Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 26, 2019

Biden's Intervention In Ukraine And Ukraine's 2016 Election Meddling Are Matters of Fact

Several mainstream media have made claims that Joe Biden's intervention in the Ukraine and the Ukrainian interference in the U.S. election are "conspiracy theories" and "debunked". The public record proves them wrong. By ignoring or even contradicting the facts the media create an opening for Trump to rightfully accuse them of providing "fake news".

On October 04 a New Yorker piece, headlined The Invention of the Conspiracy Theory on Biden and Ukraine, asserted:

[In late 2018], Giuliani began speaking to current and former Ukrainian officials about the Biden conspiracy theory, and meeting with them repeatedly in New York and Europe. Among those officials was Viktor Shokin, a former top Ukrainian prosecutor who was sacked in March, 2016, after European and U.S. officials, including Joe Biden, complained that he was lax in curbing corruption. Shokin claimed that he had lost his powerful post not because of his poor performance but rather because Biden wanted to stop his investigation of Burisma, in order to protect his son. The facts didn’t back this up. The Burisma investigation had been dormant under Shokin.

Several other media outlets also made the highlighted claim to debunk the "conspiracy theory". But is it correct?

We have looked into the claim that Shorkin's investigation against Burisma owner Zlochevsky was dormant, as the New Yorker says, and found it to be false:

The above accounts are incorrect. Shokin did go after Zlochevsky. He opened two cases against him in 2015. After he did that Biden and his crew started to lobby for his firing. Shokin was aggressively pursuing the case. He did so just before Biden's campaign against him went into a frenzy.
On February 2 Shokin confiscated four large houses Zlochevsky owned plus a Rolls-Royce Phantom and a "Knott 924-5014 trainer". (Anyone know what that is?) Ten days later Biden goes into overdrive to get him fired. Within one week he personally calls Poroshenko three times with only one major aim: to get Shokin fired.
Zlochevsky had hired Joe Biden's son Hunter for at least $50,000 per month. In 2015 Shokin started to investigate him in two cases. During the fall of 2015 Joe Biden's team begins to lobby against him. On February 2 Shokin seizes Zlochevsky's houses. Shortly afterwards the Biden camp goes berserk with Biden himself making nearly daily phonecalls. Shokin goes on vacation while Poroshenko (falsely) claims that he resigned. When Shokin comes back into office Biden again takes to the phone. A week later Shokin is out.

Biden got the new prosecutor general he wanted. The new guy made a bit of show and then closed the case against Zlochevsky.

It is quite astonishing that the false claims, that Shokin did not go after Burisma owner Zlochevsky, is repeated again and again despite the fact that the public record, in form of a report by Interfax-Ukraine, contradicts it.


On Thursday Buzzfeed News wrote about a different Ukrainian prosecutor who in early 2019 was approached to set up meetings with President Donald Trump's private lawyer Rudy Giuliani:

[Gyunduz] Mamedov’s role was key. He was an intermediary in Giuliani’s efforts to press Ukraine to open investigations into former vice president Joe Biden and the debunked conspiracy theory about the country’s interference in the 2016 presidential election, a collaboration between BuzzFeed News, NBC News, and the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) can reveal.

The OCCRP is funded by the UK Foreign Office, the US State Dept, USAID, Omidyar Network, Soros' Open Society, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and others. Most of these entities were involved in the 2014 coup against the elected government of the Ukraine.

Is the "conspiracy theory" about Ukrainian interference in the U.S. election really "debunked"?

It is, of course, not. The facts show that the interference happened. It was requested by the Democratic National Committee and was willingly provided by Ukrainian officials. 

As Politico reported shortly after Trump had won the election, it was the Democratic Party organization, the DNC, which had asked the Ukrainians for dirt that could be used against the campaign on Donald Trump:

Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.

A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation.

The Ukrainian efforts had an impact in the race, helping to force Manafort’s resignation and advancing the narrative that Trump’s campaign was deeply connected to Ukraine’s foe to the east, Russia.

The Ukrainian-American who was the go between the DNC and the government of Ukraine had earlier worked for the Clinton administration:

Manafort’s work for Yanukovych caught the attention of a veteran Democratic operative named Alexandra Chalupa, who had worked in the White House Office of Public Liaison during the Clinton administration. Chalupa went on to work as a staffer, then as a consultant, for Democratic National Committee. The DNC paid her $412,000 from 2004 to June 2016, according to Federal Election Commission records, though she also was paid by other clients during that time, including Democratic campaigns and the DNC’s arm for engaging expatriate Democrats around the world.

In March 2016 Chalupa went to the Ukrainian embassy in Washington DC and requested help from the Ukrainian ambassador to go after Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort. In August 2016 the Ukrainians delivered a secret "black ledger" that allegedly showed that Manafort had illegally received money for his previous work for the campaign of the former Ukrainian president Yanukovych.

Handwritten ledgers show $12.7 million in undisclosed cash payments designated for Mr. Manafort from Mr. Yanukovych’s pro-Russian political party from 2007 to 2012, according to Ukraine’s newly formed National Anti-Corruption Bureau. Investigators assert that the disbursements were part of an illegal off-the-books system whose recipients also included election officials.

“Paul Manafort is among those names on the list of so-called ‘black accounts of the Party of Regions,’ which the detectives of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine are investigating,” the statement said. “We emphasize that the presence of P. Manafort’s name in the list does not mean that he actually got the money, because the signatures that appear in the column of recipients could belong to other people.”

The provenance of the ledger is highly dubious. It was allegedly found in a burned out office of Yanukovych's old party:

The papers, known in Ukraine as the “black ledger,” are a chicken-scratch of Cyrillic covering about 400 pages taken from books once kept in a third-floor room in the former Party of Regions headquarters on Lipskaya Street in Kiev.
The accounting records surfaced this year, when Serhiy A. Leshchenko, a member of Parliament who said he had received a partial copy from a source he did not identify, published line items covering six months of outlays in 2012 totaling $66 million. In an interview, Mr. Leshchenko said another source had provided the entire multiyear ledger to Viktor M. Trepak, a former deputy director of the domestic intelligence agency of Ukraine, the S.B.U., who passed it to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau.

Anti-corruption groups in Ukraine said the black ledger detailing payments was probably seized when protesters ransacked the Party of Regions headquarters in February 2014.

The pages from the ledger, which had come from anonymous sources probably supported by John Brennan's CIA, were never proven to be genuine. But the claims were strong enough to get Manafort fired as campaign manager for Donald Trump. He was later sentenced for unrelated cases of tax evasion.

Serhin A. Leshchenko, the member of the Ukrainian parliament who published the dubious ledger, was rabidly anti-Trump. Shortly after providing the "secret ledger" he talked with the Financial Times and promised to continue to meddle in the U.S. election. The FT headline emphasized the fact:

    Ukraine’s leaders campaign against ‘pro-Putin’ Trump (screenshots):

The prospect of Mr Trump, who has praised Ukraine's arch-enemy Vladimir Putin, becoming leader of the country's biggest ally has spurred not just Mr Leshchenko but Kiev's wider political leadership to do something they would never have attempted before: intervene, however indirectly, in a U.S. election.
Mr. Leshchenko and other political actors in Kiev say they will continue with their efforts to prevent a candidate - who recently suggested Russia might keep Crimea, which it annexed two years ago - from reaching the summit of American political power.

"A Trump presidency would change the pro-Ukrainian agenda in American foreign policy," Mr Leshchenko, an investigative journalist turned MP, told the Financial Times. "For me it was important to show not only the corruption aspect, but that he is [a] pro-Russian candidate who can break the geopolitical balance in the world."
If the Republican candidate loses in November, some observers suggest Kiev's action may have played at least a small role.

A Democratic Party operative asked the Ukrainian ambassador to find dirt on Trump's campaign manger Paul Manafort. A few month later a secret "black ledger" emerges from nowhere into the hands of dubious Ukrainian actors including a 'former' domestic intelligence director.

The ledger may or may not show that Manafort received money from Yanukovych's party. It was never verified. But it left Trump no choice but to fire Manafort. Ukrainian figures who were involved in the stunt openly admitted that they had meddled in the U.S. election, promised to do more of it and probably did.

The Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election is well documented. How the Buzzfeed News author can claim that it is a "debunked conspiracy theory" is beyond me.

In 1998 the U.S. and the Ukraine signed a Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (pdf). It came into force in February 2001. Article I defines the wide scope of assistance:

1. The Contracting States shall provide mutual assistance, in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty, in connection with the investigation, prosecution, and prevention of offenses, and in proceedings related to criminal matters.

2. Assistance shall include: (a) taking the testimony or statements of persons; (b) providing documents, records, and other items; (c) locating or identifying persons or items; (d) serving documents; (e) transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; (f) executing searches and seizures; (g) assisting in proceedings related to immobilization and forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and (h) any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the Requested State.

3. Assistance shall be provided without regard to whether the conduct that is the subject of the investigation, prosecution, or proceeding in the Requesting State would constitute an offense under the laws of the Requested State.

When Trump asked the current Ukrainian President Zelensky to help with an investigation into the above matters he acted well within the law and within the framework of the treaty. It was certainly not illegitimate to do that.

But when mainstream media deny that Biden's interference in Ukraine's prosecutor office is suspect, or claim that the Ukraine did not interfere in the U.S. elections, they make it look as if Trump did something crazy or illegal. He does plenty of that but not in this case. To use it a basis of an 'impeachment inquiry' is political bullshit.

Making these false claims will come back to haunt those media outlets. Sooner or later the public will recognize that those claims are false. It will lessen the already low trust in the media even more.


Posted by b on October 26, 2019 at 17:51 UTC | Permalink

next page »

"Sooner or later the public will recognize that those claims are false. It will lessen the already low trust in the media even more."

More precisely, there exit Trump-friendly media with millions of followers, so insisting on innocence of Biden will have a political cost. Not to mention leftist media reminiscing how Senator Biden championed the cause of MBNA (credit cart giant) when it was also a generous employer of his dear son. Of course, given the size of Delaware, it could be just a coincidence.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Oct 26 2019 18:16 utc | 1

Great job MoA. This will never stop until Trump is out of office, either in 2020 or in 2024.

Posted by: Jose Garcia | Oct 26 2019 18:26 utc | 2

Thanks b for providing the nitty gritty details of this sorry saga. That term "conspiracy theory" has been so widely abused that, to me at least, it now means something that the author wishes were not true but almost certainly is.

Posted by: corkie | Oct 26 2019 18:27 utc | 3

What is certain is that if Biden is selected as the Dem candidate and ends up as President, the GOP (if it retains influence in Congress) will open an investigation into his actions on behalf of his son. Russia-gate is the gift that keeps on giving!

Posted by: Maracatu | Oct 26 2019 18:30 utc | 4

Thanks b, for the reality check.

Joe Biden needs to STFU, and go away. He and his ilk are part of the problem, not the solution.

The rulers of America insist on pushing this sycophant for the empire down our throats.

And, he can take HRC and her crowd with him.

It's high time for some new blood, IF, TPTB, will even allow that to happen, which I very much doubt....

Posted by: ben | Oct 26 2019 18:34 utc | 5

P. S. DJT, IMO, is ALSO in the same category with Biden, HRC and other scum-bags that need to "go away", if not imprisoned..

Posted by: ben | Oct 26 2019 18:39 utc | 6

I think that Ukrainegate actually involves facts, names, dates, dollars will make the media farrago harder than Russiagate to sustain for long, since the latter seems to have been more of a whisper campaign.

But whether any further loss of confidence in the media could be decisive might depend on whether one thinks there is a bottom, and how much farther there is to fall.

Does the Mighty Wurlizter simply shift to Montenegro-gate (or some other opportunity created by another Trump blunder), or might the Barr/Durham investigation's shift in status to "criminal" -- that is, to an investigation to now establish criminal activity--with its subpoena powers, blanket declassifications, and criminal liabilities for obstruction of justice--change the dynamic? This, of course, is what Larry Johnson has been saying at Sic Semper Tyrranus. Distinguished barflies here have wondered if this might also serve to discipline the IO/MSM Wurlitzer.

One wild card here will be the NSA. If the Snowden and Wikileaks disclosures are any indication, the NSA will have collected all of Clinton's private emails, would have dispositive evidence of whether the DNC cache was leaked or hacked, whether Cosy Bear was a CIA Vault 7 false flag, and will have the full inventory of lovebird texts, and not just Mifsud's but Halper's, Glenn Simpson's, Crowdstrike's communications with the CIA's Trump Task Force / IC counter-intelligence set up, and its MI6 enablers.

Not sure how much leverage Barr will have with the NSA, but subpoena power, blanket de-classification, obstruction of justice risks, and (according to Johnson) Gina Haspel's potential collaboration to bring down Brennan -- hey, who knows what might shake loose?

Posted by: Paul Damascene | Oct 26 2019 18:46 utc | 7

Thanks for another informative and insightful commentary, B. It's like a drink of cool, clean water after staggering through a volcanic landscape full of fumaroles belching sulfurous plumes of superheated gas.

Sometimes my hobby horses merrily hop along under me without any effort on my part. I just hang onto the reins and howl. So: it's bad enough that the US mass-media consent-manufacturers, aka the CIA/Deep State's "Mighty Wurlitzer", gin up endless propaganda to discredit the facts you mention; their mission is to fool enough of the public that there's no "there" there, and prop up Biden's presidential campaign in the bargain.

But what increasingly bugs me is so-called "alternative" news outlets and independent journalists buying into the spin that Trump and his associates are using the pretext of investigating corruption as a means to illegally and illicitly "dig up dirt on political rivals". Put the other way around, they concede that Biden and other Team Obama honchos are indeed "dirty", and that their Ukraine adventure was reprehensibly illicit or illegal and self-serving-- but they return to faulting Trump for impermissibly exploiting these circumstances in order to gain political advantage.

It doesn't surprise me that talented but co-opted journalists like Matt Taibbi are careful to affirm that Trump et al's conduct is manifestly an abuse of power. But, sadly, even journalists like Aaron Maté, Max Blumenthal, Ben Norton, and Michael Tracey have echoed this rote condemnation.

My guess is that this arises from two acronyms: incipient TDS, which compels even "alternative" US journalists to regard Trump as the "heel" in the staged "professional"-wrestling scam of US electoral politics. Also, CYA; I suspect that these relatively young, professionally vulnerable journalists are terrified of coming off as "defending" or "excusing" Trump, lest they trigger wrathful excoriation from their peers and the hordes of social-media users whose custom they cultivate.

This is why I appreciate your clarity and forthrightness on this fraught topic.

Posted by: Ort | Oct 26 2019 18:56 utc | 8

thanks b... insightful and on target as i read it...

@8 ort.. i always enjoy reading your posts.. regarding your last paragraph, that is how i also see it, otherwise it would be easier for them to call a spade a spade.. they have to qualify their comments on trump out of fear of the repercussions of not doing so..

Posted by: james | Oct 26 2019 19:23 utc | 9

Ort @ 8 --
Rereading your post, and agreeing with some it, I find I disagree less with its conclusions than on first reading.

If you were referring to Trump's convo with Zelensky specifically, reasonable people might disagree over whether that was an abuse of power or sleazy and dumb (in being unnecessary)--which of course shouldn't mean the Bidens get a pass here, which none of these young journalists are suggesting.

But where I would disagree is if you were suggesting that Taibbi, Mate and Blumenthal are making obligatory objections to Trump more generally, in order to curry favour with their peers. I think each of them would readily reel off lists of things (more substantive than Ukrainegate -- and probably not including Russia collusion) that they think Trump should be castigated, impeached and perhaps prosecuted for.

Posted by: Paul Damascene | Oct 26 2019 19:26 utc | 10

Well, there you have it--proof that BigLie Media indeed specializes in publishing Big Lies that ought to reduce such outlets to the status of Tabloids. Of course, the media is free to lie all it wants within the limits of slander and libel, but most people don't like being lied to particularly over matters of importance.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 26 2019 19:32 utc | 11

Larry Johnson has a piece at SST on a CIA task force set up to compromise Trump and prevent him becoming president.
That Trump avoided all the traps set for him (even the Mueller investigation could pin nothing on Trump) and won the election says a bit for Trump. He definately is more than the twitter reality TV persona that he puts up as a public face.
With the Barr investigation, it looks like the non Trump section of the swamp will be drained in the near future.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 26 2019 19:39 utc | 12

Possibly an irrelevant point, but Shokin's replacement Lutsenko was the prosecutor who resurrected the "deceased", self declared journalist, Arkady Babchenko. The story was full of plot twists, involving a Boris German/Herman, who was Russian. B kept Us regaled with events. I'd post a link, but have witnessed too many thread expansions too risk it.

Posted by: jasmin | Oct 26 2019 19:43 utc | 13

I think a lot of people give the MSM too much credit. Of course editorials etc. can influence people's thinking but the media, and journalists in general, are loathed by the people who voted for Trump. It's a big reason he was elected.

Posted by: dh | Oct 26 2019 19:45 utc | 14

Ort @ 8 said;"It doesn't surprise me that talented but co-opted journalists like Matt Taibbi are careful to affirm that Trump et al's conduct is manifestly an abuse of power."

Co-Opted, or truthful, depending on what you believe. You, have every right to your opinion, but, when push comes to shove, think I'll give my opinion being swayed or not, by giving more credibility to the five names you've decided to "shade".

DJT has a record of behavior, and so do the five you've mentioned. My choice is clear, I'll believe the five..

Posted by: ben | Oct 26 2019 19:45 utc | 15

Alexandra Chalupa's connection to the thinktank The Atlantic Council should be borne in mind in the developing discussion in the comments forum. Her sister Irena is or has been a non-resident Senior Fellow there. Irena Chalupa has also been a senior editor at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

Also the founder and CEO of the Crowdstrike company in charge of cybersecurity for the DNC during the 2016 presidential election campaign was Dmitri Alperovich who is a Senior Fellow at The Atlantic Council. It was Crowdstrike who came up with the idea that Trump had to be under the Kremlin's thumb and from there the hysterical witch-hunt and associated actions known as Russiagate began.

I'm surprised that at this point in time, Bellingcat has not been included in digging up "dirt" on Trump, Manafort or anyone Manafort supposedly had connections with who is also mentioned in the "black ledger" but maybe that's because with the garbage that Bellingcat has so delivered, Eliot Higgins and company can't be trusted any more. Their masters should have known though, that when you give your subordinates base material to work with, they can only come up with base results: garbage in, garbage out.

Posted by: Jen | Oct 26 2019 19:56 utc | 16

Thanks for your ongoing documentation of the political criminality in the US b

The recent events are playing out like a two-bit soap opera rerun in a nursing home for America's brainwashed.

Maybe Trump could start a new TV game show called Apprentice Corruption and instead of saying "Your Fired!" it could be "Your Guilty!"

As an American it is difficult to watch the country that I was taught such good things about in school be exposed as a criminal enterprise running cover for the elite cult that owns global private finance and manipulates Western not-so-civilized culture.

I hope all this BS we are going through wakes up enough of the semi-literate public to overthrow the criminal sect and restore the Founding Fathers motto and concept of E Pluribus Unum.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 26 2019 19:57 utc | 17

Lee Stranahan of Radio Sputnik has been reporting on Alexandra Chalupa's role for a number of years now. I hope he gets proper credit as this story comes out.

Posted by: lysias | Oct 26 2019 20:09 utc | 18

Given the fact that she got a first hand look at the Outlaw US Empire's injustice system and its tie-in with BigLie Media, the comments by the now back in Russia Maria Butina carry some legitimate weight that're worth reading:

"'I believe that the Americans are wonderful people, but they have lost their legal system,' Butina said. 'What is more, they are routinely losing their country. They will lose it unless they do something'....

"'I am very proud of my country, of my origin,' Butina stressed. 'And I come to realize it more and more.'"

Should I bold the following, maybe make the lettering red, and put it in all caps:

"They are routinely losing their country."

I know this is an international bar, but the general focus has long been on the Outlaw US Empire. IMO, Maria Butina is 100% correct. The topic of this thread is just further proof of that fact. As I tirelessly point out, the federal government has routinely violated its own fundamental law daily since October 1945. The media goes along with it robotically. And aside from myself, I know of no other US citizen that's raised the issue--not Chomsky, not Zinn, not anyone with more credentials and public accessibility than I. I sorta feel like Winston Smith: Am I the only one who sees and understands what's actually happening?! Well, I've shared what I know, so I'm no longer alone. But that's not very satisfying, nor is it satisfactory.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 26 2019 20:35 utc | 19

The corruption of the system is in what's legal, and it's almost certain Hunter Biden was legal yet corrupt. I think Biden being Obama's VP disqualifies him from being president, but if you want to count this too, okay.

That said, the idea that the president asking personally is a part of the treaty of cooperation is preposterous. The Justice Department asks Ukraine, etc. It is not, repeat not, within his rights to intervene in cases personally, especially when there is a personal political interest. It is silly to ignore this in the US context, but coupled with money in the international context, Trump was asking Zelensky to make an announcement he could brandish against his opponents. He had no interest in whether a legitimate investigation, or likely any investigation, could be made. His intervention in this wise was more asking for a rigged "investigation." Making premature announcements is bad and dishonest prosecution, but Trump was trashing all such considerations for his anti-impeachment/anti-Democratic Party campaign.

Lastly, the idea that Ukraine intervened on behalf of Clinton suffers from a multitude of problems, not least of which is lack of motive. Clinton as a civilian certainly lacked means. Considering the non-effect of the dismissal of Manafort, there was no opportunity either. But if Obama's administration was asking for assistance in prosecuting criminal corruption, Obama and whoever were doing what Trump is allegedly doing. The double standard shows the shameful duplicity of the post.

The insistence that, sometimes its treason but other times its not, is ridiculous. Insinuations of treason are morally corrupt BS. Trump was using his position to, basically, place a shady story from a supposedly neutral source, in opposition work for his campaign. That is no part of his duties, which makes it a campaign violation. Excuses from the Trump lovers should be dismissed out of hand.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Oct 26 2019 20:49 utc | 20

Yes b., but how do we get this into Tomorrows NYT, LAT, Miami Herald, Wash Post, etc.?

Posted by: joetv | Oct 26 2019 20:53 utc | 21

It seems some corners are coming unglued if the ZH link below is any indication

The take away quote from a Matt Taibbi twit
LOL. Barack Obama is going to love this interview his former DIA James Clapper just gave to CNN about the Durham probe: “It’s frankly disconcerting to be investigated for having done... what we were told to do by the president of the United States.”

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 26 2019 21:00 utc | 22

Prescient observation by Aaron Mate:

"When CNN & MSNBC now cover the criminal inquiry into conduct of intel officials in Russia probe, they are literally covering their employees — John Brennan (MSNBC); James Clapper, Andrew McCabe, James Baker (CNN). I avoid the term, but it’s appropriate here: Deep State TV."

Sure, he sees it, many of us barflies see it, but it's the public within the Outlaw US Empire that must see and understand this dynamic. If they don't or won't, then Butina's words are even more correct--They are losing their country.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 26 2019 21:00 utc | 23

Here are some more Biden & Biden lobbying revelations going back to 2008 from the Washington Examiner from before Biden became VP.

Posted by: Brian_J | Oct 26 2019 21:07 utc | 24

Below is another ZH link (still can't do HTML....sigh) about more Biden perfidy re his son Hunter

The take away quote
Joe Biden intervened at least two times on matters his son Hunter's firms was being paid to lobby on, according to government records reviewed by the Washington Examiner.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 26 2019 21:08 utc | 25

steven t johnson #20

Excuses from the Trump lovers should be dismissed out of hand.

They usually are dismissed around this bar stj. As are the excuses from the Dem lovers.

How do you excuse this?

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 26 2019 21:10 utc | 26

psychohistorian #25

Sad about your html but do try tinyurl as a workaround :)

Liked your post. Biden is jackal food from here on in.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 26 2019 21:14 utc | 27

maracatu 4

The merry-go-round scenario you post would indicate a broken state. Biden’s been in office for 43years, Trump 3yrs... the potential for dirt is large, mix it with even larger GOP vengeance should that scenario arise and this will drag on through the decades.

‘A republic, if you can keep it.’

Posted by: MadMax2 | Oct 26 2019 21:27 utc | 28

What Trump did was corrupt. Normal corruption. What Biden did was corrupt. A lot more corrupt. And rather brazen.

Posted by: paul | Oct 26 2019 21:35 utc | 29

"They are routinely losing their country."

Part and parcel of democracy. Western style democracy at least. Perhaps others can set theirs up better, though allways, the achilles heel of democracy is information, or media. Who oversees ensuring voters recieve accurate information.

The oz state of NSW had something that broke through this for a bit. ICAC
It took complaints from the public and investigated them. They did not have power to bring charges, but for a time findings were made public. Once it got onto a money trail it would keep following and that would lead to other money trails. It was a state agency and had to stop at state borders but most money trails led to federal politics. It was defanged when they came too close to federal politics.
Something like this in a countries constitution could work though it could be corrupted the same as anything else.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Oct 26 2019 21:46 utc | 30

@karlof 23
Indeed, the guilty are hiding in plain sight. It appears sinister, and is, but I think its a positive development of late, as it would suggest that big media are scrambling to preserve the status quo by legitimising these deep state actors.

It wasn’t so long ago these deep state types would rather steer clear of the media. Now they are out there earning bread driving the narrative. Are these deep state media faces a tactical last resort...?

Posted by: MadMax2 | Oct 26 2019 21:49 utc | 31

Obama orchestrated the regime change operation in Ukraine. As we know from Wayne Madsen's little book, "The Manufacturing of a President", Obama has been a CIA asset since he was a suckling babe. To promote containment of the Russian menace, the US got in bed with Ukrainian fascists and successfully exploited political tensions in that country resulting in the removal of the duly elected Yanukovitch. A right wing billionaire then took the reigns and Putin orchestrated a referendum in Crimea in retaliation that resulted in its return to Russia. The Crimeans were and continue to be happy, happier than the rest of Ukrainians under Kiev neo-fascist free market exploitation.

It is natural that neo-fascist Ukrainians would express their disapproval of Trump, who was making nice with Putin. No matter what his motives were, he was bucking US anti-Russian policy. I liked Trump at that time for this willingness to end a Cold War policy sponsored by the US military industrial complex. You can cal it "deep state" if you like. It's not deep and it's not a shadow government. It's the war party. It's the elite profiting from weapons manufacture. Trump has no principles except expedience and his pro-Russian stance is likely owing to the money laundering he's been doing for Russian criminals since he is such a lousy business man. Putin and other Russian kleptocrats saved Trump boy's bacon. So it's very confusing when bed actors do good things.

Biden is no doubt quite corrupt. But that's got little to do with Trumps quid pro quo with Ukraine. You say that Ukrainian interference in US elections is well documented. You don't offer any documents, b. Anti-Putin Ukrainians were naturally anti-Trump. So what? Where's the beef? Show me how that little piss ant country that can't even pay its fuel bills and gave the world Chernobyl, interfered in US elections.

Your defense of Trump is getting tiresome. He's a criminal with no respect for the US Constitution and he deserves to be impeached. This is not to say that Joe Biden or his drug addict son are not also shit stains. I am just dismayed that you, an ostensibly intelligent independent commentator would go to bat for an ignoramus like Trump.

Posted by: jadan | Oct 26 2019 22:13 utc | 32

The general charge against Trump is that he was "digging up dirt" on opponents. Well laddy-dah. So what. Welcome to Politics 101.

President Harry Truman probably received as much flak as any politician ever did, especially after he canned war-hero General MacArthur. But Truman wasn't a candy-ass current politician complaining about dirt-digging. No, he gave back more than he got, in spades.

What was "give-em-hell" Harry Truman's attitude? Some Truman quotes:
--"I never did give anybody hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell."
--"It's the fellows who go to West Point and are trained to think they're gods in uniform that I plan to take apart"
--"I didn't fire him [General MacArthur] because he was a dumb son of a bitch, although he was, but that's not against the law for generals. If it was, half to three quarters of them would be in jail."
-- "I'll stand by [you] but if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen."

That's what Trump is doing and will probably continue to do with fake news. (And he coined the phrase.)

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 26 2019 22:16 utc | 33

I'll repeat what I posted here some days ago: this is not a battle between truth vs lies, but between which is the truth that will guide the USA for the forseeable future.

Empires don't act on facts: they are all-powerful, so they sculpt reality as they see fit. What determines this is class struggle: the innerr contradictions of a society that results in a given consensus, thus forming a hegemony.

It's not that the liberals deny Biden did what he did, but that they disagree with Trump's interpretation over what he did. This is what the doctrine of the vital center is all about: some facts are more facts than others, prevailing the one which maintains the cohesion of the empire.

There's a battle for America's soul; the American elite is in flux: Russia or China?

Posted by: vk | Oct 26 2019 22:19 utc | 34

It seems Jeff Bezos is angry he didn't get that USD 10 billion cloud contract from the Pentagon:

Company with ties to Trump’s brother Robert awarded $33 million government contract

Posted by: vk | Oct 26 2019 22:25 utc | 35

MadMax2 @31--

In 1984, the narrative was now 100% in your face and everything had to be manipulated to match it, which apparently hadn't been needed previously. But we aren't told if that was done as a "last resort." I would think not given continuing polls showing ongoing distrust of media, thus the difficulty of manufacturing consent. Look at the great popularity enjoyed by Sanders amongst 18-30 year-olds who get most of their information online or via social media and the measures being taken to try and manipulate those realms. Then there're efforts to counter the misinformation and manipulation by numerous activists, many of which get cited here.

Another thought: They're out front now because the Establishment's deemed the fight to control the narrative's being lost, and they've been drafted to rectify the situation. If correct, they ought to keep failing.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 26 2019 22:26 utc | 36

karlof1 #19

The international nature of this bar and its many flies is that mostly (from what I read) they have an immense respect for the rule of law. It is this singular concept that we trust will transcend religion and the quasi religiosity of political allegiances.

The rule of law is a deity-like singularity that embraces all beings equally, or should.

Assaulting that legitimate expectation of the law applying equally is what confronts us daily in so many ways and when it is observed being assaulted by the highest office bearers in political and corporate life that we barflies get mighty annoyed.

The gross vista of assumed immunity demonstrated by Nixon is equaled by the antics of the Clinton foundation and its Directors. Each and every one of them.

But it is far worse than that as the assault on the rule of law is daily carried out by the mafias that infest our societies, the corrupt and violent police that cant/wont protect our citizens, the international warmongering criminal classes that propagandise us to accept warring as a legitimate exercise of power even though we recognise it as a crime against humanity.

So when we see the deplorable state of media and jurisprudence and fairness we can only think as Maria Butina does "that we are routinely losing our countries" and I would add our civil societies. The latter is vastly more concerning than the former IMO.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 26 2019 22:27 utc | 37

Again, not surprised at all. Pro-democratic/anti-Trump media write articles (obviously made-to-order) to whitewash alredy badly discredited Biden, and present all the arguments in favor of his dark connections with Ukraine as a kind of "conspiracy theory". This is a common practice. Not having sufficient competence to reasonably refute the arguments of opponents, MSM (as well as all sorts of "experts") immediately mark the position of opponents with "conspiracy theory" (there are also other options to choose from: "Putin's agent", "Putin’s useful idiot", "Kremlin's agent", "pro-Russian propaganda", etc.). It is assumed that this makes unnecessary/optional (and even "toxic") all further conversations with the opponent (that is, there is no need to answer him, to prove something with facts, etc.), because his position is a "conspiracy theory".

Western MSM are actively using this simplest propaganda technique of information warfare. For example, this was the case when reporting on events in Syria - those journalists, the media, experts who did not agree with the lie of MSM about Assad’s use of the chemical weapons were declared "conspiracy theorists" (and also "Assad apologists"). This method was also used to cover "the Skripal case" - those who questioned the British authorities' version of the "Novichok poisoning" were declared "conspiracy theorists".

When I see words like “conspiracy theory” in the headlines and see what media use them, then, you know, it's all clear. No chance for such articles/media to be taken seriously.

Posted by: alaff | Oct 26 2019 22:47 utc | 38

@32 jadan quote "Show me how that little piss ant country that can't even pay its fuel bills...." are you familiar with the name porkoshenko, or any other one of the numbers of kleptomaniacs in positions of power in the ukraine? how do you think they got their, if ''that little piss ant country' can't even pay it's bills? i am sure you are capable of adding 2 + 2...

b isn't defending trump here.. he's highlighting how corrupt the msm is! it looks like you missed that.. check the headline..

Posted by: james | Oct 26 2019 22:59 utc | 39

This is the way the controlled media works. They provide half a story, half truths, straw-man facts, selective quotes and 'expert' comment, opinion and unwarranted assumption presented as fact that all together cover the spectrum from black to white, spread across the many titles. They also disseminate a fine dusting of lies and actual truth here and there. The result is the public have a dozen 'truths' to pick from, none of which are real, while the outright lies and actual truths get dismissed as not credible and the half-truths and straw-man truths appear to carry some validity. If you look for it you can find it applying in almost every bit of 'news', if it is in any way controversial, whether it is partisan politics, Climate Change or Brexit to give examples.

Posted by: Peter Charles | Oct 26 2019 23:02 utc | 40

jadan @32:

As we know from Wayne Madsen's little book, "The Manufacturing of a President", Obama has been a CIA asset since he was a suckling babe.

If Obama was CIA, and GW Bush was CIA (via daddy Bush), and Clinton was CIA (via Arkansas drug-running and the Presidency), and Bush Sr was CIA ... then what can we conclude about Trump? 1) he's also CIA, or 2) he's a willing stooge.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 26 2019 23:51 utc | 41

uncle tungsten @37: rule of law

If the people get the government they deserve then they also get the laws/order they deserve. Voting alone is unlikely to fix that. We need Movements.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 26 2019 23:51 utc | 42

Ukraine was just one hell of a honey pot that too many couldn't resist visiting.
Kind of like Russia (Uranium One and HRC) or China (Biden for a start)
Giulani is going to be very busy - he still hasn't produced anything that wasn't already published, but I bet he has much more.

And then there is this:

Posted by: Michael Droyd | Oct 27 2019 0:12 utc | 43

Bezos's blog is blaming Trump for his not getting that juicy contract.

Posted by: lysias | Oct 27 2019 0:21 utc | 44

james #39
are you familiar with the name porkoshenko

Barfly award to you for best typo this thread. :))

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 27 2019 0:30 utc | 45

Jackabbit @ 41

There is a third possibility. What if Trump wasn't supposed to become President, according to the CIA's plans? This seems plausible to me, because during the 2016 election, it seemed to me at least that almost nobody in the US political and media establishments took Trump's candidacy seriously. Clinton was so sure she could easily beat Trump that she used her influence with the media to get Trump media coverage, in order to weaken the "serious" Republicans, one of whom everyone thought would get the nomination, like Jeb Bush.
I know you believe that Trump was somehow exactly what the US deep state needed. I don't agree, but even if you are right, are you really sure that the CIA and the rest of the deep state were smart enough to understand and agree that they needed someone like Trump?

Posted by: Glenn Brown | Oct 27 2019 0:32 utc | 46

@ karlof1 | Oct 26 2019 20:35 utc | 19

I thought the RT interview with Maria was breath-takingly honest. Mr K, you are not alone in the shocked realization... To a European audience, and to many Americans, she's saying what they fear, the reality they've "suspended disbelief" in. Shattering. the process.

I have read in "The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb" that Groves told one of the senior boffins in March of '44 that the bomb was to be used on Russia, not Japan. This implies an incipient Policy Coup inside FDR's government, in at least, the army.

You can take that as a starting point for crime, but the trace leads back to the Depression and the Veteran's March and the "Businessman's Plot" and, if David Irving's right, the murder of FDR, and, presumably, the Truman switcheroo that dumped Wallace, the JFK "correction" (McCain said that), Vietnam, the political murders (Malcom, Bobby, and the others, maybe Walter Ruther too), the Nixon "silent coup", and so on....100% criminal while we saluted and made eagle scout....well, somebody said...

Quite a parade...wait! Here comes J. Edgar in drag!....and Raygun with the stupid grin...

Well, at least it's entertaining...

Posted by: Walter | Oct 27 2019 0:32 utc | 47

DB @ 33 said; Trump coined the phrase "fake news".

Horse puckey DB, check this out:

Posted by: ben | Oct 27 2019 0:47 utc | 48

And this;

Posted by: ben | Oct 27 2019 0:54 utc | 49

Burisma investigated by SFO for money laundering:

Posted by: evilempire | Oct 27 2019 0:56 utc | 50

Glenn Brown @46:

... smart enough to understand and agree that they needed someone like Trump?

Yes, I do think they are smart enough and agreed to act in their collective best interest. Kissinger first wrote of MAGA in a WSJ Op-Ed in August 2014. Trump entered the race in June 2015, IIRC.

Do you think that Trump - who failed at multiple businesses - just woke up one day and became a political and geopolitical genius? As a candidate he said he'd "take the oil" and now, more than 3 years later, he has! LOL.

And JUST AFTER the Mueller investigation formally ends, Trump ONCE AGAIN solicits a foreign power to interfere in a US election. The biggest beneficiary? Deep State BIDEN! Who now gets all the media attention.

FYI Wm Gruff makes your same point often: that Deep State mistakes demonstrate that they couldn't possible pull of a Trump win (if that's what they wanted). I disagree.

<> <> <> <> <> <>

I very much doubt that anyone will go to jail - or serve any meaningful jail time if they do - over the Deep State shenanigans. Nor will people 'wake up' and see how they've been played anytime soon. Even the smarter, more savvy denizens of the moa bar have much difficulty connecting dots. Dots that they don't want to see.

Jackrabbit !!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 27 2019 1:12 utc | 51

I am sorry but I c/n remember if was the guy at the far end of the bar down near to the bathroom in the boots, bathing suit, and top hat, or the guy at the seat nearest to the front door, in the grey flannel suit with polished boots, but it was one of them who gave the bar, a few evenings back, much of what it needs to be coherent. It was hierarchy of elements that propagandist use to install and support false narratives in their written and spoken words. It was system of analysis, given to us here at the bar, to establish the gosh awful truth hidden within an intentionally wrong narrative.
That evening I had too much bar juice, so this all I can recall, 8 elements could be applied to the propaganda to diagnose and debunk and discover the false in wrongful, misleading propaganda.. see the following.

1. EN always the propagandist must establish the general narrative God turned the blue sky, red.
2. WR the propagandist must make great wrongs into powerful strong rights.. The devil made him do it.
3. PE profession propagandists cherry pick the facts; include in the narrative only those facts that support the proposition.
The devil was seen talking to God on more than one occasion.
4. IS ignore damning or off point stuff that challenge or defeat the narrative or transform it into a positive
The fact that God had killed the devil two years before is ignored.
5. BV blame the victim.. don't give the victim a chance to speak..
The victim (God) did it..
6. MU make stuff up to support the narrative
A person on Jupitor saw God practising every evening He watched as God turned blue seas red and red seas blue
7. AC Attack all challengers allow no one to intercede in the attack
The Pope said God could not show him that he could turn Blue seas to red, or vice a versa
8. RL Repeat, and repeat and repeat the lie.. until it becomes embedded in the mind of the innocent.
We are all tired of hearing this story..

After sobering up and thinking about this list, I realized its content seems very close to what a lynch party seeking to get up the never to hang an innocent slave for a criminal act "done by one of their kind" would do. The party would pretty much go through the 8 things, attempting to convince itself that the slave was guilty, until finally one of the members of the lynching party would swat the horse and the party would watch the victim swing..

We must develop a technology suitable to encoding these things, and to find other such things to add to this debunk the propaganda list of 8 items; so that no one can pass off on us wrongful narrative?
Its ok to be innocently wrong, in fact, we all learn when we discover a wrong, but intentional wrong should be against the rules of the bar.

We should adopt these 8 things and use them in our analysis..

Posted by: snake | Oct 27 2019 1:22 utc | 52

@45 uncle t - lol... porky for short! that is mostly how i think of him..

Posted by: james | Oct 27 2019 1:23 utc | 53

@ 39 james

"But when mainstream media deny that Biden's interference in Ukraine's prosecutor office is suspect, or claim that the Ukraine did not interfere in the U.S. elections, they make it look as if Trump did something crazy or illegal. He does plenty of that but not in this case. To use it a basis of an 'impeachment inquiry' is political bullshit."

b is parroting the Trumpster line. Biden was bad and corrupt and Trump was acting within legal bounds. The issue is Trump's extortion of Ukraine, not Biden's extortion of Ukraine. Trump is just a boneheaded gangster under that phony Norman Vincent Peale positivity. The political bullshit spews from his mouth 24/7/365. This is an impeachable issue, one among many. b is a Trump apologist.

Any country with a developed spy service interferes with the elections and other political processes of other nations. It's standard practice! Ukraine's capability is very limit. Big f-ing deal, b! Nobody but the US rigs a US election! And you know very well, b, that Germany's electoral process is superior to the US process, which is corrupt and incapable of audit. Trump has no mandate and he cannot command obedience in his own administration because he makes as ass of himself almost daily.

Posted by: jadan | Oct 27 2019 2:12 utc | 54

The Deep State at work:

- Support for 'moderate rebel' headchoppers and the rise of ISIS;

- Support for White Helmet propaganda;

- Kidnapping the Skripals;

- Integrity Initiative;

- Epstein "suicide" (murder/escape);

- Govt to MIC/Finance revolving door (looting);

But they would NEVER interfere in a Presidential election.


Jackrabbit !!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 27 2019 2:14 utc | 55

@41 Jackrabbit

If Obama was CIA, and GW Bush was CIA (via daddy Bush), and Clinton was CIA (via Arkansas drug-running and the Presidency), and Bush Sr was CIA ... then what can we conclude about Trump? 1) he's also CIA, or 2) he's a willing stooge

Trump at first threw down the gauntlet to the spies and proclaimed his autocratic prerogative when God held off the rain for his inauguration (!) but now he would gladly get on his knees between Gina Haspel's legs if the CIA would only help him stay in power. What distinguishes Obama from other presidents is the degree to which he was manufactured. He made it to the WH without much of a political base. Control of the political context, media and process, launched Obama to the top. It was fulfillment of the liberal American dream. It was a great coup. Talk about the "deep state"! It's staring us all in the face.

Posted by: jadan | Oct 27 2019 2:44 utc | 56

Oh, but Deep State DID interfere.

FACT: Deep Stater Hillary colluded with DNC against Sanders. (But she would NEVER participate in collusion that caused her to lose an election./sarc LOL)

And now pro-Trump people say Clapper, Brennan, and Comey interfered in the 2016 election OR committed treason by trying to unseat the President!

So we can talk about Deep State interference . . . as long as it follows the partisan narrative that's been established for us.

Jackrabbit !!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 27 2019 2:45 utc | 57

jadan #54

I have news for you. USA Presidents use strong coercive persuasive arguments or means of speach ALL THE TIME. And always have. Sometimes they can be subtle and allude to an action that might make them happy and sometimes they can be blunt. Its a presidential thing. It is what statespeople do when they 'negotiate' for their desired outcome.

It is not illegal or corrupt. It is power nakedly exercised. Just because Biden is a candidate for the same presidential role does not confer immunity for Biden's graft in favor of his son a few years back.

You make a mockery of your position.

One USA President visited Australia once and when confronted with a roadblock of demonstrators seeking peace in Vietnam demanded of the Australian Premier to "drive over the bastards".

That didn't happen but the President continued to drive all over the Vietnamese innocents.

Trump may be a grifter and a scumbag but there are warmongers well ahead of him in the cue for justice. Take Hillary Clinton for example. She is a ruthless killer and the greatest breach of USA national Security ever with her Secretary of State emails held on an unsecured server in her closet.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 27 2019 3:26 utc | 58

The same powers some call "deep state," are the same powers that have given us ALL modern day presidents, probably from FDR on.

IMO, they are nothing more, nothing less than the "captains of commerce", who, through the vast accumulation of wealth by monopoly, buy our "representatives" to legislate rules and regulations to benefit themselves.

Our so-called "leaders" work for them, with very few exceptions, and transcends all political parties, and now also the Supreme Court.

$ has been ruled speech, unlimited $ is allowed to be given to politicians for elections. How could anything but massive corruption take place under this kind of system?

Posted by: ben | Oct 27 2019 3:30 utc | 59

they make it look as if Trump did something crazy or illegal. He does plenty of that but not in this case.

You suffer from TDS. What on Earth are you talking about here? Plenty of that? Say what? Why do you undercut your entire point in your article with this little piece of utter nonsense?

Name one thing that Trump that has done that is illegal. Name one thing that is crazy.

Stop apologizing to the crazies by denigrating Trump. Your entire article was all about how none of the bs is true. And then you put your own brand of bs in there at the end. Cut it out.

Posted by: restlelss94110 | Oct 27 2019 3:34 utc | 60

@ 54 jadan... thanks for your comments... i am feeling more philosophical tonight, as i don't have a gig and have some time to express myself a bit more here.. first off, i don't like any of these characters - trump, biden, and etc. etc.. i have no horse in the game here, and it sounds like you don't either.. your comment- "The issue is Trump's extortion of Ukraine, not Biden's extortion of Ukraine." i can go along with that until i reflect back onto what increasingly looks like an agenda to get trump even prior to when he was elected, at which point i want to say why are we only examining trump in all of this? who gets to decide what the issue is, or as caitlin johnstone lets to say - who gets to decide what the narrative is here? i don't have an answer for this, but those who appear to be taking a side in all of this - including you with the quote i make - seem to think that it has to be the issue of trumps extortion of ukraine, verses what appears to me the cia - dem party extortion of the ordinary usa persons mind...

let me back up... has mccarthyism version 2 come to life since the advent of what happened in the ukraine from 2014 onward?? is the issue of a new cold war with russia been on the burner for at least 5 or more years here and began before trump was even considered a potential candidate for the republican party? did russia take back crimea, which wasn't supposed to happen? is this good for military industrial complex sales? and etc. etc..

so, i don't think it is fair to only consider the latest boneheaded thing trump did when i consider the bigger picture unfolding here.. now, maybe you think i am a trump apologist... i am just saying what the backdrop looks like to me here.. i am sure biden is small potatoes in the bigger picture here, but if taking a closer examination of what took place in ukraine leading into 2014, with the victoria nulands and geoffrey pyatts and etc. etc. of usa diplomatic corps, usa dept of state and etc. could lead to a better understanding of how the usa has went down the road it has for the past 60 years of foreign policy on the world stage, it would be a good start... so, to me - it ain't about trump.. it is about usa foreign policy and how it has sucked the big one on the world stage for at least since the time of vietnam when i was a teenager..

i suppose it depends on the time frame one wants to take.. my time frame will be considered an evasion of the moment to some, but it is how i see it.. sure, trump is scum, but the bigger issue to me is the usa's foreign policy agenda.. anything that can pull back the covers on that would be an extremely good thing... now, perhaps this is the straw that broke trumps back and the deep state will not tolerate being scrutinized.. that i could understand, but i am not going to be putting it all on trump as the reason the covers have to remain on all the shit the usa has been responsible for on the world stage to date and especially the past 10 years.. i am not able to blame trump for all of that.. and as you can see, i would prefer to get down to the nitty gritty of who is zooming who here... the msm for all intensive purposes is complicit in duping the american public.. that to me is the gist of b's comment here, not that he is cheer-leading for trump.. i just don't see it that way...i'm definitely not!

Posted by: james | Oct 27 2019 3:44 utc | 61

Another excellent article...

I note only that some comments are quite ridiculous...cloaking themselves in supposedly 'agreeing' with Bernhard's line of inquiry...but then basically repudiating the whole thing [in what they imagine to be a 'subtle' way...LOL]

This seems to happen a lot here...lately...

I say lately because I've been here for a long long time...often as merely a lurker...and things used to be much different...

There is a definite smell in the air that just doesn't smell right...never used to be like that...[Bernhard can take a bow because he is now considered dangerous enough to warrant a concerted disinfo campaign...]

Now some of these operators here think they are no doubt quite clever by half...but they certainly aren't fooling the old school folks around here...

I think those of us in that category are simply observing and noting...

It must be rather frustrating for the operators to sense at this point that their efforts are totally in vain...[although they do seem to be here in a pack, where they can agree with one another and back each other up...thus only making themselves even more obvious...]

Posted by: flankerbandit | Oct 27 2019 3:48 utc | 62

BREAKING: US military targeted the leader of Da’ish, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, in a raid in northwestern #Syria on Saturday, according to a senior US defense official.

Posted by: Yul | Oct 27 2019 3:53 utc | 63

Name one thing that Trump that has done that is illegal. Name one thing that is crazy. by restlelss94110 @60..
I not really picking on you.. but this came to mind..
I wish you would be clear.. in what it is you are complaining about?
The facts as laid out, or the opinion that was given?

Name something Trump that has done that is legal?
Name one campaign promise Trump has fulfilled?

Hitler had a rule, that rule went something like this
never do something illegal.. think before you do,
if what you want to do is illegal, change the law,
then do it.

Posted by: snake | Oct 27 2019 3:54 utc | 64

@ 60; To be impeached doesn't require a crime, just a breach of the constitution, which every POTUS swears to uphold.

Article 1 sec. 9 states;

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Since DJT didn't put his businesses in a blind trust, he still receives revenue from them. By renting the entire 45th floor of his tower in D.C. to the Saudi's he is violating the above clause, or so it is said.

Judge for yourself.

And, some people think, this is not the only instance....

Posted by: ben | Oct 27 2019 4:01 utc | 65

Posted by: steven t johnson | Oct 26 2019 20:49 utc | 20 raises interesting but questionable points.
... the idea that Ukraine intervened on behalf of Clinton suffers from a multitude of problems, not least of which is lack of motive. Clinton as a civilian certainly lacked means. Considering the non-effect of the dismissal of Manafort, there was no opportunity either.
<<== The reality in 2016 was that Trump was perceived as a faulty candidate (perhaps correctly) and Clinton as a good one (that took a lot of "wishful" or "conventional" thinking), so Ukrainians had a motivation of being in good graces with the next Administration. Morever, Interior Ministry was in the hands of extreme nationalists who expected to "win the war with Russia" with copious American support. Clinton offered some help in this direction, Trump did not.

...Making premature announcements is bad and dishonest prosecution, but Trump was trashing all such considerations for his anti-impeachment/anti-Democratic Party campaign... <<== If making premature announcements is a crime for prosecutors, then a large proportion of them should be fired, disbarred or worse, which may be a good idea but selectively applying it to Trump is hypocritical and stupid. It is one thing to announce that Maria Butina is a spy, a hapless individual with views that are highly unpopular in liberal circles, and another to apply it to Trump who has a media machine to support him.

...Trump was using his position to, basically, place a shady story from a supposedly neutral source, in opposition work for his campaign. That is no part of his duties, which makes it a campaign violation. <<== Investigation of possible crimes has a curious position in the division of powers. While impacting what judiciary can do, it belongs to executive power, and that is led in USA by President. People totally indepenent from Trump and Republicans suspect that Biden corruptly intervened in Ukrainian law enforcement and that opponents of Trump used materials falsified by Ukrainians (and made a galore of premature announcements). Should such allegation be left uninvestigated because they could implicate Clintonites and Poroshenkovites? By the way, Trump did not request that Zelensky should dig out something on Biden and Crowdstrike regardless of the actual available evidence.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Oct 27 2019 4:07 utc | 66

@psychohistorian | Oct 26 2019 19:57 utc | 17

As an American it is difficult to watch the country that I was taught such good things about in school be exposed as a criminal enterprise running cover for the elite cult that owns global private finance and manipulates Western not-so-civilized culture.

As a non-american I see this mainly as successful schooling by the same enterprise.

Posted by: Norwegian | Oct 27 2019 7:14 utc | 67

Yul @ 63

didn’t they kill him 3 or 4 times already? like that guy in Iraq, Al Sadr? And isn’t he a Mossad asset called Simon?

Posted by: Yarkob | Oct 27 2019 8:41 utc | 68

Karlof2 @19

"And aside from myself, I know of no other US citizen that's raised the issue ... ....not anyone with more credentials and public accessibility than I"

Of course not me Dear. Dat's the whole point. The Fake Stream Media will ONLY employ Yes Men. Anyone with an original idea is OUT.

But we Deplorables know full well what's going on. Just that I don't hold much faith in the faux-intellectual class (or lack thereof)

Posted by: El Sid | Oct 27 2019 10:59 utc | 69

Yarkob @70

He was born Eliot Shimon

Posted by: Anunnaki | Oct 27 2019 12:33 utc | 70

In the link in comment 26, uncle tungsten’s pointing out an extraordinary article by Israel Shamir regarding American/Ukrainian corruption. Highly recommended.

Posted by: Robert | Oct 27 2019 12:34 utc | 71

Trump is a bullshitting grifter whose main political tactic is to distract his political opponents and even some of his "allies" while he does things largely in plain sight but his enemies are so desperate to get rid of him by means fair or foul that they don't bother looking at what he is actually doing.
As such a grifter, Trump didn't really need to grift for the first couple of years of his presidency because that stupid cow, Hillary Clinton did his work for him with the Russiagate bullshit. With that largely disproved and out of the way, Trump needed to throw his enemies who were still desperate to impeach him a bone to gnaw on and that bone is Ukrainegate, which fuckwits like Shiff and Pelosi have fallen hook, line and sinker. It really wouldn't surprise me if eventually came out that this was a grift. Trump speaks to Zelensky about corruption around Biden and Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election - both valid subjects for him to raise with the Ukrainian president but omits the threats to hold up military aid to Ukraine as probably correctly reported in the White House "transcript", but at the same time Trump is planting in the minds of White House staff that he did threaten the military aid so the leakers go to work and easily convince his opponents that he mentioned it in the phone call who are desperate for any evidence of Trump's misbehaviour. Adam Schiff and others are the perfect marks for Trump's grift. It wouldn't surprise if sometime next year, Trump produces a complete recording of his conversation with Zelensky.
The others include that "political expert" Matthew Yglesias:

Holding up authorized military aid to Ukraine in an effort to coerce the government into smearing Joe Biden and validating an absurd conspiracy theory that aims to exonerate Russia for 2016 election interference is a perfectly impeachable offense.

I'm totally gobsmacked that someone who is supposed to be so clever about politics can be totally stupid but then that is what marks are.
BTW, Zelensky, if he is to achieve the objectives he was elected to deliver, needs a non-hostile regime in Washington to counteract the neo-Nazis/ Nazis and the rest of Washington seems so in love with the neo-Nazis/Nazis that the only person he can work with is Trump.

Posted by: Ghost Ship | Oct 27 2019 12:38 utc | 72

Thanks Don for knocking yourself [likely] and Biden [very likely as collateral or intentional, it doesn't matter] out of the Presidential contest. The Ukraine was, pace Snyder, bloodlands between Germany and the Soviety Union [Dolphy and Uncle Joe] and now, in a way, also bloodlands between the US, the occasional Fourth Reich, and Russia [Donny and Joe B, and Vlad, truly Vlad the Impaler].

Posted by: SteveLaudig | Oct 27 2019 12:49 utc | 73

Glenn Brown @46

Your suspicion of the narrative that the CIA installed Trump is entirely justified, because that narrative makes no sense. The suggestion that the CIA would install a candidate who was drawing negative attention to their regime change operations is brain dead and naturally triggers cognitive dissonance in people who have some idea what the CIA is really about.

Consider what you need to believe to accept that narrative:
1) CIA installs Trump
2) CIA cranks up the "Mighty Wurlitzer" to attack Trump
3) Trump calls out the "fake news" (that's what the mass media is, particularly in "Mighty Wurlitzer" mode)
4) Trust in the empire's mass media plummets (damaging the effectiveness of the "Mighty Wurlitzer")
5) ??? (imperial sock puppet hand waving)
6) CIA profits!

Of course, this only makes sense if you let the empire fanbois distract you from #5 above with their semantically empty hand waving. They are trying desperately to convince people that the CIA and imperial establishment never make mistakes or fail to achieve their objectives. This myth of omnipotence and invulnerability is the foundation of American exceptionalism and thus must be defended and reinforced at all costs.

Naturally, that narrative is nonsense as anyone who diligently traces their way through the logic of it can plainly see. The obvious choice of the CIA/imperial establishment was Clinton. She was a plug-in replacement for Obama and was already up to speed on all of the narrative spinning necessary for a President to support numerous ongoing CIA operations worldwide.

By the way, the CIA's choice for 2024 was that Butt-gig character. The progression after the CIA don Pappa Bush and the CIA's Cambridge asset Clinton and the CIA don's idiot son was intended to heavily leverage "identity politics" as this would most damage the CIA's top archenemy socialism. and is seemed easy to stage manage.

- 2008-2016 --> First woman President
- 2016-2024 --> First Black President
- 2024-2032 --> First gay President

So much win! So much fake progress! A whole quarter century in which the population could have been kept distracted from real economic progress by artificial symbolic progress. The CIA nearly broke their own arm patting themselves on the back for such a "brilliant" plan.

As you can see the CIA's plans are falling to shit. They had to swap the "First Black President" in for the "First woman President", but to this day they still don't quite understand why that happened. Peter (penis?) Butt-gig (weird, but they think it is funny and the name is part of the operation) was being groomed for 2024, but when the CIA failed the second and last time to get Clinton in as the "First woman President" they moved Butt-gig up to 2020 in an effort to get their plans back on track.

Arguments by those saying a Trump Presidency was part of the plan of the CIA are no different from the clown stepping on a rake and getting smacked in the face by the handle claiming "I meant to do that!"

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 27 2019 12:57 utc | 74

@ uncle tungsten 58

"I have news for you. USA Presidents use strong coercive persuasive arguments or means of speach ALL THE TIME. And always have. Sometimes they can be subtle and allude to an action that might make them happy and sometimes they can be blunt. Its a presidential thing. It is what statespeople do when they 'negotiate' for their desired outcome."

What you say is true. The implied threat of being bombed back to the stone age plays a primary role in most US "diplomacy". This accounts for the colossal military budget. But soliciting the help of foreign agents to manipulate the US political process is a no-no and so is the extortion of foreign governments to that end.

Nobody's picking on poor little American Hero, Donald Trump.

Posted by: jadan | Oct 27 2019 13:04 utc | 75

@ karlof1

>> As I tirelessly point out, the federal government has routinely
>> violated its own fundamental law daily since October 1945

Despite reading your comments, I don’t recall what you refer to here. Could you kindly describe again what happened in Oct 45? Thanks.

Posted by: oglalla | Oct 27 2019 13:20 utc | 76

Correct if wrong please.
Trump is just the fall guy for deep state crimes. Everything he has been accused of has an actual crime w documented proofs as opposed to he did it shrieks, Mueller found bubkis. Yet no real chatter about this. It seems impossible to think that the same capitol running HRC and the Dems isn't running him. Everything he's done so far 'benefits' 'they', regardless as to campaign rhetoric.
Please correct if wrong.

Posted by: Tannenhouser | Oct 27 2019 13:24 utc | 77

Yul @ 63

If al-Baghdadi really did die in Idlib, I wonder if Trump will blame the other jihadi/takfiri groups in Idlib for sheltering him. Perhaps we'll even see video of the White Helmets rushing to support the dead and wounded.

Posted by: Ghost Ship | Oct 27 2019 13:32 utc | 78

The imperial sock puppet misrepresents my point asserting that I believe "that Deep State mistakes demonstrate that they couldn't possible pull of a Trump win (if that's what they wanted)."

This is false. I am confident that the CIA/imperial establishment could certainly have installed Trump if that's what they wanted, and if they fully understood why their plans are failing (hint: it isn't a mysterious worldwide upsurge in right wing/authoritarian populism, but that is their best guess at the moment).

Note how the imperial narrative manager trots out the tired reference to Kissinger anointing Trump for President in 2014. Note that no link is provided. That is because Kissinger says nothing remotely like what the narrative spinner claims. Read it for yourself: Henry Kissinger on the Assembly of a New World Order.

Kissinger's arguments for unilateralism and defense of capitalist globalism are the precise opposite of Trump's efforts to disengage the US from much of the rest of the world both economically and militarily. This is why the imperial stooge fails to link the Kissinger ramblings it claims as the core of it's conspicuously bogus narrative.

The imperial fanboi is trying to get you to "connect dots that you cannot see", but those dots are not invisible to you because you are stupid. Those dots are not visible to you for the simple reason that they do not exist. Try to get the imperial stooge to reveal the "hidden dot" that explains why the CIA would unleash its most powerful weapon (the Mighty Wurlitzer) against its own asset, and then have that supposed asset call out the fakeness of the tune being played by that disinformation instrument, severely damaging that instrument. You will get some hand waving, but no real answer. That imaginary dot will remain invisible to you.

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 27 2019 13:34 utc | 79

The great advantage that b has, as an observer and analyst of US Foreign follies, is that he watches from a distance, aware of but not marinated in, the poisonous culture of a century of total anti-communist/Russian propaganda bolted onto centuries of Jim Crow, lynch law and contempt for the tedious process of collecting and testing evidence.
Being American or part of the anglophone world which is now almost wholly co-opted into US culture does not disqualify us from understanding what is going on when Biden's crass corruption is spun into a private affair that Trump has no business investigating but it does mean that we look at the world through a very distorted lens.

Another observer who's thoughts about Russia and the US are always worth reading is Patrick Armstrong:

Posted by: bevin | Oct 27 2019 13:35 utc | 80

to karlof1 # 19. You're not alone and you never have been. Unfortunately, tragically, it has been and still is almost impossible to convince most "Murkans to look behind the screen, to use their brains !!!! For decades I thought that perhaps my research was incomplete, or my explanations were unclear, but the fact is They Don't Want To Know. The proverbial horse is smarter than most "Murkans. And the price one pays is enormous. Loss of friends. Loss of culture. I hope you are surrounded by family and thank you for your erudition.

Posted by: Miss Lacy | Oct 27 2019 13:47 utc | 81

Fuzzball@80 Most of what you say is true. But this is not:
" because of (Stalin's) fear of overthrow by his military he fired the vast majority of his military leadership before WWII so that when the war arrived the Russian military was without trained leadership and this cost Russia millions of casualties. .."
The claim that the 1937 purges deprived the Red Army of its best officers is part of general Robert Conquest/Foreign Office propaganda. In fact, as the performance of the army showed, after initial setbacks, which arose out of geostrategic errors by the Politburo, the Red Army proved to be very well led. As is often the case (cf the Union in US Civil War) the best thing that can happen to most armies, after years of peace, is the loss of its top layers, which generally include careerists and sycophants.

Posted by: bevin | Oct 27 2019 13:59 utc | 82

Deleted comments by "Fuzzball" which is one of 20+ names some sockpuppeteer tries to use here.

Posted by: b | Oct 27 2019 14:43 utc | 83

People should be clear on what Lord Acton said, which was that, whereas power merely tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Posted by: lysias | Oct 27 2019 14:45 utc | 84

FDR solicited the help of British intelligence in the 1940 election.

Posted by: lysias | Oct 27 2019 14:49 utc | 85

William Gruff @81:

imperial narrative manager ... imperial fanboi

LOL. That smear makes no sense. In this instance, you're the one defending the Empire's Deep State.

But don't worry, no one here will notice./sarc

Note that no link is provided.

I've provided the link many times in previous comments - as you know.

Kissinger says nothing remotely like that

Wrong. Anyone that's familiar with Kissinger's way of speaking can make out the allusion to MAGA.

Kissinger's arguments for unilateralism and defense of capitalist globalism are the precise opposite of Trump's efforts to disengage the US

And yet Kissinger advises Trump.

... why [would] the CIA would unleash its most powerful weapon (the Mighty Wurlitzer) against its own asset, and then have that supposed asset call out the fakeness of the tune ...

Well, that's really not such a mystery. The kayfake distracts and covers for the prior failures. It also serves to move the country to the right as the President MAGA becomes a populist champion.

Jackrabbit !!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 27 2019 15:21 utc | 86

William Gruff @76

You accept that CIA/Deep State is manipulating US elections. You just don't like MY version of that manipulation.


Jackrabbit !!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 27 2019 15:27 utc | 87

Ignore the hand waving and try to follow the imperial fanboi's logic (or lack thereof):

So faith in the corporate mass media is in decline in the empire. The CIA's Mighty Wurlitzer depends upon that faith for its effectiveness. The fanboi correctly sees this as a decline in the CIA's influence over the public. The fanboi doesn't say, but perhaps this decline is due to the role of the corporate mass media in promoting the war of aggression against Iraq, and attacks on Libya and Syria. The brilliant solution that the fanboi proposes that the CIA cooked up to restore the credibility of the corporate mass media, and thus their own disinformation machinery?

Wait for it! Such awe-inspiring plans need to be savored!

The CIA's plan according to fanboi:
1) Install a guy as President
2) Use their influence in the mass media to launch fake news attacks against that President
3) Have that President that they supposedly control accurately call out the fakeness of those mass media attacks
4) ??? (hand waving)
5) The public is now distracted from the fact that the mass media is manufacturing fake news!

How does this distract anyone from fake news? How does this restore the authority of the corporate mass media? How does this rejuvenate the power of the Mighty Wurlitzer? Exposing the fakeness of the mass media to raw public scrutiny somehow "distracts" the public from that media's fakeness? How does that logic work in the real world?

It doesn't. The actual placement of that "invisible dot" you are expected to connect to is hand waved away.

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 27 2019 15:57 utc | 88

As far as I can see JR is one of those guys that think the blob is all seeing, all knowing , etc., and that they have such awesome foresight that all of their plans unfold exactly as they planned.

He is indoctrinated with the blob's awesomeness.

I have friends that think like that.

Posted by: arby | Oct 27 2019 16:06 utc | 89

Sm Gruff @90:

5) The public is now distracted from the fact that the mass media is manufacturing fake news!

I didn't say that.

Your dishonesty discredits your mocking.

Funny -> Sad.

Jackrabbit !!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 27 2019 16:12 utc | 90

arby @91: ... one of those guys that think the blob is all seeing, all knowing. etc.

Not at all. I haven't made any such suggestion.

Jackrabbit !!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 27 2019 16:14 utc | 91

b left a link that is connected to this thread that is really quite humourous... some of you here might enjoy reading it!@

Little Russia-gate: The Tragic Comedy Of Journalism Has a Ukrainian Encore

Posted by: james | Oct 27 2019 16:34 utc | 92

Thanks for the many replies!

uncle tungsten @37--

To have a nation and a government for it, the requisite is civil society; so yes, losing that latter means the two former are lost as well. It's extremely difficult to determine if today's polarization is on par with that which arose during the 1850s prior to the Civil War. Sure, we read about the irrational passions of the Southern Fire Eaters, but they were merely the elite not those who would need to fill the ranks of the Confederate Army. And what of the North; I've never read of anyone being the equivalent of the South's Fire Eaters. People talk of potential Civil War, but where are the passions that must be ignited to begin such a conflict. There's polarization, but it's between numerous factions as I see it.

Walter @47--

No need to ask you if you've seen Born on the Fourth of July or read Cache-22. Lump in all contemporary events since Sputnik and the Black Freedom Marches, The Pentagon Papers and The Arrogance of Power and thinking individuals must suspect something is greatly wrong. Sure, they occupied our time and engaged a few of our minds; I guess the entertained part is where we laugh at ourselves for being so damn gullible and meek not to act as heroes ourselves and seek them instead through celluloid and music--go to a concert and rave about The Wall yet do nothing about it the next day.

oglalla @78--

The US Senate ratified the UN Charter on 28 July 1945 and the treaty entered into force on 24 Oct 1945. Once ratified by Senate, all treaties become part of the Supreme Law of the Land, the US Constitution as stipulated by its Supremacy Clause.

Miss Lacey @83--

Thanks for your reply! No, aside from my daughter and wife, late mother and aunt, no one in my family wants to be concerned. IMO, it's sorta like being marooned on an island with MoA being the bottle to put my messages into. That makes me wonder how Dafoe came up with Robinson Caruso thus reminding me to read the story he wrote, not the Disneyfied version. Gulliver's Travels, or Travels into Several Remote Nations of the World is similar as it certainly appears Swift wrote it as political criticism but fictionalized it to keep his head. Now I'm thinking of Tom Jones anew, as social criticism. What worries me is that it seems only the Old Guard, seniors like myself and those I'm replying to actively object, are brave enough to voice their opinions and speak truth to power. I look at the late Father Berrigan and hope I can summon the attributes he displayed. IMO, it will take an army of millions imbued with his convictions and endowed with his attributes to alter our nation's road to perdition.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 27 2019 18:54 utc | 93

karlofi @95 said

"No, aside from my daughter and wife, late mother and aunt, no one in my family wants to be concerned. "

Better than myself and I daresay for a lot of barflies.

Seems most folks prefer the lies.

Posted by: arby | Oct 27 2019 21:30 utc | 94

jadan #77

But soliciting the help of foreign agents to manipulate the US political process is a no-no and so is the extortion of foreign governments to that end.

Nobody's picking on poor little American Hero, Donald Trump.

Yes to that. BUT it works.
Nixon, Vietnam peace deferred - against LBJ.
Reagan, Iran hostages deal held up against Carter.

Extortion of foreign governments - see IMF and its continuous service to private capital oligarchies lurking in the curtains behind governments.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 27 2019 22:25 utc | 95

karlof1 #95

People talk of potential Civil War, but where are the passions that must be ignited to begin such a conflict. There's polarization, but it's between numerous factions as I see it.

I don't for a minute think or talk of civil war as the state enforcement apparatus in the USA is absolutely brutally in command. The various police forces are unimpeachable (let alone the president). The people's history of the United States is recorded in the immediate and ruthless suppression of the working class and its allies in the true left.

Joe Hill organised about it and was killed for it.

I agree that it is polarisation and blind factionalism that is the driver of the kabuki drama.

Sometimes though, a theme emerges that fractures the factional construct.

A theme that seeps through the membrane of separation. Today that theme appears to be
'bring the troops home',
'end regime change wars'
'invest in rebuilding USA not foreign wars'

I am most heartened by Tulsi Gabbard's constant mantra of these themes, their harmonisation with the body politic, and intrigued by Trump's response so far. In a sense Gabbard incessantly calls out Trump to perform his campaign promises. She has already downed Hillary with a mighty deft aikijujutsu tackle.

The complementary mantras of Gabbard and Sanders in a Presidential contest has not been evidenced to anything like the same degree in the last 50 years IMO and bodes well for a refresh of the old factional rigidity. Social media may well be the vector to facilitate the demise of that factional rigidity but is unfortunately a monopoly medium.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 27 2019 22:54 utc | 96

@65 George Washington was in the tobacco business and sold tobacco to the government of France. Was Washington violating the constitution?

Posted by: Fly | Oct 27 2019 23:12 utc | 97

uncle tungsten @98--

Thanks for your reply! It helps me understand your POV; very major help! Yes, The longstanding historical situation and interpretation works best via the Marxist School of Thought, explanations via the lens of Class War, and that holds forth for today. It's part of my overall narrative for "Western Civilization" in a manner never included in any textbook.

Gabbard, IMO, needs to learn more, provided she's genuine. If she could talk in front of the audiences Sanders does, she would poll much higher. And as I've expressed, Sanders/Gabbard would be an excellent ticket; but to be really effective, they need an allied Congress to win the Political Fight.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 28 2019 5:53 utc | 98

karlof1 #100

Thank you for your response.

Gabbard, IMO, needs to learn more, provided she's genuine. If she could talk in front of the audiences Sanders does, she would poll much higher. And as I've expressed, Sanders/Gabbard would be an excellent ticket; but to be really effective, they need an allied Congress to win the Political Fight.

Gabbard has begun her journey with a profoundly beneficial mind set that is focused, unflappable and forms responses that have immense clarity and brevity. She is the epitome of 'stay on message'. The political conveyor belt that Gabbard has stepped on to will inform and mature her mind as it does for all who choose that path. See Bernie Sanders path, yours, mine, so many others.

One of the many essential ingredients for her success would be a solid grasp of Alinsky and his rules for radicals, something that guided my action for life. The other element that I sense she has a sense of is the anthropologist skill in human terrain mapping. See zeroanthropology dot net older posts for some discussion. Also see modern military training in this field sometimes called humint. Its application was bungled by US generals in Afghanistan and was reported by the Rolling Stone Magazine (as far as I recall).

There was a book called 'the village at ten mile inn' circa 1945 that describes the Chinese revolution and techniques to bring knowledge and action to illiterate villagers that had just been liberated by Mao's vanguard army. Perhaps you have read that small tome. A modernised translation of that approach is what is unfolding in the USA at this time in a small way as people are seeing the nature of the beast that rules them and the vista of a better path.

But to this current campaign in the USA 2020 elections.

My take (dread) is that Sanders will be stymied again and he may choose one of two paths - the path of continuing challenge and run independently as a write in (if that is workable) or the the path of the sheep dog. Regardless of that moment of choice it should be preceded by the duality ticket of Sanders and Gabbard together addressing the big crowds. Setting the tableau for the baton handover as it were and combining forces to oust the DNC machine.

That is predicated on my reasoning that Sanders is on his final lap for strategic reasons (NOT health). Essentially Gabbard need not follow him as an independent colleague but remain inside the bosom of the beast for another cycle or two and persist with the challenge and drag the overton window (pardon me for using that term) inside the Democrats toward a social justice/leftish position. That strategy would severely rattle the game and build the movement.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Oct 28 2019 8:36 utc | 99

As such a grifter, Trump didn't really need to grift for the first couple of years of his presidency because that stupid cow, Hillary Clinton did his work for him with the Russiagate bullshit.
Posted by: Ghost Ship | Oct 27 2019 12:38 utc | 74

I would add that Hillary couldn't do it without a multitude of people working in the same direction. It takes a village to raise a child and it takes a huge outbreak of Mad Cow Disease (brain turning into a sponge, as observed in Joe Biden) to screw a major political party.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Oct 28 2019 17:50 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.