quote:A cabal is a group of people united in some close design together, usually to promote their private views or interests in an ideology, state, or other community, often by intrigue, usually unbeknown to persons outside their group...
quote:For the Real Collusion Story, Look at Hillary Clinton
The mainstream media has spent two years relentlessly pushing the narrative that Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with shady Russians to dig up dirt on Hillary Clinton and then cheated with the Russian government to steal the election from her.
That’s not what happened.
What actually happened was that the Clinton campaign paid a political opposition research firm, Fusion GPS, to frame Trump and his campaign by creating fake evidence of Russian collusion. To do this, Fusion GPS hired several people, including former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, to compile a dossier full of questionable second- and third-hand stories told by anonymous Russian sources about Trump and some of his campaign personnel.
Then that fake dossier was laundered to make it look like it came from intelligence agencies, not from political operatives paid by Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). The dossier was then used by the FBI to obtain a surveillance warrant on the entire Trump campaign team through a minor team member named Carter Page.
To get their FISA warrant on Page, top Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) officials deliberately misled the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) judge by hiding the fact that Steele was paid by the Clinton campaign and DNC.
Payments to Fusion GPS were hidden by passing them through the law firm Perkins Coie. Not only is that an FEC violation, it’s an attempt to get Clinton’s and the DNC’s fingerprints off the dossier.
That’s important to note because it’s going to be explored thoroughly in DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s upcoming report. Both the money used to pay for the dossier and the truth of who really created it were deliberately laundered to hide its true origins from the FISA Court.
That’s a major crime, and Horowitz will thoroughly lay out how it happened.
It’s been public information since last October that Clinton’s campaign and the DNC paid for the production of Steele’s dossier. Everything that’s come out in the intervening 10 months has only confirmed what we already know.
So evidence continues to mount that the Trump–Russian collusion narrative is actually a hoax—a massive political dirty trick that was hatched by the Clinton campaign, paid for with DNC cash, and laundered through Perkins Coie, all to create a fake dossier that was used to justify an FBI investigation as well as to spawn a strategic leaking campaign to the media.
However, many journalists have a vested interest in pretending the Steele dossier is authentic. They engage in fantasies that it hasn’t been debunked.
Mainstream media has been playing favorites between two competing narratives.
The first narrative is that the Steele dossier is real; Trump colluded/cheated with the Russians and that’s why he won the election; and Mueller is going to prove it. This is the only narrative the mainstream media wants to cover. They give the vast majority of their air and print time to discussing it.
The other narrative is one that mainstream media journalists resent every second they have to spend covering it. They want to suppress it and pretend that only right-wing conspiracy theorists discuss it.
This is, of course, the narrative where all the evidence keeps surfacing—that the real collusion during the 2016 presidential election was between the Clinton campaign, top officials in the DOJ, and the FBI, the intelligence community, and key members of the mainstream media. And this collusion involved framing the Trump campaign for stealing the election with the help of the Russian government.
And now even more evidence has surfaced that top DOJ and FBI officials were colluding with Democratic operatives to influence the 2016 election.
quote:2018 proved to be a year of numerous revelations that provided clarity regarding events leading up to—and following—the 2016 presidential election.
It is now clear that elements within the FBI, the CIA, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the State Department were actively working against the Trump campaign, and that these elements continued to work against President Donald Trump’s administration following his surprise win.
Immediately following Trump’s victory, these efforts focused on two specific fronts: hobbling the effectiveness of Trump’s newly formed administration and simultaneously working toward his impeachment.
Complicit in this effort was the mainstream media, which almost gleefully promoted story after story full of half-truths and partial facts.
But as we moved into the second half of 2017, the president continued to surprise and confound the opposition. His administration began to assert itself, and a semblance of control was exerted over the FBI and DOJ at the most senior levels.
In early 2018, a purge of sorts appears to have taken place; a number of high-profile individuals abruptly resigned or were fired. Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was fired and is currently the subject of an ongoing grand jury investigation.
The investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller, which began in May 2017, began to return indictments, but has noticeably failed to produce any evidence of collusion on the part of the Trump campaign. Each indictment from Mueller has specifically noted there was no collusion on the part of any American citizen. The special counsel appears to be particularly focused on violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, and influence peddling under the Obama administration.
At the same time, multiple investigations, including a prominent investigation into FISA abuse, conducted by DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, remain ongoing.
Looking forward into 2019, the questions become “who will be held accountable?”; “how high up the political ladder will the investigation go?”, and “will some of the more prominent players, such as former CIA Director John Brennan, become part of an investigative focus?”
Dit zou toch na 4 delen geen revelatie moeten zijn.quote:Op zaterdag 29 december 2018 18:21 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
Aha, volgens redpilled is er een complot om Trump af te zetten.
Werkelijk? Afzetten gebeurt via een impeachment-procedure. En daarvoor hebben de samenzweerders openlijk steun nodig van de Republikeinen.
Tot zover het stiekeme complot.
Het is alleen geen complot. De meeste Democraten willen dat Trump verdwijnt omdat de man in hun ogen ongeschikt is voor het presidentschap (waar ze natuurlijk gelijk in hebben).quote:Op zaterdag 29 december 2018 18:26 schreef dellipder het volgende:
[..]
Dit zou toch na 4 delen geen revelatie moeten zijn.
Laat wel zien hoe goed *not* jouw bijdragen hier zijn.
Gast, als jij een opinie hebt prima.quote:Op zaterdag 29 december 2018 18:29 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
[..]
Het is alleen geen complot. De meeste Democraten willen dat Trump verdwijnt omdat de man in hun ogen ongeschikt is voor het presidentschap (waar ze natuurlijk gelijk in hebben).
Impeachment gebeurt niet stiekem. Trump wordt alleen afgezet als de Republikeinen hem zat zijn.
Tom Fitton van Judicial Watch vind ik ook een goeie om te volgen.quote:Op zaterdag 29 december 2018 14:52 schreef MrRatio het volgende:
Collusion is geen crime.
Natuurlijk mag je achter gesloten deuren alvast kennis maken met de toekomstige gesprekspartners, zoals een Russische ambassadeur.
Waar Flynn op gepakt is: op de vraag van de Russische ambassadeur of sancties besproken tegen de Westbank besproken zijn zei Flynn "No" tegen de FBI terwijl dit "Yes" had moeten zijn. De transcript waren al in handen van de FBI. Aha, dat is jokken tegen de FBI en dat is een valse verklaring afleggen. Het is meer geheugentest dan een zoektocht naar echt strafbare feiten. Een perjury-trap.
Hillary Clinton werd niet onder ede verhoord, er zijn geen aantekeningen gemaakt van haar gesprek met de FBI.
Zomaar twee voorbeelden van meten met twee maten.
Het is inderdaad lastig om goed de weg te vinden naar betrouwbare informatie. Het meeste wat zich opdringt is in het genre: negatieve berichten over Trump zijn waar, negatieve berichten over de Clintons zijn nooit waar. Dezelfde instelling is terug te vinden in de meeste NL media (Twan Huys, Michiel Vos, Erik Mouthaan)
Bronnen die ik tot nu toe vertrouw zijn Dan Bongino, Josh Bernstein en Sean Hannity.
twitter:TomFitton twitterde op zaterdag 29-12-2018 om 04:03:53 Happy New Year! In 2018, @JudicialWatch took the lead in defending the rule of law on immigration and election integrity, taking on Deep State slow-motion coup against @RealDonaldTrump, and we continued the heavy lifting on Clinton email "matter"! And we are are ready for 2019... https://t.co/fe10DFtdMJ reageer retweet
Nee, het is een anonieme medewerker van de FBI die claimt dat er tussen die 50.000 sms'jes berichten zitten waarin wordt opgeroepen Trump iets aan te doen.quote:Op zaterdag 29 december 2018 19:07 schreef dellipder het volgende:
Dit is een artikel van een rapport uit maart 2017 dat door FBI-officials is bevestigd.
Stuk lijkt geschreven op basis van een enkele bron. En elke journalist weet: een bron is geen bron.quote:Did FBI brass discuss the assassination of President Donald Trump? If not, what was the nature of the threats against the president from inside the alleged premiere law enforcement agency in the United States?
Heel vergezocht is het niet als men in beschouwing neemt dat Andrew McCabe animositeit had jegens Micheal Flynn inzake zijn rol in de zaak Robyn Grytz, de obstruction of justice zaak die de acting director had geopend tegen de president voordat de OSC was ingesteld en de tekstberichten tussen Lisa Page en Peter Strzok, met name de "we'll stop it" met betrekking tot het aankomende presidentschap van Donald Trump.quote:Op zaterdag 29 december 2018 20:40 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
[..]
Nee, het is een anonieme medewerker van de FBI die claimt dat er tussen die 50.000 sms'jes berichten zitten waarin wordt opgeroepen Trump iets aan te doen.
Je focus is wederom niet gecentreerd. Mijn bericht gaat niet over Hillary Clinton, maar over een media narratief dat nu al ruim twee jaar is gepropageerd door middel van samenwerking van HRC, de DNC, een oud-MI6 spion en betaalde Russische bronnen.quote:Op zaterdag 29 december 2018 18:18 schreef KoosVogels het volgende:
[..]
Clinton is allang niet meer relevant. Waar die heks wel of geen recht op denkt te hebben, zal allemaal wel.
Mueller onderzoekt of er sprake was van dubieuze contacten tussen de Russen en het campagneteam van Trump. En op dat vlak heeft de beste man het nodige uit te leggen. Denk aan de beruchte meeting in Trump Tower en de contacten met Wikeleaks.
Daarnaast heeft Trump natuurlijk al veel langer dubieuze contacten in Rusland. Wat zei Jr een paar jaar terug ook alweer? Oh ja, dat er bakken Russisch geld door de Trump organisatie vloeit.
Ben benieuwd wat er in 2019 nog allemaal wordt onthuld.
quote:The Prague delusion
The Central European city is the last stop for the resistance fantasy
In 1901, Sigmund Freud published a book called The Psychopathology of Everyday Life. It offers entertaining observations about slips of the tongue and pen, ‘bungled actions’ — e.g., you mistakenly reach for your keys when approaching the door of a friend’s house — various forms of forgetfulness, and what Freud congregates under the categories of ‘determinism and superstition.’ As long as you do not take it too seriously, it is an amusing agglomeration of eccentricity and (mostly) mild insanity.
It also cries out for updating. Freud died too soon to encounter a stupendous form of everyday psychopathology, one that is everywhere patent in the upper reaches of American society today. I mean, of course, anti-Trump hysteria — and I use the term ‘hysteria’ advisedly, in a quasi-Freudian, etymologically sensitive sense.
For taken all in all, there is a brittle, catty, whinging quality to the phenomenon of anti-Trump hysteria that puts it at odds with everything direct, forthright, and manly in our everyday concourse.
Let me forestall spluttering indignation by saying that I understand that these days the word ‘manly’ can hardly be deployed straight, without implicit deflationary quotation marks. But I answer that that only corroborates the insinuating prevalence of that fraught feminization that has manifested itself (speaking of psychopathology) in such embarrassing developments as the so-called ‘pussy hats,’ the maenad-like ferocity of the Department of Justice and the FBI under the pantywaist watch of characters like Rod Rosenstein, James Comey, and Robert Mueller, and the coven of dismal choristers who weave dirge-like prognostications in their gossipy, fake-news stories, blog posts, and Twitter feeds around every development, imagined as well as real, pertaining to the Trump administration.
This is a deep, or at least a broad, subject, and I may make a sort of mini-series reflecting upon it. For the moment, let me just mention a signal instance of psychopathology that bubbled up from the depths a day or two ago. It involves — or supposedly involves — Michael Cohen, the low-life former personal lawyer of President Trump. Mr Cohen is about to embark upon an extended stay at Club Fed for various crimes, none of which (alas for The Narrative™) have anything to do with ‘Russian Collusion,’ the supposed raison d’être of the Mueller investigation that swept him up in its insatiable maw. (Since I brought up Freud already, let me also suggest that some enterprising soul write a study of Mueller’s activities under the title Prosecution Terminable and Interminable.)
Many months ago, when Michael Cohen first came to the attention of CNN, Bill Kristol, and other acolytes in the anti-Trump sorority, a rumor was floated that he had been in Prague in 2016 and had spoken to unnamed but highly placed ‘Russians’ either to hand over the US government to Vladimir Putin or to assure Putin’s connivance in making Donald Trump President.
A notable flaw in this theory was that Michael Cohen had never visited Prague, not then, not ever.
If you think that is a disabling flaw, however, you do not appreciate the robust goad to invention that hysteria provides. That fact that Michael Cohen has been shown not to have been in Prague is merely a fact. What is that against the ardent heart’s desire to Get Trump and cancel the effects of the 2016 election?
Just because the idea that Michael Cohen was in Prague doing Trump’s dirty business was shot down when originally floated, does not mean that it might not fly when resurrected. Which it just has been: ‘A mobile phone traced to President Donald Trump’s former lawyer and “fixer” Michael Cohen,’ McClatchy breathlessly reports, ‘briefly sent signals ricocheting off cell towers in the Prague area in late summer 2016.’ Says who? Why ‘four people with knowledge of the matter.’ Oh. ‘Four people,’ you say. And they have ‘knowledge of the matter.’ Well, that settles it, right? Jonathan Chait offers a similarly vacuous intervention at New York magazine (where he also reprises that hardy perennial, the infamous ‘dossier’ bequeathed to the world by Christopher Steele.)
I hadn’t thought Michael Cohen was known for his sense of humor, but his response to this insanity was pretty droll. ‘I hear #Prague #CzechRepublic is beautiful in the summertime,’ he tweeted, ‘I wouldn’t know as I have never been. #Mueller knows everything!’
Many years ago when I was living in New York, I had a friend who worked in an intelligence capacity at the New York Police Department. Among his responsibilities was responding to people who would call in with complaints that the telephone company (for example) was sending them mind-control signals. ‘Oh yes, we’ve heard about that,’ my friend would say. ‘What you need to do is line you windows with aluminum foil. It will keep out the evil signals.’ It usually did the trick, too.
I’m sorry my friend is no longer with us. He might, just maybe, have been able to calm the hysterics who are overexcited by these newly invented telephonic emanations.
quote:McClatchy's Gordon describes sourcing behind his new Cohen-Prague myth: “Some of the sources have government sources, and some of the sources are people who have told us that they have trusted intelligence-type sources that they get information from. We don’t know the specifics"
Een president die dit soort onzin steevast uit z'n vingers en mond krijgt, die verdient niets anders dan de houding die jij 'anti-Trump waanzin' noemt.quote:Op zaterdag 29 december 2018 22:07 schreef dellipder het volgende:
Dit is zo'n artikel wanneer je de anti-Trump waanzin voor een minuutje inruilt voor een klein beetje rede, diep adem haalt en dit leest een therapeutish effect kan hebben, is mijn vermoeden.
Anderzijds er zijn nu eenmaal die simpelweg niet te helpen zijn.
[..]
twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 29-12-2018 om 19:30:16 Any deaths of children or others at the Border are strictly the fault of the Democrats and their pathetic immigration policies that allow people to make the long trek thinking they can enter our country illegally. They can’t. If we had a Wall, they wouldn’t even try! The two..... reageer retweet
twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op zaterdag 29-12-2018 om 19:36:17 ...children in question were very sick before they were given over to Border Patrol. The father of the young girl said it was not their fault, he hadn’t given her water in days. Border Patrol needs the Wall and it will all end. They are working so hard & getting so little credit! reageer retweet
De waanzin betreft vooral het handelen van de beste man.quote:Op zaterdag 29 december 2018 23:21 schreef dellipder het volgende:
Ach jee...
Ik moet weer nader toelichten dat mijn anti-Trump waanzin retoriek betrekking heeft op de collusion delusion en de vele gebreken daarin die ik zojuist heb beschreven precies binnen het kader van het onderwerp van deze reeks.
Valt allemaal wel mee, maar alles om de aandacht af te leiden van de huidige misstanden en het uitgezette beleid natuurlijk.quote:En verder natuurlijk het gebruikelijke niet adresseren van alle aangevoerde argumenten en beweringen, maar wel heel zielig getriggerd raken over een woordje, de drang daarover niet kunnen onderdrukken en geheel op emotie gebaseerde nietszeggende volledig overbodige bijdrage aanleveren.
Het is een gotspe om zelfs te veinzen dat zulks een begin van een poging is dat te maken heeft met het onderwerp van deze reeks over overheidscorruptie en corruptie door de DoJ/FBI/Hillary/ Obama/DNC nexus.
Zeer magere, feitelijk waardeloze inbreng tweemaal in successie.
Ik ken ook nog wel een aantal, bijvoorbeeld Micheal Cohen went to Prague deel 1, deel 2, deel 3, deel 4, et cetera.quote:Op zondag 30 december 2018 00:24 schreef Xa1pt het volgende:
De waanzin betreft vooral het handelen van de beste man.
Dit is vooral voorspelbare inhoudsloze repliek. Armoedig, omdat men niets substantieel kan inbrengen wat het Russia collusion delusion narratief gestalte houdt. Zoek professionele hulp als je nog steeds gelooft dat Trump de marionet is van Putin!quote:Valt allemaal wel mee, maar alles om de aandacht af te leiden van de huidige misstanden en het uitgezette beleid natuurlijk.
Forum Opties | |
---|---|
Forumhop: | |
Hop naar: |