Showing posts with label Draft:Timeline of the Trump-Russia Scandal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Draft:Timeline of the Trump-Russia Scandal. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 20, 2017

In From The Cold: CIA Gesture Indicates Thawing US-Russia Ties

Authored by MK Bhadrakumar via The Asia Times,


In the annals of Russian-American relations, it is difficult to recall a precedent for the Kremlin leader calling his White House counterpart to convey his personal gratitude and appreciation for the profound contribution made by the US’ Central Intelligence Agency and its director to Russian national security.


The great irony is that the incumbent Kremlin boss is a former KGB officer. Vladimir Putin never ceases to surprise.


The Kremlin readout of Putin’s phone call to US President Donald Trump on Sunday should be an eye-opener to anyone who bought the US propaganda that Putin is a demon preparing to devour the West – or Russian propaganda that encourages an impression to be formed among the naïve and the gullible that the world is carved into two neat halves, namely the good and the evil.


Countries like Turkey, Iran and Egypt – and Venezuela and North Korea – should take particular note that the world situation and the emerging international order are a lot more complicated than some among them would like to think. What prompted Putin to make such an extraordinary move?


For a start, the Kremlin senses that the investigation into alleged Russian interference in the US election last November is meandering aimlessly and may have to be wound up sooner rather than later. That being the case, a future is conceivable in which the tidal wave of Russophobia in the US recedes, leaving behind much devastation and debris but also the opportunity to begin rehabilitation and reconstruction.


Most certainly, Putin understood the great symbolism and meaning behind the gesture by the CIA to pass on crucial intelligence relating to the security of his hometown, the city of his heart’s desires, and the pride of all Russian people.


US President Donald Trump chats with Russia



US President Donald Trump chats with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin as they attend the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in Danang, Vietnam, on November 11, 2017. Photo: AFP / Sputnik/ Mikhail Klimentyev



It all seems very much like strangers in the night exchanging glances. The key lies in interpreting the CIA’s gesture. The CIA signaled that it is once again viewing Russia as an interlocutor in professional terms and that, in its estimation, all is soon going to be business as usual.


The amazing part, of course, is that the CIA simply ignored the Obama administration’s sanctions against Russia. Putin has promised Trump that the Kremlin will remember this noble gesture and that if, god forbid, the occasion arose, the FSB will reciprocate.


Could the CIA have acted on its own? We don’t know what channel the CIA used. But Putin seems aware that Mike Pompeo, the CIA’s Director, took the decision. The likelihood is that Pompey spoke to the Russian ambassador Anatoly Antonov with Trump’s approval. Putin pointedly requested Trump to pass on his words of appreciation to Pompeo personally.


All of this occurred so very close to Monday – the moment when President Trump was expected to unveil the new US National Security Strategy. Didn’t the CIA hear National Security Advisor HR McMaster condemning Russia only a week ago, naming that country as a “revisionist power” that threatened the very foundations of the world order and international system that the US painstakingly erected in the last century after World War II ended?


Two phone conversations between Trump and Putin within three days resets the calculus. If the first phone call by Trump on Thursday was to thank Putin for the friendly references he made to the US in his annual year-end news conference in Moscow, the call on Sunday was likewise to convey Putin’s gratitude to Trump for approving Pompey’s initiative to pass on the vital intelligence regarding the impending terrorist strike in St. Petersburg.


Many signals lately suggest that some degree of sobriety is setting in, finally, within sections of the US establishment, along with a realization that Trump has been a voice of sanity all along in maintaining that US interests stand to gain by working with Putin and taking Russia’s help. More importantly, the Kremlin is sensing that Trump’s travails could be ending.


Of course, there are negative tidings, too. Only ten days ago, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson conjured up an image of Russia as the “enemy” through his three-nation European tour. And as recently as December 9 there was an altercation between US and Russian fighter planes in the skies above the Euphrates.


But to be sure, the “working lunch” later today in Washington between US Under Secretary of State Shannon and Russian Ambassador Antonov will be closely watched in places as far away as Beijing for any more sounds of ice cracking. Antonov was quoted as saying last night that the two phone conversations between Putin and Trump underscored that “our countries need each other. Our countries define the joint program of actions to strengthen global security.”









Monday, December 18, 2017

The Year Of The Headless Liberal Chicken

Authored by CJ Hopkins via Counterpunch.org,


According to the Chinese zodiac, 2017 has been the Year of the Rooster. Myself, I’ve decided to designate it the Year of the Headless Liberal Chicken.



I don’t mean that to be insulting … or, all right, I guess I do, a little. But my heart goes out to liberals, seriously. At this point, the amount of utterly baseless, contradictory propaganda, mass hysteria, and just flat out insanity the ruling classes have demanded they swallow is more than any human mind, no matter how medicated, could possibly handle. Is it any wonder so many of them of lost it and started seeing Nazis and Russians coming out of the woodwork?


Just consider what the average liberal has been forced to try to cognitively reconcile since the tragic events of last November …


First came the overwhelming shock of Hillary Clinton’s loss to Trump, a repulsive, word salad-babbling buffoon with absolutely no political experience who the media had been portraying to liberals as the Second Coming of Adolf Hitler. This was a candidate, let’s recall, who jabbered about building a “beautiful wall” to protect us from the hordes of “Mexican rapists” and other “bad hombres” who were invading America, and who had boasted about grabbing women “by the pussy” like a prepubescent 6th grade boy. While he had served as a perfect foil for Clinton, and had provided hours of entertainment in a comic book villain kind of way, the prospect of a Donald Trump presidency was inconceivable in the minds of liberals. So, when it happened, it was like the Martians had invaded.


Mass hysteria gripped the nation. There was beaucoup wailing and gnashing of teeth. Liberals began exhibiting irrational and, in some cases, rather disturbing behaviors. Many degenerated into dissociative states and just sat there with their phones for hours obsessively reloading the popular vote count, which Clinton had won, on FiveThirtyEight. Others festooned themselves with safety pins and went out looking for defenseless minorities who they could “demonstrate solidarity” with. Owen Jones flew in from London to join his colleague Steven Thrasher, who was organizing a guerilla force to resist “the normalization of Trump” and the global race war he was about to launch, which “not all of us were going to get out of alive.”


In the weeks immediately following the election, the mainstream media inundated liberals with pronouncements of the advent of an “Age of Darkness” and the “Triumph of White Supremacy” over the beneficent values of Globalism. Yes, it was pretty much the end of everything. America was facing nothing less than a descent into “racial Orwellianism,” “Zionist anti-Semitism,” and “the bottomless pit of Fascism” itself. Liberals, who by then had dispensed with the safety pins, immediately set about terrorizing their children with visions of the impending holocaust, which would be carried out by the genocidal, racist monsters who had voted for Trump.


At that point, the media had been hammering hard on the Trump-is-Hitler narrative for months, so they had to stick with that for a while. It had only been a few weeks, after all, since The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian, and numerous other establishment publications, had explained how Trump was using special fascist code words like “global elites,” “international banks,” and “lobbyists” to signal his virulent hatred of the Jews to the millions of Americans who, according to the media, were secretly Hitler-loving fascists.


This initial post-election propaganda was understandably somewhat awkward, as the plan had been to be able to celebrate the “Triumph of Love over the Forces of Hate,” and the demise of the latest Hitlerian bogeyman.


But this was the risk the ruling classes took when they chose to go ahead and Hitlerize Trump, which they wouldn’t have done if they’d thought for a moment that he had a chance of actually winning the election. That’s the tricky thing about Hitlerizing people. You need to be able to kill them, eventually. If you don’t, when they turn out not to be Hitler, your narrative kind of falls apart, and the people you’ve fear-mongered into a frenzy of frothing, self-righteous fake-Hitler-hatred end up feeling like a bunch of dupes who’ll believe anything the government tells them. This is why, normally, you only Hitlerize foreign despots you can kill with impunity.


This is Hitlerization 101 stuff, which the ruling classes ignored in this case, which the left poor liberals terrified that Trump was actually going to start building Trump-branded death camps and rounding up the Jews.


Fortunately, just in the nick of time, the ruling classes and their media mouthpieces rolled out the Russian Propaganda story. The Washington Post (whose owner’s multimillion dollar deal with the CIA, of course, has absolutely no effect on the quality of its professional journalism) led the charge with this McCarthyite smear job, legitimizing the baseless allegations of some random website and a think tank staffed by charlatans like this “Russia expert,”who appears not to speak a word of Russian or have any other “Russia expert” credentials, but is available both for television and Senate Intelligence Committee appearances. Numerous similar smear pieces followed. Liberals breathed a big sigh of relief … that Hitler business had been getting kind of scary. How long can you go, after all, with Hitler stumbling around the White House before somebody has to go in there and shoot him?


In any event, by January, the media were playing down the Hitler stuff and going balls-out on the “Russiagate” story. According to The Washington Post (which, let’s remember, is a serious newspaper, as opposed to a propaganda organ of the so-called US “Intelligence Community”), not only had the Russians “hacked” the election, but they had hacked the Vermont power grid! Editorialists at The New York Times were declaring that Trump “had been appointed by Putin,” and that the USA was now “at war” with Russia. This was also around the time when liberals first learned of the Trump-Russia Dossier, which detailed how Putin was blackmailing Trump with a video the FSB had shot of Trump and a bunch of Russian hookers peeing on a bed in a Moscow hotel in which Obama had allegedly slept.


This nonsense was reported completely straight-faced, and thus liberals were forced to take it seriously. Imagine the cognitive dissonance they suffered. It was like that scene in 1984 when the Party abruptly switches enemies, and the war with Eurasia becomes the war with Eastasia. Suddenly, Trump wasn’t Hitler anymore. Now he was a Russian sleeper agent who Putin had been blackmailing into destroying democracy with this incriminating “golden showers” video. Putin had presumably been “running” Trump since Trump’s visit to Russia in 2013 to hobnob with “Russia-linked” Russian businessmen and attend the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow. During the ensuing partying, Trump must have gotten loaded on Diet Coke and gotten carried away with those Russian hookers. Now, Putin had him by the short hairs and was forcing him to staff his Manchurian cabinet with corporate CEOs and Goldman Sachs guys, who probably had also been videotaped by the FSB in Moscow hotels paying hookers to pee on furniture, or performing whatever other type of seditious, perverted kink they were into.


Before the poor liberals had time to process this, the ruling classes launched “the Resistance.” You remember the Pussyhat People, don’t you? And the global corporate PR campaign which accompanied their historic “Womens’ March” on Washington? Do you remember liberals like Michael Moore shrieking for the feds to arrest Donald Trump? Or publications like The New York Times, Salon, and many others, and even State Satirist Stephen Colbertaccusing Trump and anyone who supported him of treason … a crime, let’s recall, that is punishable by death? Do you remember folks like William Kristol and Rob “the Meathead” Reiner demanding that the “deep state” launch a coup against Trump to rescue America from the Russian infiltrators?


Ironically, the roll-out of this “Russiagate” hysteria was so successful that it peaked too soon, and prematurely backlashed all over itself. By March, when Trump had not been arrested, nor otherwise removed from office, liberals, who by that time the corporate media had teased into an incoherent, throbbing state of anticipation were … well, rather disappointed. By April, they were exhibiting all the hallmark symptoms of clinical psychosis. This mental breakdown was due to the fact that the media pundits and government spooks who had been telling them that Trump was Hitler, and then a Russian sleeper agent, were now telling them that he wasn’t so bad, because he’d pointlessly bombed a Syrian airstrip, and dropped a $314 million Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb on some alleged “terrorist caves” in Afghanistan.


As if liberals’ poor brains weren’t rattled enough, the corporate media then switched back to, first, the Russian Propaganda narrative (which they expanded into a global threat), then, the Hitler stuff again, but this time Trump wasn’t actually Hitler, because Putin was Hitler, or at least he was fomenting Hitlerism throughout the West with his legions of fascist hacker bots who were “influencing” unsuspecting consumers with their blitzkrieg of divisive “fake news” stories. Oh, yeah, and now Putin had also done Brexit, or Trump and Robert Mercer had, but they were working for Putin, who had also hacked the French election that he hadn’t hacked, or … whatever … this was no time to worry about what had or hadn’t actually happened. The peace and prosperity President Obama had reestablished throughout the West by incessantly bombing the Greater Middle East and bailing out his pals at the Wall Street banks was being torn asunder by Vladimir Putin, who at some point had apparently metamorphosized from a ruthless, former KGB autocrat into a white supremacist megalomaniac.


Right on cue, on the weekend of August 11-12 in Charlottesville, Virginia, where there had never been any history of racism, a “national gathering” of approximately five hundred tiki torch-bearing neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan types, and other white supremacists, many of them barking Nazi slogans, marched into the pages of history. Never before have so few fascists owed so much to the mainstream media, which showered them with overwrought coverage, triggering a national Nazi panic. Liberals poured into the streets, tearing down Confederate monuments, and otherwise signaling their total intolerance of the racism they had tolerated until a few days earlier. People named after Robert E. Lee, and horses named after General Lee’s horse, went into hiding to until the panic subsided. This was wise, as by then the so-called anti-fascists were showing up in force at anything resembling a right-wing rally and stomping the living Hitler out of Nazis, and Trump supporters, and journalists, and … well, anyone they didn’t think looked quite right. This totally preemptively self-defensive, non-violent type of violent behavior, naturally, shocked and horrified liberals, who are strongly opposed to all forms of violence that aren’t carried out by the US military, or the police, or someone else wearing a uniform. Unsure as to whom they were supposed to condemn, the Nazis or the Antifa terrorists, they turned for guidance to the corporate ruling classes, who informed them it was time to censor the Internet.


This made about as much sense as any of the other nonsense they’d been spoonfed so far, so liberals decided to get behind it, or at least look the other way while it happened.


Facebook, Google, Amazon, Twitter (and all the other corporations that control the Internet, the media, Hollywood, the publishing industry, and every other means of representing “reality”) surely have people’s best interests at heart. Plus, they’re only censoring the Nazis, and the terrorists, and the Russian “fake news” disseminators, and, OK, a lot of leftist publications, and award-winning journalists, and anyone else espousing “divisive,” anti-American, or anti-corporate, “extremist” views.


Look, I know what you’re probably thinking, but it isn’t like liberals don’t actually care about fundamental liberal values like freedom of the press and speech and all that. It’s just that they desperately need the Democrats to take back the House and the Senate next year, so they can get on with impeaching Trump, and if they have to stand by while the corporations suppress a little leftist dissent, or, you know, transform the entire Internet into a massive, mind-numbing echo chamber of neo-McCarthyite corporate conformity … well, sacrifices have to be made.


This can’t go on forever, after all. This level of full-blown mass hysteria can only be sustained for so long. It’s all fine and good to be able to whip people up into a frenzied mob, but at some point you need to have an endgame. The neoliberal ruling classes know this. Their endgame is actually fairly simple. Their plan is to (a) make an example of Trump to discourage any future billionaire idiots from screwing with their simulation of democracy, and (b) demonize anyone deviating from neoliberal ideology as a fascist, racist, or anti-Semite, or otherwise “abnormal” or “extremist.” Their plan is not to incinerate the entire planet in a war with Russia. We’re not on the brink of World War III, despite how many Twitter likes or Facebook shares it might get me to say that. Yes, eventually, they want to force Russia to return to the kind of “cooperation” it engaged in during the 1990s, when it was run by an incorrigible drunkard and the Goldman Sachs boys and their oligarch pals were looting the country for all it was worth … but that has little to do with all this.


No, the corporate ruling classes’ endgame here is to reestablish neoliberal “normality,” so we can get back to the War on Terror (or whatever they’ll be calling it by then), and put this neo-nationalist revolt against neoliberalism episode behind us.


To do that, they will need to install some sort of hopey-changey, Obama-like messiah, or at least somebody who can play the part of POTUS like a normal person and not sit around the Oval Office gobbling McDonald’s and retweeting racist memes by random British fascists.


The way things are going, that might take a while, but rest assured they’ll get there eventually.


Now that Robert Mueller has proved that Trump colluded with Vladimir Putin by obstructing an investigation by Comey into Michael Flynn’s lying to the FBI about not colluding with the Russian ambassador on behalf of Israel at Kushner’s behest, the dominoes are surely about to fall.


Once they all have, and Donald Trump’s head has been mounted on a spike on the White House lawn as a warning to any other potential usurpers, all this Russia and Nazi hysteria that has the poor liberals running around like headless chickens will disappear. Russia will go back to being Russia. The North American Nazi Menace, deprived of daily media coverage, will go back to being a fringe phenomenon. Liberals will go back to ignoring politics (except identity politics, naturally) and obediently serving the global capitalist ruling elites that are destroying the planet, and the lives of millions of human beings, in order to increase their profit margins.


Sure, there’ll be a brief emotional hangover, once the adrenaline rush wears off and they look back at their tweets and Facebook posts, which in hindsight might convey the impression that they spent the better part of a year parroting whatever insane propaganda the corporate media pumped out at them, and otherwise behaving like Good Americans … but then, that’s what the “delete” key is for.









Monday, December 4, 2017

"The Whole Thing Is Completely Absurd": Kremlin Blasts Notion That Flynn "Influenced" Putin

As the U.S. media and Washington D.C. legislators continue to lose their collective minds over the Michael Flynn charges, Kremlin  press secretary Dmitry Peskov took to the podium earlier today to dismiss the notion that Flynn"s comments to former ambassador Sergey Ivanovich had any impact on Putin"s ultimate decision to retaliate against U.S. sanctions as "completely absurd."  Per the RT:








“Flynn was in no position to request anything of Sergey Ivanovich [Kislyak, Russia’s former US ambassador] let alone to expect any requests to be relayed to Vladimir Putin – the whole thing is completely absurd,” said the Russian President’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov during a media briefing in Moscow.


 


In the end Russia did postpone its response, but Peskov says that “the decision was taken by Putin alone, and cannot be attributed to any requests or recommendations.”


 


What information Putin receives from his ambassadors is of no concern to anyone else,” said Peskov. “The Russian president makes all decisions independently on the basis, as he has said many times, of Russia’s national interest.”



Flynn


For those who may have just returned from a remote island and missed the "shocking" revelations of the past three days, as we"ve detailed numerous times, former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn plead guilty last Friday to lying under oath by denying to the FBI that he urged the Russian ambassador to delay a decision on retaliating against U.S. sanctions and attempted to influence a U.N. vote.  Of course, the conversations in question happened after the election, during the transition period, and wouldn"t have been an issue but for Flynn"s seemingly inexplicable decision to lie about them.  Here"s more from NBC:








A two-page charging document filed last week listed two false statements Flynn made about his interactions with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak in late December 2016. It said Flynn falsely claimed that he had not asked Kislyak "to refrain from escalating the situation in response to sanctions that the U.S. had imposed against Russia," and that he didn"t recall Kislyak telling him Russia had decided to moderate its response as a result of his request.


 


Prior to the Dec. 29 call with Kislyak, Flynn called a senior official with the presidential transition team who was with other members of the team at Trump"s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida to discuss what to say to the Russian ambassador regarding sanctions, according to the statement of offense.


 


Court documents also said Flynn falsely claimed that he didn"t ask Kislyak on Dec. 22 to "delay a vote on or defeat" a U.N. Security Council resolution, and then falsely denied that Kislyak had described Russia"s response to the request. Before that call, a "very senior member" of the transition team directed Flynn to contact foreign officials, including those from Russia, to learn where they stood and influence the vote, according to the statement of offense. The "very senior member" was Jared Kushner, three people familiar with the matter told NBC News.


 


According to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s charge, Flynn made the false statements to the FBI on Jan. 24, two days after he was sworn in as national security adviser.



Of course, the real question from here is what Flynn"s plea deal means for the White House.  Not surprisingly, the Left has celebrated the development as an indication Flynn could potentially implicate President Trump in the "Russian collusion" investigation while Trump supporters have argued that the decision to pursue Flynn over false statements clearly indicates that they have nothing else of substance.  Per the Wall Street Journal:








To Mr. Trump’s supporters, the charge against Mike Flynn for making false statements was evidence that investigators were nowhere near proving collusion with Russians to interfere in the 2016 president election, the matter at the heart of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigative mandate.


 


But Mr. Trump’s detractors viewed the plea deal as a milestone—the first senior aide to Mr. Trump to turn on his former boss—in an investigation that continues to escalate.


 


Both versions make assumptions about what information Mr. Flynn has to offer, a mystery that will reveal itself over time. For now, Mr. Flynn’s deal with the special counsel and his team suggests at the very least that Mr. Mueller believes Mr. Flynn has something valuable to share and that his investigation is unlikely to end soon, said former federal prosecutors.


 


“A guilty plea at this stage really could mean a whole lot of different things, and folks are in a hurry to have the plea meet their predetermined narratives,” said Stephen Vladeck, an expert in national-security law and law professor at the University of Texas.



So what say you...is the "Russian collusion" investigation weaving its way into the Oval Office or are escalating suggestions of the President"s downfall just another "nothing burger?"









Sunday, December 3, 2017

From The Archives: Obama Administration Confirms "No Problem" With Flynn Contacting Foreign Officials

As we detailed yesterday, ABC was forced to retract an epic mistake in their reporting that claimed contact between Trump staff (Flynn) and Russian officials "druing the campaign" - correcting it to point out that it was in fact "during the transition".


President Trump tweeted his perspective, confirming the new "facts" from ABC...



    CNN   were quick to mock the White House for saying that the Obama administration approved Flynn"s contacts   (and found someone all too eager to go on TV and attack their claims)... (via The Hill)


The White House said on Friday that it was the Obama administration that authorized former national security adviser Michael Flynn"s contacts with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during President Trump"s transition, according to CNN.


 


Flynn pleaded guilty on Friday to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Kislyak in the month before Trump took office, the first current or former Trump White House official brought down by special counsel Robert Mueller"s investigation into Russia"s election meddling.


 


James Clapper, who served as the Director of National Intelligence under Obama, said that the claim that the Obama administration authorized Flynn"s contacts with Kislyak was "absurd," adding that the administration was concerned by the communications at the time.


“That’s absurd. That’s absolutely absurd," Clapper said on CNN.



 



Confused yet?


So, given all the confusion, here is a clarifying source free of all possible bias - the Obama administration"s State Department - confirming Trump and Flynn"s story, and crushing Clapper"s continued lies...from the archives:



Transcript for the hard of hearing:


REPORTER: "This building [the Obama State Department] doesn"t see anything necessarily inapprorpiate in contact between members of the incoming [Trump] administration and foreign officials, no matter what country they"re from?"


 


OBAMA STATE DEPT SPOKESPERSON: "No, no...and again this has been ongoing. We have no problem with them doing such on their own."



Well, that"s going to ruin a few talking points for tomorrow"s Sunday morning political shows.









Saturday, December 2, 2017

ABC Makes "Epic Mistake", Retracts Bombshell Flynn Story

Having caused chaos in financial markets briefly, set the liberal media on fire with "I told you so"s, and sparked a renewed round of #ImpeachTrump demands, ABC News issued a "clarification" to their bombshell Flynn report that not only negates the entire story but provides President Trump with another round of ammunition to fire against the "fake news" media.



Critically, ABC News reports, correcting their earlier report, that Michael Flynn is prepared to testify that Donald Trump directed him to contact the Russians as president-elect, not as a candidate.


Here is the full "clarification"


During a live Special Report, ABC News reported that a confidant of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn said Flynn was prepared to testify that then-candidate Donald Trump instructed him to contact Russian officials during the campaign.


 


That source later clarified that during the campaign, Trump assigned Flynn and a small circle of other senior advisers to find ways to repair relations with Russia and other hot spots.


 


It was shortly after the election, that President-elect Trump directed Flynn to contact Russian officials on topics that included working jointly against ISIS.



So to clarify - just as President Trump had stated, there was no contact with Russians during his time as a candidate but in fact it was in transition as he attempted to mend broken bridges with another world super-power in his role as president-elect - this in no way a criminal act at all. In fact, reaching out to foreign governments during transitions is standard procedure.


CNN is embarrassed...



Axios apologizes for its use of the story...


(We regret highlighting a story that had one source making an astonishing allegation.)



And maybe Brian Ross, so-called journalist and ABC News Chief Investigative Correspondent, who wrote the ABC article, will explain himself and his "sources" for this nothingburger of a story.



One wonder what the consequences are, or should be, for such an obvious error.


The original tweet published by ABC News containing Ross" initial report had been retweeted more than 25,000 times and embedded in various news stories online before it was deleted.


But the clarification - issued at 7:53pmET - has just 2600 RTs...



Is it any wonder trust in the mainstream media is at rock bottom?


How long before Dianne Feinstein retracts her angry statement aimed at President Trump "negotiating with Russia against US interests"?


We look forward to President Trump"s tirade over this.









Monday, November 27, 2017

Russiagate Explained

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,


Michael Flynn is in the news again.



Russiagaters are gushing with excitement at the revelation that Flynn’s lawyers are no longer sharing information with the president’s legal team now that Robert Mueller’s investigation is looking more closely at the former National Security Advisor’s involvement in the production of a film about an exiled cleric from Turkey. The story goes that this separation means that Flynn has struck a deal with Mueller, which Mueller wouldn’t permit him to do if he didn’t have damning information on Trump.


Of course this excitement is dependent on the false belief that Mueller’s job is to get the president impeached, and that he would only cut deals toward that ultimate end. It is also dependent on the false belief that there is any evidence to be found that Trump illegally colluded with the Russian government to steal the 2016 election. And, like the rest of the Russiagate enthusiasm around Flynn, it is also somewhat dependent on compartmentalizing away from the fact the Turkey and Russia are two completely different countries.


This is all par for course in the interminable dance of soaring excitement followed by thinly veiled disappointment that Russiagaters have been engaged in for over a year. I’ve been receiving some complaints that I don’t recap enough on the specific details of why I reject the establishment Russia narrative so aggressively, so if you’re just tuning in, what follows is a quick synopsis of how this weird thing has been going so far.


At the beginning of 2015 Hillary Clinton was already scaring people with her intensely hawkish positions on Russia, long before she went all-in on her horrifying support for a no-fly zone in a region where Russian military planes were conducting operations. Coincidentally this same nation Clinton wanted to fight happens to be the nation everyone in her political party is supporting new cold war escalations with today.


When WikiLeaks began releasing Democratic party emails, those ever-trustworthy truth angels collectively known as the US intelligence community began asserting that the leaks were provided by Russian hackers, a claim WikiLeaks denies. Clinton, still widely expected to win the presidency, used that opportunity to call for “military responses” to cyber intrusions, saying as president she would “make it clear that the United States will treat cyber attacks just like any other attack.”



In a debate with Trump in October of 2016, Clinton asserted that “17 intelligence agencies” had all concluded that Russia was behind the WikiLeaks releases, which this year we learned was actually four agencies, which was actually three agencies plus Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, which was actually two dozen agents from the CIA, FBI and NSA that Clapper hand-picked himself.


James Clapper is a known Russophobic racist who has said that Russians “are almost genetically driven to co-opt, penetrate, gain favor, whatever,” and that “It is in their genes to be opposed, diametrically opposed to the United States and to Western democracies.”


Clinton has continued to repeat the “17 intelligence agencies” lie long after it was conclusively debunked, and Democratic party loyalists continue to repeat it to this day. They do this to manufacture the illusion that this is something agreed upon by the entire US intelligence community and not two dozen analysts picked by a man with a seething eugenicist hatred of Russians.



Russia, incidentally, functions with regard to the United States as the right arm of China, the chief rival of the US power establishment Clinton has spent her career immersed in.


In January Clapper’s ODNI released its much anticipated intelligence report on the Russian hacking allegations to the public, which spent much of its space bizarrely talking about the fact that RT America covers third party presidential candidates and Occupy Wall Street. It ties Guccifer 2.0 to the WikiLeaks releases on very shaky grounds, despite an abundance of evidence that “Guccifer 2.0” is in fact an US establishment psyop and not a hacker at all.


To this day we’ve seen no hard evidence of Russian hacking the Democratic party emails despite assurances from NSA veterans that if such evidence exists it can surely be found on NSA records and safely shared with the public without exposing any sources or compromising any methods that aren’t public knowledge already. And yet the anti-Russia sentiment that assertion sparked has been used to manufacture support for sanctions, troops along Russia’s border, NATO expansionism and proxy conflicts. This is simply unacceptable in a post-Iraq invasion world. When it comes to assertions which lead to war, including cold war, the US intelligence community must be considered guilty until proven innocent. They have lost the trust of every sensible person forever.


The many, many gaping plot holes in the Russian hacking narrative are likely why as 2017 has worn on, establishment loyalists have been opting to focus more on allegations that Russia used a pervasive propaganda campaign to get Trump elected.


This includes RT America, which has the temerity to air the anti-establishment opinions of Americans whom mainstream media outlets refuse to platform, Pikachu-gate, and a narrative about $100,000 in Facebook ads somehow influencing a $6.8 billion election despite the fact that the ads in question rarely mentioned the election and most of them not being seen until after it was over.


Most disturbingly, the “Russian propaganda” angle has led to a large percentage of the US population supporting and promulgating the narrative that Americans need to be protected from ideas or information, which has led to enormous increases in corporate censorship across all major social media platforms. Which of course works out nicely for the unelected power establishment which has a vested interest in manipulating the ideas and information that Americans consume.


So that’s the narrative about Russia’s half of Russiagate. The story about Trump’s half is even more absurd.


The notion that Democrats may be able to get Trump impeached for colluding with Russia really took hold in January with the release of the now-infamous Christopher Steele dossier, which alleges that Russians have been blackmailing Trump into compliance with their agendas using a video they took years prior of Trump paying a bunch of prostitutes to urinate on a bed the Obamas once slept in. Apart from the obvious fact that nothing about this is even remotely believable, the dossier itself is riddled with significant errors and mostly unverified, and Steele himself has been distancing himself from parts of it. Some of the more high-octane Russiagaters have claimed that since some small parts of the Dossier have been confirmed to contain accurate basic information it must therefore all be true, which is the same as claiming that since Alex Jones was right about Iraq WMDs he’s definitely right about everything else he says as well.


Oh, and the position on Ukraine that the dossier alleges Trump was blackmailed into espousing? It’s virtually identical to Obama’s, and arguably more anti-Russia.


You’ll also hear a lot of talk about how Trump has “financial ties to Russia”, meaning he is necessarily therefore financially beholden to the Kremlin.


This story of course requires that you ignore the many, many other foreign countries with which Trump has financial ties in order to view this as significant. Why would Trump exclude Russia from his map of business deals when the arm-waving hysteria about that country didn’t start until last year? In order to make Russian business ties look significant amid a sea of other foreign business ties you need to make the case that Russia is uniquely nefarious among nations, and few Americans saw it that way until the anti-Russia propaganda campaign began last year.


There’s talk about how some campaign officials met with Russians, which is only suspicious if you ignore all the other foreign nationals they met with and doublethink your way into believing that Russia has always been viewed as uniquely malicious among nations. Manafort and Gates were indicted for stuff that had nothing to do with Trump or Russia, and back in August the Washington Post ran a story explicitly stating that Papadopoulos was a very low-level aide whose attempts to arrange meetings between campaign officials and Russians were consistently rejected by the Trump campaign.


Taken individually, parts of Russiagate look like they could maybe possibly somehow lead somewhere plausible. Taken together, it’s obvious that the American people are being manipulated toward an anti-detente agenda by the Democrats who just want Trump impeached and the US power establishment which wants to secure geopolitical power by aggressively undermining its potential rivals.


The term Gish gallop refers to a fallacious debate tactic in which one barrages one’s opposition with a deluge of individually weak arguments which take far too long to debunk individually in a way that sustains the audience’s interest. This is all Russiagate amounts to. When Russiagaters tell you that there’s “too much smoke for there not to be fire”, they are unwittingly telling you “I’ve been won over by a Gish gallop fallacy.”


Every single aspect of their argument can be easily debunked without exception, but since there’s so much of it and since pundits are assuring them of its reality so confidently, they believe.



Every few weeks there’s some major new “bombshell” revelation which Russiagaters get all excited about, only to have people read the actual information in the “bombshell” and find out it’s not actually anything incriminating or particularly remarkable. Take all those “bombshells” together, though, and you create the illusion of something real. That’s all this nonsense is.


 


*  *  *


Hey you, thanks for reading! My work is entirely reader-funded so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following me on Twitter, and maybe throwing some money into my hat on Patreon.









Saturday, November 18, 2017

How America"s Deep State Operates To Control The Message

Authored by Philip Giraldi via The Strategic Culture Foundation,


It is not possible to overstate the power of certain constituencies and corporate lobbies in the United States.



These pressure groups, joined by powerful government agencies, many of which have secret agendas that focus on national security, constitute what is increasingly being recognized as “Deep State America.” Deep State is the widespread belief that there exists in many countries an entrenched and largely hidden infrastructure that really controls the national narrative and runs things. It explains why, for example, a country like the United States is perpetually at war even though the wars have been disastrous failures ever since Korea and have not made the nation more secure.


To be sure, certain constituencies have benefitted from global instability and conflict, to include defense industries, big government in general, and the national security state. They all work together and hand-in-hand with the corporate media to sustain the narrative that the United States is perpetually under threat, even though it is not.


The recent exchanges over the Russia-US relationship exhibit perfectly how the Deep State operates to control the message. American President Donald Trump briefly met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Vietnam. Putin reportedly told Trump that Russia “absolutely had not meddled” in the 2016 US election and Trump then told reporters that he believed the Russian leader meant what he said, “which is good.” As détente with Russia is not considered desirable by the Deep State, there was an immediate explosion of a contrary narrative, namely that Trump believes a Russian “enemy” and does not trust what his own intelligence agencies have told him about 2016 because he is being "played" by Putin.


This story was repeated both on television news and in all the mainstream newspapers without exception, eventually forcing Trump to recant and say that he does believe in US intelligence.


Not a single major media outlet in the US reported that it just might be possible that Putin was telling the truth and that the intelligence community, which has been wrong many times over the past twenty years, might have to look again at what it considers to be evidence. No journalist had the courage to point out that the claims of the Washington national security team have been remarkably devoid of anything credible to support the conclusions about what the Russian government might or might not have been up to. That is what a good journalist is supposed to do and it has nothing to do with whether or not one admires or loathes either Putin or Trump.


That the relationship between Moscow and Washington should be regarded as important given the capability of either country to incinerate the planet would appear to be a given, but the Washington-New York Establishment, which is euphemism for Deep State, is actually more concerned with maintaining its own power by marginalizing Donald Trump and maintaining the perception that Vladimir Putin is the enemy head of state of a Russia that is out to cripple American democracy.


Beyond twisting narratives, Russiagate is also producing potentially dangerous collateral damage to free speech, as one of the objectives of those in the Deep State is to rein in the current internet driven relatively free access to information. In its most recent manifestations, an anonymous group produced a phony list of 200 websites that were “guilty” of serving up Russian propaganda, a George Soros funded think tank identified thousands of individuals who are alleged to be “useful idiots” for Moscow, and legitimate Russian media outlets will be required to register as foreign agents.


Driven by Russophobia over the 2016 election, a group of leading social media corporations including Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Twitter have been experimenting with ways to self-censor their product to keep out foreign generated or “hate” content.


They even have a label for it: "cyberhate". Congress is also toying with legislation that will make certain viewpoints unacceptable or even illegal, including a so-called Anti-Semitism Awareness Act that would potentially penalize anyone who criticizes Israel and could serve as a model for banning other undesirable speech. “Defamatory speech” could even eventually include any criticism of the government or political leaders, as is now the case in Turkey, which is the country where the “Deep State” was invented.









Monday, October 30, 2017

"Did He Wear A Wire?": Former Trump Campaign Aide Pleads Guilty To Lying To FBI

Update: Papadopoulos"s attorney has weighed in...



* * *


In addition to the news that former Trump campaign executive Paul Manafort and his longtime deputy, Rick Gates, have been indicted on 12 counts including tax fraud, money laundering, failing to register as a lobbyist for a foreign country, and conspiring against the US, unsealed court documents have revealed that former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty on Oct. 5 to making false statements to the FBI.


Noting that the Russian government often uses foreign intermediaries to accomplish its foreign policy goals, the FBI said it investigated Papadopoulos, who served as a foreign adviser for the Trump campaign starting on March 2016 and continuing through most of the campaign, for any such contacts. This investigation included an interview in January 2017. According to the indictment, there is probable cause to believe that on Jan. 27, Papadopoulos made material false statements and omitted material facts to the FBI regarding his interactions during the campaign with foreign contacts, including Russian nationals.


Specifically,  Prosecutors charged Papadopolous with lying to investigators and that he falsely described his interactions with a certain foreign contact, identified as a professor, who discussed "dirt" related to emails concering then-presiential candidate Hillary Clinton, when in fact, he had repeated communications with that contact while serving as an adviser on the campaign. Papadopoulos allegedly told the FBI that those conversations happened before he joined the campaign, statements rebutted by the Justice Department"s timeline.



Papadopoulos also shut down a Facebook account following a second interview in February. The account included communications with foreigners including Russian nationals - thereby obstructing the FBI"s investigation. 


A self-described energy consultant, Papadopoulos was the youngest and least experienced member of the small foreign policy team Trump abruptly formed last March after coming under criticism for his lack of foreign policy expertise. Furthermore, the Washington Post reported that in at least half a dozen email requests sent between March and September 2016, adviser George Papadopoulos urged Trump or senior members of his campaign to meet with Russian officials. Some of those emails were read to the newspaper by a person with access to them.


These newly surfaced emails mark the latest in a long string of examples of the Trump team’s efforts to establish direct communication with Russia during the 2016 race.


In one, Papadopoulos offered to arrange “a meeting between us and the Russian leadership to discuss US-Russia ties under President Trump,” as quoted by the Post.


It is worth recalling, however, that as the WaPo first reported back in August, several Trump officials, including Paul Manafort, who served as Trump’s campaign chairman, expressed concern over the proposed meetings. Other officials who raised concerns over Papadopoulos’s proposals to meet with with Russian officials include the Trump campaign’s co-chairman, Sam Clovis, and Navy Rear Adm. Charles Kubic.


Papadopoulos also passed on an exchange with the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), which conveyed that the Russian foreign ministry was receptive to Trump making a trip to Russia. An official with the Council confirmed that a discussion about a U.S.-Russia dialogue “informally” occurred.


“We discussed the idea informally as one of the opportunities for ... dialogue between Russia and the U.S.,” Ivan Timofeev told The Post. “RIAC often hosts meetings with prominent political figures and experts from the US and many other countries.”


Manafort, according to the report, passed on the note to one of his colleagues, saying “We need someone to communicate that DT is not doing these trips.”


“We thought we probably should not go forward with any meeting with the Russians until we have had occasion to sit with our NATO allies,” Clovis said in a March email discussing a potential meeting.


* * *


Then there"s this from the WaPo"s initial account:


Papadopoulos emerges from the sample of emails as a new and puzzling figure in the examination of the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russian officials and their proxies during the 2016 election, now the subject of a special-counsel investigation.


 


Less than a decade out of college, Papadopoulos appeared to hold little sway within the campaign, and it is unclear whether he was acting as an intermediary for the Russian government, although he told campaign officials he was.


 


While the emails illustrate his eagerness to strengthen the campaign’s connections to the Russian government, Papadopoulos does not spell out in them why it would be in Trump’s interest to do so. His entreaties appear to have generated more concern than excitement within the campaign, which at the time was looking to seal the Republican nomination and take on a heavily favored Hillary Clinton in the general election.



The Papadopoulos emails are part of 20,000 pages of documents the campaign provided to Congress earlier this month.


* * *


A growing question now is what Papadopoulos may have "given" the government as part of the plea agreement, and whather he has "flipped" on Trump:


Former US Attorney Preet Bharara says the FBI appears to have found a cooperating witnes in Pap - which is significant.



In his plea agreement, the government says it will offer leniency to Pap in exchange for his cooperation, and that sentencing will be delayed before cooperation is completed.



Finally, as The Smoking Gun asks, "did George Papadopoulos agree to wear a wire or make any FBI-monitored calls?"



And at least some, for now, believe the answer is yes:



Finally, with some asking whether the young ex-advisor may have had alterantive motives, the Guardian"s Jon Swaine points out that the former aide sought book publisher recommendations three weeks ago.


“Interested in meeting with a prominent publisher. Recommendations welcome, ” wrote Papadopoulos



* * *


Here"s Pap"s plea agreeement:



 


....and the criminal complaint
 










Thursday, October 26, 2017

"The Hoax Turned Around": Trump Responds To News Hillary Funded "Fake Dossier"

Responding to Tuesday"s WaPo report that Hillary Clinton was the mystery financial source behind the "Russia Dossier", Trump blasted Hillary Clinton, calling the project a “disgrace” and claiming the tables have turned on Democrats over the “Russia hoax.”


"I understand they paid a tremendous amount of money and Hillary Clinton always denied it, the Democrats always denied it, and now only because it"s going to come out in a court case they said "yes, they did it" and  they’re embarrassed by it, but I think it’s a disgrace,” Trump told reporters, before heading to Texas for a briefing on Hurricane Harvey recovery efforts and a Republican fundraiser. “It’s a very sad commentary on politics in this country.”



Trump repeatedly said Wednesday that this information only came out because the court case would have revealed it. Amid a series of Russia-related controversies that have Democrats – at least for now – on defense, Trump suggested the allegations of Russia collusion with his campaign were a "hoax" and have boomeranged and are hurting Democrats.


“The whole Russia thing … this was the Democrats coming up with an excuse for losing the election,” Trump told reporters. “They lost it and they lost it very badly. And they didn’t know what to say, so they made up the whole Russia hoax.”


Trump added: “Now it’s turning out that the hoax is turned around, and you look at what’s happened with Russia and the uranium deal and the fake dossier, and it’s all turned around.”


Trump was referring not only to the dossier but the Obama administration’s 2010 approval of a Canadian mining company’s sale to a Russian firm that gave them partial control of U.S. uranium reserves.  “I think the uranium sale to Russia and the way it was done so underhanded with tremendous amounts of money being passed, I think that"s Watergate modern age,” Trump said.


On Tuesday night, the Democratic National Committee distanced itself and washed its hands of the whole affair, stressing that the current leadership was not involved in the arrangement.


“Tom Perez and the new leadership of the DNC were not involved in any decision-making regarding Fusion GPS, nor were they aware that Perkins Coie was working with the organization," DNC Communications Director Xochitl Hinojosa said in a statement. "But let’s be clear, there is a serious federal investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, and the American public deserves to know what happened.” 


A spokesman for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., who led the DNC at the time, told Fox News on Wednesday that, “She did not have any knowledge of this arrangement.”


What exactly Hillary Clinton knew is unclear. But Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said in a statement that, “I personally wasn’t aware of this during the campaign.” However, he said, “if I had gotten handed it last fall, I would have had no problem passing it along and urging reporters to look into it.”


The Washington Post also reported that while Elias and his law firm retained Fusion GPS in April 2016, the firm’s research before that was funded by an “unknown Republican client” during the GOP primary. Asked Wednesday if he knows who that was, Trump teased the media. “I think I would know but I won’t say,” he said. “I have one name in mind. … It will probably be revealed.” 









Wednesday, September 20, 2017

Russian Collusion? New Emails Reveal Hillary Clinton Invited Putin To "Pay For Play" Event

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,


In newly released emails which the mainstream media is willfully ignoring, Hillary Clinton invited Russian president Vladimir Putin to a Clinton Foundation event. The Russian collusion between Hillary Clinton is becoming very apparent.



Hillary Clinton likes to talk a tough game about Russian President Vladimir Putin. And she likes to put him on the list of those at fault for her loss in the election last November to Donald Trump. But that didn’t stop her from inviting him and other top Russian officials to a Clinton Foundation gala right after she became Secretary of State.





Clinton Foundation director of foreign policy Amitabh Desai sent dozens of invitations to world leaders including then-Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, and Former President of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev, emails recently obtained by Judicial Watch revealed.



While Democrats blast any Republican who has the nerve to even look Russia’s direction, Hillary and her minions in the Clinton Foundation were begging the Russians to come to an event put on by the “pay for play” organization.


Hillary offered political favors in exchange for money filtered through the Clinton Foundation.


On March 13, 2009, Desai emailed the list of invitations to Assistant Secretary of State Andrew Shapiro, who then forwarded the email to top Clinton aide, Jake Sullivan. This happened at approximately the same time that the newly appointed Clinton tried to “reset” U.S. relations with Russia. Yet, Donald Trump has been blasted for trying to do the same thing. The propaganda in the media is becoming clear as they continue to brush this story under the rug too.


Hillary Clinton repeatedly attacked Putin during her 2016 presidential campaign and often tried to link president Donald Trump to the Russian leader. Clinton and her staff, with help from Barack Obama and the media also allegedly concocted the “Russian hacking” narrative within 24-hours of her election defeat, as documented in the Clinton campaign tell-all book, Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign:





That strategy had been set within twenty-four hours of her concession speech. Mook and Podesta assembled her communications team at the Brooklyn headquarters to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up.



For a couple of hours, with Shake Shack containers littering the room, they went over the script they would pitch to the press and the public. Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.



Clinton’s public display of contempt for Putin does not match her track record of how she interacted with the Russian leader in the past as controversy swirled following a uranium deal she approved while at the State Department. The deal was quickly followed by a massive donation to her foundation, proving the “pay for play” policy she herself used to become wealthy.





“One year after inviting Putin to the Clinton Foundation event, she approved the sale of 20% of America’s uranium capacity to Russia,” Conservative Review noted.



“Shortly thereafter, donors connected to the company that was sold to Russia contributed $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation.”



These newly released emails simply prove what most already knew – Hillary Clinton’s collusion with Russia is far deeper than Donald Trump’s.

Friday, August 4, 2017

Vladimir Putin, At Wit's End With Washington, Opts For Poker Over Chess

Authored by Robert Birdge via The Strategic Culture Foundation,


Russian President Vladimir Putin has made a calculated bet that the embattled Trump administration will interpret his expulsion of hundreds of US diplomats from Russia as more of a friendly warning than an overtly hostile act.



As US lawmakers on the weekend sent to President Trump"s desk a bill that would make it virtually impossible for the US leader to revoke a new round of anti-Russia sanctions without congressional approval, Putin announced that 755 American diplomats «will have to leave Russia as a result of Washington"s own policies».


Speaking on Sunday, the Russian leader – clearly exasperated by the clinical bout of Russophobia that took possession of the American psyche long before a rich real estate developer named Donald Trump emerged on the scene – delivered a message loaded with both strength and regret when he said: «We"ve been waiting for quite a long time that maybe something would change for the better, we had hopes that the situation would change. But it looks like, it"s not going to change in the near future ... I decided that it is time for us to show that we will not leave anything unanswered».


All things considered, Putin"s response was exceptional for its balance and restraint. Although 755 diplomats may sound like a small army, slashing the US side by that number gives Moscow and Washington exactly 455 civil servants each. That sounds not only fair, but logical. 


At the same time, Putin announced the seizure of two US properties in Moscow – a warehouse and a riverside retreat nestled in a wooded area along the shores of the Moscow River. Once again, this maneuver is merely tit-for-tat on the part of the Russians, and lacks enough punch to inflict any mortal wound on US-Russia relations. That is, unless the Americans – who have until Sept. 1 to comply with the expulsion order – wish for it to. 


Importantly, Putin"s expulsion order is not against the Trump administration. It is a well-timed response to a malicious move by ex-President Barack Obama, who, in the waning hours of his disastrous presidency, declared 35 Russian diplomats «persona non grata», while performing a land grab on Russian properties. He gave these officials and their families just 72 hours to leave the country – and right before New Year"s, the most popular Russian holiday.


At the time, Putin, confident that bilateral relations would improve under Trump, shrugged off Obama"s desperate last act on the political stage. 





«We will not create problems for American diplomats. We will not expel anyone,» he said. «Furthermore, I invite all children of US diplomats accredited in Russia to the Christmas and New Year tree in the Kremlin».



Ironically, then-President-Elect Donald Trump called Putin «very smart» for not allowing Obama to cause him to react harshly to the expulsion, thereby delivering a long-term setback to US-Russia relations. What could not have been anticipated at the time, however, was to what extent the "Deep State" – that disruptive and destructive shadow force that comprises the real power behind the Oval Office – would go to destroy the Trump presidency (It is worth mentioning that the very existence of the Deep State precludes the ludicrous notion that Russia somehow «hacked American democracy» since Moscow understands better than anyone that regardless of the US political party in power – Democrat or Republican, take your choice – the real decisions are made by a monolithic, supra-political structure that does not tolerate political freedom in any form, and least of all democratic. Any attempt to rig such a fixed system would be pure folly).


The fact that Trump almost immediately declared his intent to sign the Russian sanctions bill indicates that he either caved in to the relentless pressure by the establishment, or he was never very sincere about restoring relations with Russia in the first place. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. However, judging by the unhinged anti-Russia comments by members of his staff (UN Ambassador Nikki Haley, for example, in March told NBC: «We cannot trust Russia ... We should never trust Russia»), it seems Trump was the only one in Washington in favor of fixing the US-Russia relationship


Indeed, after US lawmakers voted in favor of the anti-Russia bill, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson delivered a comment that was so stupid it had to be calculated. The House and Senate votes in favor of more Russian sanctions, Tillerson said, «represent the strong will of the American people to see Russia take steps to improve relations with the United States». 


Huh?


And then Tillerson signed off with the following statement that actually carried a thinly veiled threat: «We will work closely with our friends and allies to ensure our messages to Russia, Iran, and North Korea are clearly understood». 


Tillerson, however, will now have to work extra hard to get the message across to America"s European allies, especially the Germans, who are fuming mad about the latest anti-Russia sanctions. That"s because the sanctions target any company that is involved in Russia’s energy export pipelines, like Nord Stream 2, a joint Russia-German project to carry Russian natural gas under the Baltic Sea, bypassing American client states, like Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States. 


In other words, what we have here is the American superpower attempting to deny the right of economic cooperation between two consenting states. In the event the US fails to get what it wants, which seems to be everything under the moon, its infantile will is enforced by the small yet lethal firearm known as "sanctions." Fortunately, such bumbling "diplomacy" is transparent even to the most knee-jerk Russophobes for the very simple reason it places their own financial security at great risk.


So what is the source of this latest anti-Russia mood coming out of Washington? Briefly, it began in earnest in September 2015 when Russia made the decision to enter the Syrian fray – legally, it should be added, with an expressed invitation by President Bashar Assad – to fight against the terrorists of Islamic State. Strangely, the more damage Russian forces inflicted upon this malevolent group, the more it was criticized by US politicians. 


However, the anti-Russia witch hunt really hit its stride when it became clear that Hillary Clinton would lose the 2016 presidential election to the populist Donald Trump. The Deep State that backed her needed a scapegoat for the devastating loss, and Russia, as usual, provided a convenient suspect. To this day, seven months after Trump entered the White House, the world has not seen a single scrap of hard evidence to suggest Russian interference in the election. But that has not stopped the media from continuing its non-stop attacks on both Trump and Putin (We may eventually see Vice President Mike Pence, who espouses the world view of the US elite, take over the reins of the US presidency. This week, after meeting the trembling leaders of the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, Pence delivered this line of rubbish: «Russia seeks to redraw international borders by force, undermine democracies of sovereign nations and divide the free nations of Europe»). 


Although we may hope that Donald Trump will see the writing on the wall as far as US-Russia relations go, and find ways to restore bilateral relations between the world"s two nuclear powers, things are not so simple as that. Trump has been assailed by a mainstream media that can only be described as out of control and half-insane. Worse than the military industrial complex, it is truly hell-bent on war, which became clear after Trump bombed a Syrian airfield in April and became an overnight darling of the Neo-Liberal goon squad. When Trump eventually curbed his appetite for violence and bloodshed, he once again became a target for media-sponsored destruction.


Clearly, either the media and its many powerful proponents will get their way and bring down Trump, or Trump – and in direct contradiction to history"s tragic lessons (read Kennedy and Lincoln) – will somehow emerge victorious against the Deep State. The options for Russia, not to mention the American people themselves in such a dire and dangerous situation, are rather slim. A bit like leaving Las Vegas with more in your pocket than when you first arrived.


In conclusion, Putin"s move was a long time coming, yet this may have been exactly what the Deep State – anxious for any excuse to permanently wreck US-Russia relations – had been eagerly anticipating.