Posts Tagged ‘DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE’
2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, BARACK OBAMA, BASKET OF DEPLORABLES SPEECH, BERNIE SANDERS, BILL CLINTON, BLACKS, CBS NEWS, CELINDA LAKE, CLINTON FUNDATION, CNN, COMMUNISM, CONDOLEEZA RICE, DEBBIE WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, GEORGE W. BUSH, HILLARY CLINTON, HISPANICS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JAMES WEBB, MICHELLE OBAMA, NBC NEWS, POPULISM, RACISM, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, SOCIALISM, SUSAN BORDO, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DESTRUCTION OF HILLARY CLINTON, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TOM BROKAW, TWITTER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. SENATE, WHITES, WHITEWATER, WIKILEAKS, WOMEN, YOUTH
In History, Politics, Social commentary on April 24, 2017 at 1:29 am
If author Susan Bordo has her way, Americans will be sopping up tears with handkerchiefs for the next four years–if not longer.
Bordo is the author of a new book, The Destruction of Hillary Clinton. You need not read its full text to discover its thesis. Its dust jacket offers this in a Q and A format.
Question: “How did an extraordinarily well-qualified, experienced, and admired candidate—whose victory would have been as historic as Barack Obama’s—come to be seen as a tool of the establishment, a chronic liar, and a talentless politician?”
Answer: “In this masterful narrative of the 2016 campaign year and the events that led up to it, Susan Bordo unpacks the Rights’ assault on Clinton and her reputation, the way the left provoked suspicion and indifference among the youth vote, the inescapable presence of [FBI Director] James Comey, questions about Russian influence, and the media’s malpractice in covering the candidate.”
Others who come in for blame: WikiLeaks; Vermont U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders; younger women; and even Monica Lewinsky.
Yes, it was
- Bernie Sanders’ fault for daring to challenge Clinton for the Democratic nomination–and refusing to accept that it was “Hillary’s turn” to become President.
- WikiLeaks’ fault for publishing emails sent by members of the Democratic National Commitee–which proved the supposedly impartial DNC was working to secure the nomination for Clinton.
- Younger women’s fault for not identifying with a woman old enough to be their grandmother–and who has lived an extraordinarily privileged life since she became First Lady in 1993.
- Monica Lewinsky’s fault for being a reminder to voters that Hillary’s husband had disgraced the Presidency in an oral sex scandal.
All of these factors certainly played a part in why Clinton lost the White House for the second time in eight years. But they are not all the factors behind her loss.
There were plenty of others–that are not mentioned in Bordo’s book.
Among these:
#1 Hillary Clinton was an uninspiring candidate. When Barack Obama ran for President in 2008, NBC Anchor Tom Brokaw compared his rallies to Hannah Montana concerts. Audiences were excited by his charisma, eloquence, relative youth (47) and optimism (“Yes We Can!”).
Clinton radiated none of these qualities. She was 67 when she declared her candidacy for President–and looked it. Her speaking voice grated like the proverbial fingernail on a blackboard.
Hillary Clinton
She seemed to have been around forever–as First Lady (1993-2001), as Senator from New York (2001-2009) and as Secretary of State (2009-2013). Those born after 2000 thought of the Clinton Presidency as ancient history. She was offering a resume–and voters wanted an inspiration.
#2 Clinton brought a lot of baggage with her. In contrast to Obama, whose Presidency had been scandal-free, Clinton–rightly or wrongly–has always been dogged by charges of corruption.
During the Clinton Presidency, a failed land deal–Whitewater–while Bill Clinton was Governor of Arkansas triggered a seven-year investigation by a Republican special prosecutor. No criminality was uncovered, and no charge was brought against either Clinton.
After leaving the White House, she and her husband set up the Clinton Foundation, a public charity to bring government, businesses and social groups together to solve problems “faster, better, at lower cost.”
As Secretary of State, more than half of Clinton’s meetings with people outside government were with donors to the Clinton Foundation. If a “pay-to play” system wasn’t at work, one certainly seemed to be.
She cast further suspicion on herself by her unauthorized use of a private email server. This wasn’t revealed until March, 2015–after she was no longer Secretary of State.
She claimed she had used it to avoid carrying two cell-phones. But, as Secretary of State, she traveled with a huge entourage who carried everything she needed. Her critics believed she used a private email system to hide a “pay-for-pay” relationship with Clinton Foundation donors.
#3 As a candidate for President, she “secretly” worked with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, the chair of the Democratic National Committee, to ensure that she would get the nomination.
As DNC chair, Wasserman-Schultz was expected to be impartial toward all Democratic candidates seeking the prize. This included Vermont U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, Clinton’s chief competitor.
Bernie Sanders
So Sanders and his supporters were outraged when, on July 22, WikiLeaks released 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments hacked from computers of the highest-ranking officials of the DNC.
The emails revealed a clear bias for Clinton and against Sanders. In one email, Brad Marshall, the chief financial officer of the DNC, suggested that Sanders, who is Jewish, could be portrayed as an atheist.
#4 The Obamas’ support proved a plus/minus for Clinton. Understandably, President Obama wanted to see his legacies continued–and she was the only candidate who could do it.
So he–and his wife, Michelle–stormed the country, giving eloquent, passionate speeches and firing up crowds on Clinton’s behalf.
President Barack Obama
So long as either Obama stood before a crowd, the magic lasted. But once the event was over, the excitement vanished. Hillary simply didn’t arouse enough passion to keep it going.
Obama’s supporters found Clinton wanting–in attractiveness, grace, eloquence, trustworthiness and the ability to inspire.
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CLINTON WATTS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, CYBERWARFARE, DAILY KOS, DAILY KOZ, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DONALD TRUMP, ESPIONAGE, EUROPEAN UNION (EU), FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HUFFINGTON POST, JEFF SESSIONS, JOE SCARBOROUGH, MEDIA MATTERS, MICHAEL T. FLYNN, MIKE PENCE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO), NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, REX TILLERSON, RUSSIA, SALLY YATES, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WIKILEAKS
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 5, 2017 at 12:08 am
“We do not need a reckless President who believes she is above the law.”
As chants of “Lock her up!” spread across the floor of the Republican National Convention, Michael T. Flynn voiced his agreement. “Lock her up—that’s right.”
Movie-star handsome, the former United States Army lieutenant general and director of the Defense Intelligence Agency was clearly enjoying his moment as a keynote speaker.
Clapping his hands, he continued: “I’m gonna tell you what. It’s unbelievable—unbelievable.
“I have called on Hillary Clinton to drop out of the race, because she—she—put our nation’s security at extremely high risk for their careless use of a private email server.
Michael Flynn at the Republican convention
“Lock her up–lock her up. You guys [the audience] are good. Damn right—that’s exactly right. There’s nothing wrong with that.
“You know why we’re saying that? We’re saying that because if I—a guy who knows this business—if I did a tenth of what she did, I would be in jail today.”
That was July 18, 2016.
Six months and two days later, he was riding even higher: On January 20—the day Donald J. Trump became President—Flynn took office as the nation’s 25th National Security Adviser.
Two days later, The Wall Street Journal reported that Flynn was under investigation by U.S. counterintelligence agents for his communications with Russian officials.
On February 8, Flynn flatly denied having spoken to Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak in December, 2016, about removing the sanctions placed on Russia by the outgoing Obama administration.
The sanctions had been placed in retaliation for Russia’s efforts to manipulate the 2016 Presidential election.
On February 13, The Washington Post reported that Acting Attorney General Sally Yates had warned Trump in late January that Flynn had lied about his contacts with Kislyak—and that he could be blackmailed by Russian Intelligence.
Sally Yates
Flynn was forced to resign that same day–after only 24 days as National Security Adviser.
Officially, the reason given was that he had misled Vice President Mike Pence. But Flynn’s deception had already been known—via the warning to Trump by Yates.
Only after Yates’ warning became known to the media was Flynn forced to resign.
Even worse for Flynn: The same Washington Post story reported that, in December, 2015, he had appeared on Russia Today, the news network that American Intelligence agencies consider “the Kremlin’s principal international propaganda outlet.”
He had also received more than $45,000 as a “speaking fee” from the network for a talk on world affairs. At the gala where Flynn received the fee, he sat next to Vladimir Putin for dinner.
Flynn did not file the required paperwork for the trip. Nor did he report the “fee” to the Pentagon.
On March 30, The Wall Street Journal reported that Flynn had offered to testify to the FBI or the Senate and House Intelligence committees in exchange for immunity from prosecution. So far, neither the FBI nor the Congressional Intelligence committees has agreed to such a deal.
Meanwhile, as a Presidential candidate and President, Donald Trump has steadfastly denied the revelations about collaboration between members of his 2016 Presidential campaign and Russian Intelligence agents.
Donald Trump
He has repeatedly attacked the “fake news” media reporting these revelations. Chief among his targets: CNN, The New York Times and The Washington Post.
He has also derided the Intelligence agencies responsible for America’s security.
On October 7, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a joint statement blaming the Russian government for the hacking of Democratic National Committee emails. Its motive: “To interfere with the US election process.”
Two days later, Trump publicly stated: “But I notice, anytime anything wrong happens, they like to say the Russians are– Maybe there is no hacking. But they always blame Russia.”
On March 4, Trump unleashed a series of tweets accusing former President Barack Obama of tapping his Trump Tower phones prior to the election: “How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”
One month later, Trump has offered no evidence to support that accusation. Nor have the FBI and Justice Department provided any. Yet Trump has refused to apologize or retract the libel.
Former Obama White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest has his own take on Trump’s motivation. Appearing on the March 5 edition of ABC’s This Week, he said:
“We know exactly why President Trump tweeted what he tweeted.
“Because there is one page in the Trump White House crisis management playbook. And that is simply to tweet or say something outrageous to distract from the scandal, and the bigger the scandal, the more outrageous the tweet.”
In time, the epitaph for the Trump administration may prove to be a bitter parody of The Muppet Movie song, “The Rainbow Connection”:
Why are there so many
Tales about Russians
And Right-wingers taking bribes?
Russians are Commies
And have lots of rubles
For traitors with something to hide.
So I’ve been told
And some choose to believe it.
It’s clear as the old KGB.
Someday we’ll find it
The Russian Connection–
The bribers, the traitors–you’ll see.
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CLINTON WATTS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, CYBERWARFARE, DAILY KOS, DAILY KOZ, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DONALD TRUMP, ESPIONAGE, EUROPEAN UNION (EU), FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HUFFINGTON POST, JEFF SESSIONS, JOE SCARBOROUGH, MEDIA MATTERS, MICHAEL T. FLYNN, MIKE PENCE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO), NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, REX TILLERSON, RUSSIA, SALLY YATES, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WIKILEAKS
In Bureaucracy, History, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 4, 2017 at 12:16 am
Slightly more than two months after taking office, President Donald Trump has become haunted by “the Russian connection.”
Throughout 2016, the CIA, FBI and National Security Agency (NSA) found numerous ties between officials of the Trump Presidential campaign and Russian Intelligence agents.
And many of those he has appointed to office have strong ties to the government of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
One of these is Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. In 2013, as the chief executive of ExxonMobil, he was presented with the 2013 Order of Friendship award. He had just signed deals with the state-owned Russian oil company Rosneft. Its chief, Igor Sechin, is a loyal Putin lieutenant.
Rex Tillerson
Another such official is Attorney General Jeff Sessions. During the 2016 campaign, Sessions–then serving as a surrogate for Donald Trump’s campaign–twice spoke with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.
But during his Senate nomination hearings, Sessions denied that he had had “communications with the Russians” during the campaign.
The discovery of numerous contacts between Trump campaign officials and Russian Intelligence agents led the FBI to launch an investigation into Russia’s efforts to influence the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election. That investigation is still ongoing.
And the House and Senate Intelligence Committees have launched their own investigations into the same.
On March 30, Clinton Watts, an expert on cyber warfare, testified before the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. As part of his testimony, he presented a prepared statement on “Disinformation: A Primer In Russian Active Measures And Influence Campaigns.”
FROM WATTS’ STATEMENT: Russia certainly seeks to promote Western candidates sympathetic to their worldview and foreign policy objectives. But winning a single election is not their end goal.
Russian Active Measures hope to topple democracies….from the inside out [by] creating political divisions….
[Their ultimate goals are] the dissolution of the European Union and the break up of the North American Treaty Organization (NATO).
Achieving these two victories against the West will allow Russia to reassert its power globally and pursue its foreign policy objectives bilaterally through military, diplomatic and economic aggression.
Trump has repeatedly praised Russian President Vladimir Putin. On December 18, 2015, Trump appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” Its host, Joe Scarborough, was upset by Trump’s praise for Putin:
SCARBOROUGH: Well, I mean, [he’s] also a person who kills journalists, political opponents, and invades countries. Obviously that would be a concern, would it not?
TRUMP: He’s running his country, and at least he’s a leader. Unlike what we have in this country.
SCARBOROUGH: But again: He kills journalists that don’t agree with him.
TRUMP: I think our country does plenty of killing, also, Joe, so, you know. There’s a lot of stupidity going on in the world right now, Joe. A lot of killing going on. A lot of stupidity. And that’s the way it is.
On July 22, 2016, Wikileaks released 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments hacked from computers of the highest-ranking officials of the Democratic National Committee (DNC). Early reports traced the leak to Russian hackers.
At a press conference in Doral, Florida, Trump declared: “Russia, if you are listening, I hope you are able to find the 33,000 emails that are missing–I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
This was nothing less than treason–calling upon a foreign power, hostile to the United States, to interfere in its Presidential election.
On December 16, 2016, FBI Director James B. Comey and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. agreed with a CIA assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election in part to help Donald Trump win the White House.
Trump, however, has steadfastly denied any such role by Russia: “I think it’s ridiculous,” he told “Fox News Sunday.” “I think it’s just another excuse. I don’t believe it….No, I don’t believe it at all.”
On October 19, 2016, Trump’s admiration of Putin became a major target for his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton.
This occurred during their third and last Presidential debate.
CLINTON: … that the Russians have engaged in cyber attacks against the United States of America, that you encouraged espionage against our people, that you are willing to spout the Putin line, sign up for his wish list, break up NATO, do whatever he wants to do, and that you continue to get help from him, because he has a very clear favorite in this race.
So I think that this is such an unprecedented situation. We’ve never had a foreign government trying to interfere in our election.
We have 17–17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyber attacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin and they are designed to influence our election. I find that deeply disturbing. And I think it’s time you take a stand…
TRUMP: She has no idea whether it’s Russia, China, or anybody else.
CLINTON: I am not quoting myself.
TRUMP: She has no idea.
CLINTON: I am quoting 17…
TRUMP: Hillary, you have no idea.
CLINTON: … 17 intelligence–do you doubt 17 military and civilian…
TRUMP: And our country has no idea.
CLINTON: … agencies.
TRUMP: Yeah, I doubt it. I doubt it.
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CLINTON WATTS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, CYBERWARFARE, DAILY KOS, DAILY KOZ, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DONALD TRUMP, ESPIONAGE, EUROPEAN UNION (EU), FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HUFFINGTON POST, JEFF SESSIONS, JOE SCARBOROUGH, MEDIA MATTERS, MICHAEL T. FLYNN, MIKE PENCE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO), NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, REX TILLERSON, RUSSIA, SALLY YATES, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WIKILEAKS
In Bureaucracy, History, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on April 3, 2017 at 12:56 am
Clinton Watts is a consultant and researcher on cyberwarfare. He has served as
- A U.S. Army infantry officer;
- An FBI Special Agent on a Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF);
- The Executive Officer of the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point (CTC); and
- As a consultant to the FBI’s Counter Terrorism Division (CTD) and National Security Branch (NSB).
In a statement he prepared for the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, he outlined cyberwarfare measures that Russia used to influence the 2016 Presidential campaign.
He delivered this on March 30. Part of this reads as follows:
Through the end of 2015 and start of 2016, the Russian influence system….began pushing themes and messages seeking to influence the outcome of the U.S. Presidential election.
Russia’s overt media outlets and covert trolls sought to sideline opponents on both sides of the political spectrum with adversarial views toward the Kremlin. The final months leading up to the election have been the predominate focus of Russian influence discussions to date.
Clinton Watts
However, Russian Active Measures were in full swing during both the Republican and Democratic primary season and may have helped sink the hopes of candidates more hostile to Russian interests long before the field narrowed.
The final piece of Russia’s modern Active Measures surfaced in the summer of 2016 as hacked materials from previous months were strategically leaked.
On 22 July 2016, Wikileaks released troves of stolen communications from the Democratic National Committee and later batches of campaign emails. Guccifer 2.0 and DC Leaks revealed hacked information from a host of former U.S. government officials throughout July and August 2016.
For the remainder of the campaign season, this compromising material powered the influence system Russia successfully constructed in the previous two years.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump–as both Presidential candidate and President–has steadfastly refused to acknowledge the efforts of Vladimir Putin’s government to ensure his election.
Consider his exchange about this with Democratic Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton during the third and final Presidential debate on October 19, 2016:
CLINTON: So I actually think the most important question of this evening, Chris, is, finally, will Donald Trump admit and condemn that the Russians are doing this and make it clear that he will not have the help of Putin in in this election, that he rejects Russian espionage against Americans, which he actually encouraged in the past?
Those are the questions we need answered. We’ve never had anything like this happen in any of our elections before.
CHRIS WALLACE: Well?
TRUMP: That was a great pivot off the fact that she wants open borders, OK? How did we get on to Putin?
[After insisting that Clinton wants “open borders” and “people are going to pour into this country,” Trump deigned to address Wallace’s question.]
TRUMP: Now we can talk about Putin. I don’t know Putin. He said nice things about me.
If we got along well, that would be good. If Russia and the United States got along well and went after ISIS, that would be good. He has no respect for her. He has no respect for our president.
And I’ll tell you what: We’re in very serious trouble, because we have a country with tremendous numbers of nuclear warheads–1,800, by the way–where they expanded and we didn’t, 1,800 nuclear warheads. And she’s playing chicken.
FROM WATTS’ STATEMENT: This pattern of Russian falsehoods and social media manipulation of the American electorate continued through Election Day and persists today.
Many of the accounts we watched push the false Incirlik story in July now focus their efforts on shaping the upcoming European elections, promoting fears of immigration or false claims of refugee criminality.
They’ve not forgotten about the United States either. This past week, we observed social media campaigns targeting Speaker of the House Paul Ryan hoping to foment further unrest amongst U.S. democratic institutions, their leaders and their constituents.
As we noted two days before the Presidential election in our article describing Russian influence operations, Russia certainly seeks to promote Western candidates sympathetic to their worldview and foreign policy objectives.
But winning a single election is not their end goal. Russian Active Measures hope to topple democracies through the pursuit of five complementary objectives:
- Undermine citizen confidence in democratic governance;
- Foment and exacerbate divisive political fractures;
- Erode trust between citizens and elected officials and democratic institutions;
- Popularize Russian policy agendas within foreign populations;
- Create general distrust or confusion over information sources by blurring the lines between fact and fiction.
From these objectives, the Kremlin can crumble democracies from the inside out creating political divisions resulting in two key milestones:
- The dissolution of the European Union and
- The break up of the North American Treaty Organization (NATO).
FROM THE TRUMP-CLINTON DEBATE:
TRUMP: … from everything I see, [Putin] has no respect for this person.
CLINTON: Well, that’s because he’d rather have a puppet as president of the United States.
TRUMP: No puppet. No puppet.
CLINTON: And it’s pretty clear…
TRUMP: You’re the puppet!
CLINTON: It’s pretty clear you won’t admit…
TRUMP: No, you’re the puppet.
ABC NEWS, BARACK OBAMA, BREITBART NEWS, CBS NEWS, CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, CIA, CNN, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DONALD TRUMP, ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN, EXTORTION, FACE THE NATION, FACEBOOK, FERGUS CULLEN, FOX NEWS SUNDAY, GREG ABBOTT, HACKING, HILLARY CLINTON, IRS, JAMES B. COMEY, JAMES R. CLAPPER, JEFF SESSIONS, JEWS, JOHN KASICH, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, KEN PAXTON, MARK LEVIN, MICHAEL ROGERS, MIKE PENCE, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NBC NEWS, NEW HAMPSHIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAM BONDI, PAUL RYAN, PHILIP KLEIN, POLITICO, Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION, REPUBLICAN PARTY, ROGER STONE, SALON, SOVIET UNION, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER, THE WASHINGTON POST, THREATS, TIME, TREASON, TRUMP UNIVERSITY, TRUMP-RUSSIA TIES, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, U.S. SECRET SERVICE, USA PATRIOT ACT, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WIRETAPPING
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on March 8, 2017 at 12:06 am
President Donald Trump claims that, as a Presidential candidate, he was a victim of illegal wiretapping ordered by President Barack Obama.
In fact, even without wiretaps, there were at least four instances where Federal law enforcement authorities could have utterly changed the outcome of the 2016 election.
Two of these dealt with purely domestic issues–
- The Trump University scandal; and
- Trump’s repeated threats of violence against Republican and Democratic opponents.
The third and fourth ones dealt with issues directly affecting the security of the United States.
It is unprecedented for an American Presidential candidate to repeatedly bestow fulsome praise on the leader of a foreign power hostile to the United States. And to receive equally fawning compliments in return from that leader.
Yet that is precisely what has happened between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.
Thus Putin on Trump: “He is a bright personality, a talented person, no doubt about it. It is not up to us to appraise his positive sides, it is up to the U.S. voters. but, as we can see, he is an absolute leader in the presidential race.”
Vladimir Putin
And Trump on Putin: “It is always a great honor to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond. He’s running his country, and at least he’s a leader. Unlike what we have in this country”–a clear attack on President Barack Obama.
Donald Trump
Case #3: The Justice Department did not invalidate the results of the 2016 election, despite overwhelming evidence that Russia intervened to elect Trump as Vladimir Putin’s chosen candidate.
- Admiral Michael Rogers, director of the National Security Agency (NSA) and US Cyber Command, said in mid-November that Russia made “a conscious effort” to sway the results of the Presidential election by the hacking of 20,000 emails from the Democratic National Committee.
- “There shouldn’t be any doubt in anybody’s mind,” said Rogers. “This was not something that was done casually. This was not something that was done by chance. This was not a target that was selected purely arbitrarily. This was a conscious effort by a nation-state to attempt to achieve a specific effect.”
- The Russians hacked the Democratic committee’s servers–but not those of the Republican National Committee.
- On December 16, FBI Director James B. Comey and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. agreed with a CIA assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election in part to help Donald Trump win the White House.
Trump, however, has steadfastly denied any such role by Russia: “I think it’s ridiculous,” he told “Fox News Sunday.” “I think it’s just another excuse. I don’t believe it….No, I don’t believe it at all.”
Case #4: The Justice Department did not prosecute Trump for treason, even though he solicited aid from Russia, a nation hostile to the United States. And no major official of the government–including President Obama–publicly condemned him as a traitor.
At a news conference in Doral, Florida on July 27, Trump publicly invited “Russia”–i.e., Vladimir Putin–to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails: “I will tell you this, Russia: If you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
This was essentially treason–calling on a hostile foreign power to interfere directly in an American Presidential election. And it was seen as such by both Democrats and even Republicans.
- “This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent,” Hillary for America policy adviser Jake Sullivan said in a statement. “That’s not hyperbole, those are just the facts. This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue.”
- “I find those kinds of statements to be totally outrageous because you’ve got now a presidential candidate who is, in fact, asking the Russians to engage in American politics,” said former CIA Director Leon Panetta, a Clinton surrogate. “I just think that’s beyond the pale.”
- Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker Paul Ryan, said: “Russia is a global menace led by a devious thug. Putin should stay out of this election.”
- Even Trump’s Vice Presidential running mate, Mike Pence, said: “If it is Russia and they are interfering in our elections, I can assure you both parties and the United States government will ensure there are serious consequences.”
FBI Director James Comey believed that Hillary Clinton’s emails on a private server were so dangerous to national security that he announced–11 days before the election–that he was re-opening an investigation he had closed.
That announcement erased widespread outrage over Trump’s unintended admissions of predatory behavior toward women–“Grab them by the pussy”–and reversed Clinton’s growing lead in the polls.
Yet the Bureau has not issued any such statements about the continuing reports of close ties between Trump and Putin, and Trump’s possible investments in Russia.
To their shame, the federal agencies charged with safeguarding America failed to take action against these abuses.
And, to their shame, the news media, to date, has failed to indict them for their negligence.
ABC NEWS, BARACK OBAMA, BREITBART NEWS, CBS NEWS, CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, CIA, CNN, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DONALD TRUMP, ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN, EXTORTION, FACE THE NATION, FACEBOOK, FERGUS CULLEN, FOX NEWS SUNDAY, GREG ABBOTT, HACKING, HILLARY CLINTON, IRS, JAMES B. COMEY, JAMES R. CLAPPER, JEFF SESSIONS, JOHN KASICH, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, KEN PAXTON, LEON PANETTA, MARK LEVIN, MICHAEL ROGERS, MIKE PENCE, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NBC NEWS, NEW HAMPSHIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAM BONDI, PAUL RYAN, PHILIP KLEIN, POLITICO, Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION, REPUBLICAN PARTY, ROGER STONE, SALON, SOVIET UNION, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER, THE WASHINGTON POST, THREATS, TIME, TREASON, TRUMP UNIVERSITY, TRUMP-RUSSIA TIES, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, U.S. SECRET SERVICE, USA PATRIOT ACT, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WEIMAR REPUBLIC, WIRETAPPING
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on March 7, 2017 at 12:35 am
Even without wiretaps, there were at least four instances when Federal law enforcement authorities could have disqualified Donald Trump as a Presidential candidate–or secured his indictment.
Threatening your political opponents with violence is a crime under Federal law. Yet such threats against his Republican and Democratic opponents played a major role in Trump’s Presidential campaign.
- Philip Klein, the managing editor of the Washington Examiner, wrote on the eve of the Republican National Convention in July: “Political commentators now routinely talk about the riots that would break out in Cleveland if Trump were denied the nomination, about how his supporters have guns and all hell could break loose, that they would burn everything to the ground. It works to Trump’s advantage to not try too hard to dispel these notions.”
- On August 9, 2016, Trump told a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina: “Hillary [Clinton] wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the Second Amendment. If she gets to pick her [Supreme Court] judges, nothing you can do folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.”
- Reacting to Trump’s “dog-whistle” threat against Clinton, Michael Hayden, former head of the CIA and National Security Agency (NSA) said: “Well, let me say if someone else said that outside of the hall, he’d be in the back of a police wagon now, with the Secret Service questioning him.”
Making threats against anyone under protection by the U.S. Secret Service is a felony. Yet Donald Trump was never held legally accountable by the Justice Department.
Threats of violence continued to be made by Trump supporters right up to the day of the election.
- On July 29, 2016, Roger Stone, a notorious Right-wing political consultant acting as a Trump strategist, told Breitbart News: “The first thing Trump needs to do is begin talking about [voter fraud] constantly. If there’s voter fraud, this election will be illegitimate, the election of the winner will be illegitimate, we will have a constitutional crisis, widespread civil disobedience, and the government will no longer be the government.”
- At a town hall meeting where Trump’s Vice Presidential nominee Mike Pence appeared, a woman named Rhonda said: “For me personally, if Hillary Clinton gets in, I myself am ready for a revolution.”
- In Cincinnati, a Trump supporter threatened to forcibly remove Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, from the White House if she won the race: “If she’s in office, I hope we can start a coup. She should be in prison or shot. That’s how I feel about it,” said Dan Bowman, a 50-year-old contractor. “We’re going to have a revolution and take them out of office if that’s what it takes. There’s going to be a lot of bloodshed. But that’s what it’s going to take….”
Even Fergus Cullen, former chairman of the New Hampshire GOP, expressed fear of what might happen if Trump lost the election:
Fergus Cullen
“That’s really scary,” Cullen said, recounting the violence at Trump rallies around the country leading up to the Republican National Convention. “In this country, we’ve always had recriminations after one side loses. But we haven’t had riots. We haven’t had mobs that act out with violence against supporters of the other side.
“There’s no telling what his supporters would be willing to do at the slightest encouragement from their candidate,” he said.
Trump even began encouraging his mostly white supporters to sign up online to be “election observers” to stop “Crooked Hillary from rigging this election.” He urged them to act as poll watchers in “other” [non-white] communities to ensure that things are “on the up and up.”
Many of his supporters promised to do so.
“Trump said to watch your precincts. I’m going to go, for sure,” said Steve Webb, a 61-year-old carpenter from Fairfield, Ohio.
“I’ll look for…well, it’s called racial profiling. Mexicans. Syrians. People who can’t speak American,” he said. “I’m going to go right up behind them. I’ll do everything legally. I want to see if they are accountable. I’m not going to do anything illegal. I’m going to make them a little bit nervous.”
Knowing that large numbers of angry–and possibly armed–Right-wingers planned to descend on polling places could only have had a chilling effect on untold numbers of Democratic voters. And this would have been especially true in heavily conservative states.
Both the USA Patriot Act and the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act have statutes dealing with making terrorist threats against government institutions to influence their members.
President George W. Bush signing the USA Patriot Reauthorization Act of 2005
If Trump’s remarks did not violate one or both of those laws, certainly remarks made by his surrogates did.
Thus, the Justice Department could have cited the Patriot Act in indicting Trump and/or any number of his followers for “activities that…appear to be intended…to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion [and]…occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”
The Justice Department could have also demanded that the results of the election be invalidated on the basis that widespread voter and candidate intimidation played a massive role in it.
But of course this did not happen.
ABC NEWS, BARACK OBAMA, BREITBART NEWS, CBS NEWS, CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, CIA, CNN, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DONALD TRUMP, ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN, EXTORTION, FACE THE NATION, FACEBOOK, FERGUS CULLEN, FOX NEWS SUNDAY, GREG ABBOTT, HACKING, HILLARY CLINTON, IRS, JAMES B. COMEY, JAMES R. CLAPPER, JEFF SESSIONS, JOHN KASICH, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, KEN PAXTON, LEON PANETTA, MARK LEVIN, MICHAEL ROGERS, MIKE PENCE, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NBC NEWS, NEW HAMPSHIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAM BONDI, PAUL RYAN, PHILIP KLEIN, POLITICO, Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION, REPUBLICAN PARTY, ROGER STONE, SALON, SOVIET UNION, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER, THE WASHINGTON POST, THREATS, TIME, TREASON, TRUMP UNIVERSITY, TRUMP-RUSSIA TIES, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, U.S. SECRET SERVICE, USA PATRIOT ACT, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WIRETAPPING
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on March 6, 2017 at 12:56 am
Future historians–if there are any–may one day write that it’s what didn’t happen that played at least as great a role in electing Donald Trump President as what actually did.
There were at least four instances where intervention by Federal law enforcement authorities could have utterly changed the outcome of the 2016 election.
And Trump’s completely unsupported accusations that he was illegally wiretapped were not one of those instances.
On March 4, in a series of unhinged tweets, Trump accused former President Barack Obama of tapping his Trump Tower phones prior to the election:
“Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!”
“Is it legal for a sitting President to be ‘wire tapping’ a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!”
“I’d bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!”
“How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”
There are two theories about what prompted Trump’s accusations.
Theory #1: They were prompted by Right-wing media outlets that had been pushing wiretapping claims in recent days.
On March 2, Right-wing radio host Mark Levin claimed that Obama had used “powers of the federal government to surveil members of the Trump campaign.”
Referring to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his newly disclosed meetings with Russia’s ambassador last year, Levin asked: “Today’s reporting on Sessions having a chance meeting with the ambassador–where did that information come from? Look at the timing of it. Was Obama surveilling top Trump campaign officials during the election?”
On March 3, the Fascist media site Breitbart News echoed the charge. Its story was based on Levin’s show and offered no evidence to back up its accusations.
Theory #2: Trump, under scrutiny for ties between his campaign and Russia, sought to deflect attention by making an outrageous accusation.
Donald Trump
Even without wiretaps, there were at least four instances where intervention by Federal law enforcement authorities could have disqualified Trump as a Presidential candidate and/or secured his indictment.
Case #1: The Justice Department did not indict Trump and/or the Attorney Generals of Texas and/or Florida for their roles in the Trump University scandal.
- Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi personally solicited a political contribution from Donald Trump around the same time her office deliberated joining an investigation of alleged fraud at Trump University and its affiliates.
- After Bondi dropped the Trump University case against Trump, he wrote her a check $25,000 for her re-election campaign. The money came from the Donald J. Trump Foundation.
- Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton moved to muzzle a former state regulator who says he was ordered in 2010 to drop a fraud investigation into Trump University for political reasons.
- Paxton’s office issued a cease and desist letter to former Deputy Chief of Consumer Protection John Owens after he made public copies of a 14-page internal summary of the state’s case against Donald Trump for scamming millions from students of his now-defunct real estate seminar.
- After the Texas case was dropped, Trump cut a $35,000 check to the gubernatorial campaign of then attorney general and now Texas Governor Greg Abbott.
One attorney general who refused to accept money from Trump was New York’s Eric Schneiderman. His decision to press fraud claims against Trump forced the real estate mogul to settle the case out of court for $25 million.
“Today’s $25 million settlement agreement is a stunning reversal by Donald Trump,” said Schneiderman on November 18, “and a major victory for the over 6,000 victims of his fraudulent university.”
There have been no press reports that the Justice Department investigated these cases to determine if Trump violated the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act statutes.
If the Justice Department did not investigate these cases, it should have. And if he did violate the RICO statutes, he should have been indicted, even as a Presidential candidate or President-elect.
Even if an indictment had not produced a conviction, the mere bringing of one would have cast an unprecedented cloud over his candidacy–let alone his being sworn in as President.
Case #2: The Justice Department did not indict Trump for his series of threats that he made–directly and indirectly–against Republicans and Democrats throughout the 2016 campaign.
- On March 16, he warned Republicans that if he didn’t win the GOP nomination in July, his supporters would literally riot: “I think you’d have riots. I think you would see problems like you’ve never seen before. I think bad things would happen. I really do. I wouldn’t lead it, but I think bad things would happen.”
- An NBC reporter summed it up as: “The message to Republicans was clear on [March 16]: ‘Nice convention you got there, shame if something happened to it.’”
- That Republicans clearly saw this as a threat is undeniable. Paul Ryan, their Speaker of the House, said on March 17: “Nobody should say such things in my opinion because to even address or hint to violence is unacceptable.”
2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALEC BALDWIN, ALTERNET, BARACK OBAMA, BERNIE SANDERS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, DAILY KOS, DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FSB, HILLARY CLINTON, JOE SCARBOROUGH, JOSEPH STALIN, KGB, MORNING JOE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATO, NAZI GERMANY, NAZI-SOVIET "NON-AGGRESSION PACT", NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLAND, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN CONVENTION, REUTERS, RUSSIA, SALON, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE, SLATE, SOVIET UNION, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WEHRMACHT, WIKILEAKS
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on February 24, 2017 at 10:29 am
The love-fest between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump certainly got off to a great start.
No doubt well-informed on Trump’s notorious egomania, Putin called a press conference to announce: “He is a bright personality, a talented person, no doubt about it. It is not up to us to appraise his positive sides, it is up to the U.S. voters. but, as we can see, he is an absolute leader in the presidential race.”
Vladimir Putin
That was on December 17, 2015.
Trump didn’t lose any time responding. On the December 18, 2015 edition of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” he said: “Sure, when people call you ‘brilliant,’ it’s always good. Especially when the person heads up Russia.
“He’s running his country, and at least he’s a leader. Unlike what we have in this country”–yet another insult at President Barack Obama.
Donald Trump
Both Putin and Trump are well-known for their authoritarian characteristics. But more than one dictator’s admiration for another might explain their continuing “bromance.”
Trump has repeatedly attacked United States’ membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). He believes the United States is paying an unfairly large portion of the monies needed to maintain this alliance–and he wants other members to contribute far more.
He has also said that, if Russia attacked NATO members, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after determining whether those nations have “fulfilled their obligations to us.”
If he believed that they had not done so, he would tell them: “Congratulations, you will be defending yourself.”
For Putin, this clearly signaled a reason to prefer Trump over his 2016 rival, Hillary Clinton. Trump’s statement marked the first time that a major Presidential candidate placed conditions on the United States’ coming to the defense of its major allies.
The withdrawal of the United States from NATO would instantly render that alliance kaput. Its European members that have long hurled insults at the United States would suddenly face extinction.
Even if their armed forces proved a match for Russia’s–which they wouldn’t–their governments would cower before the threat of Russia’s huge nuclear arsenal.
Trump’s motives for his “bromance” with Putin are more difficult to decipher.
Some believe that Trump–a notorious egomaniac–is simply responding to an overdoses of Putin flattery.
Others think that, while visiting Moscow, Trump made himself vulnerable to Russian blackmail.
There are unconfirmed Intelligence reports that he paid–and watched–several Russian prostitutes urinate on a bed once slept on by President Obama and his wife at Moscow’s Ritz-Carlton Hotel. The alleged incident was reportedly captured by hidden microphones and cameras operated by the FSB, the successor to the KGB.
A recent “Saturday Night Live” sketch featured a Putin lookalike intimidating Alec Baldwin’s Trump at a press conference–by holding up a video tape marked “Pee-Pee Tape.”
Still others believe that Trump–who has refused to release his tax returns–is deeply in dept to Russian oligarchs.
On July 22, 2016, Wikileaks released 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments hacked from computers of the highest-ranking officials of the DNC. And they clearly revealed a bias for Hillary Clinton and against her competitor, Bernie Sanders.
The leak badly embarrassed Clinton. About to receive the Democratic Presidential nomination, she found herself charged with undermining the electoral process.
Cyber-security experts believed the hacking originated from Russia–and that Putin had authorized it.
Even so, Putin is not the first Communist dictator to find common cause with an avowed Right-winger.
On August 23, 1939, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin signed a “non-aggression pact” with Nazi Germany’s Fuhrer, Adolf Hitler.
Joseph Stalin
The reason: Hitler intended to invade Poland–but feared going to war with the neighboring Soviet Union if he did so. By signing a non-aggression pact with Stalin, he avoided this danger–and gained “rights” to the western half of Poland.
Adolf Hitler
Bundesarchiv, Bild 146-1990-048-29A / CC-BY-SA 3.0 [CC BY-SA 3.0 de (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/de/deed.en)%5D
In addition, Nazi Germany began receiving huge shipments of raw materials from the Soviet Union–as part of Stalin’s effort to placate Hitler and avoid a Nazi-Soviet clash.
And Stalin got something, too: The eastern half of Poland, which would be occupied by the Red Army.
But the Hitler-Stalin alliance lasted less than two years. It ended without warning–on June 22, 1941.
With 134 divisions at full fighting strength and 73 more for deployment behind the front–a total of three million men–the German Wehrmacht invaded the Soviet Union.
Hitler had long intended to obtain “living space” for Germany–in Russia. By 1941, having conquered most of Europe, he felt strong enough to embark on his great crusade.
There are three ways Putin may come to regret his “bromance” with Trump.
First: Trump may be not be able to lift the sanctions imposed on Russia by President Obama for interfering in the 2016 election.
Second: Increasing political pressure on Trump by Democrats and even Republicans for that interference may result in even tougher action against Russia.
And third: Trump is known for his egomania, not his loyalty. He may take offense at some future perceived Putin slight. In such case, he may well decide he doesn’t owe anything to the man he once called “a leader.”
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BILL O'REILLY, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CIA, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOS, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, FOX NEWS, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HUFFINGTON POST, JOE SCARBOROUGH, KGB, KIM JONG-UN, MEDIA MATTERS, MORNING JOE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NANCY PELOSI, NAZI GERMANY, NAZI PARTY, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO), NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, RUSSIA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOVIET UNION, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on February 9, 2017 at 1:44 am
On December 14, 2016, NBC News reported that “U.S. intelligence officials now believe with ‘a high level of confidence’ that Russian President Vladimir Putin became personally involved in the covert Russian campaign to interfere in the U.S. presidential election.”
According to senior Intelligence officials, Putin had several motives:
- Waging a vendetta against Hillary Clinton, whom he has long disliked;
- Publicly disgrace the United States by revealing corruption at the heart of its politics; and
- “Split off key American allies by creating the image that [other countries] couldn’t depend on the U.S. to be a credible global leader anymore.”
The CIA believed that Putin wanted to elect Donald Trump. The FBI wasn’t so certain, feeling that Putin might have simply wanted to do as much harm as possible.
Even so, an air of unreality clung to all of this.
On June 2, 2016, before an audience in San Diego, California, Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had noted Trump’s strange attraction to dictators:
“And I have to say, I don’t understand Donald [Trump’s] bizarre fascination with dictators and strongmen who have no love for America.
“He praised China for the Tiananmen Square massacre; he said it showed strength.
“He said, ‘You’ve got to give Kim Jong Un credit’ for taking over North Korea–something he did by murdering everyone he saw as a threat, including his own uncle, which Donald described gleefully, like he was recapping an action movie.
“And he said if he were grading Vladimir Putin as a leader, he’d give him an A. Now, I’ll leave it to the psychiatrists to explain his affection for tyrants,” said Clinton.
Vladimir Putin
On December 18, 2015, Trump appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” Its host, Joe Scarborough, was upset by Trump’s praise for Putin:
SCARBOROUGH: Well, I mean, [he’s] also a person who kills journalists, political opponents, and invades countries. obviously that would be a concern, would it not?
TRUMP: He’s running his country, and at least he’s a leader. Unlike what we have in this country.
SCARBOROUGH: But again: He kills journalists that don’t agree with him.
TRUMP: I think our country does plenty of killing, also, Joe, so, you know. There’s a lot of stupidity going on in the world right now, Joe. A lot of killing going on. A lot of stupidity. And that’s the way it is.
SCARBOROUGH: I’m confused. So I mean, you obviously condemn Vladimir Putin killing journalists and political opponents, right?
TRUMP: Oh sure, absolutely.
And Trump went far beyond handing out compliments.
On July 22, 2016, Wikileaks released 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments hacked from computers of the highest-ranking officials of the Democratic National Committee (DNC). Early reports traced the leak to Russian hackers.
And Trump’s reaction?
At a press conference in Doral, Florida he declared: “Russia, if you are listening, I hope you are able to find the 33,000 emails that are missing–I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
This was nothing less than treason–calling upon a foreign power, hostile to the United States, to interfere in its Presidential election.
As President, Trump has defended the leader of the Communist world against hostile journalists and American Intelligence agencies.
Donald Trump
On February 5, he gave an interview to Fox News host Bill O’Reilly. As startled viewers watched, there occurred this exchange:
O’REILLY: Do you respect Putin?
TRUMP: I do respect him but—
O’REILLY: Do you? Why?
TRUMP: Well, I respect a lot of people but that doesn’t mean I’m going to get along with him. He’s a leader of his country. I say it’s better to get along with Russia than not. And if Russia helps us in the fight against ISIS, which is a major fight, and Islamic terrorism all over the world —that’s a good thing. Will I get along with him? I have no idea.
O’REILLY: But he’s a killer though. Putin’s a killer.
TRUMP: There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What do you think—our country’s so innocent? You think our country’s so innocent?
O’REILLY: I don’t know of any government leaders that are killers.
TRUMP: Well—take a look at what we’ve done, too. We made a lot of mistakes. I’ve been against the war in Iraq from the beginning.
O’REILLY: But mistakes are different than—
TRUMP: A lot of mistakes, but a lot of people were killed. A lot of killers around, believe me.
Trump launched his Presidential campaign on June 16, 2015. According to The New York Times, by late October, 2016, he had aimed nearly 4,000 insulting tweets at 281 targets.
Among those insulted:
- Women
- Blacks
- Hispanics
- The media
- Muslims
- The disabled
- Asians
- The Pope
- Prisoners-of-war.
Considering his hair-trigger temper and willingness to insult virtually anyone, Trump’s careful, even fawning attitude toward Vladimir Putin stands out.
No wonder House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said, following Trump’s February 5 remarks on Putin:
“I want to know what the Russians have on Donald Trump. I think we have to have an investigation by the FBI into his financial, personal and political connections to Russia, and we want to see his tax returns, so we can have truth in the relationship between Putin, whom he admires, and Donald Trump.”
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANCIENT GREECE, ASIANS, AUBREY DE SELINCOURT, BERNIE SANDERS, BLACKS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CIA, CNN, CYBERSECURITY, DAILY KOS, DALLAS MORNING NEWS, DEBBIE WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ, DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DONALD TRUMP, ELIZABETH WARREN, FACEBOOK, GEORGE W. BUSH, HERODOTUS, HILLARY CLINTON, HUBRIS, MARCO RUBIO, MEXICANS, MICHAEL HAYDEN, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MUSLIMS, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PAUL RYAN, POLITICO, PRISONERS OF WAR, RAW STORY, RUSSIA, SALON, SLATE, TED CRUZ, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WIKILEAKS, WOMEN
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on February 7, 2017 at 4:00 pm
Donald Trump has changed Presidential campaigning–perhaps forever.
First, he routinely insulted his opponents. He made angry and brutal attacks on a wide range of persons and organizations–including his fellow Republicans, journalists, news organizations, other countries and even celebrities unconnected with politics.
Among those groups:
- Mexicans
- Prisoners-of-War
- Blacks
- Handicapped
Second, he weaponized social media. He made Twitter an essential arm of his campaign, swiftly insulting his opponents and keeping them constantly off-balance. He proved himself a master at the tabloid news culture and thoroughly in tune with his target audience.
Third, he used the media for free publicity. Since announcing his candidacy on June 16, 2015, he got a year’s worth of free media advertising. This wasn’t the result of a networks’ conspiracy to favor Trump.
Instead, it owed to the media’s lust for sensational copy. And scenes of conflict–such as making brutal attacks on others–generate huge viewership.
This was most apparent in debates, during which he belittled his Republican opponents with insulting nicknames, such as:
- “Little Marco” – Florida U.S. Senator Marco Rubio
- “Goofy” – Massachusetts U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren
- “Lyin’ Ted” – Texas U.S. Senator Rafael Eduardo “Ted” Cruz
And looking beyond the Republican primary cycle, he created one for his future Democratic antagonist: “Crooked Hillary”–Hillary Clinton, former First Lady, U.S. Senator from New York and Secretary of State.
Political pundits marveled at Trump’s ability to jettison long-held niceties of political discourse and not pay an electoral price for it. They kept predicting that eventually this might happen. But it never did.
Fourth, he openly called for the subversion of the American political system.
On July 22, 2016, Wikileaks released 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments hacked from computers of the highest-ranking officials of the Democratic National Committee (DNC).
Cyber-security experts believed the hackers originated from Russia–and that Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized it.
The emails revealed the DNC’s bias for Clinton for President. And they showed clear animosity toward her lone challenger, Vermont U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders.
Sanders’ supporters had long charged that the DNC and its chair, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, were plotting to undercut his campaign.
Five days later, on July 27, at a press conference in Doral, Florida. Trump said:
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Trump hoped to score points on Hillary Clinton’s using a private email server as Secretary of State. Instead, he ignited criticism–of himself–on both Left and Right.
“This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent,” said Jake Sullivan, Clinton’s chief foreign policy adviser. “This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue.”
Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan was equally quick to react. “Russia is a global menace led by a devious thug,” said Brendan Buck, Ryan’s spokesman. “Putin should stay out of this election.”
“If he is talking about the State Department emails on her server, he is inviting a foreign intelligence service to steal sensitive American government information,” said Michael Hayden, head of the CIA under President George W. Bush.
“In addition to its implications for national security today,” wrote Benjy Sarlin, political reporter for MSNBC, “the incident raised disturbing questions about how Trump would govern as president. If a leader is willing to turn to ask foreign spy agencies to target a political opponent, what would he ask of his own spy agencies?”
The avalanche of criticism led Trump to claim: “I was only being sarcastic.”
For at least one normally conservative newspaper, Trump’s words were simply too much. In a July 27 editorial, The Dallas Morning News declared:
“Words have meaning. The world is listening. And what the world is hearing is a man demonstrating that he is unfit to sit in the Oval Office.”
Since the end of World War II, Republicans had taken an intensely anti-Communist stance. Now their Presidential nominee had not only complimented an ex-KGB agent but had even invited him to target the American political system.
Despite the criticism, the overwhelming majority of Republicans–including Paul Ryan–continued to support Trump’s candidacy. Nor did the Obama administration investigate or indict him for treason or subversion.
The ancient Greeks believed hubris–overweening pride–to be the greatest of sins. And, they warned, it was usually punished by divine wrath.
In his book, The World of Herodotus, Aubrey de Selincourt writes that the Greek historian filled his book, The Histories, with “stories of the perils of pride–pride of wealth, pride of power, pride of success, and, deadliest of all, the pride which leads a man to forget that he is a nothing in the sight of the gods.”
And, in the pages of The Histories lies this warning: “Look to the end, no matter what it is you are considering. Often enough, God gives a man a glimpse of happiness, and then utterly ruins him.”
Donald Trump has finally made it to the White House. But there is still time for hubris to overtake and destroy him.
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, BARACK OBAMA, BASKET OF DEPLORABLES SPEECH, BERNIE SANDERS, BILL CLINTON, BLACKS, CBS NEWS, CELINDA LAKE, CLINTON FUNDATION, CNN, COMMUNISM, CONDOLEEZA RICE, DEBBIE WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, GEORGE W. BUSH, HILLARY CLINTON, HISPANICS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, JAMES WEBB, MICHELLE OBAMA, NBC NEWS, POPULISM, RACISM, REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, SOCIALISM, SUSAN BORDO, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DESTRUCTION OF HILLARY CLINTON, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TOM BROKAW, TWITTER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. SENATE, WHITES, WHITEWATER, WIKILEAKS, WOMEN, YOUTH
NO HANKIES FOR HILLARY: PART ONE (OF TWO)
In History, Politics, Social commentary on April 24, 2017 at 1:29 amIf author Susan Bordo has her way, Americans will be sopping up tears with handkerchiefs for the next four years–if not longer.
Bordo is the author of a new book, The Destruction of Hillary Clinton. You need not read its full text to discover its thesis. Its dust jacket offers this in a Q and A format.
Question: “How did an extraordinarily well-qualified, experienced, and admired candidate—whose victory would have been as historic as Barack Obama’s—come to be seen as a tool of the establishment, a chronic liar, and a talentless politician?”
Answer: “In this masterful narrative of the 2016 campaign year and the events that led up to it, Susan Bordo unpacks the Rights’ assault on Clinton and her reputation, the way the left provoked suspicion and indifference among the youth vote, the inescapable presence of [FBI Director] James Comey, questions about Russian influence, and the media’s malpractice in covering the candidate.”
Others who come in for blame: WikiLeaks; Vermont U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders; younger women; and even Monica Lewinsky.
Yes, it was
All of these factors certainly played a part in why Clinton lost the White House for the second time in eight years. But they are not all the factors behind her loss.
There were plenty of others–that are not mentioned in Bordo’s book.
Among these:
#1 Hillary Clinton was an uninspiring candidate. When Barack Obama ran for President in 2008, NBC Anchor Tom Brokaw compared his rallies to Hannah Montana concerts. Audiences were excited by his charisma, eloquence, relative youth (47) and optimism (“Yes We Can!”).
Clinton radiated none of these qualities. She was 67 when she declared her candidacy for President–and looked it. Her speaking voice grated like the proverbial fingernail on a blackboard.
Hillary Clinton
She seemed to have been around forever–as First Lady (1993-2001), as Senator from New York (2001-2009) and as Secretary of State (2009-2013). Those born after 2000 thought of the Clinton Presidency as ancient history. She was offering a resume–and voters wanted an inspiration.
#2 Clinton brought a lot of baggage with her. In contrast to Obama, whose Presidency had been scandal-free, Clinton–rightly or wrongly–has always been dogged by charges of corruption.
During the Clinton Presidency, a failed land deal–Whitewater–while Bill Clinton was Governor of Arkansas triggered a seven-year investigation by a Republican special prosecutor. No criminality was uncovered, and no charge was brought against either Clinton.
After leaving the White House, she and her husband set up the Clinton Foundation, a public charity to bring government, businesses and social groups together to solve problems “faster, better, at lower cost.”
As Secretary of State, more than half of Clinton’s meetings with people outside government were with donors to the Clinton Foundation. If a “pay-to play” system wasn’t at work, one certainly seemed to be.
She cast further suspicion on herself by her unauthorized use of a private email server. This wasn’t revealed until March, 2015–after she was no longer Secretary of State.
She claimed she had used it to avoid carrying two cell-phones. But, as Secretary of State, she traveled with a huge entourage who carried everything she needed. Her critics believed she used a private email system to hide a “pay-for-pay” relationship with Clinton Foundation donors.
#3 As a candidate for President, she “secretly” worked with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, the chair of the Democratic National Committee, to ensure that she would get the nomination.
As DNC chair, Wasserman-Schultz was expected to be impartial toward all Democratic candidates seeking the prize. This included Vermont U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, Clinton’s chief competitor.
Bernie Sanders
So Sanders and his supporters were outraged when, on July 22, WikiLeaks released 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments hacked from computers of the highest-ranking officials of the DNC.
The emails revealed a clear bias for Clinton and against Sanders. In one email, Brad Marshall, the chief financial officer of the DNC, suggested that Sanders, who is Jewish, could be portrayed as an atheist.
#4 The Obamas’ support proved a plus/minus for Clinton. Understandably, President Obama wanted to see his legacies continued–and she was the only candidate who could do it.
So he–and his wife, Michelle–stormed the country, giving eloquent, passionate speeches and firing up crowds on Clinton’s behalf.
President Barack Obama
So long as either Obama stood before a crowd, the magic lasted. But once the event was over, the excitement vanished. Hillary simply didn’t arouse enough passion to keep it going.
Obama’s supporters found Clinton wanting–in attractiveness, grace, eloquence, trustworthiness and the ability to inspire.
Share this: