A good think about Bernie's book is that he documents, in detail, all of the
things that he talked about during the campaign. He has statistics and
examples of everything from the thievery of the bankers to the inadequacies
of our health care system. We think we know all this but we have a hazy
idea. It helps to read specific facts about medication prices here and in
other countries, or about the lack of any doctors at all, in some areas of
our country. We are a very flawed society.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 10:56 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: The Story of the Trump Dossier: Secret
Sources, an Airport Rendezvous, and John McCain
If you smell something fishy these days, it's all the Red Herrings being
dragged in front of us.
All these accusations about who is spying on whom, reminds me of my elder
sister's accusations that her Care Givers are "Stealing her Blind"! To
which I tell her, "It could be worse than being stolen Blind."
But here's the thing. My sister has a long history of thievery. From
picking up things in the homes of family and friends, to teaching her
youngest son to steal in stores. As she unfolds her most recent episode, I
keep in mind that the reason she believes everyone around her are crooks is
because she is one, herself.
And so, I look at my TV, or listen to my radio, and hear of all those nasty
crooks tampering with our most secret information systems, and I tell me,
"Sure, they most likely are." That is because we are doing exactly the same
thing to the other nations of the world. Friend and Foe, alike. If we're
not, then shame on us!
But it's a Red Herring! Trump "won" the election through our own flawed
election system. Remember, despite our government's claim to the contrary,
we have never had a, "one citizen, one vote" process.
Ballot tampering has always been part of our elections. Whether it is done
through intimidation or through vanishing ballots, or anything in between,
we do not have that wonderful clean election that we had been taught about
in our Third Grade Social Studies Class. It's time we faced the awful
Truth. We are just as good, and just as bad, as are the people of any other
nation on Earth. And by the way, we are not as superior over other Life
Forms, not created in our make believe God's Image, as we want to believe.
If we don't get real, we'll destroy the planet for All Life, not just ours.
Carl Jarvis
On 1/12/17, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yesterday, I listened to a discussion between Robert Sheer and Binney,him.
can't remember his first name but he's the person who worked for the
NSA and whom the FBI tried to terrorize because he was a whistle
blower, about the Russian Spying. Binney doesn't think, from the
wording of the government's statement about the information, and from
his knowledge of how these things work, that the information being
reported, is actually significant.
Miriam
Borger writes: "The extraordinary but unverified documents published
on Tuesday on Donald Trump's ties with Moscow began life as a piece of
opposition research, which has become as much a part of US politics as
yard signs and coloured balloons."
President-elect Donald Trump. (photo: Getty)
ALSO SEE: Explainer: What Is in the
Trump-Russia Dossier John McCain Passed to the FBI?
The Story of the Trump Dossier: Secret Sources, an Airport Rendezvous,
and John McCain By Julian Borger, Guardian UK
11 January 17
What began as opposition research during the Republican primary slowly
grew from a covert investigation into an extraordinary but unverified
global story The extraordinary but unverified documents published on
Tuesday on Donald Trump's ties with Moscow began life as a piece of
opposition research, which has become as much a part of US politics as
yard signs and coloured balloons.
There is a small industry of research and investigative firms in
Washington, typically staffed by a mix of former journalists and
security officials, adept at finding information about politicians
that the politicians would rather stay hidden. The firms often do not
know who exactly is hiring them; the request could come from a law
firm acting on behalf of a client from one of the parties.
In this case, the request for opposition research on Donald Trump came
from one of his Republican opponents in the primary campaign. The
research firm then hired one of its sub-contractors who it used
regularly on all things
Russian: a retired western European former counter-intelligence
official, with a long history of dealing with the shadow world of
Moscow's spooks and siloviki (securocrats).
By the time the contractor had started his research, however, the
Republican primary was over. The original client had dropped out, but
the firm that had hired him had found a new, Democratic client. This
was not necessarily the Hillary Clinton campaign or the Democratic
National Committee. Opposition research is frequently financed by
wealthy individuals who have donated all they can and are looking for
other ways to help.
By July, the counter-intelligence contractor had collected a
significant amount of material based on Russian sources who he had
grown to trust over the years - not just in Moscow, but also among
oligarchs living in the west.
He delivered his reports, but the gravity of their contents weighed on
If the allegations were real, their implications were overwhelming.investigate.
He delivered a set to former colleagues in the FBI, whose
counter-intelligence division would be the appropriate body to
It is believed he also passed a copy to his own country's intelligencearound the world.
service, but it felt constrained in what action it could take and left
it up to the Americans to do their own investigation and draw their
own conclusions.
As summer turned to autumn, the investigator was asked for more
information by the FBI but heard nothing back about any investigation.
The bureau seemed obsessed instead with classified material that
flowed through a private email server set up by Clinton's aides. The
FBI's director, James Comey, threw the election into a spin 11 days
before the vote by announcing his investigators were examining newly
discovered material.
The former intelligence official grew concerned that there was a
cover-up in progress. On a trip to New York in October, he decided to
pass the material to the press. He met David Corn, the Washington
editor of Mother Jones, who first reported its existence on 31
October.
The FBI however continued to refuse to comment on the issue, despite
reports that it had requested and perhaps acquired a warrant for
further investigation from the Foreign intelligence surveillance
(Fisa) court. The silence was not altogether surprising. The FBI
counter-intelligence division, headquartered in Washington, is
extremely secretive, much more so than the New York field office,
which had strong links to former prosecutor and mayor Rudy Giuliani,
who was by then working for Trump. The threat of leaks from New York
about Clinton emails had reportedly pushed Comey into making his
October surprise announcement.
In mid-November, the documents took another route into Washington that
ultimately led to them being mentioned in the joint intelligence
report on Russian interference that was delivered to President Obama
and President-elect Trump. On 18 November, the annual Halifax
International Security Forum opened in the Canadian city, bringing
together serving and former security and foreign policy officials from
Senator John McCain, a hawkish Republican, was there and washim.
introduced to a former senior western diplomat who had seen the
documents, knew their source and thought him highly reliable. McCain
decided the implications were sufficiently alarming to dispatch a
trusted emissary, a former US official, to meet the source and find
out more.
The emissary hastily arranged a transatlantic flight and met the
source at the airport as arranged. (The Guardian has agreed not to
specify the city or country where the meeting took place.) The meeting
had a certain cold war tradecraft to it, as he was told to look for a
man with a copy of the Financial Times. Having found each other, the
retired counter-intelligence officer drove the emissary to his house,
where they discussed the documents and their background.
The emissary flew back within 24 hours and showed McCain the
documents, saying it was hard to impossible to verify them without a
proper investigation. McCain said he was reluctant to get involved,
lest it be perceived as payback for insulting remarks Trump had made
about him during his rambunctious campaign.
However, on 9 December, McCain arranged a one-on-one meeting with
Comey, with no aides present, and handed them over.
"Upon examination of the contents, and unable to make a judgment about
their accuracy, I delivered the information to the Director of the
FBI. That has been the extent of my contact with the FBI or any other
government agency regarding this issue," the senator said in a
statement on Wednesday morning.
It is not clear what underpinned the FBI's decision to include a
summary of the documents in its highly classified briefing to the
president and president-elect and their top staff, before the bureau
had completed its investigation. It may have been as a defensive
measure, to prove for posterity that it was not involved in a
cover-up, or because its investigators believed them to be credible.
Whatever the motive, it was quickly leaked - first to CNN, which
reported on the material on Wednesday. That triggered a controversial
decision by BuzzFeed to publish an unredacted version of the documents
on its website.
It is unclear where the BuzzFeed version came from. The author of the
reports had been insistent on blotting out references to his Russian
sources in the copies he gave to the press, including the Guardian,
out of fear for their safety. The unredacted version could have come
from the original client, who commissioned the research, or from
intermediaries between the counter-intelligence contractor and the
client.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.
President-elect Donald Trump. (photo: Getty)
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/11/trump-russia-report-op
positi
on-research-john-mccainhttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/11
/trump -russia-report-opposition-research-john-mccain
ALSO SEE: Explainer: What Is in the
Trump-Russia Dossier John McCain Passed to the FBI?
The Story of the Trump Dossier: Secret Sources, an Airport Rendezvous,
and John McCain By Julian Borger, Guardian UK
11 January 17
What began as opposition research during the Republican primary slowly
grew from a covert investigation into an extraordinary but unverified
global story he extraordinary but unverified documents published on
Tuesday on Donald Trump's ties with Moscow began life as a piece of
opposition research, which has become as much a part of US politics as
yard signs and coloured balloons.
There is a small industry of research and investigative firms in
Washington, typically staffed by a mix of former journalists and
security officials, adept at finding information about politicians
that the politicians would rather stay hidden. The firms often do not
know who exactly is hiring them; the request could come from a law
firm acting on behalf of a client from one of the parties.
In this case, the request for opposition research on Donald Trump came
from one of his Republican opponents in the primary campaign. The
research firm then hired one of its sub-contractors who it used
regularly on all things
Russian: a retired western European former counter-intelligence
official, with a long history of dealing with the shadow world of
Moscow's spooks and siloviki (securocrats).
By the time the contractor had started his research, however, the
Republican primary was over. The original client had dropped out, but
the firm that had hired him had found a new, Democratic client. This
was not necessarily the Hillary Clinton campaign or the Democratic
National Committee. Opposition research is frequently financed by
wealthy individuals who have donated all they can and are looking for
other ways to help.
By July, the counter-intelligence contractor had collected a
significant amount of material based on Russian sources who he had
grown to trust over the years - not just in Moscow, but also among
oligarchs living in the west.
He delivered his reports, but the gravity of their contents weighed on
If the allegations were real, their implications were overwhelming.investigate.
He delivered a set to former colleagues in the FBI, whose
counter-intelligence division would be the appropriate body to
It is believed he also passed a copy to his own country's intelligencearound the world.
service, but it felt constrained in what action it could take and left
it up to the Americans to do their own investigation and draw their
own conclusions.
As summer turned to autumn, the investigator was asked for more
information by the FBI but heard nothing back about any investigation.
The bureau seemed obsessed instead with classified material that
flowed through a private email server set up by Clinton's aides. The
FBI's director, James Comey, threw the election into a spin 11 days
before the vote by announcing his investigators were examining newly
discovered material.
The former intelligence official grew concerned that there was a
cover-up in progress. On a trip to New York in October, he decided to
pass the material to the press. He met David Corn, the Washington
editor of Mother Jones, who first reported its existence on 31
October.
The FBI however continued to refuse to comment on the issue, despite
reports that it had requested and perhaps acquired a warrant for
further investigation from the Foreign intelligence surveillance
(Fisa) court. The silence was not altogether surprising. The FBI
counter-intelligence division, headquartered in Washington, is
extremely secretive, much more so than the New York field office,
which had strong links to former prosecutor and mayor Rudy Giuliani,
who was by then working for Trump. The threat of leaks from New York
about Clinton emails had reportedly pushed Comey into making his
October surprise announcement.
In mid-November, the documents took another route into Washington that
ultimately led to them being mentioned in the joint intelligence
report on Russian interference that was delivered to President Obama
and President-elect Trump. On 18 November, the annual Halifax
International Security Forum opened in the Canadian city, bringing
together serving and former security and foreign policy officials from
Senator John McCain, a hawkish Republican, was there and was
introduced to a former senior western diplomat who had seen the
documents, knew their source and thought him highly reliable. McCain
decided the implications were sufficiently alarming to dispatch a
trusted emissary, a former US official, to meet the source and find
out more.
The emissary hastily arranged a transatlantic flight and met the
source at the airport as arranged. (The Guardian has agreed not to
specify the city or country where the meeting took place.) The meeting
had a certain cold war tradecraft to it, as he was told to look for a
man with a copy of the Financial Times. Having found each other, the
retired counter-intelligence officer drove the emissary to his house,
where they discussed the documents and their background.
The emissary flew back within 24 hours and showed McCain the
documents, saying it was hard to impossible to verify them without a
proper investigation. McCain said he was reluctant to get involved,
lest it be perceived as payback for insulting remarks Trump had made
about him during his rambunctious campaign.
However, on 9 December, McCain arranged a one-on-one meeting with
Comey, with no aides present, and handed them over.
"Upon examination of the contents, and unable to make a judgment about
their accuracy, I delivered the information to the Director of the
FBI. That has been the extent of my contact with the FBI or any other
government agency regarding this issue," the senator said in a
statement on Wednesday morning.
It is not clear what underpinned the FBI's decision to include a
summary of the documents in its highly classified briefing to the
president and president-elect and their top staff, before the bureau
had completed its investigation. It may have been as a defensive
measure, to prove for posterity that it was not involved in a
cover-up, or because its investigators believed them to be credible.
Whatever the motive, it was quickly leaked - first to CNN, which
reported on the material on Wednesday. That triggered a controversial
decision by BuzzFeed to publish an unredacted version of the documents
on its website.
It is unclear where the BuzzFeed version came from. The author of the
reports had been insistent on blotting out references to his Russian
sources in the copies he gave to the press, including the Guardian,
out of fear for their safety. The unredacted version could have come
from the original client, who commissioned the research, or from
intermediaries between the counter-intelligence contractor and the
client.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
