele were conspiring together to ensure that the latter could continue to be intimately involved in the Mueller investigation, despite the FBI termination,
It is obviously possible that Ohr did not report up the chain of command, and if so, he and his wife become pivotal figures in the conspiracy. Alternatively, it could be that Rosenstein is lying in which case, we have large questions about who else is implicated, and specifically whether the termination of Steele by the FBI was anything more than a ruse.
If, as seems to me likely, although not certain, the second possibility is closer to the truth than the former, then before Ohr testifies on 28 August before the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees he will have to consider whether he is prepared to 'take the rap' for his superiors, or 'sing sweetly.'
The fact that in a report in 'The Hill', I think on the same day as the Attkisson piece, John Solomon was quoting from Ohr's handwritten notes of a meeting with Glenn Simpson in December 2016 makes me wonder whether he may not already have made a decision. A key paragraph from the report:
'Yet, Simpson allegedly acknowledged that most of the information Fusion GPS and British intelligence operative Christopher Steele developed did not come from sources inside Moscow. "Much of the collection about the Trump campaign ties to Russia comes from a former Russian intelligence officer (? not entirely clear) who lives in the U.S.," Ohr scribbled in his notes.'
(See http://thehill.com/hilltv/r... .)
There is I think a need for caution here. There is no guarantee that Simpson was telling the literal truth to Ohr, or indeed the latter reproducing with absolute accuracy with he was told (handwritten notes can be disposed of easily, but they can also be rewritten.)
One is I think on firmer ground in relation to what it suggests was not the case that there is any substance whatsoever in the ludicrous story of someone running a private security company in London sending out hired employees who then gain access to top Kremlin insiders, with these, of course, telling them precisely what they actually think.
And it confirms my strong suspicion that the dossier is actually a composite product, much of it assembled at Fusion, which could indeed contain material from a range of people from the former Soviet space, who could living in the United States, Britain, or elsewhere Ukraine and the Baltics being obvious possibilities.
So Sergei Skripal and Sergei Millian, neither of whom fit the description by Simpson, have been mentioned as possible sources, and there is also the very curiously ambiguous role of Rinat Akhmetshin.
All these people, obviously, could simply have fabricated material or retailed gossip, and Steele himself was involved in fabricating material on an industrial scale to cover up what actually happened to Alexander Litvinenko.
That said, I continue to think it possible that both the second and final memoranda may incorporate some 'glitter', as well as 'chickenfeed' fed from FSB cybersecurity people to their FBI counterparts, to hark back to George Smiley says to the Minister, quite possibly included in the hope that the BS involved would be reproduced in contexts where it could provoke legal action.
All this leads me back to the suspicion that Steele's involvement may have been less in crafting the dossier, than making it possible to conceal its actual origins while giving it an appearance of credibility. It could also be the case that Nellie Ohr's sudden interest in radio transmissions had to do with communications inside the United States, rather than with Steele.
It could then be that Steele has been, in effect, hoist with his own petard, in that he is having to sustain the fiction that he had some kind of grounds for making the claims about Aleksej Gubarev and XBT. How far this matters, at least in relation to the action bought against 'BuzzFeed' in Florida, remains moot at the moment.
Apparently that organisation is doing rather well in sustaining the claiming that 'fair report privilege' could circumvent any requirement to prove truth and a key question now is whether documents which the DOJ is being forced to produce will establish that the dossier was being used by officials in ways that would trigger the privilege as of 10 January 2017.
That said, what Ohr reports Simpson as telling him raises fundamental questions about how anyone could have relied upon the dossier for anything and should push people back to actually asking hard questions about its origins.blue peacock -> Jack , 4 days ago
Mr Habakkuk, you mention "ambiguous role of Rinat Akhmetshin" - I am not sure if you meant Akhmetov.
I am surprised and curious about you mentioning him - if you meant Akhmetov - because that is one name among all the oligarchs which has so far not been prominent. Thank you for your posts, these posts and the SST comments could and should serve as help to the congressional investigations and hearings.Patrick Armstrong , 3 days ago
To add: Steele was on the FBI's payroll, in addition to being on Fusion GPS's payroll. And on the payroll of Her Majesty's Government. After he got caught leaking to the media he was apparently "fired" by the FBI. But he was continuing to communicate and brief through Bruce Ohr at the DOJ.
I think the circle of Glenn Simpson. Chris Steele, Bruce & Nellie Ohr, Adam Waldman. Peter Strzok, and Sen. Mark Warner will be very interesting to pursue.
The other circle that should be investigated is the Brennan, Clapper, Lynch, Comey, Yates, Susan Rice.
No investigation can exclude the active participation of key people from the media complex including people like Comey's good friend Benjamin Wittes.David Habakkuk -> Patrick Armstrong , 3 days ago
Younger isn't the brightest bulb in the box, is he?
"If you doubt the link between legitimacy and effective counter-terrorism, then albeit negatively the unfolding tragedy in Syria will, I fear, provide proof. I believe the Russian conduct in Syria, allied with that of Assad's discredited regime, will, if they do not change course, provide a tragic example of the perils of forfeiting legitimacy. In defining as a terrorist anyone who opposes a brutal government, they alienate precisely that group that has to be on side if the extremists are to be defeated. Meanwhile, in Aleppo, Russia and the Syrian regime seek to make a desert and call it peace. The human tragedy is heart-breaking"Patrick Armstrong -> David Habakkuk , 3 days ago
Those were indeed some of the most inane comments in an inane piece.
But then, if you read an interview given to Jay Elwes of 'Prospect' magazine in May last year by Younger's predecessor Sir Richard Dearlove, who looks to have been a significant background presence in what has been going on, you will find that, although he is much more coherent than than his successor, it is almost as inane.
(See https://www.prospectmagazin... . )
As it happens, Dearlove was one of the signatories of the 'Statement of Principles' of something called the 'Henry Jackson Society.'
This was founded in 2005, in Cambridge, by a group in whom acolytes of an historian called Maurice Cowling were prominent Dearlove is himself a graduate in history from that university.
In its original version, the 'Statement of Principles' explained, among other things, that the Society: 'Believes that only modern liberal democratic states are truly legitimate, and that any international organization which admits undemocratic states on an equal basis is fundamentally flawed.'
(See https://en.wikipedia.org/wi... .)
Ironically, it was shortly after the publication of the dossier that Anatol Lieven published in the 'National Interest' an article entitled 'Is America Becoming a Third World Country?' (See https://nationalinterest.or... .)
Among other things, he harked back to the way that, in 1648, a century and a half of bloody ideological strife in Europe had been ended with a recognition that the legitimacy of different state forms had to be accepted, if a kind of 'war of all against all' was to be avoided.
And Lieven went on to reflect on the way that, at what was then widely seen as the end of the Cold War, the abandonment of universalisitic pretensions by Russia and China was interpreted as justifying an embrace of these by the the West.
This, he went on to argue, had actually had the paradoxical effect of relegitimising 'rιgimes' which do not conform to Western 'democratic' models, concluding by noting what appears to our new, quasi-Soviet, preference for not letting experience interfere with ideological dogma:
'Finally even after the catastrophes of Iraq and Libya there is almost no awareness among US policymakers of the fact that US attempts to change the regimes of other countries are likely to be seen not only by the elites of those countries but also by their populations as leading to and intended to lead to the destruction of the state itself, leading to disaster for its society and population. When the Communist regime in the USSR collapsed (though only in part under Western pressure), it took the Soviet state with it. The Russian state came close to following suit in the years that followed, Russia was reduced to impotence on the world stage, and large parts of the Russian and other populations suffered economic and social disaster. Remembering their own past experiences with state collapse, warlordism, famine and foreign invasion, Chinese people looked at this awful spectacle and huddled closer to the Chinese state one that they may dislike in many ways, but which they certainly trust more than anything America has to offer especially given the apparent decay of democracy throughout the West.'
( https://nationalinterest.or... .)
I read with interest your piece back in June entitled 'Putin Once Dreamed the American Dream', reprinting Charles Heberle's account of the 'Transforming Subjects Into Citizens' project, and the attitude of some people close to Putin to it.
(See https://patrickarmstrong.ca... .)
One of the things which struck me was that the question why the American Revolution succeeded, and so many others failed, which was concerning the intellectuals to whom Heberle talked, is one of the central questions of modern political thought, from Tocqueville on.
(Indeed, the question of the preconditions for what might be called 'constitutional' government, has been central to 'republican' thought, ever since it was revived by Italian thinkers, including prominently Machiavelli, when the 'Renaissance' made them reactivate and rework debates from ancient Rome and Greece.)
However, to hark back to the anxieties expressed by Lieven, nothing in the analysis of the great French thinker necessary guarantees that the success of 'Democracy in America' is stable and permanent, or indeed that the relatively civilised order of the post-war 'Pax Americana' is necessarily durable in Western Europe.
Also in June, Sergei Karaganov published a piece in 'Russia in Global Affairs', of which he is publisher, entitled 'Ideology of Eastward Turn.' A paragraph that struck me:
'Russian society should by no means abdicate from its mostly European culture. But it should certainly stop being afraid, let alone feel ashamed, of its Asianism. It should be remembered that from the standpoint of prevailing social mentality and society's attitude to the authorities Russia, just as China and many other Asian states, are offspring of Chengiss Khan's Empire. This is no reason for throwing up hands in despair or for beginning to despise one's own people, contrary to what many members of intelligencia sometimes do. It should be accepted as a fact of life and used as a strength. The more so, since amid the harsh competitive environment of the modern world the authoritarian type of government in the context of a market economy and equitable military potentials is certainly far more effective than modern democracy. This is what our Western partners find so worrisome. Of course, we should bear in mind that authoritarianism just like democracy may lead to stagnation and degradation. Russia is certainly confronted with such a risk.'
Unlike you, I cannot claim serious expertise on Russia. But, as a reasonably alert generalist television current affairs producer, I took note of the indications which were emerging in the course of 1987 that the Gorbachev 'new thinking' was underpinned by a realisation that Soviet institutions and ideas had become fundamentally dysfunctional, to which you have referred repeatedly over the years.
And, after long tedious months trying interest the powers that were in British broadcasting in what was happening, I ended up producing a couple of programmes for BBC Radio in February/March 1989 in which we interviewed some of the leading 'new thinkers', among them Karaganov's then immediate superior at the Institute of Europe, Vitaly Zhurkin.
At the Institute for the USA and Canada, by contrast, we did not interview its head, Georgiy Arbatov, but his deputy, Andrei Kokoshin, and one of the latter's mentors on military matters and collaborators General-Mayor Valentin Larionov, who I later realised had earlier been one of the foremost Soviet nuclear strategists. (At the Institute for World Economy and International Relations, we interviewed Arbatov's son, Alexei.)
Talking to these people we got a sense, although it had to be fleshed out later, of the scale of the disillusion with Soviet models, and indeed which began to frighten me not long after of the way many of them were romanticising the West.
What Karaganov now writes is I think a hardly very surprising reaction to the way that the Western powers responded to the 'new thinking.' Moreover, it seems to me that the disillusionment involved is in no sense particular Russian, but rather global.
If one regards 'democracy' as though it were quoted on the stock exchange, before 1914 there were very many buyers, including among the Russian ιlite. By 1931, in very many places, including large sections of the 'intelligentsia' in Western countries, it was a sellers' market, to put it mildly.
After 1945, a kind of long 'bull market' in 'democracy' started: for very good reasons.
The largely but very far from entirely peaceful retreat and collapse of Soviet power was to a very significant extent the product of this. The subsequent behaviour of Western ιlites has generated a vicious 'bear market', a fact they appear unable to understand.
I do not think Karaganov's article is simply a reflection of changes in Russian attitudes. The changes, it seems to me, are global.Jack -> David Habakkuk , 3 days ago
I do think that we in the West really blew it. In 1990, we could have said, in all humility, that our way of life (IMO the key word is pluralism) had proven more survivable. So we should welcome the others into the tent. Instead, we were right and that was that.
PS, in light of the Henry Jackson society and all Younger's references to "values" this one rather stands out "A vital lesson I take from the Chilcot Report is the danger of group think."
Yeah. Group think, the very opposite of what I mean by pluralism.FB -> Patrick Armstrong , 3 days ago
Sharyl Atkinson describes well the conspiracy. When one steps back and look at all the machinations we know now, it seems incredible.
Just as you're asking about the origins of the dossier I wonder if it was orchestrated or something that evolved organically? If it was orchestrated, then who was the mastermind? Did Brennan, Clapper and Come sit down and hatch it or was Simpson the brains? What is astounding is the scale. So many people involved. Were they all motivated by ideology or by the need to protect their racket?
It seems there are many sub-plots. There's the Deripaska, Steele, Waldman, Mueller, Sen. Warner angle. Then there's the Simpson, Steele, Ohr, Strzok, Page, McCabe angle. There's also the Simpson, Steele, media reporters angle. Then there's the whole Mifsud, Halper, Carter Page, Papadopolous, Downer bit. There's the Comey, Rosenstein, Yates, Strzok FISA application piece. Then there's all the stuff happening in the UK including Hannigan's resignation as soon as Trump is elected. Of course the whole Mueller appointment and the obstruction of justice thread to tie Trump's hand. There are so many elements. Who initiated and coordinated? Was each element separate?
There's no doubt a political thriller movie could be made.Michael Regan , 2 days ago
Thanks for the quote...LOL
I guess the comedy part is that there actually exist people with medically functioning brains, who are somehow able to contort such a worldview...Aleppo as peaceful 'desert' indeed...who knew that having bearded fanatics in charge is somehow 'better'...[and not 'heart-breaking']...David Habakkuk -> Michael Regan , a day ago
Some here may find blogpost from March of this year interesting as it speaks to the production of the Steele dossier. I have not seen it mentioned here before and a site search produced no results. https://apelbaum.wordpress.... Some sections seem to have gotten David Cay Johnston's hackles up.Michael Regan -> David Habakkuk , a day ago
I had seen Yaacov Apelbaum's piece referred to by Clarice Feldman in a post on the 'American Thinker' site a few days back, but not looked at it properly.
It is indeed fascinating, and clearly repays a closer study than I have so far had time to give it. I was however relieved to find that what Apelbaum writes 'meshes' quite well with my own views of the likely authorship of the dossier.
A question I have is whether the monumental amount of labour involved in producing it can really be the work of a single IT person however wide-ranging his abilities and interests. My suspicion is that there may be input from Russian intelligence.
This is not said in order to discredit Apelbaum's work. In matters where I have had occasion critically to examine claims from official Russian sources, I have found several unsurprising, but recurring, patterns. Sometimes, the information provided can be shown to be essentially accurate, and it is reasonably clear how it has been obtained.
At other times, claims are made which information from other sources suggests either are, or may well be, true, but the 'sources and methods' involved are deliberately obscured, making evaluation more difficult.
And then, there are many occasions when what one gets is quite patently a mixture of accurate information and disinformation. Analysing these can be very productive, if one can both sift out the accurate information, and attempt to see what the disinformation is designed to obscure.
One thing of which I am absolutely certain is that the networks which are outlined by Apelbaum are precisely those which Russian intelligence will have spent a great deal of time and ingenuity penetrating.
This will have been attempted by 'SIGINT' and surveillance methods, and also through infiltrating agents and turning people. (There are often grounds to suspect that some of those most vociferously denouncing Putin are colluding with Russian intelligence.)
Together, these methods are likely to have produced a mass of information. It is important to remember, for example, that at the time of his mysterious death on 23 March 2013 Boris Berezovsky was negotiating to return to Russia, and that his head of security, Sergei Sokolov did return, with a 'cache' of documents.
Some of these were used back in April 2016 in a 'Vesti Nedeli' edition presented by Dmitry Kiselyov, who manages Russia's informational programming resources, and an accompanying documentary on the 'Pervyi Kanal' station.
The purpose was to demonstrate that Alexei Navalny was the instrument of a 'rιgime change' plot in which William Browder was acting as an agent of MI6.
There is a good discussion of this, which highlights some of the problems with the documents, by Gilbert Doctorow, and Sokolov appears to have been involved in some murky activities since.
(See https://russia-insider.com/... ; https://en.crimerussia.com/... .)
But whatever the credibility or lack of it of the material, its appearance illustrates a general pattern, where the political disintegration of the London-based opposition to Putin has meant that more and more people involved in it have been supplying information to the Russians.
If, as I strongly suspect, there is fire beneath the smoke in those Russian television programmes, and if a great part of a series of projects of a related kind orchestrated in conjunction by elements in American and British intelligence were actually large run from this side, this will be creating headaches for people in Washington, as well as London.
An important role in the Apelbaum piece is played by the private security company Hakluyt. A quick look at the entries on Wikipedia and Powerbase will make clear that, if there is a British 'deep state', this is likely to be at its core.
(See https://en.wikipedia.org/wi... ; http://powerbase.info/index... .)
It is against this background that on has to see a specific claim which Apelbaum makes, for which I do not think any evidence is produced, about two figures whose role in 'Russiagate' is clearly central. So Luke Harding is described as 'A Guardian reporter and a Hakluyt and Orbis contractor' (note word.) Meanwhile, Edward Baumgartner is described as 'Co-founder of Edward Austin. Contractor at Orbis and Hakluyt.'
That Harding is corrupt, as also Sir Robert Owen's 'Inquiry' into the death of the late Alexander Litvinenko, I can prove. When Owen's report was published in January 2016, a preliminary response by me was posted here on SST, which among other things listed some of the evidence establishing that the interviews supposedly recorded with Litvinenko by Detective Inspector Brent Hyatt immediately before his death were blatant forgeries.
If this is the case, then questions are raised about how much of the apparently compelling forensic evidence is forged and close examination suggests that key parts of it are.
(See http://turcopolier.typepad.... .)
In relation to that part of the evidence discussed in my January 2016 post which exposes the fumbling attempts by Steele and his colleagues to cover up the truth about when and how Litvinenko travelled into central London on the day he was supposedly killed, most of this had been among a mass of material submitted by me to the Inquiry Team, which I have e-mails to prove was read.
Likewise, also in January 2016, I sent the key relevant evidence on this crucial matter to Harding and senior figures at the 'Guardian', and have reason to believe it was read.
Further study of Owen's report has confirmed my suspicion that a strong 'prima facie case' of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice exists against very many of those involved in it.
At the same time, materials produced on the Russian side have confirmed my suspicion that the reason why Steele and others have been able to get away with their cover-up is that the Russian intelligence services are no more enthusiastic than their British counterparts about having anything like the whole truth about how Litvinenko lived and died made public.
Given the central role which Steele has now assumed in what looks like one of the biggest political scandals in American history, and the fact that in his book 'Collusion' Harding was again coming out in support of him, it would be of the greatest possible interest if indeed the latter had combined being a senior 'Guardian' correspondent with being paid by both Orbis and even more important Hakluyt.
And, particularly given the peculiar ambiguities of the role both of Fusion GPS and Baumgartner in the 'Trump Tower' meeting, it would be of great interest if the latter could be tied not only to Fusion, but to Orbis and again even more important Hakluyt.
This in turn might be relevant in trying to make sense of whether the fact that he and Simpson appear to have been working against Trump and Browder at the same time was or was not part of an elaborate ploy to give credibility to 'information operations' against the former.
There are accordingly two possibilities. It may be that, while much else in the Apelbaum material can be shown to be accurate, such accurate information is being used to give credibility to disinformation.
Alternatively, he is being used as a conduit for accurate and really explosive information about the British end of 'Russiagate', which he is unlikely to have unearthed all by himself, and the actual sources of which are for very understandable reasons being obscured.David Habakkuk -> Michael Regan , a day ago
Thank you for your reply. You have given me much to think about and I am very grateful that you took the time to respond in such a comprehensive manner, and that you have provided me and others here with some really compelling information and notions.
In particular, the issue of sources and methods you note seems spot on. The author(s)'s information gathering methodologies and expertise are certainly not those of the laiety. In fact in the comments below his post YA mentions intelligence work.
Additionally, the text itself displays an odd parallelism with his assertion regarding the Steele Dossier- that is, the likelihood of multiple authors, of diverse origins.
One thing that did catch my eye was a response he made to David Cay Johnston's pissy request for a retraction about Jacoby involvement. YA included a quote in Latin from Cicero's accusations against Cataline. Here is the English: What is there that you did last night, what the night before -- where is it that you were -- who was there that you summoned to meet you -- what design was there which was adopted by you, with which you think that any one of us is unacquainted?
While this sort of riposte isn't exactly hyper-erudite, it ain't chopped liver either. What I mean to say is that exceptional cyber skills, algorithm coding (I'm guessing crawlers) are not commonly coupled with that sort of classical formation. His recourse to various biblical quotes suggests an unusual level of education as well. And no way is he younger than 38 or so.
At any rate, thank you for the article and your kind and informative reply.Michael Regan -> David Habakkuk , a day ago
Thanks. I have now read both a good few of Apelbaum's earlier posts, and also the comments on his discussion of the dossier. Given the importance of his analysis of that document closer study is clearly needed of all this material, but I have some preliminary reactions.
My curiosity about who Apelbaum might be is reinforced by the fact that the intimations he gives about his background in his responses to comments, while not incompatible with what he has said in the past, do not sit so easily with it.
In a July 2010 post, he explained that: 'In my previous life, I was a civil engineer. I worked for a large power marine construction company doing structural design and field engineering.' According to the account he gave then, he subsequently shifted to software development.
(See https://apelbaum.wordpress.... .)
What he now tells us is that: 'As far as how I first started, I do have an intelligence background and have been developing OSINT/cyber/intelligence platforms for many years.'
That makes sense in terms of the analysis, which whatever other inputs there may or may not have been looks to me like the work of someone who has a serious background in these kinds of methodology, and moreover, is clearly not any kind of 'Fachidiot.'
So, questions naturally arise about Apelbaum's intelligence career, in particular, who he is likely to have been employed by, and associated with, in the past, and whether he is still involved with any of those agencies which have employed him.
Even if he is not, questions would obviously rise about present connections arising from past work. This is in addition to the possibility that the logic of events may have provoked him to collaborate with those who might earlier have been his adversaries.
Reading Apelbaum's work, I am reminded of another interesting intervention in an embittered argument relating to the Middle East and the post-Soviet space, from what turned out to be an unexpected source.
In the period following the 'false flag' sarin attack at Ghouta on 21 August 2013 an incisive demolition of the conventional wisdom was provided in the 'crowdsourced' investigation masterminded by one 'sasa wawa' on a site entitled 'Who Attacked Ghouta?'
(See http://whoghouta.blogspot.com .)
And then, in December 2016, an Israeli high technology entrepreneur called Saar Wilf, a former employee of Unit 8200, that country's equivalent of the NSA or GCHQ, who had subsequently made a great deal of money when he and his partner sold their company to Paypal, co-founded a site called 'Rootclaim.'
(See https://www.rootclaim.com .)
The site, it was explained, was dedicated to applying Bayesian statistics to 'current affairs' problems. This is a methodology, whose modern form owes much to work done at Bletchley Park in the war, which is invaluable in 'SIGINT' analysis and also combating online fraud.
At the outset, 'Rootclaim' posted a recycled version of some of the key material from the 'Who Attacked Ghouta?' investigation. So, it seems likely, if not absolutely certain, that Saar Wilf and 'sasa wawa' are one and the same.
Following the Salisbury incident on 4 March, a blogger using the name 'sushi' produced a series of eleven posts under the title 'A Curious Incident' on the 'Vineyard of the Saker' blog.
(See https://thesaker.is/tag/sushi/ .)
Again, there are some very clear resemblances to 'sasa wawa' and Saar Wilf, which made me wonder whether the same person may be reappearing under yet another 'moniker.'
While the 'flavour' of Apelbaum seems to be different, the combination of what looks like serious technical expertise in IT techniques relating to intelligence with broad general intellectual interests looks to me similar.
I was amused by the combination of his quotation of the words from John 8:32 etched into the wall of the original CIA headquarters 'And you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free' and the following remarks:
'The June 2016 start date of Steele's contract with Fusion GPS is the start of the "billable" activity, not the beginning of the research. Steele and Simpson/Jacoby have been collaborating on Trump/Russia going back to 2009.
'Also, there is a large Hakluyt/Orbis "commercial intelligence" network in the US that regularly services political and federal agencies and has the power to summon Nazgϋls the likes of John Brennan. So Steele is not the new kid on the block, he has been doing this type of work long before 2016. This is also why he has such a cozy relationship with the brass at the DOJ and state.'
As it happens, I think that many of the collaborations involved may have started significantly earlier than this. In his response to David Cay Johnston, Apelbaum links to an April 2007' WSJ' article by Simpon and Jacoby which, among other things, deals with Semyon Mogilevich.
This is behind a paywall, but, fortunately, the fact that Ukrainian nationalists have had an obvious interest in treating it as a source of reliable information has meant that it is easily accessible.
(See www.madcowprod.com/wp-conte... )
It should I think be clear from my January 2016 post why I find this particularly interesting, in that it has to be interpreted in the context of a crucial 'key' to the mystery of the death of Alexander Litvinenko.
This is that he, the Ukrainian nationalist former KGB person Yuri Shvets, the convicted Italian disinformation peddler Mario Scaramella, and quite possibly the sometime key FBI expert on Mogilevich, Robert 'Bobby' Levinson, were involved in trying to suggest that Mogilevich was an instrument of a plot by Putin to equip Al Qaeda with a 'mini nuclear bomb.'
So, I then come back to the question of whether this notion of a 'large Haluyt/Orbis "commercial intelligence" network in the US', playing the role of Sauron with Brennan, perhaps, as the 'Witch-king of Angmar', does or does not have substance.
If it does, there would be very good reasons for a variety of people, with a range of different attitudes to events in the post-Soviet space and the Middle East, to think that they had an interest in collaborating with Russian intelligence against a common enemy.
If it does not, then there is a real possibility that Apelbaum may be involved in using accurate intelligence to disseminate inaccurate. (It seems to me that he is much too intelligent to be a plausible candidate for the role of 'useful idiot.')
One further point that may, or may not, be relevant. Many of the most influential American and British Jews, for reasons which I find somewhat hard to understand, seem to have decided that the heirs of the architects of the Lvov pogrom are nice and cuddly.
So, for example, Chrystia Freeland, the unrepentant granddaughter of the notorious Nazi collaborator Michael Chomiak, has been able to end up as Canadian Foreign Minister because made a successful journalistic career on the London 'Financial Times', a paper with a strong Jewish presence.
That the editorial staff of such a paper thought it appropriate to have someone like Freeland as their Moscow correspondent gives you a good insight into how moronic British ιlites have become. This may well be relevant, in trying to evaluate claims about Hakluyt and other matters.
In relation to Apelbaum, it may be quite beside the point that other Jews from a Russian/East European background, both in Russia, Israel, and the United States, have very different views on Ukraine, Russia, and the dangers posed not least to Israel by jihadists. It is however a fact which needs to be born in mind, when one comes across people whose views cut across conventional dividing lines in the United States and Britain.
Beside the point in relation to Apelbaum, I am confident, but also needing to be kept in mind, is the possibility that elements in the United States 'intelligence community', seeing the 'writing on the wall', may think it appropriate to shift from trying to pass the buck by blaming the Russians to doing so by blaming the Brits.David Habakkuk -> Michael Regan , 2 hours ago
It seems apparent that Putin's reordering of the Russian economy after the collapse of Long-Term Capital Management, Republic Bank's difficulites and the death of Edmund Safra left a bitter taste in the mouths of many who had hoped to exercise rentier rights over the Russian economy and resources. Why so much US resources and energy have been committed to recovering a contested deed is a real conundrum.
I was unaware of Freeland's grandfather and his lamentable CV. Thank you. It's funny that you mentioned both the Ghouta post and the Vineyard of the Saker. I recall reading those and thinking- this is not like common fare on the intertubes.
Your last points about failings in the quality of elite decision-making is extremely important. This dynamic of the dumb (US, UK, EU) at the wheel is, for me, the most frightening feature of the current state of play. In the worst moments I fear we are all on a bus driven by a drunk monkey, careening through the Andes. It's going to hurt all the way to the bottom.
Again, I am very grateful for your replies and all the great information and thought.Steve Smith , 3 days ago
I think the question of why large elements in both American and British ιlites got so heavily invested, in essence, in supporting the oligarchs who refused Putin's terms in what turned into a kind of 'bare knuckles' struggle they were always likely to lose is a very interesting one.
It has long seemed to me that, even if one looked at matters from the most self-interested and cynical point of view, this represented a quite spectacular error of judgement. And, viewing the way in which 'international relations' are rearranging themselves, I am reasonably confident that this was one matter on which I got things right.
A central reason for this, I have come to think, is that Berezovsky and the 'information operations' people round him Litvinenko is important, but the pivotal figure, the 'mastermind', if you will, was clearly Alex Goldfarb, and Yuri Shvets and Yuri Felshtinsky both played and still play important supporting roles were telling people in the West what these wanted to hear.
It is a truth if not quite 'universally acknowledged', at least widely recognised by those who have acquired some 'worldly wisdom', that intellectually arrogant people, with limited experience of the world and a narrow education, can commonly be 'led by the nose' by figures who have more of the relevant kinds of intelligence and experience, and few scruples.
This rather basic fact is central to understanding the press conference on 31 May 2007 where the figure whom the Berezovsky group and Christopher Steele had framed in relation to the death of Litvinenko, Andrei Lugovoi, responded to the Crown Prosecution Service request for his extradition.
In his prepared statement, Lugovoi claimed that his supposed victim used to say that everyone in Britain were ''retards', to use the translation submitted in evidence to Owen's Inquiry, or 'idiots', to use that by RT. And according to this version, the British believed in everything that 'we' that is, the Berezovky group said was happening in Russia.
(For the RT translation, see https://www.rt.com/news/and... .)
Whether or not Litvinenko expressed this cynical contempt, the credulity with which the claims of the 'information operations' people around Berezovsky have been accepted well illustrated by Owen's report and perhaps most ludicrous in Harding's journalism makes clear it is justified.
What moreover became very evident, when Glenn Simpson testified to the House Intelligence and Senate Judiciary Committees, was that he was once again recycling the Berezovsky's group's version of Putin 'sistema' as the 'return of Karla.'
Given what has been emerging on the ways in which Fusion GPS and Steele were both integrated into networks involving top-level people in the FBI, DOJ, State Department and CIA, it seems clear that the 'retards'/'idiots' label is as applicable to people on your side as to people on ours.
Perhaps then, cartoons about Trump as a puppet, with the strings pulled by another puppet representing Manafort, whose strings are in turn pulled by Putin, should be replaced by ones in which Mueller is seen as a puppet manipulated by the ghost of Boris Berezovsky.
But that is the irony. The relationship with Berezovsky blew up in the faces of all concerned, when in the wake of the successsful corruption of the investigation into the death of Litvinenko by him and his 'information operations' people, he attempted to recoup his fortunes by suing Roman Abramovich, and got taken to pieces by Lord Sumption.
As to what happened next, a recent item on 'Russian Insider', providing a link to and transcript of a more recent piece presented by Dmitry Kiselyov on 'Vesti Nedeli is a good illustration of where accurate information and disinformation can be mixed in material from Russian sources.
(See https://russia-insider.com/... .)
The piece, which appeared in July, discusses, and quotes from, an interview given the previous month to Dmitry Gordon, who runs a Ukrainian nationalist site, by Berezovsky's daughter Elizaveta. Among other things, this deals with Berezovsky's death.
(See https://gordonua.com/public... . A little manipulation will get you a reasonably serviceable English translation, although it becomes comic because Berezovsky is referred to as 'pope'.)
The 'Vesti Nedeli' piece uses what Elizaveta Berezovskaya says in support of the claim that Berezovsky was murdered by British 'special forces', because he was planning to return to Russia, and he 'knew too much about them.'
As it happens, this is a patently tendentious reading of what she says. However, interesting features of the actual text of the interview are 1. that it does provide what to my mind is compelling evidence that her father was murdered, and 2. while she clearly suggests that this was covered up by the British, she is not suggesting that they were responsible but also not making Putin 'prime suspect.'
Whether the suggestion by his daughter that her father might have been murdered by people who knew that by so doing they might get control of assets he might otherwise recoup has any merit I cannot say: I doubt it but cannot simply rule the possibility out.
What remains the case is that at that point there were very many people, including but in no way limited to elements in Western intelligence agencies, who had strong interests in avoiding a return by Berezovsky to Russia.
And the same people had the strongest possible interest in avoiding his being treated at the Inquest into Litvinenko's death by a competent barrister representing the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation in the way he had been treated by Lord Sumption.
Ironically, it may have been partly because Lugovoi had made a dramatic announcement that he was withdrawing from the proceedings less than a fortnight before Berezovsky's death that before this happened a lot of people were staring at an absolutely worst-case scenario.
Time and again, in Owen's report, one finds matters where he recycles patent disinformation, which a well-briefed barrister acting for the ICRF could have easily ripped to shreds. At the same time, in this situation, the Russians could most probably have made a reasonable fist of coping with the multiple contradictions in claims made on their own side.
And, crucially, their patent weak suit the need to obscure the actual role of Russian intelligence in the smuggling of the polonium into London, which had nothing to do with any murder plot could have been reasonably well 'covered.'
Precisely because of these facts, the one scenario which can very easily be completely ruled out is that which is basic to the 'information operations' now coming out of London and Washington. In this, Berezovsky's death is portrayed as a key element in a systematic attempt by the Putin 'sistema' to eradicate the supposedly heroic opposition, much of it located in London.
That sustaining this fable is critical to defending the credibility of Steele, and therefore of the whole 'Russiagate' narrative, is quite evident from the 'From Russia With Blood' materials published by 'BuzzFeed' in July last year.
(See https://www.buzzfeed.com/he... .)
This, however, leads on to a paradox, which is highlighted by a piece posted by James George Jatras on the 'Strategic Culture Foundation' site on 18 August, entitled 'Have You Committed Your Three Felonies Today?'
(See https://www.strategic-cultu... .)
Among the points Jatras who I think is an Orthodox Christian makes is that the logic of contesting the 'Russiagate' narrative has had some strange consequences. Among these, there is one on which the actual history of the activities of Berezovsky and his 'information operations' people bears directly:
'Flipping the "Russians did it" narrative: Among the President's defenders, on say Fox News, no less than among his detractors, Russia is the enemy who (altogether now!) "interfered in our elections" in order to "undermine our democracy." Mitt Romney was right! The only argument is over who was the intended beneficiary of Muscovite mendacity, Trump or Hillary that's the variable. The constant is that Putin is Hitler and only a traitor would want to get along with him. All sides agree that the Christopher Steele dossier is full of "Russian dirt" though there's literally zero actual evidence of Kremlin involvement but a lot pointing to Britain's MI6 and GCHQ.'
(See https://www.strategic-cultu... .)
For reasons I have already discussed, I think what while Jatras is substantially right, 'zero evidence' is only partially correct: It seems to me that disinformation supplied by elements in Russian intelligence could quite possibly have found its way into the second and final memoranda.
That said, Jatras has pointed to a fundamental feature of the current situation, which involves multiple ironies.
The total destruction of Steele's credibility could easily be achieved by anyone who was interested in looking at the evidence about the life and death of the late Alexander Litvinenko seriously. However, because a central tactic of most of those who are attacking the 'Russiagate' narrative has generally been 'Flipping the "Russians did it" narrative', they are like people who ought to be able to see Steele's 'Achilles' heel', but in practice, often end up attacking him where his armour is, without being, not at its weakest.
Meanwhile, as I have already stressed, the ability of the Russian authorities to undermine the 'narrative' produced by the 'information operations' people around Berezovsky, of whom the most important are Alex Goldfarb and Yuri Shvets, is compromised by their fear of having to 'own up to' their actual role in the smuggling of the polonium into London in October-November 2007.
The person who had a strong interest in blowing this structure of illusion to pieces was actually Lugovoi. But it seems to me at least possible that there has been a kind of disguised covert conspiracy by elements in Western and Russian intelligence to ensure there was no risk of him doing so.Paul M , 3 days ago
One of the things I've never understood about the Trump Dossier story is the lack of any forensic analysis of its content and style anywhere in the media, even the alt media. Who was supposed to have actually written it? Steele? The style does not match someone of his background and education, and the formatting and syntax were atrocious. The font actually varied from "report" to "report." It certainly did not give me the impression of being the product of a high-end, Belgravia consultancy.
I wonder whether it was produced by an American of one sort or another and then "laundered" by being accorded association with the UK firm. Given that Steele just happened to be hired by the USG to help in the anti-FIFA skulduggery, he and his firm seem very much to be a concern that does dirty little jobs that need discretely to be done, though in this case, the discretion was undermined.richardstevenhack , 3 days ago
Most of the memos were issued before October and Fusion/Simpson authorized Steele to release information to the FBI starting in July. The question is why the memos were released after the election when a release before the election would have been enough to sink Trump. Instead the FBI and presumably those paying Fusion on Hillarys behalf sat on it, and Comey comes out days before the election
Saying he was reopening the HC email investigation.
Kind of looks like they all wanted Trump in office and the disclosure was to give Trump the excuse needed to back track on his promises to improve relations with Russia and blame that on pressure from the Deep State and Russia Gate.
Looking at Trumps history with Sater (FBI/CIA asset) and his political aspirations that began following his Moscow visit in 1987 it seems likely Trump has been a Deep State asset for 30 years and fed intelligence to CIA/FBI on Russian oligarchs and mafia . Indeed he may well have duped Russians into believing he was working for them when in fact it was the CIA/FBI who had the best Kompromat with US RICO laws that could have beggared himPat Lang Mod -> richardstevenhack , 3 days ago
One thing to remember about the FBI is Sy Hersh. Hersh claims the FBI has been sitting on a report for two years that fingers murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich as the Wikileaks DNC email leaker (or one of them, at least.)
Now can we imagine that not everyone in a senior position at the FBI knows about that report? I can't. Literally everyone from the supervisor of the Special Agent or computer forensic investigator who examined Rich's computer right up to the Director HAD to know that report exists - and covered it up.
That right there is obstruction of justice and conspiracy. Literally everyone at the FBI who can't PROVE he didn't know about that report will be going to jail. The entire top administration of the FBI is going to go down.
And how many people at the Department of Justice are aware of that report? Did Rosenstein know? Who else in the Obama administration knew?
That would be motivation for a lot of desperate maneuvering. Add to that who was really behind the Steele Dossier and even more people are likely to end up in jail.richardstevenhack -> Pat Lang , 3 days ago
What is the link for Hersh saying that?Pat Lang Mod -> richardstevenhack , 3 days ago
You haven't heard that yet? It's the infamous audio tape that Hersh was caught on discussing it. He's since obfuscated what he said, but the tape stands on its own, and he has never said that anything he said on the tape wasn't true, despite that a lot of Democrats and Trump-bashers claim he has.
Here's one source on Youtube:
Seymour Hersh discussing Wikileaks DNC leaks Seth Rich & FBI report
https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2FgYzB96_EK7s%3Ffeature%3Doembed&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DgYzB96_EK7s&image=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FgYzB96_EK7s%2Fhqdefault.jpg&key=21d07d84db7f4d66a55297735025d6d1&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=youtuberichardstevenhack -> Pat Lang , 3 days ago
I have told you several times and I will tell you again probably hopelessly that Hersh PERSONALLY has told me that the "tape" was made without his permission or knowledge when he was aimlessly speculating on possibilities.Pat Lang Mod -> richardstevenhack , 3 days ago
I am unaware of your explicitly telling me that he personally told you that the tape was "aimless speculation." My apologies if I missed that response.
Of course the tape was made without his permission. We all know that. It's irrelevant to what he said on the tape.
What I'm saying is that despite what he may have told you, nothing on that tape sounds like "aimless speculation".
When you consider that he has four good reasons for dissembling about the tape, I view it as far more likely that everything he said was true.
1) If what he said is true, he may have compromised his FBI contact. Not good for his line of work.
2) If what he said is true, compromising that contact may well make all his other contacts wary about talking to him in the future - a bad deal for a journalist who relies on his contacts.
3) If what he said is true, he may have compromised his ability to get his "long form journalism" article published - a problem he already has had in the past.
4) If what he said is true, he's accusing the FBI of sitting on that report for two years, which might well make him a target of retaliation in some way.
If you believe that everything he said on the tape is untrue and that is what he explicitly told you, fine. I'm waiting for his "long form journalism" report to explain it. So far everything he has said publicly about it has not contradicted what he said on the tape, but merely waved his hands about it.Aukuu Makule -> Pat Lang , 3 days ago
Sy Hersh talks a lot both loudly and profanely. He never intended to tell Buttowski that there was more than a possibility that the FBI held more than a rumor that this might be true. He talked to Buttowski because a mutual friend of him and me asked him to do so for no good reason. Please go talk to all the other people you pester and not on SST. You are an argumentative nuisance.blue peacock , 3 days ago
I have no stake in the debate about Rich, DNC, wikileaks.
But I do notice some loose ends. Hersh may well have engaged in speculation, but it is interesting speculation:
55. During his conversation with Butowsky, Mr. Hersh claimed that he had received information from an "FBI report." Mr. Hersh had not seen the report himself, but explained: "I have somebody on the inside who will go and read a file for me. And I know this person is unbelievably accurate and careful. He's a very high level guy."
56. According to Mr. Hersh, his source told him that the FBI report states that, shortly after Seth Rich's murder, the D.C. police obtained a warrant to search his home. When they arrived at the home, the D.C. police found Seth Rich's computer, but were unable to access it.The computer was then provided to the D.C. police Cyber Unit, who also were unable to access the computer. At that point, the D.C. police contacted the Cyber Unit at the FBI's Washington D.C. field office. Again, according to the supposed FBI report, the Washington D.C. field office was able to get into the computer and found that in "late spring early summer , [Seth Rich][made] contact with Wikileaks." "They found what he had done. He had submitted a series of documents, of emails. Some juicy emails from the DNC." Mr. Hersh told Butowsky that Seth Rich "offered a sample [to WikiLeaks][,] an extensive sample, you know I'm sure dozens, of emails, and said I want money."
. . .
"I hear gossip," Hersh tells NPR on Monday. "[Butowsky] took two and two and made 45 out of it."
. . .
The clip is definitely worth listening to in its entirety if you haven't already. Hersh is heard telling Butowsky that he had a high-level insider read him an FBI file confirming that Seth Rich was known to have been in contact with WikiLeaks prior to his death, which is not even a tiny bit remotely the same as having "heard rumors". Hersh's statements in the audio recording and his statement to NPR cannot both be true.
https://medium.com/@caityjo...Rob , 3 days ago
An interview of Rep. John Ratcliffe who will lead the questioning of Bruce Ohr.
https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fembed%2Fqn23H0vMCsM%3Ffeature%3Doembed&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dqn23H0vMCsM&image=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2Fqn23H0vMCsM%2Fhqdefault.jpg&key=21d07d84db7f4d66a55297735025d6d1&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=youtubeDavid Habakkuk -> Rob , 3 days ago
I suspect Buzzfeed were in the grip of Trump Derangement Syndrome, and perhaps you overestimate their professionalism.blue peacock -> David Habakkuk , 3 days ago
You may very well be right. There may be a large element of 'amateur night out' about this.
But then I come back to the question of who decided that the dossier be published, and who, if anyone, was consulted before the decision was made. For the reasons I gave, I am reasonably confident that those on this side who had been in one way or another complicit in its production and covert dissemination were taken aback by the publication.
It is not clear to me whether anything significant can be inferred from the publicly available evidence about whether those on your side who had been complicit were involved in the decision to publish without taking even elementary precautions, or whether the 'Buzzfeed' people just had a rush of blood to the head.Cynthia Anne , 4 days ago
I suspect the decision to publish the dossier was political. It was required to enable Clapper, Brennan, and others to opine on national media and create further media hysteria prior to the vote as well as to justify the counter-intelligence investigations underway. They were throwing the kitchen sink to sink Trump's electoral chances. I don't think a lot of thought was given about the legal ramifications.
This seems to be a pattern. Leak information. Then use the leaked story to justify actions like apply for a FISA warrant or fan the media flames.Pat Lang Mod -> Cynthia Anne , 4 days ago
And now they are turning on one another. Hayden just slammed Clapper for making too much of losing the security clearance the he abuse for political reasons.blue peacock -> Pat Lang , 4 days ago
Looks like both Clapper and Haydon made the same comment about Brennan. they said "his rhetoric was becoming a problem. Ah, the USAF intel rats are swimming for the shore. Lets see how many others (not all USAF) decide to try to save themselves.MP98 -> blue peacock , 3 days ago
I find it incredulous that former leaders of the intelligence and law enforcement agencies have gained paid access to powerful media platforms and they have used it to launch vicious attacks on a POTUS.
I find it amazing that McCabe and Peter Strzok are raising hundreds of thousands of dollars on social media platforms.
IMO, everyone on the list that Sarah Sanders noted, should not just lose their clearance but should be testifying to a grand jury.David Habakkuk -> blue peacock , 3 days ago
Not really incredulous. Just expected behavior from swamp creatures whose self-assumed importance and "rights" (that the rest of us peasants don't have) are coming under threat.English Outsider -> David Habakkuk , 3 days ago
It seems to me absolutely appalling, and I am also appalled that people on this side appear to have been playing a central role in all this.
One question. It seems to me that if what seems likely to be true does prove true, a range of these people must have committed very serious offences indeed.
However, I am too ignorant to know what precisely those offences might be. If you, or anyone else, had a clear understanding, I would be interested.Pat Lang Mod -> English Outsider , 3 days ago
"It seems to me absolutely appalling, and I am also appalled that people on this side appear to have been playing a central role in all this."
That says it all. We got the more discreditable side of the affair outsourced to us. Ugh. Is that all we're fit for now in the UK? White helmets and Khan Sheikhoun and Steele, all the scrubby stuff? Is that what the famous "Special Relationship" now consists of? We get to do the scrubby stuff because it's what we're fit for and we can be relied upon to keep it quiet?
Because at least on the American side there are people concerned about the political/PR involvement of parts of their own Intelligence Community, and seeking to have it looked into. Here - am I right? - it's dead silence.
I've been permitted to say before on SST that I don't think the Americans are going to resolve this affair satisfactorily until more light is cast on the UK side. But I also think that, for our own sakes, we should be looking at what exactly our IC does, and in particular, how much UK political involvement there was in what is now clear was a direct PR attack on an American President.blue peacock -> David Habakkuk , 3 days ago
I strongly suspect that Steele has a future as a novelist.
I'm not a lawyer and have no experience with the federal criminal statutes. Having said that I suspect that the following could be considered crimes:
- intentionally misleading FISC
- leaking classified information
- launching investigations on the basis of known false information
- surveillance of US citizens on the basis of false information
- conspiracy to subvert the constitution
There may also be certain professional agreements with the government that may have been violated. The only way any of these people will face a grand jury is if Donald Trump chooses to take action. Left to the natural devices of the law enforcement institutions nothing will happen and they will sweep everything under the rug. The intensity of Trump's tweets and the accusations therein are rising. If the GOP retains the House and Jim Jordan becomes speaker, then there may be a possibility that Sessions, Rosenstein and Wray may be fired and another special counsel appointed who will then convene a grand jury.
Considering what has been uncovered by Congressional investigators and the DOJ IG, I am truly surprised that Sessions has resisted the appointment of a special counsel. But of course that could go the way of the Owens inquiry in your country.
Sep 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
Nellie Ohr will sit for an interview with Congress next week, according to Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX).
Ohr, an expert on Russia who speaks fluent Russian, is a central figure in the nexus between Fusion GPS - the opposition research firm paid by the Clinton campaign to produce the "Steele Dossier " - and the Obama Justice Department - where her husband, Bruce Ohr, was a senior official. Bruce was demoted twice after he was caught lying about his extensive involvement with Fusion's activities surrounding the 2016 US election.
Notably, the Ohrs had extensive contact with Christopher Steele, the ex-MI6 spy who authored the salacious anti-Trump dossier used to justify spying on the Trump campaign during the election, and later to smear Donald Trump right before he took office in 2017. According to emails turned over to Congress and reported in late August, the Ohrs would have breakfast with Steele on July 30 at the downtown D.C. Mayflower hotel - days after Steele had turned in several installments of the infamous dossier to the FBI . The breakfast took place one day before the FBI/DOJ launched operation "Crossfire Hurricane," the codename for the official counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign.
"Great to see you and Nellie this morning Bruce," Steele wrote shortly following their breakfast meeting. " Let's keep in touch on the substantive issues/s (sic). Glenn is happy to speak to you on this if it would help," referring to Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson.
No stranger to the US intelligence community, Nellie Ohr represented the CIA's "Open Source Works" group in a 2010 " expert working group report on international organized crime" along with Bruce Ohr and Glenn Simpson .
Nayel , 56 minutes agothebriang , 1 hour ago
I'd bet she gets up there and denies everything, lust like Strozk. And the DOJ does nothing, and even allows the perjury to slide.
Sessions is clearly complicit. Loretta Lynch might as well be still running the show...and perhaps she is...
Seeing as how the Shadow Government seems to be running the "Collusion Investigation" on themselves...samsara , 1 hour ago
Is she going to name the 3 "journalists" that Fusion paid to start pushing the Russia narrative in the MSM?
I want names, goddammit.
Thread by Thread the garment is unraveled for all to see
" Needless to say, Congress will have no shortage of questions to ask Nellie. "
Like why did she get a ham radio? I guess she didn't trust the NSA?
Aug 31, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.orgPft | Aug 30, 2018 9:59:52 PM | 58Jackrabbit | Aug 30, 2018 11:04:20 PM | 63
what russian oligarchs?
House of Trump, House of Putin has some interesting stuff.
The US and the UK, unlike most Western democracies, permit anonymous ownership of real estate which facilitates money laundering of roughly $300 billion per year in the United States alone, most of it from Russia. As a result, luxury real estate has provided a haven for Russian oligarchs
According to a BuzzFeed investigation by Thomas Frank, more than 1,300 condos, one-fifth of all Trump-branded condos sold in the US since the eighties, were sold "in secretive, all-cash transactions that enable buyers to avoid legal scrutiny by shielding their finances and identities." The BuzzFeed article added that the total value of these condo sales -- sales that match the US Treasury's criteria for possible money laundering -- was about $ 1.5 billion, a figure that actually may understate the amount of dirty money in play.
Starting in 2006, Donald Jr., executive vice president of development and acquisitions for the Trump Organization, made about half a dozen trips to Russia over the course of a year and a half. "In terms of high-end product influx into the US, Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets, ....We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia."
After a decade of litigation, multiple bankruptcies, and $4 billion in debt, Trump rose from the near-dead with the help of Bayrock and its alleged ties to Russian intelligence and the Russian Mafia. "They saved his bacon," said Kenneth McCallion, a former federal prosecutor
Another Bayrock partner, the Sapir Organization, had, through its principal, oligarch Tamir Sapir, a long business relationship with Semyon Kislin, the Ukranian billionare commodities trader who was tied to the Chernoy brothers and, according to the FBI, to Vyacheslav Ivankov's Russian mafias gang in Brighton Beach.
Trumps man Giuliani appointed Kislin to be a member of the New York City Economic Development Corporation
Kushner paid $295 million for some of the floors in the old New York Times building, purchased in 2015 from the US branch of Israili-Russian oligarch Leviev's company, Africa Israel Investments (AFI), and partner, Five Mile Capital.
Kushner later borrowed $285 million from the German financial company Deutsche Bank, which has also been linked to Russian money laundering,
The Trumps Taj Mahal had become a favorite destination for the Russian mob because Trump made a point of giving high rollers "comps" for up to $100,000 a visit, an amenity that casinos often offered big-time gamblers. Later, two other Trump casinos, the Trump Castle Hotel and Casino, and the Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino, agreed to pay fines for "willfully failing to report" currency transactions over $10,000 and failing to comply with laws designed to prevent money laundering.
There is not a major Russian organized crime figure who we are tracking who does not also carry an Israeli passport," said Jonathan Winer, the former money-laundering czar in the Clinton State Department.
Trump World Tower, one-third of the units on the tower's highest and priciest floors, floors seventy-six to eighty-three,* had been snatched up, either by individual buyers from the former Soviet Union, or by limited liability companies connected to Russia or countries that had been part of the Soviet Union. "We had big buyers from Russia and Ukraine and Kazakhstan," sales agent Debra Stotts told Bloomberg Businessweek. Ukrainian billionaire Semyon "Sam" Kislin assisted the sales effort by issuing mortgages to buyers of Trump's latest luxury condos.
Trump Tower in Toronto. When it came to financing the skyscraper, Shnaider, a billionaire of Russian extraction, turned to Raiffeisen Bank International AG in Vienna, a bank whose affiliate has been called "a front to provide legitimacy to the gas company [US-indicted Russian crime boss Semion Mogilevich] controls, RosUkrEnergo," according to Scott F. Kilner, deputy chief of mission for the US embassy in Austria. So it followed that it was likely that funds from the Mogilevich-Firtash money pipeline were behind the Trump project in Toronto.
Then there is the Chabad connection of the Kushners and Putin backed Russian oligarchs, but no time for that
Clarifying: it's good info about the suspicions of Trump-Russian connections. I appreciate you're being helpful in providing that.
Mueller has had over a year to investigate. No doubt he can call on vast resources of US govt too. For all that effort, Mueller has not shown direct Russian govt influence (yet).
Circe , Aug 30, 2018 11:18:23 PM | 64
JR, ben was right on that point. I would put it this way: Trump is owned by Zionist Russian Oligarchs with dual citizenship. Haaretz has an article Know your oligarch: A guide to the Jewish billionaires in the Trump Russia probe.
It would be great if the Mueller probe exposes how minor Russia collusion is compared to Zionist collusion. Ergo the big prizes for Israel and status quo for Russia under Trump.
I suspect that most still pushing the Trump illusion here are Zionists who care squat about party and American democracy but are really pleased with what Trump is doing for Israel i.e. MIGA and the Zionist American collusion that is growing exponentially with each successive American President.
Trump is their man and he's being well-supported by Zionists even here disguised as Russia lovers, populists and Hillary haters. Let's not forget how many Russians are Zionists: over one million in Israel, not to mention Soviet Jews from former Soviet territory. So the numbers are much greater. An army of hasbara on the web.
Let's just say there's a huge incentive to sell the Trump illusion and push the Trump juice around here. It's concealed hasbara masquerading as Trumpism, plain and simple! Shameless pretense and very transparent.
Sep 16, 2018 | www.amazon.com
Edward Novak on September 15, 2018A frustratingly neutral collection of accounts from morally questionable people.
Trump is really, really bad at being President. This isn't news to anyone who has been following the leaks, rumors, announcements, policies, and tweets coming out of the White House for the last nineteen months.
Rather than being a revelatory, shocking look behind the curtain of an administration run by the single dumbest man to ever hold his office, the book just confirms the stories we've already heard, mixing in additional commentary from people in or close to the White House, mostly former employees who clearly still agree with Trump's agenda, even if they could no longer stand the man himself.
Woodward presents anecdotes from these individuals--people like Sen. Lindsay Graham, a renown proponent of endless wars in the Middle East, and Steve Bannon, former Chief Strategist, an out-and-proud xenophobe and fascist--without commentary or context, which has the odd effect of presenting these people only in contrast and comparison to Trump himself.
One unfamiliar with Bannon, for example, could come away from the book thinking that he was a fairly reasonable person (rather than a racist, white nationalist) because he is only ever shown as a foil to the ongoing circus of incompetence that is the Trump administration.
This is Woodward's style, of course; he presents himself as an almost entirely neutral presence, merely transcribing the things he learned, but when discussing such dangerous and reprehensible people, a paragraph here and there dedicated to reminding readers what, exactly, these people claim to believe would have been appreciated additional context.
Essentially, this book is just Michael Wolfe or Omarosa's stories, only drier and with more footnotes.
Sep 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
I Am Jack's Macroaggression ,
Wait - where is the Special Counsel looking into FBI/DOJ misconduct with regard to falsely exonerating Hillary ehile fabricating probable cause to spy on Trump??
Seriously, Mueller has been on a fishing expedition for 2 fucking years premised entirely on what seems to be FBI/DOJ manufactured evidence and lies to the FISA court... steele memo, the meetings with 'Russians' that were obvious set ups... Sally Yates making what should be a CRIMINAL abuse of office call in justifying spying on Flynn because as part of an incoming admin he was (gasp!) talking to Russian diplomats like incoming admins HAVE TO AND ALWAYS do...
There are more than enough reasons for a special counsel to look into all that because the Very fucking point Is the FBI and DOJ have been corrupted by political bias, despite the 'nothing to see here' bullshit of the IG Report.
All this while Hillary and Brennan and Comey and Clapper with his phony bullshit DNI report all walk around free.. and I'll believe McCabe and Rosenstein are going to be indicted when they are indicted.
Rosenstein tried to hide very relevant texts from Congress and lied about why.
Trump is getting shit advice. He should fire Sessions and Rosenstein right away, let the media go nuts, and find a couple black or latino guys or women to replace them in 'acting' status. See - they just need to be honest and teasonably good.
I Claudius, 4 hours ago
Completely disagree w/Dershowitz. Mueller is getting bad press for not going after Hillary and the democrats. If his findings are all against Trump it will be portrayed as a partisan hack job given all the dems on his team.
My thoughts? Tony Podesta and that Skadden Arps attorney have been selected by the party leaders as the fall guys for the dems. They are throwing them overboard so the Mueller BS probe can be portrayed as non-partisan. They can claim that Manafort was not just a "get Trump's associates" hit job by now stating that Manafort got them these two clowns.
Manafort has zero on Trump and Mueller now has a huge dem jizz load on his face for getting nowhere. He now has to preserve his reputation and going after these two f'wads for some minor issue (don't forget, the Repubs backed themselves into a corner claiming this Foreign lobbyist thing is a minor infraction). So now they get these two guys on a BS charge . . .
And they walk and Mueller saves face.
caconhma, 3 hours ago
It is all BS. The Trump affairs are just diversions from his primary assignments:
- Utterly promote and advance interests of Zionist Mafia and Israel
- Destabilize the US internal situation and use it as a pretext for transforming the USA into a totalitarian police state
- Protect and defend US$ as the only one viable reserve currency
- Prevent by any means China from becoming a geopolitical superpower challenging the USA
IMHO, Trump's masters are doing their job very incompetent and their evil game will terribly backfire against them.
Aug 30, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk
Dave , August 28, 2018 at 17:41Xavi , August 28, 2018 at 18:40
BBC is skanky state propaganda. The myth of BBC being some standard for news reporting died with the advent of the availability of international and independent news in Western countries. The main thing that BBC used to have which propped up the illusion of it being a respectable news source is that there was no competition or alternative to compare its narratives against. Since that time is over, so is BBC's masquerading as an impartial or accurate news source.Ken Kenn , August 28, 2018 at 21:49
Agree, Dave. That's what's informing the push to rubbish dissenting sites as fake news and eventually have them removed.
Ironic when the BBC has been ceaselessly pushing fake news for at least 15 years, with disastrous results. (Iraq; Libya; what caused the deficit and who should be forced to pay it down; Russia/Syria false flags; Corbyn A/S.)Deb O'Nair , August 28, 2018 at 00:52
Well I was convinced of fake BBC news during 9/11 and not for the reasons of building 7 coming down too early but the fact that the female journalist was facing a camera standing in front of a glass window and there was no reflection of her or the camera person from the glass. Not even a faint shadow.
That's when I knew the BBC were employing vampires and have been ever since.
Green Screen technology I discovered later. All the On the spot reporters are at it apparently. Or repeating Reuters or PA.frankywiggles , August 28, 2018 at 09:48
I find it impossible to watch BBC News, primarily because most of the editorial staff and senior correspondents seem to be working for MI5/6 and are more interested in disseminating Geo-political propaganda than upholding their journalistic responsibilities as defined in the BBC charter. People should not only boycott the BBC but refuse to pay the license fee on the grounds that it's a compulsory political subscription.D_Majestic , August 28, 2018 at 14:35
BBC world affairs editor 'fed up' with complaints directed at the corporation's news output
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/aug/28/bbc-news-is-not-biased-in-brexit-reporting-says-john-simpsonBrendan , August 28, 2018 at 10:34
Of course BBC News is not biased. Most of the time it is not even factual.ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 11:00
In a BBC article on 4 July 2018, you wrote: "I have not felt ready until now to acknowledge explicitly that we had met, but do now that the book is nearing completion."
Could you please explain that comment? I do not see why your acknowledgement of your meetings with Sergei Skripal should be delayed until your book is nearing completion.
If you felt that it was right to reveal those meetings in July, then why was it not right to do so in March, soon after the poisoning occurred? What difference would it have made if you had done so four months earlier?
I cannot think of any negative consequences of an earlier acknowledgement of the meetings. In fact, disclosures of any possible conflict of interest are generally considered to be desirable in journalism, regardless of whether the conflict of interest is real.Kay , August 28, 2018 at 14:42
The book is obviously part of a propaganda campaign. It seems hugely fortuitous that Mark Urban should have had "hours" of interviews with Skripal before the poisoning incident.
Isn't it much more likely that the Urban "interviews" would have happened after the event? But Urban can't say that because that would lead to demands from other journalists or news bodies to have access to Skripal.
And that can't happen because either Skripal would be asked about what happened on the day of the poisoning, or can't be guaranteed to stick to the script, or is no longer alive. And that leads to a suspicion that whatever Skripal is supposed to have said in his interviews with Urban has really just been made up by the British security services.ADHD , August 28, 2018 at 15:59
I'm open to alternative hypotheses but right now I think the most likely explanation for Urban's pre-poisoning contact with Sergei Skripal is that, at the time, it was assumed the Orbis dossier would be a key component of the successful takedown of Trump and Urban was putting together a mutually flattering account by interviewing the main players.
Tongue in cheek, it'd be worth asking Urban if his decision to cover the Skripal poisoning in his new book was made before or after the Skripals were actually poisoned.Brendan , August 28, 2018 at 10:37
The consensus seems to be that it was an anti-Russia book, but that doesn't conflict with what you say (there is overlap, your view is just more specific). But, I just find it hard to believe that Urban and the conspirators would waste their time "counting their chickens ". Not least because such a book would form a handy list of traitors (together with confessions) if Trump were to prevail and it fell into the right hands. This is "101 How to Organise a Revolution" (secrecy / don't put anything in writing); surely British security services know that?
With regard to your tongue-in-cheek point. Urban could have interviewed Skripal anytime after Trump was gone, unless he believed Skripal might be unavailable (for some reason). The fact he interviewed Skripal before does indicate foresight. If Urban really did interview Skripal before the event then he would be wiser to pull the book and burn every copy in existence (as well as all his notes).
Regardless, it looks like the master of the universe are losing their ability to create reality.Tom , August 28, 2018 at 10:38
Last month, Mark Urban was promoting the reports that the Russian assassins had been identified from CCTV footage:
"There are now subjects of interest in the police Salisbury investigation. ( ) analytic and cyber techniques are now being exploited against the Salisbury suspects by people with a wealth of experience in complex investigations."
That story originated with a report by PA, which Security Minister Ben Wallace called "ill informed and wild speculation". https://mobile.twitter.com/BWallaceMP/status/1019906962786484225
Or as Craig Murray put it, "Unnamed source close to unnamed British police officers tells unnamed Press Association journalist Britain knows the unnamed Russian agents ".
Even Urban's colleagues had to admit that "The BBC has not been able to independently confirm the story."
Still, that didn't stop Mark Urban from reporting the story almost as fact.Ian Fantom , August 28, 2018 at 10:41
The BBC relies on it's interpretation of the Act because it is held for the purposes of 'journalism, art or literature.' but this relies on a usually unrelated precedent and the opinions of a number of Judges which contradict this view. I'm in the process of challenging this with ICO but don't expect anything will change until another supreme court ruling:
https://medium.com/@tomcoady/bbc-foi-exemption-for-the-purposes-of-art-journalism-or-literature-c39e4fa3e36Made By Dom , August 28, 2018 at 11:04
I've put in a Freedom of Information request regarding meetings with Skripal other than any that were for the purpose of BBC news journalism. (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/mark_urbans_non_journalistic_mee )craig Post author , August 28, 2018 at 11:18
Can I play Devil's Advocate ?
I can see the value in asking writers, journalists and artists to pose exactly the same questions as Eccles' original letter but I'm not convinced about Craig's email.
A quick google shows me that a man named Mark Urban has written a book on the Skripals. Isn't it likely that Urban was keeping the interviews to himself in order to keep his book alive?
It wouldn't surprise me if Urban cares far more about his writing career than his job at the BBC. I'm sure most journalists would rather be authors. He's written a number of books on war and military intelligence. If his sources have nothing to do with the BBC then why should he answer to an on line mob?SA , August 28, 2018 at 11:29
" Isn't it likely that Urban was keeping the interviews to himself in order to keep his book alive?"
No, entirely unlikely. a chance to plug his forthcoming book and his Skripal contacts to a massive worldwide televion audience was eschewed.
The book is now about the Skripal attack. Presumably that was not the original subject he was researching, as it hadn't happened yet. The book will just be a rehash of the "noble defector Putin revenge" line and none of the questions I asked about the genesis of his involvement will be answered in it.Chris Hemmings , August 28, 2018 at 14:41
"Presumably that was not the original subject he was researching, as it hadn't happened yet." Or it was prescience ie that it was part of the planning for the incident?giyane , August 28, 2018 at 11:46
@BBC, Summer 2017, in an executive office:
"Hey Mark, why don't you go down to have a chat with this guy in Salisbury. I have a hunch that a story might be going to happen involving him, you know, as an ex-Soviet spy. Spend time with him, get to know him, be able to write in depth about him. Say it's for a book ."ZigZag Wanderer , August 28, 2018 at 12:26
Urban is never one-sided in his BBC reports on the Middle East. I would rather have him as Foreign Secretary than a bumbling idiot like Hubris Johnson or a Tory racketeer Hunt, because however clunky the formula of BBC balance Urban is at least pretending to be governed by normal rules. After Thatcher went anyone with half a brain left the Conservative party, leaving dolts like Johnson and nasties like May and Cameron to pick up the pieces after Blair and Brown.
There's money to be made from Russian billionaires and tory shit will follow the money like flies on d**t**d.
Urban pretends to research a book exposing Russia and part of his research is to interview Skripal. His objective is to find dirt on Putin in order to swing the war in Syria in favour of USUKIS bombing Assad to smithereens, bayonets bums etc.
Tory shit Hubris Johnson finds this political research floating around the Foreign Office and decides to twist it into Russia murders Skripal by Novichok. Unfortunately Johnson is already known to be a liar and gravy-trainer Tory and nobody believes him at all. Mrs May , realising that Johnson, Fox, Rees-Mogg and Hunt are completely bonkers, does Chequers her own way.Sharp Ears , August 28, 2018 at 11:16
Interestingly Mark Urbans' book on Sergei Skripal was available to purchase on Amazon in July. I added it to my Amazon wishlist on 28/7/18. I've just looked at my wishlist and was rather surprised to find it is no longer available. It has been pulled.
From memory the books description said that Mark had interviewed Skripal 'extensively' during 2017 and also mentioned the 'new' spying war now happening between Britain and Russia.
A quick search revealed a new version of the book ( with an altered title ) will be available in early October .. details here. https://www.panmacmillan.com/authors/mark-urban/the-skripal-files
Oh dear . panic stations !Agent Green , August 28, 2018 at 12:27
Salisbury poisoning: Skripals 'were under Russian surveillance'
Mark Urban Diplomatic and defence editor, Newsnight
4 July 2018
'My meetings with Sergei Skripal
I met Sergei on a few occasions last summer and found him to be a private character who did not, even under the circumstances then prevailing, wish to draw attention to himself.
He agreed to see me as a writer of history books rather than as a news journalist, since I was researching one on the post-Cold War espionage battle between Russia and the West.
Information gained in these interviews was fed into my Newsnight coverage during the early days after the poisoning. I have not felt ready until now to acknowledge explicitly that we had met, but do now that the book is nearing completion.
As a man, Sergei is proud of his achievements, both before and after joining his country's intelligence service.
He has a deadpan wit and is remarkably stoical given the reverses he's suffered in his life; from his imprisonment following conviction in 2006 on charges of spying for Britain, to the loss of his wife Liudmila to cancer in 2012, and the untimely death of his son Alexander (or Sasha) last summer.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44717835KEVIN GLENNIE , August 28, 2018 at 11:18
Laughable given that the whole world and virtually all heads of State were under US surveillance by the NSA at least until Edward Snowden made all his revelations.Niki Henry , August 28, 2018 at 11:21
I have pasted and copied your Email regarding the above with a few slight alterations, it will be interesting to see the response I receive if any being just a concerned citizen of the U.Paul Baker , August 28, 2018 at 11:28
Is this not a matter for the Police? (Even if you're not too sure if they'd do anything about it) These would be files that are to do with an attempted murder case. And definitely not Journalism if the story is fabricated.Sharp Ears , August 28, 2018 at 11:39
It feels as if you are moving in the right direction in linking Sergei to Steele. I'm intrigued by the very early media references to Sergei wanting to return home to see his elderly mother for perhaps the last time. He had apparently written to Putin making his request but again according to newspapers hadn't received a reply.
I would suggest Julia was bringing the answer via her own secret services contacts, her boyfriend and his mother, apparently Senior in the Russian Intelligence Agency. Perhaps a sentimental man Sergei was aware his mother couldn't travel so the plea to Putin was his best bet.
Such a request must have disturbed MI6 if Sergei had anything at all to do with the Steele dossier because inevitably if he returned to Russia he'd be debriefed by his old colleagues. But how can you rely on a mercenary double agent? If he decided he might want to stay in Russia with his family that might well have been attractive, away from the lonely existence in a Salisbury cul de sac with only spies for company. But the Steele dossier has great potential to turn sour on the British.
It's author was a Senior spy and Head of the Russian Desk for some years. It is perhaps you'd agree? inconceivable that he didn't require permission to prepare it, especially as much of it was based on his experience as a spy in Russia. Yet it's equally inconceivable that the Agency bosses didn't know the identity of the commissioners or the use to which it would be put in the US election to boost Clinton's bid. If she'd won everything would have been fine but as it is any discussion of foreign interference in that election would have to include MI6 leading the list (they probably didn't tell any politician?) To have Sergei supporting and highlighting that embarrassment would be problematic for US-UK relations. Of course Sergei may have had other nuggets to expose as well as Steele.
Soon after Julia's arrival the pair fell ill. They both survived but are now locked away, presumably for life and never able to explain their side of the story.
It was a bodged job with a poor cover story from the start and could only be carried because of D Notices and media complicity. Is his mother still alive? Would he still like to see her before she dies? Would Russia allow it? Would MI6 allow it? I think that's 3 yeses and a resounding No.Charles Bostock , August 28, 2018 at 15:58
Following the deaths of 55 Palestinians on the Gaza 'border' and the wounding of thousands, in this video, Urban asks the questions but the Israeli government spokesman, David Keyes, is allowed to spout all the usual propaganda against Hamas.
Gaza deaths: Who's to blame? BBC Newsnight
Published on 15 May 2018
Fresh protests against Israel are expected in the Palestinian territories, a day after Israeli troops killed 58 people in the Gaza Strip.
David Keyes is the spokesman for the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mark Urban asked him whether it was appropriate for the US to open their embassy on the 70th anniversary of Israel's creation, a day that is hugely controversial for the Palestinian people.
Newsnight is the BBC's flagship news and current affairs TV programme with analysis, debate, exclusives, and robust interviews.
Mr Keyes' pronounced American accent was heard. The Occupation was not mentioned. A Palestinian voice was not heard.
This is another of his videos. On the same subject and on the opening of the Israeli Embassy in Jerusalem. This time, Jonathan Conricus spoke for the IDF.
Israel says. Same old. Same old. BBC. ZBC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WdqoPKKkD8Peter , August 28, 2018 at 11:39
"Urban asks the questions but the Israeli government spokesman, David Keyes, is allowed to spout all the usual propaganda against Hamas."
Yes indeed : Urban asked the questions and allowed the interviewee to answer. Perhaps you would have preferred him to interrupt the interviewee continually 'a la Today programme, or to have shouted at him similarly to the way I understand some people shout at customers inside or outside supermarkets?Jeremn , August 28, 2018 at 11:42
This may or may not be relevant regarding Russia, chemical weapons and BBC/MSM bovine effluent:
"US Poised to Hit Syria Harder: The Russian Defense Ministry issued a statement on Aug. 25 stating that the Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham militants had brought eight containers of chlorine to Idlib in order to stage a false-flag attack with the help of UK intelligence agencies. A group of Tahrir al-Sham fighters trained to handle chemical warfare agents by the UK private military company Olive arrived in the suburbs of the city of Jisr ash-Shugur, Idlib, 20 km. from the Turkish border."
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/08/27/us-poised-to-hit-syria-harder.htmlPaul Greenwood , August 28, 2018 at 12:00
Can't help thinking that the answer to all this lies in Estonia. Sergei went to Estonia in June 2016, Pablo was in Estonia, the Estonians passed on sigint about Trump-Russian collusion in the summer of 2016. A Guardian article of 13 April 2017 said:
"Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump's inner circle and Russians, sources said. The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence known as sigint included Germany, Estonia and Poland."
Perhaps not the Dossier, as such, but some material on collusion?wonky , August 29, 2018 at 10:29
John Paul Jones also fought for the Russians and was a Rear-Admiral. He was buried in Paris 1792 and disinterred 1905 and relocated to USAAgent Green , August 28, 2018 at 12:11
..then he met Jimmy Page in the 1960s and the rest is history..Paul Carrom , August 28, 2018 at 12:12
No doubt in my mind that the Skripal affair is a planned operation carried out by US/UK intelligence. What has actually taken place is still to be determined, but the propaganda operation itself is clear.Doodlebug , August 28, 2018 at 14:53
Definitely done by the UK.mark golding , August 28, 2018 at 17:40
What did the UK have against Dawn and Charlie? (Please don't say you subscribe to all that bottle-finding bullshit).Doodlebug , August 28, 2018 at 18:06
Catch my last post Doodlebug, sadly MI6 diabolical elements can be traced back to Ireland in the 70's early 80's assassinations theRealTerror (theRealElvis) understands.Jo , August 29, 2018 at 11:59
I know about Ireland, and I agree, it was NOT a nerve agent. That said, I don't believe anyone was 'attacked', including the Skripals.N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:24
Being used as practice and to establish more "evidence"N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:20
Often it's been open. There was the BBC monitoring station at Caversham Park. The BBC's Foreign Broadcast Information Service split the world into two parts with the CIA.
All foreign correspondents of major newspapers too work with MI6. Nobody who is close to them has any kind of doubt about this.N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:38
Theresa May says a no deal Brexit "wouldn't be the end of the world".
- This is not a negotiating strategy. This is not a pantomime where one giant on the stage can wink to his supporters (using the British media) without his opponent (EU27) noticing.
- The subconscious doesn't work well with negation. Whatever you do, please DON'T imagine an elephant at this time.
- I would love to know what the preparations are at Trinity College, Cambridge, for food shortages. They own the port of Felixstowe, which handles more than 40% of Britain's containerised trade. They also own a 50% stake in a portfolio of Tesco stores. Soon food distribution will be what everyone is talking about. I am never going to stop making the point that the god of the Tory party is Thomas Malthus.Nuno Strybes , August 28, 2018 at 12:43
Oh dear.. Theresa May in Africa:
" As a Prime Minister who believes both in free markets and in nations and businesses acting in line with well-established rules and principles of conduct, I want to demonstrate to young Africans that their brightest future lies in a free and thriving private sector. "
I despise everyone who says that free markets are the solution for the problems of the third world. What they mean is mass starvation and an enormous population cull. There are international "foundations" that pay academics and politicians large amounts of money to spout this obscene line. One of them is called the John Templeton Foundation. They have had their fangs in to British universities for a long time.
They are keen on Prince Philip, the guy who said he wanted to come back as a virus so he could kill a large part of the population. Never trust anyone who has received a Templeton scholarship or prize or who has anything to do with these people or with the message that free markets and the private sector are the key to "development"Ros Thorpe , August 28, 2018 at 12:30
When the Tories talk about 'free markets', they are talking about markets free from democracy.
May's rhetoric is laughable .basically all her speeches read : 'the sky is green, the snow is black etc etc' -- totally detached from reality and a spent political force, as their recent membership numbers showed, with more revenues from legacies left in wills than from actual living members.N_ , August 28, 2018 at 12:47
I agree with the Skripal relatives that Sergei is dead. He hasn't been seen or heard of and would have called his mother. Mind boggling deception at all levels and I struggle to believe any of it.Nuno Strybes , August 28, 2018 at 12:38
Sergei Skripal could be in US custody, either in the US itself or in a US facility somewhere.
If he is dead, then the rehospitalisation of Charlie Rowley may be to assist with the narrative. "Once you've had a drop of Novvy Chockk, you may recover but you can fall down ill at any time, and here's an Expert with a serious voice to confirm it."Trowbridge H. Ford , August 28, 2018 at 13:08
I follow this blog closely, particularly in relation to the Skripal case, but this is my first comment. I just watched Sky News piece on 'super recognisers' and couldn't help but wonder why, in an age of powerful facial recognition technology, the police and security services seem to have drawn such a blank. The surveillance state in the UK is known to be one of the most advanced in the world but when it comes to this highly important geopolitical crisis our technological infrastructure seems to be redundant to the point where 'human eyes' are deemed to be more accurate than the most powerful supercomputers available. Psychologically, all humans have an inherent facial recognition ability from a very young age, but the idea that some police officers have this ability developed to such an extent that they supercede computer recognition is, i feel, laughable. To me this announcement through the ever subservient Sky News reeks of desperation on the part of the ;official story'. Are we about to be shown suspects who, although facial recognition technology fails to identify them, a 'super recogniser' can testify that it actually is person A or person B and we are all supposed to accept that? Seems either a damning indictment of the judicial process, or a damning indictment of the £££££'s of taxpayers money that is spent on places like GCHQ etc whose technology is now apparently no better than a highly perceptive human brain. Give me a break !giyane , August 28, 2018 at 13:49
Why no interest in how the Coopers died in Egypt? We will soon be told by HMG that the Russians somehow dd it too., thanks to Urban's research?Trowbridge H. Ford , August 28, 2018 at 14:16
People do die Trowbridge. I know you haven't, but you have the motivation of outliving your persecutors. With Muckin about with Isis gone and covert operations isn't social work Kissinger looking as though he's on daily blood transfusions, you have rejected Trump for some reason. But Trump has undone much of John McCain's worst mischief in one year. If McCain was an example of a politician, we don't need politicians.Trowbridge H. Ford , August 28, 2018 at 15:03
Give me an example, other than the Coopers. of a healthy couple one day that is found dying the next day like the Skripals.
And while i tried on another site to be generous about McCain. he got Navy Secretary John Lehman, Jr. to scare the Soviets for prevailing in the Vietnam War so much about what NATO was up to in the fallout from shooting Swedish PM Olof Palme that Moscow gave up the competition for fear that it would blow up the world, helping bring on the crappy one we have.
McCain was a continuing Cold Warrior who we don't need since we still have Trump who is just trying to do it another way.Doodlebug , August 28, 2018 at 15:26
Oh, I forget that couple in Amesbury. Looks like the Porton Down Plague is spread overseas.
Posting on this site in like playing bridge online the cards are stacked against you.
"Give me an example, other than the Coopers. of a healthy couple one day that is found dying the next day like the Skripals."
Will a 17 year old and his step-father do?
They both survived, but one or other (quite possibly both) would have died without medical intervention.
Sep 15, 2018 | consortiumnews.com
Curious , August 17, 2018 at 2:30 am
I'll add one. Brennan traveling to Ukraine to meet with the coup leaders, traveling under a diplomatic passport and a false identity (assumed name).
This put him right in the middle of the Ukraine crises, along with Biden and V Nuland, and the mess they created just to get NATO on Russia's borders.
This is as big, if not bigger than his lying to Congress, so I'll throw in the reminder.
Sep 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
nmewn ,FreedomWriter ,
All up to their beady little eyeballs in it...
CHUCK TODD TROTSKY: Yeah, I was just going to say, if the F.B.I., for instance, had a FISA court order of some sort for a surveillance, would that be information you would know or not know?
CHUCK TODD TROTSKY: You would be told this?
CLAPPER: I would know that.
CHUCK TODD TROTSKY: If there was a FISA court order–
CHUCK TODD TROTSKY: –on something like this.
CLAPPER: Something like this, absolutely.
CHUCK TODD TROTSKY: And at this point, you can't confirm or deny whether that exists?
>>>CLAPPER: I can deny it.<<<
The head of ObaMao's intelligence, the DNI ...(Clapper)...just lied on national TeeeVeee, to the American public, with a straight face, something we all now know to be absolutely, verifiably, true.
Something as blatantly deceptive as this needs something special in return. Like a noose.nmewn ,
Yeah, lying on CNN, apparently you can be arrested for that, it's almost as bad as lying to Congress under oath..... oh wait...herbivore ,
They are twisted, seditious, criminal , lying, bastards.
In a nutshell: Hillary Clinton paid a foreign agent (Christopher Steele, via two entities to wipe her fingerprints, those being Perkins Coie & Fusion GPS) to fabricate the pretext of FISA warrants... which her cronies then dutifully introduced into a secret court ...and were granted FISA warrants (not once but FOUR TIMES) for US government intelligence agencies to spy on her political opponents.
Its unprecedented, a scandal more vast and all encompassing than Watergate.
And...having found NOTHING (again, four times) to charge Carter Page with, they leak to their cronies in the Alinsky Press that US government intelligence agencies do in fact have an active spying operation going on against American citizens to damage the reputations and careers having failed to find any evidence of "Russian collusion" which (again) was the pretext for the FISA warrants.
Now that those among us with a fully functional brain know FOR SURE that there are TWO SETS of laws in this nation we can go about our individual activities and businesses with total disregard to "their laws" without any self imposed moral or ethical trepidation.
There's just one set of laws, but they're selectively enforced, depending on whether you're one of the little people or you're among the elite. Must be nice to be one of the elite, not having to worry about laws and stuff.
Sep 15, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
indaknow ,Dilluminati ,
Carter Paige? You mean the guy this time last year was a Russian spy? The guy who hasn't been charged with anything? The guy that the original FISA warrants were issued against in order to spy on the trump campaign? Oh yeah that guy.
Is he connected to the Papadopoulos guy? You know... The guy that got 14 days for lying to meathead?
And now Manafort. Somehow hes bringing Trump down for sure. Even if it doesn't have anything to do with the Trump campaign.
As looney would say... Looney
From my understanding the unmasking of a national security investigation does make liable to suit the press by Carter Page, additionally I'm still amazed that people are seeing this through their preconceptions. How NSL (national security letters) and FISA material made it consistently from the top echelons of government needs people asking some genuine questions. If you have followed this carefully, it is evident that despite the non-related charges brought forth by Mueller that this was a politicized prosecution by the establishment. The questioning of the narrative of this gets people called all types of names.
Talking about establishment behaving badly:
I finally came across an article where the establishment is calling people "Satan" and the article was accurate from the standpoint of an "establishment analysis" but of course left out the actual details of the ongoing criminal racketeering.
I had a person say that they "felt sorry for me" Pity being an expression of disrespect that I no longer attended Church, and I thought to myself that it wasn't worth the reply that saying sorry or asking forgiveness cuts it, or that the decision or another or your belief yourself guarantees you are saved if your repeated heinous crimes boil down to asking "forgiveness" a mistake, bad judgement.
And the abuse was SEVERE again the details are slowly coming out but you see how the Demonization process works. The response in both cases identical.
And remember that none of this is new.. simply signs of very corrupt people feeling non-accountable to anything. I fully expect the abuse at the Church to continue, I expect the Star Chamber establishment to become more bold.. and in summation I'm predicting very cleanly and accurately this ends badly. No escaping this.. it ends badly
Sep 14, 2018 | www.unz.com
Adrian E. , says: September 14, 2018 at 10:57 am GMTWhat I find interesting in the case of Bob Woodward's book is that many anti-Trumpers seem to celebrate it without even taking into account that, if its contents were to be believed, it would completely discredit the whole "Russiagate" story that has been the main line of attack against Donald Trump.
As far as I can judge from the excerpts that have been published, most of the book deals with issues of style -- it is certainly nothing new that many people in the establishment strongly dislike Trump's style -- and about people in important positions in Trump's surroundings have a negative opinion of him and sometimes try to work against him -- that is hardly something new, either.
The only piece of information that could really make Trump look like someone unhinged and dangerous is the claim that he demanded Assad to be killed. Of course, I don't know whether that claim is true and if Trump said something like that, it was meant as an assignment or he just wanted to know what others thought about the idea. But Trump certainly would not have said anything like that if he was a Russian puppet. Although Russia hardly has absolutely loyalty to Assad as a person, killing the president of a government with which Russia is allied and thereby causing more instability is certainly not something Russia might want. So, not only does Bob Woodward's book that claims to report things that happened behind the scenes not show any hints that the Russiagate conspiracy theory might be true, but -- if it is to be believed -, it shows quite strong evidence against that theory.
I don't know whether Bob Woodward spells this out anywhere in the book -- I doubt it because the main target audience of the book is probably Trump haters who like to hate Trump for any conceivable reason and might be upset if one such reason, which had been heavily promoted, was taken away from them. But at least, Bob Woodward seems to be consistent on this to some degree -- after the report by a few handpicked agents from three agencies and Clapper's bureau in January 2017, Woodward criticized the politicization of the secret services. Apart from a few excerpts, I have not read Bob Woodward's book, and I cannot judge its merits, but I think that he is probably somewhat less dishonest than many of Trump haters -- this strange coalition of pseudo-leftists with the deep state.
What I do find absurd is the reception of Bob Woodward's book. It seems that most Trump haters don't seem to have any problems with thinking Trump is unhinged because he threatened to kill the president of a country that is allied with Russia and that he is a Russian puppet and that therefore the investigation about "collusion" is necessary. I think that once more demonstrates the irrationality of the base of that "Anti-Trump Resistance" (not, of course, of people from the Clinton campaign, the FBI and CIA who invented Russiagate, they just exploit the irrationality of large parts of the public).
Bob Woodward's book also stands in a strange relationship to the anonymous NYT piece. The author of that piece seems to be a hardcore neoconservative and free-trade neoliberal -- he wants deregulation, more money for the military, but he dislikes that Trump does not escalate tensions against Russia enough and has to be pressured in order to expell enough Russian diplomats, and also the tentative support of peace efforts for Korea go against his neoconservative desires.
Although it is not mentioned explicitly, the piece is at least compatible with "Russiagate" -- Trump's desire not to escalate international tensions against countries like Russia and North Korea too much is seen as a "preference for dictators and authoritarian leaders", which is an interpretation that is typical of neoconservative ideologues. In contrast, Woodward's main point for accusing Donald Trump of being unhinged is that he wanted to have Assad killed -- something many of the hard-core neocons would hardly object.
Mike P , says: September 14, 2018 at 1:05 pm GMT@Adrian E. What I find interesting in the case of Bob Woodward's book is that many anti-Trumpers seem to celebrate it without even taking into account that, if its contents were to be believed, it would completely discredit the whole "Russiagate" story that has been the main line of attack against Donald Trump.Agent76 , says: September 14, 2018 at 2:35 pm GMT
As far as I can judge from the excerpts that have been published, most of the book deals with issues of style - it is certainly nothing new that many people in the establishment strongly dislike Trump's style - and about people in important positions in Trump's surroundings have a negative opinion of him and sometimes try to work against him - that is hardly something new, either.
The only piece of information that could really make Trump look like someone unhinged and dangerous is the claim that he demanded Assad to be killed. Of course, I don't know whether that claim is true and if Trump said something like that, it was meant as an assignment or he just wanted to know what others thought about the idea. But Trump certainly would not have said anything like that if he was a Russian puppet. Although Russia hardly has absolutely loyalty to Assad as a person, killing the president of a government with which Russia is allied and thereby causing more instability is certainly not something Russia might want. So, not only does Bob Woodward's book that claims to report things that happened behind the scenes not show any hints that the Russiagate conspiracy theory might be true, but - if it is to be believed -, it shows quite strong evidence against that theory.
I don't know whether Bob Woodward spells this out anywhere in the book - I doubt it because the main target audience of the book is probably Trump haters who like to hate Trump for any conceiveable reason and might be upset if one such reason, which had been heavily promoted, was taken away from them. But at least, Bob Woodward seems to be consistent on this to some degree - after the report by a few handpicked agents from three agencies and Clapper's bureau in January 2017, Woodward criticized the politicization of the secret services. Apart from a few excerpts, I have not read Bob Woodward's book, and I cannot judge its merits, but I think that he is probably somewhat less dishonest than many of his haters - this strange coalition of pseudo-leftists with the deep state.
What I do find absurd is the reception of Bob Woodward's book. It seems that most Trump haters don't seem to have any problems with thinking Trump is unhinged because he threatened to kill the president of a country that is allied with Russia and that he is a Russian puppet and that therefore the investigation about "collusion" is necessary. I think that once more demonstrates the irrationality of the base of that "Anti-Trump Resistance" (not, of course, of people from the Clinton campaign, the FBI and CIA who invented Russiagate, they just exploit the irrationality of large parts of the public).
Bob Woodward's book also stands in a strange relationship to the anonymous NYT piece. The author of that piece seems to be a hardcore neoconservative and free-trade neoliberal - he wants deregulation, more money for the military, but he dislikes that Trump does not escalate tensions against Russia enough and has to be pressured in order to expell enough Russian diplomats, and also the tentative support of peace efforts for Korea go against his neoconservative desires. Although it is not mentioned explicitly, the piece is at least compatible with "Russiagate" - Trump's desire not to escalate international tensions against countries like Russia and North Korea too much is seen as a "preference for dictators and authoritarian leaders", which is an interpretation that is typical of neoconservative ideologues. In contrast, Woodward's main point for accusing Donald Trump of being unhinged is that he wanted to have Assad killed - something many of the hard-core neocons would hardly object. Very good observations. Maybe the "kill Assad" ploy is not intended for domestic consumption but rather to further undermine Trump's working relationship with Putin – just as with the of the phoney Russian agent indictment which wast timed precisely to disrupt the Helsinki summit.History is very clear who runs the media for those who are in the know.Agent76 , says: September 14, 2018 at 2:39 pm GMT
9/23/1975 Tom Charles Huston Church Committee Testimony
Tom Charles Huston testified before the Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, commonly known as the Church Committee, on the 43-page plan he presented to the President Nixon and others on ways to collect information about anti-war and "radical" groups, including burglary, electronic surveillance, and opening of mail.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?408953-1/tom-charles-huston-testimony-church-committeeSeptember 1, 2015 THE CIA AND THE MEDIA: 50 FACTS THE WORLD NEEDS TO KNOWBuckwheat , says: September 14, 2018 at 2:47 pm GMT
Since the end of World War Two the Central Intelligence Agency has been a major force in US and foreign news media, exerting considerable influence over what the public sees, hears and reads on a regular basis.
https://www.intellihub.com/the-cia-and-the-media-50-facts-the-world-needs-to-know-2/President Trump's greatest legacy will be his exposing how corrupt the American government has become. Almost every branch of Government has been exposed as corrupt but the absolute worst is the FBI. This attempted coup should be met with the hangman's rope for traitors.jilles dykstra , says: September 14, 2018 at 3:19 pm GMTHistorians know that very few people understand great historical events when they happen.Anonymous ,  Disclaimer says: September 14, 2018 at 3:55 pm GMT
My idea is that this now is the case.
Never before in history did the leader of an empire understand that that empire could not survive, and act accordingly.
The British empire was already not sustainable, financially, before 1914. Britain had to give up the two fleet standard, the situation where the British fleet was superior to the next two biggest fleets. Obama had to give up the two war standard, the USA went to one and a half war. What a half war accomplishes one can see in Syria.
The British empire fell apart through WWII, Churchill the undertaker. For this reason, I suspect, are the peace proposals that Rudolf Hess brought to Scotland in May 1941 still secret. France got a generous peace, logical to assume that Hitler would propose the same to Great Britain, the empire he admired.
The British example makes two things clear: what should have been clear prior to 1914 was not clear, or was ignored, and the price of unwilling, or not capable of understanding history at the moment it happens becomes clear. Britain did not have a Deep State, one might say, on the other hand, one can be of the opinion that the British Deep State did exist. A conflict as now in the USA never existed in Great Britain.
What would have happened if say Chamberlain would have acted as Trump does know, anybody's guess. Chamberlain did not want war, but he also did not want to end British imagined power, he belonged to the Thirtyniners, those with the illusion that Great Britain was ready for war in 1939.
As in 1917, the USA had to rescue Britain, but this time the price was high: opening the empire to foreign competition, on top of that, FDR's lofty statements, the Atlantic Charter, in fact the end of all colonial European empires.@Buckwheat President Trump's greatest legacy will be his exposing how corrupt the American government has become. Almost every branch of Government has been exposed as corrupt but the absolute worst is the FBI. This attempted coup should be met with the hangman's rope for traitors.Windwaves , says: September 14, 2018 at 4:01 pm GMT
President Trump's greatest legacy will be his exposing how corrupt the American government has become. Almost every branch of Government has been exposed as corrupt but the absolute worst is the FBI. This attempted coup should be met with the hangman's rope for traitors.
The media controls the minds of the mob, and presents itself as vox populi . Corruption has been exposed, and the media admits to it, endorses it, and encourages more.
So, whaddya figure? 20 years to total economic collapse? Who's gonna feed the messicans? Oh! The humanity! Oh, Rome, do not burn!
"Shining city on a hill" and all that bullshit. Turn out the lights.Yep, finally someone who gets it.jilles dykstra , says: September 14, 2018 at 5:09 pm GMT
Trump 180 degree turn on his promises to get out of israel's wars is clear proof that he is just another zionist.@Deschutes I didn't like Clinton, but I think Trump is as bad, probably worse. Look at the EPA under Trump, it's a fucking joke with fossil fuel shills like Pruitt gutting much needed laws to protect environment and people. Look at Education secretary DeVoss: it does NOT get any worse: a billionaire christian fundamentalist wacko billionaire who bought her way into that post funding the GOP/Trump ticket!? She's the epitome of what the 'Trump voters' ostensibly hate: a billionaire class aka 'Rome on the Potomac' as this author calls it, the plutocracy who own and run the show while the proletariat slave away at their office temp jobs, or worse yet amazon.com sweatshop, etc. DeVoss is privatizing education so that christian fundies can have their kids taught 'gawd made the world in 7 days' instead of Darwin's evolution. Look at Trumps Atty General Sessions: he's a reactionary fossil from the 1950s who wants to illegalize weed? Roll back sensible drug policy? He's a fucking disaster. And look at what Trump is doing for Israel!? Moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, and Kishner sucking up to Netanyahoo, doing his bidding like an Israel firster? This is all good? This is what the disenfranchised Trump supporter voted for and had in mind??Ilyana_Rozumova , says: September 14, 2018 at 6:13 pm GMT
Trump is a fucking awful trainwreck. ' Moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, '
If this makes Netanyahu happy for some time, at negligible cost to the USA, smart move.
At the same time, Trump can claim 'see how I love Israel'.
For me the same as the fake attacks on Syria.
Show.@Wizard of Oz You seem to be using language like Alice's Humpty Dumpty. "Zionism" is at least a little bit constrained in meaning by its being a movement to restore the Jewish people as currently understood to the land of Israel (Judea and Samaria principally which creates special difficulties...) with Jerusalem as it's capital, and, I suppose to maintain them there. You are absolutely correct.Enver Masud , says: Website Next New Comment September 14, 2018 at 6:39 pm GMT
But it also includes protection of Israel.
And what is the best protection of Israel?
To control the most powerful country in the world ergo USA
And what is even better protection of Israel?
To to rule the world.
What is wrong or evil in this plan?
Nothing! it is good plan.
So where is the snag?
Complications in executing this plan.Bob Woodward needs to answer for not following up on what really happened at the Pentagon on 9/11. My letter the Washington Post at http://www.twf.org/News/Y2009/1206-Ombudsman.pdfanarchyst , says: Next New Comment September 14, 2018 at 6:50 pm GMT
In part, I wrote:
According to the Washington Post, Barbara K. Olson called her husband twice on September 11, 2001 in the final minutes of Flight 77. Her last words to him were, "What do I tell the pilot to do?"
"She called from the plane while it was being hijacked," said Theodore Olson -- 42nd Solicitor General of the United States. "I wish it wasn't so, but it is."
However, prosecution exhibit P200054 (attached) in United States v.
Zacarias Moussaoui -- http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/ exhibits/prosecution/flights/P200054.html -- shows that Barbara Olson made only one phone call -- it did not connect, and it lasted for 0 seconds!
Both accounts of Barbara Olson's phone calls -- the Solicitor General's and the prosecution's in United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui -- cannot be correct.Media lies and fabrications have been going on ever since there were "journalists" (I use that term loosely). The difference today, is that "professional journalism" is now blatantly showing its liberal communistic bias.crimson2 , says: Next New Comment September 14, 2018 at 7:20 pm GMT
From "Remember the Maine" in the Spanish-American war (actually a powder magazine explosion–not an attack) to walter duranty's extolling the "virtues" of communism while one of the greatest artificially-engineered (by communists)famines in the Ukraine was taking place, in order to force the "collectivization" of privately-held farms, to walter cronkite outright lying about the American military's effectiveness during the 1968 Vietnam "Tet offensive" (in which much enemy life was lost) journalism has always been a "nasty craft". In cronkite's case, the North Vietnamese were ready to settle (and capitulate) until cronkite's lies about the supposed American "defeat" were publicized. Cronkite's lies gave the North Vietnamese new resolve, as they realized that they had the American "news media" on their side. There has always been a certain sympathy for communism and totalitarianism in the so-called "mainstream media". All one has to do is to look at the journalists fawning over Cuba's Fidel Castro and how wonderful life is in that communist "paradise".
Journalists HATE the internet because it exposes their "profession" for what it really is with the internet, anyone can be a true journalist. This is why the same "mainstream media" is calling for the "licensing" of journalists–something that would have been unheard of (and treasonous) in previous decades
Professional journalism is its own worst enemy@Rational WHAT A FOO BELIEVES........HE SEES; OR WHY JUDAISTS ARE GOING BERSERK.The Alarmist , says: Next New Comment September 14, 2018 at 7:53 pm GMT
Thanks for the excellent article, Madam.
You forgot to mention that the NYT and Woodward are Judaists.
Jewish paranoid delusions have become severe since Trump took office.
Obviously the NYT op ed is fake. It is a forgery. Per PCR, it is by the NYT itself. Childish pranks.
Bob Woodward's "sources" are fake. He made things up himself.
Every Sabbath, Judaists like these read the Torah, including Deuteronomy 20:16:
"However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes."
And their plan to destroy and exterminate the white goyim is facing hiccups, so the Judaists have gone berserk.
Jewish paranoid delusions
Maybe the dumbasses who think the Jews are behind every bad thing that ever happens to them are the paranoid delusional ones.We're surprised the tools of the Oligarch Class remain loyal to their paymasters? Comey and Müller both received very lucrative board-seat assignments for looking the other way when appropriate, or digging a little deeper when asked.Agent76 , says: Next New Comment September 14, 2018 at 8:56 pm GMTPublic Intelligence
"In the absence of the governmental checks and balances present in other areas of our national life, the only effective restraint upon executive policy and power in the areas of national defense and international affairs may lie in an enlightened citizenry -- in an informed and critical public opinion which alone can here protect the values of democratic government. For this reason, it is perhaps here that a press that is alert, aware, and free most vitally serves the basic purpose of the First Amendment. For, without an informed and free press, there cannot be an enlightened people."
Sep 14, 2018 | www.unz.com
I have no choice. I must don the mantle of greatness and take the reins of the country. Desperate times call for desperate measures. I will run for the office of dictator, or President in American parlance.
Readers may ask, "But Fred, what makes you think you are qualified to be President?" To which I respond, "Nothing. But have you seen what we have now? You want a White House with John Bolton in it?"
I append here a few of the enlightened policies which I will effect. Hold your applause until the end. Interspersed for perusal are a few slogans that I may use to incite your fervor.
One: I will end all policies hostile to Cuba. I will not make life difficult for eleven million perfectly good people to please a ratpack of phony Cubans afflicting Miami. In fact, I will offer Havana a twenty-billion-dollar loan if they will take the bastards back. Cuba poses no danger to anyone. They have good cigars. They should be left alone to live as they please and drink mojitos. If nutcake Republicans protest my policy, I will have them stuffed into an abandoned oil well. Along with the pseudo-Cubans.
Two: Elizabeth Warren will be required to take a DNA test to see whether she is a wild Indian. If she is, she will have to wear feathers. Otherwise, to see a psychiatrist.
We have nothing to be afred of but Fred hisself! Has a classic ring, don't you think?
Three: I will end the Afghan war in an afternoon, relying on use the exit strategy proposed by James P. Coyne, the Sun Tsu of our age:
"OK, on the plane. Now ."
If Lindsey Graham complains that we need to kill more puzzled goatherds, I will have him inserted into the oil well on top of the Republicans and pseudo-Cubans, with Oprah tamped down on top as a sort of cork. There is nothing in Afghanistan that Americans need or want, except opium products, and private enterprise now provides these in abundance. Check the nearest street corner, or ask your kids.
Four: I will make membership in AIPAC a felony, and remind its members that I could have Oprah temporarily removed from the oil well to make more room. Aipackers can act as they please in their own country–I will not meddle in foreign affairs–but leave ours alone.
Fred! Ahhhhhh . This has a nicely orgasmic quality that will appeal to the younger demographic. It represents the satisfaction that my rule will bring to the entire country.
Five: I will end all sanctions against Iran. Then I will sell those Persian rascals airplanes and cars and electronic stuff and towel softener and lock them into the American economic system. This will make Boeing and AT&T and Intel love me with the deep sweet love that never dies, at least as long as the money flows, and there will be lots of jobs in Seattle.
Six: I will bring charges of treason against the contents of the Great Double Wide on Pennsylvania Avenue. The evidence is incontrovertible. The first rule of empire is Don't Let Your Enemies Unite. Everybody who has an empire knows this. Except us. Inside the White House a bunch of apparently brain-damaged political mostly left-overs, suffering from Beltway Bubble Syndrome, push China, Russia, and Iran together like some kind of international spaghetti-grope LGTBQRSTUV threesome. Who are our dismal leaders really working for? China?
A Fred in Every Pot This makes no sense, you may say. No, but we are doing politics. It is almost iambic pentameter, like Shakespeare. It will lend class to my campaign.
Seven: I will keep the F-35 program. It provides a lot of jobs. However, I will but get rid of the airplane. Isn't this brilliant? Instead of building the thing, workers will dig holes and fill them in, but keep their current salaries. It will improve their health, and make America safer. The fewer dangerous things the children in the Five-Sided Wind Tunnel have, the less trouble it can cause.
Better Fred than Dead! Some readers will dispute this. What do they know?
Eight: I have been urged to end affirmative action on the grounds that things should be done by people who can actually do them. This is racist. I will have nothing to do with it. Instead I will make affirmative action democratic and inclusive. Everyone will qualify for it. Special privilege should not be restricted to a minority. It isn't the American way.
Fred! Good as Any, Better'n Some. Good thinking.
Nine: I will abolish NATO. America should find a cheaper way to control the vassals. There is of course the bedtime story that NATO exists to confront the Russkies, and only incidentally provides a compulsory market for American armament. Nuts. Russia cannot seem dangerous to anyone who wasn't dropped on his head at some formative juncture in life. Smallish population, low military budget.
Likewise South Korea, which has twice the population and forty times the economy of the North. If it wants to defend itself, it has my blessing. If it doesn't, it isn't our problem.
Tippecanoe and Frederick Too! This may require exhumation, but for this we have backhoes.
Ten: I will make a modest reduction in the military budget, say seventy-five percent. To keep the soldiers happy I will invest in high-throughput roller coasters, a shooting range with BB guns, and really loud speaker systems that say Va roooom and Bangbangbang and fzzzzzzzzboom. These will provide psychic emoluments of martial life without the murder.
Eleven: The money thus saved I will use on pressing domestic problems. LA has 68,000 homeless people on the streets, San Francisco loses conventions because of so many homeless defecating on the sidewalks, Portland has homeless riots,. The lower primates in Antifa and BLM rend such social fabric as any longer exists. Dams are aging. Our trains are out of of the Fifties. And we spend a trillion a year on goddam aircraft carriers?
Fred? Well, Got a Better Idea?
Twelve: As an educational reform, I will have the Department of Education filled with linoleum cement, the occupants being left inside. This will raise the national IQ by at least three points. I will pass an amendment to the fragments of the Constitution saying, "No federal entity or person shall say, think, suggest, or do anything whatever regarding schooling on pain of garroting." Part of the savings from lowering the military budget will go to purchasing garrotes. The duration, content, and nature of the schools shall be left to localities without exception.
Thirteen: The father of any girl subjected to genital mutilation will be awarded a free gender reassignment operation, preferably with tin-snips. Genital mutilation should be inclusive. The father will then be placed for two weeks in the bottom of a public latrine in Uganda. If this doesn't suffice to deter the practice, I may be forced to adopt extreme measures. A country that allows such treatment of daughters deserves to go to hell. And seems to be.
Fourteen: I will impose a literacy test for voting. People too dim to find their way home should not be permitted to influence policies they have never heard of and can't spell. Yes, this might be called illiberal. If so, it will doubtless be the only example of illiberalism in this meritorious list.
Fifteen: In higher education, I will prescribe horse whipping for anyone saying microaggression, white privilege, whiteness, patriarchy, safe space, people of color, racism, any kind of phobia, or "Resist" in a squalling voice with an exclamation point. No curriculum containing the word "Studies" will be permitted.
Sixteen: Anyone prescribing Ritalin for children under twenty-one will be thrown from a helicopter.
In conclusion, I say to my yearning public, There, you, see, there is hope. Together we can do this. See you at the polls.
... ... ...
Fred Reed is a former news weasel and part-time sociopath living in central Mexico with his wife and three useless but agreeable street dogs. He says it suits him.
FoxTwo , says: September 15, 2018 at 11:03 am GMTIn today's world of political insanity, a healthy dose of sarcasm may be considered as a good antidote. Love your columns Fred; keep them up!