I wonder what @paulsurovell thinks of the recently released Barr memo, where he lied through his teeth.
paul was such a big fan of the Barr summary (also a big fat lie) of the Mueller report, after all.
Well, paul ignored that one.
Here's another. John Durham's investigation, having pissed away millions of dollars and 3 years, is coming up to submitting it's final report, which will be just another embarrassment.
When John H. Durham was assigned by the Justice Department in 2019 to examine the origins of the investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, President Donald J. Trump and his supporters expressed a belief that the inquiry would prove that a “deep state” conspiracy including top Obama-era officials had worked to sabotage him.
Now Mr. Durham appears to be winding down his three-year inquiry without anything close to the results Mr. Trump was seeking. The grand jury that Mr. Durham has recently used to hear evidence has expired, and while he could convene another, there are currently no plans to do so, three people familiar with the matter said.
Mr. Durham and his team are working to complete a final report by the end of the year, they said, and one of the lead prosecutors on his team is leaving for a job with a prominent law firm.
Over the course of his inquiry, Mr. Durham has developed cases against two people accused of lying to the F.B.I. in relation to outside efforts to investigate purported Trump-Russia ties, but he has not charged any conspiracy or put any high-level officials on trial. The recent developments suggest that the chances of any more indictments are remote.
So now, thank to the Durham investigation, we have the basic information on how this scam was perpetrated. The scam involves lots of people who hate Russia, think Russia wants to destroy the world and those who view a good US-Russia relationship as bad for them. One of those people is Christopher Steele (of the fake dossier) and another is the co-founder of Crowdstrike (of the questionable DNC hack) and, James Clapper, and well, the whole Clinton campaign and the lawyers they hired to concoct this thing.
Susman got off, while clearly guilty, but that's not as important as the facts that came out during the trial.
And Russiagate continues to unravel. There is an indictment for Igor Danchenko, the guy who made up the Steele Dossier with his drinking buddies who is technically Russian but lives in the US and has zero Russian connections and worked at the Brookings Institute (your favorite), which I found out has big ties to the Clintons (that makes total sense).
For some reason, the FBI, who should have known better, took these bogus documents and ran with them, using the dossier to get a FISA Warrent to spy on someone in Trump's campaign. Why the FBI did not know better, or if they knew and just played along is still to be confirmed but it's likely they were upset that Trump, while on the campaign trail was talking about getting along with Russia and questioning NATO.
We don't have evidence for some of this, but we have way more than we had before and you have to be seriously misinformed (because the mainstream media does not admit fault) to still think Russiagate was/is real.
BlueAnon pundits are celebrating a 2nd John Durham court loss. Durham's cases are based on the faulty theory that FBI was misled into chasing Democrats' fabricated Trump-Russia conspiracy theories. But the FBI was in on it, as the evidence makes clear. https://t.co/uD6IK5ykkw
C'mon Drummerboy. You know better than to reference articles from the MSM.
Now, if you can get some snake oil salesman doing a video from a dimly lit basement, you might get some traction.
I could easily imagine Trump doing a deal along the lines laid out in the article. We know Trump would happily pimp out his wife or daughter for personal gain, so why not the U.S.
I thought the biggest takeaway from that was less the Trump connection, and more the fact that it adds evidence that Putin's plan was always to seize much of eastern Ukraine (beyond what the separatists ever controlled), which undermines the claims that the war could have been avoided, or that Putin only annexed territory because Ukraine wouldn't negotiate.
C'mon Drummerboy. You know better than to reference articles from the MSM.
Now, if you can get some snake oil salesman doing a video from a dimly lit basement, you might get some traction.
I could easily imagine Trump doing a deal along the lines laid out in the article. We know Trump would happily pimp out his wife or daughter for personal gain, so why not the U.S.
Except the snake oil salesman in the basement is really a reporter at the New York Times. Thought this commentary from Scott Ritter was a good description (a bit off topic from this thread but I will deal with that NYTs attempt to resurrect Russiagate next):
NOTES - NOT EXACT TRANSCRIPT
GN: Scott please update us on the war in Ukraine.
SR: The battlefield is tense. Ukrainians are willing to beat their heads against a brick wall sending in these assault formations into a prepared Russian defense where they are slaughtered. They are literally making no gains. They might occupy an empty village overnight and then they are all killed and the empty village becomes empty again.
They are. . . there was an interesting article in the New York Times.. .I love it. . .they are spoon fed whatever the government wants . . it says that the Ukrainians actually have artillery supremacy now! Especially in the South. That because we provided them with the M777s, advanced European systems, Teaser, German systems, the HIMARS that the Ukrainians, despite having numerical inferiority, are now able to impose their will on the Russians.
I mean if you read the article it's all. . .it's all over for the Russians! They are all dying. Their units are being broken up and . . I read it and I went, humm, um. . .doesn't anybody fact check anything anymore?
Take the statement, "the M777 outranges anything the Russians have." No it doesn't. The Russians have systems that outrange the M777. They said "the M777 guided satellite munitions are unique. The Russians don't have anything like that." But they do have something like that. It's in the system that out-ranges the M777. In fact, it is used frequently to kill the M777.
They say the HIMARS have a range and accuracy unlike anything the Russians have. The Russians actually have a rocket system that out-ranges the HIMARS with the same accuracy.
I'm not saying the Ukrainians don't have good systems. They do. And I'm not saying that these systems don't kill Russians. They do. But the idea that Ukrainians have achieved artillery superiority/supremacy on the southern front is a bald-faced lie.
There is a war going on. it's tense. The Russians and the Ukrainians are engaged in what we call an artillery duel. The systems being used are equal systems or advantage Russia. And there are more of the Russian systems and they are winning this duel. They are killing more of the Ukrainians systems faster than these systems can be replaced.
That's the stage we are at right now. We are back to the grind. Ukrainians are throwing away lives and equipment in these incessant attacks. Ukraine is suffering more casualties than the Russians. The Russians are able to replace their losses. They just announced that mobilization is over and 87,000 troops are deployed to the region. The rest are being organized into combat units that will be brought in.
In the near future, unlike what the New York Times says, that Ukrainians are going to launch very successful offensives in the coming months, taking advantage of their superiority of the Russians in winter warfare to capture Kherson. . . I don't know. . . I've never smoked marijuana . . maybe I should because the writing would become so creative. That's the only way I can explain why a New York Times reporter is doing this [pretends to inhale some pot] Oh, yeah, man, Ukraine can win! . . .artillery supremacy. . .winter is to Ukraine's advantage. . . I don't get it. .
NOBODY BELIEVES UKRAINIANS HAVE A WINTER ADVANTAGE!
And first of all, Ukraine has seen it's power grid destroyed. It's energy supplies are severely diminished. They are not going to make it through the winter. They are going to be very cold. No power. No gas. Right off the bat that's problematic because even though that is a civilian problem it will filter down to the troops. The troops on the front line will be cold themselves but also hungry and also knowing that their families back home are cold and hungry.
Meanwhile the Russians have families that are warm and well-fed. The Russians on the front line get rotated out for rest. It's not sunshine and rainbows for either but it's better for the Russians. The Russians also have better equipment. This winter is going to be very tough in Ukraine. I would not be surprised if sometime this month, maybe later the Russians begin large-scale operations designed to achieve more dramatic results.
I thought the biggest takeaway from that was less the Trump connection, and more the fact that it adds evidence that Putin's plan was always to seize much of eastern Ukraine (beyond what the separatists ever controlled), which undermines the claims that the war could have been avoided, or that Putin only annexed territory because Ukraine wouldn't negotiate.
I posted that long Scott Ritter commentary detailing how New York Times reporting on Ukraine could only be written by stoned reporters.
LIkewise, the article on Russiagate could only have been written by reporters on LSD or peyote.
It's free of evidence and why have we not heard this "story" before? We have gone over how Constantine Klimnik was more likely a CIA agent than a Russian Spy. We have gone over how Paul Manafort was working for the Ukrainians, not the Russians. If you have followed Russiagate over the years, this story just makes zero sense--except as propaganda to link some things together for Manufactured Consent as expressed in your post. Looks like it's working.
I thought the biggest takeaway from that was less the Trump connection, and more the fact that it adds evidence that Putin's plan was always to seize much of eastern Ukraine (beyond what the separatists ever controlled), which undermines the claims that the war could have been avoided, or that Putin only annexed territory because Ukraine wouldn't negotiate.
I posted that long Scott Ritter commentary detailing how New York Times reporting on Ukraine could only be written by stoned reporters.
LIkewise, the article on Russiagate could only have been written by reporters on LSD or peyote.
It's free of evidence and why have we not heard this "story" before? We have gone over how Constantine Klimnik was more likely a CIA agent than a Russian Spy. We have gone over how Paul Manafort was working for the Ukrainians, not the Russians. If you have followed Russiagate over the years, this story just makes zero sense--except as propaganda to link some things together for Manufactured Consent as expressed in your post. Looks like it's working.
Don't bogart that joint, my friend.
Jamie, how long must we be subjected to this lunatic, treasonous SH!T?
I thought the biggest takeaway from that was less the Trump connection, and more the fact that it adds evidence that Putin's plan was always to seize much of eastern Ukraine (beyond what the separatists ever controlled), which undermines the claims that the war could have been avoided, or that Putin only annexed territory because Ukraine wouldn't negotiate.
I posted that long Scott Ritter commentary detailing how New York Times reporting on Ukraine could only be written by stoned reporters.
LIkewise, the article on Russiagate could only have been written by reporters on LSD or peyote.
It's free of evidence and why have we not heard this "story" before? We have gone over how Constantine Klimnik was more likely a CIA agent than a Russian Spy. We have gone over how Paul Manafort was working for the Ukrainians, not the Russians. If you have followed Russiagate over the years, this story just makes zero sense--except as propaganda to link some things together for Manufactured Consent as expressed in your post. Looks like it's working.
Don't bogart that joint, my friend.
Jamie, how long must we be subjected to this lunatic, treasonous SH!T?
Dennis, my love, how about instead of calling for my MOL execution, you actually show me where I am wrong? Why don't you show me where this "story" was previously discussed during Russiagate? Why don't you show me the evidence they used to prove their point? I'll wait. . .
Dennis, my love, how about instead of calling for my MOL execution, you actually show me where I am wrong? Why don't you show me where this "story" was previously discussed during Russiagate? Why don't you show me the evidence they used to prove their point? I'll wait. . .
The story wasn't "previously discussed" because it's based on new reviews of the available information, new interviews, and a new book. You can learn a lot by reading an article before commenting on it.
Dennis, my love, how about instead of calling for my MOL execution, you actually show me where I am wrong? Why don't you show me where this "story" was previously discussed during Russiagate? Why don't you show me the evidence they used to prove their point? I'll wait. . .
The story wasn't "previously discussed" because it's based on new reviews of the available information, new interviews, and a new book. You can learn a lot by reading an article before commenting on it.
New, New, New!!!! "New reviews of the available information" = creative storytelling.
I did read it and it reminded me of what Joyce Carol Oates said about Carlos Castaneda (which goes along with our "these things were written on drugs theme):
“Is it possible that these books are nonfiction?” author Joyce Carol Oates asked in 1972. “I realize that everyone accepts them as anthropological studies, but they seem to me remarkable works of art, on the Hesse-like theme of a young man’s initiation into ‘another way’ of reality. They are beautifully constructed. The dialogue is faultless. The character of Don Juan is unforgettable. There is a novelistic momentum.”
Oh, pleeeeeeze. This is just dime store novella territory. Where are the facts in this piece by a wannabe Earnest Hemingway? This is for sure going to Netflix.
Kilimnik cleared customs at Kennedy Airport at 7:43 p.m., only 77 minutes before the scheduled rendezvous at the Grand Havana Room, a Trump-world hangout atop 666 Fifth Avenue, the Manhattan office tower owned by the family of Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Shortly after the appointed hour, Kilimnik walked onto a perfectly put-up stage set for a caricature drama of furtive figures hatching covert schemes with questionable intent — a dark-lit cigar bar with mahogany-paneled walls and floor-to-ceiling windows columned in thick velvet drapes, its leather club chairs typically filled by large men with open collars sipping Scotch and drawing on parejos and figurados. Men, that is, like Paul Manafort, with his dyed-black pompadour and penchant for pinstripes. There, with the skyline shimmering though the cigar-smoke haze, Kilimnik shared a secret plan whose significance would only become clear six years later, as Vladimir V. Putin’s invading Russian Army pushed into Ukraine.
Oh, pleeeeeeze. This is just dime store novella territory. Where are the facts in this piece by a wannabe Earnest Hemingway? This is for sure going to Netflix.
Kilimnik cleared customs at Kennedy Airport at 7:43 p.m., only 77 minutes before the scheduled rendezvous at the Grand Havana Room, a Trump-world hangout atop 666 Fifth Avenue, the Manhattan office tower owned by the family of Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Shortly after the appointed hour, Kilimnik walked onto a perfectly put-up stage set for a caricature drama of furtive figures hatching covert schemes with questionable intent — a dark-lit cigar bar with mahogany-paneled walls and floor-to-ceiling windows columned in thick velvet drapes, its leather club chairs typically filled by large men with open collars sipping Scotch and drawing on parejos and figurados. Men, that is, like Paul Manafort, with his dyed-black pompadour and penchant for pinstripes. There, with the skyline shimmering though the cigar-smoke haze, Kilimnik shared a secret plan whose significance would only become clear six years later, as Vladimir V. Putin’s invading Russian Army pushed into Ukraine.
Well, the fact claim in the passage you quoted is that Kilimnik shared a plan. I suppose the when and where of this plan first being discussed is the new reporting here, but the existence of the plan itself isn't. The article itself gives you the link:
As described by Kilimnik in messages and memos over the next several months, the envisioned autonomous republic in the east would nominally remain part of Ukraine; with Yanukovych as its leader, it would then negotiate a settlement. But what became known as the Mariupol plan was, as Manafort later acknowledged to prosecutors, a “backdoor” route to Russian control of eastern Ukraine — remarkably similar to what Putin has now declared accomplished through his gun-barrel annexations.
Many of the other fact claims in the piece likewise either have links or mention their sources, which the curious and interested can follow and read on their own. The Senate Intelligence Committee report, for instance, is referenced several times -- you can find links to all five volumes here.
Hope that's helpful in clearing up "where are the facts in this piece"
Oh, pleeeeeeze. This is just dime store novella territory. Where are the facts in this piece by a wannabe Earnest Hemingway? This is for sure going to Netflix.
Kilimnik cleared customs at Kennedy Airport at 7:43 p.m., only 77 minutes before the scheduled rendezvous at the Grand Havana Room, a Trump-world hangout atop 666 Fifth Avenue, the Manhattan office tower owned by the family of Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Shortly after the appointed hour, Kilimnik walked onto a perfectly put-up stage set for a caricature drama of furtive figures hatching covert schemes with questionable intent — a dark-lit cigar bar with mahogany-paneled walls and floor-to-ceiling windows columned in thick velvet drapes, its leather club chairs typically filled by large men with open collars sipping Scotch and drawing on parejos and figurados. Men, that is, like Paul Manafort, with his dyed-black pompadour and penchant for pinstripes. There, with the skyline shimmering though the cigar-smoke haze, Kilimnik shared a secret plan whose significance would only become clear six years later, as Vladimir V. Putin’s invading Russian Army pushed into Ukraine.
Do you doubt that Kilimnik met Manafort in the Grand Havana Room? Do you think it's fiction writing?
"Men, that is, like Paul Manafort, with his dyed-black pompadour and penchant for pinstripes."
The reporter can't help it if the protagonists act like stock characters. That's what these guys are like.
Relatedly, that's my biggest complaint about Trump -- he's just not believable as a character. He looks, talks, and acts like a spiteful liberal caricature of the worst excesses of the Republican party. It's simply not credible that he's a real person and not a cartoon somehow brought to life.
I can't help you, that's for sure.