Deep Politics Forum
The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - Printable Version

+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Players, organisations, and events of deep politics (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-32.html)
+--- Thread: The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump (/thread-15194.html)



The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - Paul Rigby - 01-04-2017

Cliff Varnell Wrote:Quite a number of punters in that crowd protesting the coup that brought the Big Orange Fascist into power.

Over the last 11 days of the 2016 Rigged Election the American airwaves were flooded with denunciations of Clinton.

Conclusive proof Cliffy & the rest of the Deep State have been right all along:

[video=youtube_share;gFUuvOD2G7c]http://youtu.be/gFUuvOD2G7c[/video]


The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - Paul Rigby - 01-04-2017

I'm beginning to doubt the sanity of the Charlatans' IOps peeps.

What follows is so gloriously absurd and ineffective that only a Deep State bot could possibly find it convincing. (Needless to say, the Langleybots did.)

Anyway, according to today's Daily Blackshirt, Svetlana Legovera, an Anglo-Russian banker somewhat ungallantly described as 'Crazy Miss Cokehead,' 'spoke with Michael Flynn at the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar, a gathering of former intelligence officials hosted at Cambridge University in 2014.' Quite why MI6 invited what the reader is presumably to consider an SVR cokehead to this gathering of bores, poseurs, nutters, drug-pushers and the like is not made clear. I assume, absent any suggestion to the contrary, that Ms. Legovera was actually CIA or MI6.

It gets even less interesting:

'Moscow-born Miss Legovera showed the President's former national security adviser a number of historic Russian documents including an erotic postcard' that Joseph Stalin sent to a woman in 1912.'

Yes, that's right. A declassified postcard. What ensued was a reckless carnal abandon which threatened nothing less than the immediate collapse of the American Empire:

'It is claimed the two remained in email contact afterwards and swapped messages on an unclassified channel Mr Flynn signed himself General Misha', Russian for Michael.'

This grotesque act of treason - Flynn had obviously chosen to celebrate his enrollment in the SVR by using his new Russian codename - caused the wise men of Babylonian Towers and Bush Central 'alarm' as they adjudged it 'evidence that Mr Flynn was behaving in a worrisome' manner.'

The full non-event, described in the usual reverential tones by the presstitute, can be endured here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4370168/Flynn-dismissal-linked-meeting-Cambridge-graduate.html


The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - David Guyatt - 02-04-2017

Disgraceful! Send the pinko subversive crypto-Commie to the Tower for immediate execution.


The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - Paul Rigby - 02-04-2017

David Guyatt Wrote:Disgraceful! Send the pinko subversive crypto-Commie to the Tower for immediate execution.

That's Flynn taken care of. But what to do about the Rooskie banker? House of Lords, perhaps?


The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - David Guyatt - 02-04-2017

Paul Rigby Wrote:
David Guyatt Wrote:Disgraceful! Send the pinko subversive crypto-Commie to the Tower for immediate execution.

That's Flynn taken care of. But what to do about the Rooskie banker? House of Lords, perhaps?

House of Lords for sure. Elevation of bankers to the ermine gown and jock strap/G string - Russkies or otherwise - is now a mandatory (mandatory Tooth, not mastubatory!) requirement in the UK.

The people have to see who really is in charge after all.


The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - Paul Rigby - 02-04-2017

Paul Rigby Wrote:I'm beginning to doubt the sanity of the Charlatans' IOps peeps.

What follows is so gloriously absurd and ineffective that only a Deep State bot could possibly find it convincing. (Needless to say, the Langleybots did.)

Anyway, according to today's Daily Blackshirt, Svetlana Legovera, an Anglo-Russian banker somewhat ungallantly described as 'Crazy Miss Cokehead,' 'spoke with Michael Flynn at the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar, a gathering of former intelligence officials hosted at Cambridge University in 2014.' Quite why MI6 invited what the reader is presumably to consider an SVR cokehead to this gathering of bores, poseurs, nutters, drug-pushers and the like is not made clear. I assume, absent any suggestion to the contrary, that Ms. Legovera was actually CIA or MI6...

The full non-event, described in the usual reverential tones by the presstitute, can be endured here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4370168/Flynn-dismissal-linked-meeting-Cambridge-graduate.html

When It Comes to Meddling in the US Election, Was it the UK?

by Publius Tacitus

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2017/03/when-it-comes-to-meddling-in-the-us-election-was-it-the-uk-by-publius-tacitus.html#comments

Quote:I learned a long time ago that when you are close to the truth the opposition, if there is any, springs into action and launches a desperate counter attack. That appears to define what happened in the wake of Fox News suspending Judge Andrew Napolitano for the following claim:

that former US President Barack Obama asked British intelligence agency GCHQ to monitor President Donald Trump. . . .

Andrew Napolitano, a political commentator and former New Jersey judge, said on Tuesday Obama used GCHQ in order to "make sure there were no American fingerprints."

"Three intelligence sources have informed Fox News that President Obama went outside the chain of command - he didn't use the NSA, he didn't use the CIA, he didn't use the FBI and he didn't use the Department of Justice," said Napolitano. "He used GCHQ."

Well, the Brits went absolutely bonkers. GCHQ came as close to having a full blown aneurysm as any bureaucratic entity can.

"We've made clear to the administration that these claims are ridiculous and they should be ignored and we've received assurances that these allegations will not be repeated," a Downing Street spokesman told reporters.

One of Judge Napolitano's sources apparently was Larry Johnson. However, according to Johnson, the Judge did not accurately report what Johnson had said. According to Mr. Johnson, President Obama did not order anything. Instead, information collected by GCHQ was passed to people in the U.S. intelligence community and then distributed in an unauthorized manner. To deny that GCHQ did not do anything in response to a request from President Obama, but that does not mean that GCHQ (aka General Communication's Headquarters) was passive and doing nothing.

Let me suggest one possible logical explanation. GCHQ, by virtue of being a foreign entity can (and does) easily and routinely collect electronic communications information in the United States. The Brits can do this without having to worry about FISA courts, probable cause, etc. Want proof? Here is the NY Times piece on 17 March 2017 that cites one example:

The conspiracy theorizing also tested what is often called the special relationship between the United States and Britain. American intelligence agencies enjoy a closer collaboration with their British counterparts than any other in the world. GCHQ was the first agency to warn the United States government that Russia was hacking Democratic Party emails during the presidential campaign

Got that? US and UK have a "special relationship" and the GCHQ was THE FIRST (not the second or third) to warn Obama that Russia supposedly was hacking Democrat Party emails. When did they warn us? Before the discovery of the DNC hack or afterwards? If afterwards, how long? Who received that warning and what steps were taken to take counter measures? Lots of questions.

Here's another one--if the Brits knew that the Russians were hacking the DNC emails then how did they completely miss the Russians passing that info to one Julian Assange, who happens to be holed up in London in the Ecuadorian Embassy?

So why the enormous pushback from the Brits on Fox News? If we were playing Poker I would call that a tell. The Brits, normally implacable, allowed us to see their left eyebrow twitching. Judge Napolitano works for the Murdoch's, who also happen to have significant economic interests in Great Britain. I have heard the the British Government leaned hard on the Murdochs to do something about the Judge. So far, he has been suspended. Remains to be seen if he comes back on air.

To recap, we have the GCHQ routinely collecting on U.S. citizens and sharing that with the United States via NSA. Let me suggest one additional twist--the Brits decided, with encouragement from people in U.S. intelligence (John Brennan, perhaps? Mike Rogers?) to step up their collection on Donald Trump and associates and then passed that information, unfiltered and unmasked, to their U.S. counterparts. Is that what alarmed Devin Nunes earlier this week?

Let's stretch out a bit further. Is it possible that Britain's version of the CIA, MI-6, also got into the act and helped its former officer, one Mr. Steele, compile and distribute the now infamous dossier?

Why in the world would the Brits do something so risky? I think the answer to that is pretty simple, straight forward and self-evident. Trump's policy positions on Syria and NATO represented direct threats to British interests. In Syria, Trump expressed a willingness to side with Russia in defeating ISIS and to withdraw the U.S. from the business of nation building. Trump also turned over the apple cart of status quo foreign policy by stating quite plainly that NATO was an anachronism and needed to be given a good, hard look. Anyone want to argue that our British cousins were comfortable with these policy shifts?

Therefore, it is not a train to crazy town to suggest that GCHQ and MI6 would be quite willing to lend a hand in helping take out Trump. Could that will be one of the key revelations coming down the pike in coming weeks. This also helps account for British establishments' consternation of the claims of Judge Napolitano. It also provides a plausible explanation for the tremendous pressure brought on Judge Napolitano who, without fully understanding what he was talking about, identified a the fat, ugly naked man in the room that looked a lot like the Queen (apologies to her Majesty).

Wouldn't that be a shocker--learning that the Government of Great Britain was working hand in glove with U.S. counterparts to sandbag Donald Trump and his Presidency?

Most overlook an obvious but obscure issue--GCHQ has been collecting intelligence on American citizens for years. Especially Americans of Irish descent or those with ties to Irishmen in the Northern Ireland. That was especially true twenty years ago. You do not have to hold Top Secret clearances to understand this fact. The British were collecting intelligence on Americans with names like Moynihan, O'Keefe, Lang and Kelly. Make no mistake about that.

One final point. The dog that did not bark. By that I mean that notwithstanding all of these machinations, no significant intelligence was generated that provided a smoking gun that could have spelled the end of Donald Trump. How do I know that? Only by deduction. If such information had been scooped up you can be assured that it would have found its way immediately to the front pages of the NY Times and the Washington Post. That has not happened. I think he real story is what did the Brits know and when did they know it? I suspect any further investigations into this matter will put a bit of a damper on US/UK relations.



The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - Paul Rigby - 02-04-2017

Paul Rigby Wrote:
Cliff Varnell Wrote:Quite a number of punters in that crowd protesting the coup that brought the Big Orange Fascist into power.

Over the last 11 days of the 2016 Rigged Election the American airwaves were flooded with denunciations of Clinton.

Conclusive proof Cliffy & the rest of the Deep State have been right all along:

[video=youtube_share;gFUuvOD2G7c]http://youtu.be/gFUuvOD2G7c[/video]

WEAPONIZING COMEDY

MARCH 16, 2017

https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2017/03/16/weaponizing-comedy/

Quote:As Monty Python pointed out, jokes can be the deadliest weapon of war. In the current atmosphere of Russophic hysteria, therefore, we should not be surprised that NATO this week has accused the Kremlin of weaponizing comedy. At first, given the topic, I thought that this must a Pythonesque spoof, but it appears that the accusation is deadly serious.

[video=youtube_share;ienp4J3pW7U]http://youtu.be/ienp4J3pW7U[/video]

In response to a request from the Latvian Ministry of Defence, NATO's Strategic Communications Centre for Excellence has this week published a report entitled Stratcom Laughs: In Search of a Strategic Framework'. The report states its purpose as being to study humour as a strategic communication tool'. The first part of the report undertakes a long academic analysis of what humour is and what purposes it serves. In later parts it then looks at how the Russian state allegedly uses humour as a propaganda tool and how Ukrainians have countered it with humour of their own.

The basic conclusion of the report is that in Russia, the entire "official humour industry" … is directly Kremlin-controlled'. Working for the Kremlin, Russian comedians use humour to reduce their compatriots' stress and make them feel more comfortable and thus more accepting of the political system. They provide audiences with a positive sense of social identity, which is contrasted with a negative view of others. The in-group' Russia is portrayed as victimized by the out-group' the West. And in the context of Ukraine, through comedy, Russian propaganda has been trying to use and exacerbate a number of differences between social groups so as to create an atmosphere of total distrust and panic.'

To make this point, the report analyzes a number of comedy shows on Russian TV, most notably the show KVN in which teams (normally of students) compete for the prize of League Champion. One of the most successful teams has been that of the Moscow State Institute for International Relations (MGIMO), an elite university which trains future diplomats. The MGIMO team known as Parapaparam comes in for particularly close attention in the NATO report.

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

According to the NATO report, KVN is a ready-to-act tool of strategic communication', and its owner enjoys a special relationship with the Kremlin'. Parapaparam's sketches serve to reinforce positive social identity', aid the reduction of internally reduced stress', promote the division of Russia and the West into us' and them', support aggressiveness', suggest Russia has superior power, manpower, and military power/capacity', and denigrate foreign leaders. Particularly criticized is a sketch in which Parapaparam delivered their own version of a US news report about Russia.

[video=youtube_share;BxAGbPg9jF4]http://youtu.be/BxAGbPg9jF4[/video]

Indeed, Russian comedians do indeed often mock foreign countries, their leaders, and their attitudes towards Russia, and no doubt this does contribute to some sense of moral superiority or stress reduction'. But it's hardly an uniquely Russian phenomenon. To take just a couple of examples from my youth remember Spitting Image's The President's Brain is Missing', anyone? Or Whoops Apocalypse's portrayals of Leonid Brezhnev?

[video=youtube_share;0FaH7ATXkWg]http://youtu.be/0FaH7ATXkWg[/video]

[video=youtube_share;yJg_sAsQT-M]http://youtu.be/yJg_sAsQT-M[/video]

The problem with this report, like so many other commentaries on Russia, is that it is rather lacking in solid evidence to back up its primary claim, in this case that all this comedy is directly Kremlin-controlled'? The NATO report contrasts Russian state-led humour with the spontaneous humour generated by Ukrainian activists to fight Russian aggression'. As it says, A horizontally organized post-Euromaidan Ukrainian civil society had to combat Russia's vertically constructed propaganda machine. … That is why Ukraine [sic] counter propaganda and use of humor were and still are more a product of a variety of independent and spontaneous initiatives, rather than a systematic approach.'

But this is just a claim. It lacks proof. It sounds good, but as anybody who follows Russian affairs should know, there are no shortage of pro-Russian' humorous cartoons and memes circulating around the internet. Are we to believe that these are all part of a vertically-integrated' comedy machine, that there aren't any independent and spontaneous' Russian humourists too? Is every cartoon which mocks anti-Russian sentiment really the product of some hidden comedy troll factory?

https://irrussianality.files.wordpress.com/2017/03/obsession.jpg?w=474

The question which the report should have asked, and which it didn't, is why Russian audiences laugh at the jokes of Parapaparam and the like, and why Russian comedians choose to make them. They laugh because the jokes make sense to them, and they make sense because they fit perceptions they already have. For instance, if they find Parapaparam's references to Jennifer Psaki funny, it's because Psaki really did come off as rather clueless on Russian-related topics. And the reason the comedians make these jokes, then, is because they know that the audience is going to laugh at them. In short, it's demand-driven.

In addition to Parapaparam and KVN, the report denounced a number of other comedians and shows, such as Maksim Galkin's Maksim Maksim and the show Yesterday Live. This produced an immediate response from those concerned. Galkin declared, It's never entered my head that anybody could use me for any sort of goals. I never been anybody's instrument, and have always made fun of all politicians.' And Yesterday Live's director VAsilii Barkhatov said that the NATO report was the product of phobia' and that he had never worried about either the [Russian] regime or NATO'.

To be fair, all states engage in propaganda that is to say they use information to try to influence others; and propaganda can, and often does, involve humour. But that doesn't mean that every comedian is a government propagandist. Is Russia weaponizing humour? Don't make me laugh.



The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - Paul Rigby - 02-04-2017

David Guyatt Wrote:
Paul Rigby Wrote:
David Guyatt Wrote:Disgraceful! Send the pinko subversive crypto-Commie to the Tower for immediate execution.

That's Flynn taken care of. But what to do about the Rooskie banker? House of Lords, perhaps?

House of Lords for sure. Elevation of bankers to the ermine gown and jock strap/G string - Russkies or otherwise - is now a mandatory (mandatory Tooth, not mastubatory!) requirement in the UK.

The people have to see who really is in charge after all.

[video=youtube_share;mB6oMnB1guA]http://youtu.be/mB6oMnB1guA[/video]


The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - Paul Rigby - 03-04-2017

Paul Rigby Wrote:I'm beginning to doubt the sanity of the Charlatans' IOps peeps.

What follows is so gloriously absurd and ineffective that only a Deep State bot could possibly find it convincing. (Needless to say, the Langleybots did.)

Anyway, according to today's Daily Blackshirt, Svetlana Legovera, an Anglo-Russian banker somewhat ungallantly described as 'Crazy Miss Cokehead,' 'spoke with Michael Flynn at the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar, a gathering of former intelligence officials hosted at Cambridge University in 2014.' Quite why MI6 invited what the reader is presumably to consider an SVR cokehead to this gathering of bores, poseurs, nutters, drug-pushers and the like is not made clear. I assume, absent any suggestion to the contrary, that Ms. Legovera was actually CIA or MI6.

It gets even less interesting:

'Moscow-born Miss Legovera showed the President's former national security adviser a number of historic Russian documents including an erotic postcard' that Joseph Stalin sent to a woman in 1912.'

Yes, that's right. A declassified postcard. What ensued was a reckless carnal abandon which threatened nothing less than the immediate collapse of the American Empire:

'It is claimed the two remained in email contact afterwards and swapped messages on an unclassified channel Mr Flynn signed himself General Misha', Russian for Michael.'

This grotesque act of treason - Flynn had obviously chosen to celebrate his enrollment in the SVR by using his new Russian codename - caused the wise men of Babylonian Towers and Bush Central 'alarm' as they adjudged it 'evidence that Mr Flynn was behaving in a worrisome' manner.'

The full non-event, described in the usual reverential tones by the presstitute, can be endured here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4370168/Flynn-dismissal-linked-meeting-Cambridge-graduate.html

Ratf*ck A Go Go! Atlanticists and MI5 Go After Trump!

by PETER LEE

APRIL 3, 2017

http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/04/03/ratfck-a-go-go-atlanticists-and-mi5-go-after-trump/

Quote:I try to keep a certain distance from the anti-Trump circus. But I do want to put some thoughts on record, given the obsession with Trump's Russia connection and what I see is a determined effort to minimize the British/NATO angle in the attack on Trump.

My personal feeling is that there are significant swaths of the European establishment that derive their mission and meaning from serving as allies to the United States in an anti-Trump effort: the British government and intelligence services, NATO, various right-leaning European governments, their think tanks, in other words, the Atlanticists.

They didn't like Trump because he was more interested in dealing directly and positively with Russia on matters of US strategic concern in the Middle East and Asia and much less interested in perfecting the Atlanticist Euro-centric anti-Russian containment/deterrence apparatus and backing crazy EU/NATO expansion stunts like the Ukraine operation.

Perhaps similar to Trump's interest in dealing with China instead of doing pivot. Difference is, Atlanticist lobby is much more entrenched in Washington, the NATO alliance is miles ahead of the "box of sand" Asian containment network, and Great Britain is America's primary intelligence partner.

So I think people over the pond, particularly in Europe, were interested in feeding documentation on Trump's murky Russia connections to his opponents, and especially on behalf of Hillary Clinton, who is very much an Atlanticist fave. Effort was pretty low key at first because nobody expected Trump to get anywhere, but things picked up when he got the nomination, and then shifted into apesh*t crazytime when he got the presidency.

The British link is there for all to see in the notorious Steele dossier. What people don't want to see is the inference that Steele was either getting dirt from MI5/GCHQ or is simply a cut-out for a British effort.

I should say the possibility that the UK intelligence service may have been deeply involved in preparing the brief against Trump does not elicit an urge from me to spontaneously genuflect concerning the accuracy of the evidence. I daresay psyopspackaging and releasing selective intel and innuendo at opportune times through deniable channels for maximum effectis a core mission of British spookdom, as is making up utter crap, like the notorious "dodgy dossier" on Saddam Hussein.

An interesting datapoint is the Guardian leg-humping a story about Michael Flynn having conversations with a Russian-English historian causing "concern" to "US and UK officials". The only useful conclusion from this farrago, as far as I can tell, is that a) investigating Things Flynn was an official US-UK joint and not just Christopher Steele lunching Russian emigres in Grosvenor Square and b) the UK press is doing a similar tag teaming with US media to sell Trump/Russia like it pitched in with the US to sell Saddam/Iraq.

And the Guardian is doing it this time! You've come a long way, baby!

The mega-uproar over the "GCHQ tapped Trump" story was, to me, quite interesting, for the massive full-court pushback it elicited and the grudging backdown from the Trump administration.

If the story proved out true, it would be a disaster for the UK.

On the institutional level, confirmation that US investigatory and intel outfits resorted to GCHQ to, shall we say, supplement collection related to US citizens and *ahem* circumvent US laws would lead to demands for that bane of all spook prerogatives, oversight and perhaps a committee to review requests for intel exchange between the US and GCHQ before they happened (I recall reading that currently the NSA can reach into Five Eyes servers and pull out whatever it wants whenever it wants; it would be fun to find out in open testimony if that actually happens!).

On the political level, it would be hard to escape the imputation that Great Britain was conducting politically-motivated collection/querying/handover of intel concerning disfavored US politicians and officials, and that the English bulldog was INTERFERING IN AMERICA'S SACRED ELECTIONS, you know, like a certain country, name begins with R ends with A led by a guy name begins with P ends with N is allegedly doing.

It would be interesting to see how the public relations fracas on terms of "Putin trolls pushed fake news on Facebook" vs. "GCHQ pushed fake news into the FBI" would play.

GCHQ/MI5's powerful capabilities and their slavish eagerness to put them at the service of the US are the glittering jewels in the tattered collar of the British poodle. If GCHQ becomes a "normal" intelligence interlocutor of the USwith the added stigma of having engaged in politicized active measures on behalf of US factionsthen the UK risks dropping to parity with *gasp* Germany as another arm's length partner.

Fox's alacrity in yanking some guy called "Judge Nap" for publicizing the GCHQ surveillance allegations was interesting. You might expect Fox would be keen to push this rather provocative and open-ended talking point to provide some aid and comfort to Trump and ride a ratings-boosting angle. But Fox shut Nap down!

Wonder if Rupert Murdoch got the call from the UK government that any encouragement of this kind of tittle-tattle would call down the wrath of the British government on Rupert's extensive media holdings in Britain.

Well, with Judge Nap in the cooler, I doubt any other Fox commentators will be too interested in pursuing that allegation.

And maybe the US intel community told Trump he'd be gone in a heartbeat if he threatened to compromise the US-GB special spook relationship to save his skin. So he backed off.

If Trump falls on his ass I expect that will provide the political cover for some discrete "now it can be told" bragging about how the Atlanticist band of brothers joined hands to defeat the Russian menace. If Trump hangs on, it just goes into the secret museum of US-UK ratf*cking operations.



The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump - David Guyatt - 04-04-2017

Paul Rigby Wrote:[quote=Paul Rigby]

On the institutional level, confirmation that US investigatory and intel outfits resorted to GCHQ to, shall we say, supplement collection related to US citizens and *ahem* circumvent US laws would lead to demands for that bane of all spook prerogatives, oversight and perhaps a committee to review requests for intel exchange between the US and GCHQ before they happened (I recall reading that currently the NSA can reach into Five Eyes servers and pull out whatever it wants whenever it wants; it would be fun to find out in open testimony if that actually happens!).

The writer recalls well. ONLY the USA, in fact, can reach its soiled hand into the entire collection reservoir/archive of the Five Eyes and pull out anything and everything. Every other member of the five can only access stated code-worded material of the ECHELON system and thus suffer from far more restricted access. This was all made public over a decade ago by New Zealand investigative journalist, Nicky Hager, in his book Secret Power about New Zealand's involvement and role in the Five Eyes. Hager received his information from disgruntled members of New Zealand's Government Communications Security Bureau - which is their eye-closing name for the Kiwi NSA.

Quote:On the political level, it would be hard to escape the imputation that Great Britain was conducting politically-motivated collection/querying/handover of intel concerning disfavored US politicians and officials, and that the English bulldog was INTERFERING IN AMERICA'S SACRED ELECTIONS, you know, like a certain country, name begins with R ends with A led by a guy name begins with P ends with N is allegedly doing.

I note the following paragraph from your post No. 546 above wherein the perennial penned slyness of the British civil servant saw the following uttered in defence of GCHQ:

'"We've made clear to the administration that these claims are ridiculous and they should be ignored and we've received assurances that these allegations will not be repeated," a Downing Street spokesman told reporters.'

"The claims are ridiculous...."

That's what the striped trousered masters of British double-speak call a "non denial denial."