RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Barack Obama's Parting Gift to Donald Trump Was Mike Flynn Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=36478"><span class="small">John Kiriakou, Reader Supported News</span></a>   
Sunday, 10 December 2017 09:39

Kiriakou writes: "Donald Trump's White House falls apart a little more every day. It seems like every morning there’s more news about who among Donald Trump's friends, relatives, and advisors is being subpoenaed, questioned, accused, or indicted or, worse for the president, who has flipped and will testify against him."

John Kiriakou. (photo: The Washington Post)
John Kiriakou. (photo: The Washington Post)


Barack Obama's Parting Gift to Donald Trump Was Mike Flynn

By John Kiriakou, Reader Supported News

10 December 17

 

onald Trump’s White House falls apart a little more every day. It seems like every morning there’s more news about who among Donald Trump’s friends, relatives, and advisors is being subpoenaed, questioned, accused, or indicted or, worse for the president, who has flipped and will testify against him. Meanwhile, Trump flails around, making accusations against everybody from the FBI to the Democrats to the Washington Post and George Soros. It would be great fun to watch if the stakes weren’t so high for the country.

The linchpin to this whole “Russiagate” case is Mike Flynn. The former three-star general and director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) was a loose cannon whom Obama had to fire in 2014. While Flynn had a real vision to transform the bloated DIA from a second-tier also-ran in the intelligence community to a primary war zone intelligence service, he was known as a nasty jerk to those around him, he was unnecessarily harsh with his subordinates, and he simply could not or would not follow the president’s direction.

Flynn suffered from that very Washington affliction: He thought he was smarter than everybody else in the room and he wouldn’t take advice. Trump has the same disease.

After Flynn had proven himself a thorn in the collective sides of Obama and Ashton Carter, then Secretary of Defense, he jumped into the Trump campaign with both feet, famously leading a chant of “Lock her up!” in reference to Hillary Clinton, at the 2016 Republican National Convention.

I believe it was then that Obama decided to have a little fun with Flynn, at Trump’s great expense. Here’s what we know:

NSA spies on Americans. They also spy on Russians. And when an American is on the phone with the Russian ambassador, or meeting with Russian attorneys with “ties to Russian intelligence,” and then reporting back to a major Republican presidential campaign, NSA lights up. So NSA knew that Flynn was in touch with Russian Ambassador Serge Kislyak even before the two hung up the phone.

A conversation between a senior presidential campaign official and a Russian diplomat or intelligence officer is major news in the intelligence community, and that news would have been reported back to Obama posthaste. So Obama knew that Flynn, Donald Trump Jr., and others were meeting with the Russians. And he knew what was being said because NSA had given him the transcripts.

Another thing we know is that in their first post-election meeting at the White House, Obama gave Trump one piece of unsolicited advice: Don’t hire Mike Flynn. The meeting was reported everywhere, and most observers thought that Obama had made the recommendation because he had to fire Flynn from DIA for insubordination.

I don’t think that was it at all. I think Obama knew that Trump would do exactly the opposite of what he wanted. If Obama doesn’t want him to hire Flynn, then, by God, he’s going to hire Flynn. And so he did.

Flynn then proceeded to dig himself a deeper hole. We know that he telephoned Kislyak on December 22 and again on December 29 to ask him to either delay or veto a United Nations Security Council Resolution that would have condemned Israeli settlements on Palestinian land. Of course, NSA was fully cognizant of these conversations and, as it turns out, provided those transcripts to the FBI.

Was this “collusion” with the Russians? Of course not. It was an overeager, underinformed, and amateurish attempt at foreign policy. If anything, it was collusion with the Israelis to try to block Obama’s foreign policy on Israel and the settlements. If anything, it was a violation of the Logan Act of 1799, which prohibits the making of foreign policy by a private citizen, which Flynn still was.

But that’s not the point. The point is that the FBI by then had a transcript of the call when they asked Flynn to speak with them about it.

And therein lies the rub. First, I can tell you from personal firsthand experience that nobody should ever, EVER, talk to the FBI, at least without an attorney sitting right next to you. FBI agents will lie, cheat, and deceive to get you to trip yourself up in your response to their questions. Even if you don’t remember what you said in some particular conversation months or years ago, or if your recollection is fuzzy, they will charge you with a felony for “making a false statement.” That’s the leverage that they want over you.

Mike Flynn is a career intelligence professional. He knew that NSA would have been listening to his conversations with the Russians. He knew that NSA would have passed the information to the FBI. But when the FBI interviewed him about his talks with the Russians, he lied. It’s as simple as that. He lied. And that’s a felony.

In the greater scheme of things, Mike Flynn is a small fish. His son, Mike Jr., who was also implicated in the case, is a smaller fish. Special Counsel Robert Mueller has Jared Kushner in his sights. He has Donald Trump Jr. in his sights. Eventually, he wants to get the president, if the evidence leads him there. Mike Flynn can give him that evidence. That’s why he made an agreement to plead guilty to that false statements charge. He likely won’t see any prison time, and his son won’t be charged with any crime at all. In exchange, the Flynns, along with George Papadopoulos and, probably, Richard Gates, will all be free to rat out Kushner and the Trumps. That’s the end game.

And that brings us back to Barack Obama. Obama, whether you like him or not, is undoubtedly one of the brightest and most politically savvy presidents we’ve had in generations. I think he saw all of this coming. He knew that the Trump campaign was a train wreck waiting to happen. He knew that Hillary Clinton was probably the only Democrat in America who couldn’t beat that train wreck. He knew that he could manipulate the narcissist Trump. So Obama planted the seed to bring the entire House of Trump crashing down. It all started with Flynn, the guy who thought he was smarter than everybody else.

The investigation and ensuing criminal cases make for an ugly process, but the country will be stronger once it’s all over. We’ll have Barack Obama to thank for it.



John Kiriakou is a former CIA counterterrorism officer and a former senior investigator with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. John became the sixth whistleblower indicted by the Obama administration under the Espionage Act - a law designed to punish spies. He served 23 months in prison as a result of his attempts to oppose the Bush administration’s torture program.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Media Downplay Class Warfare as 'GOP Victory' Print
Sunday, 10 December 2017 09:33

Norton writes: "The fallacy of 'neutral,' 'both sides' journalism rings loud and clear in corporate media reporting on the Republican Party’s tax plan."

Mitch McConnell gloating about so-called 'tax reform.' (photo: CNN)
Mitch McConnell gloating about so-called 'tax reform.' (photo: CNN)


Media Downplay Class Warfare as 'GOP Victory'

By Ben Norton, FAIR

10 December 17

 

he fallacy of “neutral,” “both sides” journalism rings loud and clear in corporate media reporting on the Republican Party’s tax plan. The GOP bill, passed by the Senate in the early hours of December 2 and described by major media outlets as a “tax cut,” is in reality an explicit handout to large companies and the ultra-rich that will actually increase taxes on working-class Americans.

But under the cover of a shallow understanding of “balance,” corporate media have internalized the outlandish idea that it is “partisan,” and thus not “neutral,” to acknowledge the undeniably destructive effects of particular political policies. These inconvenient facts are hence not emphasized in news reporting, and cannot be presented alone without being “balanced” with an opposing perspective—even if that contrary view is demonstrably false.

In the case of the GOP legislation, which will slash the corporate tax rate and add some $1.4 trillion to the national debt, the deception took a variety of forms.

The primary distortion, as noted, was portraying the Senate GOP bill as a massive “tax break.” Headlines and reports spoke of “tax cuts” and “tax breaks” vaguely, without indicating that the breaks were not for Americans as a whole, but rather for corporations and the rich.

  • Reuters (12/2/17): “Senate Approves Major Tax Cuts in Victory for Trump”
  • New York Times (12/2/17): “Few Hurdles Left, GOP Is Confident Tax Cuts Will Be Signed This Month”
  • USA Today (12/2/17): “Senate Passes Huge Tax Cuts After Last-Minute Changes; Conference With House Next”

By way of contrast, HuffPost (12/2/17) provided an apt corrective to the vagueness: “Senate Passes Massive Tax Cuts for the Rich in Middle of the Night.” While The Atlantic (12/2/17) had a euphemistic main headline—”Senate Republicans Pass Their Tax Cuts”—the subhead clarified: “The bill slashes corporate tax rates, but millions of middle-class families could face tax increases under the $1.47 trillion bill.”

The Intercept (12/1/17) stressed further, “The GOP Plan Is the Biggest Tax Increase in American History, by Far.” After noting that the bill includes some $6 trillion in tax reductions, largely for corporations and households with annual incomes above $400,000 (i.e. the 1 Percent), reporter Ryan Grim pointed out:

[The bill] gets referred to as only a $1.5 trillion cut because it raises $4.5 trillion in taxes elsewhere. But the key question is who gets a tax hike and who gets a tax cut. Put simply, the bulk of the tax cut is going toward the rich, while the tax increases go to everybody else.

The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a nonpartisan think tank, reported that, “The lowest-earning three-fifths of Americans would pay more on average in federal taxes, while the top 40 percent on average would receive a tax cut,” with the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans receiving an average cut of more than $9,000.

The Institute added, “The legislation is described as tax reform but would cut hundreds of billions of dollars in healthcare spending.” The AARP similarly warned that the Senate GOP bill would trigger up to $25 billion in cuts to Medicare.

It would also add at least $1 trillion to the US federal deficit, according to Congress’ own Joint Committee on Taxation. The nonpartisan Penn Wharton Budget Model estimate is even higher, at an additional $1.4 trillion in government debt. This will no doubt be used to justify massive cuts in social spending, including Social Security and Medicare, which leading Republicans like House Speaker Paul Ryan and Sen. Marco Rubio are already promising to go after.

In other words, the Republican tax-deal-for-the-1-percent is nothing short of class war: The working class will lose even more of the little wealth that it has, and the capitalist class will reap all the benefits. The legislation even includes a tax break for owners of private jets, along with banks and oil companies.

Many reports did highlight some of these deleterious impacts of the tax plan in the body of the story, but they buried the lead. And the majority of Americans do not read past the headline.

Depicting a Working-Class Disaster as a ‘Victory’

Another way corporate media whitewashed the undeniably destructive effects of the Republican tax plan is by portraying it primarily as a “victory” for Trump and the GOP:

  • Washington Post (12/2/17): “Senate GOP Tax Bill Passes in Major Victory for Trump, Republicans”
  • BBC (12/2/17): “Tax Bill: Trump Victory as Senate Backs Tax Overhaul”
  • AOL (12/2/17): “Trump Wins First Major Legislative Victory of Presidency as Senate Passes Republicans’ Tax Reform Bill”
  • Guardian (12/4/17): “Markets Rally After Trump’s Tax Victory”

It’s striking how little this presentation—from “mainstream” media, supposedly critical of Trump—diverged from that of right-wing outlets that openly support Trump and the GOP, such as Fox News (“Trump Takes Victory Lap After Senate Passes Tax Bill, Calls It ‘Largest Tax Decrease…by Far,'” 12/2/17).

The contradiction was highlighted in a SFGate report (12/2/17) with a headline focused on political gamesmanship—”Senate Narrowly Passes GOP Tax Overhaul Bill in Major Victory for Trump”—but a lead that acknowledged the losses for regular people:

Securing a desperately sought legislative victory for the Trump presidency, the Senate approved a $1.5 trillion tax overhaul Saturday morning that provides massive tax cuts to large corporations and wealthy individuals but could lead to higher tax bills for millions of Californians.

So why not headline the bill’s impact on the vast majority of people? Why showcase the Trump victory angle?

ABC News (12/4/17) likewise exhibited these contradictions within one broadcast. In a segment  titled “Tax Bill Seen as Victory by Trump, GOP,” the host said, “Right now the bill is pretty unpopular,” without explaining why or providing any further information.

“This is a big legislative win, the most significant one for the Trump administration thus far, and this is something to take home to your constituents,” declared ABC analyst Meghan McCain. The daughter of neoconservative Sen. John McCain even referred to the Republican Party as “we.”

It was not until further in the segment that ABC analyst Matthew Dowd noted, “Seventy percent of the benefits of this tax bill go to the very wealthy, the top 1 or 2 percent of the country.” Refuting the title of the segment, Dowd added:

This may be a legislative victory, but it’s not a political victory. It’s an unpopular bill, the most unpopular tax bill ever passed, pushed by an unpopular president, passed by an unpopular Congress.

More and More Euphemisms

The ubiquitous term “tax reform” (e.g., CNN, 12/2/17; The Hill, 12/4/17; Politico, 12/5/17; CNBC, 12/5/17) has a misleadingly benevolent connotation—who doesn’t like reform?—so long as media don’t ask who benefits and who is harmed. Likewise other headline language, such as “tax overhaul” or “revision,” that fails to reflect the different impacts of Republicans’ plan:

  • Reuters (12/2/17): “US Senate Approves Republicans’ Tax Overhaul”
  • CBS (12/2/17): “Tax Bill: Senate Passes Sweeping Tax Overhaul in Early Morning Vote”
  • Wall Street Journal (12/2/17): “Senate Passes Sweeping Revision of US Tax Code”

With euphemisms like “mixed bag” and “mixed blessings,” several outlets seemed to gesture weakly toward the massive assault on working-class Americans. Reuters (12/2/17) reported that the “sweeping tax overhaul” will move “Republicans and President Donald Trump a major step closer to their goal of slashing taxes for businesses and the rich while offering everyday Americans a mixed bag of changes.” The Washington Post (12/2/17) noted the bill “bestows extensive benefits on corporate America and the wealthy while delivering mixed blessings to everybody else.”

That “everybody else” is reduced to a subordinate clause perfectly represents how corporate media’s pretense of “balance” barely veils their reflexive positioning on the side of the rich.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
This Is How Tyranny Begins Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=36361"><span class="small">Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Facebook Page</span></a>   
Saturday, 09 December 2017 13:54

Reich writes: "Yesterday at his rally in Florida, Trump attacked one of the women who has accused Roy Moore of pursuing a sexual relationship with her when she was a teenager and he was in his 30s."

Former Clinton labor secretary Robert Reich. (photo: Steve Russell/Toronto Star)
Former Clinton labor secretary Robert Reich. (photo: Steve Russell/Toronto Star)


This Is How Tyranny Begins

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Facebook Page

09 December 17

 

esterday at his rally in Florida, Trump attacked one of the women who has accused Roy Moore of pursuing a sexual relationship with her when she was a teenager and he was in his 30s. The woman, Beverly Young Nelson, said earlier yesterday that she had added notes under Moore's note and signature in her high school yearbook, which she'd previously offered as evidence of their relationship. "So did you see what happened today, you know, the yearbook? Did you see that?" Trump said mockingly at the rally. "There was a little mistake made, she started writing things in the yearbook. Ah, what are we gonna do?” Trump also chided Nelson’s lawyer, Gloria Allred. “Gloria Allred, anytime you see her, you know something's going wrong."

This is the President of the United States going after a woman who has had the courage to accuse a powerful man of sexual abuse, and her lawyer. Can you imagine the heat these women are now taking? Beverly Nelson and Gloria Allred are not politicians or celebrities with their own followings. Nelson is simply a private citizen of the United States, and Allred is representing her. Who in the future will have the courage to stand up to Trump and his powerful political allies when he mocks and attacks individuals like this?

This is how tyranny begins. This is how democracy ends. Friends, we must stand up to this.

Your thoughts?


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Massive Worldwide Rallies Condemn US, Courtesy of Trump Jerusalem Call Print
Saturday, 09 December 2017 13:48

Cole writes: "Ayat Ahmad reports for Elbalad (Beirut, liberal) that Friday saw huge, angry demonstrations against the United States in the Palestinian West Bank, Jordan, Yemen, Tunisia, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia and elsewhere in protest of Trump's announcement recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel."

Muslims crumple a portrait of U.S. president Donald Trump during a protest outside the US Embassy in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, December 8, 2017. (photo: Sadiq Asyraf/AP)
Muslims crumple a portrait of U.S. president Donald Trump during a protest outside the US Embassy in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, December 8, 2017. (photo: Sadiq Asyraf/AP)


Massive Worldwide Rallies Condemn US, Courtesy of Trump Jerusalem Call

By Juan Cole, Informed Comment

09 December 17

 

yat Ahmad reports for Elbalad (Beirut, liberal) that Friday saw huge, angry demonstrations against the United States in the Palestinian West Bank, Jordan, Yemen, Tunisia, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia and elsewhere in protest of Trump’s announcement recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

AFP starts in Beirut but goes on to give us great footage of protests in places like Mogadishu and Tehran.

This AFP slide show is also revealing. The demonstrations against the US in Iraq and Afghanistan, of course, could threaten US troops stationed in those countries:

In the West Bank, a general strike was called, including in schools, and Palestinian politicians called for wide participation in marches.

In the little town of Palestinian Bethlehem, Israeli troops forcibly cleared the streets, as AFP reported:

The biggest crowds came out in Gaza, raising the credibility of Hamas. CBC reports on the Palestinian protests:

CBC The National: “Trump’s decision on Jerusalem prompts airstrikes and protests”

In beleagured Sanaa, the capital of Yemen, Iran’s Press TV reports the population came out in force despite Saudi bombing.

Virtually every major Turkish city–Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, etc.– saw huge rallies against the United States. Turkey is a NATO ally.

This is not to mention the demonstrations in Berlin, London and elsewhere in Europe.

The US had already fallen dramatically in popularity around the world as soon as Trump was elected, and he’s done nothing to reverse the free fall.

(photo: juancole.com)

The US needs allies to bolster its security in the world. It is not clear it will have any left by 2020.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS | Cornel West: I Refused to Be a Darling of the Liberal Establishment Print
Saturday, 09 December 2017 12:27

Excerpt: "Fitting in, in a neoliberal world, is to be well adjusted to injustice. I'll give you an example: Dear brother Ta-Nehisi Coates has just come out with a new book."

Professor Cornel West. (photo: VICE)
Professor Cornel West. (photo: VICE)


Cornel West: I Refused to Be a Darling of the Liberal Establishment

By Audie Cornish, The New York Times

09 December 17

 

fter nearly a year of the Trump presidency, do you regret your criticisms of Barack Obama? Oh, no. I told the truth. When I said drone strikes are crimes against humanity, when I said Obama bailed out Wall Street rather than Main Street — I shall forever support that. I was just speaking to the reality that people are hurting, and we have to do the same thing under Trump as we did under Obama.

Do you feel as if the black community punished you for that? I think most black people disagreed with me, but they didn’t call for my punishment. They just disagreed in terms of the timing and the intensity of it. But somebody’s got to tell that truth and be pushed to the margins no matter what — every generation has it, and I don’t mind being it.

In the original introduction to “Race Matters,” you wrote that there was a crisis of black leadership. Now we’re seeing this whole new generation of black activists: Black Lives Matter, or even N.F.L. athletes taking a knee during the national anthem. Do you still see this crisis? Well, I was talking about the crisis of black elite leadership. When it comes to black leaders, if the model is to be successful but not publicly attack white supremacy — well, then that’s really about success to fit in. Fitting in, in a neoliberal world, is to be well adjusted to injustice. I’ll give you an example: Dear brother Ta-Nehisi Coates has just come out with a new book.


READ MORE


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 Next > End >>

Page 1414 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN