16
   

Monitoring Biden and other Contemporary Events

 
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 07:45 am

Berlin recall election: The decline of the SPD

The most striking thing about the results of the partial re-run of the federal election in Berlin last Sunday is the heavy losses suffered by Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s party. The Social Democrats (SPD) lost 7.8 points, receiving only 14.6 percent of the votes cast. Compared to the original federal election in September 2021, in which they had already achieved a poor result, with 23.5 percent, the Social Democrats once again lost more than a third of their votes.

he re-run had become necessary because the Supreme Court ruled at the end of last year that the serious shortcomings in the conduct of the original election made a by-election necessary in 455 of 2,256 constituencies.

A year earlier, the Berlin State Supreme Court had ruled that the principles of universality, equality and freedom of the vote had been so seriously violated in the Berlin House of Representatives (state assembly) election, which took place on the same day in the same polling stations, that the entire election had to be repeated. This happened exactly one year ago.

By deciding to repeat the Bundestag (federal) election in only 455 constituencies, the Berlin State Supreme Court tried to provide some protection to the federal government and prevent a political earthquake. Nevertheless, the rerun election result is very revealing and shows how strong the opposition to the government is.


https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/02/18/qywr-f18.html
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 08:23 am
March in Nashville two days ago

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GGkMlp-W0AEBJQO?format=jpg&name=900x900
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 08:38 am
Social programs are just horrible.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GGrHPEGa0AAOYyG?format=png&name=small

0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 08:42 am
@blatham,
They're flying some of them upside down. Must be the government informers in their ranks. Or they're just stupid.
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 09:08 am
@hightor,
Perhaps they were purchased from an Australian nazi group.

Edit: note to dlowan if she pops in... that was a Coriolis joke.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 09:28 am
At a South Carolina townhall this weekend, Haley said she would pardon Donald Trump. Isn't that nice.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 09:42 am
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

Call me skeptical.


Of anything that's no pro Putin.
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 12:55 pm
The Russian authorities want to keep the body of Navalny under lock and key for at least another 14 days, according to his team.

"The investigators have told Alexei's lawyers and mother that they will not release the body," wrote Navalny's spokeswoman Kira Yarmysh on X today.
The reason given was "chemical tests" to be carried out on the body.
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 01:14 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Probably the hydrochloric acid test will head Putin's list.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 01:25 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
Lash wrote:
Call me skeptical.

Take another look at what she wrote. Then choose the proper term she ought to have used:
Quote:
Skeptical: not easily convinced; having doubts or reservations.

Or this one:
Quote:
Cynical: believing that people are motivated purely by self-interest; distrustful of human sincerity or integrity.

And then, of course, there's a related term:
Quote:
Projection: the unconscious transfer of one's own desires or emotions [or characterological features] to another person [or persons]
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 02:13 pm
Arf arf arf
Quote:
Roman Sharf: The Russian CEO who won autographed pair of Trump’s golden sneakers

Financial Times
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 02:21 pm
Quote:
Rick Hasen@rickhasen
3h
#ELB: “Gov. Tony Evers signs new election maps, ending Wisconsin Republicans’ grip on legislative power”
Story Here
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2024 03:21 pm
This is a long piece from Talking Points Memo but I'm choosing to post it in its entirety because I think it is a very important piece of history that has clear implications how we should understand the modern GOP. I'll add a couple of notes at the bottom but I hope this excellent reporting helps carve a through-line from decades past up to the present.
Quote:
A Central Figure In The Abramoff Corruption Scandal Is Helping MTG Become A ‘Real Player’ On Capitol Hill
The firebrand congresswoman has an infamous ally and her eye on higher office.
By Hunter Walker

Sixteen years ago, things looked bleak for Ed Buckham. The former chief of staff to the House Majority leader had been swept up in a wave of scandal, found himself under investigation by the FBI and, ultimately, was forced to close down his lucrative lobbying firm.

He was never charged with a crime and, now, Buckham has made a fairly quiet return to a notable role on Capitol Hill. Buckham is the chief of staff to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA).

Their partnership brings together a man who, before his fall from grace, was known as one of the most influential and effective operators in the halls of Congress and Greene, a MAGA firebrand who is trying to turn her popularity with the GOP’s right-wing base into real power in Washington.

In a statement to TPM, Greene praised Buckham as a worthy ally in her ambitious mission.

“I have big plans for the future of this country, so of course I’m going to hire the best,” Greene said. “And I’ll continue stacking my team to accomplish every goal I set.”

Greene’s statement was provided by her office. It did not address questions about Buckham’s past.

Buckham’s roller coaster congressional career started with stints as a staffer in multiple offices. He became known as one of the most powerful people in Washington during his time working for Tom DeLay, a Texas congressman who became the GOP’s majority whip and ultimately majority leader with Buckham as his right-hand man. Buckham parlayed his position into a lucrative lobbying career — until a snowballing series of scandals saw him exiled from K Street. Greene ultimately gave him a chance for a comeback as she seeks to climb the ladder as DeLay once did.

Reached by phone last week, DeLay described Buckham as perfectly suited to help Greene plot a Washington ascent.

“She found him and she’s very smart to have hired him, because no matter what her future is in the House or otherwise he can help you,” DeLay said.

‘The Hammer’ And ‘The Handle’

A Tennessean, Buckham began his career in Congress in 1983 when he was in his mid-twenties. He started as a research assistant on the Judiciary Committee and worked for multiple Republican members before becoming executive director of the House Republican Study Committee, a group of the most conservative members. It was there that he met DeLay, who was, in his own words, “ambitious” and eager to move up in the world.

“We got to be friends and he wanted me to be chairman of the Republican Study Committee, which is a huge stepping stone to the leadership table,” DeLay said of Buckham. “So, I agreed and that’s when we hooked up. He was executive director and I was chairman of the Study Committee and we drove the leadership crazy.”

Buckham joined DeLay’s staff in 1995. With Buckham’s help and counsel, DeLay scored a series of partisan wins including helping drive the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton. During their run, DeLay earned the nickname “The Hammer” for the aggressive tactics he used to keep Republican colleagues in line. DeLay said Buckham “was huge in developing the strategy.”

“If I was ‘The Hammer’ … he was the handle, that’s for sure,” DeLay said of Buckham.

After working on DeLay’s staff, Buckham opened a lobbying firm, the Alexander Strategy Group, in 1998. The firm made millions and, according to the Washington Post, “thrived” thanks largely to “its close connections to DeLay.” Alexander Strategy Group also had DeLay’s wife on the payroll for four years.

Then came the Abramoff investigation — at the time perhaps the largest political scandal to hit DC since Watergate — and it all came crashing down.

The substance of what super lobbyist Jack Abramoff was accused of — fraud in his dealing with his clients — is not so much what the scandal is remembered for as the way it metastasized, expanding to include more and more people. A dizzying series of interconnected corruption cases swept through the Republican Party, culminating in the conviction of Abramoff, who was close with Buckham and DeLay. Both Buckham and DeLay were investigated as part of the probe during the mid-2000s, but were not found to have committed any wrongdoing and were not charged with a crime in conjunction with the case.

Some of their colleagues were not so lucky. Two of DeLay’s senior congressional aides were among the group of Republican staffers and Bush administration White House officials who ended up being convicted or pleading guilty as part of the fallout from the Abramoff probe.

Abramoff himself pleaded guilty to three felony charges in January 2006. The charges against Abramoff included fraud related to him steering Native American tribes that had casino operations to a strategy firm run by a former DeLay aide, Michael Scanlon. Both Abramoff and Scanlon, who pleaded guilty in 2005, also faced charges related to providing gifts to public officials in exchange for actions that benefited their clients and were sentenced to prison time following their pleas. The bribery scandal also led to the conviction of one Republican congressman, Ohio’s Bob Ney, who pleaded guilty in 2006 to multiple offenses after admitting he accepted trips, campaign contributions, and other gifts in exchange for official actions that benefited Abramoff’s casino-running clients.

There were extensive ties between Abramoff, Buckham, and DeLay. After leaving DeLay’s office, Buckham, who was an ordained minister, organized a conservative Christian non-profit called the U.S. Family Network. The group, which raised millions, paid substantial fees to Buckham’s lobbying firm and was funded “almost entirely” by businesses linked to Ambramoff. This cash included a mysterious $1 million check that allegedly came from a pair of Russian oil tycoons.

“In my opinion, the money we took in to bring America back to God was all from these tainted sources,” Christopher Geeslin, a former board president of the U.S. Family Network, told Washington State’s Spokesman-Review newspaper at the time. It was one of multiple interviews where he expressed concern about the group’s finances. “I believe that we were a shell organization for [Buckham’s] own enrichment, and possibly public corruption,” he added.

‘A Concierge Operation’

While DeLay and Buckham were cleared in the Abramoff investigation, they were not unscathed. Buckham shut down his lobbying firm the week after Abramoff pleaded guilty. He directly attributed the closure to the scandal. DeLay resigned from Congress in April 2006, a week after one of his aides entered a guilty plea of their own. The scandal was widely seen as helping to precipitate DeLay’s downfall. At the time, DeLay also faced separate corruption charges in Texas over his fundraising operation. He was convicted in 2010 on state money laundering charges for allegedly funneling money he received from lobbyists who sought to influence him to other Republicans. He denied any wrongdoing, and the conviction was overturned in 2013.


DeLay’s prodigious fundraising operation, which had attracted the interest of the FBI and authorities in Texas, was a key weapon in his arsenal as he hammered his priorities through the House. He backed the pet projects and campaigns of allies and funded primary challenges against his enemies. Through it all, Buckham was a key part of the operation.

“I give him credit for any successes that I’ve had — never lost a vote — and all the good stuff we did,” DeLay said of Buckham. “He was right in there at the very beginning. He taught me everything I know. He’s quite the strategist.”

The pair’s connection was spiritual as well as political. Buckham became DeLay’s pastor and they held intimate prayer sessions in the congressman’s office.

“He was my mentor, my rock, my refuge,” DeLay said of Buckham.

DeLay’s vote counting and wrangling operation was known for its personal touch with members of the Republican caucus. He and his team knew all the members and their spouses. DeLay provided his colleagues with cigarette breaks and meals during late night sessions as well as what Newsweek described as an “endless stream of birthday cards and get-well wishes, flowers and small favors.” According to DeLay, “Buckham was huge in developing the strategy and he knew the House better than anybody.”

“We set up, really, what you could call a concierge operation,” DeLay explained.

In the end, the mix of campaign contributions, meals, and event tickets that paved the way for DeLay and Buckham’s rise was key to their demise. The investigations that led both men to leave the Hill focused on their relationships with lobbyists and the mix of favors, campaign donations and gifts that swirled around them.

After shuttering his firm in the wake of the Abramoff scandal, according to public records, Buckham worked with an RV dealership in West Virginia and other small businesses.

However, he was never far from the Hill. Buckham’s son and daughter have both worked as congressional staffers. In 2016, the right-wing Freedom Caucus reportedly considered hiring Buckham as its executive director — a throwback to his days at the top of the Republican Study Committee. At the time, Politico covered the possible comeback and described Buckham as “a controversial former top aide to Tom DeLay and central figure in the Jack Abramoff scandal.”

The Freedom Caucus ultimately went a different route.

Keeping Her Options Open

In the end, it was Greene, who has been mired in nearly constant controversies of her own, who brought Buckham back. Greene owned a Crossfit gym and became involved in conservative activism during Donald Trump’s administration. She first ran for office in 2020 as a staunch supporter of the former president’s MAGA agenda. Since then, Greene has made national headlines for her history of anti-Semitic and Islamophobic comments as well as her embrace of paranoid theories about the coronavirus, QAnon, and even supposed Jewish space lasers. Greene was also involved in the conspiracy-fueled efforts to protest and overturn Trump’s 2020 election loss that coincided with the Jan. 6 attack.

Greene hired Buckham in October 2021 at a turbulent moment in her office. It was a little over nine months after she came to the Hill and her first chief of staff had quit shortly after Greene engaged in a shouting match with Democrats outside the Capitol.

The bombastic, inexperienced Greene and Buckham, a devout behind the scenes operator might seem like an odd couple. However, each has something the other needs. Buckham brings the experience in dealmaking and diplomacy Greene needs if she hopes to move from MAGA influencer to wielding real influence. And, in Greene, Buckham found someone who had so much of their own drama that they were willing to look past his.

As she announced Buckham’s hiring, Greene praised him to the right-leaning Washington Examiner as a “a strong conservative” who has had experience in the swamp, so to speak — probably more of it than most people working on the Hill right now. Greene also brushed aside any concerns about Buckham’s past.

“This is a serious hire,” Greene said. “It’s the first of more to come, and I’m not afraid of the controversy.”

Apart from an article on the progressive site Raw Story, Buckham’s comeback has attracted relatively little public attention. However, behind the scenes, the move made waves. DeLay, who still speaks with Buckham, “was thrilled” about his former chief’s return. He said he heard from other Republicans who were “excited” to see Buckham join forces with Greene.

“A lot of — especially the conservatives and staffers … it seems to me that they’re calling him up and getting advice. He’s very much involved in what’s going on,” DeLay said of Buckham, adding, “I know that, when he walked into Greene’s office … I heard from a lot of people on the Hill that they were very excited about it. … He talks to a lot of people, a lot of staffers especially.”

In a profile on Greene last year, the Washington Post did not mention Buckham’s past ties to Abramoff. However, the paper noted that Republicans credited Buckham with giving Greene a “focus on the inside game in Congress” that had been instrumental in shifting her relationship with GOP leadership. That gamesmanship may be useful as Greene aims to go from the fringe to a far more central role in Washington.

According to one senior Republican congressional aide, who requested anonymity to candidly discuss strategic deliberations, Greene is “trying to set herself up for something.” The aide said Greene angled to become Trump’s running mate as he pursues a second term and has moved on to eyeing offices in her home state, such as a run for Senate or the governor’s race.

According to a source close to Greene, she is keeping her options open including potentially taking a Cabinet position if Trump is re-elected or a leadership position on the Hill. As Greene seeks to gain power, she has notably broken with some of her colleagues on the right. Last year, Greene was ousted from the Freedom Caucus following tensions with her fellow conservatives over her support for former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and her clashes with Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO). As other MAGA members and conservatives led the successful effort to oust McCarthy, Greene emerged as one of his vocal backers.

“She wanted to be a real player,” DeLay said, praising Greene’s handling of the speaker battle as a move that would help her gain ground. “It was obvious to me she wanted to be a player and she used the Freedom Caucus as her base, but at the same time, she knew as time went on, here comes McCarthy, and she knew — or somehow somebody told her — that she needed to grab ahold of his coattails and support him. So she went from a leader in the Freedom Caucus to maybe backing off a bit and knew where the power was.”

And DeLay suggested Buckham’s impact on Greene’s approach was clear.

“I shouldn’t say it that way … she’s a woman,” DeLay began before briefly pausing and plowing forward with a laugh. “I was going to say his fingerprints is all over her.”

Buckham rejected that notion in a statement provided to TPM by Greene’s office.

“Marjorie Taylor Greene doesn’t need Ed Buckham. She’s a force of her own. I’m just here to assist,” Buckham said.

Buckham did not comment on his past work in Washington.

‘Just The Way Business Was Done Back Then’

For his part, DeLay dismissed the scandals that brought both him and Buckham down as “the beginning of the cancel culture.” He painted the investigations as a conspiracy hatched by Democrats and competing lobbyists who were “using our legal system as a political weapon” and suggested similar forces are behind Trump’s legal woes.

“Ed was investigated deeply, and they found nothing, and I knew they wouldn’t,” DeLay said. “It was generated — the whole investigation was generated by the Democrats aided by … the Native American tribes, the lobbyists for the American tribes, because the lobbyists lost a lot of money to Abramoff and his operation and they wanted to destroy him to get rid of him.”

Despite believing he was unfairly targeted, DeLay has no regrets.

“None at all. It was time for me to go anyway,” said DeLay.

Abramoff, for his part, is not willing to weigh in on Buckham’s comeback. Reached via phone on Monday, Abramoff declined to comment on this story.

“I am so sorry to be rude, but at this point, I do not speak either on or off the record to the media,” Abramoff said. “I hope you understand that this is not personal, but rather a blanket policy for now.”

It’s a new rule for Abramoff. After being released from prison in 2010, he leaned into his infamy and made regular media appearances, including a stint as a mystery judge for TPM’s annual Golden Dukes scandal and corruption awards in 2011. Abramoff’s current silence may have something to do with a new round of legal woes. In 2020, Abramoff pleaded guilty to multiple criminal charges related to an allegedly fraudulent cryptocurrency scheme. The charges included violations of rules that were actually inspired by Abramoff’s prior misconduct. According to court documents, Abramoff entered a guilty plea on two counts pursuant to a plea agreement that would involve “continued cooperation with the government.” Abramoff’s attorneys and prosecutors jointly requested that his sentencing be postponed as the trial for the CEO of the cryptocurrency company is ongoing. A judge agreed, and the next status hearing in the case has been set for next month.

Another figure associated with Buckham’s controversial past had no similar reluctance to comment — and he dramatically changed his prior story. Christopher Geeslin, the former board president of the U.S. Family Network, who had accused Buckham in newspaper interviews of taking “tainted” money from Russia, is happy to see Buckham back on the Hill.

Geeslin called Buckham a “fine man” and suggested he had been “somewhat naive” when he expressed concern over the group’s finances.

“It’s just the way business was done back then I guess,” Geeslin said.

Geeslin, who is a pastor, suggested the situation had worked itself out perfectly.

“Ed Buckham, I consider him a good friend and any problems we had in the past, we don’t have them now,” he said, adding: “In my opinion, he’s right where God would want him to be and I’m glad he’s there.”


Jack Abramoff began his political career partnered with Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed in the College Republican National Committee (which Karl Rove had run some years earlier). They gathered power through strategizing the removal of centrist Republicans and demanding a more extremist ideology from associates (as Rove had also done).

As Walker details, these guys were also getting rich through various sideline lobbying activities. That's VERY important as it is a common marker of the conservative movement from the seventies through to today. Though Norquist and Reed managed to escape indictments and jail regarding the Abramoff scandal, both are still active and influential movement figures. Reed, however, was damaged by his connections to the scandal which was lucky for all of us as he was a swiftly rising figure in the movement. He was smart, handsome and charismatic and there's a very good chance he would have run for the Presidency had he not been so damaged. Norquist (who back then had a large photo of Lenin on the wall of his office) has always been, and remains, tightly associated with the Koch/libertarian crowd.

Tom DeLay, of course, we probably all remember. Though I've read a lot about this period, Buckham is not a name I'm familiar with (or perhaps I've forgotten). But to see a figure like him now emerge in association with MTG comes as no surprise at all.

But I want to circle back to the central importance of money in all this. A or the key reason movement conservatism has remained such a vital element of the modern GOP is how much money can be made through the countless operations of what these people get up to. These people, many, many of them, make millions running grifts whether as lobbyists or in right wing media or religious communities or through humping in cash via pleas for donations or various other scams or through funding from big money doners like Koch or Scaife or Coors or Harlan Crow or the Bradleys, etc, etc.

So if you ever wonder why so many of these people aren't much bothered by the grift that constantly marks Trump's behavior, it is because they are very much like him.
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2024 03:19 am
Russia's domestic intelligence service, the FSB, has arrested a 33-year-old woman with US and Russian citizenship on suspicion of treason in Yekaterinburg in the Urals.
The suspect, who lives in Los Angeles, is in custody because she collected money for a Ukrainian organisation and thus worked against Russia's security, the FSB announced in Moscow.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  4  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2024 04:54 am
The Death of Alexey Navalny, Putin’s Most Formidable Opponent
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2024 08:15 am
Quote:
The US justice department must drop spy charges against Julian Assange
Margaret Sullivan
Tue 20 Feb 2024 11.13 GM

As the UK considers extraditing the WikiLeaks founder, American press freedom hangs in the balance

Does Merrick Garland, the Biden-appointed attorney general, really want his legacy to include a heavy blow to long-established press rights in the United States?

If not, Garland must drop the 17 charges under the Espionage Act against Julian Assange. This should have happened years ago but now is a key moment. The high court in London is considering this week whether to extradite Assange to the US to face those charges.

What the UK court does is important to Assange himself, who is in poor health after years of imprisonment and asylum-seeking. A decision to extradite, according to his wife, would be tantamount to a death sentence.

But the real answer to this troubling debacle lies across the Atlantic in Washington.

First, let’s deal with the argument so often heard about Assange – that he’s not really a journalist, rather a data-dumping publisher, at best, and therefore what happens to him won’t harm American press rights.

“The question of whether Assange is a journalist is a red herring,” Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, told me in an interview this week.

The charges alone, Jaffer said, seek to criminalize the process of journalism – getting government secrets from informed sources and, eventually, revealing them to the public. In this era, when far too much information is classified in the United States, we rely on reporters to pry it out and let citizens know what their government is doing in secret.

With the protection of the first amendment, American journalists have been doing just that for decades.

Consider the Pentagon Papers, which revealed the lies and misdeeds of the Vietnam war. Or the Washington Post’s and the Guardian’s reporting that exposed the National Security Agency’s global surveillance programs. Or, earlier, the New York Times’s reporting about how the US government was secretly monitoring the calls and emails of citizens without court-approved warrants.

This kind of reporting would be threatened – already is threatened – because of the charges against Assange.

You don’t have to like him or the way his WikiLeaks published reams of classified information to recognize what Jaffer calls the “profound damage” these charges create.

Imagine what a future Trump administration, armed with an Assange conviction, could do to the traditional press. Reporting would be treated as a crime, which is why newsroom lawyers have followed Assange’s prospects so closely and with so much concern.

Years ago, President Obama considered bringing charges under the Espionage Act against Assange for his receiving and publishing huge amounts of classified data about US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, largely obtained from the US army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning

One infamous revelation: video of a 2007 Apache helicopter attack by American forces in Iraq that killed 11 civilians, including two Reuters journalists.

Although Obama and his justice department – no great friends of the press – strongly objected to what Manning and Assange had done, they grasped something crucial.

Charging him under the Espionage Act (an old law never intended for this purpose) would seek to criminalize the normal functions of journalism. That would especially be true for national security reporting, which relies so heavily on confidential sourcing: getting information from informed sources, verifying it, vetting it and publishing it to inform the public.

The Obama-era justice department decided against moving forward because of the “New York Times problem”. In other words, prosecuting Assange would punish and inhibit the traditional press. Great national security reporters like Charlie Savage at the Times or Ellen Nakashima at the Washington Post would bear the brunt.

Donald Trump’s justice department, unsurprisingly, saw this as an opportunity. If it had the potential to hurt the legacy news media, full speed ahead.

The “love” that Trump expressed for WikiLeaks, because it published revelations that hurt his rival, Hillary Clinton, during the 2016 presidential campaign, didn’t protect the Australian-born publisher. Assange was indicted in 2019; all but one of the 18 charges against him came under the Espionage Act.

“This is unlike anything we’ve seen before and it crosses a bright red line for journalists,” James Risen, the longtime investigative reporter for the New York Times and later with the Intercept, told me at that time.

Far beyond the effect on individual reporters and their news organizations, it’s the public that suffers when journalists are punished or censor themselves in fear.

Joe Biden’s justice department could have dropped these charges years ago but so far has let them stand.

It’s high time now to right that wrong.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2024 01:02 pm
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5d3adabe6ea0dea1e1210078d8ddb43cf23ec58bab649094dd8c3a5a374e3e42.jpg
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  5  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2024 02:28 pm
The Origin Of Trump Selling NATO Down the River, Becoming Putin’s Puppet

Quote:
Nothing ever happens out of the blue. Whether you’re talking about an earthquake, a star going nova, or the sudden ascension of a reality TV host to the top of the GOP ticket, it doesn’t just simply happen one day. It has antecedents. Political historian Heather Cox Richardson is reporting that MAGA Republicans’ blockage of crucial aid to Ukraine and Trump’s off the wall crack encouraging Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to NATO allies, have their roots in what happened ten years ago this week, in 2014.

• Although few Americans paid much attention at the time, the events of February 18, 2014, in Ukraine would turn out to be a linchpin in how the United States ended up where it is a decade later.

• On that day ten years ago, after months of what started as peaceful protests, Ukrainians occupied government buildings and marched on parliament to remove Russian-backed president Viktor Yanukovych from office. After the escalating violence resulted in many civilian casualties, Yanukovych fled to Russia, and the Maidan Revolution, also known as the Revolution of Dignity, returned power to Ukraine’s constitution.

Paul Manafort used to work for Yanukovych, beginning back in 2004, in fact. Yanukovych had a reputation as a gangster and so he hired Manafort to rehabilitate it. Which, considering how things turned out for Manafort and those in his immediate circle, is a bit like asking Al Capone to join up with Eliot Ness on a crime busting spree. Very odd choice, in other words. Be that as it may, Manafort, who was working for billionaire Oleg Deripaska at the time, decided to take the job.

• Deripaska worried that Ukraine would break free of Russian influence and was eager to prove useful to Vladimir Putin. At the time, Putin was trying to consolidate power in Russia, where oligarchs were monopolizing formerly publicly held industries and replacing the region’s communist leaders. In 2004, American journalist Paul Klebnikov, the chief editor of Forbes in Russia, was murdered as he tried to call attention to what the oligarchs were doing.

Take careful note of that. This is something that happens routinely in Putin world, the murder of journalists (and yes, the Saudis do it with impunity as well) and Trump hates journalists. These very things will begin to happen in this country if Trump regains power.

• With Manafort’s help, Yanukovych finally won the presidency in 2010 and began to turn Ukraine toward Russia. In November 2013, Yanukovych suddenly reversed Ukraine’s course toward cooperation with the European Union, refusing to sign a trade agreement and instead taking a $3 billion loan from Russia. Ukrainian students protested the decision, and the anger spread quickly. In 2014, after months of popular protests, Ukrainians ousted Yanukovych from power and he fled to Russia.

• Manafort, who had borrowed money from Deripaska and still owed him about $17 million, had lost his main source of income.

Manafort was out of a job but that was not a problem. He called his old buddy Roger Stone and Stone got Manafort involved with Donald Trump’s campaign, which at that time was floundering. Manafort was an oddball from the start, being referred to as Trump’s “campaign mis-manager.”

• He [Manafort] did not take a salary but reached out to Deripaska through one of his Ukrainian business partners, Konstantin Kilimnik, immediately after landing the job, asking him, “How do we use to get whole? Has OVD [Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska] operation seen?”

• Manafort began as an advisor to the Trump campaign in March 2016 and became the chairman in late June.

• Thanks to journalist Jim Rutenberg, who pulled together testimony given both to the Mueller investigation and the Republican-dominated Senate Intelligence Committee, transcripts from the impeachment hearings, and recent memoirs, we now know that in 2016, Russian operatives presented Manafort a plan “for the creation of an autonomous republic in Ukraine’s east, giving Putin effective control of the country’s industrial heartland, where Kremlin-armed, -funded, and -directed ‘separatists’ were waging a two-year-old shadow war that had left nearly 10,000 dead.”

Here’s the big part. This is what you need to pay close attention to.

• In exchange for weakening NATO, undermining the U.S. stance in favor of Ukraine in its attempt to throw off the Russians who had invaded in 2014, and removing U.S. sanctions from Russian entities, Russian operatives were willing to help Trump win the White House. The Republican-dominated Senate Intelligence Committee in 2020 established that Manafort’s Ukrainian business partner Kilimnik, whom it described as a “Russian intelligence officer,” acted as a liaison between Manafort and Deripaska while Manafort ran Trump’s campaign.

It took Putin ten years to actually invade Ukraine and you see the state of affairs we are in now with Mike Johnson and MAGA extremists stonewalling aid to Ukraine and Trump making stand up comedy out of both Ukraine and NATO, while he tries to generate money via $18 sneakers sold for $399 — plus tax and shipping. And if they’re autographed, then the price goes up into the high five figures range.

Meanwhile, Avdiivka fell a few days ago because Ukrainian troops lack ammunition. Biden has warned MAGA Republicans that “[t]he failure to support Ukraine at this critical moment will never be forgotten,” and he has said, “history is watching.” This is to a group of people whose only interest is political theater and their next appearance on Fox News.

Make no mistake: Putin is playing the long game. He scoped all this out and scripted it long ago. MAGA is clueless and following Trump’s lead. Trump is petrified because he’s cornered and running out of money. Who do you think he’s counting on the bail him out? If you said Vladimir Putin, you have it right.

This is what everybody needs to know going into Election Day 2024. But I don’t see this scenario, all these connections, getting the news coverage that they deserve. Ergo, a splintered, disheartened electorate could vote democracy away and reelect Putin’s puppet.

Not saying it will happen, just saying it did happen before and Putin is desperately trying to make sure that it happens again. That’s why he planted his disinformation tape, saying that he wanted Joe Biden to win. Pure reverse psychology and treachery.

And the GOP is going right along with it. Probably a lot more of them would speak up, but they don’t want to end up excommunicated like Liz Cheney or having to pay security guards like Mitt Romney. And soon the GOP as we know it could be no more, with a Trump and an election denier running the RNC. Yes, Premier Khrushchev, you were right. It is possible to take over America without firing a shot. And Russia has done an admirable job of taking over the Republican party.

politizoom
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.15 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 03:38:03