Glenn Greenwald and Tucker Carlson Agree on the flacking of “hacking” by Russia.  AND this was ten days BEFORE the anemic “proof” served up by Jeh Johnson’s Department of Homeland Security and foot-dragging FBI officials were eventually told to hold their noses and “get with the program;”

that is, to agree with Obama favorite, CIA Director John Brennan on the “Russian hacking.”  See comment and link below for Jeh Johnson’s stated approach to moral decisions like drone-killing – and, presumably, lying.)

Glenn Greenwald Slams Democrats for Attacks on Anyone Skeptical of CIA Russia Assessment

December 19, 2016 (five minutes)

 

On April 5, 2015, Jeh Johnson told 60 Minutes host Leslie Stahl of his relief over not being Catholic (like his wife), because then he “would have to go to confession” for some of the things he had approved under pressure with a knee-jerk yes.  They were discussing target-killing American citizens by drone without due process.

 

Well, Whew! again, for Jeh.  For, while drone-killing Americans is grist for confession, so is lying – whether about “Russian hacking,” or other important things.  Worse still, his Catholic wife might remind him that confession is not as easy as it looks; that it has as much to do with future as past behavior; that for his sins to be forgiven, he would have to promise to stop taking part not only in killing, but in lying as well.

 

The quaint phrase we Catholics use to describe what is required is a “firm purpose of amendment.”  (My lawyer friends are the first to point out that this may be the main reason why, reportedly, there are so few lawyers, Catholic or not, in heaven.)

 

On the chance readers might think this not a fair representation of Jeh Johnson’s approach, we paste in part of his dialogue with Lesley Stahl, plus the link to the 60 Minutes segment:

 

from “Homeland Security” which aired on April 5, 2015:

 

Lesley Stahl: The homegrown [terrorist] movement … was largely inspired by this man, an American turned terrorist in Yemen, named Anwar al-Awlaki. He was killed by a drone strike like this one, one of many Johnson green-lighted when he was general counsel at the Pentagon.

Jeh Johnson: If it was a strike off what we call the hot battlefield — in other words, outside of Iraq and Afghanistan — by the military then I would have to give the legal sign-off first. And so I did that.

Lesley Stahl: At one point, you had to decide whether it was OK to kill an American, al-Awlaki.

Jeh Johnson: In any use of targeted lethal force, we’d have to conclude that it was consistent with domestic law and international law.

Lesley Stahl: Did you say it [drone killing] was not legal many times?

Jeh Johnson: Occasionally I would have to conclude that the legal authority was not there. And quickly found out that it was actually easier to say yes than it was to say no.

Lesley Stahl: Why was it easier to say yes?

Jeh Johnson: Very often when we’re asked to approve the use of targeted lethal force, it can only be in a matter of minutes.

Lesley Stahl: Right–

Jeh Johnson: And so there’s a lot of momentum to that. So to say no is like stepping in front of a 90-car freight train.

Lesley Stahl: The first time you said yes, you have said that you were very uncomfortable.

Jeh Johnson: How could somebody be comfortable with authorizing legally the use of lethal force? My view is if you become comfortable with it, then you should get out of the job.

Lesley Stahl: What you actually said was, “If I were Catholic, I would have to go to confession.”

Jeh Johnson: Yes. …

(Emphasis added)

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/homeland-security-jeh-johnson-60-minutes-lesley-stahl/

Have we seen this before?  Informed by the same intelligence officials of ill repute who were responsible for the fraudulent evidence concocted to explain the need for war on Iraq, the U.S. is preparing to “retaliate” against Russia for leveraging Donald Trump into the presidency.  The difference this time around is that the deluge of evidence-free, pre-retaliation propaganda has been so effective that those lusting for “retaliation” are getting a totally free pass in virtually all U.S. media.  The government is not required (or even asked) to provide ANY evidence – real or fraudulent – beyond what anonymous CIA officials whisper to tame media stenographers.  Yesterday, Ray discussed media reports of imminent U.S. “retaliation.”

December 28 (8 minutes)

 

The supreme irony: Yes, there was gross interference in the U.S. electoral process – but the culprits were Hillary Clinton and functionaries in the Democratic National Committee who stole the nomination from Bernie Sanders.  Chapter and verse describing that theft is found in the content of the emails leaked to WikiLeaks – by some insider who could not stomach the corruption is my best guess.  (Does it tell you anything that the top five DNC officials had to resign immediately, two days before the Democratic convention?)

 

The U.S. media circus orchestra, conducted by maestro John Brennan, made a herculean effort to divert attention from the contentof the emails, by confecting a successful story line that diverted attention to “the Russians,” blaming them for “hacking” highly embarrassing (albeit authentic) emails depicting the screwing of Sanders.  Smugly, the Democrats and the media were convinced Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in for the presidency, once she fly-swatted Bernie Sanders away.  Had the Democratic primary and nomination process not been so clearly corrupted, we would surely be preparing to inaugurate President-elect Bernie Sanders in three weeks.  Enough irony for today?

House Intelligence Committee eunuchs defame Edward Snowden, in large part because he exposed their own complicity in what former NSA directors (predecessors of the malleable Dick-Cheney tool, Michael Hayden) publicly called “clear violations of the law.”  RT International asked Ray to comment on the House committee report, as soon as a redacted version was made public yesterday.

December 22, 2016 (seven minutes)

 

It is Snowden who decided, at great risk, to honor his oath to defend the Constitution against ALL enemies foreign and domestic – and NOT the timid politicians whose cowardice Snowden exposed.  Naïve souls still inclined to give credence to congressional “overseers” (“overlookers” is a better word) and to a constitutional-lawyer-in-chief who lies outright about his sweeping power to pardon, are now asked to believe that Snowden was/is a Russian spy.  For the “full story,” tune in to the shameless Fawning Corporate Media, which are busy giving disingenuousness a bad name.

 

“At long last, have you no sense of decency?”

Take a break from Christmas shopping.  Find your earplugs and listen to Ray talking to Dave Lindorff of This Can’t Be Happening in a relaxed, sometimes humorous (in a black-comedy kind of way) conversation for the better part of an hour.  BUT, unless you are new to raymcgovern.com , you may find much of the first half familiar.  For frequent visitors to the website, there is some interesting new discussion – about the significance of the ABM Treaty scuttled by Bush and Cheney – during the second half of the interview.  We break down the interview into a few discrete time-segments below.

http://thiscantbehappening.net/node/3402

 

Those tired of hearing Ray on the spurious charges of “Russian hacking,” can fast forward to minute 25:00 when the discussion turns to central Europe and the fallout from the coup in Ukraine.  At minute 35:00 the discussion focuses more on strategic matters – particularly the destabilizing result of George W. Bush’s pulling the U.S. out of the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, which had been the key stabilizing factor in the strategic equation.  Ray traces that issue back to its beginning in May 1972.  It was analysts working for Ray in CIA’s Soviet Foreign Policy Branch, and military analysts in other branches, who were able to assure Nixon that CIA could verify if he could trust, so to speak. Ray was there in Moscow when President Richard Nixon came and signed the historic ABM Treaty.

Brad Friedman of KPFK/Pacifica radio asked Ray to discuss the significance of President-elect Donald Trump’s reluctance to speak with appropriate reverence and awe about the President’s Daily Brief.  Ray explains his own two-stage reaction to Trump’s remarks; Ray’s comment may surprise you.  He also explains the relative importance of the PDB and NIEs (National Intelligence Estimates) and the roles each play in the intelligence cycle.

http://bradblog.com/?p=11971

December 21, 2016 (33 minutes – from minute 19:15 to 52:00)

Think about it: If you were President-elect Trump, would you submit yourself daily to briefers working for “honorable men” like CIA Director John Brennan, who has gotten malleable media and perfunctory pundits to promote the canard that Trump owes his election victory to Russian hackers?  Brad also asks Ray why he is so sure that the line that Brennan’s anonymous minions are promoting is “a crock.”  (There is a lot more on that in the interviews and articles that follow on raymcgovern.com.)

MSNBC’s Ari Melber mouths what MSNBC management apparently thought were curve balls, in an attempt to strike out the Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald, who is “from Missouri” on “Russia’s email hacking.”  “Show Me” the evidence, says Glenn, as he knocks the curves out of the park.

 

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc-news/watch/glenn-greenwald-weighs-in-on-election-hacks-838954051793?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

December 21, 2016 (seven minutes)

 

It is a good sign, though, that, despite the likelihood someone at MSNBC knew Glenn’s high batting average, they let him get up to the plate anyway.

Tuesday on Fox Radio’s “The Alan Colmes Show,” Alan spoke with former CIA analyst Ray McGovern, one of the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity who believes the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign were not hacked by the Russians, but victims of a leak from within the DNC.

 

McGovern: A Disgruntled Bernie Supporter Probably Leaked DNC Emails

December 20, 2016 (18 minutes)

Alan Colmes, like Ray, grew up in New York City where most folks know the meaning of “a crock.”