A new cottage industry of Democratic conspiracy mongers has gone mainstream, and it benefits Trump.
Masha Gessen is a Russian-American journalist and author who has become one of the nation’s leading Russia experts and one of its most relentless and vocal critics of Vladimir Putin. She has lived her life on and off in the U.S. and Russia, but as a Jewish lesbian and mother of three children, she left Russia in 2013 and moved back to the U.S. in part because she felt threatened by the increasingly anti-LGBT climate there, one that began particularly targeting LGBT adopted families with discriminatory legislation.
Throughout the years Gessen (pictured, above) has become one of the go-to Kremlin critics for the U.S. media, publishing harshly anti-Putin reporting and commentary in numerous media outlets, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, Slate, Harper’s and several articles about political repression in Russia for the Intercept. She has also become a virulent critic of Donald Trump, writing shortly after the election that “Trump is the first candidate in memory who ran not for president but for autocrat—and won,” while describing the critical lessons that can be learned on how to resist Trump’s autocratic impulses by studying Putin.
She now has a new article in the New York Review of Books – entitled “Russia: the Conspiracy Trap” – that I cannot recommend highly enough. Its primary purpose is to describe, and warn about, the insane and toxic conspiracy-mongering about Russia that has taken over not the fringe, dark corners of the internet that normally traffic in such delusional tripe, but rather mainstream U.S. media outlets and the Democratic Party. Few articles have illustrated the serious, multi-faceted dangers of what has become this collective mania in the U.S. as well as Gessen’s does.
To begin, Gessen details several examples of classic, evidence-free, unhinged, and increasingly xenophobic conspiracy theorizing masquerading as serious news in mainstream outlets such as MSNBC, CNN, and the Washington Post. Routine diplomatic interactions are depicted as dark and sinister if they involve Russians. When the most flamboyant, alarmist, tabloid-style Russia stories from leading news outlets collapse (as so many have), or when Trump’s actions (such as hiring numerous anti-Russia hawks for key positions) explode the “Putin’s puppet” narrative, it makes no difference to our mainstream conspiracy obsessives because – as she puts it – “such is the nature of conspiracy thinking that facts can do nothing to change it.”
Wild, melodramatic claims about hidden Russian plotting and Trump collusion are routinely and constantly hyped by leading media outlets based on nothing but their imaginations or, at best, coordinated whispers from intelligence officials utterly insusceptible to verification, from operatives trained in disinformation. As she writes:
The backbone of the rapidly yet endlessly developing Trump-Putin story is leaks from intelligence agencies, and this is its most troublesome aspect. Virtually none of the information can be independently corroborated. The context, sequence, and timing of the leaks is determined by people unknown to the public, which is expected to accept anonymous stories on faith; nor have we yet been given any hard evidence of active collusion by Trump officials. . . .
The dream fueling the Russia frenzy is that it will eventually create a dark enough cloud of suspicion around Trump that Congress will find the will and the grounds to impeach him. If that happens, it will have resulted largely from a media campaign orchestrated by members of the intelligence community—setting a dangerous political precedent that will have corrupted the public sphere and promoted paranoia. And that is the best-case outcome. . . . More likely, the Russia allegations will not bring down Trump.
The crux of her article is the point that has been driving everything I’ve been writing and saying about this topic for months: that this obsession with Russia conspiracy tales is poisoning all aspects of U.S. political discourse and weakening any chance for resisting Trump’s actual abuses and excesses. Those who wake up every day to hype the latest episode of this Russia/Trump spy drama tell themselves that they’re bravely undermining and subverting Trump, but they’re doing exactly the opposite.
This crazed conspiracy mongering is further discrediting U.S. media outlets, making Washington seem even more distant from and irrelevant to the lives of millions of Americans, degrading discourse to the lowliest Trumpian circus level on which he thrives, and is misdirecting huge portions of opposition energy and thought into an exciting but fictitious spy novel – all of which directly redounds to Trump’s benefit. As Gessen puts it in the key sentence that ought to be pinned everywhere in neon lights:
Russiagate is helping [Trump]—both by distracting from real, documentable, and documented issues, and by promoting a xenophobic conspiracy theory in the cause of removing a xenophobic conspiracy theorist from office.
I’ve been asked often why I’ve written so much against the prevailing sentiments on Russia and Trump. It’s not just because this obsessive narrative distracts from Trump’s genuinely consequential actions or from the need to find an effective vessel for activism against über-right-wing nationalism. It’s not just because it’s driven by ugly and historically familiar anti-Rusisan xenophobia, nor because it dangerously ratchets up tensions between two nuclear-armed, traditionally hostile countries. Those things are all true, but that’s not the main impetus.
Above all else, it’s because it’s an offensive assault on reason. This kind of deranged discourse is an attack on basic journalistic integrity, on any minimal obligation to ensure that one’s claims are based in evidence rather than desire, fantasy, and herd-enforced delusions. And it’s emanating from the most established and mainstream precincts of U.S. political and media elites, who have processed the severe disorientation and loss of position they feel from Trump’s shock election not by doing the work to patiently formulate cogent, effective strategies against him, but rather by desperately latching onto online “dot-connecting” charlatans and spewing the most unhinged Birther-level conspiracies that require a complete abandonment of basic principles of rationality and skepticism.
To see how extreme this derangement has become, let’s look at the latest conspiracy theory that took hold of fringe and mainstream figures alike this weekend. It was prompted by the death of Alex Oronov, a 68-year-old Ukrainian-American whose daughter married Bryan Cohen, who is the brother of Michael Cohen, who is Trump’s personal lawyer. Got all those connections, those “dots”?
Back in the 1990s, the fever swamp of the Far Right was driven mad by Bill Clinton’s election. They were convinced he and Hillary were mass murderers, constantly ordering the deaths of political opponents and others who could incriminate the Clintons – not just Vince Foster but an endless number of remotely related people.
Any person who died and had any kind of connection to the Clintons, no matter how remote, became part of the “Clinton Body Count.” These were people who died and whose death was ruled by the coroner to be due to “natural causes” yet were still classified by right-wing extremists as “mysterious deaths,” all for the purpose of implying that the Clintons were responsible for their deaths.
One of the primary pushers of this innuendo was the nation’s most influential radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who spent the 1990s hyping every death with any proximity to the Clintons as “suspicious.” He gleefully resurrected this theme during the 2016 campaign by claiming that people close to the Clintons were once again mysteriously dying. This is what Limbaugh told his audience in August:
I can remember reading magazines back in 1992 that catalogued all the people who the Clintons knew who had died. . . . The inherent conspiracies that were associated with this. And lo and behold, here we go again.
Limbaugh cited a Townhall article describing the deaths of three DNC-related officials and told his audience: “Since the DNC emails were leaked a few weeks ago, three people associated with the DNC have all found dead, under what could be questionable circumstances.” Limbaugh added: “This is exactly the kind of stuff we saw back in 1992 and 1993.” He then mocked the media for viewing this speculation as insane conspiracy theories, emphasizing:
A lot of people [the Clintons] know who have died, been murdered . . . . it’s amazing the cycle that exists with the Clintons . . . . How many other politicians do you know who have so many mysterious deaths associated with them?. . . . But there is a Clinton body count.
Rush Limbaugh Clinton body count, Julian Assange murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich WikiLeaks… https://t.co/gZzaJkXvOa pic.twitter.com/2zmkl9Nnik
— citizenwells (@citizenwells) August 11, 2016
There’s now an identical – and quite profitable – Democratic cottage industry that specializes in pointing to every death of anyone with any proximity to Trump or Russia and strongly implying – with zero evidence – that they were murdered. But the difference is that it’s not confined to the fringes but is fully embraced by numerous mainstream Democratic figures. It’s not a coincidence that one of the key figures of this early 1990s anti-Clinton sickness, David Brock, is now always lurking at the center of similar yet highly lucrative insanity, but now on behalf of Democrats.
One of the most popular online conspiracists among Democrats is now the former Tory member of the UK Parliament and current Murdoch-rag-writer Louise Mensch, whose history of public humiliations and pure bigotry is far too long to chronicle.
But because she has now turned her deranged behavior to peddling any and all conspiracies about Trump and Russia, she has built a huge Twitter following among Democrats convinced that all of their critics are Kremlin spies and anyone who dies was murdered by the Putin/Trump axis to protect their conspiratorial cover-up. Here’s what this newfound liberal journalistic icon tweeted two weeks ago:
I absolutely believe that Andrew Breitbart was murdered by Putin, just as the founder of RT was murdered by Putin.
— Louise Mensch (@LouiseMensch) February 24, 2017
That is as flagrantly insane as the most warped versions of birther and truther fever dreams that have tragically engulfed significant portions of the U.S. population. That tweet, by itself, should disqualify her from any form of serious consideration. But Mensch is now routinely cited as some sort of credible journalistic source on Russia conspiracies by unhinged, mainstream anti-Trump fanatics such as MSNBC and Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe, who will launder any insanity as long as it promotes their Tom Clancy fever dreams of Trump as a Kremlin asset.
When news of Oronov’s death broke over the weekend, Democratic Party loyalists instantly began implying, if not outright stating, that his death was really a murder, intended to silence him from exposing the Trump/Russia conspiracy. One of the leading articles pushing this evidence-free tripe was this thing called “The Palmer Report,” whose insinuations went viral because they were quickly mainstreamed by all kinds of prominent Democrats with a platform.
What is the Palmer Report? It’s a classic Fake News site created by Bill Palmer, a crazed fanatical follower of Hillary Clinton who got caught purposely disseminating fake news during the election. The site he ran during the campaign was called “The Daily News Bin,” and among other gems, that was the site that published the totally false but viral claim – based on the fraudulent assertions of MSNBC’s partisan warriors Joy Ann Reid and Malcolm Nance – that the DNC and Podesta emails WikiLeaks was publishing were forgeries.
The Palmer Report is the same Fake News site that published multiple stories claiming that the vote totals for the 2016 election were altered, causing Slate to compare it to The National Enquirer. In February, the Atlantic warned of “The Rise of Progressive Fake News,” and one of its leading examples was the “very harmful” Palmer Report.
This is where Democrats are now getting their “news” from. The Palmer Report seems to be a trusted news source for Professor Tribe. Yet it’s no better – no different – than what Macedonian teenagers or Clinton Body Count sites are churning out. But it’s being mainstreamed by prominent, establishment Democrats who have completely taken leave of their senses in the wake of Trump’s victory and show no signs of returning to anything resembling sober, grounded reasoning any time soon.
The Democrats’ favorite reporter during the 2016 campaign was Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald, who outright fabricated a claim that Trump “was institutionalized in a mental hospital for a nervous breakdown in 1990,” and then when caught, claimed that it was a “signal to a source.” Not even an outright fabrication and a pitiful explanation like that hurt his standing among Democrats; if anything, it bolstered it, because it was for the Right Cause.
And now, every time a Russian dies, mainstream Democratic sites instantly imply with zero evidence that they were murdered by Putin and possibly Trump to cover up something or other. Even when the autopsy rules that they died of natural causes, the conspiracies persist, indeed are often bolstered – just as Louise Mensch “absolutely believes” Putin murdered Andrew Breitbart despite the coroner’s findings.
TPM’s Josh Marshall this weekend pronounced Oronov’s death a “startling new development” – just as Limbaugh and right-wing sites do for every Democrats’ death. The liberal journal The Washington Monthly – echoing the innuendo tactics of the right-wing fever swamps focused on the Clinton Body Count – added: “Was it a heart attack, as seems to be implied? Or something else? . . . . Someone might want to figure out the actual cause of death.”
Is it possible all these people were killed by Putin and Trump to ensure their conspiracy remains hidden? Anything is “possible” – in the same sense that it’s possible that Bill and Hillary Clinton had Vince Foster and multiple Arkansas state troopers murdered. But since there’s no evidence for it, responsible, rational people don’t go around spouting it and trying to lead others to believe it.
When DNC staffer Seth Rich was murdered in 2016, his family was furious and sickened by the attempt to exploit his death by implying that he was murdered by the Clintons for political reasons. In an interview with Buzzfeed, Oronov’s family just did the same thing, denouncing the theories laundered by TPM, the Palmer Report and other Democrats as “total bullshit” and noting that Oronov “died of a prolonged illness,” only “after three months at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City.”
But as Buzzfeed’s editor-in-chief Ben Smith noted last night, the denunciation of this conspiracy theory by Oronov’s family received only a tiny fraction of the attention which the viral stories implying he was murdered received.
This happens over and over and over. Totally fraudulent stories about Russia are published on the internet. Those who do it – including the leading media outlets and their journalists – receive endless benefits: exploding follower counts on social media, gushing praise from their peers, media appearances, profitable traffic for their sites. But then when the stories fall apart and are debunked, as they so often are, the debunking is shared by virtually nobody, and there is zero accountability or cost to their reputations because their false stories were peddled for a Good Cause.
The most obscenely transparent charlatans and grifters have built a huge social media following over the last year by feeding Democrats an endless stream of increasingly unhinged, insane conspiracy theories about Trump and Russia. That Trump is a Manchurian Candidate recruited by old Soviet leaders and installed in the White House as a 30-year-plan – or that any critics of Democrats are on the payroll of Putin – are completely acceptable theories which many of the Democrats’ most beloved commentators endorse literally on a daily basis.
Part of it is exciting: they get to center themselves as intrepidly uncovering an international Moscow-led plot to infiltrate the U.S. Part of it is self-excusing: it explains why Democrats have failed without having to confront the party’s fundamental corruption. Part of it is personally enriching: just as was true of the Clinton years, these conspiracies have created a whole stable of new media stars, and the crazier they are, the bigger their following will be.
But whatever the motives, what’s most damaging is how mainstreamed it’s all become. These are the same circles which endlessly rail against misleading reports from Fox News and right-wing radio, and the dangers of Fake News. And yet – in the name of stopping Trump and winning the New Cold War – they are the most enthusiastic disseminators of exactly what they denounce.
The most ironic part of it all is that they are achieving exactly the opposite of what they convinced their followers they are doing: they are strengthening Trump, not weakening him, by poisoning and corroding all of the institutions that – if they had any credibility – could effectively check him.
Ultimately, what makes Gessen’s article so important – aside from the fact that partisan smear artists cannot dismiss her on the ground that she loves Putin and works for the Kremlin – is that it focuses on the key point: namely, that this fixation on primitive conspiracy-mongering is just a slothful way of avoiding the real work of meaningfully opposing Trump. As she explains, this bottomless, ultimately pointless obsession with Russia has utterly crowded out effective strategies for opposing Trump, and has obscured many of the truly damaging policies he is implementing with little notice:
Meanwhile, while Russia continues to dominate the front pages, Trump will continue waging war on immigrants, cutting funding for everything that’s not the military, assembling his cabinet of deplorables—with six Democrats voting to confirm Ben Carson for Housing, for example, and ten to confirm Rick Perry for Energy. According to the Trump plan, each of these seems intent on destroying the agency he or she is chosen to run—to carry out what Steve Bannon calls the “deconstruction of the administrative state.” As for Sessions, in his first speech as attorney general he promised to cut back civil rights enforcement and he has already abandoned a Justice Department case against a discriminatory Texas voter ID law. But it was his Russia lie that grabbed the big headlines.
Indeed, even the most plausible plank of the story – that the Russians were behind the hacking of Podesta and the DNC – has been widely accepted as Truth despite no evidence from the U.S. Government. As Gessen notes: “A later building block in the story, which has become its virtual cornerstone, is the joint intelligence report on Russian interference in the campaign, which was released in December and is, plainly, laughable.”
Worst of all, our discourse is being drowned by irrational, highly corrosive delusions and feverish conspiracy theorizing – not just from Trump, who built his political career on a racist and deranged conspiracy theory about Obama’s true birthplace, but also from those who have anointed themselves leaders of the Resistance against him. How can one credibly denounce Trump’s birtherism or his fact-free accusation that Obama ordered his wiretapping if one is simultaneously spreading the most blatantly evidence-free claims and conspiracies or venerating those who have built their new platforms based on feeding hungry partisans flagrantly fraudulent “reporting”?
The Russia narrative dominates national discourse, as it has for months, and becomes progressively more removed from evidence. As Gessen concludes: “What is indisputable is that the protracted national game of connecting the Trump-Putin dots is an exercise in conspiracy thinking. That does not mean there was no conspiracy. And yet, a possible conspiracy is a poor excuse for conspiracy thinking.”
This is it…
NSA “Project Dragnet Master Database”
The insanity that has engulfed America is put into harsh perspective when one considers the insane people run the biggest, most powerful military in the world and regularly start aggressive wars, destroy contries and overthrow legitimate leaders. Comforting.
In fairness, Masha Gessen has done her part in helping with the anti-Putin hysteria in the West. She is credited by Wikipedia with breaking the story of supposed Putin’s palace on the Black Sea – which belongs to the class of nutty “truth” telling about the “richest man in the world”. And of course she has contributed smears and innuendos about the Russia’s strongman which seek to implicate him in political assassinations. Here is a sample:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/putins-russia-dont-walk-dont-eat-and-dont-drink
Kara-Murza of course recovered since the article only to be “poisoned” again ….and recover again from the silly Putin’s goofs. Forgive me but I don’t buy this kind of partisan sniping. Gessen is Khodorkovsky’s fan, which is fine by me as long as it is made plain. Obviously, Russia continues to have a byzantine dimension to it, with a horde of real-life bad dudes and gangsters (some of them well connected) and ugly corruption on all levels of government (see Zvyagintsev’s brilliant cameo of it in the movie “Leviathan”). Russia also has a tradition of professional seers, liars and phantasists who will sell you worlds in collision, theosophy, or a lullaby of Stalin being smothered to death by Beria with a pillow. In short, consumer of news about Russia beware!
Help..the Russians are coming. Start learning Russian and you will be surprised they have literature, classical music and yes the Russians care about their children too.
Oh, there’s no end to the interrelationships between the Trump administration and Putin’s Russia. Just to use a recent example: According to Counterpunch, the Huffington Post, and other sources, steel from Russia is being imported to build the Keystone oil pipeline. Donald Trump, of course, has already lifted the freeze on the construction of this pipeline that was imposed by Obama. A Russian oligarch, who is a long-time Putin alley, owns 31% of the company that makes this steel:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/02/15/how-a-russian-steel-oligarch-and-putin-ally-is-profiting-from-keystone-xl/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-reverses-pledge-to-mandate-us-steel-for-keystone_us_58bbae99e4b0fa65b844b451
Trump initially claimed that the pipeline would not be allowed to proceed unless American steel was used in its construction, but he quickly backtracked on that promise. That decision and others will make Trump’s friends in Russia even richer than they already are.
Just saw this CNN clip in which an articulate, strikingly handsome Jewish-looking fellow was saying something about how the FBI and Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election in order to help Mr. Trump. Fucking Democrats. When will they learn?
Yep. I caught Krystal Ball on MSNBC this morning parroting the same. It appears nothing will dislodge this notion from the Dems any time soon.
Jimmy Dore succinctly excoriates the vile Ruth Marcus. Yearning for the ‘good old days’ of the Cold War is quite an accomplishment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhJwt_awaWM
The comments below including mine are not a bad sorting out of the individual issues conflated into one massive TrumpRussiaCIAhackingPutinUkraine wiki, of which the worthless US “news” stories are merely the to-be-archived talk pages.
Investigative journalism is not dead but sleeping, and I don’t doubt that both Glenn and Bill Palmer will do better at both when they have actual funds to do it. For now our problem is that PR flacks outnumber journalists four or five to one in the English speaking world, and outnumber INVESTIGATIVE journalists perhaps two or three hundred to one. There ARE plenty of Woodwards and Bernsteins focusing on some element of this story, but we would also have dismissed Watergate had every theory about *THAT* (some involving “the Russians”) been splattered over the planet based on each page of each note they took at each phase of their investigation. Frankly, the US intelligence community is the only entity focused on facts that actually has the capacity to get and verify them, but they are obviously conflicted and distrusted for good reason. MI6 or CSIS or Australia’s spies however have access to FVEY (“Five Eyes”) taps, and clearly Chris Steele (MI6) thinks the TrumpDossier is real and will be testifying about it. Steve Bannon is clearly afraid of what the Australian spymasters have to say to the CIA, NSA, or Democrats, and made some effort to harass him at the US border as a warning. If I’m wrong, please, explain how someone with such friendly ally credentials gets caught up in the screen net… At the very least it’s astonishingly incompetent like Trump’s handling of allies.
In 2018 people will vote for Congress, every seat, based on issues like health care or pollution controls. They’ll listen to the AARP, to the American Medical Association, to their state Attorneys-General, and to “Dreamers” they know as neighbors. Nothing that happened in 2017 will count. So any concerns for “the left” are unwarranted, the US “left” isn’t the Democrats nor the MSM, it’s the Bernie surge, and that can turn states from Trump in the blink of a hospital bill. What Glenn is legitimately concerned about here is the future of journalism & the risk of amplifying xenophobic hate nationalism against Russians, as if that somehow countered or made up for same against Muslims, Mexicans, Jews or LGBTQ, which is clearly truly happening “on the right”.
Journalists, which this article is directed to, can and should take these steps:
1. Start actually using http://sourcewatch.org and FOIA requests to Intellipedia http://muckrock.com so you’re starting from a baseline of sources that someone interested in factual verification has already vetted. Read these critically, of course, and use them only to find sources not adopt opinions. If you find a contrary theory that makes more sense, ADD IT IN TO SOURCEWATCH so that no one theory goes viral when it’s easily countered.
2. Beyond that, do some citizen duty at Wikipedia and help remove obvious crap. It’s not a hopeless task. Dumping a dozen good credible articles in the talk pages will let people refute THOUSANDS of ‘troll’ attempts to spin the story in indefensible directions, the bang for buck of this is really very good, and it publicizes the work of GOOD investigative journalists, scholars, and thoughtful opinion writers. If you DON’T do this, the most trusted general knowledge compendium in English will be translated into dozens of other languages in its WRONG form, and you know what the output of that will be.
Please, no drivel about how bad Wikipedia is, it’s better than Britannica or Encarta, and you can’t replace it or fundamentally change it, so help fix it.
3. Separate the issues in your own work. For example ask these questions all in DIFFERENT articles:
3a. Is a grand alliance of North Atlantic/Russian/NorthPacific Caucasians (USA, Canada, Scandanavia, Europe, Russia) with some cultural or geographic allies (South Korea, Japan, Australia, New Zealand) interests AGAINST the least democratic regions on Earth (Mideast, Southeast Asia, China, much of Africa) actually desirable or possible? Like the FDR+Stalin alliance vs Hitler & Tojo? What common values or beliefs are there? What are the countries in position to stabilize or destabilize such an alliance? (Israel, Latin American trouble spots, South Afirica, India/Pakistan conflict zones, North Korea, Iran)
3b. If such an alliance is rejected as impractical, colonial, white-supremacist or nuclear blackmail (as it may be for many good reasons), THEN, ask again:
Why are the USA and Russia aiming enough nukes at each other to destroy the entire world many times over, despite longstanding non-proliferation treaties that included the provision that these arsenals would ultimately be dissolved.
Yes that is the same question Iran keeps asking. It’s disgusting it’s only them.
3c. Assuming we ignore the never-quite-ignored nuclear threat of an accident or tweet or alt-fact or incompetence causing nuclear armageddon (all of which is at high tide with present oversight), moving on to the question of economies:
Where is the analysis of cost & benefit of oh say US Single Payer health care or a national high speed rail or smart grid program, or even just getting Internet up to gigabit in rural America, as it is in rural South Korea or most of Europe?
Surely anyone wanting to rebuild America wants it all to have the same shot at attracting high end manufacturing as Chattanooga got from Volkswagen…? Not enough has been written by the way about Comcast’s role in sabotaging it.
3d. Regarding science, and important science-driven policy like regulation of methane (CH4) or carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, why exactly do I *NEVER* read a clear statement of the differences between insurance style risk analysis (focusing on “alarmist” scenarios of low probability but very high expense) and scientific freedom (investigating even long held theories to find holes in them) and the policy-making process? Scott Pruitt did a better job of this than the press, frankly, which immediately began debating science questions which he had punted. He isn’t supposed to defer to Congress but to science, of course, so he’s wrong to punt them, but that doesn’t mean he’s wrong about the process. No one in 2009 would have said an Obama EO was the right way long term to deal with methane or carbon regulation.
We do get past a LOT of nonsense by simply acknowledging that Hitler had more scientific backing for his racial theories, or the US Cavalry had more doctors willing to sign off on distributing smallpox blankets to natives, than the present Trump regime has scientists willing to endorse no limit on either methane or CO2… Would we listen to doctors about arsenic or asbestos, or to the arsenic or asbestos mining companies? And more importantly… WHERE?
3e. On political tactics all journalists should have to read military information warfare manuals on psyops, psych warfare, propaganda, and methods like crapflood or gaslighting (not the same thing but closely related). And read every damn word Carol Cadwalldr or Berit Anderson has written about Robert Mercer, a genius billionaire COMPUTATIONAL LINGUIST, and what he did with the infowar machine inherited from SCL. Anyone who thinks they are choosing voters to target, but not generating the fake news headlines, hasn’t read what Mercer’s work actually is.
3f. Follow the money. Just ignore everything else and follow it. You’ll find there are ten-trillion dollar plays here (like dumping stranded assets in coal, bitumen and fracking into sovereign funds and pension plans to break them & cheat the poor), trillion-dollar plays (fometing US-Russia tension or US-China tension to sell new nuclear bombs, and other crimes against humanity), hundred-billion-dollar plays (like private prisons revived to hold Dreamers and dissidents), ten-billion-dollar plays (like expansion of Russian interests in destabilized Europe especially Baltics and Ukraine, maybe in Scotland or Ireland if they leave UK), and the typical billion-dollar plays Trump and Rybolovlev get involved in under their own names.
Trump’s biggest financial claim ever was that there was “$50 TRILLION” under US national parks… you might want to look into why he’d say that, who is stupid enough to believe that is value that can be banked on, who would get cheated if they were stupid enough to invest in it, and whether that is YOU.
Interview people like Mark Carney, or scientists relied on by 350.org or IPCC, or Nicholas Stern, or forensic accountants… they’ll all tell you that the coal, methane in soft ground amenable to leaks, bitumen, inaccessible Arctic oil, etc. is WORTHLESS. “Unburnables”. It’s the largest bubble the markets have ever fallen for. ExxonMobil & Shell are dumping the Tar Sands in Alberta, but who is BUYING? Suckers backed by YOU (via pension funds) who will lose big just like 2008 when these stocks collapse.
Since when has a sudden surge in the Dow Jones (Which includes Goldman Sachs) and the S&P, simultaneous with a huge growth in JUNK BONDS, meant anything BUT a bubble? It’s being inflated to the doomsday level, and it’s not hard to see why:
Unless the suckers see a sudden surge they won’t panic and buy in “before it’s too late”… i.e. won’t put their money in so Blankfein and Tillerson and Mercer can get OUT. Scott Pruitt, Ryan Zinke, these are useful idiots. The power is at State and the CIA, so it’s Rex Tillerson and Mike Pompeo (longtime Koch ally) you need to report on.
Now this will be ignored, but I’ll find it on archive.org in 20 years and cite it on my deathbed. If it’s polonium I’m dying of, you’ll know I was wrong and it was Putin all along.
Trump is arguably the US deep state’s most useful idiot and easily controlled front man http://www.globalresearch.ca/donald-j-trump-and-the-deep-state/5573547?print=1
So if they succeed in portraying him as Putin’s puppet, that’s a win for them.
Focus on Rex Tillerson, Robert Mercer (who initially backed Cruz then shifted his vast AI machine to Trump), Dmitry Rybolovlev (who is at least the most consistent link between Trump personally and the Russian bank cartel in Cyprus), Rebekah Mercer (Heritage Foundation), Mike Pompeo (evidently one of few people trusted by both Koch Brothers AND Trump). Plus of course Goldman Sachs, which has been undermining the Eurozone since 2001 for who knows who… http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/greek-debt-crisis-goldman-sachs-could-be-sued-for-helping-country-hide-debts-when-it-joined-euro-10381926.html
What makes this much worse than birther, or Clinton murders, or any of the other right-wing nonsense, is that it is conceivable that this could lead to a nuclear war, which would end civilization … all for the cheap and tawdry reasons listed above. At its core the opposition to Trump based on ‘Russia’ originates with people who benefit from war, or the threat of war. Primarily the military industrial complex, and the intelligence agencies (more and more openly called the ‘deep state’).
A less deadly outcome than burning half the world to ashes will be the loss of American democracy, if they succeed in ‘regime change’ at home. Not to mention we will never be free of war, assuming we don’t all die at some point.
Probably the most amusing and pithy comment comes from that denizen of hell itself … Vladimir Putin. To paraphrase he commented that after practicing the technique again in Ukraine, the intelligence services were ready to try it at home.
concerning our efforts to take the Middle East and threatening Russia for trying to stop us
“Keep in mind that a surprising number of military officers and policymakers still subscribe to the idea that just a little more effort, a couple of more years, a few thousand extra troops, a bit more political gumption, and it might all have spelled victory in Iraq. Such would’ve-could’ve-should’ve apologetics are, of course, historically dangerous. The German Wehrmacht carefully cultivated a similar “stab-in-the-back” myth to explain that it was the politicians, not the army, that had actually lost World War I. A decade later, many of those disgruntled German military professionals embraced the bellicose language of a certain well-known fascist demagogue.”
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176252/tomgram%3A_danny_sjursen%2C_surging_to_failure/#more
What a useful idiot
Glen,
Have you stopped and thought for a second that the handful of extremely wealthy and powerful US Press Barons are intentionally perpetuating conspiracy stories (through their staff/outlets) to help Trump ( a friend) out? Is Trump well connected to the owners of Fox news, etc?
There is a name for it – amplify nonsense non stop until everyone switches off interest. We have reached over saturation. – Trump can buy his press baron friends a drink.
The technical information warfare term is “crapflood”, the only real way to discredit a truth in plain sight: surround it with many similar but ultimately decisively debunkable theories… thus when anyone states the truth, it can be defeated by immediately saying “YES AND…” following by some claim that sounds similar or related and may get a head nod in a debate or press panel, BUT which ultimately can’t check out.
Example: “Dick Cheney deliberately turned the US IC priorities away from a threat he was clearly warned about, involving large planes being piloted by persons with no interest in learning to land them, on a well known target that the same group had hit in 1993.”
“YES AND large planes at that time were being fitted with ‘fly by wire’ overrides so they could be landed if pilots were disabled or dead…” but of course these were not employed on 911 by the attackers, and if they had capability to do that…
“YES AND only the CIA had reliable tools to crash fly-by-wire planes at will…”
And from there the US deep state is portrayed as a powerful monolith capable of killing anyone, coercing anyone’s family to pretend loved ones were or were not on planes, and never being caught, because it can keep secrets forever.
When the reality is they’re a cartel of crooks fronted by well known scammers: http://www.globalresearch.ca/donald-j-trump-and-the-deep-state/5573547?print=1
Isn’t state supported Russian tv terrible propaganda!!!….in other news, the US president’s spokesman is now being paid directly by CNN:
This is hilarious, TV news has the solution to CIA spying on everyone’s TV…
…turn off your TV.
http://www.wcpo.com/money/consumer/dont-waste-your-money/how-to-stop-your-smart-tv-from-spying-on-you
Yeah, the solution to the the government spying on me is that I should turn off the TV I bought? Get serious.
Even funnier, the CIA documents state that when they hack a smart TV, they install a fake-off mode:
“Added feature to periodically re-acquire alsa (audio) device while in Fake-Off mode.
Suppress LEDs to improve look of Fake-Off mode.”
So, the news media, in their role in the empire, are trying to mollify people and misleading them into believing they can turn off their hacked smart TV’s, when in reality, the CIA is still listening in.
https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_12353643.html
The CIA has become it’s own army, operating armed drones. Now the CIA has it’s own NSA internet spying sabotage dept.
Doesn’t this make all the democratic oversight and legal restrictions on the military and the NSA…meaningless?
Peter Doran has been testifying at the US congress that the Russians are “a virus” and need to be “cured like one”
Just as the new US aircraft carriers somehow are evidence that the “underfunded” American Military needs a 54 billion dollar boost, all those CIA malwares lead some to believe that the US hasn’t spent enough on “political warfare”
It is high time for that to change. The United States needs to revive the political warfare skills it once possessed and that have since atrophied, as Michael Doran and I argued in a 2013 Policy Innovation Memorandum for the Council on Foreign Relations. Putin has shown himself to be a master of this game; other adversaries, including Iran and the Islamic State, also actively wage political warfare. We don’t have the luxury of saying that it’s beneath us to play that game. Nothing less than the future of democracy is at stake.
I don’t think Doran and Max Boot need to worry about anything being “beneath” Trump.
Woops! Should be:
Peter Doran has been testifying at the US congress that the Russians are “a virus” and need to be “cured like one”
Just as the new US aircraft carriers somehow are evidence that the “underfunded” American Military needs a 54 billion dollar boost, all those CIA malwares lead some to believe that the US hasn’t spent enough on “political warfare”
I don’t think Doran and Max Boot need to worry about anything being “beneath” Trump.
I was a long time reader/subscriber of The New York Review of Books, from the early 70’s until Timothy Snyder’s many essays on the Ukrainian Coup:
http://www.nybooks.com/contributors/timothy-snyder/
What surprises me is that Gessen was published by the NYRB, as the editorial policy of that magazine favored, and still favors, the R2P zealots like Michael Ignatieff and Samantha Power: the Isaiah Berlin acolytes who are New Cold Warriors, in sum, a mirror of the Neo-Conservatives. Silvers without Epstein has proven to be a debacle!
I will definitely read the Gessen essay and thank you for your essay!
Regards,
StephenKMackSD
This is too funny. The assassins/propagandists/spies working for serial liar Donald Trump think the Wikileaks spokesman lacks integrity:
“After the conference, a CIA spokesperson responded: ‘As we’ve said previously, Julian Assange is not exactly a bastion of truth and integrity.”
Both Greenwald and Scahill are gatekeepers on the biggest issues, namely 9/11 and Zionism. They won’t touch with a thirty foot barge-poll the truth about Zionist power, corruption and culpability in 9/11 to kickstart Netanyahu’s ‘war on terror.’
Thanks for an excellent article on a remarkably sad topic. The “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” preference of our elite mainstream press is kind of stunning to me. I never imagined they would all go National Enquirer at the same time. In the same way. Full tilt boogie.
Smug hauteur. Verbose, yet slick rationalizations of the unacceptable. I’d become used to seeing these from the Times, the WaPo and the Atlantic, etc. But, the goggle-eyed, Alex Jonesian hissing and chittering that pours off their pages now. I never did think they’d get so asinine. Not before shutting down their print editions at least.
We have no adults in the room at this point. Our once (moderately) competent elite newsmedia has given up on their readership, and is flaming out in a pointless, pitiful, ultimately boring explosion of wack-i-tude.
I have to wonder if some of their flaming venom and group-madness is due to an underlying, shame-ridden desire to see some of Trump’s agenda succeed. How many editors at the Times or the Post have teenagers now competing with (better) Asian kids for prime Ivy League acceptance letters? How many BoWash ‘consultant’ types are even more anxious about this or similar competitions?
Maybe they want to fail at unearthing Trump’s malfeasances.
great piece, another person I can’t recommend enough who is a Putin critic, survived Russia under Yeltsin and Putin until being forced to leave is Mark Ames who I know has clashed with Glenn Greenwald and is no fan of Pierre Omyidiar but regardless is spot on with much of his investigative journalism and mythbusting on the establishment, media personalities, libertarian movement, Putin’s foreign and domestic policies and false Russian conspiracy theory. check his articles out on Pando.com, the Exlie, The Exiledonline.com, https://www.nsfwcorp.com & http://shameproject.com/ Check out Telesur English’s Abby Martin’s interview with him https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7HwvFyMg7A&t=1s and Michael Tracey now a report for TYT Politics’s interview of him https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCl_EhJk6b0
great piece, another person I can’t recommend enough who is a Putin critic, survived Russia under Yeltsin and Putin until being forced to leave is Mark Ames who I know has clashed with Glenn Greenwald and is no fan of Pierre Omyidiar but regardless is spot on with much of his investigative journalism and mythbusting on the establishment, media personalities, libertarian movement, Putin’s foreign and domestic policies and false Russian conspiracy theory. check his articles out on Pando.com, the Exlie, The Exiled, https://www.nsfwcorp.com. Check out Telesur English’s Abby Martin’s interview with him https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7HwvFyMg7A&t=1s and Michael Tracey now a report for TYT Politics’s interview of him https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCl_EhJk6b0
Glen,
Did you lose your black & white handkerchief with a pizza related map on it… leading to Russia?
It’s falling apart Glen… God Speed Julian Assange.
Hey boys and girls …
After months of vicious, specious and conspiracy-laden attacks upon Hillary Clinton, now these Intercept intellects argue that investigating Russian interference in the US election should be avoided.
Why?
Because empowering Russianphobic McCarthyites hysterically gives a platform to crazy conspiracy zealots as well as democrats and media “who have anointed themselves leaders of the Resistance against him.”
Hmmm … I wonder what other “irrational, highly corrosive delusions and feverish conspiracy theorizing” would help Trump?
How about Benghazi, the Deep State conspiracy, the Clinton Foundation, emails from a private server, and various accusations of murder and warmongering delivered fresh from no less than the mercurial hacker hippie Julian Assange who assures the world that Clinton orchestrated the “war in Libya” (actually a Civil War begun during the Arab Spring uprisings.) ?
After talking Gadaffi forces into committing civilian atrocities, Clinton talked Nato into bombing the Gadaffi forces (as well as talking various generals into switching sides ostensibly because of these atrocities), all by getting secret advice on her secret email servers while plotting how to invade Syria … and I suppose Iran because that nuke treaty was just her trying to fool everyone. Oh, and causing a refugee crisis in Europe. That’s what sinister warmongers do isn’t it. Monger wars?
But fortunately our impartial and illustrious Intercept instigators inform us that Trump’s greatest asset was Hillary Clinton herself. Not Republicans, not rightwing media, not various propaganda films, not Breitbart, not the billionaires backing Trump with dark money, not stolen emails, not disenfranchised voters … none of that nonsense helped Trump. It was the Democrats.
Thank you Mr. Greenwald.
Now you say investigating Trump’s apparent collaboration with the Russians will actually help him?
For me, your credibility ranks with that of climate deniers and Republicans.
Why are you still posting? “Correct the Record” isn’t issuing paychecks any more.
It’s funny how the leaked e-mails from the DNC undermine your points at nearly every turn. A few examples:
– That mysterious period when Trump was getting loads and loads of free media coverage, to the point where one of the networks spent an hour showing his plane sitting on a runway while Bernie Sanders was giving a major speech? Turns out that the Clinton campaign was telling all friendly media to give Trump as much publicity as possible, because they thought he would be the easiest Republican to beat. (And, incidentally, they were also trying to keep Sanders off the air, because the more publicity he got the more people liked him.) In a very real sense, Clinton’s campaign helped (at the very least) to give us Trump as a candidate. (They referred to it as the “Pied Piper Strategy” in e-mails, if you want to go and look it up.)
– They were correct about Trump being the easiest to beat, in that polls as long ago as March of 2016 were showing that the only Republican Hillary Clinton had a reasonable change of beating was Trump — and her edge over him was within the margin of error. Sanders didn’t have that problem — and I don’t think it’s because Sanders is particularly charismatic, because he isn’t. It’s because he isn’t a Clinton and isn’t associated with Clinton, and thus does remind people of a foolish vote for the Iraq war, an attempt to lawyer out of lying under oath by arguing what the word “is” means, unnecessary enthusiasm over trade agreements which — exactly as predicted by Bernie Sanders, which ought to shut up Clinton enthusiasts (but doesn’t because they have no shame) — kill jobs and drive down wages, and the million and one other “minor issues” which make up the Clinton baggage. For every Trump gaffe or crudity, there is a moment of bad judgement by a Clinton, usually one which is suspiciously like what would have happened if Wall Street and large corporations were in charge of what the Clintons were doing.
– When Hillary Clinton was informed about the FBI investigation into her server, she went and erased a big chunk of the data. As a criminal attorney (before she became a politician), Hillary Clinton certainly knew that tampering with evidence is against the law. (In point of fact, she once got a pedophile rapist a successful plea bargain by arguing that the evidence had been tampered with!) To everyone who isn’t a part of the Clinton cult of personality, that is at the very least a reason to wince and regret that Clinton got the nomination. To milton marshmellowforbrains, here, it’s a point to be ridiculed, even though about a decade ago they were ranting about such violations from the Bush administration, which just goes to show that, to Democratic tribalists, It’s OK If You’re Named Clinton.
– As for climate change deniers, incidentally (I don’t know of any “climate deniers” — I think everyone agrees that there is a climate), the Clintons may not exactly deny that climate change is going on, and they may not go so far as to pretend it’s not from human influence, but their policy was, in the 1990s, and was going to be, if Hillary had won the election, “kick the can down the road”. As the leaked e-mails showed, Clinton didn’t want to put climate change in the party platform, and tried to have the DAPL protesters labelled “environmental extremists”. That’s hardly surprising, since she quite publicly has been shilling for fracking for years, chose a pro-fracking, pro-fossil fuels (as well as pro-Too-Big-To-Fail-banks and anti-choice) VP, and hired Salazar, known for his ties to the fossil fuel industry, to handle staffing. For Clinton supporters to claim Clinton was some kind of environmentalist goes right past humorous and straight to insulting.
If this and previous articles are any indication, “Correct the Record” still issues paychecks.
Your objections refer to the “Pied Piper strategy” which, as you point out, helped Trump. Unless Clinton and associates intended to lose the general election, their “help” for Trump was designed to put forth the worst Republican candidate possible. A poor strategy or a botched implementation of a reasonable strategy isn’t the “cause” of Trump’s win. But even if the best explanation (it isn’t) for Trump’s win is Clinton and associates’ ineptitude, blaming her (them) for ineptitude is about as useful as blaming ducks for hunters. Take away the ducks and the hunter remains; take away Clinton’s ineptitude and the Trump malignancy remains.
This point seems forgotten.
Except in this article where GG finally notices the insane Republican conspiracy machine. Unfortunately, he concludes that Democrats would be making a mistake attacking Trump with unproven Russian conspiracy theories — advice that isn’t even useful, nor even less, accurate.
If relentless partisan, personal, and political attack — a marker of Republican politics since Nixon — is so ineffective, then the Republicans would have disappeared years ago. They haven’t disappeared, they control all three branches of government, NOT because smears and slanders don’t work, but because they do work — and quite well when supported by an apparently impartial authority (like an FBI director, right wing media, bizarre conspiracists, wikileaks, repetition, rightwing media, lack of evidence, and the purely political abuse of power.
The advice of don’t be mean to President Trump because it will somehow help him when the Russian conspiracy pops like the empty bubble it is, ignores the history of partisan politics in the US since Nixon. Smearing your opponent with specious, unproven, and vague accusations of corruption works. Quite well, apparently, if President Trump, Mitch McConnell, the Bushes, and virtually every elected Republican now holding office amount to evidence.
To put it differently, name one progressive (or reasonable) political policy Trump has embraced. The cornerstone of his blathering nonsense amounts to “blame the powerless” for they are the ones damaging an otherwise GREAT America. And when he’s not blaming immigrants, Muslims and African Americans, he bizarrely blames Clinton and Obama for founding ISIS, the Chinese for perpetrating the climate change hoax, Democrats for selling out the middle class, the media for fact checking and the US government for having national interests, established procedures, and a judiciary.
Trump will be defeated only when the Republicans repudiate him.
Truth doesn’t touch him. He lies with impunity.
Russia intervened in the US election without consequence.
Breitbart/Fox/Rightwingerism drives political policy in the US.
Progressive policies aren’t just ignored, they’re actively repressed — physically and politically assaulted — like the DAPL protests or people without documents.
Indeed, GG makes this extraordinary and counterfactual claim,
Catching Jeff Session perjuring himself, watching the State Department dissolve from within thanks to Putin pal Tillerson, and demanding reasonable explanations for bizarre or notably policy reversals (like modifying the Republican platform re: Ukraine or not costing out ACA “replacement” all have real political effect. They are NOT “more removed from evidence.” The evidence piles up.
When the elephants stampede, people get hurt.
Why ignore this metaphoric reality?
I submitted my lengthy response to your post a few minutes ago.
Let’s see how long it sits in limbo. One post a week or two ago sat for two full days.
About an hour and twenty minutes.
So
good jobpassable work, mods... climate deniers ..
i don’t think anyone claims there’s no climate
as for energy policy, Obamaism/Clintonism plays “hide the sausage” with big oil and fracking, while making a big deal in public out of the battle over some of the visible plumbing
republicans just say go ahead and dig for gas, screw the planet
six of one, half a dozen of the other
Those who point out proofing errors (of which I make more than my fare share … oh lookie another ERROR) tend to have nothing useful to say.
And here we see it.
I would say almost anyone — any human being, even any monkey — would make a better EPA administrator than Scott Pruitt.
But that’s my opinion and how good could my opinion be when I didn’t even bother to type out the full phrase “climate change denier”? I suppose if I’d left the final T off “Holocaust” you’d call me anti-semitic.
Dumbshittery isn’t a legitimate political position, try as you and others might to make it one.
I’m looking for an example of irrelevant pearl clutching journalism. Can anyone here help me find a good one? Glenn?
Gessen has fueled the hysteria.
Listen
Trump’s words raise red flags for autocracy | MSNBC
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel…/trump-s-words-raise-red-flags-for-autocracy-80726534789..
Rules for surviving a Trump autocracy | MSNBC
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/rules-for-surviving-a-trump-autocracy-815712323798
Media in the age of Trump | MSNBC
http://www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/media-in-the-age-of-trump-860224067858
agreed that we should not resort to the same dirty tactics that conservatives use.
but the facts remain: putin DID illegally invade crimea. and the kremlin DOES at this very moment support separatists in moldova, georgia and ukraine (so far).
‘agreed that we should not resort to the same dirty tactics that conservatives use.’
Could you be a bit more specific – are you talking about taking a ‘leak’?
sorry……… i’m not into watersports :P loooooooool
i wholeheartedly concur with every point that this article makes. i am both scared of the anti russian hysteria resulting in lethal consequences(both the u.s. and russia are nuclear powers!) and disgusted with the democratic party’s cynical ploy to hijack the anti trump movement which has very good reason to oppose this man without throwing in the fabricated drivel of anti russian hysteria. make no mistake, there are those in washington who want war with russia. this is insanity! incidentally nato has armed forces right at russia’s doorstep. how many russian troops are stationed at our border?!
i am both scared of the anti russian hysteria resulting in lethal consequences(both the u.s. and russia are nuclear powers!)
Don’t be scared – as the scare that anti russian hysteria might result in lethal consequences is probably even less scary than anti russian hysteria resulting in lethal consequences.
Especially about the nuclear thingy –
There might be some peeing involved – soo?
But who is scared about that?
“When DNC staffer Seth Rich was murdered in 2016, his family was furious and sickened by the attempt to exploit his death by implying that he was murdered by the Clintons for political reasons.”
Nice try, Glenn. Except that Craig Murray, who is a friend of Julian Assange, already confirmed that he picked up the DNC material himself and delivered it to WikiLeaks. Though he didn’t mention Seth Rich’s name, this proves that it was a leak, rather than a hack. Incidentally, on Dutch TV, Assange offered a reward to anyone with information on Rich’s murder–though he stopped short of publicly admitting he was the source of the leak. In any case, investigators in the case have stated that nothing was stolen from Rich and that he was shot in the back, strongly suggesting an assassination rather than a mugging gone awry.
You can call RT “propaganda” all you want, I double dares ya to find a better explanation of the new Trumpcare plan on any American network.
Is it just me or is Feinstein completely incoherent here:
To the question of “is there enough oversight”, Feinstein, who is on a committee that has responsibility for oversight of the intelligence agencies, answers “well oversight is one thing”…then she describes why technology companies should help “the police” in “a national security event”
Huh? The story is about the CIA, not the police. The story is the CIA losing control of dangerous malware, not about tech companies helping the police. Feinstein seems about as compos mentis as Trump here.
It was perhaps one of the most insane interviews I have ever seen. She is a completely demented nut job… I swear she could be an alien or possessed.
– as nearly every US Comedian has warned in a much, much better way about Xenophobic Conspiracy Theories Drowning U.S. Discourse and Helping Trump what makes Gessen’s article so unimportant – aside from the fact that partisan smear artists cannot dismiss her on the ground that she loves Putin and works for the Kremlin – is that it doesn’t focuse on the key irony: namely, that this fixation on trying to seriously deconstructing comedy is just an ineffective way of avoiding the real humor in all of this.
The one explanation that seems most interesting to me is this one: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/12/1609948/-Why-does-Russia-want-Trump-It-s-all-about-oil-Why-does-Trump-want-Russia-It-s-all-about-money It is easier for me to believe in “the art of a (really huge) deal” than an oath of fealty from Trump… to anyone.
When we know the world actually is run by conspiracies that intercept our communications and write model bills and spy on French political parties to come up with action points, who can deny conspiracy theories out of hand?
I tried to warn the conspiracy theorists that they were just giving ideas to the CIA, but would they listen …
Wnt-
This is off topic, but you one asked for proof that the NSA manipulates Wikipedia-do you remember that?
I have been tracking one link that indicates this, since around 2011. This was before the Snowden thingy and what we now know. Here is one piece of that puzzle:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:NSA_electronic_surveillance_program&redirect=no
Breitbart was murdered by Putin? But everyone knows he was really killed by John “Pedo” Podesta!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iy1ktydDos8
Now Matt Taibbi is jumping onto the bandwagon, warning the press not to overplay their hand about the Russia allegations.
Democrats should ignore these warnings. Gessen and Taibbi are only getting cold feet because they know you are onto something. The proper strategy is to start impeachment proceedings now, because the evidence of collusion is bound to show up sooner or later and every day you wait is one more day for the Trump administration to cause mischief.
‘Gessen and Taibbi are only getting cold feet because they know you are onto something.’
Gessen and Taibbi (and Glenn Greenwald) are only repeating what most US Comedians already had expressed in a much more coherent way.
US Comedians have an agenda. They want the US government to be as dysfunctional as possible to give them more material to work with. They should all be arrested under the Sedition Act or possibly deported to Comedia or whatever country Comedians come from.
‘US Comedians have an agenda.’
So have Comedians who pretend to be Italian Fascists.
So could you please arrest yourself -(Citizen Arrest?) and deport yourself to the Lago di Garda?
Just read The Taibbi on the Russian Deep State doo doo. This caught my eye:
Ain’t that the truth. As it is, there should be more dirt on Trump than wet on water before any Russian collusion. *To be sure, I feel confident if there was any money to be made colluding with the Russians, Trump would be colluding . .. That’s what he’s always done in his life-long fight against poverty.
Trump’s ‘pussy grabbing’ alone should be grounds for impeachment. They impeached Bill Clinton for less than that. .. but nothing came of it.
Hell fire, Trump’s whole life should be grounds for impeachment. The free press, while they’re still free, should put that in their pipe and smoke it, imo.
Crimea was a gift from the West to Russia. Not one shot was fired….. If the EU and USA had not stirred unrest in Kiev and had waited for the regular presidential elections to take place in Ukraine, Putin would never have dared to save Crimea from a civil war situation. Russia was prepared from the beginning to let Ukraine ( corrupt, broke and unreliable ) go to the West ….. Now Europe and the US are paying billions to keep that country afloat. Trump would say: Bad deal !
Crimea saved itself. They saw the shitstorm Clinton’s state department unleashed next door, they decided it would be safer to rejoin Russia, and they took a clear overwhelming vote in favor. Putin did the only sensible thing in accepting.
Finally…I got tired of this the moment people accused Jeff Sessions of having ties to Russia, when it sounded like he merely forgot about having some banal meeting with Sergey Kislyak.
Impeachment for even the most glaringly obvious criminal acts is an *extremely* high burden… I should say impeachment + conviction. Impeachment on it’s own has ussually been nothing more than political theater.
Add to this that both houses of congress is controlled by Republicans and no definable criminal act has even been postulated – let alone proven…
At some point you really need to demand that wapo, nytimes and their readers put down the water bong. Waterever they are smoking – it is giving them hallucinations.
Their giddy reporting on leaks has backfired spectacularly. They walked into that one snd Trump clubbed them like a baby seal.
Yes, the right has it’s share of loonie birds — but in a few short months Democrats jackassery has topped everyone. Imagine a donkey climed up on it’s hind legs braying until it’s lungs collapse.
Yeah, you get the picture…
You don’t have to be xenophobic to think Trump is potentially in hock to unscrupulous mobsters. He won’t release his tax returns; bad sign. His people lie constantly; another bad sign.
The guy had shady real estate deals in Jersey, in the 1980s. He’s not unfamiliar with goons. It would not surprise me at all if he still does business with goons, all over the world. (What legitimate bank would float this serial bankrupt a loan?)
I agree that some of the conspiracy theory stuff is bonkers, but there’s enough here to warrant serious investigation.
I’m confused. If this is all fake news and democratic hysteria, why cant Trump just punch through it all with his superhuman bluster? Why the resignations? Why the recusals? Why the lying?
god forbid you accept the details. If they can’t fit into one of two buckets, all is lost amirite
John Dean or some easily discredited variation of Juanita Yvette Lozano?
Milton’s pro-DNC disinformation campaign continues, ,ad nauseam.
Ugh!
A funny thing about bunkers.
The longer you’re in one, the smaller it becomes.
Watch Downfall.
Try not to identify with certain fanatical characters if you can.
You mean this movie?
Yes … and including many of the hilarious parodies like the one you provide.
Everyone should spend an hour browsing those parodies.
Some are brilliant.
The universal seduction of any conspiracy thinking is the warm invitation to return to early-childhood binary thought: goods vs. bads, outer reality as simplicity, little thought required.
As adults, we recreate this regressive inner world together, as “herd-enforced delusions” (thank you for that term!) In that state we adults, wrapped in the comforting cohesion of gang-membership, can commit battles, wars, bombings, lynchings, demonizations, imprisonments, deportations, etc.
Thanks for this well-reasoned article.
The Trump-Russia conspiracy mongering is designed to prevent the Trump administration from establishing diplomatic relations with Russia. Why are the Neo-cons behind this strategy trying to prevent American diplomacy with Russia you may ask? To prevent diplomacy from spoiling their plans of regime change in Syria and Iran. In both cases Russian diplomacy with the Obama administration was key in preventing a war with both countries. Now with Republicans fully committed to war with said countries the Democrats can’t play spoiler in these long drawn out war plans because they will have already demonized Russia and Putin, whom diplomacy with would stand the best chance of derailing more disaster wars. How will anti-war Democrats be able to prevent these wars when the most important international negotiating partner is has been branded their sworn enemy? How can the Trump administration engage in diplomacy with Russia as these war plans unfold, when acts of diplomacy are branded as treason?
Most of you, including Glenn, believe the CIA is guilty of incredible and wild things, so why is it so hard to believe that an autocratic Russian oligarchic regime would throw its weight behind an American political movement especially when that movement publicly advances the interests of this autocratic regime? Does it make Russia bad for fucking with our elections when we fuck with theirs? I believe America is “guilty” of supporting poltical causes in Russia so it doesn’t even seem the least bit fantastical to imagine Russia returning the favor. For me at least and from what I see xenophobia has nothing do with any of this. We’re talking about our respective intelligence services and the actions of individuals. I genuinely like so much about Russian culture, its history, not so much anti gay culture but we have that kind of shit here so even that at least is familiar. I just don’t get it Glenn.
Decades of evidence.
Dearth of evidence.
Perhaps you “don’t get Glenn” because Glenn gets this?
I show up to class. We’ll see where the chips fall as time passes.
Fair enough. A lot are absent through no fault of their own, truant, or have never enrolled.
I guess what I’m really saying is that you can’t come to a class on evolution (for example), study hard, and come to the conclusion that science is mistaken; we’re not evolved creatures, we’re designed by some unprovable means.
Exactly. It’s not that I believe Russia is incapable of interfering in a U.S. election; it’s that I’ve seen no credible evidence that it did. There are all kinds of things people — on both the left and right — have claimed the CIA did that I also decline to believe, due to lack of evidence. There are also a great many evil deeds committed by the CIA I do know happened, because of…evidence.
Have a look at the latest essay at consortium news.com which makes a good case for the lest wikileaks docs showing how the US spooks could fabricate a Russian role in DNC hacking etc.
That’s consortium news.com.
Spot on. Let’s be clear – EVERYBODY (US, Russia) fucked with the Ukraine elections, for example, but only ONE country invaded Crimea. And that right there is the story reduced to it’s most basic elements. They (we) are all playing the game (and the game is pretty ugly), but Putin is the actor that commits first (and the most aggressively) to the kind of escalation that inevitably leads to war and/or humanitarian crisis. Viewed through the lens of history, whether or not the primary goal behind Russian support of the Assad regime was specifically to induce a hostage crisis that would destabilise the EU will not matter – but, should the EU disintegrate, it will certainly be the most significant outcome in global economic terms. We are talking military advantage and money – huge amounts of it – winding up in the pockets of Putin and his crew of oligarchs, at the direct expense of pretty much every western nation.
So in my view there is good reason to be extremely wary of the level of communication between the Trump team and Moscow. This is not new territory for much of his cabinet, many of whom already have deep business ties and/or personal relationships with Putin and/or his representatives. The fact that they have lied and misrepresented those ties (Sessions under oath) is not exactly encouraging either. Calling that wariness ‘hysterical’ or ‘delusional’ is an absurd level of hyperbole – it’s just prudent and common sense.
Crimea was NOT “invaded” . Crimea underwent a unilateral secession from its union with Ukraine. As an autonomous Republic within Ukraine (a status it has had since transfer in Soviet times from Russia to the Ukraine SSR), its arguable that Crimea had that right, especially in light of the violent putsch by Ultra-nationalist militants.
Its no different to what happened in Yugoslavia when Slovenia and Croatia both declared their independence without first getting agreement from the Federal government in Belgrade. In that case, the collective West were enthusiastic supporters of such a move (as they wished to absorb the Yugoslav republics into EU/NATO), yet apparently the same right doesn’t exist for Russian Crimea? Hypocrisy much?
The difference is the west didn’t mobilize troops.
Invaded Crimea?? Russia had a naval base there for over 200 years. And the predominantly Russian military population there oddly enough chose to side with Russia and held a referendum declaring its intention to do so.
Both Sevastopol and the Black Sea Fleet (initially commanded by Grigory Potemkin) were founded under Catherine the Great in 1783, before the US had a constitution.
In the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Crimeans voted on multiple occasions to rejoin Russia or to establish full independence for the peninsula. Throughout this period, Russia maintained its naval base there (as if there were ever any other possibility!).
Crimea is Russian. Period. End of. Deal with it.
The US has bases all over the EU and in Japan. What’s your point here?
At long last the truth may have finally come out.
At some point Russia’s primary goal could have been to use the US invasion of Iraq that heralded the creation of AQI giving rise to ISIS using American weapons and money funneled through Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey to conquer part of the Levant so that Russia could drop bombs on Syria in support of Assad inducing a hostage crisis* in order to destabilize the EU.
That might have been Putin’s plan all along.
*or maybe inducing a refugee crisis? Either way, it apparently doesn’t matter as viewed through a certain lens.
The US invasion of Iraq is the greatest foreign policy failure in US history. You’ll get no argument from me. That in no way let’s Putin off the hook for his bullshit in either Crimea or Syria.
Certainly Obama’s hands-off approach and attempts to rely on diplomacy instead made that possible by opening a window of opportunity, but it took a bad actor – Putin – to actually use that window to something brutal, shitty and self-serving rather than work for a common resolution. So if the goal is LESS war, and MORE peace, Putin is most definitely not your man. Which was my point – western wariness, skepticism and vigilance is just common sense, not ‘hysteria’.
Maybe (well, certainly) it’s escaped your notice, but Putin’s forces–unlike O’s and Donald’s–are in Syria at the request of the Syrian government.
You mean the same Syrian government that fired chemical weapons at civilians, and now – with an assist from Putin – is bombing hospitals?
Ok, I’ll bite – explain to me how that legitimizes Putin’s involvement?
The US has bombed hospitals – and weddings, funerals, and schools too.
How does that legitimate its involvement in Syria? Or Yemen? or Iraq?
No. That would be the Syrian government that was accused, on no evidence (and against the evidence that later emerged), of firing chemical weapons. When a belligerent rogue state launches a terrorist campaign against your country, of course it’s legitimate to ask for help from a neighbor with a shared interest in the chaos from spreading.
You left out an old friend of yours Glenn. No, this is not an accusation, lol, just a light hearted entry point. But the broadcast from MSNBC is no laughing matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHX031UoCXA
I discovered that quite by accident in a piece by Caitlin Johnstone, who writes a blog (it seems to be a blog) called Newslogue. She more recently wrote a very nice piece (I thought) about Wikileaks, titled “Seven Profoundly Stupid Things That People Say About WikiLeaks”:
http://www.newslogue.com/debate/382/CaitlinJohnstone
Meanwhile, good piece, as always.
What’s really going on here? Now with Steve Bannon being the real power in the White House, everybody’s trying to cash in on using fake news to drive traffic to their sites and make them really rich.
Six corporations (all run by rich and powerful conservative white guys who hate Obama and love Trump) run all media. It’s not journalism anymore. It’s “infotainment” in their minds. On-air people are NOT journalists. Instead, they’re multi millionaire talk hosts doing talk radio on TV. One works for Fox and makes millions pushing Trump’s racist birther crap. Then MSNBC offers $2 million a year more to now say that Trump is telling “mistruths”. Fuck yeah, they’ll take the money. That’s all that matters. Do and say any goddamn thing you have to for ratings.
What’s really funny is when guests appear on these shows and don’t do as they’re told by the producer. This in turn screws up the host who can’t deal with someone with informed opinions. Do you really think that Joy Reid’s going to risk her multimillion dollar MSNBC gig by saying Trump’s a serial liar? No, they leave that to their resident socialist O’Donnell.
It’s too bad that Greenwald has to put in time in appearances on these shows. Then again, that’s the price you pay when you’re a global superstar muckraker.
I take your point and agree to a certain extent.
But you don’t examine your own premise. Joy Reid (or any of the other well-compensated newsreaders/pundits) are “personalities” with a q rating. They aren’t hired for their talent. They’re hired for their ability to appear credible while selling their product (“news”) The buyers — her audience — determine her credibility. She doesn’t risk her position by calling Trump a serial liar; indeed, it’s more likely she strengthens her position. Truth or falsity doesn’t matter when everyone has a point of view.
Coke or pepsi? What difference? That’s not politics; that’s branding. (I must emphasize that this does NOT mean the two major parties are as identical as Coke and Pepsi. The differences are stark and severe.)
I suppose one could argue that the advertisers don’t count as much as the audience — they’ll gladly hawk their products (drugs, cars, weight loss, etc.) to the larger audience although I’d expect to find a sort of political bias according to the demographic. Old people watch Fox and the networks, Millennials watch the Daily Show or (what I rely upon) Vice or just glance at Yahoo headlines on Facebook, Twitter, etc.
Thus the need for multiple platforms and endless repetition of branding phrases.
It doesn’t matter if Trump is a crazy liar. He’s isn’t selling policy or principle. He’s selling his brand.
The Democrats seem unable to grasp this simple dynamic. It’s not about popularity or principle or policy or even personality.
It’s all about power.
Period.
Would Glenn have written this?
https://theintercept.com/2017/03/08/wikileaks-files-show-the-cia-repurposing-foreign-hacking-code-to-save-time-not-to-frame-russia/
Have not read her article yet, however Masha Gessen has in a big way helped fuel “the insane and toxic conspiracy mongering about Russia”
Have seen and heard her on MTP, Maddow’s etc feeding the fires about big bad bad Russia.
One of the latest times Gessen was ignoring any of U.S. crimes against humanity while knocking Russia’s crimes against humanity was on Chuck Todd’s weekly MTP where she and Chuck Todd were discussing Trump’s comments about the “U.S. not being innocent. We have killers too” They were discussing whether the U.S. has lost the “moral high ground”
This segment was absurd and hypocritical. Both Gessen and Todd made every effort to divert from U.S. crimes against humanity that the Bush and Obama administration’s have committed in Iraq, Libya, Syria by trying to steer clear of a comparison with Russian foreign policy.
Meet the Press: Political News & Interviews with Chuck Todd – NBC …
link to nbcnews.com
Gessen is not innocent of fueling the bad bad bad Russia conspiracies dominating the msm
But for that reason alone, it is noteworthy that she claims that the current DNC/CIA crop of propaganda being pushed, is meaningless, baseless garbage. She obviously has an ax to grind against Russia, but feels that this pretext for doing so is meaningless and actually damages more meaningful arguments against both Russian behavior and Trumpian behavior.
“She obviously has an ax to grind against Russia, but feels that this pretext for doing so is meaningless and actually damages more meaningful arguments against both Russian behavior and Trumpian behavior.”
She may truly feel that although that is not what she has explained on many of the MSNBC programs I have seen her on. She has only touched on the obsession with the DNC tapping once, the rest of the time I have heard her fuel the hysteria. Starting last fall. Gessen fueled the mania
Trump’s words raise red flags for autocracy | MSNBC
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/…/trump-s-words-raise-red-flags-for-autocracy-807.
Rules for surviving a Trump autocracy | MSNBC
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/rules-for-surviving-a-trump-autocracy-815712323798
Media in the age of Trump | MSNBC
http://www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/media-in-the-age-of-trump-860224067858
The democrats spread fake news just like the republicans? SO WHAT?
A big part of growing up is learning to separate facts from fakes; taking one’s cues from grown-up authority figures is for children, not adults.
The Americans who want big brother to keep them safe will have their eyes yanked open by the facts, economic and environmental.
Besides, all this Russia BS is nothing compared to the 911 myth, which is supported by most journalists, including Mr. Greenwald.
Can you provide any evidence for that assertion? I don’t believe that is even remotely true.
The evidence is in the towers falling, allegedly by jet fuel from planes flown with precision by amateur pilots; either the towers, built to withstand two jumbo jet strikes and hurricane force winds, were shoddily constructed, or God really did love bin Laden best.
The towers were blown up, not “pancaked”.
If you really want evidence, look on the Web; this is all history and there are plenty of videos and news reports from that day. Look at the evidence, not what your heart says. America is not immune to traitors who will murder their own citizens; look who actually benefited from the attacks. It sure as hell wasn’t bin Laden.
No it is.
Who is the naive one here? Gessen ignores all of the numerous Trump business ties to Russians. Who disputes the Felix Sater,Paul Mannafort, Carter Page connections?Oh yes, and the Lying of General Flynn and Jeffrey sessions in regards to meetings with the Russian ambassador. Finally the public adoration by Trump towards Putin? Media is performing they’re duties.Asking questions and researching all the information they can. For a change!
Liberals are always laughing at right-wing working-class voters for voting for Republicans who are working against their interests, and so they are just plain ‘stupid,’ etc. While those some of those same working-class liberals continue to support and vote for Democrats who work against their interests. Both Parties have a lie they tell voting cattle. It is the bigger and better lie that gets elected.
How else can they govern anymore? Bribes are not working except for about 10% of the population.
Yep.
Elizabeth Warren is beloved by Democrats for her consumer protection work.
The biggest foe of Elizabeth Warren’s consumer protection work has been not a Republican but the Democrat Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
When Schultz was outed for trying to throw the Democratic primary election to Clinton, and had to resign, Clinton immediately hired her, endorsed her in her own primary race (she was being challenged more or less because of her attempts to sabotage Warren), and gave her a huge campaign donation (and the Clinton campaign really did not give money to other candidates). And, just to make sure that everybody could tell it wasn’t just Clinton, Biden went and endorsed her, too.
@Gert
I’d have given you credit if you had mentioned the thermodynamic quantity of the combustion reaction.
We know the thermodynamic quantity has a negative sign in the product side of the reaction because it was stated combustion is occurring, so I’d be acting generously in giving credit there.
The factors you read about on google do change the value of the thermodynamic quantity. But only after this one, dominate, mechanism is related to the combustants will you know how hot your flame is.
(hint: most undergrad Thermodynamic calculations of combustion temperature involve gases. Oxygen and acetylene combustion is a common reaction in welding. How hot is your torch?)
Why would undergrads be given questions involving gases?
It’s all part of The Plot, to undermine your Truth. Bwahahaha
I didn’t read it on Google, you twit!
“do change the value of the thermodynamic quantity.”
… is pseudo-gobbledigook. Like so much of troofer “science”. What quantity? Gibbs Free Energy? That’s a State function. So what are you babbling about?
Now show us the calcs, genius (NOT!)
Oh god, this is so stoopid. Yeah I know, nuf inanely posted a freestanding post on this bullshit, but please, please don’t encourage him. If one must respond at all, it should be with ridicule, not by taking his absurd fixation seriously.
Perhaps he could post it somewhere else, then link to it here.
But only after this one, dominate, mechanism is related to the combustants will you know how hot your flame is.
… is FALSE too. What determines flame temperature is really complex.
There’s no end to your paranoia. It’s how you ended up as an antisemite too.
You really should join the Russiagaters, you know that?
I think this is an interesting perspective (haven’t read the Gessen piece yet). However, the issue is that even if some are madly connecting dots and it *feels* conspiratorial, much of what we’re learning is based on excellent investigative journalism. Real reporters are doing some excellent work in print, the New Yorker, for instance. You cannot liken, for instance, the New Yorker’s Azerbaijan piece to any conspiracy Limbaugh has ever spewed out of his delusional asshole. And on cable news, although much of it fits the style and news cycle, which promotes frothy dramas, there are some doing good work — like Rachel Maddow. As much as Greenwald is attempting to bring more nuance to a subject that is far from black and white, he’s suggesting that *none* of the as of yet unproven about Russian collusion are true. Not all of it will bear out, not every Russian who has died has been murdered by Putin — but much of this will be corroborated. We can and should do two things at once: find out exactly how this man became “President” and force him to face any necessary criminal charges, and at the same time, fight against authoritarianism every day: from the left. One does not preclude the other.
I don’t know what people will stand on if you kick this chair out from under them. They might have to admit they were wrong and who does that anymore…especially in the face of people they’ve deemed not as evolved as them
The reason conspiracy theories are attractive is that, unfortunately, malicious conspiracies do exist and people sort of “pick that up” but, without logic and careful reasoning behind it – just like any strong emotion – it will be easily manipulable. Especially with unmitigated pride behind it :b
And, regardless, responding in ridiculous, uncontrolled, non-forward-thinking ways – even if right – has never created a productive outcome
What a complete load of tripe, Glenn. One starts to wonder what you’re hiding.
Commies under his bed?
Maybe your meds?
“But they don’t allow the ongoing nonsense about every other account here supposedly being me. ”
They prevent the discussion of the subject; they do not prevent the practice from occurring.
its some sort of Unitarian quilting circle where she more or less scripts it out with her activist friends using their accounts … imo
“some sort of Unitarian quilting circle ”
and everybody gets to do a panel. I get it.
Hi all, can we please focus on the subject of the article, or debate each others’ arguments, and not throw around accusations? Thank you!
Travis, I have specifically avoided accusing anyone of impersonation. I have challenged Gert to demonstrate in her own words simple Thermodynamic principles. But, rather than engage, Gert resorts to invective.
(Glenn mocked ‘Truthers’ in the piece so we’re not too far into the tules.)
The effen NIST report on 911 mentions Flame Temperature and I am explaining, again, why that term is completely disingenuous, in response to Gert’s demand. She’s stated she’s a ChemE and so she should be able to answer a simple question on Thermo.
Really, she launches the “antisemite too” card and you ask the board to simmer down?
This back-and-forth is how the comments have run for 11 years; when played with wit it is entertaining and informative.
When it devolves to killing the messenger, it sucks.
Where else are you going to have graduate level pyrometallurgy explained in layman’s terms?
The answer to my question is:
Kinetics. The actual mixing of the fuel and oxidizer. The NIST report discusses the Flame Temperature of plastic chairs as contributing to the melting of the towers. That is preposterous because the Flame Temperature of plastic chairs is based on the plastic molecules reacting completely and simultaneously. That cannot happen in the context of a plane crashing into a building. The chair is going to melt and then burn but it cannot burn anywhere near the 1500 degrees mentioned. That’s why the smoke from the towers is black, indicating temps below 1000. A valid engineering report would not have made that mistake. There are many other mistakes that indicate wilful obfuscation by the NIST.
It’s quite easy to get to the Flame Temperature of acetylene because it is mixed with the correct amount of oxygen in a welding torch tip. A welder knows to tune his oxygen cutting-torch slightly once the torch is lit to maximize temperature by maximizing the ratio AND mixing of oxygen and acetylene. That is because the temperature of gas combustion is dominated by the physical proximity of combustants, i.e. kinetics.
For the umpteenth time: I go to the little boys room, as a cis-gender male, you idiot.
Nor do they need to prevent the practice. For as Glenn made clear, and at least in my case, it is not occurring.
Let’s cut to the chase, so that we can move on to practical thinking and action to oppose the worst in the Trump agenda, as Greenwald urges us to do. First, Trump will not be impeached and removed from office–utterly unthinkable given his massive rust belt support from millions of “deplorable” citizens who see him as their champion…and are heavily armed. Second, while Trump will not be impeached and removed, he has been and will continue to be damaged and constrained by large and powerful forces–an unholy alliance of liberals, neocons, the deep state, and the MSM. Third, this battle with Trump & Co. will simultaneously do considerable damage to the elements of this unholy alliance, weakening them as well. The likely result will be that little will get done in the deeply-divided federal government for an extended period of time, and Washington will be in a state of drift. Thus world events–in the Middle East, Europe, and elsewhere–will play out according to dynamics substantially unaffected by traditional American intervention or control. As the new world order of global-but-unipolar neoliberal capitalism dies in fits and starts before our eyes, a resurgent nationalism will replace it for the foreseeable future. Those pushing today for a more humane and sustainable world would do well to first focus on a more humane and sustainable nation, because that’s where the action will be during their lifetimes. A great resource here is Edward Bellamy’s “Looking Backwards.”
“an unholy alliance of liberals, neocons, the deep state, and the MSM.”
Oh they know people are catching on to the whole deep state thing, and the media is taking pre-emptive defensive measures to try and dissuade the uninitiated from questioning the matter further:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/06/us/politics/deep-state-trump.html
The sources and quotes in that article are hilarious. What irks me is them tenuously connecting these concepts with Trump though. Not because I like him, but because they’re trying to manufacture a narrative that will prompt the braindead to automatically equate the word deep state with Trump. When people who are aware of the deep state bring the concept up, they’re hoping we will simply be painted as supporters of his and dismissed.
They’re trying to contain and shut down discourse, but they’re getting sloppier and sloppier.
Oh and one more thing. I don’t think he’s actually fighting them back at all, given his cabinet member choices, and the fact that he wants to increase military spending etc. Calling out the media is one thing, but actions speak louder than words.
I’ll never buy that he’s a victim trying to heroically fight against the powers that be story. People who run for president know the score, and they know what they’re getting into, and he’s pretty sleazy so I’m sure there was enough dirt on him to control him from the get-go.
This is good:
For what it’s worth, I doubt American commanders who are the final link in the command chain, the ones who have to literally “push the button” will do it. Not without independent confirmation from other human beings in the high command who they consider sane…or at least saner than Trump.
I know the military structure wants to establish, as much as is possible that they are willing to destroy the planet if so ordered, on a moment’s notice, and thus win the game of chicken with the Russians. But just based on human nature..I doubt it would happen. Of course there are accidents, people going rogue, false alarms, there are all sorts of dangers. I just think that a massive launch that could be described as “blowing up the world” would not happen without the individuals responsible being doubly, triply sure that Trump hadn’t totally lost the plot based on what he saw on Breitbart. Of course US soldiers aren’t going to admit this, they’d lose their jobs immediately. But when the time comes, I’m pretty sure they will weigh the value of the planet before pressing any buttons. Killing hundreds of thousands in a far off country is one thing, destroying Earth’s ability to support human life…is another.
You’re forgetting that evangelical Christians make up a large chunk of the military, particularly the Air Force. They seriously believe that the end of the world will be a good thing, something to look forward to, because their ridiculous tinpot vision of a deity will come down to wave a wand and make everything okay.
I am increasingly of the opinion, these days, that religion is really to blame for most of the craziness in the world. It started to be obvious in about 1890 or so that there’s no such thing as an immaterial soul, and it became absolutely certain by around 1970. In order to continue claiming that the impossible was an obvious truth, religions had to start telling people to flat-out ignore reality, and that’s how we got things like Trump’s wall.
I will say I am glad Masha Gessen removed her ear piercings.
Why, did you do the same?
A byproduct of all the lying is that maybe the US press will be less inclined to use government statements as confirmation of government claims. Ex: “anonymous government source confirms intelligence report stating Russia behind DNC hacks” (Well, we can hope, can’t we???)
“Person who usually voices Opinion A now supports seemingly-contradicting Opinion B!”
One of the cheapest and most widespread rhetorical slight of hand tricks out there, regularly employed by intellectually dishonest columnists. A person’s support of a stance is never a good argument for (or against) that stance, unless the person’s technical expertise is directly relevant to the question at hand.
Apparently Amber Phillips isn’t sure yet if Trump is a serial liar, (spoiler alert, he is)
So she blames the “sorry state” of political discourse on….Bernie Sanders (Sound like any Democrats you know?)
If your colleague lies repeatedly to you, do you owe them the “time of day”? I can imagine a co-worker saying: “screw you Trump, get your own damn watch!” But I think Bernie Sanders is much more professional than that.
But Phillips here says that we must remain in a state of uncertainty as to the emperor’s state of undress.
“But Phillips here says that we must remain in a state of uncertainty as to the emperor’s state of undress.”
To be fair, Trump’s belly does over-hang his junk …
I used to think Trump would not last but it is becoming apparent he is the most useful idiot the deep-state could have dreamed up.
RE: “nor because it dangerously ratchets up tensions between two nuclear-armed, traditionally hostile countries”
That is certainly reason enough to disavow the claims, particularly when there is so little evidence to support them publicly. Democrats, inadvertently or not, are ultimately making a case for damaging U.S.-Russia relations, escalating tensions and risking war, for what? These wild claims are becoming a legitimate threat to national security. What’s worse they appear to be fomented by agencies that are supposed to be protecting the U.S. The Obama escalation with Russia vis a vis .is not protection, combined with Syria and Ukraine, it’s the biggest flare up since the end of the Cold War and arguably the worst situation since 1962.
What if the left gets everything it wants here? Trump is deposed for colluding with the Russians to win the election by hacking the Democrats. Would that make war with Russia more likely or less likely?
Is that “everything” the “left” wants? Trump gone? Just wait four to eight years, DONE.
I’m pretty sure the left wants way more than that.
I think there is a growing realization that the “Oh thank God Bush is gone, anybody is better than him!!!…Oh thank God Trump is gone anybody is better than him!!” strategy of flipping back and forth between increasingly right-wing corporate managerial teams is not a good strategy for Americans obtaining peace, good healthcare, good jobs, affordable education etc.
Finally, yes, that seems to be happening. Voting for ‘the least worst thing’ may be a buried fad…
Nope, “The Lesser of Two Evils” is still going strong. It won’t be going away any time soon, either, since it’s a major profit center for the Democrats:
1. Estimate how terrible the Republican candidate will be.
2. Pick a candidate who is just slightly less terrible than the predicted Republican candidate.
3. Solicit donations from corporations who no longer have to worry about the threat of actual regulation because your candidate will not consider that.
Of course, this would stop in a heartbeat if the Republicans started running candidates who had even a coherent vision of governance and a plan, even if that vision and plan were terrible, but since the Republican plan has been, since about 1990, “push for anything as long as it hurts someone, and fall down and throw a tantrum if you don’t get it”, that’s not happening any time soon.
I think you’re describing “milton”, Clinton Troll par Excellence!
Obviously, in the face of DNC criminality, supreme corruption, and blinding idiocy, the Republicans do not have to bother worrying about mounting a candidate who has a coherent vision anything. The DNC has gone out of its way to make life for the GOP easy peasy lemon squeezey…
That certainly doesn’t recommend the Dems as a party of anything remotely resembling opposition, to the GOP.
Obviously, in the face of DNC criminality, supreme corruption, and blinding idiocy, the Republicans do not have to bother worrying about mounting a candidate who has a coherent vision [of] anything
True, but they would still need a rabblerouser who can actually get the proles on their feet. The supply of washed-up TV faces (especially with the exceptional knack for trolling) would seem to be somewhat limited.
Trump will always be surrounded by conspiracy theories as he is constantly challenging people.
trump News: http://trumpnews-1.weebly.com/
Americans are so screwed:
Some American news show should take this plan to Germany or France and ask cancer patients there if they would like to exchange their universal medical care system for….the “freedom” to try to treat their cancer with a 4000 dollar coupon.
Once again, a clear and cogent piece from Greenwald. This is why I thought what John Lewis said back in January was reckless. And I could give a rat’s behind that he walked the walk during the civil rights campaign back in the 1960s. That doesn’t give him a free pass in 2017 to peddle dangerous nonsense. For a sitting congressman to state that the newly elected President is illegitimate with NO EVIDENCE for such a claim is the height of irresponsibility. And moreover, consider this. We have a political process that funnels huge amounts of money into PACS. This money comes from individuals, corporations, and FOREIGN sources. And then this money is unleashed on the American public in the form of TV ads peddling outright lies and massive out of context distortions of the truth. And then we vote and we have no problem with this evidently. We don’t question the legitimacy of our Presidents elected in this manner. But then a few REAL emails are leaked and we are sent into a moral panic about Russia and the legitimacy of this election? Oh please. Give me a break.
Micah and Sam and Jon and Mattathaias and so on…
Exit you comfort zones. Release all the NSA documents to the capable and brave. We’re tired of self appointed gatekeepers posing as inside beltway “outsiders” paying lip service to real transparency and accountability. Now Wikileaks has handed your asses to you and its pretty clear to this observer that your disrespect for both Assange and Wikileaks methodology has been encouraged by Firstlook Intercept editorial staff.
Kim Dotcom ? @KimDotcom
CIA uses techniques to make cyber attacks look like they originated from enemy state. It turns DNC/Russia hack allegation by CIA into a JOKE
7:56 AM – 7 Mar 2017
A joke boys. For those of us out here looking these mother fuckers in the eye every day using our real names your unwillingness to take it to them on for us is no badge of honor its a scarlet letter of shame.
The Russians didnt do anything. Your calls for congressional investigations are a hollowed out homage to things as you wish they were. Not as the are. It was the CIA and the deep state all along.
WRITE ABOUT UMBRAGE FOR THE NEXT 3 MONTHS AND START DOING STORIES ON DEEP STATE AMERICAN COINTELPRO 2.0 TARGETS: Another profound revelation is that the CIA can engage in “false flag” cyberattacks which portray Russia as the assailant. Discussing the CIA’s Remote Devices Branch’s UMBRAGE group, Wikileaks’ source notes that it “collects and maintains a substantial library of attack techniques ‘stolen’ from malware produced in other states including the Russian Federation.
“With UMBRAGE and related projects the CIA cannot only increase its total number of attack types but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the “fingerprints” of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. UMBRAGE components cover keyloggers, password collection, webcam capture, data destruction, persistence, privilege escalation, stealth, anti-virus (PSP) avoidance and survey techniques.”
Start Thinking of Trump as an Ally Against the Deep State. Focus Your Coverage on Preserving the Integrity and Independence of the Executive Branch from Wholly Undemocratic Deep State for Future Generations
Heres Bill Binney showing you how its done: “I think the president is absolutely right. His phone calls, everything he did electronically, was being monitored,” Bill Binney, a 36-year veteran of the National Security Agency who resigned in protest from the organization in 2001, told Fox Business on Monday.
Binney also told Sean Hannity’s radio show earlier Monday, “I think the FISA court’s basically totally irrelevant.” The judges on the FISA court are “not even concerned, nor are they involved in any way with the Executive Order 12333 collection,” Binney said during the radio interview. “That’s all done outside of the courts. And outside of the Congress.”
Binney also told Fox the laws that fall under the FISA court’s jurisdiction are “simply out there for show” and “trying to show that the government is following the law, and being looked at and overseen by the Senate and House intelligence committees and the courts.”
“That’s not the main collection program for NSA,” Binney said.
Its not the vote, the influence or the count. The meme that tRump is a traitor, loves Russia Putin more than the European union & most Americans is enough to give us a shot at the midterms & shutting down that which seeks to destroy our ‘great’ society.
Great rant about the anti-Russia propaganda from the Sane Progressive:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg58nUYZoSw
That woman is great! And not for the first time either…
Linked to and tweeted as well. Let’s go viral!
Yea, rant is the right word for her.
BTW, she mentions an email from Clinton that proves collusion between The Clinton campaign and media regarding elevating Trump. I really couldn’t sit through her entire rant.
Do you know which email she is referring to?
Thanks Ham!
How the Hillary Clinton campaign deliberately “elevated” Donald Trump with its “pied piper” strategy
Do you know which email she is referring to?
There’s a wikileaked email in which she indicated to prefer Trump as the Rep-nominee. Because he’d be easier to beat. Too clever by half, that woman! ;-)
http://observer.com/2016/10/wikileaks-reveals-dnc-elevated-trump-to-help-clinton/
And there were so many Green Party members angry with Dr. Jill Stein over her attempt to audit the election process in three hotly & closely-contested rust-belt states–which, I suppose, is still technically going on as she challenges the constitutionality of Pennsylvania’s abruptly shutting down of any attempt at a recount.
Had we gotten recounts of the paper ballots by hand–instead of simply assuming the tabulations were already accurate, thus defeating the purpose of a recount in the first place, as Wisconsin did–in those three states along with forensic examinations of the DREs in those counties in Pennsylvania that did not use paper ballots, we could conclusively answer any & all questions anyone could possibly still have about the conducting of the 2016 general election.
(I’m not holding my breath for a seemingly miraculous appellate court decision forcing not just Pennsylvania but Michigan & Wisconsin to do such things from Dr. Stein’s latest &, in all likelihood, last suit. I may continuously harp on the weaknesses inherent in our current election process, from the voting machines to the use of common-carrier lines to transmit the tabulations from one place to another, along with my belief that someone–or group of someones–tampered with the election process & thus, the results, but I’m well aware of the incredibly long odds such a result from said lawsuit has, as well as the complete lack of evidence I have to support my belief that the election was tampered with by someone–or group of someones–even though I do NOT believe Putin or anyone in the Russian oligarchy to be the culprits of such a scheme. That’s why I supported the recount effort & so should have those in the Green Party that dissented, not because it would help the Green Party, but because it was the right thing to do for the country, as the current political climate is making all-too-painfully aware.)
As for both Gesson & Greenwald’s points in their respective articles, I could not agree more, especially with underscoring the danger so many people are courting with this McCarthy-esque fearmongering of Russia here in the U.S. & the very real threat of nuclear attack & retaliation should such tensions coupled with our forces & theirs being in such close proximity in places like Syria, for instance, manage to commit an act of aggression or outright war.
However, I do not think the best we can hope for is the impeachment & conviction of Donald Trump with the flimsiest & most fact-free of reasons, as Gesson believes. For one thing, the Democrats already missed their best chance at getting a special prosecutor to investigate whether any of this Putin/Trump hype is even remotely grounded in reality:
https://theintercept.com/2017/03/07/senate-democrats-blow-best-chance-to-demand-special-russia-prosecutor/
For another thing, the Deep State is at war with its transient, corrupt, & authoritarian brethren. I am certainly not blind to the destructive consequences that can and/or will happen as a result. HOWEVER, such consequences will occur as a result of their attempts to injure if not destroy each other, leaving those of us on the outside the opportunity to organize & take charge of the vacuums that this conflict will inevitably create, more likely due to practical necessity than by any organized group’s deliberate seizing of an exploit of one or more of these powerful factions’ weaknesses. We’ve known how incredibly difficult it is to fight the Deep State when it can focus all its attention on us. Here’s hoping now that their attention is primarily focused elsewhere some headway can be made against them.
Gessen’s warning is well worth heeding, to be sure, but I believe Trump will more than likely be impeached & convicted due to his near-cartoonish level of corruption–David Cay Johnston’s reporting on Donald Trump over the years is essential reading to understand just how corrupt & amoral Trump has behaved over the years–than anything regarding Russia, unless he has committed corrupt business practices in Russia or with Russian oligarchs, which should surprise no one if found to be true.
Of course, that then leaves us with President Mike Pence. Do NOT believe for two seconds that he is in any way, shape, or form a step up from a President Trump. As a life-long Hoosier, I know better than most how wrong that is, & not least of which because it would end the war between the Deep State & Trump’s corrupt, authoritarian yet transient regime. His relationship with Dick Cheney alone should make anyone fearful of Trump’s Presidency just as afraid of a possible Pence Presidency, if not more so.
Just so we’re clear, I’m not implying that Trump should be left in office as the lesser of two evils if–& probably when–the opportunity to impeach & convict Trump presents itself. What I am saying is that such impeachment & conviction of Trump MUST be followed with an even stronger resistance to the establishment with Pence as its champion.
(Full Disclosure: I voted for Sen. Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Party primary & Dr. Jill Stein in the general election.)
In many ways, Pence would be worse. He’s not a fan of ending free trade agreements, he’s more hostile to the LGBT community, he believes that Russia is a threat and stated so in the debates (Perhaps that’s why they want Trump out…)
As for the voting, the electronic machines aren’t as bad as people think, at least not the ones I work with. (As long as nobody at the county messes with them, and all the physical things are kept secure, the biggest things to worry about with the ones I work with are machine malfunctions- which are sadly, more common.) I do think elections should be audited, whether they are close or far apart, whether they are for president or school board, whether they are partisan or not. Elections should be taken seriously, and we should trust the result.
Trump transit to Pence: from the frying pan into the fire.
Apologies for not answering sooner. It’s so much worse than you think, & not because of anything you do with them. Here’s a comment I posted a while back when someone wanted specific examples of election fraud:
https://theintercept.com/2016/11/06/nine-ways-the-u-s-voting-system-is-rigged-but-not-against-donald-trump/?comments=1#comment-304538
It is a rare occasion in which I completely agree with Greenwald: READ the article he refers to!!!
Specifically, the second last paragraph. Here’s an excerpt: “The unrelenting focus on Russia has yielded an unexpected positive result, however. Following Flynn’s resignation, Trump designated Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster, a thoughtful and highly respected military strategist, as his national security adviser. And Fiona Hill, probably the most knowledgeable American scholar of Putin’s Russia, is expected to take charge of Russia policy at the National Security Council. Hill has been a consistent and perceptive critic of Putin, and a proponent of maintaining sanctions imposed by the United States following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.”
It also presents a far more realistic view of Trump: “Trump is doing nothing less than destroying American democratic institutions and principles by turning the presidency into a profit-making machine for his family, by poisoning political culture with hateful, mendacious, and subliterate rhetoric, by undermining the public sphere with attacks on the press and protesters, and by beginning the real work of dismantling every part of the federal government that exists for any purpose other than waging war.”) , or this characterization of Trump and cohorts: “Trump and his entire campaign team are precisely the kinds of fringe characters that Russians have traditionally cultivated, to no measurable effect. Even the insiders on Trump’s team were outsiders: Jeff Sessions was seen by his Senate colleagues as a crank and an extreme outlier on immigration and other issues; General Mike Flynn had been fired by the Obama administration for insubordination that stemmed from his penchant for conspiracy theories. Others, like foreign policy adviser Carter Page, had never been allowed at the grown-up table before. One-time campaign manager Paul Manafort, for all his supposed Republican/Washington credentials, was basically a paid hack for a succession of the world’s crooks. And Steve Bannon, above all, had turned being a fringe character into a profession.”.
“this obsession with Russia conspiracy tales is poisoning all aspects of U.S. political discourse and weakening any chance for resisting Trump’s actual abuses and excesses”
Perhaps if GG would spend less time and talent attacking Russia attacks, and more on exposing these “actual abuses and excesses”, he’d not only be more productive in this respect, but might actually realize that the Russian frenzy is more anecdotal than substantial.
What the hell does that even mean?
Sheesh!
It means lots of smoke but not much fire.
The actual malefactors — if I follow NH correctly — operate in plain sight. You don’t need a murky Russian connection to see the glaring corruption of Trump and Trump associates.
I don’t know if you’re being willfully obtuse or if you simply don’t comprehend written English. Probably the former IMO. Either way, you should try to answer the fairly articulate argument NH makes rather than revealing your own lack of comprehension.
Meanwhile Mordor is spying on anything with a pulse but milton’s concerned about the Russians!
“more anecdotal than substantial”
Unimportant and inconsequential in current affairs, given the many ways in which Trump presidency endanger many things we normally take for granted.
Anecdotal: (from dictionary.com)
“based on personal observation, case study reports, or random investigations rather than systematic scientific evaluation”
Substantial: (google search Substantial)
“of considerable importance, size, or worth.”
What GG calls Russian frenzy is an inconsequential part of anti Trump criticism.
It is amazing to me the tendency of some commentators here to emphasize the least important parts of my comments.
The comment you responded to exposes the selective reading of GG. The article he refers too balances its criticism of Russian-bashing testimony of what Russia is, and who Trump and Putin are. In complete contradistinction to GG, Masha Gessen account at least provides a more accurate context for the allegations against Russia.
I appreciate the literary criticism, but it is beside the point.
If by “anecdotal” you mean “more based on personal accounts” than on research, I think the evidence presented contradicts that. Nor am I sure how anecdotal can be juxtaposed with substantial. Surely the evidence is substantial even if it were completely anecdotal.
Now, if you are going to tell anyone how he is to better spend his time, you can find, in this article and references here and there, many more appropriate targets for your assistance.
Substantial has at least two meanings.
You don’t get to use both meanings as a fulcrum for your lack of comprehension.
The use of “anecdotal” carries only an implication of untruth. It certainly does not imply the opposite of the second meaning of substantial. The relation of anecdotal to untruth is like that of a list of meetings between Trump people and Russians to wrong doing. Wrong doing may be implied, but it sure has not been proven or even shown likely.
Right, besides, what the hell does it even mean for a frenzy to be anecdotal v. substantial? Whether the frenzy is anecdotal or not, a frenzy it remains, and thus harmful and distracting.
Exactly. NH is a master of that most subtle of rhetorical fallacies in which the reader is encouraged to replace the implications of inexact and inappropriate words with robust versions of the ideas NH is pushing, thus glossing over inaccuracies and untruths. Not so different from that sentence I just wrote!
As to ‘anecdotal’, see reply to Gert above.
“Perhaps if GG would spend less time and talent attacking Russia attacks, and more on exposing these “actual abuses and excesses”, he’d not only be more productive in this respect, but might actually realize that the Russian frenzy is more anecdotal than substantial.”
This paragraph does not tell anyone what to do, but rather tries to state that GG’s op-eds might benefit if he’d expand his scope and talent a bit.
This is an issue with human psychology that has probably been around as long as we have.
We tend to pick up on things that confirm our biases and ignore anything that doesn’t (which is why the debunking doesn’t get shared as much as the hoax). This is something I myself have been drawn into in the past (and probably still am to a degree) but being aware of it at least makes me stop and think about what I choose to believe.
Anyway, I really enjoyed reading this article. It’s something that we all need to stop and think about for sure.
When the conspiracy theories get exposed as bogus, even if only in part, that helps Trump. It’s happened a few times already.
I doubt they’ll relly care, as long as the donor $$$ keep flowing in.
What happens when some prove to be true after all?
Got a crystal ball?
What would happen if you just f*cked off outtahere?
Got any balls? Why don’t you take gg to moscow and cruise some bars? B—-.
Real classy, wayne!
The Rapture occurs and Jesus returns!
As any aspiring authoritarian would naturally do.
As a Bernie supporter, I must be an authoritarian, right?
WRONG! Accept that not everyone is impressed by your rancid Clintonism, you fool.
I don’t believe anything you say.
Oh dear. If you don’t believe Gessen or Greenwald, why on earth would you believe me, huh? You sad, sad clown…
Another sly bit of calculated crap-throwing. I may disagree with GG, I may learn from Gessen, but if I disbelieve them (or anyone else for that matter) I will say “I don’t believe you.” I believe what GG says. I disagree with it in this case.
Do you understand that your expressed agreement with someone doesn’t give you a single bit more (or less) credibility? Do you understand that my disagreement with someone is different from my disbelief of someone?
Do you understand anything about common human cognition or the meaning of words?
Do you understand anything about common human cognition or the meaning of words?
I’ve read too much of your pro-Cinton/DNC apologisms word salad to spend much time on them, libtard.
Not just ‘someone’ but TWO people, actually!
Nuffy, are you reading this? ;-)
with endless postings via Tor
You really are too funny, nuffy, you know that? I don’t even know what Tor is. Hell, I have trouble turning my tooter on!
When are you going to treat us to your calcs on Building 7, huh? Go on, we could all do with a good laugh here! ;-)
“When are you going to treat us to your calcs on Building 7, huh? ”
You pose as a chemical engineer yet you couldn’t carry it off. Now you attack commenters, calling them names, mocking them … seems like a personal attack.
-Mona- used to call me a “crank” for understanding mathematics. Now you are doing the same thing essentially.
Why do you behave as -Mona- does?
Don’t you have a soup kitchen to operate? I’ll bet john anderson is getting peckish.
Not even in the slightest.
Show us your calcs. I bet I know far more about statics, dynamics, material science and calculus than you do.
” I bet I know far more about statics, dynamics, material science and calculus than you do.”
What mechanism dominates the temperature of combustion?
What mechanism dominates the temperature of combustion?
A lot of factors influence the ‘temperature of combustion’. There isn’t really such a thing. A combustion is a chemical reaction (a quantum rearrangement of chemical bonds, usually exoenergetically), the rate of which is determined by multiple factors. Concentration (‘chemical activity’ to be precise) of reagents, temperature, presence/absence of catalysts are a few of them.
Where are you going with this?
“A lot of factors influence the ‘temperature of combustion’. …
Where are you going with this?”
It is beyond belief that you are a Chemical Engineer. You gave a response that a lawyer would give; you know, when you become the expert after reading other experts.
That answer is straight from google. And yes those factors affect combustion temperature but they do not “dominate” combustion.
I asked the question in such a way that there was no easy google search answer.
You failed to even discuss the dominate mechanism. The dominate mechanism of combustion is not even discussed in the NIST report. They discuss Flame Temperature (caps on purpose, it’s a defined quantity)
Tell me again, what mechanism dominates combustion? (it’s a one word answer)
(Hint: try searching on correlating Flame Temperature with Combustion temperature)
HA !!!
Why Gil? What’s funny about claiming someone is someone else? Cos it’s a ‘matter of opinion’?
Still, you too have been warned.
“Still, you too have been warned.”
You warn people for making valid observations concerning your posts … so you “warn” them.
Sharpening a claw, perhaps?
Grinding an axe, I think… ;-)
Look up the word denigrated and then get back to me.
What are you warning me about Gert? What false thing have I claimed about you ?
On the other hand you frequently violate the rules of this board by name calling and promoting a personal web site, so I hope when the moderator comes to protect you from reminding someone of Mona, he takes note of those things.
You’re the one who stirred up this shit abput my education, completely in bad faith, as only a rancid Ziobot can.
I’m not rising to the bait but you’re warned about some things that aren’t permitted on this site. Don’t let me ‘I told you so’ later on. :(
“What happens when some prove to be true after all?”
Corporate profits will grow, real wages will decline, the military budget will expand, healthcare costs will inflate, infrastructure will decay, public debt will balloon, the prison population will swell, and income inequality will accelerate as the wealth and security of most Americans continues to diminish.
What has been happening for the past 25+ years will keep happening.
The course will continue even if some of the accusations are true; it won’t change even if all of them are false.
The democratic party is in a really really fucked up place because they are now arguing that Putin is worse than bin Laden.
They aren’t arguing this overtly, but when you compare and contrast the PR face of how the democratic party treated 9/11 and islam vs (whatever russia is supposed to have done) and russia then it it more than obvious that this is exactly what they are arguing.
When they are forced to confront this contradiction (and they will) do you think the democrats are going to find love and empathy for russia, or do you think the masks are going to drop and they are going to unleash on islam?
This is why you can’t contain demonization to just one enemy.
Hate excuses hate.
And just how DANGEROUS is all this false prodding of the Bear, really? :-(
OBL is to Islam what the Russian state is to… the Russian state, because word salad?
Convincing argument.
@erty ytre
It isn’t complicated.
Who is worse Putin or bin Laden?
This isn’t a trick question and if you are unsure how to answer you have lost your mind and morality completely.
Let met help you.
Crashing airplanes into buildings is 10 billion times worse than (allegedly) leaking emails.
At least ten billions times.
Whatever you think Putin’s sins justify, then bin Laden sins justify 10 billion times more.
Should we have hearings into who in the US government has been influenced by bin Laden and bin Laden’s philosophy? Hell, we can start with the Saudis.
Why not?
I understand that we weren’t sufficiently addled with grief after 9/11 to really buckle down and do what needed to be done–but Hillary’s devastating loss has allowed us to take the bold steps necessary to get to the bottom of who is on side of America and who isn’t. Now admittedly we should have gotten on this right after 9/11–but better late than never.
Do you think the democratic case against all things russia helps or hurts the republican case against all things muslim?
Funny you should pick those examples, as there’s exactly the same amount of evidence for both.
Your reference to 9/11 brings to mind the bitterest irony in all this, as put by CHOMSKY (in his 2 Feb. interview by David Gibbs), “My guess is that most of the world is just collapsing in laughter” about the disproportion between the “horror” of Russia’s supposed “hack of the election” (“so amateurish by US standards that you can hardly even laugh”) and the US’ horrific sabotages of other countries’ democratic processes, e.g. the 9/11 – on – steroids inflicted on Chile in 1973.
See http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/03/03/most-of-the-world-is-just-collapsing-in-laughter-on-claims-that-russia-intervened-in-the-us-election-an-interview-with-noam-chomsky/ ),
Instead of us describing this Russia hysteria as “pot calling kettle black”, we should describe it as “panthers calling beetles black”.
It is slothful, but it’s sensational; remember that russian spy girl (some lil cutie) Anna Chapman…
This stuff just gets traction.
Here’s the scary shit: trumps a liar (but who cares so is everyone else HRC BHO, GHWB, etc), CIA is apparently waging a war on the US Constitution (so maybe trump isn’t a liar), there’s all this bull shit about russian interference, lions, tigers, and bears oh my… it’s all out of control it seems.
Is the US in decline? Is it crumbling from within?
Looks like it.
+10!
This cuutsie…
After reading about 150 of the 224 comments posted here, I find it easier to understand why nearly 42% of eligible voters didn’t bother to vote in this last election. It’s no wonder so many people just give up, tune out, and bail on our political system.
There’s a tendency in this article to over-hype the main point and engage in sweeping hyperbole about what the Democrats are in fact doing.
Broad generalizations with a spittle-flecked tinge to them can quite often serve the purpose of masking the real situation.
Are the Democrats talking exclusively about Russi’a influence?
Is the American media obsessed and presenting predominantly fantastical accounts created from air?
There’s a point when some degree of sensationalism can infect even the most supposedly non-ideological high church hymn.
Why do you call yourself a liberal ? Liberals are usually a tolerant, intellectual bunch.
I recognize this person from The Guardian. He’s one of many pseudo-liberal Democratic Party loyalists who’ve lost their goddamned minds over the election.
The voice of reason has arrived. Quiet everyone.
What do you call yourself?
Not a Liberal, that’s fer sure!
I’m not sure why you think your definition of what a liberal is constitutes anything but your opinion.
Going by your example, I’d say: ‘incorrigible imbecile’.
Forty and change years ago Phil Ochs gave the best description, which could just about pass for a definition, of “Liberal”. It is probably even more valid today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw
Pfffffttt…
I suspect they do discuss other things in private. I think the reason that Mr. Greenwald criticizes them is that Hillary Clinton, despite the best efforts of Vladimir Putin, still managed to win the popular vote. To do so, despite fielding an historically weak candidate and in the face of the Russian propaganda machine, demonstrates the Democrats’ message is resonating tremendously with the people. If they hone their message (that bankers deserve larger bonuses) a little more, somewhere in the US, a Democrat might actually be elected to office. But they are squandering their momentum by continually whining about Russia. This is like watching a basketball team that always blames the referee for their losses. The spectators only have limited sympathy – yes, the team may have received a bad call, but it would also help, as Mr. Greenwald is trying to point out, if they could make a basket.
I think the reason that Mr. Greenwald criticizes them is that Hillary Clinton, despite the best efforts of Vladimir Putin, still managed to win the popular vote.
Yeah, that and blowing $1.2 billion and still LOSING!
It’s enough to send any libtard in Ca doolally, donchathink? QED, anyway…
http://freebeacon.com/politics/total-cost-of-clintons-losing-campaign-1-2-billion/
The money spent by SuperPACs, trying to influence social media, was largely wasted. Low budget amateur efforts such as the Trump Twitter account proved to be more effective. However, propaganda on social media is about to get a whole lot more sophisticated, and firms will arise to deliver better value for $1.2 billion. Money will eventually reign supreme, even if it loses some battles along the way.
Money will eventually reign supreme, even if it loses some battles along the way.
Only way forward: restrict monies spent on election campaigns. Not likely in the U$$, IMO…
I really don’t think people outside the party really know what’s going on to be honest. There’s a lot of soul searching to be done and re-alignment of focus and purpose.
It’s pretty simple. Either the more progressive grassroots people on the ground and in the streets regain dominance in the party or they don’t. If they don’t it will continue to be pretty much what it is now.
No one knows how it will play out.
It’s only been a few months and outsiders don’t know how best to get over the huge body blow and move on effectively.
Honestly, give them some fucking space.
The next four years are going to be a gruesome spectacle and the Democrats are completely hamstrung to do anything about it. It will play out in its own way.
Sick of people telling them what they need to do, to be honest.
* people outside the party DON’T really know
It’s well meaning advice. People see a train wreck and want to help, but they don’t realize they are just getting in the way of the trained rescuers. Fortunately, I am able to resist my urge to help, if that’s any comfort.
In fact, the best way to undermine the Republicans may be to give them everything they want. So perhaps it’s all part of some larger nine dimensional game of chess.
It’s not a matter of choosing to give them what they want or not. If the Republicans stick together, they’ve got the votes to do nearly anything they want.
Of course, they still want to get elected to help more rich guys, so they have to be careful not to upset the inhabitants of their one party district Rube farm too much. They might get primaried.
“They might get primaried.”
They can always rip a page out of the DNC playbook to avoid that.
You’re on fire, Benito! :)
I really don’t think people outside the party really know what’s going on to be honest.
Well, unless there are further leaks/hacks of emails/conversations no one knows the most intimate thoughts, though I suspect there hasn’t been as much soul-searching in, say, John Podesta’s focus and purpose as some might hope for.
No one knows how it will play out.
Perhaps not. There does seem to be a groundswell in community-level groups who are trying to push for change. But when people like Nancy Pelosi at the top of the party saying things like, “I don’t think people want a new direction.” (which to many sounds like, “I am either lying or am completely obtuse.”) and Obama pushing his own candidate on the DNC to counter the most symbolic of shifts to the left, after such a devastating presidential loss and the loss of countless other seats from there all the way down to state levels, then it’s simply naive to think that it will play out in a different direction anytime soon because resistance to change/introspection at the top is powerful.
It’s only been a few months and outsiders don’t know how best to get over the huge body blow and move on effectively.
How much time on the fainting couch do they need? This isn’t like a physical injury where you have to stop doing what hurt you in order to heal. The longer they remain limp and ineffective the longer Trump has to realize every wet dream the republicans ever conjured. There is no downtime. There are no timeouts. Sanders, who immediately pivoted from his own electoral body blow to fighting with the people in the streets, knows that. Why do the rest of the democratic wilting flowers deserve time and space to reconstitute the same weaknesses that defeated them in the first place? The list of bills the Republicans are proposing while people fash themselves over this Russia shite has been devastating. The democrats haven’t been particularly effective at maintaining a united front over Trump appointee confirmations so when, exactly, should we start telling them what we expect from them? When the bills are already on Trump’s desk being signed?
Democrats are completely hamstrung to do anything about it.
Yes, well, if that’s so – and one should perhaps look back on how the republicans handled being in the minority for lessons on how effective that can be – then maybe they should step aside and let some of the younger, more energetic people in the party, who still have ideas about how to fight, rise to the top. Because business as usual is killing them, one seat at a time.
Sick of people telling them what they need to do, to be honest.
They are called “public servants” for a reason. What you are saying is that you are sick of people doing what they are supposed to do in a democracy, hold their elected officials responsible for their demonstrable actions. I find that sort of obeisance quite sad. It is a fallacy that we, as citizens, are to only come out of the dark to pull levers at the ballot box, then should sit down and stfu for the interim. We need to refute that long and loud because it hasn’t gotten us anything but a long slow decline and it’s been devastating for a good chunk of the rest of the world.
You make some good points, but just to clarify on your last point I was referring to all the people involved in the Democratic party not just the “leaders” when I said I’m sick of people telling them what they need to do. You mentioned the ground-swell of people that are pushing for change and in other posts I mentioned the enormous turn out for the march the day after the inauguration. That is who I was including, all the people who consider themselves in the Democratic party or align with them.
Independent Liberals should start competing at local and state levels. They can caucus with Dems but not necessarily follow their lead. If they can gather enough strength, they should compete at the national level as well. Joe Lieberman was a disaster in the end, supporting the most corrupt state powers but he proved independents could win.
I think liberals have become dumb. Like many GOP partisans, they repeat ideas not create them. Bill Maher is an example of how self righteous many, so called, liberals have become. We’re producing followers, there are very few intellectuals left in the movement. In the 50s, 60s and 70s there were liberals with new ideas regularly.
The right wing are the thinkers now. Their ideology and motives are flawed but they’re appealing to people who have a desire to hear the truth. Their tone suggest that they’re the only truth tellers. Those who now claim to represent liberals are like evangelicals in the 80s. They don’t successfully debate opinions anymore. This phony, perpetual outrage seems to be the Atwater/Rovian tactic being used more often.
Triangulation stinks! Screw their inner workings. People make the assumption that Dems are better political thinkers than the average guy who follows policy and politics intensely. The liberals during the 50s, 60s and 70s managed to sway thinking from the streets and courts. It’s the Dems who had to catch up.
I’m sorry Weiner played himself. He argued liberal positions well and embarrassed the idiotic positions the GOP and the right embraces today.
“There’s a lot of soul searching to be done and re-alignment of focus and purpose.”
No there’s not. There’s a lot of huntin’ for commies under the bed. If that constitutes “soul searching” then its more than high time for the Party to engage in a small game of chance, associated by sobriquet, to the same party what they’re hunting’ for, unner the bed, involving a round or 6 in a revolver. My vote would be: fill all chambers and full speed ahead.
This is exactly the sort of lie that spontaneously sprouts like a poison tree from a polluted earth.
Have you never heard of Dodd Frank or the CFPB?
Of course not.
Why remain silent when a simple slander sows your purpose?
You’re talking about the message they are sending, and I’m talking about the message which is received. Those are two different things. So it isn’t slander, just a breakdown in communications.
Fair enough.
You might want to ask yourself why the wrong message is received.
To pursue the metaphor to the point of breaking, Hillary went right ahead and made her slam dunk basket of deplorables, like the one that netted our side that stunning, overwhelming, and historic US victory in Iraq, during the last mid-eastern playoffs.
First question: I think you are implying that there is nothing to be concerned about unless Russia obsession is the only thing talked about. But how could it be? The purpose of this Russia obsession (outside of the few for whom it is truly exclusive) is to motivate the base without actually having to make a case against Trump, easy though that ought to be.
Second question: Well certainly the media is not exclusively so obsessed, but creating stories mostly from air is important. How else do you attract viewers that really have no interest in the news?
There’s a general closing of ranks in the face of Trump. That’s the only positive thing going on right now. The march the day after the Inauguration of Trump was symbolic of that.
There’s always the myth floating in the air, that in some undefined period in the past there weren’t all these squabbles and hand wringing.
There always was.
Ah, so now the myth is floating in the air rather than implied in the article. Fine, every myth imaginable floats in the air. But there is very little actual opposition from democrats, especially those who have significant power. In the very sober press you have Blow and Krugman, who to many look like the (necessarily included) lunatic fringe but who make really good sense most of the time. Then there is the occasional representative from some little state such as Maryland with a good sense of what is happening, but who pays any attention to him?
There’s a few big donors that have too much sway on the direction of the party. Moving away from the big donor class is primarily what needs to be done to free up the party. Sanders proved that you can still be competitive without them.
Oh wait. The plot thickens. Now he comes out as a closet Sanders supporter! Good.
[…] serve the purpose of masking the real situation.
And the REAL situation IS?
A lot more complex and nuanced and undefined really. Imagine a lot of things going on at once, but the spotlight gets put on one sensational thing that happens to stick up a little more than the others. People that don’t make headlines who are already jockeying for position and power and groups making coalitions and strategies on several levels. Who heads the party and fronts the party line in the media are important of course. But a lot goes on in dull offices and conference rooms too.
Baloney. The focus is clearly on the Russkies.
Carry on like that and the Left Wing of the One Party will be in the political wilderness for +20 years. I’d bet 500 large notes on that.
And you will have contributed to that situation. Own goals being your speciality, it seems…
One could credibly draw the conclusion, that since the Democrats have become so unhinged, that such deranged people as those now in control of the party, don’t deserve to be in power, and that the system of democracy worked to save us from them. Judgment that impaired can’t be allowed anywhere near power and the voters had a presentiment they would continue to suffer under that status quo. The corporatist shills among them just rejected needed reform again, by crushing Sanders-backed Ellison. That makes of Trump in comparison a kind of last, worst hope for populism and democratic accountability, up against a cabal of democrats and neocons who prefer a Deep State coup over democracy, which clearly serves only elite interests. Glenn laments the party’s real lack of opposition to Trump in a meaningful way, but that is because it does not oppose is policies in any meaningful sense, but is simply appalled at his threat to their own previous monopoly of sinecures.
Oh yeah, much better to have a serial liar who accuses the past president of a felony.
Moderation and reason have prevailed.
Funny that: for serial liars, flipfloppers and incompetents, loook no further than ‘your gal’!
Yeah, let’s talk, not about the imbecile sociopath with the button to launch nuclear ICBMs, let’s talk about the losing candidate who has exactly nothing to do with the government now. What a brilliant idea.
It’s you guys who fielded the losing candidate, Libtard.
Talk about the Orange Buffoon? My, the twitter/bloggosphere is already on FIRE over that! Not much to add there…
A meaningless insult that reveals all you need to know about the speaker and nothing about the subject.
It’s time to expose the fake news. I didn’t realize how much could be said in a single article. Props, sir
She sounds like FAKE NEWS
There’s a subtle implication that before this virulent Russia mania that the period before that both in social media and the published press there must have been some contrasting period when calm sober reason prevailed and all was well in the land.
There wasn’t. Remember the playing of the by Trump where he was broadcast live to the tune of $billions of dollars of free propaganda?
Remember social media being swamped by neo-Nazis with frog heads spewing vile crap?
Remember the stately New York Times publishing headlines on Clinton’s emails in batches every day.
The media eats sensationalism up for lunch every day and has been for ages.
It’s not uniques to the Russia story. It’s a defining characteristic of the modern media, a lot of it being fueled by 24 hour cable news stations that have to fill all that time with SOMETHING. They make money from ratings and anything that increses ratings is GOOD. There’s a bare minimum of ethical consideration for the good of the country or responsible reporting.
That’s the way it has been for a long time.
As for a solution? I have no idea. Scolding seems to have no effect.
No, you are just making that up. Sober reasoning, previous mania, whatever, I do not see anything in the article that points to the specifics of the previous state.
What I do see is this:
But you would be ignoring GG’s body of work if you believe he really thinks that democrats and Clinton supporters in particular regularly engage in sober grounded reasoning.
That’s sort of my point.
If you look at the Russian press you will find an oft repeated theme.
Western sources: Russia intentionally bombs civilians and hospitals in Syria.
Russian govt and media response: xenophobic Russophobia.
Western sources: Russia continues to supply soldiers, weaponry and finance to eastern Ukraine
Russian govt and media response; xenophobic Russophobia. Why is the West so full of hatred for Russia?
Western sources: Russia is conducting a concerted campaign to subvert elections and parties in EU and Nato countries.
Russian govt and media response: Why are there so many Russophobes in the western media?
Western sources attribute the shooting down of Malaysian Airlines MH17 to Russian supplied and operated anti aircraft missile launcher .
Russian govt and media response: Why is the west so Russophobic.
Western sources report that the Russian government’s intelligence sources hacked and supplied Democratic Party files to Wikileaks in order to subvert the presidential election campaign.
Some Western Russian apologists: Why are you so xenophobic and Russophobic?
And the truth as always lies somewhere in between, would you agree ?
No.
You sound like McCain……napalm for breakfast !
Yeah only a war hawk would condemn a country for shooting down a civilian airliner with 298 people on board. What’s wrong with him?
A country where there is a civil war going on and without operational radarsystems, should not allow civil aircrafts in its airspace. As to who did what….the jury is still out. I hope other people who call themselves liberals in Calif are not as shortsighted as you…
The jury was never called by Russian apologists.
Bellincat has identified the exact Buk, the Russian crew, the route they took from Russia into Ukraine and back out again.
The jury of people who can see plain evidence has already given a verdict.
Aha…Bellingcat ! A former military turned to fake internet investigator. Be happy there in California and don’t lose your religion, you are truly exceptional !
Thanks for revealing yourself. Just like the Trumpsters. Facts don’t matter when pushing your ideology.
Did you give a crap when your buddies in the Petagon shot down IA 655?.
See, this is the problem with Murrican dickheads of your variety: it’s always OK when your ‘exceptional nation’ does it, right?
Never have said anything of the sort. The US admitted it, paid compensation.
Masterlist of US regime changes in RoW
But shitferbrains LIC is worried about Putin!
Why is the West so full of hatred for Russia?
Why are there so many Russophobes in the western media?
Why is the west so Russophobic?
Why are you so xenophobic and Russophobic?
All legitimate questions, AFIC…
It’s nonsense.
Russia bombs a hospital and kills a whole family and dozens of children.
Father of children: I hate Russia.
Russia: Why the hostility to Russia?
How many hate the United States of Mordor for ITS bombing campaigns, oh-full-of-shite-one?
Go hang out at salon or wonkette, it’ll suit you much better.
I won’t be responding to you any more.
But I will to you, arsehole.
I won’t be responding to you any more.
But I’ll still hold you to account on that.
Russia behaves pretty much like the US when it or one of its allies ( Israel or the Saudis or its Syrian rebel allies) bomb or shell civilians. Often the initial response is to deny any civilian deaths. If forced to acknowledge they occurred by overwhelming evidence, step 2 is to claim the enemy used the civilians as human shields. Step 3′ if it comes at all, is to call it a tragic accident even when there is a clear pattern of bombing civilian targets. I am not snarking. That really is the way all four governments and their apologists argue, yet mainstream American liberals only notice it with Russia.
No, I don’t get asked about it much, but the US does just what you say. The US has done a lot of horrible things and anyone who tries to ignore the excesses and downright grotesque episodes in UD foreign theaters is just not facing reality. The Intercept does a good job of calling the US to task. That’s admirable.
The US has done a lot of horrible things
Yeah but it was all the Rethuglians, wasn’t it Libtard? Nothing to do with smug ‘liberal’ f*ckwits like you, eh?
Praise Me!
Yes, there is a lot of nonsense going on. I attribute it to unresolved questions that if answered completely could result in some earth shaking consequences.
Yes, the Democrats need to evolve. Duh.
But let’s take a little trip down memory fact lane.
Fact, Trump exhibited an unusual and very weird sycophancy regarding Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Why? No answer.
Fact, Trump has had a web of associations with Russians both in the US and Russia. One close one is a mobster.
Fact, Trump was in need of financing and loans after he went bankrupt several times and had trouble borrowing from American banks.
Fact, Trump’s son said a great deal of their business was coming from Russia.
Fact, The DNC and Podesta had their files hacked.
Wikileaks obtained these files and released them during the campaign.
Fact, The US intelligence agencies and several private cybersecurity companies concluded after expert examination of the evidence (some which might include human intelligence sources) that the Russian intelligence agency, GRU, was responsible for hacking those files through their state hacking operation.
Fact, an ex-MI6 expert in Russian intelligence gathering complied a collection of information he had extracted from his Russian contacts. The information included reports that Trump and his campaign had colluded with Russia during the campaign. It also reported that Trump had been recruited by Russian intelligence over 5 years ago.
There are reports of continuing investigations by the US intelligence agencies of any connection between Trump, his aides and Russia, including financial transaction
So, these are all facts as found. They can all be verified. You can get a copy of the dossier yourself.
So people who feel like the country has been subverted by Russian actions and actions by Trump should just cool it after losing a close election when further evidence that confirms some of these facts could prove that the president is guilty of impeachable offenses, among other things and Russia has demonstrated that it is conducting continuing campaigns of subversion of other western countries?
Uh, ok. That’s nice.
This is a continuing story that has not been resolved and has huge implications depending on the final outcome.
Of course people are speculating and tons of nonsense get mixed into that speculation.
That’s the nature of a spy novel being played out in real time , real life.
People should call out outright falsehoods when they appear being presented as true information. But there’s nothing dishonest about speculating when it is made clear that that is what is being done.
It’s a messy affair to be sure, but at the back of it is the fervent desire to find and expose the facts and answers to the quite consequential questions that beg for resolution.
A worse situation would be a society so lame and apathetic that it simply resigns itself to con men, mobsters, authoritarians doing as they wish with no one raising questions or RESISTING their malevolent machinations to gain and maintain power.
You forgot to mention the telepathic powers Putin exercices on the US voters. He switched those one at the precise moment the US citizen casts his vote….
Yeah let’s all shrug our shoulders when a foreign power interjects itself into our domestic politics surreptitiously. What could possibly be wrong with that?
Coming from a Liberal in Califate…
You are a really weak troll. You should seek other hobbies.
What are they putting into your water supply from those collapsing dams out there? From Governator Schwarzenegger to Governor Moonbeam 2.0 … more Kool Aid than cool.
I can smell your envy of people lucky enough to live in California from here.
Yeah, that MUST be it! ROFLOL.
Ever been to California? It’s freakin fantastic.
Pffffffttt…
I avoid the US like I would the plague, nowadays…
thank you for your post, LIC.
Yeah, but I’m still convinced Gary Webb used three bullets to kill himself, not the widely reported “only two.” An that Michael Hastings was actually mind hacked, as opposed to just his car.
But anyways- must be nice to have the extra money and other capital that it takes to just hop across continents every time your politics make things so shitty in the last continent that you have to move- and all that while preaching socialism, abd criticizing right wing wealth and power, lol.
Socialism for all- except my personal bank account!
Same sh!t as Germany, 1932:
“A middle class liberal party strong enough to block the Nazis did not exist – the People’s Party and the Democrats suffered severe losses to the Nazis at the polls. The Social Democrats were essentially a conservative trade union party, with ineffectual leadership. The Catholic Centre Party maintained its voting block, but was preoccupied with defending its own particular interests and, wrote Bullock: “through 1932-3 … was so far from recognizing the danger of a Nazi dictatorship that it continued to negotiate with the Nazis”. The Communists meanwhile were engaging in violent clashes with Nazis on the streets, but Moscow had directed the Communist Party to prioritise destruction of the Social Democrats, seeing more danger in them as a rival for the loyalty of the working class. Nevertheless, wrote Bullock, the heaviest responsibility lay with the German Right, who “forsook a true conservatism” and made Hitler their partner in a coalition government”
As you stated Rush Limbaugh continually lamented about the Clintons and they now cease to exist in the Political spectrum. Thus words even those spoken long ago have relevance and meaning. Then you so egregiously expound conspiracy theorists while patronizing Putin and Russia for bigotry. Paltry self interests willing to extend a hand to Crony Capitalists in league to revive imperialism and overrun Democracy itself. Apparently the Russians and some Trump republicans pay to well and have bought the shop, which leads those like Greenwald and his Russian supporters to betray the right to defend freedom and democratic ideas to preserve some dignity while billions suffer because of a smug sense of appeasement. The Democratic party you expound is very small, very tight and powerless.
@Milton Wiltmellow
Ok, first this:
The once widely heralded print version of The Americans Spectator died in the 90s, for the reasons I said. (The online version is a poorly trafficked and rarely cited joke; that Phoenix did not rise from the ashes.)
Do see this great 2001 Atlantic piece: The Life and Death of The American Spectator -The conservative magazine survived and prospered for twenty-five years before Bill Clinton came into its sights. Now the former President is rich and smiling, and the Spectator is dead
And Milton, as for this drivel, please, do get a grip:
That’s just feckin’ unhinged. *I* do not subscribe to any source remotely akin to what TAS became when it turned into a deranged anti-Clinton tabloid. YOU, Milton, are the one spewing and defending a closely similar derangement that this time manifests among Democrats. Just as is documented above by Glenn with reference to Masha Gessen.
The nastiness of your response gets hidden by your craven evasion and willful ignorance.
What became of that which you call “demented nonsense.”
Did it suddenly hop to the democrats like a flea?
Here’s the point.
When the very earth is toxic, only poison grows. You blame the wind and rain for the farmer’s crop.
milton has a plan
like flowers on toxic earth
registered demo
Reading through these comments, one fact emerges.
There are those trying to make sense of things and those whose sole purpose is to attack — with invective and insults — anyone who doesn’t fully comply with their own political positions.
The difference is stark and undeniable.
Thank you for your empty haiku — the form of which is designed to convey a certain fullness using a thoughtful austerity of language. Your attempt to vilify me for my political statement belongs to a certain class of internet thugs more effectively given voice by Trump himself.
It’s probably a bit late for Glenn to get up on a soapbox and plead for the snowflakes and their heralds to come to their senses. What we are seeing is liberalism folding itself into the cult of personality of Clintonism as they race towards oblivion. Let them go and enjoy the spectacle as much as possible.
If this helps in the deconstruction of the administrative state I’m all for it, let it continue .
Slipping in a bit of phony spin about the real High Crimes committed, Obama’s abuse of power is pathetic but that story will have to be faced eventually.
As I understand Glenn calls for sanity against all those fellow journalists who turned into a bullhorns for the CIA betraying their fundamental moral and factual integrity and forfeit last shred of credibility as journalists , namely people who ought to dedicate themselves to social purpose of peace and social justice via exposing the reality of majority of the people and call the truth they see but they do not. What true journalist see and uncover is always a kind conspiracy by definition, a conspiracy of lies or conspiracy of silence. But that’s not what conspiracy theory is all about.
It is hopeful that at least Glenn on this site tries to stay relevant to ordinary people lives and rejects propaganda purpose of the widely peddled conspiracies on all sides, and focusing on real lives, not conspiracy theories of who people are and what people do but reality on the ground, and only secondly to the oligarchic owner interests. It takes some guts.
The ruling elite maintain and finance MSM and a zoo of controlled opposition types and ridiculed conspiracy theorists as long as they peddle utopian, futile, doomed to failure half measures while avoiding mentioning an eight hundred pounds gorilla of utterly superfluous ruling elite in itself, calcified structure of power itself and cannibalistic social relations it imposes on society.
Only such false ideas can be pondered and even tolerated in this inverted totalitarianism we are living under. Anything, any simplest idea that really works for 99% however, will be ruthlessly eradicated however useful or rational or reasonable it may be because in itself it would defeat or challenge mechanism of absolute control over society.
Hence, curious features of inverted totalitarianism such as vocal but ignored or prostituted by media so-called political opposition and an illusion of free speech that has been concocted as a element of the system which in reality comes to “media gagged speech”, and a right to speech with no right to be heard and right to oppose with no right to lead etc., hollowed out shell of rights we all pretend we have.
It take Russian journalist to speak up against utter insanity that in fact shockingly gags all those who want put forward well documented and reasonable criticism of Putin himself and Russia in many fields and contexts that must continue in a manner devoid of hysteria as transparent agent of any debate and change beneficial to any society at large.
Unfortunately a hysteria in MSM continues.
The MSM has always been untrustworthy propaganda. The only reason to single this out is because it is particularly dangerous. I don’t know why Glenn’s angle on this suggests at all that the MSM is usually better than this, because it isn’t. in the service of special interests, it lies constantly – just as much as Rush Limbaugh does for his “reasons,” if not so flamboyantly – and always has.
Glenn did not “suggest” anything of the sort. He *did argue, with evidence, that the media, along with the Democrats, has been fleeing from reason. No one has addressed the myriad faults of the modern corporate media than has Glenn. But this deep dive into unreason and evidence-free conspiracy theories, in reliance on manifestly unhinged sources such as Louise Mensch, is something new.
Much was rotted in the media-driven public discourse already, but abandoning reason — when the establishment media and the second of the two major parties joins the GOP and does that — the rot in the public discourse is compounded, astronomically.
Whether it is “new” in that area or not, the idea that the institutions of which he speaks could have any “credibility” (his word), is absolutely laughable – and because lack of credibility is in the MSM a feature and not an anomaly, what Greenwald is saying about their potential usefulness to mitigate Trump’s damage is as ridiculous as suggesting they were responsible with regard to Bush’s behavior.
Or Obama’s behavior, for that matter.
You are unreasonable. To have the establishment media become so bad as to be no more wed to reason than Alex Jones or Prison Planet is a calamity for political discussion.
Before one can even argue against the omissions and distortions of this or that, one must NOW first try to drag the media back to the real world of facts and determining them via evidence and logic. That is a difference in kind, not just degree.
It’s the difference between arguing with a mentally stable but neoliberal relative about politics, as opposed to a relative with untreated schizophrenia who loves Hillary because the Virgin Mary in his head tells him to. Reasoned discourse carries the possibility of reaching some resolution and reaching the stable relative with truth; it is wholly impossible to reach truth with the psychotic relative.
Reason matters. A lot. Virtually every facet of human interaction is destroyed when reason is.
Don’t tell me what I’m being.
Glenn’s claim that the U.S. media is capable of reining in what the establishment wants (and it wants this theatrical charade about Trump to distract from endemic corruption, just as it UNREASONABLY promoted the Iraq war etc.) is utterly ridiculous. The institutions are not credible, they have many times (and in a sense constantly have) embodied ‘unreasonable’ nonsense and sold it to the populace – and appealing to them to act out of the character they have chosen precisely to further the establishment’s purposes is facile.
Unreasonable is NOT coterminous with lacking reason. Judgments can be unreasonable, and that was the case with the credulousness the media gave to the Iraq war propaganda the Bush administration and its acolytes spewed. That was a failure to challenge power.
By contrast, what is happeneing NOW is a failure to reason. Any goddam thing anyone — including Louise Mensch — asserts is now incorporated into the narrative no matter bow baseless and bizarre. No claims are too bizarre to render someone’s credibility extinguished; Mensch claims Putin murdered Andrew Breitbart and some in the media and some Democrats find her a great source of insight. That’s well beyond the failure to challenge power; it rules out the possibility of doing so, because people are no longer in touch with the metrics of reality.
Relatedly, when I say you are “unreasonable” I am not clamming you are on another planet operating like a lunatic. My critique goes to your judgment as not being guided by or based on good sense. Not that you are out of touch with reality. That is, you are not the thing Glenn is critiquing and which is new and even worse with the media — being unmoored from the metrics by which rational people assess reality.
I very much disagree that this sado-masochistic manipulation
by the democrats is something “new.”
The disdain for/fear of/”fleeing from” reason has a long history
in both corporate owned whorehouses known as
democrat and republican.
The war against the Vietnamese people was one of their
most vigorously flaunted examples of perversity and that was
pumped up over 5 decades ago – when they still had enough of
a guilty conscience to use nationalistic delusions to
promote some improvements in domestic justice – but that
energy left the corporatists with their beloved rise of the
glorious fraudulent Clintonian Reaganism.
My apologies.
I meant to type “glorious”ly “fraudulent.”
I stipulate this because the Clintonistas are only “glorious”
as they are frauds and liars.
Don’t forget, they also attained glory in mass murder.
To commit the atrocity of Vietnam the government relied on lies. Lots and lots of plausible lies. But not implausible, wild-eyed conspiracy theorizing with no basis in fact or reality that rendered reasoned debate and opposition impossible.
I very much disagree.
The basis of the vicious attacks in Vietnam by the faking U$A
were based on a devotion to a conspiracy theory wherein
the peasants of a colonialized land on the other side of the planet
were an imminent threat to the religion of capitalist theology
which celebrated horrifying slaughter in the name of Jesus
and monetary supremacy.
Maybe they weren’t “wild-eyed” as much as they were desperate and
smugly sadistic, but the lies and delusional misrepresentations
were just as sick.
This year’s perverse conspiracy is just the latest version of
the same perversity of exceptionalistic predatory celebration
of militaristic garbage as was what drove that bipartisan
bloodbath so many decades ago.
I suppose it may be genetic and the lust for slaughter may be
inescapable for those who believe they are the
spittin’ image of some misogynistic, anal-retentive, aloof,
loser
of a god.
Mona, I too distinguish between “judgment as not being guided by or based on good sense” (e.g. plausible lies about Vietnam, Iraq), and “being unmoored from the metrics by which rational people assess reality.”
But part of this unmooring owes to broader declines in US political culture, e.g. in habits brought into debates. Once people start the habit of reflexively impugning others’ motives, it’s not such a big jump to them to soon start to imagine the worst conspiratorial possibilities from these others. Clark could be on the right track if he’d recall another tragic aspect of the ‘60s, that of the start of a collapse of manners in the MSM, which may’ve owed much to the Buckley-Vidal TV debates in ’68.
I see as quite tragic that Vidal was chosen by ABC, instead of Chomsky. This choice may’ve done much to lead the Left to mostly follow Literary smarty-pantses (e.g. Vidal, deconstructionists), over disciplined thinkers in the sciences etc. (e.g. Chomsky). It was inevitable that the New Left’s subsequent drift toward Identity Politics would bring the alt-Right etc. backlash; see Archdruid J.M. Greer’s view at http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-hate-that-dare-not-speak-its-name.html .
If JFK, RFK, and Goldwater had to witness these sad spectacles, they’d be rolling in their graves.
Perhaps the worst part about all of this is what it says of the victims of wallstreet and madison avenue who are so disrespected that poison dielect is prefered of real facts, insights education and decision. The duality of this so-called representative form of government is playing like a farce.
once upon a time i was a democrat .. and once upon a time i knew a young woman who could rap and speak pig latin at the same time, so that only i could understand it .. no encryption needed
these days the democrats are sole-sourcing reality via the CIA .. and the level of their political analysis boils down to what makes a good joke on SNL
so putin and mother russia are just the right bogeymen for the people who get it
“Theory” is what you experience as you follow both the money and transactions involving the transfer of power. “Reality” is what you find at the end of that trail, and it isn’t a place where the powerful exist to serve the masses.
“Above all else, it’s because it’s an offensive assault on reason.”
At times, when I doubt my own sanity and ability to reason, I am grateful that you keep writing and reminding us of the lack of evidence. I would like to join local efforts to combat Trump and Company and would like to work to get reasonable progressives elected to office, but I lack both the patience and the denial to listen to all the nonsense that drowns out the real work that needs to be done.
ABOUT THE NY REVIEW OF BOOKS ARTICLE :
“The “meetings” that sounded so sinister were in fact public encounters that occurred during a panel and, later, a cocktail party—schmoozing, which is both the ambassador’s and campaign advisers’ jobs.”
> “One of the meetings was a private conversation between Sessions and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak that took place in September in the senator’s office […].”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-spoke-twice-with-russian-ambassador-during-trumps-presidential-campaign-justice-officials-say/2017/03/01/77205eda-feac-11e6-99b4-9e613afeb09f_story.html?utm_term=.637e8008a9d0
“Is it possible that there is a trove of yet-unleaked classified information that proves that a Russian conspiracy existed, and succeeded in hijacking the American election ? Yes, it is. Is it also possible that a few, or many, intelligence officials, who feel, understandably, both insulted by Trump, who has openly and repeatedly denigrated the intelligence establishment, and terrified of what he might do to the country, are using scant or inconclusive evidence to try to undermine his credibility ? Yes. What is indisputable is that the protracted national game of connecting the Trump-Putin dots is an exercise in conspiracy thinking.”
> Is it possible the Democrats already have in their possession the documents needed to pulverize the Trump administration ten times over, and that they’re merely waiting for the right time to disclose them, conscious as they are that acting too soon would not only obfuscate the part of the electorate that is still under hypnosis, but would also deprive them of the support they need on the other side of the aisle, not to mention, perhaps, the military-industrial Moloch’s, to whom Trump just promised an additional $ 54 bn (hence the liberals’ staged obsession with Russia ?) ? I’ll let you decide…
“Is it also possible that a few, or many, intelligence officials, who feel, understandably, both insulted by Trump, who has openly and repeatedly denigrated the intelligence establishment, and terrified of what he might do to the country, are using scant or inconclusive evidence to try to undermine his credibility ?”
> Undermine Trump’s credibility ? LOL : he doesn’t seem to be needing any help for that, does he ?
“What is indisputable is that the protracted national game of connecting the Trump-Putin dots is an exercise in conspiracy thinking. That does not mean there was no conspiracy. And yet, a possible conspiracy is a poor excuse for conspiracy thinking.”
> In a chess game, the idea is to anticipate the other player’s move… Everybody will agree journalists should stand above the chessboard, watching and analyzing the entire game. But should they just wait for the moves to occur, or do they also have the responsibility to look further, even if that sometimes means speculating ? In other words, are journalists allowed to use warning signs and proactively empower the public in the pursuit of truth (I’m not saying that that’s what most of them are doing right now in the Russia-narrative, mind you…) or should they stick to what already happened in a passive way ? Would the first option equate an Infowars-like charlatanic online agenda ?
“This strategy predates email and the Internet and even contemporary Russia—it goes back to the cold war, when the Soviet Union aimed to sow disinformation and build alliances with marginal political players […].”
> Actually, it goes back to the Okhrana, the Czar’s ubiquitous secret police…
“Modern Russian spymasters get their ideas about the West from the West itself—they are generally convinced that the American political system is accurately portrayed by House of Cards. If Russian disruption efforts were more successful during the 2016 American election, it was not because the Russians have become so much better at what they do or have finally developed a sophisticated understanding of American politics—it is because American politics have come to resemble the TV caricatures.”
> Poor (unsubstantiated) argument : they’ve developed one of the most efficient ‘news’ networks in the world in no time, attracting dozens of US ‘dissidents’ as well as some big names from the US news media (Ed Schultz, Larry King,…), and interviewing hundreds of Americans critical of the US’s foreign policy. In a July 20, 2014 interview entitled “Biased journalism OK, propaganda isn’t”, RT-UK anchor Oksana Boyko clearly laid out how she (and RT) viewed the role of journalism : “I’m not talking about governmental or political pressure, explicit pressure – obviously, we can all agree [this is a nuisance to actual journalism] – but I’m talking about, you know : journalism at its very core is an act of filtering information and the way that filter is set up depends on [one’s] culture, [one’s] historic, personal, gender experiences and, you know, some of that process is subconscious […], we all have our biases […]. We [here at RT] are totally transparent about our biases. Isn’t the recognition of [one’s] biases, [one’s] own perspective, and the limitations of [one’s] own perspective a bit more honest and ethical than just claiming objectivity and impartiality, which I think many of our Western colleagues do ?” Could be a statement from The Intercept, couldn’t it ? If “Russian spymasters” on US soil are anything like the Russians behind RT, claiming, as Gessen does, they’ve remained stuck in the past, unable to adapt to the ever-changing media- and political landscape, and that they’re watching ‘House of Cards’ to form their opinion about US politics, is, I’m afraid, a bit outdated an opinion in itself…
“If a causal relationship between Russian interference and Trump’s 70,000-vote, three-county edge exists, the likelihood that such a relationship can be proved is vanishingly small. Failing that, what might an investigation find ? Undoubtedly, it can find that Trump’s associates lied about their contacts with Russian officials—as they lie, habitually, about a great many things. What makes the Russia lies worse than any other ?”
> Of course, the probability of Congress publishing damning information about Trump’s (past) ties to Russian mobsters, if said ties exist, is very small (These things usually get settled with the interested parties when the lights are off.), but if this isn’t fake news, if this isn’t a conspiracy theory, doesn’t the American public deserve to know ? Wouldn’t this represent a threat to US sovereignty ? That’s where Comey (and the FBI investigation into two Russian banks) comes in…
“If [Trump] is impeached, it will have resulted largely from a media campaign orchestrated by members of the intelligence community—setting a dangerous political precedent that will have corrupted the public sphere and promoted paranoia. And that is the best-case outcome.”
> Of course, for the Democrats to be shifting to the right again with the kind of nationalistic rhetoric we thought only the hard right could produce, instead of focusing on how to regain their lost middle-class electorate, adds to the current chaos, but that doesn’t take away the fact that Trump is actually the one who started this – or at least fed the machine – when he publicly called for Russian help in making the rest of the Clinton e-mails public during his campaign, so that, should he face impeachment indeed, he would primarily have himself to blame for it. We can deplore the shadowy, undemocratic, influence of the Dar Adals of this world all we want, the truth is ‘The Deep State’ is never so powerful as when there is a vacuum of power. And with his amateurism and his instability bordering on – if it is not outright – lunacy (and that of his team of arrogant neophytes), it is precisely Trump himself, more than anyone else, who is responsible for that current vacuum…
ABOUT TI’S COMMENT :
“One of the primary pushers of this innuendo was the nation’s most influential radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh, who spent the 1990s hyping every death with any proximity to the Clintons as “suspicious.” He gleefully resurrected this theme during the 2016 campaign by claiming that people close to the Clintons were once again mysteriously dying. […] Limbaugh cited a Townhall article describing the deaths of three DNC-related officials and told his audience: “Since the DNC emails were leaked a few weeks ago, three people associated with the DNC have all found dead, under what could be questionable circumstances.” Limbaugh added: “This is exactly the kind of stuff we saw back in 1992 and 1993.” […] When DNC staffer Seth Rich was murdered in 2016, his family was furious and sickened by the attempt to exploit his death by implying that he was murdered by the Clintons for political reasons.”
> “The mystery surrounding the murder of rising Democrat star Seth Rich took a sudden sinister turn Wednesday with claims that he was responsible for the email dump that brought down close Hillary Clinton ally Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
Julian Assange, the head of Wikileaks, the organization that released the emails, announced a $20,000 reward for information leading to Rich’s July 10 death, hinting that Rich was responsible for leaking the documents.
Assange’s offer has also added fuel to the flames of conspiracy theories sweeping the Internet that the Democratic presidential candidate and her husband Bill were somehow involved in Rich’s death.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3726250/Enemies-Hillary-Bill-say-27-year-old-murder-victim-Seth-Rich-suspected-leaking-DNC-emails-belongs-Clinton-Death-List-people-ties-couple-died-time.html
When Julian Assange told the Dutch news show ‘Nieuwsuur’ on August 9, 2016 : “we are investigating, you understand, what happened in that situation, with Seth Rich. I think it is a concerning situation. There’s no conclusion yet; we wouldn’t be willing to state a conclusion, but we are concerned about it. And, more importantly, a variety of Wikileaks sources are concerned when that kind of thing happens”, was he guilty of using Limbaughesque innuendo or was that acceptable ? And then this : if you take the Infowars and the WNDs, who are knowingly propagating propaganda (and not using any question marks in their headlines), out of the equation, can you, in this instance, blame lucid yet rational people for their lack of trust towards political actors known for fabricating false narratives, while castigating the same actors for that very reason when it comes to dubious Russian plots ?
Another example : Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, announced in 2013 that “directed energy”, among other things, was becoming increasingly crucial to deal with identified enemies (Source : https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/trump-inherits-a-secret-cyberwar-against-north-korean-missiles/ar-AAnMCb5). On June 13, 2014, Reuters indicated that “[d]ozens of aircraft[s] briefly vanished from air-traffic control radars in Austria, Germany, the Czech Republic and Slovakia this week and last in separate incidents that Slovak authorities blamed on military electronic warfare exercises”. Knowing what Dempsey said, should journalists wait for such a (Slovak) confession, should some Tupolev transporting the Red Army Choir crash at the height of some post-electoral tension, before examining the possibility directed energy might have had something to do with it ?
Should we all subscribe to the official version of JFK’s assassination, or is there some room for (public) doubt still ?
“As [Gessen] explains, this bottomless, ultimately pointless obsession with Russia has utterly crowded out effective strategies for opposing Trump, and has obscured many of the truly damaging policies he is implementing with little notice […]”
Has it, really ? Did it prevent massive demonstrations against the Muslim ban 1.0 ? Was Russia the prime focus of all the furious constituents who gathered at political town halls to address their GOP ‘representatives’ these past weeks ?
If Trump is impeached because of his (alleged) connections to the Russian mob, so be it. What matters is what happens next : was the Russian argument merely a political pretense or is the basket of deplorable hawks in Washington once again planning something big ? In your previous article, Mr. Greenwald, you underscored how close part of Trump’s stated foreign policy is to Obama’s. Whose shadow, Obama’s or Clinton’s, is predominant now within the Democratic party ?…
Sorry Glenn, using a stopped clock (Gessen: Russia is behind everything but Trump) as a source does not bolster the valid and sane assertion that all allegations of Russian interference in US politics are bullshit.
Yes it does!
The “Stopped Clock” is clearly pointing out that it’s time to cut all the phony baloney Russo hysteria bullshit and get on with the real business at hand(s): resisting the oligarchical/permanent state domination of everything and everyone – including You!
Good lawd ha’ marcy. Who among us doesn’t have a body count over the past 8-10 years?
Mine would include:
1 – An almost brother-in-law, killed by LE too lazy to do their job.
2 – A sister, died of grief due to No. 1
3 – A nephew-in-law, overdose statistic in midwest where there aren’t any decent jobs
4 – A step-sister with mental issues never addressed by a healthcare system geared only toward money.
5 – A stepmother, mother of No. 4 who probably also died of grief.
5 – A dearly beloved Grandfather and Grandmother.
6 – A couple of uncles/aunts, good midwestern folks (raised biased but not above being convinced it’s wrong), mostly just old age….but what if it wasn’t?
It wasn’t curiosity that killed the cat. It was rampant speculation based on spurious assertions/flights of fancy. Fuck the facts. :-s
Do you remember all that demented nonsense about the Clintons in the 90s? It was a sickening spectacle to behold.
I had subscribed too The American Spectator (as well as The New Republic which I misunderstood as being to the left, and to Reason for the libertarian take, and thus thought I was doing well-rounded reading). When it became a salacious rag I canceled it; it was full of nauseating, tabloid crap about the Clintons, even falling so low as to write about Hillary’s supposed demand for more sex with Bill, and then all that Arkansas State Troopers mafia bullshit. Limbaugh then dutifully pushed it all on his radio rants.
That shit destroyed what had been an intelligent if often offensive journal of the right. Cancellations flooded in and TAS died a deserved death.
Yet again, you confuse and excuse yourself.
You’re sickened by “that demented nonsense” but subscribe to a primary source of “that demented nonsense.”
Can you draw any conclusion about the people pushing that nonsense?
No?
Here’s one conclusion. TAS isn’t dead and buried, it’s still spreading its demented nonsense. So ask yourself, “Who keeps buying this shit?”
Rush Limbaugh
Including yourself, since the 2016 election, exactly how many comments have included the name Seth Rich or reference to the Clinton kill list.
Okay, not even exactly. Just roughly.
Now here’s the question … how many people including yourself, GG, and those members of your gangrenous gang have objected to this sort of “demented nonsense.” How often? Where has this “demented nonsense” been sanctimoniously condemn until today?
I have a better exact number to answer that question. The exact number is 0. None. Zero. Nada. Zilch.
Yet today GG finally mentions the decades long right-wing conspiracy theorists as objectionable, so of course Mona declares how sickened she was by that “demented nonsense.” If any of you had shown just a tiny bit of integrity prior to today — to call “bullshit” on the most demented theories about the Clinton kill list — then I might be a little less abrasive towards the bunch of you empty hypocrites.
Sessions perjured himself.
Flynn perjured himself.
Various members of the Trump campaign admitted being in contact with the Russians during the campaign.
Yet in today’s article GG finds a couple of people who’ve gone to far in their claims of a Trump/Russian conspiracy to indict — guilt by association — Democrats everywhere and newspapers everywhere. But it’s not enough to say these people were/are wrong — he equates it to three fucking decades of Republican lies, half-truths, bogus conspiracies, slanders, false accusations of murder and an almost infinite pile of “demented nonsense.”
TAS is not dead nor is the investigation into Trump’s collusion with the Russians over. Christopher Steele just re-emerged yesterday.
It’s fine to adopt a wait and see attitude, but it shows an incredible lack of credibility to accuse democrats and mainstream media as being as intentionally malevolent and manipulative as the Republicans since … well, since Nixon talked the Vietnamese into five more years of the Vietnam war.
“Any person who died and had any kind of connection to the Clintons, no matter how remote, became part of the “Clinton Body Count.”
The only ones who seem to fail to be listed in the Clinton Body Count are the million and change who were killed by Clinton/Albright in Iraq, the thousands killed under Clinton/NATO in former Yugoslavia, the thousands in Haiti, and the millions stuffed away in the Clinton’s everything-to-prison pipeline.
The only ones who seem to fail to be listed in the Clinton Body Count are the million and change who were killed by Clinton/Albright in Iraq, the thousands killed under Clinton/NATO in former Yugoslavia, the thousands in Haiti, and the millions stuffed away in the Clinton’s everything-to-prison pipeline.
Those are the ones that concern me the most. It’s a damn shame that some folk think we all should be much more concerned, though, about the bodies that demonstrably can’t be laid at their feet.
And that was before the million-plus in Iraq, the tens of Ks massacred in Libya and the additional tens of Ks killed/displaced/etc in Syria, Mali, Ukraine and Honduras. They weren’t just looking in the wrong place, they were truly ahead of their time.
I wish you could have written this article with a recognition of the tremendous across the board activism going on in the usa right now. Russia-gate got Sessions recused for goodness sakes. It will get us the independent investigation that has a shot at uncovering corruption that will result in impeachment. And the corruption has a big Russian element, along with others around the world. I continue to lose respect for your analysis. I guess I want journalists to see the glass half full.
“Russia-gate got Sessions recused for goodness sakes.”
Didn’t get him fired…
Probability of getting Trump impeached with a Republican House and Senate is below zero.
“I guess I want journalists to see the glass half full.”
Even when it is totally empty?
Great article Glenn. I thought this was going to be yet another retread of your past articles but was wrong.
God help us if conspiracy theories typically reserved for the fringe outlets or /r/conspiracy go mainstream. To those who read Gessen’s article and liked what they saw, you might consider a subscription to the New York Review of Books (not the NYT Sunday Book Review), which is a really underrated resource for in-depth reviews and analysis.
It’s a weird day when Gessen and Greenwald subtly echo Charles Krauthammer’s lament that trust in institutions is eroded too far (though I suspect Glenn has different reasons for bringing it up). Not surprising that you, Nate, would also echo the sentiment in your way. I’d be troubled by such alignments.
Krauthammer to O’Reilly: It’s Not Just Democrats, Trump’s Been Eroding Our Trust of Institutions Too
Maisie, I almost never watch videos linked in comments; I’ll read transcripts. But I very much doubt that Gessen or Glenn are “subtly echoing” Charles Krauthammer on anything material.
It’s like this: Nate thinks this is a “great article,” and says so above the comment of mine to which you are responding.
Nate.
The institutions of the U.S. are in truth no more trustworthy than the “fringe” elements, something which Glenn touches on – but so lightly that Nate actually thinks Glenn is promoting establishmentarianism. You could say this is because Nate is inattentive and projecting, but you could also say it is because Greenwald isn’t being entirely clear in his passage about how institutions are being “corroded” and “poisoned” by this Russia business – the idea that he believes that before this the institutions were pure or trustworthy is stunning; but for this point he adds only the caveat “if they were credible,” which I hope is meant to be funny.
Let me fix that for you:
Then why is he singling this out as particularly like “Rush Limbaugh” when everything from their coverage of the Libya invasion to the Iraq War and the ignorance of Saudi and Israel atrocities, and from stories written by Big Pharma and Big Oil and Big Banks, are daily occurrences for the “institutions” Greenwald potentially supposes could even remotely have “credibility”?
In the following passage he is clearly supposing they could be credible, or joking. Do you know which it is? If he’s joking, it’s damn funny, but it dismantles the point.
To wit (my emphasis):
“The institutions” could refer to credible media outlets in general. That doesn’t require imagining specific places like the LA Times, NYT etc. becoming credible in this lifetime.
Trump’s “Russia connection” is akin to Obama’s “Muslim socialism” – memes encouraged to distract people from the endemic corruption of the system itself, focusing instead on absurd nonsense about a particular leader.
Personally I believe these memes are spread by the Deep State itself, which loves Trump as much as it would have loved Hillary (had she not been insane about a Syrian no-fly zone), and the distraction in the case of Trump (as with Obama) really does divert very well from the shadow government’s awful accomplishments at his puppeteered hands, as well as from the fact that Democrats are really Republicans.
But don’t worry! As Greenwald says with tongue firmly in cheek, the United States’ institutions might save us – that is, “if they had any credibility” (Glenn can be so funny!) – supposing that they’re not similarly corrupted by special interests who benefit from corporatism, militarism, imperialism and oppressive-policing (inclusive of ‘collect it all’ surveillance). “If they had any credibility!” What a hoot!
I completely agree. It’s all about creating an externalized enemy, for people to focus their angst on. I even think some of the memes about the deep state itself are being spread by this apparatus.
The whole concept is being increasingly politicized as people identify it with Trump (by both his supporters and detractors), even though it goes way beyond our traditional ideological dichotomies.
It’s baffling that some people still laugh this stuff off as being in the realm of conspiracy too. It’s the only logical explanation as to why there’s very little deviation in terms of economic and military foreign policy between the two parties. People can argue about the specifics and the motives, but it’s pretty clear there are forces outside of government that are directing policy.
(my emphasis)
“If.”
Those of you who have been reading Glenzilla since the Bush-Cheney years will know that Greenwald has repeatedly documented how the two parties collude to advance the ruling class agenda.
Howard Zinn wrote:
Thank you.
Thank you Glenn for some much needed sanity. In an ironic way the Democrats are behaving like the Venezuelan right-wing during the Chavez years. They just couldn’t process how Chavez kept winning elections, and instead of looking at the SOCIO-ECONOMIC factors, they would delude themselves with insane conspiracy theories (He rigged the vote, he was a Cuban puppet, he was an Iranian agent).
The conspiracy-theorizing is distracting from what some of the opposition wants, but it is exactly what the IC opposition wants. The thesis here presumes a common interest among anti-Trumpistas that I’ve never been able to pinpoint. Certainly opposing his immigration stance is a fanciful, imaginary price of common ground among the opposition. The whole Bernie wing feels exactly the same way bout Mexicans.
Edit: word missing in Limbaugh quote.
Also, use of “unhinged” by the author is becoming unhinged.
It is articles like this that make one take pause and say, “WTF.” Where to begin? A caveat is always a nice way to begin…
Caveat: Before moving forward to addressing Mr. Greenwald’s concerns, I agree that there is no compelling evidence to suggest that Putin rigged the 2016 Presidential election in Trump’s favor. If it could be proven that Wikileaks conspired with Putin to hack emails originating from the DNC’s and Podesta, then maybe a case could be made that Trump’s victory was questionable. However, those very hacks did uncover a plot wherein key democrats CONSPIRED to undermine Bernie Sander’s primary campaign – a claim that had been echoed by his supporters for some time beforehand. The same can be said for the campaign of Ron Paul wherein major news media outlets would not even report his standing with in the latest polls during his bid for the Republican nomination.
Conspiracy theories: Speaking of conspiracy theories as if they all could be lumped into the same general category in which they can be uniformly characterized as a “complete abandonment of basic principles of rationality and skepticism” is, in and of itself, a form of lazy thinking. One need only examine the work of Douglas P. Horne, who served on the staff of the [Kennedy] Assassination Records Review board:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QalNyRp3Tsc
And even though I provide a link to a six hour video wherein Mr. Horne presents a critically exhaustive, logic laden review of the Warren Commission’s findings in the 30 year retrospective light of all available evidence, the vast majority of those who read this comment will not even bother to click on the link. Yet, the conclusions reached by that review board leaves no doubt that conspiracies involving numerous government agencies, the military, and underworld occur – oftentimes in plain sight. The arrogantly dismissive manner by which all conspiracy theories are summarily conflated and dismissed as merely the “deranged” product of “insane” minds by notables such as Chomsky, Gessen, and Mr. Greenwald is largely driven by their own feverish concern for political expediency. Chomsky would have us believe that conclusive proof of Kennedy’s assassination would serve no practical purpose. Yet, in the very same breath, he would argue that it is necessary to dispossess the American public of their “manufactured” delusions as a precursor to providing them with a narrative of his choosing. Does this sound remotely logical to anyone? A week after the assassination of JFK, polls revealed that roughly 50% of Americans believed that Oswald acted alone. Yet, in the years the followed the 1998 release of the Assassination Records Review Board findings, that number plummeted to 13%. The fact that more than four out of five Americans believe that dark-state elements within their own government conspired with the Mob to have President Kennedy killed speaks to the degree to which they are no longer predisposed to reflexively rejecting theories that do not comport with the official party line of the US government.
Yes, there are a plethora of conspiracy theories that originate from within various intelligence communities and/or political parties. Those who weave such tales are often advocates of political expediency as well. For instance, the Russian government concluded that Kennedy was killed by elements from within the American military and Intelligence community within a year following the assassination. As they too have a proven competing vested interest in fanning the flames of public discontent within America and abroad, such theories are often touted by their proxies and sympathetic media outlets. RT is replete with connect-the-dot theories that are meticulously constructed to provide false, but plausible explanations, for circumstances that are routinely obscured by US National security apparatus. Hell, I remember a couple of speeches given by Hugo Chavez that claimed the US government was artificially inducing cancer in a number of central American leaders. Likewise, he claimed that the Haitian earthquake was caused by the US government. The Russian, British, Israeli, and American governments have all engaged in numerous false flag operations that were intended to vilify an opponent. The fact that Americans are no longer prone to marching in lockstep after years of profit-generating wars and reflexively ingesting what ever explanation was spoon fed to them by their government would please the likes of Kerouac, Kesey, and Ginsberg to no end. And, although widespread belief in many of those conspiracy theories appear to challenge the “basic principles of rationality and skepticism” at first glance… collectively, they provide tangible proof that numerous populations are now beginning to think for themselves at the expense of the “official” narrative, or lack thereof.
The “conspiracy theory” is usefully seen as both pejorative and distinct from a “theory of conspiracy” or “warranted conspiracy theory” when the conspiracy theory’s answers to these questions are not satisfactory. I bold the more salient ones:
-How large is the supposed conspiracy?
-How many people are part of this conspiracy?
-Are there enough of them to carry out the plan?
-Does belief in this theory require accepting inherently contradictory premises that the conspiring entities are incredibly competent, bone stupid, organized, clever, and hopelessly incompetent—all at the same time?
-Do the conspirators have virtually super-human, perfect efficacy and abilities on a level that would be the envy of a Marvel Comics super hero?
-What infrastructure and resources does it need?
-How much time and money did it take and where did this money come from?
-If there are many thousands of conspirators, how are they organized?
-Where are the secret conferences held?
-If they are organised through known channels or entities, how do they keep non-members who work there from uncovering the conspiracy?
-If there are thousands of conspirators, and the conspiracy has gone on for decades, why have none of them defected?
-Why have none of them leaked the story, including those on their deathbeds?
Greenwald and Gessen refer to a belief in a purported state of events that fails the reasonableness test in its answers to those sorts of questions. No doubt both Greenwald and Gessen accept the existence of Those “theories of conspiracy” or “warranted conspiracy theories.”
Yes, the term conspiracy theory is commonly used as a pejorative with the specific intent of summarily dismissing it. In fact, anyone who questions the logical inconsistencies contained within the 911 commission report is automatically labeled a “truther” or “conspiracy theorist” by you – even if they refrain from providing an alternate explanation. To those of you who want to understand how the term “conspiracy theory” has been increasingly used to reflexively discredit those who take exception to the “official” narrative, this video is quite instructive:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BPhYEFGaGM
In his role as the President of the John Birch Society, Larry MacDonald became the target of mainstream media gatekeepers. Just as CIA asset William F Buckley was used to marginalize the the right wing views of American discourse in his day, one can plainly see how Pat Buchanan and Tom Braden used their Crossfire platform to paint Larry MacDonald as a “conspiracy theorist” with the specific aim of not addressing his views on the emerging New World Order. Remember, this interview was conducted in May of 1983 – long before the term New World Order was first invoked by President Bush to describe the very drive toward neoliberal economic hegemony to which Larry MacDonald was taking pointed exception.
More to the point, I provided you with a very concrete example of that which I was attempting to convey. Yet, you endeavor to muddy the waters; why is that exactly? Did you follow the link and listen to the six hour video that describes in painstaking detail the government conspiracy to cover-up the assassination of JFK? The CIA, DIA, Military, Secret Service, Key members of congress and the federal Judiciary, Dallas police and numerous civilian medical personnel were instrumental in a cover-up that has stood uncontested to current day. All of this in spite of the fact that 80% of the American public know that Oswald did not act alone as claimed by the Warren commission.
Secondly, I already acknowledged that “there are a plethora of conspiracy theories that originate from within various intelligence communities and/or political parties” with the caveat that “Those who weave such tales are often advocates of political expediency as well.” In fact, CIA director William Casey is credited with saying, “We’ll Know Our Disinformation Program Is Complete When Everything the American Public Believes Is False.”
“All of this in spite of the fact that 80% of the American public know that Oswald did not act alone as claimed by the Warren commission.” They “know” this? How? And how do you know that the number is 80%? This is why a skeptical person such as myself might not want to plow through 6 hours (!) of some video in which I likely will be dealing with the kind of logic you just presented.
Don’t ask me questions if you are unwilling to listen to the answers. When I refer to experts like Douglas P. Horne it is because their work has informed my own opinions. Listen to the first two hours and you will be amazed by that which you hear, I guarantee it. But, while doing so, you might want to ask yourself this simple question: Why haven’t I ever heard of Mr. Horne’s brilliant work until today? After all, the Assassination Records Review Board was appointed by President Clinton.
That is false I dismiss truthers based on their implausible and incredible claims.(These claims do not yield satisfactory answers to my criteria listed above.) It has nothing to do with what they argue about the 911 Commission Report.
No, nor shall I. I lack all interest in the topic. My interest is in what I initially posted, to wit: setting forth criteria by which a set of beliefs can be properly dismissed as a “conspiracy theory.” Any readers who do watch your video would be advised to do so with my criteria in mind.
(I have some extensive experience of the John Birch Society, but you react badly when I tell of my own lived experiences. So I shall not go into it.)
Yet, you would presume to denigrate those who have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the official explanation of a lone gunman is pure unadulterated bullshit. Again, I cited the work of Douglas P. Horne because those who subscribe to the view that a lone gunman (Oswald) was not singularly responsible for JFK’s death are “routinely” accused of harboring “conspiracy theories.”
Nice try Mona, this isn’t about the John Birch society.
You now: “Nice try Mona, this isn’t about the John Birch society.”
You just above: “In his role as the President of the John Birch Society, Larry MacDonald became the target of mainstream media gatekeepers.”
And you again: “Yet, you would presume to denigrate those who have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the official explanation of a lone gunman is pure unadulterated bullshit. ”
You are a fantasist. I’ve offered no opinion at all on the Kennedy assassination or on any theories, official or otherwise, about that event. Nor do I care about it as a topic. You are simply making shit up.
In his article, Glenn Greeenwald made no attempt to draw a clear distinction between the generic term “conspiracy theory” and those you chose to suggest (i.e. “theory of conspiracy” or “warranted conspiracy theory”). When I took exception to the fact that Glenn Greenwald was heavy-handedly conflating, and then condemning, all “conspiracy theories”, you felt compelled to provide qualifications that would mask his mistake.
The Oxford dictionary concisely describes a conspiracy theory as “A belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for an unexplained event.” In keeping with this definition, I provided a link that clearly proves that some “conspiracy theories” are substantial and defensible even if all they do is debunk the official narrative. Rather then weighing the merits of my claim by examining the evidence that I provided, you chose to ignore it all together as if it was not a further qualification of my main thesis that it is illegitimate to characterize all conspiracy theories as “merely the “deranged” product of “insane” minds.” Thus, in attempting to take exception to my main thesis, you were, in effect, offering an opinion on the merits of the example that I provided.
When all is said and done, the qualifications you chose to provide provided no defense of Glenn’s mistake. Nor did they serve to refute the merits of my own arguments. Yet, you have the nerve to call me a fantasist.
This is just more evidence of the fact that your narcissistic sociopathy knows no bounds.
And nary a word of a president giving credence to Mark Levin and Breitbart.
Greenwald has simply lost his mind … there is no other explanation. His hate on for the Democratic Party has reached bounds that could be called derangement.
In time, the story will be told, and I very much doubt, that there is nothing between Putin and Trump.
The difference between left and right wing conspiracies is that the mainstream media promotes the Democratic conspiracy theories. That’s because most journalists in the establishment media tend to be liberal or neo-liberal Democrats.
The are undermining themselves in the process, destroying their own credibility. The reputation of the press is already lower than whale shit. As the saying goes, they’re “throwing away a pearl greater than all their tribe.”
“when Trump’s actions (such as hiring numerous anti-Russia hawks for key positions) explode the “Putin’s puppet” narrative,”
‘Scuze me but that’s ass backwards, as is your portrayal of Mensch who is one of Murdoch’s minions whose sensationalist misreporting in Hotstreet was fully funded by Rupert.
After noticing that i paid close attention to the details: in all this article gives me the creeps because, under the auspices of being concerned about factual evidence based reporting, it really exposes the great difficulty and possible inability of any reporter to sift through the morass of misinformation and present unbiased reportage which is the only way to expose the excesses of corruption permeating global governance.
So keep up the good work snd keep reminding us to read betwen the lines
You’re still proposing your own form of conspiracy theory, the conspiracy theory where American’s intelligence agencies, forming a “deep state,” are both deranged enough to stop at nothing to keep Trump out of the White House, and also stunningly incompetent, despite all the surveillance. How is this any less hysterical than the “Russian narrative,” especially when it’s no secret that Putin has an interest in destabilizing Western democracies? And I fail to see what the Democratic party has to do with this. Even if they are trying to use Russia as a bogeyman, one can both accept that and also desire a full investigation of the Russian ties.
it’s no secret that Putin has an interest in destabilizing Western democracies?
ok. However the illegal ties that the state department maintains with corporations for doing business in Russia and all other countries is so dirty that the DEEP STATE fears it’s laundry will be hung out to dry by President Trump.
why do you suppose the 2-faced hillary and obama were so eager for the TPP? (aka maximum corruption lawyered by wallstreet thieves)
As opposed to, say, Rex Tillerson, and the hundreds of billions he’ll make from oil if the sanctions are lifted? What makes you so sure the “DEEP STATE” actually exists as a meaningful concept? And frankly, do you seriously think a man like Donald Trump is going to air out anyone’s laundry? He doesn’t even seem to know how our judicial system works, aside from whether he isn’t the last person to bring someone else to justice.
But even if what you’re saying is all true, it’s all a red herring. I don’t mean that it’s unimportant in general, but it doesn’t matter how horrible Hillary, Obama, or the state department were. It doesn’t matter if someone is using this to make Russia as a “bogeyman.” If the president is beholden to a foreign power, this should be deep troubling to all Americans. The same would be true if Hillary won and her campaign had similar ties to China amidst Chinese interference in our election.
Trump or Bannon did not invent the term “Deep State”.The term “Deep State” goes back to the waning days of the Ottoman Empire when it was nominally ruled by a Sultan but in actuality was ruled by ministers, bureaucrats and generals who set policy and made things happen. This was the portion of government in Egypt that sunk the elected Muslim Brotherhood by tying up the economy so that they lost the confidence of the people and could be removed in a Junta.
Many foreign entities have deep influence on US Politics from Israel to Poland to the Vatican. The US has exercised power to remove foreign leaders so many times in the past it is ridiculous to feign outrage that other countries would not try to do the same.
So agree – (where’s the up vote button btw, c’mon guys it’s just not that difficult to implement …).
It’s becoming farcical and makes me wonder what this is truly about … given Snowden being in Russia. I dunno … it’s all smelling funny just about now, including dear GG.
Only a full investigation into this mess can reveal anything.
“It’s becoming farcical and makes me wonder what this is truly about … given Snowden being in Russia. I dunno … it’s all smelling funny just about now,”
That smell is the kitchen john anderson reviewed. If wafts far and wide.
To quote: ” it’s no secret that Putin has an interest in destabilizing Western democracies.” This is an example of “Putin mind reading”. Ascribing to Putin motives which have no evidence. But if it is negative, then it is just taken as true.
Putin has been in power for something like 17 years, and what democracies in Europe have been destabilized? Poland is doing well and along with the Baltics and other countries elected anti-Russian leaders? As it stands, the EU has stood solid with Russian sanctions. The Ukraine is unstable because of a violent coup against a legitimately elected government. And when the Eastern Ukrainians objected they were immediately shot up by the illegal regime. Soros tried to blame the problems Europe is seeing with migrants and refugees on Putin for deliberately creating them just for that purpose. There were already 500,000 refugees just in Germany before one Russian bomb was dropped on Syria with the Assad regime nearing collapse. About 60% of the migrants into Europe are from countries not at war with anybody nor Russia. Putin has utterly failed to upend any democracy if he has been trying.
True enough as to the ailment. But what’s the prescription? This appears to be a fruitless search for reason. Hysteria — especially hysteria about foreigners — is a common theme, the current version of which is to stoke talk of Russia as a way of getting at the president. People tune in and like the show, a show that provides fame and fortune to many. That’s why the show keeps running.
in a democracy, secrecy of public property and operations, communications, etc is poison. It’s about OWNERSHIP.
And the root cause that prevents US citizens from getting back on track to “goodness” is getting money 100% out of politics, 20 to life for corruption, changing the currency system (firing the criminal fed).
Right. But in what reality-based universe is there the remotest chance of that happening? Near as I can tell, the public as a whole likes things just fine as they are. Sure, it likes to complain about this and that, but if the public wanted change so much, why does the 115th Congress look virtually identical to the 114th?
I fail to see anything hysterical about Russia coverage.
It appears that Russia hacked the DNC with a goal of aiding Trump. That in itself doesn’t implicate Trump or his associates. But there is also the fact that Trump will not disclose his business ties, and there are indications that in fact he might have been indebted to Russians. Flynn was caught undermining Obama policy. Trump is strangely friendly toward Putin. Plus, there is that dossier.
All that is requested by the media or the Democrats is an impartial investigation, which, in the current environment, can only be accomplished by an independent counsel.
An investigation may very well uncover nothing. Or it may uncover some unsavory business connections. In the current international environment, where right wing fringe parties may be aided by the Russians, this is particularly important.
It is just wrong to say that the goal of the Russian inquiry is impeachment. The goal is investigation, and that is entirely legitimate.
It isn’t “helping” Trump. The media is still reporting on the travel ban, the ACA repeal, immigration. It is preventing Trump and the Republicans from controlling the narrative, and certainly isn’t helping his approval.
Really? It appears? The DNC didn’t even turn over their server to verify it was hacked, and the most plausible explanation is a leak by an insider. As for Podesta, who is stupid enough to click on a phishing email and enter their [email protected]?
There was no independent council for Clinton despite “the appearance” of influence peddling in the multiple instances of foreign donations to her “Foundation”.
“All that is requested by the media or the Democrats is an impartial investigation, which, in the current environment, can only be accomplished by an independent counsel.”
Would you also perhaps advocate for a similar investigation into whether there were Trump advocates within the Israeli Government (specifically Benjamin Nut&Yahoo) who might have preferred DJT over HRC as well?
I mean…this Nut&Yahoo character actually came over to our country to personally address a joint session of Congress to lobby them to go against the wished and policies of a sitting president – getting multiple standing ovations for his undermining efforts.
Now just imagine if that was Putin who tried to pull off such an outrageously treasonous stunt?
Or when GWB walked lovingly hand-in-hand with the leader one of the most politically and culturally Jurassic countries to have personally supplied 18 of the most despicable airline passengers….like ever!
What is the evidence that the Russians hacked the DNC? Nothing has been produced. Can’t we get over the idea that Hillary lost because of the Rooskies? She lost simply because of flawed campaign strategy. First, she drove 14 million Democrats out of the party after the primary. They left because of rigging and cheating and egregious insults from HRC and her campaign. Then, her general election strategy was Gala Feminist Celebrity fundraisers and coastal meetups, while Trump’s strategy was Target Rust Belt. This elitism in the year when the cri de coeur from the heartland was populism. Since the DNC election last week, more Dems are exiting. Gallup reports that voters self reporting as Dems have shrunk from 31 percent in July 2016 to 25 percent in Jan 2017. GOP has remained the same. Independents have grown from 42 percent in 2016 to 44 percent in January 2017. Liberal-centrist-ThirdWay Democrats are not positioned to win any time soon.
Glenn, every time you start to explain why we should dismiss any talk of any sort of Putin-Trump connection, your eyes go all wide and your lips get all spit-flecked. Maybe just run a bullet list with no exposition or bloviating. It would be more easily digested by those who aren’t already bobbing along in your choir. I think you might spend too much time monitoring the drivel of fringe “thought leaders” who are rarely heard from by most people, and they are warping your own perspective. You’re staring into the abyss, man! Go see a movie, binge on a season of some rando tv show. Recalibrate.
Also, maybe don’t try to burnish your sources by flaunting their connections to the same MSM outlets you consistently smear as incompetent/willfully misleading?
So agree and so glad that it’s not just me who is witnessing this Greenwald meltdown … this isn’t even a piece worthy of The Intercept. What’s happened to him in the past months – it’s simply stated weird.
But in time the story will be told, and all will be revealed, and we will all understand what was happening behind the scenes to Glenn compelling him to write such drivel that is so beneath his skills and abilities.
This is a place for alternative viewpoints. Given the hysteria about Russia from everybody to McCain to Pelosi, there is a need for an alternative voice to provide context. The evidence for “hacking” is slight to non-existent. The influence exercised by Russia was slight and out in the open. Everybody knows RT is backed by Putin, and they were anti-Clinton for sure. It was certainly no secret that voting for Trump meant friendlier relations with Russia. Given the Putin baiting by Clinton and the MSM, that showed courage. (He didn’t stoop to calling Putin “Hitler”.)
Don’t you progressives realize that by demonizing Russia (a regional power at best) you are playing into the hands of the those who support continuing US inspired armed conflict in Ukraine and Syria that has already cost 100,000s of thousands of lives?
well folks, there you have it, from someone who just said “by demonizing russia, you are playing into the hands of those who support continuing US inspired armed conflict in ukraine and syria.” thats all you need to know right there. because, um, like totally all these ukranians who decided to overthrow their russian DEEP STATE overlords, whose leader’s son looted 40billion from their coffers, were then inspired by the us to cause violence in eastern ukraine and crimea…oh wait a sec! nah son. nope. pretty sure the russians inspired armed conflict in ukraine…as opposed to a popular uprising that deposed a russian backed leader, which was inspired by people fed up with corruption and a lack of sovereignty. and as for us inspired armed conflict in syria? yea, like, um, totally. the united states, as opposed to iran or russia-which has a military base in tartus-was the one that inspired the crackdown on teenagers spray painting anti assad graffiti in homs. the us is totally dropping barrel bombs on hospitals right?
I see no need to demonize Russia or any other nation. It is usually the leaders of nations that call down such ire. And I absolutely agree that The Intercept, among others, is a haven for alternative (rational and skeptical) viewpoints. My point stands: Glenn’s posts on Russia are going off the rails, and I think it’s because he is conflating fringe conspiracy theories with more typical inquiries into objectively strange and evasive behavior. Label me a progressive if you like, whatever that term means to you. I’m certainly an advocate for open government, regardless of party, and I don’t like seeing people in power outright lying to us. It wasn’t acceptable to me with any previous administration and it isn’t acceptable with this one. So if someone is demanding an independent investigation into the various Putin-Trump allegations, which have only been exacerbated by all of the evasions and lies, then I am all for it. It also happens to be the best way to put to rest any UNwarranted claims, as all of the evidence (or lack thereof) is brought to light and examined. Why would any journalist argue against that? Unless Glenn has multiple reliable sources whispering to him that all of this is BS, he is just guilty of his own bias. When multiple sources, seemingly independent of each other, all catch a whiff of smoke, then it is just common sense to look for the fire. Yeah, dine folks are gonna scream FIRE before they see one, and accuse their current rival or preferred scapegoat of arson, but that’s fucking life. You don’t want that kind of heat? Stay a private citizen. Nobody made these fuckers run for office, or take whatever powerful roles were offered. Far as I am concerned, you want to stand on the high rung, then get used to people looking up your ass and talking about your shit. Otherwise, stay the fuck home. And Glenn can decide for himself if he wants to speak truth to power or just be another pundit jabbering at other pundits and accomplishing nothing. Either way, he’ll be more effective if he’s calm and concise, and can elevate his discourse above that of the wackjob Twitter accounts he obsesses over.
“Don’t you progressives realize that by demonizing Russia (a regional power at best) you are playing into the hands of the those who support continuing US inspired armed conflict in Ukraine and Syria that has already cost 100,000s of thousands of lives?”
That is, of course, the entire idea. To get “Liberals” to vote for bombs.
In essence,
this article only confirms that the democrats and republicans are
playing a game and pretending to be opposing forces while
they are both playing for the same owners.
That so many people (and I suspect Ms. Gessen is one of the many)
refuse to see that the democrats are in collusion with the republicans
in their desire to crush the majority of people and destroy any
hint of that great evil “SOCIALISM” for the benefit of an
elite obnoxious minority of Trump-ist predators’ bank accounts.
No one has done more for Trump’s benefit than has the DNC and Trump
was seemingly doing all he could to make the “Queen of Chaos”
Clinton seem less toxic than she really is.
Is Gessen a Clinton supporter? I truly do not know, but if she is
then her critique is highly suspect. If Gessen is opposed to both
democrats and republicans in general, then I would say she is
on the right path.
The people of Russia, like the people of Iraq, Syria, Libya, and
numerous other nations which have been subjected to horror shows
based on lies and deceit from the faking U$A and its capitalist
worshiping allies, do not deserve the horrors which the democrats
and republicans will proudly unleash upon them
for private profits.
Maybe Gessan had a “oh shit” moment. Maybe as a Russian and a Jew she heard echoes of Germany Nazi propaganda used against Jews and Slavs in the current anti-Russian hysteria. Those German themes continued into the Cold War and McCarthyism, and now have filtered in charges against Putin and indeed against all Russians. Everyday somebody attacks Putin/Russians as having infiltrated the West and undermining Western democracies and civilization. Instead of Jewish banker, you have an RT reporter.
This is the same accusation made by German Nazis against European Jews–fighting the Jews wasn’t just a national German issue, but one which the world had to undertake. You can see this at the end of an interview between Tucker Carlson and democrat David Cicilline:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVstIYoAWPk
Cumulatively and piece by piece, the Russian hysteria is putting togther a modern day version of Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Or at another level, Gessan must have realized that democrats and the media talk about Russians in the same way Trump talks about Muslims and Mexicans. Olbermann on “Russian scum”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98n1IbWJhYU
You make some interesting suppositions, but I have NO intention
of watching the garbage (democrat/republican) links which you
have included.
In the end, I still do not know (and it really doesn’t matter)
where Gessen stands. I know she loathes Putin, but I do not
see Putin as uniquely deserving of more loathing than any
leading democrat or republican in the faking U$A.
Thanks for responding.
So catch me up, folks.
Did the Deep State elect Trump or is the Deep State inventing a Russian conspiracy because it wanted Clinton elected?
If only they’d find a credible spokesperson for the Deep State … like they have now apparently found for the not-deep-state of Russia.
I guess that chess champion guy was just too … um … confused.
Well, chess champs tend to be crazy. Plus, Kasparov has some crazier views than most from his belief in the “New Chronology” to his relying on support from “National Bolshevik” Eduard Limonov.
Huh? Of course Russia has a deep state. But I’m unaware of anyone who is purportedly it’s spokesperson.
Oh. Okay.
Did that Russian deep state intervene in the US election or not? (psst. absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence,)
Hypothetical conspiracies, like the “Deep State,” imply certain things must be true. It seems to me the US “Deep State” posits a convenient but unverifiable truth.
Unless you define it down to the mundane collective of US intelligence agencies, the concept of a “Deep State” implies operations, goals, personnel and agendas — all hidden. It cannot be disproved. Then, when something peculiar or aberrant occurs. those who believe in the “Deep State” grab for that as an explanation like a passenger on a sinking ship grabs a life jacket. You can see these conspiracy theorists splashing their version of “Clinton did it” throughout this comments sections. (I include you among these dog paddlers.)
But despite GG’s elaborate attempt to pardon himself, this Deep State cannot be the entity that both elected and opposed the election of Trump.
Do you see the logical problem here? It’s the same problem running through the years of Republican conspiracies. It becomes a sort of deux ex machina to explain everything from lost elections to random deaths and stupid policies to even worse actions.
Relying upon an impressive and stalwart figure like Gessen neither proves nor disproves anything. If her opinion matches his, then wowser, we have an article that explains Mr. Greenwald’s trumpian obsession with McCarthyism, Clinton, fake news, and democrats in general.
Here’s an article from the mainstream press — being picked up by the mainstream press with lots of facts and citations. It isn’t a conspiracy theory and it doesn’t empower Trump. And it’s a hell of a lot more credible than blaming the Deep State, fake news or Democrats in general.
If you truly want to know something, educate yourself. Don’t rely upon spokespersons.
That was my point.
I doubt Gessen is any more or less credible than Kasparov or Kara-Murza.
I can’t say; there are plausible allegations but not much, if any, evidence. So I hold my opinion in abeyance.
Glenn does not and need not “pardon himself.” For he does not ascribe to a cartoon version of the U.S. Deep State. That is, he does not claim it is a monolith vested with virtually super-human powers. Participants in the Deep State can and do disagree, just as all human groups do; they are as likely to be given to factions as any other human group. While I think Glenn has suggested a preponderance of power at the FBI preferred Trump, he’s been clear that the CIA was all in for HRC.
What I see is that you’ve contrived a problem that does not exist.
What does exist is the U.S. Deep State, as is written about and acknowledged by rational, reasonable and well-informed people.
“Huh? Of course Russia has a deep state. ”
It means something different when I say it.
You just add to the entropy.
I’m going to the kitchen for a ham sandwich.
Deep State inventing a Russian conspiracy because it wanted Clinton elected.
DT thinks for himself, not a team whore on the dole or the strings.
Funny how the US media is sometimes credible and sometimes not.
The media is credible when it serves a purpose, but not credible when it doesn’t — or rather then the agenda demands a lack of credibility.
Ask Donald Trump how that works.
Or ask anyone else trying to slog through this swamp of mucky agendas.
Or ask anyone else trying to slog through this swamp of mucky agendas.
At least your agenda isn’t mucky: it’s plain slavishly ‘I’m with Her!’
More hilarity from a member of the gangrenous gang here at the intercept.
Many of the points GG makes in this article I’ve made repeatedly. Sometimes it just gets tiresome to continue to give history and context to a bunch idiots like yourself. Later I might post a comment about GG’s strained attempt to equate 30 years of Republican conspiracy theories (and the financial backers) with the rather recent phenomenon (which I haven’t noticed) in which false and half-baked conspiracy theories replace reality.
Ask Boris Nemtsov if he was actually killed by Putin agents.
Ask Vladimir Kara-Murza who poisoned him … twice.
Or ask any Russian journalist the fate of Anna Politkovskaya.
There is no equivalence between Clinton conspiracy theorists and Putin/Trump conspiracy theorists.
Putin actually kills his opponents.
But thank you for your spite and venom. It means I’m doing something right.
“Sometimes it just gets tiresome to continue to give history and context…”
It’s especially entertaining to watch you mangle it (history) to fit your narrative.
Absolutely correct. There is no equivalence.
The ‘history and context’ you’ve neglected to provide is that Clinton and the warmongers that make up US hegemony throughout our world are actually and literally responsible for killing millions of innocent humans.
Your ongoing mewling about your disenfranchisement because of Hillary’s loss and your inability to recognize that this simple to ascertain, inescapable fact should actually be the predominant thing coloring your thinking about what’s going on on planet Earth means you are doing something wrong.
Such brilliance!
Since Clinton + warmongers and hegemonists = millions of dead people, then anyone who disagrees with your politics (unspecified of course) must be responsible for mass murder.
I’m humbled by your immaculate righteousness.
Nice quote from Camus.
“There is no equivalence between Clinton conspiracy theorists and Putin/Trump conspiracy theorists.
Putin actually kills his opponents.”
Thanks for the laugh, that was comedic gold.
Putin actually kills his opponents.
Listen arsehole. Your empire has killed and will continue to kill people on an industrial scale. I hold you part responsible for cheering it on.
You’re really getting desperate and it’s funny to watch you flail about.
The longer this Russian thing goes on , the stronger both Trump and Putin will become. That is why they both keep provoking the MSM and their so-called adversaries ( democrats and neo cons) who are ignorantly auto-destroying.
If VfE gets it, anyone else should too. FACT.
Great article. The Russian conspiracy hysteria is not something that just got out of control. Hillary’s main attack during the election was that Trump=Putin. Wikileaks counted the most discussed topics during the debates and Putin/Russia by far dominated the debates–that is on Hillary. And now the democrats up and down the organization are engaged in an organized campaign to make “Putin/Trump” thee issue against Trump. And the base has gladly followed. Just take a look at dailykos.com for a week to see how infected the party has become. This is not an accident.
But the US is a bit late to the Russian conspiracy party. Europe was engaging in these conspiracies before the election. Putin was behind Brexit. Drunk Russian soccer fans fighting with English drunk soccer fans–actually Russian army soldiers sent by Putin. These accusations are not from fringe elements but from EU and national leaders. The Polish interior minister claimed Putin was behind the terrorist attacks in Paris. Soros claimed that the Putin had deliberately created the refugees to flood and distablize the EU,
And it started earlier with corrupt hedge fund thieves blaming Russia for going after corrupt people (THEN accusing Russia of murdering your lawyer), lying businessmen creating the myth that Russia masterminded the Moscow bombings, and disgraced spies blaming the 7/7 London bombings on Putin. (Makes the Propornot claim that Putin was behind the killing of Jo Cox and the Mesch claim that Putin killed Breitbart look tame.)
– in all fairness, both clintons did end up as mass murderers. it was just people no one in the media cared about (iraqis, serbians, libyans, ukranians, etc.)
– on the other hand, gessen will probably fall out of favor. as the deafening silence that greeted malala’s “drone attacks are fueling terrorism. innocent victims are killed in these acts, and they lead to resentment among the pakistani people” statement shows, even the tokens had best “know their place”. this is summed up nicely by a classic boondocks scene:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHEUkOORvFE
and a more direct example:
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/191081/boston-marathon-tsarnaev-masha-gessen
– mensch is not being shamed but instead encouraged. she was removed from the “heat street” site but will now be in charge of creating “new digital media” for news corp. so she will continue to spew inane theories but from behind the proverbial curtain. expect more of her glenn beckisms posted under different names (or “the editors”).
– all of this just proves that while people pretend to care about “the truth” or even the truth they couldn’t care less about The Truth. that is, they will only venture to the hinterlands of their subjective view but never cross over into actual facts that may conflict with the views that form their identity for better or worse. whether it’s “right” or “left” many americans have fear of “The Other” in their DNA. inward reflection is anathema. as is discussion of ANYTHING that would require effort or change outside their increasing huge comfort zones.
tl;dr – “we can’t accept that our class had anything to do with the plight of the idiots in the flyover states so let’s pin everything on that country still recovering from the ass pounding we gave it in the 1990s”.
And THAT, is the heart of the matter…
On the “Russian ambassador is a spy” thing, that is too funny.
An American “ambassador” can go on secret missions in a country that America has just bombed to pieces, and still be an “ambassador”:
Was Stevens attending a diplomatic cocktail party when he was killed???
But the Russian ambassador, just talking to this “intelligence agent” is unthinkable, Those inscrutable Russians can recruit you to betray your country, and you wouldn’t even know it!!!
Who would have guessed, that the Russian Ambassador was working for the Russian government!!! What a brilliant disguise!!!
From now on, no diplomats are to talk with anyone!!…well American ones can, but only when they are on secret missions in nations that America has just attacked!!
It’s a great article, Glenn Greenwald.
To the people who think he’s preaching to the choir, let me point out that Mr Greenwald is often quoted in responsible articles by respected journalists, as well as in books that I have read, so he is capable of reaching a far wider audience than just us.
Something that I thought about this morning – not in defense of former President Obama, but to cite as an example of what a lousy job the MSM is doing – when this admin claims that “Obama did it,” let me point out that it is rarely placed in context. No matter what you think about his policies, he is – as far as we know – a cool and rational thinker. Whatever decisions he made were likely studied and deliberated, and if positions/policies changed, there were hopefully reasons why they did, based on new evidence, a changing situation, and/or new facts. They were not “trumpeted” by running a nasty campaign of denigrating people in diverse groups and running a campaign of fear and loathing. Mr Obama’s actions are perceived as more deliberate than emotional, except in the cases of embarrassing leaks by whistleblowers – which is my personal opinion.
Obama’s reasons for cancelling Keystone were as fallacious as anything that has ever come out of Trump’s mouth, and all he earned was praise.
If Trump’s presidency can put an end to this hero-worship nonsense surrounding the POTUS, it will be worth it. Having a press corps cover the POTUS with all the diligence and professionalism of a bunch of 12-year-old girls covering a Justin Bieber concert was good for no one.
agreed. obama gets credit for “stopping” KXL but all he did was kick the can down the road because an election was coming up (and only then because of sustained protests and not the “goodness of his heart”).
also that POTUS worship is gross. the best part of trump is watching the “elites” turn on each other. it also proves that all you need to succeed and survive is a pile of cash. any non-b(m?)illionaire would have been crushed by half the attacks trump deflected even before the primaries. if howard dean had been a real estate mogul his “YAHHHHHHH!” would have done nothing to derail his campaign.
Obama could have stopped DAPL dead 3 or so years ago. But he chose to “let play out”, until he could hand it off to Trump to run it in…
It got him out of the unenviable position of tarnishing his sterling reputation as a “Liberal”, by ramming an odious land/soul/life destroying project down the throats of the American people, but still made sure that it went through, just as he intended….
Why else allow months and months of official attacks and torture on the water protectors…?
It was clear that Obama had a very good understanding of the image of the US in the world, the state of racism inside the United States, the crisis of gun deaths in America, the poor state of healthcare. And Obama could give a good speech. Where he fell down was that he read his speeches and then put the government on autopilot. He let the “blue dog democrats” sabotage the promise of single payer healthcare. He let the military “surge” in Iraq, rather than end the war like so many hoped he’d do.
Clearly Obama totally understood what he was doing, by carrying on with Clinton/Bush’s policies in so many areas.
But if all a president does is, nothing more than what any university prof in poli-sci can do, describe the situation, then what’s the point of an election?
Now you have got in Trump, someone who can’t string three words together, is badly misinformed, but who for better or for worse, is going beyond words; is touching some cherished American taboos.
It’s funny how the SJW hystericals don’t realize that, if their idiotic campaign does succeed and the US and Russia do end up nuking each other the second wave of victims, following the initial mass death outcome, is going to be ‘them’. Metrosexuals who can’t imagine life without their phones and lattes who won’t spontaneously starve and decompose are going to hunted down, raped and likely eaten by the more resilient red-state brutes. And, of course, there’s going to be zero ‘safe spaces’, sensitivity training, sexual orientation tolerance or universal health care. It would be somewhat hilarious to see them flee the ‘minority’ gang-ruled cities only to fall pray to some white supremacist and probably proudly cannibalistic posse.
ahahahahahahahaha did you miss your medication today?
Hey, SJW, you are an excellent and super-intelligent debater. Without a doubt, you will talk yourself out of trouble should a Russian nuke blow up things and people near you.
“Don’t eat the seed corn”
It’s an old expression and it’s applicable. It’s understandable that partisan opponents want to throw everything they can at Trump, including his own sort of propaganda. But if in doing so, you erode the democratic foundation that allows for informed consent to be governed, then everyone loses.
Americans are destroying their own reason-based self governing society. Yes Americans are easily manipulated by their Russophobia, but by reinforcing their misconceptions about the world, future American policy will need to be responsive to that false narrative. (which is great if you want more war…but is not so good for most people).
Keep posting. You are so needed.
“truther fever ”
Nice touch.
truther fever is like the melting point of steel IIRC
You, like Glenn, are barely aware of the alphabet let alone the language of mathematics.
It’s like Glenn joking with Snowden that he isn’t savvy technically. Very funny.
You nor Glenn could solve the simplest 3 dimensional force vector so you mock loudly the idea.
I doubt either of you could the same in two dimensions (that would be Pythagorean formula or high school level math).
A good man always knows his limitations; forwards and backwards. It makes judging as straight-forward as the line you’ve drawn.
“let’s demolish some buildings but fly airplanes into them too” is the
greatest idea of a plan ever in the history of human civilization
Oh Vic, … motive is not necessary to describe what happened but I’ve tried to explain that to you before.
You, nor Glenn, cannot even imagine the mathematics or physics involved, literally. You cannot know what you don’t understand and yet you are comfortable parroting the government’s story. The same folks alleged to have committed the crime are the ones who “investigated” the crime. Check minus.
Simple independent mathematical analysis shows what happened to the 3 towers. Go get a degree in math or engineering before you defend further the government.
Give it up nuf…. people like Vic Perry are not interested in weighing the evidence – because, to do so, one must first possess at least a rudimentary understanding of physics and statics. It is far easier to summarily dismiss the logical and mathematical inconsistencies that abound in the official explanation of the free fall collapse of three steel-framed, high-rise buildings into their own footprint on a single day, then to acknowledge their own intellectual deficiencies.
Vic, arguing with someone who claims that a literal, clinical genius like Glenn can’t grasp — or “imagine” — the mathematics involved is futile. Just don’t do it.
Oh nuf said is preaching to the converted with me, I know that nothing like that happened all the other times jets crashed into skyscrapers before 9/11. Sad!
As I said, you might be able to punch numbers into a calculator but your knowledge ends there.
Remember how excited Americans got the first time a “muslim” tried to blow up the WTC?
meh.
It was a good thing they found quickly the ring gear from inside the differential housing of the van carrying the bomb. They knew the only way for a ring gear to be laying about was if the bomb was right on top of the housing and cracked it open. That way they were able to figure out who the bomber was! Good thing no covert group helped him.
It’s just like the discovery of a passport from one of the hijackers in the debris after the collapse. It helped prove “muslims” did it.
Your loyalty to the machine will be noted but not rewarded as you jump through hoops without a treat.
Flocks of jumbos flying into skyscrapers providing the background signal to noise ratio, so the troofers can claim Bushco wot did it!
Had Glenn done the math he couldn’t help but conclude that the three buildings fell at approximately three times the rate (roughly 10 sec versus 27 sec) than would have been expected given the government’s “pancake collapse” explanation. In fact, the corporate contractors that were hired to sell that load of crap to the American public backed off from the claim that the heat generated from Jet fuel was the sufficient to create a uniform catastrophic failure of the buildings inner and outer steel framed infrastructure . Instead they concluded that “office fires” were the main source of heat that caused the free-fall collapse of WTC buildings 1, 2, and 7. And again, such nonsensical claims are meritless because there is no evidence that office fires observed had the potential to generate even a significant fraction of the heat required to undermine the buildings steel infrastructure – even if it was not fire-proofed. Furthermore, there was no evidence to support the claim that the fires were uniformly spread throughout any of the buildings let alone in a way that could have caused all of the vertical support members to fail simultaneously along their entire length – which would have been necessary to account for the free-fall rate of collapse recorded for all of the three buildings. Instead, the mean by which NIST and its associate contractors reached the conclusion that fires caused the uniform, (near) free-fall collapse of three, steel framed, high rise buildings was not derived from physical evidence or observation, but from the tweaking of data within a computer model that was meant to satisfy a predetermined outcome. This is not forensic science by any stretch of the imagination.
http://drjudywood.com/articles/BBE/BilliardBalls.html
But hey, if Glenn is a certifiable “clinical genius” who is capable of doing the math, then all of this is elementary. Why, then, has he not been openly critical of the 911 commissions findings?
It’s the perfect cover! And anyone who doesn’t do Pythagoras (I do, BTW) should STFU, ya’ll hear!
Every time this nonsense arises I’m reminded of the other guy crazy on “the math.”
What does “solve a 3-dimensional force vector” mean? One solves equations, not vectors. Perhaps an equation involve vectors, in which case, one might be able to solve it and find a vector, as a solution. Otherwise, this makes no sense.
I believe that, in this case, the term “solving” can be interchanged with the term “finding.” Or, if one begins with a force vector, the term solving could be more properly conveyed with the term “resolving” – as in resolving a force vector into its three mutually perpendicular components (x, y, z). This having been said, nuf’s phrasing is nothing more than a form of shorthand than can readily be understood by those who are not predisposed to finding fault.
Solving is not equivalent to resolving. This is the ambiguity of meaning to which I responded. “Solving” can’t mean one, or the other, or both of these. There is no specific context here in which to understand the usage. As it stands, the phrase “solving a force vector” is meaningless. If one cares about mathematics, as the writer claims to, one needs to be especially careful to provide a context and say exactly what one means, not rely on “shorthand” which sounds mathematical but does not convey mathematical ideas. Arbitrary use of mathematical jargon, especially in a non-formal setting, such as a comment thread on a mainly political website, suggests an attempt to intimidate a reader, rather than actually enlighten. Using mathematics or statistics to intimidate people contributes mightily to the very unfortunate and very widespread (especially in the US) unwillingness and fear of exploring and coming to grips with ideas that are appropriately and meaningfully couched in mathematical language.
This is the rub, is it not? The desire to cut someone who you believe was engaged in intimidation? Might I suggest a number of other more plausible explanations for nuf’s posture?
1. Vic, Gert, and Perry have garnered notorious reputations for ruthlessly attacking those with whom they share a contentious history – often in unison. Thus, longtime contributors like nuf feel compelled to take the high ground from the get go.
2. There is a longstanding pattern on Glenn Greenwald’s blog’s of attacking anyone who openly questions the official findings of the 9/11 commission. In fact, Glenn banned a number of contributors for just raising the subject on threads that were days old. His justification for doing so stemmed from the belief that the subject was a distraction from that which he was writing about at that time. Thus, many of Glenn Greenwald’s self-appointed gatekeepers have taken it upon themselves to launch insulting personal attacks at anyone who mentions the subject.
3. Those who have a basic understanding of statics and physics readily recognize that it is impossible for three steel framed, high rise buildings to collapse into their own footprint at near freefall acceleration in a manner consistent with that asserted by the 911 commission. The proof of this relies on mathematics. When a person lacks the requisite mathematical proficiency to understand the natural laws that govern such events, then they should refrain from attempting to challenge the opinions of those who do. I believe that this was nuf was attempting to convey above all else.
Sorry about the typos, it is late and I am exhausted.
Good article! I doubt that it will slow the stampede, but good nonetheless.
Sometimes, being trampled by the stampede is enough to inspire future generations :b
It IS amazing that the so-called “legitimate” media can be so corrupted as to not even worry about being called out for reporting things that are clearly silly, e.g., that the Coast Guard had determined that the Russians interfered in the US election* (as Seymour Hirsch pointed out) . They can’t even pass the laugh test any more, and they don’t care.
(* as one of the “17 intelligence agencies”)
Another excellent analysis that underlines why Glenn remains one of the decade’s leading journalists.
This bit is particularly striking, and could not be stressed enough:
“I’ve been asked often why I’ve written so much against the prevailing sentiments on Russia and Trump. It’s not just because this obsessive narrative distracts from Trump’s genuinely consequential actions or from the need to find an effective vessel for activism against über-right-wing nationalism. It’s not just because it’s driven by ugly and historically familiar anti-Rusisan xenophobia, nor because it dangerously ratchets up tensions between two nuclear-armed, traditionally hostile countries. Those things are all true, but that’s not the main impetus.
Above all else, it’s because it’s an offensive assault on reason. This kind of deranged discourse is an attack on basic journalistic integrity, on any minimal obligation to ensure that one’s claims are based in evidence rather than desire, fantasy, and herd-enforced delusions.”
Exemplary writing, and how I hope the message sinks in.
Sincere thanks, Glenn.
Very well expressed! Keep it up, please.
So many Trump supporters here. I almost feel sorry for Putin being so misaligned by that mean old Democratic party, LOL.
people who think Dems are fucking idiots
must
undeniable
totally
obviously
support Trump
because
uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
I forget why that would have to be
can you splain it
much thank yous
the remainder of the sentence you’re looking for is
“….support Trump because commies under the bed…”
happy to oblige
I hope I didn’t misalign you Ted,
LOL
Vic, Ted actually likes Trump voters so he’s not insulting us. Why, he’s over in Glenn’s other thread high-fiving Trump-voter and arch-authoritarian, Republican Craig Summers. Craig, you see, wrote a long screed on…Russia. That totally floated Ted’s boat.
I guess I misaligned Ted.
H
ah.
You must not have heard. Only the US media and government (democrats specifically) lie and Putin is just trying to make peace and provide a good life for the Russian people and the world. You must have missed the memo about the “truth” everyone here seems to have received
wow steve is even dumber than Ted
Putin has zero impact on our life steve. Zero.
Trump has plenty.
Brilliant Dem strategy: hey let’s attack Putin! This is sure to bring Trump down.
You geniuses with your strategies.
Why do you assume I’m a democrat? I am not and never said “attack” Putin but maybe don’t defend him the same way their state media does. They clearly are doing their job but here’s your problem Vic. You automatically label people and call them stupid when they don’t agree with you which is interesting since I don’t even know you at all. Now that is a genius, winning strategy. Keep ignoring the alignment between the Trump and Putin regimes’ resource extraction agendas because that is what people should be talking about. Not election meddling or democrats and media hypocrisy. I see no benefit or relevance to these discussions
No.
People absolutely should be talking about what Greenwald so well documents above, to wit: the insanity and flight into unreason by much the Democratic Party and much of the media over Russia/Putin. For all the reasons both Greenwald and Gessen cite and explain, this is a pernicious and dangerous phenomenon, corrupting of the body politic.
Why do you assume I’m a democrat?
Did Vic say that? Must ‘ave missed that bit! ;)
You geniuses with your strategies.
Hahahahaha, ROFLOL, Vic!
Glenn, I’m sorry to say that you are a voice crying out alone in the wilderness.
Alex Jones– derided as he may be– has it right: Journalism has become InfoWars. The Psyops tactics with which we have all been manipulated by our intelligence services for the last 50 years has finally percolated all the way down to the street-level journalist. It has shaped our collective cognition and shaken our command of Reason.
Only you and perhaps 5% of journalists see their job as reporting the truth, reporting what’s important, functioning as the foil to government over-reach that a free and independent press is supposed to be.
95% of Newswertainers care nothing for the truth. Thy see their job as representing their side in the InfoWar.
CNN, WaPo, the NYT, and some writers at The Intercept congratulate themselves daily for “holding Trump accountable!” But where were they as Obama expanded JSOC? Where were the hard-hitting reports on the US Marine Kill Teams in Afghanistan and the important national conversation that should have ensued? Where were they when Obama used the IRS to attack his political foes? Where was their indignation when reporters were surveiled and threatened with imprisonment by the Obama administration? Where was the accountability as Obama’s drone policies led to the deaths of thousands of innocents in countries upon which we have not even declared war?
A press that only holds one side “accountable” is not holding anyone accountable. They are worse than useless. They are propagandists, plain and simple. They are de-facto PsyOps agents.
LOL as if you know the truth. Let’s give the government a free pass now since the media was so bad at reporting on Obama? They are harder on Trump because he is a crazy person and they aren’t critical of ANY politician because it makes them uncomfortable unless they feel compelled which they do in this case. They were ready to get on their knees for Trump after that speech but then he went on his wiretapping rant and that ended that. Or you can go with the Alex Jones conspiracy
You should work on your reading skills. It is apparent that you stopped reading when you saw Alex Jones’ name.
I don’t and have never advocated the press giving Trump or anyone a “free pass.” But when the ENTIRE media apparatus wields their massive power to destroy a President by any means necessary; colludes with anonymous Intelligence Service operatives who have dubious agendas; and spins countless wild, unproven and unprovable xenophobic conspiracy theories; that is not “holding him accountable.” That is irresponsible, dishonest, discrediting (to the press), and it is a threat to our democracy. It would be a threat to our democracy regardless of WHO is in the White House.
The press is not an elected body with a mandate. The public does not need the press to be the opposition party. If members of the press wish to question, investigate, and analyze what the President is doing, they should do so, regardless of WHO is in the White House. And they should report their findings honestly to the public.
But it is not the job of the press to lie, distort, misrepresent, fear-monger, and propagandize in the service of the side they choose. Yet that is what they are doing.
That is not journalism, it is PsyOps. And they are not journalists. They are subversive propagandists of an InfoWar.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/03/leaked-cia-document-cia-uses-false-flag-cyberattacks-blame-russian-hackers.html
A leading IT think tank – the Institute for Critical Infrastructure Technology – points out:
Malicious actors can easily position their breach to be attributed to Russia. It’s common knowledge among even script kiddies that all one needs to do is compromise a system geolocated in Russia (ideally in a government office) and use it as a beachhead for attack so that indicators of compromise lead back to Russia. For additional operational security, use publically available whitepapers and reports to determine the tool, techniques, and procedures of a well-known nation-state sponsored advanced persistent threat (APT), access Deep Web forums such as Alphabay to acquire a malware variant or exploit kit utilized in prolific attacks, and then employ the malware in new campaigns that will inevitably be attributed to foreign intelligence operations. Want to add another layer? Compromise a Chinese system, leap-frog onto a hacked Russian machine, and then run the attack from China to Russia to any country on the globe. Want to increase geopolitical tensions, distract the global news cycle, or cause a subtle, but exploitable shift in national positions? Hack a machine in North Korea and use it to hack the aforementioned machine in China, before compromising the Russian system and launching global attacks. This process is so common and simple that’s its virtually “Script Kiddie 101” among malicious cyber upstarts.
James Carden – a former Advisor to the US-Russia Presidential Commission at the US State Department – writes:
Evidence of a connection between the Russian government and the hackers that are believed to have stolen the DNC/John Podesta e-mails remains illusory. Cyber-security expert Jeffrey Carr has observed that “there is ZERO technical evidence to connect those Russian-speaking hackers to the GRU, FSB, SVR, or any other Russian government department.” The very real possibility that non-state actors carried out the hack of the DNC has been conspicuously absent from the mainstream narrative of “Russian interference.”
Glenn: can you please reach out to former CIA analyst Ray McGovern about the resurgence of Russophobia? Thanks.
The problem
Part of ‘our’ problem, i.e. those of us who don’t see *PUTIN* as some evil Professor Moriartsky at the centre of an international web of massive aggression and presidential election haxoring – is the fact that most people don’t know, at all, what constitutes ‘evidence’ or ‘proof’.
Valid evidence is what is absolutely required to prove a theory. Glenn could probably provide a pithier and more definitive definition of what constitutes ‘evidence’ in this case than, I. But for now, let me just says what it is not. What is not evidence is the CIA simply asserting that “Putin hacked the DNC”, that is not “proof” of anything. Sorry.
In all fairness, the same applies to Glenn’s “deep state” conspiracy theory. I have yet to see the “proof” that the intelligence community is fabricating evidence in order to damage Trump and help the Democratic party. If it was that obviously fraudulent, the Trump administration wouldn’t need to lie and the Republican party wouldn’t be trying to avoid an investigation.
Despite all of this media insanity about Putin and secret deals with Russia and videos of Trump in some Russian hotel room and Sessions meeting with the Russian ambassador and cartoons of Putin and Trump in bed together and so on and so on and so on . . . can anyone pinpoint the exact moment that Russia became The Enemy this time? And why?
Is it just because they supposedly “interfered” in the election? Really? Have any of the people who have discovered this newfound enemy realized that NATO and the U.S. have been building up troops and armaments around the Russian borders for years? Do they have any idea why? Surely it is not the *dun dun dun* specter of communism. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Russia and China are freeing themselves from the yoke of the petrodollar, that BRICS has created a development bank to rival the World Bank, and that BRICS nations have challenged U.S. monopolies, etc., all of which threatens U.S. preeminence as an empire. Because it sure as shit isn’t Russian incursions into Norway or Russian hacking of the DNC or the resurrection of Stalin or Lenin or Rasputin or whoever.
http://www.skeptic.ca/Parenti_Cold_War.htm
Well, the Parenti piece that Vivek cites is a good one for the longer historical view.
In the nearer (post-Soviet) era, I would suggest looking at the strong nationalist, Putin, succeeding the malleable and tractable drunk, Yeltsin.
As for the “why,” you can’t do much better than to grasp the core policy of the US in Eurasia, which has long been to prevent any power there from becoming strong enough to challenge American dominance, either regionally or globally. As I repeatedly suggest, see the Wolfowitz (Libby) memo — the original version — and Brzezinski’s The Grand Chessboard.
Thanks, Doug. This stuck out from the original memo:
“We must maintain the mechanism for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.”
And if you can’t figure out that that comment is meant to assuage US/Western capitalists and is, in fact, what capitalists in their own countries are doing to to their own citizens, on purpose, well…it’s trickle-down authoritarianism capitalist style.
“can anyone pinpoint the exact moment that Russia became The Enemy this time? And why?”
when they stepped into Syria and tipped the balance.
More than merely malleable and tractable. He opened up Russia to the neolib “economists”, shunting everything into the maws of the oligarchs, and under Clinton’s tutelage, laid siege to his own Duma, for which Clinton named him a great Democrat.
“can anyone pinpoint the exact moment that Russia became The Enemy this time? And why?”
The moment:
It was 1964, and Hillary’s rabid neocon Republican mentor, Goldwater, had just failed to get elected, and hence failed to bomb Russia back to the stone age, as he and LeMay had hoped to do. Hillary has always wanted to rewrite that Goldwater moment, so she found a new neocon party (same as the old neocon party) and a collection of Phil Ochs “Liberals”, to back her in doing so. In your guts you know (s)he’s nuts.
Unfortunately, those who embrace conspiracy theories rarely emerge because the process of embracing conspiracy theories in the first place necessarily involves convincing oneself that contrary evidence is proof of a larger conspiracy.
So watch for the morphing of Putin into the Galactic Emperor of the Reptilian Illuminati….
Only half-joking. If the media is going to jump the shark then why not jump a dozen sharks…?
Another great article.
I needed that one, Glenn. I have a friend who has chugged the Koolaid on the Russia thing. She sent me an article, this article: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/13/donald-trumps-worst-deal
Citing to me that it’s something, when it’s nothing. It’s nothing but whining. It’s the pot calling the kettle black. Stating that Trump and his “wealthy oligarch” buddies built a tower in that Middle Eastern nation and that it sits in the middle of poor folks? Like we HAVEN’T seen that in OUR nation?
The article also calls that nation (Azerbaijan) “one of the most corrupt nations on the planet,” I believe was the quote (could be paraphrasing, don’t have time to go back and look, so don’t kill me if it’s not verbatim). Anyway, yeah, right behind the United States?
They’re reaching. And this article you’ve written today is EXCELLENT.
Yesterday, I watched a HACK on MSNBC get huffy because a Trump employee (of the White House) used the word “if” a couple times? haah, the HACK then went on to chide her, “If, if, if, IF!?” She then went on to ask her if that was all she got and that she had “no proof”???
Wow, the BALLS on these bastards!
Simply asked: Is it possible that the russian thing was created 1) to let people forget that the ugly Clintons e-mails were true and let them oversea the sabotage against Sanders? and 2) that the military industry needs a war against Russia ? (Look what the Nato does in Europe. Bringing nuclear missiles to POLEN!…). But Trump and Rex Tillerson want business with Putin… hate or love? What a problem.
I think 1 is definitely true. It’s demonstrable that RUSSIA SCARY stories have coincided perfectly with DEMOCRATS INCOMPETENT & CORRUPT FUCKUPS stories for a whole year now.
2 I don’t know about. I have mixed feelings stemming from the sense that much of The Cold War served conveniently govt hacks in both the US & USSR, especially during the 80s. The Cold War was largely a gentlemen’s agreement to have proxy wars elsewhere, and people around the globe paid for it, but it wasn’t necessary in and of itself because hey lookie! the proxy wars continue…
This is not to downplay the dangerousness of whipping it up, given the speed at which large populations could be wiped out thanks to instant big weapon decision-making.
You are right. Russia is, I think, not the target as such, but is supposed to play an enemy in a war-game for profit. Look, the EU with the Nato is now organizing a “Europe of Defense” – defense against whom? Instead of organizing peace, they are planing war on a big scale. Qui bono? Very, very dangerous.
People’s inclination to seek information that reinforces their personal beliefs is what kept the conservative movement going for the past forty years. Despite scientific evidence about climate change, despite verifiable statistics about immigrants, despite the invention of the Hubble telescope, there are people who believe the exact opposite of the what the facts prove to be reality… climate change is affected by fossile fuels, immigrants are not a danger to American citizens, and the earth is NOT 6000 years old.
“Liberal” pundits are now caught up in the same feedback loop. Because of the shock of the election that has challenged their beliefs, they are clinging to “facts” that reinforce those beliefs, no matter how wildly unproven the reports may be. It’s probably some type of psychological self-preservation mechanism of the human mind.
Unfortunately, the out-of-power-party members are capitalizing on this the new path to congratulatory recognition by serving up one blatantly alternative fact after another. They have learned well.
Everyone should read the book, Society Of The Spectacle. No book has never been more poignant.
“. . read the book, Society Of The Spectacle”
Reminds me of the “many colors of Benetton” ad in the 90’s that commodified multi–culturalism. And, if you object to this kind of thing (marketing), then what are you, a deplorable?
I believe the Russia conspiracy stuff began as a way for Dems to distract the media from the actual content of the DNC e-mails and the Podesta e-mails, which included a large volume of facts the Hillary campaign had wanted to cover up. But it rapidly spun out of control, and there was no going back after Hillary failed to win.
I agree except it’s worse — Hillary was already saying dumb bullshit to her dear friends at Goldman Sacks & Pillages about how environmentalists fighting fracking were really Russian ops.
The Russia thing was obv decided upon as a top-drawer excuse before the Podesta emails.
Oh that’s right, I’d forgotten that choice bit.
We should ask the Hillary fans here if they are down with that reactionary inanity.
Mona, I’ve found the fracking bit to be the killer all-time conversation stopper. A choice bit it is indeed.
I have yet to even have the hackiest of lib hacks dispute it, and a lot of them even do this mealy-mouthed “well look I’m not saying I support everything about Hillary….” bit before they STFU.
It is pretty stunning to watch the dynamic you describe (distraction of media from DNC and Podesta emails) infect the national conversation and become entrenched as fact. Repeatedly, talking heads will say “IT IS A FACT blahblahblah.” It’s Clinton’s WMD.
“To begin, Gessen details several examples of classic, evidence-free, unhinged, and increasingly xenophobic conspiracy theorizing masquerading as serious news in mainstream outlets such as MSNBC, CNN, and the Washington Post.”
Remember that, as a courtesy call way back in January 2017, Times and Post through their headlines seeded the term “kompromat” in the popular mind, emphasizing that, under the tactic, claims need not be true to be damaging. (The epidemic of “kompromat” has since disappeared from headlines as quickly as it appeared.)
Following through on one’s promises is an effective means of establishing credibility.
By the way, did anyone assume “kompromat” would be used by Russians?
Another absurdity of Democrat hysteria on Russia: Trump does admire to a large extent the Cold War order, hence the nuke buildup promise for one along with a whole host of things, but with the difference that DC & Moscow would openly admire each other’s authoritarianism instead. His political mentor of his chauvinist & fascist tendencies was Roy Cohn after all.
Democrats only started making a fuss about Russia after you & Snowden came along (and when Snowden had his passport revoked so he got stuck in Russia), and it’s in this blatantly fraudulent attack in defense of the American imperial system & its War On Terror hysteria to justify any civil liberties abuses.
Donald Trump is a transnational capitalist riding on the right-wing economic nationalism both parties deploy to subjugate exploitative harm on global Southern countries. So, how do you attack some gilded demagogue like him who’s clearly a product of the system they support?
You spitball that Russia nonsense again and say he’s associating with the WRONG transnational oligarchs like Putin & not exclusively the good ones like the Gulf states or Netanyahu in order to not attack the the bipartisan apparatus they all come from.
And it failed, miserably. It will also fail even worse in the future if this continues, become Democrats would rather do that weak opposition because they’re a center-right party who won’t attack what really got Trump in there.
By the way, this is what actual journalists are writing about, instead of purity trolling each other:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/05/us/politics/trump-deregulation-guns-wall-st-climate.html
Justin, we’re all SO happy to see the NYT sufficiently addressed each and every one of your objections before proceeding to write that article. I mean, wow, it’s a good thing to see that you’re around protecting us with your complaints. If not for YOU, who even KNOWS what fast and loose trash writing the Old Gray Lady would be gettin up to! Please keep up the VERRRRRY important work! lolol
That you describe the above, copiously documented article as “purity trolling” is on the Exhibit list for all that is wrong with the Democratic Party. You cannot accept urgently needed criticism of what you are doing oh-so-wrong that cannot either elect more Democrats or defeat Donald Trump. Much less restore reason to Democrats’ thinking.
Your prefer non-reason, or at least ignoring how pervasive it is in Democratic enclaves. That is very foolish. Not to mention self-defeating.
cartoon idea:
guy head-to-toe dripping with sludge says “You’re just all purity trolls aren’t you”
and “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”
With all due respect to Ms. Gessen, her annoyance at the rafts of new Russia critics is understandable. It is like discovering a deserted beach, enjoying it in solitude and then returning several years later to find it overcrowded with concession stands and hordes of people. Of course you are going to resent all the newcomers who have moved into, and spoiled, your once pristine territory.
So I would take her article with a grain of salt. The Russians probably aren’t responsible for everything bad that happens, but that isn’t for lack of trying. I can foresee a lot of things going wrong in the next four years, and setting up a scapegoat seems like a good idea. This may ultimately help Mr. Trump escape his fair share of the blame, but it is always better for a country to have an external enemy to build solidarity, rather than collapsing into internecine squabbling.
However, I’m open to suggestions. If the Russians aren’t to blame, who is responsible for the mess in which the United States is mired?
“If the Russians aren’t to blame, who is responsible for the mess in which the United States is mired?”
Do you own a mirror? Or you could just, I dunno, read Glenn more often. He’s explained that numerous times and in great detail.
Or YOU might want to read the comments more often, so as to familiarize yourself w/ Benito’s world-class schtick. Just a friendly suggestion. Cheers.
“If the Russians aren’t to blame….” look at ExxonMobil, GoldmanSachs… http://www.globalresearch.ca/donald-j-trump-and-the-deep-state/5573547?print=1
Who do you think benefitted from the great pump and dumps of US housing, the Eurozone, and now “stranded assets” in dirty oil and coal?
All this noise is great cover for Rex Tillerson and Robert Mercer and Steve Mnuchin and Lloyd Blankfein, isn’t it? You see their names in the US news?
I’m not condoning it but, perhaps, another motive for hitching their wagons to these flaming unicorns of bullshit is that … it seems to work. It gets people fired up and, to oppose/resist djt, we need to be fired up. I would rather people get fired up by truth and only truth, but that seems to take a lot longer, and a lot more effort. Again, not condoning it. And I see other commenters see this as possible motivation, too. Maybe some journalists need to go back to schools that actually teach journalism. And maybe we shouldn’t just willy-nilly call everyone on TV or the web a “journalist.”
By the way, please correct typo above: “…anti-Rusisan xenophobia…”
I disagree because getting “fired up” may be a very bad idea. Once people start crying* and are in the grip of irrational, uncontrollable, passionate anger, they have lost the battle.
*Especially on national TV.
People being “fired up” is utterly meaningless if the Democratic Party and politicians keep on the same path. Most of them couldn’t bother to be “fired up” enough to even oppose Trump’s cabinet picks. They also weren’t “fired up” to pass legislation allowing cheap pharmaceuticals from Canada. They haven’t been “fired up” to truly help poor people and other members they’ve abandoned for a long time.
You can’t expect ’em to get fired up over poor people, or healthcare, or education, or a non-boiling world, or trivia like that there hey. Where’s the recompense? The boff? But commies under the bed…???!!!
Kinda weird that amid a wide scope of regulatory roll-back, from clean streams, to tailpipe missions, gutting the budget of the EPA & NOAA, rolling back financial consumer regulations, etc, Greenwald seems more concerned with telling liberals all the things they’re doing wrong. It’s almost as if Greenwald has these ENORMOUS IDEOLOGICAL BLINDERS on that prevent him from conceiving of any area of interest outside of his narrow focus on 1) civil liberties, particularly those ‘common’ ones that ignore the particular health concerns of women 2) foreign policy, or 3) how the Democratic party is full of people insufficiently concerned about items 1 and 2.
By the way, this is what actual journalists are writing about, instead of purity trolling other journalists:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/05/us/politics/trump-deregulation-guns-wall-st-climate.html
So shitty you had to post that purity trolling line multiple times? It sucked the first time, no need to rub it in.
By the way, this is what actual journalists are writing about, instead of purity trolling each other:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/05/us/politics/trump-deregulation-guns-wall-st-climate.html
Agreed. The idea that people are more concerned with democrats supposedly pushing conspiracy theories when the republicans control all 3 branches and have a crazy conspiracy theory pushing president is troubling to say the least.
He does have a tendency to focus on topics that interest him. Returning to this site, day after day, hoping to find a Greenwald article on tailpipe emissions must be frustrating.
Mr. Runia finds most unseemly to dwell on Democrats’ galloping away from reason and into the fever swamps. For him, that is simply “telling liberals all the things they’re doing wrong.”
Cuz, yanno, they’re doing so much right — so right that their Queen, er, candidate lost to a widely despised, deeply reactionary buffoon who is and was the only national politician more detested than the one they insisted on running against him.
Greenwald seems to think they need to correct their course, but Justin Runia knows that is codswollop. Losing, after all, isn’t all that bad, I guess.
I have seen very little honest reporting about what the actual American people are doing to counter Trumpism. I have seen some reporting in the NYT and Post(I say some) about grassroots efforts, and I hear some on the news channels, but much of what they do cover is typical Beltway crap which has been out of touch with Americans for years. This site included.
All I read here are how horrible the establishment democrats are and the endless hyperbole of the Beltway talk. No talk about any of the real grassroots efforts going on. I live in Illinois and if anyone knows the cronyism and corruption of old time democrats it’s this state. I have seen 2 municipal elections so far this year, one I worked, both at the end of February, vote out at least 50% in one community and 75% in another community of old school democrats for progressive democratic candidates. And that enthusiasm for working and helping these people get elected didn’t occur until after November 8th.
I’ve seen thousands of people gather in various groups across our communities to work on local issues, school boards, strategize to help get progressives elected to more local and state level offices, working cohesively to help house districts that are now energized more than ever to get more progressives involved and or elected. I’ve seen people get trained and registered to become voter registrars helping people get registered to vote and ensuring they meet all the requirements needed on voting day. I’ve seen Americans donate and volunteer in mass to work with the ACLU, I have seen local churches and schools being turned into sanctuary centers to help undocumented folks, etc. I’ve seen more institutions locally step up to offer to house refugees. I’ve seen people channel their energy into attending townhalls, demanding more from their representatives. Environmental groups and their supporters growing by the day, endlessly pushing back. Yeah I hear talk about Russia but out in the real world outside of Washington, the world most of us live in, that’s not the prevailing theme. So frankly I resent being told that the efforts some of us are making are not enough for example because Tom Perez got elected DNC chair, a role which in the scheme of things doesn’t mean a thing. And those of us who may have had differences in this past election season, out in the field, are putting aside our differences and working together towards a common goal. We are the folks who will have influence ultimately going forward.
The fact that there is this prevailing theme that the RNC took their losses seriously because they did a debrief mattered not. No one changed strategy, nothing changed. The only changes the GOP saw resulted from another “grass roots” effort, the Tea Party and I don’t recall the RNC orchestrating that(well the Koch brothers did – another story).
It’s the people who continue the bickering online and in the halls that are wasting their energy IMO. And not one of them is impacting the real work those of us out in the field are actually doing. I want to know how this Trump-Russia stuff is helping him and undermining our work, when the people involved in what we are doing continues to grow.
HA HA HA! I choked on my raisin bran!
The Russia story dominates the news, including progressive news like Democracy Now! I’ve stopped watching large portions of programs because they obsess on this story. THAT’s the point of Glenn’s article: progressive or even liberal news should be focusing on things like the deregulation that you mention, not this BS.
“this . . pointless obsession with Russia has utterly crowded out . . strategies for opposing Trump . . ”
yes, but it’s marketable, isn’t it, just like Trump and his tweets. Plus it turns the pleb’s against each other. Maybe she doesn’t understand how this country works yet.
By the way, this is what actual journalists are writing about, instead of purity trolling each other:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/05/us/politics/trump-deregulation-guns-wall-st-climate.html
1) The Russia narrative started with the Cold War…
2) And was perpetuated by the Obama/Hillary Klan over Ukrainian pipeline to Western Europe….
3) By sending Nuclear-Armed US Navy Boats into the Black Sea “to protect the Olympics”
4) And, before they did all of that, Obama/Billary Klan retreated the NATO HQ out of Turkey to Germany.
….
SO THEY COULD START THE MISSILES OF OCTOBERFEST TO “PROTECT OLYMPIC ATHLETES”…
A couple of weeks ago on Twitter, a prominent and respected Canadian liberal journalist was doing the Putin this, Putin that routine.
So I asked him, “Do you have any evidence that Putin is murdering opponents?”
His reply?
“ARE YOU SERIOUS?”
Well, I was – but saw immediately what I was up against. I had had normal interaction with him in the past, but in horror and frustration, I simply blocked him. Maybe I should have tried to reason with him, but it seems we are past that point now. To question the Putin as monster, Putin as Puppet meister, is to immediately brand yourself as best “unserious”, at worst – as ‘commie’ or a “useful tool”.
We are in so much trouble.
We’re in trouble because people think Putin has murdered journalists when you believe he hasn’t? I’d hate to see what you think when something serious actually happens
I never said, not once, not ever, that Putin has not murdered opponents. My comment was about “evidence”.
Next!
so nemtsov was killed by random strangers? i mean no i dont have evidence, but its not exactly like russia has a transparent legal system that would release the evidence linking putin to the murders…considering the consolidation of media in russia and the well documented fear of retaliation that opposition journos harbor. your argument looks pretty felicitous there billy boy. it rests upon an open press in russia that is free to investigate deaths…caused by a bullet…that happen to get lodged in anti putin figures. dont see that happening. guess what billy boy you feckless moron. i dont have evidence im not living in a computer simulation, but im pretty sure this is reality due to the fact that no computer in the world could code for the profound ignorance and stupidity lodged in your head, like a bullet of idiocy. oh, and if you think im being ridiculous, bill fucking owens here just said “to question the putin as monster, putin as puppet meister, is to immediately brand yourself as best ‘unserious.'” hey fuckface, if you want to be taken a little more serious, work on your english there buddy. for your next round of putin apologizing, remember that it’s weird saying “the putin.” also, its puppet master. and usually for native english speakers you say “at best” instead of as best.
Once again, tough to argue w/ anything Greenwald has written here. And now I feel foolish realizing I retweeted some tweets from ppl I didn’t realize were grifters. (just RT’d stuff ppl I follow had RT’d. d’oh!)
instead of telling us repeatedly that only YOU know how silly a russian putin/trump association is…how about using these pages to convince us instead of again…as trump would BTW…just presenting THE GREATEST critic on earth of putin?
i suspect had the effort been about putins treatment of lesbians with 3 kids we suddenly wouldnt be all wasting our time.
except you leave out the part that serious critics are now focusing on…MONEY LAUNDERING.
NO point in asking why you don’t pursue that issue when it is important to equate those who do with silly hate talk radio.
but….you certainly have the right to appeal to those you choose.
for…..whatever reason…..you need to….
You are entirely evading the copious documentation above of Democrats ensnared in and promoting wild-eyed and dangerous conspiracy-theory thinking. Key figures doing it at every bit the clownish level of a Limbaugh or the worst of the anti-Clinton right in the 90s. Important Democrats are literally abandoning reason.
You seem wholly uninterested in discussing — much less acknowledging — this reality, a reality well-documented above.
“the serious critics”
Well, if they are serious, they must know shit. Like serious Rachel Maddow. Or serious Peter Daou. Or the most serious of all the serious critics, Chuck Todd.
Putin did make an unprovoked takeover of Crimea though the situation in Ukraine did nothing to assure Russia that their only southern naval port was safe with Ukraine turning to the west and a legitimately elected pro-Russian Ukrainian government was driven from office. A number of European countries believe Russia in actively trying to destabilize their countries. I am a life-long Democrat and have been hearing this all my life. It is both the left and the right that does this. Trump’s ascension has been guided by people with unusual interest in Russia and Russia’s cyber activities seemed to aid it. It took 900 days to follow President Nixon’s path from the his “plumbers” initiating their plan to his resignation. This thread is going to go where it goes and Trump only adds fuel to the fire as did General Flynn. Putin is ambitious. His followers are not all Russian intelligence. He has a lot of street supporters and others willing to do many bad things for him and Russia.
The people in Crimea are Russian. They Voted overwhelmingly to go with Russia. No one made them vote that way. They are damn happy that Russia is looking after them and not the the thugs in the Ukrainian Rada. Putin’s street support is up to 80+% because of how he turned Russia around into positive territory after the horrendously bad free market experiment foistered on the Russia people by the Western elite. Unlike Trump, he has been more successful in draining the swamp. Your comment “…others willing to do bad things for him and Russia” pray tell, what are these bad things? And evidence.
Thanks Glenn, this report is much more thorough than the previous Russia post. The article you shared is an important one, hope more people take it into account, but xenophobia seems to be all the rage across the political spectrum and across national borders as well. Amazing time to be alive. A journalist on Democracy Now recently commented that investigative journalism is dead. Aside from Scahill and a few others I mostly agree with that assessment. Anyone interested should look at Aldous Huxley’s book “Ends and Means.” Written in the 1930’s about the nationalistic/xenophobic wave that preceded WWII. Amazingly relevant almost a hundred years later.
And Democracy Now! is as guilty of this BS as anyone else. I don’t even watch large segments of the show now because of their harping on this Russia crap. If you are radical or truly progressive, whether Russia hacked the DNC or even the election is not an issue, as in who gives a damn.
I agree that there are shady “news” sites that are spewing nonsense that some subset of credulous Democrats might believe. I think it is a bit hysterical to say “This is where Democrats are now getting their ‘news’ from” as if all Dems have eschewed reputable news sources.
And I think you could benefit from re-reading the above article. And do note this bit:
And this:
Louise Mensch is a quite dumb and unhinged, rightwing freak. Now beloved of key Democrats.
Yes, I think you need to re-read the piece, slowly, and for comprehension.
Exactly. I don’t see why any of this matters when most people do not trust the media or politicians
Gessen would be a bit more credible if she did not herself espouse ridiculous theories about Putin. She has been a major promoter of the theory that Putin was behind several Moscow bombings a few years back. She also uncritically repeated allegations from people with questionable ethics and wild allegations, like Boris Berezovsky, Alexander Litvinenko, and Bill Browder.
That said, her being treated as credible by the media should help people stop taking this conspiracy theory seriously. (Personally, I trust Mark Ames more than her.)
I agree, she’s not credible. However we want people to take a hard look at this nonsense because it’s nonsense, not because a notorious Putin critic says we should. Let’s not ride on the coat tails of people like Gessen.
Who cares what the mainstream media and cable news outlets are ranting about? I think if the election proved anything is that enough people do not pay attention or care about their opinions for them to have the importance you seem to think they do. I get the point about not being over dramatic or hysterical and making things up but speculating about what this type of reporting may or may not eventually cause down the road is rather pointless. If you are so skeptical about the Russia “conspiracy” or whatever you want to call it then don’t report on it but don’t report on your skepticism because if you follow Glenn’s reporting on this from the beginning it has been overly skeptical if I’m being generous. Trump himself admitted Russia was behind the DNC hacking so not sure why he keeps touting the no evidence line but if that’s how you feel then report on some actual news instead of trying to prove a negative
Trump has no idea where those emails came from. In other words, he was talking out his ass.
And you know this how? I mean he is the president after all so he should have the information. Regardless, I’m quite sure you don’t know and neither does Greenwald yet he is so confident in refuting not the specific intel but the general concept of the Trump regime/organization’s Russian ties and their resource extraction goals. It is possible to filter out the partisan noise and see what’s right in front of your face
[[[ rump himself admitted Russia was behind the DNC hacking so not sure why he keeps touting the no evidence line but if that’s how you feel then report on some actual news instead of trying to prove a negative ]]]
There’s LOTS of evidence. The emails themselves prove most of it.
The DNC “hack” wasn’t a hack.
Why?
The DNC had Exchange Hosting at AppRiver.Com.
I scanned their systems.
My conclusion: Someone at AppRiver LEAKED the DNC emails.
Oh really? How is this the first I’m hearing about it then? At the very least the GOP would be pushing that message instead of constantly obfuscating when asked about Trump’s Russia ties. And you like the other guy who replied miss the point of what I said which barely has to do with Trump admitting it was Russia but the fact that Greenwald and many on the left are focused entirely on the wrong issue which is the messaging being put out by the party with no power. And like I said, it should not matter because nobody trusts them or the media so people who sit around and obsess about the MSM and cable news all day as if they are brainwashing everyone seem to not want to address actual issues that are right in front of our face by those with actual power
Thank you. A rational person. I do wonder why so many of these journalists are so worried about what the democrats in Washington are doing as if they speak for the work and interests of those of us who could careless about Beltway hyperbole.
I attended a townhall yesterday on Federal issues with my house representative. There were 500 people there. Huge turnout. One question about Russia, the rest were about his voting record in congress, the slashing of the EPA, what’s being done about school choice and vouchers, environmental protections being slashed, the executive order banning people from certain countries, undocumented immigrants, application for citizenship, and health insurance coverage. There was not some overwhelming interest in Russia and Trump other than people think Trump is a nutcase basically. If that’s in some way empowering Trump and the GOP, so be it I guess.
Everyone who pays attention to the issues stopped watching almost all MSM long ago. They are driven by advertising, and nothing has changed since the Ana Nicole Smith story. By publicizing only what Democrats say about Russia, they are doing Trump a favor, yes, because policy issues are under-covered.
The Presidency is itself a distraction – as Keith Ellison put it, the Dems got to here by losing not one election but a THOUSAND. The party needs to focus on legal challenges to gerrymandering and vote suppression. And on its “superdelegate” systm which cost it the Presidency because the superdelegates refused to heed the polls that said Sanders, but not Clinton, could beat Trump.
That said, it’s not wrong to oppose a kleptocrat alliance of Putin and Trump led by Robert Mercer and Dmitry Rybolovlev (Trump’s apparent Russian handler, a story that holds a LOT of water) and know who really holds the nukes.
And Glenn is not wrong that the whole Internet should not become the archived talk pages of a TrumpRussia wiki.
I think Glenn is wrong about Bill Palmer, though, at least in the post election when I discovered him, Palmer wa scrupulously verifying facts. There was no better coverage of the actual legal issues behind the recount challenges. The headlines are pushing it but not overstating what a statistician actually said, the barely-over-1% wins were very hard to explain by coincidence. That in combination with the Waukesha Country reports of more votes for Trump THAN WERE CAST, and then subsequent refusal by that county to actually recount BALLOTS rather than run their machines again, meant there is no way to accept the WI “results” as real. Detroit really did get cheated of voting machines in an obvious attempt to subv ert the black vote, and PA has standing case law to nullify elections that Hillary chose not to invoke. So there is genuine doubt that a majority of voters really did vote for Trump in WI, MI, PA and that those states lawfully certified their “results”. Certainly a refusal to actually count all the paper ballots by hand disqualifes this election from being beyond reasonable doubt. In combinatino with the massive fake news scam The Guardian and Scout.AI and others have written about, and the Robert Mercer targetting technology (which is just as capable of writing headlines as steering suckers), a rational person can reject that Trump “won”. And given Trump himself states that his legitimacy is somehow in doubt due to his popular vote failure, indirectly by claiming to have won the non-illegal vote, not even Trump is ignoring that claim.
TrumpRussia is a tactic to get all the CIA, FBI and NSA intelligence into the open before Trump appointees can DESTROY it. That is all. We’ll sort out wheat from chaff later. It’s a long way to 2018. By then Katie’s issues above will be what count.
[[[ Oh really? How is this the first I’m hearing about it then? ]]]
Cuz the media, including TI, don’t want to tell the truth.
Why? There’s no money to be made telling the truth.
There’s more money in perpetual lies every night. There wouldn’t need to be $1,000,000 per hour “investigations”…. etc.
PS….
FYI… the emails were either LEAKED….
OR… the emails were LEAKED … (via remote backups)
MY MOTTO: Cloud Computing is for Airheads.
no intelligence agency ever claimed that the DNC was “hacked”; even that Kindergarten Kops “report” citing RT programs that had been off the air for years stated that the DNC fell victim to a phishing attack. There is no Big Bad Bear out there hacking our political system – just dumb lawyers clicking on emails that are clearly fake.
OK another reply that misses the point but you actually had the chance to see the other comments which I even said that that was not the point, especially whether or not it was a “hacking” or “phishing.” I could care less and care even less about the condescension as if you all have the truth somehow. Pretty ridiculous
We’re more than 25 years removed from the end of the Cold War, which apparently we won, and the situation we’re faced with today is that either Putin installed the leader of the most powerful country in the world, or half this country believes this is what happened.
Which makes Putin the most remarkable Russian operator in all history – exerting the type of influence the Soviet KGB could only dream of – or America is unfathomably naive and easily manipulated.
Who wrote this fiction?
S/be “coroner’s report” not “corner’s report”.
Mensch is an unhinged publicity-seeker. She is slowly turning into a self-parody.
What a surprise; another Jewish critic of Putin.
Just WTF is this supposed to mean?
Exactly what it says. ^^^
And I would take Mensch’s criticism of Putin with a cupful of salt. LGBT rights don’t get the attention they do in the West. So obviously a bit off putting if you are expecting equal measure. And interestingly enough the headline is itself, a conspiracy theory.
Yes, a jewish human which, like all humans, don’t belong in these parts