Also, this tweet, from Margarita Simonyan, the editor in chief of the state-funded TV network RT:
“Aaa, the CIA report is out! Laughter of the year! Intro to my show from 6 years ago is the main evidence of Russia’s influence at US elections. This is not a joke!”
Posts
104 comments:
Twitter.
Aaa, laughter of year, indeed.
Margarita is "close" to Putin. And she is hot and sassy. The CIA certainly noticed her.
Thanks to US intelligence, her very low profile in the United States is now over. Another Russian objective achieved.
Half the "report" is about her and RT. What the fuck?
Reminds me of teaching my little brothers and sisters to play cards. They'd show their hands, but then get so mad if you asked if they had any 2s. "Mom, he looked at my cards!"
The same party that saw nothing wrong with Hillary putting all her classified emails on a home-brew server, and that basically used "password" as their password on the DNC and Podesta's computers is suddenly wanting to declare war on Russia, over computer "hacking." Hacks were involved in losing this election for Hillary, no doubt about that.
If Hillary was indeed the target of Russian espionage (phishing) and propaganda, it seems to me the long-range Russian strategy was more likely intended to facilitate the ascendency of the Sanders-Warren wing of her party over the establishment rather than to specifically aid Trump.
After all, much of the inculpatory information released revealed how the DNC establishment, the Clinton campaign and the media coordinated to rig the primary process against Sanders.
The underlying inconsistency of the intelligence report's assessment of Russian strategic intent is revealed in the “Annex,” which describes RT “Strategic Messaging” on behalf of Russian government “interests in areas such as foreign and energy policy.”
The content of that messaging is summarized in the report by several bullet points that read like a Bernie Sanders stump speech:
Occupy Wall Street. "Information warfare aimed at promoting popular dissatisfaction with the US Government. RT created a Facebook app to connect Occupy Wall Street protesters via social media. In addition, RT featured its own hosts in Occupy rallies.”
Civil Liberties. The United States as a "surveillance state" with “widespread infringements of civil liberties, police brutality, and drone use.”
Economic Injustice. “RT has also focused on criticism of the US economic system, US currency policy, alleged Wall Street greed, and the US national debt. Some of RT's hosts have compared the United States to Imperial Rome and have predicted that government corruption and "corporate greed" will lead to US financial collapse.
Anti-Fracking. “RT runs anti-fracking programming, highlighting environmental issues and the impacts on public health. This is likely reflective of the Russian Government's concern about the impact of fracking and US natural gas production on the global energy market and the potential challenges to Gazprom's profitability.”
Non-Intervention. “RT is a leading media voice opposing Western intervention in the Syrian conflict and blaming the West for waging "information wars" against the Syrian Government. In an earlier example of RT's messaging in support of the Russian Government, during the Georgia-Russia military conflict the channel accused Georgians of killing civilians and organizing a genocide of the Ossetian people.“
Of course, by suggesting that Russian interests are aligned with the left, instead of Trump, that's "McCarthyism."
I blame moose and squirrel.
These was a time when those on the left saw our tough stance on Russia as putting us at risk. Those same people saw the CIA as fomenting chaos in the world.
How times have changed.
It isn't a joke in the sense "no funny stuff" repeatedly voiced on command at the right moments, with an Asian accented English, isn't a joke in The Big Lebowski.
IT IS TWO* JOKES!!!!
*Two or more.
Basically, the Russian have adopted a Moe Howard philosophy toward American leftists:
"Every time they think, they weaken the nation."
James Clapper has ended his long career in intelligence by disgracing himself.
It's the personal consequence of his acquiescing in the gross politicization of intelligence.
Clapper thought that Hillary's "17 intelligence agencies" argument would help defeat Trump. When Trump won, however, Clapper had to "put up or shut up" by publishing this report -- which is an absolutely ludicrous report.
This is not a joke!
Sorry, Пропустите Симонян, but it really is a joke. Just it wasn't meant to be one!
"with an Asian accented English"? My recollection is German accented English. Are you implying Wong was in league with the Nihilists?
If your name is Clapper, this is likely to happen to you.
The 2016 election will forever be called the 2016 erection. The American people got the shaft from Trump himself (there will be continual tweats of buggery from him from now on), the Republican witch-hunt for a pulsating, throbbing, thrusting, & turgid email on Anthony's Weiner & laptop, and g-man James Comey's last minute syphilitic pre-erection demand to reopen the rectal examination of Ms. Clinton's email server's illegal orifice. Legal question: can an orifice be illegal? If James "The Clap" Clapper says there was Russian hacking and back-ending of the erection to help Trump, then it must be so. Certainly, Rusky Weapons of Ass destruction from a tainted erection have never been easier to find. At least, to prevent a fatal disease - read Trump - they could have put a condom on the erection tools in their bag of tricks. Trump said that he has no problem "down there." What about the rest of us up here who don't want to be legislatively raped by him? His first bill as president will be to make Russian names mandatory for newborns. Russia will then quietly annex the U.S.A. and get back Alaska that they sold in 1867. We will all be in for Trump's Folly over the next 4 years until the next non-flaccid erection in 2020, a year of perfect vision, and hard-ons for a new president.
Sorry, that was the wrong translation for "miss." I need to "reset."
Госпожа Симонян
Mark O said...
If your name is Clapper, this is likely to happen to you.
The Clapper Caper?
Clearly a classic, EDH!
Is this what intelligence briefings are like? I think I would start skipping them too. Trump badly needs someone in charge there that he can trust.
I'm not saying they're dishonest, I'm saying they have goals, and those goals may not match with the President's.
Ouch! The burn!! It hurts!!!
Our numerous Intelligence agencies haven't exactly covered themselves in glory over the past years.
The hen was guarding the hen house.
This is always the problem intelligence agencies face. They can't disclose the evidence they have or how they obtained it. So they say "trust us," which given their history it's tough to do. The nonclassified report that was released was embarrassingly weak. The report implies NSA, CIA, and FBI have actual evidence but the stuff in the report is crap.
The Russians are laughing at the Americans who are still falling for child level propaganda. They quit doing that 20 years ago.
The Nazis ways are still in power in secret parts of our "Intelligence" agencies. Courage to stop them is the only answer. And Russian Putin sees courage is Trump. That makes him happy. His people were literally trapped between Stalin and Hitler once. They will not surrender to that again.
You know, I never had any intention of voting for Trump. Until the progressive left started in with its never-ending BS, such that now, you cannot trust anything they say. It was the progressive left who led me and so many others to side with Trump. Now they are leading so many of us to actually side (at least in this instance) with the neo-Soviets, who just like the Communist Soviets of old would like to undermine the U.S.
Way to go.
I am regular American Joe, and I am telling you RT tweeterer is making good sense, and all workers should listen to her wise words.
George Washington! Apple pie!
The report focuses on Russia today and some public statements from the Russians to say that they hacked the election to help trump. Now this is technically evidence but it is a compete lack of proof. It's actually embarrassing that the government published this report because it is so weak and so obviously bs that we readers must assume that our intelligent agencies are run by a bunch of clowns.
This reminds me so much of the Bush years with the CIA selectively leaking to hurt that administration. The CIA has clearly taken sides from the get go. There needs to be a real house clearing with these birds and it's not a given trump is up to that job. Trump can't pretend to not notice this or think its an honest manner of opinion. The CIA is working hand in glove with the democrats and the media to de-legitimize trumps election. There is no other explanation as to what is going on.
The Propaganda Media is licking their wounds today. DJT just beat them from 4 directions at once on their fake news of Russian War drums.
All Media news has been temporarily shut down and now runs the 10 minutes of real Ft Lauderdale shooting news for hours of a continuous loop broken only with breaking news that it snows in winter. Meanwhile the Fake News Creators can struggle to catch up and conspire among themselves on the reset.
The purpose of the report is to give Democrats a reason to say that Trump is somehow not really the president.
What other purpose could the report have? Obama is a Chicago pol, who is dead set against even the most minimal checks against voter fraud. Suddenly he is concerned about the integrity of US elections?
In Cali, an illegal alien can attest that he or she is a citizen by checking a box on a drivers license form and instantly become registered to vote. And Obama is worried about the nogoodniks at RT?
This weak propaganda also shows the Democrat Party has withered away leaving behind a few 70+ years old and slow Congressional minority spokes people that try to swagger threats like it is still 2008 and Paul Ryan is the opposition.
Who will start asking, "What did the President know and when did he know it?" I don't think the Obama administration has thought this through.
Oh now it's getting embarrassing.
US intelligence capabilities used to be the envy of the world--admired by our allies, feared by our enemies.
SMH
I bet Trump is relaxing now, like Bonaparte the day after the battle of Austerlitz.
They haven't learned anything, popular vote aside, the tide has turned. The idealized democrat vs the unserious joke, And they lost. Where can they go? Full blown to the whambulance.
Bad people, those Putins. About a hundred years ago Ras Putin did it to the Russian royal family and now his great great great nephew Vlad Putin does it to the American royal family.
Because of fear she would start nuclear war,Russia used same propaganda and manipulation tactics in 2008 to keep Hillary out. No Dems made a fuss at the time because they were happy Obama beat McCain.
Blogger Trumpit said...
"The 2016 election will forever be called the 2016 erection.."
******************************
Just as the Clinton presidency is called the Johnson presidency.
@Phil: "These was a time when those on the left saw our tough stance on Russia as putting us at risk. Those same people saw the CIA as fomenting chaos in the world." They still do, except when Russia hurts the Dems and the CIA helps them. Their political convictions, like their ethics and linguistics, are entirely situational. Whatever helps the cause, goes. If Bush or Romney acts tough on Russia, do the opposite; if Trump acts nice on Russia, get tough. There is one constant: American national interests be damned.
"CLINTON THREATENS WAR WITH RUSSIA IN SPEECH:
To Russian ears, Clinton seemed determined in her speech to provide
this missing ingredient for bipolar enmity, painting Moscow as the
vanguard for racism, intolerance, and misogyny around the globe.
The nation Clinton described was unrecognizable to its citizens. Anti-woman? Putin’s government provides working mothers with three years of subsidized family leave. Intolerant? The president personally attended the opening of Moscow’s great mosque. Racist? Putin often touts Russia’s ethnic diversity. To Russians, it appeared that Clinton was straining to fabricate a rationale for hostilities.
We're playing chess and they're playing billiards.
The DNC and Podesta got hacked SO HARD that their own words and what they really thought was exposed. The horrors, the horrors.
Give me a break.
Putin is the guy who, in October 2013, controlled all of Ukraine through a puppet . . . and today has control of just Crimea and a small sliver of Donbass, at the cost of hundreds of Russian servicemen killed, with anti-Russians controlling the rest of the country. The biggest reduction of Russian influence since the breakup of the Soviet Union -- and yet the public perception isn't that he incompetently bungled the whole thing, but that he successfully "stood up" to the US.
And Putin's the guy who has pissed away millions of dollars on a propaganda outlet that's more-or-less ignored by everyone in the general public . . . and is now getting credit for controlling an American election for it.
If you assumed the Obama Administration was secretly being paid off by Putin to puff up his reputation, what exactly would they do differently? How extraordinarily incompetent have the Obama-Clinton and Obama-Kerry State Departments been that Putin looks like a mastermind?
The bureaucracy will say anything if the politicians threaten to cut their funding if they do not fall into line and say what they are told to say.
Sad!
I still don't u derstand how Russia supposedly tried to influence the election. It seems like they are conflating hacking with leaking.russia may have hacked but unless they were the ones that put the info into Wikileaks hands you can't argue they tried to influence the election. Because it was Wikileaks that put all the info out. Wikileaks says it's not the Russians. I don't totally trust assange, but there does appear to be a likely suspect as to who actually leaked the info. And he's a dead democratic operative who was murdereded shortly thereafter. (Which sounds awfully suspicious considering the timing of his death).
Then there's the fact that Podesta got himself hacked by clicking on a phishing email link. So how did THAT work. Did the Russians send the phishing email and was Podesta just really stupid? And did Russia get really luckY? Becaise thst sounds like routine hacking. Not some high level govt hacking job. Most people don't assume thst someone is actually going to click on a link in a suspected email. So, if Podesta was the cause of his own hack, and Russia was the sender of the email, then its an example of a self inflicted wound. And Russia doesn't seem all that tech savvy. I can't imagine too many govt agents who were trying to hack not us g that info since it was so easily gained.
But the fact that we have an alternate explanation for why Podesta got hacked that has little to do with "the Russians" maybe that's all the explanation that's required.
"Mark O said...
If your name is Clapper, this is likely to happen to you.
The Clapper Caper?"
Clap on. Clap off. The Clapper.
US intelligence capabilities used to be the envy of the world--admired by our allies, feared by our enemies.
Not since I was alive. The KGB was always the envy of every intel service with the British MI 5 ad MI 6 next.
The OSS was pretty good at some functions w[but was referred to as "Oh so Social." The CIA has had disaster after disaster. They were the biggest promoters of the "Soviet Union is powerful" school until it collapsed and then they were the principle promoters of the "Reagan had nothing to do with it."
Aldrich Ames was missed in spite of obvious signs for 20 years. Read Circle of Treason" for crissakes !
Colin Powell testimony to the UN at least had some arial recon and some graphics.
So let me get this straight: Clapper claims the Kremlin Commies clearly copped the correspondence from Clinton Committee computers in a cunning computer caper but couldn't crack the Clinton closet computer codes or corrupt the county counts?
parturient montes nascetur ridiculus mus
Who knew that Horace had Russian fans.
Jason for the win.
The CIA has always been a Democrat agency, Blackford Oakes notwithstanding. There's a famous quote to that effect (but apparently not famous enough for me to find in google) when someone (Ike?) suspected the agency had been infiltrated by the Russians and had someone check it out: "There are no communists in the CIA. Or Republicans".
The wakeup for me was the Iran assessment late in the Bush II admin. I don't see how *any* Republican could trust them after that.
Jason -- Catastrophically correct.
CIA lost credibilty in the Reagan years when they projected Soviet might forward immediately prior to the collapse of the USSR. They then failed to prevent 9/11 after he World Trade Center bombing in 1992. They provided the stage props for W's invasion of Iraq, they got Khalid Sheikh Mohammad to confess to everything short of being the second shooter on the grassy knoll in Dallas, and under Clapper routinely lied to Congress.
Trump should fire everyone at the CIA and start over. They are worthless bureaucratic drones.
Need to work "classified" into that.
H: C is for Clinton.That's good enough for me.
Our self-identifying deep-end socialists haven't checked in yet. Hmmm.
Sorry, shallow-end.
I beg your pardon.
Free vino at the galleries.
Blogger Michael K said...
The KGB was always the envy of every intel service with the British MI 5 ad MI 6 next.
Possibly true, about the KGB, but not because the Russkis are naturally better spies. The rise of Putin made it pretty clear that the KGB was the government of the old USSR. Not being answerable to political types or voters can make for great efficiency. The spy agency sets its goals and accomplishes them, using whatever resources it requires.
"There are no communists in the CIA. Or Republicans." Duncan Chaplin Lee disproves the first of those assurances.
Russkies enjoy humiliating Obama.
"There are no communists in the CIA. Or Republicans".
Except for Aldrich Ames.
... 17 intelligence agencies ...
??? WWW TTT FFF ???
And Aldrich Ames was no Republican.
@Roy, the Office of the Director for National Intelligence is responsible for coordination and oversight of all intelligence agencies. This includes, for instance, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which primarily makes maps.* The seventeen agencies that are (in theory) coordinated by the ODNI include the State Department, the Department of the Treasury, Homeland Security, the Department of Energy, the DEA, all four of the uniformed services (but not the Defense Intelligence Agency, which continues to be under the Department of Defense), and the ODNI itself.
Did you notice the hyphen in the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency? That was Jim Clapper's doing. As a rule of thumb in the federal government the more letters in your acronym the less important your agency is. When Clapper headed that agency he inserted the hyphen so the NGIA could become a three letter agency like the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc. It may seem petty, but it's true. Note also that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services calls itself the CMS, conveniently dropping one of the M's, so the practice is not confined to the Intelligence Community.
_____________
* And there's no sense saying that NGA does more than draw maps. It does, but not much more than that. I worked there briefly back when it was in Reston, VA.
@Big Mike,
Actually, I am somewhat familiar with the intelligence community. Think U2, Cuban Missile Crisis and Russian EMP testing.
The problem is that the community has become The Borg.
"Borg is a collective proper noun for a fictional alien race that appears as recurring antagonists in the Star Trek franchise. The Borg are a collection of species that have been turned into cybernetic organisms functioning as drones a hive mind called the Collective, or the hive."
It has grown to the point where nobody knows what's going on and what's more they don't care. Institutional loyalty is the primary mission.
You can get some idea of the problems from a book written in 1989 about Russian hacking of our military and defense computers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cuckoo's_Egg
The problems described in the book have gotten mush worse.
Russians, Soviets, Hitler, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Democrat corrupted Federal Agencies and other tyrants: "Tell A Lie Often enough and it becomes the truth".
The Hussein matter was seconded by British (And other?) agencies. What do they report about this "hacking"?????
Those WMD may have been hidden among other, Muslims, who will hang together against "unbelievers" even if at war with each other.
It's too bad that people can't remember it was the Democrats in power at the time who first started this nonsense about Saddam having weapons of mass destruction.
Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation's wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
-- President Bill Clinton (State of the Union Address), Jan. 27, 1998
"No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.""Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
I have a whole shit load of these.
Here are the Dems acting all tough. Too bad Bush fell for the CIA bullshit after the Clinton's left. I've noticed that Trump seems at least skeptical of our intelligence agencies, and for that I am encouraged.
So... after Lois Lerner we were supposed to believe US intelligence services had remained uncorrupted by eight years of Obama? It's a sad day when you can't tell if your government is being more or less truthful than Vladimir Putin's.
I am more mad at the CIA for dropping the whole WMD thing for political reasons when time has shown that they were right. That was the politicization, to align with Obama's worldview. Just like this.
The Daily Beat is now publishing articles on the KGB activities in America during the cold war: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/01/07/inside-the-kgb-playbook-to-recruit-americans.html
Next step, referring to the Russian Federation as the USSR, and we'll have Chuck Schumer on the senate floor, holding aloft a blank sheet of paper he insists contains the names of Soviet spies among Trump appointees.
When it is pointed how ridiculous he appears, Schumer will say that he is being subjected to McCarthyism.
Jason at 8:52 PM
So let me get this straight: Clapper claims the Kremlin Commies clearly copped the correspondence from Clinton Committee computers in a cunning computer caper but couldn't crack the Clinton closet computer codes or corrupt the county counts?
Completely correct.
"It's a sad day when you can't tell if your government is being more or less truthful than Vladimir Putin's."
It's a sad day when you can't tell that Trump is Putin's useful idiot.
It's a sad day when you can't tell that Trump is Putin's useful idiot.
It's a sad day when you forget to take your medications. Speaking of useful idiots... OWS and anti-fracking groups appear to have been bankrolled by Russia. I guess some things never change.
Michael K; The best intel service in the world - bar none - is the Israeli's. The Russians have turned native citizens into agents, but the Israelis have put Jewish agents into the command structures of several Arab militaries. The Arabs believe there are many more such agents and waste a lot of times and resources looking to uncover them. They also highly compartmentalize their military and intel attempting to minimize the effect of such agents. Every time something goes wrong for an Arab country, they blame Israel. Westerners laugh at such mindless knee jerk responses, but the Arabs really believe there are Jews hidden everywhere working to destroy them. The Russians only wish they were half that effective.
The poor CIA guys just need to stick with running their own winning candidate, like they did with the Magic Obama, altered records and all, but raised by CIA insiders.
Eisenhower warned him, but the new guy JFK still fell for their song and dance at Bay of Pigs. Which lead him into talking up plans for doing a Truman fires MacArthur on them, until his CIA Driver slowed to a stop in the prepared Dallas kill zone.
Then they fed the new guy, Bush Junior, enough Iraq misinformation and he chose to along with their War.
DJT has the courage to refuse playing the new guy believes the CIA bullshit game. This will probably end with DJT in a political kill zone called Impeachment for taking Russian money.
Soooooo, with all this Russia has always been out enemy and Putin is an evil SOB why exactly did Hillary approve selling them the uranium they used to upgrade and expand their nuclear arsenal? Is Hillary the real Russian mole?
Allen; there needs to be a distinction between WMD in general and nuclear WMD is particular. Saddam did indeed possess and use WMDs. Mustard gas and Sarin are considered WMDs. He used them against the Iranians, Kurds and Shiaite rebels. He did not have nuclear weapons. My personal favorite affirmation of Saddam's nuclear weapons program was from John Kerry himself. In July of 98, he guaranteed from the floor of the Senate that Saddam would have a nuclear weapon in 5 years if he was not stopped. Said with a suitable serious voice and a deeply thoughtful look on his face, of course.
Soooooo, with all this Russia has always been out enemy and Putin is an evil SOB why exactly did Hillary approve selling them the uranium they used to upgrade and expand their nuclear arsenal? Is Hillary the real Russian mole?
You are simply a liar on several fronts. First off, we did not sell Russia uranium. A Russian company through mergers and acquisition became the owner of uranium mines in the U.S. (why do you hate capitalism so much?) representing about a fifth of U.S. reserves. Secondly, the Russian nuclear arsenal has been shrinking and they have plenty of their own weapons grade uranium and plutonium that they can scavenge from outdated weapons (just like we do, we have not produced plutonium in over 30 years and yet we have plenty of it).
"...based on confidence and assertions..." Anybody else think about Climate Change too?
I am more mad at the CIA for dropping the whole WMD thing for political reasons when time has shown that they were right.
Another lie.
They weren't right. We found a few thousand shells that were overlooked when Saddam destroyed his chemical arsenal. There was no active WMD program and no stockpile that could be used.
"Assembling the means to manufacture weapons of mass destruction." JR114 or somesuch.
Fredo said...
First off, we did not sell Russia uranium. A Russian company through mergers and acquisition became the owner of uranium mines in the U.S. (why do you hate capitalism so much?) representing about a fifth of U.S. reserves.
...
So what you're saying is, Hillary sold American uranium to the Russians.
I guess your ability to talk yourself into things is commendable, but it doesn't work on other people.
Steven said: Putin is the guy who, in October 2013, controlled all of Ukraine through a puppet . . . and today has control of just Crimea and a small sliver of Donbass, at the cost of hundreds of Russian servicemen killed, with anti-Russians controlling the rest of the country. The biggest reduction of Russian influence since the breakup of the Soviet Union -- and yet the public perception isn't that he incompetently bungled the whole thing, but that he successfully "stood up" to the US.
The idea that Yanukovich was Putin's "puppet" and that Putin "controlled all of Ukraine" is complete nonsense. If that were true, Yanukovich would not have spent most of his presidency pursuing an association agreement with the EU, and only agreed to shelve the EU deal - without actually committing to join Russia's customs union instead- after Putin made him a far better offer. Yanukovich wasn't pro-Russian, he was pro-Yanukovich.
Saying that Putin "bungled the whole thing" implies there was some different course of action he could have taken, which would have preserved his (actually very limited) power in Ukraine. But other than sending tanks to Kiev, there wasn't.
It's true that if Putin hadn't persuaded Yanukovich to abandon the association agreement, he presumably would have served out the remaining year of his term (and then likely been defeated for re-election), and neither the Maidan coup or separatist civil war in Donbass would have happened. And assuming it's true that "hundreds" of Russian servicemen have been killed in the Donbass conflict (although, despite the Nemtsov Report claim of over 200 killed, it's more plausible that the number is 0-100), then those lives would not have been lost. However, Russia would also not have been handed a justification to reunite the naval base and Russian majority in Crimea with the motherland, which most Russians would probably consider worth the sacrifice of a few hundred troops (after all, they supported the war in Chechnya, in which at least 8,000 troops were killed).
Also, although Putin wanted Ukraine in his custom's union for symbolic reasons, Ukraine isn't actually any great prize: It's a literally Third World country, whose GDP is smaller than Kazakhstan's, and less than 7% the size of Russia's. The only part with any tangible value was the naval base in Crimea.
Like every neocon project, the "Maidan Revolution" (US-encouraged, violent coup against a democratically elected president) has been an absolute disaster: Ukraine has experienced a collapse of per capita GDP, the permanent loss of Crimea, a civil war in which thousands of have died, and the loss of Donbass (until Kiev is willing to enact constitutional reforms and grant it autonomy). Full EU membership won't happen for at least 25 years, if ever, and in the meantime Ukraine has alienated itself from it's largest trading partner. And corruption wasn't much worse under Yanukovich. But at least now Ukraine has a government willing to ban Russian TV, movies, and books, so maybe that makes it all worth it.
So what you're saying is, Hillary sold American uranium to the Russians.
Hillary didn't sell anything to anybody. The State Department did not object to the sale. Granted, it does look bad that the company made a significant donation to the Clinton Foundation, but looking bad is a long way from proving a quid pro quo. Your obsession with Clinton conflicts rings kind of hollow when you are willing to give Trump a pass on all his.
I am not, and never have been, a fan of the Clintons.
If you're going to hide behind simplistic sophistry, I will agree that Hillary herself did not sell anyone any uranium, because she did not own any uranium, or uranium mines.
Effectively, however, she allowed the sale to go through, which is prima facie preposterous, so now the Russians have our uranium, and Hillary has their money. Agree or disagree: the Russians would not have our uranium if Hillary did not have their money.
But yeah, is there a receipt, probably not.
"The College Fix story is new, but the petition is 3 weeks old." December 23 to January 6 is 2 weeks, professor. Embarrassingly bad math.
Agree or disagree: the Russians would not have our uranium if Hillary did not have their money.
I don't know and neither do you. Would the sale have been approved if Hillary was not Secretary of State or the company had not donated to the Clinton Foundation, no one knows? Also, note that the Clinton Foundation and Hillary are two separate entities, and while the Clintons control how the money from the foundation is used it is illegal for them to self deal from the fund. Of course that is exactly why Trump is in trouble with his foundation (that and he also did not register it to accept money from third parties).
There is no shortage of weapons grade uranium or plutonium, both us and Russia have more than we know what to do with.
Freder the helpless: "Also, note that the Clinton Foundation and Hillary are two separate entities, and while the Clintons control how the money from the foundation is used it is illegal for them to self deal from the fund."
You are a child.
Other potential Freder insights: Tammany Hall was a civic organization!
"...both us and Russia have more than we know what to do with." Apparently the Russians disagree with you on this. And wasn't your position that the uranium was not actually sold to the Russians?
Apparently the Russians disagree with you on this.
No. The Russians have plenty of weapons grade uranium (as do we). Neither they nor we need to make any more for a long, long time (hundreds of years at the very least). In fact, we were paying to help them dispose of their excess stock until recently. Uranium does have other uses besides in nuclear weapons.
You are a child.
Do you have any evidence of self dealing from the Clinton Foundation? The records are public (unlike those of the Trump Foundation). If you have any proof of self dealing, which is illegal, please provide it.
Trump and the Trump Foundation are separate entities. Heard something similar to that recently. Can't remember where.
Nice attempt at sidestepping. I never said the Russians had enough uranium. I said they disagreed with you on the question of their belief they had enough. If they believed that, why waste millions of dollars obtaining more?
The good news is that it's now clear we can save money by shutting down the CIA since doing so won't harm national security.
If they believed that, why waste millions of dollars obtaining more?
Because they plan to mine it, refine and enrich it (for nuclear medicine or power plant use), and sell it? You really don't understand the concept of a market, do you.
One thing they don't need to do is enrich it to the 99+ percent purity needed for a nuclear bomb. They have plenty of that (679 metric tons), in fact they have not produced weapons grade uranium since before 1989. (the U.S. ended production in 1964). Also, Russia has about 9% of the world's uranium reserves (507,800 metric tons) while the U.S. only has 1% (62,900 metric tons).
Sheesh, do a little research and you might not show that you are commenting on something you know absolutely nothing about.
Trump and the Trump Foundation are separate entities.
Yes they are, but he has violated the rules of the Foundation by self dealing (which he has admitted).
So why not just refine their existing stocks? Not all of that is weapons grade. And the stack they are buying won't give them a monopoly. Which goes to my point that the Russians do not agree with you about their having enough uranium. Why spend millions acquiring more of something you already have enough of. You don't really understand the concept of running a business, do you? If they really believed they had enough, they would be expanding their market share to sell off some their abundant stocks now on hand.
And, once again, I never said the Russians did or did not have enough uranium. You made that claim. I said the Russians did not agree with your assessment. Just admit it, you don't have a clue what the Russians believe.
Other potential Freder insights: Tammany Hall was a civic organization!
Al Capone was a used furniture salesman. Said so right on his business card.
If a significant transaction...could the Russians be trying to corner the market, with both economic and strategic implications?
If a trivial transaction...could it just have been the medium of a bribe, and was just done in units of U instead of oil or vodka?
Hint: 20% of US reserves is significant. At that it's a pity she was bought so cheap. But she doesn't wipe her ass without getting paid. She may not know IT but she knows quid pro quo.
Lots of evidence that I wouldnt bother to cite because you and everyone has seen it. DoS meetings and such were pay to play. Why WOULD she let this happen WITHOUT wetting her beak?
I read the latest report and even if everything that is alleged is true, it boils down to:
1. The Russians phished and Podesta took the bait, and they released the emails they got. No evidence of forgeries or changing anything.
2. There was some hacking around unnamed State/local election boards, but nothing that might affect the vote.
3. Not even an allegation of contact between Russia and Trump or anyone in his campaign, so no possibility of quid pro quo.
4. Some senior Russians were happy that Trump won/Clinton lost. No reason given as to why, but given the liberal melt-down after November 8, they hardly need to have thought Trump would be a pushover to think that Clinton losing was something a large swathe of the US could not deal with.
#4 aside, any actions against Clinton could easily be explained by the fact that almost everyone expected her to win, and actions to discredit her would discredit the incoming government--a Russian agenda that is already generally understood throughout Europe.
Compare this to what Obama did in Israel in 2015 (working through OFA and others) or in the UK before the Brexit vote. And that NSA was monitoring Merkel's and other allied leaders' phone use.
The only thing out of the ordinary is they made public the DNC stuff. Otherwise, we should be more upset at ourselves than anything else the Russians are alleged to have done.
That is IF you believe the Russian govt was behind all this--which CIA and FBI see as "highly probable", but NSA only as "moderately probable." Given how this administration has suborned and politicized CIA and FBI, I think of the three, NSA is the one to listen to.
Also, the Administration has taken a pass on much more serious hacks, esp the OPM hack. By doing so, it no doubt encouraged others, including Russia.
This almost a big nothing. Publicizing it as they have done, this mainly shows the Obama people using a thin stick and pliant media to delegitimize Trump and in so doing, further Putin's agenda of casting doubt on Western governments.
I am sooooo disgusted, and Obama can't get out of town fast enough.
Freder wrote: No. The Russians have plenty of weapons grade uranium (as do we).
and now they have even more thanks to Hillary and Obama.
You know who also has more? Iran. Thanks to Russia bu also thanks to Obama.
Post a Comment