Richard Stanley

Administrator
Why is it that you're the only one who gets to define what the point is? Or, that you get to define the bounds within which I react to your point?
Because your desire to refocus the discussion away from the points I'm trying to make is irritating. If you want to protect Russia, you and Putin should make a new thread for that, but Putin, at least, seems reticent to defend Russia on this issue.

Watch Is Trump For Real?, which has a clip of the former CA tech guru admitting that they were gathering the data and developing what became Trump's propaganda weapons before Trump even announced and then tell me that my allowance that the Russiagate meme is a great cover is not correct? And that it doesn't matter what Russia's real involvement was or not. As Vladimir Pozner says, Putin is benefiting now from appearing to stand up to Trump (and vice-versa).

Not having watched the documentary, I don't know where else Cambridge Analytica got their data. Does anything else stand out? Any hacked sources, or corporate archives protected by privacy policies? Or just data that's readily available on the Internet?
If you have billions of dollars or pounds at hand you can buy user data from most any corporation and more, even if under the table. Facebook doesn't have enough users to do the job, but rather it is great to deploy the posts to the users it does have (and that are matched within the larger meta-database that the psychometrics were developed with. More data means more possible messaging accuracy, and thus vote conversion success.

In any case, your stubborness is making the case for the psychological validity of "Framing". You know what you already believe is correct, so you have no need to get the facts. And this makes you want to make excuses for it all, because it was done before, just to a lesser scale.

Was Hillary stupid, or was she role-playing? What difference does that make? Either way, she was a pathetic candidate who couldn't even beat Donald Trump. She subverted democracy in the most conspiratorial, evil and underhanded way, by secretly using the DNC machinery to undermine Bernie Sanders.
Hillary was not "a pathetic candidate" because of stupidity. What difference does it make? WTF? Your last sentence subverts your second sentence, but she did more than that. She stood down!!!!!!

She did so in the same fashion that Hankey discusses about the fake controversy between Trump and the Bushes, and with Ted Cruz. It's all rigged Jerry. This is what I've been saying over and over again on this thread and others, but some reason makes you want to make excuses for Russians or such and such.

I feel the same for the deluded Russian people as I do for the deluded American people, but Vlad is not one of the deluded Russians. He knows what the game is, else he would be there in the first place.

Maybe you need someone to exist that will provide some hope, but this can only come from reframing the bottom up.

You start a new house frame, at least, by nailing one stud to another at a right angle. The first horizontal member is necessarily attached to the ground, not held in the air by the vertical upright alone. This, BTW, is why the symbology of the Cross is really an insider joke, because this framing represents is a hoax, a psy-op. :rolleyes:
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I have decided to add a link to each of my posts on this thread to an updatable, summarized overview, with a list of my qualifications and caveats, on the Trump tableau. The latter hopefully more reflective of the entire thread than the Barr Report(s) are of the Mueller Report, albeit my suspicions that the Mueller Report and investigation being rigged is now even greater. Thus it will necessarily contain an appendix on Russia and Putin (and the curious, perplexing positions of the US intelligence community).

Let's just say for now, that if I am correct in my overarching theory of Globalization via cyclical waves involving massive cultural upheavals, utilizing such as contrived thesis, antithesis and synthesis, then such as Mr. Putin and Mr. Trump (like Hillary and the Georges) have the same employers. You don't put this much (insane wealth and power) at stake and not employ the practice of 'controlled opposition', a form of "divide and conquer".

I will first add the new link to this post when I'm done. Maybe it can form the basis of a new blog page post ... if I can manage to keep both feet out of a medical facility or an urn, that is.
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
I have decided to add a link to each of my posts on this thread to an updatable, summarized overview, with a list of my qualifications and caveats, on the Trump tableau.
Some kind of summarized overview, or reorganized extended overview, would be a great idea. The daily post format has become quite unwieldy and inaccessible, after 1000+ posts. As you know, I find myself often disagreeing with major parts of the thesis, and my daily carping and complaining adds to the sense of chaos. Perhaps after you've posted your overview, I can post an overview of my dissent.

If you have billions of dollars or pounds at hand you can buy user data from most any corporation and more, even if under the table.
Did the video 'Trumping Democracy' explicitly claim that the Trump organization did this? Because if they did, of course it would be a massive criminal and impeachable offense. Maybe there would even be some congressional Democrats agreeing with me about that.

As Vladimir Pozner says, Putin is benefiting now from appearing to stand up to Trump (and vice-versa).
Is that the reason you posted the Pozner talk, to make that point? Pozner also said that from 1985 to 2007, the FSU and then Russia were desperately trying to integrate into the West. Putin welcomed US troops into Afghanistan, and he even applied to join NATO and the EU. The US spit in his face.

Yes, now Putin is benefitting domestically by standing up to US bullying, as Pozner said. But it's not a situation that Putin created, or that he can exert much if any control over.

Let's just say for now, that if I am correct in my overarching theory of Globalization via cyclical waves involving massive cultural upheavals, utilizing such as contrived thesis, antithesis and synthesis, then such as Mr. Putin and Mr. Trump (like Hillary and the Georges) have the same employers.
If Putin and Trump have the same employers, there should be some actual evidence of that.

The model I'm gradually coming round to, says that Globalization is driven in cyclical waves exactly as you say, but that those waves are driven from the Anglo-American-Zionist power center, which has been gradually expanding its reach over the last 3000 years, while its center has shifted several times. And also that vast parts of the globe (including China) have never been truly integrated into that "global" empire, while other parts (such as Russia and South America) are poorly integrated potential battlegrounds. And considering how few people are true insiders or beneficiaries of this Globalist enterprise, and considering how bat-shit crazy the enterprise has become in the modern context, there are also rebellions continually arising from deep within the empire.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
I'm still supporting Richard Carrier's Patreon, and he posted a great essay today on Trump's legal situation. The essence of it is that Trump is in trouble on multiple criminal counts that have little or nothing to do with the Russiagate narrative. And that the Republicans ought to be just as eager to impeach as the Democrats -- but politically, it's not happening.

Excerpt:

https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/15227

I’ve just seen two things happen in 2019 that now actually look serious. You might not realize why.
There is an evident case for RICO charges against Trump that’s starting to build in a serious way, i.e. felony conspiracy, the law we use to prosecute mafia lords; we wrote the RICO statutes specifically to get crime lords who try to always work through agents to avoid prosecution. All that’s required for a conviction for conspiracy is an illegal act, coordinated by persons acting on your behalf, serving your interests. It’s really hard to effect a defense of “I didn’t know they were doing it”; many a crime lord has tried that and failed.
This isn’t about Russia. This is about good old fashioned crookery: money laundering and blackmail; in other words, racketeering.
Example number one:
A lawyer has now laid out how the inauguration fund investigation looks to be heading that way, in particular how some fifty million dollars or more doesn’t seem to have been spent on any legitimate use, money laundering tactics were used (like getting donors to buy whole blocks of tickets they won’t even use as a means of funneling large sums of cash), and foreign nationals may have illegally funneled millions to Trump’s campaign in this and other ways (a few examples of many more have leaked already). This will be hard to dodge. Money always leaves a trail. And they will find where it all came from and where it all went. And it isn’t looking like it will come out square. And this would implicate Trump in a massive criminal conspiracy of a very straightforward kind, standard white-collar crime (plus effectively the bribery of public officials), that no one can lie or silence their way out of. The evidence will all be documentary.
And now the Bezos thing has exploded. Jeff Bezos has published evidence that the The National Inquirer tried to blackmail him (and through him The Washington Post) on behalf of Donald Trump (and again, involving foreign national influence on the President, in this case from Saudi Arabia). That’s a crime. They claim they didn’t do it. But if Bezos hasn’t been duped, they left a paper trail. So it seems unlikely they can get out of this (this articlecovers what’s going on, with links bearing more evidence; more has since come out, and a federal investigation is ongoing). And as this was in the service of Trump’s interests, and we have ample evidence The National Inquireroften acted as Trump’s agent in similar capacities (e.g. in the paying off of his mistresses to get him elected, now an admitted fact), this implicates Trump in a criminal conspiracy to commit felony blackmail. Another RICO charge.
This isn’t trivial ambiguous shit like the collusion charge was going to turn out to be. This is serious criminal shit. And the evidence appears to be in documents, so lying and silencing witnesses won’t evade prosecution here. Trump might actually be screwed. Worse, the investigations of these two conspiracy charges will likely take longer than he has left in his term, so the Republican Senate won’t be able to shield him. He’ll very possibly be a civilian by the time he is indicted. He’ll have to be tried by a jury. In New York. Ouch. The thread holding up Damocles’ sword is fraying.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I have no idea where the Russiagate matter will turn out, especially with the supposed counterintelligence investigations that were admitted as early ongoing only relatively of late. As I discussed long before, given any conventional POV, a person of Trump's history of foreign, at least, money flows should warrant an intense investigation of same. For instance the connection of Trump to Deutsche Bank and its contemporaneous criminal usage as a conduit for Russian (and others') flight capital. Trump used DB to fund his massively failed Atlantic City casinos, of which he still has one, the Taj Mahal, that even today is a massive money loser. The only reason I can see for the otherwise penny pinching Trump to keep it open is for tax loss functions and as a vehicle for ongoing money laundering. Remember, we don't get to see his tax returns.

But it is also interesting that the term 'collusion' is still so bandied about. Collusion is only significant in a political context, as there is no chargeable criminal statue against it. As I've conjectured more than once on the thread, there is the fear that if Trump is trumped out, that we'll end up with Pence. The docu Is Trump For Real? also put some meat on the bones of this issue, showing Pence's history of serving the Real Deep State.

In terms of counterintelligence, then, we must still consider General Michael Flynn's actions with Russia and Turkey. And here, is Flynn a double agent or a Benedict Arnold? (And was General Benedict Arnold a double agent or merely a ... Benedict Arnold?) I have conjectured that Flynn is indeed a DA, given his top level in ... uhmm ... military counterintelligence. The lame but plausible cover story is that Flynn just got mad (at Obama) and got greedy.

Under the Trump man-child patsy theory, Trump would have little insight into those handling him, instead thinking that they are his network of support.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
The opening of the following Maddow piece has a clip of Trump crypticly revealing to us the real basis of the Deep State conspiracy against him is "oranges". Hilarious. You know, those 'orange' people. (Hint: Orange was the new (historical and biblical) red.)

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/trump-appears-to-be-changing-his-mind-on-mueller-report-release-1470470211619

Lawrence O'Donnell goes more in depth on the "oranges" and other strange (even for Agent Orange Leaks) comments today. The discussion, including a psychoanalyst, brings up the possibility of mental impairment, thus an avenue for delivering President Pence, using the 25th Amendment. The latter of which it would conveniently be VP Pence's responsibility to initiate the process. Could Trump also use this as a means to get a plea bargain from further prosecutions, necessitating the 'collusion' of multiple federal, state, and local jurisdictions of course?

https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/trump-s-day-of-strange-confusing-statements-1470419011872
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Administrator
The following excerpt is the opening half of Marcy Wheeler's latest post at the emptywheel. It focuses on the 'irony' Glenn Greenwald's take on Bill Barr's recent actions, given Barr's historical actions in relation to such as Bushco's Iran-Contra affair, and then the nexus of Scooter Libby of the Bush 43 Valerie Plame business. Libby being pardoned by Trump as a firm and tangible example to his circle of 'innocent' fiends that he would have their backs if they don't rat him out. Trump actually openly uses this mafia term as acting President of the USA.

Glenn Greenwald, who has written two books about the abuse of Presidential power, continues to dig in on his factually ignorant claims about the Mueller report. For days, he and the denialists said that if Mueller’s report was being misrepresented by Bill Barr, Mueller would speak up. Now that Mueller’s team has done so, Glenn complains that these are anonymous leaks and nevertheless only address obstruction, not a conspiracy with Russia on the election.
Glenn and his lackeys in the denialist crowd who continue to willfully misrepresent the public evidence have yet to deal with the fact that Mueller has already presented evidence that Paul Manafort conspired with Russian Konstantin Kilimnik on the election, but that they weren’t able to substantiate and charge it because Manafort lied. Mueller’s team say they believe Manafort did so in hopes and expectation that if he helped Trump and denialists like Glenn sustain a “no collusion” line, he might get a pardon. That is, we know that Trump’s offers of pardons — his obstruction — specifically prevented Mueller from pursuing a fairly smoking gun incident where Trump’s campaign manager coordinated with Russians on the hack-and-leak.
As Glenn once professed to know with respect to Scooter Libby’s obstruction, if someone successfully obstructs an investigation, that may mean the ultimate culprit in that investigation escapes criminal charge.
Glenn’s denialism is all the more remarkable, though, given that this same guy who wrote two books on abuse of presidential power is choosing to trust a memo from Bill Barr that was obviously playing legalistic games over what the public record says. As Glenn must know well, Barr has a history of engaging in precisely the kind of cover-up of presidential abuses Glenn once professed to oppose, fairly epically on Iran-Contra. The cover-up that Barr facilitated on that earlier scandal was the model that Dick Cheney used in getting away with leaking Valerie Plame’s identity and torture and illegal wiretapping, the kinds of presidential abuses that Glenn once professed to oppose.
I find Glenn’s trust of Bill Barr, one of the most authoritarian Attorneys General in the last half century, all the more ironic, coming as it does the same week that DOJ IG released this IG report on several DEA dragnets.
That’s because Glenn’s more recent opposition to abuse of power comes in the form of shepherding Edward Snowden’s leaks. Glenn’s recent fame stems in significant degree to the fact that on June 5, 2013, he published a document ordering Verizon to turn over all its phone records to the government.
The dragnet Snowden revealed with that document was actually just the second such dragnet. The first one targeted the phone calls from the US to a bunch of foreign countries claimed, with no court review, to have a drug nexus. Only, that term “drug nexus” came to include countries with no significant drug ties but instead a claimed tie between drug money and financing terrorism, and which further came to be used in totally unrelated investigations. That earlier dragnet became the model for Stellar Wind, which became the model for the Section 215 dragnet that Glenn is now famous for having helped Edward Snowden expose. ...

We must also remember, with Barr, that he stated 3 separate times, on the road to becoming AG, that the presidential dangling of a pardon to alter testimony is indeed a crime. He also stated that a sitting president can do most anything he wants. And we should also remember that if one can legally obstruct justice (which one can not) without an underlying crime, that this provides all the incentive in the world to actually obstruct justice if there is indeed a crime. Just don't get caught, and hire a swampy, successful, repeat offender, like William Barr.

For some background context on Barr, raised Catholic with an elite NYC education:

Early career
From 1973 to 1977, Barr was employed by the Central Intelligence Agency. Barr was a law clerk to Judge Malcolm Wilkey of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from 1977 through 1978. He served on the domestic policy staff at the Reagan White House from May 3, 1982, to September 5, 1983, with his official title being Deputy Assistant Director for Legal Policy.[5] He was also in private practice for nine years with the Washington law firm of Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge.[6]
U.S. Department of Justice
In 1989, at the beginning of his administration, President George H. W. Bush appointed Barr to the U.S. Department of Justice as Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel, an office which functions as the legal advisor for the President and executive agencies. Barr was known as a strong defender of presidential power and wrote advisory opinions justifying the U.S. invasion of Panama and arrest of Manuel Noriega, and a controversial opinion that the FBI could enter onto foreign soil without the consent of the host government to apprehend fugitives wanted by the United States government for terrorism or drug-trafficking.[7]

(We should note that 'President' Manuel Noriega was a strong supporter of American covert right-wing activities throughout Central and South America, and drug trafficking issues were the pretext to invade and arrest him, as he possibly knew more than anybody about the complicity of the Bush crime family and the CIA. Today Panama is one key hub in the Trump international money laundering operations, as recorded bigly in the Panama Papers.)

So if "there is no crime", then such as the President should stop acting so guilty, as many are saying. Trump stated several times that he thought that Meuller Report should be released in its entirety, but now that he can hide behind the veil the Barr Report, he has an excuse for it not to be, or merely to be delayed after he and his acolytes promote that he has been (fake) exonerated. It's just that we have a president, now, whose whole life is pathologically and psychopathically consumed with guilty behavior (but not guilty feelings) and lies. Much of his base support is baked into the Trump cake because they perceive his daily, open, Samson-esque, bull shit as being (much) more acceptable than the long perceived notion of the subtle chicanery of politicians. He is "our crook" (and to such as evangelicals he is indeed either Samson or Cyrus resurrected). Except that he IS NOT your crook.

My 'concise' Trump boilerplate is still in the works. The goal of conciseness may be hubris on my part.
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
So Marcy Wheeler says that Glenn Greenwald is a "denialist" (an implicit comparison to a "Holocaust denialist" or a "Climate denialist") surrounded by "lackeys"? She's talking about such famous luminary lackeys as, presumably, 'Moon of Alabama', Caitlin Johnstone, Aaron Mate, Max Blumenthal, Kyle Kulinski, Jimmy Dore, and even yours truly? Who am I missing?

To quote two of those 'lackeys' in one breath:

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/03/russiagate-is-really-finished.html

As for Marcy Wheeler, Rachel Maddow and other dimwits who peddled the Russiagate nonsense I agree with the advice Catlin Johnstone gives:
Every politician, every media figure, every Twitter pundit and everyone who swallowed this moronic load of bull spunk has officially discredited themselves for life.
...
The people who steered us into two years of Russiavape insanity are the very last people anyone should ever listen to ever again when determining the future direction of our world.
Yes, I know I'm not supposed to ignore it when I'm being insulted, and realize that Wheeler is trying to say something that I should agree with, or care about. Trouble is, I can't for the life of me find anything worthwhile in those paragraphs.

Wheeler tells us that anonymous leakers are claiming that the Mueller Report is bad for the President, apparently in some unspecified way. Surprise surprise, anonymous leaks have been the only evidence in this case all along.

She tells us Glenn Greenwald has always been pointing out that there's been nothing but anonymous leaks supporting the Russiagate conspiracy, now he's complaining that those same anonymous leakers are back to their old tricks. But, is this "willful misrepresentation", or the simple truth?

Next: the "denialist crowd" allegedly is refusing to come to terms with some Kilimnik->Manafort conspiracy to obstruct investigation of a "hack and leak". It's said that Manafort lied because of some dangled promise of a pardon. The pardon never materialized, right? So Manafort can talk to his heart's content, right? But the "denialist crowd" says that this "hack and leak" involved a "leak" from a DNC insider (most likely, Seth Rich) along with a "hack" by a team of Ukrainian (not Russian) hackers. So Wheeler's claim that the "denialist crowd" has failed to yet "deal with" the issue, is transparent bullshit.

I doubt if anyone on this "denialist" team would say that Barr and Mueller are any sort of saints, and I don't understand why Wheeler accuses Greenwald of "trusting" either Barr or Mueller. On the contrary, it's downright bewildering that Wheeler or anybody else, would ever have expected anything worthwhile to come out of this investigation.

So if "there is no crime", then such as the President should stop acting so guilty, as many are saying.
Trump is acting guilty, because he is guilty as sin. He launders money for Russian criminal oligarchs, quite possibly in defiance of Putin's government. He also pursues all sorts of criminal activities in the USA without any help from the Russians.

All Greenwald is saying (along with his "lackeys") is that Trump is innocent of the particular crime that Mueller is investigating. The Russians never interfered in the US election in any meaningful way. The infinitesimal effort by Internet Research Agency can't be linked to either the Russian government or the Trump campaign. The DNC "hack" was unrelated to the "leak". No collusion, no crime, so no obstruction related to it.

This whole thing has been a massive misdirection. From what? Well, everything that matters.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
I'm sorry Jerry. I got out ahead of my skis on this one. I didn't realize y'all had exclusive access to the Mueller Report, along with Barr. Is it behind a paywall or something?

As such, I'm only aware that the first Barr Report (or unSummary) allowed that the Mueller "did not exonerate" Trump. And, that it appears that Mueller intended for Congress to decide what to do with Trump, based upon the data the report provided. What that actually is I don't know, unlike your friends.

As we've been through before, I've already allowed that poor Liddle Putin might be being set up by Trump's handlers, but I still tend to doubt that he is unaware of this.

In any case, that Liddle Putin is still letting his oligarchs go rogue seems rather humorous. He conducted a purge quite a while ago, so why can't he control them now?

It is my understanding, and I think I'm on pretty firm ground here, is that Mueller's 'Russian' mandate extends beyond the alleged Russian manipulation of the election, but rather to whether the president is being influenced unduly (financially or otherwise) in any way by Russian or other foreign interests. If you know otherwise, please inform me so. Because if I am correct about this, then the denials about election interference and 'no collusion' (which is not a crime in statute) is also a distraction.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
I didn't realize y'all had exclusive access to the Mueller Report, along with Barr. Is it behind a paywall or something?
A truly pathetic straw man argument. Nobody knows what's in the Mueller Report. But, Russiagate advocates are forced into increasingly desperate conspiracy theories to maintain this belief that magical evidence is being hidden.

As we've been through before, I've already allowed that poor Liddle Putin might be being set up by Trump's handlers, but I still tend to doubt that he is unaware of this.
In order for Putin to be "set up", there would have to be some crime committed somewhere that he's being "set up" to take the blame for. So why is it that time and time again, the blame seems to stop somewhere short of Putin, if indeed there's any blame at all? If Putin is the mastermind of some conspiracy, isn't it more along the lines of others taking the blame for him? I don't even see a RICO case here.

In any case, that Liddle Putin is still letting his oligarchs go rogue seems rather humorous. He conducted a purge quite a while ago, so why can't he control them now?
And aren't most of these money laundering cases that we're talking about, very old news by now? That is, about the time of that purge? Although it's also pretty humorous, the idea that Putin has some kind of absolute dictatorial power over every actor in the Russian economy, including criminals.

It is my understanding, and I think I'm on pretty firm ground here, is that Mueller's 'Russian' mandate extends beyond the alleged Russian manipulation of the election, but rather to whether the president is being influenced unduly (financially or otherwise) in any way by Russian or other foreign interests. If you know otherwise, please inform me so.
FWIW, Wikipedia says: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017–2019)

The Special Counsel investigation (2017–2019), also referred to as the Mueller probe, Mueller report, Mueller investigation and Russia investigation,[1][2] was a United States law enforcement and counterintelligence investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. According to its authorizing document which was signed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on May 17, 2017, the investigation's scope included allegations that there were links or coordination between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and the Russian government[3][4] as well as "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation".

Sounds very narrowly focussed on the Russiagate election interference issue to me. What's the basis for your belief otherwise? Wikipedia isn't usually far wrong on basic factual questions like this.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Wikipedia said:
"any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation".
Please review the meaning of the word "any". As I discussed before, it was revealed relatively late in the media that a prior counterintelligence investigation was rolled into the Mueller investigation. And under the rubric of "any", separately widely discussed in the media, but nevertheless related, in regards to Trump's tax returns it was widely discussed that Mueller's team would have obtained those tax returns -- which would have nothing directly to do with the election 'conspiracy'. Perhaps this is all disinformation. I don't know, and neither does most anybody else at this point.

The following is the first draft of my 'concise' perspective of the Trump tableau. Note that I have created the dialectic distinction of neoRome and neoZealot.

Presumed points of agreement:
  1. Trump is a high-order criminal, no matter the lens of perspective
  2. There is a 'global' network of individuals pressing for increased Globalization (neoRome)
    1. Those with the most influence appear to have little concern with various profiteering leading inevitably to income inequity and large scale economic disruption to vulnerable segments
  3. There is a looser global coalition of cultural nationalists of both Right and Left stripes (neoZealots), (imperfectly) known variously as populists, 'patriots', NRA gun rights zealots, race nationalists, evangelicals, progressives, etc.
    1. Many of this diverse coalition are Putophiles [sic], based upon various motivations (more below)
    2. Per Vladimir Pozner, 'America' (the Real Deep State) created today's Putin. (more below)
Points of departure:
  1. Trump is indeed an 'actor' (a so-called Lifetime Actor), either witting (most likely IMO) or unwitting, ultimately working for the corrupt Globalist enterprise
    1. The propagandic obverse of George Washington, Trump cannot tell the Truth
    2. The Globalist enterprise is an historical continuum, operating on the hundreds of globalist expressions found in the Bible, the cultural backbone of Western Civilization (which includes the (fake) East, e.g. Russia
    3. As such Trump is reprising the roles of Samson, the curious (double) agent of chaos, and an agent of one of the Beasts of Revelation (in a Futurist millennial interpretation)
      1. This branding is what provides Trump strong political purchase amongst his Low Church religious base
    4. Trump has masterfully adapted fascio-populist messaging (ala Hitler) and co-opted disaffected white elements of the Democratic base (ala Bill Clinton)
  2. A key common component of Putophilia is: "the perceived enemy of my enemy (e.g. the American/Globalist Deep State) is obviously my friend"
    1. Putin is portrayed domestically, including by the Orthodox Church, as a literal apocalyptic millennial messiah
    2. Putin plays the role of a foil, where via numerous circumstances Judaic Israel cannot fulfill this specific role as the 'West's' institutional antithesis
      1. 'America' (writ large) indeed 'created' Putin
        1. If you don't have a sufficient enemy for the globalist task at hand, you must create one
          1. So, provide the pretexts, such as the Wolfowitz Doctrine
        2. Such synthetic foils creates the justification for increased military budgets, pretexts for various foreign deployments and 'defense' missions, leading to third party weapons sales, i.e. profits
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Please review the meaning of the word "any".
One would also have to consider the word "directly" when parsing this legalese. I don't see it as a general fishing license.

Trump is indeed an 'actor' (a so-called Lifetime Actor), either witting (most likely IMO) or unwitting, ultimately working for the corrupt Globalist enterprise
I'm not sure how it's possible to be an unwitting 'Lifetime Actor'. I agree that Trump's interests & actions are well aligned with the "Globalist enterprise". He seems to be a perfect choice for that shadowy entity that is re-enacting the Book of Revelation, if indeed there is such an entity. But i don't think the evidence is solid enough to convince a Bayesian naysayer like some people we know.

Furthermore, I can't help but imagine that we would have come up with some sort of Biblical narrative for Hillary, if she had won. I admit it's hard to believe that it would be as good a parallel.

A key common component of Putophilia is: "the perceived enemy of my enemy (e.g. the American/Globalist Deep State) is obviously my friend"
We have to ask, first of all, in what sense was Putin 'created' by the "Globalist Deep State". On the one hand, it's possible that he has been a secret asset of this "Deep State" ever since his KGB days, and was deliberately selected by Yeltsin exactly because of his reliable alliance to that cause. In that case, Putin's public enmity to the American aspect of that Globalist Deep State would be completely fake, a matter of "perception" only.

But I don't think that's what Pozner was saying. He sees Russia as a genuine outsider to the West, and believes that Putin was force into his role by US and European actions. If that's correct, then Putin is not just a perceived enemy of America and the Globalist Deep State, but he is an actual enemy.

It's possible that Putin could be a friend of the Globalist Deep State, and an enemy to America, at the same time. Maybe the true home of the Globalist Deep State has never moved from Rome. Or, maybe it will move next to some underground lair in Argentina.

Whether Putin is only a perceived enemy of America, or an actual enemy, in either case the nuclear weapons and missiles are real. And so are the propaganda machines on both sides, whipping up enthusiasm for this upcoming war. Russophobia and Russiagate are propaganda tools of war hawks.

If Putin is America's enemy, does that make him my friend? Not hardly. Undoubtedly, he has a nuke targeted for the Eugene airport, three miles from my house. Nothing personal, I'm sure.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
One would also have to consider the word "directly" when parsing this legalese. I don't see it as a general fishing license.
Surely any legal challenge would examine the use of the word 'directly' as well 'any'. As to 'any' this has always been the concern for opponents of so-called independent investigations, because they have been able to go off in all sorts of tangential directions.

As to 'direct' the issue then becomes what possible quid pro quo might be involved between Trump and various Russians and their government. We are talking here about an individual with massive amounts of money flow with Russians (as publicly stated by one of his sons) and who lied, during the late campaign, that he had no business interests after having just signed a 'business' letter of intent to proceed with Trump Moscow. In my book this is "direct', and those aspects are not the end of the story.

I'm not sure how it's possible to be an unwitting 'Lifetime Actor'. I agree that Trump's interests & actions are well aligned with the "Globalist enterprise". He seems to be a perfect choice for that shadowy entity that is re-enacting the Book of Revelation, if indeed there is such an entity. But i don't think the evidence is solid enough to convince a Bayesian naysayer like some people we know.
While it seems counter-intuitive to consider the 'unwitting' possibility, the narratives of Trump's days from childhood do seem consistent with that he is a born pathological liar, a narcissist and psychopath, and that the 'nurture' component may have fed into this rather than mitigate such tendencies. He was born with not only a golden spoon in his mouth but a golden butt plug as well; made an entitled, literal millionaire by the age of eight. As such, he could easily have been profiled, such as to be steered to believe that he had this destiny to fulfill. Maybe he got to watch the TV show made especially for him, where the con man Trump fake saves a town and wants to build a wall in doing so.

Maybe plausible deniability was invented to deal with Bayesians eh? And, I wonder what percentage of Bayesians limit their analyses to surface narrative (e.g. official stories, etc.) versus allowing the possibilities of hidden agendas to guide historical affairs?

Furthermore, I can't help but imagine that we would have come up with some sort of Biblical narrative for Hillary, if she had won. I admit it's hard to believe that it would be as good a parallel.
"If she had won". There is no 'if' in my book. The Republican Party primary process and the Fox and Breitbart noise machines made him the preferred candidate, while Hillary had too many negatives going in, and failed to campaign in key areas - against advice.

Do we have election audit ability for the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania? Or any other 'swing' state for that matter?

But I don't think that's what Pozner was saying. He sees Russia as a genuine outsider to the West, and believes that Putin was force into his role by US and European actions. If that's correct, then Putin is not just a perceived enemy of America and the Globalist Deep State, but he is an actual enemy.
You are correct that Pozner was not implying this, but I agree with his words in any case. If Putin is sincerely, now, an antagonist then America, as neoRome, created the enemy it wanted. But still, I'm pretty sure Putin is schmart enough to understand the Great Game.

I'm sure that such as the NYT and the WaPo would dissallow that Putin is such an actor, so should you?

The evidence that the USSR was a controlled opposition front is pretty strong IMHO. Evidenced by such as how many complete purges Stalin had of his intel agencies top strata. How many hih level traitors to the cause could they have had? And Putin rose out of all that, from the KGB.

Whether Putin is only a perceived enemy of America, or an actual enemy, in either case the nuclear weapons and missiles are real. And so are the propaganda machines on both sides, whipping up enthusiasm for this upcoming war. Russophobia and Russiagate are propaganda tools of war hawks.
Fear is the stampede lubricant of the masses. That's what makes for more Dead Presidents. The junior countries become forced to choose sides, take in military and economic advisors, and then the Dead Presidents party.

If Putin is America's enemy, does that make him my friend? Not hardly. Undoubtedly, he has a nuke targeted for the Eugene airport, three miles from my house. Nothing personal, I'm sure.
Well, you are exceptional in this regard.

In any case the Wolfowitz Doctrine has been darkly successful for the profiteers, as was the infamous PNAC document talking about a need for a new Pearl Harbor.
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
An international Trump real estate project article, Donald Trump's Worst Deal, from March, 2017 managed to escape me. This one involves Trump's business relationship to Iran's Revolutionary Guards, of whom Agent Orangutan has just announced are a terrorist organization.

The project seemed guaranteed to lose money, and the question becomes what the Trump Org's motivation to be involved in it was. Especially since the Trump's are so connected to other similar money laundering endeavors. Curiously the Trump's rejected the participation of a construction company (deemed incompetent by the Trumps) owned by the project's major partner, while accepting a family member of the same partner to manage things, and where this individual had no relevant experience.

The article states that the Trump Org waited to sever ties to the project in December of 2016, after he had won election, having been informed of the connection some time before. They should have known if Trump Org followed normal vetting procedures required by law post-9/11. (Added 4/10/19)

It seems that this project was indeed connected to desires for the Iranians to get around sanctions, and the article discusses that the Trump Org made only the most minimal effort at performing the necessary due diligence. As such, is it any wonder that Trump has just purged the top levels of the DHS, his head of the Secret Service, these after having purged the FBI, and making threats to eliminate judges.

Note: I did not excerpt the text regarding the connection to the Revolutionary Guards, which is nearer to the end of this rather long article. It is just too much to excerpt.

Heydar Aliyev Prospekti, a broad avenue in Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, connects the airport to the city. The road is meant to highlight Baku’s recent modernization, and it is lined with sleek new buildings. The Heydar Aliyev Center, an undulating wave of concrete and glass, was designed by Zaha Hadid. The state oil company is housed in a twisting glass tower, and the headquarters of the state water company looks like a giant water droplet. “It’s like Potemkin,” my translator told me. “It’s only the buildings right next to the road.” Behind the gleaming structures stand decaying Soviet-era apartment blocks, with clothes hanging out of windows and wallboards exposed by fallen brickwork.
As you approach the city center, a tower at the end of the avenue looms in front of you. Thirty-three stories high and curved to resemble a sail, the building was clearly inspired by the Burj Al Arab Hotel, in Dubai, but it is boxier and less elegant. When I visited Baku, in December, five enormous white letters glowed at the top of the tower: T-R-U-M-P.
The building, a five-star hotel and residence called the Trump International Hotel & Tower Baku, has never opened, though from the road it looks ready to welcome the public. Reaching the property is surprisingly difficult; the tower stands amid a welter of on-ramps, off-ramps, and overpasses. During the nine days I was in town, I went to the site half a dozen times, and on each occasion I had a comical exchange with a taxi-driver who had no idea which combination of turns would lead to the building’s entrance.
The more time I spent in the neighborhood, the more I wondered how the hotel could have been imagined as a viable business. The development was conceived, in 2008, as a high-end apartment building. In 2012, after Donald Trump’s company, the Trump Organization, signed multiple contracts with the Azerbaijani developers behind the project, plans were made to transform the tower into an “ultra-luxury property.” According to a Trump Organization press release, a hotel with “expansive guest rooms” would occupy the first thirteen floors; higher stories would feature residences with “spectacular views of the city and Caspian Sea.” For an expensive hotel, the Trump Tower Baku is in an oddly unglamorous location: the underdeveloped eastern end of downtown, which is dominated by train tracks and is miles from the main business district, on the west side of the city. Across the street from the hotel is a discount shopping center; the area is filled with narrow, dingy shops and hookah bars. Other hotels nearby are low-budget options: at the AYF Palace, most rooms are forty-two dollars a night. There are no upscale restaurants or shops. Any guests of the Trump Tower Baku would likely feel marooned.
The timing of the project was also curious. By 2014, when the Trump Organization publicly announced that it was helping to turn the tower into a hotel, a construction boom in Baku had ended, and the occupancy rate for luxury hotels in the city hovered around thirty-five per cent. Jan deRoos, of Cornell University, who is an expert in hotel finance, told me that the developer of a five-star hotel typically must demonstrate that the project will maintain an average occupancy rate of at least sixty per cent for ten years. There is a long-term master plan to develop the area around the Trump Tower Baku, but if it is implemented the hotel will be surrounded for years by noisy construction projects, making it even less appealing to travellers desiring a luxurious experience—especially considering that there are many established hotels on the city’s seaside promenade. There, an executive from ExxonMobil or the Israeli cell-phone industry can stay at the Four Seasons, which occupies a limestone building that evokes a French colonial palace, or at the J. W. Marriott Absheron Baku, which has an outdoor terrace overlooking the water. Tiffany, Ralph Lauren, and Armani are among the dozens of companies that have boutiques along the promenade. ...

The building looks rather risque to me, the outer curves should have been pink though. And the interaction between the two 'hot' elements caused a fire after this article was published.

387
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Retire, collect $200K pension, and stay out of jail. Nice work for the slumlord sister of our slumlord President. I have previously posted on this thread about this story of All County Building Supply and Maintenance. At least they weren't screwing blacks in these scams, ... since they wouldn't rent to them in the first place. Proof that they aren't racists.

President Trump’s older sister, Maryanne Trump Barry, has retired as a federal appellate judge, ending an investigation into whether she violated judicial conduct rules by participating in fraudulent tax schemes with her siblings.
The court inquiry stemmed from complaints filed last October, after an investigation by The New York Times found that the Trumps had engaged in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s, including instances of outright fraud, that greatly increased the inherited wealth of Mr. Trump and his siblings. Judge Barry not only benefited financially from most of those tax schemes, The Times found; she was also in a position to influence the actions taken by her family.
Judge Barry, now 82, has not heard cases in more than two years but was still listed as an inactive senior judge, one step short of full retirement. In a letter dated Feb. 1, a court official notified the four individuals who had filed the complaints that the investigation was “receiving the full attention” of a judicial conduct council. Ten days later, Judge Barry filed her retirement papers.
The status change rendered the investigation moot, since retired judges are not subject to the conduct rules. The people who filed the complaints were notified last week that the matter had been dropped without a finding on the merits of the allegations. The decision has not yet been made public, but copies were provided to The Times by two of the complainants. Both are involved in the legal profession.
...
In retirement, Judge Barry is entitled to receive annually the salary she earned when she last met certain workload requirements. Though the exact figure was not immediately available, it appears to be between $184,500 and $217,600.
The Times investigation focused on how the profits and ownership of the real estate empire built by the president’s father, Fred C. Trump, were transferred to Donald J. Trump and his siblings, often in ways designed to dodge gift and estate taxes.
...
Judge Barry had been a co-owner of a shell company — All County Building Supply & Maintenance — created by the family to siphon cash from their father’s empire by marking up purchases already made by his employees, The Times investigation found. Judge Barry, her siblings and a cousin split the markup, free of gift and estate taxes, which at the time were levied at a much higher rate than income taxes.
On a financial disclosure form filed in 1999, Judge Barry noted that her share of the All County profits for the previous 17 months totaled just over $1 million.
The family also used the padded invoices to justify higher rent increases in rent-regulated buildings, artificially inflating the rents of thousands of tenants. Former prosecutors told The Times that if the authorities had discovered at the time how the Trumps were using All County, their actions would have warranted a criminal investigation for defrauding tenants, tax fraud and filing false documents.
Similarly, Judge Barry benefited from the gross undervaluation of her father’s properties when she and her siblings took ownership of them through a trust, sparing them from paying tens of millions of dollars in taxes, The Times found. For years, she attended regular briefings at her brother’s offices in Trump Tower to hear updates on the real estate portfolio and to collect her share of the profits. When the siblings sold off their father’s empire, between 2004 and 2006, her share of the windfall was $182.5 million, The Times found. ...
 

Richard Stanley

Administrator
Further putting the cynical lies of Steve Bannon and Trump to the light of day, the following demonstrate, once again, their desire to fuck over all Americans, including their delusional base. MAGA's rhetoric exposed should be Make Americans (over) Pay Again (for swamp shit).

https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/inside-mick-mulvaney-s-slow-rolling-attack-on-cfpb-1495214147981

The above clip discusses the story below, I'm sorry that from time to time the MSM is correct. Consistent with Donald Trump's lifetime pursuit of fucking over of nearly everyone, in this case it's also consistent with the aims of traditionalist Catholics, like Bannon, and those that sponsor the false front of Randian libertarianism (the "lazy fair" monarchists of the Mont Pelerin Society). Albeit, Bannon is more nuanced in employing rhetoric cribbed from Rerum Novarum. "Oh, it's those evil Jews for Goldman Sachs ("where I used to work, so I know.") are leading Herr Trump astray.

At this rate, soon we'll have no more meat and agricultural inspectors, negating Upton Sinclair's efforts. Caveat emptor.

The 'savior' Trump, is kissing the asses of the money lenders:

...
Mulvaney was also aware that appearances have consequences. For agency heads, it is important to appear open to all points of view about their regulatory decisions, especially if they end up having to defend them in court. In February, he agreed to meet with his critics in person. Thirty or so people gathered around a conference table as rain lashed the windows. Mulvaney, who is 51, has close-cropped hair and a bulldog countenance that befits his manner. A founder of the House’s hard-line Freedom Caucus, he can be sarcastic, even withering, in hearings and speeches. But Mulvaney struck a placating tone with his guests. He kept his opening remarks brief, according to six people who attended the meeting. Important things at the bureau would not change, he reassured them. “I’m not here to burn the place down,” he insisted. Mulvaney said he did not intend to discuss his plans for the payday-loan rule with them but encouraged everyone to share their views.
Many of Mulvaney’s guests came from advocacy groups, like Americans for Financial Reform and the Center for Responsible Lending, that often did battle with Washington’s powerful financial-industry lobby. But the meeting also included a dozen religious leaders, among them officials from national evangelical and Baptist organizations, whose members tend to be among Trump’s most loyal supporters. These leaders viewed payday lending as not only unfair but also sinful, and they had fought against it across Trump country — in deep-red South Dakota, on the same day Trump won the presidency, voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure effectively banning payday loans. The ministers had planned carefully for their moment with Mulvaney, and for 20 minutes they took turns detailing the harm that payday lending had inflicted on their neighborhoods and congregations. Eventually they gave the floor to the Rev. Amiri B. Hooker, who led an African-American church near Mulvaney’s old congressional district.
“I told him I was from Kershaw County,” Hooker told me recently, recalling his exchange with Mulvaney. “He smiled and asked how were the good folks from Kershaw.” When Hooker pastored in Lake City, an hour away from Kershaw, a quarter of his congregation either had taken out payday loans themselves or knew someone who had. He told Mulvaney about an 84-year-old congregant in Lake City whom, during a week that she was so sick that she missed services, he saw hobbling toward him down the street. “She said, ‘I had to go pay my bill,’ ” Hooker recalled. The woman had taken out a $250 loan almost three years earlier to cover her granddaughter’s heating bill. She was still paying it off, Hooker told Mulvaney, at a cost of $75 a month, rolling over the loan into a new one each time.
Despite his earlier reticence, Mulvaney seemed eager to offer his own view of how the bureau ought to operate. It wasn’t up to the federal government to stop people from taking the kind of credit that suited them, he suggested: “There’s no reason people should be taking these loans — but they do.” He pointed out that there wasn’t anyone in the room from North Carolina, where payday lending was illegal. They should plead their case to state officials. “You have a place to go to address payday loans, and it’s not me,” he said, according to multiple attendees. As the C.F.P.B.’s acting director, he wouldn’t stop enforcing the law as written. He only wanted a more efficient bureau, he explained, one steeped in evidence-based decision-making, one that educated consumers to make good decisions on their own. Mulvaney provided few details about how it would all look, but he promised the pastors he would follow up to let them know which way he decided to go on payday-loan regulation. “I’ve never heard from him,” Hooker says.
In the months that followed, Mulvaney’s vision for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would become clearer. This account of Mulvaney’s tenure is based on interviews with more than 60 current or former bureau employees, current and former Mulvaney aides, consumer advocates and financial-industry executives and lobbyists, as well as hundreds of pages of internal bureau documents obtained by The New York Times and others. When Mulvaney took over, the fledgling C.F.P.B. was perhaps Washington’s most feared financial regulator: It announced dozens of cases annually against abusive debt collectors, sloppy credit agencies and predatory lenders, and it was poised to force sweeping changes on the $30 billion payday-loan industry, one of the few corners of the financial world that operates free of federal regulation. What he left behind is an agency whose very mission is now a matter of bitter dispute. “The bureau was constructed really deliberately to protect ordinary people,” says Lisa Donner, the head of Americans for Financial Reform. “He’s taken it apart — dismantled it, piece by piece, brick by brick.” ...
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
I'm sorry that from time to time the MSM is correct.
As usual, only partially correct.

The NYT article portrays Elizabeth Warren and the original CFPB as crusaders for consumer justice. But my take is that the CFPB's original proposal, to require payday lenders to evaluate the ability of borrowers to repay promptly, posed a false dichotomy. The payday loan industry couldn't comply with the proposal, because the vast majority of their borrowers couldn't qualify. So, it was effectively a proposal to shut down the payday loan business. The choice was between a completely unregulated, predatory industry -- versus no such industry at all, and no loans available to minimum-wage working Americans at any price.

The alternative of regulating interest rates to make these loans more affordable, was not up for discussion. And, as this NYT article makes clear, the payday loan industry is enormously profitable, even with high default rates. Of course there are high default rates, and enormous profits as well, offering loans at 400% interest to poor, but honest and diligent, wage earners.

The article complains that the terms of most consumer loans (including credit cards and revolving accounts) are Byzantine, incomprehensible and unfair. But it's far from obvious how the CFPB ever intended to cope with that problem.

It's a fact, however, that Trump and his administration are doing nothing to help their base. "Fucking them over", yes indeed.

The use of the expletive, however, indicates some emotional distress or dismay about the process? Things are not just the same as they always were, but steadily getting worse, at least for average Americans.
 
Last edited:
Top