Trump and his supporters have been loudly claiming that the Barr letter about the Mueller report has shown "no collusion!" which has been shouted loudly from the rooftops, with many supposedly respectable sources such as the New York Times agreeing with this assessment, thus supporting the long running Trump/Hannity repeated claim.
But I note that the big headline on this morning's Washington Post was "Mueller Finds No Conspiracy," not "No Collusion." Indeed, a careful reading of the clearly carefully written Barr letter finds it not using the word "collusion" at all. Its crucial getting Trump off a major hook says that the available evidence suggests that there was "no conspiracy and no coordination." Nothing about collusion.
Clearly few have even notieced this, very few besides myself so far, but I did occasionally see commentators noting that while Trump/Hannity were constantly denying "collusion" with the Russians, Mueller was not investigsting that, ssomething that is not iillegal in any case, but instead "conspiracy" was what was being investigated, something that is a crime. While I am about to accuse Trump of stupidity, I think he or somebody figured it out that pushing this "no collusion" line would end up as it has as indeed Mueller was not investigating the not-illegal "collusion." So far, they are getting away with this scam.
So how do these things differ? Conspiracy and cooedination both imply some amount of planning and direction, with for conspiracy some sort of communication and agreement on the plan with the other conspiring party, namely the Russians. What apparently the Mueller report finds is none of that: no central plan or direction or the making of such a plan with the Russians. This indeed looks like it is true, although some of what went on around the Trump Tower meeting gets pretty borderline, even as that seems to have been sort of a mutually botched meeting.
But on the matter of collusion we have piles of evidence that this has occurred, and the evidence is the large pile of indictments that Mueller has brought forward against a lot of people, with many of those charged with having unreported meetings and dealings with Russians, including passing of information back and forth, with many of these then lying about all this, and with some of these people pleading guilty of what they were charrged with. These actions have involved very clearly in many cases collusion with the Russians rhese people were dealing with. The crucial diffeeence is that it appears that all this collusion was unplanned and undirected. It was disorganized and spontaneous collusion, although serious enough to bring about efforts to cover up what was going on by many, including apparently Trump himself, even if AG Barr has decided he did not commit obstruction of justice.
The only person I have seen so far to have sort of caught on to this, although not quite as clearly as I am stating here, Juan Cole today. He notes that Trump himself is simply so disorganized and frankly stupid that he is barely capable of cooking up such an organized conspiracy. No conspiracy was organized. But given his situation of being deeply in hock to the Russians and wanting major business with them, showed up in the many efforts to work together, especially given that Mueller's group found the Russians actively intervening in the election itself to the point that Mueller indicted a bunch of them, although it seems they were largely working without any plan or coordination with Trump or his campaign.
To close this out, of course I am watchng Hannity, who is ranting and raving about "no collusion," but he is lying as usual. He demands the rest of the media to apologize, but he is the liar. There was lots and lots of collusion, and we know it. It was simply collusion without any organized conspiracy or coordination.
Barkley Rosser
12 comments:
This is nonsense. Either the writer is deluded or shameless. Nothing will will the writer of Russian-itis.
Editing:
Nothing will cure the writer of Russian-itis.
Me or somebody else, Anonymous?
Six of Trump's closest associates have been indicted in connection with this. I only note that Dana Milbank of WaPo agrees with me: lots of collusion, which is different from conspiracy, which Trump is too stupid to actually engage in.
As it is, Anonymous, I happen to be very well informed about Russia and pay close attention to it, probably more than you on both counts. So spouting about "Russian-itis" just makes you poorly informed and stupid.
As it is, I am increasingly disgusted that most of the media has simply rolled over and bought the Trump/Hannity line that "no collusion" is what has been shown. It has not. Again, the word does not appear in the Bar letter.
Barkley,
despite being a Professor of Economics, and having a Russian speaking wife you are utterly incompetent in this area and are completely brainwashing by neoliberal/neocon MSM. You tend to subconsciously equate Russia and the USSR. For your information, Russia is a neoliberal state; much like the USA and Putin is promoter of neoliberal capitalism, almost in less man-eating variant then in the USA.
For you information Muller investigation was a part of color revolution against Trump launched by intelligence serves in the same way the launch color revolution in other countries. It is unclear to me why they did that but that fact and the sequence of event, especially questioning the legitimacy of election and Mueller appointment gambit with Comey as a sacrificing pawn corresponds to what you can learn from the books of CIA-connected write Gene Sharp -- the reverence source of color revolution mechanics. . See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Sharp Is not clear to me why the Deep State has such an allergic reaction and viewed Trump as a threat the US government world neoliberal empire, because Trump, as corrupt as he is, is a part of NYC neoliberal elite and in no way a revolutionary. And it was clear that he will execute the same "bait and switch" maneuver as Obama betraying his election promises.
But it was a color revolution. Which so far failed.
So you better stop writing such detached from reality statements as "But on the matter of collusion we have piles of evidence that this has occurred, and the evidence is the large pile of indictments that Mueller has brought forward against a lot of people, with many of those charged with having unreported meetings and dealings with Russians," This is such a low level of IQ that it hurts.
Unacceptable for a Professor pretending to be a political analyst.
In reality this was a false flag operation to present Russia as the culprit. Russia serves as a very convenient scapegoat for such things.
And having an external scapegoat and projecting into it all the ills helped to cement cracks in the neoliberal façade, when the US population rejected neoliberal’s elite candidate. In addition, it allowed to launch NeoMcCartyism campaign in MSM for the suppressing the internal dissent, when anybody who question the US foreign wars or the rule of financial oligarchy can be framed as Putin’s agent.
So this is another classic method of suppressing the dissident voices including whose who argue for the return of the New Deal Capitalism. Looks at how MSM treat Tulsi Gabbard.
So most of your writings on this particular topic are just an implicit repetition of State Department taking points infused into your brain via MSMs you read. You have no first hand sources about Russia.
That's why I would strongly recommend you to stop writing on this topic. You just disgrace yourself.
You are totally mired in contradictions, likbez. Russia ia a neoliberal state? But supposedly color revolutions are for neoliberalism over authoritarian statist nationalisms. Why is Russia then afraid of color revolutions?
Russia is still probablycloser to being neoliberal than to being the old USSR, but under Putin it has moved substantially back in that direction, with a large increase in both state ownership and control of the economy, as well as, of course, an increase in authoritarianism and nationalism.
The idea that the Mueller investigation was an attempted color revolution is just hilariouos, although Trump certainly has strong authoritarian nationalist tendencies like Putin. But he is way more neoliberal than Putin, who is pushing pretty hard against that. It is this claim of Putin's alleged neoliberalism that just makes your post a pile of gibberish.
Barkley,
You may be well informed but to really grok this story like likbez does you need a tin-foil hat. You can't tell the false flags from the true flags without a tin-foil hat!
I should not waste time, but for another incoherence in likbez's post (and were you the Anonymous mumbling about "Russian-it is," likbez), on the one hand you note that I have a Russian wife, but then claim that I have no personal knowledge of what is going on over there.
Just for the record, between my wife and me we know most of the top players in economic policy over there, including Putin's top economic adviers (a corrupt creep), the head of the central bank (a former student of my wife's), the rector of the three top uni depts. in economics, the editor of the Russian Economic Journal, and quite a few others. no, likbez, I am far better informed than not only most readers of this blog, but also nearly everybody in the US intel establishment. Deal with it.
Oh, just for the record, after the egomaniacal comment above, I fully grant that certainly lots of people in CIA and DIA, etc. who are much better informed than I am on such things as exactly how much oil did Rosneft last month and similar sorts of specific data. It is on the matter of who is doing what and supporting what and what the policiea are and who is carrying them out, in that area, I am very well informed, certainly far more so than our friend Likbez claims.
Barkley,
For me the standard of understanding of Russian political situation is Professor Steven Cohen.
See https://www.thenation.com/article/the-real-costs-of-russiagate/
Sorry, but despite all your bragging, you not even close.
Politically you are aligned with neocons like Robert Kagan and Max Boot. That's a very sad situation for any academic, as they are known lobbyists of MIC. Which means that politically you are just a MIC stooge.
I despise such people. They are all intellectual pigmies, unable to see a bigger picture which is the level of threat to the human civilization. That's why I advice you no longer touch this sensitive topic. You are not intellectually equipped to analyze it. You have no solid philosophic framework and a set of ethical principles that are pre-requisites for this.
Trump current policy toward Russia is just Hillary policy with an orange wig. He acts as a neocon marionette, even more hapless marionette then Bush II.
This positions him as far from a Russian stooge as one can get. The fact that he probably took large bribes from Russian and/or Russian-Israeli oligarchs does not change this one jota.
And in view of the danger to human civilization, your peddling of Russiagate nonsense look completely inappropriate, and even stupid.
This anti-Russia fear-mongering serves to impoverish the US people (aka "deplorable) and line the pockets of "national security parasites" from the Boing to Pentagon brass, plus Israel, which actually acts as a state-based lobbyist for the US MIC.
Again, politically, Trump has proven himself to be an impulsive, stupid, and impotent neocon stooge. I now do not understand why he had run, as that means to take those huge risks of exposing your own dirty laundry and shady dealings. To take such huge risks makes sense if and only if you really want to do something good for the nation, putting yourself under fire, making a personal sacrifice for the good of the nation.
As the result of Russiagate, the Neo-McCarthyism mentality (that you fully support) have already been baked into post Mueller US political atmosphere with the huge bills being delivered to the deluded and hapless US taxpayers.
With two very powerful political factions supporting Neo-McCarthyism things will only get worse and it probably this poisonous atmosphere will last a decade or more.
The best we can hope for at this point is that we avoid a catastrophic mistake that would lead us to a war with Russia that would end the existence of the US. If not human civilization.
P.S. I also am completely disappointed with the position of Sandwichman, whom I previously respected.
"P.S. I also am completely disappointed with the position of Sandwichman, whom I previously respected."
(My position being that a four-page letter by Barr is not the same as a four-hundred page report from Mueller and anyone who pretends it is either a fool or a jackal.)
Well, Likbez, I am not surprised you are a fan of Stephen Cohen's. He makes some good points. But then he loses it pretty badly on others. Sorry, quoting him does not impress me anymore than you declaring how much of an intellectual "pigmie" I am, not to mention lacking in ethical principles I am. Sorry, but reading Stephen Cohen does not make you an expert on this.
And like S-man, I await the Mueller Report, or at least as much as Barr will allow us to see since he is apparently busily redacting chunks of it.
BTW, Likbez, I am all for having peaceful and reasonable relations between the US and Russia, but it does take two to tango, and Stephen Cohen is a bit too quick to make excuses for the authoritarianism and aggressions carried out by the Putin regime.
As it is, when Trump won the election I predicted that despite saying he wanted better relations with Russia and obviously kowtowing all over the place to Putin for financial reasons, we would end up having worse relations, which seems to be happening (see Us withdrawal from INF treaty among other things) because they would both be expecting too much of each other and both being egomaniacs would overreact and go the other way when things would not work out as they expected. I that this is more or less what has happened, and Russigate has had very little to do with it.
Post a Comment