Kremlingate part 2

In case you missed it...

Glenn Greenwald: Mueller Did Not Merely Reject the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theories. He Obliterated Them

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51459.htm

"The two-pronged conspiracy theory that has dominated US political discourse for about three years - that (1) Trump, his family and his campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election, and (2) Trump is beholden to Russian President Vladimir Putin was not merely rejected today by the final report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. It was obliterated: in an undeniable and definitive manner.

The key fact is this: Mueller - contrary to weeks of false media claims - did not merely issue a narrow, cramped, legalistic finding that there was insufficient evidence to indict Trump associates for conspiring with Russia and then proving their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That would have been devastating enough to those who spent the last two years or more misleading people to believe that conspiracy convictions of Trump's closest aides and family members were inevitable. But his mandate was much broader than that: to state what did or did not happen.

That's precisely what he did: Mueller, in addition to concluding that evidence was insufficient to charge any American with crimes relating to Russian election interference, also stated emphatically in numerous instances that there was no evidence - not merely that this was insufficient to obtain a criminal conviction - that key prongs of his three-year-old conspiracy theory actually happened. As Mueller himself put it: 'in some instances, the report points out the absence of evidence or conflicts in the evidence about a particular fact or event..."

Is Trump For Detente or Militarism - A Talk With Stephen Cohen (and vid)

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/04/is-trump-for-detente-or-militari...

"It is quite distressing to see the Mueller report take up, as if it were settled fact, the idea that Russia influenced the 2016 presidential election, particularly since his investigation doesn't provide any information that supported this theory. So this TRNN interview with professor Stephen Cohen provides a badly needed counterpoint. Please also view the preceding segment 'Is Russian 'Meddling' an Attack on America?' - RAI with Stephen Cohen."

I love spy games. Why would anyone believe a spook especially one with his track record. I know I don't know what really happened but I also know I don't trust a liar not to lie.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4719428/mueller-testifies-iraqs-wmds

I have developed quite the filter for 'whataboutism'.  One of the benefits of babble.

When it is what about "something that no one is denying" then it is just fluff.  Pretty well everyone on babble will acknowledge that the US is the worst meddler in foreign governments, so Russians saying "I am not a meddler, your a meddler" is just a distraction.  Most if not all the people here saying there was Russian meddling also hold the following views:

1) That the US is a meddler

2)That Israel, Saudi Arabia and others meddle.  I would take the extra stance that any of the current probes will end up clearing allies - 'in the national interest'.

3) That Canada meddles or facilitates meddling with our allies.

4) That every country that is a world power meddles. 

So when someone posts repeatedly that Russia didn't meddle, would never meddle and any evidence has to be fake, pardon me if I take it with a grain of salt.

I agree with your post Pogo but that logic begs the question, why would anyone believe Mueller's version of events?

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I agree with your post Pogo but that logic begs the question, why would anyone believe Mueller's version of events?

  I am not a big fan of Mueller.  I lean more to Sara Kendzior.  That said there is ample evidence on the public record that Trump is way worse than Nixon.  And if this tame report was all we got why did so many of Trump's confederates like Manafort get deals that allowed them to avoid facing justice for their treason. The FBI is mostly right wing Republicans and they cut a bunch of Republicans a bunch of slack.

Pogo wrote:

When it is what about "something that no one is denying" then it is just fluff.  Pretty well everyone on babble will acknowledge that the US is the worst meddler in foreign governments, so Russians saying "I am not a meddler, your a meddler" is just a distraction.  Most if not all the people here saying there was Russian meddling also hold the following views:

1) That the US is a meddler

2)That Israel, Saudi Arabia and others meddle.  I would take the extra stance that any of the current probes will end up clearing allies - 'in the national interest'.

3) That Canada meddles or facilitates meddling with our allies.

4) That every country that is a world power meddles. 

So when someone posts repeatedly that Russia didn't meddle, would never meddle and any evidence has to be fake, pardon me if I take it with a grain of salt.

Russia never does anything wrong.  You obviously haven’t gotten the message.

NDPP wrote:

No. The message is that Russia ALWAYS does something wrong. Which is why it was thought so perfect for the Dems to weaponize it to explain their election loss and for the Repugs to 'shadow-box' with them over it for reasons of their own. This is how the US duopoly works. 

 

Petras: Shadow Boxing For Empire - The Mueller Report

https://petras.lahaine.org/shadow-boxing-for-empire-the-mueller/

"...In a word, the Democratic Party and President Trump engaged in prolonged shadow boxing over whom and how they would direct the US global power grab. The key to the party-partisan shadow boxing was the Mueller Report; specifically, the Democratic Party's attempt to oust Trump without exposing their imperial convergence. After a two-year investigation no Russian conspiracy was discovered and no one cared - the public have other concerns..."

The rhetorical strategy here is to take biases that exist in the mainstream and use them to accuse other babblers of supporting that bias if they raise any concern about anything against the protected entity.

The people doing the protecting are unwilling to acknowledge that some genuine, unbiased, legitimate points of concern do not mean that the bias that exists elsewhere exists here.

Mainstream bias is used to silence all discussion about the protected entity.

As such there is an opposite bias here coming from the people who are pretending to attack bias elsewhere.

The bullying is so intense here on the topic that few people will engage in the topics allowing them to become echo chambers.

If you want to really stop bias rather than just turn it around to your advantage -- the way to do that is start with a presumption of integrity and a lack of bias amog those you disagree with. Examine what they say on merits instead of shooting down all they say negative to those you protect.

Most of all understand that the mainstream biases do not necessarily exist here -- that the slant of this place is different, thankfully, and that we could be in a position to consider things in a different light. things that cannot be discussed on their merits elsewhere could be here, if we are not totally closed.

In the end the best way to defeat bias is to engage on merits, as defeating things without foundation is more powerful than suppressing them. Allowing discussions to occur on merits also allows more faith that the positions here are legitimately held rather than self censored.

This does not mean questioning basic principles that this place is founded on. but this place is not founded on any presumptions that one side or the other is always right. We should be loyal to truth, fair examination, fair discussion and principles but not specific parties, countries, individuals who become above scrutiny.

Timebandit wrote:

We should be loyal to truth, fair examination, fair discussion and principles but not specific parties, countries, individuals who become above scrutiny.

Should be. But NDPP has no interest in that. I don't forsee that changing any time soon.

I wish I could say there was only one like that here. I think this place is full of factions and biases and a lack of interest in criticizing or examing their own side. The ones really open to that exist here but they are outnumbered. Many discussions are shut down becuase one group takes over daring anyone else to be calle names like Conservative in disguise, imperialist, pro US, anti (whomever), not really progressive etc. etc. Most discussions turn into one side trying to deligitimze the debate that we are supposed to be here having.

Michael, re: your post 352, wouldn't Cole be talking about run of the mill corruption post election?  Not collusion?   Influence peddling and breaking your own country's sanctions for money or political favours is practically an American tradition.

Collusion is the radioactive word in this media narrative, and when I read it in this context, I immediately think the writer is a democratic partisan (it's Juan Cole, I know...) writing for his "still hoping" base.    Point being, overall, the MSM conflation between corruption and collusion is in my view dangerous, transparently dishonest and likely to, post Mueller report, help Trump politically going forward.   Frankly I think the MSM has largely poisoned the well with what remains of the American centre on corruption charges too at this point.   Curious for your thoughts on the above.

Mobo2000 wrote:

Michael, re: your post 352, wouldn't Cole be talking about run of the mill corruption post election?  Not collusion?   Influence peddling and breaking your own country's sanctions for money or political favours is practically an American tradition.

Collusion is the radioactive word in this media narrative, and when I read it in this context, I immediately think the writer is a democratic partisan (it's Juan Cole, I know...) writing for his "still hoping" base.    Point being, overall, the MSM conflation between corruption and collusion is in my view dangerous, transparently dishonest and likely to, post Mueller report, help Trump politically going forward.   Frankly I think the MSM has largely poisoned the well with what remains of the American centre on corruption charges too at this point.   Curious for your thoughts on the above.

Well, mobo, you may be right, but I can't think of another example offhand of any U.S. administration, however corrupt, which attempted to establish a communications channel with a rival country outside of the standard State Department diplomatic channels. Do you know of such an example? To use the obvious parallel, what do you think the Republicans would have said if Obama had done something similar with, say Iran? Oh, wait, Reagan actually did that with Iran, but unfortunately all the criminals in that case were pardoned by George H. W. Bush. One of the worst offenders, Oliver North, current leader of the NRA, is still a huge hero to the right.

josh wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I agree with your post Pogo but that logic begs the question, why would anyone believe Mueller's version of events?

Because it’s supported by the evidence?

So you  have seen the full report and the supporting documents? It seems like pretty thin gruel so far but go ahead believe a spy because of course they never lie, unless told to.

I’m going to build on this drift so my apologies to readers (the thread is still kremlin gate)

Russia and China are clearly very passionate topics here with two distinct teams with strong determination/stubbornness here on babble!

I’m well on one side (we all know where I stand), but I believe I see the position of the other side? I’m of the belief that Canada should be adopting more from the Communist Party of China! I suspect that this thought drives the opposite team here on babble up the freekin wall!

Now Russia is no longer communist, but isn’t the communist party still strong throughout Russia? Would it be fair to say that they form opposition in Russia?

Timebandit you started this thread drift with an unwarranted gratuitous insult to NDDP. But yeah its now about me.

So in your view NDPP is not loyal to truth, fair examination or fair discussion but you and your buddies are. I'd call you delusional but Pondering already has a new introspective thread on why this place is so toxic.

Taibbi: Russiagate Was QAnon For Journalists (Part 1)

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1121066505918189575

"Did America's entire 'respectable' news media really spend 22-plus months humping a transparent conspiracy theory, praying out loud for a former FBI chief to save them from Donald Trump, like cultists awaiting passage to Heaven's Gate on the Hale Bopp Comet?

The defining characteristic of the Russiagate press corps was certainty. It knew everything in advance and whenever it turned out to be wrong, it just moved to the next thing it knew..."

Here too...Lots more to come on this from investigative journalist extraordinaire Matt Taibbi. Watch his Twitter feed above for next installment coming soon.

 

I am sure that most of the report will be based on verifiable facts. The problem is I know that a slight tweak of the facts can easily effect the legality of any action. We are not to believe any state-run media except the CBC and BBC but are supposed to accept everything a representative from the 5Eyes tells us. The fascists that run NATO are the people I fear not the modern day, Red Under the Bed. I agree that various spy agencies are trying to interfere in everyone else's elections, Russia included. I would suspect that Canada in the Ukraine has at minimum funded social media sites to influence their election outcomes.

I also believe that the DNC is corrupt to the core just like the GOP hierarchy so forgive my skepticism as I watch various varieties of war criminals fight over whether someone is trying to subvert their undemocratic elections. With the amount of money awash in the US system the idea that the Russians can overpower the various billionaires that both openly and covertly are involved is too me an absurdity so that means that this whole thing is a Red Herring centered on Trump the biggest Red Herring of all time.

Trump is a grifter and the fact that he was not jailed before he went into politics, given all the people he fleeced with bad deals, says a lot about the US system of justice. Naomi Klein's book, No Is Not Enough, has a very good analysis in the first chapter called; "How Trump won by becoming the ultimate brand."  His political persona is a combination of his nasty boss role on the Apprentice and MAGA idiots favourite talk show host, Rush Limbaugh.

To re-purpose a phrase, his supporters know he is a bastard but he is their bastard.

Any questions you would like to ask that are possible to answer? If babble will let me have the names and contact information of all the posters who have been here over the many years I might be able to find the answer. That was a rather lame rhetorical devise.

ETA:  The only person I know for sure who has been driven off this board by a specific persons behavior was my wife and it was Catchfire not Timebandit that turned her off for good.

It is good that someone is still paying attention to Clinton.  I think the rest of us have moved on.

Clinton is an anchor.  She needs to go away.

 The Democratic Party is made up mostly of old style Republicans (not to be confused with TrumpRepublicans) but with a heart.  The will still carpet bomb countries and drone strike hospitals and schools.  They just feel horrible doing it again and again.

 

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Only in America can a "servant of the people" go from being middle class to having personal wealth of around $45,000,000 and that doesn't include Bill's wealth or her kids wealth. She like all of the US politicians with any real power is a member of the plutocracy. Trump is the bad boy member of the club who has never tried to hide his avarice.

 

From a tweet by Sarah Kendzior:

"Well yes, obviously vote for any Dem over Trump! But we are still owed answers about the mistakes of past admins (Bush as well as Obama) if we want to remedy the structural deficiencies that helped open the way for Trump and his crime syndicate. We deserve honesty and competence."

In other places she will argue that the reason America is quickly becoming a "autocratic kleptocracy" is due to the decades of erosion done by previous regimes.  Mostly by Republicans, but Democrats did nothing to fix a broken system.