Sunday, February 17, 2019

Unwitting collaboration

"The Real Motive Behind the FBI Plan to Investigate Trump as a Russian Agent" (Porter) (my emphasis in red - note the (((Goldman))) is the 'American' 'journalist' who spearheads the JYT's promotion of the Putin-runs-American-politics racket, and, if you can believe it "moved to Israel after college and returned to the U.S. in 1998.[6]"):
"Goldman also gave an interview to The New Yorker’s Isaac Chotiner, in which the interviewer pressed him on the weakest point of the Trump-as-Russian-agent theory.  “What would that look like if the President was an unwitting agent of a foreign power?” asked Chotiner.

The Times correspondent, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his coverage of the alleged Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election, responded:  “It is hard to say what that would look like.” Goldman then reiterated the concept. “People were very careful to tell me that: ‘It is wittingly or unwittingly.’” And in answer to a follow-up question, Goldman referred to evidence he suggested might be held by the FBI that “perhaps suggests that the President himself may be acting as a foreign agent, either wittingly or unwittingly….”

The idea that American citizens were somehow at risk of being led by an agent of the Russian government “wittingly or unwittingly” did not appear spontaneously. It had been pushed aggressively by former CIA Director John O. Brennan both during and after his role in pressing for the original investigation.

When Brennan testified before the House Intelligence Committee in May 2017, he was asked whether he had intelligence indicating that anyone in the Trump campaign was “colluding with Moscow.”  Instead of answering the question directly, Brennan said he knew from past experience that “the Russians try to suborn individuals, and they try get them to act on their behalf either wittingly or unwittingly.” And he recalled that he had left the government with “unresolved questions” about whether the Russians had been successful in doing so in regard to unidentified individuals in the case of the 2016 elections.

Brennan’s notion of “unwitting collaboration” with Russian subversion is illogical.  Although a political actor might accidentally reveal information to a foreign government that is valuable, real “collaboration” must be mutually agreeable. A policy position or action that may benefit a foreign government, but is also in the interest of one’s own government, does not constitute “unwitting collaboration.”

The real purpose of that concept is to confer on national security officials and their media allies the power to cast suspicion on individuals on the basis of undesirable policy views of Russia rather than on any evidence of actual collaboration with the Russian government.

The “witting or unwitting” ploy has its origins in the unsavory history of extreme right-wing anti-communism during the Cold War. For example, when the House Un-American Activities Committee was at its height in 1956, Chairman Francis E. Walter declared that “people who are not actually Communist Party members are witting or unwitting servants of the Communist cause.” 

The same logic – without explicit reference to the phrase — has been used to impugn the independence and loyalty of people who have contacts with Russia.

It has also been used to portray some independent media as part of a supposedly all-powerful Russian media system.

The revelation that it was turned against a sitting president, however briefly, is a warning signal that national security bureaucrats and their media allies are now moving more aggressively to delegitimize any opposition to the new Cold War."
'Unwitting collaboration' would be something like Trump negotiating with Putin leading to some agreement that would be mutually beneficial to the peoples of both countries, say some kind of big arms pact or anything at all that would lead to an increase in the likelihood of peace, but not beneficial to the Military Industrial Complex or Big Jew.  This hearkens back to the general idea that the Clintonistas were funding the dossier at a time when they thought Trump's chances against Killary were laughable, so its intent was not as oppo against Trump, but as a Cold War tool against the Russians (we would never have known this had Trump not won, as his winning repurposed the dossier).  As we see from Porter's analysis, the FBI and the (((media))) had similar ideas, and we can see the same thread running through the current deranged thinking of the Clintonistas, who continue to assert that we'll all see it when Mueller finally gets around to releasing his hidden material.  At the same time, we're also being prepared for the fact that Mueller's report is going to be a big bust, with no actual collusion found.  Of course, if the whole exercise is simply to manage Trump, rein him in from some egoistical desire he might have to be seen as a Great Man due to the fact he brought sanity and peace to the world, the danger of a no-collusion finding would be immense, leaving him the rest of his term (and perhaps the next) to do huge damage to the war industry and the Zionists.

I think a significant part of the Trump Derangement Syndrome, part of The Clarification, is that the American 'left' or 'liberals' are suffering grievously from the lack of self esteem caused by the collapsing of the American Empire.  Of course, Trump has nothing to do with this collapse - which largely stems from Zionist bribery and the disastrous series of Wars For The Jews encouraged by the (((media))) - but his management of the process of the United States losing its position as the One Essential County will go a long way to determining whether the process is sane and relatively comfortable, or a massive disaster.
blog comments powered by Disqus