The One Fact Which Disproves Russiagate, But Nobody Wants To Talk About

By Caitlin Johnstone

January 15, 2017 "Information Clearing House" -  Yesterday the people of Hawaii were temporarily terrorized by a notification sent to their mobile phones that a ballistic missile was headed straight for them and they needed to seek shelter immediately. They were not notified that it was a false alarm for 38 minutes, despite its reportedly being a simple human error triggered by an employee who “pushed the wrong button”.

Many who are less trusting of official CNN narratives when it comes to the US power establishment have been voicing skepticism of this explanation, finding the timing highly suspect given that the Trump administration just caused international controversy by giving the okay for a $133 million sale of an anti-ballistic missile system to Japan. A sale which, according to Russia, violates international ballistic missile treaties and will put a strain on Moscow’s relationship with Tokyo.

The general idea is that this deal has a lot less to do with the threat posed by North Korea, its ostensible object, and a lot more to do with the Russia-China tandem that the US power establishment is continually working to undermine. Placing an anti-ballistic missile system in the hands of a US ally right on the east edge of Asia weakens the effectiveness of mutually assured destruction (MAD), the understanding that if any nation launches a nuclear attack on another nuclear-armed country there will be full-scale retaliation and both countries will be destroyed. If some American officials get it into their heads that their country’s rivals can be taken out via nuclear strikes and any retaliatory strikes nullified via missile defense systems, MAD is no longer a deterrent to this and we’re looking at potentially billions of deaths and possible planetary extinction.

Regardless of whether the false alarm was a psyop designed to manufacture support for the anti-ballistic missile sale or a genuine human error, the fact remains that the deal itself is undeniably a move taken by the Trump administration against the will and interests of the Kremlin. This is just the latest in a string of maneuvers against Russia that have been made by this administration, despite Trump’s continued outward assurances that he wants to improve relations with Moscow. As is so often the case, a US president is saying one thing and doing something very different.

And it completely kills the Russiagate narrative.

Just a few days ago Russiagaters were having yet another “BOOM! We got him!” social media parade about an article from the Clinton-directed Daily Beast, claiming that a senior national security aide within the Trump administration had suggested scaling down the US troop presence along Russia’s border, a dangerous escalation which all peace advocates support eliminating. In the first sentence of the article’s second paragraph, the author Spencer Ackerman acknowledges that “the proposal was ultimately not adopted.”

Huh?

So President Trump, alleged to have been groomed early and at great expense by the Kremlin in anticipation of a presidential victory nobody else imagined possible at that time, was pitched a recommendation to scale down new cold war escalations with Russia… and he refused? That’s how you’re starting your article about the “return on Russia’s election-time investment in President Trump”?

Never Miss Another Story

Get Your FREE Daily Newsletter
No Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media

Russiagate is so weird. You need to plug yourself into Louise Mensch and Rachel Maddow ramblings so extensively that you can contort your sense of reason to the point where it looks perfectly rational to believe that Putin was omniscient enough to know that Trump could defeat all primary opponents and take the fight to the heir apparent Hillary Clinton back when virtually no one else imagined such a thing was possible, recruited his team reportedly at the cost of billions of dollars, poured all kinds of intel and resources into ensuring Trump’s election using hackers and bots to influence American opinion, only to get a US president who is, when it comes to facts in evidence, already just a year into his administration demonstrably more hawkish towards Russia than his predecessor was.

Again: huh?

Nobody wants to think about this because it doesn’t fit in with America’s stale partisan models; Democrats would have to admit that their best shot at getting a rival president impeached is pure gibberish, and Trump supporters would have to acknowledge that their swamp-draining populist hero is actually just one more corrupt globalist neocon like his predecessors. But when it comes to actual facts in evidence, that’s exactly what we’re looking at.

Over and over and over again this alleged Russian asset has been choosing to undermine Moscow instead of advancing its interests. He approved the sale of arms to Ukraine, a move loudly encouraged by DC neocons which Obama refused to do because of the dangerous tensions it would inflame with Russia. His administration forced first RT and now Sputnik to register as foreign agents, expanded NATO with the addition of Montenegro, assigning established Russia hawk Kurt Volker as special representative to Ukraine, shutting down a Russian consulate in San Francisco and throwing out Russian diplomats as part of continued back-and-forth hostile diplomatic exchanges, and signing the Russian sanctions bill despite loud protests from Moscow. If he is indeed an expensive Russian asset, then Russia got ripped off.

The one area Russiagaters can claim Trump hasn’t gone against Russian interests is in Syria, where the administration has cooperated with Putin in fighting terrorist forces. Or at least, they would have been able to make that argument had Obama not been in favor of it as well. If Syria proves Trump is a Putin puppet, then the White House must have been offering a two-for-one deal, because they bought Obama as well.

Russiagaters can claim “Well, Trump colluded with Russia, but because we’re putting political pressure on him not to align with Putin he isn’t able to do anything to advance Moscow’s interests.” Okay, but what’s the charge, then? That Russia bought Trump, and accomplished absolutely nothing other than bringing new sanctions and cold war escalations down upon itself? Again, the Steele dossier upon which the collusion narrative is based alleges that Trump was recruited at great expense long before anyone in the US thought of him as a serious presidential contender. We’re expected to believe that Putin was psychic enough to know Trump could win with enough confidence to invest accordingly, but not psychic enough to know that collusion and election meddling could be detected by America’s sprawling surveillance networks and cause backlash, sanctions and escalations?

No part of any of this makes any sense at all. If you can see past the stupid corporate media-fed filters of Trumpism and anti-Trumpism enough to look at what’s actually happening, the collusion narrative is nonsense on its face.

Maybe the false missile alarm wasn’t a psyop, but Russiagate definitely is. America’s unelected power establishment had a plan to manufacture support for new escalations to hobble the Russia-China tandem regardless of who won the 2016 presidential election, and since their prefered candidate didn’t win they’ve been employing what is surely the most extensive single psychological operation ever performed in human history.

And it’s working so far. Sure will cause a lot of problems for them if people start waking up to it, though.

Thanks for reading! My work here is entirely reader-funded so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following me on Twitter, bookmarking my website, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, or buying my new book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers.

 
Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

https://caitlinjohnstone.com

====

Join the Discussion

It is not necessary for ICH readers to register before placing a comment. This website encourages readers to use the "Report" link found at the base of each comment. When a predetermined number of ICH readers click on the "Report" link, the comment will be automatically sent to "moderation". This would appear to be the most logical way to allow open comments, where you the reader/supporter, can determine what is acceptable speech. Please don't use the report feature simply because you disagree with the author point of view. Treat others with respect, remembering that "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."- Benjamin Franklin. Please read our  Comment Policy before posting -