#is now paid by russia and the gop

[hussyknee]

Once I stopped wheezing, I went looking for what inspired this tweet. Apparently anyone consistently ripping into Biden and telling anyone why he's trash is "voter suppression". Liberals have all lost their goddamn minds.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Jay Kuo at Think Big Picture:

For years, critics of Vladimir Putin have been warning that the Russians have taken over parts of the Republican Party. They raised the alarm as Republicans defended the Russian leader, parroted clear Kremlin talking points, and became mules for disinformation campaigns. In recent weeks, that criticism has shifted to include not just Republicans who have left the party, including former representatives Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, but current GOP members. Recently, two powerful Republican chairs of the House Intelligence Committee and the House Foreign Affairs Committee warned openly about how Russian propaganda has seeped into their party and even made its way into speeches on the House floor. Other members are now even openly questioning whether some of their fellow officials have been compromised and are being extorted. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) suggested in a recent interview that the Russian spies may possess compromising tapes of some of his colleagues. It’s unclear where he’s getting his information or how accurate it is.

And then there’s this: According to a report by Politico, a number of European politicians were recently paid by Moscow to interfere in the upcoming EU elections by Russians pretending to be a “media” outlet called “Voice of Europe.” The Kremlin-backed operation used money to influence officials to take pro-Russian stances. Authorities have conducted some money seizures and launched an investigation into which members of the European Parliament may have accepted cash bribes. This in turn raises an important question for our own politics: Are the Russians doing the same with U.S. politicians, directly or indirectly? This piece walks through the three types of compromise—disinformation, extortion, and bribery—to give a sense of what we know and what we don’t really know, and, importantly, where we should be on our guard. As this summary will show, from the 2016 election till now, there’s enough Russian smoke now to assume there is a fire, one that compromises not only the integrity of our own system of elections, but the safety and security of the free world. Duped.

Over the past year, we have witnessed two distinct kinds of Russian propaganda in action. Both use our own elected officials and intelligence processes to amplify and even weaponize disinformation. The first kind originates online through Russian-backed internet channels. Information operatives begin spreading false rumors, for example about Ukraine, that then get repeated within right-wing silos before reaching willing purveyors of it within the halls of Congress. A chief culprit in Congress is Georgia’s Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Among the Russian-originated false narratives she has uplifted is the patently false claim that Ukraine is waging a war against Christianity while Russia is protecting it. On Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast, Greene even claimed, without evidence, that Ukraine is “executing priests.”

Where would Greene have gotten this wild, concocted notion? We don’t have to look far. Russian talking points have included this gaslighting narrative for some time. The twist, of course, is that, according to the International Religious Freedom or Belief Alliance, it is the Russian army that has been torturing and executing priests and other religious figures, including 30 Ukrainian clergy killed and 26 held captive by Russian forces. The Russians have also targeted Baptists, whom they see as U.S. propagandists, according to an in-depth Time magazine piece on the violence and death directed toward evangelicals. The Congressional propaganda mouthpieces for Russia aren’t limited to the U.S. House. Over in the Senate, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance was also recently accused of spreading Kremlin-backed disinformation about Ukraine, this time over spurious allegations that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy siphoned U.S. aid to purchase himself two luxury yachts.

[...]

The accusation that Russians are presently extorting and blackmailing U.S. politicians into supporting Russia’s agenda has some broad appeal. It would help explain some mysteries, including why people like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) suddenly is no longer as supportive of Ukraine as before and constantly kisses the ring of Donald Trump these days—after presciently saying in 2016 that the GOP would destroy itself if it nominated him. 

The problem has been that these accusations aren’t supported by much evidence. That means that political extortion by the Russians is either not a very prevalent practice, or it’s so effective that no one dares expose it. Either way, we’re left without much to go on. The Russian word kompromat came into common parlance around the time that Buzzfeed published a salacious story about another intelligence report back in early 2017. In that instance, the author, a former British intelligence officer named Christopher Steele, was concerned Russia had compromising data on the soon-to-be president, Donald Trump.

That report never wound up being substantiated, and its sources and funding came into question as well. But intelligence agencies are in general agreement that obtaining kompromat is standard practice by Russia, and someone like Trump could have been an easy mark considering the company that he kept (e.g. Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell) and the projects he was involved with (e.g. the Miss Universe contest). Lately, the notion of kompromat emerged once again, this time not from Democratic-paid outfits but from within the GOP itself. Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) is one of the more “colorful” characters within the GOP, primarily known lately for being one of the eight members who voted to oust former Speaker Kevin McCarthy and even for getting into public jostling and shouting matches with McCarthy.

The Republican Party (or at least its pro-MAGA faction) is compromised by Russian kompromat.

[qqueenofhades]

This may be a stupid question but do you really believe MTG is funded by Putin? In my head she's too fucking stupid to be calculating enough to actually enrich herself.

I don't know if she is actually getting money from the Kremlin or she's just a moron who loves to believe whatever conspiracy theorist nonsense she's told, but I think it's pretty clear she is either being handled fairly directly by Russian intelligence or is closely plugged into sophisticated Russian propaganda systems. Example A, Marge submitting an amendment to the Ukrainian aid bill insisting that aid not be disbursed until the Ukrainian government allegedly stopped "oppressing Hungarians in Transcarpathia." This is a key part of the Orban regime's anti-Ukraine talking points that has in turn been directly amplified by Russia, but it is so specific and so obscure (not to mention, there's literally zero chance Marge knows what any of those words or issues mean, or could find Transcarpathia on a map) that there's no way she organically came up with it on her own. She's also been otherwise echoing word-for-word Russian propaganda about them being "the defenders of Christianity" by invading Ukraine, which is one of Putin's preferred/favorite narratives and plays into the function of the Russian Orthodox Church as a Kremlin booster. Hence, if Marge is directly repeating Putin's personal justifications, I'd say it is more likely than not that she's getting something out of it.

As I have said before, it is pretty clear that Putin is ordering Trump to get the House GOP to stall Ukraine aid in exchange for help in the election, and there is a significant chunk of the House GOP that is eager to suckle at the Russian propaganda teat in all circumstances. (See: Hunter Biden's laptop being a Russian disinformation operation from the start that got exposed when the House GOP impeachment effort went up in flames.) We have also consistently had networks of Russian agents and Russian money be exposed in Europe, where they are offering financial incentives to EU politicians to serve as Kremlin shills. Russian dirty money has beyond doubt entered the Republican Party at many, many levels; we had that whole investigation about how Trump and the Russians have been working in concert for a long time. Now, because getting Trump in power again is so important for the Russians, and the Russians' help is so important for Trump in trying to stay out of jail, the corruption is pretty systemic.

In short, I figure it is only a matter of time if/when we find out that the most stridently pro-Russian members of the Treason Caucus are actually being paid by or otherwise benefiting from Russian lobbyists, because they are fascist traitors who love money, will kiss Trump's ass in any circumstances, and are willing to do anything in the name of undermining America, Ukraine, Biden, and Western democracy in general. We know it is the way Russian destabilization, disinformation, and influence operations customarily work, and that they have previously and consistently worked in cahoots with MAGA, so yeah. If Marge and Co. aren't active Russian assets, financially or otherwise, I would be very surprised.

[canichangemyblogname]

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Matt Davies

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

September 30, 2023

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

This afternoon, the House of Representatives passed a continuing resolution to fund the government for 45 days—until just before Thanksgiving—by a vote of 335 to 91. 

The maneuver was a huge blow to the MAGA caucus that was demanding dramatic cuts to the government, the embrace of their border policies, and elimination of Ukraine aid in exchange for keeping the government open. The measure the House passed had almost none of that. It was a clean continuing resolution to fund the government at 2023 levels for another 45 days…with two important exceptions: it added disaster funding, and it stripped out additional funding for Ukraine’s war against Russia.  

House speaker Kevin McCarthy’s move was enough of a surprise that Democrats had to scramble even to read it, but it essentially means that McCarthy had to turn away from the MAGA Republicans to whom he has been catering and turn to the Democrats for the votes needed to fund the government. 

All but one of the Democrats voted in favor; the lone “no” vote came from Representative Mike Quigley (D-IL), the co-chair of the Ukraine Caucus, whose district has a high percentage of Ukrainian Americans. The unity of the Democrats is notable and a sign of their strength going forward.

In contrast, the Republicans remain divided, but after months of catering to the extremists, today the rest of the conference asserted itself. One hundred and twenty-six Republicans voted in favor of the measure; 90 voted no. That 90 included all the usual suspects on the far right. The vote to pass the measure was a clear rebuke to the MAGA Republicans who had forced their colleagues in swing districts to vote for dramatic and unpopular cuts in services and then refused to fund the government anyway. 

House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) said, “The American people have won. The extreme MAGA Republicans have lost. It was a victory for the American people and a complete and total surrender by right-wing extremists who throughout the year have tried to hijack the congress.”

McCarthy, explaining his sudden about-face to work with the Democrats, also blamed the extremists. It was very clear he had done all he could to work with them, he said, but “if you have members in your conference that won’t let you vote for appropriation bills, doesn’t [sic] want an omnibus, and won’t vote for a stopgap measure so the only answer is to shut down and not pay our troops, I don't want to be a part of that team. I want to be part of a conservative group that wants to get things done.” 

More colloquially, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) wrote: “Here’s what went down: we just won a clean 45 day gov extension, stripped GOP’s earlier 30% cuts to Social Security admin etc, staved off last minute anti-immigrant hijinks, and averted shutdown (for now). People will get paychecks and MTG threw a tantrum on the way out. Win-win[.]”

Still at stake is funding for Ukraine, but members promise to make sure that happens. “We will get the Ukraine funding next,” Representative Eric Swalwell (D-CA) wrote. “This is a 45-day bill to make sure government is open and troops/cops/air-traffic controllers etc get paid. With the same leverage we used to bear back MAGA, we will keep Ukraine in the fight.”

The issue of funding for Ukraine is not a small one. Former Representative Liz Cheney (R-WY) noted that it was on September 30, 1938, that British prime minister Neville Chamberlain announced he would not stand in the way of Adolf Hitler’s annexation of the Sudentenland, a key move in Hitler’s rise. “Members of the House and Senate who are voting to deny Ukraine assistance on the 85th anniversary of Neville Chamberlain’s 1938 “peace in our time” speech should read some history,” she wrote. “Appeasement didn’t work then. It won’t work now.”

The votes should be there for Ukraine aid. Just two days ago, members of the House voted 311 to 117 for Ukraine funding, and the Senate, too, strongly favors Ukraine aid. But there is no doubt the removal of this funding signals that Trump and the MAGA Republicans favor a foreign policy that helps Russian president Vladimir Putin. 

The biggest loser in today’s vote was former president Trump, who had urged his loyalists to shut down the government until they got all their demands. He is an agent of chaos and recognized that hurting the nation—including our credit around the world—would make voters more likely to turn against the sitting president. 

Getting himself or someone like him back into the White House is becoming his only hope for turning back his legal troubles, especially now that a judge has decided that he, his older sons, a number of associates, and the Trump Organization engaged in fraud that requires the dissolution of many of his businesses. That is a psychic blow as well as a financial one, and he cannot afford either.

The biggest winner is the American people, not only because Congress has agreed to do as the vast majority of us wish and fund the government. It’s far too early to say Republican leadership might really be breaking away from the MAGA crowd, but for today, at least, we can see what’s possible. It is clear at the very least that McCarthy cannot hold the speakership without Democratic votes. 

Tonight the Senate also passed the continuing resolution, by an overwhelming vote of 88 to 9. The nine were all Republicans. 

President Biden is expected to sign the measure. Tonight he released a statement saying that the agreement would prevent “an unnecessary crisis that would have inflicted needless pain on millions of hardworking Americans. This bill ensures that active-duty troops will continue to get paid, travelers will be spared airport delays, millions of women and children will continue to have access to vital nutrition assistance, and so much more.” “But I want to be clear,” he continued: “[W]e should never have been in this position in the first place. Just a few months ago, Speaker McCarthy and I reached a budget agreement to avoid precisely this type of manufactured crisis. For weeks, extreme House Republicans tried to walk away from that deal by demanding drastic cuts that would have been devastating for millions of Americans. They failed.” Biden noted that despite the bill’s lack of aid for Ukraine, McCarthy and the overwhelming majority of Congress have been strong supporters of Ukraine. He said, “We cannot under any circumstances allow American support for Ukraine to be interrupted. I fully expect the Speaker will keep his commitment to the people of Ukraine and secure passage of the support needed to help Ukraine at this critical moment.”

—

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[scott1984fp2]

Bad @Tesco & @MarksAndSpencer Who Paid For 1st & Recruitment 1st Nakba On Behalf Of: Tory Party Lords Knights Dames Sirs Madams, Russia, Chinese Dictatorship, North Korea, Vatican Catholicism Pope's Italian Mafia, USA GOP Republicans Conservatives, French Nobles, India, Iran, & Now Its Marks And Spencer Plc, Tesco, @BritishGas , @BP_Plc , @MarksAndSpencerUSA / @MarksAndSpencee , BRICS Project 2025 & Brazil South Africa Are Pawns 😢😢😢😢😢😢💔💔💔💔💔💔💔

[zimbabwelive]

Why Is CPAC Having a Conference in Budapest

Come May 18, the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), for nearly 50 years the largest and most influential gathering of conservatives in the world, will assemble in Budapest, with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán as its keynote speaker.

That means leading American conservatives who are supposedly deeply committed to the ideals of personal liberty, limited government, free markets, human dignity, and the like will be joining forces behind one of the most authoritarian and antisemitic heads of state in the world. The speakers reportedly will include Orbán, who won his fourth term as prime minister on April 3; Eduardo Bolsonaro, the son of Brazil’s president; and Santiago Abascal, leader of Spain’s far-right Vox party.

At this writing, it’s unclear which big name American conservatives will be headlining the event. “I can’t tell you who is actually scheduled to speak,” said Daniel Schneider, executive director of the American Conservative Union (ACU), which sponsors CPAC. In recent months, however, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Alex Jones, and Tucker Carlson, have all made highly visible appearances on the Orbán bandwagon, with Carlson repeatedly extolling the virtues of the Hungarian strongman to millions of viewers on Fox News.

The hard-right’s growing affinity for Orbán’s Hungary should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed how the Republicans became Putin’s Party and how they have responded to the ongoing Russian atrocities in Ukraine. Think of Hungary in terms of Russia’s trajectory in recent years, during which Putin ushered in an era of global theft on an unimaginable scale, putting together a mafia state in which his handpicked oligarchs had monopolistic control of Russia’s strategic resources—an authoritarian kleptocracy in which billions in dark money were stashed in anonymous shell companies. As has been widely reported, Ukrainian-born billionaire Leonard “Len” Blavatnik, a naturalized American citizen, has contributed millions to leading GOP candidates, including Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, Marco Rubio, and Lindsey Graham. Similarly, as I reported in House of Trump, House of Putin, and American Kompromat, Russian oligarchs have paid countless millions to huge white-shoe American law firms representing their banks and energy companies and have plowed millions of dollars into supporting right-wing, populist movements elsewhere in the West.

But now that Russian atrocities in Ukraine dominate the news cycle 24/7, the mechanisms through which Putin’s propaganda, disinformation, and dark money flow to the West are finally being shut down. More than a thousand Russian businesses and individuals have been sanctioned. Russia has defaulted on foreign loans. Its banks have been removed from Swift. All Russian flights have been banned from United States, the U.K., the EU, and Canadian airspace. New investment in Russia from the West is being shut down. Yachts are being seized. One by one, the faucets are being turned off. And, as The Bulwark put it, that’s why the right has begun to increasingly “launder its Putinism” through support of Orbán.

[influencermagazineuk]

Christopher Steele says the reason Donald Trump has refused to pay $380K in legal fees after losing the UK dossier case

After becoming the first former or current president in the history of the United States to have been convicted in a criminal case, Donald Trump has failed to follow an order from the UK's High Court to pay £300,000 ($380,000) in legal costs. Calling cost the most crucial factor in every litigation, he alleged that it is an attempt by Trump to exact "revenge against us or to keep us quiet." (AFP) Calling cost the most crucial factor in every litigation, he alleged that it is an attempt by Trump to exact "revenge against us or to keep us quiet." (AFP) Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0, via Wikimedia Commons The GOP leader has also snubbed a formal offer to settle with Christopher Steele, a former MI6 officer who compiled a dossier asserting Russian interference in the 2016 US poll. This puts the former US President in contempt of the British High Court, which dismissed his attempt to sue Steele's firm, Orbis Business Intelligence, in February. Orbis formally offered settlement in March; months later, Trump's lawyers still have not responded. During the run-up to the 2016 Presidential election, Trump's political opponents, led by Hillary Clinton, hired Steele, an ex-chief of MI6's Russia desk, to compile the report. As the former MI6 agent puts it, the crime makes it likelier that a reelected Trump will end up in Britain as President after "stiffing our bill collectors around town" and being "contemptuous of our legal system." He continued to say that Trump has to face "enforcement" if he visits the UK. Christopher Steele reveals why Trump has been breaking order. Speaking to Sky News, Steele said: "We were awarded a £300,000 initial cost order in February, which was confirmed when his right of appeal was turned down at the end of March." "He's been in contempt of that injunction for February and March," he added. In describing calling cost the most critical factor in every litigation, he claimed it an effort to take "vengeance against us or to keep us quiet." "Here we have perhaps the next president of the US here, who is running for office and claims to love and respect the UK, and is treating our legal system with contempt," he said. He also said the former US President has been trying to delay many of these legal challenges, fines, and costs until "after what he thinks will be his re-election in November, in which case he will just tell us all to jump." In a message to X, Steele posted: "Trump, who claims to respect the UK, has now been in breach of this order for two months and faces enforcement if he travels here again." The former US President has, as of now paid the court £10,000 as surety against legal fees ahead of the hearing. This was handed to Steele in February. But Trump said the report, which also contained unsubstantiated charges of bribery and salacious claims that he employed sex workers while staying in Moscow, was riddled with errors and breached his rights under the Data Protection Act. Read the full article

[worldtodaysposts]

Why Is CPAC Having a Conference Next Month in Budapest?

As Vladimir Putin grows increasingly isolated, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán becomes the chief conduit to the West for Putin-style authoritarianism and corruption.

Come May 18, the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), for nearly 50 years the largest and most influential gathering of conservatives in the world, will assemble in Budapest, with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán as its keynote speaker.

That means leading American conservatives who are supposedly deeply committed to the ideals of personal liberty, limited government, free markets, human dignity, and the like will be joining forces behind one of the most authoritarian and antisemitic heads of state in the world. The speakers reportedly will include Orbán, who won his fourth term as prime minister on April 3; Eduardo Bolsonaro, the son of Brazil’s president; and Santiago Abascal, leader of Spain’s far-right Vox party.

At this writing, it’s unclear which big name American conservatives will be headlining the event. “I can’t tell you who is actually scheduled to speak,” said Daniel Schneider, executive director of the American Conservative Union (ACU), which sponsors CPAC. In recent months, however, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Alex Jones, and Tucker Carlson, have all made highly visible appearances on the Orbán bandwagon, with Carlson repeatedly extolling the virtues of the Hungarian strongman to millions of viewers on Fox News.

The hard-right’s growing affinity for Orbán’s Hungary should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed how the Republicans became Putin’s Party and how they have responded to the ongoing Russian atrocities in Ukraine. Think of Hungary in terms of Russia’s trajectory in recent years, during which Putin ushered in an era of global theft on an unimaginable scale, putting together a mafia state in which his handpicked oligarchs had monopolistic control of Russia’s strategic resources—an authoritarian kleptocracy in which billions in dark money were stashed in anonymous shell companies. As has been widely reported, Ukrainian-born billionaire Leonard “Len” Blavatnik, a naturalized American citizen, has contributed millions to leading GOP candidates, including Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, Marco Rubio, and Lindsey Graham. Similarly, as I reported in House of Trump, House of Putin, and American Kompromat, Russian oligarchs have paid countless millions to huge white-shoe American law firms representing their banks and energy companies and have plowed millions of dollars into supporting right-wing, populist movements elsewhere in the West.

But now that Russian atrocities in Ukraine dominate the news cycle 24/7, the mechanisms through which Putin’s propaganda, disinformation, and dark money flow to the West are finally being shut down. More than a thousand Russian businesses and individuals have been sanctioned. Russia has defaulted on foreign loans. Its banks have been removed from Swift. All Russian flights have been banned from United States, the U.K., the EU, and Canadian airspace. New investment in Russia from the West is being shut down. Yachts are being seized. One by one, the faucets are being turned off. And, as The Bulwark put it, that’s why the right has begun to increasingly “launder its Putinism” through support of Orbán.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Oliver Darcy at CNN:

Vladimir Putin’s information war in U.S. media paid off this weekend with a key victory halfway around the world. [...] As a Republican, Johnson is in a tough spot, politically speaking. While the Republican Party was once vehemently hawkish toward Russia, viewing the post-Soviet country as its chief adversary on the international stage, it has softened considerably in recent years and much of the party actively opposes sending additional dollars to Ukraine to continue fighting Russia. It was little more than a decade ago when Mitt Romney, then the party’s standard-bearer, famously declared Russia to be “our number one geopolitical foe.” In the years since, the party has dramatically changed its tune on Russia. A CNN poll conducted last summer found that a staggering 71% of Republicans do not support additional aid to thwart Putin’s war on Ukraine.

Much of the GOP’s softening toward Russia is owed to a near-total reversal in rhetoric from right-wing media personalities and outlets, prompted in large part by Donald Trump’s ascension to power in GOP politics. While the biggest players in right-wing media once fervently championed the foreign policy doctrines of the neo-conservatives, they now follow in the footsteps of Trump and vehemently reject the views once held by the George W. Bush administration. This transition is perhaps best exemplified by Tucker Carlson. The former Fox News host was once sharply critical of Putin, characterizing him in no uncertain terms as a cruel “dictator.” But in recent years, Carlson has reversed his stance, flooding the right-wing information space — which he once reigned as king over — with pro-Putin rhetoric that effectively amounts to Russian propaganda. Carlson’s stance was put on display in stark fashion recently when he traveled to Moscow to conduct a widely denounced softball chat with Putin and then proceeded to record a series of propaganda videos touting Russia’s supposed greatness.

While figures like Carlson have promoted Russia and Putin, they have simultaneously trashed Ukraine and its leader Volodymyr Zelensky, promoting conspiracy theories that the country interfered in the 2016 election and was hiding biological weapons labs. Carlson, for example, has likened Zelensky to vermin and vigorously spoken out against U.S. support for Ukraine. Right-wing commentators like Carlson have questioned why taxpayer dollars are being spent to help Ukraine defend its borders when the U.S. struggles to secure its own southern border (though a recent bipartisan bill intended to tackle both issues was rejected by hardline Republicans.)

[...] “The GOP’s shift away from support for Ukraine shows how in the Republican Party, everything flows downstream from the obsessions and priorities of right-wing propagandists,” Matt Gertz, a senior fellow at the progressive watchdog Media Matters, told me Tuesday. “Tucker Carlson and his ilk wanted to back Putin’s invasion, their relentless lies won over the party’s base, and ultimately its elected officials have adopted their position.” “We’ve seen this same pattern time and again: Fox News and the like take basic concepts like ‘it’s a good idea to get vaccinated against the coronavirus’ and ‘the January 6 insurrection was bad’ and turn them on their heads — and Republican elites inevitably follow,” Gertz added. “Governing based on what gets ratings for B.S. artists is no way to run a country.”

CNN's Oliver Darcy wrote in the Reliable Sources newsletter that the right-wing media's anti-Ukraine/pro-Putin disinformation campaign has had fatal consequences in the fight against Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

The Republican Party and much of the right-wing commentariat were once resolutely anti-Russia; however, beginning in the 2010s that began with Vladimir Putin's enactment of anti-LGBTQ+ laws and then Russian asset Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and eventual "Presidency", the GOP shifted from anti-Russia to pro-Russia (and consequently anti-Ukraine).

[qqueenofhades]

I hate hate HATE the fact that putin probably has this shit eating grin on his face w all this denial of ukraine aide. I know there are a couple of other packages where congress can piecemeal it in the future but still. Fuck!!!!!!!! HOW is it all so obvious AND so badly done by the Rs lol

It just illustrates the extent to which the GOP has become the Group of Putin on pretty much every level. There are many reasons for this and they are all equally important to understand:

They love Putin anyway because of all the pro-Trump election interference in 2016, and they're hanging their hat on it being just enough to squeak Trump back in for 2024.

They hate Ukraine to start with because a) it was the cause of Trump's first impeachment (the failed extortion of Zelenskyy) and b) it's central to their current flailing and failing attempts to portray Biden as doing some kind of crime in Hunter's business interests there (in Burisma).

They also loathe the idea of democracy in general and think autocrats, especially their buddy Putin, should have the right to do whatever they want, as well as subscribing to the isolationist America Only xenophobia that was also prevalent in the late 1930s right before WWII. So any noble appeals to maintain Ukraine's democracy and freedom hold no water with them, when they're busy trying to destroy those things here in America as well.

They're heavily influenced by Russian dark money and Russian propaganda, which is part of the larger nexus of Russian influence that operates within and enables the European and American far-right in a creating an anti-Western illiberal fascist theocratic far-right global coalition. If you're interested in this topic, I recommend this (excellent but extremely depressing) book.

As such, yes, the growing anti-Ukraine sentiment in the Treason Caucus is giving plenty of unfortunate credence to Putin's hypothesis that if he can just hang on in Ukraine until 2024, the Republicans will get elected/into full power and instantly be able to cancel all US support for Ukraine. Which they would probably do, and which would be an unmitigated calamity for Ukraine, America, and the world, because that's how the Group of Putin likes to roll.

The Kremlin talking heads are thrilled about this entire development, because obviously of course they are.

The budget resolution to keep the government open for the next 45 days doesn't directly affect aid to Ukraine -- at least for now. The previously agreed-upon financial and military assistance will continue to be paid out, and since a new package will have to be negotiated soon anyway, it's highly likely that Ukraine aid will be included either in that one or a separate bill beforehand.

The Senate Republicans, aside from the usual suspects, are generally supportive of aid to Ukraine. To give -- choke, ugh, wheeze -- Mitch Fucking McConnell 0.2% of credit, he has consistently held the old-fashioned anti-Russia pro-Ukraine line against the crass Putin-smoochin' of his comrades, and made sure to appear jointly with Schumer during Zelenskyy's recent visit to DC. However, he is toadstool slime who may well attempt to price in Ukraine support by trying to cut other American domestic programs or Biden accomplishments. So. Mixed bag.

Lindsey Graham, of all people, has also emerged as a high-profile Senate GOP voice for Ukraine support. However, he is a spineless paramecium who will ultimately do whatever Trump tells him, so let's likewise not put too much faith in that.

Biden has already issued a firm statement insisting that US aid can't be disrupted in any circumstances, and there has been a bipartisan Senate statement as well. So there is existing pressure to get a new package done quickly, and an extra $300 million funding for Ukraine (a resolution, however, not a binding legislation) was approved with 300+ votes in the House just a few days ago. So there is still the ability to do it.

The main question is Kevin Fucking McCarthy. He has issued tepid and conditional statements of support for Ukraine (with the usual "we should be spending this money on our southern border!!!" Republican bullshit) and is under pressure to put a new funding bill on the floor quickly, but since the crazies oppose it and also him, he could easily be his usual brand of spineless and delay doing so. He may also try to strip Ukraine aid out of the next full-year budget resolution, which is already going to be enough of a clusterfuck, but he's going to face far more opposition from Democrats who voted for the 45-day funding package to keep the government open for now, but won't accept anything long-term without money for Ukraine.

Anyway. Republicans the worst, McCarthy sucks, Putin sucks, film at 11.

[potatoes83]

The Spin Cycle: Let's talk about government shutdowns...

Once again, the mainstream media, including Fox News is pearl clutching and going into straight up hysterics about the grim spectre of a government shutdown. Explaining how it's the GOP, the far right who joined with Democrats to sink the noble Speaker McCarthy's temporary spending bill, bringing us to the BRINK OF DISASTER. Using words like CRISIS, CHAOS, and other Pulitzer-worthy spin.

But there's a few things happening here. First off, what is a government shutdown exactly? Well, for starters, we're talking about the Federal government. And the vast majority of your day-to-day interactions with government are provided by local, county, or state governments, or private/government companies like the post office. Simply put, your mail will still be delivered. Your garbage will still be picked up. Your water will still flow, your electricity will still run, your roads will still be maintained, your day-to-day life won't really change all that much. And I would point out that we've been through a couple of these before in my lifetime. Remember the big one a few years back? National parks were closed, because they couldn't afford the staff to be there. In the case of Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore here in Michigan, which happens to be unstaffed during the off-season anyway, they actually paid security to sit there and keep people out and tell them that it was closed. That's right. Because of the shutdown, they couldn't afford to run an unstaffed park, but they could afford to pay security to stand there and tell you it was closed. Tell me you're not trying to prove a point without using those words. 🤦‍♂️

And I think that's really the big part of it, not to go all down the rabbit hole on you, but everyone's in a panic because oh my God the government is SHUTTING DOWN. Forgetting that only a few short years ago this happened, and what affected you exactly? How quickly we forget. And I really think that's why all the hysteria is out there, because if people actually stoped for a minute and realized how little they actually need the Federal government, how during a shutdown their lives continued on same as they ever did, they might start wondering why it's so bloated / why we pay so much in taxes to support it. All non-essential workers will be laid off, hundreds of thousands of people, you're telling me you're running an organization with hundreds and thousands of non-essential people??? Anywhere I've ever worked, if I was not essential, I wouldn't be there.

Now yes, you're dealing with Social Security checks that won't go out, the military that won't be paid, so on and so forth, those evergreen soundbytes and talking points, but understand that I'm not a heartless bastard sitting here with some sort of anti-government myopia. Because they have the power to fix this. They're already talking about how we could have a shutdown and still be able to fund Ukraine because of some last minute legal tap dances in the appropriations process. Now first and foremost, no, actually I'll get to that in a minute. Point is, we could have this horrible government shutdown where you can't go to a national park, and still fund social security. And still fund our military. This is doable. The term shutdown is actually a gross overcharacterization.

But they have tied every single negotiation to additional funding for Ukraine, nevermind completely ignoring doing anything about our unfathomable debt load. Now step back and put a pin in whether you agree with the war between Russia and Ukraine or not, first off, since when is Russia our enemy? The Cold War is over, and last I checked, Congress had not declared us to be in open war with Russia. But getting even more simple, more soup to nuts, you're telling me that it is utterly essential that we fund the Ukrainian military before we fund our own? Or our senior citizens? That is some bullshit, and that should make anyone on any political spectrum stop and take notice.

The point is, as always, they're playing games. The difference this time around is that they're not even bothering to cover it up, and people still aren't seeing it. Like I'm really not trying to be that guy in the room, but when you can legitimately, legally, and relatively easily fund these things, our brave and selfless military, or those citizens of this country who have worked all their lives holding up their end of a promised bargain, but you choose not to because that would undermine your narrative, well you are just straight up fucking evil. Like there's no other word for it. You are literally using human beings as bargaining chips in your desperate attempt to hold sway and power.

Look, in this doomsday world where we are constantly told that the planet is on fire, that we are responsible for the suffering of everybody else who suffers, and that there is basically no hope, we're all done for, sometimes you really need to take a step back and focus on you. Just you. And for the vast majority of us, what you are going to find is come Monday morning, you will wake up. And you will be able to go to work. And you will be able to go to the grocery store, or pick up fast food, or order pizza, your house will still be there, the lights will still be on, the sink will still shoot water, the drain will still take it away. And all this, and countless other mundane things that you have come to count on every day of your life will continue to pass despite the fact that the government is shut down. 🥔

[newstfionline]

Sunday, May 28, 2023

Hot times (Bloomberg) Global warming-induced heat waves are worsening other problems around the world: Ships in the Panama Canal are being asked to lighten their loads, and wildfires in Canada’s top energy-producing province of Alberta have knocked out a fifth of the nation’s natural gas output. Scorching temperatures in Malaysia are pushing up food inflation—and putting pressure on government bonds. It’s a great time to be in the air conditioning business.

Debt ceiling negotiators race to cement deal before June 5 deadline (Washington Post) The U.S. government will run out of money to meet all its payment obligations on June 5, if Congress does not raise the debt ceiling, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen told lawmakers on Friday, providing a more precise forecast to lawmakers trying to break an impasse. Her new projections came as lawmakers struggled to strike a deal that would raise the nation’s borrowing limit and hold spending down, which Republicans have said is necessary to get their support to raise the borrowing limit. The new default date should not be seen as a reprieve, but rather a more firm deadline that “ensures the urgency” of reaching a deal within days, said Rep. Patrick T. McHenry (R-N.C.), one of the key GOP negotiators. (Later: President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy reached an “agreement in principle” to raise the nation’s legal debt ceiling, but now Congress must rush to approve the spending cuts package in a matter of days to avert default.)

Teen workers are in high demand for summer and commanding better pay (AP) Teens have long been vital to filling out the summertime staffs of restaurants, ice cream stands, amusement parks and camps. Now, thanks to one of the tightest labor markets in decades, they have even more sway, with an array of jobs to choose from at ever higher wages. In April, nearly 34% of Americans aged 16 to 19 had jobs, according to government data. That compares with 30% four years ago, the last pre-pandemic summer. More jobs are available for those who want them: There are roughly 1.6 jobs open for every person that is unemployed, according to the Labor Department. In normal times, that ratio is about 1:1. Maxen Lucas, a graduating senior at Lincoln Academy in Maine, had his first job at 15 as a summer camp dishwasher, followed by a stint as a grocery bagger before getting into landscaping. He said young workers can be choosier now. “After COVID settled down, everyone was being paid more,” said the 18-year-old from Nobleboro who���ll head off to Maine Maritime Academy this fall.

US to give away free lighthouses as GPS makes them unnecessary (Guardian) Ten lighthouses that for generations have stood like sentinels along America’s shorelines protecting mariners from peril and guiding them to safety are being given away at no cost or sold at auction by the federal government. The aim of the program run by the General Services Administration is to preserve the properties, most of which are more than a century old. The development of modern technology, including GPS, means lighthouses are no longer essential for navigation, said John Kelly of the GSA’s office of real property disposition. And while the Coast Guard often maintains aids to navigation at or near lighthouses, the structures themselves are often no longer mission critical. Yet the public remains fascinated by the evocative beacons, which are popular tourist attractions, beloved local landmarks and the subject of countless photographers and artists, standing lonely but strong against tides and storms, day and night and flashing life-saving beams of light whatever the weather.

Russia’s gold (Reuters) Russia produced an estimated 325 tonnes of gold in 2022, and exported 116.3 tonnes of it from February 24, 2022, to March 3 of this year. Russia is not exactly the most favorable trading partner of the world, so the overwhelming majority of it, 99.8 percent of Russia’s gold exports, went to just three countries: predominantly the United Arab Emirates (75.7 tonnes worth $4.3 billion, up from 1.3 tonnes in 2021) and then China and Turkey, who split the balance. Russia’s been hawking its gold at about 1 percent under market rates, making it a favorable trade to those willing to subvert the global sanctions.

Ukrainian children carry on (AP) The two children squinted to see through the thick smoke that hung in the air after a deafening blast shook their small home in Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk region. The pair, ages 9 and 10, called out for their father. Only eerie silence followed. Then Olha Hinkina and her brother, Andrii, rushed to the bomb shelter, as they had been taught. When the booms stopped and the smoke cleared, they found their father on the porch—motionless and covered in blood after being struck by a Russian projectile. The two siblings join a generation of Ukrainian children whose lives have been upended by the war. Russia’s full-scale invasion has subjected them to constant bombardment, uprooted millions from their homes and turned many into orphans. At least 483 children have lost their lives and nearly 1,000 have been wounded, according to figures from Ukraine’s general prosecutor’s office. Meanwhile, UNICEF says an estimated 1.5 million Ukrainian children are at risk of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health issues, with potentially lasting effects. Nearly 1,500 Ukrainian children have been orphaned, the National Social Service of Ukraine said. When Andrii Hinkin remembers his hometown, he doesn’t recall the bombs, the smoke or the thunderous explosions. He remembers it as a beautiful village. Asked what are his biggest dreams, he responds timidly. “I want to grow up.”

US rebukes Kosovo for escalating tensions, Serbia puts army on alert (Reuters) The United States and allies rebuked Kosovo for escalating tensions with Serbia on Friday, saying the use of force to install mayors in ethnic Serb areas undermined efforts to improve troubled relations with neighbouring Serbia. Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic placed the army on full combat alert and ordered units to move closer to the border following clashes on Friday between Kosovan police and protesters opposed to the ethnic Albanian mayors. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken criticized the government of Kosovo for accessing the municipal buildings by force and called on Prime Minister Albin Kurti to reverse course. In a statement, Blinken said Kosovo’s actions went against U.S. and European advice and had “sharply and unnecessarily escalated tensions, undermining our efforts to help normalize relations between Kosovo and Serbia and will have consequences for our bilateral relations with Kosovo.”

Suspicious Software (Guardian) According to a joint investigation by multiple international research groups, spyware developed by NSO Group, an Israeli cyber-intelligence firm, has been used for the first time in a military conflict. NSO Group’s Pegasus, a military-grade spyware that allows users to hack into and remotely control any cell phone, was used to target multiple people involved with the Armenia-Azerbaijan border conflict from October 2020 to December 2022. The victims include journalists, human rights advocates, and a U.N. official. One former Armenian foreign ministry spokesperson was hacked over 27 times between October 2020 and July 2021, a period when she was still active as a diplomat, taking part in crucial negotiations regarding the Nagorno-Karabakh war. She was reportedly involved “squarely in the most sensitive conversations and negotiations related to the Nagorno-Karabakh crisis,” including ceasefire talks involving France, the U.S., and Russia. While NSO Group claims it investigates reports of its spyware being abused by governments, it has been continually abused around the world. The governments of India, Poland, Spain, Saudi Arabia, and Mexico have all employed the spyware for different purposes, including surveilling opposition leaders and foreign diplomats.

Amid Turkey election, a Syrian man’s murder stokes fear among refugees (Washington Post) The campaign posters promising to deport Syrian refugees appeared on the morning that Saleh Sabika was killed. They were all across the city by the time he began his final shift in a country that didn’t want him anymore. Grainy CCTV footage from the Istanbul sock factory around 10 a.m. shows a fistfight between Sabika, a 28-year-old Syrian, and a Turkish colleague. Not long after, eyewitnesses said, the colleague grabbed a knife from a nearby restaurant and returned to stab Sabika in the chest. He was dead by the time he reached the hospital. “He wasn’t just killed by a weapon,” said his childhood friend Islam, who spoke on the condition that he be identified by his nickname, fearing for his own safety. “He was killed by the words of all those politicians who planted the ideology against us in people’s heads,” he continued. “It won’t be the last death like this.” As Turkey prepares for a landmark runoff in its presidential election, the fate of people like Sabika and Islam are on the ballot. After years of economic crisis here, Syrian refugees and asylum seekers have become easy targets for leaders across the political spectrum, who contend that immigrants are changing the nation’s character and should be returned to their home country by force. Even before election season, a rising tide of forced deportations, police harassment and violent hate crimes had left many Syrians feeling under siege.

Israeli agents conducted raid against militants in civilian area, killing a child (Washington Post) The traffic was barely moving on March 16 in central Jenin, an unusually busy Thursday afternoon in the West Bank. With the holy month of Ramadan just days away, restaurants were full and shoppers wove between cars as they hustled from store to store. A father pushed a stroller past a silver sedan. Inside the car, Israeli undercover agents were in place, waiting to carry out an operation against two Palestinian militants who were walking nearby. Omar Awadin, age 14, pedaled by on his bicycle, having just completed his last errand of the day. Moments later, four plainclothes security forces burst from a second silver sedan nearby in pursuit of the militants and opened fire. Such scenes are increasingly common in the West Bank, where more than 3 million Palestinians live under Israeli military occupation and a new generation of militants has risen to prominence. Israel says raids like this one are vital to disrupting terrorist networks and protecting its citizens from attack; Palestinian officials say they are war crimes that should be referred to the International Criminal Court. Israeli military operations have long been a fixture of life here, but they once happened mostly at night, and usually ended in apprehensions. This year, under the most right-wing government in Israeli history, a growing number of incursions have been carried out during the day, in densely packed urban areas such as Jenin. As of May 15, 108 Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, including militants and civilians, had been killed by Israeli forces, according to the United Nations, more than double last year’s toll from the same period. At least 19 were children—including Omar, who was fatally shot during the raid in Jenin.

[theivorybilledwoodpecker]

And it's important people realize Pelosi is far from the only one making statements meant to intimidate people into silence.

I'll admit that I've mainly kept an eye out for my state politicians and the White House statements, but there are several that are troubling.

After John Fetterman's former staffers sent an anonymous letter asking him to put conditions on aid to Israel, his chief of staff dismissed this by saying no one elected staffers. Present staffers received an email reminding them that they could not publicly share opinions that differed from Fetterman's positions unless they did so anonymously. This may well be the policy, but considering the letter was anonymous and the signees were not current staffers, it certainly sends a message that Fetterman does not welcome dissenting opinions.

He has said: "Other Democrats that are now vocalizing and saying these incredibly unhelpful kind of things—why? What's your goal? Are you trying to diminish the president? Are you trying to strengthen Trump? It's much easier and much less effort to just write a check for Trump."

He told South Africa to "sit this one out" and told James Carville to "shut the fuck up" when Carville said Biden might loss.

The White House likened proPalestinian protesters to the Nazis in Charlottesville.

Biden labeled a proPalestinian protester who interrupted him as a "MAGA Republican."

Then we have the House censuring Rashida Tlaib and passing a resolution that equates antizionism to antisemitism.

The message is clear: Like the GOP, Republican politicians do not support freedom of speech. They may be avoiding saying those exact words, but they are trying to intimidate people into silence through labeling them as antisemitic, MAGA Republicans, or being paid by Russia.

It is so transparent it would be hilarious if it wasn't being done to commit genocide and if it wasn't a tactic that has worked a thousand times before. McCarthyism.

I hate dealing with the state of modern politics so much man

[drst]

Sorry for the long post but this thread is important.

Transcript:

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 Ok. Deep breath.

I think we may look back on this as the first Great Information War. Except we're already 8 years in.

The first Great Information War began in 2014. The invasion of Ukraine is the latest front. And the idea it doesn't already involve us is fiction, a lie. 1/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 It was Putin's fury at the removal of President Yankovych in Feb 2014 that kicked everything off. Information operations were first crucial step in invasion of Crimea & Donbass. A deliberate attempt to warp reality to confuse both Ukrainians & the world. 2/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 This was not new. The Soviets had practiced "dezinformatsiya" for years. But what was new in 2014 was technology. Social media. It was a transformative moment. "Hybrid warfare" on steroids: a golden Willy Wonka ticket to manipulate hearts & minds. Almost completely invisibly. 3/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 But it wasn't just Ukraine. We now know Russia began another offensive in Feb 2014. Against the West. Specifically, but not exclusively, America. How do we know this? Because the FBI conducted a forensic, multi-year investigation. That almost no-one paid any attention to. 4/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 The Mueller Report. You've heard of it. But probably as a headline about how it didn't "prove" collusion between the Kremlin & Trump campaign. We can come back to that. What it did prove - BEYOND ANY DOUBT - was that Russia attacked 2016 US election through multiple routes. 5/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 And just *one* of the ways Russia attacked 2016 US election was via the tech platforms. Especially: Facebook. This was a military technique, it pioneered in Ukraine in 2014. By 2016, it refined, iterated & supersized these. Most brilliantly of all, they were entirely invisible 6/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla  Feb 27 And it wasn't just Russia. Companies such as Cambridge Analytica. Political operatives such as Manafort. Amoral opportunists such as Cummings. They learned how to exploit a platform that was totally open - anyone could do so. And totally closed - no-one could see how. 7/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 But also it *was* Russia. That's what the Mueller Report proves. And, again, Ukraine is at centre of it all.(Read @profshaw's thread here. Note walk-on role for Arron Banks's business partner & his friend the Russian spy) 8/ Quote Tweet Tamsin Shaw @ProfessorShaw Feb 23 Are there still people out there who think the alarm over GOP-Russia ties in 2016 was cooked up by HRC? It was always about Ukraine. Paul Manafort, Rick Gates and Konstantin Kilimnik (Russian intelligence agent) took Trump a plan for Ru taking Eastern Ukraine 1/6

@carolecadwalla Feb 27 In 2016, we knew none of this. Russia & other bad actors acted with impunity &, in some cases alignment. But now, through the sheer bloody hard work of academics, journalists & FBI, we do know.

But it was complex, messy, difficult. So..We brushed it all under the carpet 9/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 Feb 27 We failed to acknowledge Russia had staged a military attack on the West. We called it "meddling". We used words like "interference". It wasn't. It was warfare. We've been under military attack for eight years now. 10/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 This failure is at the heart of what is happening now in Ukraine. Because the first offensive in the Great Information War was from 2014-2022. And Putin won.

And he won by convincing us it wasn't even a war. 11/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 We fell for it. We said it was "just ads" that "don't work anyhow". And "a bot didn't tell me to vote". Facebook is still an open threat surface. Exploited by authoritarians from Philippines to India to Brazil to Hungary. It's maybe not a world war. But the world is at war. 12/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 Meanwhile, in Britain, we're a captured state. In America, the institutions of govt worked. Even in spite of Trump. The authorities investigated. Individuals were indicted, charged, jailed. The hostile actions of a foreign state examined & unpicked. 13/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 (Not that it mattered.) The US media & therefore public failed to understand the real lessons of Mueller Report. And in the UK? We didn't even bother trying. We allowed Johnson's govt to sweep 2016 under the carpet. Nigel Farage. Arron Banks. Facebook. Russia. The lot. 14/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 But it wasn't 'just ads'. It was war. And it's absolutely crucial that we now understand that Putin's attack on Ukraine & the West was a JOINT attack on both.  

That began at the exact same time.

Across the exact same platforms. 15/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 And this new front, the invasion of Ukraine, is not just about Ukraine. We are part of the plan. We have always been part of the plan. And Ukraine is not just fighting for Ukraine but for the rest of us too. 16/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 And maybe that could be why we've failed to understand Putin's strategy in Ukraine? Because it's not just a strategy in Ukraine. It's directed at us too. And that's what makes this such a uniquely perilous moment. Not least, because we still don't understand we're at war. 17/

Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla Feb 27 If it helps, the penny dropped for me with Skripal. Planned by the GRU - Russia's military intelligence. As was the weaponised hack-&-leak of Hillary's emails. Military doctrine carried out by military officials in  military operations. Just like the one now in Ukraine.

[mojave-pete]

COLLUSION

COLLUSION How The Obama Administration Set In Motion Democrats’ Coup Against Trump Rep. Devin Nunes realized the purpose of Obama’s dossier. 'Devin figured out in December what was going on,' says Langer. 'It was an operation to bring down Trump.' By Lee Smith OCTOBER 28, 2019 The following is an excerpt from Lee Smith’s book out October 29, “The Plot Against the President: The True Story of How Congressman Devin Nunes Uncovered the Biggest Political Scandal in U.S. History.”

AFTER DONALD TRUMP was elected forty-fifth president of the United States, the operation designed to undermine his campaign transformed. It became an instrument to bring down the commander in chief. The coup started almost immediately after the polls closed.

Hillary Clinton’s communications team decided within twenty-four hours of her concession speech to message that the election was illegitimate, that Russia had interfered to help Trump.

Obama was working against Trump until the hour he left office. His national security advisor, Susan Rice, commemorated it with an email to herself on January 20, moments before Trump’s inauguration. She wrote to memorialize a meeting in the White House two weeks before.

On January 5, following a briefing by IC leadership on Russian hacking during the 2016 Presidential election, President Obama had a brief follow-on conversation with FBI Director Jim Comey and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates in the Oval Office. Vice President Biden and I were also present.

President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities “by the book.” The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.

From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia. . . .

The President asked Comey to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team. Comey said he would.

The repetition of “by the book” gave away the game—for there was nothing normal about any of it.

Rice wrote an email to herself. It commemorated a conversation from two weeks before. The conversation was about the FBI’s investigation of the man who was about to move into the White House—an investigation from which Obama was careful to distance himself. During the conversation, the outgoing president instructed his top aides to collect information (“ascertain”) regarding the incoming administration’s relationship with Russia.

“To any rational person,” says Nunes, “it looks like they were scheming to produce a get-out-of-jail-free card—for the president and anyone else in the White House. They were playing Monopoly while the others were playing with fire. Now the Obama White House was in the clear—sure, they had no idea what Comey and Brennan and McCabe and Strzok and the rest were up to.”

Boxing Trump in on Russia Meanwhile, Obama added his voice to the Trump-Russia echo chamber as news stories alleging Trump’s illicit relationship with the Kremlin multiplied in the transition period. He said he hoped “that the president-elect also is willing to stand up to Russia.”

The outgoing president was in Germany with Chancellor Angela Merkel to discuss everything from NATO to Vladimir Putin. Obama said that he’d “delivered a clear and forceful message” to the Russian president about “meddling with elections . . . and we will respond appropriately if and when we see this happening.”

After refusing to act while the Russian election meddling was actually occurring, Obama responded in December. He ordered the closing of Russian diplomatic facilities and the expulsion of thirty- five Russian diplomats. The response was tepid. The Russians had hacked the State Department in 2014 and the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 2015. And now Obama was responding only on his way out.

Even Obama partisans thought it was weak. “The punishment did not fit the crime,” said Michael McFaul, Obama’s former ambassador to Russia. “The Kremlin should have paid a much higher price for that attack.”

But the administration wasn’t retaliating against Russia for interfering in a US election; the action was directed at Trump. Obama was leaving the president-elect with a minor foreign policy crisis in order to box him in. Any criticism of Obama’s response, never mind an attempt to reverse it, would only further fuel press reports that Trump was collaborating with the Russians.

Spreading Intelligence to Spring Leaks In the administration’s last days, it disseminated intelligence throughout the government, including the White House, Capitol Hill, and the intelligence community (IC). Intelligence was classified at the lowest possible levels to ensure a wide readership. The White House was paving the way for a campaign of leaks to disorient the incoming Trump team.

The effort, including the intended result of leaks, was publicly acknowledged in March 2017 by Evelyn Farkas, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense in the Obama administration.

Obama’s biggest move against Trump was to order CIA director John Brennan to conduct a full review of all intelligence relating to Russia and the 2016 elections. He requested it on December 6 and wanted it ready by the time he left office on January 20. But the sitting president already knew what the intelligence community assessment (ICA) was going to say, because Brennan had told him months before.

Brennan’s handpicked team of CIA, FBI, and NSA analysts had started analyzing Russian election interference in late July. In August, Brennan had briefed Harry Reid on the dossier and may have briefed Obama on it, too. Earlier in August, Brennan sent a “bombshell” report to Obama’s desk.

When Brennan reassembled his select team in December, it was to have them reproduce their August findings: Putin, according to Brennan, was boosting the GOP candidate. And that’s why only three days after Obama ordered the assessment in December, the Washington Post could already reveal what the intelligence community had found.

“The CIA,” reported the December 9 edition of the Post, “has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system.”

The story was the first of many apparently sourced to leaks of classified information that were given to the Post team of Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima, and Greg Miller. The reporters’ sources weren’t whistle-blowers shedding light on government corruption— rather, they were senior US officials abusing government resources to prosecute a campaign against the newly elected commander in chief. The article was the earliest public evidence that the coup was under way. The floodgates were open, as the IC pushed more stories through the press to delegitimize the president-elect.

A Wave of Leak-Sourced Stories All Saying the Same Thing The same day, a New York Times article by David E. Sanger and Scott Shane echoed the Post’s piece. According to senior administration officials, “American intelligence agencies have concluded with ‘high confidence’ that Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald J. Trump.”

A December 14 NBC News story by William M. Arkin, Ken Dilanian, and Cynthia McFadden reported that “Russian President Vladimir Putin became personally involved in the covert Russian campaign to interfere in the U.S. presidential election, senior U.S. intelligence officials told NBC News.”

The ICA that Obama ordered gave political operatives, the press, and his intelligence chiefs a second shot at Trump. They’d used the Steele Dossier to feed the echo chamber and obtain surveillance powers to spy on the Trump campaign. The dossier, however, had come up short. Trump had won.

But now, on his way out of the White House, Obama instructed Brennan to stamp the CIA’s imprimatur on the anti-Trump operation. As Fusion GPS’s smear campaign had been the source of the preelection press campaign, the ICA was the basis of the postelection media frenzy. It was tailored to disrupt the peaceful transition of power and throw the United States into chaos.

Because Trump hadn’t been elected by the US public, according to the ICA, but had been tapped by Putin, he was illegitimate. Therefore, the extraconstitutional and illegal tactics employed by anti-Trump officials were legitimate. The ultimate goal was to remove Trump from office.

“If it weren’t for President Obama,” said James Clapper, “we might not have done the intelligence community assessment . . . that set off a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today.”

Nunes agrees. “The ICA,” he says, “was Obama’s dossier.”

Changing the Intelligence Assessment Nunes is sitting in his office in the Longworth House Office Building along with his communications director, Jack Langer, a forty-six-year-old former book editor and historian with a PhD from Duke University.

“The social media attacks on Devin began shortly after the election,” Langer remembers. “They’re all hinting at some vast conspiracy involving Russia that the chairman of the Intelligence Committee is part of. And we have no idea what they’re talking about.”

Nunes points out that his warnings about Russia fell on deaf ears for years. “And all of a sudden I’m a Russian agent,” says the congressman.

Now Langer and Nunes see that the attacks were first launched because the congressman had been named to Trump’s transition team. “I put forward [Mike] Pompeo for CIA director,” says Nunes. “He came from our committee.”

The attacks on Nunes picked up after the December 9 Washington Post article. The assessment provided there was not what the HPSCI chairman had been told. The assessment had been altered, and Nunes asked for an explanation. “We got briefed about the election around Thanksgiving,” he says. “And it’s just the usual stuff, nothing abnormal. They told us what everyone already knew: ‘Hey, the Russians are bad actors, and they’re always playing games, and here’s what they did.’”

By providing that briefing, the IC had made a mistake. When it later changed the assessment, the November briefing was evidence that Obama’s spy chiefs were up to no good. “I bet they’d like to have that back,” says Nunes. “They briefed us before they could get their new story straight.”

‘They Kept Everyone Else Away from It’ Nunes acknowledges that he was caught off guard by many things back then. “We still thought these guys were on the up and up,” he says. “But if we knew, we’d have nailed them by mid-December, when they changed their assessment. ‘Wait, you guys are saying this now, but you said something else just a few weeks ago. What’s going on?’”

After the Post story, Nunes wanted an explanation. “We expressed deep concern, both publicly and privately,” says Langer. “We demanded our own briefing to try to determine whether that Post story was true or false. They refused to brief us. They said, ‘We’re not going to be doing that until we finish the ICA.’”

Nunes says the fact that the IC conducted an assessment like that was itself unusual. “I don’t know how many times they’d done that in the past, if ever,” he says. “But if the IC is operating properly, when someone says what can you tell me on X or Y or Z, they have it ready to pull up quickly. The tradecraft is reliable, and the intelligence products are reliable.” That was not the case with the ICA. There were problems with how the assessment had been put together.

“If you really were going to do something like an assessment from the intelligence community, then you’d get input from all our seventeen agencies,” says Nunes. “They did the opposite. It was only FBI, CIA, NSA, and DNI. They siloed it, just like they had with Crossfire Hurricane. They kept everyone else away from it so they didn’t have to read them in.”

‘Manipulation of Intelligence for Political Purposes’ Nunes released several statements in the middle of December. The HPSCI majority, read a December 14 statement, wanted senior Obama intelligence officials “to clarify press reports that the CIA has a new assessment that it has not shared with us. The Committee is deeply concerned that intransigence in sharing intelligence with Congress can enable the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes.”

After the statements warned of political foul play in the IC’s assessments, the social media attacks on Nunes became more regular. “They were constant,” says Langer.

Anti-Trump operatives recognized that Nunes was going to be a problem. The HPSCI chair had previously called out the IC for politicizing intelligence. “They said that we had defeated Al Qaeda in Iraq and Syria,” says Nunes, “and I knew that wasn’t true. Then they withheld the Osama bin Laden documents to conceal that Al Qaeda worked with Iran, because the administration was protecting the Iran deal. So when I saw them changing this assessment of the 2016 election in midstream, I knew it was the same old trick: they were politicizing intelligence.”

The speed with which Brennan’s handpicked analysts produced the ICA and then got a version of it declassified for public consumption was another sign that something wasn’t right. “All throughout Obama’s two terms, his IC chiefs aren’t paying attention to Russian actions,” says Nunes. “We give them more money for Russia, which they don’t use. But now they know so much about Putin that they manage to produce a comprehensive assessment of Russian intentions and actions regarding election interference in a month—at Christmastime, when everything slows down. And then they produce a declassified version in a manner of weeks. None of this is believable.”

Three different versions of the ICA were produced: an unclassified version, a top secret one, and another highly compartmentalized version. According to a January 11, 2017, Washington Post story by Greg Miller, Ellen Nakashima, and Karen DeYoung, an annex summarizing the dossier was attached to the versions that were not declassified.

‘Designed to Have a Political Effect’ The FBI had been working from Steele’s reports for more than half a year. Including the dossier along with the ICA would provide Comey with ammunition to take on the president-elect. Both he and Brennan were manipulating intelligence for political purposes.

“A lot of the ICA is reasonable,” says Nunes. “But those parts become irrelevant due to the problematic parts, which undermine the entire document. It was designed to have a political effect; that was the ICA’s sole purpose.”

The assessment’s methodological flaws are not difficult to spot. Manufacturing the politicized findings that Obama sought meant not only abandoning protocol but also subverting basic logic. Two of the ICA’s central findings are that:

Putin and the Russian government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. Putin and the Russian government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. To know preferences and intentions would require sources targeting Putin’s inner circles—either human sources or electronic surveillance. As Nunes had previously noted, however, US intelligence on Putin’s decision-making process was inadequate.

But even if there had been extensive collection on precisely that issue, it would be difficult to know what was true. For instance, the closest you can get to Putin’s inner circle is Putin himself. But even capturing him on an intercept saying he wanted to elect Trump might prove inconclusive. It is difficult to judge intentions because it is not possible to see into the minds of other people. How would you know that Putin was speaking truthfully? How would you know that the Russian president didn’t know his communications were under US surveillance and wasn’t trying to deceive his audience?

Quality control of information is one of the tasks of counterintelligence—to discern how you know what you know and whether that information is trustworthy. There was no quality control for the Trump-Russia intelligence. For instance, Crossfire Hurricane lead agent Peter Strzok was the FBI’s deputy assistant director of counterintelligence. Instead of weeding out flawed intelligence on Russia, the Crossfire Hurricane team was feeding Steele’s reports into intelligence products. Yet the ICA claimed to have “high confidence” in its assessment that “Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President- elect Trump.” What was the basis of that judgment?

According to the ICA:

Putin most likely wanted to discredit Secretary Clinton because he has publicly blamed her since 2011 for inciting mass protests against his regime in late 2011 and early 2012, and because he holds a grudge for comments he almost certainly saw as disparaging him.

“Most likely” and “almost certainly” are rhetorical hedges that show the assessment could not have been made in “high confidence.” Putin may have held a grudge against Clinton, but there is no way of knowing it.

The supporting evidence deteriorates more the farther the ICA purports to reach into Putin’s mind.

Beginning in June, Putin’s public comments about the US presidential race avoided directly praising President-elect Trump, probably because Kremlin officials thought that any praise from Putin personally would backfire in the United States.

This is absurd. Part of the evidence that Putin supported Trump is that he avoided praising Trump. It is difficult enough to determine intentions by what someone says. Yet the ICA claims to have discerned Putin’s intentions by what he did not say.

There is no introductory philosophy class in logic where reasoning like that would pass muster. Yet Brennan’s handpicked group used it as the basis of its assessment that Putin had helped Trump.

Moscow also saw the election of President-elect Trump as a way to achieve an international counterterrorism coalition against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.

This may be an accurate description of how Putin saw Trump. But Trump’s predecessor also wanted to coordinate anti- ISIS operations with Moscow. On this view, Trump would have represented a continuation of Obama’s ISIS policy. Why would this make Trump’s victory suspicious to Obama’s intelligence chiefs?

Curious Inaccuracies about Russia’s RT Network The ICA also pointed to documentary evidence of Putin’s intentions: English-language media owned by the Russian government, the news site Sputnik, and the RT network, were critical of Clinton.

State-owned Russian media made increasingly favorable comments about President-elect Trump as the 2016 US general and primary election campaigns progressed while consistently offering negative coverage of Secretary Clinton.

Curiously, just days before the election, the informant the US government sent after the Trump campaign praised the Democratic candidate in an interview with Sputnik. “Clinton would be best for US-UK relations and for relations with the European Union,” Stefan Halper told the Kremlin-directed media outlet. “Clinton is well-known, deeply experienced, and predictable. US-UK relations will remain steady regardless of the winner although Clinton will be less disruptive over time.”

The ICA includes a seven-page appendix devoted to RT, the central node, according to the document, of the Kremlin’s effort to “influence politics, fuel discontent in [sic] US.”

Adam Schiff appeared on RT in July 2013. He argued for “making the FISA court much more transparent, so the American people can understand what’s being done in their name in the name of national security, so that we can have a more informed debate over the balance between privacy and security.”

RT’s editor in chief, Margarita Simonyan, is a master propagandist, according to the ICA. The document fails to mention that Simonyan heads another Moscow-owned media initiative, Russia Beyond the Headlines, a news supplement inserted into dozens of the West’s leading newspapers, including the New York Times. Russia Beyond the Headlines has been delivered to millions of American homes over the last decade. By contrast, RT’s US market share is so small that it doesn’t qualify for the Nielsen ratings. Virtually no one in the United States watches it.

Taking the logic of Brennan’s handpicked team seriously would mean that the publishers of the New York Times played a major role in a coordinated Russian effort to elect Donald Trump.

‘It Was an Operation to Bring Down Trump’ Nunes realized even then the purpose of Obama’s dossier. “Devin figured out in December what was going on,” says Langer. “It was an operation to bring down Trump.”

There was no evidence that any Trump associate had done anything improper regarding the Russians, and Nunes was losing patience. “We had serious things the committee wanted to do,” he says. “With Trump elected, we could do some big stuff, like with China.”

Still, it was important for HPSCI to maintain control of the Russia investigation. Otherwise, Democrats and Never Trump Republicans were likely to get their wish to convene a bipartisan commission to investigate Russian interference—with the purpose of turning it on Trump.

“Before they started floating the idea of a special counsel, the big idea was a special commission like the 9/11 Commission,” says Langer. It was outgoing secretary of state John Kerry who first came forward with the proposal.

The point was to change the power dynamic. “In a normal committee,” says Langer, “the majority has the power, and that happened to be us. They wanted to strip our power and make it fifty-fifty.”

“Bipartisan” was a euphemism for “anti-Trump.” “It would have been a complete joke,” says Nunes. “A combination of partisan hacks from the left and people who hated Trump on the right.”

Democrats led by Schiff and Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer were joined by the late John McCain, the most active of the Never Trump Republicans. After the election, the Arizona senator had instructed his aide David Kramer to deliver a copy of the Steele Dossier to Comey.

“God only knows who they’d have populated that committee with,” says Nunes. “Anyone they could control. It would have been a freak show.”

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan defended HPSCI’s independence. On the Senate side, Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr had only one move. To deflect demands for an independent commission, he effectively ceded control of the Senate investigation to his vice chair, Democrat Mark Warner.

No Evidence of Collusion Years Later Still, Nunes believed that all the talk of Trump and Russia was a waste of time. “They kept promising us evidence of collusion, week after week, and they came up with nothing.”

Nunes’s disdain for the ICA forced the Crossfire Hurricane team’s hand. “Right around the time that they came out with the ICA, they kept saying that we were waiting on something to show us, something important that was coming in,” he says. “They said it was some significant figure who they couldn’t quite track down yet.”

But the FBI knew exactly where its missing link was, the piece of evidence that they thought would convince hardened skeptics like Nunes that collusion was real. They didn’t have to chase him down, because he was sitting at home in Chicago. He submitted to a voluntary interview January 27 and without a lawyer because he had no idea what the FBI had in store for him.

The Crossfire Hurricane team was figuring how they were going to set up the Trump adviser they’d used to open up the investigation in July 2016: George Papadopoulos.

Lee Smith is the media columnist at Tablet. Photo White House / public domain