America’s Election Meddling Would Indeed Justify Other Countries Retaliating In Kind

Highlighting the U.S.’s long history in meddling in other countries’ elections is not “whataboutism,” but rather a highly germane point to understanding the context for the allegations of Russian meddling in Election 2016, Caitlin Johnstone observes.

Former CIA Director James Woolsey in 2015. (Christopher Michel, Flickr, CC BY 2.0)

By Caitlin Johnstone

There is still no clear proof that the Russian government interfered with the 2016 U.S. election in any meaningful way. Which is weird, because Russia and every other country on earth would be perfectly justified in doing so.

Like every single hotly publicized Russiagate “bombshell” that has broken since this nonsense began, Mueller’s indictment of 13 Russian social media trolls was paraded around as proof of something hugely significant (an “act of war” in this case), but on closer examination turns out to be empty.

The always excellent Moon of Alabama recently made a solid argument that has also been advanced by Russiagate skeptics like TYT’s Michael Tracey and Max Blumenthal of The Real News, pointing out that there is in fact no evidence that the troll farming operation was an attempt to manipulate the U.S. election, nor indeed that it had any ties to the Russian government at all, nor indeed that it was anything other than a crafty Russian civilian’s money making scheme.

The notion that a few Russian trolls committed a “conspiracy to defraud the United States” by “sowing discord” with a bunch of wildly contradictory posts endorsing all sorts of different ideologies sounds completely ridiculous in a country whose mainstream media spends all its time actively creating political division anyway, but when you look at it as a civilian operation to attract social media followers to sock puppet accounts with the goal of selling promoted posts for profit, it makes perfect sense.

James Corbett of The Corbett Report has a great video about how absolutely bizarre it is that public dialogue is ignoring the fact that these trolls overwhelmingly used mainstream media like the Washington Post in their shares instead of outlets like RT and Infowars. As a scheme to acquire followers, it makes perfect sense. As a scheme to subvert America, it’s nonsensical.

There is currently no evidence that the Russian government interfered in the U.S. election. But it is worth pointing out that if they did they had every right to.

What About Whataboutism

“Whataboutism” is the word of the day. At some point it was decreed by the internet forum gods that adding “-ism” to a description of something that someone is doing makes for a devastating argument in and of itself, and people have hastened to use this tactic as a bludgeon to silence anyone who points out the extremely obvious and significant fact that America interferes in elections more than any other government on earth.

“Okay, so America isn’t perfect and we’ve meddled a few times,” the argument goes. “So what? You’re saying just because we’ve done it that makes it okay for Russia to do it?”

Actually, yes. Of course it does. Clearly. That isn’t a “whataboutism,” it’s an observation that is completely devastating to the mainstream Russia narrative. If it’s okay for the CIA to continuously interfere in the elections of other countries up to and including modern times, it is okay for other countries to interfere in theirs. Only in the most warped American supremacist reality tunnel is that not abundantly obvious.

Every country on earth is absolutely entitled to interfere in America’s elections. America is responsible for the overwhelming majority of election interferences around the world in modern times, including an interference in Russia’s elections in the nineties that was so brazen they made a Hollywood movie about it, so clearly an environment has been created wherein the United States has declared that this acceptable.

It amazes me that more people aren’t willing to call this like it is. No, it would not be wrong for Russia to interfere in America’s elections. Yes, what America did to Russia absolutely would make a proportionate retaliation okay. Of course it would.

Ridiculous Double Standards

Imagine this:

A guy in a cowboy hat runs into a bar and starts punching people. Most of them just rub their sore jaws and hunch over their drinks hoping to avoid any trouble, but one guy in a fur cap sets down his vodka and shoves the man in the cowboy hat.

The man in the cowboy hat begins shrieking like a little girl. All his friends rush to his side to comfort him and begin angrily shaking their fists at the man in the fur cap.

“Hey, he punched me!” says the man in the fur cap.

“That’s a whataboutism!” sobs the man in the cowboy hat.

Can you imagine anything more ridiculous?

Seriously, how do people think this is a thing? How does anyone think it’s legitimate to respond to my article about a former CIA Director openly admitting that the U.S. still to this day interferes with elections around the world babbling about “whataboutisms”? What a doofy, indefensible monkey wrench to throw into the gears of political discourse.

Yes, obviously by asserting that it is acceptable for the CIA to meddle in other countries’ elections, the US has created an environment where that sort of thing is acceptable. If Americans just want to embrace their American supremacist bigotry and say “Yeah we can do that to you but you can’t do it to us cuz we have big guns and we said so,” that’s at least a logically consistent position. Crying like little bitches and behaving as though they’ve been victimized by some egregious immorality is not.

Channel 4 News reported on the research of the Institute for Politics and Strategy at Carnegie Mellon University’s Don Levin back in November, writing the following:

“Dov Levin, an academic from the Institute for Politics and Strategy at Carnegie Mellon University, has calculated the vast scale of election interventions by both the US and Russia.

“According to his research, there were 117 “partisan electoral interventions” between 1946 and 2000. That’s around one of every nine competitive elections held since Second World War.
The majority of these – almost 70 percent – were cases of U.S. interference.

“And these are not all from the Cold War era; 21 such interventions took place between 1990 and 2000, of which 18 were by the US.”

If Americans don’t like election meddling, they need to demand that their government stops doing it. As long as it remains the very worst offender in that department, the U.S. is entitled to nothing other than the entire world meddling in its elections.

I shouldn’t even have to say this. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Don’t dish it out if you can’t take it.

Caitlin Johnstone is a rogue journalist, poet, and utopia prepper who publishes regularly at Medium. Follow her work on FacebookTwitter, or her website. She has a podcast and a new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. This article was re-published with permission.

153 comments for “America’s Election Meddling Would Indeed Justify Other Countries Retaliating In Kind

  1. John-Harrison
    March 1, 2018 at 05:57


  2. Mild-ly - Faceitous
    February 27, 2018 at 10:20

    Abe– “Davis’s latest spin effort is understood in the context of gross Israeli interference in US electoral politics, pro-Israel Lobby influence exercised within both the Clinton and Trump campaigns, and ever-increasing Israeli meddling in US foreign policy.”

    False Teachers and Their Destruction

    But there were also False Prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies… Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their lust these teachers will exploit you with referential misdirection.
    While your short biography of Lanny Davis is unequivocally true, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with the well timed caustic release of e-mails by Director Comey.

  3. Boris n Natasha
    February 22, 2018 at 16:53

    I did. It’s crap.

  4. Mild - ly - Facetious
    February 22, 2018 at 12:55

    The deniers here with their made up minds, by refusing to consider Davis’ findings, have rendered a verdict without examining the evidence. [definition of prejudice]

    I contend, the evidence demands a verdict — or else, like so much FABLED or COVERED UP American history, we easily swallow the lie – accept the deception and thusly, our history is written.

    The Unmaking of the President 2016:
    How FBI Director James Comey Cost Hillary Clinton the Presidency
    By Lanny J. Davis

    A longtime Washington insider argues that former FBI Director James Comey’s letter to Congress, sent just before the presidential election in 2016 was a key determining factor in Trump’s win: “Compelling criticism…lapsed Trump supporters might well open their minds to this attorney’s scholarly, entirely convincing proof of the damage done” (Kirkus Reviews, starred review).

    During the week of October 24, 2016, Hillary Clinton was decisively ahead of Donald Trump in many polls and, more importantly, in the battleground states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. Then FBI Director James Comey sent his infamous letter to Congress on October 28, saying the bureau was investigating additional emails that may have been relevant to the Hillary Clinton email case. In The Unmaking of the President 2016, attorney Lanny J. Davis shows how Comey’s misguided announcement—just eleven days before the election—swung a significant number of voters away from Clinton, winning Trump an Electoral College victory—and the presidency.

    Davis traces Clinton’s email controversy and Comey’s July 2016 appearance before Congress, in which he said the Clinton email matter was effectively closed. From that moment until Comey’s late October letter to Congress, Davis says, Clinton was destined to be elected president by substantial popular and electoral vote margins. But the decision to send his October 28 letter, so near to the election, not only violated long-standing justice department policies but also contained no new facts of improper emails at all—just pure speculation. Davis shows state by state, using polling data before October 28, and on election day, how voter support for Hillary Clinton eroded quickly. He proves that had the election been held on October 27, Hillary Clinton would have won the presidency by a substantial margin.

    Despite so many other issues in the closing days of the campaign—Trump’s behavior, the Russian hacking, reports of Clinton momentum in marginal states such as Georgia, Arizona, even Texas—after the October 28 Comey letter, everything changed. References to “Clinton emails” and “new criminal investigation” dominated media coverage virtually round-the-clock through election day November 8. Now Davis proves with raw, indisputable data how Comey’s October surprise cost Hillary Clinton the presidency and changed American history in the blink of an eye.

    • February 22, 2018 at 15:42

      Mild – ly – Facetious,

      Of course, the only one who’d know the truth is James Comey, but it’s fascinating to ponder what Mr. Comey’s (formerly on the Board of Directors at global banking giant HSBC) response might look like if he were asked, “Was your decision to release the October 28 letter guided by direction coming from the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland?” We are offering up the possibility that, per standard operating history, the biggest money and power on Earth rigged the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

      The film “All the Plenary’s Men” by John Titus on YouTube might help shed some light on the subject.


    • Abe
      February 23, 2018 at 15:29

      Lanny J. Davis is a longtime pro-Israel Lobby operative.

      Davis was treasurer for the rabidly pro-Israel former Senator Joe Lieberman’s Reuniting Our Country PAC.

      Davis also served as senior advisor and spokesman for the Israel Project, a Hasbara agency that produces propaganda handbooks

      In 2009, Davis did damage control for Democratic congresswoman Jane Harman of California over the American Israel Public Affairs Committee leak story. NSA wiretaps reportedly intercepted a 2005 phone call between Harman and an agent of the Israeli government, in which Harman allegedly agreed to lobby the Justice Department to reduce or drop criminal charges against two employees of AIPAC in exchange for increased support for Harman’s campaign to chair the House Intelligence Committee. The NSA transcripts reportedly recorded Harman ending the phone call after saying, “this conversation doesn’t exist.”

      It was reported that Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General at the time of the phone call, blocked Justice Department lawyers from continuing the investigation into Harman (in spite of the alleged crime) because the Bush administration “needed Jane” to support their warrantless wiretapping program, which was soon to be revealed to the public by The New York Times.

      Davis got busy spinning for the hawkish pro-Israel shill Harman. In June 2009, Harman received a letter from the Justice Department declaring her “neither a subject nor a target of an ongoing investigation by the Criminal Division.” Though the espionage charges were later dropped on the two employees from AIPAC, against the wishes of the FBI, Harman did not get the chair for the foreign intelligence committee.

      Davis served as special counsel to President Bill Clinton from 1996 to 1998. After leaving the White House, he worked as a lobbyist for the nation of Pakistan prior to the attacks of September 11, 2001.

      In numerous interviews, Davis refers to Hillary Clinton as his “best friend” Some of Davis’s fawning emails to Hillary, including a 945-word entreat to the then Secretary of State, were released to the public as part of the Clinton email controversy.

      Davis’s latest spin effort is understood in the context of gross Israeli interference in US electoral politics, pro-Israel Lobby influence exercised within both the Clinton and Trump campaigns, and ever-increasing Israeli meddling in US foreign policy.

  5. Boris n Natasha
    February 22, 2018 at 12:06

    Use of the word interference brings up an important distinction. Non-interference is a peremptory norm of international law. But what the norm pertains to is coercive interference. Expressing an opinion on, say, elections, is a very different thing than interference: it’s a right granted by Article 19 not just to Americans but to Russians and in fact everybody in the world. Whether published by printing press, social media, bots, sockpuppets, or any other medium. That awkward fact drives statist idiots up the wall.

  6. February 22, 2018 at 11:38

    Anyone who doubt that the U.S. “meddles” in other countries’ elections need only check out the definitive KILLING HOPE by Bill Blum (who reports for Truthdig). The book covers from just after WWII to early 2000s. U.S>”meddling” goes from the SAME Propaganda alleged to be done by Russia to FUNDING “opposition” political parties & candidates in OTHER countries to training at the U.S>Army’s Ft. .Benning, GA) and arming PARAPMILITARY DEATH SQUADS (in Central America: EL SALVADOR, GUANTAMALA, CHILE,COLOMBIA).The U.S> has overthrown or outright ASSSINATED leaders of other countries it did not want. CHILI’s Salvador Allendei is only one example.In IRAN, the U.S> took out their leader Mossedeq (who ahd the audacity to think that IRAN’s OIL should bhe used to benefit IRAN’S PEOPLE. The U.S.replaced him with the Shah of Iran who repressed all olitical dissent (leaving only fundamentalist Islam untouched), incarcerated, tortured and killed opponents for 25 years until the Iranian Revolutionthat the U.S> government STILL wants to punish Iran for today. On the HOMEFRONT, there IS “meddling” in U.S. elections and it’s NOT by Russians:it’s by a far right-wing that knows it can only win by stacking the deck & cheating. Since the 2000(S)eletion of G W Buish, Republicans have engaed in PURGING VOTER ROLLS of LEGAL VOTERS (mostly Black & Latino), Voting Machines OWNED BY REPUBLICAN COMPANIES can “flip”vote (only need 1% to 2% to impact close elections) and there’s NO paper trail to insure your vote was cast as intended. In urban neighborhoods,v oting sites are CLOSED at the last minute or have too few machines. VOTER ID REQUIREMENTS are made & then DMV offices CLOSED. On a larger scale BIG MONEY & BIG MEDIA pre-determine what candiates we get to “choose” from. FACT: Big Media gave Donald Trump #2 BILLION in FREE air-time which had far MOREimpact than a 100 Russian Facebook activists. It’s obvious WHY Republicans are rigging elections–but, WHY have DEMOCRATS ALLOWED IT since 2000?

  7. February 22, 2018 at 01:13

    The issue really is, why DON’T we talk about what meddling the US does? What kind of reasoning justifies hundreds of cases of US meddling, choosing to overlook it and even justify it? That is really psychopathy. “Two wrongs don’t make a right” is highly inadequate rhetoric to excuse the US record of nefarious activities since at least 1953.

    • Skip Scott
      February 22, 2018 at 09:00


      I agree. The MSM, being a shill for our intelligence agencies, doesn’t want to talk about our interference in other countries elections. The Woolsey interview was a fluke, and I bet dollars to donuts that he got spanked by his higher-ups after the show. It’s like Schumer’s “six ways from Sunday”, a slip-up that gets dropped into the memory hole like a hot potato by our MSM. After all, we’re the “exceptional Nation”, dontcha know. Rules only apply to the “little” people.

    • Private Citizen
      February 22, 2018 at 12:36

      My comment that “two wrongs don’t make a right” with regard to the ‘whataboutism’ inherent in the article’s title (America’s Election Meddling Would Indeed Justify Other Countries Retaliating In Kind), clearly isn’t apologetics for “the US record of nefarious activities”; it is condemnation of all sides engaging in election meddling.

      I’m not sure how you managed to reach the conclusion that my comment “is highly inadequate rhetoric to excuse the US record of nefarious activities since at least 1953.”

      It doesn’t make any sense.

      • Skip Scott
        February 22, 2018 at 16:59

        First of all, it has yet to be proven that the Russian GOVERNMENT was involved in any meddling whatsoever. Secondly, Russian citizens on the internet have the same right to the freedom of speech regarding their views of US politicians as I do to share my views of Putin’s Russia. Thirdly, it is a case of grossly FALSE equivalence even if Russia did interfere in light of the history of our CIA interfering in multiple countries elections, instigating coups, engaging in assassinations, and supporting dictators. In light of our subversion of the 1996 Russian election, I would argue that some comeuppance would be justified. “Two wrongs don’t make a right”, but three lefts do.

  8. Private Citizen
    February 21, 2018 at 17:20

    “I once had to deal with young coworkers sure that I must support wrongful US foreign policies because I was much older. They saw the US as a “gerontocracy” when in fact most governments are.”

    An example of the kind of fallacious ‘whataboutism’ that the comments section of this equally fallacious article is riddled with:

    “They saw the US as a “gerontocracy” when in fact most governments are.”

    Whether or not most governments are ‘gerontocracies’, has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not the US is a ‘gerontocracy’.

    I struggle to imagine what point the posters of comments such as this are attempting to make.

    Something smells fishy.

    • Typingperson
      February 22, 2018 at 00:27

      Yep. Your logical reasoning skills.

      Love that CN is getting more exposure these days, but the trolls do poison the climate.

      • Private Citizen
        February 22, 2018 at 13:32

        Care to elaborate?

  9. Private Citizen
    February 21, 2018 at 16:53

    Two wrongs don’t make a right, they make two wrongs. That is the essence of the ‘whataboutism’ fallacy.

  10. Private Citizen
    February 21, 2018 at 16:47

    “America’s Election Meddling Would Indeed Justify Other Countries Retaliating In Kind

    Highlighting the U.S.’s long history in meddling in other countries’ elections is not “whataboutism,” but rather a highly germane point to understanding the context for the allegations of Russian meddling in Election 2016, Caitlin Johnstone observes.”

    The entire premise of this article is logically flawed, as illustrated by the title and opening sentences.

  11. michael crockett
    February 21, 2018 at 16:24

    Caitlin Johnstone you killed it with this article. When I read ” Crying like little bitches and behaving as though they`ve been victimized by some egregious immorality”, I almost died laughing. Love the satire. We just need for America to get the memo: The Emperor Has No Clothes. Thank you Caitlin. Please keep up the good work.

  12. Private Citizen
    February 21, 2018 at 15:37

    It is fallacious to dismiss interference in elections by external actors, based on their relatively lower expenditure; when the fact remains that efforts were undertaken to influence elections by external actors.

  13. Bob In Portland
    February 21, 2018 at 15:33

    Please do an examination of Mueller’s career. Mueller is a coverup artist for the CIA. Remember, he ran the investigation of 9/11 and avoided mentioning the CIA’s involvement in that, along with the House of Saud. He overlooked CIA money laundering, gun running and cocaine distribution through Panama during the trial of Manuel Noriega. There was another drug case, in the SF Bay Area that had CIA fingerprints all over it, which he steered through the federal courts without a mention of the CIA.

    Going back to him being a young federal prosecutor Mueller turned down Patty Hearst’s request for a pardon. You ask What does Patty Hearst have to do with Patty Hearst and the SLA? I suggest you read Mae Brussell’s dissection of the whole stinking mess here:

    Follow the course of how Donald DeFreeze, a petty criminal and informant for the LAPD, became Cinque. Look whose fingerprints are on him.

  14. Private Citizen
    February 21, 2018 at 15:28

    It is actually ‘whataboutism’ to claim that Russian meddling in US elections is justified based on similar actions by the US. The logical response would be to condemn all countries who meddle in the elections of other countries, rather than engaging in ‘whataboutery’.

  15. Bill Goldman
    February 21, 2018 at 14:19

    How could any government effectively interfere or meddle in US elections when whoever is in charge of the US government at any particular moment is part of a bi-partisan elite establishment which used to be called “tweedledee/tweedledum”?

    • Bob In Portland
      February 21, 2018 at 15:41

      The point of this “Russia-hack” okeydoke is to prepare the US for its war with Russia, probably in the Ukraine. Because their preferred candidate, Hillary, didn’t grab the ring it’s been turned on Trump because, in reality, the only major difference between him and Hillary is his lack of interest in war. So the CIA’s interference in the US elections is just another propaganda campaign, like rape camps in Yugoslavia or weapons of mass destruction or invading Afghanistan to capture bin Laden. Or the Gulf of Tonkin, or those medical students in Grenada.

      Considering the CIA’s track record for dishonesty I’m not sure why so many Democrats embrace every half-assed innuendo coming out of Langley.

  16. Mcmike
    February 21, 2018 at 09:42

    Of course some of the commenters are certainly paid trolls employed by security or partisan factions, or are reactionary dupes influenced by paid trolls or planted fake news… so much irony it makes your head spin

  17. MrK
    February 21, 2018 at 03:56

    Former CIA Director Woolsey became Chairman of Freedom House after Bill Richardson stepped down.

    They are also both on Jacob, 4th Lord Rothschild’s Strategic Advisory Board of Genie Oil And Gas.

    • February 21, 2018 at 18:18


      You’re getting warmer …

  18. February 21, 2018 at 00:01

    At the time of the Dulles brothers’ misdeeds, particularly the psychopathic Allen of the CIA, the world wasn’t onto US psy-ops and assassinations, but plenty of great investigative reporters have uncovered and published the ugly truths since then. If the UN had ever intended to fulfill its noble goals the US would have been sanctioned years ago.

    Elizabeth stated the truth, that both parties commit electoral fraud. Electronic voting machines guarantee that elections will be perverted.

  19. Drew Hunkins
    February 20, 2018 at 22:33

    If you have time, be sure to visit OpEdNews and read the recent debate between Feffer and Mate.

    It’s a stunning and extremely disturbing display of how smart liberals — Feffer — can very cleverly distort and obfuscate in order to push a propaganda line against the independent Putin admin.

    This debate will leave you fuming. Feffer actually goes to the extent of calling Putin a racist and that Putin’s fomenting racism in the United States. I’m not making this up.

    It is a must-read for all CN enthusiasts. To make the Captain Obvious point: the liberal Russia-gaters are currently pulling out all the stops and are slickly peddling each and every argument they can muster in each and every forum possible. We may be fighting a losing battle.

  20. Mild - ly - Facetious
    February 20, 2018 at 21:29

    Finally, this chart from The New York Times shows the amount of FREE AIRTIME Trump has received from media, vs. purchased ads, compared to all other candidates, including Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders:

    So why the tremendously lopsided imbalance? Perhaps Trump himself explained it best, nine years ago:

    “One thing I’ve learned about the press is they’re always hungry for a good story, and the more sensational the better. […] if you are a little different, or a little outrageous […] if you do things that are bold or controversial, the press is going to write about you.”

    The Donald may not “do politics,” as he likes to say, but he definitely does the media.

  21. Mild - ly - Facetious
    February 20, 2018 at 21:17

    How Trump Won —

    Stunning chart shows how Donald Trump has dominated media coverage of the 2016 race

    Allan Smith
    Mar. 15, 2016

    Donald Trump on TV.
    It’s no secret that Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump receives a ton of attention from the press.
    But just how much is stunning, especially when compared to his campaign budget.

    The New York Times’ The Upshot compared the total amount of “bought” and “earned” media since the start of the campaign season for all of the major Democratic and Republican candidates.

    Bought media encompassed political advertising while earned media encompassed “news and commentary about his campaign on television, in newspapers and magazines, and on social media,” The Upshot wrote. The site used a media-tracking firm to estimate the value of Trump’s “earned” coverage.

    And the difference for Trump was staggering:

    Earned media typically dwarfs bought media for presidential candidates — but nowhere near the level of Trump. With almost $2 billion of value estimated in earned media, Trump’s total is more than double that of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner who had the second highest on The Upshot’s list. Trump has received more than six times the estimated earned media value of the No. 2 Republican candidate on the list, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

    And Trump has spent a fraction of the money his fellow combatants have paid for advertisements. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush spent more than eight times as much money on advertising as Trump — and he’s been out of the race for nearly a month. Cruz, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich have all spent more money than Trump on ads. Even New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who dropped out of the race in early February and has since endorsed Trump, has spent nearly twice what the GOP frontrunner has to date on bought media.

    While much of the attention Trump has received has been far from positive, but, as Trump wrote in “The Art of the Deal,” he’s a strong believer that “good publicity is preferable to bad,
    … but from a bottom-line perspective, bad publicity is sometimes better than no publicity at all. Controversy, in short, sells.”

    • Anon
      February 20, 2018 at 21:36

      This commenter “Mild – ly – Facetious” (several spellings used) is spamming and should be considered for blocking as a troll.

  22. Mild - ly - Facetious
    February 20, 2018 at 20:21

    mike k – – – “Poor Hillary”…………


    That amorphous, and typically void reply, mike k, is disturbingly typical of the shallow mindedness (easy believe-ism) that prevails thru out the American apathetic mentality. They who, as lemmings, join and follow “the crowd”; i.e. the accepted narrative of some nebulous “moral majority” and become incapable of accepting the unexpectedness of Naked Truth — or the possibility of opening new realities amidst the gullible/easily led, non-critical thinkers which fall victims to those who claim the power to Create Reality.

    How, Mike, does/can your “Poor Hillary” remark speak to the reality-of-events that were set in motion AFTER Comey’s – as I wrote, OCTOBER SURPRISE release and statement vis-a-vis the Clinton emails?

    The context of the below link isn’t an algebraic equation nefariously intended to divert or confuse, or change your mind, Mike — if you’ll recall my past comments, I voted for Bernie Sanders, I deplored the dirty tricks employed by the DNC against Bernie, I was with the Sanders supporters that shouted against Hillary.

    Your “Poor Hillary” reply, Mike is, in effect, a cheap and very insincere cop-out – a choice to ignore and/or refusal to question and/or renounce the ACCEPTED narrative of real-time events that have given us a Donald Trump presidency.

    As I said in the comment that you replied to, the facts as meticulously accrued by Lanny Davis become a Legal Right to question the Legal Authority of James Comey, head of the FBI, to release those Clinton e-mails at that-specific-point-in time, when he, James Comey, knew, they contained NO CLASSIFIED LANGUAGE…?

    Finally, mike k. It’s Impossible for You to Know,
    Until you Know All the Facts of a matter.
    All else is opinion based on sentiment
    Southern Sentiment/Perception/Opinion
    Let us , against our President and Into
    A Deterioration and Devastation and
    Decomposition of The Union of States
    As the South fought for their RIGHT

    To Own Slaves/Breed Slaves/Sell Slaves
    As a “United States” privilege of Ever
    Enduring Capitalism via Militarism written
    within the creed, ” Damn the Torpedoes!”
    Full Speed Ahead, (John Paul Jones)
    Your “poor Hillary” remark, mike k, is
    adjacent to the Practice of Stoning or the
    Burning of witches by OPINION/Not Fact

    By all I’ve said in this particular comment, I mean to say, the stir and echo of opinion and fact all serve to distort the truth.

    There can be no truth without Fact all else is impulse – like the shooters with assault rifles which take lives indiscriminately and without a Heart. And with no sincerity except for their own Self-Privileged, Self-Licensed, Self-Approved desire for Self-Actioned achievement of their own Impossible Dream.

    That Trump epitomizes and optimizes the grasp of/for the impossible dream — while his “base” cheers and approves his tweets and accumulating world-wide personal financial conquests, the eyes of the world despise / recognize the hypocritical deceit they collectively see as the Demise of the America they’ve known as the symbol of (political) Democracy.

    >>>> PLEASE ABSORB THE FULL VIDEO w/o pre-structed biases

    • Mild - ly - Facetious
      February 20, 2018 at 20:34

      I beg you all to watch this video – as relates to “RUSSIAN” Involvement in our election… .

    • Anon
      February 20, 2018 at 21:32

      Your attack on Mike is poorly reasoned, based on nothing at all, and indicates corrupt motives and values.
      This comment should be removed as a pointless personal attack, and “Mild – ly – Facetious” (several spellings used) should be considered for blocking as a troll. He has done a lot of this sort of thing.

  23. Bo
    February 20, 2018 at 19:29

    “If Americans don’t like election meddling, they need to demand that their government stops doing it.”

    Line of the day!

  24. HLT
    February 20, 2018 at 18:49

    One of the most obvious US interferences (and devastating interferences) in recent history is, of course, the interference in the Ukraine lead by Victoria Nuland: I can only conclude that she probably not only encouraged the far right activists in the Ukraine to overthrow Yanukovich once an agreement was reached with the EU and the opposition on 21st Feb. 2014, she ordered it. Simply, because if the agreement had worked (which would have been very likely because it was fair to all sides) the case of the neo-cons and their liberal side-kicks (quoting here Robert, we miss you a lot, Robert! Fortunately your allies have decided to maintain your webside) would have been dead and buried.

  25. Monte George Jr.
    February 20, 2018 at 18:36

    Am I the only one who sees this indictment as a golden opportunity? The document is an open admission that we (USA) view the subject (alleged) activities as illegal and reprehensible. Since the USA is far and away the World’s worst offender in this regard, now is the time for a world leader (Vlad, this is your cue) to propose that the opposing sides meet and forge agreements to mutually surveil and curtail such activities. Win-Win! How could we refuse?

    • Sam F
      February 20, 2018 at 21:26

      There have been suggestions of joint action to suppress cyber hacking, and the diplomatic point is good.

      • Bob In Portland
        February 21, 2018 at 15:45

        Great, as long as I’m the one who’s doing the repressing. Otherwise, no.

    • Typingperson
      February 22, 2018 at 00:21

      Putin has been proposing a joint cybersecurity agreement / committe with USA for years. Obama rebuffed him. Repeatedly.

  26. ToivoS
    February 20, 2018 at 17:11

    Caitlyn begins with :There is still no clear proof that the Russian government interfered with the 2016 U.S. election in any meaningful way.

    Of course there is no proof that they interfered in any meaningful way. That is irrelevant. Some Russians did try to interfere. That is all that matters to the US, the indispensable nation. Being indispensable, almost by definition, means that the US has rights that no other nation possess. Recall, that Obama repeated on numerous occasions that the US was the indispensable nation. As Ray Mc Govern pointed out that the antonym of indispensable is dispensable. This means, I guess, that according to Obama all nations are dispensable except of the US.

    Given that mind-set it is only natural that the US believes that it has the right to interfere in other nations politics but that it not right for any foreign entity to interfere in ours (of course, Israel has been given an exception).

    I first discovered this special place that the US thinks it has on the world. stage. During the Cuban Missile Crises in 1962 I was arguing as a 17 year old in my high school civics class why it was OK for the US to have nuclear armed bases ringing the Soviet Union and China and Russia was not allowed to have one in Cuba. That did not go over well then.

    In any case, this mind set is firmly established in the US psche. We are indispensable, the rest of the world are not. What we do is therefore not comparable to what any other nation do. This whataboutery thing is a short hand for the mindset. As my father used to say: “do what I say, not what I do”.

  27. Tuttle
    February 20, 2018 at 16:50

    Exceptionally well put!

    • Joe Tedesky
      February 20, 2018 at 17:54

      Hey most of us are American, so what else would you expect? (sarcasm intended)

  28. Realist
    February 20, 2018 at 16:49

    If you take a close look at American leadership, Caitlin, you cannot avoid the reality that it is mostly a gerontocracy–a government largely composed of old guys in the their 70’s, the flower of the boomer generation. Apparently, we never grew up and still act like of bunch of decrepit adolescents, a collection of greying overweight Peter Pan’s whining and whinging about not getting our ill-considered way on everything. And, who’s to be our replacements when the inevitable happens, in spite of mass wishful thinking? A generation of even worse bellyachers: I give you Suzie Snowflake and company.

    • Joe Tedesky
      February 20, 2018 at 17:52

      You see Realist I being the type to try and always use our weakest strength as a source of our advantage, and almost always being a person who would rather see the glass half full, see this up and coming generation has being just perfectly fine, but a youthful fine needing a little or a lot more of fine tuning. It’s for this reason I try my best to influence my grandchildren with plenty of historical and current events opinions that may lead them in the right direction. This is the job I feel us older people can contribute too.

      I also agree it’s time that the old folks in Washington finally hang it up, because they have done enough of damage inside of their careers already, and plus they are just to damn old. Joe

    • Anon
      February 20, 2018 at 21:23

      I once had to deal with young coworkers sure that I must support wrongful US foreign policies because I was much older. They saw the US as a “gerontocracy” when in fact most governments are. They assumed people their age could not be part of the problem. The “boomer” generation contained far more “liberals” than their predecessors and successors, but very few of those liberals could rise to power, as has been true in every recent generation in the US. The wrongs of the US are not due to a generation nor to age in power, they are due to the corruption of institutions, the corruption of mass culture, the empowerment of the lowest characters.

      • Joe Tedesky
        February 20, 2018 at 23:01

        Hey Anon I remember being in boot camp when Nixon got elected in 1968. Most of us bootcampers were under 21 and could not vote, but almost all of us in that winter of 68 would have voted for Tricky Dicky because he said he would get us out of Vietnam…but, later on we would be reminded of how Nixon had specified ‘ground troops’ out only not total withdraw.

        I also remember that we of my generation of who couldn’t vote thought that if we could that we would change the world….well here we are 50 years later, so I’ll ask you Anon, how’d we do? Joe

      • Realist
        February 20, 2018 at 23:45

        Look at it that way, if you like. The old guard, the survivors in the struggle for power from our generation were the ones with the least to offer, the ones least amenable to real change, the ones most dedicated to maintaining the societal structure of insider power and privilege, the ones bound and determined to fossilize our foreign policy in a never-ending cold war with some essential enemy, be it Russia, China, Iran or some other country perhaps based entirely upon convenience. The same ilk of loud strident whiners who demand “safe zones” rather than free speech, and social order rather than options, are waiting in the wings to take our place, almost imperceptibly infiltrating a functionally ossified gerontocracy trapped in a steady state dedicated to its own self-preservation rather than the needs of the many. The “youth movement” of the 60’s did not save us, did not make things better, neither will any youth movement from the 90’s. The sad truth is that whenever any of these people finally float to the top and get their tickets punched at Davos, they’ve already been culled from a very large herd by selective forces and have probably long since adjusted their thinking at a very deep level to survive in that rarified environment. Power changes people. Club membership confers not only privileges but attitudes. Wanna bet that Hillary Clinton of 1968 would not have been very complementary of Hillary Clinton of 2016?

  29. broompilot
    February 20, 2018 at 16:23

    Thank you for this article. Several months ago people started tossing this “whataboutism” nonsense in my face. I was stunned that they saw this as some sort of legitimate and logical response. And they were very smug thinking they found an answer to their hypocrisy conundrum regarding election meddling. There is a more technical term for it, which escapes me at the moment, but within the rules of a formal debate (not our silly presidential kind) It is in fact a thing. However, it has no value or purpose in the investigation of a matter.

  30. Marshalldoc
    February 20, 2018 at 15:36

    I usually agree with Caitlin’s positions but, in this case, she’s completely wrong. In essence, she’s advocating the law of the jungle as opposed to the rule of law. If, hypothetically [and I don’t believe it is the case], Russia did ‘interfere’ in our electoral process (and there are laws that criminalize such actions) then it is wrong and should be adjudicated by a legal process and, if proven, punishments administered. That the U.S. has engaged in such criminal behavior for decades (probably since the founding) without suffering consequences does not mitigate the illegality… it only proves the lack of legal process with which to hold violators accountable (same can be said about our illegal invasions & regime-change ops around the world dating from when the Pilgrims sent smallpox-infected blankets to their 1st Nations neighbors). But, in a democracy, people get the government they deserve [not my original thought] and the lawlessness with which our government operates is not a reflection on others, it is a reflection upon ourselves and our willingness to tolerate such thing being done in our names; so long as there’s no unacceptable blowback. By Caitlin’s logic, we should be encouraging the CIA to fudge Russia’s upcoming elections rather than insuring the CIA’s leadership is sent to jail.

    • mike k
      February 20, 2018 at 15:41

      You sure had to stret———-ch a long way to find a way to misunderstand Caitlin’s piece.

      • Marshalldoc
        February 21, 2018 at 12:02

        How so?

  31. February 20, 2018 at 13:38

    What is extraordinary is that our media, knowing this, continues to shout exceptionalism. It just another version of the same thing. We reserve the right to ignore borders and violate international law, unless it is a slam dunk that the law is on our side. We use the UN when it suits us, we ignore it when it doesn’t..

    The ugly American has just gotten uglier, except now our bullying makes foreign government officials scared to say so less they are threatened with missiles or sanctions. We don’t have full spectrum dominance, but we are now at a point that we are as close as we will ever get.

    • mike k
      February 20, 2018 at 15:46

      Bullies always pretend to be a lot more fearsome than they are, they bluff a lot. Trump and the America firsters are like that. Their bark is much bigger than their bite. The loudest barkers wait for someone else to do the fighting for them; chicken hawks.

  32. Mild - ly - Facetious
    February 20, 2018 at 13:02

    For many months I’ve been telling friends & acquaintances that Russian “meddling” was not the Specific Performance that determined Mr. Trump’s election victory. That interference in no way,shape or form can compare to the “October Surprise” bomb dropped on the American electorate by then FBI Director James Comey when he illegally released those (now proven) innocuous Clinton e-mails.

    The man Trump fired for not “protecting” him is the very singular person that opened the door to his electoral victory. What has been my ongoing opinion is now indisputable — thanks to the painstakingly meticulous research conducted by Lanny Davis. His Q&A guest appearance on Washington Journal this morning was (for me) extremely pleasantly informative. His research and conclusion creates a manifestly clear and wide the gap of negative influence between Russian Interference and what the press did IN AMERICA with those (now proven) innocuous e-mails.

    Take a look&listen — link below:

    • mike k
      February 20, 2018 at 15:37

      Poor Hillary…………

      • mike k
        February 20, 2018 at 15:48

        Except for those millions she stole from the rest of us.

        • Lee Campbell
          February 21, 2018 at 02:29

          Regardless of one’s opinion of the candidates, the CSPAN segment linked to in Mild-ly’s post is quite
          interesting- even Lanny Davis,who one may think would be all-aboard with the Russia-gate narrative,
          dismisses that story, instead attributing her loss to James Comey’s announcement of the re-opening
          of the FBI investigation of Clinton’s email practices. Davis supports his thesis with a comprehensive
          examination of pre-election polling results.
          Readers of this site should know that the dominant narrative is BS, so I am curious about some posts
          seeming to dismiss outright the CSPAN segment Would someone kindly explain what I am missing?

  33. DAnna Sviridova
    February 20, 2018 at 12:58

    The simple overlooked, ignored, unexamined & unmentionable truth is the election meddling of the Electoral College. Killery won the vote and tRump got the crown lawfully. The USSA blames Russia. What a pathetic reason to instigate even more war to please the MIC.

    • Skip Scott
      February 21, 2018 at 10:36

      DAnna Sviridova-

      I made this point about a week or so back in another article’s comment thread, and I was rightfully corrected (if I remember correctly) by Miranda. She pointed out that we have no idea who the victor would have been without the presence of the electoral college because 40 pct of the populace chose not to vote. Many are so disenchanted with the corruption of our political system they opt out of the process. Without the electoral college (and other corrupting aspects) it’s anybody’s guess who would have won.

  34. Hank
    February 20, 2018 at 12:44

    Thank you ?

  35. Putin Apologist
    February 20, 2018 at 12:40

    It had to have been Russian meddling. Why else would the American people have rejected the wishes of the establishment?

  36. mike k
    February 20, 2018 at 12:15

    Seeing proof where there is actually no proof, is similar to thirsty souls lost in a vast desert seeing an oasis of plentiful water where there is none. Those who are desperate to prop up Russiagate begin to see a nefarious plot behind a simple ad on Facebook offering puppies for sale. And magically, accusations become proofs…………

    • mike k
      February 20, 2018 at 12:46

      Reminds of the Salem witch trials – to be accused was automatically to be guilty. “Why would people accuse you if you had not done something wrong?”

  37. Michael Kenny
    February 20, 2018 at 12:07

    This is panic! With Putin openly interfering in the Italian election, it is no longer possible to deny Russian government interference in the US election. Of course, all this started in Ukraine. Those Americans who defend Putin are essentailly seeking to justify his actions in Ukraine. Thus, using US interference in other countries to justify Putin’s atack on Ukraine amounts to blaming the victim. Ukraine didn’t interfere in Russia’s affairs. Where did Putin get the right to interfere in Ukrian’e affairs? Indeed, where did Americans get the right to give away other people’s countries. As with all the pro-Putin camp, Ms Johnstone’s argument is essentailly that because A violated B’s rights, C is entitled to punish(!) A by also violating B’s rights!

  38. jimbo
    February 20, 2018 at 11:05

    It is interesting how Caitlin says now how the interference not “meaningful,” unlike not long before when I and others, Caitlin too, I imagine, adamantly insisted nothing happened because there was no solid proof. Well, something did happen. And there is proof. At the urging of a lawyer friend I finally read the entire indictment and clearly, according to US law, there were quite a few actual crimes committed by some Russians, and if one had to ascribe a motive to what they did, sowing discord in the US body politic does the trick. The crimes described in the indictment are clearly political, as opposed to say, commercial. You have to read it if you don’t catch my meaning. Objectively, Russia-mania or not, the US government is right to pursue these criminals. These Russians lied on their visa applications and broke some other laws to punk our politics and, if Caitlain is right, maybe made a few rubles on the side. Since their crimes did involve the election and politics – speculating here – I am tending to think the Kremlin may have been involved, that someone in the government, maybe Putin, was at least aware of what these people were doing. My point is to remind us keep our heads. I know they’re driving us crazy with their nutso witch hunt but let us not get super Russo-phiilic while the rest of the country and world gets Russo-phobic. I too get carried away with frustration at how they are amping up the Russia thing but from now on I will endeavor to read the documents and not rely on the snarky bits of gleaned, cherry picked and then mocked parts of the info. Oh, man, that’s what Stephen Colbert and those awful -formerly cool – TV comedians do, but so do we, they’re such easy targets. Peace.

    • mike k
      February 20, 2018 at 11:16

      Don’t lose your balance trying to be too balanced, Jimbo. May we all travel the difficult road to peace together.

    • David G
      February 20, 2018 at 11:29

      Two things:

      • First, possibly a pedantic point, but you are by my count the umpteenth person since late last week who has said the Mueller indictments constitute “proof” that the Russians did such and such. Here’s a quick lesson in the law: indictments are *accusations*, not proof of anything. I’m not saying DoJ doesn’t have evidence to back them up, but you haven’t seen it yet: you’re just contributing to the media echo chamber bootstrapping these *accusations* into so-called proof.

      • Second, on the fallacy of focusing on what aspects of “Russia interfered” may or may not be proven, while taking for granted the paranoid, functionally very right-wing framework within which the political/media establishment is operating, please see my comment above which begins, “This Caitlin Johnstone post …”.

    • Martin - Swedish citizen
      February 20, 2018 at 12:04

      You have a point: if the charges are proven, those Russians are guilty of some crimes.
      To be objective and trustworthy, it is crucial to take this and everything else into consideration and weigh the respective importance of the different pieces, to create a full picture.

      What happened to the DNC and Wikileaks in the latest development. Are the “Russians” cleared by the FBI?

      Caitlin Johnstone is right in comparing US meddling with the alleged Russian one and the different magnitudes of them. The bar comparison is splendid! If true, it serves the US right. No endorsement of either party, just that what you saw you must harvest.

      • Martin - Swedish citizen
        February 20, 2018 at 12:06

        Saw* —> sow

    • JoeD
      February 20, 2018 at 12:15

      Actually no they didn’t. Mistakes on visa applications do not constitute “fraud” on the State Department.

      The rest of Muller’s argument, the now-discredited “honest services” theories, was overturned by the Supreme Court for unconstitutional vagueness in a case brought before it. (

      There’s nothing here other than the death of the First Amendement.

    • Rob
      February 20, 2018 at 16:07

      “…sowing discord in the U.S body politic…”.?! You cannot be serious. The discord was present long before any Russians got involved, and their contribution to heightening it could only have been immeasurably small. We Americans don’t need outsiders to make us hate and distrust one another.

      • Joe Tedesky
        February 20, 2018 at 17:12

        Rob you are right, and rather than we rant on about all this craziness, we solid Americans would do well to call the Russia-Gate psy-ops to what it really was, and that it was a projection of American guilt bestowed upon Vladimir Putin and every Russian, which is what this whole thing is all about, because the nuclear arms industry needs a armed up bogeyman with nukes.

        Like when we were kids and did something bad and got caught, and then you blamed it on the 1500 lb elephant who came in and ransacked your room. Although the elephant wasn’t your enemy the elephant served the purpose of getting you off the hook, as the elephant was your diversion. Maybe a child would think that by blaming the elephant that this would also make their bad look reasonably good, or adequate enough to what everyone else is doing.

        Well at least that’s the way I see it, and Rob yes we Americans are doing a well enough of a bang up job of it all on our own to screwing up our democracy, so as we really didn’t need anyone’s outside help, neither from the Russians, nor the English, or help from any concerned Israeli…whoops I forgot Israel yes. Joe

  39. mike k
    February 20, 2018 at 11:05

    Please keep coming back Caitlin. We love you and the work you are doing.

  40. mike k
    February 20, 2018 at 11:04

    What can be so frustrating is that the truth of our situation is so simple, and so apparent, and yet in talking to one of our deluded fellow humans, we feel this enormous distance opening up between what we can see so clearly, and their mind created illusions. The gap between us is made of all those days and years, and difficult work that enabled us to see through the illusions that our friend is still trapped within. We can invite them to walk on this path to real knowing, but we cannot force them, nor can we walk it for them.

    • Sam F
      February 20, 2018 at 21:10

      Very well said, and very true.

  41. Joe Tedesky
    February 20, 2018 at 11:02

    When it comes to the arrogance of Woolsey’s statement of how we Americans by Woolsey’s standards are granted special needs permission to interfere into other countries elections, it is with this same outward American exceptionalism that makes me idly nervous to ‘Nuclear 1st Strike’ capability’s and America’s inward conceded belief that this first strike if there is to be one should be an American 1st Strike right, or am I reading too much into this? Seriously think about what the advantage of a 1st Strike could mean, and then think indispensable.

    John Wilson is right we are giving to much credit to the deception of this whole affair. Rather than us call this affair Russia-Gate we should be calling it ‘Hillary/Debbie Cheated-Gate’, or something like that. This title would clear up any confusion to what this all has really been all about. Who says nobody loves Hillary? Well the National Security State does, so there.

    • mike k
      February 20, 2018 at 11:10

      Right on Joe. Hubris makes possession of the ring of power ultimately dangerous. To take pride in saying that we might be just crazy enough to use it, proves how unfit we are to wield such dangerous power. Children playing with dynamite………

      And children become evil, at that.

    • Dave P.
      February 20, 2018 at 22:06

      Joe, you are reading into it rightly, Exceptional America having the God given right to make this 1st strike. That is why Ruling establishment has been hell bent on developing this First Strike capability for some time now – capability to execute complete KO. They are not thinking about finding solutions to an affordable decent healthcare for the citizens. or other important domestic social/economic issues needing to be resolved.

      I used to think that the Nation’s Political and Military leaders, and other Government high level functionaries have families and are sane, and are doing all this belligerent talking for political reasons. I don’t think like that any more. I am coming to believe that our political leaders and others in power in Washington are not sane. Whatever were the ulterior motives, diplomacy, dialog, and some decency was still there in our relations with Soviet Union up to the Reagan Presidency. It is all over now. The leadership starting with Bill Clinton’s administration, if not earlier, are committed to imposing this Full Spectrum Dominance on this planet – no matter whatever the costs are.

      It is going to be a very rough ride for the entire World beyond the West. I wonder what is going on in the minds of political and military leadership in Russia. They must be busy preparing the defenses like they have been doing it just about their entire History.

      • Joe Tedesky
        February 20, 2018 at 22:50

        Dave consider how at this exact moment in various capitals of the world where there are people chosen to sit and delve into the likelihood that an adversary may launch a missile at them at anytime and how would these analysts interrupt but; cypher-warfare linked to nuclear response, sanctions upon sanctions for what both sides know are lies, heckling Lavrov by CFR members while the Russian Ambassador speaks WTF, questionable assassinations of ambassadors, military choir, Putin’s chauffeur, passenger plane exploding over the desert killing 274 Russian civilians, doping charges on Russian Olympiad’s, registering Russian news agencies under foreign espionage acts, and on and on. So with all of that, how would you analyze your odds up against a 1st Strike Attack coming from the hegemonic hellcat USA? Then consider we know they are thinking that, and then we grope around looking into how we would best analyze that….it’s total madness, and with that madness it is best but only the steady and sane should be left to be in charge. And by all means hang a big flashing sign at the entry saying, ‘No exceptional nor indispensable allowed’. Joe

  42. David G
    February 20, 2018 at 09:08

    This Caitlin Johnstone post gets at an extremely important point that deserves more attention from those of us unimpressed by all the Russia-gate hysterics:

    Even if (and I am in no way conceding this) some of the less mutually inconsistent elements of “Russia interfered” (and the rapidly fading “Trump colluded”) blizzard of allegations end up being substantiated, it would *still* all just be part of the sharp-elbowed norm of how countries interact here on gradually broiling planet Earth, and not a particularly shocking example of it at that – it would be something to be investigated, analyzed, discussed, and responded to rationally.

    There is nothing in the allegations, even if somehow substantiated, that justifies the belligerent, paranoid, “contaminating our bodily fluids” obsession that the media/Beltway establishment is using to crowd out all rational thought in favor of promoting its perilous, pre-existing anti-Russia program.

    There is an analogy to what this same establishment was pushing on us precisely 15 years ago:

    It was impossible to know, as the invasion of Iraq inexorably approached, that there were literally zero chemical or biological weapons in that country. (We knew they used to be there, because the West supplied them back in the 1980s.) The case being made that they still existed was obviously fraudulent at the time, but even I was slightly surprised that post-invasion the U.S. couldn’t locate even a single rotting crate of mustard-gas shells in the whole damn country.

    But it bothered me that so much of the public debate over the war was devoted to whether the dreaded “WMDs” existed, and no attention was paid to the insane, warlike paradigm in which it was tacitly agreed the U.S. should respond in the event the oddly elusive little buggers did indeed exist.

    And so it is today: regardless of how the mundane facts of Russia-gate pan out, the U.S.’s real problems lie within its borders – largely, in fact, between its citizens’ ears – not in Moscow.

    [Whew, well I feel like I’ve earned by Kremlin pay check for this morning! ^_^]

    • FobosDeimos
      February 20, 2018 at 16:12

      If anyone harbored genuine doubts about whether or not Saddam still had WMD (especially chemical weapons) in March 2003 (in spite of the clear and totally credible reports of the UN inspectors, after many visits on the ground), any such doubts should have been erased at the precise moment when the US forces entered Iraki territory in March 2003. I still remember the clueless American soldiers (men and women), and the myriad “embedded journalists” shown on TV wearing regular military uniforms and equipment, absolutely unprotected against a hypothetical “chemical attack”, most of them smiling because thay had been promised that it would be a cakewalk. No gas masks at all, no special protective garment; practically a trip to the beach. The only answer for such a display of arrogance was: that the US Government and the Armed Forces of course knew perfectly well that there were no WMD at all. Powell knew, Bush knew, the NYT and Washington Post knew. So, as of approximately March 21, 2003, if the MSM had been a tiny bit honest, we would have started to read, watch and hear loud and clear reports questioning the WMD narrative, as there was no sign of them existing. However, the MSM continued parroting the same lies for years, and many of them still refuse to tell the truth.

  43. mike k
    February 20, 2018 at 09:05

    Caitlin, I’m sure you realize that your critics in this case are in a delusional state about Russia. In such a case, we cannot expect them to be rational, or even to see what is plainly staring them in the face. It’s like trying to tell a brainwashed Moonie that his/her guru is a phony. It’s like JC said, they have ears but they can’t hear what you are saying, or see what is so apparent to your eyes. As deprogramers discovered, it is almost impossible to get through to these people. It’s no use getting angry with these folks; they have a very real cognitive block on this issue. As with life long racists, you will not be able to change their minds in any short time frame, and not without openness on their part, which is severely lacking. One of the tragedies of our time is that it is easier to brainwash someone, than it is to undo that conditioning. We might be able to avert the extinction of humans that is approaching even more rapidly every day, if someone could find a way to change people’s minds in a short time………….

    • Annie
      February 20, 2018 at 13:34

      You are so right about that. On CNN the article below was posted, along with a video. Those that pushed Russia-gate, like CNN, and other mainstream media now have to save face. Those so called Russian trolls will not be extradited to this country, no court case, no definitive determination of the truth, so truth is no potential problem for the media. They can continue their story of lies. Now they’re saying the Troll factory is owned by someone very close to Putin. Of course those Americans who bought into this story will continue to be believers, since they need to believe there country can do no wrong, which is what abused children often believe, since truth then becomes a threat, undermining their sense of security even though it is based on lies. .

      Trump is helping to undermine US democracy. That’s just what Russia wants
      Stephen Collinson Profile
      Analysis by Stephen Collinson, CNN
      Updated 11:15 AM ET, Tue February 20, 2018

      • February 20, 2018 at 17:13

        Two things must be done by president Trump to stop this disinformation hoax from becoming a tragedy of nuclear conflict. I am no Trump fan but should he imploy these two strategies he may save the nation and world. One a pre-inditement pardon of Julian Assange and have him testify on the true origin of how he obtained the DNC e-mails. Two use a back channel to Moscow and have Putin/Lavrov convince the owner of the indited company to turn himself in to US authorities and stand trial. Mueller would then be Sh—ing bricks as he would have to provide proof for his charges which we all know he has none. These two things would finally put a stake through the heart of Russiagate and destroy the credibility of the perpetrators for years to come.

        • Annie
          February 20, 2018 at 17:34

          freedom lover, we wouldn’t let it happen. Perhaps foreign news sources have a more honest approach on this issue and they will further recognize we are unworthy of any trust, and we will lose influence on political decisions that affect the rest of the world.

        • February 20, 2018 at 19:45

          There will be no US pardon of Assange, because the lack-of-intelligence community wants him muzzled, preferably in some dark cell buried deep. The newest campaign is the one wherein a slew of posts from a private Twitter account for Wikileaks is being touted as revealing how they wanted a GOP victory because it would mobilize the Democrats. This is then merged with the emails allegedly from Assange to Trump Jr. to show Wikileaks, and by extension Assange, were part of the Great Conspiracy to Deny the Anointed Her Throne.

          I think we need to be clear about this entire Russian-conspiracy fantasy. It is intended for one purpose—to keep all eyes off the fact that both political parties are and have been for decades engaging in real election fraud. It provides them with a wedge should too many progressives win in the primaries and/or the general in November to contest those victories in the name of “Russian interference.” Why else would those trustworthy souls at DHS have already announced there’s a very great possibility that will happen RIGHT BEFORE THE PRIMARIES START?

          The establishment and the media tried using the the same blackout technique applied to the Sanders campaign, only to have the candidates being blocked take very effectively to social media. So, then, suddenly, we’re seeing study after study and seeing social media exec after social media exec telling us how dangerous social media are to our ability to think, and warning us we should just get off it right now before we’re all brain-dead.

          Lately, I’m seeing more and more hit pieces on progressives in the media, viciously skewed to the point of outright disinformation. I expect to see more of it as the year continues. The fact is, we who detest that our government is in the employ of the plutocrats and corporations are at war, and the sooner we understand that and act accordingly, the better chance we have of fixing this mess.

          • Skip Scott
            February 21, 2018 at 10:26

            Spot on Elizabeth!

        • backwardsevolution
          February 21, 2018 at 00:11

          freedom lover – yep, take the fight right to them, call their bluff. The only problem is that half of the country wouldn’t believe Assange, and Assange probably wouldn’t reveal his sources. But I like your idea and spunk.

          Someone said the other day that Trump is one of the few people who could have put up with the chaos of Russiagate, and that he is just letting it all unravel as it will.

  44. Tom Welsh
    February 20, 2018 at 08:59

    This is a great and badly-needed article, because it shines a bright spotlight on the one thing the US establishment doesn’t want to talk about: its assumption of uniqueness, indispensability, and exceptionalism.

    It is indeed the case that the unspoken assumption is, “But we are different!” Always.

    For Japan (accidentally, by the way) to attack an American base before declaring war and kill 3,000 Americans is “a day that will live in infamy”. Yet FDR, who uttered those ringing words, had looked on approvingly 37 years before when the Japanese did exactly the same thing to the Russian fleet at Port Arthur!

    For a handful of foreigners to fly aircraft into American buildings and kill about 3,000 people was justification for the USA to declare war, essentially, on the rest of the world – in a war that has no foreseeable end.

    Yet for the USA to kill at least 3 million civilians in each of Japan, Korea, South-East Asia and Iraq – that was fine. After all, those aren’t Americans! Just think about it for a moment. That’s at least two “Holocausts” (accepting the figure of 6 million for the Jewish “Holocaust”). Yet the people who perpetrated the “Holocaust” are deemed to ultimately wicked that it is unacceptable to refer to them as normal human beings. In many countries it is illegal to refer to them at all except in terms of unreserved condemnation.

    But the Americans who killed twice as many are good, decent, upright, patriotic citizens. Yessiree Bob!

    So for Americans to go around the world overthrowing governments, murdering political leaders, initiating and supporting terrorist movements, utterly destroying civilized states and reducing them to vistas of rubble – sending them back to the Stone Age, as American leaders like to call it – is perfectly fine.

    Because, you see, they MEAN WELL.

    • Joe Tedesky
      February 20, 2018 at 14:28

      Excellent summary of the unfairness of American thinking. America’s biggest impediment to achieving a worthwhile world it can live with, is neglected this status, that is unless we Americans can evolve to the point of our admitting to all of our nations wrongs, but American isn’t on the 12 point program yet, so we will need but to put up with this acceptance of our consistent lying for a while longer.

    • Dave P.
      February 20, 2018 at 18:48

      Tom Welsh –

      Excellent summation.

      As you wrote: ‘to the unspoken assumption “But we are different!” Always’. Yes, sure we are different. As KiwiAntz wrote in his comments a few days ago: U.S. people are the most brainwashed, and gaslighted people on this Earth – I would add the word most dumbed-down to it. So, sure it does makes us different, no question about it. What has been going on here for almost two years now is so bizarre, so surreal that it is very hard to find the words to describe it. It seems like that the Power Structure ruling this unimaginably militarily strong Empire ever on Earth is completely unhinged.

      The question is – how can the people put a stop to this complete nonsense called Russia-Gate, this Russia Hysteria. Saying evenly mildly conciliatory words about Russia is now a taboo in the Media, TV, Congress or any in any other forum, and in social gatherings too.

      With this day and night bombardment of utterly false and disgusting nonsense from the Ruling Establishment and servile media has unhinged the people in this country. It is true in my own home , and about the people in the neighborhood, and other social circle we have. Their only education is what is told to them mostly on TV, and to some extent on other social media. I may be wrong, but if they, the Rulers in Washington, start a real conflict with Russia tomorrow, there is going to be no meaningful opposition in the country.

      And the whole World should be concerned with that. The World has come to very dangerous impasse.

  45. Tom Welsh
    February 20, 2018 at 08:40

    I find the “whataboutism” meme interesting but perverse and harmful to open discussion.

    As far as I know the first person to indulge in “whataboutism” was one Jesus Christ, who is recorded as having said,

    3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

    4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

    5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

    Matthew 7:3-5 King James Version (KJV)

    • Dave
      February 20, 2018 at 11:41

      Yup. The charge of “whataboutism” is a false argument, the concept of “whataboutism” as an issue being a logical fallacy. I wrote a post detailing the self-invalidating aspects of the notion of “whataboutism” a couple posts above yours.

      Crying “whataboutism” is something that people whose arguments / objectives do not substantiate as truthful by the facts, and who don’t feel they’re capable of handling themselves in an honest debate resort to.

    • Joe Tedesky
      February 20, 2018 at 14:01

      Yeah you make a great point, but my 2nd grade Nun didn’t buy any ‘ism’ excuse when we naughty kids got caught by the Nun being bad, and tried doing the ‘ism’ thing to her…she just never bought into it. Maybe our Nun’s had it right, after all.

      • Gregory Herr
        February 20, 2018 at 22:16

        What about catechism?

        • Joe Tedesky
          February 20, 2018 at 22:32

          Oh, you mean the part where the Nuns scared you into believing you were going to hell for an eternity? I still have emotional scars from that Gregory, but I also still have a positive favorably of those same Sisters taking care of me as a new born. Did you know Nun’s don’t get a retirement package?

          But that ‘ism’ was where our religious learning began, and ended. Glad you picked up on that. Joe

          • Gregory Herr
            February 20, 2018 at 23:37

            When I was eight I went through an agony of sorts trying to square what I was taught about damnation with a loving God. But alas, that exercise in futility didn’t prepare me for the real struggles in futility to come! It’s one emotional scar after another. But one thing I can say for myself is that I’ve at least toughened up a bit and continue to smell a rose or two along the way.

            Sure they get a retirement package. It’s on the other side.

  46. David G
    February 20, 2018 at 08:23

    Back in the Paleolithic era of this whole thing, before the election IIRC, when the “fake news” label hadn’t yet been tortured to death by partisans of both sides, the NY Times ran at least one story that tracked down a viral, made-up, anti-Hillary “news” story to its source – which ended up being some freelance guy in Eastern Europe (not Russia) who indeed was making a living out of the clicks that sort of garbage generates.

    That whole aspect has been memory-holed by the MSM in favor of this incoherent narrative of the Russian State Troll Army, which is simultaneously tiny and omnipresent, budgeted like a luxury family vacation but able to overwhelm the whole US of A, superhumanly effective yet somehow ineptly concealed.

    • Tom Welsh
      February 20, 2018 at 08:44

      Just as Russia is so weak (and growing rapidly weaker) that it is a desperate threat to Western civilization.

      “For months we have been making triumphant retreats before a demoralised enemy who is advancing in utter disorder”.

      – “Wasp” by Eric Frank Russell

      • David G
        February 20, 2018 at 09:13

        War is peace; freedom is slavery; ignorance is strength …

  47. Dave
    February 20, 2018 at 08:12

    Claiming “whataboutism” in a discussion or debate is a logical fallacy. It is a propaganda tactic used to shut-out information that challenges an argument, and to stigmatize and label those who don’t agree with you. The fundamental basis for the concept of claiming “whataboutism” is hypocrisy and disingenuous, saying ‘when I accuse you of this thing it is valid, but when you accuse me of the same thing, it is invalid’ – which, of course, is a fallacy.

    The truth is what all considerations taken into account add up to. But claiming “whataboutism” is about obstructing consideration of anything that denies the “whataboutism”-claimer’s sense of victory. There is no truth apart from understood context, and claiming “whataboutism” is all about removing inconvenient context from a discussion, so that the truth cannot possibly be arrived at.

    Claiming “whataboutism” is strictly anti-truth at its core, being zero-sum and sociopathic thinking and behaviour, and the people who claim “whataboutism” tend to always be severely lacking in subject information, and just want to deny any information that discredits their disingenuous zero-sum objective.

    Those who claim “whataboutism” are only seeking to ‘win’ by forceful determination and intellectual subterfuge. They are liars.

    • john wilson
      February 20, 2018 at 10:40

      “Dave” what the hell are you talking about? Are you smoking a particularly strong brand of skag today?

      • Dave
        February 20, 2018 at 11:35

        The article discusses the merits of “whataboutism”:

        “What About Whataboutism

        “Whataboutism” is the word of the day. At some point it was decreed by the internet forum gods that adding “-ism” to a description of something that someone is doing makes for a devastating argument in and of itself, and people have hastened to use this tactic as a bludgeon to silence anyone who points out the extremely obvious and significant fact that America interferes in elections more than any other government on earth.”

        Maybe you were enjoying your morning smoke and forgot that it’s a good idea to read an article before commenting on it? I think you should definitely try the ‘reading before commenting’ thing – just a tip.

        • Nancy
          February 20, 2018 at 12:44

          I get what you’re saying.

      • February 20, 2018 at 11:42

        Wow “John Wilson”…looks like “Dave” has you there and now you have followed your *whataboutism* with an *ad hominem* attack. High school level debaters aren’t allowed to do this but Consortium news posters (and some of the contributors) do it all day long.

        President and CEO
        Hasbara Trolling and lawn Services LLC

        • Abe
          February 21, 2018 at 00:53

          Hey comrade, speaking of “ad hominem”, turns out Tulsi Gabbard does indeed pal with Adelson and other heroic “defenders of Israel”. Gabbard was honored at Rabbi Shmuley Boteach’s “World Values Network” fourth annual “Champions of Jewish Values International Awards Gala” at the ballroom at the Marriott Marquis in Times Square in 2016.

          Apparently endorsing Adelson-favored bills and performing the Iran “skeptic” shuffle is part of Gabbard’s “ongoing commitment to maintain our freedom”.

          Schmuley’s li’l Hasbara event in 2016 featured “Crown Prince” Reza Pahlavi, son of the late Shah of Iran whose terrorist “Savak” police rivaled the Gestapo. Saudi Arabia’s BFF, Israel would love to see the Pahlavi regime “maintain freedom” in Iran once again.

          So keep on waving that cute li’l “Hasbara troll” banner, comrade. It helps eliminate the “whataboutism”.

        • Abe
          February 21, 2018 at 00:58

          Hey comrade, speaking of “ad hominem”, turns out Tulsi Gabbard does indeed pal with Adelson and other heroic “defenders of Israel”. Gabbard was honored at Rabbi Shmuley Boteach’s “World Values Network” fourth annual “Champions of Jewish Values International Awards Gala” at the ballroom at the Marriott Marquis in Times Square in 2016.

          Apparently endorsing Adelson-favored bills and performing the Iran “skeptic” shuffle is all part of Gabbard’s “ongoing commitment to maintain our freedom”

          Schmuley’s li’l Hasbara event in 2016 that honored Gabbard also featured “Crown Prince” Reza Pahlavi, son of the late Shah of Iran whose terrorist “Savak” police rivaled the Gestapo. Saudi Arabia’s BFF, Israel would love to see the Pahlavi regime “maintain freedom” in Iran once again.

          So keep on waving that cute li’l “Hasbara troll” banner of yours, comrade. It helps eliminate “whataboutism”.

          • Abe
            February 21, 2018 at 01:27

            2016 on the “Charlie Rose Show” on PBS (no reference to “proxy” anything)

            Rose: “We make them pay the price by killing Russians?”

            Former CIA deputy director Mike Morell: “Yeah.”

            Rose: “And killing Iranians?”

            Morell: “Yes. You don’t tell the world about it. But you make sure they know it in Moscow and Tehran.”

            Do try to be clear in what you’re saying in the comments, Mike, par example:

      • Jake G
        February 20, 2018 at 13:12

        You dont understand it?
        I do. Hes absolutely right, and its actually not hard to come to that conclusion on your own.
        “Whataboutism” was literally invented by liars who were caught in their hypocrisy and wanted a rhetorical way out. But its not valid. Not in the slightest. I fact, you actually found (and still find) those people getting caught in their own “whataboutism” definition. And oh boy, do they get mad if you point that out. ;)
        Its a perfect way to discredit someone, because they will tick out completely and everyone will see them as the liars they are.

        • February 20, 2018 at 13:23

          what aboutism is just another form of personal attack, when they have no return argument…

  48. David G
    February 20, 2018 at 08:10

    And I’m guessing that tally of U.S. interference in foreign elections doesn’t include all the coups to seat authoritarian regimes when the elections don’t go the way Washington likes: Iran, Guatemala, DR Congo, Chile – for starters.

    • Gregory Herr
      February 20, 2018 at 23:00

      Couldn’t have Arbenz looking out for Guatemalan farmers if it meant United Fruit would lose a buck. And those Iranians couldn’t be allowed to get uppity with their Parliament and natural resources. A police state was needed to keep exploitation on schedule. And of course Woosely…the Chileans just didn’t understand what was good for them…torture and military rule, that’ll teach ’em. Social reform and uplift of the poor set a bad example towards pinching profits. The Congolese want independence, democracy, and social progress? Not with all that mineral wealth you don’t! Watch closely as we kill Lumumba. Message delivered.

      When uncle sam “interferes” he makes it count for so much more.

  49. Fran Macadam
    February 20, 2018 at 08:09

    When you have an empire, the locals recede in importance to the influence of and patronage required to keep the foreign satrapies in orbit. Hence the vast expenditures in Washington for foreign lobbyists to successfully influence policy, by our own former government employees, basically against the interests of average Americans, in order to further interests of faraway indentured regimes. Russia not among them, not being a satrapy.

  50. Michaelwme
    February 20, 2018 at 08:09

    Most agree with Churchill: the world would have been a much better place if the UK had interfered with the German election in ’33 as he strongly urged, but to no avail.

    The London Economist says the US is the Greatest Force for Good in the World: The US always supports candidates who believe in integrity, honesty, freedom, and democracy, and fights against all authoritarian, corrupt candidates who would, if elected, abolish freedoms, make themselves Dictator for Life, and not only control every aspect of their people’s lives, but steal all their country’s resources.

    And if you believe that (and most Americans do), I have a bridge from Manhattan to Brooklyn I can sell you at a great price (and did I forget to say, it’s your patriotic duty to buy it?).

    • February 20, 2018 at 13:32

      Would monopoly money be acceptable for that bridge you want to sell on your planet?

  51. backwardsevolution
    February 20, 2018 at 06:39

    That Corbett Report video is so well done. Thanks for posting that.

    • Michaelwme
      February 20, 2018 at 08:31

      Don’t you realise that ‘James Corbett’ are a bunch of Russian trolls in St. Petersburg who forged the name, American IP address, US postal address, & etc. to mislead people into thinking they are really an American named James Corbett?

      Since Mueller says so, it must be true. One must always trust the FBI, the greatest law enforcement agency ever since J. Edgar got the dirt on everyone and made them say it was (and also approve all his funding requests).

      • February 20, 2018 at 10:55

        no secret that James is a Canadian living in Japan

  52. backwardsevolution
    February 20, 2018 at 06:25

    From Tucker Carlson at 25:10:

    Testimony from Facebook is that they can only account for $46,000.00 having been spent, total (by the Russians). Tucker Carlson said, “Just a few hundred bucks were spent on key states like Michigan and Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, thousands were wasted on states like California and Maryland that obviously were going to Democrats from day one, and did.”

    Apparently the Trump and Clinton campaigns spent $81 million – MILLION – on social media, not including the Super Pacs, the party committees. The guest said, “So the money that was spent by Russia on social media was a drop in the bucket.”

    Good article, Caitlin. The statements by Former CIA Director James Woolsey are very telling. I bet he’s wishing he could take them back.

    And what Max Blumenthal had to say was interesting too: “56% of ‘Russian-linked Facebook ads’ appeared *after* the election. 25% were seen by no one. Clear game changers.”

    • Eruanion
      February 20, 2018 at 11:46

      You mean that these Russians had a better return on invest,ment than the entirety of the Super Bowl advertisers put together? Why aren’t we hiring these guys to do viral marketing for our companies? I mean, if they can reach millions of people with crappy ads for so cheap, and make a miracle like this happen, then they can sell billions worth of product for us! Heck, at @ $33/ad (based on reported number of ads and actual expenditures) they flipped nearly 10 million votes (or kept the voters at home) Now we need a product they can sell fo rus, and we’ll all be rich!

      • Nancy
        February 20, 2018 at 12:40

        Your logic is entirely too rational to penetrate the thick skulls of the mainstream media in the U.S.

      • Martin - Swedish citizen
        February 20, 2018 at 17:44

        This is exactly the argument of Swedish politicians, MSM and Defense: “they” are supernatural.

    • February 20, 2018 at 13:18




    • j. D. D.
      February 20, 2018 at 15:54

      Problem is that Tucker, who was reluctant to believe in the Russian interference hoax all along, has now capitulated to the Fox News mantra, ala Hannity, Ingraham etc,. ignoring the elephant in the room – that Christopher Steele, as well as GCHQ’s Robert Hannigan, British Intelligence operatives, have been at the center of of the smear Trump campaign from the start. Hannity, who cites relevant factual information on the role of the fatuous Steele dossier, does a non-sequitur to go on about “Russian government lies,” and “Uranium One,” as though the campaign to destroy Trump before and after the election were being run from Moscow, not London and Washington. Tucker. perhaps realizing his folly, tried to cover himself by the ridiculous assertion that “Russia is a Third World Country,” rather than the nuclear superpower that it certainly is, thus minimizing the dangerous insanity of the Mueller scam.

      • backwardsevolution
        February 20, 2018 at 19:33

        j.D.D. – yes, you are exactly right. I have been watching those two programs on a nightly basis and I’ve actually been shocked that both Carlson and Hannity are carrying on this Russia nonsense. They didn’t at first. In fact, it’s only been in the last few months that they’ve been speaking ill towards Russia, and it’s mostly been Hannity. This has been upsetting to watch. In fact, last night I just turned off Hannity.

        Carlson focuses mainly on immigration, attacking the MSM, Google, Facebook, and oddly enough most of the guests he has on are from the “other side”, i.e. adversarial and Democrats. He debates back and forth with these people.

        Hannity focuses mainly on the FISA fiasco, unmasking and Uranium One and, unlike Carlson, his guests are mostly like-minded people, legal experts (lawyers, Judicial Watch), and investigative reporters who are providing him new facts on a nightly basis.

        I too have wondered what’s going on, j.D.D. I’ve seen Carlson almost choke on “America = good; Russia = bad”. Many times he has said that the West spies and meddles too, but he seems to pull himself back quickly now, as if he has been told he must keep with the “Russia meddled in the election” scenario. A few times I’ve pictured Carlson going home to a good stiff drink over what he has to say. In fact, I think it was Carlson who said just last night that Russia has “one” base outside Russia, which is Syria, and we have hundreds. He’s trying to put information out there, but just a little at a time. He also stood up for Russian athletes re Olympic doping, saying they’re not the only ones doing it, and he’s mentioned several times that there are other governments who are not listed as foreign agents (but should be), who collude in elections, and don’t ever get called on it.

        Hannity, I think, is giving the Democrats what they’re asking for. He’s going along with this “Russia = bad” scenario in order to blame Hillary Clinton for colluding with the Russians on Uranium One, giving up 20% of U.S. uranium to the Russians. He’s also using “Russia = bad” in order to prove that Hillary Clinton and the DNC colluded with Russia over the Steele dossier (as it apparently contained info from top Russian insiders). I think Hannity is doing this in order to throw “collusion” back in the other side’s face, that it was the “Democrats” who actually colluded with Russia!

        Either way, I don’t like it, and I’ll be tuning out if the volume gets too much louder.

        • geeyp
          February 21, 2018 at 03:32

          I thought Carlson got an education during the 2016 campaign going around the country to hear and see how the other half lives. It is disheartening to see that that is now wearing off.

          • backwardsevolution
            February 21, 2018 at 08:23

            geeyp – I don’t think it’s wearing off or that Tucker has forgotten. He often speaks about how low-skilled illegal labor is hurting American workers. Tonight he did a follow-up on the Chicago bakery that had hired a couple thousand illegals and were forced to fire all of them. What happened? Well, wages were increased to $14.00/hour and a whole bunch of African-Americans got new jobs.

            Tucker is very cynical and I see him often smirking about what his guests are saying (and these are guests he mostly agrees with), never mind how he goes after those on the Left (and some Right) who continue to state that there was collusion between Trump and Russia.

            On a nightly basis he asks why ordinary people, who dare to question the accepted narrative, are called traitors or unpatriotic.

            He knows what’s going on. But I do think he is expected to denounce Russia for meddling (although he often says other countries meddle too, even the U.S.)

            Let’s hope that Devin Nunes and Trey Gowdy are successful in their attempts to get to the truth. Perhaps the Inspector General’s report, which is coming out soon, will shed some light on what’s been going on.

            geeyp, don’t get disheartened. I think there is a lot more happening behind the scenes than we know about.

        • j. D. D.
          February 21, 2018 at 09:33

          Christopher Steele, the author and promoter of the dirty Dossier, can’t be both a “liar” on the one hand, and his “Russian sources,” be trusted on the other.You can’t have it both ways, as the Fox crowd pretends. Moreover, the Fox narrative never exposes Steele’s hatred for President Putin, having been kicked out of Russia, and that his “contacts” are all Putin-haters.Nor do they point out Steele’s role in the Putin-bashing Litivenko fraud or his role in advising Victoria Nuland on the Ukraine coup. It is also hard to believe that the Fox team is unaware of the current legal proceedings in the UK in which defendant Steele was joined in court by the British Foreign office as well as his mentor Richard Dearlove, former Director of MI6 and author of the WMD myth.

  53. john wilson
    February 20, 2018 at 05:32

    By constantly talking about ‘Russia Gate’ we give it a credibility to which its not entitled. This whole affair was invented because Hillary Clinton lost to Trump and the shock and outrage of this event sent the establishment and the DNC into revenge mode. The whole world knows the US interferes in the electoral process in other countries and even when the US has failed to get the out come they want, they then seek to undermine the duly elected governments. The constant Russia gate search by the DNC and their cronies in the deep state is to usurp Trump and drive him out of office, otherwise, what is the point of all this nonsense? America is looking more and more like a banana republic every day.

    • Sam F
      February 20, 2018 at 07:07

      Israel-gate is the story here, not the “Russia-gate” propaganda war, a coverup by the zionist-controlled mass media. The traitors are Hillary’s major campaign sponsors (top 10 all zionists) and foundation donors (Saudis and MIC): Both Dems and Reps are foreign agents taking bribes from Israel.

      The zionist and MIC Reps want to dump Trump because he is not militarist enough; the zionist and MIC Dems want to dump him because he is not persuaded to support wars for Israel. Everyone else is given lies by the mass media, controlled almost entirely by zionists, that this will somehow install someone better rather than worse, which is obviously false.

      • tina
        February 20, 2018 at 23:07

        What is the Zionist /MIC goal? What is the goal of evangelists? what is the goal of al queda ?What is the goal of western democracies? What is the goal of Mormons? What do Catholics want? I ask these questions not being snarky, but , really what are all these disparate groups looking for? Power, money, dominion? And if so, how does that help anything?

        • Sam F
          February 21, 2018 at 07:31

          1. Zionists seek to set all other groups in the Mideast against one another.
          2. MIC seeks war anywhere with small countries to justify exorbitant budgets.
          3. One need not ask what other groups want unless their acts are related.
          These are self-interested groups led by demagogues demanding power in their group.
          One does not expect them to try to “help anything” but themselves.

      • February 22, 2018 at 11:55

        What planet are you living on? ISRAEL IS GETTING EVERYTHING THEY WNT & MORE. Trump has said Jerusalem should be their capitol & vows to move the U.S. Embassy there next year. While Trump’s main yardstick for what to do is “did Obama do it? I’ll do the OPPOSITE.”–that does NOT apply to Israel (or any other MIC decisions). Israel’s getting its $3.5BILLION EVERTY YEAR…plus, the messing with Iran & Syria—-which is what Israel wants. Finally, putting Know-Nothing Jered Kushner (who practically calls Netanyahu”Uncle Bibi”0 “in charge of Middle East peace” must make the Israeli power structure GLEEFUL.

    • j. D. D.
      February 20, 2018 at 09:16

      John, While your facts are correct, there is more to it than simply an excuse for Clinton’s defeat. The Obama administration and the Clinton campaign were committed to a confrontation with Russia and China long before the Trump candidacy. At the prodding of British Intelligence as early as the summer of 2015, they reacted in horror as Trump repeatedly affirmed his policy of cooperation with Russia, employing MI6’s Christopher Steele to portray Trump as a Russian agent. When that failed, their focus shifted to impeachment and ouster. leading to the criminal Mueller operation. The latest bogus indictments represent an attempt to slow the momentum towards exposure of critical role of Christopher Steele, the key foreign intelligence agent at the center of it all, who ironically was not indicted by Mueller. For a more comprehensive look, by the authors of the report that started the effort to defeat Russiagate, I suggest.

      • February 20, 2018 at 11:32

        So you believe that Lyndon Larouch’s political action committee is a reliable source of info?

        • Brad Owen
          February 20, 2018 at 12:51

          Yes. I’ve watched it over 20 years now, and they’ve NEVER been wrong. I remember watching LaRouche presidential campaign half-hour infomercial in the 80s, talking about how TPTB had decided to let Germany re-unite, but carve up Yugoslavia. I thought what nonsense, but damn if it didn’t happen just that way. I remember him telling Andropov if he didn’t sign on with Reagan and Star Wars to replace M.A.D., the Soviet Union would disintegrate economically in 5 years. It took 6 years, and damn if it didn’t happen exactly that way (he’s a master physical economist and prognosticator, besides being an expert historian). He called the death knell of of the trans-atlantic financial system in july 2007 when Japan ceased its “carry-trade”, and damn if the meltdown didn’t happen in 2008..btw, NOTHING appropriate was done to fix this problem, and we’re severely exposed to another, larger melt-down (he calls it a General Breakdown Crisis worse than a Great Depression, worse than the disintegration of USSR/Warsaw Pact, producing a New Dark Age (which his people have something to say about THAT in their essay “Return of the Monarchs”), IOW, the breakdown is sought after by TPTB, as it forwards THEIR agenda. He has prescribed his “Four Laws” to address this “Sword of Damocles” hanging over our heads. I’ve learned to listen to him, not caring if he appears like a crank or crackpot…which everyone should know better by now NOT to give any credence to MSM pronouncements about supposed villains and “crackpots”.

          • Abe
            February 22, 2018 at 14:44

            Larouche’s fourth “law” is “Adopt a Fusion-Driver Crash Program.”

            In the final analysis, Larouche is a rabid pro-nukes dipstick.

            No, thanks.

          • Abe
            February 22, 2018 at 15:12

            “We are not going to get out of civilization’s most catastrophic financial collapse unless we massively invest now in the infrastructure projects, including nuclear power plants”


        • j. D. D.
          February 20, 2018 at 15:30

          Bar none. The original document on Mueller, published months ago, has been borne out in subsequent investigation far more accurately than any other.

        • Monte George Jr.
          February 20, 2018 at 16:55

          Not a fan Larouche, but this is a case of a stopped clock which is right twice a day.

        • Abe
          February 20, 2018 at 23:42

          Will, please note that EIR is not the “source” of the investigations it cites.

          For example, William Binney and Ray McGovern of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have presented the results of their investigations in numerous forums. In September 2017, Binney and McGovern spoke at an EIR event in NYC and were featured in an EIR “investigation report”. Binney is quoted in the February 2018 article cited above.

          EIR has a familiar pattern of appropriating the work of numerous investigators that have nothing to do with the perpetual “British coup” nostrums of Larouche.

      • Putin Apologist
        February 20, 2018 at 13:23

        Clinton, sure, but Obama? The historian, Alfred W. McCoy postulates that Obama didn’t really want to do Syria, or Iran, he wanted to get out of the Middle East, he genuinely wanted to “Pivot to Asia”, which he saw as a growing threat to the Empire. But it was the Jews (or the Zionists if you prefer) within his administration that pushed for doing Syria. And it was them, enraged over Putin’s interference with their plans for Syria, along with the MIC that pushed for this renewed Cold War.

        As for Mueller’s indictments, these are Russians citizens that will never be extradited, he will never have to prove anything. Muller threw the Clintonites a bone.

        • j. D. D.
          February 20, 2018 at 15:33

          Yes, and Mueller is well aware of that, as the msm rushes to make the allegations into fact, as it has done all along.

    • KiwiAntz
      February 20, 2018 at 17:08

      Looking like a banana republic? It is a banana republic! And yes, the writer is quite correct that Russia or any other Country would be legally entitled to interfere in America’s elections if they so desired, which they don’t as they have better things to do than listen to a bunch of hypocritical cry babies who can’t handle a taste of their own meddling medicine? Russia, China & Iran are building bridges & China’s one belt initiative is providing a alternative to America’s endless war narrative? China builds bridges in Countries by trading & funding infrastructure & utilities? America creates chaos thru regime change meddling & commits war & war crimes & literally burns bridges & destroys in every Country it goes into? The US is huckster, gangster nation trying to scam & thieve resources via warmongering rather than forming alliances through diplomacy like China does? And if you want to know why all this Russiagate, Chinagate & Irangate is happening & why there is this unprecedented hatred for Russia, China, Iran, Korea etc all you have to do is google “ the US Petrodollar system “ & you can find out instantly how this system determine’s America’s foreign policy decisions, just follow the money trail & everything becomes crystal clear? Russiagate, & election meddling, Iran, Korea media bashing are a smokescreen shell game to confuse & distract the American & Worlds citizens to keep them ignorant & misinformed so they can’t discover the truth about US hegemony via the Petrodollar recycling system? To quote Yogi Bear, “ you can observe alot just by looking? If you reverse “Yogi’s logic & look into the US Petrodollar system, & as a result of this observation you will be able to gather an “awareness” of what America is attempting to do, in order to prop up this dying Empire?

      • Anon
        February 20, 2018 at 20:40

        The US is truly a “huckster, gangster nation trying to scam & thieve resources via warmongering.” It has degenerated into a bipartisan prehistoric tyranny, a disgrace beyond salvation in the judgment of history, with no path to restore democracy. A pile of doodoo waiting for the compost heap to make it great again.

Comments are closed.