The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity
Subscribe to the Institute View Us on YouTube Follow Us On Twitter Join Us on Facebook Join Us at Google Plus

Search Results

for:

Caitlin Johnstone

Trump Is Still No Closer To Impeachment. At What Point Do Russiagaters Lose Faith?

undefined

Mueller isn’t going to find anything in 2017 that these vast, sprawling networks wouldn’t have found in 2016. He’s not going to find anything by ‘following the money’ that couldn’t be found infinitely more efficaciously via Orwellian espionage. The factions within the intelligence community that were working to sabotage the incoming administration last year would have leaked proof of collusion if they’d had it. They did not have it then, and they do not have it now. Mueller will continue finding evidence of corruption throughout his investigation, since corruption is to DC insiders as water is to fish, but he will not find evidence of collusion to win the 2016 election that will lead to Trump’s impeachment. It will not happen.
~ Me, last year.
I don’t make predictions very often. Pretty much my entire worldview is premised upon the idea that we are in a wildly unprecedented point in history, that old patterns are breaking down and giving way to novelty, and that, more and more, the only thing we should expect is the unexpected. If I didn’t believe that our species is capable of breaking out of our predictable patterns and pulling off something miraculous from way out of left field, I wouldn’t be bothering with the fight against the omnicidal, ecocidal Orwellian oppression machine that is driving us toward extinction. I’d just make art and hug my kids a lot and wait for the end to come.

The above quote was an exception. It was as glaringly obvious then as it is now that if there were any evidence to be found of Trump conspiring with the Russian government to rig the 2016 election, it would have been picked up by the vast, sprawling surveillance networks of the US-centralized empire and leaked to the Washington Post while Obama was still in office. If it didn’t happen then, it won’t happen at all.
Mueller isn’t going to find anything in 2017 that these vast, sprawling networks wouldn’t have found in 2016. He’s not going to find anything by ‘following the money’ that couldn’t be found infinitely more efficaciously via Orwellian espionage. The factions within the intelligence community that were working to sabotage the incoming administration last year would have leaked proof of collusion if they’d had it. They did not have it then, and they do not have it now. Mueller will continue finding evidence of corruption throughout his investigation, since corruption is to DC insiders as water is to fish, but he will not find evidence of collusion to win the 2016 election that will lead to Trump’s impeachment. It will not happen.
~ Me, last year.
I don’t make predictions very often. Pretty much my entire worldview is premised upon the idea that we are in a wildly unprecedented point in history, that old patterns are breaking down and giving way to novelty, and that, more and more, the only thing we should expect is the unexpected. If I didn’t believe that our species is capable of breaking out of our predictable patterns and pulling off something miraculous from way out of left field, I wouldn’t be bothering with the fight against the omnicidal, ecocidal Orwellian oppression machine that is driving us toward extinction. I’d just make art and hug my kids a lot and wait for the end to come.

The above quote was an exception. It was as glaringly obvious then as it is now that if there were any evidence to be found of Trump conspiring with the Russian government to rig the 2016 election, it would have been picked up by the vast, sprawling surveillance networks of the US-centralized empire and leaked to the Washington Post while Obama was still in office. If it didn’t happen then, it won’t happen at all.
Mueller isn’t going to find anything in 2017 that these vast, sprawling networks wouldn’t have found in 2016. He’s not going to find anything by ‘following the money’ that couldn’t be found infinitely more efficaciously via Orwellian espionage. The factions within the intelligence community that were working to sabotage the incoming administration last year would have leaked proof of collusion if they’d had it. They did not have it then, and they do not have it now. Mueller will continue finding evidence of corruption throughout his investigation, since corruption is to DC insiders as water is to fish, but he will not find evidence of collusion to win the 2016 election that will lead to Trump’s impeachment. It will not happen.
~ Me, last year.
I don’t make predictions very often. Pretty much my entire worldview is premised upon the idea that we are in a wildly unprecedented point in history, that old patterns are breaking down and giving way to novelty, and that, more and more, the only thing we should expect is the unexpected. If I didn’t believe that our species is capable of breaking out of our predictable patterns and pulling off something miraculous from way out of left field, I wouldn’t be bothering with the fight against the omnicidal, ecocidal Orwellian oppression machine that is driving us toward extinction. I’d just make art and hug my kids a lot and wait for the end to come.

The above quote was an exception. It was as glaringly obvious then as it is now that if there were any evidence to be found of Trump conspiring with the Russian government to rig the 2016 election, it would have been picked up by the vast, sprawling surveillance networks of the US-centralized empire and leaked to the Washington Post while Obama was still in office. If it didn’t happen then, it won’t happen at all.
Mueller isn’t going to find anything in 2017 that these vast, sprawling networks wouldn’t have found in 2016. He’s not going to find anything by ‘following the money’ that couldn’t be found infinitely more efficaciously via Orwellian espionage. The factions within the intelligence community that were working to sabotage the incoming administration last year would have leaked proof of collusion if they’d had it. They did not have it then, and they do not have it now. Mueller will continue finding evidence of corruption throughout his investigation, since corruption is to DC insiders as water is to fish, but he will not find evidence of collusion to win the 2016 election that will lead to Trump’s impeachment. It will not happen.
~ Me, last year.
I don’t make predictions very often. Pretty much my entire worldview is premised upon the idea that we are in a wildly unprecedented point in history, that old patterns are breaking down and giving way to novelty, and that, more and more, the only thing we should expect is the unexpected. If I didn’t believe that our species is capable of breaking out of our predictable patterns and pulling off something miraculous from way out of left field, I wouldn’t be bothering with the fight against the omnicidal, ecocidal Orwellian oppression machine that is driving us toward extinction. I’d just make art and hug my kids a lot and wait for the end to come.

The above quote was an exception. It was as glaringly obvious then as it is now that if there were any evidence to be found of Trump conspiring with the Russian government to rig the 2016 election, it would have been picked up by the vast, sprawling surveillance networks of the US-centralized empire and leaked to the Washington Post while Obama was still in office. If it didn’t happen then, it won’t happen at all.
Mueller isn’t going to find anything in 2017 that these vast, sprawling networks wouldn’t have found in 2016. He’s not going to find anything by ‘following the money’ that couldn’t be found infinitely more efficaciously via Orwellian espionage. The factions within the intelligence community that were working to sabotage the incoming administration last year would have leaked proof of collusion if they’d had it. They did not have it then, and they do not have it now. Mueller will continue finding evidence of corruption throughout his investigation, since corruption is to DC insiders as water is to fish, but he will not find evidence of collusion to win the 2016 election that will lead to Trump’s impeachment. It will not happen.
~ Me, last year.
I don’t make predictions very often. Pretty much my entire worldview is premised upon the idea that we are in a wildly unprecedented point in history, that old patterns are breaking down and giving way to novelty, and that, more and more, the only thing we should expect is the unexpected. If I didn’t believe that our species is capable of breaking out of our predictable patterns and pulling off something miraculous from way out of left field, I wouldn’t be bothering with the fight against the omnicidal, ecocidal Orwellian oppression machine that is driving us toward extinction. I’d just make art and hug my kids a lot and wait for the end to come.

The above quote was an exception. It was as glaringly obvious then as it is now that if there were any evidence to be found of Trump conspiring with the Russian government to rig the 2016 election, it would have been picked up by the vast, sprawling surveillance networks of the US-centralized empire and leaked to the Washington Post while Obama was still in office. If it didn’t happen then, it won’t happen at all.
read on...

Psychic Nikki Haley: If There Is A Future Chemical Weapons Attack, Assad Did It

undefined

UN Ambassador and Clairvoyant Prognosticator of the Transmundane Nikki Haley has foreseen that, if there are any future chemical weapons attacks in the Syrian province of Idlib, it will most definitely be the Syrian government that is responsible and not the multiple terrorist factions in the area.

“If they want to continue to go the route of taking over Syria, they can do that,” said Nikki Haley at a UN press conference today, without explaining how a nation’s only recognized government can ‘take over’ the country it governs. “But they cannot do it with chemical weapons. They can’t do it assaulting their people. And we’re not gonna fall for it. If there are chemical weapons that are used, we know exactly who’s gonna use them.”

Haley was referring to the Syrian government’s impending push to complete its military campaign of recapturing its land from the terrorist factions and militias who, with extensive help from the US and its allies, have been holding communities hostage in a failed attempt to take over Syria. Her supernatural prophecy is just the latest in an increasingly bizarre string of claims being advanced by political figures and establishment media that the Assad government is planning to use chemical weapons to complete that campaign in Idlib.
read on...

Five Things That Would Make The CIA/CNN Russia Narrative More Believable

undefined

As we just discussed, some major news stories have recently dropped about what a horrible horrifying menace the Russian Federation is to the world, and as always I have nothing to offer the breathless pundits on CNN and MSNBC but my completely unsatisfied skepticism. My skepticism of the official Russia narrative remains so completely unsatisfied that if mainstream media were my husband I would already be cheating on it with my yoga instructor.

I do not believe the establishment Russia narrative. I do not believe that Donald Trump colluded with the Russian government to rig the 2016 election. I do not believe the Russian government did any election rigging for Trump to collude with. This is not because I believe Vladimir Putin is some kind of blueberry-picking girl scout, and it certainly isn’t because I think the Russian government is unwilling or incapable of meddling in the affairs of other nations to some extent when it suits them. It is simply because I am aware that the US intelligence community lies constantly as a matter of policy, and because I understand how the burden of proof works.

At this time, I see no reason to espouse any belief system which embraces as true the assertion that Russia meddled in the 2016 elections in any meaningful way, or that it presents a unique and urgent threat to the world which must be aggressively dealt with. But all the establishment mouthpieces tell me that I must necessarily embrace these assertions as known, irrefutable fact. Here are five things that would have to change in order for that to happen...
read on...

Brilliant Strategy Of Offering North Korea 'The Libya Model' Somehow Falls Through

undefined

Three days before President Trump announced him as the new National Security Advisor, deranged mutant death walrus John Bolton appeared on Radio Free Asia and said of negotiations with North Korea, "I think we should insist that if this meeting is going to take place, it will be similar to discussions we had with Libya 13 or 14 years ago."

Bolton has been loudly and publicly advocating "the Libya model" with the DPRK ever since.

"I think we're looking at the Libya model of 2003, 2004," Bolton said on Face the Nation last month, and said the same on Fox News Sunday in case anyone failed to get the message.

Bolton never bothered to refine his message by saying, for example, "Without the part where we betray and invade them and get their leader mutilated to death in the streets." He just said they're doing Libya again.

This was what John Bolton was saying before he was hired, and this was what John Bolton continued to say after he was hired. This was what John Bolton was hired to do. He was hired to sabotage peace and facilitate death and destruction. That is what he does. That is what he is for. Can openers open cans, John Bolton starts wars. You don't buy a can opener to rotate your tires, and you don't hire John Bolton to facilitate peace.
read on...

The Skripal Case Is Being Pushed Down The Memory Hole With Libya And Aleppo

undefined

On the fourth of March, in the sleepy British cathedral town of Salisbury, an ex-spy named Sergei Skripal was poisoned by an assassin with the most deadly nerve agent known to man.

The Russian government was immediately blamed by a shocked and outraged world. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson assured the people of Great Britainthat “There’s no doubt” that Moscow was responsible. In a large and sudden leap forward in cold war escalations, Russian diplomats were thrown out of countries all around the globe, including my own Australia, in a show of solidarity with the United Kingdom. It was the largest collective ejection of Russian diplomats in history.

Two months after his earth-shattering assassination, as the world stared spellbound at the weekend’s immensely popular PR spectacle of a royal wedding, Sergei Skripal was quietly discharged from the hospital he’d been staying at. The BBC reports that he is walking and approaching complete recovery.

Wait a second. Haven’t I seen this Python skit before?

So to recap, an ex-spy who had been retired and strategically irrelevant for years was reportedly poisoned by the Kremlin with Novichok, a scary Russian-sounding word which refers to a group of extremely deadly and fast-acting nerve agents that start shutting down the body’s muscles and respiratory system within 30 seconds to two minutes. Except in the case of Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia it was several hours with a leisurely stroll, a meal, and beers in between.
read on...

That Time John Bolton Promised Regime Change In Iran Before 2019

undefined

In July of last year neoconservative death cultist John Bolton, now the National Security Advisor of the United States, gave a speech at the Grand Gathering of Iranians for Free Iran in which he openly called for regime change in Tehran.

Bolton, who is so stupid, crazy and evil that he remains one of the only high-profile individuals on this planet who still insists that the Iraq invasion was a great idea, spoke about the need to prevent the Iranian government from achieving "an arc of control" through Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. He decried the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), claiming that Iran was still a nuclear threat under the existing agreement, and spoke glowingly of aggressive sanctions against Tehran. He concluded his speech with the following statement:
"There is a viable opposition to the rule of the ayatollahs, and that opposition is centered in this room today. I had said for over 10 years since coming to these events, that the declared policy of the United States of America should be the overthrow of the mullahs' regime in Tehran. The behavior and the objectives of the regime are not going to change, and therefore the only solution is to change the regime itself. And that's why, before 2019, we here will celebrate in Tehran!"
Whoa there, Grandpa Clusterbomb. Back up a bit.
read on...

Atlantic Council Explains Why We Need To Be Propagandized For Our Own Good

undefined

I sometimes try to get establishment loyalists to explain to me exactly why we’re all meant to be terrified of this “Russian propaganda” thing they keep carrying on about. What is the threat, specifically? That it makes the public less willing to go to war with Russia and its allies? That it makes us less trusting of lying, torturing, coup-staging intelligence agencies? Does accidentally catching a glimpse of that green RT logo turn you to stone like Medusa, or melt your face like in Raiders of the Lost Ark?
read on...

What Are 'Assad Apologists'? Are They Like Those 'Saddam Apologists' Of 2002?

undefined

Isn’t it fascinating how western journalists are suddenly rallying to attack the dangerous awful and horrifying epidemic of “Assad apologists” just as the western empire ramps up its 
longstanding regime change agenda against the Syrian government? Kinda sorta exactly the same way they began spontaneously warning the world about “Saddam apologists” around the time of the Iraq invasion?
read on...

Ex-CIA Director Thinks US Hypocrisy About Election Meddling Is Hilarious

undefined

Take off the terrorist’s mask, and it’s the CIA. Take off the revolutionary’s mask, and it’s the CIA. Take off the Hollywood producer’s mask, and it’s the CIA. Take off the billionaire tech plutocrat’s mask, and it’s the CIA. Take off the news man’s mask, and guess what? It’s the &*#$ CIA.

CIA influence is everywhere. Anywhere anything is happening which could potentially interfere with the interests of America’s unelected power establishment, whether inside the US or outside, the depravedlying, torturingpropagandizingdrug traffickingcoup-stagingwarmongering CIA has its fingers in it.

Which is why its former director made a cutesy wisecrack and burst out laughing when asked if the US is currently interfering in other democracies.

Fox’s Laura Ingraham unsurprisingly introduced former CIA Director James Woolsey as “an old friend” in a recent interview about Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s indictment of 13 alleged members of a Russian troll farm, in which Woolsey unsurprisingly talked about how dangerous Russian “disinformation” is and Ingraham unsurprisingly said that everyone should really be afraid of China. What was surprising, though, was what happened at the end of the interview.
read on...

Russiagate Isn’t About Trump, And It Isn’t Even Ultimately About Russia

undefined

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes recently asked a question of his Twitter following that was so heavily loaded it wouldn’t be permitted on most interstate highways: “Aside from genuine cranks, is there anyone left denying it was the Russians that committed criminal sabotage in the American election?”

Hayes asked this fake question because he works for MSNBC and it is therefore his job, and he asked it in response to a report first made viral by deranged espionage LARPer Eric Garland that a Dutch intelligence agency had been observing Russian hackers attacking US political parties in advance of the 2016 election. Like all “bombshell” Russiagate reports, this one roared through social media like wildfire carried on the wings of liberal hysteria about the current administration, only to be exposed as being riddled with gaping plot holes as documented here by independent journalist Suzie Dawson. The report revolves around an allegedly Russian cyber threat now known in the west as “Cozy Bear”, which as Real News‘ Max Blumenthal notes is not a network of hackers but “a Russian-sounding name the for-profit firm Crowdstrike assigned to an APT to market its findings to gullible reporters desperate for Russiagate scoops.”

This “bombshell” overlapped with another as it was reported by the New York Times that at one point many months ago Trump had wanted to fire Robert Mueller, but then didn’t.

*Cough.*

Why does this keep happening? Why does the public keep getting sold a mountain of suspicion with zero substance? Over and over and over again these “bombshell” stories come out about Trump and Russia, Russia and Trump, only to be debunkedretracted, or erased from the spotlight after people start actually reading the allegations and thinking critically about them and see they’re not the shocking bombshells they purport to be? These allegations are all premised upon claims made the US intelligence community, which has an extensive and well-documented history of lying to advance its agendas, as well as porous claims made by an extremely shady and insanely profitable private cyber security company, and yet all we’re ever shown is smoke and mirrors with no actual fire.
read on...


Authors

Tags