Greg Palast: typical candor, insight, and humor on why Trump won

October 25, 2017, 24 minutes

Greg Palast discusses the 2016 election with “Aggressive Progressive” comedian Jimmy Dore – how Trump’s billionaire buddies helped him steal the White House, and how he conned the mid-West workers while Hillary Clinton could not be persuaded to show up there.  Palast and Dore mock the notion that Vladimir Putin played any significant role, despite the McCarthy-ist BS regularly dealt out by Rhodes Scholar Rachel Maddow.  Palast has done a post-election edition of “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.”

… and now this!

Lethal Russian battle moose trained to invade Finland

No, the source of this alarming report is not former NATO commander, U.S. Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, so susceptible was he to nightmares about Russian-bred Orlov horses carrying Cossack cavalry into Ukraine.  Rather, the source is Finnish media, which last spring accepted and reported as fact an old April Fool’s joke about trained Russian military moose going into battle.

hummmm… “accepted as fact”

Matt Taibbi’s Slip Shows Beneath Praise for Ed Herman:

RIP Edward Herman, Who Co-Wrote a Book That’s Now More Important Than Ever

We need a new ‘Manufacturing Consent’

By Matt Taibbi, November 14, 2017


In his eulogy for Herman who, with Noam Chomsky, wrote the classic Manufacturing Consent, Taibbi makes the point that Ed’s work “has never been more relevant” – oops, except for Herman’s skepticism regarding Russia-gate.  The following two paragraphs reflect the painful contortions journalists like Taibbi go through, having drunk too much of the Kool-Aid served by the New York Times and the rest of the Establishment.



In his last piece, from this past summer, Herman made a list of some of the whoppers the media has foisted on the public over the years: the depiction of the U.S. not as an invader but as a defender of South Vietnam against “aggression,” the notion that the Soviets were behind a papal assassination attempt, the “missile gap” and others.

Herman was a skeptic about the current Russia news, but that isn’t why his work is relevant today. You can believe he’s dead wrong on Russia and Trump, and Manufacturing Consent would still be far more relevant now than it was when he and Chomsky first wrote it. [bold added]



See what I mean?  Am I the only one to see supreme irony in the fact that Taibbi would credit Herman with unmasking key historical WHOPPERS, but the fact that he was a “skeptic” about Russia-gate … well, “you can believe he’s dead wrong” on that one.  One can still admire Herman for providing the framework and conceptual tools needed to unmask whoppers – except please don’t apply them to Russia-gate. Would the NY Times manufacture consent on Russia-gate?  Does anyone remember the Times’scheerleading for the war on Iraq?


Oh, I think I get it.  I went and found the last piece Ed Herman wrote:


Fake News on Russia in the New York Times, 1917-2017

by Edward S. Herman / July 8th, 2017


Herman nails it.  He knows how it all works, and can spot REALLY FAKE NEWS, because, well, he wrote the book.  In my mind’s eye I can see him smiling with satisfaction while putting the finishing touches to his parting shot – at the same time realizing that his parting shot was likely to be missed by those in most need of his observations.


It is just short of amazing that Kool-Aid-drinking journalists can perform the mental gymnastics necessary to honor Herman, on the one hand, and remain a card-carrying member of Establishment groupthink, on the other.  And spread “consent” of the kind “manufactured” by the New York Times on Russia


This is the first I heard of Herman’s farewell address, so to speak.  Had any of you seen it already?  Is it totally unknown to “progressives?”  Would they read it if you asked them?


Hat tip to Matt Taibbi for referring us to it.  It is a must-read, in my view. As for the Herman/Chomsky book Manufacturing Consent?  Taibbi is correct — “it has never been more relevant.”  But there is no need for a new Manufacturing Consent.  It would suffice to re-read the old one.



McGovern to Binney on RT America: Do Americans deserve to hear us, with our combined 50 or more years of intelligence experience?

November 13, 2017 (11 minutes)

President Donald Trump said Saturday that Russian President Vladimir Putin again denied that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election, and that Putin seemed sincere.  This, of course, is a direct challenge to the paper-thin January “assessment” assessed by handpicked assessors from three agencies led by former bureaucratic “hacks” – labeled as such by the President himself.

That “assessment” has been debunked by a group of former senior intelligence analysts, who cite forensic evidence that the so-called “Russian hack” of the Democratic National Committee was actually an inside job – not a hack, by Russia or anyone else. RT America spoke Monday to Bill Binney, a former Technical Director at NSA, and Ray McGovern whose CIA-analyst career included briefing three Presidents. Both were involved in the “Russian hack” analysis, which was published last July by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, and briefed by Bill Binney to CIA Director Mike Pompeo exactly three months later.

Mocking Trump Does Not Prove “Russia Did It”

By Ray McGovern

Mocking Trump Doesn’t Prove Russia’s Guilt

The group-think Establishment feigns shock as Trump takes on U.S. intelligence “hacks” full bore.  The Fawning Corporate Media cannot, by itself, get rid of Trump.  But the rest of the Deep State can.  They will now try big time.  As Chuck Schumer told Rachel Maddow in early January, the “intelligence community has six ways from Sunday” to put a President in his place.  Today is only Monday.

Intel community ‘not being honest’ with president about Russia

Bill Binney interviewed by Ed Schultz on President Trump’s interest in getting the facts on Russia-gate from Bill

November 8, 2017, 7 minutes

While Trump has told CIA Director Mike Pompeo to listen to Binney, the political establishment and mainstream media are pushing back with their customary smearing tactics.  They’ve got their work cut out for them; widely respected Bill Binney is a very difficult person to smear with any credibility.