Jump to content
The Education Forum

Attorney's file on Roger Stone, LaRouche and Russia influencing the 2016 presidential election


Recommended Posts

Matt Taibbi   “It’s Official: Russiagate is this Generation’s WMD”

The Steele report occupies the same role in #Russiagate the tales spun by Ahmed Chalabi occupied in the WMD screwup. Once again, a narrative became turbo-charged when Officials With Motives pulled the press corps by its nose to a swamp of unconfirmable private assertions…

As a purely journalistic failure, however, WMD was a pimple compared to Russiagate. The sheer scale of the errors and exaggerations this time around dwarfs the last mess. Worse, it’s led to most journalists accepting a radical change in mission. We’ve become sides-choosers, obliterating the concept of the press as an independent institution whose primary role is sorting fact and fiction.”

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Where to begin with that article.  Its devastating.

Carter Page was offered a 19 per cent stake in a multi billion dollar company?

The Post sent a team of reporters to Prague, and they spent days on end and could find no trace of Cohen ever being there?

Steele took stuff from an online posting?

This is so bad because now the Trump camp will be reinvigorated since his whole motto of Fake News has at least been partly shown to be  accurate.

One of the most acute things he says is that Resistance turned into Russia Gate.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jennifer Rubin writing just now in the Washington Post: "However, in a major respect, Barr’s action in declaring no crime of obstruction is inexplicable. Because it is the Justice Department’s position that Trump cannot be indicted as a sitting president, there is no requirement — indeed, it is inappropriate — for Barr to weigh in. The job is up to Congress, according to Barr’s own department guidelines. Suspicions about Barr’s willingness to clear the president, based on a memo he wrote to the Justice Department before being nominated as attorney general, look well-founded."

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

Matt Taibbi   “It’s Official: Russiagate is this Generation’s WMD”

The Steele report occupies the same role in #Russiagate the tales spun by Ahmed Chalabi occupied in the WMD screwup. Once again, a narrative became turbo-charged when Officials With Motives pulled the press corps by its nose to a swamp of unconfirmable private assertions…

As a purely journalistic failure, however, WMD was a pimple compared to Russiagate. The sheer scale of the errors and exaggerations this time around dwarfs the last mess. Worse, it’s led to most journalists accepting a radical change in mission. We’ve become sides-choosers, obliterating the concept of the press as an independent institution whose primary role is sorting fact and fiction.”

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million

Bullshed.  Pure unadulterated bullshed.

No one -- and I mean no one -- ever promoted the Steele Dossier as hard fact. 

Bush & Co promoted WMD as a fact. An invasion was launched on that premise, killing at least a million Iraqis.

All the Steele Dossier launched was a million late night TV jokes about pee.

The investigation into Trump/Russian collusion started well before the appearance of the Steel Dossier.

Taibbi writes:

  For years, every pundit and Democratic pol in Washington hyped every new Russia headline like the Watergate break-in. </q>

And why was that?  Because of Trump's own behavior.  Because of the lies and colluding in plain sight -- "Russia if you're listening" and all the sound and fury tweets vying daily to dominate the news cycle.

It wasn't the Steele Dossier that created the phenomenon RussiaGate -- it was Trump's own practice of owning the news cycle no matter what.

The Steele Dossier played no central role in any of this.  We knew for sure weeks ago that Cohen hadn't been in Prague.  In the popular culture the pee tape was an on-going joke, not the driver of interest.

Let the useful idiots of Trumpian fascism take a victory lap.  Mueller didn't write any of the conclusions presented by partisan Republican AG Barr.

Let's see the full report.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/23/2019 at 2:25 PM, Robert Wheeler said:

Jim, I do not believe you received the memo about never mentioning CrowdStrike, the DNC email leak, or anything to do with Podesta's e-mail.

You see, CrowdStrike and the DNC email leak is what got all of those Burned Out Bernie Supporters all fired up about seeing their $20 contributions going into the Clinton Coffers.

Alas, since you brought up CrowdStrike, don't forget CrowdStrike's co-Founder with George Kurtz, was a Ukranian named Dimiti Alperovitch.

The amount of investigative reporting and detailed technical analysis that destroys the credibility of CrowdStrike is massive.

A decent article to start is linked below. If you start following some of the embedded links within the article, you will be an expert on Ukranian politics in the 21st Century and cyber security.

If the White House had unclassified evidence that tied officials in the Russian government to the DNC attack, they would have presented it by now. The fact that they didn’t means either that the evidence doesn’t exist or that it is classified.

If it’s classified, an independent commission should review it because this entire assignment of blame against the Russian government is looking more and more like a domestic political operation run by the White House that relied heavily on questionable intelligence generated by a for-profit cybersecurity firm with a vested interest in selling “attribution-as-a-service”.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-24/what-crowdstrike-firm-hired-dnc-has-ties-hillary-clinton-ukrainian-billionaire-and-g

CrowdStrike - What is this? 2016?

For those who believe the U.S. Deep State invented the Russian electronic attacks on our 2016 election, isn’t it remarkable that the Deep State exonerated President Trump from conspiring with the Russians but nevertheless said, according to William Barr’s 3/24/2019 summary of the Mueller Report, the following:

The Special Counsel's investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.

The second element involved the Russian government's efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Taibbi writes:

...Buzzfeed made the historic decision to publish the entire Steele dossier, bringing years of pee into our lives. This move birthed the Russiagate phenomenon as a never-ending, minute-to-minute factor in American news coverage.

Comey was right. We couldn’t have reported this story without a “hook.” Therefore the reports surrounding Steele technically weren’t about the allegations themselves, but rather the journey of those allegations, from one set of official hands to another. Handing the report to Trump created a perfect pretext. </q>

Taibbi overlooks the role of Mike Flynn's lying about discussing sanctions with the Russians and Jeff Session lying to the Senate about contacts with Russians.

When Trump fired Comey he admitted it was to stop the investigation.

That was the "hook" that drove the RussiaGate phenomenon.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Taibbi:

Still, who knew? It could be true. But even the most cursory review showed the report had issues and would need a lot of confirming. This made it more amazing that the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, held hearings on March 20, 2017 that blithely read out Steele report details as if they were fact. From Schiff’s opening statement:

According to Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer who is reportedly held in high regard by U.S. Intelligence, Russian sources tell him that Page has also had a secret meeting with Igor Sechin (SEH-CHIN), CEO of Russian gas giant Rosneft… Page is offered brokerage fees by Sechin on a deal involving a 19 percent share of the company.

I was stunned watching this. It’s generally understood that members of congress, like reporters, make an effort to vet at least their prepared remarks before making them public.</q>

I'm stunned reading this.  What part of "according to Christopher Steele" does Taibbi not understand?  If Schiff were reporting this as a fact why did he include the qualifier "reportedly"?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

For those who believe the U.S. Deep State invented the Russian electronic attacks on our 2016 election, isn’t it remarkable that the Deep State exonerated President Trump from conspiring with the Russians but nevertheless said, according to William Barr’s 3/24/2019 summary of the Mueller Report, the following:

The Special Counsel's investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.

The second element involved the Russian government's efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.

Coordinated with the Russian government?

Is the Russian Mafia considered part of the "Russian government"?

Did Trump or his campaign conspire with Russians who were not part of the government?

Didn't AG Barr conclude the report did not exonerate Trump?

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...