KremlinGate

1328 posts / 0 new
Last post
NDPP

Protecting the Shaky Russia-Gate Narrative  -  by Robert Parry

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/12/15/protecting-the-shaky-russia-gate-n...

"...If Russia-gate is the massive scandal that we are told it is by so many important People - across the US mainstream and the political world - why do its proponents have to resort to lies and exaggerations to maintain the pillars supporting the narrative?

Because to tell the truth would undercut the narrative of evil Russians defeating Hillary Clinton and putting Donald Trump in the White House - the core narrative of Russia-gate."

JKR

Why can't some people wait for the results of the investigations into "Russia-gate" before they come to the conclusion that their is no substance to "Russia-gate?" If there is no substance to Russi-gate there should be nothing to fear.

NDPP

No doubt the first McCarthyite witch-hunt critics were given much the same outrageous rationalization...

NorthReport

Sure sounds like we have our own echo of Fox News here

NDPP wrote:

No doubt the first McCarthyite witch-hunt critics were given much the same outrageous rationalization...

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

NDPP wrote:

Because to tell the truth would undercut the narrative of evil Russians defeating Hillary Clinton and putting Donald Trump in the White House - the core narrative of Russia-gate."

You know, I remember Nixon fans saying just about the same thing during the years-long Watergate investigation. In that case, there was even less chance that the questionable behaviour actually changed the outcome. Everyone expected Nixon to blow away McGovern, even when nobody was talking or thinking about Watergate. Still, Nixon had been involved in a fairly well concealed series of crimes, and was eventually forced to resign in the face of imminent impeachment. Ironically, he would most likely have gotten away with it all if he hadn't secretly recorded his conversations in the oval office.

In this case, the election was very close, and could easily have been tipped by a few thousand voters in Wisconsin or Pennsylvania seeing a bunch of stories on their facebook feeds about Pizzagate or whatever. Such stories may have originated with Russian intelligence operatives. We haven't seen the evidence, but a lot of people who have seen it seem impressed.

Personally, I don't see how anyone on either side can be positive of the facts at this point given the available public evidence.

NDPP

NorthReport wrote:

Sure sounds like we have our own echo of Fox News here

NDPP wrote:

No doubt the first McCarthyite witch-hunt critics were given much the same outrageous rationalization...

NDPP wrote:

Prefer CNN?

'The Russia-thing is just a big nothing burger'- Van Jones

Jimmy Dore: CNN Senior Producer Admits 'Russia Story Mostly Bullshit'

https://youtu.be/A0TFcJX4Mp0

 

NDPP

MSNBC? More:

Media Watchdog [FAIR] Shames MSNBC's Horrible Russia Coverage

https://youtu.be/Hok1ilVqG5c

"...I'm supposed to be consumed right now by this whole Russia thing... War has destroyed our country, continues to destroy our country and it seems to me that they're getting ready to start a war with Russia with all of this and they want me to hate Russia. Am I wrong?" 

Exactly so. 

 

NorthReport
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
No doubt the first McCarthyite witch-hunt critics were given much the same outrageous rationalization...

McCarthy's antics are described as a "witch-hunt" precisely because there was nothing concrete or objective about them.   People weren't being investigated for plotting to overthrow the State, they were investigated for rumours of  purported sympathies with those who might theoretically want to overthrow the State.

McCarthyism was literally based on gossip and nosey neighbours.  There was no "evidence" to wait for.

But just like the Olympic cheating, this time there seems to be actual evidence.  Not gossip or innuendo.  Not "they joined the wrong club in college".  Not "their neighbours wonder why they're up at all hours of the night and keep to themselves".

NorthReport

Trump with his eyes clearly on the 2018 mid-terms, seems to be caught between wanting to stop Mueller at any cost before the Russian connection gets exposed versus creating a constitutional crisis if he does. His popularity is low and if he tries to fire Mueller  it could seriously sink even worse, so he appears to be backing off for now. But in the scheme of things who believes one word that comes out of his mouth!

voice of the damned

^^ As well, and somewhat connected to what Magoo said, there is a difference in the focus of the investigation. HUAC and McCarthy went after hundreds of people from large sections of the population(including Hollywood screenwriters), based largely on their expressed beliefs or personal associations. But Mueller's invesitgation is confined to a few dozen people, AT MOST, almost all of them connected with the Donald Trump campaign.

If you absolutely have to find a 1950s Cold War precedent for RussiaGate, maybe you can compare it to the Alger Hiss trial, which did focus on one particular man and his immediate associates. But that's a lot less sensational than saying "McCarthyism!"

JKR

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
No doubt the first McCarthyite witch-hunt critics were given much the same outrageous rationalization...

McCarthy's antics are described as a "witch-hunt" precisely because there was nothing concrete or objective about them.   People weren't being investigated for plotting to overthrow the State, they were investigated for rumours of  purported sympathies with those who might theoretically want to overthrow the State.

McCarthyism was literally based on gossip and nosey neighbours.  There was no "evidence" to wait for.

But just like the Olympic cheating, this time there seems to be actual evidence.  Not gossip or innuendo.  Not "they joined the wrong club in college".  Not "their neighbours wonder why they're up at all hours of the night and keep to themselves".

Ironically the gossip and innuendo now seems to be coming from those screaming, "McCarthyism!" I think it is unwise to side with people who are afraid of simply going where the evidence leads.

Pogo Pogo's picture

I am just wrapping my head around Trump questioning someone getting emails from a third party. I would say in the spirit of the season what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. 

NorthReport

Trump Putin call: CIA helped stop Russia terror attack

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42386258

NorthReport

GOP chairman worried by Trump's stance on Russian interference

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/365168-gop-chairman-worried-...

NorthReport

A Frustrated Donald Trump Plots Counterpunches and Talks Lawsuits

The White House says it isn’t contemplating firing Robert Mueller. But the president is eager to undercut him and the Russia-focused press corps.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/a-frustrated-donald-trump-plots-counterpun...

NorthReport
voice of the damned

NorthReport wrote:

Trump Putin call: CIA helped stop Russia terror attack

Quite possibly they did, and good for them(assuming the threat was legitimate and not some juiced-up thing). But I'm kind of wondering what the pro-Putin crowd thinks about their boy collaborating with the murderous imperialists over at the CIA.

Mobo2000

Who's the pro-Putin crowd?   If you think they are on babble just ask them.   Name some names.

Mobo2000

JKR said:

""Ironically the gossip and innuendo now seems to be coming from those screaming, "McCarthyism!" I think it is unwise to side with people who are afraid of simply going where the evidence leads."

You are not going where the evidence leads because you have not seen any evidence.   It's all secret, except when it's deemed politically useful to leak it to a friendly reporter, or when pressured, update Congress.   You are following breadcrumbs dropped by bad actors who do not deserve your trust.

If you want to place your faith in CNN, the Washington Post and the New York Times, as informed by the CIA and FBI, be my guest, but do wake me up and let me know when the smoking gun arrives.

 

NorthReport

FBI warned Trump in 2016 Russians would try to infiltrate his campaign

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-warned-trump-2016-russians-woul...

NorthReport
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Who's the pro-Putin crowd?   If you think they are on babble just ask them.   Name some names.

Why?  He's never bothered to put names to "Canuckleheads" or "faux-leftists" or "Russophobes".

I could surely name another, but it's longstanding babble convention to not mention the banned.

voice of the damned

Mobo2000 wrote:

Who's the pro-Putin crowd?   If you think they are on babble just ask them.   Name some names.

Well, I'm not in the habit of calling out people I'm not otherwise engaged with at the particular moment, and in any case, the opinions in question aren't babble-specific. Let me depersonalize the point...

"It's kind of hard to reconcile the idea that Putin is some sort of principled opponent of US foreign-policy, with his evident willingness to collaborate with the CIA when it suits his interests."

 

 

NorthReport
NDPP

Witch-hunt Update:  The Senate's Russia Investigation is  Now Looking into Jill Stein

https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/942893577042104323

"Led by Dianne Feinstein, Democrats are exploiting Russiagate to eliminate the political opposition to their left. The innuendo spread against Stein and the Green Party contains all the classic elements of McCarthyism."

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
The innuendo spread against Stein and the Green Party contains all the classic elements of McCarthyism.

Do you have a special "McCarthyism" key on your keyboard, or do you have to type it out manually every time you post?

JKR

Mobo2000 wrote:

JKR said:

""Ironically the gossip and innuendo now seems to be coming from those screaming, "McCarthyism!" I think it is unwise to side with people who are afraid of simply going where the evidence leads."

You are not going where the evidence leads because you have not seen any evidence.   It's all secret, except when it's deemed politically useful to leak it to a friendly reporter, or when pressured, update Congress.   You are following breadcrumbs dropped by bad actors who do not deserve your trust.

If you want to place your faith in CNN, the Washington Post and the New York Times, as informed by the CIA and FBI, be my guest, but do wake me up and let me know when the smoking gun arrives.

 

I agree there is no need to jump the gun before the legal investigations conclude. I'm withholding my judgement of innocence or guilt until the legal investigations conclude. I agree that it is possible that the judgement of the legal investigations may not go against against Trump. This is what I mean when I state that the evidence should be allowed to lead the way. I think the legal proceedings should be allowed to take their course and come to a judgement based on evidence without being discredited prematurely by innuendo for partisan political purposes.

NorthReport

Several of Trump's entourage have been charged or already have pleaded guilty. 

It's hard to keep up - is it 4 or 5 so far?

This kinda reminds me of the female verbal attacks against a male concerning sexual assault. How many is enough before the male cries "uncle", eh!

But, by all means, let's ignore all the mounting evidence and wait for the final shoes to drop!

NorthReport

Trump predicts exoneration in Russia investigation as allies fear a 'meltdown'

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/18/politics/trump-russia-investigation/index....

NDPP

CrossTalk Bullhorns: FBI-Gate

https://youtu.be/4fHMb-siw90

"What was Russiagate is now quickly becoming FBI-gate. Who will investigate the investigators?"

voice of the damned

If Trump was preaching anti-NATO rhetoric as far back as the 80s, it would make sense(to say the least) that he got on the Russians' radar as someone to root for.

That said, I'm not convinced of the causistry that Schindler suggests, ie. Trump got turned by the Russians during his '87 visit, since it is at least the third explanation as to how he went over, the other two being that he is in hock to the Russian mob, and that he was being blackmailed over his hotel-room frolics. (I think there might be another one, but it's not coming to mind right now.) As I've said before, it's odd that we've got several different narrative strands that all end up in the same place.

But yes, if Trump held those particular opinions for that long, he's definitely the most anti-NATO person ever to run for the presidency on a major-party ticket, which is a pretty strong rebuttal to the claim that the Russians would never want someone like him in the White House.

josh

NDPP wrote:

CrossTalk Bullhorns: FBI-Gate

https://youtu.be/4fHMb-siw90

"What was Russiagate is now quickly becoming FBI-gate. Who will investigate the investigators?"

 

Did someone mention the "Pro-Putin crowd"?  Once again, it's like Fox and RT have merged.

josh

NDPP wrote:

Witch-hunt Update:  The Senate's Russia Investigation is  Now Looking into Jill Stein

https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/942893577042104323

"Led by Dianne Feinstein, Democrats are exploiting Russiagate to eliminate the political opposition to their left. The innuendo spread against Stein and the Green Party contains all the classic elements of McCarthyism."

 

 

McCarthyism:

a vociferous campaign against alleged communists in the US government and other institutions carried out under Senator Joseph McCarthy in the period 1950–54. Many of the accused were blacklisted or lost their jobs, although most did not in fact belong to the Communist Party.

Note:  It's started several years before McCarthy latched on to it.  And last longer than 1954.

Mobo2000

VOTD:  ""It's kind of hard to reconcile the idea that Putin is some sort of principled opponent of US foreign-policy, with his evident willingness to collaborate with the CIA when it suits his interests."

None of the commentators NDPP has been posting are asserting that Putin is a principled opponent of US foreign policy, and it's not my view either.      It's clear Russia has been seeking cooperation with the US on many fronts for years.   Putin and Russia are not opponents of the US, they are targets.   And the US is exponentially more powerful in every dimension -  militarily, economically, influence in the world, access to strategic resources.   The US is choosing this fight.

RE: "McCarthyism" -- the essential element of McCarthyism was removing political opponents from positions of power or influence by accusing them of being traitors, acting in the interest of a foreign power.   Perhaps the babblers that object to the term could speak to the general point rather than quibble semantics.  

josh

No, they weren't all in "positions of power."  Loyalty oaths were instituted in many school districts and in other "non-power" lines of work.  That has nothing to do with an investigation into whether a foreign power interfered in an election, and whether a campaign took part in that interference.

Mobo2000

Magoo:   What did you think of the Iraq war II, launched by Bush Jr?   Did you oppose it at the time?  

I ask because I am hoping to draw on your empathy reserves here.   I did oppose that war, and at the time it was common for the right to call anti-war protestors "Saddam Lovers".   I've made this obvious point a few times on this thread, but here goes, I'll make it again -- if we oppose aggression by our country, or our countries allies, we are not making any value judgements about the proposed target.   We are opposing the crime of aggression.

And speaking of the dearly departed ikosmos -- on that thread he was called a russian spy, "how's the weather in St. Petersburg", told to go suck Putin's cock, told that his keyboard was sticky from masterbating over images of Putin, etc etc etc.   If I'm touchy on the "pro-putin" digs, its because I'd like this difference of opinion on Russiagate to be discussed here in a way that doesn't go down that juvenile and regrettable path again.   I profoundly disagree with some of you on Russiagate,  but I've never called you names, and I'm not going to start.   I'd like to ask that you consider doing the same.

Mobo2000

Josh:  screenerwriters, hollywood directors and actors, university professors are all in positions of power.   Not as powerful as senators of course, but they have considerable influence with the public, and could infect their minds with the pernicious communist ideology.  

 

NorthReport

No one should be surprised by the 'say anything but the truth' President

Trump wrong to claim collusion 'disproven'

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/12/19/trump-exoneration-russia-m...

NorthReport
contrarianna

Mobo2000 wrote:

Magoo:   What did you think of the Iraq war II, launched by Bush Jr?   Did you oppose it at the time?  

I ask because I am hoping to draw on your empathy reserves here.   I did oppose that war, and at the time it was common for the right to call anti-war protestors "Saddam Lovers".   I've made this obvious point a few times on this thread, but here goes, I'll make it again -- if we oppose aggression by our country, or our countries allies, we are not making any value judgements about the proposed target.   We are opposing the crime of aggression....

Quite right Mobo.

As Greenwald tweeted:

In the minds of many Democrats, if you vehemently denounce Trump's actual policies and ideology, but question or express skepticism about their orthodoxies on Trump/Russia collusion, this makes you "pro-Trump." It's hard to process, let alone analyze, irrationality that extreme.

And in response to Greenwald's lengthy, very well-documented piece, "The U.S. Media Suffered Its Most Humiliating Debacle in Ages and Now Refuses All Transparency Over What Happened"
https://theintercept.com/2017/12/09/the-u-s-media-yesterday-suffered-its...

which digs into the fraudulent Wilileaks/Trump email story blared from multiple major news outlets, retweeted many thousands of times, and  posted approvingly on Babble?

There was  no need to admit error in posting false stories, or read the article, or discuss--let alone try to refute the facts of Greenwald's article itself. 

All that was  that was required was a usual trolling , mocking, smear:

Reminds of the old commercial: Is it Donald Trump or Glenn Greenwald?  Hard to tell.

http://rabble.ca/babble/media/wikileaks?page=5

  

voice of the damned

Mobo wrote:

 It's clear Russia has been seeking cooperation with the US on many fronts for years.   Putin and Russia are not opponents of the US, they are targets.  

So why on Earth is Putin working with the people who are targeting him?

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
on that thread he was called a russian spy, "how's the weather in St. Petersburg", told to go suck Putin's cock, told that his keyboard was sticky from masterbating over images of Putin, etc etc etc.

I certainly can't endorse those comments.  I didn't make any of them, and I think at least one would be actionable by a mod.

That said, I'm also curious:  did he ever call anyone anything in that thread?  And are you in just as high dudgeon about it?  I remember the babbler you're referring to, and I remember him as generally giving MORE than he got. 

But what say you?

NDPP

The Jimmy Dore Show:

CIA Spy Chief - 'Russiagate Has Failed!'

https://youtu.be/DbYNKvsIKDo

"...Let's talk about what I think are the possibilities going forward. So, I would not be surprised if Bob Mueller concludes that the Trump campaign did not violate the law with regard to its contacts with the Russians. And I think that, had there been something there, they would have found it already..."

NorthReport

The current CIA Chief is  a Trump appointee. Right!

voice of the damned

Implying that someone likes to orally pleasure Vladimir Putin is homophobic, and should not be tolerated on any message board with claims to progressive values. But as a personal insult against the poster, it's pretty much in the same ballpark as saying "Does Justin Trudeau pay you to write this stuff, or do you just do it out of slavish devotion to the cause?"

The action implied by the phrase "brown-noser" is gender and orientation non-specific, and you can come up with a lot of creative ways to describe it in ever more graphic terms. I recommend that as a substitute for the phrase that rhymes with "Buck Locke".

NDPP

NorthReport wrote:

The current CIA Chief is  a Trump appointee. Right!

Wrong as usual. This isn't him. A Clinton supporter.

NDPP

NorthReport wrote:

Trump Putin call: CIA helped stop Russia terror attack

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42386258

NDPP wrote:

I think the CIA, which is the main enabler of these terrorist proxies, probably set them up to 'demonstrate' that it really is fighting terrorism, and has no ill will towards Russia at all. Or alternatively, scrubbed and disclosed it fearing the Russian reaction if the bloody plot succeeded and possible exposure of theUS hands behind it. In any case, many lives were probably saved. As well, despite the impression conveyed by the western propaganda so enjoyed by those here,  there is a whole range of contacts, cooperation and communications that routinely go on internationally between intelligence agencies and police. Interpol is one example but there are others. You people need to lay off the Louise Mensch, repeated viewings of Red Dawn or whatever you're smoking. Your gullibility is embarrassing, your malevolent Russophobia alarming.

josh

NDPP wrote:

The Jimmy Dore Show:

CIA Spy Chief - 'Russiagate Has Failed!'

https://youtu.be/DbYNKvsIKDo

"...Let's talk about what I think are the possibilities going forward. So, I would not be surprised if Bob Mueller concludes that the Trump campaign did not violate the law with regard to its contacts with the Russians. And I think that, had there been something there, they would have found it already..."

Yes, Russiagate has failed to the extent that Russia has failed to limit exposure of its election interference.  Interesting that you now concede that there were “contacts”.  Now the only question is the extent and nature of those contacts and their legal significance.

Mobo2000

VOTD:    Regarding Putin and cooperating with the US, I think this article by Matt Taibbi goes over some of the electoral issues facing Putin and views Russians have about the US.   It is a selling point for him in the upcoming election that he has a good dealings/rapport with Trump, and he emphasized it in his address last weekend.  

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/taibbi-what-does-russiaga...

 "As Goodman and others have pointed out, failing to predict the Soviet collapse was probably the biggest intelligence failure in our history. While Ronald Reagan and his cronies politicized intelligence and overhyped the Soviets as a mighty and monolithic force, the on-the-ground reality was that the Soviet Union was a crumbling third-world state besotted with crippling economic and infrastructural problems.

We missed countless opportunities for easier, safer and cheaper relations with the Russians by consistently mistaking their disintegrating Potemkin Empire for an ascendant threat.

It's not exactly the same story now, but it's close. Putin's Russia certainly has global ambitions, just as the Soviets did. But the game now is much more about connections and hot money than about geopolitics or territory. There's evidence that the Russians have tried to burrow their way into America's commercial and political establishment, but by most accounts the main route of entry has been financial.

If indeed Trump was a target of Russian efforts, we'll likely discover that this was not something that was exclusive to Trump but rather just one data point amid a broad, holistic strategy to curry favor and make connections across the American political class.

Still, these efforts are probably far more limited in scope than we've been led to imagine. DNC hack or no DNC hack, Russia is still a comparatively weak country with limited power to influence a nation like the U.S., especially since it's still dogged internally by those same massive economic and infrastructural problems it's always had. Putin's political grip on power at home is also far less sure than our pundits and politicians are letting on.

The generalized plan to create chaos in other industrialized states by seeding/spreading corruption and political confusion – which many in the intelligence community believe is an aim of Russian intelligence efforts – is revealing in itself. It's the strategy of a weak and unstable third-world state looking for a cheap way to stay in the game (and bolster its profile) versus more powerful industrial rivals. Hyping Russia as an all-powerful menace actually plays into this strategy."

Pages

Topic locked