Tag Archives: Russiagate

Chris Hedges: Russiagate Spells Journalism’s Death

The attempt to ignore Jeff Gerth’s monumental study of press malfeasance during Russiagate is almost as bad as the actual malfeasance. From Chris Hedges at consortiumnews.com:

Jeff Gerth’s exhaustive look at the systemic press failure in covering allegations of pro-Trump Russian interference in the 2016 election has been followed by an ominous silence.

De-Pressed – Mr. Fish.

Reporters make mistakes. It is the nature of the trade. There are always a few stories we wish were reported more carefully. Writing on deadline with often only a few hours before publication is an imperfect art.

But when mistakes occur, they must be acknowledged and publicized. To cover them up, to pretend they did not happen, destroys our credibility. Once this credibility is gone, the press becomes nothing more than an echo chamber for a selected demographic. This, unfortunately, is the model that now defines the commercial media.

The failure to report accurately on the Trump-Russia saga for the four years of the Trump presidency is bad enough. What is worse, major media organizations, which produced thousands of stories and reports that were false, refuse to engage in a serious postmortem.

The systematic failure was so egregious and widespread that it casts a very troubling shadow over the press. How do CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, The Washington Post, The New York Times and Mother Jones admit that for four years they reported salacious, unverified gossip as fact?

How do they level with viewers and readers that the most basic rules of journalism were ignored to participate in a witch hunt, a virulent New McCarthyism? How do they explain to the public that their hatred for Trump led them to accuse him, for years, of activities and crimes he did not commit? How do they justify their current lack of transparency and dishonesty?

Continue reading

PATRICK LAWRENCE: The Press Reckoning on Russiagate

Jeff Gerth’s Columbia Journalism Review article should be earth shattering, and it would be if anyone in the mainstream media paid attention to it. But they won’t. From Patrick Lawrence at consortiumnews.com:

Jeff Gerth’s investigation for The Columbia Journalism Review exposes the dark heart of the news media’s coverage of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections. 

Jack Anderson in 1973. (Rochester Institute of Technology, Public domain, Wikimedia Commons)

In the autumn of 1973, Jack Anderson, the wonderful iconoclast of the Washington press corps, published a syndicated column revealing that a Hearst Newspapers reporter had spied on Democratic presidential candidates in the service of Richard Nixon’s 1972 reelection campaign.

At the time of Anderson’s column, Seymour Frieden was a Hearst correspondent in London.  Anderson also reported, not quite in passing, but nearly, that Frieden tacitly acknowledged working for the Central Intelligence Agency.

Anderson’s column was as a pebble tossed in a pond. The ripples grew, if slowly at first.

William Colby, the C.I.A.’s recently named director, responded with a standard agency maneuver: When news is going to break against you, disclose the minimum, bury the rest, and maintain control of what we now call “the narrative.”

Colby “leaked” to a Washington Star–News reporter named Oswald Johnston. The paper fronted Johnston’s piece on Nov. 30, 1973. “The Central Intelligence Agency,” it began, “has some three dozen American journalists working abroad on its payroll as undercover informants, some of them full-time agents, the Star–News has learned.”

April 24, 1975: C.I.A. Director William Colby, right, with Vice President Nelson Rockefeller, left, and Deputy Assistant For National Security Affairs Brent Scowcroft during a break in a meeting of the National Security Council. (Public domain, Wikimedia Commons)

Continue reading→

New Email Reveals Answer To Establishment’s Efforts To Oust Trump, by Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke

A newly discovered email uncovers a whole host of previously unknown lies and destroying what’s left of the narrative. From Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke at The Epoch Time via zerohedge.com:

An FBI email previously not known to the public has revealed that the bureau planned to make Igor Danchenko—the primary source for British former spy Christopher Steele’s Trump dossier—a confidential human source (CHS) before it had even interviewed him. 

(L–R) Former FBI agent Peter Strzok; former FBI Director James Comey; and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. (Getty Images/Illustration by The Epoch Times)

The revelation, which was discovered as a result of special counsel John Durham’s case against Danchenko, indicates that the FBI deliberately targeted 2016 presidential candidate and later President Donald Trump with claims it already knew at the time to be false.

The email—of which only the subject line has been made public—was first uncovered by an internet sleuth who goes by the moniker “Walkafyre” and was included in hundreds of unused exhibits from Danchenko’s trial.

The FBI used Danchenko—who was acquitted last week on all charges of lying to the FBI—in its investigation of Trump, despite knowing that Danchenko had helped fabricate the dossier.

With the benefit of this new information, a renewed examination of the timeline between the Nov. 8, 2016, presidential election and the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller on May 17, 2017, reveals that the FBI—with the help of the Obama administration and Washington establishment figures—executed a concerted campaign to oust a sitting president.

Email Reveals FBI’s Plan for Danchenko

The newly discovered email was sent by FBI agent Kevin Helson to unknown recipients on Jan. 12, 2017. The email’s heading reads “Plan to Convert Danchenko into CHS.”

This email is critical for several reasons. It shows that the FBI intended to hide Steele’s main source behind CHS status after they had previously discovered Steele couldn’t back up the claims in his dossier despite their offer of $1 million to him for any corroboration. As a CHS, Danchenko also would be shielded from any external investigations—including those of Congress.

Continue reading→

Mystery solved: DOJ secretly thwarted release of Russia documents declassified by Trump, by John Solomon

The illegalities just keep cascading from the FBI and Department of Justice. From John Solomon at justthenews.com:

Department used last-minute privacy concerns to halt release, then ignored direct order from president to make memos public.

In the final hours of the Trump presidency, the U.S. Justice Department raised privacy concerns to thwart the release of hundreds of pages of documents that Donald Trump had declassified to expose FBI abuses during the Russia collusion probe, and the agency then defied a subsequent order to release the materials after redactions were made, according to interviews and documents.

The previously untold story of how highly anticipated declassified material never became public is contained in a memo obtained by Just the News from the National Archives that was written by then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows just hours before Trump left office on noon of Jan. 20, 2021.

Meadows’ memo confirmed prior reporting by Just the News that Trump on Jan. 19, 2021 declassified a binder of hundreds of pages of sensitive FBI documents that show how the bureau used informants and FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign and misled both a federal court and Congress about flaws in the evidence they offered to get approval for the investigation.

Continue reading→

Shouldn’t Hillary Clinton Be Banned From Twitter Now? By Matt Taibbi

Russiagate has been a lie from day one and Clinton knew it. Yet, not a Russiagate or Hillary Clinton tweet has been banned from Twitter. From Matt Taibbi at taibbi.substack.com:

Trial testimony reveals Hillary Clinton personally approved serious election misinformation. Is there an anti-Trump exception to content moderation?

Last week, in the trial of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis asked ex-campaign manager Robby Mook about the decision to share with a reporter a bogus story about Donald Trump and Russia’s Alfa Bank. Mook answered by giving up his onetime boss. “I discussed it with Hillary,” he said, describing his pitch to the candidate: “Hey, you know, we have this, and we want to share it with a reporter… She agreed to that.”

In a country with a functioning media system, this would have been a huge story. Obviously this isn’t Watergate, Hillary Clinton was never president, and Sussmann’s trial doesn’t equate to prosecutions of people like Chuck Colson or Gordon Liddy. But as we’ve slowly been learning for years, a massive fraud was perpetrated on the public with Russiagate, and Mook’s testimony added a substantial piece of the picture, implicating one of the country’s most prominent politicians in one of the more ambitious disinformation campaigns we’ve seen.

Continue reading→

Hillary Factor: Evidence now shows false Russia collusion story began and ended with Clinton, by John Solomon

Most readers at this site probably knew long ago that Hillary and her people were behind Russiagate. However, it looks like Durham may be pursuing facts and a case that would put her at the defendant’s table. From John Solomon at justthenews.com:

Sussmann trial testimony confirms earlier CIA, FBI evidence that Hillary Clinton approved dirtying up Trump with unproven Russia allegations.

In an era where the hunt for disinformation has become a political obsession, Hillary Clinton has mostly escaped having to answer what role she played in spreading the false Russia collusion narrative that gripped America for nearly three years.

On Friday, that dodge ended with a most unlikely witness: her former campaign manager Robby Mook, who was supposed to be a witness helping the defense of her former campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann on a charge of lying to the FBI.

Instead, under cross-examination by Special Counsel John Durham’s team, Mook was forced to concede two extraordinary facts.

First, the Clinton campaign wasn’t “totally confident” about the accuracy of computer data suggesting Donald Trump had a secret communications channel to the Kremlin via Russia’s Alfa Bank.

Continue reading→

What it means that Hillary Clinton did it, by David Zukerman

It looks like, to use a favorite media phrase, that the walls are closing in on Hillary Clinton. From David Zukerman at americanthinker.com:

The Wall Street Journal ran a scathing editorial on May 20, called “Hillary Clinton Did It“.

This editorial began: “The Russia-Trump collusion narrative of 2016 was a dirty trick for the ages — and now we know it came from the top — candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.” The editorial quickly explained: “That was the testimony Friday by 2016 Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook in federal court [in Washington, D.C.], and while this news is hardly a surprise, it’s still bracing to find her fingertips on the political weapon.” (Also not surprisingly, The May 20 print edition of The New York Times did not include a story on Mook’s testimony.)

Mook’s testimony was heard at the trial of attorney Michael Sussman, charged with lying to the FBI in calling to their attention a story that Donald J. Trump, by means of connections with Russia’s Alfa Bank, was colluding with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The lie at issue was not the false claim about a Trump-Alfa connection, but the charge that Sussman brought this matter to the FBI as a good citizen, and not as a representative of the Clinton campaign.

Continue reading→

Breaking Down The Flurry Of Legal Filings By Clinton Campaign Associates In Durham Case, by Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke

Durham inches closer and closer to something big, and his targets know it. From Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke at The Epoch Times via zerohedge.com:

In a coordinated legal action between a number of Hillary Clinton operatives and associates, almost two dozen separate documents were simultaneously filed on April 19 in special counsel John Durham’s case against former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann.

(Getty Images, Justice Department; Illustration by The Epoch Times)

This sudden flurry of mass filings included responses from former Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta, campaign manager Robby Mook, Clinton campaign lead lawyer Marc Elias, contractors Fusion GPS, the Clinton campaign itself, and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

The trigger for the flurry of filings was a request by Durham to unseal a number of emails involving the parties. The emails are currently being withheld on very questionable grounds of attorney–client privilege. Based on the coordinated filings, it appears that a large number of important people associated with the Clinton campaign are very concerned about the information in those emails becoming public.

Continue reading→

The Russiagate Hoax Goes Much Deeper Than We Thought, by Peter Van Buren

One hates to allow one’s self even a scintilla of optimism, but it looks like Durham’s investigation may be closing in on the big fish. Let’s hope he doesn’t have an unfortunate accident and we get a chance to see how it all plays out. From Peter Van Buren at libertarianinstitute.org:

The latest filing by Special Counsel John Durham, investigating Russiagate and the Hillary Clinton campaign, suggests the rabbit hole goes a bit deeper than we thought. One hates to sound like Rachel Maddow, but it is just that much more likely the walls are closing in.

Durham filed a new, 34-page motion on April 15, 2022, in answer to defendant Michael Sussman’s request to dismiss the case against him. Durham accused Sussman of lying to the FBI about his working for the Clinton Campaign while he was trying to sell the Bureau on an investigation into Trump’s ties to Russia, focusing on alleged Internet pings between a Trump server and the Russian Alfa Bank. Sussman’s claims also included a number of pings against Trump Tower WiFi and later White House WiFi by a Russian-made Yota cell phone.

Sussman’s motion basically called Durham case garbage, which pressed Durham to explain to the court why the case needed to proceed, hence the new motion. The court subsequently ruled against Sussman and the full trial will commence May 15.

As he has done in the past, Durham used the required motion as a chance to tip over a few cards he is holding. It looks like aces.

Continue reading→

Re-Visiting Russiagate In Light Of The Ukraine War, by Caitlin Johnstone

President Trump was repeatedly tagged as being a Putin puppet, but he sent arms to Ukraine, which Obama had refused to do. The Russiagate smear was as much to smear Putin as it was Trump. From Caitlin Johnstone at caitlinjohnstone.com:

It’s hard to believe that the last president spent his term pouring weapons into Ukraine, shredding treaties with Russia and ramping up cold war escalations against Moscow which helped lead us directly to the extraordinarily dangerous situation we now find ourselves in, and yet mainstream liberals spent his entire administration screaming that he was a Kremlin puppet.

A lot of anti-empire commentary is rightly going into criticizing how the Obama administration paved the way to this conflict in Ukraine with its role in the 2014 coup and support for Kyiv’s war against Donbass separatists. But what’s getting lost in all this, largely because Trumpites have been using their mainstream numbers to loudly amplify criticisms of the role of the Obama and Biden administrations in this mess, is what happened between those two presidencies which was just as crucial in getting us here.

Though it’s been scrubbed from mainstream liberal history, it was actually the Trump administration that began the US policy of arming Ukraine in the first place. Obama had refused forceful demands from neocons and liberal hawks to do so because he feared it would provoke an attack by Russia.

Continue reading→