As the song goes, "Aim high, shoot low".

Not sure about the speculation. There's justification for military spending beyond the cold war. Actually, the cold war could be sacrificed in order to re-prioritize military spending.

In any case, Trump's proposed picks are interesting. I especially like the idea of Dana Rohrabacher as Secretary of State if it comes to pass.

One thing for sure .... there's been so much 'fail' with the Obama years that there's an abundance of low-hanging fruit for Trump to feather his cap with success early on, which will give him a template for future successes. That depends largely on who his picks for key posts are, but there has seldom been so much opportunity for a new President as the one that greets Trump.

It's there to be had. Let's hope that Trump doesn't blow it.

Posted by: woogs | Nov 19 2016 19:29 utc | 1

Sounds about right and this just means a new criminal class has taken over the beltway. That doesn't do anything for us citizens, just more of the same.

Everything is on schedule and please there's nothing to see here.

Posted by: jo6pac | Nov 19 2016 19:36 utc | 2

I wonder if Rogers' statement appearing to implicate Russian government hackers in leaking DNC information to Wikileaks at that link to Twitter was made after the Democratic National Convention itself accused Russia of hacking into its database. In this instance, knowing when Rogers made his statement and when the DNC made its accusation makes all the difference.

If someone at the NSA had been leaking information to Wikileaks and Rogers knew of this, then the DNC blaming Russia for the leaked information would have been a godsend. All Rogers had to do then would be to keep stumm and if questioned, just say a "nation state" was responsible. People can interpret that however they want.

Posted by: Jen | Nov 19 2016 19:37 utc | 3

Any of the scenarios you mention could be right. The one thing that is certain - Russia was not the culprit. Not because Russians would not be inclined to hack - I think it is plausible that everyone hacks everyone (as someone said) - but Russians would not likely go to Wikileaks to publicize their prize. They'd keep it to themselves... in that way, they are probably like LBJ, who knew that Nixon had sabotaged the end-of-war negotiations in Paris in 1968, but said nothing for fear of shocking the "system" and the people's trust in it... (didn't work out too well in the end, though). Putin was right when he said (referring to the 2016 US election) that it all should somehow be ... more dignified.

Posted by: GoraDiva | Nov 19 2016 19:38 utc | 4

Makes me wonder who populates the Anonymous group of loosely affiliated hackers and if they were used. The tale has probability; it would be even more interesting if the motive could be framed within the hacker's fulfilling its oath of obligation to the Constitution. Le Carre might be capable of weaving such a tale plausibly. But what about the Russia angle? IMO, Russia had the biggest motive to insure HRC wouldn't become POTUS despite all its denials and impartiality statements. Quien Sabe? Maybe it was Chavez's ghost who did all the hacking; it surely had an outstanding motive.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 19 2016 19:52 utc | 5

I'll add some color on Rogers in another post, but I just want to preface any remarks with one overriding aspect of the leaks. From the details of most of these leaks, speculation on tech blogs (and as far as anyone knows for certain):

There are many parties that had great incentive to acquire and leak the emails, but I have to insist with the utmost conviction (without a string of expletives) that a junior high school kid could have performed the same feat using hacking tools easily found on the internet. There was absolutely nothing technically sophisticated or NSA-like in someone's ability to get into the DNC server or grab Podesta's emails. It was a matter of opportunity and poor security. If anyone has a link to any other reasoning, I would love to see it. The DNC and Hillary leaks (among other hacks) were due to damn amateurish security practices. The reason you don't outsource or try to get by on the cheap for systems/network security is to reduce the risk of this happening to an acceptable cost/benefit level.

So the presumption of Wikileaks source being (or needing to be) a state actor with incredibly sophisticated hacking tools is utter nonsense. Yes, it could have been the Russian FSB or any one of the five-eyes intelligence agencies or the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency. But it could have just as plausibly been Bart Simpson pwning the DNC from Springfield Elementary School and sending everything to Wikileaks, "Cool, I just REKT the Clintons!"

WikiLeaks doesn't care if the leak comes from the head of a western intel agency or a bored teenager in New Jersey. It cares that the material is authentic and carefully vets the content, not the source. At least until they kidnapped Assange and took over WikiLeaks servers a couple of weeks ago, but that's for a different tin-foil hat thread.

Posted by: PavewayIV | Nov 19 2016 20:14 utc | 6

Is Trump that much of a deep thinker? Rebellious teenager who chooses anyone that the last administration didn't like seems more plausible to me. It doesn't matter who they are or what their record is. I don't think Trump plans to surrender any of his undeserved power to anyone. He'll be running the whole show. They'll do what he wants or be shown the door.

Posted by: Carol Davidek-Waller | Nov 19 2016 20:18 utc | 7

Here is another tale I find very plausible:

rufus (aka "rufie") the MoA Hillbot uses a new persona - "Ron Showalter" - to attack Trump post-election. rufie/Ron conducts a false flag attack on MoA (making comments that are pages long) so that his new persona can claim that his anti-Trump views are being attacked by someone using his former persona.

See here, here, and here.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 19 2016 20:42 utc | 8

One thing Trump could do immediately to signal that he is not with the establishment

Posted by: nmb | Nov 19 2016 21:01 utc | 9

I generally dislike "theories" that go too much into speculation, -- however this one sounds actually quite plausible!

As for "Russia did it", this was obvious bullshit right from the start, not least because of what GoraDiva #4 says:
I think it is plausible that everyone hacks everyone (as someone said) - but Russians would not likely go to Wikileaks to publicize their prize. They'd keep it to themselves

Allegations against Russia worked on confusing different levels: hacking -- leaking -- "rigging".

It was all like this :-)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CwI-ThzWIAApRki.jpg

This picture encapsulates IMO the full absurdity this election campaign had come down to:
MSM constantly bashing Trump for "lies", "post-factual", "populist rage", "hate speech", -- while themselves engaging in the same on an even larger level, in a completely irresponsible way that goes way beyond "bias", "preference" or even "propaganda".
I understand (and like) the vote for Trump mainly as a call to "stop this insanity!"

~~~

Some more on the issue:

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/10/really-really-upset-foreign-office-security-services/
I left Julian [Assange] after midnight. He is fit, well, sharp and in good spirits. WikiLeaks never reveals or comments upon its sources, but as I published before a fortnight ago, I can tell you with 100% certainty that it is not any Russian state actor or proxy that gave the Democratic National Committee and Podesta material to WikiLeaks.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/10/russia-hack-dnc-really.html

And here about an inconspicuous detail suggesting one hacker actually planned to set up "Russians" as the source:
https://medium.com/@jeffreycarr/the-yandex-domain-problem-2076089e330b#

Nice summary on Sputnik
https://sputniknews.com/us/201610261046768902-dnc-hack-speculation-carr-interview/

Posted by: Qoppa | Nov 19 2016 21:12 utc | 10

btw, the "inside job" theory goes quite nicely with what we know about alleged traces to "Russians":

https://www.wired.com/2016/07/heres-know-russia-dnc-hack/

The following week, two cybersecurity firms, Fidelis Cybersecurity and Mandiant, independently corroborated Crowdstrike’s assessment that Russian hackers infiltrated DNC networks, having found that the two groups that hacked into the DNC used malware and methods identical to those used in other attacks attributed to the same Russian hacking groups.

But some of the most compelling evidence linking the DNC breach to Russia was found at the beginning of July by Thomas Rid, a professor at King’s College in London, who discovered an identical command-and-control address hardcoded into the DNC malware that was also found on malware used to hack the German Parliament in 2015. According to German security officials, the malware originated from Russian military intelligence. An identical SSL certificate was also found in both breaches.

Sooooo .... these "traces" all show known Russian methods (whether true or not). If they are known they can be faked and used by someone else.

Now who is the no. 1 organisation, worldwide, in having and being capable to use such information?

@b, your speculation gets better and better the more one thinks about it.

Posted by: Qoppa | Nov 19 2016 21:35 utc | 11

I'm out of my depth on cyber forensics, but would the NSA, and thus Clapper, know who hacked and leaked these documents? Or would the NSA be in the dark, as they suggest?

Posted by: IhaveLittleToAdd | Nov 19 2016 21:58 utc | 12

Just watched Oliver Stone's "Snowden". Awesome. Can't believe after seeing it that Clapper has survived all these years. Just another Hoover.

Posted by: Mina | Nov 19 2016 22:18 utc | 13

Sheer conspiracy talk, besides b are wrong on Assange, Assange know who leaked it and have denied that a nation is behind it!

Posted by: Manne | Nov 19 2016 23:35 utc | 14

thanks b.. i like the idea of it being an inside job.. makes a lot of sense too.

i like @3 jens question about the timing as a possible aid to understanding this better.

@4 gordiva comment - everyone hacks everyone comment..ditto. it's another form of warfare and a given in these times..

i agree with @6 paveway, and while it sounds trite, folks who don't look after their own health can blame all the doctors.. the responsibility for the e mail negligence rests with hillary and her coterie of bozos..

@7 carol. i agree.

@8 jr.. did you happen to notice a few posts missing from the thread from yesterday and who it was that's been removed? hint : poster who made the comment "more popcorn" is no longer around. they have a new handle today..

@20 manne.. you can say whatever you want and be speculative too, but i don't share your view on assange knowing who leaked it..

Posted by: james | Nov 19 2016 23:50 utc | 15

Except that you have to consider the targeting. I've suspected an insider all along, given the pre-packaged spin points coordinated with the release vectors. Not that the Russies, Pakistanis, or Chinese wouldn't know more about the US than the US knows about itself, but the overall nuance really hits the anti-elitist spurned sidekick chord. This clashes a bit with b's interagency pissing match scenario, but, then again, you step on the wrong tail... Someone didn't get their piece of pie, or equally valid, someone really really disapproves of the pie's magnitude and relative position on the table.

Curious how Weenergate led to the perfectly timed 650K emails on that remarkably overlooked personal device.

Posted by: stumpy | Nov 20 2016 0:00 utc | 16

@20 Manne
Yes I think on this case Assange does know, if I remember correctly, he spoke to RT and said something to the effect of 'it's not Russia, we don't reveal our sources but if the DNC found out who it was they would have "egg on their faces"' ...and easy access, copy, paste, send job, my hunch it was the DNC staffer who was suicided.

Posted by: MadMax2 | Nov 20 2016 0:01 utc | 17

James

Its what Assange himself says, do your homework, as someone else said here, Wikileaks wont reveal the source, that doesnt mean they dont know who leaked it.

Posted by: Manne | Nov 20 2016 0:05 utc | 18

Is Trump that much of a deep thinker? Rebellious teenager who chooses anyone that the last administration didn't like seems more plausible to me. It doesn't matter who they are or what their record is. I don't think Trump plans to surrender any of his undeserved power to anyone. He'll be running the whole show. They'll do what he wants or be shown the door.
Posted by: Carol Davidek-Waller | Nov 19, 2016 3:18:02 PM | 7

I agree.
Trump's got charm and a good memory and doesn't need to be a deep thinker in order to network efficiently and listen carefully. Nor does he need to be a mathematician to figure out that 1 + 1 = 2.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Nov 20 2016 0:05 utc | 19

@24 manne.. okay, thanks..

Posted by: james | Nov 20 2016 0:07 utc | 20

Has anyone else got the feeling that much of the panic inside Washington is due to the possibility that the crimes of the Obama administration might be exposed?

One of the most uncanny moments I've experienced watching the Syria crisis unfold is seeing the "Assad gasses his people" operation launched, fail miserably, then - mostly - interest is lost. I know: the lie, once asserted, has done most of its work already, debunked or not. I also understand that the western press is so in the tank for the establishment, so "captured" that it shouldn't surprise anyone that no follow up is offered. My point is, rather, that if you think back over just the Ukrainian and Syrian debacle the amount of dirt that could be exposed by a truly anti-establishment figure in the White House is mind boggling.

Just off the top of my head:

- the sabotage of the deal to save the Ukrainian constitutional order brokered by Putin, Merkel and Hollande c/o of the excuisitely timed and staged sniper shootings (otherwise known as the "most obvious coup in history")
- the farce that is the MH17 inquiry (and the implication: another false flag operation with a cut-out that killed, what was it, 279 innocents?)
- the Kherson pogrom and the Odessa massacre
- the targeting of both Libya and Syria with outright lies and with all the propaganda perfectly reflecting the adage that, in dis- info operations, the key is to accuse your enemies of all the crimes you are committing or planning to
- highlights of the above might include: Robert Ford's emails scheming to create "paranoia" in Damascus while completely justifying same; the "rat-lines" and Ghoutta gas operation; the farcically transparent White Helmets Psy-op *

And on and on...

If you or the institution that pays you had a closet full to bursting with skeletons like this and you were facing an incoming administration that seems to relish and flaunt it's outsider status wouldn't you be freaking out?

To ice the cake the latest Freudian slip is the crusade against "fake news." Seriously, if I were in their shoes that's the last phrase I would want people ruminating over. I think it was R. D. Laing who said "we always speak the truth." One way or another.

* This comes with the delicious irony that the operation's own success offers proof of the adage that sometimes you can succeed too well. The fact that the Omran photo was plastered across every paper in the west is good evidence of how completely "fake" our news has become. My favourite is this farcical interview between Amanpour and Lavrov: https://youtu.be/Tx8kiQyEkHc

Posted by: Oddlots | Nov 20 2016 0:32 utc | 21

@27 Oddlots
Most of those are pretty easy picking under a firm rule of law - plenty of underling rats willing to squeal with even gentle pressure, I'm sure.

His legacy is horrific.

Obama taught constitutional law for 12 years... It would be sweet, sweet poetry to see him nailed... his 'white papers', formed in secret courts that no one can see, no oversight in the light of day... phony legal documents that allowed him to incinerate fellow humans via drone without charge, without trial...

Some brother, some nobel prize...

Posted by: MadMax2 | Nov 20 2016 0:53 utc | 22

95% or more of the individuals Trump is considering for his administration, including those already picked have a deep-seated obsession with Iran. This is very troubling. It's going to lead to war and not a regular war where 300,000 people die. This is a catastrophic error in judgment I don't give a sh...t who makes such an error, Trump or the representative from Kalamazoo! This is so bad that it disqualifies whatever else appears positive at this time.

And one more deeply disturbing thing; Pompeo, chosen to head the CIA has threatened Ed Snowden with the death penalty, if Snowden is caught, and now as CIA Director he can send operatives to chase him down wherever he is and render him somewhere, torture him to find out who he shared intelligence with and kill him on the spot and pretend it was a foreign agent who did the job. He already stated before he was assigned this powerful post that Snowden should be brought back from Russia and get the death penalty for treason.

Pompeo also sided with the Obama Administration on using U. S. military force in Syria against Assad and wrote this in the Washington Post: “Russia continues to side with … rogue states and terrorist organizations, following Vladimir Putin’s pattern of gratuitous and unpunished affronts to U.S. interests,”.

That's not all, Pompeo wants to enhance the surveillance state, and he too wants to tear up the Iran deal.

Many of you here are extremely naïve regarding Trump.

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20 2016 1:37 utc | 23

James @21 I noticed the different handle but b hasn't commented on the attack. I assumed that this meant that b didn't know for sure who did the attack.

As I wrote, rufus/Ron made himself the prime suspect when he described the attack as an attempt to shut down his anti-Trump message. Some of us thought that it might be a lame attempt to discredit rufus but only "Ron" thought that the attack was related to him.

If one doesn't believe - as I do - that Ron = rufus then you might be less convinced that rufus did the deed.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 20 2016 1:53 utc | 24

@20 Manne--

Yes, it is important to remember that Assange, though he did not state that he knew who provided the DNC emails, implied that he did, and further implied--but did not state--that it was Seth Rich. Assange's statement came shortly after Rich's death by shooting. Assange stated he specifically knew people had people had risked their lives uploading material, implying that they had in fact lost them.

--Gaianne

Posted by: Gaianne | Nov 20 2016 2:43 utc | 25

b's speculation has the ring of truth. I've often wondered if Trump was encouraged to run by a deep-state faction that found the neocons to be abhorrent and dangerous.

Aside: I find those who talk about "factions" in foreign policy making to be un-credible. Among these were those that spoke of 'Obama's legacy'. A bullshit concept for a puppet.The neocons control FP. And they could only be unseated if a neocon-unfriendly President was elected.

Trump is turning animosity away from Russia and toward Iran. But I doubt that it will result in a shooting war with Iran. The 'deep-state' (arms industry and security agencies) just wants a foreign enemy as a means of ensuring that US govt continues to fund security agencies and buy arms.

And really, Obama's "peace deal" with Iran was bogus anyway. It was really just a placeholder until Assad could be toppled. Only a small amount of funds were released to Iran, and US-Iranian relations have been just as bad as they were before the "peace deal". So all the hand-wringing about Trump vs. Iran is silly.

What is important is that with Iran as the nominal enemy du jour plus Trump's campaign pledge to have the "strongest" military (note: every candidate was for a strong military), the neocons have no case to make that Trump is weak on defense.

And so it is interesting that those that want to undermine Trump have resorted to the claim that he is close to Jews/Zionists/Israel or even Jewish himself. Funny that Trump wasn't attacked like that before the election, huh?

The profound changes and profound butt-hurt lead to the following poignant questions:

>> Have we just witnessed a counter-coup?

>> Isn't it sad that, in 2016(!), the only check on elites are other elite factions? An enormous cultural failure that has produced a brittle social fabric.

>> If control of NSA snooping power is so crucial, why would ANY ruling block ever allow the another to gain power?

Indeed, the answer to this question informs one's view on whether the anti-Trump protests are just Democratic Party ass-covering/distraction or a real attempt at a 'color revolution'.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 20 2016 3:20 utc | 26

Plausible as hell b.

b said also.."Rogers support for the new cold war will also gain him favor with the various weapon industries which will eventually beef up his pension."

That's the long game for most of the "Hawks" in DC. Perpetual war is most profitable.

And, that game transcends both parties.

Posted by: ben | Nov 20 2016 4:33 utc | 27

@32

What is important is that with Iran as the nominal enemy du jour plus Trump's campaign pledge to have the "strongest" military (note: every candidate was for a strong military), the neocons have no case to make that Trump is weak on defense.

Oh please! Trump is stacking his cabinet with Iran-obsessed Islam haters! Nominal enemy, my ass! And was every candidate for spending a Trillion more on defense??? Did you even read Trump's plan to build up the military?

You do Netanyahu proud with your deflection. What? Nothing regarding Pompeo's blistering comments on Russia or Ed Snowden?

Why are you trying to diminish the threat to Iran with the hawks, Islam-haters, and Iran-obsessed team that Trump cobbled together so far?

Trump's Israel adviser David Friedman is known to be more extreme than even Netanyahu.

No doubt Netanyahu has unleashed an army of IDF hasbara to crush criticism of Trump and his Iran-obsessed cabinet because he must be elated with his choices and wants to make them palatable to the American sheeple.

Netanyahu is the first leader Trump spoke with on the phone. Trump praised Netanyahu from day one. PNAC and Clean Break were war manifestos for rearranging the Middle East with the ultimate goal of toppling Iran.

Trump and his cabinet are all about tearing up the deal and assuming a much more hostile position with Iran. Tearing up the deal is a precursor to a casus belli. What more proof is there that Trump is doing the bidding of Zionist Neocons??? Oh, but you don't want more, do you?

Your comment reeks of duplicity and sophistry.

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20 2016 4:52 utc | 28

I always try to "follow the money" concept.

As chipnik noted in a comment, Iran is one of the only countries that is yet to be under the control of private finance (see my latest Open Thread comments, please)

I personally see all this as obfuscation covering for throwing Americans under the bus by the global plutocrats. The elite can see, just like us, that the US empire's usefulness is beyond its "sold by" date and are acting accordingly. America and its Reserve Currency status are about to crash and the elites are working to preserve their supra-national private finance base of power/control while they let America devolve to who knows what level.

Too much heat and not enough light here...or if you prefer, the noise to signal ratio is highly skewed to noise.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 20 2016 6:28 utc | 29

And in support of my noise to signal comment there is this comment I made recently in the MoA Fake News posting:

So is this real or fake news? Trump meeting with folks this week to expand his personal business interests in India....EGAD!

http://www.ebhsoc.org/journal/index.php/journal/article/viewFile/6/6

Crimes involving moral turpitude have an inherent quality of baseness, vileness, or depravity with respect to a person's duty to another or to society in general.

Given the above Trump would not be allowed to immigrate to the US.....just saying...

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 20 2016 6:31 utc | 30

Assange: No state actor behind the leak.
http://fortune.com/2016/11/03/julian-assange-wikileaks-russia-podesta-emails/

Posted by: Manne | Nov 20 2016 8:50 utc | 31

the shadowbrokers say they have NSA malware/tools and to prove it after their auction was met with crickets riding tumbleweeds they released some teaser info on NSA servers used for proxy attacks and recon. of course a few just happened to be "owned" boxes in russia (and china and some other places for that matter). add their russian IP addresses to some (mostly useless) sigantures associated with supposedly russian-designed malware and you've got some good circumstantial evidence.

also: an email address associated with one or more attacks is from a russian site/domain but whoever registered was directed to the .com domain instead of the .ru one. this probably means someone got sloppy and didn't remember to check their DNS for fail.

in general these hacks look less like russians and more like someone who wants to look like russians. the overpaid consultants used by the DNC/clinton folks can put "bear" in the names and claim that a few bits of cyrillic are a "slam dunk" but all the "evidence" is easily faked. not that anyone in the "deep state" would ever fake anything.

Posted by: the pair | Nov 20 2016 8:55 utc | 32

@ Jackrabbit | 26

Trump is turning animosity away from Russia and toward Iran.

I worry about it as well. Trump said he'll tear up nuclear agreement, and the people he is choosing also have rabid anti-Iranian agenda.

Nice start for Trump:

Thursday US House voted to stop civilian aircraft sales to Iran by both Boeing and Airbus.

Few days before - US extending economic sanctions against Iran through 2026.

Of course Trump can block it, but will he? Even if he does, he might blackmail Iran for something in return, etc. Iran is by no means off the hook for neocons and Israel, and I wouldnt be surprised if Trump follows the suit.

Trump will (or might) have better relations with Russia, but this cordiality doesnt extend to Iran. Or as Jackrabbit says, US neocons will simply switch the targeted state and Iran may soon become "worse threat to humanity than ISIS", again.

Posted by: Harry | Nov 20 2016 10:35 utc | 33

@33

I doubt separating the animosity towards Russia and Iran is even possible. Truth be told his comments towards Russia during the election seemed more like he was woefully unaware of the reality of the Russo-American situation in the Mideast than about being ready to negotiate major US power positions and accept Russia as anything more than enemy. Sounded very off the cuff to me. Maybe he thought he'd 'get along great with Putin' at the time but after realizing later that means making nice with Iran and giving up a large measure of US influence in the MENA he has reconsidered and taken the party line. It'd certainly be understandable for a noncareer politician. I'd imagine he'd be more interested now in currying favour with the MIC and the typical Republican party hawks than with Russia/Putin given his statements on military spending. Back when I saw him bow down at the altar of AIPAC earlier in the season I had trouble reconciling that with how he hoped to improve relationships with Russia at the same time given their radical differences wrt their allies. He's made a lot of those type of statements too, it was hard to read where he stood on most any issue during election season.

I imagine as he's brought into the fold and really shown the reality of how US imperialist power projection he'll change his mind considerably. I think we, as readers and amateur analysts of this type of material, take for granted how hard some of this knowledge is to come by without looking for it directly. When we hear someone is going to make nice with Russia we want to think "well he says that as he must surely recognize the insanity and destructive forces at work." Maybe it's more of a case where the person speaking actually thinks we're in Syria to fight ISIS - that they have very little grasp of how things really work over there.

In my eyes the names he's been considering are reason for much worry for those hoping Trump would be the one to usher in a multipolar world and end the cold war. I never had much hope in that regard (but I'm still praying for the best).

Posted by: FecklessLeft | Nov 20 2016 12:12 utc | 34

Figment of imagination ...

Putin has been supporting right-wing movements across the West in order to weaken NATO

Care to back this statement with arguments, examples ar a link to an excellent article?

Looking at most of "New Europe", it's the other way around ... fascist states allied with Nazi Germany against communism, participating in massacres of Jewish fellow citizens and functioning as a spearhead for US intelligence against communism after the defeat of Nazi Germany – see Gladio. Now used by the CIA in the coup d'état in Ukraine in Februari 2014.

Ahhh ... searched for it myself, a paper written earlier in 2016 ... how convenient!

○ Putinism and the European Far Right | IMR|

The paper, authored by Alina Polyakova, Ph.D., deputy director of the Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council , was originally presented at the 2015 ASEEES Annual Convention.

Policy set by the Atlantic Council years ago: make Russia a pariah state. Written about it many times. BS and more western propaganda. The West has aligned itself with jihadists across the globe, Chechnya included. Same as in Afghanistan, these terrorists were called "freedom fighters". See John McCain in northern Syria with same cutthroats.

Absolutely outrageous! See her twitter account with followers/participants Anne Applebaum and former and now discredited Poland's FM Radoslaw Sikorski.

Pitiful and so uninformed!

Posted earlier @BT - To the Stake .. Burn the Heretic

Posted by: Oui | Nov 20 2016 12:45 utc | 35

"Emails of the DNC and of Clinton's consigliere John Podesta were hacked and leaked. Additionally emails from Clinton's private email server were released. All these influenced the election in favor of Trump."

Not necessarily so. An informal poll of people in blue collar flyover country about their voting intentions prior to the election expressed 4 common concerns

i) The risk of war.
ii) The Obamacare disaster especially recent triple digit percent increase in fees.
iii) Bringing back jobs.
iv) Punishing the Democrat Party for being indistinguishable from the Republicans.

http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/when-shouting-stops.html

Posted by: Yonatan | Nov 20 2016 12:58 utc | 36

Fascists usually start off doing a lot of good work in the honeymoon-period.
Here we go!

Posted by: Newsboy | Nov 20 2016 13:23 utc | 37

Circe @28

We shouldn't take Trump's bluster at face value. For example, Trump said that he'd eliminate Obamacare. Now he has backed off that saying that some elements of Obamacare are worthwhile.

Trump called for a strong military while attacking Hillary as "trigger happy". The implication is clear - Trump would not be looking for wars like Hillary would.

That the Israeli head of state is one of the first foreign leaders that any President-elect speaks to is no surprise. That you harp on what is essentially nonsense is telling.

In my view Trump is not anti-Jewish. He is anti-neocon/anti-Zionist. As Bannon said, America has been getting f*cked.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 20 2016 14:03 utc | 38

Oddlots @ 21 says:

To ice the cake the latest Freudian slip is the crusade against "fake news."

i see it more as another mindfucking meme than a Freudian slip. another paean to Discordia, the goddess of chaos. we've lived with 'fake news,' heretofore advertised by reliable sources, since forever. baptizing this bastardized melange only sinks us deeper into dissonant muck.

Posted by: john | Nov 20 2016 14:18 utc | 39

One would hope if that is true - Trump recognises this and fires him as well rather than promoting him.

However, if he were instrumental in getting Trump elected it is understandable if Trump decided to promote him.

It's well-known and clear Trump rewards those who have done him favours.

Let us hope it is not true.

The first thing Trump must do when elected is declassify all material related to MH17. This can be done in late January/ February as one of his first orders of business.

It's important to do this quickly - at least before the Dutch Elections in March 2017.

#MH17truth

If Trump does this he will do a number of things.

1 - Likely reveal that it was the Ukrainians who were involved in shooting down MH17. I say likely because it's possible this goes deeper than just Ukraine - if that's the case - more the better.

2. He will destroy the liar Porky Poroshenko and his corrupt regime with him. He will destroy Ukraine's corrupt Government's relationship with Europe.

3. He will destroy the sell-out traitor to his own people Mark Rutte of Netherlands. This will ensure an election win for a key Trump ally - Geert Wilders.

If Rutte is discredited for using the deaths of 200 Dutch citizens for his own political gain - he is finished and might end up in jail.

4. He will destroy Merkel utterly. Her chances of re-election (which she just announced she will stand!) will be utterly destroyed.

5. He will restory Russia-USA relations in an instant.

Trump must also do this ASAP because this is the kind of thing that could get him killed if he doesn't do it ASAP when he's inaugurated.

Of course - until then - he should keep his mouth shut about it - but the rest of us should be shouting it all around the Internet.

#MH17truth
#MH17truth
#MH17truth
#MH17truth
#MH17truth

Then - after that - he can move to do the same for September 11.

MH17 must come first ASAP because of the Dutch Elections and the chance to remove that globalist traitor to his own people Rutte.

Posted by: Jules | Nov 20 2016 15:12 utc | 40

b: "Let me know how plausible you find the tale."

Very, very, very plausible. Yes! (Fist-pump)

And very well documented, too. Sort of like the theory that 9/11 was carried out by the Boy Scouts of America. After all, the boost in jingoism and faux-patriotism gave the BSA a boost in revenue and membership, so that pretty well proves it, eh?

And if you dig deep enough I'm sure you'll find that on 9/10 the BSA shorted their stocks in United.

Yo! (Double fist-pump)

Posted by: Denis | Nov 20 2016 15:19 utc | 41

Re: Posted by: Oddlots | Nov 19, 2016 7:32:04 PM | 21

Totally agree Oddlots and that is why Trump must be on the front foot immediately.

Exposing MH17 and destroying Poroshenko, Rutte & Merkel - and Biden & Obama by the way and a bunch of others is absolutely key.

Blow MH17 skyhigh and watch Russia-USA relations be restored in a nanosecond.

It will be especially sweet to watch the Dutch traitor to his own people Rutte destroyed in the midst of an election campaign such that he might end up in jail charged with treason and replaced by Geert Wilders - the Dutch Donald Trump if ever there was one - within a matter of weeks.

However, a word of caution, it is precisely because of these possibilities that there has to be a high chance Trump will be assassinated.

Pence would not walk that line. Not at all.

There is no doubt Trump's life is in danger. I hope he has enough good people around him who will point the finger in the right direction if and when it happens.

Because frankly I doubt it.

Posted by: Jules | Nov 20 2016 15:35 utc | 42

I think it's a bit of a stretch. First of all, there are other, deeper areas of investigative matters concerning previous governments of the US, impeachable offenses and international crimes - remember when Nancy Pelosi took impeachment off the table? Not to mention, what did happen in Benghazi and why? It wouldn't matter who did that hacking of those emails- it's a bit like the exposure of the White House tapes in Nixon's presidency. We didn't worry about who revealed that - we went to the issues themselves. I think that is what Trump is doing as he brings people to his home for conversations. It is the opposite of Obama's 'moving forward, not looking back'. Trump is going to look back. It's not about reinstating the cold war; it's about gathering information.

Do we want another Obama? I don't think so.

Posted by: juliania | Nov 20 2016 15:37 utc | 43

Re: Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 19, 2016 10:20:57 PM | 26

I think Saudi Arabia are the ones who should be scared. Trump has implied before he knows who is responsible for September 11.

My guess is he wants to expose Saudi Arabia and the Bush Family.

Ever wondered why the Bushes hate and appear frightened of Trump? Because they understand he will expose their complicity in September 11 and potentially have them locked up.

Or perhaps he'll let Dubya off claiming he didn't know in return for a favour and lock up Dick Cheney instead. Quite possible.

The Saudis will get thrown down the river and lose any assets they hold in US Dollars - a significant amount I believe!

Sucks to be a Saudi Royal right about now - they better liquidate their US assets ASAP if they have any brains.

Posted by: Jules | Nov 20 2016 15:43 utc | 44

Retired UK ambassador Craig Murray said on his Web site, after meeting with Assange and then traveling to Washington where he met with former NSA officials, that he was 100 percent sure that Wikileaks's source was not the Russians and also suggested that the leaks came from inside the U.S. government.

Posted by: lysias | Nov 20 2016 15:49 utc | 45

Pursue the truth about 9/11, and you'll also find guilty paties in Israel (as well as Pakistan). Is Trump willing to do that?

Posted by: lysias | Nov 20 2016 15:52 utc | 46

Guilty parties

Posted by: lysias | Nov 20 2016 15:54 utc | 47

At least one Rep. is unhappy about losing jobs in the Puget Sound area...

"Chicago-based Boeing (NYSE: BA) has not disclosed the value of the 80-jet order to help Iran modernize its aging aircraft fleet. The deal would be worth $25 billion at list prices and includes 34 wide-body jets made in the Puget Sound region.

Lawmakers who oppose the deal say Iran is a sponsor of terrorism in Syria and a backer of Hezbollah."

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2016/11/18/rick-larsen-house-vote-iran-boeing-deal.html

Posted by: dh | Nov 20 2016 16:00 utc | 48

Re: Posted by: lysias | Nov 20, 2016 10:52:19 AM | 46

That would seem to be the truth wouldn't it, but I doubt he'd go that far down the rabbit hole? How would that serve him?

He'd go as far down as Saudi Arabia & Pakistan - and yes, that would serve his purpose for "enemies".

It would also serve Israel's interests. I can't imagine he'd go as far as to expose Israel - why would he? His life would then be in danger!

Posted by: Jules | Nov 20 2016 16:02 utc | 49

@24 jr.. i found the rs guy to be quite repugnant..rufus never came across quite the same way to me, but as always - i could be wrong! i see pac is gone today and been replaced with another name, lol.. and the beat goes on.. b has deleted posts and must be getting tired of them too.

@31 manne.. thanks.. does that rule out an insider with the nsa/cia as well?

@34 fecklessleft.. i agree with your last paragraph..

@36 yonatan.. i agree with that alternative take myself..

@40 jules.. would be nice to see happen, but most likely an exercise in wishful thinking.. sort of the same with your @44 too.. the saudis need to be taken down quite a few notches.. the usa/israel being in bed with the headchopper cult has all the wrong optics for suggesting anything positive coming from usa/israel..

Posted by: james | Nov 20 2016 16:49 utc | 50

#1 election story, from 3 (indirectly 4) separate investigative journalists.

Also, see Sputnik comments at bottom of:

https://sputniknews.com/radio_the_bradcast/201611171047576289-us-election-exit-polls/

Posted by: Robert Beal | Nov 20 2016 17:04 utc | 51

b says 'Next we [can speculate] - Trump offers Rogers the Clapper job. He would replace the boss that wanted him fired.' There, fixed it.

There appears to be a growing canyon in the intelligence world with some wanting to rid the Office of the National Intelligence agency altogether, while others are lobbying for it to remain.

Recall the 50+ intelligence analysts who went on record that the higher ups within the spying apparatus were cooking the books on Syria and the Islamic State - http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/09/exclusive-50-spies-say-isis-intelligence-was-cooked.html

Remember when Obama referred to the rise of the Islamic State as the 'JV team'? That nonchalant attitude by Obama towards the growing threat of the head choppers in Iraq and Syria was squarely placed on senior management within the intelligence community -

"Two senior analysts at CENTCOM signed a written complaint sent to the Defense Department inspector general in July alleging that the reports, some of which were briefed to President Obama, portrayed the terror groups as weaker than the analysts believe they are. The reports were changed by CENTCOM higher-ups to adhere to the administration’s public line that the U.S. is winning the battle against ISIS and al Nusra, al Qaeda’s branch in Syria, the analysts claim."

Who knows, Rogers may very well have been one in senior management who encouraged these 50 analysts to come forward. Maybe the IG investigation is wrapping up and at least internally, the senior management who made intel reports to Obama full of 'happy talk' have been identified and are now leaving on their own.

Maybe Rogers is a 'White Hat' as is being suggested by the CTH - https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/11/19/shadow-fight-angst-within-obama-admin-as-intel-community-white-hats-align-w-trump/

Posted by: h | Nov 20 2016 17:11 utc | 52

@38

We shouldn't take Trump's bluster at face value. For example, Trump said that he'd eliminate Obamacare. Now he has backed off that saying that some elements of Obamacare are worthwhile.

For crying out loud! I don't give a rat's ass about Obamacare when he outlined a plan to boost the military by a trillion dollars and stacks his cabinet with crazy Iran-obsessed hawks who want to start a world war over effing Iran! And you're deflecting this with freakin' Obamacare! It's speaks volumes about your credibility!

Trump is anti-Zionist??? Ha! His adviser to Israel David Friedman is an extreme right-wing Zionist! Or do you just prefer to completely ignore fact and reality???

And Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo can't stand Putin and their comments and record are there - FACT!

And Trump didn't only tell Hillary he was going to build up the military; he outlined it later in his plan with facts and figures and it's going to cost about a Trillion dollars, so quit comparing it to a gradual phasing out of Obamacare!

Okay, you know what? I see right through your little game. Unless you have something cogent with factual backup; I don't wanna read your responses based on pure fantasy and deflection. I look at the cold, hard facts and reality. I look at who Trump is surrounding himself with rabid Islam-haters obsessed with going after Iran and extremist Zionist loons and hawks like Pompeo and Pence making disturbing comments on Russia and Snowden and Trump's plan. So quit pretending you're not trying to obscure fact with fiction meant to deceive!

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20 2016 18:25 utc | 53

#23 Circe

"...and not a regular war where 300,000 people die..."

- Regular? So, you're calling an aggression on Syria just a 'Regular' war, on par with the course? The very least the Americans have to do, including those given the 'Nobel Peace Prize' (a bloody joke if there ever was one)? And those regular wars are needed to, what, regularly feed and the US MIC Beast? So... Obama and Hillary were just getting on with the inevitable?

Your other observations regarding Pompeo are more meaningful, but I think you underestimate the power of groupthink under the Clinton-Bush-Obama continuous administration complex. Anyway, if Pompeo doesn't wish to get "reassigned", he might be better off unmounting the neocon horse mindset and getting on better with the Tea Party dogma, where the enemies of thy enemies are more likely to be seen as friends then frenemies.

#34 Feckless Left

In a sense you are right, he is not a career politician and he might be underestimating the depth of the abyss. Yet, he has far more street cred than you seem to be giving him credit for. An honest, naive idealist, he is certainly not...

Posted by: Quadriad | Nov 20 2016 18:37 utc | 54

Circe, I have addressed your panic about Iran in another thread and you failed to reply so again:

"Even if true that the future administration would shift its focus against Iran, what can they accomplish militarily against it? Nought. SAA & ISA would send militias to support Iran, nothing would prevent Russia from using Hamedan airbase just as it uses Hmeimim and deploy S-400 et al systems to bolster Iran's already existing ones. Plus on what grounds politically could they intervene? Nobody is buying Bibi's "Bomb" bs seriously anymore. Forget it, with Syria prevailing Iran is safe.."

Posted by: Lozion | Nov 20 2016 18:51 utc | 55

@Circe

If Trump is so friendly with Zionists, why did they go crazy when Bannon was named as a senior adviser?

And, neocon angst about the Trump Administration is well summed up by Cohen's tweet:

After exchange w Trump transition team, changed my recommendation: stay away. They're angry, arrogant, screaming "you LOST!" Will be ugly.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 20 2016 18:57 utc | 56

Oddlots #21. insightful. you ignored the entire list on the financial side, but they are linked through the profound mutual support between Israel and Wall Street.

I have been really surprised at the lack of discussion of BHO's impromptu post-election tour of Germany and Greece. It seems to me Egypt flipped and it was met with silence, because WashDC must be secured before the neocons can respond. But the two countries that are game-set-match are Germany and Greece. The Greek navy with German support is a great power in the Mediterranean. How convenient to keep them at each other's throats for a decade. I think BHO was trying desperately to keep them onside. But he would either have to promise them something that he can no longer deliver after Jan 20th...or he has to clue them in to a different timeline than the one we think is playing out. Anyone have a idea why the Prez had to go and talk to Merkel and Tsipras *without intermediaries?*

Posted by: S.H.E. | Nov 20 2016 19:03 utc | 57

Today Putin meeting Obama in Peru. Like, you lost nigga!
https://cdnbr2.img.sputniknews.com/images/623/35/6233517.jpg

Posted by: Nick | Nov 20 2016 19:22 utc | 58

28

Having now founded a central bank in every nation of the world, the Khazars have defeated the Pope and the Caliphate. Only Iran and North Korea don't have a Khazar central bank. And only Iran has the last stash of crown jewels and gold bullion that the Khazars don't already control.

They want Iran as part of Greater Israel, and they hate Russia for driving them out after the fall of the Soviet Union. The Khazars control the American Union under a Red/Blue Star. Just talking ethnics, not race, religion or creed, since Hebrew is a religion of pure commercial convenience for the Khazars.

US and IL are therefore aligned against IR and RU. Now we can get rid of all the race, religion or creed crap, and talk New Math set theory: {US,IL} ≠ {IR,RU}

Who are {US,IL} sanctions against? {IR,RU}. In this new Trump' Administration: {TA} ⊆ {US,IL}, and {TA} ⊄ {IR,RU}. From a chess perspective, Putin just got Kieningered, because the Khazars would have everyone believe that {TA} ❤ {RU}, when in reality, {TA} ∩ {RU} = {Ø}.

On to {IR}!!

Posted by: TheRealDonald | Nov 20 2016 19:47 utc | 59

I'm fully expecting a radical change in rhetoric coming from Mr. Trump and his new team, but little else. The REAL movers and shakers who run the U$A have everything moving their direction right now, so why change? I expect "the Donald" to do as he's
told, like every other POTUS in modern history. They'll let him screw the workers, but, not the REAL owners of the U$A( 1%).

Posted by: ben | Nov 20 2016 19:55 utc | 60

55

You don't know? Before he died, my father told me a trick. Once the bloom was off their marriage, his wife would deliberately provoke his heavy-handed management of the family, by doing whatever he didn't want. So he learned to always 'go crazy' over things, knowing that's exactly what she would do to spite him, ...and in that way, using 'reverse psychology', the Khazars would have you believe that they hate Trump, and Trump loves Russia. They're just putting the Maidan gears into motion.

Like taking c__ from a (ಥ‸ಥ).

Posted by: TheRealDonald | Nov 20 2016 19:59 utc | 61

If Trump is considering Mitt Romney for SoS then you can bet his policy towards Russia will be hostile because the only reason Trump would put someone between himself and Putin, who repeatedly called Russia, America's No. 1 enemy, is because he wants a bad cop on Russia in the State Department, in spite of his supposed good cop remarks regarding Putin. In other words, he wants someone who can put it straight to Putin so he himself can pretend to be the good cop. If Trump were being honest regarding a softening in policy with Russia do you really believe he would ever consider someone like Romney for SoS??? Again, Mitt Romney has made the most scathing comments of anyone against Putin, and then calling Russia the number one geopolitical enemy of the U.S.. Many on the Democratic and even Republican side felt he went overboard and many have since called his comment prophetic and today Romney feels vindicated.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/30/romney-again-makes-case-russia-most-dangerous-foe-amid-syrian-air-strikes.html

Many analysts on the Democratic side and Republican side are calling Romney prophetic since he made that statement on Russia before Russia messed with U.S. plans for Syria.

So, my point is this; it's possible, it's very possible that, Mike Pompeo, Trump's choice for CIA Director, who also has a hostile position towards Russia asked Trump to consider Romney because he know doubt also believes that Romney proved good foresight with that comment regarding Russia and urged Trump to give Romney a meeting.

My 2nd point is this: quit trying to make Trump into what he's not when he's spelling it all out for you in black and white!

It doesn't look good. This picture that's starting to develop is looking worse by the day. Look at who he's surrounding himself with; look at his actions and forget about his words. This man has sold ice to the eskimos in his business dealings. Look at the facts. Trump is not who you think he is and just because he made some comments favorable in Putin's regard doesn't mean he's not going to turn around and stick it to Putin a year or maybe a few years down the line. Kissinger told Fareed Zakaria today on GPS: One should not insist in nailing Trump to positions he took during the campaign.

I already wrote that I believe Trump is using this fake softer strategy to get Russia to look sideways on a coming Resolution to invade Iran and then he's going to deal with Putin and Russia.

If Trump picks someone like Romney for State; he'll have 3 individuals in the most important cabinet positions dealing with foreign policy and foreign enemies who will be hostile to Russia: VP, CIA Director and SoS. Therefore he would be sending his bad cop to deal with Russia and sending a message to Putin like: Don't put your money on whatever I said during the campaign, my positions are changing for the empire's benefit and strategic interests. And even if he doesn't choose Mitt, because on Breitbart where his base convenes they're up in arms about this meeting, I would still be wary of his direction because of the picks he's made already; the majority of his cabinet so far want war with Iran and his VP and CIA Director can't stand Putin and then looking at who's advising him, rabid Neocon Zionists like James Woolsey and David Friedman.

Look at what Trump does, who he's meeting with, who he's choosing to surround himself with and quit hanging on what he said, because talk is cheap, especially coming from someone who's now in the inner circle of American power.

@55

Please don't give me one measly Cohen tweet as fact! The entire Zionist Organization of America came to Bannon's defense and he will be attending their gala! It's been made public everywhere; so quit obscuring the truth.

@54

Yes, Russia could come to Iran's defense considering Iran allowed for Russia's use of that air base for Syria and rescued one of the two Russian pilots shot down by Turkey, and is fighting al-Nusra shoulder to shoulder with Russia, but the empire has something up its sleeve to stop Russia from coming to the defense of Iran, should the U.S. and Israel decide to circumvent the Security Council. Something stinks; Trump is top loading his cabinet with crazy, Iran-obsessed hawks and his VP and CIA Direct also have no love for Putin. They're planning something against Iran and I know they're going to do something to tie Putin's hands. Something's up and it's going to lead to war beyond Syria. Look the Russians are already depleting resources in Syria; already that puts Russia in a weakened position. I don't know what they're planning but it's not good. The picture unfolding with Trump's cabinet is very disturbing.

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20 2016 20:14 utc | 62

There's another aspect and maybe it's significant and maybe not that could influence a change in Trump's position on Russia that would have also made him take the extreme step of meeting with Romney while considering the SoS position. Trump is getting the highest level of security briefings now that he's President-elect. You wanna bet that Russia and Putin are mentioned in over 50% of those briefings and ISIS, Iran and others get the other 50% collectively???

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20 2016 20:35 utc | 63

@Circe

Hasbara hysteria to undermine Trump. Unrelenting bullshit and innuendo.

What was Bannon talking about when he said that America is getting f*cked? Globalism vs. Nationalism. Who equates nationalism with nazism? Zionists. Who is butt-hurt over Trump Presidency? Zionists and neocons.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 20 2016 20:41 utc | 64

@63

Unrelenting bullshit and innuendo.

Yep, describes your weak deception to a T! ...like I'm going to hang on Bannon's word as gospel when he's going to be wining and dining with Zionists at the ZOA gala.

Try again.

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20 2016 20:47 utc | 65

Oh, and one more thing: Zionists, FYI, relate very well with nationalists and supremacists since they got their own nationalist, supremacist operation in ISRAEL! So I'm only too sure they'll be commiserating and exchanging ideas on how best to secure their nationalist, supremacist vision for the empire. There's a whole lot of common ground for them to cover during the gala, and YOU CAN'T AND DIDN'T DENY THAT BANNON IS ATTENDING THE ZIONIST GALA! Did you???

So again, quit dogging me, quit presuming I'm some undercover hasbara, that maybe you are, and spare me the bullshit.

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20 2016 20:54 utc | 66

As if we didn't need anymore proof of where Trump is taking the U.S.: Trump tweeted a comment highly praising General James Mattis after their meeting considering him for Secretary of Defense. This is a major, major red flag signalling a very troubling direction in Trump's foreign policy.

Mattis served for two years as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO. Although, he served under Obama, he was against the Iran deal and considers Iran more dangerous that ISIS!

Mattis is nicknamed "mad-dog mattis" for a reason: he is an extreme hawk and he is MIC incorporated.

But here's the kicker, Mattis like Pompeo, Pence and Romney has also made blistering comments against Russia, stating that Putin wants to break up NATO, sent "dogs and thugs" into Georgia and has been very critical of Putin's actions in Ukraine and Syria.

At the beginning of the primaries, Neocons wanted Mattis as a candidate for the Presidency on the Republican side. I like how the following article describes just how much Neocon war hawks salivated over the thought of Mattis in the White House:

http://original.antiwar.com/daniel-mcadams/2016/04/25/neocons-panting-president-mad-dog-mattis/

Well folks, Mattis, the darling of Neocons, will be in the White House next to Trump advising him on war strategy! And worst of all this mad-dog Neocon war hawk is going to run the Pentagon, oversee a trillion-dollar military expansion and command the next world war!

So are you convinced yet that Trump is perpetuating the Neocon PNAC/Clean Break plan or are you still totally blind???

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20 2016 21:59 utc | 67

More and more troubling news from Trump camp and his party, but lets not make snap judgements. We'll see soon enough.

Posted by: Harry | Nov 20 2016 22:17 utc | 68

@34 fl, 'In my eyes the names he's been considering are reason for much worry for those hoping Trump would be the one to usher in a multipolar world and end the cold war. I never had much hope in that regard (but I'm still praying for the best).'

Trump is in it for Trump. He's a solipsist. We and our 'real world' doesn't exist for Trump. He lives in Trump Tower. The only things he cares about are his personal interests. He'll put in people to 'run the government' who will insulate him and his interests from the consequences of their actions and that'll keep him happy and them in their jobs, no matter the consequences for our 'imaginary' real world. We're back to the mad Caesars. Our government has been steadily walking away from us since Bush XLI. It's on the run now, we're up to Nero. We 'barbarians' need to take care of our real world in its absence, prepare ourselves to pick up the pieces when it's become so unrecognizable that it's finally disappeared.

Posted by: jfl | Nov 20 2016 22:24 utc | 69

any speculation on who actually putting up the $25 million to settle the university lawsuit? perfect time to get leverage cutting a deal.

Posted by: b real | Nov 20 2016 22:31 utc | 70

In Nam officers who endangered their troops were subjected a fragging wherein the officer in question was killed in such a manner that the perpetrator escaped blame for his actions. It is my belief that this fact was one of the primary reasons that an all volunteer military was instituted. I'm a veteran, USN enlistee, so I do have some experience operating in a bureaucratic environment.

I am of the opinion that a group of military patriots and their cohorts were instrumental in bringing down the New World Order junta. This junta includes the Bu$h/Scherff) crime family (google Scherff), various mafia crime families, The Clinton/Gore crime families and many other groups dedicated to self enrichment at the expense of the Republic.

Fragging can rake many forms. For instance anonymously leaking intelligence in the form of emails.

I believe that a new set of crooks have seized the reins of power in the U.S. The difference between the new crooks and the new crooks is that the new crooks are U.S. patriots.

For krissakes Bernie is a F*#KING Bolshevik!

Just me opinion.

Posted by: ALberto | Nov 20 2016 22:34 utc | 71

@Harry

That is my position as well.

Nothing we say is going to change who Trump picks for his cabinet or his plans for his first 100 days.

I'm still taking in the failure of the corrupt Democratic Party and their flawed champion, Hillary. And wondering about the possibilities to start a fresh new Movement that is independent of the Democratic Party.

AFAICT those complaining about Trump at this point are the ones that took Hillary's defeat hardest.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 20 2016 22:37 utc | 72

Bill Clinton was a fake populist, Gore was a fake populist - too stupid to use Clinton's fake populism and economic dot com boom bubble to catapult him over an idiot - Dubya. The guy you wanted to have a beer with. Not the guy with whom you wanted to have a beer.

Obama was a fake populist, Hillary couldn't fake fake populism. Now we have Trump - the fake populist. Damn the torpedoes. Full Speed Ahead.

Good People Don't Smoke Pot. - Jeff Bong Sessions

Posted by: fast freddy | Nov 20 2016 22:41 utc | 73

@ 29

I agree. Past the sell-by date and let the pieces hang where they may. I finally get the whole "Zombie" thing.

Posted by: ~f | Nov 20 2016 22:48 utc | 74

@ 71 AFAICT those complaining about Trump at this point are the ones that took Hillary's defeat hardest.

So it just can't be that people are seeing that Trump is doing things that betray a Neocon agenda, right? Because only you see it as it is.

Quit diminishing people and their credibility by painting them into the Hillary corner. I for one was never for Hillary and all my comments during the primaries and election prove it; so fail again.

And there is nothing factual about your statement; it's a presumption meant to diminish credibility without proof; that's all it is, as usual. And if you want to diminish someone's credibility then look for statements they made that prove they were in the Hillary camp. And, fyi, I'm totally against what the U.S. has been up to in Syria, I was never in the Hillary camp and couldn't stand her or Obama. And I was relieved that Putin messed up their plans in Syria. I happen to be against the Anglo/Zionist empire destroying balance of power and imposing their will on the rest of the world. So think again.

Unlike you, I'm a straight-shooter and I don't attack other's credibility without proof.

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20 2016 22:57 utc | 75

It seems to me that the anti-Iranian stance is bluster and smokescreen for the SYRIAN DEFEAT.

> It placates so-called "allies" that are anti-Iranian;

> It placates the security agencies and arms dealers.

Acting against Iran would result in a similar dead-end/defeat as in Syria because Russia and China would back Iran.

IMO those who really want war are anti-Trump.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 20 2016 23:08 utc | 76

@Circe

Apparently you didn't notice. My previous comment was not directed at you.

I agreed with Harry and made a general statement.

The only credibility you have here are your words and logic. Your hysteria is not helping you.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 20 2016 23:13 utc | 77

OK, not sure where my post went, but it was very tin-foil hat and TL;DR. Here's the short version:

1. Rogers, no. He was brought in to do damage control. The leaker was probably Seth Rich, who was assassinated for his efforts, or some other .gov/DNC/Hillary insider.

2. Assange/WikiLeak's Dead-man's Switch key is about to be revealed, allowing the decryption of an 88 GB file of content he said was capable of bringing down governments. This is something unreleased/unknown - not the Clinton/Podesta emails we've already seen.

If you're hazy about the back story of Assange/WikiLeaks and haven't heard about why the U.S. government is so concerned about the widely-distributed 88 GB encrypted file, this will give you an idea. It ends with some computer geek stuff that people are trying to use to find the key Assange left to be found.

Posted by: PavewayIV | Nov 20 2016 23:26 utc | 78

@ Jackrabbit who wrote: "AFAICT those complaining about Trump at this point are the ones that took Hillary's defeat hardest."

The there are those of us that despise both as puppets of the global plutocrats that own private finance and everything else including governments. i would suggest you temper your"general" statements a bit, thanks.

@ ~f who wrote: "I agree. Past the sell-by date and let the pieces hang where they may. I finally get the whole "Zombie" thing."

Thanks for that. So, does that mean you read "Monsters of the Market" by David McNally (with subtitle "Zombies, Vampires and Global Capitalism)? I recommended it to everyone as a real wake up view of our world.

@ PavewayIV who wrote about a Wikileaks file that may bring down governments.
I certainly hope so. It is way past time. Too many have given their lives as this ugly form of social organization refuses to let our species evolve to something better.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 21 2016 0:43 utc | 79

@75

IMO those who really want war are anti-Trump.

Really??? Ha-ha! well then all the people he hired so far must be anti-Trump traitors because that’s exactly what they want!

To everyone else who makes sense around here.:

With all those hawks Trump hired and mad-dog Mattis who seems like a sure thing to head the DoD, and oversee the massive military expansion planned; you can bet that if they have a hard time fabricating intelligence against Iran as they succeeded with in the case of Iraq; we're going to see a false flag that will result in a casus belli for war against Iran. And I can bet Zionists are already working hard on the components of that false flag and I don’t discount that the false flag could manifest as a serious cyber-attack on important U.S. installations and Israel has the capacity, technology and expertise to carry out something that big while leaving fake intelligence pointing to Iran. They developed Stuxnet and who knows what they’re capable of. Zionists have carried out many extra-judicial assassinations in Iran and have worked with terrorist groups inside Iran as well, and U.S. operatives together with Mossad operatives working with those terrorist groups tried to mount the fake green revolution that fizzled out almost as soon it started. So, everyone should be extremely vigilant this time around so we don't have a repeat of Iraq times 100.

Now, regarding Syria, it concerns me that Saudi Arabia is providing an unlimited supply of fighters and weaponry to exhaust both Iran and Russia prior to that war that Zionist Neocons are cooking up against Iran. So Saudi Arabia is part of the plan, and they may be playing another covert role. Perhaps, a way to stop SA would be for Russia to arm the resistance in Yemen to create a greater burden and distraction for Saudi Arabia in Yemen and pull some of those wahhabi bastards out of Syria and into Yemen. Maybe someone has a better idea of how to get SA from providing an unlimited supply of resources to the terrorists in Syria or the war there is going to bleed resources in Iran and Russia.

China may be the only hope there is to stop the Anglo/Zionist empire’s advance. China is a military and economic power to be feared, because China put a great deal of resources into its military and has spent very little of its military treasure. Trump has a mortgage held by China that is close to a billion dollars. If Trump tries to advance on Iran; maybe China can use that leverage and other leverage regarding the U.S. debt it holds. China has some power in that regard but not to bring the U.S. economy down as that would affect China’s economy as well. There must be a way to stop the empire’s war plans with Iran. If the Empire succeeds in gutting Iran it will have unlimited gas and oil reserves to plunder and then there will be no stopping it. They will easily be able to challenge Putin and Russia after that. So something must be done to stop the empire now.
Note as well in Congress on the Democratic side that Chuck Schumer has replaced Harry Reid as Minority Leader in the Senate. This is significant because Schumer who can be called nothing less than a Neoliberal war hawk and shill for Israel opposed the Obama administration’s Iran Deal and tried to convince his fellow Democrats to bow down to the de facto leader of the U.S., Bibi Netanyahu when he spoke to Congress. So we can expect that, when the Resolution for war with Iran is taken to Congress, that Zionist shill Schumer will be the first on the other side to sign on to it.

As you can see the stage is clearly being set on both sides for war with Iran and in essence for fast-tracking PNAC/Clean Break; the Zionist manifestos for control of the Middle East by the Anglo/Zionist empire and of course Trump is proving he is part of the plan as he is stacking his cabinet with war hawks obsessed with getting Iran.

Posted by: Circe | Nov 21 2016 1:21 utc | 80

Jeff 'Reefer Madness' Sessions. Let the Circus commence to begin. You cannot make this stuff up.

Posted by: ALberto | Nov 21 2016 1:37 utc | 81

@Circe

Oh my! So what shall we do? Will you implore us to take to the streets and stand shoulder to shoulder with the heroic Democrats that want to stop Trump?!?!

(That's where you're headed isn't it?)

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 21 2016 2:29 utc | 82

Documentation Austin protests funded/generated by forums is fake news.

Ironically (???), after commenters here began showing up claiming Soros was behind these things as though it was "Gospel" I mad the comment this reminded me of Free Rupublic false rumors from the Bush Jr. Years. Sure enough, from above link:

Several hours later, the first important step occurred. Mr. Tucker’s tweet was posted to the main Reddit community for Mr. Trump under the heading: “BREAKING: They found the buses! Dozens lined up just blocks away from the Austin protests.” It quickly generated more than 300 comments, some of which blamed the protests on George Soros, the liberal billionaire philanthropist, who is a frequent target of the group.

The next morning, the frenzy began. A user on Free Republic, a conservative discussion forum, linked to the Reddit thread about Mr. Tucker’s post, increasing the attention and spreading it further into the online world. Later, Facebook pages like Robertson Family Values, which is named for but not affiliated with the stars of “Duck Dynasty,” and Donald Trump Commander in Chief 2020, linked to the Free Republic discussion. Those posts were shared more than 5,000 times each, and more than 300,000 Faceboo;k users have linked to the Free Republic thread.

Up 2 our ass in fake-news conspiracy theories.

...

> Let me know how plausible you find the tale.

I find more likely: one thing Donald's appointments so far have in common (other then Iran-phobia)... all have been vocal Hillary should be "locked up" (Flynn said this at the convention). I'd bet unspoken signal from this troupe: Hillary's going to be prosecuted. Not for right reasons though, just (as with Iran)... hate.

Posted by: jdmckay | Nov 21 2016 2:55 utc | 83

@circe.. dear circe. i am enjoying your posts for the most part. jackrabbit is providing some good fodder for you to pounce on.. you could be thankful for that too..

i am not an american. the way i see it, the usa, especially the upper echelons of power in the usa is neo con central. this includes most all of the politicians that are either beholden and subservient to the military industrial complex, wall st. and zionism, or more sophisticated in their ability to hide the role these backers play in all their positions.. that trump has this type of environment to choose from makes sense especially after the last 15 years of neo con control. now, maybe i am wrong and he is picking the worst of the lot. you seem to suggest this.

trump seems extremely fickle with his mouth and what he does and doesn't say. it is hard to know just what he thinks. he is quite capable of saying the opposite of what he might have said the previous day.. that is the way he comes across to me.. typical gemini scatter brain basically..

israel and saudi arabia see iran as an enemy.. it doesn't mean the usa has to, but the usa has never struck me as being able to get out of it's monetary relationship with these countries or something. so, maybe you have a point about iran being next up.. however they aren't doing so great in syria.. saudi arabia doesn't seem to be doing very well in yemen either. maybe i have it wrong and russia and iran are getting bogged down in syria / yemen and lord knows wherever else the warmongers want to destabilize. it doesn't look like this to me though.. my impression is the usa, while still strong in many ways, seems to have lost it's mojo, beginning with ukraine /crimea and going on to syria.. maybe i have it wrong..

electing trump also seemed like a vote against all these foreign war escapades - something hillary was always in favour of.. now maybe trump can be convinced about how a financial collapse is just around the corner and the only way to stave it off is with yet another war in a faraway country - this time a bigger one that would really generate a lot of money for wall st.. it is possible. you may be right, but i have to agree with harry that i think it is premature at this point to know for sure.. it doesn't look good, and no where near as good as the bill of sale trump was offering for his voters, but i still think it is too early to tell.. thanks...

Posted by: james | Nov 21 2016 3:03 utc | 84

jdmckay - finally an observation from you I can agree with 100%. The selection of hard-line loyalists seems to indicate that a major showdown is likely coming.

Perchance Hillary and all those "close to her" will be sacrificed to save the honor of the American Political System, which should itself be scrapped and rebuilt altogether.

With a bit of luck, the purge will include the Bushes & their neocons, and quite likely Obama too.

You guys might be witnessing the tip of the incoming iceberg that is a deep-state counter-coup.

Posted by: Quadriad | Nov 21 2016 3:08 utc | 85

@83

it doesn't look good, and no where near as good as the bill of sale trump was offering for his voters

Thank you for being honest, even though you think it's too early to tell, but personally, I can't stand any of his picks so far; and these aside from SoS are the most important from a global perspective and very telling of where he's headed.

By the way in 2009; I was exposing Obama as well for the Neo tool he was. What bothers me is that people still don't get it; there's no difference in the goal between both parties; only in the strategy to get there. Obama turned out just as I suspected he would and so will Trump, but right now the Trumpers are acting exactly the same way the Obamabots acted; like their guy is gonna do something different as in anti-Neocon. Oh and let me repeat myself, Hillary would have been an extension of Obama like Trump will be an extension of Bush and they're all the same shit, 'scuse my French!

Posted by: Circe | Nov 21 2016 4:02 utc | 86

Are there ANY links confirming ANY Trump cabinet positions so far? If no, then its all speculation and imo tiresome..

Circe. What I would call the NWO elites have been derailed off their hegemonic trajectory the moment Russia decided to intervene in Syria. If they are not able to achieve regime change there, how can they accomplish it in Iran? Keep calm and have a drink..

Posted by: Lozion | Nov 21 2016 4:24 utc | 87

@ james in response to Circe

Please step back and see that the left/right social construct is a tool of those that don't want you to see the real top/bottom social construct and attack it directly.

I see Trump as accelerating the path that Clinton II, Obama, Bush, etc. had us on. The only thing that will stop the madness is for the countries of the world to stop buying US Treasuries so we cannot afford the war machine of empire suppression globally and soon/now within the US proper. I am concerned that they will be still be able to sell the public the fear of others and war is good for the economy memes.

We DO live in interesting times....and for Americans those times are going to get "worse" before they have a chance to get "better".

We need a new Enlightenment period that exposes the God of Mammon for the cancer that it represents within our form of social organization.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 21 2016 4:39 utc | 88

"it doesn't look good, and no where near as good as the bill of sale trump was offering for his voters, but i still think it is too early to tell.. thanks..."

Posted by: james | Nov 20, 2016 10:03:34 PM | 83

This mirrors my thoughts...

On the other hand...so does this..
it doesn't look good, and no where near as good as the bill of sale trump was offering for his voters, but i still think it is too early to tell.. thanks...

Posted by: james | Nov 20, 2016 10:03:34 PM | 83

On the other hand, so does this..

"Hillary would have been an extension of Obama like Trump will be an extension of Bush and they're all the same shit, 'scuse my French!

Posted by: Circe | Nov 20, 2016 11:02:57 PM | 85

Posted by: ben | Nov 21 2016 4:51 utc | 89

Oops! sorry for the double up.

Posted by: ben | Nov 21 2016 4:52 utc | 90

@ Lozion who wrote: "Are there ANY links confirming ANY Trump cabinet positions so far? If no, then its all speculation and imo tiresome.."

There is this link: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-wraps-marathon-weekend-cabinet-search-013401227.html?ref=gs
with this in it:
"
Trump's picks so far include ultra-conservative Senator Jeff Sessions as attorney general, hawkish congressman Mike Pompeo as CIA director and retired lieutenant general Michael Flynn as his national security adviser.
"
Granted, these Trump "picks" have not been confirmed by Congress but far from just the speculation you imply.

While I agree with you that the hegemonic trajectory has been derailed for the moment, I believe like others here that Iran is the next country to invade and think that Israel will be the point country for this endeavor as PavewayIV has implied in comments......with US backing. I think this trajectory is baked in whether the world economy collapses or otherwise.......the empire will not die of its own volition.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 21 2016 5:02 utc | 91

William Binney speculated back in July that the DNC leaks came from someone in the NSA, upset with Clinton's cavalier handling of classified information. He said no hacking was necessary because the NSA had the contents of all emails that passed through US routers since the early naughts, just as Snowden had informed us.

That is, the NSA has all DNC, Clinton private server, Podesta, your and my emails. Not just the metadata, but the contents. No need for a hack at all. All squirreled away within the NSA.

Posted by: William Rood | Nov 21 2016 5:25 utc | 92

@ William Rood who wrote:
"
That is, the NSA has all DNC, Clinton private server, Podesta, your and my emails. Not just the metadata, but the contents. No need for a hack at all. All squirreled away within the NSA.
"
I am an aging techie and it still took me seeing the movie Snowden for that fact to really hit my brain. I suspect that blog contents and comments are in there also.....Hi NSA:) I shudder to think of the potential for social abuse of such a trove of data.

I s this the world you want your children to inherit?

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 21 2016 5:46 utc | 93

@90 Thank you psycho, that list is indeed alarming..
Regarding Iran, I maintain attacking it has a very low probability of happening thanks to the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) acting as a type of Asian NATO counterweight. Russia has made clear it will not tolerate more encroaching on its sphere of interest and it knows if the Shia Crescent is defeated it will be next. Hence, this cannot be allowed to pass, at least not on Volodya's watch. Sorry but now that Clinton lost, the sounds of Trumpets is fading in my ears..

Posted by: Lozion | Nov 21 2016 6:09 utc | 94

@ Lozion who wrote two conflicting statements in #93

1. ".....that list is indeed alarming.."

2. "Sorry but now that Clinton lost, the sounds of Trumpets is fading in my ears.."

I hope your 2nd statement is true but the facts of the 1st are truly alarming.

If I am right in perceiving this evolving geopolitical situation as being about the continuation of private finance in our world then all bets are off on how far the adherents of the God of Mammon will go to maintain their power/control.

What sort of world will the children inherit? Stay tuned and contribute.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 21 2016 6:43 utc | 95

Petraeus can be sec. of state's pick

Posted by: Nick | Nov 21 2016 8:47 utc | 96

Speaking about attack on Iran - direct invasion wont happen, I'm 99.99% sure of it. Even if Killary was elected, still she wouldnt have started it. US can no longer afford such wars, and Iran is way too powerful in asymmetric warfare. It would be a terrible defeat for US and its military knows it, despite of bravado for public consumption.

However, US will do as much damage as it can to Iran:

* Sabotaging at every step. Sanctions, broken deals and promises (nothing new here). Sanctioning everyone who deals with Iran (banks, Airbus, etc). Pulling all the stops to prevent Iranian pipeline projects.

* They might try Libya 3.0 scenario. It was suppose to happen after Syria's defeat, but since its still holding and terror campaign is slowly winding down, USrael and co might launch it in Iran. Damage wont be as high as in Syria/Libya, but there could be plenty of unrest in Kurdish region and Baluchistan, also dont underestimate what sabotage and explosives could do for critical infrastructure. USrael obviously wont expect terrorists to win, but Iran would bleed pretty bad, and its good enough for neocons, zionists and medieval monarchies.

Posted by: Harry | Nov 21 2016 9:47 utc | 97

I saw Petraeus flogging his arse on AJ this morning. The interviewer lobbed up some Dorothy Dix questions to let Petraeus boast about how well he sorted Iraq - when asked about his responsibility as the first Imperial Consul of Anbar - y'know the sunni crescent where Daesh kicked off, Petraeus quickly blamed Bremner for sacking all the soldiers & civil servants then went on to trumpet his success - without naming them natch - because he didn't have any.
AJ being AJ, Petraeus was repeatedly asked about Syria esp regarding the trumpet's unwillingness to buy into the current usuki meme until he got visibly angry before making the fatal mistake of saying trump wouldn't stick to what he said in the campaign.

I know Petraeus is desperate and backed the wrong horse in Obamblam but he's not gonna get a gig out the trump creep - if he was he would be talking to trump not AJ, and since it is foreign policy that trump is most likely to renege on first, the trump won't hire someone who admits that.

I doubt of many of trump's picks will be well known, and retreads will be something he will definitely steer clear of as much as he can.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 21 2016 10:25 utc | 98

@96 with regards to Iran , any US attack on iran militarily or covertly will have harsh repercussion by the iranians. They have this much time to plan asymetric response and planting sleeper cells all around the world. But one thing for certain it will be curtains for US allies in the persian gulf.

remember the iranian response during iraq war when US forces tried to capture iranian officials ? they executed brilliant attack on a military base killing and kidnapping american personel , by pretending to be american forces.

underestimae the iranian at US own peril... remember the RQ170 ?

Posted by: milomilo | Nov 21 2016 11:40 utc | 99

Trump has to gain Electoral College support on 19 December and then be inaugurated. He understands the adage...many a slip twixt cup and lip...flew low for two years...two months to go...Donduck has been well served by flatteries and dragging his wing...what's different relative to the campaign...but what the heck hey...eschatologies are out to get us...all of us...who here knows who or what al Baruq is.? How does one spell that in English.?..Barack...funny thing is old al Baruq reappears to set the scene for the return of the 12th Madhi...but more fascinating yet is the 'White Horse Prophecy' and its number one adherent...aka...Mitt Romney...so one white horse (Barack) leaves and another slots into SoS...eschatology is something Obama must have considered fairly deeply given his name and given the context of his attainment of Office...

Posted by: pubumwei | Nov 21 2016 12:15 utc | 100