Voices from Russia

Friday, 5 January 2018

Jill Stein in the Crosshairs: The Russiagate Investigation Shifts to Clinton’s Political Rivals


Jill Stein had dinner with Putin, so… GET THE GUILLOTINE! That’s how we roll in this country now. Didn’t she know it’s illegal to eat with Russians?

Richard Baris


The Russiagate investigation zeroed-in on Green Party candidate Jill Stein. That proves that the probe isn’t an attempt to determine whether Russia meddled in the 2016 elections, but a crude weapon to bully the political rivals of Hillary Clinton and her dissolute allies in the bureaucracy. On Monday, Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) (chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee) said that the committee was “just starting to look at Ms Stein’s campaign as it continues its investigation of the Trump campaign”. According to the New York Times:

Democrats seethed for more than a year at Ms Stein, whose tens of thousands of votes in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania either exceeded or nearly matched Donald Trump’s margins of victory in those states, which delivered him the White House. At least in certain quarters, they greeted news of the queries enthusiastically.

Jesse Ferguson, a former Clinton campaign spokesman, said Americans ought to know if a presidential nominee, no matter how minor, was a Russian asset or that they simply boosted her in an effort to chip away Democratic votes from Clinton. He said:

Russian operatives weren’t promoting Jill Stein because they thought she’d win. They were promoting her because they thought it’d hurt Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump.

A “Russian asset?” Jill Stein is a “Russian asset?” How long are American liberals going to put up with this bullshit? How long before they wash the mud from their eyes and acknowledge what should be as plain as the nose on their face… their precious investigation of Donald Trump is nothing more than a witch-hunt to intimidate or destroy political rivals. Jill Stein’s persecution strips away the façade… exposing Russiagate as a complete fraud used to exact revenge on the adversaries of Hillary Clinton and her reprobate friends. Even the New York Times admits as much. Why is there no evidence of wrongdoing after more than a year of relentless non-stop investigations? Why are there just accusations, allegations, and baseless claims?

Take a hard look at the Stein case and you’ll understand why. The meat-puppet senators conducting these wretched show-trials don’t give a damn about the truth. They know the case against Stein is a complete fabrication. They also know they can carry on with complete impunity because the big money powerbrokers that pull their strings and order them about are beyond the reach of any legal accountability. That’s what’s really going on; the fatcat behind-the-scenes honchos are just settling scores for Hillary’s lost election. It’s payback time for the Clinton Mafia. Here’s more baloney from the Times:

Senate investigators are interested in unravelling what was behind the apparent closeness between Ms Stein, a Harvard-educated doctor and perennial Green Party candidate, and Russia.

Give me a break. Does anyone on the Senate Intelligence Committee honestly believe that Jill Stein is a Russian agent? Of course not. They’re just harassing her to send a message to the rest of us:

You’d better watch your step or we’ll trump up charges against you and make your life a living hell.

Isn’t that the message? You’re damn right it is! You call this “America?” Here’s a clip from an article by Danielle Ryan at “blacklisted” RT… you probably shouldn’t read it because it undoubtedly will transform you into a Russian agent or a Kremlin apologist:

This is a witch hunt. It’s neo-McCarthyism, plain and simple. The people who are outright calling Stein a Russian agent are making a complete mockery of themselves and of the American political process. Dragging Stein into this mess shows Clinton Democrats up for what they really are. It proves that the “Resist” crowd’s crusade isn’t just about Trump and “collusion”… it’s also about discrediting all dissenting American voices and establishing their own definition of what political opposition is supposed to look like. For the Clinton cult, it’s not supposed to look like Jill Stein. Anyone who disagrees with the Democrats is a Putin puppet… if you’ve ever been to Moscow, forget it… don’t even bother trying to defend yourself. Off with your head.

Bravo, Ryan! You nailed it, girl. It’s too bad America’s liberals don’t see things so clearly. The World Socialist Web Site also issued a statement condemning the attacks on Stein. As always, the WSWS is on the forefront of the issue while the other phoney liberal sites and pundits continue to support these thoroughly-corrupted and reactionary investigations. Here’s an excerpt from their statement:

The Socialist Equality Party condemns the targeting of Jill Stein, the Green Party presidential candidate in the 2016 election, by the neo-McCarthyite witch-hunters on the Senate Intelligence Committee. The attack on Stein, spearheaded by the Democratic Party, is an unconstitutional attempt to delegitimise and suppress political opposition to the monopoly of the capitalist two-party system. In addition to the dinner hosted by RT, Stein, according to ranking committee Democrat Mark Warner, had “very complimentary things to say about Julian Assange”. For having spoken out publicly in support of a political prisoner and dissident, Stein is threatened with being hauled before a congressional committee as if she were involved in a treasonous activity. This is the Orwellian reality of America in 2017, ruled by two rightwing oligarchic parties that can and will tolerate no political opposition.

Imagine that… Stein actually spoke up for Assange, the highly-principled whistleblower who sacrificed his own freedom to expose the truth about Washington’s homicidal activities around the world? That has to be worth 30 years of hard labour at least! What a farce! Here’s more from the Times:

Senator Mark Warner (D-VA), the committee’s top Democrat, wouldn’t comment directly on the committee’s interest in Ms Stein, but pointed out that several of the interactions appeared to be consequential, saying, “I’ll point out though that Ms Stein was at the infamous dinner that included General Flynn and Vladimir Putin, and we do know that she has very complimentary things to say about Julian Assange, who certainly was being used by the Russians to take some of the hacked information and release it into our political system”. The disclosure that the committee is looking closely at Stein’s campaign is the latest indication that the Senate committee is still expanding its investigation as it nears the one-year mark.

Do you hear that, liberals? Do you hear what Warner is saying? Do you like the idea that the investigation is expanding and that the hectoring, harassing, and intimidating is going to continue for the foreseeable future and that it’s going to include anyone who admires men like Assange or Snowden or Manning or anyone who opposes the corrupt and murderous oligarchy that rules this stinking country? Do you like that idea? If you’re a liberal and you hate Donald Trump, then, you probably see the Russiagate investigation as your best chance to achieve the Golden Grail of “impeachment”. However, are you willing to compromise your principles, join forces with the sinister and unscrupulous Clinton cabal, and throw allies like Jill Stein under the bus to achieve your goal?

How high a price are you willing to pay to get rid of Trump?

That’s the question that every liberal in America should ask themselves. They’d better answer it fast before it’s too late.

28 December 2017

Mike Whitney




Thursday, 4 January 2018

If Hillary Had Won, We’d Be Even Worse


What if Hillary Clinton had won 114,000 more votes in four key states? Or, what if she’d picked up the two to three percent of the vote she lost because Bernie Sanders supporters sat on their hands on Election Day? She’d be “Clinton 2” or “Clinton 45” or “the second President Clinton”… and the world would look very different. In terms of personnel and therefore policy, a Clinton Administration II would look and feel like a mash-up of Obama’s third term and a throwback to figures that populated her husband’s White House during the 1990s. Having moved to the right since Bill’s first term, progressive figures like then-Labor Secretary Robert Reich would be out in the cold. Rahm Emanuel and Timothy Geithner could expect cabinet offers. Therefore, so could some Bush-era neocons like Robert Kagan. Hillary didn’t promise much change to domestic policy during her campaign. Her biggest proposal was to spend 275 billion USD (15.664 trillion Roubles. 1.783 trillion Renminbi. 17.415 trillion INR. 343.43 billion CAD. 350 billion AUD. 227.74 billion Euros. 202.72 billion UK Pounds) on infrastructure, which would’ve left us 1.3 trillion USD (74.046 trillion Roubles. 8.428 trillion Renminbi. 82.336 trillion INR. 1.624 trillion CAD. 1.655 trillion AUD. 1.077 trillion Euros. 958.35 billion UK Pounds) short of what we need. Not that she could have gotten it through a Republican Congress.

The alternate presidential history of 2017 differs most significantly in two respects… foreign policy and tone. Clinton’s liberal supporters always glossed over her long history of a hawkish, arguably far-right, approach to military matters. Those who mourn her loss to Trump today completely forgot that she convinced Obama to back military coups against the democratically-elected leaders of Honduras and Egypt. She also successfully advised Obama to arm and fund radical Islamist militias in Syria and Libya, plunging two modern Muslim countries into civil wars that reduced one of them to a failed state. Clinton’s famous cackle after a US drone blew up Libyan ruler Moammar Khaddafi’s convoy, leading to his being sodomised by a bayonet on video, is terrifying. Micah Zenko speculated in Foreign Policy in July 2016:

It’s impossible to know which national security crises she’d be forced to confront, of course, but those who vote for her should know that she’ll approach such crises with a long track record of being generally supportive of initiating US military interventions and expanding them.

Two months later, Clinton Ehrlich FP writer penned an astonishing look behind the Kremlin walls at the thinking of top Russian officials worried about the US election:

Moscow perceives the former secretary of state as an existential threat… That fear was heightened when Clinton surrogate Harry Reid, the Senate Minority Leader, recently accused Putin of attempting to rig the US election through cyberattacks. That’s a grave allegation… the very kind of thing President Clinton might repeat to justify war with Russia.

Would Hillary’s tough talk have triggered World War III with Russia by now? Probably not. However, it isn’t impossible… which shows us how far right she stands politically on the use of the force. More likely and thus more worrisome, Hillary might have leveraged the current U.S. presence in Iraq and Afghanistan into attacks against neighbouring Iran. Clinton said in 2008:

I want the Iranians to know, if I’m the president, we’ll attack Iran [if Iran were to attack Israel… even if there were no Congressional authorisation or a clear and present danger to the USA] And I want them to understand that… we’d be able to totally obliterate them [to retaliate for an attack on Israel].

Unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran has a real military and thus a real ability to defend itself… that’d mean a long, costly, and possibly unwinnable war. Like Trump, Hillary would almost certainly authorise the construction, deployment, and use of more assassination drone planes.

The one arena where most people agree that President Clinton would be better than President Trump is presidential tone. Yes, “she does yell into microphones and speak in an overly enunciated voice… two factors that may make her seem abrasive”. However, this woman’s campaign assigned 12 staffers to compose a tweet; they went through ten drafts over ten hours. There wouldn’t be any Trump-style 0300 Twitter diarrhoea coming out of a Clinton White House.

When George W Bush was president, there wasn’t one morning I didn’t regret that Al Gore wasn’t there instead. Gore wouldn’t have invaded Iraq. He might not have gone into Afghanistan either. Unlike pretty much every other president, he cared about the environment. There isn’t a single moment I miss President Hillary Clinton, though. Trump is a disaster, a real piece of crap. However, everyone knows it. Because Trump is so loud, stupid, cruel, greedy, and corrupt, all liberals and not a few conservatives clearly discern the true nature of his administration, and of the system itself. If Hillary Clinton were president, the left would still be just as asleep as it was between 2008 and 2016. First woman president! Aren’t we just the best?

Meanwhile, drones fire their missiles, US troops and spooks prop up tyrants, and the filthy rich rake in their loot. Trump gives us clarity. That’s no small thing.

27 December 2017

Ted Rall



Friday, 10 November 2017

Brother Ajamu Speaks…


The North Koreans aren’t going to denuclearise (I may have made up a word) as long as they see the USA as an existential threat. Therefore, what this warmongering criminal is saying is that she supports an attack on that nation. Moreover, there’ll be others standing with her ready to send the working class and poor off to die for nothing… once again.

All hail the “Ministry of Truth” being called for by liberal Democrats where CNN, NYT, MSNBC, and Wash Post determine what truth is.

There’s a story and there are questions about hacking that aren’t  part of the discussion. During the campaign, my staff was hacked, both phones and computers. I had 12,000 emails stolen and the campaign and party had intrusions. Now, who had an objective interest in doing that… the Russians? We know who, but don’t have the evidence, so up to this message, we haven’t made a big deal of it. We always understood that this was just the dirty nature of a corrupt bourgeois politics that the ill-informed refer to as democracy. So later for that BS concern about the Russians from citizens of a state that hacks, murders leaders of other nations, overthrows governments, and allows its own citizens to be murdered with impunity by its police forces.

Ajamu Baraka


Saturday, 12 August 2017

12 August 2017. “Russian Hacking” Didn’t Defeat the Clintons… Their Shitty Greedster Record Did Them In, With No Help from Outsiders


NAFTA… “Welfare Reform”… the destabilisation of Federal Yugoslavia… the dismantling of reasonable New Deal restrictions on Wall Street profiteers… the aggression against Serbia in 1999… the deliberate bungling of healthcare reform… the sponsorship of the Kosovo gangster state… need I go on? The Clintons were feral “conservative” Repugs in everything but the name… ordinary people do have memories and did act on them. They knew that Trump was a buffoonish knave, but they also knew that the Clintons had proven themselves unscrupulous thieves and unrepentant muggers of ordinary folk. They voted AGAINST… they didn’t need “foreign meddling” to come to that conclusion. There IS a country that routinely meddles in the internal affairs of others… it ISN’T Russia…


Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.