Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
flyangler

What if the Russians Are Playing Everyone?

Rate this topic

14 posts in this topic

In spycraft, sowing disinformation is a key tactic that's been used for as long as humans have used spy-craft. While the definition below suggests a Soviet origin, Sun Zu discussed feeding false information to enemies. Most major wars have included similar. The WW2 Allies did their best to distract German forces from Normandy before D-Day. 

Why do I ask this question? Well, the greatest thing the Russians can do is sow doubts in Western cultures toward their governments, especially the USA. If that is a goal, then all manner of tactics can eminate downward from there. 

The assumption by everyone is that Putin hated Clinton and wanted to hurt her by originally supporting Trump. As the DNI said in his report late last year, once the Russians realized that Clinton was the likely winner, they switched their focus from supporting Trump to hurting Clinton (yes, the IC report says several times that there was a shift in focus by Russians, as I have said here repeatedly). So how could they do that and still hurt the faith the Ame I can people have in the eventual president? 

First, a review of disinformation as Wikipedia defines:

Disinformation is false information spread deliberately to deceive. The English word disinformation is a translation of the Russian dezinformatsiya, derived from the title of a KGB black propagandadepartment. The book Disinformation documents that Joseph Stalin coined the term, giving it a French-sounding name to falsely claim it had a Western origin.

Russian use began with a "special disinformation office" in 1923.Disinformation was defined in Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1952) as "false information with the intention to deceive public opinion". Operation INFEKTION was a Soviet disinformation campaign to influence opinion that the U.S. invented AIDS. The U.S. did not actively counter disinformation until 1980, when a fake document reported that the U.S. supported apartheid.

The word disinformation did not appear in English dictionaries until the late-1980s. English use increased in 1986, after revelations that the Reagan Administration engaged in disinformation against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. By 1990 it was pervasive in U.S. politics; and by 2001 referred generally to lying and propaganda.

So what are examples in the past year? 

- Dodgy Dossier, used by Dems to slam Trump and the basis for federal probes, was largely based on information given to ex-UK spy by "former" Russian spies or other Intel officials. What if it was all planeted as part of a plan? 

- Russian lawyer, what if she was fed false info by her Kremlin sources to bait Americans? Why would she use easily exploitable email to bait the Trumpians into a meeting? No serious spy would do so. 

- Kysliak, Russian ambassador, seems to be caught saying many things in communications intercepted by US NSA - what if Russians know they are being spied upon and say false or misleading things hoping they will be intercepted? 

- The memo that Comey supposedly confronted Lynch with showing her assuring Clinton campaign that email server investigation would not go too far supposedly has a Russian connection or sourcing. 

 

It is too too early for me to recall more but what if the US intel community is subject to one giant Russian disinformation exploit and they fell for it, hook, line and sinker? 

One thing about the Obama Administration, they did not see the Russians as a serious adversary for at least the first four or five years. What if Obama's IC leadership, and their middle managers, became numbed to Russian intrusions and succeptible to this exploit? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they are; sitting back and watching the show. The MSM is doing more damage to our country and the office of the President with disinformation, lies and propaganda than Russia will ever do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, achez said:

Of course they are; sitting back and watching the show. The MSM is doing more damage to our country and the office of the President with disinformation, lies and propaganda than Russia will ever do.

which is it?  you just agreed that the russians are effing with us and then you blame the MSM media? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and the originator of MAGA doing all he can to help Russia do it.. how long before Trump mentions the Sanctions Bill against Russia sitting on his desk.. what are the chances he signs it???? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, big country said:

which is it?  you just agreed that the russians are effing with us and then you blame the MSM media? 

MSM playing the role of Lenin's "useful idiots" working against their own self-interest because they are too stoopid to know they are being used. 

Need a definition, here's Wikipedia and note the Soviet origins:

In political jargon, a useful idiot (also useful fool) is a person perceived as a propagandist for a cause the goals of which they are not fully aware of, and who is used cynically by the leaders of the cause. According to the Oxford Dictionary of Euphemisms, the phrase stems from useful fool to refer to "a dupe of the Communists" and was used by Vladimir Lenin to refer to those his country had successfully manipulated.

The Media is lapping up the piss disguised as wine that the Russians have been dumping in the USA since early 2016. The Media, in a fit of fury that their girl lost, have been grasping at straws for a reason they could point to (other than the truth) was well as a way to hamper the vulgar Trump. Enter the Russian issue. 

I will repeat again, I am of the BELIEF that there were meetings with Russian individuals and glancing "meetings" (handshakes) with Russian diplomats that were mostly innocuous (I am not vouching for the motives of Stone nor Page). None of it mounts to collusion and none of the "meetings" resulted in any follow-up information sharing or actions. Seriously, if the US IC was monitoring the communications where Team Trump was mentioned, why is there NO follow-up intercepts about the actual actions of collusion? One does not create a conspiracy in one fleeting discussion and yet there is NO evidence of any follow-up conversations or communications intercepted. 

I am of the BELIEF that Team Obama was regularly abusing the FISA Court and US Intelligence for political purposes. And not just against the Trumps, against anyone they felt it would be good to surveil. So when HRC lost, the Obama Team (Rice, Powers, Rhodes, Brennan, Clapper, Jarrett) became concerned they would be found out so they created the Russia meme as a thing. They took the innocuous Trump-Russia contacts and built a narrative around them about "collusion". They elevated "the alt Right" as being a Russian operation so that they could tie that to Bannon and then to Trump. They unmasked Flynn and others, they disseminated, they leaked, they distributed dodgy dossiers and they got "their guys" who were running DoJ, FBI, CIA and DNI to create investigations and write reports. 

And the Media lapped it up thinking it wine because it satisfied their three biggest needs:

1) Explain HRC devastating loss without examining the real reasons

2) Would hamper the Trump Administration and slow it progress while trying to drive a wedge between Trump and his supporters

3) Fill the airtime void in a post-election world where covering any accomplishments of the Trump Admin would lose liberal viewers hurting ratings and advertising dollars. 

Yes, the Media is playing the role of useful idiots to the Russian long-term needs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jim DE said:

Tom, I was wondering if this whole Jr/Russian meeting wasn't leaked by Russians as this popped up right after Trump met Putin. 

It popped up just as Trump was getting relatively high marks for his off-shore trips and for his being tough with Putin. When the Junior stuff dropped, I asked here why then? What changed that made that the time to drop a story that was about a meeting that had taken place last summer?

I have first thought the WaPo was sitting on the story waiting for an opportune time but now no longer think so. It was the sources who held the story back, whoever they were. There was too much additional investigative reporting done AFTER the story was published that suggests that the WaPo was not sitting on it as an exclusive. Thus, the timing was controlled by the sources of the emails, etc. Who were they and what motivated their timing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jim DE said:

Tom, I was wondering if this whole Jr/Russian meeting wasn't leaked by Russians as this popped up right after Trump met Putin. 

yup,

and maybe that why Trump MUST make concessions to Putin,

if he doesn't deliver, 

more evidence gets leaked......

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, big country said:

and the originator of MAGA doing all he can to help Russia do it.. how long before Trump mentions the Sanctions Bill against Russia sitting on his desk.. what are the chances he signs it???? 

ugh, again the ruse of Trump's "pro Russia agenda". Please document what Trump has done that is favorable to Russia. Frank seems incapable of that. 

Odds he signs it? 100%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, fish'nmagician said:

yup,

and maybe that why Trump MUST make concessions to Putin,

if he doesn't deliver, 

more evidence gets leaked......

 

Where are those concessions? It would seem to me that Trump has done an awful lot with EOs and regulatory changes as well as military actions to show that he is yielding no concessions to Putin. 

I just love that your mind sees everything "on the come" without any regard for what has come to pass. You are forever waiting for that big one to drop and yet it never happens. I can guess you were disappointed that Kushner seems to have done well yesterday in the defense of his own actions. So your sights are probably set to Mannafort as the next big one to make headlines. And when that does not produce, then what? 

(Oops, deleted off-topic comment per Tim's admonishment yesterday)

Meanwhile, US equity markets, the world's greatest future discounting machine known to man, are hitting record highs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Riverboat33 said:

The left wing media and the America last crowd, carry the water for Russia with glee and new found energy.

the america last crowd are folks lying about meeting with our enemy and calling for getting rid of sanctions vs them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brennan and Clapper, deep inside the Obama Intel Abuse Scheme, are calling for a virtual coup against Trump if he fires Mueller. 

In the most vocal opposition to president Donald Trump yet, former CIA Director John Brennan said that if the White House tries to fire special counsel Robert Mueller, government officials should refuse to follow the president orders, as they would be - in his view - “inconsistent” with the duties of the executive branch.

"I think it's the obligation of some executive branch officials to refuse to carry that out. I would just hope that this is not going to be a partisan issue. That Republicans, Democrats are going to see that the future of this government is at stake and something needs to be done for the good of the future," Brennan told CNN's Wolf Blitzer at the Aspen Security Forum, effectively calling for a coup against the president should Trump give the order to fire Mueller.

Falling back on his neocon roots, James Clapper, who has waged a long-running vendetta with Trump, once again warned about Russian interference in US affairs. When asked about the June 2016 meeting between Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort with a Russian lawyer and others, he responded: "I'm an old school, Cold War warrior and all that - so I have, there's truth in advertising, great suspicions about the Russians and what they do. A lot of this to me had kind of the standard textbook tradecraft long deployed by Russians. It would have been a really good idea maybe to have vetted whoever they were meeting with.' [TK: Note that Clapper does not refer to what kind of "textbook tradecraft" this might have been. Entrapment? Disinformation? Did Clapper slip there without realizing it? And as far as "vetting" in advance, how was Team Trump, without access to intelligence in June 2016, supposed to do that?]

And so he did: on the call Clapper said Trump asked him to "to put out a statement rebutting the contents of the dossier which I couldn't and wouldn't do. It was kind of transactional" referring to a dossier that alleged ties between President Donald Trump's campaign and Russia. It was not clear if he wouldn't and couldn't do it because the contents were legitimate, in his view, or because the dossier is what started the whole "Russian collusion" narrative in the first place. Curiously, Clapper saw it as a favor to Trump not to issue a statement: Clapper was asked by Blitzer why he didn't put out a statement replying: "The whole point of the dossier by the way was we felt an obligation to warn him to alert him to the fact it was out there. That was the whole point."

It was not clear if James Comey, whose subsequent leak to the NYT led to the appointment of Mueller, would have applied the same reasoning when asked by Trump to rebut the dossier's contents.

If the Rice surveillance and unmasking story is real, then Clapper and Brennan were in on it and that makes them compromised in anything they say at this point. Clapper wanted to stay on as Clinton's DNI and wanted to gain cred with HRC and this is one of those ways. Now, Clapper is worried that if Mueller is fired and another, less Dem-friendly special council is assigned, or even if a new AG is allowed to pursue it, his caper will be uncovered, destroying his legacy and the American Public's faith in the US IC. 

Too many people have a vested interest in hiding the Obama abuses of FBI, CIA and NSA systems and they will do everything they can to divert attention, even if that means destroying a lawfully elected president and the country's political cohesion. . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.