Jeff Carter Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Bob - you are welcome to speculate that the Internet Research Agency had developed an incredibly complex system which could produce graphics with simple memes which in fact acted as a form of mind control on American voters and then target a minuscule amount Facebook ads so precisely as to swing the 2016 election to Trump, but it remains a speculation. The only hard facts available about the IRA project is that it was hugely minuscule in context to total similar activity and that the actual content of the ads seem juvenile and dumb. W Niederhut - I’m sorry, but the information in the Steele Dossier remains largely unverified. Acknowledging this may be a Trump/GOP talking point, but it is also a material fact as of this date.Efforts may have been made after January 2017 to verify or follow up its assertions, but the relevant information is its use, prior to attempts to verify, in October 2016 to initiate FISA authorized surveillance directed against persons associated with the Trump campaign. This is the shoe which is yet to drop, scheduled to fall perhaps this week. This is the real scandal, which first began to surface in late 2017. Efforts to inform people that the verifiable facts would “flip the script” on this whole sordid affair have been met with layers of denial which have been mind-numbing to behold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Jeff Carter said: Bob - you are welcome to speculate that the Internet Research Agency had developed an incredibly complex system which could produce graphics with simple memes which in fact acted as a form of mind control on American voters and then target a minuscule amount Facebook ads so precisely as to swing the 2016 election to Trump, but it remains a speculation. The only hard facts available about the IRA project is that it was hugely minuscule in context to total similar activity and that the actual content of the ads seem juvenile and dumb. W Niederhut - I’m sorry, but the information in the Steele Dossier remains largely unverified. Acknowledging this may be a Trump/GOP talking point, but it is also a material fact as of this date.Efforts may have been made after January 2017 to verify or follow up its assertions, but the relevant information is its use, prior to attempts to verify, in October 2016 to initiate FISA authorized surveillance directed against persons associated with the Trump campaign. This is the shoe which is yet to drop, scheduled to fall perhaps this week. This is the real scandal, which first began to surface in late 2017. Efforts to inform people that the verifiable facts would “flip the script” on this whole sordid affair have been met with layers of denial which have been mind-numbing to behold. Jeff, I posted links to the extensive database of Russian Facebook ads from 2016, as you requested. Have you reviewed any of them? They're like case studies in a Gerasimov Doctrine propaganda textbook for fomenting conflict and division in U.S. society along racial, ethnic, and religious lines-- in close parallel to the 2016 Trump/Manafort campaign. As for the verification of the Steele Dossier, here's a high quality link to a Lawfare review article on the subject. (In my experience, Lawfare publishes good material.) The Steele Dossier: A Retrospective https://www.lawfareblog.com/steele-dossier-retrospective Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for you and Robert to post a credible reference link to support the Trump/GOP talking point about the Steele Dossier being fake-- and to give us your take on the death of Oleg Erovinkin. Edited October 21, 2019 by W. Niederhut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Carter Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 The Lawfare article concedes that “much of the reporting simply remains uncorroborated”, and weakly holds that “none of it, to our knowledge, has been disproven.” In its summary, it proclaims that “the general thrust of Steele’s reporting seems credible in light of what we now know about extensive contacts between numerous individuals associated with the Trump campaign and Russian government officials….But surely there is more to come from Mueller’s team.” But there wasn’t more to come, as conceded by the Washington Post after the Mueller Report was released - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/24/what-steele-dossier-said-vs-what-mueller-report-said/ Further, as is now known, the “extensive contacts” linking the Trump campaign with “Russian government officials” were, in the main - and this includes Papadopoulos, Trump Tower Moscow, Flynn, Page, and the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting - initiated by assets of the FBI/CIA/, MI-6, and Fusion GPS. I fully understand that Trump is a reactionary con-artist, but he legally won the election and the proper response should be within the constitutional framework of your country and not in the dirty tricks division of your sketchy intelligence agencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, Jeff Carter said: The only hard facts available about the IRA project is that it was hugely minuscule in context to total similar activity and that the actual content of the ads seem juvenile and dumb. I don't think I ever overstated the impact as you're suggesting I did. I asked you originally what you thought the cost of an organic campaign was (which you didn't respond to) and then said I was skeptical about the price tag of the FB campaign. In fact organic campaigns can be much more involved and that is why I question the idea that 40k was spent on the FB effort. It's possible though a large organic campaign could be mounted which is supplemented with targeted FB and YouTube posts to leverage and legitimize something like Hillary's pizzagate thing and there you go. It's picked up by RT or Alex Jones blah blah blah. I don't see that as out of the question. Edited October 21, 2019 by Bob Ness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 16 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: As for that whole murder thing, do you know how fast Trump would be removed from office if that happened? They would be working on the indictment in the SDNY as the impeachment proceedings began. I would hope so but that's not a given is it? What's the principle then? There is none. If he can't be indicted for obstruction (which you've said in the past is an inconsequential "process crime") then why can he be indicted for anything? By this reasoning he can avoid indictment because the smallest minority in the Senate can kill it by voting against removal. That is, he only has to convince enough Senators to vote against impeachment that makes the vote 66 or less! Do you see my reasoning? I'm traveling but will take up the other part of the discussion later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 11 hours ago, Jeff Carter said: The Lawfare article concedes that “much of the reporting simply remains uncorroborated”, and weakly holds that “none of it, to our knowledge, has been disproven.” In its summary, it proclaims that “the general thrust of Steele’s reporting seems credible in light of what we now know about extensive contacts between numerous individuals associated with the Trump campaign and Russian government officials….But surely there is more to come from Mueller’s team.” But there wasn’t more to come, as conceded by the Washington Post after the Mueller Report was released - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/24/what-steele-dossier-said-vs-what-mueller-report-said/ Further, as is now known, the “extensive contacts” linking the Trump campaign with “Russian government officials” were, in the main - and this includes Papadopoulos, Trump Tower Moscow, Flynn, Page, and the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting - initiated by assets of the FBI/CIA/, MI-6, and Fusion GPS. I fully understand that Trump is a reactionary con-artist, but he legally won the election and the proper response should be within the constitutional framework of your country and not in the dirty tricks division of your sketchy intelligence agencies. Jeff, Did you bother to read your own WaPo reference article here by Glenn Kessler? It was based on the heavily redacted version of the Mueller Report Bill Barr reluctantly gave to Congress, but still concluded that Mueller's investigation corroborated the Steele Dossier, without disproving anything in it. Here's a direct quote from the Kessler analysis. “The Mueller Report substantiates the core reporting and many of the specifics in Christopher Steele’s 2016 memoranda, including that Trump campaign figures were secretly meeting Kremlin figures, that Russia was conducting a covert operation to elect Donald Trump, and that the aim of the Russian operation was to sow discord and disunity in the U.S. and within the Transatlantic Alliance,” Joshua A. Levy, counsel for Fusion GPS, told The Fact Checker. “To our knowledge, nothing in the Steele memoranda has been disproven.” Two other comments. 1) We still need valid reference links to corroborate your unsubstantiated claims about "FBI, CIA, and MI6 assets initiating" the many 2016 contacts between Kremlin officials and the Trump campaign. Who arranged for Veselnitskaya to meet with Don, Jr. and Trump campaign insiders in June of 2016? Who initiated Paul Manafort's and Michael Flynn's undisclosed 2016 contacts with Kremlin officials? 2) Why do you fail to mention the case of Trump's convicted 2016 Campaign Manager Paul Manafort? We know that Manafort had worked for the Kremlin for years to promote the corrupt Yanukovych regime in the Ukraine, and we also know that Manafort lied about his 2016 contacts with Konstantin Kilimnik, even after he agreed in a plea bargain to cooperate with Mueller's investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Carter Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 W Niederhut - your direct quote is a statement by a spokesperson for Fusion GPS, the firm which paid for Steele’s work. That’s like relying on the Dallas Police for an opinion on security measures forLHO. This is veering into territory which gets moved into other topic threads. I’ll just say that your paragraph on Manafort represents a ridiculous misinterpretation of the known facts. I can tell you are repeating information found in the mainstream media. The American MSM is probably the worst on the entire planet. You are being actively misinformed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Prutsok Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 3 hours ago, Jeff Carter said: W Niederhut - your direct quote is a statement by a spokesperson for Fusion GPS, the firm which paid for Steele’s work. That’s like relying on the Dallas Police for an opinion on security measures forLHO. This is veering into territory which gets moved into other topic threads. I’ll just say that your paragraph on Manafort represents a ridiculous misinterpretation of the known facts. I can tell you are repeating information found in the mainstream media. The American MSM is probably the worst on the entire planet. You are being actively misinformed. Neiderhut's "ridiculous" but you think Natalia Veselnitskaya is CIA or MI-6? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 3 hours ago, Jeff Carter said: W Niederhut - your direct quote is a statement by a spokesperson for Fusion GPS, the firm which paid for Steele’s work. That’s like relying on the Dallas Police for an opinion on security measures forLHO. This is veering into territory which gets moved into other topic threads. I’ll just say that your paragraph on Manafort represents a ridiculous misinterpretation of the known facts. I can tell you are repeating information found in the mainstream media. The American MSM is probably the worst on the entire planet. You are being actively misinformed. Jeff, What did Glenn Kessler conclude about that claim by Joshua Levy in his fact-checking article? I agree with your general skepticism about "the mainstream media" in matters related to the Deep State, but Kessler's fact-checking is usually well documented, as in this comparison of the claims in the Steele Dossier and the redacted Mueller Report. Meanwhile, you still haven't posted any credible references to support your "Deep State" conspiracy theory about the Trump campaign's numerous contacts with Kremlin officials in 2016. As for Paul Manafort, it is a matter of public record that he lied about his 2016 contacts with Konstantin Kilimnik, even after he agreed to cooperate with the Mueller investigation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted October 21, 2019 Author Share Posted October 21, 2019 (edited) Look, Mr. Wheeler proved long ago that almost every person that George P met abroad was an FBI informer or asset. (He actually thinks they were really CIA, but I will only go as far as FBI) I mean do we really have to go through all this stuff again, like Stefan Helper? Like Mr. Mifsud? How they tried to entice him with promises of HRC emails? And how Mifsud's informing triggered an FBI CI inquiry into Russian interference. Recall, George P met with Mifsud before the Democratic Convention. To me it was a disgrace that Mueller did not go into this aspect in any depth or at any length in his report. And this gave the Republicans a very good issue to go after him at his hearings for Schiff. And because of that, they came off better than Schiff did. Edited October 21, 2019 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Carter Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Natalia Veselnitskaya links to Fusion GPS.The information she had on the DNC was given to her directly by Glenn Simpson, Fusion GPS head, as she told NBC News. She had dinner withSimpson the night before the Trump Tower meeting. Kliminik was Manafort’s business partner in the consultancy firm in Kiev. They saw each other almost every day for years. Manafort didn”t lie about meeting a man who he saw regularly, nor is there anything suspicious about their routine meetings, despite the Mueller people’s very deliberate efforts to infer there was. They call Kliminik a “Russian agent” although the concept is absurd. Kliminik worked ten years at the NED subsidiary Republican Institute in Moscow. No “Russian agent” would be allowed such position. Manafort’s legal issues stem from disagreements with statements from business partner Gates - who decided to “cooperate” with Mueller. Manafort refused to cooperate and Mueller threw the book at him. That doesn’t mean Manafort is not unsavory, but your understanding of the facts is not accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said: Look, Mr. Wheeler proved long ago that almost every person that George P met abroad was an FBI informer or asset. (He actually thinks they were really CIA, but I will only go as far as FBI) I mean do we really have to go through all this stuff again, like Stefan Helper? Like Mr. Mifsud? How they tried to entice him with promises of HRC emails? And how Mifsud's informing triggered an FBI CI inquiry into Russian interference. Recall, George P met with Mifsud before the Democratic Convention. To me it was a disgrace that Mueller did not go into this aspect in any depth or at any length in his report. And this gave the Republicans a very good issue to go after him at his hearings for Schiff. And because of that, they came off better than Schiff did. Jim, From what I have read, George Papadopoulos was a minor player in the 2016 Trump campaign's contacts with Kremlin officials and cut outs-- although Papadopoulos, like Flynn, did, in fact, plead guilty to lying about his undisclosed contacts with Mifsud-- consciousness of guilt. Paul Manafort's 2016 (and prior) work with the Kremlin is of far greater import in Trump's Russiagate scandal. He lied about his 2016 contacts with Kilimnik, and was involved in negotiating the quid pro quo alterations in the 2016 RNC platform regarding support for Ukraine. My questions for those who still believe that the Trump Russiagate scandal was a U.S. "Deep State" conspiracy to sabotage Trump... 1) Why did so many Trump campaign associates LIE about their 2016 contacts with Kremlin officials? Explain. 2) Why was information about the Trump campaign's numerous 2016 contacts with Kremlin assets (and the Steele Dossier) completely blacked out of the mainstream U.S. media before the election? 3) Why has Trump repeatedly denied that Russia hacked (and is still hacking) our elections? 4) Why did Mitch McConnell adamantly refuse to cooperate with a bipartisan announcement to the public about Russian interference in our 2016 elections? 5) Why did Trump engage in at least ten counts of obstruction of justice (per the Mueller Report) in the Russiagate investigations-- beginning with the firing of James Comey? 6) Why did Trump say, "I'm f-cked!" when he first heard that Rod Rosenstein had appointed a Special Prosecutor to investigate Russiagate? 7) Why did Bill Barr deliberately misrepresent the findings of the Mueller Report, while refusing to release Mueller's own redacted summary of the Report? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted October 22, 2019 Author Share Posted October 22, 2019 This is its come down to, HRC now says that Tulsi and Stein are Russian assets: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/clinton-gabbard-russian-asset-jill-stein-901593/?fbclid=IwAR0FXMoflucB2gMMThgv92RFzlQ_svZkJDf6q2hNq3Ee-ga7dgnxVPCiwAQ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 (edited) 44 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: This is its come down to, HRC now says that Tulsi and Stein are Russian assets: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/clinton-gabbard-russian-asset-jill-stein-901593/?fbclid=IwAR0FXMoflucB2gMMThgv92RFzlQ_svZkJDf6q2hNq3Ee-ga7dgnxVPCiwAQ Jill Stein was photographed sitting at a banquet table with Putin and Michael Flynn in 2015. It was a Russia Today gala of some sort. Did Putin fund Jill Stein's third party candidacy in 2016-- which siphoned a critical one percent of the swing state votes from Clinton in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin? Putin, certainly funded Trump's candidacy in 2016 ($30 million through the NRA alone.) To be honest, it seems like the Trump/GOP "Deep State" conspiracy theories about Trump's Russiagate scandal are ignoring the forest for the trees-- the obvious evidence that Trump is a compromised Russian asset. Trump and his 2016 campaign cronies have repeatedly lied about their numerous 2016 contacts with Kremlin liaisons, and they have also aggressively obstructed and covered up damning details in the Mueller Report. Why has Trump denied that Russia is hacking our elections? It's absurd. As for Manafort, he has done dirty work for the Kremlin in the Ukraine for years, and was paid handsomely for his chicanery. I would be shocked to learn that Manafort WAS NOT working for Putin in the summer of 2016. (And, BTW, Trump's attorneys DID float a pardon offer for Paul during his stonewalling of Mueller's investigation.) To paraphrase Churchill, Manafort is a $3 dollar bill, wrapped in a greasy 10,000 ruble note, baked in a rotten pirogue. Edited October 22, 2019 by W. Niederhut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Carter Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Ah ... the "Kremlin Octopus" conspiracy theory. I think I prefer Cliff calling everyone a fascist. Best to everyone. The next year or so will be a crazy ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now