The attempted Clinton-CIA coup against Donald Trump

[Paul Rigby]

Just A Friendly Reminder That The Democratic Establishment Is Trying To Start A War With Russia

Caitlin Johnstone

02 Mar 2017

http://www.newslogue.com/debate/365

Hillary Clinton was actively trying to start a hot war with Russia. Anyone who says she wasn't is either delusional or lying. She was promising to set up a no-fly zone in Syria, knowing (as testified by top military officials) that this would necessarily entail shooting down Russian military planes and starting a war with Russia. She also openly pledged "military responses" to the alleged (and still unproven) Russian "cyber attacks", another act of war. This woman, who already had an extensive history of actively pushing for disastrous acts of military intervention seemingly at every opportunity, campaigned on this language. I'm no Trump supporter, but I must admit I breathed a sigh of relief when she failed to win the election, saying, "Ahh, well at least that Russia nonsense is over and done with."

I was horrifyingly wrong. The corporate media and the US intelligence community, both of which are considered major components of the deep state power institution, began working together to keep cranking up the heat on the Russia hysteria higher and higher through "anonymous sources" providing information to deeply pro-establishment outlets like the CIA-funded Washington Post. If anyone in the Trump transition team did anything that looked even remotely friendly toward Russia, the corporate media would squeal and ring alarm bells for days. When they started keeping their acts of Russian diplomacy a secret, the intelligence community leaked it to the corporate media, who then started babbling about treason charges under something called the Logan Act, an obscure piece of legislation that has literally never once been used to prosecute anyone despite having existed for hundreds of years.

They babbled about "election hacking," a blatant psy-op which as of December had deceived half of all Hillary voters into believing that Russia had actually tampered with election machines. They babbled about Crimea, despite its annexation (which the Crimean people overwhelmingly favored) having happened in 2014. They babble about Trump "selling America out" to Putin, without ever explaining what that means or what it would look like. They advanced thousands of troops toward Russia's border and then started babbling about blackmail and urinating Russian prostitutes, saying that if Trump withdraws the troops after inauguration then it proves he's being blackmailed. They don't explain what amassing troops at Russia's border has to do with "election hacking," but Americans are so twisted up, down and all around with the constant psychological pummeling of McCarthyism and Russia fearmongering that they don't even bother to ask what's up with that.

http://i.imgur.com/FkQGa7Z.png?1

The push toward war never even lost momentum after Clinton's loss. For whatever reason (theories abound), the deep state is clearly trying to escalate tensions with Russia, and the Democratic establishment (along with their neocon buddy John McCain and his sidekick Lindsey) is helping them do it. They're either working with the deep state to try and force the President's hand or trying to keep things as tense and escalated as possible until they can regain power and do it themselves, but they're definitely pushing for escalations into either a cold war or a hot one.

Don't believe me? Are you sitting there now thinking "Yeah, nah Caito, you got this one wrong, they don't want a war with Russia, no one wants a war with Russia! That would be stupid." Well good, glad to hear you think it's stupid, but just for strategy's sake, please do ask them yourself. Go to town halls with federal Democratic officials and ask them if they want a war with Russia, and when they say they don't, ask them to promise to work against any attempts to start a new cold war or military confrontation with Russia. Record their responses and publish them on social media. Go ahead and tag me too; I'll share them on my own platform to help us all keep track of where they're at with this thing. If you can get them to respond to emails, tweets or social media comments, pass those on to me as well. If they're willing to promise the American people that they'll do everything they can to keep us out of a potentially world-ending situation, we should be keeping track of those promises and making everyone aware of who said them. This is one of those occasions where I'd rather be a big wrong loudmouth about it than a meek right know-it-all. If us asking uncomfortable questions is what it takes to get them to not do it just to prove us wrong, then I'll take that. I'll be wrong and alive any day over right and dead. And I'd love to be wrong about this, because the last cold war brought us within an inch of total annihilation on more than one occasion.

There are too many things that can go wrong when tensions escalate between nuclear superpowers. In 1962, at the most dangerous point in the last cold war, President John F. Kennedy needed to make a tremendous amount of concessions to deescalate the Cuban Missile Crisis, including removing Jupiter missiles from NATO bases in Italy and Turkey which were within striking distance from Moscow. Could you imagine the uproar and accusations of treason if Trump ever tried to make such concessions? If tensions escalated to the point where a nuclear deployment was an imminent threat, the media, the politicians, and a great number of the brainwashed public would be actively fighting any move he made to deescalate things. Kennedy had to deal with some hefty, hefty stuff, but even he never had to deal with negotiating a detente while his own country fought him tooth and claw on it every step of the way. This is extremely dangerous.

After former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn drew glass-shattering shrieks of outrage from the political left for speaking to Russian officials during the transition period (which former ambassador to Russia Jack Matlock says is actually standard practice), he was fired for keeping those calls on the down-low and replaced with a largely unknown fellow from the Army named Lieutenant General H.R. McMaster. There were a number of think pieces written by various publications in which political commentators took guesses as to who Flynn's replacement might be, but I never saw a single one which predicted McMaster. The guy came totally out of left field, and not much is known about him, but we do know this: his Ph. D. thesis was titled "Dereliction of Duty: Johnson, McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies That Led to Vietnam," and he has publicly warned of the dangers of the military industrial complex, stating "the military-industrial complex may represent a greater threat to us than at any time in history."

Interestingly, a Democrat (the anti-war kind, not the establishment kind) was also in the news recently denouncing this same military industrial complex and warning of its push toward a new cold war with Russia. Former Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich appeared on FOX Business Network's Mornings with Maria with a very urgent and sobering message in response to the intelligence maneuver that led to Flynn's resignation.

"There are people trying to separate the US and Russia so that this military industrial-intel axis can cash in," Kucinich said, adding, "There's a game going on inside the intelligence community where there are those who want to separate the U.S. from Russia in a way that would reignite the Cold War."

And now Trump brings in a Lieutenant General and Ph. D. out of left field to help him navigate matters of national security, whose area of study just happens to focus on the lies the deep state uses to dupe America into war and who just so happens to have an open disdain for the military industrial complex that President Eisenhower tried so urgently to warn us about in his farewell address upon leaving office fifty-six years ago.

Yesterday, Trump told Congress in a speech that was so successful and widely praised that Democratic congressional leader Nancy Pelosi looked like this while watching it, "America is willing to find new friends, and to forge new partnerships, where shared interests align. We want harmony and stability, not war and conflict. We want peace, wherever peace can be found."

I said earlier that I am not a Trump supporter. But there is quite literally nothing worse than nuclear war, and toward his stated goal of peace he has nothing but my unequivocal support. Let's get rid of everyone who feels otherwise.