LINK The Real Muellergate Scandal - Craig Murray
"Robert Mueller is either a fool, or deeply corrupt. I do not think he is a fool.
I did not comment instantly on the Mueller Report as I was so shocked by it, I have been waiting to see if any other facts come to light in justification. Nothing has. I limit myself here to that area of which I have personal knowledge – the leak of DNC and Podesta emails to Wikileaks. On the wider question of the corrupt Russian 1% having business dealings with the corrupt Western 1%, all I have to say is that if you believe that is limited in the USA by party political boundaries, you are a fool.
On the DNC leak, Mueller started with the prejudice that it was “the Russians” and he deliberately and systematically excluded from evidence anything that contradicted that view.
Mueller, as a matter of determined policy, omitted key steps which any honest investigator would undertake. He did not commission any forensic examination of the DNC servers. He did not interview Bill Binney. He did not interview Julian Assange. His failure to do any of those obvious things renders his report worthless.
There has never been, by any US law enforcement or security service body, a forensic examination of the DNC servers, despite the fact that the claim those servers were hacked is the very heart of the entire investigation. Instead, the security services simply accepted the “evidence” provided by the DNC’s own IT security consultants, Crowdstrike, a company which is politically aligned to the Clintons."
0
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
1 comment
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.So your point is that all the other crimes that Mueller provided illumination to are irrelevant and dismissable because he did not do forensic on the DNC servers, that you know of. I agree if your are correct it is an avenue that should be looked into if it wasn't. That is, strictly as far as the Russian connection is concerned.
The question for you concerns your motivations for your posting. Is it a desire to get at the truth of the extent of the Russian connection, or left over angst at the Clintons. One of the typical diversions one sees with conservatives today is to turn the argument back on the Clintons. They have been history for 16 months.
Another typical fall back is "well what about them, they did it too". I'm not saying that is what you are doing. But anytime someones turns the argument back to the Clintons after all this time, I suspect their underlying motives.
t1nick
Level 8
May 12, 2019
1
Russiagate is still sucking most the air out of the room as far as focus by Dems and the MSM. Trump is still corrupt AF, appears to be guilty of obstruction, and could likely get a 2nd term should Dems run another centrist corporate warmonger. Biden is Hillary 3.0. The DNC and DCCC look to kneecap progressives yet again. It seems they'd rather lose with a centrist than win with a progressive.
HRC still has her fingers in a lot of the party's machinations, and DWS is on MSDNC talking about election integrity if you can believe that. We've had the 16 mos of Team Hillary's Pied Piper because they couldn't beat the one they set up to run against.
Dolt 45 is the giant shit sandwich we're all having to take a bite from because they were certain they could coast to the finish line with enough votes for her coronation.
They even said they didn't need progressives. Her in a townhall with Rachel Maddow and Schumer predicting they'd gain moderate Republicans 2 to 1 for the progressives they'd lose.
She picked "right to work" Tim Kaine as VP. They did nothing to smooth over the betrayal the progressive wing felt, but still acted as if they were owed those votes regardless. It was like a car thief asking the victim for gas money afterward. The woman who insisted she was the hard-nosed tactician trusted her in-house metrics more than the party organizers in the field.
It wasn't the Russians that made her skip those states. Her and her team knew better. Maybe they should have hired the Russian troll farm with the $1.2B in her war chest because they apparently got results on a shoestring budget.
But no... I'm not pissed. If Establishment Dems want to put their thumb on the scale again, maybe I'll just lie down in the middle of the road and let them run over me. Hope they at least figure out the right election to try to rig this time.
@WilliamCharles
Sounds like youre angry. I resent Hillary and her team for losing a sure thing and giving us Trump. But I do not spend much thinking about it. Water under tthe bridge. Hopefully we've learned something.
Seriously... the same type of kneecapping and gaslighting is already happening for the 2020 primaries. The crowded field is meant bring the superdelegates into the picture again. And there's endless op-eds about how centrism is the "safe" choice.
Part of the festering wound is that the original shenanigans is denied, ignored, or minimized. And instead of policies appealing to the base (M4A has support by most the vountry regardless of party), the party still acts as if "Not Trump!" is enough on its own like they did in 2016.
The primaries are absolutely the time to weed out the deadwood. Centrists that are essentially GOP-lite definitely belong in the reject pile. I am encouraged by others who see the same things I do. I think it's worth getting outraged over the endless stream of lies that causes our country to export death and misery to other countries to facilitate our plunder. I only hope I continue to keep that fire burning long enough for it to do some good for others.
I still see attempts at trying the kneecap Bernie, not water under the bridge at all.
Re: the article, I do not see the claim of a likely Russian hack being substantiated either.
:-----:
"The bitterness hasn’t gone away.
Sanders’s supporters maintain the 2016 primary was rigged; Clinton was the establishment candidate, lifted by the entirety of the Democratic Party apparatus, from the way the Democratic National Committee scheduled debates to fundraising — and besides, she had the support of the Party’s superdelegates before the primaries even began.
This all came to a head in July 2016, when the DNC’s then-chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to abruptly resign just as the party’s nominating convention began. The central issue was leaked emails (now believed to be hacked by Russians) showed Democratic leaders disliked Sanders. After the election, Donna Brazile, who was appointed to replace Schultz, revealed that the DNC, deeply in debt at the start of the 2016 cycle, had struck a deal with Clinton in 2015, essentially trading some of its autonomy for Clinton’s fundraising help. To Sanders supporters, this was all evidence that the primary was rigged from the beginning."
@WilliamCharles
I concur completely with your last paragraph.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.