Despite the lack of evidence to support the conspiracy theory that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election, Russiagate has achieved its purposes.
Russiagate has three purposes.
One is to prevent President Trump from endangering the vast budget and power of the military/security complex by normalizing relations with Russia.
Another, in the words of James Howard Kunstler, is “to conceal the criminal conduct of US government officials meddling in the 2016 election in collusion with the Hillary Clinton campaign,” by focusing all public and political attention on a hoax distraction.
The third is to obstruct Trump’s campaign and distract him from his agenda when he won the election.
Despite the inability of Mueller to find any evidence that Trump or Trump officials colluded with Russia to steal the US presidential election, and the inability of Mueller to find evidence with which to accuse Trump of obstruction of justice, Russiagate has achieved all of its purposes.
Trump has been locked into a hostile relationship with Russia. Neoconservatives have succeeded in worsening this hostile relationship by manipulating Trump into a blatant criminal attempt to overthrow in broad daylight the Venezuelan government.
Hillary’s criminal conduct and the criminal conduct of the CIA, FBI, and Obama Justice (sic) Department that resulted in a variety of felonies, including the FBI obtaining spy warrants for partisan political purposes on false pretexts from the FISA court, were swept out of sight by the Russiagate hoax.
The Mueller report was written in such a way that despite the absence of any evidence supporting any indictment of Trump, the report refused to clear Trump of obstruction and passed the buck to the Attorney General. In other words, Mueller in the absence of any evidence kept the controversy going by setting up Attorney General Barr for cover-up charges.
It is evidence of Mueller’s corruption that he does not explain just how it is possible for Trump to possibly have obstructed justice when Mueller states in his report that the crime he was empowered to investigate could not be found. How does one obstruct the investigation of a crime that did not occur?
As Kunstler puts it, “The Special Prosecutor’s main bit of mischief, of course, was his refusal to reach a conclusion on the obstruction of justice charge. What the media refuses to accept and make clear is that a prosecutor’s failure to reach a conclusion is exactly the same thing as an inability to make a case, and it was a breach of Mr. Mueller’s duty to dishonestly present that failure as anything but that in his report — and possibly an act of criminal prosecutorial misconduct” on Mueller’s part.
But this is not the only dishonesty in Muller’s report. Although Mueller’s report clearly obliterates the Russiagate conspiracy theory peddled by the military/security complex, the Democrats, and the presstitutes, Mueller’s report takes for granted that Russia interfered in the election but not in collusion with Trump or Trump officials. Mueller states this interference as if it were a fact without providing one drop of evidence. Indeed, nowhere in the report, or anywhere else, is there any evidence of Russian interference.
Mueller simply takes Russian interference for granted as if endless repeating by a bunch of presstitutes makes it so. For example, the Mueller report says that the Russians hacked the DNC emails, a claim for which no evidence exists. Moreover, it is a claim that is contradicted by the known evidence. William Binney and other experts have demonstrated that the DNC emails were, according to their time stamps, downloaded much more quickly than is possible over the Internet. This fact has been carefully ignored by Mueller, the Democrats and the presstitutes.
One reason for ignoring this undisputed fact is that they all want to get Julian Assange, and the public case concocted against Assange is that Assange is in cahoots with the Russians who allegedly gave him the hacked emails. As there is no evidence that Russia hacked the emails and as Assange has said Russia is not the source, what is Mueller’s evidence? Apparently, Mueller’s evidence is his own political indictment of Russian individuals who Mueller alleged hacked the DNC computers. This false indictment for which there is no evidence was designed by Mueller to poison the Helsinki meeting between Trump and Putin and announced on the eve of the meeting.
Indictments do not require evidence, and Mueller had none. Moreover, Mueller could not possibly know the identities of the Russian intelligence agents who allegedly did the hacking. This was of no concern to Mueller. He knew he needed no evidence, because he knew there would be no trial. The indictment was political propaganda, not real.
The myth of Russian interference is so well established that even Glenn Greenwald in his otherwise careful and correct exposition of the Russiagate hoax buys into Russian interference as if it were a fact. Indeed, many if not most of Trump’s supporters are ready to blame Russia for trying, but failing, to ensnare their man Trump.
The falsity of Russiagate and the political purposes of the hoax are completely obvious, but even Trump supporters tip their hats to the falsehood of Russian interference so that they do not look guilty of excessive support for Trump. In other words, Russiagate has succeeded in constraining how far Trump’s supporters can go in defending him, especially if he has any remaining intent to reduce tensions with Russia.
Russiagate has succeeded in criminalizing in the American mind any contact with Russia. Thus has the military/security complex guaranteed that its budget and power will not be threatened by any move toward peace between nuclear powers.
The Democratic Party and the presstitutes cannot be bothered by facts. They are committed to getting Trump regardless of the facts. And so is Mueller, and Brennan, and Comey, and a slew of other corrupt public officials.
A good example of journalistic misconduct is James Risen writing in Glenn Greenwald’s Intercept of all places, “WILLIAM BARR MISLED EVERYONE ABOUT THE MUELLER REPORT. NOW DEMOCRATS ARE CALLING FOR HIS RESIGNATION.” Quoting the same posse of “hang Trump high” Democrats, Risen, without questioning their disproven lies, lets the Democrats build a case that Mueller’s report proves Trump’s guilt. Then Risen himself misrepresents the report in support of the Democrats. He says there is a huge difference between Barr’s memo on the report and the report itself as if Barr would misrepresent a report that he is about to release.
Length is the only difference between the memo and the report. This doesn’t stop Risen from writing: “In fact, the Mueller report makes it clear that a key reason Mueller did not seek to prosecute Trump for obstruction was a longstanding Justice Department legal opinion saying that the Justice Department can’t indict a sitting president.” This is something Mueller threw in after saying he didn’t have the evidence to indict Trump. It is yet another reason for not indicting, not the reason. Risen then backs up his misreport with that of a partisan Democrat, Renato Mariotti who claims that Mueller could have indicted Trump except it is against US Justice Department policy. Again, there is no explanation from Risen, Mariotti, or anyone else how Mueller could have indicted Trump for obstructing what Mueller concludes was a crime that did not happen.
Just as Mueller indicted Russian intelligence agents without evidence, he could have indicted Trump without evidence, but a case against a president that is without evidence is not one a prosecutor wants to take to court as it is obviously an act of sedition.
That the Democrats and the presstitutes want Trump indicted for obstructing a crime that did not occur shows how insane they have been driven by their hatred of Trump. What is operating in the Democratic Party and in the American media is insanity and hatred. Nothing else.
Risen also alleges that the unproven Russian hacks were passed over by Barr in his memo on the report. Not only is this incorrect, but also Risen apparently has forgot that the investigation was about Trump’s collusion with Russia to do something illegal and the investigation found that no such thing occurred. Risen, like the rest of the presstitutes and even Greenwald himself, takes for granted that the unproven Russian hacks happened. Again we see that the longer a lie is repeated the more it becomes true. Not even Greenwald can detect that he has been bamboozled.
At one time James Risen was an honest reporter. He won a Pulitzer Prize, and he was threatened with prison by the Department of Justice when he refused to reveal his source for his reporting on illegal actions of the CIA. But Risen discovered that in the new world of journalism, telling the truth is punished while lying is rewarded. Risen, like all the others, decided that his income was more important than the truth.
Journalists who lie for the Establishment have no need of the First Amendment. Perhaps this is why they have no concern that Washington’s attack on Julian Assange will destroy the First Amendment. They are helping Washington destroy Assange so that their self-esteem will no longer be threatened by the fact that there is a real journalist out there doing real journalism.
This article was originally published at PaulCraigRoberts.org on April 22, 2019.
I have subscribed to the FPJ newsletter for a few months now. I have appreciated the depth of analysis that exposes so many conventional representations of various issues in mainstream media.
I was quite shocked, though, to read this article about the so-called “Russiagate.” So much of what is written in this article is in complete contradiction to what is explicitly stated in the Mueller report, including exhaustive documentation of evidence used in drawing it conclusions. *Regardless* of what might be the sinister intentions of the Special Counsel’s investigation into Trump and his campaign, there are some facts that exist independent of any opinion about Mueller, his team, and his intentions:
1) There are dozens of documented examples of “collusion” between DT’s campaign and Russian contacts, though Mueller *very specifically and explicitly* states that he did not investigate with respect to “collusion,” (because there is no legal definition), but rather with respect to “conspiracy,” which has a much more rigorous criteria to meet. Even with that more rigorous criteria, Mueller suggests that the evidence for it is abundant, but he wasn’t sure it would meet a “beyond reasonable doubt” criteria in court. To even be discussing whether the evidence is “beyond reasonable doubt” when it comes to *conspiring* with a foreign government to sway an election is bizarre.
2) The report documented multiple instances of obstruction of justice by DT and his campaign. Mueller explicitly states that he isn’t pursuing it as a criminal matter *only* because a sitting president can’t be indicted. He is very clear about this. DT committed the crimes, he just can’t be prosecuted while he is in office. This is hardly an exoneration of DT. What did he obstruct? His and his campaign’s role in colluding/conspiring with Russia. It happened. To suggest the Mueller report and its findings are all a plot to delegitimize DT or to unfairly characterize Russia as a bad actor is to deny abundantly documented facts.
Russia may very well be a wonderful and benevolent player on the international scene. If so, that is true *in addition to* the fact that Russia played an active role in subverting the US democratic process of electing our president, and our president appreciated their help.
3) The report notes that fourteen separate *additional* criminal investigations have been passed along to outside counsel. This is very likely to lead to multiple criminal charges being brought against the president once he is out of office.
FPJ has not simply taken the position that these matters are not important, but that they actually aren’t true.
“Despite the inability of Mueller to find any evidence that Trump or Trump officials colluded with Russia to steal the US presidential election, and the inability of Mueller to find evidence with which to accuse Trump of obstruction of justice, Russiagate has achieved all of its purposes.”
That is a shocking paragraph from the above article. It is a blatant misrepresentation of the report. More accurately, it is a blatant *lie* with respect to what the report found. It is as much a distortion of public facts as FPJ consistently accuses mainstream media of doing on other topics. And large swaths of the report are still redacted due to “ongoing investigations,” so we still don’t know the full extent of Mueller’s findings.
I will be unsubscribing from FPJ. If it can’t be trusted to accurately present publicly available facts around the topic of the Mueller report and its findings, I have no way of knowing if it can be trusted to be presenting accurate information about other topics.
This is a puzzling comment, given the fact that the report explicitly acknowledges that there is no evidence to support the conspiracy theory that Trump committed a crime by colluding with the Russian government to steal the election.
None of the incidents of having contact with Russians are evidence to support that conspiracy theory.
The suggestion that Trump could be indicted for obstruction of justice is not evidence to support that conspiracy theory.
No, it is not. The report explicitly states that “the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges”. As for what PCR says about the obstruction accusation, he goes on to explain:
“It is evidence of Mueller’s corruption that he does not explain just how it is possible for Trump to possibly have obstructed justice when Muller states in his report that the crime he was empowered to investigate could not be found. How does one obstruct the investigation of a crime that did not occur?”
This is accurate. As just shown, Mueller does state that the crime he was empowered to investigate could not be found. So PCR’s question is relevant: how can one obstruct justice in the absence of evidence that a crime was committed for which justice could be obstructed?
Russiagate is a conspiracy theory, and you are a conspiracy theorist who maintains a belief that Trump colluded with the Russian government to steal the election despite there being no evidence to support that belief.
Everyone should read the report for themselves and keep an open mind. National security should be our first priority.
His name was Seth Rich but everyone knew him as Russia.