Deep Politics Forum

Newsweek presstitute Kurt Eichenwald claims Trump was addicted to amphetamines and placed in a mental hospital following a breakdown in 1990.

Asked to substantiate the claim, the presstitute waffles, then seeks recourse (at approximately 8 mins and 15 mins) to that old stand-by, patriotic CIA sources.

Newsweek Sr. Editor GOES NUTS on Tucker Carlson Show

Published on Dec 15, 2016

[video=youtube_share;_nJazT_uww8]http://youtu.be/_nJazT_uww8[/video]

Tracy Riddle Wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat...dd4d893c5e

FBI backs CIA view that Russia intervened to help Trump win election
By Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima December 16 at 2:20 PM

FBI Director James B. Comey and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. have backed a CIA assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election in part to help Donald Trump win the presidency, according to U.S. officials.
Comey's support for the CIA's conclusion suggests that the leaders of the three agencies are in agreement on Russian intentions, contrary to suggestions by some lawmakers that the FBI disagreed with the CIA.
"Earlier this week, I met separately with (Director) FBI James Comey and DNI Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election," CIA Director John Brennan said in a message to the agency's workforce, according to U.S. officials who have seen the message.
"The three of us also agree that our organizations, along with others, need to focus on completing the thorough review of this issue that has been directed by President Obama and which is being led by the DNI," Brennan's message read.
Trump has consistently dismissed the intelligence community's findings about Russian hacking.
The CIA and FBI declined to comment.
The CIA shared its latest assessment with key senators in a closed-door briefing on Capitol Hill about two weeks ago in which agency officials cited a growing body of intelligence from multiple sources. Specifically, CIA briefers told the senators it was now "quite clear" that electing Trump was one of Russia's goals, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.
CIA and FBI officials do not think Russia had a "single purpose" by intervening during the presidential campaign. In addition to helping Trump, intelligence officials have told lawmakers that Moscow's other goal included undermining confidence in the U.S. electoral system.
A separate House intelligence briefing by a senior FBI counterintelligence official last week left some Republican and Democratic lawmakers with the impression that the bureau wasn't on the same page as the CIA, according to officials present.
"The truth is they were never all that different in the first place," an official said of the FBI and CIA positions.
In his message to the CIA's workforce, Brennan said the administration has provided detailed briefings to lawmakers and their aides since the summer.
"In recent days, I have had several conversations with members of Congress, providing an update on the status of the review as well as the considerations that need to be taken into account as we proceed," Brennan wrote. "Many but unfortunately not all members understand and appreciate the importance and the gravity of the issue, and they are very supportive of the process that is underway."

I continue to speculate that this clusterfuck IS the plan. Just how, I don't know. But it can certainly give Obama "reasonable" cover to declare a state of emergency. And then we are in uncharted territory.

EDIT: I voted for Obama twice, and very unhappily for Hillary this last election.

Trump's Showdown With the CIA

Finian Cunningham

13 December 2016

https://sputniknews.com/columnists/20161...-with-cia/

Quote:It doesn't come more scathing than this. On nationwide television, US President-elect Donald Trump rubbished the Central Intelligence Agency as "ridiculous" for making claims that Russian hackers helped get him elected.

The CIA America's foremost intelligence apparatus set up after the Second World War by then President Harry Truman is supposed to be the guiding light for occupants of the White House on all matters geopolitical. And here we have aspiring White House occupant Donald Trump telling the CIA to shut up.

Over the last week, the spy agency was quoted by both the Washington Post and New York Times as having informed anonymous government officials that there was "high confidence" that Russian-sponsored hackers had interfered in the US presidential election in favor of Trump over his Democrat rival Hillary Clinton. The alleged modus operandi to sway the election was the leaking of private emails to whistleblower site Wikileaks which implicated Clinton in big business corruption and fomenting foreign wars, among other scandals. It's a sensational claim, especially given that the CIA or its unnamed official conduits quoted by the US' two most prominent newspapers have provided zero evidence to support their contention of Russian malfeasance. Russia has flatly denied the accusations. As has Wikileaks.

In effect, the explosive insinuation is that Trump's election last month is invalid because voting was marred by foreign manipulation. In his subsequent slap-down of the CIA, Trump was clearly implying that the supposedly prestigious spy agency was far from competent. He said that the hacking of the Democrat party's emails could have been carried out by anybody, including "someone sitting in their bed somewhere". He also expressed skepticism on the specific claim that Russia was to blame. His campaign team went even further in its dismissal of the CIA, saying: "These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction." Adding insult to injury, Trump also disclosed that he is reducing the daily briefings customarily received by presidents to weekly meetings. "I don't need to hear the same words every day," he said, adding that "when something changes" then the CIA and can call him.

In a previous edition of this column it was speculated that the CIA and its secretive Deep State networks might pull off a "digital 9/11" on the day of the November 8 election to scupper a Trump victory. During the long run-up to the ballot, it was abundantly evident that the US political establishment, including the CIA and mass media, favored Clinton to win. Her belligerent foreign policy towards Russia was certainly something that former CIA officials were endorsing.

As it turned out, Trump's election blindsided the US establishment. The latter were sure Clinton was a shoo-in. The bolt from nowhere may be why the powers-that-be appeared slow to react on Trump's election. The latest dredging up of allegations about Russian hackers getting Trump into the White House seems to be part of a retrospective action by the Deep State to call the presidential election in the way that it sees fit.

It is worth noting that from a constitutional viewpoint Trump's inauguration as 45th president is not finalized. Legal challenges are underway aimed at forcing the decisive Electoral College to overturn earlier votes for Trump.

If enough brouhaha is whipped up over alleged Russian interference in the US election and large sections of the US corporate media seem all too willing to do that then a critical number of Electoral College votes might be revoked in Clinton's favor.

Trump appears to be aware of this stealth agenda. As well as lambasting the CIA's "Russian hacker" claims as rubbish, he also said that it was a brazen partisan effort by his Democrat rival and her powerful backers to overturn an election result that they did not accept.

In short, Trump is inferring an electoral coup attempt. But even if the CIA and its spooks fail to thwart Trump in taking the White House, an alternative, less controversial option is to smear the next president as a Russian stooge. That charge has already been made during the election campaign when Trump was denigrated by Clinton and media pundits for being a "puppet" of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Following Trump's election victory, those charges notably disappeared from public discourse.

However, the recent resurfacing of CIA claims that Russia interfered in the election serves to recall earlier smears. That in turn seems designed to curtail Trump's stated foreign policy objective of normalizing US-Russia relations. In particular, Trump has said he wants to work with Russia on resolving the Syrian and Ukrainian conflicts.

In recent days, Trump has flagged the possibility of appointing ExxonMobil boss Rex Tillerson as the next Secretary of State. The oil tycoon has extensive industry links with Russia as well as reportedly cordial personal relations with president Putin. He has publicly opposed the erstwhile US sanctions policy on Russia as counterproductive.

Trump's consideration of Rex Tillerson for the top diplomat position has provoked disapproving media headlines that such a choice is "proof" of Russia's hand in steering the US election.

In the wake of sensational CIA claims that Russia interfered to get Trump elected, one can see how his presidency will be dogged by ongoing aspersions that his policies are somehow hostage to the Kremlin's orchestration.

One way or another, however, whether the Deep State can succeed in thwarting Trump taking the White House or rather confines itself to warping his foreign policy towards Russia, the reality is that Trump seems to be on a collision course with his top spooks.

Trump's brusque attitude toward the CIA over its claims of Russian subversion suggest that he is prepared for a bruising encounter. So much so that the Washington Post is reporting that personnel within the agency are anxious that Trump in office will exact retribution with mass sackings at the agency's Langley headquarters.

There was a time when no US president would dare take on the CIA, such was the agency's fearsome reputation for dirty tricks and political assassinations. Only one president pushed that envelope. John F Kennedy threatened to smash the CIA into a "thousand pieces and throw it to the wind" following the Bay of Pigs fiasco in 1961. Two years later, the CIA and its mafia contractors had JFK murdered in broad daylight in Dallas, Texas.

If Trump follows through on his showdown with the CIA, he will have to tread carefully. But, as with other tentacles of the US empire, the CIA is no longer the same all-powerful agency it once was.

The American public have become more attuned to how the Deep State operates through its fake news media conduits in order to propagandize and manage perception. That is partly why the US media is currently floundering from a credibility crisis.

Significantly too, the US domestic crime agency, the FBI, has pointedly declined to support the CIA's reported contentions about Russian interference in the US election. Moreover, quite a few senior US lawmakers in Congress have expressed skepticism over the CIA claims.

The time for muzzling the CIA may be at hand.

Clinton Says Personal Beef' by Putin Led to Hacking Attacks

By AMY CHOZICK

DEC. 16, 2016

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/16/us/pol...ebook&_r=0

Quote:Hillary Clinton said on Thursday that the hacking attacks carried out by Russia against her campaign and the Democratic National Committee were intended "to undermine our democracy" and were ordered by Vladimir V. Putin "because he has a personal beef against me."

Speaking to a group of donors in Manhattan, Mrs. Clinton said that Mr. Putin, the Russian president, had never forgiven her for the accusation she made in 2011, when she was secretary of state, that parliamentary elections his country held that year were rigged.

"Putin publicly blamed me for the outpouring of outrage by his own people, and that is the direct line between what he said back then and what he did in this election," Mrs. Clinton said.

It is the first time Mrs. Clinton has publicly addressed the impact of the hacks since the intelligence community concluded that they were specifically aimed at harming her campaign.

"Make no mistake, as the press is finally catching up to the facts, which we desperately tried to present to them during the last months of the campaign," Mrs. Clinton told the group, which collectively poured roughly $1 billion into her effort. "This is not just an attack on me and my campaign, although that may have added fuel to it. This is an attack against our country. We are well beyond normal political concerns here. This is about the integrity of our democracy and the security of our nation."

In her remarks, she endorsed the proposal of a bipartisan group of senators to investigate the hacking and said the inquiry should be modeled on the commission set up after the Sept. 11 attacks. "The public deserves to know exactly what happened, and why, in order for us to prevent future attacks on our systems, including our electoral system," she said.

Mrs. Clinton said the hacking was one of two "unprecedented" events that led to her defeat. The other was the release of a letter by James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, shortly before the election disclosing new questions about emails handled by her private server. The letter, she said, cost her close races in several battleground states.

"Swing-state voters made their decisions in the final days breaking against me because of the F.B.I. letter from Director Comey," she said.

Mrs. Clinton first talked about the impact of Mr. Comey's letters in a conference call with donors a few days after the election. Since the election she has kept a low profile, mostly appearing on social media in photographs by passers-by who have spotted her walking her dogs near her home in Chappaqua, N.Y.

Proven hacking:

Georgia Sec. of State claims DHS hacks his office during elections

Published on December 16, 2016

https://off-guardian.org/2016/12/16/geor...elections/

Brian Kemp, the secretary of State for Georgia, has joined his voice to the choir of American political figures decrying the "hacking" of American politics. The only trouble is, he's pointing fingers at the wrong side.

Kemp told a local news station that his office regularly comes under cyber-attacks either the day before, or the day of, an election. The Republican Sec. of State claimed that ten different attacks, dating back to February of this year, could all be traced back not to the Russian government but to IP addresses associated with the Department of Homeland Security.

[video=youtube_share;n8wgA01IsJs]http://youtu.be/n8wgA01IsJs[/video]

DHS Caught Hacking Georgia Secretary of State Office During the Election (NOT RUSSIA)

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/georgia/georgi.../475707667

Georgia secretary of state says cyberattacks traced to DHS addresses

by: Aaron Diamant Updated: Dec 15, 2016 - 3:59 PM

Quote:ATLANTA - The Georgia Secretary of State's Office now confirms 10 separate cyberattacks on its network were all traced back to U.S. Department of Homeland Security addresses.

In an exclusive interview, a visibly frustrated Secretary of State Brian Kemp confirmed the attacks of different levels on his agency's network over the last 10 months. He says they all traced back to DHS internet provider addresses.

[WATCH: Sec. of State's office waiting to hear back from Trump administration over apparent hacking]

"We're being told something that they think they have it figured out, yet nobody's really showed us how this happened," Kemp said. "We need to know."

Kemp told Channel 2's Aaron Diamant his office's cybersecurity vendor discovered the additional so-called vulnerability scans to his network's firewall after a massive mid-November cyberattack triggered an internal investigation.

The Secretary of State's Office manages Georgia's elections, and most concerning for Kemp about the newly discovered scans is the timing.

The first one happened on Feb. 2, the day after Georgia's voter registration deadline. The next one took place just days before the SEC primary. Another occurred in May, the day before the general primary, and then two more took place in November, the day before and the day of the presidential election.

"It makes you wonder if somebody was trying to prove a point," Kemp said.

Last week, the DHS confirmed the large Nov. 15 attack traced back to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection internet gateway. But Kemp says the DHS' story about its source keeps changing.

"First it was an employee in Corpus Christi, and now it's a contractor in Georgia," Kemp said.

Unsatisfied with the response he got from DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson this week, Kemp fired off a letter Wednesday to loop in President-elect Donald Trump.

"We just need to ask the new administration to take a look at this and make sure that we get the truth the people of Georgia are deserving to know that and really demanding it," Kemp said.

Kemp says several of those scans came around the same time he testified before Congress about his opposition to a federal plan to classify election systems as "critical infrastructure," like power plants and financial systems.

Kemp believes Georgia's state-run election systems are already secure and doesn't think the feds should be involved.

The DHS did not return Diamant's emails seeking comment Tuesday.

Tracy Riddle Wrote:

Magda Hassan Wrote:

David Guyatt Wrote:"I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people,"

Kissinger's shameful statement on Chileans irresponsibly electing Salvador Allende which led to the CIA sponsoring a coup d'etat to install the awful Augusto Pinochet who instigated a bloody campaign of torture and repression thereafter.

I have been thinking of this exact quote while pondering the attempt to over turn the US election result.

Except that in any other country, the candidate who got 2.8 million more votes would be the winner. But thanks to our archaic electoral college system, that's not the case.

Yeah, weird system. Seems very undemocratic. But why has it been permitted to stay this way for so long? And why machine voting? Pencil and paper so much more secure.. And it doesn't matter how many votes you have if tptb want you gone you will be gone.

Magda Hassan Wrote:

David Guyatt Wrote:"I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people,"

Kissinger's shameful statement on Chileans irresponsibly electing Salvador Allende which led to the CIA sponsoring a coup d'etat to install the awful Augusto Pinochet who instigated a bloody campaign of torture and repression thereafter.

I have been thinking of this exact quote while pondering the attempt to over turn the US election result.

You and me both, Maggie. Clinton, the DNC and the Neocons are not doing what they're doing - trying to invalidate the election result - just for fun. I see that all this pointing to another coup attempt to be shortly be underway.

They want that war with Russia at all costs.

Quote:DECEMBER 15, 2016
The Democratic Party Allies with the CIA
by RENEE PARSONS




Email


It is nothing short of a massive paradox, bordering on the ridiculous, for the CIA to allege that Russian cyber attacks had influenced the outcome of the recent Presidential election "to favor one candidate over the other" and sought to "undermine confidence in the US electoral system." Seriously?


For the CIA, of all intel' sources to make that claim; the least credible, the most culpable of indiscriminate destruction of sovereign nations throughout the world since 1947, some while struggling to become democracies, is directly out of their "How to Initiate Regime Change 101" playbook which has proven so effective in the last sixty years. (See "Legacy of Ashes: History of the CIA" by Tim Weiner) That is sixty years of some of the most unhinged elements in the intelligence gathering world, sixty years of malicious skullduggery as well as unbridled murders and treasonous assassinations including JFK for his efforts to dismantle the Deep State. (See The Devil's Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA and the Rise of America's Secret Government" by David Talbot)


And now the CIA has added a new, politically-motivated Chapter entitled Regime Change at Home" including those democratically-challenged Democrats who refuse to accept responsibility for the election loss they themselves created, are now publicly identified as willing pawns and co-conspirators with the CIA. What a way to rebuild the party!


Last Friday, the ever reliable, CIA-accommodating WaPo, published yet another article totally dependent on anonymous sources and quoting from a secret' CIA assessment report. One might question what is the point of announcing the existence of a secret' document when the document itself is withheld from the public presumably, in CIA lingo, purely for propaganda purposes.


While the WaPo reports that intel agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government" and that those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intel community," yet the public has not been apprised of any arrest warrants being issued or any requests for extradition. What does that tell you?


According to the Post, "CIA officials told Senators it is now quite clear that electing Donald Trump was Russia's goal." Fortunately, there is a bulk of the American public who are no longer taken in by the MSM "fake news" or the myopic Democratic party for that matter when it comes to matters of foreign policy.


Speaking of fake news, with the Propornot list identifying 200 websites that reliably echo Russian propaganda" and Turning Point USA's Professor Watchlist of 200 "left wing extremist" professors implicit as tools for Mother Russia, will those journalist' whose names appeared in the Podesta email rsvp list from Wikileaks step up and reveal whether they are also on the CIA payroll. Such disclosure would go a long way toward clarifying where Fake News is originating.


Until the secret assessment' is made available for public review or the factual, annotated evidence is presented regarding Russian electoral influence and specifically how that "influence" was responsible for HRC's loss, the CIA should, as my grandfather would say, either "put up or shut up."


The CIA's allegations and its lack of substance were so unverifiable that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) which is responsible for the nation's seventeen intel agencies, has refused to endorse the CIA's assessment due to a lack of conclusive evidence" that Russia intended to elect Trump with the FBI casting doubts on the CIA's assertions as fuzzy' and ambiguous' despite the CIA's level of "high confidence" with a "consensus" which is another way of saying the assertion was not unanimous.


The distinction here is that while every country in the industrialized world, including Russia and the United States conduct some level of cyber surveillance, there is no way to distinguish the legal intent' of that surveillance. While the FBI, as a law enforcement agency has a legal evidentiary standard to meet for a court of law, the CIA has no such constraint. In light of the FBI's reluctance, retiring Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nv) has called for FBI Director James Comey to resign.


Challenging the CIA allegations has also come from former intel analyst and former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray who has called CIA claims "bullshit." "They are absolutely making it up" and putting himself in a potentially hazardous situation, he has said "I know who leaked them. I've met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it's an insider. It's a leak, not a hack…" An associate of Julian Assange, Murray further added that "I have watched incredulous as the CIA's blatant lie has grown and grown as a media story blatant because the CIA has made no attempt whatsoever to substantiate it. There is no Russian involvement in the leaks of emails showing Clinton's corruption."


But those critiques of the CIA assessment have not convinced the Democratic leadership on the House and Senate Intel Committees, Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Cal) and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Cal) from continuing to assert that "Based on briefings we have received, we have concluded that the Russian intelligence agencies are making a serious and concerted effort to influence the U.S. election," as the Democratic party continues to rally around the CIA in its latest effort to subvert democratic rule.


It is clear where all this is leading… as the December 19th date for the Electoral College vote approaches, the essential point here is the invalidation of an otherwise legal election and the flimsy fomenting of a potential Constitutional crisis. The collusion between the MSM and the Democratic party has instigated an extraordinary crescendo of panic of those willing to have HRC assume the throne of hegemony, wars and international interventions that have become so second nature to the Democratic party.


Here's a Bulletin: There is no Constitutional basis for the popular vote in Amendment XII (adopted 1804) of the Constitution. In other words, those partisans trying to flip the electoral votes because they don't like the Nov. 8th result have no legal standing. While Jill Stein's ill-considered recount attempt, perhaps prompted by her inability to poll more than 1% of the national total, cited a possible foreign state' hacking the election results came weeks after she sat at Vladimir Putin's dinner table in Moscow. That recount has gleaned no such evidence.


As Talbot reported In Chessboard, soon after the Bay of Pig fiasco, former President Harry Truman confided to his biographer Merle Miller that "I think it was a mistake. If I'd known what was going to happen, I never would have done it. Eisenhower never paid any attention to it and it got out of hand. It's become a government all of its own and all secret…that's a very dangerous thing in a democratic society." Prophetic words indeed. Truman, of course, was the author of what became the Central Intelligence Agency as authorized with adoption of the National Security Act of 1947.


In response to JFK's assassination, Truman clearly felt the need to clarify why he set up the CIA with a December 22nd letter to the Washington Post entitled "Limit CIA Role to Intelligence." Here are some of the most important excerpts beginning his letter with:


"I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence AgencyCIA."


"I decided to set up a special organization charged with the collection of all intelligence reports from every available source (Departments of State, Defense, Commerce, Interior) and to have those reports reach me as President without department "treatment" or interpretations."


"…most important thing about this move was to guard against the chance of intelligence being used to influence or to lead the President into unwise decisionsand I thought it was necessary that the President do his own thinking and evaluating."


"For some time I have been disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas."


"I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations. Some of the complications and embarrassment I think we have experienced are in part attributable to the fact that this quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigueand a subject for cold war enemy propaganda."


"But there are now some searching questions that need to be answered. I, therefore, would like to see the CIA be restored to its original assignment as the intelligence arm of the President."


And then in a June, 1964 letter to the managing editor of Look magazine, Truman reiterated that "The CIA was set up by me for the sole purpose of getting all the available information to the President. It was not intended to operate as an international agency engaged in strange activities."


If President-elect Trump is looking for another swamp ridden quagmire of which to drain, the CIA is a good place to start while restoring its original intent.

Source

This Just In: It Is Very, Very, Very Important To Us That You Focus On Hating Russia

Caitlin Johnstone
17 Dec 2016

http://www.newslogue.com/debate/206

Editor's note: In an effort to avert Facebook censorship, today's Caitlin Johnstone column has been replaced with a mainstream news article from the National News Conglomerate.

Quote:Breaking Anonymous sources in various intelligence agencies have determined in a secret assessment that it is very, very, very important that you forget all your grievances against America's political status quo right now and focus on hating Russia instead. Our sources, whose identity you needn't worry your pretty little head about, are telling us that the importance of your Russian hatred is far more urgent than your concern regarding the content of the DNC leaks, the content of the Podesta files, the collusion of the mainstream media with powerful political parties as revealed in WikiLeaks documents, America's soul-crushing economic disparity, or the overwhelming urge your mounting cognitive dissonance is giving you to scream "I just can't do this anymore" and steer your vehicle into oncoming traffic.

"We really, really need people to believe us here," one source told National News Conglomerate, speaking under conditions of total anonymity and deliberate, infuriating vagueness. "There are some very bad people in charge of a particular country, and that country is definitely not the United States of America."

"It's Russia," the source added, with a self-assuredness in his or her voice that should inspire trust and confidence in everything he or she has said here.

This breaking Real Newsâ„¢ revelation contradicts many of the false narratives being promulgated by fake news outlets and in rumors on the internets. The fake news story that these fake news outlets fakely share, in a way that is completely wrong (and fake), is that there is no evidence that Americans should be particularly worried about Russia. We here at NNC would like to thoroughly debunk and disprove this false fake faketty fake fake fake news fakery by reminding our readers that the statements made by our anonymous sources can be verified by the other statements of anonymous sources made in other respected real news outlets like the Washington Post and the New York Times.

"There is simply no disputing the fact that we all really, really want Americans to believe this particular thing that we're having an annoyingly hard time getting them to believe," said an anonymous authority figure from the shadows of a dark parking garage in an undisclosed location to the Washington Post. "There is total consensus in anonymous community about that."

"Can I be an anonymous source too?" an insider known only by the pseudonym Schmoe Schmiden asked the New York Times. "Tell them Putin's a buttmunch. You can print that, right?"

Russian President and alleged buttmunch Vladimir Putin yesterday instructed his employees at the fake news Russian propaganda network WikiLeaks to issue an unfair and undemocratic challenge to President Barack Obama, tweeting "Obama should submit any Putin documents to WikiLeaks to be authenticated to our standards if he wants them to be seen as credible."

This scandalous challenge by WikiLeaks founder and secret Kremlin operative Julian Assange flies in the face of the fact that some people still do believe the things President Obama says. Recent surveys indicate that he remains highly trusted by Democrats with landline phones, for example, and by people with no access to the internet. His approval rating among Americans who wear suspenders remains at a near all-time high.

As always, National News Conglomerate would like to remind readers that it is in fact illegal for you to read WikiLeaks, but it is legal for us to read them for you and tell you what they say. In fact, it's best if you avoid reading anything on the internet at all except for the things we tell you to read, and stick to reading books in the meantime. Remember books? Why, those darn millennials with their Myface and their hippitty hop music don't remember what it's like to curl up with a good book while mother brings you cup after cup of hot chocolate and strokes your hair and reminds you to be a good little girl and to never marry an unfaithful fornicator like your father. Those were the good old days, back when we all agreed to hate Russia and everyone who didn't got blacklisted and censored. The world made so much more sense back then.

Thank you for shopping at National News Conglomerate. Caitlin Johnstone will be back to her regularly-scheduled slot when her reeducation programming is complete. To help us keep track of her, you can like her on Facebook, follow her on Twitter, or even support her on Patreon so she'll think you're a red commie like her. Please keep reading without thinking.

Paul Rigby Wrote:The "Elite" Coup Of 2016

Moon of Alabama

15 December 2016

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/12/eli....html#more

Quote:

• There is an "elite" coup attempt underway against the U.S. President-elect Trump.
  
• The coup is orchestrated by the camp of Hillary Clinton in association with the CIA and neoconservative powers in Congress.
  
• The plan is to use the CIA's "Russia made Trump the winner" nonsense to swing the electoral college against him. The case would then be bumped up to Congress. Major neocon and warmonger parts of the Republicans could then move the presidency to Clinton or, if that fails, put Trump's vice president-elect Mike Pence onto the throne. The regular bipartisan war business, which a Trump presidency threatens to interrupt, could continue.
  
• Should the coup succeed violent insurrections in the United States are likely to ensue with unpredictable consequences.
  
• The above theses are thus far only a general outlay. No general plan has been published. The scheme though is pretty obvious by now. However, the following contains some speculation.
  

The priority aim is to deny Trump the presidency. He is too independent and a danger for several power centers within the ruling U.S. power circles. The selection of Tillerson as new Secretary of State only reinforces this (Prediction: Bolton will not get the Deputy position.) Tillerson is for profitable stability, not for regime change adventures. The institutional Trump enemies are:

• The CIA which has become the Central Assassination Agency under the Bush and Obama administrations. Huge parts of its budgets depend on a continuation of the war on Syria and the drone assassination campaigns in Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere. Trump's more isolationist policies would likely end these campaigns and the related budget troughs.
  
• The weapons industry which could lose its enormous sales to its major customers in the Persian Gulf should a President Trump reduce U.S. interference in the Middle East and elsewhere.
  
• The neoconservatives and Likudniks who want the U.S. as Israel's weapon to strong arm the Middle East to the Zionists' benefit.
  
• The general war hawks, military and "humanitarian interventionists" to whom any reduction of the U.S. role as primary power in the world is anathema to their believes.
  
• The current CIA director Brennan, a leading figure of the CIA torture program and Obama consigliere, is in the Clinton/anti-Trump camp. The former CIA heads Hayden and Panetta are public Clinton supporters as is torturer king and former CIA deputy director Michael Morell.
  

It is thereby no wonder that the CIA is leading the anti-Russian campaign. Its task now is to implant the idea in the U.S. public that Russian intervention skewed the U.S. election towards Trump. The purpose is the delegitimization of the Trump victory in the eyes of the media and public but even more so in the eyes of the electors within the electoral college.

The CIA is heavily supported by the same mainstream media that pushed for Clinton during the election. (These are, not by chance, also the same media that pushed the CIA's earlier "Saddam's Weapon of Mass Destruction" campaign.)

The Democratic partisan and Harvard law Professor Lawrence Lessig is pushing the electors and offers them free personal legal support. He says the electoral college vote is now close.

Could 37 Republican electors, put there by voters in their states to vote for Trump, be convinced to move from electing Trump to abstain or vote for someone else, Trump would miss the needed 270 votes. The whole election of the president would then by kicked up to the House of Representatives.

Should the electors vote for Trump there is still a possibility that members of the House and the Senate could officially question that vote and cause delays or Congressional probes and legal challenges.

Here are the detailed general proceedings and specifics for the electoral college as explained by the National Archives and Records Administration.

Though neoconservatives have no genuine support within the U.S. electorate they have a strong hold on significant parts of Congress and the relevant MSM commentariat. Many leading neoconservatives and war hawks like Robert Kagan, Max Boot and the Washington Post editorial board came out for Clinton during the campaign. Clinton even ran campaign advertisements with Republican Congress luminaries like Lindsay Graham, Sasse and Flake.

The House and the Senate majority may well be on the anti-Trump side if push comes to shove. But whatever the outcome there surely would be intense legal challenges and I expect the case to go up to the Supreme Court.

As an alternative to legal shenanigans Trump's inauguration could be delayed by Obama's order to the intelligence community to create a formal review of Russian intervention in the election by January 20. That is not by chance the official inauguration date! The selling point:

By ordering a "full review" of allegations of Russian into the 2016 election process, President Barack Obama is essentially asking the IC to make an analytical judgment about the validity of the election that will place Trump in the Oval Office.
A "compromise" in Congress could be to wait for the Intelligence Community's analysis and then discuss it before certifying Trump as president. That would end up with no result as National Intelligence Estimates are notoriously vague. Meanwhile the Vice President-elect would sit in as acting President:

If the President-elect fails to qualify before inauguration, Section 3 of the 20th Amendment states that the Vice President-elect will act as President until such a time as a President has qualified.
If the congressional or legal process around the Trump election gets delayed, that may be a state for a long time. The ruling Washington blob or borg could well live with an acting President Pence while Trump would have no official say in any government business. (Could Clinton then become acting VP or qualify as the new president?)

The media intervention on the anti-Trump side is heavy.

But first keep in mind that there is no public evidence, ZERO, that Russia indeed had anything to do with the DNC or Podesta or other leaks and the publication of emails by various outlets like Wikileaks.

Craig Murray assures us that he knows that these were not hacks but insider leaks and that he knows the leaker(s). Indeed he now tells us that the emails were handed over to him during a visits in Washington. Former intelligence officials including the technically very knowledgeable former NSA official William Binney concur that the hacking story is false.

All we have heard or seen so far are hearsay rumors and allegations of evidence. To me as experienced IT professional the case is technically laughable just as Murray explains here. If the claimed hacks occurred at all the alleged methods were so common that anybody could have done these. There is not even one claimed fact yet that is technically halfway acceptable as evidence that "Russia did it".

But still the NYT runs a big package of pieces telling us that "Russia did it" based on the non-factual CIA rumors and unprofessional IT assertions by Crowdstrike, the self-promoting IT security company the DNC hired and paid. Before that the Washington Post published major claims of Russian interference by anonymous officials. NBC News now tops that with "intelligence officials" saying Putin himself ran the hacking campaign. Authors of the story are the long time insider hacks Bill Arkin and Ken Dilanian known for clearing his stories with the CIA before publishing. The next story will tells us that Vladimir Valdimirovich himself was punching the keyboard.

Many news outlets and editorials follow these "leads".

Part of the scheme the Clinton campaign has worked out was explained by a former opposition research consultant to the Democratic National Council, the Ukrainian-American Alexandra (aka Andrea) Chalupa, in this thread:

Andrea Chalupa ‏@AndreaChalupa Dec 11
1.) Electoral College meets Dec. 19. If Electors ignore #StateOfEmergency we're in, & Trump gets elected, we can stop him Jan. 6 in Congress

2.) If any objections to Electoral College vote are made, they must be submitted in writing, signed by at least 1 House member & 1 Senator

3.) If objections are presented, House & Senate withdraw to their chambers to consider their merits under procedures set out in federal law.
...

Editorials and op-eds in the major papers are pushing the scheme along. Just for example from a long list A.J. Dionne in the Washington Post:

The CIA's finding that Russia actively intervened in our election to make Trump president is an excellent reason for the electors to consider whether they should exercise their independent power. At the very least, they should be briefed on what the CIA knows, and in particular on whether there is any evidence that Trump or his lieutenants were engaged with Russia during the campaign.
The New York Times editorial laments about Trump ridiculing the CIA fairy tales it promotes.

Many people who have voted for Trump would be disgusted and outraged if or when Trump will be denied his office. Many of them are armed and would protest. Violence is ensured should the coup succeed.

Trump selected four former generals to joins his cabinet and staff. Should the troubles escalate we might be roughly in for a scenario as laid out in the 1992 military paper: The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012 (http://strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mi...lap_jr.pdf) by Charles J. Dunlap.

A CIA-led Coup Against American Democracy Is Unfolding Before Our Eyes

Paul Craig Roberts

17 December 2016

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/12/...g-roberts/

This article by Moon of Alabama is not conspiracy theory: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/46056.htm Read it carefully. Check out the links.

The article is a documented and accurate description of a coup that is underway. The extraordinary lies that are being perpetrated by the media and by members of the US government have as their obvious purpose the prevention of a Donald Trump presidency. There is no other reason for the extraordinary blatant lies for which there is not a shred of evidence. Indeed, there is massive real evidence to the contrary. Yet the coup proceeds and gathers steam.

President Eisenhower warned us more than a half century ago of the danger that the military/security complex presents to US democracy.

[video=youtube_share;8y06NSBBRtY]http://youtu.be/8y06NSBBRtY[/video]

In the decades since Eisenhower's warning, the military/security complex has become more powerful than the American people and is demonstrating its power by overturning a presidential election.

Will the coup succeed?

In my opinion, former and present members of the US government and the media would not dare to so obviously and openly participate in a coup against democracy and an elected president unless they expect the coup to succeed.

It is an easy matter for the ruling interests to bribe electors to vote differently than their states. The cost of the bribes is miniscule compared to the wealth and income streams that a trillion dollar annual budget provides to the military/security complex. The fake news of a Putin/Trump election-stealing plot generated by unsupported allegations of present and former members of US intelligence, the lame-duck President Obama, and the presstitute media provide the cover for electors to break with precedent "in order to save America from a Russian stooge."

The CIA-controlled European media, the politicians in Washington's European vassal states, NATO officials, and the brainwashed European peoples will support the coup against Trump.

The only ones speaking against the coup are the voters who elected Trumpall of whom are alleged to have been deceived by Russian fake news the Russian government, and the 200 websites falsely described by the Washington Post and the secret organization PropOrNot as Russian agents.

In other words, those objecting to the coup are the ones described by the coup leaders as those who made the coup necessary.

I do not know that the coup will succeed, but looking at the commitment so many high level people have made to the coup, I conclude that those bringing the coup expect it to succeed.

Therefore, we should take very seriously the expectation of success that those who control levers of power are demonstrating.