Just Saying Who's Trumping der Fuhrer?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Richard Stanley, Jan 5, 2016.

  1. lorenhough

    lorenhough Well-Known Member

  2. Jerry Russell

    Jerry Russell Administrator Staff Member

  3. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    I had noticed this video, but got distracted by other matters. I think this might be a sequel talk that he gave on the next day. Will watch later, after I discuss Leviathan, and the Return of the King that is.
  4. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    The following long article from The Atlantic is about the career of Paul Manafort, who made the Washington Swamp what it is today (meaning now and before Trump came along). When Manafort started his first lobbying firm with such as Roger Stone there were about 100 registered professional DC lobbyists, and now there are about 10,000 of them. Manfort personally changed the techniques and ethics of lobbying, combining lobbying with running political campaigns.

    As the guy who constantly said he would drain the Swamp, Trump hired the guy who did more than anybody to create it in the form it became.

    I selected the following excerpt for the name that popped up in relation to Russian oligarchs, and thus a possible nexus with Agent Orange Leaks.

    VII. The Master of Kiev
    During the 1980s and ’90s, an arms dealer had stood at the pinnacle of global wealth. In the new century, post-Soviet oligarchs climbed closer to that position. Manafort’s ambitions trailed that shift. His new firm found its way to a fresh set of titans, with the help of an heir to an ancient fortune.

    In 2003, Rick Davis, a partner in Manafort’s new firm, was invited to the office of a hedge fund in Midtown Manhattan. The summons didn’t reveal the name of the man requesting his presence. When Davis arrived, he found himself pumping the hand of the Honorable Nathaniel Philip Victor James Rothschild, the British-born financier known as Nat. Throughout his young career, Nat had fascinated the London press with his love interests, his residences, and his shrewd investments. For his 40th birthday, he threw himself a legendary party in the Balkan state of Montenegro, which reportedly cost well over $1 million—a three-day festival of hedonism, with palm trees imported from Uruguay.

    Russian oligarchs were drawn to Rothschild, whose name connoted power—and he to them. “He likes this wild world,” Anders Åslund, a friend of Rothschild’s, told me. Rothschild invested heavily in post-communist economies and became a primary adviser (and a friend) to the young Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska.

    Rothschild and Deripaska fed off each other’s grand ambitions. Like a pair of old imperialists, they imagined new, sympathetic governments across eastern Europe that would accommodate and protect their investments. Their project required the type of expertise that Manafort had spent years accumulating. In 2004, Rothschild hired Manafort’s new firm to resurrect the influence of an exiled Georgian politician, a former KGB operative and friend of Deripaska’s then living in Moscow. This made for a heavy lift because the operative had recently been accused in court as a central plotter in a conspiracy to assassinate the country’s president, Eduard Shevardnadze. (He denied involvement.) The rehabilitation scheme never fully developed, but a few years later, Rick Davis triumphantly managed a referendum campaign that resulted in the independence of Montenegro—an effort that Deripaska funded with the hope of capturing the country’s aluminum industry.

    Deripaska’s interests were not only financial. He was always looking to curry favor with the Russian state. An August 2007 email sent by Lauren Goodrich, an analyst for the global intelligence firm Stratfor, and subsequently posted on WikiLeaks, described Deripaska boasting to her about how he had set himself up “to be indispensable to Putin and the Kremlin.” This made good business sense, since he had witnessed the Kremlin expropriate the vast empires of oligarchs such as Mikhail Khodorkovsky who’d dared to challenge Putin. In fact, the Kremlin came to consider Deripaska an essential proxy. When the United States denied Deripaska a visa, the Russians handed him a diplomatic passport, which permitted him to make his way to Washington and New York.

    Manafort understood how highly Deripaska valued his symbiotic relationship with the Kremlin. According to the Associated Press, he pitched a contract in 2005, proposing that Deripaska finance an effort to “influence politics, business dealings and news coverage inside the United States, Europe and former Soviet Republics to benefit President Vladimir Putin’s government.” (Deripaska says he never took Manafort up on this proposal.) ...

  5. Jerry Russell

    Jerry Russell Administrator Staff Member

    Trump's new Federal Reserve chairman, Jerome Powell, is another Georgetown graduate. He's the first non-Jewish Fed chair since Paul Volcker. The early betting is that he'll be an inflation-fighter like Volcker was.

    Or in other words: even while Trump was touting the lofty height of the stock market in his State of the Union message, he was preparing its downfall behind the scenes.


    Compare and contrast Jerome Powell's silence in the wake of the flash crash on his first day at work to Alan Greenspan -- who got on an airplane the day after the Black Monday crash of 1987, canceling an appearance he was to have made, and reassuring the markets with a statement on Tuesday morning that the Federal Reserve was standing by and ready and willing and available to satisfy any kind of disruption in the banking and financial systems. That was the day -- October 20, 1987 -- that the Greenspan put was born.

    My issue with the mainstream media these past few weeks is that they have been insistent on the fact that there is going to be a Powell put to follow the Greenspan, then Bernanke, and then Yellen put. I've been pushing back against that conventional wisdom, mainly because of A) the release of the 2012 FOMC transcripts when we finally got to hear words coming out of Powell's mouth which showed that he was no pushover and B) the fact that he worked for a $1 salary to educate the Congress on the perils of the Untied States defaulting on its debt.

    Powell himself has stated that was concerned that quantitative easing would end up being habit-forming for the markets.

    So I read his silence these last few days as prudent and cleaving to the original intention of the Federal Reserve being lender of last resort; not babysitter to the stock market.
  6. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    If memory serves me correctly, Greenspan's initial action was an 180 degree about-face from his previous career stance, so who knows what we'll get with Powell?

    The Trumpian chaos otherwise has been overwhelming lately, hard to know what to report on. I guess that has ironically been good for getting back to work on history and such.
  7. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    The following excerpted article further discusses Trump's extensive financial conflicts of interest, mostly via his real estate leasing deals. I have mentioned these in prior posts on this thread. In this article Forbes made detailed estimates on annual income based on what they believe are 75% of the assets in question. Trump's multiple assurances that he would eliminate any such conflicts were superficial, at best. Of which one instance is discussed in the excerpt. The Chinese government bank mentioned is a large leaseholder in Trump Tower.

    There is a discussion of the larger known conflicts of interest in the wider article.

    Shortly before President Trump's inauguration, one of his lawyers, Sheri Dillon, stood inside Trump Tower with the soon-to-be commander-in-chief and revealed his plans to maintain his business interests while insulating his presidency from foreign influence. "President-elect Trump has decided, and we are announcing today," the lawyer said, "that he is going to voluntarily donate all profits from foreign government payments made to his hotels to the United States Treasury. This way, it is the American people who will profit."

    Left unsaid: The Trump Organization makes more money from the Chinese bank alone than it ever could expect from hotel visits by members of a foreign government. And the president has made no pledge to hand over that money. Or the incoming rent from the state-owned Bank of India, which leases space in San Francisco, part of a deal that expires in 2019.

    The point of anticorruption laws is to prevent the possibility of outside influence, so that no one has to wonder, after the fact, whether it happened. Yet one of the country's primary conflict-of-interest laws doesn't apply to the president. By holding on to his assets, Trump has chosen to test whether the Emoluments Clause follows suit (he got one case dismissed in January; two others are active). So the president remains in business with the world's two most populous countries. Even if he tries to avoid a bias, there's a clear feeling in foreign capitals that currying favor with his business can't hurt. It's a global perception problem, at best. "He does not forget his friends," said Emin Agalarov, who helped broker the infamous Russia campaign meeting in Trump Tower, according to Donald Trump Jr. When President Trump announced a travel ban from seven Muslim-majority countries, it was hard to miss that the ban excluded Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Azerbaijan and the United Arab Emirates--all places where he had previously pursued business deals. In May the prime minister of Georgia made a visit to the White House, where, according to two of Trump's former business partners, the president asked about his old project in the former Soviet republic. ...

  8. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    The following excerpted article discusses Trump Jr.'s current trip to India to hawk luxury condos there, all the while giving a speech on foreign policy. As the article discusses, the Indians are lapping it up for a number of topical reasons. It probably doesn't hurt that Indian culture and Trump have gaudy fetishes for everything gold.

    From: https://www.vox.com/world/2018/2/21/17031706/donald-trump-jr-india-conflict-of-interest
    Trump Jr.’s visit to India not only suggests that the Trump Organization wants to lean into its investments in India — it almost seems designed to invite corrupt behavior.

    Experts say Junior is selling access to himself — and by proxy, to the president of the US — in exchange for buying his products. He knows that if a member of the Indian elite wants a chance to advocate for a policy that they’d like to see enacted, buying Trump property is a simple way to do it.

    But what makes it crystal clear that Trump Jr. wants to use his political ties to advance his business interests is the fact that he’s planning to deliver a speech on Indo-Pacific relations at an event in India on Friday. (It’s a serious affair — Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi will be speaking at the same summit.)

    Unlike his sister Ivanka, Trump Jr. is not a formal member of the White House. He’s technically just a businessman running the Trump Organization on behalf of his father.

    But by delivering a foreign policy speech, Trump Jr. is signaling to Indians that he’s in their country as a businessman and as a surrogate for the US government. If any wealthy Indians were on the fence about whether it was worth buying a condo just to talk to Trump Jr. about, say, trade policy, the fact that he’s delivering that speech should make it seem worthwhile. Trump Jr. is sending a clear signal that he wants to talk policy.

    And since he is deliberately blurring the lines between his role as a businessman and as the son of the president, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to conclude that President Trump’s foreign policy could be for sale to the highest bidder.

    Experts say the Trump brand is thriving in India in part because Trump himself appeals to large swaths of the population, both for his politics and for his perceived business acumen.

    “[Trump is] popular on the right, especially among supporters of the Bharatiya Janata Party, the current ruling party in India, who admire his Islamophobic rhetoric and blunt nationalism,” Aditya Dasgupta, a scholar of Indian politics and economics at the University of California Merced, told me.

    The Trump administration has spoken highly of its partnership with India and taken aim at India’s major rivals over the past year. Trump announced that he was suspending military aid to Pakistan in January and is on the path to a trade fight with China after criticizing its practices for years — moves that make India feel better about its own ties to the US.

    A Pew Research Center survey released last fall found that Trump’s approval rating in India was about twice his approval rating in other countries in the region like Japan and Indonesia.

    But Trump’s popularity among Indians also stems from the way he symbolizes wealth and power.

    “India has a rapidly growing and prospering urban middle and upper class, which often looks aspirationally to American society for symbols, brands, and status markers to emulate,” Dasgupta explained. “It’s no surprise that the Trump brand, and the conspicuous consumption it is meant to signal, would attract buyers.”

    Niranjan Sahoo, a senior fellow with the Observer Research Foundation, a think tank in New Delhi, told me the Trump Organization is also reaping the benefits of taking a gamble on India’s market. He said that many other foreign companies have stayed away from India’s real estate market due to concerns about corruption and bureaucracy.

    “The Trump Organization has taken a sort of risk, which is now paying off, particularly after Trump became president,” Sahoo told me.
  9. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    The following excerpted article counters an increasing trend in the MSM to hedge on the outcome of the Russiagate investigations. The article examines such hedging arguments in a recent Politico article (see highlighted in red), and in the process gets to some aspects of Trump's behavior, which I and others have been asserting are really more indicative that he is a Lifetime Actor, built for his present role.

    As such is the discussion of whether Trump is merely a buffoonish dolt or not, the Vox piece arguing that Trump is not a dolt. Also, that we are seeing so many leaked 'revelations' only because the whole Trump operation has been unprecedentedly opaque, about everything (also leading to its Samsonesque chaos effects). Various matters are simply too sloppy for any real "collusion". Perhaps this is the way this was all intended to be perceived by the public, especially if such as sowing a loss of public confidence in the institutions is the main goal.

    Brought up as one of the aspects that showed Trumpian competence was the ease in crushing the Republican primary field. I have asserted on this thread that this aspect seems more to have been scripted by the provision of just under 20 Republican primary contenders, which was not in line with the always tightly controlled Republican tradition -- until it changed only in the prior 2012 election cycle. The "preparing of the way" also seems to me to have extended to the exceptional incompetence of the Hillary campaign, despite the Clinton's legendary political campaign history.

    In the above vein, Comey's odd behavior in his revelations and the insane election timing of the re-opening of the Hillary e-mail investigation makes more sense. We are being played "both sides against the middle", ... or is it more the reverse?

    All of this is why I am highly suspicious about claims for the Seth Rich murder. I think it was much more Machiavellian than most figure.

    From: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/21/17030420/trump-russia-mueller-guilty
    Paul Manafort left his job working as the Kremlin’s favorite expat political consultant in Ukraine in the spring of 2016 to run his old acquaintance Donald Trump’s long-shot presidential campaign on a volunteer basis.

    Soon after, Moscow-backed hackers transmitted thousands of stolen Democratic Party emails to WikiLeaks, whose release was artfully timed to make trouble for Trump’s Democratic opponents. They became the basis of Trump campaign rhetoric in the months before Election Day.

    Emerging conventional wisdom in Washington, however, remains that there’s little reason to believe that Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation will end up proving much of interest. Politico magazine editor-in-chief Blake Hounshell this weekend wrote one of the buzziest pieces advocating a skeptical approach to Mueller’s ongoing inquiry, titled “Confessions of a Russiagate Skeptic,” throwing cold water on the notion of high-level cooperation between Trumpworld and the Russians.

    But to believe this, frankly, requires a much greater suspension of disbelief than to posit that the president colluded with Russia. You have to believe that after a decade of paying Manafort millions for his expertise to help pro-Russian candidates win elections in Ukraine, no one from Moscow thought to consult with him about how to help a pro-Russia candidate win an election in the United States.

    Last but by no means least, it seems clear that whether or not there was an explicit or tacit agreement on this point, Trump entered office intending to pivot American foreign policy in a more pro-Russian direction and installed Flynn as national security adviser and Rex Tillerson as secretary of state with a view toward implementing that agenda.

    The investigation — dating back to before Comey’s firing and Mueller’s appointment — seems to have played a big role in scuttling this and pushing Trump to maintain broad continuity with prior American foreign policy.

    The one place I do agree with Mueller skeptics is that liberals shouldn’t get their hopes up that the special counsel will “save” them or the country from Trump. Trump appeared on national television and explained to an NBC News audience that he improperly used his powers of office to remove the FBI director in an effort to shield his friends and associates from criminal scrutiny. The institutional Republican Party shrugged that off, and eventually, the public moved on.

    My guess is that whatever revelations are forthcoming from Mueller will fit a similar pattern — most people already have a negative view of Trump, so it’s hard to move the needle too much more on public opinion, and the whole GOP has already wagered so heavily on the Trump experiment that they’re not going to pull the plug regardless of what happened.

    But politics aside, the suspicion of illicit collaboration between the highest-ranking members of the Trump campaign and the Russian pro-Trump information operation is well-founded, and the ongoing criminal investigation into that possibility is steadily bearing fruit. There’s no earthly reason for journalists to adopt a stance of preemptively exonerating Trump when, so far, suspicion has been validated at nearly every turn.
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2018
  10. Jerry Russell

    Jerry Russell Administrator Staff Member

    Isn't this jumping to conclusions? I thought there was no actual evidence that these were "Moscow-backed hackers". What little evidence there is, points to Seth Rich. And you can speculate all you want, but we don't have any evidence that he was "Moscow backed" or who killed him.

    The suspicion might be well-founded, but where is this "fruit" of the investigation? Does Vox mean the defendants named in the recent indictment? Or is the reporter claiming some inside information? Or is this, again, sheer speculation?

    As things have played out: if Trump was intending to create a state of amiable relations with the Russians, what's been achieved is the opposite. The Democrats are on the warpath, and Trump and the Republicans are competing to show that they can be just as aggressive as the Neolib wing of the War Party.

    And if that's Trump's true role in this Machiavellian plan, I suppose it's working well.
  11. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    IMO the timing of matters trumps everything else, such as when document dumps occurred immediately after Trump calls for Russia "to find the missing emails"; or that Trump Jr. is happy to take a meeting at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer, with connections to a Putin oligarch and the Kremlin, offering dirt on Hillary (but she really only wants to talk about adoption of Russian orphans ... wink, wink).

    Who said that Seth Rich was "Moscow backed"? Not me. I don't know Seth from Adam, and for all I know he might be in the Hidden Resort. Or, a very convenient, and silent, fall guy. And considering the domestic and foreign (Russian) political machinations that Paul Manafort and Roger Stone have had over the years, I certainly wouldn't put anything past Vltchek's Russian saints.

    None of this is to my point, ... that we are being led down a primrose path. My assertion is that the whole scenario is a psy-op scam, and Trump and Hillary, Putin and Mueller are all in on it. Mueller is the guy who did such a great job on sewing up 9/11. And along the way he even told us, in a public speech, that the magic passport of Atta's was just that ... magic.

    Similarly, I have stated that I don't buy the Flynn boy scout narrative, in that, in his official spook positions, he had to have known about the actual nature of the Afghan opium trade and the origins of the Taliban ...

    Results aside, Trump is hypercritical of pretty much anything and anybody, ... except Russia and Vltchek ... for some reason.
  12. Jerry Russell

    Jerry Russell Administrator Staff Member

    In this case, Trump's sarcastic request for Russian intelligence help came immediately after the first big release of DNC emails, in late July. The next Wikileaks document release was in October.

    Of course one can always argue that suspicious timing might be purely coincidental. But in this case, I don't see that there's anything about the timing that needs to be explained.

    The Vox quote said that the DNC emails were transmitted by "Moscow-backed hackers". Assange, on the other hand, hinted that Seth Rich was the source. The only way to square that circle is to see Seth Rich as "Moscow-backed."

    That sort of logic is being used to spread the Russian tar far and wide. For example, consider the recent NY Times article blaming Russian hackers for making US students upset that schools have become shooting galleries. According to WSWS:


    ...the Times seized upon the Justice Department indictment of Russian nationals over the weekend to claim that Russia is at “war” with the United States. Now, the Times has widened this claim into an argument that Russia somehow bears responsibility for social divisions over the latest mass shooting in America.

    Its lead headline Tuesday morning blared: “SHOTS ARE FIRED, AND BOTS SWARM TO SOCIAL DIVIDES - Florida School Shooting Draws an Army Ready to Spread Discord”

    According to the Times, Russian “bots,” or automated social media accounts, sought “to widen the divide” on issues of gun control and mental illness, in order to “make compromise even more difficult.”


    The Times lead is based entirely on a “dashboard” called Hamilton 68 created by the German Marshall Fund’s Alliance for Securing Democracy, whose lead spokesman is Clint Watts, the former US intelligence agent and censorship advocate who declared in November that social media companies must “silence” sources of “rebellion.”

    Without naming any of the accounts it follows, Hamilton 68 claims to track content tweeted by “Russian bots and trolls.” But most of the trends leading the dashboard are news stories, many posted by Russia Today and Sputnik News, that are identical with the trending topics followed by any other news agency. Thus, Hamilton 68 provides an instant New York Times headline generator: Any major news story can be presented as the result of “Russian bots.”
    Perhaps, but I don't see the benefit in speculating about internal motivations of actors like Trump, Hillary, Putin or Mueller. They each have their own role in the drama: Trump as a businessman with some Russian affiliations, Hillary as a liberal cold warrior, Putin as a Russian oligarch trying to maintain credibility with both Russian nationalists and Atlanticists, and Mueller as a mainstream investigator. The scenario that's playing out works to all of their benefit: I doubt if Trump really cares if his Russian oligarch friends get the short end of the stick. (That is, unless you consider that maybe it's really best for everyone, including elites and oligarchs, if actual war with Russia can be avoided.)

    So what difference does it make, if they're all secretly getting together at some dungeon to plan out the psy-op? The effect is the same in any case.
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2018
  13. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    Editted on 3/6/2018

    Looks like I may have conflated or confused something about the timing of Trump's request. In any case, the 7/27/16 request was about Hillary's emails from her private server and the Wikileaks dump five days before was the DNC emails.

    Let's see how many events are coincidental then:

    1. Trump's return from his beauty contest trip to Russia soon precedes the start of the Russian social media campaign. (I realize that it is pernicious black propaganda that the Russians would do any such thing and that Facebook's admission now that they were way too lax is all part of the psy-op.) No doubt the poor Russians are being played like fake bronze trumpets.
    2. The fake social media campaign precedes Trump's fake decision, long in the making (albeit being tied to Obama's brutal ridicule of him), to run for fake populist President.
    3. Fake populist candidate Trump soon consults with fake former military-intel chief spook, Flynn, who has business ties to Russia and Turkey. Saint Flynn was on the ground in Afghanistan, where the real fun was protecting the global heroin trade and similar.
    4. Long time Trump associate, Russian organized crime operative, Felix Sater, fake brags that he can employ Russian contacts to help Trump get elected.
    5. Saint Flynn gives an RT speech in Moscow sitting next to Putin (and with Jill Stein).
    6. Political neophytes, Papadopoulos (Catholic DePaul University BTW) and Page (Catholic high school, US Naval Academy, Navy Intel, U of London, CFR, Georgetown (National Security) -- much like Bannon)), are brought onto the campaign, touted as fake foreign policy/energy experts by Trump. Later they are called such as fake covfefe boys by same. They were fake employed in making fake contact with ... Russia.
    7. John Podesta (Georgetown) is fake phished by the fake Russians, leading to the dubious (aka fake) Pizza psy-op.
    8. Manafort (Georgetown) joins the campaign (unpaid), with his extensive ties to Russian political interests in Ukraine. He has a condo in Trump Tower, and he and Roger Stone revolutionized DC swamp lobbying, starting from their legendary Nixon and Reagan days. Manafort, who has taken close to $100 million from his Ukraino-Russian clients, and is now struggling because he spends like a fiend and the Ukrainian revolution kicked his client, a pro-Russian guy, out of office, goes to work for for Trump for free. Cui bono?
    9. One month later, DNC fake 'discovers' that it has been hacked.
    10. Papa.. fake discovers that the Russians have dirt on Hillary.
    11. Trump gives first big foreign policy speech, touting Russia, and set up by Kushner, who needs big money relief for 666 Fifth Avenue. Russian Ambassador attends and Kushner meets with him.
    12. Later, post-election, Kushner would surreptitiously request unsupervised back-channel communications with Russia, using their facilities. Political blackmail.
    13. Kushner, Trump Jr., Manafort and others meet with Russian lawyer in Trump Tower (while big Don was upstairs) connected to a Russian oligarch, who is connected to Putin. They fake tell investigators (including their fake emails they themselves released) that they hoped the meeting would give them dirt on Hillary and DNC donors. But they only fake talked about Russian orphans. Ten days prior, Donald J. Trump announced that they had some really bad dirt on Hillary soon to come out.
    14. Manafort fake offers to brief a Russian oligarch, as witnessed by his fake email.
    15. Manafort gets bizarre Catholic 'evangelical' Mike Pence selected as Veep candidate.
    16. Trump loyalist strip Republican Platform of providing defensive weapons to Ukraine (against fake Russian aggression - which is otherwise justified, even though it is fake).
    17. Wikileaks releases DNC emails, which the fake Russians fake stole. Somebody killed Seth Rich as part of the fake psy-op. It ... must ... have been Hillary and/or Debbie Wasserman Schultz, because certainly no one else would do such a thing.
    18. 5 days later, Trump calls for Russia to find Hillary's missing emails. Comey would later announce the re-opening of the closed investigation into these emails just before the election.
    19. Manafort resigns after controversy erupts over the millions that he has laundered for his Russian oligarch friends. A laundry bank in Cypress that he frequently used was run by Wilbur Ross, current Sec Commerce.
    20. Jeff Sessions continues meeting with Russians, meetings that he originally denied.
    21. Yahoo News reports that Page is being investigated for back-channel discussions about easing sanctions on Russia.
    22. Access Hollywood tape is released about pussy grabbing.
    23. One hour later, Wikileaks releases Podesta emails. Pizza time. Roger Stone predicted that it would soon be Roger Podesta's "time in the barrel".
    24. Harry Reid writes a fake letter to Comey alleging that the FBI has explosive info on Trump and Russia.
    25. The next day, the Steele Dossier breaks. Except for urine, much of which has now been confirmed.
    26. Trump is elected.
    27. Kushner tries to set up Russian back-channel, without informing American spooks.
    28. Flynn discusses Obama's new Russia sanctions (imposed for fake election tampering) with the Russians.
    29. Trump announces how fake great Putin is for showing restraint in retaliation against Obama.
    30. US spook agencies publish their fake report that Russia tampered with the fake election.
    31. Sessions lies to Congress about his fake Russi meetings.
    32. Sally Yates fake warns the WH that Flynn has serious security problems.
    33. Trump sits on Flynn for 18 days.
    34. Trump fires Yates after firing Flynn.
    35. Sessions fake recuses himself about fake Russian stuff.
    36. Trump fires Comey, whose odd announcement about missing Hillary emails got him elected. Comey neglected to tell the public that Trump was also under investigation at the time.
    37. Trump (fake?) tells NBC that he fake fired Comey because the Russia thing is fake.
    It should be noted that Trump predicted the political demise of Al Franken, as well.
    OK, that's enough. I hope.

    That doesn't prove that Rich was associated with them, or anyone else. Dead men tell no fake lies, whether they are fake dead or not. He may have been a real or fake patsy.
    Maybe Assange is a spook. OMG, he's holed up in the Ecuadorean embassy.
    Well, we have a fake dilemma don't we? The Vltchekian logical approach then is to conclude that undeniable Anglo-American deceit is proof positive of Russian sainthood.
    Since I don't have an invite to be a fly on the wall, all I can do is speculate, from the tea leaves provided. Of course, war "can be avoided", but the Holy Bible is saying it's not likely and I think that Vltchek agrees with this considering his partially correct (one eyed closed) animus against his Satanic USA. Thank God the Jesuits are running everything, and in doing this post, I've discovered even more of them in the soup.
    I'm just providing my opinion Jerry. We can always ban speculation, including my own.

    Maybe all "fake news" is nothing more than otherwise sincere speculation. But this would be rank speculation wouldn't it?
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2018
  14. Jerry Russell

    Jerry Russell Administrator Staff Member

    Umm... I think I was talking about your item 1. "Trump's return from his beauty contest trip to Russia soon precedes the start of the Russian social media campaign." Actually, the timing (according to Mueller's indictment) was that the Internet Research Agency was incorporated and got initial staffing in ~April 2013, and started actively posting on social media in mid 2014. Trump's trip was in November 2013. The timing is not that close, and in my mind it isn't evidence of anything.

    The other 36 items represent reasons to suspect maybe Trump has something to do with the Russians. OK, probably so.

    But did Trump need to directly collude with the Internet Research Agency to plan the social media campaign, or were the Russians clever enough to come up with the plan on their own? Did the Russian government provide funding & direction for the Internet Research Agency, or was it an independently funded and organized Russian oligarch's business plan? We don't know.

    I'd say we have a real dilemma, not a fake dilemma. H-bombs and missiles are real, not fake, and Trump has a real button on his desk.

    And Vltchek never said that the Russians are saints, just that they're on the other side of the barricade from the Anglo-Americans. Anglo-American missiles are aimed at Russian and Chinese targets, and vice versa.

    Yes, the Holy Bible says the End is Near. Sucks if there's nothing that can be done about that.
  15. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    OK, Trump's beauty contest was bookended by the actions of the Internet Research Agency. That makes me feel a lot better, Jerry. Especially when both the Soviet's agency that employed Putin to recruit Western businessmen, and the American intel agencies (and the Jesu now almost completely running the White House, except for Goldman Sachs that is) understand the golden boy's proclivities and have him blackmailed 7 ways from Sunday.

    I neglected to fully elaborate on item 8. At the time that Manafort agrees to go to work for the Trump campaign, for free, he is also desperately scamming banks and such for massive funds to pay back a loan to a Russian oligarch. Oddly, this oligarch sued Manafort in US court. Once Manafort secures his Trump job, supposedly also using his (alternate) residence at the expensive Trump Tower as part of his vanity appeal to Trump, the pressure to repay the Russian loan subsides.

    This was likely done using the Mercer's and Bannon's Cambridge Analytica, whom also brought in unwitting Google and Facebook employees to Cambridge Analytica's facilities to assist in social media targeting.
    Who cares?
    Ha. I meant a real 'fake' dilemma.
    Hmmm. Something's wrong with this Vltchek picture. I'm for the peeps, and he says that I hate all peeps. He says that all Americans, including the American peeps, are evil, but he doesn't know any Americans, except for maybe what he reads.
    Yes, the End is Near, one femto-second before the Beginning. Nothing can be done about it if peeps don't learn that they are thought of as various flocks of sheep, by their human 'lords'. Ignorance is evil, not the people themselves. Knowledge is salvation, literally and figuratively. We need people like Vltchek to stop playing these misdirection games.

    Isn't it interesting that I have asserted that the American people, especially the zealot Religious Right, have been deliberately culturally re-caste as the Jewish Zealots of 2,000 years before. And Vltchek agrees that 'we' are the problem that needs to be exterminated (one way or the other), so that the new global order of wonder peeps (sans those evil Americans) can thrive. So we agree on something, at least.

    I merely believe that the main thing that differentiates Americans is their particular synthetic cultural framing, of which the underlying Russian imperial framing looks remarkably similar.

    I need to reiterate that I don't known anything about this Vltchek character, except what you've detailed here on the forum.
  16. Jerry Russell

    Jerry Russell Administrator Staff Member

    What could these intelligence agencies possibly know about Trump, that's worse than what the American voters already knew when they elected him?

    Maybe, although Mueller's indictment didn't come up with any evidence of a connection.

    At any rate, what could the Russians do for Trump that he couldn't do on his own, right here in America? Here's an article discussing how the Cambridge Analytica social media campaign was devastatingly effective in suppressing the votes of African Americans and women; these were the voters that got depressed and stayed home on election day, and who had caused Obama's landslide victory four years earlier. And it wouldn't have worked at all, if the Democrats had chosen a more effective candidate, instead of Hillary.


    For example, Trump’s digital team created a South Park-style animation of Hillary Clinton delivering the “super predator” line (using audio from her original 1996 sound bite), as cartoon text popped up around her: “Hillary Thinks African Americans are Super Predators.” Then, Trump’s animated “super predator” political advertisement was delivered to certain African American voters via Facebook “dark posts” — nonpublic paid posts shown only to the Facebook users that Trump chose.

    Trump had a $150 million budget for these Facebook ads, which dwarfs the Russian effort.

    Part of what's wrong with your Vltchek picture is that you aren't reading the quotes and linked articles, or at least not carefully enough. He's lived in America, he's recently toured in America, so he has direct experience of Americans.

    He's depressed about Americans, he finds us all depressing to talk to (except he likes Noam Chomsky), and he thinks we're collectively responsible for what the US government does in the world. I don't even know what that means, "collectively responsible". We should all be brought in for neo-Nuremberg trials? Who would be the judge, God? The attorney for the defense of the public would say the clients were brainwashed. I guess Vltchek would say that the people were complicit in their own brainwashing.

    He hasn't said anything about you, but I conjectured that he might feel your negative view of Russia is nihilistic. Maybe we should ask him. Now that our front page is looking better, I wouldn't feel so bad about inviting him in for a look around.
  17. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    Likely a great deal.

    The problem for the public is that most of the public is distracted by various things, and even when not are merely inclined, from bad framing, to think of such as Trump and Dubya as only being what they 'appear' on the surface to be, and not as 'actors'. Thus, in the case of Trumpees, they think that he is a great and competent businessman, when the reverse is true. He failed miserably in the casino business, and thus depended on organized crime and the Russians to achieve his overstated financial status. And helped by his huckster development of his name branding. He is competent in branding and corruption.

    Don't keep getting me wrong here, I'm not blaming Russia for everything. I'm merely not willing to separate them from participating in the puppet show, just because they live in some isolated (faux Eastern) land mass that they conquered using imperial means and then ran out of decent access to oceans (and got snookered into selling Alaska to Sarah Palin :rolleyes:).

    It's very possible that the Russian efforts were intended to mask, conflate, and distract from the domestic efforts. The question would be did and/or do the Russians understand this. I'm guessing yes. And, it is claimed that Rick Gates, Manafort's longtime Russia stooge, stayed on with the Trump campaign long after Manafort was forced to leave because of his scandals. The official story is that Gates was involved with the messaging of the digital campaign among other things. That's what Gates and Manafort did in Ukraine, for the Russians.

    In any case I watched an analysis that demonstrated just how effective the minimalist investment in foreign originated social media fake news could be, based upon how a highly motivated target audience is willing to chain their mail - so to speak. I know several Trumpees, that long before Trump started running pass dozens of right wing emails per day along to their network of fiends. And most of this crap was half-truths at best. "Half-Truth News", which nobody but I have talked about (... just now that is).
    The Democrats chose Hillary, because Trump is correct, the fix was in. Just like the fix was in for the fake Republicans to select Trump. This is the way our democracy always works, except that the smoke-filled backroom of the conventions has morphed to this, and we have hackable electronic voting machines.

    Likely the campaign to blame the otherwise guilty Russians for trying to hack the election system serves to mask our own fixing of the digital counts. We gerrymander voting districts and shoot horses don't we?
    I am depressed about Americans, and about Russians.

    To numb my various pains, I have been watching the first seasons of The Amazing Race, which I had missed when they first aired. A bunch of mostly "ugly Americans" racing around the world trying to win a million dollars. Besides the cynical enjoyment of watching proclaimed Xians make team alliances and then watching them backstab each other, like everyone else (because its a competition), every once in a while some humanity breaks out. A Vietnam veteran declares trepidation at flying to Vietnam, where so many Americans died trying to 'help them be Free'. But after walking and riding around amongst all the smiling, friendly people he decided something might be wrong with his 'picture'. Conversely, a separate observation was how unhappy the Russian peeps looked. Of course, it was in the middle of winter, so ..? We didn't get to see Putin's face in any case.

    BTW, the above phenomenon is part of the so-called "Contact Hypothesis". Human flocks like the Trumpees are most prone to manipulation because they have little to no contact with the world outside their once comfortable ghettos.
    You said he said ... no?
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2018
  18. Jerry Russell

    Jerry Russell Administrator Staff Member

    Maybe I should've said more precisely, what information could be revealed, that's more damaging than what American voters should have already known if they were paying attention, and not lost in their bad framing?

    Why do you say "faux Eastern"? Russia is located to the East of Europe, nothing "faux" about that.

    Abrahamic "Globalism" started from what was really a small part of the planet. The early "Empire" was surrounded on all sides by poorly controlled vassal states, and beyond that by enemies, and beyond that by entire other worlds unknown. This was true for the Egyptians, and for Alexander and the Greeks, and for the Romans, and for the Venetians. For all of those "Empires", China and Russia and India and South Africa and the Americas might as well have been on another planet.

    Now it may be true now in the 21st century, that even China and Russia are "vassal states" of the Anglo-Americans. But if so, they haven't been brought into the empire very securely.

    What Vltchek is trying to tell us, is that rank and file Russians and Chinese and South Americans and Cubans haven't been completely brainwashed to the same degree as Americans have. And he likes them better, as people, because of that.

    And also that however imperfect the Russian or Chinese governments might be, they're outside and not inside the Anglo-American empire.

    From time to time I hear the argument that other people are not really any different from Anglo-American imperialists, because if they had the opportunity, they would behave equally badly. Your argument about Russia's conquest of Siberia is like that. And there's no reason to believe that white Americans are inherently more evil than other nationalities: that would be a reverse racist position. But owing to historical circumstances, the Russians etc. are on the outside of the most world-threatening empire of the moment, not inside it.

    Vltchek thinks there's no hope the Western empire is going to be changed internally, but that the best hope for long-term improvement of the West, and for humanity in general, is by pressure exerted from the East (and South). It's an interesting thesis, and I don't think it should be dismissed lightly.

    My observation FWIW is that material from state Russian sources like RT, is more likely to be accurate than material from Western corporate media.

    The stuff from the Russian troll farm was not any higher quality than from any other American troll farm, though.

    This begs the question, who "put in the fix"? You sound like a Calvinist, seeing everything as predestined and occurring according to the script. Maybe Hillary put in her own "fix", calling on her connections at the DNC to tilt the playing field in her direction. Maybe Bernie was trying his best, and it just wasn't enough to overcome Hillary's game. Maybe Trump won the Republican nomination because he was good at branding, and he was smart enough to hire Cambridge Analytica. If he spent all his money on TV ads like Hillary did, maybe he would've lost.

    Maybe none of that was fixed in advance, and maybe the oligarchs would've coped with whatever unfolded.

    Yes, I said that, and I thought I already clarified what I meant.
  19. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    Maybe I should have said:

    1. During the election campaign the individual corruption (and other deplorable) threads were coming to the fore in a slow but steady stream. Even those having been able to observe most of them would be required to weave them together. But most Americans are relatively "low information voters", and many are single issue voters on either the right or left.
    2. Like Donald Rumsfeld said, "Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones."
    3. We are likely only privy to a subset of what there is to know about Trump's skeleton closet.
    The language in Mueller's indictment stated that there was nothing linking to Trump "in this indictment".

    Russia is in the east of Europe and the west of Asia. Therefore it is Western by your logic. It is Western, it is Eastern, it is Western, it is Eastern, ........ .

    In cultural terms, Russia is far closer to the "West" than it is to "Asian" countries or African countries. Therefore this whole identification is meaningless. This dialectic is a relic of the schism between the Western and Eastern Roman Empires, which was man-made in the first place.
    I don't understand what this demonstrates.
    Maybe they are merely playing their role? Isn't that how "divide and conquer" works? You're potential vassal state X, and you're presented with a choice of Team West or Team East. Better make a choice.

    The developmental history of Russia follows the same general trajectory as the "West", and the expansion of the Roman city-state into a vast empire. Russia stared very small and via various phases launched into the world's largest geographical empire, grinding countless indigenous under its imperial thumb. Then, like the Romans -- who ran out of Romans -- the Russians didn't have enough EuroRussians to push further, and they ran into the Pacific Ocean. They have now found themselves a victim of their massive geography, and can claim, from history, to be paranoid about invasion, e.g. Napoleon, Hitler, the USA (during the Bolshevik Revolution, etc.) Now, they can conveniently claim to be in their Pax Ursica, all the while reclaiming their imperial rights to such as Crimea from the Ukrainians.

    In any case I don't assume or assert that the Chinese and the Russians are vassal states. I only assert that the USA is the designated tip of the old Roman spear, ... for the time being at least. Statistically, too many Romans and Jews in the WH kitchen to think otherwise.
    Hate the sin, not the sinner? Or maybe better, hate the sin inducer, not the sin inducee.
    He might want to think metaphorically of something like multiple collections of Matryoshka dolls? Mozhet bit da ely mozhet bit nyet.
    Again, your last sentence is not my argument.
    I'm watching a different chessboard than you guys.
    OK, so what? I'm more concerned about the narratives being presented and played out than what any media source is saying. In any case, when it is in Putin's interest he will have RT appear to present the facts that he wants and the interpretations that go with them.

    Maybe somebody is monitoring RT's truthiness, eh?
    You're the second person to call me a Calvinist, and from the perspective that the elites have always been our Lord(s) then yes this is true. Their ancestors wrote the script and it's being followed. So, I'm an operative Calvinist, not a speculative or spiritual one.
    Mozhet bit da ely mozhet bit nyet.

    If da, then perhaps I should go back to church (because I see the 'divine' script unfolding). And perhaps this project is defunct. And so should Vltchek. We can put our heads between our legs and kiss our asses goodbye, and wake up Somewhere in the Second Resurrection.

    But at the time, I thought he said that about me.

    Maybe the Romano-Zionists are really intent on delivering on their global plan, for the best interests of Everyone, as the Bible claims. This, because the script calls for a massive conflagration where all the evildoers will be turned to ... whatever ... and even many of the non-Elect faithful as well. Then maybe this means that the elites all are Platonic crypto-Buddhists who believe that everyone will get to come back (reincarnation as resurrection) and start all over with the new uniform global (Cultural) rules in place?
  20. Richard Stanley

    Richard Stanley Administrator

    I was just looking at the new aspect brought up in the latest indictment, about the "Hapsburg Group", and happened across the following comment, which I think I have briefly discussed some time ago on this thread. The Morning Joe (MSNBC) reference has to do with the billions (some estimate up to 5 billion) of dollars in free media coverage that Trump garnered via his audacity.

    Clinton was charged more tor [for - rs] ad space. Trump’s ads were clickbait. FB helped elect Trump—just like Morning Joe.
    – shared via Facebook, see original here:

    Like asking whether or not the local news programs should cover such as car chases, people were questioning whether the national media, news and talking heads should devote so much air time to this huckster. If the (Liberal) Establishment, aka the Deep Deep State, covertly wanted him elected, what a great means of providing plausible deniability. Trump was merely catnip for the media, and "Any News is Good News" for such as Trump.

    Regarding the so-called "Hapsburg Group", no actual Hapsburgs have been sighted as of yet, I believe. The first thing of interest is how Trump's liberal media [sic] conditions the name 'Hapsburg' by telling us that it is an 'alternate' spelling for the Habsburg royalty of the former Holy Roman Empire (centered in today's Austria). As to being an 'alternate' spelling, it is 'alternate' in the sense of being 'the' English spelling of the name versus the Germanic spelling.

    And that the group's name was informal, apparently given to it by Paul Manafort, who funneled Russian money to it's VIP members, including two former European chancellors, to act as covert pro-Russian lobbyists to the EU on Ukraine issues. Only Germany and Austria have 'chancellors', and today's Germany was also part of the HRE, BTW.

    I have discussed on other threads that actual Habsburgs and other royals were sponsors of the Mont Pelerin Society that sponsored the 'Austrian' Economic School that forms the economic foundations of Libertarianism, a seeming paradox which I have explained. The paradox being why would Monarchists sponsor an ideology whose logical extension is Anarchism. The same paradox can be seen with the Koch Brothers sponsorship of Libertarian and Tea Party institutions (e.g. the Cato Institute) all the while being Traditionalist Roman Catholics (aka Monarchists). The answer is to be found in Machiavellian manipulation, not in surface analysis demanded by most.

    In any case, it is numerous activities like this that made Paul Manafort a national security threat, regardless of the fact that we have now been assured by a trusty Russian that Russia is as pure as virgin snow. And yet merely dismissing Manafort from the campaign didn't remove a host of other national security threats, some of which still exist today, in the White House. The most notable is Jared Kushner and his $1.6 billion white elephant on 666 Fifth Avenue, and where he has dealings with Russian government bankers and such. Fortunately, we know all this is on the up and up now, thanks to our trusty Russian and RT.

Share This Page