A slightly skeptical view on the US political establishment and foreign policy
If Ronald Reagan was America's neo-Julius Caesar, his adopted son was the first George Bush (just as J.C. adopted Augustus).
And look what THAT progeny wrought. I fully expect that over the next century, no fewer than seven Bushes will have run or become president
(mimicking the Roman Caesarian line). Goodbye, American Republic.
We had to struggle with the old enemies of peace — business and financial monopoly, speculation, reckless banking,
class antagonism, sectionalism, war profiteering.
They had begun to consider the Government of the United States as a mere appendage
to their own affairs. We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.
polyarchy:A system where the participation of masses of people is limited to voting among one or another representatives
of the elite in periodic elections. Between elections the masses are now expected to keep quiet, to go back to life as usual
while the elite make decisions and run the world until they can choose between one or another elite another four years later.
So polyarchy is a system of elite rule, and a system of elite rule that is little bit more soft-core than the elite rule that
we would see under a military dictatorship. But what we see is that under a polyarchy the basic socio-economic system does not
change, it does not become democratized.
Neoliberalism -- the current social system in the USA and most European countries, Japan, Russia
and China (with some minor variations) -- is a very interesting ideology, one that does not dare to speak its name ;-). After a triumphal
march of neoliberalism in late 80th and early 90th (with the collapse of the USSR as the high point), neoliberalism entered a crisis
This site is slightly skeptical as for long-term viability of Neoliberalism as a
social system. After the "triumphal march" over the globe in the late seventies and 80th with the collapse of the USSR (which elite
simply changed sides) as the final crescendo of this march neoliberalism might already enter the phase of decline after the crisis of
2008. The neoliberal ideology which is, essentially, can be called "market fundamentalism" is now discredited.
Much like communism was after WWII when it became clear that it can't secure the standard of living for its population superior to the
standard of living of common people in Western European countries which remained under the capitalism. Paradoxically this was possible
only because communism existed , as it served as a powerful deterrent against the restoration of financial oligarchy. So it's not surprising
that the New Deal Capitalism was dismantled after the USSR collapse. Moor did its duty, moor can go ;-). From this point the standard
of living of poor and lower middle class in the West start to slide, the slide which was masked by tremendous technological progress
on the last 30 years in computers and communications. Still outside top 10-20% of population, the slide of the standard of living and
the income is a fact. The existence of the USSR served as a powerful inhibitor of cannibalistic instincts of the elite in the
USA and Western countries. It was communism that secured the dominance of the New Deal capitalism till late 80th.
While neoliberal think tanks try to contain damage, the fatal flaws of neoliberal ideology after 2008 financial collapse also are
now apparent and can't be hidden. The key neoliberal country and the key enforcer of neoliberalism over the globe -- the USA -- entered
"secular stagnation" period in economics. It is also is trying to fend off the challenge that China economic growth presents to its
world dominance. Brexit and the election of Trump mean that the protest against neoliberal globalization entered the mainstream
in the USA in 2016: Hillary Clinton suffered her electoral fiasco because she was the proponent of status quo, the proponent
of neoliberal globalization and the wars for expansion of neoliberal empire, the candidate who promised to kick the neoliberal can down
In this sense Trump should probably be viewed as a new stage of this decline, the phase in which financial oligarchy not only failed
to put the desired puppet into White House and was forced to unleash a witch hunt (aka Russiagate or "purple revolution") to put Trump
into the line, or depose him via "color revolution" mechanisms (During elections Trump used to have anti-globalization inclinations
-- anathema to neoliberals -- and that's why he was so viciously attacked after he has won; but those inclinations almost completely
disappeared after the election).
As currently, I see no viable new alternative to neoliberalism, our analysis of neoliberalism has distinct New Deal capitalism bias.
Although the restoration of the New Deal capitalism looks impossible because the social base of it -- the alliance of corporate management
and trade union leaders, was destroyed due to the defection of corporate managers to the side of capital owners. This realignment of
political power makes possible the restoration of the rule of the financial oligarchy, which happened in late 1980th.
And yes, my friends, like Molière's play
Le Bourgeois gentilhomme character, who was surprised and delighted
to learn that he has been speaking prose all his life without knowing
it., you are living under neoliberal regime at least since 1980, most probably without knowing
it. Current events are much easier to analyze if you use the framework proposed in those pages. On interesting nuance is that
being some kind of "Trotskyism for rich" this regime is almost as far from real democracy as the USSR one party system. It is something
Sheldon Volin called "inverted totalitarism". In certain aspects it is even more anti-democratic than the capitalism of the Gilded Age
with which it has some uncanny similarities.
Another interesting aspect of neoliberalism is the existence of so-called "neoliberal
rationality" (compare with the "proletarian mindset" of Bolshevism ). As well as the extent of brainwashing into this rationality,
especially at the university level (via neoclassical economics). As well as the level and the sophistication of the use of propaganda
-- especially for propagating a set of neoliberal myths very
similar to what were created by Bolshevism. For example, the neoliberal myths of "Free
trade", "free market" (why not
"fair" in both
cases?) , "labor market",
"human capital", etc. In reality, the key idea
behind this Potemkin Village-style ideological facade is the redistribution of wealth up toward top 1% (or even
more to the top 0.01%). Exactly like was the case with Bolshevism, which while proclaiming the false facade of "dictatorship of
proletariat" mercilessly suppressed unions and kept 90% of population at the standard of living much lower than in Western and even
Eastern Europe. Although not close to starvation which is the ideal of neoliberal "plantation economy" (implemented, for example, by
Wal-Mart, with its below subsistence wages), with atomized and isolated from each other "debt slaves."
In other words, there are some striking similarities between Soviet nomenklatura
and neoliberal oligarchy, similarities that no objective scholar studying neoliberalism can ignore. See also
Two-Party System as Polyarchy -- "the first after the post system" proved to
be ideal for neoliberal regime as it allows financial oligarchy preselect candidates from both Parties. Effectively turning the election
into expensive staged event -- a grandiose political spectacle, if you wish. but with predicted outcome as stage directors who perform
casting are members of a close circle of neoliberal elite -- mostly financial oligarchy. It could have been adopted by Soviet nomenklatura
as well, as it very effectively prevents any real challenges to the existing political regime by pre-selection of two candidates
running to the given position and two parties, which are essentially a "soft" and "hard" factions of a single party of financial oligarchy.
The level of "synchronicity" in coverage of foreign events by neoliberal MSM also reminds me the level typical for Soviet Union. With
all MSM repeating the State Department talking points and in general going out their skin be politically correct stooges of the neoliberal
Yet another very interesting aspect of neoliberal regime is the level of public apathy, limited public discourse and even vocabulary
(try to find the word "neoliberal" in WaPo ;-) as well as epidemic of narco-addition (especially in Rust Belt, which is more severely
hit by neoliberal globalization with its offshoring and outsourcing). Which is not that dissimilar to the epidemic of alcoholism under
Bolshevism. When common people see no future for themselves and their children they tend to engage in self-destructing behaviour.
Sheldon Wolin called this approach to suppressing of dissent "inverted
What is really interesting is that the term "neoliberalism" has the status of a semi-taboo in the USA, and seldom can be found
in articles published by the USA MSM, due to some kind of "silence" pact ;-). the intent of this set of pages intent is to fight this trend
and present a "slightly skeptical" view of this important social phenomenon.
It is also important to understand that the level of hostility to Trump by the "deep state" is directly connected with three main
(and very quickly betrayed) promises that Trump made during elections:
No more neoliberal globalization with its offshoring and outsourcing of jobs and industries;
No more wars for expansion of neoliberal empire;
Jobs for all Americans
All three were the direct revision of neoliberal ideology postulates, as well as departure from the "neoliberal
rationality". That's why the counter-attack of both the "Deep State" and neoliberal MSM on Trump was so vicious, with well
coordinated set of leaks, appointment of Special Prosecutor (on fake pretext), re-launch of McCarthyism, and campaign of demonization
of Trump and his administration in media. In the level of outrage that writers of Pravda during Stalin "Show Trials" would
find completely in line with their own writings -- they so vividly resembles the attacks on "revisionists" in the USSR during Stalinism,
that you may wish to revisit books devoted to those trials ;-).
What is new is that elements of color revolutions technology, which were used against
Trump and his administration by "neoliberal nomenklatura" to preserve power. The ultimate goal is to remove Trump from power, and if
this is not possible to emasculate his for the next four years. This technology was
used probably for second time in the USA history. Nixon's case was somewhat similar and also involves decisive intelligence agencies
role (the core of the Deep State) in removal the President, JFK is first such case but without any color revolution elements. It was
more like Chilean style coup d'état. Initially those technologies were designed to topple "unfriendly" to neoliberalism regimes in xUSSR space and "resource nationalists" in
the Middle East (as well as against China in Hong Cong). That suggests that after the election of 2016 neoliberals felt a real threat from Trump "revisionism".
Deployment of those technologies does not spell well with the social stability because delegitimization of elected government has
lasting effects. Just look at Ukraine which was the victim of the most recent "color revolution" experiment. They have now two breakaway
regions and the drop of the standard of living of population around 200% or more. the country also now is a debt slave. In other words when the gin of color revolution is out of the bottle it is not that easy to put it back and the events
can turn in the direction not anticipated by the originators of such a color revolution.
"... House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said that after lengthy closed-door testimony by two former top Trump aides, he found that one of the men appears to have a "credibility" problem. ..."
"... But, he said that Bannon's testimony was more eventful. Gowdy said that at one point, Bannon attempted to dodge questions by exercising a privilege that does not exist. "That was his slip-up," Gowdy said. "He got this notion that 'hey, I'm going to create a privilege that no one's ever heard of before that doesn't exist in the law." Gowdy said the only "dangerous" issue for President Donald Trump is if "credible evidence" is presented. ..."
"... He said Bannon's credibility has taken a hit, since he once said there was no chance the Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr. did not meet Trump Sr. ..."
"... But, after he was fired, Bannon reportedly told author Michael Wolff that there was no chance the meeting hadn't occurred. ..."
"... "This is the same witness that said that members of the president's family committed acts of treason. So, he's got a credibility issue," Gowdy said. "If they're hinging the entire case on Steve Bannon's credibility, good luck to the prosecution." ..."
House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said that after lengthy closed-door
testimony by two former top Trump aides, he found that one of the men appears to have a
Former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and former White House adviser Steve Bannon spent
several hours testifying before Gowdy's committee Tuesday.
Gowdy said Lewandowski wanted to answer every question posed to him, but that his lawyers
advised him against answering those regarding his work after he left the campaign. "That [onus is] on the lawyer, not the witness. Corey is going to come back and answer every
question anyone has," Gowdy said.
But, he said that Bannon's testimony was more eventful. Gowdy said that at one point, Bannon attempted to dodge questions by exercising a privilege
that does not exist. "That was his slip-up," Gowdy said. "He got this notion that 'hey, I'm going to create a
privilege that no one's ever heard of before that doesn't exist in the law." Gowdy said the only "dangerous" issue for President Donald Trump is if "credible evidence"
He said Bannon's credibility has taken a hit, since he once said there was no chance the
Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr. did not meet Trump Sr.
But, after he was fired, Bannon reportedly told author Michael Wolff that there was no
chance the meeting hadn't occurred.
"This is the same witness that said that members of the president's family committed
acts of treason. So, he's got a credibility issue," Gowdy said. "If they're hinging the entire
case on Steve Bannon's credibility, good luck to the prosecution."
"... Endeavor Content -- the financing and sales arm formed in October between sister companies William Morris Endeavor and IMG -- has purchased film and television rights to the No. 1 best-selling book. The massive deal is said to be in the seven-figure range. ..."
Michael Wolff's controversial Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House is coming to
Endeavor Content -- the financing and sales arm formed in October between sister companies
William Morris Endeavor and IMG -- has purchased film and television rights to the No. 1
best-selling book. The massive deal is said to be in the seven-figure range. Endeavor Content
plans to adapt the book as a TV series. A network is not yet attached, as Endeavor will now
begin shopping the project.
Wolff will executive produce the series, with veteran Channel 4 and BBC executive Michael
Jackson -- now CEO of indie producer Two Cities Television -- also on board to produce.
"... But, according to the letter, the FBI told the department that its system for retaining text messages sent and received on bureau phones had failed to preserve communications between Strzok and Page over a five-month period between Dec. 14, 2016, and May 7, 2017. The explanation for the gap was "misconfiguration issues related to rollouts, provisioning, and software upgrades that conflicted with the FBI's collection capabilities." ..."
"... Technical glitches obviously do happen but I can't help getting a bit of a Lois Lerner flashback upon hearing that five months of messages are missing from the time right after Trump was elected until 10 days before Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel. So if you were hoping for any follow up on that comment about an insurance policy, it looks like you can forget it. That's a well-timed glitch. ..."
"... But it seems the DOJ did turn over some additional texts that are worth considering. One involves an early draft of the Comey memo clearing Hillary Clinton. Originally the draft pointed out that Clinton had exchanged emails with President Obama while she was "on the territory" of a hostile power. Eventually, Obama's name was scrubbed from the document and finally all reference to the incident was removed. So that's one more example of the statement being watered down over time. And finally there is this : ..."
"... In another exchange, the two express displeasure about the timing of Lynch's announcement that she would defer to the FBI's judgment on the Clinton investigation. That announcement came days after it was revealed that the attorney general and former President Bill Clinton had an impromptu meeting aboard her plane in Phoenix, though both sides said the email investigation was never discussed ..."
"... Strzok said in a July 1 text message that the timing of Lynch's announcement "looks like hell." And Page appears to mockingly refer to Lynch's decision to accept the FBI's conclusion in the case as a "real profile in courag(e) since she knows no charges will be brought ..."
"... Comey himself had suggested Lynch appeared biased in the email probe and that he felt the need to act independently from her. ..."
"... "And she said, 'Yes, but don't call it that, call it a matter,'" Mr. Comey continued. "And I said, 'Why would I do that?' And she said, 'Just call it a matter.'" ..."
"... Mr. Comey said the "conclusive" episode that persuaded him to make his own announcement in the Clinton investigation rather than leave it to Ms. Lynch came last June, when former President Bill Clinton spontaneously boarded her plane on a tarmac and sat down to talk with her. ..."
"... So the story was that Lynch was biased (she was) but that Comey acted to protect the independence of the investigation. In fact, Lynch knew what Comey was going to say days before he said it. ..."
The Associated Press is reporting that the Department of Justice has given congressional
investigators additional text messages between FBI investigator Peter Strzok and his girlfriend
Lisa Page. The FBI also told investigators that five months worth of text messages, between
December 2016 and May 2017, are unavailable because of
a technical glitch .
"... According to Bloomberg , Wolff didn't even initiate this project. It fell into his lap when Trump dialed him up out of the blue to compliment him on a CNN appearance in which Wolff bashed the media's coverage of the president. So susceptible is POTUS to flattery and so eager is he to satisfy his eternal grudge with the press that a little bit of cheerleading from Wolff was all it took for him to place his trust, essentially blindly, in a far more devious reporter than the ones he's always complaining about. ..."
"... CNN drives him nuts so he turned to Michael farking Wolff, of all people, to try to balance the scales. The irony is as thick and dense as the brain matter of White House deputies who went along. ..."
"... In fact, for the first six months of Trump's presidency no one in his White House -- including then-Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and then-Press Secretary Sean Spicer -- stopped Wolff from repeatedly scheduling appointments in the West Wing. He visited about 17 times, according to a person familiar with the matter. Nor did they monitor what Trump's aides were telling the controversial author ..."
"... [An] Obama aide said his communications team kept strict tabs on authors' work -- micromanaging access to the White House, assigning press aides to mind the authors during interviews or asking staff for summaries afterward, closely tracking lines of questioning and making sure writers were escorted off the grounds after their appointments. ..."
"... Some of Bloomberg's sources claim that Kellyanne Conway gave him access more than once and appears to have spoken with him at some length. Conway's a longtime political player. What's her excuse for not knowing Wolff's reputation and intervening to protect Trump from him? ..."
"... Dubke left the job in late May but Trump's fateful phone call to Wolff allegedly happened in early February 2017, with Wolff conducting interviews at the White House not long afterward. Dubke's a right-wing media-relations pro of longstanding. He didn't speak up about Wolff either? ..."
"... In the end, though, it all falls on Hope Hicks, who was Trump's informal communications director before being formally appointed to the job in September at the tender age of 29 after Dubke quit. Although she had no leadership role in the West Wing until the fall, she's an old-school Trump deputy who was with him before the campaign. She's either the unofficial head of the Praetorian Guard or she's a very high-ranking member. Where the hell was she when Wolff came knocking? Did she do any due diligence as to whether he could be trusted to write the sort of book he was proposing to write? If so, how did she miss the high-profile critiques of his methods in magazines like Brill's Content and The New Republic ? It's tempting to accuse Hicks of being too young or simply out of her depth to do her job effectively for Trump -- but then how do you explain the apparent negligence on Conway's and Dubke's parts, too? ..."
"... Wolff's going to end up filthy rich from all this, and not just from book royalties. "Fire & Fury" will soon be a TV show (although, more likely, a TV miniseries) with Wolff himself as executive producer. And given the propensity of Trump staffers to leak, he's probably already hard at work on "Fire & Fury 2: More Fiery, More Furious." Congrats to Hope and everyone else for sharpening a knife and handing it to Wolff before allowing him to stab their boss repeatedly with it. Exit question via a million different people: Isn't there already a "Fire & Fury" TV show on cable news every day? ..."
... According to
Bloomberg , Wolff didn't even initiate this project. It fell into his lap when Trump dialed
him up out of the blue to compliment him on a CNN appearance in which Wolff bashed the media's
coverage of the president. So susceptible is POTUS to flattery and so eager is he to satisfy
his eternal grudge with the press that a little bit of cheerleading from Wolff was all it
took for him to place his trust, essentially blindly, in a far more devious reporter than the
ones he's always complaining about.
British interviewer is heads above US MSM interviewers. He also approach Wolff with kid
gloves, but he pins a couple of time his ego ;-)
Of cause BBC is a neoliberal swap and they interviewed Wolff half-dozen times :-)
In his BBC interview and this interview Wolff clearly state that Trump is not fit for the
office "mentally unfit for office" ;-). Here Wolff also claims is Trump is like a child.
Also on the question of allegation of "collision with Russia" Wolff state that "emperor has
no clothes" while in reality it is Wolff who has no cloth doing this hatcet job without
verification of even basic facts. He also pushed Bannon under the bas.
When confronted with that fact that Bannon challenged of Wolff claims, he just start
The interviewer suggested that this book is a fascinating gossip taken at the heat of the
moment, that this is one dimensional book.
Michael Wolff discusses his book Fire and Fury, about US President Donald Trump's first nine
months in office, with Nick Robinson. Mr Trump has accused the author of making up stories and
has called him a "total loser".
Nice exposure of duplicitous character Wolff "I certainly said whatever necessary to get the story"
Key question: Did you misrepresent yourself trying to get access to Trump. "I like the person" "I want to humanize the
president" "You know that I like him" "Nobody is doing it" "I might be able to change perceptions"
Another interesting question: "Where all those pledges accurate when you made them? " Why you present yourself as a beacon
to combat bias against the President.
Mainstream media turned into political party! Mainstream media professional liars are political assassins for the worst people
on this planet. Mainstream media is a political apparatus which is bought and paid off by champagne-socialists, thieves set-up-entirely
to serves rich and powerful to extract from small and weak. Mainstream media professional liars will continue to support political
scum and their style of cronyism and rampant corruption that is stunting the country's development.
Mainstream media will make
sure to siphon off large chunks of targeted electoral subsidies and Lobbying cash which will enable them to preserve their fancy
cars, apartments and privileged status as American people suffer!
The media is totally ignorant of real issues that matter to the American people they are so involved in defending their own
opinions that they have forgotten their purpose of keeping the public informed of what's happening they have taken it upon
them self to defend the Democrats and their corrupt world order agenda
On Friday at the Aspen Security Forum former CIA director John Brennan said senior officials
in the executive branch should refuse the order if President Trump fires special counsel Robert
(VERO BEACH, FL) Speaking on a panel to CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer with former DNI chief James
Clapper, John Brennan effectively called for a coup against the president if he should give the
order to fire the DOJ appointed investigator.
"I think it's the obligation of some executive branch officials to refuse to carry that
out," Mr. Brennan said . "I would just hope that this is not
going to be a partisan issue. That Republicans, Democrats are going to see that the future of
this government is at stake and something needs to be done for the good of the future.
"If he's fired by Mr. Trump, or is attempted to be fired by Mr. Trump, I hope, I really hope
that our members of congress, our elected representatives, will stand up and say enough is
enough, and stop making apologies and excuses for things that are happening that really flaunt,
I think, our system of laws and government here," Mr. Brennan said.
The editorial staff of ZeroHedge, an influential global blog which covers politics,
economics, and war from a libertarian perspective, also
concluded that Mr. Brennan's statement was "effectively calling for a coup" should
President Trump give the order to fire Mr. Mueller.
From May 17, 2017 through Sept. 30, 2017, Robert Mueller's Russia probe spent nearly $7
Million of taxpayers' dollars. In seven months, no solid evidence has been produced to prove
that Pres. Trump colluded with the Russians to impact the elections. The budget for Mueller's
investigation was approved by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. -- 12.5.17
–"Mueller's Russia probe spent nearly $7M in four months – May 17, 2017 through
Sept. 30, 2017" – Fox News --
Now there's a face to go with the name of the biased FBI operative at the center of multiple
probes and controversies dogging the Trump administration.
Fox News has obtained a photo of Peter Strzok, the longtime FBI deputy fired by Special
Counsel Robert Mueller over his bias against President Trump. Strzok (pronounced "Struck"), was
sacked by Mueller after electronic messages he reportedly sent to a colleague emerged, but not
before he played key roles in the probes swirling around Trump.
Strzok, a former deputy to the assistant director for counterintelligence at the FBI,
oversaw the bureau's interviews with ousted National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, changed
former FBI Director James Comey's early draft language about Hillary Clinton's actions
regarding her private email server from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless" and
reportedly helped push the largely unverified dossier on Trump that was initially prepared by
Fusion GPS for the Clinton campaign's opposition research.
Strzok's messages were reportedly not only anti-Trump, but also pro-Hillary. That has raised
the ire of critics because, prior to joining Mueller's probe, he made edits to Comey's speech
exonerating Hillary Clinton.
The language being edited was important because classified material that's been mishandled
for "gross negligence" calls for criminal consequences, analysts point out.
The wording change
came to light last month after newly reported memos to Congress showed that a May 2016
draft of Comey's statement closing out the email investigation accused the former secretary of
state of being "grossly negligent." A June 2016 draft stated Clinton had been "extremely
The modified language was final when Comey announced in July 2016 that Clinton wouldn't face
any charges in the email investigation.
A source close to the matter told Fox News that the probe, which will examine Strzok's roles
in a number of other politically sensitive cases, should be completed by "very early next
EXCLUSIVE – Two senior Justice Department officials have confirmed to Fox News that
the department's Office of Inspector General is reviewing the role played in the Hillary
Clinton email investigation by Peter Strzok, a former deputy director for counterintelligence
at the FBI who was removed from the staff of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III earlier this
year, after Mueller learned that Strzok had exchanged anti-Trump texts with a colleague.
The task will be exceedingly complex, given Strzok's consequential portfolio. He
participated in the FBI's fateful interview with Hillary Clinton on July 2, 2016 – just
days before then-FBI Director James Comey announced he was declining to recommend prosecution
of Mrs. Clinton in connection with her use, as secretary of state, of a private email
As deputy FBI director for counterintelligence, Strzok also enjoyed liaison with various
agencies in the intelligence community, including the CIA, then led by Director John
House investigators told Fox News they have long regarded Strzok as a key figure in the
chain of events when the bureau, in 2016, received the infamous anti-Trump "dossier" and
launched a counterintelligence investigation into Russian meddling in the election that
ultimately came to encompass FISA surveillance of a Trump campaign associate.
The "dossier" was a compendium of salacious and largely unverified allegations about
then-candidate Trump and others around him that was compiled by the opposition research firm
Fusion GPS. The firm's bank records, obtained by House investigators, revealed that the project
was funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., has sought documents and
witnesses from the Department of Justice and FBI to determine what role, if any, the dossier
played in the move to place a Trump campaign associate under foreign surveillance.
Strzok himself briefed the committee on Dec. 5, 2016, the sources said, but within months of
that session House Intelligence Committee investigators were contacted by an informant
suggesting that there was "documentary evidence" that Strzok was purportedly obstructing the
House probe into the dossier.
In early October, Nunes personally asked Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein – who
has overseen the Trump-Russia probe since the recusal of Attorney General Jeff Sessions –
to make Strzok available to the committee for questioning, sources said.
While Strzok's removal from the Mueller team had been publicly reported in August, the
Justice Department never disclosed the anti-Trump texts to the House investigators
When a month had elapsed, House investigators – having issued three subpoenas for
various witnesses and documents – formally recommended to Nunes that DOJ and FBI be held
in contempt of Congress.
Nunes continued pressing DOJ, including a conversation with Rosenstein as recently as last
Responding to the revelations about Strzok's texts on Saturday, Nunes said he has now
directed his staff to draft contempt-of-Congress citations against Rosenstein and the new FBI
director, Christopher Wray. Unless DOJ and FBI comply with all of his outstanding requests for
documents and witnesses by the close of business on Monday, Nunes said, he would seek a
resolution on the contempt citations before year's end.
"We now know why Strzok was dismissed, why the FBI and DOJ refused to provide us this
explanation, and at least one reason why they previously refused to make [FBI] Deputy Director
[Andrew] McCabe available to the Committee for an interview," Nunes said in a statement.
Those witnesses are FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and the FBI officer said to have
handled Christopher Steele, the British spy who used Russian sources to compile the dossier for
Fusion GPS. The official said to be Steele's FBI handler has also appeared already before the
In addition, Rosenstein is set to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on Dec.
Sources close to the various investigations agreed the discovery of Strzok's texts raised
important questions about his work on the Clinton email case, the Trump-Russia probe, and the
A top House investigator asked: "If Mueller knew about the texts, what did he know about the
Carr declined to comment on the extent to which Mueller has examined the dossier and its
relationship, if any, to the counterintelligence investigation that Strzok launched during the
height of the campaign season.
Looks like Mueller has strong connections to CIA and according to Brennan is his personal
friend. This glowing introduction by none other then Brenner rises several questions. One is did
CIA controlled Mueller during his tenure of FBI director.
The fact the Muller was in charge after 9/11 attacks rases additional questions.
Listening to this, I feel very confident that Mr. Mueller will be able to get to the very
bottom of the Russian investigation. I think he is probably three or more steps ahead of any
tricks our "President" might try. This man is a head chess player.
No wonder Trump and co are scared of this man. He is gonna take the whole thing
Looks like another false flag operation , now with the participation of Italian intelligence services.
"... Appears Prof. Mifsud of Maltese descent has close links to former Italian Minister of the Interior Vincenzo Scotti and the Italian Intelligence Agency. See more information from the Link Campus based in Rome. With links to a corrupt Saudi Prince, getting some sense now of a covert operation or a piggy-back Mossad act with knowledge of Intelligence gained from Five Eyes raw data ... ..."
"... "We are very excited to be partnering with the Link Campus Foundation to fund and enable important scholarship that looks to build bridges of mediation in conflict regions around the world," ..."
"... "We have respected the work of Link Campus for some time. The Centre hopes to play an important role in contributing to its efforts toward creating peace and good governance by strengthening the ability of researchers, media, and civil society to speak out and be informed on vital contemporary issues." ..."
"... "The Centre will take a very pragmatic approach to helping bring smarter and more relevant thinking to the area of conflict mediation." ..."
"... "Offering this research platform for experts is EDOF's way of trying to support those who are doing the heavy thinking as to how we can bring resolution to some of the more intractable conflicts in our world." ..."
"... Prince Turki Al Faisal said the evidence, disclosed by the United States late, was "overwhelming" and "clearly shows official Iranian responsibility". "Somebody in Iran will have to pay the price," said Prince Turki , who also served as his country's envoy to Britain and the US. ..."
"... ... Prince Turki al-Faisal , the chairman of the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies, is a former director of Saudi Arabia's intelligence services and ambassador to the United States. ..."
Appears Prof. Mifsud of Maltese descent has close links to former Italian Minister of the Interior
Vincenzo Scotti and the Italian Intelligence
Agency. See more information from the
based in Rome. With links to a corrupt Saudi Prince, getting some sense now of a covert operation or a piggy-back Mossad act with
knowledge of Intelligence gained from Five Eyes raw data ...
The EDOF Centre will work closely with the various interdisciplinary academic departments at the Link Campus University as
well as with international governments and organizations in order to support experts, academics, researchers, diplomats, governments,
and civil society activists in their attempts to help countries in conflict, crisis and transition around the world. The Partnership
Agreement was signed in Rome on May 8, 2017.
"We are very excited to be partnering with the Link Campus Foundation to fund and enable important scholarship that looks
to build bridges of mediation in conflict regions around the world," said
EDOF's CEO, Dr. Nawaf Obaid . "We have respected
the work of Link Campus for some time. The Centre hopes to play an important role in contributing to its efforts toward creating
peace and good governance by strengthening the ability of researchers, media, and civil society to speak out and be informed on
vital contemporary issues."
Professor Joseph Mefsud will be appointed the Founding Director of the Centre for a period of three years. Scholarships
and bursaries will be allocated in the field of War and Peace studies. The Centre will also hold international seminars and conferences,
produce research publications, and appoint Senior Fellows in the field of War and Peace studies.
Tarek Obaid (
1 ), Founder of EDOF, "The Centre will take a very pragmatic approach to helping bring
smarter and more relevant thinking to the area of conflict mediation." It will achieve this by having three areas of concentration:
training, mentoring, and providing platforms for professional and expert seminars; building up the capacity of institutions and
civic groups; and working with independent and official partners to remove barriers to free expression, robust public debate and
open citizen engagement. "Offering this research platform for experts is EDOF's way of trying to support those who are doing
the heavy thinking as to how we can bring resolution to some of the more intractable conflicts in our world."
Nawaf Obaid is the Visiting Fellow for Intelligence & Defense Projects at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.
He is also a weekly columnist for the pan-Arab daily, Al Hayat Newspaper.
He is currently the CEO of the Essam and Dalal Obaid Foundation (EDOF).
From 2004 to 2007, he was Special Advisor for Strategic Communications to
Prince Turki Al Faisal , while Prince Turki was the Saudi Ambassador to the United Kingdom & Ireland, and then the United
States. And from 2007 to 2011, he worked with the Saudi Royal Court, where he was seconded as a Special Advisor to the Saudi Information
Minister. Most recently, he served as the Special Counselor to the Saudi Ambassador to the United Kingdom from 2011 to 2015.
Il 20 marzo alle ore 10:30 presso l'Università degli Studi Link Campus University, si è tenuto il convegno "Brexit: stepping
off a cliff or indipendence day?"
Il convegno determina il primo atto di una collaborazione italo-britannica post Brexit, ed è stato organizzato in occasione
della firma del Protocollo d'intesa tra l'Università degli Studi Link Campus University e la London School of Economics and Political
Science, tenutasi lo stesso giorno nella sede dell'università romana.
Sono intervenuti: Franco Frattini - Presidente del Corso in Studi Strategici e Scienze Diplomatiche e Presidente della SIOI,
Vincenzo Scotti - Presidente dell'Università
degli Studi Link Campus University, Michael Cox - Direttore della LSE IDEAS e Professore di Relazioni Internazionali presso la
Turki Al Faisal said the evidence, disclosed by the United States late, was "overwhelming" and "clearly shows official Iranian
responsibility". "Somebody in Iran will have to pay the price," said
Prince Turki , who also served as his country's
envoy to Britain and the US.
... Prince Turki al-Faisal , the chairman of
the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies, is a former director of Saudi Arabia's intelligence services and ambassador
to the United States.
"... Imagine a Russia in which Putin was no longer around and the hawks, with plenty of stored up grievances, were in power. The Russians have their neocons too and if they came out on top we'd be worse off than now ..."
"... The European elites wish to see Europe as a world power. Unrealistic, perhaps, but say that entity did become a dominant force. They complain about the lack of democratic control in the States, but that's nothing to the lack of democratic control in Europe. And we've already seen what the Europeans, including us, are capable of when it comes to predatory foreign intervention. Give the Europeans enough things that go bang and we could be yearning for the good old days. ..."
Babak - "The only sensible thing to do is to cut and run; in my opinion. Just work through
the implications as US cuts and run in the Levant, in the Persian Gulf, in South Korea."
As you point out, that could have unexpected effects. We saw what happened when a previous
dominant power - Great Britain, though by no means as overwhelmingly dominant and not at all
so at the end - effectively cut and ran after the Second World War. It ended up more of a
mess than it started out as.
Even in an ideal world, a world in which the current style of Great Power politics was
universally abandoned, the sudden withdrawal of the US would cause instability and chaos. The
disengagement would have to be gradual.
But there is no such ideal world as that and there will not be. Therefore the sudden
withdrawal of the US would leave a power vacuum that others would fill.
What others? Imagine a Russia in which Putin was no longer around and the hawks, with
plenty of stored up grievances, were in power. The Russians have their neocons too and if
they came out on top we'd be worse off than now .
The European elites wish to see Europe as a world power. Unrealistic, perhaps, but say
that entity did become a dominant force. They complain about the lack of democratic control
in the States, but that's nothing to the lack of democratic control in Europe. And we've
already seen what the Europeans, including us, are capable of when it comes to predatory
foreign intervention. Give the Europeans enough things that go bang and we could be yearning
for the good old days.
I'm one of those that still hope that the non-interventionist policy that was voted for in
America in 2016 will be carried through. But if that is indeed Trump's intention then there
is more in his way than local political or administrative difficulties. To engineer such a
transition would require great care. It's no good if the US just steps back and worse comes
forward to take its place.
It's not overly idealistic, or even that unrealistic, to hope for a world in which defense
forces (AND defensive alliances) are used for the proper purpose of defence and not for
expensive and destructive enterprises dreamed up by some bubble elite. That's part of what
Trump 2016 was about. But getting to such a world would require a considerably more careful
transition than we've seen in similar circumstances in the past.
There are some analogies here with the recent Poroshenko government desire to take Donbass area back by military force.
"... How will this breakup of Syrian national territory affect the situation between the Donbass region and the Ukraine junta? ..."
"... True and very sad. The Syrians have been caught in the crossfire since the beginning. We have theorized over the various causes of the war, but, in the end, when the superpowers are hanging around, Syrians are the first row of pieces to be sacrificed. ..."
"... The Afrin war plays several roles. It will demonize and demoralize further the 'independentist' Kurds, awake the nationalist Turkish feeling by displaying military power that has been damaged by the coup, boost the Islamist flame among the rural Turks so the Turks can forget about their grudge over the EU and the declining buying power. ..."
"... All the actors are tributaries flowing into the main river, and all moving in the same general direction, because the river is actually the tide of history. All players are advancing to meet their inevitable destinie ..."
Let me see if I understand all this? The Erdogan Turks fully back the terrorists in Syria
aiming to dislodge the Assad Syrian government. The USA et al fully backs the same.
The USA also backs the PKK/YPG Kurd faction in Syria as a means to at least break up
Syrian national territory, as originally in their plans, even if they do remove the Assad
government as originally planned.
Erdogan has wanted to expand Turkey's national boundaries at the expense of Syria's. This
latest encroachment, as with Euphrates Shield, accomplishes this goal especially if they can
subsume their terrorist proxies occupied areas in Idlib Province as the USA has by using
their newest Kurd proxies in eastern Syria. Erdogan need only create some new proxy
(Turkmen?) and go after the terrorists and Kurds in western Syria. No doubt with American
Erdogan and the USA disagree only on what future the Kurdish people will play in the
eastern territories of Syria and Turkey. So what will be the necessary accommodation between
If a Kurdish state is declared and backed by NATO and a UN resolution what if anything can
Syria and her allies do about it as war is simply out of the question.
How will this breakup of Syrian national territory affect the situation between the
Donbass region and the Ukraine junta?
True and very sad. The Syrians have been caught in the crossfire since the beginning.
We have theorized over the various causes of the war, but, in the end, when the superpowers
are hanging around, Syrians are the first row of pieces to be sacrificed.
And I would never put my faith in any international community ruling after Syria. We are
in uncharted territory, I believe. Dance with the one you came with and if you have to stand
on Putin's toes to keep up, then hold him close.
"Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong
do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." -- Thucydides
"These oilfields seem to be the big prize and one of the main reasons the US wants to hold
onto this corner of Syria."
Posted by: financial matters | Jan 21, 2018 10:37:30 AM | 18
The goal of the MIC and Deep State is just to keep the chaos going as long as possible to
sell arms and benefit careers. However, Trump has been enticed to go along with it by the
promise that the US will "take their oil."
You may be correct that those Kurds aren't Syrian, but not necessarily so. The areas of
Syria that have actually had Kurdish, or for instance Armenian, majorities have enjoyed a
large measure of de facto autonomy, which has only increased in the last 20 years. So while
nominally required to use Arabic in schools, if the school is staffed with Kurdish teachers
and administrators with Kurdish students, there is little to stop them from simply teaching
in Kurdish. Or Armenian, or Aramaic, etc.
We had wrongly predicted that Turkish threats against the Kurdish held north-west area of
Afrin were empty:
Maybe not. Maybe your first analysis was correct. If the Kurdish militias do fight, it will
take many weeks, and lead to substantial Turkish losses. So it is really too early to say
that Erdogan will attempt to conquer Afrin no matter the cost, and too early to say that the
US will not put effective pressure on Erdogan, or offer him some sort of deal.
So far, Erdogan has upped the ante, but he hasn't gone all in.
Erdogan is obsessed by keeping power and winning his re election in 2018 or 2019 . To get
that, he needs to neutralize the Turkish Kurds who don't vote for him. Sunni conservative
Kurds worship Erdogan for his promotion of Sunni Islam. For them Islam is the unifying factor
of Turks especially Sunni Islam. They all vote for the AKP.
Erdogan has emasculated the burgeoning liberal Kurdish party, the HDP, by demonizing the
liberal Kurds and throwing its leader in prison just to get more votes in the previous
parliamentary election that he reran to win with a very small margin.
For the next election, he is very worried about the growth of other centrist parties, the
weakness of his ally the MHP, a nationalist party archi-enemy of the Kurds and about the
insatisfaction of the Turks with the deteriorating relation with the EU and the fall of the
The Afrin war plays several roles. It will demonize and demoralize further the
'independentist' Kurds, awake the nationalist Turkish feeling by displaying military power
that has been damaged by the coup, boost the Islamist flame among the rural Turks so the
Turks can forget about their grudge over the EU and the declining buying power.
The question is will he win fast enough not to create the impression of failure and a
quagmire that would reflect negatively on his voters? And what will be the aftermath of
Afrin? early elections?
It's a multiple win-win, a great demonstration of congruent interests all doing their own
thing. Lots of things remain to play out. But there are no downsides to this situation, no
matter who holds what piece of Syrian territory for what temporary short time.
All the actors are tributaries flowing into the main river, and all moving in the same
general direction, because the river is actually the tide of history. All players are
advancing to meet their inevitable destinies: Turkey moves closer to Russia, and closer,
despite much bad blood, to restoring the friendship between itself and Syria (over time); the
Kurds get their final lesson about the perfidious US and settle into their lands in Syria, as
Syrians; Dr. Assad gets his entire country back for his people (over time); terrorists die;
the US is further marginalized and its generals scream mayhem, in words only.
The Ukrainian Parliament has practically declared
the Minsk agreements null and void and decided to militarily "liberate" Donetsk, Lugansk and
Crimea from the will of the people living there. Just in time the neo-nazi fanatics of the Azov
received a U.S. military delegation and U.S. arms.
The 2015 Minsk II agreement (
full text ) demanded that the Ukraine creates a new law for the administration of these
Without delays, but no later than 30 days from the date of signing of this document, a
resolution has to be approved by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, indicating the territory
which falls under the special regime in accordance with the law "On temporary Order of Local
Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts," based in the line
set up by the Minsk Memorandum as of Sept. 19, 2014.
Russia is not a party of the agreement. But when the resolution by the Ukrainian parliament
was not forthcoming western propaganda falsely blamed Russia for "not fulfilling the Minsk
agreement" and the west has since bound the sanctions on Russia to this fake conclusion.
The National Bank of Ukraine announced
that an independent accountant found that PrivatBank, then owned by the coup financier and
Ihor Kolomoyskiy , was plundered of $5.5 billion shortly before it went bankrupt and
nationalized by the coup government. In connection with that an IMF loan of $1.8 billion to the
allegedly went directly into Kolomoyskiy's pockets. How much of this stolen money was paid
to U.S. politicians?
While the anti-Trump politicians and media still fret about "Russian influence" on U.S.
social media everyone seems to have forgotten that in early 2016 the Ukraine set up a massive
troll farm and a Ministry of Truth. Back then even the U.S. ambassador to the Ukraine
disliked that . If every troll tweeting in Russian or with Cyrillic letters in its name is
under the direct command of Vladimir Putin where then are those Ukrainians trolls?
The last round in Ukraine erupted while the winter games finished in Sochi. I see the
empire positioning things to repeat the treatment during FIFA. Ukraine is being primed and
the clock is set to create incidents that will force Russia's hand.
This potential very public shaming of Russia is what is restraining Russia from responding
to many of the US and Israeli (and Turkish?) provocations in Syria. Perhaps they are hoping
their present silence will gain them some grace for that showcase event.
Personally, I doubt it.
And should some incidents happen during the FIFA world cup events, we will see the real
Putin - which might be for the best in the long run.
re:?The Ukrainian Parliament has practically declared the Minsk agreements null and void and
decided to militarily "liberate" Donetsk, Lugansk and Crimea from the will of the people
living there. Just in time the neo-nazi fanatics of the Azov Battalion received a U.S.
And also just in time Russia is voting on legalizing militias in Africa and elsewhere; just
in time for Spring in the Ukraine? http://russiafeed.com/russia-legalize-private-military-contractors-get-leg-africa/
I'm curious about Ukraine & its neo-nazi's. How do the Israelis who work there, knowing
the past-present? After all, mention the word nazi in their presence, and they go out of
their collective minds attacking the source. Or maybe there's some sort of collusion taking
I never thought I'd see the day when a fellow Pole – Sniegoski – had to be called
in to defend Russia (or at least call for nuance) because the debate on all things Russian in
the West has become so utterly deluded and obsessive that even Poles, notorious overindulgers
in Russophobia in our own right, are now slowly starting to notice the insanity. When even
we notice it, you know its bad.
I find Masha Gessen a "Bought" person, she is a typical voice of the NeoLib US, and as such
she is in stark opposition to everything I stand for as a European socialist. Her class has
been responsible for the eradication of the US middle class, the dismantling of of welfare
and protection of the poor, she is full throated librul Clintonista/Obamista supported by the
mega rich, furthermore she is a backer of the hellhole called Israel, the new harsher
apartheid Haven. She is a warmonger, calling for interventions everywhere on Earth, if people
there reject US Imperialism.
I hope God loves her so much he calls her home soon. Spit.
The problem with the US left is that it does not excist, anything that you can label
Socialist is rejected out of hand, so the US will only grow worse for the unprivileged. But
whatever carry on.
Us in Scandinavia will just have to continue with living in squalor, get no education and
health care, no paid hollidays, continue to beg in the streets, waiting for rich American
This is a case of the personal becoming public, turned inside out. She hates herself and thus
ends up hating everyone and everything else. The world should be destroyed, everything turned
upside down. With these specimens what's really important is their sex life and how they'll
find their next titillation. They're on stage and demand applause. This person is certainly
crazed by hate, though. They do this 'let's you and him fight' routine, hoping for a
US-Russian confrontation, a confrontation weirdos like this would never get close to. Does
anyone really believe that she actually cares about the welfare of Ukrainians or people of
the Baltic countries? Or for that matter seeing as she hates the Russians and fantasizes
their country being demolished into many little states then why does she pretend to be
worried about them having a bad man as a dictator?
What's noteworthy about her is how she can make a handsome living here in the US. She's given
a platform and paid to be part of the current chorus singing the same songs, all part of the
well-paid public relations machine that's on overdrive. There's hardly anything actually
intellectual about this public 'intellectual', who is also incompetent, but that goes
unnoticed by the vast majority of people in the US who hardly read anything of value at all.
Various personalities like this are promoted from behind.
The regime just wants to plunder and stay in power.
That was the Yeltsin regime that Putin inherited. Putin being the pragmatist
allowed the oligarchs to continue as long as they started paying taxes and contribute to
society. Putin restored the social safety net that was completely destroyed under Yeltsin.
Isn't it funny how the west loved Yeltsin but hates Putin? It's because they want Russia to
become a powerless state or group of states, speaking of which
She wants Russia to break apart "So why is the Russian Federation of more than 80
constituent parts, [and now] as a result of being plundered by the Putin regime, have
nationalist movements – why should they stay together?"
And this is the real payday, the dream of all western Neocons and everyone who is on their
payroll. It is about power and eliminating any country that stands in the way of achieving
total power. I just wish they were honest about it and didn't couch it in all of these pseudo
intellectual and moralistic platitudes.
Masha Gessen is an intelligent loser. How sad it must be to walk around in her shoes. She is
an incredibly ugly person with interests no woman of worth would dare invest a second.
I like the jews. They are capable people. Funny too. They are not cut out for leadership
roles. Their ego eclipses their ability. Gessen is captured by this big ego. She writes well.
So what? If the only people who read your books are people who agree with you already, you
are only hardening and reinforcing your followers opinions.
Gessen is increasing ignorance and closing minds with her works. She is making monoliths
and know it alls out of lost people. All flash. No substance.
Read Albert L. Weeks's "Russia's Life-Saver" then post again. And, heed Putin's repeated,
unambiguous, videotaped repudiations of Marxism-Leninism and Stalin, which can be seen on
RT's You Tube channel.
All across the globe, people still give thanks for the liberation of the captive "Soviet"
peoples from their living hell, on Christmas Day, 1991.
As for the freak who wrote this chilling essay, she is the new face of the Soviet terror.
It simply moved to New York City and adapted to already favorable conditions.
I can't believe someone bothered to write a 4000+ word article on Masha Gessen, of all
people. Nobody in Russia takes her seriously, not even her would be comrades-in-arms. Hell,
she couldn't even hold down a job as an editor at some random travel magazine, her
subordinates hated her (which was the real reason she left Russia for the States, not some
LGBT persecution thing). Of course, in the US, she's considered edgy, insightful and oh so
knowledgeable about the evil Putin regime. But, hey, bonus for the captain obvious
observation about Russiagate being a conspiracy theory.
This is truly a big pile a bullshit .Putin a threat to the world ! How do these people get
away with this type of hyped fiction. When was the last time she looked at Iraq, Afghanistan,
Libya, Syria the constant posturing and threats against Iran or anyone else for that matter
that happens to be in the sights of the neocon lead American political system? What about the
trashing of the most comprehensive document of checks and balances against this ramped
trampeling of free speech, human and civil rights, the American Constitution ? Where is the
disgust for Bush and co's crimes against humanity the Clinton's blantant cronyism and
provocations in eastern europe and Libya?? Americans are living in denial dreamland, waiting
for some metamorphical savior like Oprah to take them by the hand and lead them to never
never land. I am so sorry that someone of the level of Gore Vidal is no longer around to
short sitdown with creep like this Well to her maybe Putin is the greatest danger to mankind
but Russia and the Russian people better be glad that he is running the show at this
particular junction in human history Russian history. Otherwise I cannot imagine another
personality of his stature and nature keeping his wits and controling any gut reaction to the
constant provocations and humiliations that the US has inflicted on Russia since Gorbachev's
naive belief in America keeping its word. Just the fact that this moron is unaware of the
colassal con job that Reagan and co pulled on Russia at the precise moment in history could
have brought the two countries togeather, for the better of the entire world is enough to
discard any positive light that she may have otherwise brought to the subject. She is not
serious and should not be taken as such by any observer of the myriad historical facts that
serve to dispel the major content of this rubbish. Dream on America .you have been bested by
what is surly a man that is flawed in many ways but is the one person that has the dexterity
to control his emotions while waiting for your immenent demise.
The Justice Department confirmed this week that employees in Mueller's office are exempt
from the shutdown and can continue their work. His office is not funded through the regular
congressional appropriations process.
A more interesting question is how those testimonies might affect Bannon -- he is in a very hot water now. If he thought that the
meeting was so incriminating why he did not contact FBI and just decided to feed juicy gossip to Wolff?
Also he was not present at the meeting and was not a member of Trump team until two months later. From who he got all this information
? Was is just a slander by disgruntled employee?
"... To reiterate, those comments were not aimed at Don Jr. ..."
"... Bannon has denied that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government during the election ..."
"... Wolff also quotes the former White House strategist as saying, "This is all about money laundering. [Robert] Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr., and Jared Kushner . . . It's as plain as a hair on your face." ..."
"... Bannon then zeroed in on Kushner specifically, adding that "[i]t goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit. The Kushner shit is greasy. They're going to go right through that. They're going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me." ..."
"The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the
conference room on the 25th floor -- with no lawyers. They didn't have any lawyers," Bannon is quoted as saying in Fire and Fury.
"Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad shit, and I happen to think it's all of that, you should
have called the F.B.I. immediately." Bannon reportedly speculated that the chance the eldest Trump son did not involve his father
in the meeting "is zero."
When Bannon's comments became public, Trump excoriated his former strategist, whom
he accused of having "lost his mind."
But while Bannon has since apologized for the remarks and sought to walk back a number of the quotes, he's stopped short of denying
that he viewed the Trump Tower meeting as treasonous. Instead, he's merely shifted the blame away from Trump Jr. and onto Manafort.
"My comments were aimed at Paul Manafort, a seasoned campaign professional with experience and knowledge of how the Russians operate.
He should have known they are duplicitous, cunning, and not our friends. To reiterate, those comments were not aimed at Don Jr.
," Bannon said in
a statement to Axios. ( Bannon has denied that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government during the election
... ... ...
Though the Trump Tower meeting took place before Bannon joined the Trump campaign, Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the House
CNN last week that he plans to question Bannon about "why this meeting at Trump Tower represented his treason and certainly unpatriotic
at a minimum."
Jared Kushner's "greasy shit"
Wolff also quotes the former White House strategist as saying, "This is all about money laundering. [Robert] Mueller chose
[senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul
Manafort, Don Jr., and Jared Kushner . . . It's as plain as a hair on your face." (Trump Jr., Kushner, and Manafort have all
denied wrongdoing.) Bannon then zeroed in on Kushner specifically, adding that "[i]t goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner
shit. The Kushner shit is greasy. They're going to go right through that. They're going to roll those two guys up and say play me
or trade me."
He and Trump's son-in-law have never seen eye to eye; their White House feuds were a poorly kept secret, and following his ouster,
Bannon has given numerous interviews knocking Kushner, including one to my colleague Gabriel Sherman in which he
maturity level. If Bannon has dirt on Kushner, he will likely get his chance to reveal it; Schiff also
his intent to question Bannon on "the basis of his concern over money laundering."
"... the recent influx of attack dog journalism has resulted in less investigative reporting and a misguided definition of news, both of which have serious, negative implications. ..."
"... All the President's Men ..."
"... The non-news news norm also includes what Larry Sabato referred to as attack dog journalism. That is, "the press coverage attending any political event or circumstance where a critical mass of journalists leap to cover the same embarrassing or scandalous subject and pursue it intensely, often excessively, and sometimes uncontrollably" (Sabato, 1991, p. 6). For instance, Obama's "you didn't build that" remark was immediately removed from context and spread by the mass media (so much so that the GOP then referenced it in their "We Built It" slogan at the Republican National Convention). His minor gaffe matters much less than his policy regarding taxes and social services. Even so, the media coverage did not focus on what his point was in the speech in which his misspoke. Rather, the attention was placed on the comment itself. The news should be what the President said he plans to do if he remains in office, not the poor wording choice. ..."
Journalists' role in the political process should be to serve as intermediaries between
politicians and the public. The average American does not have the means by which to get the
news directly from the White House and other bureaucrats. Therefore, there are reporters, who
exist to provide such information to the people. However, the recent influx of attack dog
journalism has resulted in less investigative reporting and a misguided definition of news,
both of which have serious, negative implications.
Woodward and Bernstein, as portrayed in All the President's Men , should be the
heroes of every news reporter in the country. By tirelessly digging up the dirt on the
Watergate, they discovered a government scandal. The pair adhered to their journalistic duty of
reporting the details to the public, despite hesitation from others and a warning from Deep
Throat that their lives may be in danger. They did not cease their searching once they had
enough to publish a story; rather, they kept probing until they got to the bottom of things.
According to lecture, their investigative journalism is indicative of a shift from lap dog
journalism to watch dog journalism.
Around the 1990s, American journalism lost its watch dog affiliation. Today's reporters are
rarely incited by the whispers of a government cover-up. For example, it took at least eight
years for the public to learn that Iraqi detector Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi lied about
weapons of mass destruction in an effort to influence Western war efforts (
). Reporters should not be expected to question every government decision. Nevertheless, when
the issue at hand is a war, they should be counted upon to look into why exactly one country
proposes going to war with another – reporting not only why the government is saying it
is time for war, but providing what evidence they are using to authorize their decision. This
is an enormous responsibility that is vital to our very democracy.
That is not to say that investigative journalism or watch dog reporting has died out (e.g.,
http://watchdog.org/about/ ). Rather,
their admirable tactics have been subsumed by the new news norm of non-news. In an effort to
attract an audience, countless news outlets have transitioned to offering non-news items as
news. For instance, the top story's headline on one of Tucson's local news station's websites
reads, "Donate hair this weekend to win tickets to "Disney on Ice." Another is, "Man jumps off
Bronx Zoo train, mauled by tiger." While a contest and a novel story might be interesting
enough for people to tune in, they are undoubtedly not the top stories of the day. One might
find the protesters' overtake of an Islamist group's headquarters in Benghazi more pressing,
especially considering the potential link to the recent attack at the U.S. Consulate in Libya
(or perhaps Mitt Romney's tax release).
The non-news news norm also includes what Larry Sabato referred to as attack dog
journalism. That is, "the press coverage attending any political event or circumstance where a
critical mass of journalists leap to cover the same embarrassing or scandalous subject and
pursue it intensely, often excessively, and sometimes uncontrollably" (Sabato, 1991, p. 6). For
instance, Obama's "you didn't build that" remark was immediately removed from context and
spread by the mass media (so much so that the GOP then referenced it in their "We Built It"
slogan at the Republican National Convention). His minor gaffe matters much less than his
policy regarding taxes and social services. Even so, the media coverage did not focus on what
his point was in the speech in which his misspoke. Rather, the attention was placed on the
comment itself. The news should be what the President said he plans to do if he remains in
office, not the poor wording choice.
The trend away from watch dog journalism toward attack dog journalism, as well as the warped
definition of what is considered news, have serious implications for the country as a whole.
The current nature of political news coverage can serve to place importance on non-issues,
inspire and perpetuate misinformation, and leaves out what is not easily accessible. By giving
so much attention to minor gaffes, rumors, and unimportant issues, the media make such items
salient to the public and communicate that they are important. This can lead to skewed
priorities, as people might find insignificant items to be much more relevant than they
actually should be. Additionally, attack dog journalists' mongering about Obama's birth
certificate led approximately 25% of the country to believe Obama was not born in the United
States – according to 2011 polls, administered two to three years after the rumor's
origin. Finally, acting like attack dogs rather than watch dogs prevents journalists from
investigating stories. Reporters might not act as politicians' lap dogs but by attacking rather
than digging, they fail as watch dogs.
Such a sociological shift in news norms and journalistic tendencies is difficult to reverse,
but not impossible. In All the President's Men , Woodward and Bernstein did not act
alone. While met with hesitation from most, a few people offered invaluable support, such as
their executive editor and Deep Throat. The four of them (Woodward, Bernstein, Ben Bradlee, and
Deep Throat) prove that it does not take an army to reveal a scandal. Both the moral of the
film and the return to watch dog journalism is the belief that all it takes are a few people
impassioned by a desire to get the story and to get it right.
(Sabato's book is titled "Feeding Frenzy: How Attack Journalism Has Transformed American
Badly written. It's like no one edited this book. Really makes me question the author's credibility and journalistic
integrity. Doesn't cite sources, even when providing direct quotes. That's not okay.
I'm glad someone had the courage to write about the imbecile in our White House, but this kind of crappy writing that borders
on tabloid-level makes our side look just as bad as "the other side".
Wolff is lucky that the Bannon controversy happened, otherwise this book wouldn't have sold more than a handful of copies.
Save money, watch the news, Trump nuts in either case
Kind of a waste of money. Just watch the news and read the tweets, you'll figure it out
It would be more interesting if it had some notes on sources, but there is no way to
determine 1st hand info, 2nd hand info, and third hand in a mirror info.
There was not much here that you didn't already know. But the writing is so terrible that
it was difficult to make it to the end of a rather short piece. He repeatedly writes long
paragraphs consisting of single sentences. He compulsively inserts long parenthetical
expressions everywhere which breaks up the flow and requires reading and reading to try to
figure out what he's saying. I would expect a best selling author to be able to construct a
comprehensible sentence but he mostly fails.
As much as I wanted to like this book, because I detest Trump, the only thing I can say
about this book is it stinks. It's repetitive, poorly written and he could use a proofreader.
There's nothing in it that we haven't all read on the internet.
I am afraid, if one is to believe Mathis words, that the Syrian, Ukrainian and Korean potential confrontations will lead to
exchanges that will force us into wars on several theaters in the very near future.
As of today, Gen. Mathis exposing the sew Us Defense Strategy warned that: The US will counter any "threat to America's democracy
experiment" in the world, if necessary with military force, the Pentagon chief threatened.
He singled out Russia and China as "adversaries", a far cry form the "partners" designation used by Russia in designing the
USA. He vowed: the US will respond with lethal force.
So the stage is set for escalation of escalation in several theaters. How long will the bear be poked and the dragon provoked
before retaliation ensues?
I am afraid that war looks more and more certain in 2018.
@40 b... thanks for that... the place was getting out of hand.. you are becoming too popular..
@56 carl... it is an outrageous statement from mattis, any way you read it!
"The US will counter any threat to America's democracy experiment in the world..."
usa as country that gets to dictate its agenda anywhere in the world.. it would explain why they want to circumvent any international
body that they don't already control too, like the un.. america's democracy experiment is imposing the us$ as world currency under
the threat of their military.. it is already starting to fall apart on all accounts which explains mattis's anxiousness in representing
these same undemocratic structures and institutions he refers to as 'america's ''democracy'' experiment'... he needs to get a
gig in hollywood at comedy central.. he never found his true calling..
"We will modernize key capabilities," Mattis said. "Investments in space and cyberspace, nuclear deterrent forces, missile defense,
advanced autonomous systems and resilient and agile logistics will provide our high-quality troops what they need to win." [Sputnik
Just two quotes from 'Mad dog' Mattis which prove he needs to be put in an asylum.
"I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I'll kill you
"Find the enemy that wants to end this experiment (in American democracy) and kill every one of them until they're so sick of
the killing that they leave us and our freedoms intact."
He singled out Russia and China as "adversaries", a far cry form the "partners"
designation used by Russia in designing the USA. He vowed: the US will
respond with lethal force.
Actions speak louder than words. The US is scared of two things: 1) a military conflict where its troops get slaughtered wholesale,
and 2) going up against any army or regular military force it can't destroy from the air. Whatever happens in the near future
we can rest assured Uncle Scam won't be engaging in direct hostilities with China or Russia.
@63 "Investments in space and cyberspace, nuclear deterrent forces, missile defense, advanced autonomous systems and resilient
and agile logistics will provide our high-quality troops what they need to win."
Nice for the high-quality troops. Sounds like they should be totally risk-free. But I don't share Mad Dog's faith in technology.
Looks like an accident waiting to happen.
Mattis opens his mouth and reveals his level of ignorance when it comes to understanding the Outlaw US Empire's history--it's
certainly not a "democracy experiment," nor has it ever tried to install a democracy anywhere on the planet. I'd bet he's
just as ignorant when it comes to military history, too. He reminds me of the ignorant brute Sgt. Snorkel from the Beatle Bailey
comic strip. The so-called "new" "defense posture" is no more than a tidied-up version of the two that preceded it: What we say
goes; either you're with us or against us.
By way of rebuttal, I highly recommend reading
this interview of Hassan Nasrallah from 3 Jan 2018, particularly his remarks about differences in the quality of soldiers
from The Resistance versus those of the enemy--IDF, NATO, USA, Daesh--and why they exist.
Contrary to all the hype about the Empire being a new energy exporting colossus,
it needed to import LNG
to keep its East Coast dwellings warm, but the cargo seems to have found a better price elsewhere. Just how will it displace Russian
gas from the market when it can't provide enough domestic supply?
Meanwhile, Tillerson pulls an Albright
: "Signs of starvation and death in North Korea indicate that US diplomatic strategy works fine, says the secretary of state."
Is he being two-faced? You bet! From last year
: "We're not your enemy, we're not your threat..."
Ignorant, lying, immoral are just a few of the important behavioral traits of those leading faces of the Outlaw US Empire.
And my historical investigations prove such traits have been in the forefront since its inception. Guess we can thank its tutor,
the British Empire.
The US administration either is very smart in bluffing to temporarily reassure its panicking regional allies, Israel and Saudi
Arabia or it is living in the la-la land of an incompetence close to stupidity.
Do they really believe that the Russians will allow the USA to rob their victory in Syria over ISIS? Or that the Turks will
stay idle while the USA is building a Kurdish military entity on their border? Or that Iran and Syria will allow the partitioning
of Syria and the US illegal long term presence in the region?
The USA administration is posed for dramatic blowbacks and reshuffling of alliances in the region.Maybe that is why it is running
like a headless hen!
This will damage Trump with his base. Reducing the involvement of the United States military abroad was one of the more important
commitments he made to his base and now he has broken that commitment and quite a few of his base are disappointed. Even if it's
just a couple of hundred thousand of them, there goes the next presidential election for Trump and the Republicans. By forgetting
about Russia-gate, focusing on his foreign military involvements, and provided the Democratic candidate is not a Clinton, the
presidency is for there for taking by the Democrats. Having Tulsi Gabbard on the ticket would help.
The only reservation I have is if Trump is stiffing the generals in the White House and sometime in the future pulls the plug
on all those interventions then he'll remain in the White House for another four years.
Tillerson could have been speaking for Trump, or Obama, or Bush - under whose regime the Likudnik/neocons/Zionists were able to
foment a policy coup while using the OSP to concoct lies for Israel's long-desired war.
While there are generally multiple motives for entry into wars, only one is whitewashed. As Phil Giraldi put it:
""Why doesn't anyone ever speak honestly about the six-hundred-pound gorilla in the room? Nobody has mentioned Israel in this
conference and we all know it's American Jews with all their money and power who are supporting every war in the Middle East for
Netanyahu? Shouldn't we start calling them out and not letting them get away with it?"
Here's where we are, as the same cabal cheerlead for war on Iran (Lebanon must be first) a you are either committed to stopping
the drive to war by all cognizable social and pitical forces, or you are not.
The time for letting cries of 'anti-Semite' preclude FAIR dis ussuon of the role of Jews and the Israel Lobby is over.
Those who censor this necessary component of analysis should be deemed confederates of the bankers, MIC, transnationals, and
Zionist Jews who have been driving wars for decades.
With millions dead, playtime is over. Those censoring the truth side with the warmongers.
"Institutionally, the Democratic Party Is Not Democratic"
Very apt characterization "the Democratic Party is nothing more
than a layer of indirection between the donor class and the Democratic consultants and the
campaigns they run;" ... " after all, the Democratic Party -- in its current incarnation -- has important roles to play
in not expanding its "own" electorate through voter registration, in the care and feeding of the intelligence community, in
warmongering, in the continual buffing and polishing of neoliberal ideology, and in general keeping the Overton Window firmly
nailed in place against policies that would convey universal concrete material benefits, especially to the working class"
"... That said, the revivification of the DNC lawsuit serves as a story hook for me to try to advance the story on the nature of political parties as such, the Democratic Party as an institution, and the function that the Democratic Party serves. I will meander through those three topics, then, and conclude. ..."
"... What sort of legal entity is ..."
"... Political parties were purely private organizations from the 1790s until the Civil War. Thus, "it was no more illegal to commit fraud in the party caucus or primary than it would be to do so in the election of officers of a drinking club." However, due to the efforts of Robert La Follette and the Progressives, states began to treat political parties as "public agencies" during the early 1890s and 1900s; by the 1920s "most states had adopted a succession of mandatory statutes regulating every major aspect of the parties' structures and operations. ..."
"... While 1787 delegates disagreed on when corruption might occur, they brought a general shared understanding of what political corruption meant. To the delegates, political corruption referred to self-serving use of public power for private ends, including, without limitation, bribery, public decisions to serve private wealth made because of dependent relationships, public decisions to serve executive power made because of dependent relationships, and use by public officials of their positions of power to become wealthy. ..."
"... Two features of the definitional framework of corruption at the time deserve special attention, because they are not frequently articulated by all modern academics or judges. The first feature is that corruption was defined in terms of an attitude toward public service, not in relation to a set of criminal laws. The second feature is that citizenship was understood to be a public office. The delegates believed that non-elected citizens wielding or attempting to influence public power can be corrupt and that elite corruption is a serious threat to a polity. ..."
"... You can see how a political party -- a strange, amphibious creature, public one moment, private the next -- is virtually optimized to create a phishing equilibrium for corruption. However, I didn't really answer my question, did I? I still don't know what sort of legal entity the Democratic Party is. However, I can say what the Democratic Party is not ..."
"... So the purpose of superdelegates is to veto a popular choice, if they decide the popular choice "can't govern." But this is circular. Do you think for a moment that the Clintonites would have tried to make sure President Sanders couldn't have governed? You bet they would have, and from Day One. ..."
"... More importantly, you can bet that the number of superdelegates retained is enough for the superdelegates, as a class, to maintain their death grip on the party. ..."
"... could have voluntarily decided that, Look, we're gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way. ..."
"... That's exactly ..."
"... Functionally, the Democratic Party Is a Money Trough for Self-Dealing Consultants. Here once again is Nomiki Konst's amazing video, before the DNC: https://www.youtube.com/embed/EAvblBnXV-w Those millions! That's real money! ..."
"... Today, it is openly acknowledged by many members that the DNC and the Clinton campaign were running an operation together. In fact, it doesn't take much research beyond FEC filings to see that six of the top major consulting firms had simultaneous contracts with the DNC and HRC -- collectively earning over $335 million since 2015 [this figure balloons in Konst's video because she got a look at the actual budget]. (This does not include SuperPACs.) ..."
"... One firm, GMMB earned $236.3 million from HFA and $5.3 from the DNC in 2016. Joel Benenson, a pollster and strategist who frequents cable news, collected $4.1m from HFA while simultaneously earning $3.3 million from the DNC. Perkins Coie law firm collected $3.8 million from the DNC, $481,979 from the Convention fund and $1.8 million from HFA in 2016. ..."
"... It gets worse. Not only do the DNC's favored consultants pick sides in the primaries, they serve on the DNC boards so they can give themselves donor money. ..."
"... These campaign consultants make a lot more money off of TV and mail than they do off of field efforts. Field efforts are long-term, labor-intensive, high overhead expenditures that do not have big margins from which the consultants can draw their payouts. They also don't allow the consultants to make money off of multiple campaigns all in the same cycle, while media and mail campaigns can be done from their DC office for dozens of clients all at the same time. They get paid whether campaigns win or lose, so effectiveness is irrelevant to them. ..."
"... the Democratic Party is nothing more than a layer of indirection between the donor class and the Democratic consultants and the campaigns they run; ..."
"... the Democratic Party -- in its current incarnation -- has important roles to play in not expanding its "own" electorate through voter registration, in the care and feeding of the intelligence community, in warmongering, in the continual buffing and polishing of neoliberal ideology, and in general keeping the Overton Window firmly nailed in place against policies that would convey universal concrete material benefits, especially to the working class. ..."
"... the bottom line is that if Democratic Party controls ballot access for the forseeable future, they have to be gone through ..."
"... In retrospect, despite Sanders evident appeal and the power of his list, I think it would have been best if their faction's pushback had been much stronger ..."
An alert reader who is a representative of the class that's suing the DNC Services
Corporation for fraud in the 2016 Democratic primary -- WILDING et al. v. DNC SERVICES
CORPORATION et al., a.k.a. the "DNC lawsuit" -- threw some interesting mail over the transom;
it's from Elizabeth Beck of Beck & Lee, the firm that brought the case on behalf of the
(putatively) defrauded class (and hence their lawyer). Beck's letter reads in relevant
"... Glenn R. Simpson, the co-founder of the controversial opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which is behind the largely discredited 35-page anti-Trump dossier, explained in testimony released publicly last week that his firm works to "customize a research solution" based on the "problem" of each client. ..."
"... The statements may raise more questions about the veracity of the dossier accusing Donald Trump and his 2016 presidential campaign of ties with Russia. The questionable document reportedly served as part of the basis for the FBI's investigation into Trump's presidential campaign. ..."
Glenn R. Simpson, the co-founder of the controversial opposition research firm Fusion
GPS, which is behind the largely discredited 35-page anti-Trump dossier, explained in testimony
released publicly last week that his firm works to "customize a research solution" based on the
"problem" of each client.
The statements may raise more questions about the veracity of the dossier accusing
Donald Trump and his 2016 presidential campaign of ties with Russia. The questionable document
reportedly served as part of the basis for the FBI's investigation into Trump's presidential
Simpson's statements are significant in light of the disclosure last April that Fusion GPS's
anti-Trump work was financed by Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic
National Committee (DNC).
In August 22
testimony released last week and reviewed in full by Breitbart News, Steele stated,
"Another thing we say about our work is it's custom information, it's a customized product. You
tell us what your problem is and we customize a research solution."
Simpson was responding to a question about "concerns that the work being done was driven in
a direction designed to reach a particular conclusion for a client or because of the client's
Simpson claimed that the client doesn't dictate a specific "result" for the firm to conclude
in its work. "In general when people come to us and they tell us what their challenge is, we
stipulate that they retain us for 30 days, they agree to pay our fee, they don't tell us what
to do, they don't tell us, you know, what result to get. I like to call it a holistic
As Breitbart News
reported yesterday, Simpson conceded in his testimony that he opposed Trump's presidential
candidacy and that his negative opinions of the politician may have "entered" into his
In October, the Washington Post
reported that in April 2016, attorney Marc E. Elias and his law firm Perkins Coie retained
Fusion GPS to conduct the firm's anti-Trump work on behalf of both Hillary Clinton's 2016
presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
Through Perkins Coie, Clinton's campaign and the DNC continued to fund Fusion GPS until
October 2016, days before Election Day, the Post reported.
While it is not clear how much the Clinton campaign or the DNC paid Fusion GPS, the UK
Independent , citing campaign finance records, reported that the Clinton campaign doled
out $5.6 million to Perkins Coie from June 2015 to December 2016. Records
show that since November 2015, the DNC paid the law firm $3.6 million in "legal and
reported that the information in the dossier, compiled by former British spy Christopher
Steele, served as a "roadmap" for the FBI's investigation into claims of coordination between
Moscow and members of Trump's presidential campaign.
Last April, CNN
reported that the dossier served as part of the FBI's justification for seeking the FISA
court's reported approval to clandestinely monitor the communications of Carter Page, the
American oil industry investor who was tangentially and briefly associated with Trump's
"... The media has done everything to discredit him and are always found to be false. Sure, he is obnoxious but enough already. ..."
"... Fire and fury seemed to be a compilation of the news stories about Trump that had already been worked and reworked in the written media. Other than a little embellishment it was like reruns on cable TV. You had heard the story so many times you could almost say the lines with the characters. ..."
Interesting in a voyeuristic sense but stylistically and factually flawed.
The inaccuracies are off-putting. How credible is the rest of this book if he calls Stephen Miller Jason? I am far from being
a Trump fan, but I am also far from being a Bannon fan. Wolff clearly likes Bannon and admires the daily chaos and "war footing"
tactics he engendered. I would love to read a book like this but one that is edited and vetted before going to print.
This chronicle of life in the White House is more about Steve Bannon and his buddies versus Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner's
more liberal views. Highlights of President Trump's first nine months provide material for the book's chapters.
There are almost no good words for Trump. The reader gets tired of hearing he's confused, stupid or uninformed. The writing
is tedious and relies on Yiddish and journalistic jargon to add gravitas. If you want to know more about Trump, this is not the
One reads about White House chaos and the book explains the political infighting that contributes to it. The communications
professionals' comings and goings are explained. The chief of staff gyrations and Air Force One trip insights provide interest.
If you keep up with the news you won't learn much about Trump, but as a partial biography of Bannon this is worth reading.
The hype on this book got my attention but it was a book "I could put down". Fire and fury seemed to be a compilation of
the news stories about Trump that had already been worked and reworked in the written media. Other than a little embellishment
it was like reruns on cable TV. You had heard the story so many times you could almost say the lines with the characters.
What a bombshell! Finally some truth about the "Justice system" in the US.
Following on from this should be the whole subsequent story of the DNC-Fusion-Steele dossier in detail, exposing the MSM too
for what it has been worth.
Perhaps then Trump dares to go against the deep state swamp and stop wars instead of following the dictates of CIA, Israel and
Military Industrialists. That would be a real POTUS PLUS result.
""It's troubling. It is shocking," North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows said. "Part of me wishes that I didn't read it because
I don't want to believe that those kinds of things could be happening in this country that I call home and love so much.""
Come on, child! Enough with that spectacle. Get real. Have the basic courage to know and to admit what everybody has known
about your country for ages!... The entire world already knows.
More proof, if any were needed, that the only threat to the people of the USA comes from their own government. The 'external
threat' is a fiction calculated to enslave the US population and enrich the Oligarchy.
The empire is getting a bit tattered around the edges
by Justin Raimondo Posted on January
17, 2018 January 16, 2018 While the population of Hawaii dove under manhole covers, and
#TheResistance screeched that The Orange Monster had finally done it and forced Kim Jong Un
to nuke the island paradise, it took Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, the levelheaded, and quite
personable representative from that state, to issue a statement countermanding the "take
cover" message sent out by the military earlier.
Rep. Gabbard did this within minutes, thus avoiding a major panic with potentially
dangerous consequences, while the Authorities took nearly an hour to issue a retraction.
How did this happen? The Official Story is that "someone pushed the wrong button." As to
the identity of this Someone, or the consequences that have befallen him or her, we hear nary
This bizarre incident underscores the utter absurdity and darkness of the permanent state
of emergency which we live under. For it turns out that there was no system in place capable
of countermanding the emergency alert once it went out. A tacit understanding of the reality
behind our military strategy: it's a suicide pact.
It also underscores the Potemkin Village aura of what is routinely referred to as our
National Security Establishment: in this case, it amounted to some guy in Hawaii wearing flip
flops and all too eager to go off duty and get back in the water after going through the
unending drill he'd complete hundreds, probably thousands of times before.
So who was the culprit, and what happened to him? The Hawaii authorities refuse to
identify him – because "he would be a pariah." Which is a military disciplinary system
that has to be unique in all the world. The administrator in chief of the system, a Mr.
Miyagi, explained it this
"Looking at the nature and cause of the error that led to those events, the deeper
problem is not that someone made a mistake; it is that we made it too easy for a simple
mistake to have very serious consequences. The system should have been more robust, and I
will not let an individual pay for a systemic problem."
What about the individual architects of the system? You can be your bottom dollar none of
them will bear any consequences for almost starting World War III. Gee, I recall an incident
that occurred on September 11, 2001, in which the "defenses" we'd spent billions on simply
did not function and thousands dies as a result – and not a single person was
Inefficiency and outright incompetence are built into structures as large, unwieldy, and
unresponsive as the American Empire, and this is what the concept of decadence really
entails: the slipshod slips in, the shiny surfaces get to looking a little ramshackle,
overconfidence and complacency infiltrate both leaders and led, and pretty soon you're the
Austro-Hungarian Empire: big, garish, unsustainable, and basically ready to fall to
Which is not to say that the Empire is really on its last legs and will fall of its own
weight – although that's entirely possible. Look at what happened to the Soviets. Yet
the rulers – and inhabitants – of such empires always overestimate their strength
and endurance: they live inside the bubble of their own hubris.
That popping sound you hear may augur more than anybody bargained for
A SPECIAL NOTE : My apologies for the abbreviated column, but this is being written
on the fly as I get ready to travel to San Francisco to receive my fifth infusion of the
anti-cancer drugs Keytruda and Alimta. I have to say I'm feeling a lot better since the
treatments started, but I still have a ways to go: I'll keep you posted.
It is exactly as I told you. Russiagate is a conspiracy between the FBI, the DOJ, and the
Hillary campaign to overturn Donald Trump's election. We have treason committed at the highest
levels of the FBI and Department of Justice and the Democratic National Committee.
If you believed one word of Russiagate, you now must laugh or cry at your incredible
This scandal should also bring down the presstitute media who have done the dirty work for
the conspiracy against Trump.
18 Jan, 2018
18 Jan, 2018
Thursday on the Fox Business Network, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) teased an intelligence memo that he claimed went "to
the very foundations of democracy" and called on his colleagues in the House of Representatives to make the memo
Gaetz told host Liz Claman the memo involved the FBI, the Department of Justice and President Donald Trump.
"The allegations contained in this important intelligence document go to the very foundations of our democracy,
and they require an immediate release to the public in my opinion," Gaetz said. "Unfortunately, I can not talk
about the specific facts contained within this memo. I can only share my observation -- that if the American people
knew what was happening if they saw the contents of this memo, a lot would become clear about the information that
I've been talking about the last several months. And so, I am calling on our leadership to hold a vote on the
floor of the House to make public the key contents of this intelligence memo regarding the FBI, the Department of
Justice and President Trump."
According to Gaetz, a vote could be held simultaneously with a continuing resolution vote that would make the
"critical allegations" in the document on the floor of the House of Representatives.
The United States cannot be a moral or ethical country until it faces up to the realities of US empire and the destruction it
causes around the world. The US undermines governments (including democracies), kills millions of people, causes mass migrations
of people fleeing their homes, communities and countries and produces vast environmental damage.
"U.S. foreign military bases are the principal instruments of imperial global domination and environmental damage through wars
of aggression and occupation, and that the closure of US foreign military bases is one of the first necessary steps toward a just,
peaceful and sustainable world."
... ... ... (image deleted)
US foreign military bases as of 2015. Source BaseNation.us
Responsibility to End Global Empire of Bases
Ajamu Baraka of the Black Alliance for Peace and the vice presidential candidate for the Green Party in 2016 opened the conference,
describing the responsibility of the people of the United States (USians) to protect the world from US aggression. He
"The only logical, principled and strategic response to this question is citizens of the empire must reject their imperial
privileges and join in opposing ruling elites exploiting labor and plundering the Earth. To do that, however, requires breaking with
the intoxicating allure of cross-class, bi-partisan 'white identity politics.'"
"If present trends continue, four sorrows, it seems to me, are certain to be visited on the United States. Their cumulative
impact guarantees that the United States will cease to bear any resemblance to the country once outlined in our Constitution. First,
there will be a state of perpetual war, leading to more terrorism against Americans wherever they may be and a growing reliance on
weapons of mass destruction among smaller nations as they try to ward off the imperial juggernaut. Second, there will be a loss of
democracy and constitutional rights as the presidency fully eclipses Congress and is itself transformed from an "executive branch"
of government into something more like a Pentagonized presidency. Third, an already well-shredded principle of truthfulness will
increasingly be replaced by a system of propaganda, disinformation, and glorification of war, power, and the military legions. Lastly,
there will be bankruptcy, as we pour our economic resources into ever more grandiose military projects and shortchange the education,
health, and safety of our fellow citizens."
The footprint of US empire are what Chalmers Johnson called an "empire of bases." David Vine, the author of
Base Nation, put US empire in context by describing 800 US bases in 80 countries
and US military personnel in more than 170 countries. Bases range from so-called Lily Pad Bases of hundreds of troops to town-sized
bases of tens of thousands of troops and their families. He noted many bases have schools and they do not need to worry about heating
or air conditioning,
unlike schools in
Baltimore where parents bought space heaters to keep children warm and where schools were closed due to lack of heat.
The contrast between Baltimore schools and military base schools is one example of many of the heavy price USians pay for the
military. Vine reported that $150 billion is spent annually to keep US troops on bases abroad and that even a Lily Pad base could
cost $1 billion. More is spent on foreign military bases than on any agency of the federal government, other than the Pentagon and
The Pentagon is not transparent about the number of US foreign bases it manages or their cost. They usually publish a Base Structure
Report but have not done so in several years. The Pentagon only reports 701 bases, but researchers have found many, even significant
bases, not included in their list of bases.
"95% of all foreign military bases in the world are US bases. In addition, [there are] 19 Naval air carriers (and 15 more planned),
each as part of a Carrier Strike Group, composed of roughly 7,500 personnel, and a carrier air wing of 65 to 70 aircraft – each of
which can be considered a floating military base."
The military footprint of the United States shows it is the largest empire in world history. In
our interview with
historian Alfred McCoy , author of In The Shadows of the
American Century , he describes how some of the key characteristics of US empire are secrecy and covert actions. This are
some of the reasons why it is rare to ever hear US empire discussed in the corporate media or by politicians. McCoy told us this
was true for some other empires too, and that it is often not until the empire begins to falter that their existence becomes part
of the political dialogue.
Strategies for Closing US Foreign Military Bases
David Vine described an unprecedented opportunity to close bases abroad, to do so we need to build a bigger movement. We also
need to elevate the national dialogue about US Empire and develop a national consensus to end it.
Vine pointed to Donald Trump's campaign rhetoric about pulling back from US involvement abroad and focusing on the necessities
at home as indicative of the mood of the country. In fact,
recent survey found that "78 percent of Democrats, 64.5 percent of Republicans, and 68.8 percent of independents supported restraining
military action overseas."
McCoy argued that after the globalization of President Barack Obama, which included the Asian Pivot and efforts to pass major
trade agreements, in particular the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP),
created a backlash desire to focus on "America First." Both trade agreements, the TPP and TTIP, failed as a result of a political
shift in the country, in part created by grassroots movements.
McCoy describes Obama as one of three "Grandmasters of the Great Game" (the other two being Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter's
National Security Adviser, and Elihu Root, former Secretary of War and Secretary of State at the beginning of the 20th Century) who
excelled in being strategic on behalf of US empire. In addition to trade agreements and the Asian Pivot, Obama built on the intelligence
apparatus of the George W. Bush era. Even though Obama was a "grandmaster," he did not slow the weakening of US empire. McCoy sees
the inability to account for the unpredictable complexities of US and global political developments as a common weakness of empire
The conference was divided into regions of the world (with the exception of one session on the impact of military bases on the
environment and health). There will be reports and videos published on each section of the conference on the
No Foreign Bases webpage . One common denominator around the world is opposition
to US military bases. According to the Unity Statement of the coalition:
"Many individual national coalitions – for example, Okinawa, Italy, Jeju Island Korea, Diego Garcia, Cyprus, Greece, and Germany
– are demanding closure of bases on their territory. The base that the US has illegally occupied the longest, for over a century,
is Guantánamo Bay, whose existence constitutes an imposition of the empire and a violation of International Law. Since 1959 the government
and people of Cuba have demanded that the government of the US return the Guantánamo territory to Cuba."
One important strategy for success is for US activists to work in cooperation with people around the world who want US military
bases to be closed and for the US military to leave their country. Attendees at the conference had traveled to South Korea, Okinawa
and other places to protest in solidarity with US activists.
Another strategy that many in the conference urged was the need for education about US imperialism and to tie US militarism abroad
with militarized police at home. Similarly, the reality of the US military focusing on black and brown countries abroad highlights
a white supremacy philosophy that infects foreign policy and domestic policy. Members of the No US Foreign Bases coalition also engage
in domestic efforts for racial and environmental justice.
"The Pentagon's impact on the river on whose bank it sits is not simply the diffuse impact of global warming and rising oceans
contributed to by the US military's massive oil consumption. The US military also directly poisons the Potomac River in more ways
than almost anyone would imagine."
The conference attendees decided on some next steps. A national day of action against foreign military bases is being planned
for February 23, the anniversary of the US seizing Guantanamo Bay, Cuba through a "perpetual lease" that began in 1903. Activists
are encouraged to plan local actions. If you plan an event, contact email@example.com
and we'll post it on the events page. The demands will include closing the base and prison in Guantanamo, returning the land
to Cuba and ending the US blockade.
The conference also decided to hold a conference outside of the United States in one of the countries where the US has a foreign
military base within the next year. People from some countries were not allowed to attend the inaugural conference this weekend.
And, the coordinating committee will reach out to other peace and justice groups to select a date and place for a national mass
action against US wars. This will be organized as quickly as possible because the threat of more wars is high.
This is a key moment for the antiwar movement in the US to make itself more visible and to demand the closure of US foreign bases.
In this report on
living in a post-primacy world , even the Pentagon recognizes what many commentators are seeing – the US empire is fading. One
great risk as the empire ends is more wars as the US tries to hang on to global hegemony. We must oppose war and work for the least
damaging end of empire.
Indeed, if the US becomes a cooperative member of the global community, rather than being a dominator, it would be a positive
transition. Imagine how much better it would be for everyone in the world if the US collaborated on addressing the climate crisis
in a serious way, obeyed international law and invested in positive programs to solve the many crises we face at home and abroad.
During the Baltimore conference, World Beyond War sponsored
a billboard nearby that read, "3% of US military spending could end starvation on earth." Imagine what a peace budget could look
like. The US could invest in domestic necessities including rebuilding infrastructure, a cleaner and safer public transportation
system, education, housing and health care. The US could provide aid to other countries to repair the damage it has caused. Members
of the US military could transition into a civilian jobs program that applies their expertise to programs of social uplift.
It is imperative that as the US Empire falls, we organize for a smooth transition to a world that is better for everyone. The
work of the new coalition to end US foreign military bases is a strong start.
All hell is breaking loose in Washington D.C. tonight after a four-page memo detailing
FISA court abuse
was made available to the entire House of Representatives Thursday. The
contents of the memo are so explosive, says Journalist Sara Carter, that it could
lead to the
removal of senior officials in the FBI and the Department of Justice and the end of Robert Mueller's
special counsel investigation.
These sources say the report is "explosive," stating
they would not be surprised if it
leads to the end of Robert Mueller's Special Counsel investigation
into President Trump
and his associates. -
A source close to the matter tells
that "the memo details the Intelligence Committee's oversight work for
the FBI and Justice,
including the controversy over unmasking and FISA surveillance."
educated guess by anyone who's been paying attention for the last year leads to the obvious conclusion
that the report reveals
extensive abuse of power and highly illegal collusion between the
Obama administration, the FBI, the DOJ and the Clinton Campaign against Donald Trump and his team
during and after the 2016 presidential election.
Lawmakers who have seen the memo are calling for its immediate release, while the phrases
"explosive," "shocking," "troubling," and "alarming" have all been used in all sincerity. One
congressman even likened the report's details to KGB activity in Russia. "
It is so alarming
the American people have to see this,
" Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan told
troubling. It is shocking
," North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows said. "
Part of me wishes
that I didn't read it because I don't want to believe that those kinds of things could be happening in
this country that I call home and love so much.
Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., offered the motion on Thursday to make the Republican majority-authored
report available to the members.
The document shows a troubling course of conduct and we need to make the document
available, so the public can see it,
" said a senior government official, who spoke on
condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the document. "
Once the public sees it, we
can hold the people involved accountable in a number of ways
The government official said that after reading the document "
some of these people
should no longer be in the government.
Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz (R) echoed Sara Carter's sentiment
that people might lose their job
if the memo is released:
I believe the consequence of its release will
be major changes in people currently working at the FBI and the Department of Justice
said, referencing DOJ officials
Rod Rosenstein and Bruce Ohr
Meanwhile, Rep. Matt Gatetz (R-FL) said
not only will the release of this memo result in
DOJ firing, but "people will go to jail."
Former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino says "
Take it to the bank, the FBI/FISA docs are
devastating for the Dems
The dossier was used in part as evidence for a warrant to surveil members of the Trump
according to a
published this month
. Former British spy Christopher Steele, who compiled the dossier in 2016,
was hired by embattled research firm Fusion GPS. The firm's founder is Glenn Simpson, a former Wall
Street Journal reporter who has already testified before Congress in relation to the dossier. In
October, The Washington Post revealed for the first time that it was the Hillary Clinton campaign
and the DNC that financed Fusion GPS.
Congressional members are hopeful that the classified information will be declassified and
released to the public.
We probably will get this stuff released by the end of the month
," stated a
congressional member, who asked not to be named. -
Releasing the memo to the public would require a committee vote, a source told
that if approved,
it could be released as long as there are no objections from the White House
within five days
Reactions from the citizenry have been on point:
... ... ....
Even WikiLeaks has joined the fray, offering a reward in Bitcoin to anyone who will share the memo:
Oddly, the Twitter account for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence - @HPSCI - has
been mysteriously suspended.
Of all the recent developments in the ongoing investigation(s), this one is on the cusp of turning
into a genuine happening.
As far as I remember his posts Michael Kenny is "Israel-firster."
He does not care much about the US national security by definition, having different
BTW it's a news for me that AEI launched such neocon stalwarts as "Frederick Kagan, John
Bolton, former vice president Dick Cheney, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Eliot Cohen,
Michael Ledeen, Joshua Muravchik, David Frum, and Danielle Pletka."
It is a sad fact that Trump administration now is infiltrated with neocons, but in reality
how it can be different.
POTUS no longer defines the US foreign policy; MIC does (neocons can probably be better
understood as professional lobbyists of MIC). In a way, POTUS is now by-and-large ceremonial
figure, although Trump at least during the election campaign (and shortly after, say, before
April 2017 and Mueller commission) has had somewhat more isolationist views (his bellicosity
toward Iran and NK notwithstanding.) But he was quickly brought into the fold. Now he acts
like a regular Republican President, say, like Bush III.
The latter just demonstrates the power of MIC.
That's why there a surprising level of continuity of foreign policy between different
My impression is that Israel also is effectively acting as a MIC lobbyist injecting some
money they got via military help into the USA politics directly, or indirectly.
Wolff had taken shots in a recent Newsweek column at the media's "apoplexy" over the 45th
president, specifically calling out Stelter for delivering on his show each week, in the
writer's words, a "pious sermon about Trump's perfidiousness."
"I hope I pronounced that right," Stelter joked for a gawky transition. "Do you feel my
style is wrong or my substance is wrong, trying to fact check the president?"
Wolff, snazzy in a dandy banker's navy suit, pocket square, and trademark thick framed
glasses, didn't flinch. "I mean this with truly no disrespect, but I think you can border on
being quite a ridiculous figure," he told the host. "It's not a good look to repeatedly and
self-righteously defend your own self-interest. The media should not be the story."
The television moment -- an acerbic jab at a media heavyweight on his own show -- was
classic Wolff. But it was also a bit of foreshadowing. Nearly a year later, Michael Wolff
himself is very much the story this week.
...He has also, as The Washington Post's Paul Farhi wrote on Wednesday, been accused by
critics of "pushing the facts as far as they'll go, and sometimes further than they can
...Critics have blasted the writer in the past for filling his column inches with insight
and imaginative recreation rather than actual reporting.
..."His great gift is the appearance of intimate access," an editor told Cottle in 2004. "He
is adroit at making the reader think that he has spent hours and days with his subject, when in
fact he may have spent no time at all." Another former colleague said: "He did get a lot of
things majorly wrong, but he never was just pedestrian . . . You have to admire his
Chicken and tuna sandwich 1 week ago Why would you even mention Jones? He is
in no way a legitimate source for anything, not even the entertainment he has admitted in court
he engages in. That's like referencing Manson for midwifery.
"a portraitist who has mastered the art of the suck-up putdown.""And by
repeatedly reminding the reader of what a dishonest, scheming little s -- he is, he seeks to
inflate his credibility."
Two of the best lines I've read in a while. I haven't read his books but I like what I'm
hearing about this one. Now the real question is not whether or not it is true, it's how will
Trump spin this into a whirlwind he can reap unearned profits from?
the cavalier, 1 week ago
Sounds like the perfect supercilious self absorbed twit to cover a supercilious self
crown scientist, 1 week ago
Based on what I've as yet read in the excerpts published by NewYork Magazine I would
suggest Michael Wolff has introduced our distressed democracy to alt-journalism, the Access
Hollywoodification of presenedtial history. What drips with irony is that the Stupid Orange
Clown essentially fathered this freak of literature.
b everdene 1 week ago
You can see what happened here. Wolff set the stage for gaining Trump's trust (and access)
by publically criticizing Trump critics, but then he turned the tables on Trump and wrote an
unflattering profile. How fun.
Call it Presidential Pornology.
scchan.2009, 1 week ago
So if I understood what Wolff does: if you - assuming you are famous enough - give Wolff a
chance or a hole to write BS about you, he will do it.
The thing about many similar "journalism", the tall tales are not even remotely
unbelievable. It is totally consistent with the character even if it is false. It is playing
the anti-hero of the Daily Mail or NY Post. People enjoy reading gossip, be that be rubbish
on Fox News or BS come out from Wolff's or Stephen Colbert's mouth.
For now, have a good laugh without suspension of belief!
Greatful Deadline , 1 week ago
"hit piece (plural hit pieces) (idiomatic) a published article or post aiming to sway
public opinion by presenting false or biased information in a way that appears objective and
In other words, if it's true (as in "he has tapes"), then it's NOT a "hit piece."
jim380691910 , 1 week ago
I've seen Wolff on television several times and he comes across very badly. He is
pretty full of himself. Trump and Wolff, two unlikeable people, truly deserve each
other. I'm so disgusted with Trump that I'm fine with anyone flushing him down the
mr.natural, 1 week ago
"But Wolff has also been taken to task for blurring the lines between hot take and hatchet job.
"Wolff exploits the human tendency to confuse frankness and cruelty with truth-telling," media
critic Jack Shafer wrote in Slate in 1998. "And by repeatedly reminding the reader of what a
dishonest, scheming little s -- he is, he seeks to inflate his credibility.""
This book will be a must read for all those who need to have their biases reinforced, to be
reminded that they are better than the rest, that anyone not agreeing with them is indeed a
knuckle dragging Troglodyte.
"... A journalist friend recently observed that good journalism leaves you understanding something you never even thought you cared about. This book did the opposite - left me pretty much not caring about something I was really curious about. I found the transcript of Glenn Simpson's testimony at the Senate hearings on the Steele dossier more riveting ..."
"... Wolff had an opportunity to put this disaster in writing -- a writing that any serious observer would want to add to their "reference" library. Wolff failed -- poor editing, overuse of a thesaurus, convoluted sentence structure and frequently leaving the reader wondering if statements made are Wolff's opinions or simply his ideas of what were thoughts of a person or group he has written about. There are some interesting bits in this book but it took work getting through Wolff's poor writing to get to the bits. ..."
"... unless you've been reclusive over the past several weeks, you know about most of the juicy bits. ..."
"... If you're thinking of reading a book, why not try something about a president of accomplishment Lincoln, (there's an entire that lists books about Lincoln)Teddy Roosevelt ( David McCullough's "Morning on Horseback is fantastic and Edmund Morris' trilogy about Roosevelt is not to be missed), Franklin Roosevelt? (Again there's a shelf full of books: I'm partial to Doris Kearns Goodwin's "No Ordinary Time" and Geoffrey C Ward's "Before the Trumpets" and "A First Class Temperament." If you want to read about a shady president try John Farrell's "Richard Nixon: A Life." Nixon is a whole lot more interesting than Trump. ..."
"... Disappointed. Full of innuendo and gossip. Editors should be flogged for all the errors they let by. Also someone needs to tell the author that he doesn't need to use ten dollar words to try and make the book seem credible. ..."
"... After the best parts were revealed in the media, the rest of the book reads as a dry attempt at juicy gossip. ..."
"... I'd like to read a more straight forward plain speaking account with sources to set the record straight. Guess we'll get this from Bannon's testimony quite soon! ..."
To begin with, I was very irritated
by all the editing mistakes that appeared in the Kindle edition. Writers lose some credibility when
their "finished" product is riddled with grammatical errors. This book is just not well-written. At
first the account was galvanizing, especially seeing in print one of Trump's speeches--which I
would assign a D-minus at best. Incoherent, highly repetitive writing (or in this case Trump's
speaking) indicates incoherent thinking; the president does not argue, he asserts. He has anecdotes
but no evidence. Facts are clearly anathema to him; logic escapes him. But all this is really no
surprise because he has shown himself over and over to be a vain, emotionally needy idiot, who is a
compulsive liar being propped up by immoral toadies (in his staff and in congress). That said,
after the first 90 or so pages, I became really bored. And why not? Trump (the subject of the book,
after all) has nothing to say. He has no plans to solve the country's many problems and seems
dangerously susceptible to repeating what the last person he talked to said.
I pre-ordered this book primarily
because Trump was opposed vehemently to its publication. (The same reason, years ago, that I saw
"The Last Temptation of Christ." Local religious extremists were picketing the theater.)
I cannot say that reading the book was enjoyable. It reflects the troubling times we are in now and
the likelihood of difficult times ahead. And I am asked to trust this author regarding the details.
It would be easier for me if Wolff had been a journalist with the discipline imposed by a news
editor. As it is, the quotes and attributions stand as gossip (though I am inclined to believe most
or all of them, since they appear to fit logically with information already public).
The broad brush (e.g., "All of the senior staff...") may be true, but could a careful investigator
not find a true believer among them? I am certain that I could not work in this administration, but
there must be one who is as devoted to Trump as I have been to other elected officials for whom I
Did I learn anything? Some details, perhaps, but not the big picture. I had known that this
president is a dangerously ignorant narcissist from his public statements. Is his public persona (a
childish, insecure man who holds grudges, lashes out at real or perceived opposition, and evidences
no maturity) likely to be similar to his behavior in the White House? It seems probable.
This is a poorly sourced, hearsay
laden book that would get ripped to shreds and given a C- if presented as a final project in any
top 500 journalism graduate school in the country. However, I very much doubt the author intended
it to adhere to The Rulebook of Journalistic Ethics and Integrity. In short, it revels in being a
salacious story about gossip and innuendo -- fitting quite well in our age of social media, aggregated
and questionable sources, and our own attention span lacking president. In effect, it reads like an
extremely long, multi-part post in Reddit's /r/bestof section.
Regarding the "truthiness" and authenticity of the facts that lies within: yeah, I generally
believe most of it is probably true. There is not much secrecy in the bumbling ineptitude of the
Trump administration and the in-fighting that is hidden in plain sight. Rake stepping seems a
constant favorite past time of our Dear Leader and his cohorts. Bear in mind, 'Fire and Fury' seems
clearly on the side of Bannon, so I would certainly take any of his character
opinions -- particularly, of those he clearly despises (Jarvanka) -- with a boulder sized grain of salt.
Also, there are some factual errors that are troubling to say the least. For example, Wolff
suggests that Trump's father was definitely a member of the KKK. From my cursory research on the
topic, this claim seems circumstantial at best. There are also errors in poll numbers sprinkled
throughout the text.
Should you read it? Perhaps, but don't expect anything terribly enlightening. If you're like me: a
mainstream liberal who reads the failing New York Times and the Bezos Washington Post, I doubt any
of this will be much of a surprise to you. What the book mainly does is sum up the top 50 forehead
slapping headlines of this disastrous presidency in the past year, so if you've been paying
attention, you've already read a version of this. I suppose it is useful to have a story arc within
a single book that covers the first year of the Trump presidency. Had it been better written,
properly sourced, and factually correct, it might have really been something.
This work to me seemed like more than
a timeline of events covering the period within which Wolff had been given West Wing access. That
the timeline was extruded with often sourceless hearsay makes it a bedfellow with a 14 year old's
diary. I learned little that was new, except for the seedier alleged "conversations" with the major
and minor players. Reading it made me depressed with the realization that the majority party and
its henchmen in DC right now wouldn't know the truth or respect it if it pushed them down the
I am mad that I rushed to buy this
book because of the hype and my intense dislike of Trump.
A journalist friend recently observed
that good journalism leaves you understanding something you never even thought you cared about.
This book did the opposite - left me pretty much not caring about something I was really curious
about. I found the transcript of Glenn Simpson's testimony at the Senate hearings on the Steele
dossier more riveting
Do yourselves and favor and read
that, or read the March 2017 New Yorker piece on Robert Mercer, or any of the many excellent pieces
on Trump and his administration in the New York Times or Washington Post. I gave the book 3 stars
anyway because - well - it is a only book about the dysfunctional Trump White House.
The history of Trump's first year in
office has been followed by most Americans who have any level of interest in politics. Wolff had an
opportunity to put this disaster in writing -- a writing that any serious observer would want to add
to their "reference" library. Wolff failed -- poor editing, overuse of a thesaurus, convoluted
sentence structure and frequently leaving the reader wondering if statements made are Wolff's
opinions or simply his ideas of what were thoughts of a person or group he has written about. There
are some interesting bits in this book but it took work getting through Wolff's poor writing to get
to the bits.
This book is very readable though unless you've been reclusive over the past several weeks, you
know about most of the juicy bits.
On Sunday, the historian Niall Ferguson, was the interviewee in the "By the Book" feature in the
New York Times Book Review. He was asked the standard question for this interview: "If you could
require the American president to read one book, what would it be? And the prime minister? His
answer was priceless: "I agree with you that it would be wonderful if both Mr. Trump and Mrs May
read one book. I don't much mind which one it is."
If you're thinking of reading a book,
why not try something about a president of accomplishment Lincoln, (there's an entire that lists
books about Lincoln)Teddy Roosevelt ( David McCullough's "Morning on Horseback is fantastic and
Edmund Morris' trilogy about Roosevelt is not to be missed), Franklin Roosevelt? (Again there's a
shelf full of books: I'm partial to Doris Kearns Goodwin's "No Ordinary Time" and Geoffrey C Ward's
"Before the Trumpets" and "A First Class Temperament." If you want to read about a shady president
try John Farrell's "Richard Nixon: A Life." Nixon is a whole lot more interesting than Trump.
You already know more about Trump
than he knows or realizes about himself. Skip this and read about a real president.
Disappointed. Full of innuendo and
gossip. Editors should be flogged for all the errors they let by. Also someone needs to tell the
author that he doesn't need to use ten dollar words to try and make the book seem credible.
I teetered between 2 and 3 stars,
which means I'm somewhere between "don't like the book" and "it's okay. Here's why. The book was
poorly written. Mechanically, there were way too many breaks (commas everywhere) throughout the
flow of reading. Combine this with there were too many sophisticated words throughout the whole
book, and there were typos and grammatical errors along with that. All these things distracted my
attention away from what Mr. Wolff was trying to convey. I ultimately lose interest thus stopped
reading the book.
To Mr. Wolff: If a reader is spending more time looking up the meaning of words or is constantly
re-orientating because there are so many parenthetical notations, they will probably lose interest.
I'm sure the material that surrounds the disaster our country is in right now is quite complicated.
The task of explaining all this should not involve additional layers of confusion and arcane
Illuminating reading but a bit pompously worded for a wide audience
I learnt a lot about the nuttiness
with the staff and the family, but I was glad I got the Kindle edition to look up some fairly
obscure wording with the built in dictionary. I'd like to read a more straight forward plain
speaking account with sources to set the record straight. Guess we'll get this from Bannon's
testimony quite soon!
Fusion GPS, which was behind the discredited Trump-Russia dossier authored by ex-British spy Christopher Steele, also set up and
participated in the now infamous meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, reports say.
played by the Democrat-funded opposition firm and the Obama administration itself should be the focus of investigations of Russia's
role in the 2016 elections, conservative critics such as Mark Levin say.
Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson abruptly canceled his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, scheduled
for July 19, after the firm was linked to the Trump Jr.-Veselnitskaya meeting.
Fusion GPS associate Rob Goldstone arranged the June 2016 meeting which included Trump Jr., former Trump campaign manager Paul
Manafort, Jared Kushner, Veselnitskaya and Fusion GPS associate Rinat Akhmetshin.
Manafort's phone was tapped by former Attorney General Loretta Lynch during the meeting, according to a tweet by former Massachusetts
Trump campaign official James Brower and first reported by independent journalist and author Jack Posobiec.
Reports also noted that Veselnitskaya was let into the United States under "extraordinary circumstances" by President Barack Obama's
Justice Department, headed by Lynch.
"If Brower's tweet is proven correct and Paul Manafort's phone was being tapped during the meeting – it means Loretta Lynch's
surveillance of Manafort, an American, was done without a FISA warrant," Zero Hedge noted in a July 14 report.
Zero Hedge added: "This also calls into question the June 27, 2016 'tarmac' meeting between Lynch and Bill Clinton, which would
have come after the meeting at Trump Tower."
Drawing on sources including the New York Times and Washington Post, radio host Mark Levin (via Breitbart) described the case
against the Obama administration based on what is already publicly known:
June 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA)
to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.
July: Russia joke. WikiLeaks releases emails from the Democratic National Committee that show an effort to prevent Sen. Bernie
Sanders from winning the presidential nomination. In a press conference, Donald Trump refers to Hillary Clinton's own missing
emails, joking: 'Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.' That remark becomes
the basis for accusations by Clinton and the media that Trump invited further hacking.
October: Podesta emails. In October, WikiLeaks releases the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, rolling out batches
every day until the election, creating new mini-scandals. The Clinton campaign blames Trump and the Russians.
October: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer
server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found – but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national
security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes.
The Obama administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the
federal intelligence services.
"... Take Nadia Schadlow, for instance. Never heard of her? Unless you've been navigating the rice paddies of Washington's post-9/11 national security enterprise for the last several years, there's no reason you would have. But she has been at the National Security Council since last winter, and is set to replace Dina Powell as deputy national security advisor , at the right hand of NSC chief H.R. McMaster. She was also the lead on the White House National Security Strategy , released last month. ..."
"... This was Schadlow's first position in government. Her résumé includes doctoral degrees from Johns Hopkins Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) under the tutelage of vocal Never Trumper and Iraq war promoter Eliot Cohen, who runs the largely neoconservative Strategic Studies program there, and whose last book, The Big Stick: The Limits of Soft Power, argued that the U.S., backed by a more robust military, must be the "guardian of a stable world order." ..."
"... What is significant about Schadlow's role in the White House -- she's reportedly a "trusted confidant" of General McMaster, who was lionized in the New Yorker for his T.E. Lawrence approach to counterinsurgency in Tal Afar in 2006 -- is not her bibliography, but her vast connections to Washington's foreign policy and national security clique, especially its neoconservative elite. If one were using the metaphor of chain migration, she would have plenty of friends on either side of the Potomac to tap for high-level placement, consulting, and advice. ..."
"... The foundation has a rich history cleaved to neoconservative pioneers such as Irving Kristol, father of Bill, who in his own memoirs credits the philanthropic institution and its then-director Randall Richardson (heir to the Vicks fortune) with helping him jumpstart the Public Interest, known as the premier neoconservative organ, a label Irving fully embraced . The foundation also served as a key backer of Commentary magazine after Norman Podhoretz took the helm in 1960. ..."
"... Meanwhile, since 1998, the foundation has given over $10 million to the American Enterprise Institute (AEI was built, literally, on Smith Richardson money), which fielded many of the Iraq war architects and promoters, including Frederick Kagan, John Bolton, former vice president Dick Cheney, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Eliot Cohen, Michael Ledeen, Joshua Muravchik, David Frum, and Danielle Pletka. ..."
"... No surprise, then, that the worldview of people like Nadia Schadlow is no different from the wider Washington policy orbit that has enjoyed a pipeline of patronage from her former employer. She is not only affiliated with the Foreign Policy Institute, but is a full member of the Council on Foreign Relations. When she was named to the NSC staff in March 2017, along with "Kremlinologist" and former Eurasian Foundation strategist Fiona Hill, national security establishment courtier Thomas Ricks called them both "well-educated, skeptical, and informed. In other words, the opposite of the president they serve." ..."
"... That is why there seemed to be such relief upon the recent release of the Trump administration's National Security Strategy, with Washington scribblers lauding it as " well within the bipartisan mainstream of American foreign policy " and "a well crafted document that should reassure allies and partners." ..."
"... What it actually does is to reinforce Trump's turn towards a harder line against Iran, as evidenced in McMaster's recent speeches . Nikki Haley, ambassador to the UN, is threatening fellow members on the Security Council , and the Trump administration is seen as taking sides with Israel in the fragile Middle East peace process (or what's left if it). Meanwhile, the White House has just given a green light to arming Ukraine against Russia. ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Kelley Beaucar Vlahos is executive editor of ..."
"... Follow her on Twitter @Vlahos_at_TAC. ..."
"... It turns to new parties, this endless Democrat/Republican cycle is a joke. Surely there are no more people out there that can rationally argue for the two party state as being a good setup for America. ..."
"... There is a term soldiers sometimes use to characterize those who have never fought, will never fight, but are nevertheless positive that fighting is the answer to their dissatisfactions. Chickenhawks. ..."
"... The Neocons are a cancer upon the American Body Politik. When Trump was elected I and many others were hopeful that this cancer could be effectively treated, but it could not for the cancer has spread to all vital organs and is terminal and our nation will die because of it. ..."
"... "Neocons?" Actually what they are is Neocoms or Neocommunists. World domination is the name of their game. ..."
"... The folks who thought President Trump would have a less belligerent foreign policy than Sec. Clinton would have deserve as much intellectual sympathy as those who thought that he would lower premiums and increase coverage of ACA. ..."
Over the last year critics have warned of the returning neoconservative influence on the
executive branch's national security apparatus, each day a little less confident that President
Donald Trump will keep to the seeming anti-interventionist impulses he demonstrated during the
News flash: We're already there.
Of course the most garish of the pro-war set -- Sebastian Gorka, K.T. McFarland, John Bolton
-- are easy to identify in or on the periphery of Trump's orbit (in Gorka's case, he was cast
out of the White House, only to
flak away in any media outlet that will pay attention). Meanwhile, elite neoconservative
Bill Kristol and
Max Boot have become darlings of the "Never Trump" cadre, finding new life as conservative
tokens on "Resistance" media like MSNBC.
What has been less obvious, but has become much clearer in these last few months, is that
other neoconservatives are quietly filling the vacuum left by Obama's cadre of liberal
interventionists. Many of them had taken a pass on "Never Trumping" publicly, and are now
popping up at the elbows of top cabinet officials.
Take Nadia Schadlow, for instance. Never heard of her? Unless you've been navigating the
rice paddies of Washington's post-9/11 national security enterprise for the last several years,
there's no reason you would have. But she has been at the National Security Council since last
winter, and is set to replace Dina
Powell as deputy national security advisor , at the right hand of NSC chief H.R. McMaster.
She was also the lead on the White House National Security
Strategy , released last month.
This was Schadlow's first position in government. Her résumé includes
doctoral degrees from Johns Hopkins Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) under
the tutelage of vocal Never Trumper and Iraq war promoter Eliot Cohen, who runs the largely
neoconservative Strategic Studies program
there, and whose last book, The Big Stick: The Limits of Soft Power, argued that the U.S., backed by a more
robust military, must be the "guardian of a stable world order." In that vein, Schadlow
published a book last year, War and the Art of
Governance , that extols the virtues of long-term military intervention for "achieving
sustainable political outcomes," requiring "the consolidation of combat gains through the
establishment of stable environments." Schadlow has repeated this for
years as a mantra for reordering military strategy in the wake of the disastrous wars she
and her contemporaries helped sustain, in Iraq, Libya, and elsewhere. Call it nation-building
by another name.
In a 2012 Weekly Standardcommentary , she
criticized the Obama administration for saying "the tide of war is receding," and exclaimed
"the line of thinking that now pervades the Pentagon avoids recognizing that combat and the
restoration of political order go hand and hand." While she gives a nod to "civil-military
operational planning and execution," she never utters the words "State Department." No surprise
there, either, since her neocon friends were responsible for the long slide of Foggy Bottom's
resources and influence in favor of military leadership, beginning with the "political
reconciliation" and reconstruction of Iraq, and then Afghanistan.
What is significant about Schadlow's role in the White House -- she's reportedly a
"trusted confidant" of General McMaster, who was lionized in the
New Yorker for his T.E. Lawrence approach to counterinsurgency in Tal Afar in 2006 -- is
not her bibliography, but her vast connections to Washington's foreign policy and national
security clique, especially its neoconservative elite. If one were using the metaphor of chain
migration, she would have plenty of friends on either side of the Potomac to tap for high-level
placement, consulting, and advice.
Why? As recent senior program director for the expansive, multi-million dollar International
Security and Foreign Policy Program under the Smith Richardson
Foundation , she has helped to fund and facilitate countless authors, conferences, think
tanks, and university programs since 9/11, most of which hew to the doctrine of sustained
military intervention towards the goal of U.S. global power and influence. That includes
preemptive war strategy, counterinsurgency, democracy promotion, and the continued push for
bigger military budgets and solutions to regional conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine. If
there was a prominent player in the U.S. security community over the last 20 years, you can bet
Schadlow and Smith Richardson were more often than not connected to him.
But it goes back so much further than that. The foundation has a rich history cleaved to
neoconservative pioneers such as Irving Kristol, father of Bill, who in his own memoirs credits
the philanthropic institution and its then-director Randall Richardson (heir to the Vicks fortune) with helping him
jumpstart the Public Interest, known as the premier neoconservative organ,
a label Irving fully embraced . The foundation also served as a key backer of
Commentary magazine after Norman Podhoretz took the helm in 1960.
It is in international affairs that Smith Richardson has made some of its biggest impacts,
anti-communist Reagan era and into the Middle East conflicts under Presidents Clinton,
Bushes, Obama, and Trump. To say the foundation was involved at every level in the lobbying for
and crafting of the so-called global war on terror after 9/11 would be an understatement.
Example: Former Smith Richardson research director Devon Gaffney Cross became a director of the
Project for a New American Century, the intellectual vehicle that drove the removal of Saddam
Hussein and shaped George W. Bush's foreign policy. In 2000, Cross was listed as one of the
participants in PNAC's seminal treatise,
"Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century." The rest
of the contributors are a who's who of Washington's war theocracy, most of whom have benefitted
from Smith Richardson support.
Meanwhile, since 1998, the foundation has given over $10 million to the American Enterprise
Institute (AEI was built,
literally, on Smith Richardson money), which fielded many of the Iraq war architects and
promoters, including Frederick Kagan, John Bolton, former vice president Dick Cheney, Richard
Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Eliot Cohen, Michael Ledeen, Joshua Muravchik, David Frum, and Danielle
Just as telling is Smith Richardson's continued backing of the Institute for the Study of War , headed by Kimberly
Kagan, wife of Frederick, with whom she was a "de facto advisor"
to General Petraeus for a year as he set about his then-vaunted COIN strategy in
Afghanistan. ISW, chaired by retired General Jack Keane, known as the " godfather
of the surge ," was founded in part by the generosity of Smith Richardson in 2007. It not
only promoted more troops, but an extended occupation in Afghanistan, regime change in
Syria , and ongoing hostilities with Iran. No surprise, then, that ISW has numerous
intertwining relationships with the military and the defense industry. It received $895,000 for
program work from Smith Richardson between 2014 and 2016 alone.
According to Philip Rojc of Inside Philanthropy, other recipients of Smith Richardson grants since 1998
include the the Hudson Institute ($6,032,230), the Jamestown Institute ($5,779,475), the Hoover
Institution ($3,645,314), and the Center for a New American Security ($1,595,000). Totals have
been adjusted to include 2016 numbers.
The last one -- CNAS -- is more indicative of Smith Richardson's broader strategy, in that
it doesn't only give to hardline neoconservative outfits like, say, the Foundation
for the Defense of Democracies (which has received no less than $500,000 since 2014 and
says it helped write Trump's new Iran policy ). On the contrary, Smith Richardson has been
a major patron of the conventional establishment, too, even largely Democratic think tanks like
CNAS, Brookings Institute, and the Carnegie Endowment -- all of which invariably host scholars
and programs that promote America's military-driven global influence, counterinsurgency
doctrine (CNAS was a
virtual hothouse for COIN early in Obama's presidency), and democracy
promotion in places like Russia and Ukraine, a major yet failed project of humanitarian
interventionists in the Obama administration.
No surprise, then, that the worldview of people like Nadia Schadlow is no different from the
wider Washington policy orbit that has enjoyed a pipeline of patronage from her former
employer. She is not only affiliated with the Foreign Policy Institute, but is a full member of
the Council on Foreign Relations. When she was named to the NSC staff in March 2017, along with
"Kremlinologist" and former Eurasian Foundation strategist
Fiona Hill, national security establishment courtier Thomas Ricks called them
both "well-educated, skeptical, and informed. In other words, the opposite of the president
You know the "right" kind of operator has arrived in the White House when establishment
commentariat like Ricks and
Josh Rogin get all gushy about their calming, "soft power" influence over Trump, which
sounds like a lot of bunk when you consider their well-documented points of view.
Simply put, after years of cross-pollination brought on by a slush fund of wealthy private
donors like Smith Richardson and an even more eager defense industry, neoconservative views are
no longer distinguishable from the sanctioned goals of the Washington policy establishment.
They are all working, really, as proper stewards of the military-industrial complex, which is
essential for advancing their (sometimes competing) visions of world power politics and
American exceptionalism. There is little room for realism and restraint, as voiced by this
magazine and other critics.
Call it the new "adults in the room," if you want, or peg it as the neoconservative
influence that it is. Strikingly, Dan Drezner writes that the NSS is
"Straussian" in that its "subtext matters at least as much as the text." The preeminent
scholar Leo Strauss is considered one of the key founders of the neoconservative movement, a
fact the Washington Post columnist should be well aware of. Like most of the elites
here in Washington, however, Drezner is trying to have it both ways -- calling it neocon
without have the guts to say it outright.
Kelley Beaucar Vlahos is executive editor of The American Conservative. Follow
her on Twitter @Vlahos_at_TAC.
It is a sad state of affairs when the American people are literally dependent on sane people
in Beijing, Moscow, Ankara, Tehran, and other capitals to keep a completely out of control
neo-con foreign and defense policy establishment from plunging our people on the world into
yet more pointless warfare.
Mainstream media seems "All Neocon." A star studded group of rationalizers. We are being
gently taught to hate what the neocons hate. South Pacific had the recipe. Not for the
reasons intended. Au contraire.
So. Well-heeled foreign interests and interventionists are buying nosebagger politicians and
shaping our foreign policy under Trump, just like they did under Obama, Bush II, and Clinton.
Why do we bother having elections if neocon crap is the only item on the menu?
It's incredible. No matter how often they lie and fail, no matter how many colossally
expensive disasters they cause, someone keeps letting the filth back in. They're as hardy and
resilient as cockroaches, and we need to start dealing with them as such.
Trump 'needs a war' to be re-elected. He knows this and who else to better start one than the
What is terrifying is that these same people and their ancestors actually attempted to
convince Reagan that the US could win a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Reagan wisely
chose 'Trust but Verify' over their strongest objections. Trump is a far cry from a
The generations long war to destroy the State Department appears to have completely
obscured the greatest US victory of last century. The defeat of the Soviet Union with little
more than skirmishes.
The gloved fist approach, while frustrating to the military, was a massive success.
Military solutions fail badly. One look at the history of military governments confirms their
abysmal record. Yet, we have an administration preparing for war. Not at all certain, the
people will follow.
Good article. Trump is easily distracted from his (often right) gut feelings on policy
(China, NATO, etc.) by titles: military rank, highbrow think tanks, Wall St. moguls, and
power elites from the Council on Foreign Relations. With no moral compass or basic
understanding of the Constitution or the ways Washington works, he is hapless and his agenda
I wondered how far down I'd have to go down in the article before Ukraine and Putin popped
up! It's the usual "let Putin win in Ukraine" propaganda. What astonishes me as a European is
why people who call themselves "conservatives", whom you would naturally expect to be
patriotic, often indeed excessively so, are frantically trying to persuade their fellow
citizens to submit to a foreign power inflicting a humiliating defeat on their country,
possibly the most humiliating that it has ever suffered in its history. I couldn't imagine
Europeans behaving like that.
Interesting article with good info. I believe "the Trump White House" is just continuing the
policies of the past occupants of "The House of Blood."
[More info at link below]
August 9, 2016
The House of Blood
Its color is white but it is red with blood
The residents' name should really be mud
Instead they get fancy honors and titles
Wars for them is a musical recital
The hum of their drones flying through the air
Are killing children without due care
This is hellishly called "collateral damage"
These are the words of the resident savage
Immaculately dressed in a business suit
An eloquent speaker is this callous brute
Surrounded by sycophants and flunkeys too
Evil is what these people plan and do
War and more war is their hellish aim
Are they all devils and bloody insane?
Countries are reduced to smoking rubble
These well-dressed maniacs are big trouble
People are fleeing and dying too
From the hell produced by this satanic crew
Refugees are drowning in deadly waters
Trying to escape the endless slaughters
These helpless victims once had homes
Now they have nothing, and just roam
Helpless, homeless people on the move
With nothing really left to improve
The perpetrators call their crimes "bringing democracy"
Surely creating hell on earth is really hypocrisy
But when criminals rule there is no justice
And law and order is totally corrupted
The war criminals slogan is "responsibility to protect"
They tell that to the people whose countries they wrecked
Those still alive can hear the bombs explode and thud
A hellish "courtesy" from the House of Blood
It turns to new parties, this endless Democrat/Republican cycle is a joke. Surely
there are no more people out there that can rationally argue for the two party state as being
a good setup for America.
The Neocons are a cancer upon the American Body Politik. When Trump was elected I and
many others were hopeful that this cancer could be effectively treated, but it could not for
the cancer has spread to all vital organs and is terminal and our nation will die because of
Trump won with a coalition of conservative and populist support. The two partners agree on
judges, but not too much else. For those of the latter persuasion, you at least have a seat
at the table in the current administration (thank you, Lord, for Stephen Miller!) Populists
need to run candidates at all levels and start to groom future leaders. Somebody with Rand
Paul's FP views and Tom Cotton's immigration views would be perfect.
The folks who thought President Trump would have a less belligerent foreign policy than
Sec. Clinton would have deserve as much intellectual sympathy as those who thought that he
would lower premiums and increase coverage of ACA.
Fourteen months ago, in the
first flush of power, Steve Bannon gave
to Michael Wolff -- beginning a relationship that would prove his undoing -- in which he boasted about
his plan to realign our politics. His nationalist-populist movement, he argued, would transform the G.O.P. into
something truly new: a right-wing worker's party that spent freely, "jacked up" infrastructure all over the country,
and won "60 percent of the white vote" and "40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote" on its way to a 50-year
"We're just going to throw it
up against the wall and see if it sticks," Bannon said. "It will be as exciting as the 1930s."
As exciting as the 1930s
is not a line you hear every day, but rather than an alt-right dog whistle, what I heard in Bannon's formulation was
the idea that in the Trump era, as in the crisis years that gave us both F.D.R. and Hitler, everything might be up
for grabs: not just electoral coalitions, but the nature and destiny of the liberal order. Which would be a
terrifying prospect but also an exciting one, since it would mean that the long "end of history" that followed the
Cold War had irrevocably ended, and that it was time to imagine radical revisions to a stagnant-seeming liberal West.
Flash forward a year and a
couple months, though, and Bannon's vision seems pretty much dead: its rumpled leader sacked and ritually denounced,
its bold populism subsumed into the same old, same old Republican agenda. Trump remains temperamentally authoritarian
and personally vile, but the idea of Trump_vs_deep_state as an ideological revolution, whether akin to Roosevelt's or
Mussolini's, has mostly evaporated.
2 days ago
No. There isn't *life* after liberalism; just a bunch of dead men (GOP) wondering the
earth with black hooded robes and scythes.
2 days ago
It does not matter what we call these philosophies, whether Liberalism, Capitalism,
Libertarianism etc. Good, ethical moral, wise,...
2 days ago
This suffers from the journalist disease-- "ism-ism": castigating "liberalism" without
defining it." the crisis years that gave us both F.D...
What was behind the false missile attack alarm in Hawaii yesterday. Poynter
has some context:
One of the big stories in the Honolulu
Star-Advertiser Saturday morning was that military "brass" updated island officials on
how the military would respond to a nuclear attack from North Korea . Military authorities
warned there was a "real" threat.
At 8:07 a.m. Saturday, Hawaiian residents saw a terrifying alert message on their
It took 38 minutes to correct the "mistake". A missile from North Korea would take 32-35
minutes from launch to impact in Hawaii.
But of interest is the newspaper report hyping the "threat" followed by the false alarm.
Coincidence? And the "
leaking " of the Draft Nuclear Posture Review this week, in which the military demands
hundreds of new "small" nuclear weapons to fight North Korea and Russia, is also just a
coincidence? Or is all of this part of a public relation campaign designed to increase the
acceptance of new nuclear weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare? A preparation for war on North
Korea? (Related: Deconstructing the North
Korean 'Threat' and Identifying America's Strategic Alternatives
What was behind the false missile attack alarm in Hawaii yesterday. Poynter has
One of the big stories in the Honolulu
Star-Advertiser Saturday morning was that military "brass" updated island officials on
how the military would respond to a nuclear attack from North Korea . Military authorities
warned there was a "real" threat.
At 8:07 a.m. Saturday, Hawaiian residents saw a terrifying alert message on their
It took 38 minutes to correct the "mistake". A missile from North Korea would take
32-35 minutes from launch to impact in Hawaii.
But of interest is the newspaper report hyping the "threat" followed by the false
alarm. Coincidence? And the "
leaking " of the Draft Nuclear Posture Review this week, in which the military demands
hundreds of new "small" nuclear weapons to fight North Korea and Russia, is also just a
coincidence? Or is all of this part of a public relation campaign designed to increase the
acceptance of new nuclear weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare? A preparation for war on
North Korea? (Related: Deconstructing the North
Korean 'Threat' and Identifying America's Strategic Alternatives (pdf))
Scott Creighton has been working up collateral to his theory that the Hawaii false alert was
part of a test to sell the Aegis radar system to Japan. Aegis controls the alert system in
Hawaii. The sales contract is $2 billion. Japanese and Pentagon officials were in the area
last Thursday as part of an ongoing demonstration of the system. This is his written post (he
has a later post in a 20-minute video for those who prefer):
So, while it could be a false flag test of some kind, and while it could be tied to the
talks between the two Koreas, I can see it could just as easily be corrupt MIC business as
usual. It seems unlikely this alert was sent in error. But could it have been sent so the
Japanese could see the warning system in action? And US officials reason, well, it's only
Korea and Hawaii's closest, so we have a plausible scenario and neither area has any clout to
complain? And that's as far as their thinking needed to go, because at that point it all
looks perfectly explainable?
Re: Hawaii and nukes. This behavior is to be expected when generals are placed in charge of
foreign affairs because generals are: > ignorant of anything besides warfare. > taught
to believe that they are always right and their detractors are always wrong. >of the
belief that only wars, properly conduced with maximum force, solve problems.
A couple of President Harry Truman quotes: "It's the fellows who go to West Point and are
trained to think they're gods in uniform that I plan to take apart". . ."I didn't fire him
[General MacArthur] because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not
against the law for generals. If it was, half to three quarters of them would be in
The Pentagon apparently will investigate the "leaked amateur non-professional" video of the
truck driver assault, not the assault itself, and the people connected with the video will be
punished, not the shooter. Memories of Chelsea Manning and the video of the
helicopter-shooting of the Iraqi Journalists, resulting in Manning's court-martial and
Military investigating shooting in newly leaked Afghan combat video
U.S. commanders have launched an investigation into video footage that appears to show
an American service member firing into the cab of a civilian truck as the two vehicles pass
on a road in Afghanistan, an action that could have violated the military's rules of
engagement and may hamper the alliance with the Afghan government. The shooting briefly
appears during a gritty montage of combat footage allegedly recorded by U.S. troops
battling the Islamic State's Afghan affiliate. An anonymous user recently uploaded the
video to YouTube under the title "Happy Few Ordnance Symphony," then quickly removed it.
"The amateur video posted on a public website gives us serious concern," the U.S. Central
Command told POLITICO in a statement. "The video in question is not official, not
authorized and does not represent the professionalism of the service members of U.S.
Central Command. "We are conducting an investigation into this video, and will take
appropriate actions as a result of this investigation," it added. . .
The best treat today is to listen to all those that experienced yesterday's 'nuclear
Many of us did not receive a missile attack message at all. This was not due to lack of
cell phone reception. Their phones worked, but they were not alerted. They also use the
same provider. Then, alert messages were different. Some said that the ballistic missile
threat would expire at 6pm. Right.
Here are my own experiences. You be the judge:
Driving towards Pahoa and reaching the High School intersection, I saw cops coming from
the Kalapana direction with lights and sirens on. They stopped at every pulled over vehicle
to talk to the driver. Then they turned into Pahoa road and I also pulled to the side of
the road, thinking whom they are after this time.
I had just turned down the radio, where HPR had started the news. That was at 8:01
The cop told me (both of his windows were rolled down): "The guy in North Korea has
fired three missiles at us. You should go home and stay with your family." He drove off to
Paul's gas station to talk to other drivers. His co-cop did the same at the propane
My first thought was "That's bullshit." Cops driving around talking to folks
individually while the ICBM's are homing in. It would take those things 20 minutes to hit
Fuck that shit, I am going to have breakfast as intended. Should that be true, I had at
least a last break fast.
At the store the news had already created panic among those who are easily manipulated.
The hysteria was quite impressive and my reassuring them that things are okay went in the
one ear and out the other.
Mind you that I know these people for years and I am well known for being level
I get my breakfast and sit outside. A few other guys are rolling in. Then, at 8:07 AM,
the emergency alert appears on our phones. Those who knew, were all filled in by the cops
BEFORE the alert.
The alert caused the store to close. I did my best to calm people down. Explaining to
them that they should listen to their body, instead to anything the government says. George
Carlin's made that clear a long time ago.
But people are now so disconnected from the 'Here and Now' have been so propagandized
and brainwashed, that they are incapable to keep cool and THINK.
IF that would have been the real McCoy, we would have had twenty minutes left from the
time the cops 'informed' people.
Then, when it became apparent that it was bullshit, the cops drove around and appeared
to be taking license plates of those who did not panic, but have breakfast instead.
Around 8:30 AM, Tulsi Gabbard's tweets had made it around enough for people to calm down
The alert cancellation came at 8:45 AM.
Here are some questions.
Who will be the first to become aware of a ballistic missile taking off?
Whom would they inform about that?
Why were cops driving around and telling people personally about the impending
Flight time is approximately 20 minutes, which means that there were only ten minutes
left from the emergency alert counted from when I was told.
Likely less than ten minutes from 8:07 AM down to impact.
The excuses and explanations that followed made it even more clear that this was an
intentionally triggered false alarm.
That in turn is the dictionary definition of a TERROR ATTACK. To create fear, to
terrorize the population. This was not Kim Jong UN terrorizing Hawai'i, this was the US
regime creating a false flag Emergency Alert to terrorize the Hawai'ian people.
Who would be the first to be informed about an actually and factually happening
The so called "Commander in Chief"?
Or Bill Maher?
Hopefully, of the flood of people having inundated the islands - especially the Big
Island - most will go back where they came from. Ask anybody that lives here, or was born
here's what actually happened to cause the false alarm quote Emergency Management Agency
Administrator Vern Miyagi said that the employee who made the mistake felt terrible for
triggering the alarm.
Miyagi apologized for the "trouble" and "heartbreak" caused by alert. "I accept the
responsibility for this," he said. "This is my team. We made a mistake."
But Miyagi also used the opportunity to highlight the fact that if the missile threat
were real, Hawaii residents would only have 12 to 15 minutes to react and find shelter.
"I regret what happened this morning," Miyagi said. "But it brings us up to speed again
about what to expect and what to do."
Miyagi explained that the mistake happened during a drill that occurred around a shift
change at the agency. He said an employee, was using a computer program as part of the
drill, and clicked on the wrong button, which sent out the mass alert.
"It's human error," Miyagi said. "There is a screen that says, 'Are you sure you want to
According to Miyagi, the employee clicked through the warning prompt, which resulted in
thousands of residents receiving an alert that a missile was headed toward the islands.
It's unclear how many people actually received the warning.
Miyagi said he was uncertain why some emergency sirens around the state also went
Ige said that testing of the alert system will be suspended for now. He also said that
two people will now have to approve an alert before it goes public.
The testing on Saturday was part of Hawaii's efforts to upgrade its alert system to
provide earlier warning to residents in case of a missile attack.
Ige and Miyagi acknowledged that the state's emergency agency did not have a process in
place to cancel a false warning. Furthermore, the agency didn't realize until several
minutes later that it had accidentally sent out the warning to the public, Miyagi said.
"We didn't have a message scripted that said this is a false alarm," Ige said. "We were
not prepared for that."
"So we have built that now," he added.
While state officials could instantaneously send out the erroneous alert, they required
approvals from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to send out the corrected alert --
and that process contributed to the 38-minute delay, officials said.
"We have to clear that to make sure that we can get that out," Miyagi said. On Saturday
morning, information technology staff with the emergency agency scrambled to get those
approvals "as fast as they could," he added. Civil Defense head Verne Miyagi apologizes to
our community/public via media during press conference held at the Diamond Head Emergency
Typical government incompetence. Having a dialog box " Are you sure? Y/N "
doesn't cut it anymore, as people have been conditioned for years to click on the OK
button without reading the prompt, to get to what they want. Waiting for a request of
federal funding to upgrade their systems. I can only imagine on what the price tag will be.
I suppose the silver lining is that the Japanese government observing the drill, now knows
what not to do regarding issuing public alerts.
Interesting comment about the police taking note of non-responders.
... It took 38 minutes to correct the "mistake". A missile from North Korea would take
32-35 minutes from launch to impact in Hawaii. ...
Wow! Good catch, And a nice piece of sleuthing, b... Oz's reptilian MSM didn't bother
acquainting its 'consumers' with that vital snippet of relevance. So, was the alert a
mistake or was it just another big chunk of pre-emptive Yankee Arseholery from The
I'll not waste time on whether or not the warning was legitimate; but rather, on the
expressed behavior of the people; it's a sure sign they're scared; which translates to; the
U.S. propaganda campaign has been very effective. This is truly frightening and a marker of
the true mental state of the populace. I must add; I'm very concerned; it exceeds my
vision/perception of today's reality. IMO; we've really crossed the Rubicon I'll re-adjust
my perception meter immediately to extreme.
"...Emergency Management Agency Administrator Vern Miyagi said that the employee who
made the mistake felt terrible for triggering the alarm..."
Miyagi should feel worse about remaining on his job despite his lack of management
skills and complete absence of system controls. He should also feel bad about having a
pre-programmed missile alert message that can be sent without any such alert from Pacific
Command and requires nothing more than a few clicks by a low-level employee.
"...But Miyagi also used the opportunity to highlight the fact that if the missile
threat were real, Hawaii residents would only have 12 to 15 minutes to react and find
shelter. "I regret what happened this morning," Miyagi said. "But it brings us up to speed
again about what to expect and what to do..."
Bad, bad time to look for a teachable moment here, Miyagi. I have to doubt the sincerity
of his earlier apology if he immediately morphs into a psychopathic, patronizing Homeland
Security bureaucrat and takes the opportunity to dispense a few words of government wisdom
to the little people since he has their attention. Jesus - I would have punched him in the
face at this point.
"...Miyagi explained that the mistake happened during a drill that occurred around a
shift change at the agency. He said an employee, was using a computer program as part of
the drill, and clicked on the wrong button, which sent out the mass alert..."
There is no such 'drill' or test performed anywhere else in the US that sends anything
but the canned test message to the Integrated Public Alert Warning System (IPAWS) on a
weekly or monthly schedule.
"It's human error," Miyagi said. "There is a screen that says, 'Are you sure you want
to do this?'"
The error is using the damn live IPAWS console for your 'drill'. No home-brew drill or
test should ever involve any access to the live IPAWS console for this exact
reason. I'm glad Miyagi never crewed a nuclear missile silo - we would all be dead by
"...According to Miyagi, the employee clicked through the warning prompt, which
resulted in thousands of residents receiving an alert that a missile was headed toward the
islands. It's unclear how many people actually received the warning..."
Another reason for Miyagi's immediate dismissal. When you punch in an alert on the IPAWS
console, it goes directly to the FEMA IPAWS server, where it is then disseminated to
all your other client messaging systems. Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) is one of
those systems. WEA feeds every cell phone provider in the area (all of Hawaii in this
case). Any modern smartphone that's turned on and using a Hawaiian network will
automatically display the message with some obnoxious audio alert. 1.5 million people and
he thinks this message only reached 'thousands'? He's either a horrible liar or he's a
"...Miyagi said he was uncertain why some emergency sirens around the state also went
Well, that was because his agency programmed IPAWS to fire the sirens for Civil
Emergency-type messages. Mostly because that's how you're suppose to activate them
if you're using IPAWS. That's what it's for. Didn't he just start testing the 'nuclear
attack' sirens last year? Don't tell me this message set off the Tsunami warning horns
instead. And why only some of them? Does this HEMA terrorist understand how to make any of
his DHS/FEMA junk in Hawaii work properly?
"...Furthermore, the agency didn't realize until several minutes later that it had
accidentally sent out the warning to the public, Miyagi said..."
What, NONE of these guys had a cellphone? Everyone in the building with one should have
seen/heard the alert within tens of seconds. That's how WEA works. They knew right away -
that's why they sent out FB and Twitter messages minutes later.
"We didn't have a message scripted that said this is a false alarm," Ige said. "We
were not prepared for that."
Doesn't he know anything about IPAWS? You don't NEED a pre-approved, scripted message.
There may be a specific message to deactivate WEA rebroadcasts, but there's nothing that
should have prevented them from sending a simple update for everyone to disregard the
earlier warning. This is done all the time in IPAWS - they must
really be confused or just not know how to use it at all. One would think they would take
the trouble to learn since they're inexplicably using the live console for testing.
"...While state officials could instantaneously send out the erroneous alert, they
required approvals from the Federal Emergency Management Agency to send out the corrected
alert -- and that process contributed to the 38-minute delay, officials said..."
More painfully-obvious made-up BS to cover their butts. HEMA *is* the messaging
authority there, period. FEMA has nothing to do with approving any messages for
them. The other US operators must be shaking their heads in disbelief.
"...information technology staff with the emergency agency scrambled to get those
approvals "as fast as they could," he added..."
Oh, I get it now. Contract IT that had no clue. They had to call FEMA to figure out what
to do, since they were apparently as unfamiliar with the system as the HEMA guys and
couldn't get it to work either. Good thing they didn't call the overseas help desk -
unplugging it for ten seconds wouldn't have fixed much.
What really worries me is how the Pacific Command in Hawaii reacted when all their
cellphones suddenly alerted them that THEY had 'detected an incoming ballistic missile'.
That's not the kind of erroneous alert I want my nuclear-armed military to see - ever.
According to Miyagi, the employee clicked through the warning prompt, which resulted in
thousands of residents receiving an alert that a missile was headed toward the
How come, that cops were driving around telling everybody to go home and stay with their
families, because "the guy in North Korea" had fired three missiles? Plenty of people can
attest to that. If the error was with "this employee", than that would mean that there
could have been no prior knowledge of the cops about this ballistic missile threat. How did
the cops know before the employee made "a mistake"? That is not possible. The employee made
'the mistake' at 8:07 AM. We here in Pahoa we're warned before 8:07 AM.
There is obviously much more to this than meets the eyes and ears.
The ballistic missile threat was not created by 'this employee'.
Please take the time to read this excellent written review of Daniel Ellsberg's new book
about the "Doomsday Machine". It should further the under standing about the scope of the
Doomsday Machine that would have responded to any ballistic missile fired at Guam, Hawai'i,
or the mainland. https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/01/09/rational-insanity-a
Thank You so much. While I am not familiar with
the intricacies of the IPAWS warning system, I
have experienced a number of tsunami and hurricane
alerts through this system. The cancellation was
always as immediate as the website would report.
(PTWC / CPHC respectively).
I get must be impeached and with all lower level
employees be prosecuted and terminated.
This 'event' has caused PTSD among a number of
people, especially the countless mother's with
This was not an accident, but it shall serve as
a wake up call to dismantle the nuclear Doomsday
North Korea aquired ICBM's to protect itself from
the people that almost entirely exterminated it
by the likes of Curtis LeMay.
The country with the most nukes must start unilaterally
to abolish its Doomsday Machine. Others will follow.
The threat by North Korea is a psychological projection
by the only people to ever have dropped nuclear bombs.
In that case North Korea would have lots of targets to chose from.
Posted by: somebody | Jan 15, 2018 5:43:22 AM | 60
Yes, interesting point reinforced, somewhat, by this extract from SST's January 13 post
about domestic US Military base closures...
"What's more, at the same time that the domestic base closings are proceeding, the
U.S. military footprint abroad is expanding. According to American University professor
David Vine, there are presently 800 American military bases abroad, in 70
countries, with an annual cost of $160-200 billion, including American theaters of
combat--Iraq and Afghanistan. Recent Pentagon studies of the need to devise a "third offset
strategy" to address the increased vulnerabilities of American military bases around the
globe raise further questions about the viability of the current military posture."
Unfortunately for the Yankees, Kim (correctly) regards the US Homeland as the top
priority target for NK retaliation to US Military violence inflicted on North Korea. Why
Nuke Hawaii, or some other island outpost, when he can Nuke Washington, New York, Boston,
plus the 5 biggest US freight ports and airports - at the same time on the same day? He
only has to convince the Yankees that it's "do-able" and NK will be AmeriKKKa-proof.
And let's not forget that China has said that if NK is attacked, China will respond on NK's
Hoarsewhisperer , Jan 15, 2018 6:33:15 AM |
62Heros , Jan 15, 2018 6:58:12 AM |
"The threat by North Korea is a psychological projection by the only people to ever have
dropped nuclear bombs."
This reminds me of a famous expression out of 16th century Poland:
"The jew cries out in pain as he strikes you"
The evidence here clearly indicates that by signalling this alarm, which automatically
sent it out to IPAWS/HEMA/FEMA/PACCOM/NORAD/[who knows else where], someone was trying to
provoke a missile exchange and start a war.
Some miracle or god prevented this war that the MIC is so horny for from getting started
and the US nuking North Korea. It must be the same god that in 1967 prevented the Zionists
from sinking the Liberty after 2 hours of bombs and torpedoes, which would have directly
pulled the US into Israel's war against her Arab neighbors.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 15, 2018 6:33:15 AM | 62
NK has been America-proof since the last war. The difference being that they have
convinced the US now that they can act on their own - without Chinese or Russian support.
That means the US will have to talk to North Korea directly.
"Rex Tillerson has been advocating for a diplomatic approach to this crisis, that is a
point of view that Canada shares, and so the purpose of this meeting is to talk about
economic and diplomatic ways of getting North Korea to the table," Paris said.
"I think it's the main purpose of this meeting," said Shin Maeng-ho, South Korea's
Ambassador to Canada, who is attending the meeting.
During an interview on CBC's The House with guest host Alison Crawford, Shin added: "I
think diplomacy is the only option left to us. War on the Korean peninsula means death of
millions of people."
"All foreign ministers in Vancouver will seek all the ways and means for diplomatic
solution," Shin said.
"... Regarding North Korean US military targets, the Guardian failed to include what might its primary target. Camp Humphreys which is 57 miles from the DMZ, in DPRK 300mm rocket range, and currently houses 12,000 Americans and is growing. So DPRK can't be attacked unless those Americans are evacuated first, and that won't happen. The host country would no permit it, and go crazy if they did. It would be mass mayhem. ..."
"... In fact the whole concept of forward basing actually puts a damper on any Pentagon aggression. Another example is the 40,000 Americans at various bases in the western Persian Gulf, well within Iran rocket and missile range. That means no attack against Iran. ..."
"... Finally, these bases are financially supported by host countries. In South Korea the current Camp Humphreys $10 billion expansion is reportedly being funded by ROK. ..."
> Regarding North Korean US military targets, the Guardian failed to include what might
its primary target. Camp Humphreys which is 57 miles from the DMZ, in DPRK 300mm rocket
range, and currently houses 12,000 Americans and is growing. So DPRK can't be attacked unless
those Americans are evacuated first, and that won't happen. The host country would no permit
it, and go crazy if they did. It would be mass mayhem.
> In fact the whole concept of forward basing actually puts a damper on any Pentagon
aggression. Another example is the 40,000 Americans at various bases in the western Persian
Gulf, well within Iran rocket and missile range. That means no attack against Iran.
> Finally, these bases are financially supported by host countries. In South Korea the
current Camp Humphreys $10 billion expansion is reportedly being funded by ROK.
Such military thinkers like Sun Tzu, the moderns military strategists like Mao Zedong,
General Võ Nguyên Giáp and even the military conceptions of Fidel
Castro Ruz, should be investigated, developed more thoroughly and applied in the unexpected
form of warfare that comes out of the fog of war across a battlefield on any given day.
There is great promise of creative output in the Russian military art of war for it
animates from one the most progressive nation-states, and the Russian military theorists
must embrace their historical past, welding it to the here and now.
"... The public relation campaign designed to increase the acceptance of new nuclear weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare is a symptom of this ignorance and willful blindness. ..."
"... An article published by the Federation of American Scientists provides a summary of the nuclear winter studies (those done during the period 2007-2008) and the rejection of their findings by the US Nuclear Weapons Council, see Turning a Blind Eye Toward Armageddon ..."
"... In a world of hyper sonic missiles and megaton nuclear warheads, sending off an alarm for your populace to seek bomb shelters, in a period of extremely heightened tensions, as exists currently between North Korea and the US, could be construed by your enemy as a nuclear-age form of mobilization. ..."
"... One must also consider that Russia and China have also been threatened repeatedly by the US over the last year, and both have sent extra troops to their respective North Korean borders. ..."
US political and military leaders either are unaware of -- or have chosen to reject -- the
peer-reviewed studies that predict a US-Russian nuclear war would likely wipe out most of the
human race. The public relation campaign designed to increase the acceptance of new nuclear
weapons and "limited" nuclear warfare is a symptom of this ignorance and willful
An article published by the Federation of American Scientists provides a summary of the
nuclear winter studies (those done during the period 2007-2008) and the rejection of their
findings by the US Nuclear Weapons Council, see
Turning a Blind Eye Toward Armageddon
Thank you once again for providing us a glance behind the curtain. Most historians accept that the Tsar and Russia deserve a certain degree of blame for WWI
for being the first empire to mobilize in 1914.
In a world of hyper sonic missiles and megaton nuclear warheads, sending off an alarm for
your populace to seek bomb shelters, in a period of extremely heightened tensions, as exists
currently between North Korea and the US, could be construed by your enemy as a nuclear-age
form of mobilization.
One must also consider that Russia and China have also been threatened repeatedly by the
US over the last year, and both have sent extra troops to their respective North Korean
For the TSA/PACCOM/? to decide to fake a Nuclear missile attack would not only be
exceedingly reckless, it could also be suicidal. Unless:
The enemy had been informed before hand and there was no risk.
The risk of a nuclear exchange had already been baked into the cake, and the possibility
of this kicking off a war was not a bug, but a feature.
"Mr. President," Acosta shouted three times, finally getting Trump's attention, "Did you say
that you want more people to come in from Norway? Did you say that you wanted more people from
Norway? Is that true Mr. President?" Acosta barked at Trump.
" I want them to come in from everywhere everywhere. Thank you very much everybody ," Trump
replied while Acosta continued to interject.
" Just Caucasian or white countries, sir? Or do you want people to come in from other parts
of the world people of color ," Acosta asked - effectively calling Trump racist, to which Trump
looked Acosta directly in the eye and simply said:
Acosta spoke about the incident with Wolf Blitzer afterwards and said it was clear the
president was ordering him out of the room. Acosta said he tried to ask his questions again
when Trump and Nazarbayev gave a joint statement later on, but Deputy Press Secretary Hogan
Gidley "got right up in my face" and started shouting at him to block out any questions.
"It was that kind of a display," Acosta recalled. "It reminded me of something you might see
in less democratic countries when people at the White House or officials of a foreign
government attempt to get in the way of the press in doing their jobs."
Acosta and CNN were infamously humiliated after Trump called them "fake news" during a
January, 2017 press conference in which Acosta attempted to shoehorn a question in front of
Meanwhile, Acosta was shut down in December by White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders
after he tried to grandstand during a press briefing over being called "Fake News," telling her
that sometimes reporters make "honest mistakes."
Sanders shot back; "When journalists make honest mistakes, they should own up to them.
Sometimes, and a lot of times, you don't," only to be temporarily cut off by Acosta.
"I'm sorry, I'm not finished," Sanders fired back, adding "There is a very big difference
between making honest mistakes and purposefully misleading the American people... you cannot
say it's an honest mistake when you're purposely putting out information you know is
released Tuesday by Trump Jr. reveal that his friend Rob Goldstone pitched the meeting
based on the promise of damning information on Hillary Clinton that supposedly was being
offered by senior Russian government officials. On Monday, Mark
Corallo , a spokesman for President Trump's outside counsel, alleged that the meeting had
been set up under false pretenses and implied that Veselnitskaya's association with Fusion GPS
was relevant to the alleged deception.
"... "Bannon is gone, but he's now become fodder for the book by Michael Wolff which is now being mined by both Mueller and the House Intelligence Committee. We don't know what Bannon told the intelligence committee, since it was behind closed doors. But the New York Times, who broke the story, speculate that the subpoena is a way to get Bannon to agree to an interview rather than stand before the grand jury." ..."
"... Lauria also discussed Wolff's "Fire and Fury," which paints a highly negative image of the first year of the Trump White House -- including a quote from Bannon describing Donald Trump, Jr. and former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort as "treasonous." ..."
"... The conversation then turned to the specifics of Bannon's claim of treason, the meeting between Manafort, Trump, Jr. and several Russian lobbyists in Trump Tower, and its connection with the famous "dodgy dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele. ..."
"... "The difference is that intelligence reports are vetted by the intelligence agent and then by his superiors and usually by other agencies in his country's intelligence community. It's also a taxpayer-funded operation, supposedly to protect society, although that's not always what intelligence agencies do. Opposition research is a completely different thing: getting dirt on a political opponent, which is what Steele did," Lauria explained. ..."
"... "The idea that Trump, Jr. had gotten this opposition research from the Russian government, as apparently Bannon said, is completely incorrect because there was no one from the Russian government, there was a former KGB agent. The lawyer was not a member of the government and no dirt was ever turned over. [There's] only been one campaign that received opposition research from foreigners during the 2016 campaign: the Clinton campaign that paid for it via a British former intelligence agent and his supposed Russian sources. But foreign opposition research [has] never been established as a crime." ..."
Former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon has been subpoenaed to testify before a
grand jury, supposedly on alleged ties between the presidential campaign of Donald Trump and
Russian actors. Brian Becker on Radio Sputnik's Loud & Clear was joined by Joe Lauria,
a veteran journalist who has also worked for major newspapers in four countries, perhaps most
notably as the Wall Street Journal's correspondent to the United Nations.
"Mr. Bannon has fallen and I think he was the ideological force behind Trump,
particularly in relations with Russia," said Lauria. "It's interesting to know why did Trump
call for detente, and still seems to be pursuing detente, with Russia. Many people who believe
in Russiagate believe it's because he's somehow beholden to them or has been blackmailed or
whatever. But professor Jeffrey Summers with the University of Wisconsin wrote an interesting
piece where he said Bannon was the one who had impressed upon Trump that he should improve
relations with Russia so they can team up against Islamic extremism."
"Bannon is gone, but he's now become fodder for the book by Michael Wolff which is now being
mined by both Mueller and the House Intelligence Committee. We don't know what Bannon told the
intelligence committee, since it was behind closed doors. But the New York Times, who broke the
story, speculate that the subpoena is a way to get Bannon to agree to an interview rather than
stand before the grand jury."
Lauria also discussed Wolff's "Fire and Fury," which paints a highly negative image of the
first year of the Trump White House -- including a quote from Bannon describing Donald Trump,
Jr. and former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort as "treasonous."
"If you read the key quote in that book, the House Intelligence Committee wants to question
him about an allegation against Paul Manafort and Donald Trump, Jr. for treason. I find this
very curious. If Bannon wanted Trump to have better relations with Russia, it's curious that he
would roll out an accusation of treason. He's far from the only one to bring the charge against
Trump in this entire Russiagate fiasco, but if you look at treason, it's the only crime defined
in the US Constitution. It says clearly treason against the US consists only of assisting an
enemy of the US in a state of open hostility with us."
"Russia is not in open hostilities with the United States, no one would argue that. The idea
that Trump, Jr. has committed treason is ridiculous. I don't know why Bannon used [the term].
Clearly he was angry at Trump for being fired, I don't know if he was begging for his job back
as Trump tweeted," Lauria said.
The conversation then turned to the specifics of Bannon's claim of treason, the meeting
between Manafort, Trump, Jr. and several Russian lobbyists in Trump Tower, and its connection
with the famous "dodgy dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele.
"If I could talk a second about that Don Jr meeting, there's a core issue in it over the
difference in opposition research and intelligence," Lauria said. "While Christopher Steele was
an MI-6 intelligence agent for Britain, he was working for a private company at the time. He
was hired by the Clinton campaign and the [Democratic National Committee] through Fusion GPS.
Glenn Simpson, of Fusion, who hired Steele directly, wrote in a New York Times editorial that
Steele produced intelligence memos. He was either lying or misleading the readers -- he has to
know the difference between them."
"The difference is that intelligence reports are vetted by the intelligence agent and then
by his superiors and usually by other agencies in his country's intelligence community. It's
also a taxpayer-funded operation, supposedly to protect society, although that's not always
what intelligence agencies do. Opposition research is a completely different thing: getting
dirt on a political opponent, which is what Steele did," Lauria explained.
"The idea that Trump, Jr. had gotten this opposition research from the Russian government,
as apparently Bannon said, is completely incorrect because there was no one from the Russian
government, there was a former KGB agent. The lawyer was not a member of the government and no
dirt was ever turned over. [There's] only been one campaign that received opposition research
from foreigners during the 2016 campaign: the Clinton campaign that paid for it via a British
former intelligence agent and his supposed Russian sources. But foreign opposition research
[has] never been established as a crime."
"... Historians will come to view Aug. 8, 2008, as a turning point no less significant than Nov. 9, 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell. Russia's attack on sovereign Georgian territory marked the official return of history, indeed to an almost 19th-century style of great-power competition , complete with virulent nationalisms, battles for resources, struggles over spheres of influence and territory, and even -- though it shocks our 21st-century sensibilities -- the use of military power to obtain geopolitical objectives. ..."
"... Administration officials said Mr. Putin had miscalculated and would pay a cost regardless of what the United States did, pointing to the impact on Russia's currency and markets. "What we see here are distinctly 19th- and 20th-century decisions made by President Putin to address problems," one of the officials said. "What he needs to understand is that in terms of his economy, he lives in the 21st-century world, an interdependent world." ..."
"... The dossier's claim that Putin talked about the "ideals-based international order" also rings false. Putin only ever refers to Western ideals when saying that Western countries' leaders are hypocrites for not adhering to them. ..."
"... The more straightforward explanation is that, knowing that this is opposition research, Steele and his sources provided information that rang true with what the client already believed and would want to hear. This is the first report in the series–in effect, a teaser trailer–and no consultant working on a monthly retainer is going to tell you in the first memo that his services aren't needed. If Steele had indicated that there was no dirt to investigate, the $15,000/mo. (as estimated by Vanity Fair ) contract wouldn't have lasted longer than a month or two. ..."
"... The dossier's use of the phraseology "Trump and his team" and "Trump team" and the like is confusing in reference to the pre-2016 campaign period. Other than his lawyer Michael Cohen, there's nothing I've seen to indicate that the other Trump campaign people mentioned by name in the dossier (Paul Manafort and Carter Page) knew Trump before 2016. By all appearances, the key members of Trump's team before 2016 were his children, and maybe his talent agent. ..."
"... It also seems out of character for Trump to have the foresight and planning that it would take to seek out intelligence on Hillary Clinton several years back. Several years ago, Trump and the Clintons were friends , and the Clintons attended Trump's wedding and Bill and Donald played golf together. ..."
"... Russians are very cautious about what they talk about, even amongst each other. Therefore, with the story about [sexual acts] in the Moscow Ritz Carlton, the idea you have managed to triple source it via an employee at the hotel, a serving FSB [Russian security service] officer, and the security officer at the hotel, who inevitably will be at least a former FSB or GRU [Russian intelligence agency] officer It just doesn't make sense. If such a thing had taken place, it would be a Russian state secret. ..."
"... Seems more likely that it's just a piece of "scuttlebutt" that Steele's sources, pressed to find anything juicy on Trump, saw in the newspaper or in a news search on Google or on Russian search engine Yandex . ..."
"... Whatever the truth of the matter, Page is clearly someone who was very keen to network with powerful Russians in 2016 and was not shy about leveraging his affiliation with the Trump campaign to do it. ..."
"... But at the same time, this would also mean Page was a loose cannon and a huge potential liability to the Trump campaign. Igor Sechin is, and was in July 2016, on the Specially Designated Nationals list of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control. This means that it's a crime for any US citizen to do any business with Sechin personally (though not with Rosneft as a corporate entity). ..."
"... Page, by all appearances, is reckless and kind of an idiot . He had to have known that his activities (even if they were limited to just non-treasonous networking with Russians) carried a huge risk of blowback for Trump. He didn't care. Carter Page's willingness to toe the Russian line on foreign policy, publicly and on the record, goes beyond even what the most Russophile Western expats in Moscow say in private conversations. I think it's a perfectly valid question to ask why and how Carter Page came to be affiliated with the Trump campaign, why he visited Russia alone at least twice in 2016, and what contacts he's had with Russian officials (he definitely met with some of them, at least at the New Economic School graduation reception on Jul. 8, at which there were several senior Russian officials present and Carter Page was commencement speaker and an honored foreign guest). ..."
"... And why send him to give a public university commencement speech in which he rails against US foreign policy, ensuring wide media coverage? ..."
"... A meeting with a Trump adviser on the sidelines of such a noisy, high-profile trip–with both the Russian and foreign press speculating in real-time what the hell Page was doing in Moscow–seems like an extremely incautious setting for a meeting to discuss the most scandalous quid pro quo since the secret protocols to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. ..."
"... To sum up, I have serious doubts that a meeting took place as described. But I also think that Carter Page was–at the very least–trying to leverage his connection to Trump in Russia for personal gain at the very earliest opportunity he got. ..."
"... *This report doesn't have a date. However, the July 19 report is numbered "2016/94" and the July 26 report is numbered "2016/097" so it seems like this is where the report should go. ..."
"... This is the central allegation against the Trump campaign – that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government to take actions aimed at defeating Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. The one thing that I'd add (or, rather, remind) is that by late July, the story of allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 election was in full swing . Manafort's history in the former Soviet Union was being widely reported . Carter Page, as mentioned above, had traveled to Moscow for unknown purposes a few weeks before, a trip that was covered in the Russian and US media. ..."
"... What I'd like to point out here -- in terms of the timing of the information in this report -- is that the DNC hacked e-mail dumps on WikiLeaks that led to Debbie Wassermann Schultz resigning as head of the DNC happened on July 22, 2016 , and even before the WikiLeaks dumps the DNC had been attributing the hack to Russia. ..."
"... Since this report refers to the WikiLeaks dump of DNC e-mails that happened on July 22, even though it's undated we know that the report must have been made after that, as well as after the Republican National Convention that happened on July 18, as well as after reports had emerged that the Trump team had been behind a change in the Republican Party platform to remove a reference to providing lethal arms to Ukraine. The allegation made here closely tracks what was being reported in the media at the time. ..."
"... FBI director James Comey made a point of saying that US intelligence services were struck by how unusually noisy the Russians had been in their election interference, as if they wanted to be discovered. ..."
"... *The actual date on the report is "26 July 201 5 " (in the British style), but since it refers to events that happened as recently as June 2016, and based on the news reports that said that Steele was hired in June 2016, I assume this is just a typo. ..."
"... This strains credulity. So there's a single Russian emigre who not only knows the internal mood of the Trump team, but also knows what the Russian leadership is thinking (about a matter that, remember, according to the dossier is top-top secret)? And I know what you're thinking – well, if they were in collusion, of course there's such a person. But who is it? You'd think that there couldn't be too many people who fit this description – being a Russian emigre, close to the Trump campaign, and also with top-level Kremlin access. ..."
"... This is described as someone's opinion so it's hard to argue against or fact-check. I will note that the e-mails from John Podesta's Gmail account started being published by WikiLeaks in October 2016, and since the e-mails run only through March 2016, and given that WikiLeaks usually takes time to prepare for a dump, whoever broke into Podesta's Gmail account was likely very active at the time when this report was dated. If you believe that it was the Russians who broke into Podesta's Gmail account, then this intelligence report is precisely wrong. Eleven days after this report, on August 10, Guccifer 2.0 published the personal contact info of 200 prominent Democrats, so if you believe that Guccifer 2.0 was the alter ego of the Russian government, this intelligence report was precisely wrong. ..."
"... This report is dated precisely one week before Sergei Ivanov was dismissed from his post and moved to a less political role as Putin's special envoy for the environment. If you want to be charitable to the dossier, you could say that this report foreshadows Ivanov's dismissal (later reports say that the dismissal was unexpected). But on the other hand, clearly Ivanov's move to his new position was already in the works on Aug. 5 – it was reported that rumors of the move had been circulating since spring. Why hadn't Steele's "well-placed and established" sources heard those rumors? ..."
"... Peskov is widely considered not to be an independent political player in the Kremlin. He is seen as being a sort of assistant to Putin in addition to his role as spokesman, but someone who likes the spotlight, celebrity and glamour a bit too much. ..."
"... About Turkey: Peskov started his career in the Russian diplomatic corps as a Turkey specialist and worked as the third secretary of the Russian embassy in Ankara in the early '90s. He speaks Turkish. So hearing him mentioned in connection with Turkey makes some sense. ..."
"... Russia was reported to have given advance warning to Erdogan, based on intelligence intercepts, that a coup was being planned. Peskov denied these reports. Just a few weeks earlier, Turkish president Erdogan had apologized to Putin for shooting down a Russian fighter jet on the Turkey-Syria border and Medvedev had announced that Russia would begin lifting the sanctions it had imposed on Turkey in connection with the incident. ..."
"... So in early August 2016 it seemed like Russia-Turkey relations had turned a corner and were being handled quite well – as a matter of fact, over the course of 2016, Turkey went from being the US's partner on Syria to being in a de facto alliance with Russia . The turnaround is stunning – in January 2016 , the US and Turkey were conducting joint operations in Syria, and in January 2017 , Turkey and Russia were conducting joint operations in Syria. Whoever was handling Russia's relationship with Turkey, they did a good job by any objective measure – hard to see how this can be considered "botched." ..."
"... Around this time , there was a lot of speculation in the media about whether Trump would drop out of the race. It's remarkable how the "intelligence" in the dossier follows what was being reported in the news at the time. ..."
"... Ivanov was leading the operation to "hack the US election" literally days before he was fired? That doesn't make sense. ..."
"... This ethnic Russian associate of Trump – who is it? Is it Sergei Millian ? He's supposed to be Source D , a "close associate" of Trump, but he might also be the ethnic Russian (even though Millian is technically from Belarus) associate referred to here and elsewhere. ..."
"... Here we have Carter Page telling the maybe-Millian about his collusion with Russian intelligence on the DNC leaks. Do people really go around confessing crimes willy-nilly? According to this dossier, they do. ..."
"... The big Trump campaign news of August 2016, of course, was that on Aug. 17, Steve Bannon replaced Paul Manafort as head of Trump's campaign. This news was absolutely huge. If Steele's source would have said on Aug. 9 that Bannon would be replacing Manafort, or even that a change of campaign management was being discussed, then in retrospect, you would have to admit that this source was well-informed. But if on Aug. 9, this source was talking about "a rethink and a likely change of tactics," s/he either was not very close to the campaign or was holding back on Steele. ..."
"... So this associate was so close to the campaign that he was privy to all of the team's discussions about collusion with the Russians, but he didn't know that Steve Bannon was about to be named as the new campaign head? ..."
"... But my main beef with this paragraph involves the phrase "kick-back payments to MANAFORT as alleged." Manafort wasn't accused of receiving kickbacks (as I'll explain in a moment, that doesn't make any sense) – he was accused of being paid cash by Yanukovich's political party in an off-the-books scheme, and this was widely covered in the press after the story broke in The New York Times on Aug. 14. ..."
"... That's not a kickback. A kickback is when a government or other organization is offering a contract to an outside contractor, typically in a competitive bid situation, and then when the winner is selected the winner kicks back some of the contract proceeds to the person who manipulated the contract selection process. ..."
"... So if there were kickbacks involved in Manafort's work for Yanukovich, it would've been Manafort kicking back money to Yanukovich, not the other way around. ..."
"... However, what Manafort was actually accused of in the press -- receiving money not properly accounted for under Ukrainian law -- is a crime under American law only if he received income that he didn't report to the IRS, or engaged in money laundering, even if an indisputable "documentary trail" emerges. ..."
"... It is difficult to imagine Putin and his inner circle being fearful of political vulnerability and embarrassment in connection with Manafort. As even Julia Ioffe–a journalist opposed to both Trump and Putin–conceded i n a recent article i n The Atlantic , the political consulting work that Manafort did for Yanukovich and others in the former Soviet Union was hardly unusual. ..."
"... Just to point out – there's a certain implication in the dossier's description of Manafort's work for Yanukovich that this work was "exposed" during the 2016 US election campaign. That's not the case. Manafort just wasn't a household name before 2016, so no one cared. He was just another American political consultant who was more than happy to offer his services to unsavory foreign politicians, like Sandra Bullock's character in "Our Brand is Crisis." ..."
"... Manafort's work for Yanukovich was public knowledge in Ukraine as early as 2005, and was reported actively in the Ukrainian press. By 2016 it was part of Manafort's resume. ..."
"... The report on the Alfa Group (yes, Steele spelled it wrong) is actually the only place in the whole dossier where the dossier was ahead of the mainstream news cycle. The report doesn't give any context for why a special report on the relationship between Putin and Alfa was requested. But on Halloween 2016, the story broke that in Spring and Summer 2016, white-hat hackers had been tracking electronic communications between Trump's e-mail server and an Alfa-Bank (part of Alfa Group) computer in Russia, posting their findings on Reddit – so it was in the public domain but you really had to be paying attention (as apparently a few New York Times journalists and probably the FBI were). I doubt that Steele or his sources were following hacker forums on Reddit. ..."
"... So here's what I think happened: by September, Steele's ultimate client was the Democrats. Someone tipped off the Hillary Clinton campaign (and/or the Clinton-aligned group that was paying Fusion GPS / Orbis) about the electronic link to Alfa, and then Orbis (Steele) got a call asking for an intelligence report on Alfa Group's connections to Putin, without saying why. However, since it was on the phone, the Orbis person heard it as "Alpha Group," and their Russian sources didn't correct the error. ..."
"... Vladimir Putin was deputy mayor of St. Petersburg from 1992 to 1996 . In August 1996 Putin moved from St. Petersburg to Moscow to be Deputy Chief of the Presidential Property Management Directorate (Yeltsin was president at the time, of course). He needed a new job because his boss, St. Petersburg mayor Anatoly Sobchak , lost his re-election bid. ..."
"... Alfa-Bank was a direct competitor to Khodorkovsky's Bank Menatep (a subsidiary of Rosprom) at the time. So there's no way Fridman and Aven used Govorun to deliver cash to Putin when Putin was deputy mayor of St. Petersburg. The dates don't line up. There was an 8-month gap after Putin left St. Petersburg and before Govorun started working at Alfa. ..."
"... How could Steele's sources have made this mistake? Because Govorun's Wikipedia page omits his time at Rosprom, and makes it look like Govorun worked at Alfa-Bank from 1993 to 2000. This is why you don't prepare your report based on Wikipedia, kids! ..."
"... Or if Steele was feeling particularly lazy, he could've gone to Trump's Twitter feed, where Trump proudly told his millions of followers that he'd just spent the weekend with Aras Agalarov and that he wanted to do more business with him. Maybe in Steele's world, being "well-placed" to hear intel about Trump's connections with Russian businesspeople means reading Donald Trump's tweets? ..."
"... There's no other word but "fraud" to describe an "intelligence report" that tries to make it look like the connection between Trump and the Agalarov family is some kind of inside information that you'd need "well-placed sources" to obtain. It took some serious balls for Steele to present it that way, since all anyone would have to do is Google the names mentioned in the report and it would be instantly clear that the intelligence was worthless. ..."
"... Hmm. This is the intelligence that Hillary's people were getting less than one month from Election Day. Intelligence that they paid for. Makes you feel sorry for her; I strongly suspect she was being conned with these reports. ..."
"... In December 2016, Rosneft did indeed sell 19.5% of its shares to two investors using a complicated financing structure. Some have pointed to this as an example where the dossier correctly predicted something would happen. However, the sale of 19.5% of Rosneft to an investor was part of Russia's privatization plan for 2016, which the Russian government announced in December 2015 , and the timeline for the privatization (referring to the 19.5% figure) was updated throughout the year . Anyone who was following Russian business news in 2016 knew that Rosneft was planning to sell 19.5% to an investor that year. ..."
"... Sucks to be Michael Cohen! Unless the dossier is true, he should sue for libel. ..."
"... Sechin is a very big deal in Russia, and a total badass that you don't want to mess with. He is an intimidating guy who is as serious as a heart attack. Carter Page is a dumbass. But the account of this conversation makes it sound like Page was running the meeting like a seasoned pro, leaving Sechin hanging, keeping things vague and noncommittal. I, on the other hand, think that Sechin would never bother meeting with a nobody like Carter Page to discuss something as consequential as billion-dollar oil deals and international relations unless Page had made his bona fides abundantly clear. ..."
"... "Unexpectedly." This looks suspiciously like ass-covering as to why Steele's earlier reports dated mere days before Ivanov's dismissal, containing statements attributed directly to Ivanov, made no mention that these were his last days on the job. ..."
"... Most political observers believed at the time that it was Bernie Sanders, not Russia, who pushed Hillary Clinton away from supporting TPP. This is because Bernie Sanders said openly that he was pressuring Hillary to drop support for TPP. Strangely, the only place where the "veterans' pensions ruse" was ever reported was in the Steele dossier, and the media haven't been tipped off to it to this day. Dodged a bullet! Remember, this is after Putin had supposedly directly ordered all Kremlin insiders, all of whom are tried-and-true Putin loyalists, not to talk about these matters even in private. ..."
"... Steele's team has made the bold decision to misspell Paul Manafort's name as MANNAFORT (Mannafort from heaven?) throughout this report. ..."
"... Gubarev sued BuzzFeed and its editor-in-chief for libel and slander and, lacking any basis other than the dossier itself for these allegations, BuzzFeed blacked out the identifying information. ..."
"... This is quite a cinematic portrayal of hacking. The implication seems to be that there were teams of hackers in a room somewhere and they were ordered to "stand down." Is that how hacking works? Especially in this case, where the hacking that resulted in the 2016 DNC and Podesta leaks had taken place several months before this alleged meeting? This also seems to contradict the declassified US intelligence community findings that said that the hacks were done by Russian government hacker teams called "Cozy Bear" and "Fancy Bear" that were working for the GRU, a Russian intelligence agency that isn't mentioned once in the dossier. The Romanian angle apparently refers t o Guccifer 2.0, who claimed to be Romanian but was also believed to be a Russian intelligence agency alter ego only pretending to be Romanian. If these were Russian government hackers, why would they be ordered to cross international borders and "lay low" in Bulgaria, a member of NATO? ..."
"... Also, given that Russia allegedly had huge wins in their 2016 election meddling, why would they be so stingy as to demand that Trump pay his share for the hacking? Especially if they were so concerned about covering their tracks? This only would implicate the Trump campaign and create a paper trail leading directly to Trump transition team members in the United States, plus they would be involving themselves in a criminal conspiracy to violate US money laundering laws, RICO and the like. ..."
"... What do you think? Perhaps almost 60,000 Americans dying in Vietnam was a darker time. Or maybe when Hitler's armies rolled across Europe, Japan surprise attacked Pearl Harbor, and 400,000 American soldiers died World War II. ..."
"... Anyone who thinks Trump's Presidency is the darkest time in American history is a poor student of American history. And I must assume their lives are pretty amazing if this is the worst they have ever felt. ..."
I saw someone refer to the Trump Presidency as "possibly the darkest time in American
history." I've heard some iteration of that many times from people still in a frenzy over the
I'm not a big Trump fan. I wasn't a big Obama fan either. But their presence in office did
not and does not hang over my life like a dark cloud. They really aren't that important.
Yes, they have the ability to make life more difficult for many. It is unfortunate that any
politicians have that much control over our day to day lives.
But the darkest time in American history ?
What do you think? Perhaps almost 60,000 Americans dying in Vietnam was a darker time. Or
maybe when Hitler's armies rolled across Europe, Japan surprise attacked Pearl Harbor, and
400,000 American soldiers died World War II.
For Japanese Americans, FDR's
presidency was likely a darker time, as they sat in detainment facilities. Their crime was
having Japanese ancestors.
In 1918 the Spanish Flu swept across the globe killing at least 20 million people worldwide,
675,000 Americans. At the same time, soldiers were coming home from WWI blinded by chemicals
and mutilated by bombs.
And that is just going back one century. American history also includes the Civil War,
the Whiskey Rebellion .
Anyone who thinks Trump's Presidency is the darkest time in American history is a poor
student of American history. And I must assume their lives are pretty amazing if this is the
worst they have ever felt.
... ... ...
Look at where it left the global
warming alarmists . They wanted to reduce pollution, which is a noble cause. But they lied
about the goals, they lied about the causes, and they exaggerated the timetable. It's the
classic boy who cried wolf.
Initial article about Trump by Michael Wolff which allowed him to put a feet into WH door
later, in February 2017 when he decided to milk the Trump administration.
That's was probably the only major interaction of Wolff with Trump. Wolff claimed that Trump liked it ("for some
reason"), but I do not see what can be liked in this article. It is very mediocre.
It is alarming to see that Trump did not understand whom he is dealing with: "This isn't an interview or a conversation.
It's a hit piece by a nobody, Michael Wolff, opinionated and inflaming, punctuated with short hand picked Trump quotes. Trump is
correct about the dishonesty of the media."
You see all Wolff's typical tricks, innuendo, and his infatuation with the celebrities here "a pint of
vanilla Haagen-Dazs ice cream"... "a 5,395-square-foot Colonial mansion" ...""There had to be
over a thousand policeman. They had a neighborhood roped off, four or five blocks away from this
beautiful house. Machine guns all over the place.". Nothing of substance. You will never guess from the article whom
Trump represents and how he channels the anger of ordinary Americans against neoliberalism and globalization.
You can also can see Wolff's flattery in action (just in case; he decided to write the book much later, in Feb of 2017). Later
Woff did the same trick with Bannon and actually got the access to WH via him.
It looks like among readers of Hollywood reporter there here some Trump supporters. Comments to this article are really
interesting to read now, two years later and they are more informative that Wolff's article by leap and bounds.
"... One thing to understand about Trump is that, rather unexpectedly, he's neither angry nor combative. He may be the most threatening and frightening and menacing presidential candidate in modern life, and yet, in person he's almost soothing. His extreme self-satisfaction rubs off. He's a New Yorker who actually might be more at home in California (in fact, he says he usually comes to his home here -- two buildings on Rodeo Drive -- only once a year). Life is sunny. Trump is an optimist -- at least about himself. He's in easy and relaxed form campaigning here in these final days before the June 7 California primary, even with Hillary Clinton's biggest backers and a city that is about half Latino surrounding him. ..."
"... If onstage he calls people names, more privately he has only good, embracing things to say about almost everybody. (For most public people I know, it is the opposite.) He loves everybody. Genuinely seems to love everybody - at least everybody who's rich and successful (he doesn't really talk about anyone who isn't). Expressing love for everybody, for most of us, would clearly seem to be an act. But with Trump, it's the name-calling and bluster that might be the act. ..."
"... What a self serving article once again, can't you fools write without trying to demean your next president, in every paragraph? ..."
"... Another sleeze. Nuff said. ..."
"... This wasn't an "interview", Mr. Wolff. It read like a terribly biased libturd desperately attempting to 'bait' a Presidential candidate with childish, unimportant questions. We get it...you don't approve of Trump. Now go home and cry in your pillow. ..."
"... Let's get this straight, Trump exists because the leadership of both parties declared an undeclared war on the American people. Their disdain towards ordinary Americans makes them willing to lie to get theirs and screw everybody else. The Republican leadership? Losers. That's why he exists. ..."
"... Totally biased flake article, the author is clearly a Clinton shill. The give away is labeling Clinton Cash a "hatchet job", considering a huge portion of the MSM on the left have validated the book as 100% accurate and true. ..."
"... Surprised Trump bothered giving the antagonistic Michael Wolff the interview, but it does show Trump is fearless. Hillary won't go within 5 miles of Fox News. ..."
"... The arrogance of the writer, Michael Wolff is breathtaking. We get it Mr. Wolff. Your story included the small talk and you articulated YOUR pre-conceived opinions and impressions of Mr. Trump. ..."
"... Like or hate 'em there is one thing that Trump and Sanders have both accomplished: They have thoroughly exposed the corruption and the contempt for the American People that is "mainstream" politics for both sides. ..."
"... For that reason alone, it's been great to have these guys in the race. ..."
"... This isn't an interview or a conversation. It's a hit piece by a nobody, Michael Wolff, opinionated and inflaming, punctuated with short hand picked Trump quotes. Trump is correct about the dishonesty of the media. ..."
"... Here in "liberal" Boston the Trump signs are everywhere. Bad sign for Madame Mao. Trump may not take Massachusetts but he is closing the gap with that hideous woman. ..."
"... Like Trump said: "The press are very, very dishonest. Some of them are downright sleazy".Thank God for the internet, otherwise the MSM would have us believe Madame Mao is the Virgin Mary. ..."
"... I wouldn't be surprised to see the 'Hollywood Reporter' shut off comments early. ..."
"... They delete all non-liberal comments, usually later in the morning... the millennial lib's arrive late to work in the morning because they're out partying all night... ..."
The long day is ending for Donald Trump with a pint of vanilla Haagen-Dazs ice cream. We're settling in for a late-night chat
at his Beverly Hills house, a 5,395-square-foot Colonial mansion directly across from the Beverly Hills Hotel. He's here for
the final presidential primary, a California coronation of sorts, after rallies in Orange County (where violence broke out and
seven people were arrested). He is, as he has been for much of our conversation - and perhaps much of the last year -
marveling at his own campaign. "You looked outside before, you see what's going on," he boasts about the police surrounding
his house, and the Secret Service detail cramming his garage and snaking around the pool at the center of the front drive. And
he's just returned from a big donor fundraiser in Brentwood for the Republican Party at the home of Tom Barrack, the investor
and former Miramax co-owner. "There had to be over a thousand policeman. They had a neighborhood roped off, four or five
blocks away from this beautiful house. Machine guns all over the place."
One thing to understand about Trump is that, rather unexpectedly, he's neither angry nor
combative. He may be the most threatening and frightening and menacing presidential candidate
in modern life, and yet, in person he's almost soothing. His extreme self-satisfaction rubs
off. He's a New Yorker who actually might be more at home in California (in fact, he says he
usually comes to his home here -- two buildings on Rodeo Drive -- only once a year). Life is
sunny. Trump is an optimist -- at least about himself. He's in easy and relaxed form
campaigning here in these final days before the June 7 California primary, even with Hillary
Clinton's biggest backers and a city that is about half Latino surrounding him.
... ... ...
If onstage he calls people names, more privately he has only good, embracing things to say about almost everybody. (For
most public people I know, it is the opposite.) He loves everybody. Genuinely seems to love everybody - at least everybody who's
rich and successful (he doesn't really talk about anyone who isn't). Expressing love for everybody, for most of us, would
clearly seem to be an act. But with Trump, it's the name-calling and bluster that might be the act.
... ... ...
Trump will turn 70 on June 14, but he shows no sign of fatigue even as our conversation drifts toward 11 p.m. He's been at
this since either 4 a.m. or 6 a.m. (he offers different times at different moments).
...Then I came back and did more meetings, then I did a fundraiser tonight, then I did Kimmel. And now you. You're not a
two-minute interview guy."
V. M. Varga > HelloTommy • 2 years ago
Bernie has no chance and Hillary is a neocon. What war next.
Ranger_Ric > Political Hostage • 2 years ago
Neocon or neoliberal, they are the same animals and there is no difference between George Bush and Hillary Clinton. They
all answer to the same NWO masters.
There is a difference in Hillary's case... She is a habitual liar, a fake, a criminal and a lesbian. Other than that, there
is one uniparty, the Washington Criminal Mafia.
Penny • 2 years ago
I love the smell of radical establishment media's hysteria this early in the morning. Naturally, the media elite who have
not gone after Obama for not having a press conference since 2009 and Clinton, who has not had one in over a year, doesn't
make a bean's hill of difference. ROT is the name of the "mainstream" media, especially when they see their D.C. lifestyle of
corruption and cover-ups threatened by a straight-shooting, take-no-prisoners man like Trump.
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN--TRUMP/SESSIONS 2016
YesMeansNOMeansYES • 2 years ago
What a self serving article once again, can't you fools write without trying to demean your next president, in every
Walter White > YesMeansNOMeansYES • 2 years ago
Another sleeze. Nuff said.
mredward > Political Hostage • 2 years ago
As you read the anti Trump posts, remember the Hillary pacs have purchased over a million dollars worth of bogus posters
SmartDoctor • 2 years ago
Hmm. The real news is NOT that the competition is in a statistical dead heat during the first week of June. The real news
is that Hillary's polls have been steadily plummeting, and with her level of charisma, charm, and message, it is totally
illogical to assume that they are going to improve anytime soon. They won't. And Trump, the "clown", the totally undetectable
candidate, the spoiler, the guy with no Republican backing what so ever, keeps going up and up and up. Of course the left
never, ever shows the size of the crowds he attracts to his rallies. The left is completely out of touch with the American
mainstream (you know, the folks Mr. Nixon once called "the silent majority".) Trump has the momentum nationwide, and no one
except Southern black ladies likes Hillary. There is your story! Next paragraph, "how did this happen?" And keep in mind, the
FBI hasn't spoken yet, Bernie ain't through yet, the left wing, Soros financed riots haven't begun yet, 2 weeks in politics
is a lifetime, and we haven't gotten to the convention boost yet. Yeah, I'm biased. In America's favor, sorry if that offends
anyone. TRUMP 2016
Political Hostage > SmartDoctor • 2 years ago
I live in the South, with a ton of black folks, and have yet to see any HRC bumper stickers on their cars. It's mostly
Coopers, Beetles, and Cubes that have the HRC swag on them. Not many though.
Our building has about 6,000 people working in it and there maybe a handful of Bernie stickers too. Most working people
aren't looking in the direction of democrats.
Bill Strang • 2 years ago
And you don't think the media is too easy on Hillary? Every time she opens her mouth, she lies and the media just ignores
it. But lets just hold Trump to a much higher standard then a standard democrat.
Penny > Bill Strang • 2 years ago
That is the job description of the elitists (a/k/a "mainstream" media). A recent survey revealed that 85 percent-plus
media are demRATS
Wilkins Micawber • 2 years ago
A vote for Clinton is a vote for the leftist, moonbat, felon, gay, generational welfare leech, gov union, drug addicted,
pervert, lgtqxyz, pedophile, academic, stupid college kid, white guilt ridden, illiterate third world invading trash, in
other words the Democrat base, that supports her.
Angry black woman > Wilkins Micawber • 2 years ago
10000 up votes
TroyGale • 2 years ago
I like confident people who are confident because they have struggled and won in the arena. Trump is no different, he
Here is a quote from General George Patton, I think it explains it perfectly....
"All men are timid on entering any fight. Whether it is the first or the last fight, all of us are timid. Cowards are those
who let their timidity get the better
of their manhood."
Trump doesn't let his timidity get involved, AT ALL.
Brian washere • 2 years ago
Here's an inconvenient truth liberals (media) don't want to face. All those blue collar dems that have always been
brainwashed into thinking the Bolsheviks (D) were for the "working man" are finally opening their dim eyes and realizing they
have been sold down the river.
The regulations puked out by government that chases their workplaces out of the country and the illegals they have to
compete with for replacement jobs, all trademarks of the progressives, have f--ked them hard. They are going to go Trump in
All the dems voter fraud and manipulation won't save Shrillary from that fact. This is going to be so lopsided it will
make Reagan/Carter look like a nail-biter.
Bill Thompson • 2 years ago
I'll vote for him because I want to control our border, enforce our immigration laws, cut the H-1B visas, keep our troops
home, eliminate free trade, protect the 2nd amendment.
phosgene • 2 years ago
is trump ever going to have to answer a single challenging question about how he is full of sheet? this is an "interview"
where he eats ice cream and talks about himself. we already know he can do that. the only policy or current events based
questions i saw he was completely oblivious. there is no room for anything in trump's world but trump.
hillary volunteered for the goldwater campaign when she was younger. her credentials as a republican and a conservative are
stronger than trump's. the guy has conned millions into completely selling out their party and beliefs. sad.
nonuser > phosgene • 2 years ago
Congratulations, you've made Michael Wolff very happy.
dudefromdixie • 2 years ago
Trump is going to unite the right like none before him. He is also going to conquer the left, like none before him.
HelloTommy • 2 years ago
Donald Trump's new finance guru: once a Clinton donor, Soros employee. Steven Mnuchin also contributed to Obama, Kerry and
Gore. You Trumpets are so gullible. He is also an ex-Goldman-Sachs employee and PAC donor. We're suppose to hate that right?
Tell me how that is okay?
MICHAELNLA > HelloTommy • 2 years ago
You Liberals voted for a guy who you thought was Black, not once but twice...guess you forgot to ask him who his mother was.
Meanwhile, Hussein has DOUBLED the National Debt in 8 years!
We have 95 MILLION Americans out of the work force.
50 MILLION Americans on Food Stamps.
Half of college grads unemployed.
And you expect Americans to give the "D" party another
four years in the White House...KEEP DREAMING, LEFTY!
OWilson • 2 years ago
The arrogant left, and their pals in the Media, are not used to being questioned. Hillary hasn't had a press conference in
2016. She lets CNN do all the Trump bashing, all the time. They see a change coming, and it scares the hell out of them all.
jj333 • 2 years ago
This wasn't an "interview", Mr. Wolff. It read like a terribly biased libturd desperately attempting to 'bait' a
Presidential candidate with childish, unimportant questions. We get it...you don't approve of Trump. Now go home and cry in
SamVaughn • 2 years ago
Let's get this straight, Trump exists because the leadership of both parties declared an undeclared war on the
American people. Their disdain towards ordinary Americans makes them willing to lie to get theirs and screw everybody else.
The Republican leadership? Losers. That's why he exists.
ObiterDictum • 2 years ago
Menacing who? If he financially runs the country like his campaign, expect some of those non-essential government
employees to be out on the street. For years our Government has not been afraid of the governed, but now they fear our proxy.
Bluto Redneck ✓Shithole Appr. > ObiterDictum • 2 years ago
Exactly. I predict a 15-20% real cut in our federal bureaucracy. And God help any of those fools that go out on strike.
Air traffic controllers anyone?
phosgene > ObiterDictum • 2 years ago
he's not going to cut a damn thing. do you even listen to what he says? build a wall, kick out 11 million people, massive
military increases, massive increase for veterans, massive infrastructure rebuilding, replacing obamacare with something
none of this is small government stuff, kids. he hasn't mentioned cutting a single thing on the stump. oh yeah, and the age
old republican idea of reforming entitlements? OUT THE WINDOW!
well, that only costs a few TRILLION.
Reaganite✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ • 2 years ago
One of the more obvious reasons Trump has been viewed by so many as the GOP´s best hope of defeating Our Empress of the
Seven Genders is precisely because he - and he alone among the candidates - doesn´t give a flying flip about the "civility"
speech code Democrats impose upon Republicans (or the New Tone muzzle Republicans impose upon themselves) that prohibit the
Left from ever having to face the mocking, the insults, the scathing satire, and the verbal abuse they themselves vomit upon
the Right on a daily basis. The establishment still doesn´t seem to understand just how refreshing this is.
Reaganite✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ • 2 years ago
Donald Trump and his people are upending the Political Media/Progressive Establishment industrial complex narrative. These
" media cretins of PC conformity" are staring into the abyss of their own personal irrelevancy. Trump's celebrity and
unapologetic surrogates allow his campaign to fight them with devastating effect. The professionally offended are blinded to
their own hypocrisy.
Weezy -Stable Genius • 2 years ago
Totally biased flake article, the author is clearly a Clinton shill. The give away is labeling Clinton Cash a "hatchet
job", considering a huge portion of the MSM on the left have validated the book as 100% accurate and true.
What kills many is these reporters really believe the public is incapable of discerning their real intentions when producing
articles like this.
In the meantime, Trump continues to roll on and gain further momentum.
notimportant > phosgene • 2 years ago
Completely different situation. Make the media responsible for what they tout! They can say what they want, but they
better make sure it's correct. Of course, liberals don't believe in personal responsibility. By the way, Putin has an 80%
approval rating in his country and many people respect the man outside the country. That's because he's a man and stands up
for what he believes. He doesn't allow bullying or ugliness by those who disagree with him to effect him. Time we had that in
our country and we will when Trump is president. Neither Putin nor Trump are one world order supporters. Neither am I
ScottPM • 2 years ago
Nothing would be worse than having a President that has shown that they are utterly reckless, arrogant, and shows a total
disregard for American lives by INTENTIONALLY mishandling classified information. Information is classified because people
die if it gets out. hillary has shown she can NOT be trusted as President.
phosgene > ScottPM • 2 years ago
you are completely ignorant. half the paperwork the government generates is classified. they completely misuse it ON
PURPOSE. it is meant to control information. lives have nothing to do with it. it is about protecting their butts
strongisland • 2 years ago
Amazing how a mere journalist for the Hollyweird Reporter repeatedly attempts to elevate himself intellectually above a
man who is light years more successful than himself. The mocking doesn't work here. In fact, it belies what the author is all
about. The typical Gen Y, millennial liberal snark that is never to be taken seriously...because, well, these fools think no
issues are actually serious. As long as the progressive playbook is being fulfilled...these fools are happy in their rapidly
For someone who is seemingly so in tune with the important issues...he sure skirted them as conveniently as possible when it
came to this interview. Sometimes...a worthy opponent brings out the best in an individual. Sadly, for Donald Trump...he was
tangling with a total lightweight here.
cageysea • 2 years ago
"... He loves everybody. Genuinely seems to love everybody - at least everybody who's rich and successful (he doesn't
really talk about anyone who isn't)..."
Uh.... Yeah, I got nothin'.
Mitch Alan > Bad Will Hunting • 2 years ago
...Surprised Trump bothered giving the antagonistic Michael Wolff the interview, but it does show Trump is fearless.
Hillary won't go within 5 miles of Fox News.
Deplorable- jean Lee • 2 years ago
The arrogance of the writer, Michael Wolff is breathtaking. We get it Mr. Wolff. Your story included the small talk
and you articulated YOUR pre-conceived opinions and impressions of Mr. Trump. You are the one with the black
heart! Trump 2016
Stormrdr • 2 years ago
Like or hate 'em there is one thing that Trump and Sanders have both accomplished: They have thoroughly exposed the
corruption and the contempt for the American People that is "mainstream" politics for both sides. The mechanizations and
back-room dealings have been fully revealed with each attempt to derail these "outsiders". For that reason alone, it's
been great to have these guys in the race.
I can't say I'm a big fan of either one of them, but I do admire what they've accomplished for America's political future
(whether or not it was intentional).
Rocky • 2 years ago
This isn't an interview or a conversation. It's a hit piece by a nobody, Michael Wolff, opinionated and inflaming,
punctuated with short hand picked Trump quotes. Trump is correct about the dishonesty of the media.
jack4949 • 2 years ago
Here in "liberal" Boston the Trump signs are everywhere. Bad sign for Madame Mao. Trump may not take Massachusetts but
he is closing the gap with that hideous woman.
jack4949 • 2 years ago
Like Trump said: "The press are very, very dishonest. Some of them are downright sleazy".Thank God for the internet,
otherwise the MSM would have us believe Madame Mao is the Virgin Mary.
Yip Yap • 2 years ago
I wouldn't be surprised to see the 'Hollywood Reporter' shut off comments early. It has been doing that lately
when comments don't go it's way. THAT WALL'S GOIN' TA BE HUUUGE!!!
barney59 > Yip Yap • 2 years ago
They delete all non-liberal comments, usually later in the morning... the millennial lib's arrive late to work in the
morning because they're out partying all night...
Russia's foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, said it was "wild" that Trump's son was being
blamed for speaking with a Russian attorney. Lavrov – who met Trump last week at the G20
summit in Hamburg, together with Vladimir Putin – said he knew nothing of the meeting
with the lawyer. Serious people were trying to "make a mountain out of a molehill", Lavrov
In the emails, Goldstone said he made contact with Trump Jr at the behest of the
Russian-Azeri businessman Aras Agalarov and Aglaravov's pop-star son, Emin. The Agalarovs
hosted Trump when he visited Moscow in 2013 for the Miss Universe beauty pageant.
On Wednesday, Aras Agalarov claimed the story was invented. "I think this is some sort of
fiction. I don't know who is making it up," he told Russia's Business FM radio station, adding:
"What has Hillary Clinton got to do with anything? I don't know."
Fourteen months ago, in the
first flush of power, Steve Bannon gave
to Michael Wolff -- beginning a relationship that would prove his undoing -- in which he boasted about
his plan to realign our politics. His nationalist-populist movement, he argued, would transform the G.O.P. into
something truly new: a right-wing worker's party that spent freely, "jacked up" infrastructure all over the country,
and won "60 percent of the white vote" and "40 percent of the black and Hispanic vote" on its way to a 50-year
"We're just going to throw it
up against the wall and see if it sticks," Bannon said. "It will be as exciting as the 1930s."
As exciting as the 1930s
is not a line you hear every day, but rather than an alt-right dog whistle, what I heard in Bannon's formulation was
the idea that in the Trump era, as in the crisis years that gave us both F.D.R. and Hitler, everything might be up
for grabs: not just electoral coalitions, but the nature and destiny of the liberal order. Which would be a
terrifying prospect but also an exciting one, since it would mean that the long "end of history" that followed the
Cold War had irrevocably ended, and that it was time to imagine radical revisions to a stagnant-seeming liberal West.
Flash forward a year and a
couple months, though, and Bannon's vision seems pretty much dead: its rumpled leader sacked and ritually denounced,
its bold populism subsumed into the same old, same old Republican agenda. Trump remains temperamentally authoritarian
and personally vile, but the idea of Trump_vs_deep_state as an ideological revolution, whether akin to Roosevelt's or
Mussolini's, has mostly evaporated.