Andy Divine depends on the ignorance of his readers, Episode MCCVII: On Concentration Camps & more pressing Evils. Old Socialist comments

I’ll bypass the first two installments of the Mr. Divine’s encyclical of June 21, 2019:

The Next Step for Gay Pride

The Trump Code

I’ll just read this next segment of moral shaming with which Andy confronts his readers:

The Totalitarian Nightmare the World Is Ignoring

I don’t want a new Cold War with China. But it is, in my view, an evil regime, and we should have no illusions about that. Twitter has been having a great time this past week parsing whether detention camps for illegal immigrants in the United States should be called “concentration camps.” In China, this debate might seem somewhat beside the point. Over a million Muslims who have crossed no border and committed no crimes are being taken from their homes en masse and subjected to brainwashing in vast camps and compounds from which there is no escape. Watch this excellent new BBC piece on these “thought transformation camps” — and feel the fear everywhere. The BBC was given access to a show camp, which is creepy enough. We can only imagine what goes on in the hidden ones.

Somehow Andy has become an expert on ‘concentration camps’: now Andy isn’t very adroit about his attack on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and her very welcome plain speaking on the concentration camps used by ICE to hold the Mestizo Hordes ,that are invading the land of Anglo-Protestant virtue, as articulated by that American political hysteric Samuel P. Huntington: in his Who Are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity. The separation of children/infants from their parents , not to speak of caging these human beings, is an action used by Trump and his minions: ‘Give me your tired,your poor ,your huddled masses…’! An utter betrayal of ‘American Values’ ?

Andy likes to engage in the time honored tradition of One-up-man-ship pioneered by Stephen Potter. Virtue signalling is the current term of abuse, but Potter’s old stand-by fully describes Andy’s dull-witted practice . His argument:  You’ve averted your eyes from the ‘Evil Chinese Regime‘  for too long -its Human Rights abuses! In sum, the Concentration Camps used by ICE are by comparison to the Chinese Regime’s forms of oppression/re-education are evil, while the human rights abuses practiced by ICE are subject to a kind of pseudo- apologetic! In sum,  the crimes of ICE are minimized in comparison to the Chinese.

 

On the left, we worry about Islamophobia, or we expend our energies protesting the oppression of Palestinians by Israel’s occupation. On the right, we talk of religious freedom too often as if it only applies to Christians or Jews.

Yet, here is a man and writer whose moral/political enthusiasms for ‘The Bell Curve’ and the War in Iraq are facts that Andy can’t overcome. At least with his readers whose memories reach back to Andy’s reprehensible political past.  Andy achieves his ends by means of hectoring moralizing, in service to Andy’s pathological egotism, wedded to his political nihilism.

Old Socialist

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/andrew-sullivan-the-next-step-for-gay-pride.html

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The ‘Victimhood’ of Hillary Clinton reported on by Noo Saro-Wiwa in the TLS of September 22,2019. Old Socialist comments

Noo Saro-Wiwa reports on the interview of Hillary Clinton, and her daughter Chelsea, conducted by Mary Beard on November 10, 2019. The discussion focuses upon their book,The Book of Gutsy Women: Favorite Stories of Courage and Resilience’.  Saro-Wiwa follows the Party Line on Clinton as Feminist. Yet the Clinton’s passed Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act in 1996.

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) is a United States federal law passed by the 104th United States Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton. The bill implemented major changes to U.S. social welfare policy, replacing the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.

The law was a cornerstone of the Republican Party‘s “Contract with America,” and also fulfilled Clinton’s campaign promise to “end welfare as we know it.” AFDC had come under increasing criticism in the 1980s, especially from conservatives who argued that welfare recipients were “trapped in a cycle of poverty.” After the 1994 elections, the Republican-controlled Congress passed two major bills designed to reform welfare, but they were vetoed by Clinton. After negotiations between Clinton and Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Congress passed PRWORA and Clinton signed the bill into law on August 22, 1996.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Responsibility_and_Work_Opportunity_Act

This was just a integral part of the Clinton’s Neo-Liberal Reforms that was a frontal attack on poor women of  color. The fulfillment of Reagan’s ’76 racist campaign tag line, ‘Welfare Queens Driving Cadillacs’?  Noo Saro-Wiwa hasn’t done her home work on Mrs. Clinton, which renders her Feminist propagandizing on her behalf, in the ultra-respectable, not to speak of intellectually highfalutin, Times Literary Supplement,  appear just like another bourgeois magazine, Vanity Fair’s glossy chatter comes to mind. Some telling quotes from this essay:

“This book is for everybody who gets discouraged or gets knocked down and needs to figure out how to get yourself going again”, said Hillary. “We’re in a bit of a … struggle going on right now in our country.”

Beard mentioned the American swimmer Diana Nyad (b. 1949), who at the age of sixty-one swam from Cuba to Florida through shark-infested waters. Beard asked, “Was she gutsy or stupid?” Hillary responded: “I feel like I swim with sharks all the time”.

As Hillary pointed out, the development of women’s rights, from Mary Wollstonecraft’s Vindication of the Rights of Women (1792) to the present day, has been very quick in broad historical terms. “This is really blink-of-an-eye history, and I don’t think we can take it for granted.”

Playing devil’s advocate, Beard asked whether it was right to present these women as “irremediably gutsy”, their vulnerabilities hidden away. We don’t give enough space to the people who can’t spend their whole lives being resilient. In Hillary’s view, it is important to note that everyone has ups and downs. “I’m on a campaign against perfectionism. Young women think they have to look perfect, act perfect.”

The conversation moved on to the media’s fixation on women’s wardrobes at the expense of their opinions or policies. Chelsea aired her frustrations on the issue: Hillary had to wear dark blue trouser suits on the presidential campaign trail just to stop the press conversation from drifting towards her appearance. Beard, who has experienced her fair share of body shaming, was more blunt about her situation: “So effing what?”, she exclaimed, to a roar of laughter from the audience.

“The way I reacted when that happened to me”, said Hillary,

was to ignore it. And ignoring it because … given how people’s brains work, if a woman looks like she is agitated or upset she often is viewed as not being able to handle it whatever it is, so … when I was being stalked on stage during the second debate I’m trying to answer questions about health care and immigration and the economy and my mind is going, ‘What is he doing?

And you know, I did entertain whirling around and saying, ‘Back up, you creep – you’re not going to intimidate me’. I did think about that, but I also then sort of played out in my head … the news, you know, the political press saying, He got to her, he rattled her; look at that, she’s gonna, you know, stand up to whatever, Putin – and she can’t take Donald Trump stalking her? Hmm, that doesn’t seem too presidential. It’s a really hard choice … When people try to denigrate you and undermine you, pay no attention whatsoever.

Swimming with sharks

An actual Feminist would have never supported ‘ Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act’ but a Neo-Liberal political opportunist would and did! The Clinton pose as Feminist is pure fiction, confected after the fact of her support for a Reaganite political agenda, under the rubric of reform. To also ignore her Neo-Conservative Foreign Policy, her alliance with Clapper and Brennan in the Russia-Gate hoax is to subject history, to the most violent kind of  re-write!

Old Socialist

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

@NYT front page du 5 décembre 2019 Anti-Macron, grèves anti-néo-libéralisation en France: Vieux commentaires socialistes

@NYT front page du 5 décembre 2019 Anti-Macron, grèves anti-néo-libéralisation en France: en respectable bourgouise parle! #Un euphémisme comique?
‘Les troubles posent un nouveau défi à M. Macron, dont le style de gestion descendante a suscité des critiques.’

Vieux commentaires socialistes

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

janan.ganesh@ft.com on the ‘Centrists’ Biden & Buttigieg. Old Socialist comments

Here is a collection of would be telling, or better yet, wan attempts to offer ‘insights‘ on the Democratic candidates, still in the running. Well before the first Primary in February 2020. The Villain in this retelling is the favorite Financial Times’  Straw-Man ‘The Left’, in sum, the actual Left-Wing Social Democrat Sanders. Ersatz ‘Progressive’ Warren, and the rest of New Democrats, who have grown as stale as guests, who have overstayed their welcome. ‘Centrism’ in the American political present is defined as the alliance between the New Democrats/Neo-Liberals and the Neo-Conservatives.

Gone, for the moment, is Mr. Ganesh’s acidulous style, replaced by attempts at political commentary, framed as aphorisms, or its second cousin:

Mr Obama had astronomical star power.

The left’s takeover of the Democratic party is proving to be much slower and patchier than anticipated.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the left’s coming force in Congress, is not all that typical of the party’s base, and nor is The Daily Show.

…then the revolution can wait for another time.

The biggest flops have been perceived careerists who seemed to affect left-wingery after years of subtler politics.

Mr Buttigieg means his Emmanuel Macron-ish technocracy.

The left still has all the social conditions to win.

It is hard to believe that a candidate so attuned to modern class schisms has already had her moment.

If the left still has a chance, though, it is not the overwhelming one of such recent hype.

The idea that Americans are being forced to choose between left and right extremes, like the luckless British, not only draws a spurious equivalence between Mr Trump and Ms Warren, it ignores all the pickings in between.
No longer. They hate him so much as to make them prudent.

https://www.ft.com/content/477f37a2-167b-11ea-9ee4-11f260415385

Make note that Ganesh’s links to Martin Wolf’s review of The Great Reversal: How America Gave up on Free Markets, by Thomas Philippon, acts the part of the Anti-Piketty, continuing the Anti-Leftism theme. Harvard University Press has published both Piketty books: ‘Capital in the Twenty-First Century’ and ‘Capital and Ideology’ and Philippon’s ode to competition, under threat from the Robber Baron’s of the 21st century.

Old Socialist

____________________________________________________

@doc martin

Thank you for your comment. Your argumentative rigor, in your posts below, amply demonstrate  your facility and eloquence of its own! My favorite: ‘ Why I saw the dem party left me (ACLU type who recalls going to a McGovern rally)’. James Pinkerton never let go of his animus to Sen. McGovern, even in the early 2000’s he was still offering up his political bile, as if it mattered.

You even inspired  @ALM to this bit of maladroitly re-engineered school yard taunt, for @FT’s reactionary readership: ‘Has the Socialist Worker removed the option to comment on its website? A dialog showing a permalink to the comment.’
Best regards,
StephenKMackSD

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

‘Stop & Frisk Mike’ in the pages of The Financial Times and The Times: Old Socialist comments

Headline: Michael Bloomberg: the magnate shaking up the 2020 election

Sub-headline: Money on top of his success as New York’s mayor make a formidable candidate despite a late start

https://www.ft.com/content/90cadb44-11eb-11ea-a7e6-62bf4f9e548a

Should the reader look at the candidacy of Mr. Bloomberg as a frontal attack on the ersatz Leftist, nee New Democrat, Warren, and an actual Left-Wing Social Democrat Sanders? Is the speculation that Obama and Bloomberg may have made alliance, as the in-order-too of checking a ‘Left’ takeover of a party still mired in Neo-Liberal self-delusion, post 2008? The Fate of American hangs in the balance equals made for Television political melodrama!

How fitting that John Micklethwait co-author of ‘The Right Nation’, ‘The Fourth Revolution: The Global Race to Reinvent The State’, ‘God Is Back:How The Global Revival Of Faith Is Changing The World, is Bloomberg’s editor, not to speak of former editor-in-chief of The Economist. A Hoover Institution association is here, though it seems to have lapsed:

https://www.hoover.org/profiles/john-micklethwait

The lily-white hands of an Oxbridger insures what? Should that give the reader a clue of the politics of this ‘privately held financial, software, data, and media company.’ If ‘Mike’ is such a ‘Centrist’ , then that reader can conclude, that the political center, in America, is as skewed to the Right as it has ever been. Joshua Chaffin does a workman-like job of writing this ‘news story’ that should have appeared as an editorial endorsement, or have I missed that?

Here is the good grey Times endorsement of ‘Mike’ framed as a ‘pep up’ in the presidential race:

Headline:The Times view on Michael Bloomberg entering the Democrat race: Billionaire’s Row

Sub-headline: The media magnate and philanthropist has only a slim chance of winning the nomination, but should pep up the race for the US presidency

Again Bloomberg is presented as an antidote to Leftists Warren and the  Political Apostate Sanders and billionaire Tom Steyer. In true Oxbridger hysterical Anti-Left rhetoric is a pronounced riff on Obama’s Anti-Leftism.

Mr Bloomberg will present himself as a champion of the centre ground vacated by many of the Democrat frontrunners, including Bernie Sanders, the senator from Vermont, who has tweeted that billionaires “should not exist”. Another Democrat rival, Elizabeth Warren, mobilises her supporters by hitting out against the unfairness of income inequality. She wants an “ultra-millionaire” tax. One of the Democrat contenders, Tom Steyer, is himself a billionaire and is campaigning on the need for America to beef up taxes on the rich. In this overheated and one-sided discourse, wealth not poverty is the problem. For them, countering the rich 73-year-old white male president with a very rich 77-year-old white male rival is an absurdity.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-times-view-on-michael-bloomberg-entering-the-democrat-race-billionaires-row-6v05sdv6w

Recall that Obama didn’t rhapsodize about  Franklin Roosevelt but about Ronald Reagan as transformational :

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/ref/us/politics/21seelye-text.html?source=post_page—————————

Both The Financial Times and The Times are not true believers in Bloomberg’s candidacy, but will take what is on offer! ‘Stop and Frisk’ was the offspring of The Manhattan Institute’s ‘Broken Windows Policing’. Read Judge Shira A. Scheindlin’s exit interview in the New York Times, for her withering comments on Bloomberg and Ray Kelly:

Headline: Departing Judge Offers Blunt Defense of Ruling in Stop-and-Frisk Case

She would never forget, she said, seeing a front-page photograph in a newspaper the day after she released her ruling, showing Mr. Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly, as she put it, “looking like two angry white men.”

“They seemed out of touch with the issues that the communities cared about,” Judge Scheindlin said. “They didn’t seem to understand the impact of these policies on real people and real neighborhoods and real communities and the detrimental impact it was having, even on policing. And that’s the point. They didn’t seem to get it. It was all about fear — New York would blow up.”

 

Old Socialist

P.S. The final paragraph of The Times endorsement of Bloomberg’s candidacy is instructive.

Mr Bloomberg is a full-square Democrat on gun control and climate change, a multilateralist and business-friendly. He may be worth $54 billion, but he is not a son of privilege. And in the topsy-turvy world of contemporary politics, where tribal allegiances are worn thin, he may yet stand a sliver of a chance. American politics can only benefit from listening to what he has to say.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Times on Macron’s ‘rapprochement’ with Russia: Old Socialist asks the question, is the New Cold war over?

This screen shot of a Times report from November 29, 2019  The Times has finally caught up with one of its columnist:

 

The above from November 13, 2019 that links to this Economist interview of November 7, 2019. On Russia :

My idea is not in the least naive. I didn’t by the way talk about a “reset”, I said it might take ten years. If we want to build peace in Europe, to rebuild European strategic autonomy, we need to reconsider our position with Russia. That the United States is really tough with Russia, it’s their administrative, political and historic superego. But there’s a sea between the two of them. It’s our neighbourhood, we have the right to autonomy, not just to follow American sanctions, to rethink the strategic relationship with Russia, without being the slightest bit naive and remaining just as tough on the Minsk process and on what’s going on in Ukraine. It’s clear that we need to rethink the strategic relationship. We have plenty of reasons to get angry with each other. There are frozen conflicts, energy issues, technology issues, cyber, defence, etc. What I’ve proposed is an exercise that consists of stating how we see the world, the risks we share, the common interests we could have, and how we rebuild what I’ve called an architecture of trust and security.

What guarantee does he need? Is it in essence an EU and a NATO guarantee of no further advances on a given territory? That’s what it means. It means: what are their main fears? What are ours? How do we approach them together? Which issues can we work on together? Which issues can we decide no longer to attack each other on, if I can put it that way? On which issues can we decide to reconcile? Already, sharing, we have more discussions. And I think it’s very productive.

https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/11/07/emmanuel-macron-in-his-own-words-english

It is hard to be patient with Macron, who is the self-appointed leader of Europe with a vision, while he still violently tries to suppress the continuing rebellion, that has disappeared from the Corporate Media, which approaches it 56th weekend of demonstration, as I write this. In this portion of the Economist interview he sounds just like a respectable ‘Bourgeois Liberal’. For the Neo-Liberal ‘The Market’ is the sine qua non. ‘The Community’ is  a political prop. Macron is selling himself. Hoping that his audience will forget, that in final vote in the French election, 36.5% of the voters rendered their ballots ‘spoiled’ or otherwise ‘uncountable’ !

Europe was built on this notion that we would pool the things we had been fighting over: coal and steel. It then structured itself as a community, which is not merely a market, it’s a political project. But a series of phenomena have left us on the edge of a precipice. In the first place, Europe has lost track of its history. Europe has forgotten that it is a community, by increasingly thinking of itself as a market, with expansion as its end purpose. This is a fundamental mistake, because it has reduced the political scope of its project, essentially since the 1990s. A market is not a community. A community is stronger: it has notions of solidarity, of convergence, which we’ve lost, and of political thought.

Old Socialist

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

@JananGanesh on an imperative for the Republican Right. Political Observer comments

Mr. Ganesh is a quick study, with all it attendant historical lacunae starkly evident.His collection of historical personages is tailored to impress a reader with his knowledge of American history, as his own.  Some book recommendations: the Gaddis biography of Kennan and a collection of critical evaluations in the Journal of Cold War Studies.  https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/JCWS_a_00401?mobileUi=0&.

Add to this list The Georgetown Set: Friends and Rivals in Cold War Washington by Gregg Herken, Joe Alsop’s Cold War: A Study of Journalistic Influence and Intrigue by Edwin Yoder and the indispensable Walter Lippmann and the American Century by Ronald Steel. Not to forget another  essential , American Foreign Policy and Its Thinkers by Perry Anderson. 

Mr Ganesh brings his stylistic aplomb, not to speak of his casual misanthropy, to confect his bricolage of references, in his latest essay on how the Republican right must learn to love ‘The Deep State’ -should the Republicans learn to love that entity, like The New Democrat Hillary Clinton and her  ‘Deep State’ allies Clapper, Brennan,with FBI stalwarts Comey and Mueller?

In praise of the unsung bureaucrat, besides Mr.  Michael Lewis latest and soon to be BestSeller: one of those unsung bureaucrats is Ray McGovern who has an essay worth the readers time, and close attention, on one of those bureaucrats Fiona Hall:

Headline:Ray McG0vern: The Pitfalls of a Pit Bull Russophobe

Sub-headline: Like so many other glib “Russia experts” with access to Establishment media, Fiona Hill, who testified Thursday in the impeachment probe, seems three decades out of date.

RAY McGOVERN: The Pitfalls of a Pit Bull Russophobe

Political Observer

https://www.ft.com/content/e517bb14-10f5-11ea-a225-db2f231cfeae

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Andy Divine proclaims Fiona Hill as the ‘Antidote to Trump’. Political Observer comments

It shouldn’t surprise that Andy Divine shares a propinquity with Fiona Hill. Ms. Hill’s thesis adviser was the notorious Neo-Conservative Richard Pipes. So her Russophobia, bordering on paranoia, is comfortable political territory for Andy. The first paragraph of his essay is…

I’ve been in Britain, so it was tough to give this week’s impeachment hearings the attention they deserve. But one obvious theme has emerged: the imperturbability, professionalism, and courage of the women who have testified. When I sat down last night and watched some of the footage of Fiona Hill online, I was gobsmacked.

‘Gobsmacked‘ is familiar descriptive territory for Andy, in sum, hyperbole is the first and last line of argument. His essay proceeds via a riff on what her voice evokes in emotional terms , and his familiarity with the various accents of the districts Britain. And his fascination with her personal history. The admiration of one scholarship student for another?

What of Ms. Hill’s testimony? available here:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?466380-1/impeachment-inquiry-hearing-fiona-hill-david-holmes

At about the 1:10:12 point in the c-span video Ms. Hill describes the Party Line of both the New Democrats, and the Neo-Conservatives, about ‘Russian Interference’ in the 2016 American Election*. And the attempt by the Russians to deflect that, by the use of the charge that Ukraine interfered in the American election.

From these modest origins, as she acknowledged in her opening statement, Hill became what we saw yesterday. One of the wretched things about the last few years has been following and staying sane in the blizzard of bluster, misinformation, gaslighting, conspiracy theories, and the actual empirical, complex reality we have been confronted with. To keep one’s focus while enduring this torrent of deliberate confusion and competing narratives has been extremely hard.

But not for Hill.

It is never hard for the ideologue to adhere to the approved narrative. Andy knows the territory, it is his home ground! The last two paragraphs of his essay, are awash in a maudlin exploration of the dimensions of political kitsch, allied to the patriotism of a 4th of July picnic speech, by an old pol, who relies on the cultivated ignorance of his audience.

Hearing Hill’s still voice of calm in this storm moved me deeply, and not just because she comes from the country of my birth too, but because her immigrant, accented voice revealed an understanding of America in a way this president simply doesn’t understand. She knows what’s at stake. And she has done her part. It gives me hope, I guess. Hope that we can, in fact, expose and defeat this malignancy at the heart of our democracy.

If we see Trump as the poison he truly is, we have now also seen something else. We have seen the antidote.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/11/andrew-sullivan-fiona-hill-is-the-antidote-to-trump.html

Political Observer

P.S. With 27 hours and 30 minutes of video, available for viewing on C-Span, of these hearings of last week -its a full time job, to even stay moderately well informed on this issue!

* This opening portion of Ms. Hill’s testimony, in which see acts ‘as if’ she were a member of the Committee, rather that as a witness, is telling!

THE RUSSIANS INTERESTS TO DELEGITIMIZE OUR ENTIRE PRESIDENCY. ONE YRBISSUE I DO WANT TO RAISE AND I THINK THIS WOULD RESONATE WITH OUR COLLEAGUES ON THE COMMITTEE FROM THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS THAT THE GOAL OF THE RUSSIANS WAS TO PUT WHOEVER BECAME THE PRESIDENT BY TRYING TO TIP THEIR HANDS ON ONE SIDE OF THE SCALE UNDER A CLOUD. SO IF SENATOR CLINTON HAD BEEN ELECTED AS PRESIDENT, AS INDEED MANY EXPECTED IN THE RUN-UP TO THE ELECTION IN 2016, SHE TOO WOULD HAVE HAD MAJOR QUESTIONS ABOUT HER LEGITIMACY. AND I THINK WHAT WE’RE SEEING HERE AS A RESULT OF ALL OF THESE NARRATIVES AS THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT WAS HOPING FOR. MISINFORMATION, DOUBT, THEY HAVE EVERYBODY QUESTIONING THE LEGITIMACY OF A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, BE IT PRESIDENT TRUMP OR POTENTIALLY A PRESIDENT CLINTON, BUT THEY WOULD PIT ONE SIDE OF OUR ELECTORATE AGAINST THE OTHER, THEY WOULD PIT ONE PARTY AGAINST THE OTHER. AND THAT’S WHY I WANTED TO MAKE SUCH A STRONG POINT AT THE VERY BEGINNING. BECAUSE THERE WAS CERTAINLY INDIVIDUALS AND MANY OTHER COUNTRIES WHO HAD HARSH WORDS FOR BOTH OF THE — WHO HAD HARSH WORDS FOR MANY OTHER CANDIDATES DURING THE PRIMARIES, A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WERE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE. THERE WERE MANY PEOPLE TRYING THEMSELVES TO GAME THE OUTCOME AS YOU KNOW IN THE UNITED KINGDOM, THE BOOKIES TAKE BETS, YOU CAN GO TO LADBROKES OR WILLIAM HILL AND LAY BETS ON WHO YOU THINK WILL BE THE CANDIDATE. THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT WERE TRYING TO LAY THEIR OWN BETS. THEY WANT TO GIVE A SPREAD, MAKE SURE THAT WHOEVER THEY HAD BET ON WHOEVER THEY TRIED TO TIP THE SCALES WOULD ALSO EXPERIENCE SOME DISCOMFORT THAT THEY WOULD BE BEHOLDEN TO THEM IN SOME WAY, THAT THEY WOULD CREATE JUST THE KIND OF CHAOS WE HAVE SEEN IN OUR POLITICS. SO I JUST WANT TO, AGAIN, EMPHASIZE WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL AS WE DISCUSS ALL OF THESE ISSUES NOT TO GIVE THEM MORE FODDER THAT THEY CAN USE AGAINST US IN 2020.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?466380-1/impeachment-inquiry-hearing-fiona-hill-david-holmes

Rep. Schiff then comments on Ms. Hill’s testimony. I’ve rendered in bold type Schiff’s comments, that render the utterly failed Mueller Investigation subject to, not just to an act of breathtaking revisionism, but a re-write.

THANK YOU, DR. HILL. I WILL NOW PROCEED TO THE FIRST ROUND OF QUESTIONS. AS DETAILED IN THE MEMO PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, 45 MINUTES OF QUESTIONS CONDUCTED BY THE CHAIRMAN OR MAJORITY COUNCILFULED BY 45 MINUTES FOR THE RANKING MEMBER OR MINORITY COUNCIL. FOLLOWING THAT, UNLESS I SPECIFY ADDITIONAL EQUAL TIME FOR QUESTIONING WE’LL PROCEED UNDER THE FIVE MINUTE RULE. I RECOGNIZE MYSELF FOR MAJORITY COUNCIL FOR THE FIRST ROUND OF QUESTIONS. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU, BOTH, FOR BEING HERE. THANK YOU FOR TESTIFYING. DR. HILL, YOUR STORY REMINDS ME A GREAT DEAL OF WHAT WE HEARD FROM ALEXANDER VINDMAN. FEW IMMIGRANT STORIES WE HEARD JUST IN THE COURSE OF THESE HEARINGINGS ARE AMONG INGS ARE AMONG THE MOST POWERFUL I HEARD. YOU AND DR. — AND COLONEL VINDMAN AND OTHERS ARE THE BEST OF THIS COUNTRY. AND YOU CAME HERE BY CHOICE AND WE ARE SO BLESSED THAT YOU DID. SO WELCOME. MY COLLEAGUES TOOK SOME UMBRAGE WITH YOUR OPENING STATEMENT, BUT I THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE CAN BE FORGIVEN IF THEY HAVE THE SAME IMPRESSION, LISTENING TO SOME OF THE STATEMENTS OF MY COLLEAGUES DURING THIS HEARING THAT RUSSIA DIDN’T INTERVENE IN OUR ELECTION, IT WAS ALL THE UKRAINIANS. THERE HAS BEEN AN EFFORT TO TAKE A TWEET HERE AND OP-ED THERE AND NEWSPAPER STORY HERE AND SOMEHOW EQUATE IT WITH THE SYSTEMIC INTERVENTION THAT OUR INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES FOUND THAT RUSSIA PERPETRATED IN 2016 THROUGH AN EXTENSIVE SOCIAL MEDIA CAMPAIGN AND A HACKING AND DUMPING OPERATION. INDEED, THE REPORT MY COLLEAGUES GAVE YOU THAT THEY PRODUCED DURING THE INVESTIGATION CALLS INTO QUESTION THE ACCURACY OF INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE’S FINDING THAT RUSSIA INTERVENED TO HELP ONE SIDE, TO HELP DONALD TRUMP AT THE EXPENSE OF HILLARY CLINTON. NO ONE IN INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY QUESTIONS THAT FINDING. NOR DOES THE FBI, NOR DOES THE SENATE, BIPARTISAN, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE REPORT, THE MINORITY COMMITTEE REPORT OF THIS COMMITTEE, THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN REPORT IS AN OUTLIER. BUT LET ME ASK YOU, DR. HILL, ABOUT YOUR CONCERN WITH THAT RUSSIAN NARRATIVE THAT WASN’T THE RUSSIANS THAT ENGAGED IN INTERFERING IN THE ELECTION IN 2016, AND, OF COURSE, THIS WAS GIVEN A BOOST WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMP HELSINKI AND THE PRESIDENT QUESTIONED HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES, BUT WHY ARE THE RUSSIANS PUSHING THAT NARRATIVE?

https://www.c-span.org/video/?466380-1/impeachment-inquiry-hearing-fiona-hill-david-holmes

_____________________________________________________

Added November 26, 2019

Read  this essay by  Ray McGovern via ConsortiumNews.com

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/fiona-hill-pitfalls-being-pit-bull-russophobe

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment