Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 08, 2018

Two 'Russian Influence' Campaigns Claim Victory - One Is Real, The Other One Fake

Two new 'Russian' campaigns claim victory in their disinformation acts against the 'west'. One is real and the other one is fake. But - as usual by now - 'western' media mistake one for the other. For them the real one is fake and the fake one real*.

Proud Bear, a collective of GRU spies, celebrates its success in arranging Britain's exit from the European Union. It rented billboards in London to claim victory.


bigger

bigger

bigger

bigger

Last night the GRU agents launched their @Pr0ud_Bear Twitter account and their webpage proudbear.ru to proudly confess their deed and to celebrate success.


Putin riding Brexit bulldog Arron Banks - video

The GRU officers ask for donations. They want to rent the animated billboard at Waterloo Station to show the real man behind Brexit. A bare breasted Putin "taking back control" while riding Big Ben with the Russian flag flying on top of it.


(photoshopped) bigger

The billboard rent for two weeks is £55,000 of which, as of now, £1,206 have been raised.

In a press notice the 'GRU Informatsiya Directorate' notes:

"The group hopes to counter recent unwarranted negative publicity about the GRU by putting up advertisements highlighting their part in Britain’s imminent liberation from the EU.”

The British disinformation agency Reuters calls the GRU billboards "spoof" and the GRU campaign a "stunt". That is disingenuous. Proud Bear is certainly more real then the Novichok poisoning of the now vanished Skripals and more real than the 'hacking' of the DNC servers blamed on Fancy and Cozy Bear.

Hidden in the source code of the Proud Bear website (in Firefox: "view-source:https://proudbear.ru/") is a meta text written in Russian. It begins (machine translated):

Financing Proud Bear is fully secured by the proceeds from the sale of giant eggplants grown on offshore land in Panama and watered solely with tears of Georges Soros.
But seriously, all of us are volunteers and are engaged in this project only because we are really concerned about the state of health of our democracy and the fact that not one of our leaders and a very small number of active politicians show any readiness to move their goals and protect her.

We know about the existence of Putin’s political machine aimed at destabilizing our society. We see its methods aimed at provoking discord and inciting nationalist enmity. And yet, those in power are in no hurry to respond. The 2016 referendum on UK membership in the European Union is an excellent example of such sabotage. The sea of ​​evidence that Russia had a hand in one of the most significant political decisions of our generation is simply ignored by our government. Theresa May prefers to promote Brexit’s ridiculous plan instead of stopping for a moment and truly investigating the question of whether Russia's influence was really decisive in the vote. The UK immediately needs a Muller-style investigation into Russian intervention in the Brexit campaign.

The British government denies that Russia had any influence in the Brexit campaign. That is not astonishing. Real GRU operations are executed flawlessly and stay secret until they are intentionally revealed. It did simply did not see the Russian hands behind it.

The hidden message goes on to lament about Russian and western campaigns to "destabilize democratic regimes" and lauds Russian journalists for revealing "the corrupt and antidemocratic nature of power in Russia."

That sounds like a typical GRU faint. Mirrors behind mirrors. In their hidden statement the Proud Bear agents play British victims while being the Russian source of the influence campaign that led to Brexit.


The Daily Beast is more inclined then Reuters to believe in the truth of the Russian menace.


bigger

It claims that the Russian Internet Research Agency in St.Petersburg is celebrating its great success of manipulating the U.S. midterm elections:

The Mueller-indicted Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency is apparently declaring victory in the U.S. election and warning the “citizens of the United States of America” that “your intelligence agencies are powerless.”

“Despite all their efforts, we have thousands of accounts registered on Facebook, Twitter and Reddit spreading political propaganda,” read a statement attributed to the St. Petersburg-based organization. “These accounts work 24 hours a day, seven days a week to discredit anti-Russian candidates and support politicians more useful for us than for you.”

The statement appeared on a website titled the “Internet Research Agency American Division” that popped up over the weekend. Featuring a clip art logo of a green goblin typing on a laptop, and packed with absurd boasts about the IRA’s prowess, the site at first appeared to be a lampoon. But on Tuesday night it posted a previously unseen list of 100 IRA Instagram accounts that Facebook confirmed as authentic.

The unnamed website found 100 Instagram accounts that were "authentic"? Who knew that any such exist?

The website, which the Daily Beast does not dare to name, is usaira.ru. BBC Russia took a look at it and also seems to believe (machine translation) that the IRA is behind it.

The Instagram accounts listed on the site, for example instagram.com/immi.great, are - as of now - all dead. Facebook claims that it already deleted many of the named accounts before the usaira.ru website went up. (Immi.great though is also a Youtube account of Dmajan Denoble, a legitimate lawyer who gives immigration advice.)

But how can Dana Rohrabacher, the most pro-Russian representative, lose in the midterm election if the Russians influenced it?

To me the usaira.ru site seems fake. A spoof or stunt created to further defame the Russian web company which the Muller investigation accused of selling advertisement space on the inspiring web- and Facebook pages it built for that purpose.

It is possible that the Atlantic Council's DFRLab created the usaira.ru site to promote its censorship campaign? Quite so.

Proud Bear though is real. Russia is always proud to parade its troops (vid) when it celebrates victory. Britain is in political chaos over Brexit. The GRU won. It comes out into the open, offers vodka and celebrates it.

That's how its done. Nastrovje!

---
*Note: The above may contain traces of snark.

Posted by b on November 8, 2018 at 05:17 PM | Permalink

Comments

lol! this stuff is too crazy for me...i guess i need more sleep or something.. proud bear.. i like the name...

on another note, i see the dems in the usa are worried the mueller investigation is in trouble, given the new guy who replaced sessions.. apparently they are raising questions over his position.. see the emptywheel articles from today.. they can't stop chasing the russian demons.. meanwhile, trump visits putin this weekend in paris... who set that up? the atlantic council??

Posted by: james | Nov 8, 2018 5:34:41 PM | 1

I like the Russian humor. Lavrov's been known to crack a joke or two on Russian influence.
I have no idea if GRU tipped the balance in Brexit or if they simply sat back and watched, but this satire campaign will really stir things up by highlighting the idiocy of the ruling class for all the peasants to see.

Posted by: Peter AU | Nov 8, 2018 5:37:49 PM | 2

I think that the British have long since lost their sense of irony (something that, allegedly, Americans never had).

Postings like this can be taken too literally and I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up on Newsnight as 'proof' of Russian meddling.

I know I'm being a killjoy but it's all nonsense; the idea that Russia arranged Brexit is ludicrous. (But, it's your own fault if craigsummers starts referring to this article to prove his point).

Posted by: ADKC | Nov 8, 2018 5:43:15 PM | 3

Proud Bear use language on Facebook and Twitter like Borat Sagdiyev when he go to America to make cultural learnings that make glorious nation of Kazakhstan.

Proud Bear ... I liiiike!!!

Posted by: Jen | Nov 8, 2018 6:13:09 PM | 4

Sarcasm can be tricky, especially in an era where the annihilation of mankind has a silver lining.

Posted by: librul | Nov 8, 2018 6:18:22 PM | 5

ADKC - some Brits do retain their sense of irony - I think it's wonderful that Brexiteers bang on about regaining British sovereignty from the EU when they are determined to continue to give away British sovereignty by remaining a member of the Washington gleeclub aka NATO. If anything, the Conservative Brexiteers want to give away more sovereignty to Washington than they will get back from the EU. But the best might be yet to come when Corbyn and the Labour Party win the next general election. All the neo-liberal constraints the EU imposes on its members will be dead and gone, and Corbyn and the Labour Party can return to their democratic socialist roots and sometime in the future a British Labour government might decide to launch a European Socialist Union. With ten more years of neo-liberal austerity in the EU and the failure of the right-wing government in Europe, Europeans might well welcome the ESU with open arms.
BTW, the Proud Bear thing is far more likely to be some Brits taking the piss than the GRU. Any country that still finds Dinner for One funny after watching it over fifty times has a questionable collective understanding of humour

Posted by: Ghost Ship | Nov 8, 2018 6:32:41 PM | 6

AhHa! So, now we have the answer as to why Craig Murray felt the need to defend George Soros today.

After all the evidence-free accusations justifying sanctions and diplomatic expulsions, it's clear there are no rules whatsoever governing the current Cyberwar. Recent revelations that Bellingcat's an agent for Daesh and Saudi's having tortured another journalist to death not publicized by BigLie Media also play into the game. That Democrats are absolutely unwilling to accept the fact that it was a LEAK not a Hack that led to the damning dissemination of HRC and DNC illegalities that certainly meddled in the 2016 election and are in despair that the "worst AG in US history" according to the ACLU finally got fired since that supposedly threatens their Russiagate project.

Otherwise, it all screams Distraction from other far more important happenings, in particular the upcoming Paris Peace Forum and Macrons remarks in its anticipation, which I explored on the latest open thread.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 8, 2018 6:37:00 PM | 7

What is vyaexit?

Posted by: hopehely | Nov 8, 2018 6:59:32 PM | 8

You all may think this mockery from the Russians is amusing, but I find it insensitive.

We all know that prostitutes have self esteem problems, and this targeting of American media, Facebook, etc. can only set these people back into feeling even worse about themselves..

Well, ok, only the ones that can understand they're being mocked, but still!


Posted by: Xeno | Nov 8, 2018 7:04:23 PM | 9

Mueller in trouble? You mean 2 years of thrashing about, convicting people with perjury traps and procedural garbage to come up with what we always knew was there ... absolutely nothing?

Posted by: SteveK9 | Nov 8, 2018 7:13:49 PM | 10

As I wait for my previous comment to materialize, I'll note this point: according to RT, a new law says Russian servicemen cannot share info about themselves or most of their or their fellow servicepeople's activities online. Thus, GRU personnel would be lawbreakers if they actually did this spoof.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 8, 2018 7:19:06 PM | 11

If they did this than the GRU are morons. Once the hurt starts this march I wouldn't put it past the Tories to invade Russia as a distraction. Nukes be damned.

Posted by: UserFriendly | Nov 8, 2018 7:29:37 PM | 12

I thought the Brexit referendum was the result of a private chat between Rupert Murdoch and David Cameron, and that the high finance lobby of the City of London was the main interested party in Brexit’s ultimate success. And that the whole “Russia is sowing discord” meme was simply a means of explaining the IRA’s wildly disparate messaging.

Posted by: jayc | Nov 8, 2018 7:52:40 PM | 13

UserFriendly

The Conservatives invade Russia - I wouldn't put it past them but with the effects of the austerity pogrom on the British military it would be a complete effing disaster. As that self-identifying "great military thinker", Fred Reed said "military stupidity comes in three levels: normallly(sic) stupid; really really stupid; and invading Russia." Even Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery, 1st Viscount Montgomery of Alamein, KG, GCB, DSO, PC, DL had as his first rule of war "Don't go to Moscow", his second rule of war was something about land armies and Asia but that was during the American War on Vietnam clusterfuck, so I reckon his updated three Rules of War would now be:#

Rule 1 - Don't go to Moscow
Rule 2 - Don't go to Moscow
Rule 3 - Don't go to Moscow

The trouble is the Conservative government is so stupid they might actually go to Moscow.

Posted by: Ghost Ship | Nov 8, 2018 8:05:39 PM | 14

On a more serious note:

The Russians, or rather Putin and his crew, do interfere in the West, it's their views on the family, gender, immigration, sovereignty of countries, secure borders, the need to defend the Judaeo-Christian culture, and stuff like that. These beliefs are directly opposite to the project of the Western progressives who favour borderless world, unlimited immigration, multy culty, non traditional families, transitioning .....

More to the point, Putin's take on the world and societies in it resonates with the great unwashed of the West, many if not the majority, have the same beliefs (hence Brexit, the turmoil in Italy, Hungary, the election of populist politicians ....).

The thing is the Western progressives cannot admit to any of it, they have to find a diversion, a plate of red herrings, as many fake reasons as possible to demonise and eventually destroy Russia to save their human soul re-engineering project, hence false flag ops, Novichok, election interference, the downing of commercial planes ....

Posted by: Baron | Nov 8, 2018 8:10:20 PM | 15

GRU is military intelligence. SVR or Foreign Intelligence Service... I guess this is more on the civilian or diplomatic side of things.
SVR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Service_(Russia)
GRU https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Intelligence_Directorate

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 8, 2018 8:11:21 PM | 16

Who are Fancy Bear? Can someone give me a serious answer to this question? I don't really know who any of these groups are.

Sorry, it's just that I'm trying to make sure that I'm keeping track of this whole stupid ant-Russia fiasco.

And what about this "Internet Research Agency?"

Posted by: TruthFinder | Nov 8, 2018 8:30:37 PM | 17

17

http://fancybear.net
They hacked and released a lot of WADA medical records that showed US and other athletes drugged to the eyeballs on prescription steroids for 'medical problems' such as asthma and so forth.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 8, 2018 8:51:59 PM | 18

O.o

Posted by: Josh | Nov 8, 2018 8:53:39 PM | 19

TruthFinder @ 17:

George Eliason's article on Fancy Bear at Off-Guardian is about as close an answer to Fancy Bear's identities as you're likely to come.

https://off-guardian.org/2018/06/25/who-is-fancy-bear-and-who-are-they-working-for/

He has identified them as a bunch of Ukrainian nationalists. One of their aims is to create and stir up precisely the confusion, chaos and exasperation that you are feeling.

Try to keep an open mind as to who or what is working for whom or what and don't fall into the trap of trying to discern logic and rationality in what is going on and keeping it all in order mentally or on a spreadsheet.

Posted by: Jen | Nov 8, 2018 10:22:32 PM | 20

The GRU is no longer known by this acronym since its name changed, as President Putin noted when he addressed officers of that organization 6 days ago celebrating its 100 years of service.

As with so many things Russian, it's a solemn and serious occasion. During the few minutes of Putin's address to his esteemed colleagues, he shows himself as a true commander in chief, with total gratitude for the sacrifice and dedication to honor and duty shown by heroes past and present in service of the fatherland.

Intelligence is revealed in its truest form, as the intrepid handmaiden supplying vital information to inform military tactics during the protection of Russia. This is very real, one understands, and means the difference between life and death, victory and surrender. Because the agents gathering intelligence adhered to their code and would never surrender and never give up, Russia has survived, even through the worst of upheavals.

And there is peace in Syria. And "we", says Putin, "have dealt a blow to the terrorists and prevented them coming here." And there really is a "we". This is what it feels like to be in a nation united in its sense of self, and enmeshed in real wars of survival, with real people doing real things.

Bring Back the Feared Name! Putin Proposes Reintroducing the "GRU" Intelligence Agency!

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 8, 2018 10:34:26 PM | 21

Jen @ 20
Who is George Eliason who wrote the piece at off guardian. Other than him being an American journalist in Donbass, I haven't found much on him.

The current great power war in the nuclear age is information, economic and a small percentage of kinetic in the form of proxies, eg ISIS AQ ect.
On the information war, Russia holds the aces as US is the aggressor and Truth is on Russia's side. If Russia were not firing back in the information war then the leadership would be remiss in not protecting their country.
Fancy bears and now proud bear's humor is very similar to Lavrov's and Putin also likes a bit of humor. Fancy bears made public WADA's records on athletes shortly after Russia was kicked out. Proud bear is now mocking the UK anti Russia establishment, very much a satire on the stupidity novichok and the other childish anti Russia stuff the UK establishment has come out with.
I think both entities are quite likely to be official Russia.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 8, 2018 11:28:02 PM | 22

@ Grieved

I had noted the change in name earlier but GRU is easier to remember. Still the same entity.
In interviews, Putin when asked who he respected most, said it was the agents that that work under cover for most of their lives, sacrificing friends and family for country. In that interview he said that a number went away to foreign countries during soviet times and are still there working under cover and loyal to the Russian federation.
When asked who he disliked the most, or had the least respect for - it was those that betray their own country.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 8, 2018 11:39:31 PM | 23

Borat at a US rodeo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePQ9_re7f1A
Was not able to find something similar with Borat in the land of Fawlty Towers and Grenfell.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 9, 2018 12:27:52 AM | 24

Facebook,twitter, Instagram. If you're basing your anything on what you read on these sites, you could be a friggen moron.

Posted by: ben | Nov 9, 2018 1:07:25 AM | 25

Oh, what crap! It's obviously some UK political faction pulling a stunt, probably Tory anti-Brexiteers preparing for a leadership challenge. They will lift the curtain soon to reveal.

Move along, nothing to see here!

Posted by: BM | Nov 9, 2018 1:19:51 AM | 26

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 8, 2018 10:34:26 PM | 21
(Putin's Russia)

Putin's stature was cemented when, following the Kursk disaster, a few months into his Presidency, he said "If you're looking for someone to blame for this, blame me. I'm the President and I'm responsible."

Big difference from Western governments hijacked by Right Wing cranks, who waste a lot of time and energy dreaming up reasons to blame someone else for their own blunders. Putin is held in high regard among citizens in the West for his reluctance to blame-shift unlike our home-grown political liars and tricksters.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Nov 9, 2018 1:55:57 AM | 27

It certainly looks like a cynical attempt to hammer into British minds that "the Russians manipulated us into Brexit for their interests and against ours." And then anti-Brexiteers and anti-Russian types can cite this as "proof". And they will.

Posted by: Russ | Nov 9, 2018 2:54:14 AM | 28

Proud bear and proud boys ...
somebody is playing games
not so sure the successful psychop
shines a light on itself

Posted by: not so proud | Nov 9, 2018 2:57:16 AM | 29

@16

"More to the point, Putin's take on the world and societies in it resonates with the great unwashed of the West, many if not the majority, have the same beliefs"

No, we don't. Especially not when it comes to social issues. Issues like gay marriage and unrestricted abortion access enjoy widespread support in much of the west, especially among young people (Ireland's referendum on legalizing gay marrige, which resulted in a crushing victory for the yes vote, is the most extreme example).

In economics, people want decent jobs (and job security) again. A desire to return to protectionism does not represent some sort of rebellion against Enlightenment ideals. The two things are not mutually exclusive. The British and American empires were both built on strategic use of protectionism.

And even in places like the American Bible Belt, polling shows significant support for things like Medicare for All government funded healthcare, a thoroughly progressive concept, despite constant media propaganda against it.

I'm not even sure where you're getting the idea that Putin represents purely nationalist economic policy. He leans neoliberal and favors free trade. He was criticizing Trump's tariffs back in May, and was talking about wanting a free trade deal with Egypt just last month.

Even if none of the above were the case, it wouldn't mean any significant amount of people in the west look up to Putin, for the simple reason that few people (at least in the English speaking world), pay any attention at all to Putin or Russia. It simply isn't on most people's radar (as the Dems recently discovered when polling showed essentially no one among the public cares about 'Russiagate'. Less than 1%; within the margin of error). Most people simply think and talk about Russia far less than people who visit sites like MoA.

Posted by: Merasmus | Nov 9, 2018 4:23:45 AM | 30

I don't think Breixit needs a hidden Russian hand.
Britons are plenty stupid enough to ruin the whole EU deal from which they massively profited all by themselves. a few loudmouthed Tories and their media sycophants were plenty enough.
next to the Americans and possibly the Dutch; these are the most gullible, brainwashed people in the West. they swallow any lie by the presstitutes hook, line and sinker.

it is no coincidence that in the UK, the best selling "newspapers" are rags and tabloids that apart from all the "Russia Russia!" scare run articles on celebrity nonsense, UFO's, the lot.

it is also not a coincidence that their workers party is and has been for a long time a big neoliberal pro war bastion of oppertunistic policies done by and for the elite. Blair was a local phenomena. 'just like Trump. just waiting to happen.
could not have happened in France, Germany or elsewhere; did happen in the UK
in this, they truly are a mirror of the US where the Democratic party did exactly the same thing (Clinton), even before Tony became Bush the Lesser's favorite lapdog.

even their so-called progressive papers are completely corrupt and sucking up to power. look at the Guardian for example......embarrasing, really.

no, the denizens of the United Kingdom don't need Putin's minions to screw up their society. they have been doing a fine job themselves, ever since Maggie Thatcher ran the circus.

Posted by: valar | Nov 9, 2018 4:46:08 AM | 31

B, I think this article is in bad taste. It pandys to those who want to exploit the Russiagate operation for their own ends.

It certainly looks like a cynical attempt to hammer into British minds that "the Russians manipulated us into Brexit for their interests and against ours." And then anti-Brexiteers and anti-Russian types can cite this as "proof". And they will.
Posted by: Russ | Nov 9, 2018 2:54:14 AM | 29

As I stated @27, this is probably a stunt by some Tory Wannabe to launch a leadership bid. The idea is to have people wondering who is behind the stunt for a few days, then after they have generated publicity they will out themselves. It's just a cheap cynical gimmick.

Posted by: BM | Nov 9, 2018 4:48:45 AM | 32

Many reasons why the English - it's really the English running the show - BREXITED . Not the least being renewed German arrogance and the way they put the boot into the hapless Greeks .
Until the E U have a real sharing of industrial productive capacity and wealth to the outlying fringes of the ' system ' the E U will continue to disintegrate.

Posted by: ashley albanese | Nov 9, 2018 4:53:54 AM | 33

Posted by: valar | Nov 9, 2018 4:46:08 AM | 32

"the whole EU deal from which they massively profited all by themselves."

Um, no, "they" (the British people, those who voted for Brexit) didn't profit, only elites did. That's why the vote succeeded.

Sounds like you got some Thatcherism going there yourself.

Posted by: Russ | Nov 9, 2018 5:15:37 AM | 34

Sometimes b lays his sarcasm so thick that I can't understand what he's hinting at. To me both of these info-ops look like spoofs that are not even trying to hide the fact that they're spoofs and are designed to provoke anger and hate and rage towards Russians and to make voters support whatever new sanctions their governments impose on Russia. I see nothing funny in this. The latest polls show Americans now hate Russians. Russians — not Putin or Russian establishment. It's not funny. Between American TV series about Russian "illegals" living in the US, Norwegian TV series about Russia occupying Norway, British TV series about a Russian mob boss living in London, NATO entertainment propaganda is in full swing demonizing Russia and Russians. Russian role in WW2 is being slowly erased: young Europeans now think it was Americans who defeated the Nazis, some ex-Soviet Jews now push the idea that it was Stalin, not Hitler, who was responsible for the Holocaust, some young Japanese think it was the Soviet Union that dropped the A-bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, SS divisions are being recognized as heroes on state level in the Ukraine and Baltic countries. This may seem absurd and funny to you, but it's not funny to us, Russians. All these lies are slowly accumulating and becoming "the truth" for younger generations.

Posted by: S | Nov 9, 2018 5:23:42 AM | 35

I can't stop laughing. The Nato machine is being ridiculed and taunted.

Posted by: Steve | Nov 9, 2018 5:38:49 AM | 36

Found this link over at Proud Bear's Twitter account to a Dorset source which states the group is a bunch of British activists who appear to be seriously concerned that the Russian government exercised influence over the Brexit referendum.

https://www.dorsetecho.co.uk/news/national/17211009.brexit-means-brexit-pranksters-place-putin-billboards-across-london/#comments-anchor

Well, if we assume the Russians did try to influence the Brexit vote, the end result surely blew up in their faces - as a result of the Brexit vote, Theresa May ended up as Prime Minister and Boris Johnson became Foreign Minister.

Would the Skripal poisoning incident have become the circus it has been if "Call Me Dave" Cameron had still been Prime Minister and Theresa May still Home Secretary?

Posted by: Jen | Nov 9, 2018 6:34:52 AM | 37

Peter AU 1 @ 23, 25:

George Eliason's Twitter account: https://twitter.com/gheliason

George Eliason at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/George_Eliason

Borat's Guide to Britain (a feature of Da Ali G Show): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDW4hTWbRYs

Posted by: Jen | Nov 9, 2018 6:45:31 AM | 38

@ 36 S:

I understand completely where you are coming from. Though could you please cite your sources? It's not that I don't believe you, but I'd like to be able to know where you're getting this from. Sorry if I appear rude. I just want to show other people this when I have the opportunity, about how prevalent Russophobia is.

Your post really made me think. What show about a "Russian mob boss" has him living in London, for example? I think the prevalence of Russophobia in our media is a good thing to show people.

If anyone else can help me out here, that would be much appreciated.

Posted by: TruthFinder | Nov 9, 2018 8:34:37 AM | 39

Since some posters here still wonder whether there was a hidden hand behind the successful brexit campaign and who it is, I would like to remind you of a imho great piece in – yes – The Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/07/the-great-british-brexit-robbery-hijacked-democracy

The hand has a name: Robert Mercer and Cambridge Analytica. I find that story a thousand times more likely than all that Russia blah.

Posted by: Cemi | Nov 9, 2018 8:39:29 AM | 40

Deep state behind this exposure of an alleged russian spy in Austria?

Lavrov blasts West’s ‘loudspeaker diplomacy’ after Austria claims it has exposed ‘Russian spy’
https://www.rt.com/news/443521-austria-allegations-russian-spy/

Posted by: Zanon | Nov 9, 2018 9:34:49 AM | 41

The GRU is certainly not behind Proud Bear for the simple reason they are not involved with Brexit.

What happened with the UK since 2010 is a very simple phenomenon typical of pluripartidary politics in Western Democracies.

During David Cameron's first term (2010-2015), the British economy begun to tank, and what was seen as a solution when times were good became a structural problem (immigrants). This, together with Cameron himself fueling up public opinion tension against the EU with his mirabolant negotiations (he always came back with "empty hands") propelled up the organization of the British far-right, which would become the UKIP.


The far-right always existed in the UK and they were always numerous. The thing is that, when the economy was doing fine, this far-right vote was absorbed and hegemonized by the center-right (the tories). This pattern is normal and is seen even in some third-world countries which adopted the Western system.

But the UK has one peculiarity: it is a de facto two-party system, thanks to the infamous FPTP system. Labour and Conservatives draw the map, dividing the country among themselves.

This peculiarity led to a political movement that didn't happen, e.g. in Brazil: the tories were capable of "reswallow" the far-right (UKIP). The tool? The promise of a referendum on the exit of the EU. The plan was very successful: Cameron was confortably re-elected in 2015 and UKIP was decimated in terms of seats won (the only thing that matters in the UK). What he didn't forsee was that, this time, Brexit actually won, and the far-right faction of the tories did rise up in the party hierarchy.

When the Scotish independence referendum happened, the tories and the MI5/6 were successful with the fear campaign, the Pound Sterling issue being the final swing factor. The Scotish cowardice decided the matter.

Cameron bet on the English fear to win again. When polls indicated a Brexit narrow victory in the eve of the voting day, the MI5/6 went to the extreme and murdered MP Jo Cox.

So, you see, Brexit's victory was one of those moments in History where the elite really commited an unpredicted mistake. It was a pure blunder. It very rarely happens in History, but it happens.

Posted by: vk | Nov 9, 2018 10:36:20 AM | 42

Posted by: vk | Nov 9, 2018 10:36:20 AM | 43

So, you see, Brexit's victory was one of those moments in History where the elite really commited an unpredicted mistake. It was a pure blunder. It very rarely happens in History, but it happens.

The Syriza con artists made the same mistake with their (what turned out to be fake) referendum.

Posted by: Russ | Nov 9, 2018 10:45:15 AM | 43

“.………The British disinformation agency Reuters calls the GRU billboards "spoof" and the GRU campaign a "stunt". That is disingenuous. Proud Bear is certainly more real then the Novichok poisoning of the now vanished Skripals and more real than the 'hacking' of the DNC servers blamed on Fancy and Cozy Bear…….”

I must respectfully disagree with your above statement - on both accounts. Two GRU agents have been conclusively identified in Britain about 1/4 of a mile from the house of Sergey Skripal. The Russian government (including Putin) lied about their identities and their reasons for the trip to England - on RT. No one believes for a minute that they were a couple of tourists which just happened to be recorded on CCTV that close to the Skripal house. The British government had this right from the beginning.

The Russians – from their point of view – would have been foolish NOT to intervene in the elections. There was so much at stake. The US intelligence assessment could not possibly have been more correct. On the hacking of the DNC, Ray McGovern writes at ConsortiumNews January 21, 2017 (“ Obama Admits Gap in Russian 'hack' case”):

“.......Does the Russian government hack, as many other governments do? Of course. Did it hack the emails of the Democratic National Committee? Almost certainly, though it was likely not alone in doing so. In the Internet age, hacking is the bread and butter of intelligence agencies. If Russian intelligence did not do so, this would constitute gross misfeasance, especially since the DNC was such easy pickings and the possibility of gaining important insights into the U.S. government was so high.......”

Although Ray rarely gets much right, he clearly nailed this one. But let’s look at another reason that the Russians were interested in hacking the DNC and helping to elect Trump - (pre-election) motive. Russia had every motive to elect Trump before the 2016 elections. Resetting relations with the US is critically in the interests of Russia which could result in ending “unfair” sanctions against Russia (Trump Tower Meeting); a more hands off approach to eastern Europe by the US (i.e., a world carved into areas of “interests” between the superpowers (Russia, US and China); America taking a more isolationist position in the world (similar to the years prior to WWII); a revamping or disbanding of NATO (removing threatening NATO forces from Eastern Europe); resetting roles in Syria; and the US joining Russia to fight terrorism world-wide including in Syria (despite Assad being the biggest single terrorist on the planet).

In addition Hillary Clinton represented a threat to Russia – and Russian interests in Eastern Europe and especially Ukraine. Clinton publically criticized the Russian elections in 2012 and she also threatened to create a no fly zone in Syria. She most certainly would have continued and pushed for rebel support in Syria. Clinton Erlich writes in Foreign Policy (“The Kremlin Really Believes That Hillary Wants to Start a War With Russia” http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/07/the-kremlin-really-believes-that-hillary-clinton-will-start-a-war-with-russia-donald-trump-vladimir-putin/):

“......Let’s not mince words: Moscow perceives the former secretary of state as an existential threat…….Moscow believes that Crimea and other major points of bipolar tension will evaporate if America simply elects a leader who will pursue the nation’s best interest, from supporting Assad against the Islamic State to shrinking NATO by ejecting free riders. Russia respects Trump for taking these realist positions on his own initiative, even though they were not politically expedient......”

Russia clearly had the motive to elect Trump.

Posted by: craigsummers | Nov 9, 2018 11:12:55 AM | 44

Peter AU 1 @23

I first ran across George Elliason on OpedNews:

George Eliason is an American journalist that lives and works in Donbass. He has been interviewed by and provided analysis for RT, the BBC, and Press-TV. His articles have been published in the Security Assistance Monitor, Washingtons Blog, OpedNews, the Saker, RT, Global Research, and RINF, and the Greanville Post along with many other publications. He has been cited and republished by various academic blogs including Defending History, Michael Hudson, SWEDHR, Counterpunch, the Justice Integrity Project, along with many others.

Posted by: Tobin Paz | Nov 9, 2018 11:14:30 AM | 45

@43 vk... good post... i am not sure how accurate it is, but it is a good overview...

@ 45 cs... thanks for the koolaid review...

Posted by: james | Nov 9, 2018 11:38:10 AM | 46

Considering UK has strong libel laws that can be easily abused against anyone who dares criticize anyone, and that UK probably has some kind of laws against hate speech (which obviously includes hate against specific nationality), since they're not yet outside the EU and should be expected by ECHR to have such a thing, Russian government could actually have some fun at the expense of the idiots who came up with this, if they wanted to. And were I Putin, I would actually use lawyers and the full might of British law to nail their asses, just on principle.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Nov 9, 2018 12:05:44 PM | 47

TruthFinder@40

The US actually has a 'department of propaganda' imbedded somewhere in the trillion dollar per year homeland security apparatus. Their job is to lead you to believe only what they tell you.

Readers of intellectual postings like MOA use their own ability to find and determine the truth. S@36 is an excellent example. It is likely he comments from a broad reading experience, observations and from a preponderance of the facts. May I respectfully encourage you to follow his example rather than ask for citations.

Posted by: ger | Nov 9, 2018 12:14:31 PM | 48

Posted by: paid jerk-off | Nov 9, 2018 11:12:55 AM | 45

How much did that hairball of disinformation cost your foolish clients?

You are a disgrace.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 9, 2018 12:15:35 PM | 49

LOL do people HERE actually believe that GRU is behind this? You guys got to be kidding?
This (rather) looks like a psyop stunt to blame Russia for Brexit.

Posted by: Zanon | Nov 9, 2018 12:24:43 PM | 50

Poetic Justice is one way to describe this observation atop Larry King admitting that CNN stopped doing news years ago:

"The people that were sure Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, Syria had gas, Libya had gangsterism and that Russia meddled in the world's most visible election cannot decide if a man in front of over a dozen cameras grabbed a microphone away from a woman right next to him."

Partisan Girl on CNN and Trump:

"#Acosta deserves everything he’s getting. But I notice #Trump says #CNN is fake news but turns around and believes everything they say about #Syria. Like he’s gotten a selective lobotomy."

Wouldn't that make Trump a dotard as Kim observed?

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 9, 2018 1:22:45 PM | 51

Khashoggi murder spawns TV show called "Consulat." Apparently, it's Swiss TV. Trailer vid at link.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 9, 2018 1:48:50 PM | 52

If there is anyone familiar with the 1943 Hollywood WWII propaganda movie "Sahara" starring Humphrey Bogart, have at look at the Soviet film "13th" from 1936.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Gl0aWjAJ3E

For those not familiar, this AnnaNews video shows the two side by side (or rather key scenes).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueAsSIiBYMg

AntiFake indeed!

Posted by: Yonatan | Nov 9, 2018 1:50:40 PM | 53

These billboards are not an anonymous website. In looking into whether it is Russian satire or anti brexit activists, the obvious place to start would be to find out who paid for the adds and follow the money.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 9, 2018 2:05:39 PM | 54

10

Everyone in NYC knows Trump as a slumlord bunko artist who built a towering inferno of debt through swindles, then got bailed out by former Soviet mafiya, who hold the paper on all his properties, and gave him a 24k gold penthouse at Trump Tower and celebrity golf host contract at Mara Lago.

Trump is likely the most openly corrupt of all the world leaders, openly engaging in money laundering (convicted and fined) and in underaged female human trafficking and prostitution, (that's how he met his wife at a party, after all), and now arms dealing through the Kushners.

Mueller is a Republican and so was Sessions and Cohen. What you are seeing is not 'absence of guilt', but the incredible power of graft and corruption, under a venal Napoleonic Sun King. If you 'haven't got the memo' on that, maybe try changing your flow, bro.

Who wants to be the last pole-sucker to blow Trump?

Posted by: Anton Worter | Nov 9, 2018 2:29:55 PM | 55

VK @ 43:

It is true that First-Past-The-Post voting has delivered a political culture in Britain that alienates most of the country's voters. When a political party ends up being the dominant party even with support lower than 30% of the vote, voters become sceptical and cynical about their ability to influence and change their country's politics. Such a situation could be well what Britain's political establishment has always desired.

But I wonder whether having a Proportional Representational electoral system would improve voter and party participation in Britain, given that we have it here in Australia and voter apathy towards Australian politics is very strong.

A political culture based on the institution of monarchy as it exists in Britain will also end up working against the interests of the British public. Monarchy in Britain will always favour the status quo or that political party or movement that preserves and protects British royal family members' wealth and entitlements, and keeps them secret away from Freedom of Information requests. The propaganda machine that surrounds the British royal family, and its younger members in particular, seems to be well funded and supported if not at all original in its ideas.

The British economy is tanking because the British share of North Sea oil that has been fuelling British finance since the mid-1980s is fast disappearing.

Posted by: Jen | Nov 9, 2018 2:36:07 PM | 56

Ger @ 50 and S @ 36 well said

I'm amazed at the lack of respect Russia gets considering what she has accomplished, most recently in Syria.

Bring up Putin and people say 'oh that brutal dictator'

The latest is that he wants to move into Libya to create chaos similar to what he did in Syria and therefore increase illegal immigration to Europe.

Russia in Libya UK Sun

Luckily we have some honest people reporting the truth like Eva Bartlett and MOA rather than this amazing twisting of events.

Posted by: financial matters | Nov 9, 2018 2:40:06 PM | 57

Did anybody here actually try to donate through PayPal?

Posted by: bjd | Nov 9, 2018 2:55:29 PM | 58

Lavrov humor.

Meddling in Catalonia election https://youtu.be/04FVIyf0sKU?t=1693
When asked about Russia's involvement in South Africa lavrov replies "At this time, we are busy with meddling with Catalonia's elections"

Lavrov when asked about Russian meddling in France spain and UK...
"You have not mentioned all the things, which we have done this year. Sweden, Denmark, Montenegro, [Former Yugoslav Republic of] Macedonia, Austria… We had a lot of work. Therefore, we forgot about other things, which are also important. For example, the development of cultural ties with Japan… We have not managed to overthrow the Japanese emperor yet. We did everything, but he is to remain for two more years. But we hope that we'll reach our goal," Lavrov said ironically."
https://sputniknews.com/russia/201712291060408231-lavrov-mocks-russian-meddling/

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 9, 2018 3:30:21 PM | 59

:

"That's how its done. Nastrovje!"

;-)

.

Posted by: Dennis Revell | Nov 9, 2018 3:37:04 PM | 60

Muller : a stone or piece of wood, metal, or glass used as a pestle for pounding or grinding

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 9, 2018 3:38:54 PM | 61

- When I look at the financial & economic data of the UK then it's clear that the UK is "(a bit) too big for its bridges". When I listen, read & watch british media (on line) then I do get the impression that the british "don't like it" that they have to bow the whims of Brussels. To be honest, compared to the much bigger Eurozone, the UK is just a much smaller economy.
- Just look what happened to the Euro and the US dollar since 2014/2015. Both currencies went up some 30% in a matter of say 3 years. And that something the british consumer is feeling in his/her wallet. Think e.g. Oil (priced in USD) and food. The UK is a net food importer from the Eurozone. The UK imports some 60% of its food from the Eurozone. No wonder, british voters are not (too) happy and voted for the Brexit and against the incumbents (i.e. the conservative party).

- @B, I am shocked. Was there absolute no proof that one George Soros was behind this evil deed of the Brexit ?

One has to keep in mind that Mr. Soros has A LOT OF money and is therefore involved in A LOT OF conspiracies all around the world. (Sarcasm off).

Posted by: Willy2 | Nov 10, 2018 4:24:56 AM | 62

- Correction:

This sentence in post #66:

"Both currencies went up some 30% in a matter of say 3 years."

should be

"Both currencies went up some 30% in a matter of say 3 years against the british pound sterling".

Posted by: Willy2 | Nov 10, 2018 4:30:57 AM | 63

Looks like a free-for-all for ideas about who influenced Brexit and how. From a North American perspective it looks like the old people fucking the young people.

The older folks pine for a powerful Britain of a generation ago that still had remnants of the glory of empire that have gradually slipped away over the years similar to the way that Putin pines for the glory of the USSR. They seemed to think they could do better going it alone than being under the thumbs of the nabobs of Brussels.

The younger people seemed more inclined to agree with the ideas of open borders . They thought that if you could get yourself a trade or profession that was valued throughout Europe then the world was your oyster. You could study or work in any number of countries and choose your own weather and culture. If you got fed up with one place you could move on to another.

If I was a young fellow then I know that wold be my choice. And if the results of the referendum where to my liking I wouldn't give a fiddler's fuck who's intrigue ha helped to bring it about. I would see it as the same opportunity as a North American to move to Southern California or the Florida Keys on a lark.

Posted by: peter | Nov 10, 2018 8:00:26 AM | 64

.. Brexit's victory was one of those moments in History where the elite really commited an unpredicted mistake. It was a pure blunder. It very rarely happens in History, but it happens. vk at 43.

I had this thought as well some time ago, I even posted in that direction, yes, maybe. But then I thought…no. Exactly why the Brexit vote prevailed could fill two books, and has been amply discussed on MoA … without revisiting all that, let’s just state that ‘austerity’ Tory policies, the neglect and oppression of certain sections of the population / regions / places / industries lead to a stick it to the man vote. (Plus and/or that urban Remainers were confident of their cozy spot and didn’t bother to vote..)

Brexit will create much pain, a lot more ‘austerity’ be it of a different type, e.g. sudden instead of slow erosion (e.g. > NHS); scattered rather than distributed - through sudden lay-offs and unemployment, ricochet effects, etc. A certain part of the ruling ‘elites’ (Tories mainly but not only) could not wish for anything better! Brexit will *increase* the previous chaos, the death rate, the suicide rate, the refusal of help, homeless, etc. etc. (long list.) Crime will go thru the roof, the police won’t be able to handle it (already can’t properly in London.)

This vision is based on the prediction that Brexit will be a crash-out, as I am convinced of, see previous post. No last-ditch stay or deal etc. will be implemented. There are just too many ppl in GB living off too ‘scant’ ressources (it is thought, not by me); de-growth or scaling down can’t be faced, as National Unity went out the door with Thatcher. The days of solidarity and the Brit-together spirit or whatever it is called of WW2 have been dust for a long time.

GB’s use of fossil fuels, the no. 1 indicator of economic activity, a proxy for GDP, and well-being in terms of material possessions, and many ‘state services’ is sharply down, OK (renewables yada yada)…well, see all ‘energy sources’ here, first chart. (The article is supposed to be reassuring.) The drop started well before 2008..

https://www.carbonbrief.org/five-charts-show-the-historic-shifts-in-uk-energy-last-year


Posted by: Noirette | Nov 10, 2018 9:41:47 AM | 65

Noirette @ 69

Yet another astute comment by you. Yes, the elites don't orchestrate every move as if they are puppet handlers but they do manage each event after the fact as well a they can for their own account.

Same with Trump. He is not a creation of the elites but subsequent to his election he has been rather easily managed by them, with a very few notable exceptions.

If Trump were smart (and sadly it becomes more apparent by the day he's not) he would runaway from the elites and cast his lot with the downtrodden, both those who bought his populist messsage and stuck it to the man, and those who didn't buy (IE, minourities). From there he would become breathtakingly popular and historically relevant instead of another in a long line of lying jackasses.

Unfortunately, the British leaders who lied their way into Brexit don't appear to have any such potential escape route from Brexit, except to call the whole thing off.

Posted by: donkeytale | Nov 10, 2018 10:43:13 AM | 66

donkeytale

This batch of Kool-Aid doesn't pass the smell test, donkey.

the elites don't orchestrate every move ... they do manage each event after the fact

Not orchestrating EVERY move doesn't mean that they don't orchestrate ANY move.

There are many examples of orchestration.

"The Fiscal Cliff"
Which resulted in Obama's making the Bush tax cuts permanent.

The Kavanaugh hearings
In which Democratic opposition focused on spurious accusations instead of making an issue of Kavanaugh's authoritarian bias (bias for the executive branch). Bonus: eroding support for the #MeToo Movement. The establishment doesn't like popular Movements like #MeToo and #BlackLivesMatter.

Trump "is not a creation of the elites"

This is a laughable assertion given that the electoral system in America runs on MONEY. He is as much a creation of the elites as his opponent, Hillary "I never changed my vote for money" Clinton or fellow faux populist Obama. In fact, the more that one examines the 2016 election, the more it appears to have been a setup from start to finish with Hillary winning against sheepdog Sanders, a "friend of 25 years" then throwing the race to another friend (Trump).

Among other things, Hillary: 1) deliberately alienated Sanders supporters by bringing Debra Wasserman Shultz into her campaign and choosing Tim Kaine as her running mate; chose not to campaign in 3 crucial where the election was very close.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 10, 2018 1:47:01 PM | 67

@ Posted by: Noirette | Nov 10, 2018 9:41:47 AM | 69

How did the tories planned Brexit? It simply cost their recently reelected PM!

I remember when, after Corbyn was elected leader for the first time, Cameron made jokes in the PMQs about how he would be the end of Labour and how he should simply resign. Corbyn was treated like an abortion by both sides, it was like if he was a dead man walking.

And then, one day after the referendum, only Corbyn was standing, while Cameron was publicly resigning, crying like a little girl.

The tories were absolutely confident Remain would win.

Posted by: vk | Nov 10, 2018 1:50:42 PM | 68

- Cameron wanted to extract more consessions from Brussels/the EU. He didn't want to leave the EU at all. He knew that a large minority (say 30% to 40%) was in favour of a Brexit. If say 40% was for a Brexit then Cameron could use that as leverage against Brussels to get more favours from Brussels. (Boris Johnson had the same thoughts/made a similar calculation).
- But when some 52% was in favour of a Brexit then the establishment had a rude awakening.
- Premier May made a similar miscalculation when she called for new elections in 2017. The calculation was that with the upcoming Brexit voters would reward the tories with an election victory. But instead the tories lost their majority in the House of Commons and were forced to set up with a coalition with the DUP from Northern Ireland.
- In every election since 2010 the tories lost seats/votes (incl. the Brexit vote). The british voters did not vote for the Brexit, they were "not happy" with the current economic situation and therefore voted against the incumbent party. If Labour had been the incumbent party then Labour would have lost seats and lost the Brexit vote as well.

Posted by: Willy2 | Nov 10, 2018 11:25:44 PM | 69

- Perhaps "Proud Bear" was able to influence the Brexit vote but only a bit.

Posted by: Willy2 | Nov 10, 2018 11:28:57 PM | 70

- There was/is another sign that the british establishment is/was very happy with the current status quo and don't/didn't want change and that was the scottish referendum on independence. Here the establishment also had a rude awakenig because the Tories thought the Scots would vote "Stay". But one poll told that about 40 to 48% wanted independence for Scotland.
- In spite of the Tories being in power, the establishment sent the former Labour prime minister Gordon Brown (because he was born in Scotland) to Scotland. And Brown seemed to have mamaged to talk the scots out of voting for scottish independence.

Posted by: Willy2 | Nov 11, 2018 8:38:52 AM | 71

vk at 72, I didn’t state that the Tories planned Brexit..

Both Tories and Labour are split on the matter which shows how antiquated and entrenched the GB pol system is - on the most important issue of the last decades no policy guides exist, so there aren’t any platforms for argument and/or compromise etc. possible!

I only intimated that a Brexit or other type of ‘catastrophic’ event suits some part of the Brit elites.

I agree that Cameron and his mates fully expected Remain to ‘win’, that was the whole point of doing the referendum, to 'set all this nonsense aside' a spectacularly stupid idea on all counts. (see willy2 at 73 for ex.)

Posted by: Noirette | Nov 11, 2018 9:44:37 AM | 72

JR @ 71

Thanks for this comment. It is purely conjectural on your part (as was mine too, of course) but at least it was thoughtfully written and worth responding too.

(Apologies in advance to those who dislike all this pedantic (h/t Russ) back and forth btwn JR and DT)

Here my words already agree with you:

DT: the elites don't orchestrate every move....
JR: Not orchestrating EVERY move doesn't mean that they don't orchestrate ANY move.

Well, uhm, yes. My statement would logically disagree with yours if I had said "the elites never orchestrate any move." My statement implies that the elites do in fact orchestrate moves. Of course they do. In fact, in the grande scheme, capitalism itslef is an orchestrated conspiracy of the capitalists against the workers.

As for your examples, the fiscal cliff and Kavanaugh hearings:

The Democrats couldn't obstruct Kavanaugh's appointment by simply arguing his judicial philosophy. He only needed 50 GOP votes to be affirmed. The Dems were essentially boxed out of the confirmation process by their own Obama era Reid rule for judicial confirmations which McConnell shrewdly extended to SCOTUS appointees after Trump's election, which are both examples of the Elites managing for their own accounts.

The #MeToo approach the Demotards decided to take was a method of attempted elite orchestration for sure, with two goals in mind: (1) hoping to find enough Senators outraged by Kavanaugh's decades-old frat boy antics to vote no and (2) Playing political theatre to the nation at large, specifically targeting white middle class female voters for the upcoming mid terms. D'uh.

(1) failed. (2) succeeded with the House vote, arguably failed with the Senate vote. The share of white women voters for Democrats increased over 2016 and the Dems won several House races in GOP leaning suburbs.

As for the Fiscal Cliff, I would have to go back and research since you supplied nothing along with your conjecture.

As for Trump his own self, I believe I am on much more solid ground with my own conjecture here. Trump, or more accurately, his presidential campaign, was decidedly not a creation of the GOP elite. The fact is he was vehemently opposed by the leadership and the establishment from the get go. The list of never Trumpers in 2015-16 before the general election would take longer to illustrate than space permits.

His campaign was run by outsiders and his winning message was conceived by the editor of Breitbart.org, hardly a bastion of GOP orthodoxy.

The big money flowed almost exclusively to the other candidates during the primaries, at least until it became apparent Trump would win. This money flow is also an example of the elites managing the process after the fact. Trump of course astutely captured the GOP nomination becuase he alone chased (with bald-faced lies as it turned out, surprise surprise) the disaffected GOP base (also bringing along significant numbers of disaffected blue collar Obama voters in the process) while the other 15 candidates vied for and split the GOP business establishment and elite votes.

After the election, the elites have managed Trump very well (with a few exceptions), a fact very well known and agreed upon far and wide, including by many MoA commenters too...

Posted by: donkeytale | Nov 11, 2018 11:10:22 AM | 73

donkey

Your statement had two parts. What you left out in your reply is "but they do manage each event after the fact". This second part strongly implies that the establishment is only reactive. Most readers would take it that way.

You could've written "each event that catches the establishment by surprise" - but you didn't, and your 'mistake' works in favor of the establishment. Hard to believe that it is an honest mistake given your pro-establishment bias.

the elites have managed Trump very well

LOL. Trump does what they elites want, but he is not a product of the elites.

very well known and agreed upon far and wide

Pointing to conventional wisdom is a strange way for a progressive to make a point. But just what we would expect from an establishment shill that wants to avoid the issue.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 11, 2018 1:45:48 PM | 74

Thank you Jackrabbit for that meticulous attempt....at reducing my comment down to two out of context sentence fragments. And this is priceless:

Your statement had two parts. What you left out in your reply is "but they do manage each event after the fact". This second part strongly implies that the establishment is only reactive. Most readers would take it that way.

Only "readers" who prefer to read whatever they wish into any statement so they can form their own repeated [and meaningless] judgements no matter what.

Maybe try standing up and thinking on your own instead of always playing to these imaginary "readers" and trying to hide behind some imaginary groupthink consensus you falsely believe makes your comments into meaningful pronouncements from the MoonofAlabama Anti-Troll Auxiliary League (unofficial, of course).

What is the definition of insanity again?

Oh right....constantly feeding the trolls. LMAO. I'm done...

Posted by: donkeytale | Nov 11, 2018 3:43:23 PM | 75

donkey

Your comments speak for themselves. I just decode them.

I hope when you LMAO you shake lose that fetid 'tale'.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 11, 2018 4:41:36 PM | 76

loose

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 11, 2018 4:49:15 PM | 77

Posted by: Ghost Ship | Nov 8, 2018 6:32:41 PM | 6

I agree that it is likely British humour. Labour has finally found a way to hit back at Conservatives smearing Corbyn as a Communist traitor.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 12, 2018 4:53:25 AM | 78

British influence:

"UK Gave Austria Info on Ex-Colonel Suspected of Spying for Russia"
https://sptnkne.ws/jYGJ

Posted by: Zanon | Nov 12, 2018 6:29:31 AM | 79

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Working...