Johnstone explains that President Trump can be excused from being prosecuted as
a Russian agent if he will give up his intention of normalizing relations with
the necessary enemy of the US military/security complex and join in the
orchestrated demonization of Russia.
The Charge of the Invisible Army of Kremlin Trolls
By Diana Johnstone
31 December 2017
no holiday truce in the propaganda war. On this Christmas day, The Washington
Post offered its readers a scare story entitled “Kremlin trolls burned across
the Internet as Washington debated options”.
The article is long – nearly 4000 words. The only part that is sure to be read
in these busy times of short attention spans is the headline, whose two themes
are rich in subliminal messages.
First, a slash and burn operation by an army of Kremlin trolls is laying waste
to the Internet. Second, official Washington in its benevolent innocence is
having trouble facing up to this nefarious threat.
Let’s take these two themes one at a time.
of the Troll Army
journalistic peg for this story is a phantom freelance journalist named Alice
Donovan whose “first email arrived in the inbox of CounterPunch, a left-leaning
American news and opinion website, at 3:26 a.m. – the middle of the day in
Drawing on its abundant intelligence community sources, the WaPo article
continues: “The FBI was tracking Donovan as part of a months-long
counterintelligence operation code-named ‘NorthernNight’. Internal bureau
reports described her as a pseudonymous foot soldier in an army of Kremlin-led
trolls seeking to undermine America’s democratic institutions.”
Now, it is interesting to note that the only evidence provided in this article
for “Russia’s army of trolls” (the expression pops up again) is the existence
of this pseudonymous foot soldier named Alice Donovan. And the only evidence of
her existence is numerous articles published on about a dozen websites over the
past two years. Because when CounterPunch attempted, alarmed by the FBI, to
find out who she is, it was unable to do so.
So, in this account, one ephemeral foot soldier is cited as proof of an “army”.
This should immediately raise questions. Why was the FBI investigating someone
whose only trace of existence was authorship of website articles? It couldn’t
be investigating “a person”, since apparently no one knows who this person is.
So it was investigating a website writer. Why? What was its criterion?
“As the 2016 presidential election heated up,” the article continues, Alice
Donovan “seemed to be doing the Kremlin’s bidding by stoking discontent toward
Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton and touting WikiLeaks, which U.S.
officials say was a tool of Russia’s broad influence operation to affect the
In short, “stoking discontent” toward Hillary is the distinguishing sign of
being “a tool” of a Russian operation. Incidentally, there are a lot of us who
did just that. I am one of them, having written a whole book of discontent
toward Hillary. Are we all under FBI investigation?
Is it or is it not the mission of the FBI to run a counterintelligence
operation investigating website writers who digress from the official
Washington line on Hillary Clinton, Russia and Syria? Alice Donovan did so but
her pieces were relatively mild. Why should she be singled out for an FBI
Why was CounterPunch warned against her and not against all of us who write
The not so subliminal message was: any article submitted to a website that
contradicts the official line may be the work of sinister Kremlin agents. The
evidence: they’ve found one! Its name is Alice Donovan. So be very careful what
Of course, the “evidence” is just as invisible as all the “proof” of Russian
subversion produced so far by U.S. security agencies. Nobody has seen Alice
Donovan. Nobody has talked with her. So far, there is no proof of her
existence. But that has not prevented leading mainstream media from proclaiming
her as exhibit A for Alice in the media prosecution of Vladimir Putin for
“undermining our democracy”.
“The FBI, in keeping with its standard practice in counterintelligence
investigations, has kept a close hold on information about Donovan and other
suspected Russian personas peddling messages inside the United States”,
according to the WaPo. But not such a close hold that it refrained from
unnerving CounterPunch editors with suggestions that it was facilitating
Kremlin cyberwar, or from passing along confidential intelligence reports to
the most influential newspaper in the Nation’s Capital, whose ties to the CIA
If Alice Donovan is such a threat, why not expose her/his/its identity?
Reacting to FBI warnings, CounterPunch did its own investigation and came up
with significant facts.
First, since it was impossible to trace “Alice Donovan”, the FBI must have been
alerted by the writings, not by the person. When and how did the snoopers
discover that she was apparently using a pseudonym? Did they know that first,
meaning that the FBI equated pen names with Russian subversion? But what counts
in an article is above all the content, not the signature. Throughout history,
writers have used pen names as protection from potential persecution. The FBI
exchange with CounterPunch indicates an intention to warn “left-leaning”
websites not to publish anonymous articles, which could be a first step toward
excluding persons who have something to say but fear getting in trouble because
their views are unorthodox, especially in a period of intensifying witch hunt.
But the most significant fact emerging from CounterPunch’s own investigation is
that articles by “Alice Donovan” failed to introduce some new strain of Russian
propaganda into American cyberspace. They were not at all original. The phantom
commentator picked up pieces of articles found on other left-leaning websites,
and pasted them together as her own. The articles were cut and paste – in a
That is the smoking gun, and the fingerprints are not Russian.
Indeed, inasmuch as there was nothing new, nothing particular sensational, no
great “fake news” revelation in the Donovan prose, what could the “Kremlin”
hope to gain? Why attempt to “undermine our democracy” with a few shadows of
other existing internet articles?
This simply makes no sense.
There is another hypothesis, however, that does make sense. It is clear from
the very creation of Operation NorthernNight that the FBI was charged with the
task of producing proof that Internet dissidence has its origins in a Putin
plot. But when such evidence turns out to be difficult or impossible to find,
it can be manufactured instead – just as a certain number of “terrorist plots”
have been manufactured by luring some gullible fool into a sting operation. It
could be well worth the trouble of the FBI to entrap leftist publications into
publishing articles that could be “exposed” as “Kremlin propaganda”. It
is obvious that the Deep State is desperate for “evidence” to back up their
Russia-is-destroying-our-democracy fairy tale, and this would fit right in. The
invention of “Alice Donovan” could provide such “evidence”.
If you were an FBI hack, commissioned with writing articles to be signed by
“Alice Donovan”, how would you go about it? As an FBI hack, you probably have
no idea how to write such an article. The easiest way would be to copy what
real “left-leaning” authors had written. The Donovan papers added nothing to
what was already in the public domain. They said nothing that other writers had
not written, and that might risk further poisoning the minds of gullible
Americans. She just cut and pasted. That would be a most convenient
way to “invent” a fictional Russian troll – set her loose among the websites
and then “discover” the scandal. Just a new twist on the FBI’s perpetual
entrapment ploys. A variation on the theme of sting operations. We lure you
into doing something we can accuse you of. But it is the “left-leaning”
websites that are lured into having published “fake news” by a “Kremlin troll”.
This should teach them to be careful!
There is indeed no proof that “Alice Donovan” is a creation of the FBI
undercover operation known as Northern Night, just as there is no proof that
“Alice Donovan” was a creation of a Kremlin disinformation campaign. However,
there is proof that the FBI undercover operation existed. From its secret
sources, The Washington Post reveals that a “previously unreported order – a
sweeping presidential finding to combat global cyber threats – prompted U.S. spy
agencies to plan a half-dozen specific operations to counter the Russian
threat.” Why couldn’t “Alice Donovan” have been one of those operations?
On the other hand, the Kremlin disinformation campaign is still a matter of
speculation – despite all the mainstream reports based, like this one claims to
be, on “interviews with dozens of current and former senior U.S. officials at
the White House, the Pentagon, the State Department, and U.S. and European
intelligence services, as well as NATO representatives and top European
Since all those interviews are anonymous, what makes them more credible than an
anonymous blogger? Where is the evidence – of anything?
This whole article is built on the a priori assumption of the existence of “an
army of Kremlin trolls” out to destroy American democracy. The theme is
imaginatively elaborated, but never supported by solid facts.
Trump From the Trolls
first theme in the article is designed to intimidate “left-leaning” websites,
obliging them to tow the official line, and henceforth threatened with
accusations of colluding with “the Kremlin’s army of trolls” if they do not do
so, the second theme is indirectly addressed to Trump. The subliminal message:
jump onto the anti-Russia bandwagon and you may not be impeached after all.
This message is delivered by innuendo. Whereas the whole “Russian fake news”
campaign got off the ground as a way to explain the preposterous election of
Donald Trump, and also as a way to discredit the despised president and prepare
his destitution, the tone has changed. Now, the WaPo reports, Trump is not a
beneficiary but a target of Russian disinformation:
“After Trump took office, Russia’s army of trolls began to shift their focus
within the United States, according to U.S. intelligence reports. Instead of
spreading messages to bolster Trump, they returned to their long-held objective
of sowing discord in U.S. society and undermining American global influence.
Trump’s presidency and policies became a Russian disinformation target.”
“Donovan and other Kremlin-backed personas” began attacking the Trump
administration for, among other things, supporting “terrorists” and authorizing
military strikes that killed children in Syria.
“ ‘They are all about disruption,’ said a former official briefed on the
intelligence. ‘They want a distracted United States that can’t counter Vladimir
What ambitions are those? According to Washington informants, this was because
Putin wanted to “make up for its diminished military” by seizing on “influence
campaigns and cyber warfare as equalizers.”
Now, one might think that if all Russia can muster to “equalize” the United
States’ unprecedented military machine is an army of Alice Donovans, all those
security experts in Washington should relax and stop worrying.
According to this tale, that is just what they did, convinced that “it was all
over and we’d won the propaganda war”. Then came – horrors! – RT, a Russian
sponsored American television channel than offers viewers a vision of the news
that strikes the Washington Post like an exorcism chant.
U.S. security officials run whimpering to The Washington Post claiming that top
policy-makers were misled by “a misguided belief in the resilience of American
society and its democratic institutions.” Miscalculations and “bureaucratic
inertia” left the United States “vulnerable to Russia’s interference in the
2016 presidential election”… The world’s greatest democracy turns out to be a
house of cards.
What a confession! It turns out that if the Russians huff and puff, they can
blow the house down.
“I thought our ground was not as fertile,” said Antony J. Blinken, President
Barack Obama’s deputy secretary of state. “We believed that the truth shall set
you free, that the truth would prevail. That proved a bit naive.”
Gee whiz, the guys in Washington are just too honest to dream of the nasty
things those mean Russians can do. But now The Washington Post is there, hand
in hand with “the intelligence community”, to warn us, and to warn you, Mr.
Trump, that the Russians are the bad guys out to destroy America and you must
do everything to stop them.
These complaints have a familiar ring. Whenever the Pentagon is gearing up to
bomb some hapless country into regime change, we hear the same chorus from the
mainstream media, from intelligence experts and high officials “on conditions
of anonymity”, as well as from assorted semi-governmental “non-governmental”
human rights organizations, proclaiming that American leaders must be awakened
from their idealistic dreams in order to stop the latest Hitler from doing
whatever it is such villains do. Of course, America’s naive leaders are just too
kind and innocent to take this latest terrible threat seriously – until alerted
by diligent spooks and their mainstream media collaborators. We’ve heard
this again and again. Remember how human rights advocates had to nag and
nag the gentle US war machine to get it to bomb Serbia, to bomb Libya, to arm
“good” Syrian rebels. Official America is so good and trusting that it
has to be forced to take necessary defensive action.
So come on, Trump, just wake up to the Putin cyber threat, and all will be
New Year is one full of economic, political, and war threats.
the economic threats are stock, bond, and real estate markets artificially
pumped up by years of central bank money creation and by false reports of full
employment. It is an open question whether participants in these markets are
aware that underlying reality does not support the asset values. Central banks
support stock markets not only with abundant liquidity but also with direct
stock purchases. The Japanese central bank is now one of the largest owners of
Japanese equities. Central banks, which are supposed to provide economic
stability, have created a massive fraud.
the Western world politics has degenerated into fraud. No government serves the
public’s interest. (See: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/12/29/eric-zuesse-explains-americas-worst-enemy/ )
Except for some former Soviet satellites in Eastern Europe, European
governments have defied the will of the people by admitting vast numbers of
refugees from Washington’s wars and others pretending to be refugees. The
European governments further imperil their citizens with their support for
Washington’s rising aggression toward Russia. The universal failure of
democratic politics is leading directly to war.
Saker explains that Americans with intelligence, honor, courage, and integrity
have disappeared from the US national security establishment. In their place
are arrogant morons high on hubris who believe: (1) We can buy anybody, (2)
Those we cannot buy, we bully, (3) Those we cannot bully, we kill, (4) Nothing
can happen to us, we live in total impunity no matter what we do.http://www.unz.com/tsaker/2018-war-or-no-war/
The Anglo-Zionist empire is trying to overturn the Iranian agreement and to
restart the attempt to overthrow the government of Syria. Lebanon’s Hezbollah
is also in the empire’s sights. Washington is arming Ukraine in order to enable
an attack on the breakaway provinces of Novorussia. Threats against North Korea
escalate. Even little Venezuela is threatened with military intervention simply
because the country wants to control its own destiny and not be controlled by
Washington and the New York banks.
the opinion of some, Russia’s very cautious diplomacy has increased the likelihood
that Washington will miscalculate and give the world a third world war. By not
accepting the requests of the breakaway Russian provinces in Ukraine to be
reunited with Russia, the Russian government paved the way for Washington to
provide the military means for its Ukrainian puppet to attempt to reconquer the
provinces. Success would damage Russian prestige and encourage Washington in
its aggressive actions. Sooner or later Russia will have to stand and fight.
premature declaration of victory in Syria and withdrawal has made it possible
for US forces to remain in Syria and attempt to restart the effort to overthrow
the Assad government. Russia would have to defend its victory, or by the
failure to do so encourage more aggressive actions by Washington.
have evaporated that President Trump would restore the normalized relations
between the nuclear powers that Reagan and Gorbachev made possible. The
question for the New Year is when does Washington’s aggression against Russia
ignite a hot war.
website will be examining these issues as they unfold in 2018. From the
perspective of today, it is unlikely that the New Year will be a happy one.
Nowhere in the West is there a sign of leadership toward peace and the
well-being of humanity.
Increasingly Confirming that America Is a Dictatorship
By Eric Zuesse
26, 2017 "Information
Clearing House" - Gallup headlined on December 18th, “Americans
View Government as Nation’s Top Problem in 2017”. Their report made clear
that though this finding was unprecedented, it’s part of a longer-term trend,
toward Americans naming America’s own “government as the most important problem
facing the nation.” In a democracy, the public do not view the nation’s
government to be (as in America) their enemy (which is the case if they view
the “government as the most important problem facing the nation”).
Americans increasingly view the Government as their enemy.
a dictatorship, only the people who control the government are satisfied with
the government; but, in a democracy, the public are satisfied with the
government — or else that government will be replaced in elections by people
who control the government and who do provide government that
the public approve of. In the United States, we’re instead moving in the exact
opposite direction: steadily going from one government to another, none of
which wins the public’s approval; and the present American government winning
the public’s approval even less than its predecessors did.
This is notthe situation that exists in authentic democracies. It’s
what one expects to find in a country that’s ruled by a dictatorship. Dictators
don’t need to worry so much about polls, because they don’t represent the
public; they exploit the public — they use the public.
academic study’s scientific methodology was so good, so that no one, as of yet,
in the more than three years since its publication, has been able to find any
flaw in its data or methodology. Its headline, like its writing, was as dull as
Theories of American Politics”, and this (and especially its atrocious
writing) might at least partially explain why America’s mainstream press
overwhelmingly has ignored that seminal and landmark study in the social
sciences, and especially has ignored that study’s enormous implications,
regarding contemporary U.S. politics and government. (A vastly clearer
presentation of that study, and of its findings, can be found here in this 6-minute video
summary of it.)
after that time, particularly after Donald Trump’s becoming U.S. President on
20 January 2017, polls are confirming strongly that what this scientific
analysis said, describes, even more starkly than before, the American reality —
that the U.S. federal Government now blatantly ignores public
opinion, and is controlled instead only by the rich.
example of this phenomenon was recently headlined by me “Poll:
By 2-to-1, Americans Oppose Moving U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem”, and it
reported that in the only two published national polls in the U.S. that were
taken prior to Trump’s announcement that the U.S. Embassy in Israel will be
moved from Tel Aviv to the disputed city of Jerusalem — one having been a
November 2017 poll of 2,000 Americans, published on December 11th, and the
other being a September 2017 poll of 1,000 U.S. Jews — the overall U.S. public
opposed any such move by 63% to 31%, and U.S. Jews opposed it by around similar
percentages (though the polling-questions on the two polls differed
significantly and therefore their findings are not directly comparable).
Furthermore, that article also linked to another question which was included in
the November poll, and which showed that only a minority of Americans — almost
all of whom are Democrats — believe that Russia is a “foe” of the United
States; and, of course, the U.S. federal Government (even the existing
Republican one) does consider Russia, more than any other country, to be America’s foe; so, that, too, presents a stark
contrast between the Government and its public.
on December 14th, Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign manager, the pollster Mark
Penn, whom she had mis-cast into the role of her campaign’s strategist in 2008,
headlined at The Hill, “Mueller,
FBI face crisis in public confidence”, and he summarized numerous polls
which were finding that whereas Americans overwhelmingly distrust President
Donald Trump, Americans distrust even more the Special Counsel
Robert Mueller’s investigation that’s trying to find reasons to impeach and
remove him from office. Americans are getting increasingly scared of their
Government, and now distrust both sides of it.
addition to these polls that show America’s public to be ignored by America’s
Government (other than for the public to be manipulated by means of the major
newsmedia that the billionaires who control this Government own), was also
issued on December 18th, and this poll was headlined “Half The
Public Say Their Taxes Will Go Up Under GOP Plan”. It scientifically
sampled 806 Americans, and reported that:
half the American public (47%) disapprove of the tax reform bills passed by the
Senate and House and just 26% approve. … Strong disapproval (35%) of the
proposal far outweighs strong approval (13%). … In ‘swing’ counties where the
margin of victory for either candidate was less than ten points, 30% approve of
the plan compared with 38% who disapprove. … Many Americans see this bill more
as an attempt by Republicans to gain a political victory and would rather see
Congress scrap this plan and start over. … Half of the public (50%) predict
that the federal taxes they pay will go up with the plan now under
consideration by Congress. Just 14% say their taxes will go down. … The public
was much more optimistic right before Trump took the oath of office in January.
Back then, two-thirds expected that the middle class would benefit from the
policies of a Trump administration.”
polls show that the American public believe overwhelmingly that only the rich
will benefit from the Trump/Republican tax-law changes. (If purely the
long-term impacts, such as the resultant soaring public debt, are considered,
then this perception, by the public, of the tax-law changes, is almost
certainly accurate.) The blatancy with which U.S. federal policy violates what
the polls show that the American public overwhelmingly want (such as reducing the
federal debt), and imposes instead upon the public what they clearly don’t want
(such as increasing that debt), is now stunning.
findings provide yet additional evidence that the far more extensively
documented findings in the massive study “Testing Theories of American
Politics” apply with special force today, probably even more so than they did
in the period from 1981 to 2002, which was the period that that empirical study
had examined in detail. Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter expressed publicly
on 28 July 2015 (even before Trump was President), that, “Now
it’s just an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery being the essence of
getting the nominations for president or being elected president.And the
same thing applies to governors, and U.S. Senators and congress members.” He
was stating what is, by now, an increasingly proven fact.
America is a dictatorship.
current U.S. Government office-holders haven’t publicly expressed any such
view, although the Democratic U.S. Presidential candidate whom Hillary
Clinton ‘beat’ in 2016, Bernie Sanders, has
come the closest to saying it.
not even clear, however, whether a majority of Americans actually want a
democratic government. On 9 September 2015, the YouGov poll headlined “Could
a coup really happen in the United States?” (which question presumed
that a U.S. coup hadn’t already happened, such as on 9 December 2000, or on 22
November 1963, though there is evidence that it happened in both cases), and
YouGov reported that “when people are asked whether they would hypothetically
support the military stepping in to take control from a civilian government
which is beginning to violate the constitution, 43% of Americans would support
the military stepping in while 29% would be opposed.” Perhaps many in that
large 43% plurality of Americans were somehow blissfully ignorant that the
American Government routinely not only was “beginning to violate” but
routinely had been and were violating, the U.S. Constitution,
such as by placing onto its Supreme Court, anti-Constitutional ‘Justices’ who
arbitrarily label political money as “speech” that’s unlimitedly protected by
the First Amendment, so that unlimited political spending by billionaires can
effectively control the U.S. Government (such oligarchy as is now scientifically
established to be the case), or by violating the Constitution in so many
other ways, such as by simply not enforcing certain laws in certain cases, such
as by refusing
to prosecute the banksters whose frauds caused (and who profited from) the 2008
financial crash — they perpetrated a massive unpunished crime against
the public, and this is supposed to be ‘democracy’. But regardless: a
43%-to-29% plurality of the nation’s public are so pro-military
as to favor a U.S. coup under that vague condition; they would prefer the
military, an intrinsically anti-democratic authoritarian
institution, to take direct control over the U.S. Government — as if there
could be some valid excuse for this intrinsically dictatorial institution to
overthrow the established and supposedly legal government, and to replace it by
one that’s not just supposedly, but blatantly, illegal to be in control of the
Government. This would mean that America’s billionaires — people who already
own and profit from the military’s weapons-making firms — will take control of
America, even if they don’t already have control. They control the
military-industrial complex, because they control the Deep State that, in any
capitalist country, IS the military-industrial complex.
They control the weapons-manufacturing firms such as Lockheed Martin, and also
the megabanks, and the lobbying firms, and all the rest of the systematic
corruption (the Deep State), which controls the U.S. government.
That same poll (question 13) also
asked “Do you believe that the military has a duty to protect the Constitution
against domestic enemies?” and 72% answered “Yes” and 12% answered “No.” Thus,
by a 6-to-1 margin, Americans don’t know the difference between the function
that the military and CIA are supposed to perform, versus the function that the
police and the FBI and entire Justice Department are supposed to perform. As if
that’s not frightening enough about America, Americans
now support the nation’s military-industrial complex above all other
institutions, public or private. The war-making institution isn’t
used only for defense (though its PR euphemism is ‘the defense
establishment’ and it should instead be called “the invasion-and-coup
establishment”), but it is also — and now almost exclusively — used for
invasions and coups that are based on lies (from ‘the defense establishment’,
boosting their own business), such as invasions and coups against Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, and Ukraine 2014. Instead of despising
that institution of conquest, Americans now admire it, above all others —
and far above
all the rest of the U.S. Government.
“Could a coup really happen in the United States?” A coup wouldn’t even be
necessary in order to produce here dictatorship, which has already long existed
in this country. And, while domestic spending is being slashed by the existing
U.S. regime, military spending (which already
is as large as the next ten largest national military budgets in the world)
is soaring. Why would America’s generals want to perpetrate a coup? They’re
already getting almost everything they want — and without the opprobrium they’d
suffer from a coup. It would be plain stupid for them to do that. The very
question which was asked in that poll was a bad joke, but a full 72% of the U.S.
public not only didn’t ridicule the idea, but actually endorsed it. They
endorsed what’s commonly called a ‘police state’, but which actually is
a “military state” — rule by the military. Maybe that’s what we’ve
already got. But, behind the military-industrial complex, stand the nation’s
billionaires — the
people who really run U.S. foreign policies. If that brute fact can’t
become understood by the American people, then not only does democracy no
longer exist in the U.S., but the basis to create (or restore)
democracy here is likewise absent. Americans are big supporters of the
military-industrial complex. The U.S. public have been deceived about what it
is, and what it isn’t — so deceived, that they place it at
the top, as the most respected of all institutions. How much more
upside-down — black is white, white is black — like Big Brother’s “Newspeak,”
could the U.S. public be duped to be, than that? If America’s invasion-and-coup
institution is at the top, then why are all the others held in lower esteem
than this — the most-corrupt of all
institutions in America?
I read in CounterPunch two feminist rants against men. Not all men, just white
heterosexual men. It is not always easy for a male of my generation to
understand what feminists are saying, but I try. One seems to be saying that
women live in a society that puts in power men who believe that violence
against women is acceptable. Elevating her accusation to a fact, the writer
says that women should not have to prove their case when they bring sexual
harassment and assault charges, much less prove their “personal validity to
even be making a case against a man.”
the writer saying that any irate woman should have the right to inpugn a man
with an unchallenged charge? Do men and American society believe that violence
against women is acceptable? I think not, unless the violence is committed by
police. Americans seem to accept police violence against men, women, children,
the handicapped, and the family dog.
other writer says women have to sell themselves to live. She, despite a degree
from a prestigeous university, went to work as a stripper, lap dancer, and
apparently as a prostitute. She blames men for her poor decisions.
be clear, I sympathize with anyone who finds themselves in the position that
survival requires the sacrifice of their self-esteem. This happens to people
everywhere all over the world. It is not an unique experience of women.
woman who was a stripper writes that “what I learned in the strip club taught
me more about the realities of being a woman in the 21st century than anything
else has done.” It was there, she writes, that she learned that her handicaps
in life were her intelligence and sharp tongue, and “that while men dictated
the terms of my existence, women were complicit in maintaining systemic
inequality.” Complicit women, she writes, sliced off parts of her soul just as
caught my attention was her reference to “being a woman in the 21st century.”
How different that is from being a woman in the pre-feminist era that I
experienced. It was feminists who denounced men for putting women on a pedestal
and worshiping them. The inculcated respect that men showed women, doffing
their hats in their presence, standing when women entered the room, opening
doors for them, helping to seat them at tables, never using a four-letter word
in their presence, and never ever striking a woman, an action that would
isolate a man and deprive him of male friends.
my day, no one struck a woman. It was beyond the pale.
was the feminists who said that putting women on a pedestal was the male’s way
of disempowering women. What ignorant nonsense. The most powerful members of my
family were my grandmothers, mother, and aunts. Little decisions they left to the
men. The big decisions they made.
said that women had to reject the pedestal and come down into the male world
and prove their worth. It never occurred to feminists that women had more worth
and more power on the pedestal. Feminists taught women to be promiscuous.
Cosmopolitian magazine taught women to find fulfillment in orgasm with as many
sexual partners as they can find. A number of years ago I wrote about young men
telling me that they would like to get married, but every woman they knew had
been in bed with all of their classmates. They said they would feel funny
having their friends at their wedding who had sexual experience with their
contributed to worsening the position of women that feminists initiated. In my
day women were protected by families being in the same place. Any man who
abused his wife would be confronted by his father and mother, his wife’s father
and mother, his and her grandparents, his brothers and sisters, his wife’s
brothers and sisters, his aunts and uncles, her aunts and uncles, and by the
cousins of both.
the corporations did was to bust up this protective environment by sending its
employees to some distant location where the husband and wife were isolated
from family. Kids grew up never knowing their grandparents, aunts, uncles,
cousins, people they might see one or twice a year. Isolated from the normal
support systems, families broke apart, and the divorce rate soared.
society that lowers everything to survival and to profit destroys women and
men. That is what feminists should be complaining about.
But feminism has succumbed to Identity Politics and can only generate hatred of
men who find women appealing. Judging by the growth of homosexuality, there is
a reduction in the number of men who find women appealing. Consequently,
feminism is complicit in the destruction both of the status of women and of
Trump Should Prosecute the Illegal NSA / CIA Cabal
and Put Mueller in Jail
" ... the president must completely disempower
and dismantle Robert S. Mueller’s fraudulent rogue prosecution gang, which is
merely an extension of a larger corruption of power that is unparalleled in our
As I noted in an editorial
last week, President Donald Trump has only one viable option to repel the
partisan lynch mob now nipping at his heels in the form of a taxpayer-funded
pack of legal hyenas, masquerading as objective prosecutors under the droopy
eyes of old reliable deep state hatchet man Robert Swan Mueller III, the
special counsel appointed to “investigate” the Clinton-Podesta-Schiff-Democrat
Party-Corporate Media fabricated Russia collusion delusion.
Mueller is a partisan
hatchet man with a dirty past
As the GOP Congress finally
begins to stir, as rapid-fire events make it increasingly impossible to deny
the true nature of Mueller’s handpicked partisan hit squad of Trump-hating,
Hillary-supporting D.C. swamp lawyers and arrogant federal careerists, as
firings and other departures quickly erode the carefully-contrived,
totally-counterfeit veneer of credibility ascribed to Mueller and his
henchpeople, my advice to the president has only become more apropos…and more
President Trump can, and
must, kill two birds with one stone.
First, the president must
completely disempower and dismantle Robert S. Mueller’s fraudulent rogue
prosecution gang, which is merely an extension of a larger corruption of power
that is unparalleled in our history.
Second, the president must
use every resource at his disposal to prosecute the almost-seditious abuses of
power by lawless Clinton-Obama FBI and NSA apparatchiks who:
1) Politically weaponized
the federal government’s electronic intelligence capabilities to spy on a
presidential candidate and his campaign,
2) Colluded with foreign
and non-state intelligence agents to manufacture evidence used as false
pretexts for securing FISA warrants that employed the national security
laws of the United States to give illicit, illegal cover to this political
3) Used the fruits of this
political espionage activity to damage or otherwise hinder this candidate, once
he had become president-elect and eventually President of the United
States, through surreptitious releases of the criminally-procured information,
4) Fabricated and
instigated false allegations about foreign state collusion implicating the
president’s election campaign and family members, and
5) Perpetuated this massive
criminal fraud on the American people for nearly a full year by manipulating
and abusing the investigatory and prosecutorial powers of the Department of
To this end, President
Trump must begin at the intersection of these seditious current and former
federal officials who had previously facilitated and covered up a similarly-breathtaking
and brazen criminal fraud on the country during the previous presidential
administration, to include the previous president.
The president must order
his Attorney General to appoint a special counsel to investigate the
Obama-Clinton-Mueller-Rosenstein criminal collusion that enriched the
Clinton-Democrat crime syndicate by 100s of millions of dollars and further
embedded the power of the deep state operators who facilitated what may be the
most brazen of self-serving criminal treasons in American history: the
multi-billion-dollar Uranium One pay-to-play scam.
This incredible scheme
perpetrated by the criminal Clintons and their coterie of minions and fellow
travelers, implicates top officials of our federal government…including and
especially the U.S Department of Justice, including and especially Robert
Mueller and Rod Rosenstein.
This course of action is
manifestly in the best interests of this country and of justice. It is not some
political maneuver against the president’s cynical partisan persecutors or some
clever machination to spare his presidency from the illegitimate cabal that is
single-minded in its intent to fraudulently remove the president from office,
by any means possible.
This action by the
president is both legally and constitutionally necessary to preserve any
remaining credibility in our institutions of government, which now hinges on
whether or not justice will, once and for all, be visited upon the Clintons and
their well-placed partisan accomplices, finally vindicating our system of law
and justice after decades of brazen, yet unpunished, corruption that the
Clintons and their ilk have insinuated into these institutions, bringing
unparalleled and a now-accelerating degradation to American civic life itself.
lawmakers have already demanded the resignation of Robert Mueller, as a start,
and are calling for a thorough probe of his entire ad hoc operation, which is
now coming apart at the seams with almost daily revelations of its rotten
Mueller’s decades as an
establishment federal careerist, which only ended with his ceding of the FBI’s
top job to his good pal, criminal leaker and manipulator Big Jim Comey, offer
more than enough grounds for Mueller’s disqualification for merely the appearances
of impropriety and professional conflicts of interest they raise, just at the
outset. They are of such incestuous nature as it concerns key figures of the
conspiracy to remove the president that Mueller should never even have been
considered for appointment.
That Mueller took the
Special Counsel appointment without even blinking, despite his own close
professional and personal connections to key figures implicated in the DOJ, NSA
and FBI corruption in service to ulterior partisan ends, via the Clinton crime
family, was a major red flag, right from the beginning.
Reinforcing this red flag
was the fact that Mueller’s entire (supposed) vetting for this sensitive,
consequential special counsel position amounted a single-sentence approval
letter signed by some faceless Deputy AG barely a day after the appointment was
Aside from Mueller’s
blatant disregard for both attorney and public service ethics in accepting the
special counsel appointment, some GOP lawmakers have also cited the former FBI
director’s close involvement with the Obama administration’s secret
Russian-U.S. uranium deal as more than enough reason for his immediate removal
and the commencement of a real (untainted) investigation of the Obama-Clinton
Russia-connected treason that Mueller has been instrumental in abetting and
So exactly what is the
story with Uranium One?? The short version is that in 2010, when Mueller was
FBI director, the Obama administration and then Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton approved and facilitated a highly-suspicious business deal that had
grave public implication in that the result of it was that Barack Obama and
Hillary Clinton effectively handed Russia and Vladimir Putin control over
upwards of 20% of the uranium assets of the United States.
As this deal was coming to
fruition, after years of nefarious Clintonian machinations urging it along,
Mueller’s FBI was not only investigating, but had uncovered clear evidence of,
Russian bribery and fraud to the detriment of U.S. uranium contractors, as part
of a larger Russian (Putin) racketeering scheme to gain control of global
uranium resources, namely by purchasing the power and influence being peddled
by the Clintons to anyone who would meet their terms.
As early as 2009, the FBI
had obtained evidence (secret recordings and intercepted emails) showing that a
Moscow-compromised uranium trucking company called Tenex was engaged in
racketeering through a pattern of bribes and kickbacks in violation of the
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. At the same time, Russian nuclear officials were
routing millions of dollars to benefit the Clinton Foundation. Mueller’s
evidence even included a secret informant willing to testify to these illicit
Tenex was operating out of
Bethesda, Maryland through a subsidiary named “Tenam USA.” The company was run
by a corrupt Russian official named Vadim Mikerin. As the FBI was investigating
Tenam’s extortion and bribery scheme, Russia was seeking permission from the
Obama administration and the Clinton State Department to acquire ownership of
Uranium One. Despite evidence of Tenex and Mikerim’s ongoing corruption as
early as 2009, the Obama administration rubber-stamped a U.S. work visa twice
for Mikerim, as late as 2014.
And what did our intrepid
paragon of justice Robert Swan Mueller III do to thwart this brazen scheming
and arrest its perpetrators? The answer is absolutely NOTHING. In fact, and
even worse, the deep state’s Russia collusion fantasy crusader Mueller actually
moved to silence the FBI’s confidential informant, forcing the informant to
sign a non-disclosure agreement. This otherwise-inexplicable gag order on a key
witness to the Clinton-Russia uranium treason was only just lifted on October
25, 2017, a full seven years after the fact, under pressure from Congressional
intelligence committee leadership.
Robert Mueller ensured that
his own FBI investigators were effectively walled off from exposing the real
players in our own government who were complicit in this epic
influence-peddling scam founded on the Clintons’ ruthless greed and epic
Obama’s Justice Department
and Mueller’s FBI knowingly kept Congress and the American people in the dark
about Russia’s significant and illegal manipulations involving American uranium
companies and the highest officials of American government, first and foremost
among them U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. The result was that
the Clintons’ criminal treason, in collusion with Russian nuclear criminals,
went full steam ahead, unperturbed.
Mueller’s key role in the
covering up of these Russia-Clinton uranium dealings constitutes more than
enough justification for Robert Mueller’s immediate and unceremonious removal —
an autonomous, secretive inquisitor limitlessly probing the newly-inaugurated
president who defeated his former Obama administration crony Hillary Clinton.
There are probably a dozen
other reasons why Mueller should be criminally charged, but for now let’s just
focus on this most heinous of schemes to which Mueller has been party: the
transfer of our precious uranium resources to criminal Russian oligarchs to
benefit the Clinton-Obama crime junta and sleazy hucksters from the ranks of
the Democrat party.
How is it even possible
that Russia (a supposed enemy) could acquire a 20% interest in U.S. uranium
production, you might ask. The answer is that while Hillary Clinton was
Secretary of State under President Barack Obama, the Russian atomic energy
agency, Rosatom, was handed official U.S. Government authorization to purchase
a Canadian company named Uranium One which controlled uranium mining stakes
stretching from Central Asia to the American West, including approximately 20%
of America’s known uranium resources.
Uranium One, as handed over
to the Russians by Obama-Clinton, was effectively the creation of a Canadian
entrepreneur named Frank Giustra. Mr. Giustra “coincidentally” and quite
conveniently happened to be a major Clinton donor and a personal friend of Bill
Bill Clinton and Frank
The Clinton-Giustra genesis
of the Uranium One scam was detailed in a lengthy New York Times story
in April 2015 titled “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium
Deal.” [Based on the old Grey Lady’s incessant animus for Donald
Trump and its complicity in puffing up the Russia collusion delusion about the
president, it would seem that amnesia is the order of the day at the Times.]
In 2005, Clinton was flown
on Giustra’s lavish private jet to Kazakhstan, a central Asian country once
part of the former Soviet Union. Kazakhstan possesses around 12 percent of the
world’s uranium resources and Giustra wanted to acquire ownership interest in
several uranium mines.
Using his substantial
network of contacts as a former U.S. President, Bill Clinton had arranged for
himself and Giustra to dine with Kazakhstan’s despotic ruler, Nursultan
Nazarbayev. During the meal, Clinton handed the Kazakh president a propaganda
coup when Clinton expressed support for Nazarbayev’s bid to head an
international elections monitoring group.
Apparently, it was of no
consequence or concern to officialdom in Washington that this move by Clinton
ran directly counter to American foreign policy and undermined much-deserved
criticism of Kazakhstan’s poor human rights record by, among others, Clinton’s
wife, at the time a U.S. senator.
The new company Giustra
formed to effectuate the Uranium One deal, UrAsia Energy Ltd., signed a
preliminary deal giving it stakes in three uranium mines controlled by
Kazatomprom, the government agency that runs Kazakhstan’s uranium mines and
nuclear energy industry. In 2007 UrAsia merged with Uranium One in what was
described as a $3.5 billion transaction, with the successor company retaining
the name Uranium One.
president of Kazatomprom, subsequently revealed that then-Senator Hillary
Clinton had pressured Kazakh officials to cede the uranium rights to Giustra.
Hillary served as the stick to her husband Bill’s proverbial carrot in making
the deal happen.
According to the Washington
Post, Dzhakishev “described the deal as 'a financing mechanism of the
Democratic Party' and said a Clinton adviser named Tim Phillips championed it
in meetings with him and other officials.”
From the same WaPo article:
“At the time, Clinton
denied taking any action to support Giustra’s purchase. Giustra also said
Clinton played no role in the deal and rejected any link between the deal and
his Clinton Foundation donations.
But in the leaked video of
him speaking to the authorities, Dzhakishev said a senior Kazakh official told
him to look into the deal after then-Sen. Hillary Clinton canceled a meeting
with him. Dzhakishev said he was told that “investors who currently work in
Kazakhstan and have ties to Clinton have problems and meetings will be resumed
only after Kazakhstan resolves the problems.”
“I called them, and they
came. I met them in Astana and then Clinton’s aide, Tim Phillips, began to
scream that this deal involves Democrats and is financed by them, and that we
were hampering the deal,” Dzhakishev said.
When all was said and done,
UrAsia’s investors controlled the new Uranium One. Chairman of the new company
was Canadian Ian Telfer. Telfer donated $2.3 million to the Clinton Foundation.
Frank Giustra, who had
shepherded Bill Clinton’s influence with the Kazakhstanis, held a personal
stake in the deal estimated at about $45 million. Through a spokesperson,
Giustra said he sold his stake in 2007. According to the New York Times,
one year after the 2005 uranium deal was final Giustra donated $31.3 million to
the Clinton Foundation with a promise of $100 million more.
One adviser on the Uranium
One-UrAsia merger was Paul Reynolds. Reynolds donated $1 to $5 million to the
A company called U.S.
Global Investors Inc. held $4.7 million in Uranium One shares. A U.S. Global
executive named Frank Holmes donated $250,000 to $500,000 to the Clinton
This is just the short list
of Uranium One-connected donations that flowed back to the Clintons. Although
the Clintons had an obligation to report these donations, they conveniently
waited until 2008 to do so, and only when the New York Times was
poised to expose and publish details about this obvious multi-million dollar
As is modus operandi with
all of the Clintons’ sleazy machinations, any questions or suggestions posed
about the connections between shady Clinton influence-peddling business deals
and the inevitable cash windfalls realized by the Clintons were glibly
pooh-poohed as either mere coincidence (please) or lacking any “evidence” (as
if we need signed receipts and written agreements to connect the obvious dots
of the Clintons’ epic lucre).
With classic Clintonian
prevarication, treating the public as either blind, stupid or both, the
Clintons steadfastly deny the obvious quid pro quo connections at the root of
the Uranium One Kazakhstan acquisitions. Of course, the crony beneficiaries of
the deal know enough to follow suit with similar huffy denials, lest they meet
with an unfortunate premature demise like so many others who have dared run
afoul of the Clintons’ scamming and scheming, all the way back to the Arkansas
Bubba and Putin in 2010
contemporaneous with the Clinton uranium treason
Once Uranium One was set up
with the Kazakhstani uranium holdings and firmly in the control of Clinton
cronies, the stage was set for the next step in the Clintons’ treasonous plot:
handing over Uranium One and its holdings (including 20% of America’s uranium
resources) to the Russians, or more accurately to Vladimir Putin. The Clinton
cabal’s uranium wheelings and dealings began immediately at the commencement in
2009 of the Obama administration, under the close direction of newly-installed
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
In order for Russian
nuclear entity Rosatom to purchase Uranium One the deal required approval from
the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS. The
committee consists of top officials from nine different federal agencies. Not
surprisingly, given the foreign subject matter intrinsic to the committee’s
work, the key agency — the main driver out of all government players involved —
is the U.S. Department of State, conveniently headed by Mrs. Bill Clinton in
To be clear, Hillary
Clinton did not have the authority to push such a potentially-controversial
deal through by herself. Such power ultimately resides with the president, in
this case, Barack H. Obama. But also joining Madame Clinton on the CFIUS was
the contemptible, corrupt, partisan U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.
Under the careful
orchestration of the Obama-Clinton-Democrat graft artists, the CFIUS voted
twice, first in 2010 and then in 2013, to approve Rosatom’s acquisition of
Uranium One, thereby giving Vladimir Putin control of 20% of all U.S. uranium.
It would be ridiculous to
think that Obama, Hillary, Holder, and Mueller would not have been well aware
of the FBI’s investigation into the Russian racketeering and all of the bribes
and kickbacks, in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, that formed a
backdrop to the Uranium One acquisition by Russia.
These sworn federal
officials did not step in to expose and halt the tainted Uranium One deal, they
quite unabashedly cleared the way for it. Robert Mueller, far from being just
the head of the FBI investigating Russia’s racketeering activities around the
deal, seems to have in fact been an active participant in it, going so far as
to personally deliver ten grams of HEU (highly enriched uranium) to the
Russians in September 2009.
The HEU in question had
been confiscated in 2006 by the U.S. Department of Energy in a “nuclear
smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian
accomplices.” A cable, one of several released by WikiLeaks details Director
Mueller’s mission to personally deliver the HEU to Russian law enforcement at
the behest of Hillary Clinton.
Another interesting bit of
“innocent timing” or convenient coincidence (take your pick): in June of 2010,
the same month that Rosatom struck its deal for a majority stake in Uranium
One, Bill Clinton spoke in Moscow for the tidy sum of $500,000, the 2nd highest
fee he had ever received for a speech.
dollar bonanza for 90 minutes “work” was paid by Renaissance Capital, a Russian
investment bank with ties to the Kremlin. Renaissance Capital analysts talked
up Uranium One’s stock, assigning it a “buy” rating and saying in a July 2010
research report that it was “the best play” in the uranium markets. Of course
this, too, is just a “coincidence.”
If you think all of these
connections and occurrences are too mind-boggling to accept as mere
coincidence, hold on to your seat for this next one. Remember how the
Tenam/Rosatom racketeering activities were centered in Bethesda, Maryland at
the Tenex U.S. offices? As rank-and-file FBI agents were assiduously
investigating these Russian schemes to obtain U.S. uranium resources through
the corruption of public officials, Robert Mueller knew he had to suppress the
case, what with Hillary impatiently waiting in the background for the deal to
close so she and Bill could realize the multi-million dollar windfalls to their
Since the case technically
arose in Maryland, Mueller moved to hand it to a trusted ally who conveniently
happened to be a prosecutor with jurisdiction over the case. Mueller had known
this prosecutor for over 20 years. In fact, the prosecutor’s career began as a
trial attorney working for Mueller in (ironically) the Public Integrity Section
of the DOJ’s Criminal Division.
At the time Mueller handed
his longtime legal crony the Uranium One case to be buried and forgotten,
clearing the way for approval of the Rosatom deal by the Obama administration
and Hillary Clinton, the attorney was serving as United States Attorney for the
District of Maryland. His name was Rod Rosenstein.
And the rest is history. I
leave you, good reader, to draw the obvious conclusions about what is
really behind this cozy little bromance between Robert Mueller and Rod
Rosenstein, the two lawyers who promulgated Mueller’s grotesque, unaccountable
partisan hit squad that is clearly intent on taking out our president.
Let’s not forget what
Donald Trump said to Hillary Clinton and the entire nation in a televised
presidential debate on October 9, 2016:
“I’ll tell you what. I
didn’t think I’d say this, but I’m going to say it, and I hate to say it. But
if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special
prosecutor to look into your situation, because there has never been so many
lies, so much deception. There has never been anything like it, and we’re going
to have a special prosecutor.”
After his election, Donald
Trump chose to be magnanimous and forward-looking rather than follow-through on
his words and appoint that special prosecutor. Trump naively thought he could
commence his presidency free from the tentacles of his seething, embittered
dragon lady of an opponent.
Donald Trump genuinely did
not want his presidency tangled up with the Clinton stain. He knew it this
would be impossible to avoid were he to see to the much-deserved prosecution of
Hillary Clinton and her extensive syndicate of cohorts, cronies, flunkies and
fellow travelers, including the likes of Mueller and Rosenstein, for their
countless crimes and endless scandals.
Unfortunately for him, they
gave him his “special prosecutor.” And now this prosecutor is ruthlessly and
illegitimately driving towards nothing less than a coup d’etat, ending with
Donald Trump’s being removed from his duly-elected office.
It is time for President
Trump to end this despicable sedition and begin the work of draining the