The
Three Purposes of Russiagate
By Paul
Craig Roberts
April
22, 2019 "Information
Clearing House"
- Russiagate has three purposes.
One is
to prevent President Trump from endangering the
vast budget and power of the military/security
complex by normalizing relations with Russia.
Another, in the words of James Howard Kunstler,
is “to conceal the criminal conduct of US
government officials meddling in the 2016
election in collusion with the Hillary Clinton
campaign,” by focusing all public and political
attention on a hoax distraction.
The
third is to obstruct Trump’s campaign and
distract him from his agenda when he won the
election.
Despite
the inability of Mueller to find any evidence
that Trump or Trump officials colluded with
Russia to steal the US presidential election,
and the inability of Mueller to find evidence
with which to accuse Trump of obstruction of
justice, Russiagate has achieved all of its
purposes.
Trump
has been locked into a hostile relationship with
Russia. Neoconservatives have succeeded in
worsening this hostile relationship by
manipulating Trump into a blatant criminal
attempt to overthrow in broad daylight the
Venezuelan government.
Hillary’s criminal conduct and the criminal
conduct of the CIA, FBI, and Obama Justice (sic)
Department that resulted in a variety of
felonies, including the FBI obtaining spy
warrants for partisan political purposes on
false pretexts from the FISA court, were swept
out of sight by the Russiagate hoax.
The
Mueller report was written in such a way that
despite the absence of any evidence supporting
any indictment of Trump, the report refused to
clear Trump of obstruction and passed the buck
to the Attorney General. In other words, Mueller
in the absence of any evidence kept the
controversy going by setting up Attorney General
Barr for cover-up charges.
It is
evidence of Mueller’s corruption that he does
not explain just how it is possible for Trump to
possibly have obstructed justice when Mueller
states in his report that the crime he was
empowered to investigate could not be found. How
does one obstruct the investigation of a crime
that did not occur?
As
Kunstler puts it, “The Special Prosecutor’s main
bit of mischief, of course, was his refusal to
reach a conclusion on the obstruction of justice
charge. What the media refuses to accept and
make clear is that a prosecutor’s failure to
reach a conclusion is exactly the same thing as
an inability to make a case, and it was a breach
of Mr. Mueller’s duty to dishonestly present
that failure as anything but that in his report
— and possibly an act of criminal prosecutorial
misconduct” on Mueller’s part.
But
this is not the only dishonesty in Mueller’s
report. Although Mueller’s report clearly
obliterates the Russiagate conspiracy theory
peddled by the military/security complex, the
Democrats, and the presstitutes, Mueller’s
report takes for granted that Russia interfered
in the election but not in collusion with Trump
or Trump officials. Mueller states this
interference as if it were a fact without
providing one drop of evidence. Indeed, nowhere
in the report, or anywhere else, is there any
evidence of Russian interference.
Mueller
simply takes Russian interference for granted as
if endless repeating by a bunch of presstitutes
makes it so. For example, the Mueller report
says that the Russians hacked the DNC emails, a
claim for which no evidence exists. Moreover, it
is a claim that is contradicted by the known
evidence. William Binney and other experts have
demonstrated that the DNC emails were, according
to their time stamps, downloaded much more
quickly than is possible over the Internet. This
fact has been carefully ignored by Mueller, the
Democrats and the presstitutes.
One
reason for ignoring this undisputed fact is that
they all want to get Julian Assange, and the
public case concocted against Assange is that
Assange is in cahoots with the Russians who
allegedly gave him the hacked emails. As there
is no evidence that Russia hacked the emails and
as Assange has said Russia is not the source,
what is Mueller’s evidence? Apparently,
Mueller’s evidence is his own political
indictment of Russian individuals who Mueller
alleged hacked the DNC computers. This false
indictment for which there is no evidence was
designed by Mueller to poison the Helsinki
meeting between Trump and Putin and announced on
the eve of the meeting.
Indictments do not require evidence, and Mueller
had none. Moreover, Mueller could not possibly
know the identities of the Russian intelligence
agents who allegedly did the hacking. This was
of no concern to Mueller. He knew he needed no
evidence, because he knew there would be no
trial. The indictment was political propaganda,
not real.
The
myth of Russian interference is so well
established that even Glenn Greenwald in his
otherwise careful and correct exposition of the
Russiagate hoax buys into Russian interference
as if it were a fact. Indeed, many if not most
of Trump’s supporters are ready to blame Russia
for trying, but failing, to ensnare their man
Trump.
The
falsity of Russiagate and the political purposes
of the hoax are completely obvious, but even
Trump supporters tip their hats to the falsehood
of Russian interference so that they do not look
guilty of excessive support for Trump. In other
words, Russiagate has succeeded in constraining
how far Trump’s supporters can go in defending
him, especially if he has any remaining intent
to reduce tensions with Russia.
Russiagate has succeeded in criminalizing in the
American mind any contact with Russia. Thus has
the military/security complex guaranteed that
its budget and power will not be threatened by
any move toward peace between nuclear powers.
The
Democratic Party and the presstitutes cannot be
bothered by facts. They are committed to getting
Trump regardless of the facts. And so is
Mueller, and Brennan, and Comey, and a slew of
other corrupt public officials.
A good
example of journalistic misconduct is James
Risen writing in Glenn Greenwald’s Intercept of
all places, “WILLIAM BARR MISLED EVERYONE ABOUT
THE MUELLER REPORT. NOW DEMOCRATS ARE CALLING
FOR HIS RESIGNATION.” Quoting the same posse of
“hang Trump high” Democrats, Risen, without
questioning their disproven lies, lets the
Democrats build a case that Mueller’s report
proves Trump’s guilt. Then Risen himself
misrepresents the report in support of the
Democrats. He says there is a huge difference
between Barr’s memo on the report and the report
itself as if Barr would misrepresent a report
that he is about to release.
Length
is the only difference between the memo and the
report. This doesn’t stop Risen from writing:
“In fact, the Mueller report makes it clear that
a key reason Mueller did not seek to prosecute
Trump for obstruction was a longstanding Justice
Department legal opinion saying that the Justice
Department can’t indict a sitting president.”
This is something Mueller threw in after saying
he didn’t have the evidence to indict Trump. It
is yet another reason for not indicting, not the
reason. Risen then backs up his misreport with
that of a partisan Democrat, Renato Mariotti who
claims that Mueller could have indicted Trump
except it is against US Justice Department
policy. Again, there is no explanation from
Risen, Mariotti, or anyone else how Mueller
could have indicted Trump for obstructing what
Mueller concludes was a crime that did not
happen.
Just as
Mueller indicted Russian intelligence agents
without evidence, he could have indicted Trump
without evidence, but a case against a president
that is without evidence is not one a prosecutor
wants to take to court as it is obviously an act
of sedition.
That
the Democrats and the presstitutes want Trump
indicted for obstructing a crime that did not
occur shows how insane they have been driven by
their hatred of Trump. What is operating in the
Democratic Party and in the American media is
insanity and hatred. Nothing else.
Risen
also alleges that the unproven Russian hacks
were passed over by Barr in his memo on the
report. Not only is this incorrect, but also
Risen apparently has forgot that the
investigation was about Trump’s collusion with
Russia to do something illegal and the
investigation found that no such thing occurred.
Risen, like the rest of the presstitutes and
even Greenwald himself, takes for granted that
the unproven Russian hacks happened. Again we
see that the longer a lie is repeated the more
it becomes true. Not even Greenwald can detect
that he has been bamboozled.
At one
time James Risen was an honest reporter. He won
a Pulitzer prize, and he was threatened with
prison by the Department of Justice when he
refused to reveal his source for his reporting
on illegal actions of the CIA. But Risen
discovered that in the new world of journalism,
telling the truth is punished while lying is
rewarded. Risen, like all the others, decided
that his income was more important than the
truth.
Journalists who lie for the Establishment have
no need of the First Amendment. Perhaps this is
why they have no concern that Washington’s
attack on Julian Assange will destroy the First
Amendment. They are helping Washington destroy
Assange so that their self-esteem will no longer
be threatened by the fact that there is a real
journalist out there doing real journalism.
For
further reading:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51455.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51462.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51459.htm
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/456902-mueller-report-cold-war-worse/
https://theintercept.com/2019/04/19/william-barr-mueller-report/?utm_source=The+Intercept+Newsletter&utm_campaign=cfbdf35848-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_04_20&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_e00a5122d3-cfbdf35848-131966649
https://www.rt.com/usa/456960-mueller-report-russian-meddling/
Here
you can see the presstitutes claiming that their
lies are vindicated by Mueller’s report:
https://on.rt.com/9snj
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of
the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate
editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was
columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News
Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many
university appointments. His internet columns
have attracted a worldwide following. Roberts'
latest books are
The Failure of Laissez Faire
Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West,
How America Was Lost,
and
The Neoconservative Threat to
World Order.
The
views expressed in this article are solely those
of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
opinions of Information Clearing House.
