Rocked by the Taylor testimony, Trump commands his loyalists in Congress to physically obstruct the House Intelligence Committee’s lawful impeachment inquiry

By Mark | October 23, 2019

Yesterday, after Bill Taylor, the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, gave closed-door testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, things began to take a noticeable turn in Washington. As word came out that Taylor had described in detail, under penalty of perjury, the President’s demand that Ukraine publicly announce a corruption investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden and validate a roundly debunked conspiracy theory concerning the whereabouts of a Democratic email server in exchange for a meeting at the White House and foreign military aid, a few significant things happened.

First, Rudy Giuliani started looking for a criminal defense attorney.

Second, White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham issued a statement attacking the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, calling him (and others) a “radical unelected bureaucrat“, neglecting to mention that Taylor, a West Point graduate and Vietnam veteran who has served his country with distinction for decades, was brought to the Trump administration by the President’s own Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo… Here’s that statement.

Third, Donald Trump, according to the Washington Post’s Josh Dawsey, gave the word to Republican members of the House’s so-called Freedom Caucus, to fight back as hard as they could. And, today, we saw what Donald Trump meant by that, when Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, with he approval of the President himself, led over 30 members of his congressional delegation into a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), where the House Intelligence Committee was in the process of deposing yet another witness in their impeachment investigation. [The Republican stunt, which New York Senator Chuck Schumer said was “designed to intimidate people from revealing the truth” delayed the proceedings by five hours.]

Gaetz, after entering the room with his “derp state” band of Trumpists, tweeted out, “I led over 30 of my colleagues into the SCIF where Adam Schiff is holding secret impeachment depositions,” clearly intending to give the impression that Republicans were somehow being excluded from these proceedings. This, however, was not the case. The depositions in question were not being taken in secret. They were being taken before the House Intelligence Committee, which is comprised of both Democrats and Republicans. [It’s being reported that a quarter of the Republicans who forced their way into the chamber with Gaetz, given their committee assignments, could have attended the hearing anyway.] Had Gaetz wanted to know what was covered during the session, he would have only had to ask a colleague. Instead, however, he pulled a stunt. And, in so doing, he and his associates violated national security protocol. Here, with more on that, is something from former NSA officer John Schindler.

[For background on why cellphones are absolutely banned from SCIFs, I’d encourage you to read this article in the Washington Examiner.]

Here’s the footage of the conspiracy forcing their way into the SCIF. [I’ve decided that a group of Republicans should be referred to as a “conspiracy”.]

There’s more that I could say, but that’s pretty much the gist of it… A Trump administration official testified that the President of the United States gave the order to withhold foreign military aid to Ukraine, knowing full well that Ukrainians would die as result, until such time that the new president of the country agreed to publicly open an investigation into Joe Biden. And, in response, the White House not only slandered the respected foreign service officer, but directed Republicans to physically obstruct a lawful impeachment inquiry. This, to quote Bill Taylor, is absolutely “crazy“.

One last thing…

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 103 Comments

Trying my best to avoid the Russian honeypot

By Mark | October 23, 2019

A few days ago, in a post about Tulsi Gabbard, I made a simple statement of fact. I said that RT, the “news” network that had amplified Gabbard’s comments about the Democratic primary being “rigged”, was a “Russian propaganda channel”. [For what it’s worth, the respected Columbia Journalism Review refers to RT as the “Kremlin’s propaganda outlet,” so this is hardly a controversial take.] Well, I got an interesting email just now. It seems as though RT is interested in me. There was no talk of money, or anything like that, but apparently they like my work, and want to put me on the air this Friday during a live broadcast.

Generally speaking, I’m not what you’d call a paranoid man, and I realize that it could just be that an RT producer really thinks I have something to say about “corporate water extraction and the threat is poses to communities and the environment” (which is what they claim they want me to talk about), as it’s a subject I’ve written about in the past. I can’t help but wonder, however, if this might be part of a bigger pre-2020 move on their part to build alliances with swing state bloggers, in hopes of either silencing them on certain issues, or maybe even getting them to change their public stance on a candidate. Again, I don’t necessarily think that’s what’s happening here. With that said, though, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if the Russians used RT not just to spread Kremlin propaganda, but also as a mechanism though with bring citizen journalists into the fold.

Here’s the letter. [I’m curious which other Michigan bloggers received it, and how they’ll respond.]

Dear Mr. Maynard,

I am contacting you from a national TV news program called “The Big Picture” broadcast on the network, RT America and seen across the U.S.

We would like to invite you on our news program this Friday, October 25th, at 1:30 PM EST for a brief 5-6 minute interview on the topic of corporate water extraction and the threat is poses to communities and the environment.

We can include any talking points you wish to prioritize.

The only logistical requirement is that you are able to go to the studio we book for you closest to your location. You would need to arrive at the studio by 1-1:15 PM EST as it is a live broadcast.

This is a good opportunity to bring attention to the challenges around the destructive practices of water extraction as well as the important work being done by activists like you.

As we are on deadline, the sooner you can confirm your availability, the better.

We are grateful for your time and insights and look forward to your participation!

Thank you for your consideration!

Again, there was no promise of payment. There was no photo attached of a young woman like Maria Butina, who claimed to have developed feelings for me through my blog. There’s no reason at all to think that I’m being lured into any kind of honeypot. With that said, though, it’s worth considering the fact that, if someone wanted to influence the 2020 election, it wouldn’t cost very much at all to reach out to all the bloggers in, let’s say, three swings states, who have 1,000 or more readers a day, and extend an offer to put them on screen. Even if you just got a few people to engage in a conversation, it could pay dividends down the road. It may not swing an election, but, in a race that could come down to a few hundred votes in one state, it could be worth the time and effort to cultivate someone who, with the right motivation, might either come out in favor of a particular third-party candidate, or announce to the world the he or she is “just so damned disgusted by politics” that they’re staying home.

Just to be clear, I don’t think that I’m any kind of online “influencer”, and I seriously doubt that anyone would target me for such an operation. This letter, however, got me thinking about what a foreign intelligence service could do if they were intent on shifting the grassroots conversations in a few pivotal precincts.

Posted in Mark's Life, Michigan, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 58 Comments

What’s all this I hear about Tulsi Gabbard?

By Mark | October 19, 2019

As I don’t think I’ve ever said as much here, it’s probably about time that I come out and say publicly that I’m not a fan of Tulsi Gabbard’s. If she were to somehow be the last Democrat standing, I’d vote for her in a general election against Trump, but that’s the only scenario I can think of in which I’d ever support her for anything. I’m sure she’s got her good points, but, generally speaking, I prefer my representatives not to be gay-hating Assad apologists who poll well among members of the far right like former KKK leader David Duke.

I know there are some who will interject here that I’ve fallen prey to a sophisticated campaign against Gabbard launched by the military industrial complex, the members of whom are deathly afraid of her “peace” agenda. To that, I’d say, “Bullshit.” My dislike for Gabbard stems exclusively from what she herself says and does. I didn’t like that she was one of the last Democratic members of Congress to come out in favor of impeachment once it became known that Donald Trump had put his own personal interests over those of the United States in Ukraine. [When the evidence first came out about Trump withholding foreign aid in exchange for the initiation of a fake investigation against Joe Biden, Gabbard had said that impeachment was too “divisive” to put the country through. She eventually changed her tune, though, when it became clear that refusing to do so would essentially eliminate her from the 2020 race.] And then there was that time, after the Mueller report came out, when she took the opportunity to state incorrectly that Donald Trump had been exonerated. [You can see the video below.] And, while I’m not exactly what you’d call a hawk, I don’t think that we should just disengage from the rest of the world, leaving tyrants to do as they wish in places like Syria, where a relatively small American force of 2,000 was keeping a lot of bad things from happening. And, for what it’s worth, I really didn’t like that she apparently talked early on with Donald Trump about joining his administration.

So, I’d already made up my mind about the 2020 candidate when I heard yesterday that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, after referring to Jill Stein “a Russian asset” during a podcast interview, seemed to imply that Putin’s forces might be grooming Gabbard to be a third party spoiler in 2020, in hopes of dividing the left and returning Trump the the White House.

Before we get to that, though, I’d like to share an excerpt from a recent Washington Post article about the alt-right’s fondness for Gabbard.

Stephen K. Bannon, President Trump’s former chief strategist, is impressed with her political talent. Richard B. Spencer, the white nationalist leader, says he could vote for her. Former Representative Ron Paul praises her “libertarian instincts,” while Franklin Graham, the influential evangelist, finds her “refreshing.”

And far-right conspiracy theorists like Mike Cernovich see a certain MAGA sais quoi.

“She’s got a good energy, a good vibe. You feel like this is just a serious person,” Mr. Cernovich said. “She seems very Trumpian.”

Among her fellow Democrats, Representative Tulsi Gabbard has struggled to make headway as a presidential candidate, barely cracking the 2 percent mark in the polls needed to qualify for Tuesday night’s debate. She is now injecting a bit of chaos into her own party’s primary race, threatening to boycott that debate to protest what she sees as a “rigging” of the 2020 election. That’s left some Democrats wondering what, exactly, she is up to in the race, while others worry about supportive signs from online bot activity and the Russian news media.

Perhaps strangest of all is the unusual array of Americans who cannot seem to get enough of her.

On podcasts and online videos, in interviews and Twitter feeds, alt-right internet stars, white nationalists, libertarian activists and some of the biggest boosters of Mr. Trump heap praise on Ms. Gabbard. They like the Hawaiian congresswoman’s isolationist foreign policy views. They like her support for drug decriminalization. They like what she sees as censorship by big technology platforms.

Then there is 4chan, the notoriously toxic online message board, where some right-wing trolls and anti-Semites fawn over Ms. Gabbard, calling her “Mommy” and praising her willingness to criticize Israel. In April, the Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi website, took credit for Ms. Gabbard’s qualification for the first two Democratic primary debates.

Brian Levin, the head of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University-San Bernardino, said Ms. Gabbard had “the seal of approval” within white nationalist circles. “If people have that isolationist worldview, there is one candidate that could best express them on each side: Gabbard on the Democratic side and Trump on the Republican side,” Mr. Levin said.

Ms. Gabbard has disavowed some of her most hateful supporters, castigating the news media for giving “any oxygen at all” to the endorsement she won from the white nationalist leader David Duke. But her frequent appearances on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show have buoyed her support in right-wing circles….

Speaking of Tucker Carlson she joined him on his nightly Fox News white power hour last night, where she went on at length about how, as President, she wouldn’t be controlled by the corrupt Democratic Party. And, this, of course, was after she referred to Hillary Clinton as a the “Queen of Warmongers,” again echoing a familiar rallying cry from the far right.

Here, for those of you who just can’t get enough of Democrats reciting Trump talking points, is one of Gabbard’s tweets from last night, after it became know that Clinton had inferred that the Russians might like her. [note: Some are suggesting that Clinton referred to Gabbard as a Russian asset. She did not. She did, however, say that the Russians were very fond of one particular candidate. And, when asked if she was talking about Gabbard, responded by saying, “If the nesting doll fits.”]

I don’t know how useful it is to have a conversation about whether Gabbard is a Russian asset, or just someone who the Russians like a great deal because of the positions that she’s taken. In the end, I’d argue, that it doesn’t really matter. What matters is that the Russians appear to be mobilizing bots behind her, and that the Russian propaganda channel, RT, is amplifying her voice as she goes to war with the Democratic Party. [Gabbard just referred to the primary as being “rigged.”] Again, I don’t think her motivations matter. I do think, however, that we need to be aware that forces who want to see Trump stay in the White House will do whatever they can to see to it that the Democratic base is divided going into this election. As Clinton spokesperson Nick Merrill said yesterday about the Russians, “They know they can’t win without a third-party candidate. So I don’t know who it’s going to be, but I will guarantee you they will have a vigorous third-party challenge in the key states that they most needed.” And, putting aside what Clinton said, I think that’s a completely reasonable take on this. Whether or not it’s Gabbard, the autocrats who want to see Trump remain in power have everything to gain from running a Democratic Party challenger in states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan, where Jill Stein did so much damage in 2016.

Oh, and here’s that video of Gabbard talking about how the Mueller Report had proven that Trump and the Russians hadn’t conspired to influence the outcome of the 2016 election.

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 271 Comments

Sisters are doing it for themselves

By Mark | October 16, 2019

For the past few days, I’ve wanted to invest some time in writing a comprehensive post about Trump’s former ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, and his former top Russia advisor, Fiona Hill, both of whom defied the administration’s non-cooperation edict, and agreed to tell their stories behind closed doors on Capital Hill, demonstrating the kind of character we’ve not seen to date from other members of the administration, like former White House counsel Don McGahn.

Unfortunately, though, I just haven’t had the time. And, because of this, I feel as though I may have now missed my opportunity to make the case that women are far superior to men when it comes to standing up to corruption, as some of the less fair sex, like Michael McKinley, a former senior adviser to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, are finally starting to come forward and provide testimony. [It should be noted that these men may well have been inspired by the actions of Hill and Yovanovitch, though.]

But, a few days ago, reading about Yovanovitch and Hill, I was really struck by this sense that, if we’re ever going to make it through this chapter in American history, it’ll be thanks to women, who, unlike their male counterparts, have proven more willing to come forward and speak the truth when confronted by the kind of illegal activities that this President has clearly been engaged in.

I don’t know how true this narrative that I’m pushing is, as it’s been reported, for instance, that the national security whistleblower who set all of this in motion is in fact a male, but I really like the idea of Donald “grab ’em by the pussy” Trump being besieged by growing army of courageous women of character. Again, I know it’s not that simple of a narrative, and I’m aware that, for every female member of the administration testifying, there are probably dozens of Kellyanne Conway types who will never stop doing the bidding of this horribly corrupt president, and countless women like Senator Susan Collins, who are happy to just look the other way, but I want to believe that, when all is said and done, it’ll be the women who made the difference, and I’m curious as to what others think.

Speaking of the strong women standing up to the bullying and threats of Donald Trump, did you happen to see that the President posted a photo of Nancy Pelosi earlier today with the intention of demonstrating her to be “unhinged”?

The President of the United States went on, in a following tweet, to say, “Nancy Pelosi needs help fast! There is either something wrong with her ‘upstairs,’ or she just plain doesn’t like our great Country. She had a total meltdown in the White House today. It was very sad to watch. Pray for her, she is a very sick person!”

Well, judging from the response I’m seeing, most people, it would appear, perceive this particular Rorschach test a little differently than Donald Trump. When they look at the above photo, they aren’t seeing a mad-woman who had the audacity to stand up in a room full of men and hector them, but a powerful and courageous woman willing to stand toe-to-toe with the most corrupt leader in American history, and say to his face that she is not afraid of his… And, then, by the way, go back to her office and update the header image on her Twitter page.

Posted in Politics, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 164 Comments

Debate open thread

By Mark | October 15, 2019

I don’t have anything to say, but I thought that I’d start a thread, in case anyone else wanted to weigh in… With that said, I do find it interesting how everyone is lining up to take a whack at Elizabeth Warren, though. It’s like the slapping scene in Airplane.

Posted in Uncategorized | 217 Comments

Connect

BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Jodi Lynn