Trump And The Deep State
Good stuff from Caitlin Johnstone over at Medium:
Right on cue, and perfectly in alignment with the script Michael Tracey laid out way back in March with his excellent Medium piece “The Basic Formula For Every Shocking Russia/Trump Revelation”, the New York Times published an article based entirely on anonymous sources with yet another Shocking Trump/Russia Revelation.
The article revolves around an email which the Times has never seen, instead relying on the purported testimony of “three people with knowledge of the email” and hoping its outstanding reputation for journalistic integrity (typing that physically hurt) would be enough to satisfy any skepticism its readers might have. Donald Trump Jr., the subject of this particular Shocking Trump/Russia Revelation, has published what he says is the entirety of the emails discussed in the article if anyone’s curious. Be forewarned though: it’s shocking.
What does The Deep State want from Trump?
The sudden increase in baseless Russia hysteria from the corporate media could be attributed to many things, but personally I think it’s the possible movement toward peace in Syria combined with the president’s recent series of tweets talking about moving into a constructive working relationship with Russia.
The deep state has been using its media propaganda arm to set up a situation where Trump’s support will be hurt if he doesn’t take a neoconservative stance toward those countries, and he’s suddenly ceased capitulating and stepped way out of line just by saying what he said. No matter how you squint at it, something definitely changed behind the scenes.
The Deep State loves the smell of napalm in the morning! Here's a Salon review of a new movie The War Machine:
http://www.salon.com/2017/07/09/war-machine-reveals-the-mentality-behind...
The Deep State v. Trump:
Things keep heating up. Since America is a corporatist oligarchy and not at all the democratic republic that it purports to be, the nation has rulers, and rulers historically don’t cede power easily. The current administration is arguably no less corrupt than the ones which preceded it, but since Trump came in with his own team, his own connections, his own agendas and his own ideas about how to run things, he’s getting some aggressive pushback from the alliance of powerful unelected elites which inhabited the deep state prior to his arrival, all of whom have their own connections, their own agendas, and their own ideas about how to run things.
Check it out:https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/americas-deep-state-power-struggle-is...
Comments
How fitting it would be
if our current government destroyed itself in the quest for power.
The rich and powerful fighting the rich and powerful over who will be the richest and most powerful. It's the driving force behind the sanctions against Russia. Our government officials hate competition.
Beautiful. I'd buy that for a dollar.
Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.
Dibs On The Popcorn Concession!
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qJjcsXFB3ww/WWPVuuqKyMI/AAAAAAAAwgA/Qsi7yBeXH...
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
If Russia engages
in pipelines and in peaceful trade with Europe and Asia, there will be no need for NATO nor nuclear weapons. Ash Carter proposed to modernize our nuclear weapons by reducing their yields in order to make them more useable at a cost of a $ trillion over 10 years, or $100 billion per year, about 20% of our yearly defense budget. Without Russia as an enemy, there is no need for these expenditures.
I think the entire Russia horse shit is an effort to prevent the extinction of the nuclear weapons industry as well as the behemoth venture of NATO, both of which are dangerous, pointless black holes of spending no government can afford and no one in their right mind can use.
I think the current crop of beltway morons
wants to use them. They believe that they can do so and survive.
What do we know about the new batch on back-order, aside from lower yields? Are they building more neutron bombs?
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Sadly,
I agree with you. They appear to want to demonstrate the usefulness of nuclear weapons.
I think you are right
this Russian propaganda is a smokescreen for various nefarious reasons.
One is that it keeps people's attention on what Trump tweets about all day and people aren't aware of what the republicans are doing behind people's backs.
I left this comment in a different essay:
"I'm still on the fence about if TPTB installed Trump instead of Hillary because he is so inept and his demeanor is so off putting that people will focus on his stupid tweets while the republicans pass their hideously legislation while people aren't looking.
Look at how this sideshow has infiltrated ToP. Any diary there that isn't about Trump and his BFF Putin slips off the wreck list and only has a few comments in them.
I don't think that people are aware of how many of Obama's last minute legislation they are keeping from getting passed.
The bill that would allow internet providers sell people's browsing history is just one example of the legislation they overturned.
If Obama had actually wanted the legislation to pass, he wouldn't have waited until he was almost out the door. He would have passed it earlier so that the republicans or Trump couldn't touch it.
As I stated, this is just one example. The other thing that is happening while people are distracted by this Russian propaganda is that the banks are doing whatever the Hell they want because no one is paying attention to them. The only way to find the other issues that are happening in this country and in others, is to read the alternate websites. Many of the ones that used to be more reliable have jumped on to the Russian/Trump bullshit.
This is why I think Trump was allowed to become president. If TPTB wanted Hillary instead, it would have been very easy for them to steal the election, just like they did twice for Bush."
As long as Trump lets the military do what they want, he will stay in power. If he starts pulling our troops out of the countries that surround Russia, he's toast.
Hey, SD! I truly don't think electing DT was
intentional. (Not that I have proof--just my opinion.) If anything, I'm convinced that it was probably the only recent presidential election that wasn't swung in the direction that the PtB wanted it to go. (Think GWB/Gore and all those machinations.)
Which is not to say that FSC's campaign didn't want him to become the Republican nominee, because their perception was that he couldn't possibly win. They probably did attempt to maneuver his nomination.
I remain convinced that at least part of the reason for all the Russia Mania is to give FSC 'cover,' in case she should decide to run in 2020.
A good example is the McCain-Graham road show--consistently trotted out at times that could be considered breakpoints for this Administration--to side with Democrats. There's nothing unscripted about them. They clearly give the corporatist MSM the ability to quote 'Republicans' who are siding with Dems on the Russia saga, etc. As if on cue, both of them appeared on last week's Sunday programs (with the same message).
For me, the clincher was Romney's March 2016 speech. I know of no time in history of a comparable event. It's simply unheard of for a major Party figure, much less former Presidential candidate, to formally and publicly attack the leading candidate of their own Party on a national stage.
I believe that 'Russia, Russia' is designed to ensure that a botched election--from the Deep State's viewpoint--never happens again. Meaning, the Deep State does not intend to lose control of another Presidential election.
I do agree that the MSM uses DT's Tweets to distract from other much more important issues. Of course, that's par for the course, and I'm not sure that anyone can stop it.
Mollie
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength, while loving someone deeply gives you courage."--Lao Tzu
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
@Unabashed Liberal
Now that Homeland Security controls all electoral infrastructure, real voters seriously aren't needed unless perhaps there's much to much obvious implausibility in the results, as with a very public and extremely humungaloid landslide for a (gasp - horror!) progressive. In that case, the people - and massive public protest of any more obvious cheating - might still win out for a change.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
I wouldn't count on it.
I'd expect them to dig in and insist they won, even if exit polls show the progressive at 100%.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
@dervish
Probably... My rather faint hope was that both the aware and the mass protest at this would be (at last) large enough to potentially scare them sane and into running to their NZ estates for their lives, because of a large percentage of the civil and military forces deciding to protect their own lives and those of family and friends, freedom, country, 'democracy' and fellow-citizens from these usurping enemies by that point. I haz sugar-plums and unicorns dancing in my head.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
I agree
with you and others who point out all the advantages to placing the kisser of Vladimir Putin on every topic that enrages the American people.
@Linda Wood That's one big part of it
That's one big part of it. The other is that they don't want Russia and China to enter into a trade agreement that excludes us, particularly one in which they trade oil in something other than dollars with Middle Eastern countries that like them more than us.
And of course, third, there's the need to continue to pretend that Hillary Clinton is actually President.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Linda Wood
But isn't the problem that Russia/Syria wants the wrong pipelines, bringing profit to the wrong people?
Silly question, no doubt, but does anyone know what it means to perform a (something) handshake to sharethis.com? Just got that in the slooooow bottom script after a refresh on a C-9 page, (checking to see if recs I'd given had actually vanished after my following a link or just weren't showing, as my recs do still disappear sometimes) while waiting for different connections to be made to different places before I got back to C9? Never seen/noticed it before that I recall...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Another who seems to have fallen for Trump's lies.
Very similar to when Obama was president. And Bush, and on and on.
Here's an interesting article today at Counterpunch about Johnstone and Medium. This article from her supports it's findings.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/07/11/the-green-party-marks-in-a-media...
Yeppers
Corporate shills are everywhere.
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
@Big Al Anybody can come on the
Anybody can come on the Internet and say true things, even duplicitous bastards. I don't trust Johnstone, but she has said a great many true things, which is how she gets her credibility. Once established, that credibility can be used to shepherd people in any direction she wants.
This is also true, of course, of everyone else, including the Intercept and anybody else who wants to build up social capital by providing a much-needed space for dissidents to exist without being constantly shelled. People are starved, both for factual, logical analysis, truthful statements about the reality they inhabit, AND--which isn't always the same thing--representation of their political views in a public venue. Any site or person who offers this will receive support and credibility. The greater their reach, the more this will be true.
Then, if the person is a manipulative shithead, they can spend the social capital/credibility they've acquired through voicing dissent, by shepherding people in a bad direction. People will go along with it because they've learned to trust the shepherd. After establishing a certain amount of credibility, the shepherd has gotten onto an internal "good guys" list, and it will take more bad faith actions to get them off the list than it took good faith actions to get them on it.
Markos Moulitsas did a version of this, except that his ultimate function was not to be a shepherd so much as to make his site an abattoir. He provided a gathering place for dissidents for years, and then, once they were grouped together, either created or allowed roaming bands of bullies to abuse and gaslight them, followed by repeated purges. But once, he was the champion of the anti-Bush dissidents. That's how he got his power in the first place: he built up his credibility by allowing a space for dissent.
That's why it's important, actually crucial, not to have an individualistic, personality-based approach to information, though I don't claim to have an approach that's entirely without concern for personality. I mean, if Karl Rove said something, my first assumption would be that it's a manipulative lie. There are people who have committed so many bad-faith actions that it's extremely difficult for them to get any credibility at all, and I don't think that's avoidable. But personalities and good-guy designations are not useful. In other words, understanding that some sources are poisoned wells is useful for the community. Designating certain people as invariably good is not, given the social and political surroundings.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Well said CSTM.
I had no idea who she was until she was mentioned here. When I first heard of her I saw someone seemingly spouting revolutionary talk while advocating voting for Bernie and the democratic party. Doesn't fit for me. I have no idea why "they" would want to go after her, she seems to fit right in with the rest.
@Big Al Because we're in a
Because we're in a Princess and the Pea political framework. The elites are completely intolerant of the voicing of any dissent whatsoever. Even if dissent is being voiced by one of their own for the purposes of amassing credibility and influence over others, dissent cannot be left to stand or fall on its own merits, ever, but must always be countered with attack, especially character attacks.
To clarify on the subject of Johnstone: I have no idea, really, whether she is honest or not. When I say I don't trust her, I don't mean that I have solid information that she's playing us. What I'm saying is that she hasn't gained my trust, partly because there are a few things about her style and content that give me pause, but mostly because I am extremely careful about extending my trust to journalists and commentators.
For instance, I very much like Jimmy Dore, on the subject of just about everything except Justice Democrats and Draft Bernie. However, I know Jimmy Dore is connected to Cenk and The Young Turks, who have a contract with Fusion, which is a subsidiary of Univision, one of the biggest Hillary supporters. The main Young Turks show clearly acted in a sheepdog capacity last year, and have continued in that vein this year, and it seems likely that they allow Jimmy Dore to continue to have his show so they don't lose people like me altogether from their network. It also seems likely that one day they will shorten Dore's leash, and he will either start spouting pro-Hillary true blue Democratic bullshit, or lose his show.
That doesn't mean I assume that Dore himself is a shithead. He could be honest in his views and wishing to express them bluntly, without regard for wealth or power, AND also be willing to play Cenk's game enough that he retains access to the TYT network with its amazing reach (far greater than that of other political shows on youtube). He could be a good guy AND also a sellout waiting to happen. We're living in that kind of world.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Well, if they wamt to play around with these two politcal
parties and stay half in/half out of the democratic party, more power to em. If they want to elect a president from the democratic party while pretending to be against the dem party, fine.
I've seen it over and over, Maddow, Olbermann, etc. There's always a new hero to so many on the left, like they need it. Johnstone is wrong about working with the alt-right, she's wrong about Trump, but she serves up the proper hatred of the democratic party leadership and Daily Kos types so the Berniecrats eat it up. I can see why she's appealing in that regard to disaffected democrats still tied to this political system.
@Big Al Is she actually
Is she actually pro-Trump? Huh. I don't read enough of her stuff to know.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal I mean, I haven
I mean, I haven't seen any articles where she was pro-Trump.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
My perception is she's "soft on Trump" more than pro-Trump
I don't read all her articles either and I can't say for sure, and don't have time this morning to research it, but I've never seen her actually support Trump -- certainly no more so than I've see on here from time to time,e.g., cheering him for specific actions, like the TPP decision, cheering him for pissing off the right people sometimes, etc. She doesn't spend time on criticizing him for anything that I've noticed, except the Syria bombing -- which she blamed on the deep state, giving Trump a pass as "neutered" rather than complicit or responsible.
The focus of her criticism is on what she calls the deep state. She tends to focus on democrats and the corporate media as the primary villains. She once referred to Bernie Sanders as "our beloved Bernie" and I'll say, that gave me pause. She voices the anger of Bernie true believers who are still righteously angry about the election. So her focus is narrow and pointed. She does sometimes miss the mark. I read her with all this in mind, and still enjoy many of her articles as thought-provoking (oops, that's a crime I think!).
As for promoting working with the alt-right - as far as I know that was around those young women right wing fundy preachers called The Resistance Chicks -- because they were angry about Syria too, and did an excellent expose on CNN drumming up fake support for the war. So ok, cool, I checked them out, and discovered that we have literally no other points of agreement. Don't see "working with them" and dropped that exploration after a few videos of the Resistance Chicks. I'd rather watch the Dixie Chicks sing Not Ready to Make Nice.
I noticed CJ hasn't brought them up again either.
So I think the idea she's intentionally trying to promote fascism is pretty ridiculous. Or whatever she's being accused of, I'm not even sure really, but I still think she's a burned Berner and still smoldering, which a lot of people relate to. I really appreciate this discussion and Big Al's criticisms. It's very good to question the people we listen to. I've always read her work with an awareness of her bias and point of view and found she's often right, sometimes wrong, sometimes too over-the-top, usually funny and entertaining to read whether I agree or not on any given essay. She's not a "hero" to me, but someone who makes me smile sometimes, and learn new things. But it has been growing old, now that I think about it.
I haven't seen her promoting or supporting any political candidates at any level since the 2016 election. She was for Bernie, now is not for anyone, cynical and angry at the system. I think that describes a lot of us. (raises hand)
Well said, INDEED!
This is one of the best things you've written here, and that's really saying something. Thank you so much!
@Linda Wood Thank you, Linda!
Thank you, Linda! This is something I've been thinking about a lot, and it's crucial to where we are now. We are (deliberately, I think) being put into a situation where we can't tell who to trust, and I think the plan is to get us into a situation where we can't tell what is true. It's difficult to pick a path through these swamps:
This is one thing Peter Jackson got absolutely right:
"Careful, now! Or hobbits go down to join the dead ones, and light little candles of their own!"
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
They are starting to target Caitlin
A post appeared today on the somewhat reliably left website, CounterPunch.
According to Yoav, we are all "useful idiots":
One last bit of Cointelpro sabotage from Mr. Yoav:
Yeah, right, Yoav - we are sure going to listen to people who tell us not to form alliances with those white working class folks that supported Bernie, because we all know they are all nothing but fascists.
In case you don't get it, Yoav is a corporatist tool. The fact that he got published on Counterpunch makes me think less of Counterpunch, not more of Yoav.
Just more Democratic shills
trying to discredit someone who strikes too close to the truth. MSNBC probably doesn't approve of her either, nor does DWS.
The horror.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
This author got pounded on counterpunch's
Facebook page. People have seen through his attempt to go after Caitlyn.
I couldn't follow his rambling attack.
What's that saying?
"First they....for telling the truth. Then they......"
Anyone know what I'm trying to remember?
LOL! The knives are out!
Ben Cohen of the Daily Banter is after Caitlin too, and calls her an Alt-Left nut. That's a straight-up Fox News talking point.
The well-heeled and the insiders apparently hate her, that's always a good sign.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
That makes three...
Caitlin, Jimmy Dore, and Lee Camp. They've all been targeted by the msm. When they attack, you know they're nervous. Bernie sure opened Pandora's box, and it isn't ever going back. The left is done being screwed.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Counterpunch Disappoints
I saw that as well and was puzzled. Julian Assange likes Caitlin's work:
(from an internal link in her Medium article)
The entire Counterpunch smackdown struck me as petty jealousy. It reminded me of the airhead that questioned Matt Taibbi's credentials when he wrote his Vampire Squid story. Maybe poor woman was blacklisted by the Murdoch Media Empire in Australia?
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
Yup, the only thing they bother to "go after"
is someone's reputation, when they don't dispute at all WHAT the person writes, they just slam on either how it was written or who wrote it. Just like Snowden being nothing but a "29 year old hacker" and a high school drop out, never mind what he exposed though, just forget about that and look at who he is, not what he said.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Here is an excerpt of her much maligned article...
An article with which I agree.
"...I made a tweet a couple hours ago about US warmongering and the mainstream media, and according to my notifications the very first person to retweet it was alt-light hero Mike Cernovich. To be frank I think a lot more people on the anti-establishment right understand this need to collaborate than those on the anti-establishment left. Cernovich and I probably disagree on more things than we agree on ideologically, but where we do agree it’s absolutely stupid for us not to work together, because you can be damn sure the establishment Republicans and Democrats are working together to advance the agendas of the deep state. Once we’ve killed the establishment propaganda machine that holds America’s unelected power establishment in place and given the American people the power to determine the direction that their country will take, Cernovich and I can fight all day and all night over socialized medicine and whether white men really have it that hard. Until then that fight is a pointless waste of energy which distracts from the real clear and present danger posed by the deep state right now.
This doesn’t mean we have to embrace all the beliefs of the anti-establishment right, nor does it mean we’ve got to collaborate with all of them; when I noticed a notification on Medium saying I’d been followed by Richard B. Spencer I blocked him immediately, for example. I don’t doubt that Spencer was curious about my lefty anti-establishment perspective in the very spirit of collaboration that I’m talking about here, but we’ve all got limits, and that’s mine. You can trust yourself to know who to collaborate with and in what areas; this notion that you cannot safely collaborate with the right is based on the false premise that we’re all too stupid and inept to make distinctions. I still welcome Spencer’s opposition to US interventionism, and I welcome him to practice it far away from me."
https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/lefties-need-to-stop-being-shy-about-...
The Deep State struggle continues
for a new balance of power. This goes right along with that Greenhall article the other day about the Blue Church.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Who is Yoav Litvin?
In the counterpunch article, all he says is:
Yoav Litvin is a Doctor of Psychology/ Behavioral Neuroscience
A Google search on that returns:
BIOGRAPHICAL DETAIL ONE:
BIOGRAPHICAL DETAIL TWO:
He writes for the controversial website Mondoweiss.
----
WHAT DOES THIS TELL US ABOUT YOAV?
1. Basically, Yoav has no problem going up against the entire Israeli and Washington establishments, who literally hate Mondoweiss:
“Mondoweiss” is a hate site (UPDATED)
2. He works at the Rockefeller University, which is about as deeply wired in to the whole CFR crowd as you can be without being named Brzezinski. I don't think for one minute that he could keep his job with his political stance unless it was OK with TPTB.
----
BOTTOM LINE: Now that I realize how deeply connected this guy is, I am more certain of my comment downthread about CJ being a target. This guy is not some random lone gunman, despite the Mondoweiss association.
Somewhat like Natan Sharansky, Yoav is another true believer in his own correctness, someone who will walk through machine gun fire for his position. This shows up in the authority with which he denounces CJ and warns everyone else to avoid her like the plague.
And it is an elegant piece of work. He categorically denounces her, and Counterpunch publishes it. If I disagree with him, I begin to doubt Counterpunch. If I agree with him, I doubt CJ. Either way, some leftie is going to take a hit. This is classic Cointelpro sabotage. And they can just blame it all on the "herding cats" problem of the left.
Wow! Great find.
it was strange to see how he went after Caitlyn and called her a tool for the fascists. I couldn't understand why he wrote that article on her.
It makes sense now.
Duplicate
There were a number of red flags
in that hit piece by Yoav Litvin. I came to the same conclusions about him as you did, after a brief search of his history and connections. He'll need to be a bit more subtle if he wants to maintain his cover.
native
He doesn't need to maintain his cover
Brazen is the flavor of the day now, they're convinced that we're all too terrified to push back or counter what's said.
To which I offer a heartfelt FU.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
@arendt Well analyzed. This is
Well analyzed. This is why it's imperative to have an approach to information that focuses on the information rather than the messenger.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
That was my thought too
I may (do) decide to discard particular authors who shows themselves to be untrustworthy, but it takes far more than one such writer or article before I'll discard a whole site or publication. If a dishonest, agenda-driven editorial policy taints an entire site, such as what happened on Daily Kos, then yes, that site goes on the don't bother list.
Counterpunch isn't a site I've read often and I don't know its writers or reputation, but I've read some good articles there from links posted here and elsewhere. I'm certainly not discounting them all because of these CJ articles. Does Countrrpunch have control over what gets posted, or is it like C99% where anyone can publish?
Anyway, I read Caitlin's article, and I read the hit pieces on her. She has been under fire for awhile now. I read about her spat with Daily Banter after they attacked her, which was maybe a month or two ago I think? Honestly I wasn't surprised, after she posted that article about being in a media war and how to win, and started getting a following, it was inevitable. Like she said, it is a war. In a war the other side doesn't sit idly by while you plan to destroy them and rally troops.
The worst they have on her is she's a foreigner, who writes about US politics instead of her own country. She said in an interview that her husband is American and that's why she is focusing on this country. She also admitted that, OMG, she's trying to make a living as a writer, and appreciates having a group of supporters who crowd-source her paycheck.
Does she write for a "market" then? Maybe yes. But I've heard her in many interviews and if she's fake she deserves an academy award. I'm delighted if a good writer can make a living this way!
Has she been duped by Trump? I can see why it might appear so, in this article she clearly defends Donny jr by pointing out that he didn't do anything out of the ordinary for political campaigns, including that the Clintons paid for dirt on Trump -- from freaking Russia! The hypocrisy and dishonesty are mind boggling, and she's right that the media is being fundamentally dishonest in this whole narrative.
That this revelation requires defending a trump is unfortunate, but Jimmy Dore discusses this too, about the whole CNN fiasco that ended up making James okeefe look good, made CNN look ridiculous, and propped up Trump by making his accusations against the media true! Now we have to defend him, because they are lying about him. Arg. How stupid.
Because there are so many real reasons to oppose trump. Which, I believe, Caitlin does. I'll admit I didn't and don't agree with the basic premise that Trump actually opposes or intends to undermine the deep state. I give him no credit on that, and I'm surprised at CJ and so many others who seem to believe he actually is a sort of good-guy, somehow. At best you could say he's like the proverbial bull in a china shop, breaking everything in site without a clue what he's doing, and it just happens that some of things he knocks over, we're glad to see broken. As for him having anything in mind - Trump cares about being rich, powerful, and famous. Period. Whatever else happens is anyone's guess.
Maybe she does give Trump too much credit for his "character" in thinking his actions are to challenge the deep state. Perhaps it's naive. But I still love Caitlin's writing, and think she's a valuable voice.
The emails are not from anonymous sources
The emails were posted on Twitter in a chain by Trump jr. when he found out the NYT was about to publish them. NYTimes printed them in a stream and they are legal documents.
You can call them fake news or propaganda if you want but they are timed and they are sourced.
To thine own self be true.
Regarding Trump Jr's meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya,
it seems she is a friend of former ambassador Michael McFaul, and like McFaul, has been actively engaged in opposition to Putin for quite some time. This would make her a more natural ally of Obama/Clinton than of President Trump. What could possibly have been her motivation for dishing dirt on Clinton to an inexperienced Don Jr.?
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/07/11/curiousor-and-curiousor-...
native
Good catch, Native! Since 'Russia Gate,' I've
been tuning in to CNN on the radio about 2-3 hours most days.
I can attest to the fact that McFaul is a frequent guest on CNN. He sure as heck has never fessed up to being buddies with the Russian attorney, that I've heard.
As an aside, Lindsey Graham just browbeat the FBI nominee into instructing campaigns to never accept opposition research material from foreign nationals. Whew! I'd say Kabuki in D.C. is reaching new heights!
Mollie
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength, while loving someone deeply gives you courage."--Lao Tzu
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
CNN will never admit or reveal
anything of value.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
Totally agree, dervish! That was intended
a bit tongue-and-cheek. If anything, CNN is the chief propagandist of Russia Mania! They're are totally beyond laughable. There are at least three so-called analysts on that channel that are flat-out certifiable, IMO.
For me, it's sorta a matter of 'knowing one's enemies,' that I bother to listen at all. You could say that I'm one who firmly believes that you can't fight something, if you don't have a solid grasp or understanding of it.
Anyhoo, glad that the photo was dug up. I'm planning to Tweet it to CNN, when I get a chance--ATTN: Ambassador Michael McFaul!
Mollie
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength, while loving someone deeply gives you courage."--Lao Tzu
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
@native She wanted to repeal
She wanted to repeal the Magnitsky Act.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Aha. Thanks.
I still don't see any evidence of collusion though.
native
@native
If they had any - and could explain what the problem was supposed to be - anyone still watching corporate news would be hearing about, eating, drinking and wearing it. Probably bathing in it, too. Of course, they tried that with Russian hooker piss, which is also hilariously illustrative of their mentality...
According to the Podesta emails, it seems that, at least for some associated with them, urine is recommended for be sprinkling over nightmares? Was that what made them think of urine on Trump?
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/15893
http://theantimedia.org/spirit-cooking-wikileaks-podesta-email/
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@native I thought from the
I thought from the beginning this might have been a set-up.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@MarilynW If the email was
If the email was published, the NY Times should have included the language of the email in their article, or at least quoted it, and they certainly shouldn't have made it sound like neither their reporters nor, possibly, the sources themselves (who are anonymous to us, but not to the NYT), had actually seen it.
This is atrocious journalism by any measure. The fact that Trump is an asshole who shouldn't be president doesn't excuse it--in fact, the damage being done now to our political culture, which is being allowed because "anything goes if it's against Trump," is, if anything, worse than that which was done under the Bush regime. I didn't think our political culture could be made much worse. More fool I.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
redacted - comment was to deep..
https://www.euronews.com/live
Consider the trump election as a "hostile takeover"
of the government and how it's meant to operate by tptb.
her heinous if elected would've been the status quo
just another war monger teeing up wars for tptb.
but both option a and b only serve the oligarchs, one
very willingly the other with a nudge here and there.
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
See my Open Thread today.
I'm starting to think that the horrible way the press treats information is designed, not to convince the masses, but to torment those who rely on reason and fact.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I think it's a two-fer
and it pays off so well for them. We're just freaks who are purists while the rest of America just goes on about it's business, consuming, being outraged and fearful, later, rinse, repeat.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
nails on a blackboard
@irishking I know, right?
I know, right?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
American msm and their deep state cohort
are acting more and more like a gaggle of noisy geese. They are pushing their anti-Russia-anti-Trump hysteria to the point of absurdity, and simply assuming that the public is going to buy whatever far-fetched story they come up with. Any pretense of objectivity is paper-thin at best. They've been stretching their credibility to the limit, and beyond. It's a wonder they have any audience left at all.
native
Their desperation is showing
and while I'm certain many rank and file journos know that it isn't working, management and ownership will keep flogging that dead horse, because they don't know what else to do.
It's hilarious to watch, actually.
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
They have almost become
a 21st century, Americanized version of Pravda. I gotta admit, there is something darkly humorous about that.
native
@native I think it might be
I think it might be even worse. But I don't read Russian, so I wouldn't know.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
How can you be a Russian spy
if you can't read Russian? How did you sign your FSB user agreement?
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
@dervish
Google translator? Of course, that isn't always entirely accurate and the actual contract might have involved a career as a Russian hamster-trainer or something...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@dervish but I call
but I call myself Felix Edmundovich when I'm hacking the DNC, so you know I *am* a Russian spy.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Another article from Counterpunch on C99's new hero
Caitlyn Johnstone.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/07/13/on-caitlin-johnstone-and-david-c...
@Big Al
Gotta keep that division strategy going or the public will unite and start demanding democracy en masse...
If the bus gets stuck in the muck along the road while passing through nowhere, and the only way to make it to somewhere better is for everyone to get together and push for a bit, heaven forfend that this is done if there are fundamental disagreements in unrelated areas between those mired in such as no/lousy/wastefully hyperpriced health care, no living wage, no free and fair election-land...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
If that's what the likes of Cernovich wanted to demand,
democracy itself, I'd be all for it. But that's not what they're after, not at all. I researched him when he was first brought up on this site and found the same things Frank discusses in his Counterpunch article, which I agree with (except the part about 9/11). Aligning with those who don't want the same things is a waste of time and a sure way to not get what you want. Take the democratic party for example.
@Big Al
But didn't she specify working with the right-wing in the areas of agreement and leaving the rest to be argued over later, once the most imperative issues have been settled?
Edit: no two people are ever going to agree on everything; there will always be differences in opinions between individuals at some point.
Re-edit: can I take the corporate Dems to the dump? Otherwise, I'd really rather not have to take anything to do with them at all. (Corruption smells funny and makes my toes itch.)
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
What area of agreement would that be?
Taking down the so called "deep state"? Like I said, it's necessary to really look at what they're after. Did you read the article by Frank? He explains it pretty well. Actually so did Litvin in the previous article. Johnstone thinks we can work with Trump on "areas of agreement". That's just bullshit.
How about getting the USA
out of the regime-changing business? I think there are many on the Right who could agree with making that a priority. What would be your objection to it?
native
Allying with the right wing that wants a border wall
and an expansion of the fake war of terror? Well native, C99 can go there if it wants, without me. Later.
@Big Al Where did she
Where did she say that about Trump? And frankly, if Trump *did* ask me to work with him on preventing a hot war with Russia, which is my only area of agreement with him, I'd probably say yes, but it seems ridiculous to assume that Trump would ask anybody who wasn't rich or elite to work with him on anything.
What are we even arguing about here? None of us is ever going to be asked to work with Trump.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
what about MFA?
suppose this am He tweets -" MFA wins hugely!"
what then?
Is MFA now a bad idea?
do we refuse to help because the war goes on? /ns
@Big Al 1)The generalizations
1)The generalizations aren't helpful or accurate. 2)Hero-worship and thinking someone or something is generally good aren't the same thing.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver