≡ Menu

Sessions

The Central Coast’s new congressman, Jimmy Panetta, cut through a bit of the fog today by calling for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to be investigated for his Russian contacts during last year’s presidential campaign. Sessions recused himself from the broader investigation into whole Russian affair but Panetta wasn’t satisfied.

Here’s the news release from Panetta’s office Friday morning:

“The reports that Attorney General Jeff Sessions perjured himself during his confirmation hearings about his meeting with officials from Russia are alarming.  An independent special prosecutor should open an investigation into his interactions with Russian officials during last year’s presidential campaign.  If the reports are true, Attorney General Sessions must resign.  This revelation reemphasizes the need to establish an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate the Trump Administration’s ties to Russia.”

{ 45 comments… add one }
  • maureen March 3, 2017, 9:45 am

    He should have never been confirmed. Sessions should resign.

  • Eric Sand March 3, 2017, 10:14 am

    Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely….

  • Joanna Greenshields March 3, 2017, 11:18 am

    Every single day there seems to be a need to ask more questions about this administration. I have always believed a small part of the mystery lies in the tax returns, that Trump, so far, has refused to release. If you have nothing to hide, transparency and accountability isn’t complicated.

  • Alex Stewart March 3, 2017, 11:21 am

    I am amazed at how Congress and even the media, to a great extent, are ignoring the fact that Russia undermined our election process and that tRump’s ‘surrogates’ were in contact during the process. It should be a much bigger story than Benghazi or Clinton’s emails, which we were bombarded with on a daily basis.

  • Bob Coble March 3, 2017, 3:11 pm

    Congressman Panetta is absolutely correct. I’ve noticed that there has been no public statement about Sessions and the other Russian links from Casey Lucius, the Republican who tried (and failed miserably) to convince us Monterey Bay Area voters that SHE, not Panetta, would better serve us in Congress.

  • PT Caffey March 3, 2017, 4:08 pm

    The most important thing the news media failed to ask AG Sessions:

    “When you met with Ambassador Kislyak in September, did you you warn him against Russian interference in the American election?”

    Sessions’ failure to protest Russian meddling is the dog that did not bark.

  • Karl Pallastrini March 3, 2017, 7:29 pm

    Hello Bob,

    Casey Lucius was not elected and Congressman Panetta was. Congressman Panetta is expected to weigh in on issues and share his thinking with his constituents. Casey is not. Apparently, you expect her to comment on current political issues in Washington, or be criticized (by you) for her silence. I have some news for you. The election is over. The elected official is doing his job. Provide clarity for Partisan readers. What is your expectation for Casey? Second guess the Congressman? Provide an alternative position? For how long should she be engaged in your ridiculous thinking? Would it be this issue? Future issues…all ensuing issues? I like what Panetta has to say. I liked what Casey had to say. Her silence on current issues is actually a sign of respect for the candidate that won the election.

  • Dan Turner March 3, 2017, 9:30 pm

    Look, I don’t like Trump any more than anyone else but I do believe that all this stuff about the Russians being our enemy is complete BS. The Russians have not been aggressive toward us. As a matter of fact, considering how we have provoked them for the past 15 years, their responses have been very restrained and subdued. Ever since they screwed up our plan to bomb Syria back in 2013 to get rid of Assad, they’ve been on our hit list. Pres. Obama said that if the Syrians used poison gas we’d bomb the crap out of them. Lo and behold, shortly after he said that, poison gas was used. We claimed the Syrian government did it, which they would have had to have been nuts to do since Pres O had just said he’d bomb the crap out of them if they did it. It turned out that some rebel group did it, having been given the material by the Saudis. But that’s not the point. The point is that the Russians interfered w/our drive toward a Syrian bombing campaign, ala Libya, by saying that they’d coordinate a UN effort to get all of the Syrian government’s poison gas and dispose of it. Our foreign policy goal is GLOBAL DOMINATION, Syria was next on the list and the Russians got in the way. That was unforgivable in the eyes of the neocons and liberal interventionists who control our foreign policy and, ever since then, we’ve been engaged in a propaganda campaign to vilify the Russians, portraying them as dangerously aggressive and demonizing Putin as the new Hitler (Hillary, for one, said that.)
    The only decent idea that Trump has is easing tensions w/the Russians and the neocons and liberal interventionist – along w/their propaganda arm, the MainStream Media (MSM) – have been very successful at equating relaxation of tensions w/the Russians w/treason. Obama purposely sent about 30 Russian diplomatic staff packing a few weeks before the end of his term on the excuse that the Russians had interfered w/our elections. He was counting on the Russians responding in kind by sending 30 US diplomats in Moscow home, thereby making it much more difficult for Trump to improve relations w/the Russians. Putin didn’t take the bait, didn’t send any US diplomats home but, rather, invited them and all of their kids to the Christmas parties at the Kremlin. (What a nefarious devil!) Trump’s people – Flynn (a certifiable nut), Sessions (a real old school, KKK-type racist), T. Rex Tillerson (just an oil guy – not nearly as bad as Cheney) contacted various Russian diplomats and politicians to tell them not to panic because in a few weeks they (the Trumpistas) would be in power and there was a good chance that relations would improve. That is not treasonous! There was nothing wrong with those contacts and communications and they should be given medals for what they did.
    I don’t blame you if you have accepted this Russian interference as gospel because the MSM has trumpeted it continually. If, however, you’ve ever read what our various intelligence agencies have actually said & written about this whole issue of “The Russians Did It”, they say they don’t really have any evidence of Russian interference but that, since everyone is saying they did it, there might be something to it. There is nothing to it. The Russians didn’t do it. You’ve all been hoodwinked into believing that the Russians are our enemy, that they are aggressive and that they interfered w/our election. (Actually, in a way I wish they had interfered in the election because we’ve been doing exactly that in dozens of countries for the past 70 years and it would serve us right if someone did it to us.)
    Norman Solomon, a card-carrying progressive, recently wrote an article that I urge all of you to read entitled, “The Risk of Baiting Trump on Russia”. Here’s a link to it : http://original.antiwar.com/solomon/2017/02/27/the-risk-of-baiting-trump-on-russia/
    To sum up : it is not treasonous to have a policy of reducing tensions w/the Russians; the Russians are not our enemy; the Russians do not have an aggressive foreign policy and it is a big mistake for progressives, in their zeal to get rid of Trump (an otherwise laudable goal) to jump on this anti-Russian bandwagon which is powered by 100% BS and could get us into a shooting war w/the Russians – which could quickly escalate into a nuclear war.

    • Royal Calkins March 4, 2017, 1:10 pm

      The problem with your theory, Dan, is that if all Flynn and Sessions and Tillerson and the others did was tell Russia not to panic, why did they have to have all those meetings. And if that was all they were doing, why have they lied and dissembled about it all. Also, I think you are reading way too much into the MSM’s reportage here. It is following a story, conducting an investigation in a sense, and I haven’t seen the notion repeated that communicating with the Russians or improving relations is treasonous. The story is what did they talk about and why are they lying about it.

      • Dan Turner March 4, 2017, 8:50 pm

        If you don’t think that talking to the Russians, especially w/the idea of reducing tensions w/them, has been conflated w/treason, you haven’t been paying attention. I guess they “lied” because they knew that if they had admitted that they’d been talking to the Russians they would have been tarred w/the brush of consorting w/the enemy, verging on treason.
        The important thing to understand is that there is absolutely nothing – no evidence or factual basis – to the claims that you’ve been hearing for the past 3 months that “the Russians did it”. To the extent that anyone knows, it seems as if the information about the DNC working for Hillary and to Bernie’s detriment and Hillary’s Wall Street speeches came from internal DNC leaks by a disgruntled DNC worker.
        What we are seeing here is the Deep State/Permanent Government (the Pentagon, elements of the State Department, the CIA and the other intelligence agencies) – the folks whose influence and power goes on forever regardless of who is President or who controls Congress – trying to orchestrate a coup to get rid of Trump of, failing that, to at least put him in a position where he can’t change our aggressive, provocative, war-like policies toward Russia.

        • Royal Calkins March 5, 2017, 1:13 pm

          It’s not as complicated as all that, Dan. This isn’t about treasonous discussions with the Russians. It is about dealmaking. In exchange for your help with the election, in exchange with your under-the-table help with financing projects for Trump and associates, in exchange for not calling in Trump’s debt, we’ll play nice. Do you figure that Donald Trump and Michael Flynn and Jeff Sessions just decided out of the blue that improved relations with the Russians would contribute to world peace? The Russians hacked the election. That is not a theory. They did it in league with Trump, a terrible person. They did not do this for noble reasons and it is dumb to argue that those who are bringing this to light are doing so because they have some terrible bias against Russia.

          • Dan Turner March 5, 2017, 2:58 pm

            Royal, I know its hard to believe that it IS just a theory that the Russians interfered in our election but there is no evidence to support it. Try to find some. I can understand that it is difficult to believe that its all just claims that are unsupported by any facts or evidence (in other words, BS) but it is. Try to find something factual, some proof, some evidence about the Russians having hacked something. You won’t be able to.
            As for Trump’s reasons for thinking that reducing tension w/the Russians is a good idea, that probably does have to do with, first : not believing that the Russians are evil and aggressive (probably due to to dealing that either he, or people like Tillerson, or family members have had w/the Russians over the past 15 years, or so, as a result of which they have heard the Russian’s version of what we’ve done to hurt them economically and threaten them militarily by bringing NATO to its borders, place anti-missile missiles in neighboring countries like Rumania and Poland, encouraging the Georgians to attack South Ossetia and organizing the overthrow of the Ukrainian government a few years ago and its replacement w/a rabidly anti-Russian party), and, second, that there’s money to be made by cooperating w/the Russians – especially in the areas of oil & gas. I don’t believe that there is anything wrong w/cooperating w/the Russians, whether it is on oil & gas development projects, other sorts of trade, or in fighting ISIS.
            The concept that our foreign policy’s ultimate goal is Global Domination seems to be news to you and, if that’s the case, none of my talk about the Russophobia emanating from the Obama administration, in general, and from the State Dept., the Pentagon and the various intelligence agencies, in particular, will make any sense to you because you have no basis, in your knowledge banks, for understanding it.
            That’s why, I think, you remarked to Helga that you didn’t see what any of this has to do w/anti-Russian propaganda when it has everything to do w/anti-Russian propaganda whipped up and spewed out by the folks who want to see US foreign policy continue to provoke the Russians aggressively- for short term gain in terms of armaments spending and longer-term goals related to Global Domination. To you, our foreign policy of demonizing Russia and Putin isn’t propaganda based on lies but is the truth.

          • Royal Calkins March 5, 2017, 6:02 pm

            Two quick comments, Dan. Just because you haven’t seen the evidence, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. The excesses of the various intelligence agencies does not automatically make them wrong, and if there wasn’t some real evidence, the Devin Nuneses of the world would be trumpeting that nonstop. Secondly, do you really wish to suggest that me and others who disagree with out on this subject are unaware of the last few centuries of U.S. imperialism?

    • PT Caffey March 5, 2017, 12:43 am

      Dan: “There is nothing to it. The Russians didn’t do it.”

      The American intelligence community has concluded that the Russians took active measures with respect to our election. Skeptics have argued that this conclusion is overblown and is unsupported by the known evidence; to them, Russian responsibility remains an open question. But no one, to my knowledge, has argued that we know now, definitively, that the Russians did NOT interfere.

      What is your source for this conclusion?

      • PT Caffey March 5, 2017, 12:55 am

        To be clear, any non-Russia verdict must account for the following:

        1. Hack of DNC emails
        2. Curating and timing of DNC leaks
        3. Hack of Colin Powell’s emails
        4. Hack of John Podesta’s emails
        5. Hack of Clinton’s bank speeches (not on DNC servers)
        6. Twitter and Facebook propaganda (from overseas locations)

        All this from a disgruntled DNC staffer? Show us your evidence. Please provide a link.

        • Dan Turner March 5, 2017, 11:34 am

          Sorry, PT, its not my job to provide links to you that show that the Russians didn’t do it. Its your job to show me links to real evidence – as opposed to just evidence-less claims – that the Russians did it.
          The leaks from the DNC came from some disgruntled person working in there w/access to the e-mails.
          If Powell’s, Podesta’s, etcetera’s, etcetera’s e-mails were hacked, how would I know who did it? My question to you is : How do you know who did it and why do you assume that the Russians did it?
          If you read the 25 page report that was issued by one of the intelligence agencies you’ll see that all that is says is something like : there have been a lot of claims that the Russians did it but they don’t have any evidence of that but that, since so many people are saying that the Russians did it, maybe they did but they (the intel folks) don’t know and they haven’t come across any evidence of it.
          So, show me the evidence that the Russians did it or stop attacking the Russians and supporting this Russophobic campaign that will lead nowhere good and is, actually, a distraction from the work that Democrats and other progressives in our country have to do in order to get back on track and win some elections in the future.
          The “sources” of my conclusions are all the reports and articles that I have read on-line in the alternative media (meaning alternative to the MSM) for the past few months. Incidentally, we’ve been referring to this media as “alternative” long before Trump’s “alternative facts” became a popular term.

          • PT Caffey March 5, 2017, 7:22 pm

            //Sorry, PT, its not my job to provide links to you that show that the Russians didn’t do it. Its your job to show me links to real evidence – as opposed to just evidence-less claims – that the Russians did it.//

            But, Dan, you said this: “Try to find something factual, some proof, some evidence about the Russians having hacked something. You won’t be able to.”

            Are you saying such evidence has not been made public, or doesn’t even exist? There’s a difference.

            //The leaks from the DNC came from some disgruntled person working in there w/access to the e-mails.//

            How do you know this? Seriously–what is your source?

            //If Powell’s, Podesta’s, etcetera’s, etcetera’s e-mails were hacked, how would I know who did it? My question to you is : How do you know who did it and why do you assume that the Russians did it?//

            We KNOW that these emails and speeches were hacked because they were later leaked to the news media. I do not know who did it, but the allegations posed by the intelligence community against Russia provide, for me, sufficient support for a full-scale investigation. Do you support further investigation?

            //If you read the 25 page report that was issued by one of the intelligence agencies you’ll see that all that is says is something like : there have been a lot of claims that the Russians did it but they don’t have any evidence of that but that, since so many people are saying that the Russians did it, maybe they did but they (the intel folks) don’t know and they haven’t come across any evidence of it.//

            I did read it, and that’s not what it says. In addition, much of the evidence remains classified.

            //So, show me the evidence that the Russians did it or stop attacking the Russians and supporting this Russophobic campaign that will lead nowhere good and is, actually, a distraction from the work that Democrats and other progressives in our country have to do in order to get back on track and win some elections in the future.//

            Many of us support a full-scale investigation by an independent commission with the goal of showing everyone the evidence of who’s responsible. (If the the Russians are responsible, then it’s not Russophobia.) Do you support such an investigation?

            //The “sources” of my conclusions are all the reports and articles that I have read on-line in the alternative media (meaning alternative to the MSM) for the past few months. Incidentally, we’ve been referring to this media as “alternative” long before Trump’s “alternative facts” became a popular term.//

            This distinction between “mainstream” news and “alternative” news is entirely arbitrary. Either a news outlet conforms to the professional ethics of journalism, in terms of truthfulness and fairness, or it’s not journalism. Any particular news story stands or falls upon its merits–independent of any ideology associated with its masthead. The critical standards applied should be the same. “Alternative media” is not, by its fringe nature, inherently more trustworthy. It becomes worthy of trust only when its reports prove themselves, over time, to be true.

            In the case at hand, the Russians either interfered in our election, or they did not. The truth is not a matter of opinion.

            In any case, this Russian “campaign,” as you call it, does NOT distract from the work of Democrats and progressives. Whatever its factual merits, this campaign has successfully removed from power General Flynn and it has curtailed the powers of Jeff Sessions! That’s real success. Furthermore, it has tied the Trump White House into knots. Trump has, at most, a year to enact his high priority legislative aims. The Russian campaign throws sand into those gears. And, should it bear fruit, may do much more to bring an end to his authoritarian and racist regime.

  • bill leone March 4, 2017, 9:17 am

    Dan, I have agreed with you on many issues in the past, & we have worked together on a few local political battles, but on this issue, I believe you are so sadly mistaken; the Russians do Not operate under a Democracy, they are a Kleptocracy, Vladimir Putin is a Totalitarian Monster, & Russian Cyber Intelligence is taking Active Measures to undermine Democracy in every country in the World….Especially in the US:

    Please read this: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/06/trump-putin-and-the-new-cold-war

    • Dan Turner March 4, 2017, 9:02 pm

      I agree w/some of the things you say. Putin is not “my boy”. He has no problems w/an economy run by oligarchs – a relatively few billionaires. Of course that is a kleptocracy but, in case you haven’t noticed the enormous increase in income and wealth disparity here in the US during the past 35-40 years, we are pretty much a kleptocracy/crony capitalism, also. As for democracy, whether you like the result of Russian elections or not, Putin and his party have won those elections fair and square. There are media (TV, newspapers) that are critical of him. Russia is not a dictatorship although, if you get your information solely from the MSM (the includes the NY’er to which, incidentally, I subscribe which makes me well aware of their Russophobia and their participation in the MSM propaganda system that trumpets anything the State Department and the Pentagon say, regardless of how specious and lacking in evidence and supporting facts that propaganda is), you could be forgiven for thinking that it is a dictatorship.

      • Helga Fellay March 5, 2017, 8:03 am

        Thank you, Dan. As usual, you hit it spot on. I would like to add an excerpt from today’s Consortium News’ Robert Parry who is one of the very few left who are still true to journalism.
        The Politics Behind ‘Russia-gate’
        March 4, 2017
        Exclusive: The hysteria over “Russia-gate” continues to grow – as President Trump’s enemies circle – but at its core there may be no there there while it risks pushing the world toward nuclear annihilation, writes Robert Parry.
        By Robert Parry
        “There may be a turn-about-is-fair-play element to Democrats parsing the words of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and other Trump administration officials to hang them on possible “perjury” charges. After all, the Republicans made “lock her up” a popular chant citing Hillary Clinton’s arguably illegal use of a private email server as Secretary of State and her allegedly false claim under oath that her lawyers had hand-checked each of her 30,000 or so emails that were deleted as personal.

        But there is a grave danger in playing partisan “gotcha” over U.S. relations with the world’s other major nuclear superpower. If, for instance, President Trump finds himself having to demonstrate how tough he can be on Russia — to save his political skin — he could easily make a miscalculation that could push the two countries into a war that could truly be the war to end all wars – along with ending human civilization. But Democrats, liberals and the mainstream news media seem to hate Trump so much they will take that risk.

        Official Washington’s Russia hysteria has reached such proportions that New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman has even compared the alleged Russian hacking of Democratic emails to Pearl Harbor and 9/11, two incidents that led the United States into violent warfare. On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” show, Friedman demanded that the hacking allegations be taken with the utmost seriousness: “That was a 9/11 scale event. They attacked the core of our democracy. That was a Pearl Harbor scale event. … This goes to the very core of our democracy.”

        This afterthought from me: Those who had been planning for war against Russia (and for regime change in Syria) for many years – and they include not only most actors of the Deep State, but also the neocon/neoliberal Clinton Establishment, are so determined to delegitimate the Trump presidency and lead to impeachment, so they can proceed with their war plans. As always, the MSM is their enthusiastic propaganda mouth piece. This has been widely referred to as a political coup, both domestically as well as in the foreign press.
        Trump’s personality makes it easy to hate him, and for that reason, the unthinking masses are jumping enthusiastically on this bandwagon of hatred, when they should be trying to look at the big picture: Is the satisfaction of expressing your personal Trump hatred REALLY that gratifying and thrilling that you are willing to help usher in war with Russia (which is doing us no harm). It is a foregone conclusion that Russia will be backed by China and other nations, and that this will be nuclear World War III which may well be the end of all of us? Keep in mind that these allegations came originally only from the DNC after Wikileaks published highly damaging information about Hillary Clinton, both as retaliation and in order to serve as a distraction from Clinton’s criminality. Julian Assange has emphatically denied that he received that information from Russian sources.

      • Joanna Greenshields March 7, 2017, 3:20 pm

        Dan, don’t you find it just a little bit unsettling that Putin’s opponents end up dead or poisoned?

  • Helga Fellay March 4, 2017, 1:53 pm

    It seems that the Partisan has evolved into just another MSM publication with all the same propaganda lines and unfounded anti Russia hysteria you can get from CNN – or the Herald for that matter. RSN has gone down that same rabbit hole. I am beginning to suspect that the pay is better.

  • Royal Calkins March 4, 2017, 2:56 pm

    Helga: Where do you see this anti-Russia propaganda. Do you really think Trump and his pals are stumbling around lying and getting caught because the media don’t like Russia. I haven’t heard of a soul who thinks we should escalate tensions with Russia. This is no more about Russia than Watergate was about burglary.

    • Dan Turner March 4, 2017, 9:08 pm

      Royal, you are really way off base here. This is all about neutering Trump in terms of preventing him from actually making any movement toward reducing tensions w/Russia. The militarists and their armament-maker friends need a really big, bad, nuclear armed enemy and stateless, fundamentalist Islamists just won’t fill that bill. Russia is in our way, Global Domination-wise, and they are in our sights for regime change. Again, if you get all your information from the MSM, this will be news to you.

  • bill leone March 4, 2017, 4:10 pm

    Ho, ho ho, the NYT, Washington Post & LA Times are MSM propaganda, while Anti-war.com is the Real Deal. Not, so. Anti-war.com is a (loco) Libertarian Website, which on occasion features Pat Buchanan, a leading Right-Wing, Holocaust Denying Nut-Job.

    See for yourself:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiwar.com

    • Dan Turner March 4, 2017, 9:19 pm

      There are many, many information sites on the internet that are not Libertarian from which you can get a much more honest, accurate and fact-based analysis of US foreign policy than from the MSM. However, Libertarians, although I disagree w/them on everything having to do w/economics, are on the right (no pun intended) side when it comes to being anti-interventionist, foreign policy-wise. Buchanan, who does have a fondness for Hitler and his Third Reich (I don’t think he denies the Holocaust but he does try to overlook it) writes very cogently about our idiotic, poorly thought-out, aggressive and interventionist foreign policy.
      And, yes, all that you get from NYT, Washington Post, LA Times & the rest of the MSM is a combo of baloney, half-truths and, most important of all, no mention of some of the most important aspects of events so that, when you hear it from me or Helga, it sounds as if we are raving lunatics.

  • john moore March 4, 2017, 9:58 pm

    “If the reports(that Sessions perjured himself in the nomination hearings)are true, Sessions must resign.”So says James Panetta. I have read several reports that contend that because of the ambiguity of the context of the question, Sessions did not commit perjury.

    I am biased against Sessions, and would never support him for Attorney General for reasons that I am not proud of, but I doubt that he told the Russian Ambassador “Hey, if Russia helps Trump win, we will reduce the sanctions.” If there was any evidence of that, then he did commit perjury, but without that evidence it is a bit of a witch hunt.

    I am concerned about repairing Obamacare, mending the immigration mess, creating family supporting jobs, avoiding a nuclear attack by N. Korea, restoring the education system in Ca., gangs, infrastructure repair, race issues, Pure Water recycling toxic waste for drinking water and of course the number one world problem–burning up the earth because of continued over population(Seven billion humans create more heat and pollution than the Two billion of just fifty years ago, but we still are adding a billion every 11 1/2 yrs.) We could have some deep discussions on this site.

  • bill leone March 5, 2017, 10:13 am

    Sorry Dan, Pat Buchanan is a White Nationalist, Anti-Semite, Racist, And a Holocaust denier. He worked for Nixon & Reagan, & now fully supports The Pimp President. This is what the Southern Poverty Law Center has to say about Pat Buchanan”

    https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2015/04/29/pat-buchanan-pens-exclusive-anti-semitic-publication

    I agree with many of the points that you & Helga have made, from a Progressive point of view, but when you quote sources which provide Holocaust deniers a platform, while dismissing the NYT & Washington Post as “false news,” you are in bad company, & you Do come off as raving lunatics.

    • Dan Turner March 5, 2017, 11:41 am

      Sorry, Bill, but if you read what Buchanan has written about our foreign policy, especially vis-a-vis Russia, you will find that he is very cogent in that area and the fact that he is, or may be, a Holocaust denier does not detract from his analysis/critique of US foreign policy.

  • bill leone March 5, 2017, 11:03 am

    Alas, Robert Parry, who, much to his credit, exposed Regan’s Iran-Contra debacle, writes for an online blog, Consortium.com. Here is a sample of his writing, an article in which he describes the Russian invasion of the Ukraine as Putin’s reaction to a Fascist uprising, & (in my opinion) seems to serve as an apologist for Vladimir Putin, while severely, & criticizing President Obama & especially Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

    http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/dangerous-we-hate-putin-groupthink-among-us-political-elite-threatens-world

    Consortium.com also produces another blog, with the title “Inside Russia.” I’m beginning to believe
    THIS is where many of the Pimp President’s apologists are getting their Real News, as opposed to the
    “baloney” that is printed in the NYT, & other “MSM” publications. Many of the articles use the same language (eg: “Deep State”) that has appeared in the Partisan’s comment section. Moreover, I suspect Consortium.com may be the Internet Version of RT (Russian Television).

    I encourage all those who read the Partisan to investigate these Internet sites thoroughly.

  • bill leone March 5, 2017, 11:21 am

    The Russian Connection:

    http://russia-insider.com/en/robert_parry

    It’s Russian Insider, not Inside Russia, & this blog may not have been Directly connected to Consortium.com….but there IS a connection.

  • Dan Turner March 5, 2017, 11:48 am

    Again, Bill, just because you are becoming aware of terms like “the deep state” and “the permanent government” for the first time doesn’t mean that the folks who are talking about it are wrong or imagining it. You have been immersed in our propaganda system since birth and it continued throughout your schooling and you’ve gotten daily doses of it from the MSM every day of your life. So, of course, when you come into contact with this sort of thinking, based on information that has been withheld from you by the MDSM, you think it is fictional and the folks who are speaking about it are nuts. However, its not fictional and we’re not nuts but it is very difficult you, or anyone, to even consider the thought that most everything you’ve been told for your entire life is BS.

  • bill leone March 5, 2017, 1:47 pm

    No, I have not just now come across the language used by Alex Jones & other White Nationalist groups (& yes, I Do listen to Alex Jones: “Know your enemy.” Sun Tzu). What is surprising (& chilling) to me, is that some Progressives are using the same language, concepts & conspiracy theories as members of the KKK, American Nazis, & other “Alt-Right” groups (one of them, Darth Bannon, is the Pimp President’s Closest advisor).

    Here’s what the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has been working overtime for decades to put the KKK, American Nazis, & like-mined groups Out Of Business, has to say about the issue:

    https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/02/27/%E2%80%98alt-right%E2%80%99-fears-%E2%80%98deep-state%E2%80%99-retribution-against-trump

    My own conspiracy theory, which has been supported by 17 security agencies (perhaps members of “The Deep State,” from your perspective), & has been slowly revealed, piecemeal in the “MSM” news cycle each day, is that Russian Cyber-Intelligence is to some degree responsible for Progressives & White Nationalists holding the same crazy conspiracy theories, & sharing the same concepts & language (“Hitlary” Clinton, for example). Moreover, I can identify a Delusional System when I see, hear & read one.

    • Dan Turner March 5, 2017, 3:16 pm

      OK, Pat Buchanan was a bad example because he gives you the opportunity to change the subject from the propaganda supporting US hostility toward Russia to Buchanan’s love of Hitler and ignore the message I’m trying to get across. There are many other folks who aren’t admirers of Hitler and aren’t Libertarians who have written since the election that there is no basis to “the Russians did it”. In addition to Parry there is Chomsky, Norman Solomon and many more who have written that there just isn’t any evidence that the Russians did it. If you read what various intelligence agencies have said about the subject, there is no evidence to support that.
      What in the world makes you believe that, “…Russian Cyber-Intelligence is to some degree responsible for Progressives & White Nationalists holding the same crazy conspiracy theories…”? I haven’t said anything about conspiracies and, in our country – and especially when it comes to foreign policy, critical thinking is often dismissed as conspiracy theorizing because the defenders of US policy don’t have any reasonable or rational response to the analyses made by the anti-imperialist/anti-interventionist thinkers I’ve read and studied and whose ideas I’ve been expounding on here.

  • bill leone March 5, 2017, 4:44 pm
  • Dan Turner March 5, 2017, 8:39 pm

    Royal, in response to your 6:02 reply of 3-5 I can only say that I hope you’re not on my jury when I’m tried for murder and you say to the other jurors, “…just because you haven’t seen the evidence, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.” And i just don’t understand what you mean when oyou say, “…if there wasn’t some real evidence, the Devin Nuneses of the world would be trumpeting that nonstop.”
    And I always feel so bad when I have to tell people that they just don’t know how much of what they get from the MSM is wrong/lies, half-truths, at best, and, mostly, how much is left out by the MSM making it impossible for anyone who gets his information solely from the MSM to understand what’s going on. It’s as if, at my murder trial, they didn’t mention that I had an airtight alibi because I was out of town that night. What I feel bad about is that it makes me sound as if I’m so smart and no one else knows anything, which isn’t my intent. Of course you know about our country’s history of imperialism but there’s no other way that I’ve found to tell people that they’re missing a lot of the story if they get there information mainly, of solely, from the MSM.

  • Dan Turner March 5, 2017, 10:07 pm

    PT, in response to your 7:22 entry of 3-5 : Alternative media sites such as The Intercept, Information Clearing House, Counterpunch, TomDispatch and even The Nation – to name just a few – are information sources that bring a lot of information that is real, factual and accurate but that runs counter to our government’s narrative. These counter narratives are usually never aired in the MSM and, when they are, they are done so in a disparaging and dismissive manner. The MSM is wholly unethical and unprincipled. Some refer to journalists who write about foreign affairs and the economy for the MSM as “media whores” and its hard to argue w/that once you begin to finds out what the whole/real story is.
    I’m saying that the information (demonstrating evidence or proof that “the Russians did it”) doesn’t exist. You said you’ve read the intel reports and there is some sort of evidence or proof in them that the Russians did it. I’d like you to show me where, exactly, anything like that is said. They dance around it but they never say that the Russians did it for sure or that they have any evidence. They haven’t even said, as far as I know, that they have evidence but can’t tell us about it because it would compromise their cyber-investigative techniques (which would be a specious argument, in any event). So, look for evidence and if you think you have found any send it to me and I’ll show you that it isn’t evidence at all.
    The investigation that you want is a waste of time and a distraction. I’ll be surprised if it isn’t done and – if any evidence or proof is discovered that shows that the Russians interfered in our election in an effort to help Trump – I’ll be happy to apologize to you. However, it is distracting us from analyzing what just went wrong on election day. How did we nominate such a weak, unpopular candidate, the only person who could have lost to Trump? Why was Trump the only one addressing the question of the loss of good jobs that allowed people to have a house and a car (or two), send their kids to college w/o them having to borrow enormous amounts of money? Why was he the only one speaking to the fear and anxiety caused by people seeing their standard of living decrease for the past 40 years, by seeing their kids unable to afford the life style they’d had in the 50’s and 60’s and with prospects for their grandchildren even worse? Why did we nominate a candidate who was in favor of all these “free” trade agreement up until Bernie demonstrated just how unpopular they were w/rank-and-file Democratic voters? Why have we just elected Perez leader of the Democratic party instead of Keith Ellison, or someone else? Perez represents the Obama/Clinton wing of the party and, barring a severe economic downturn, Trump is very likely to win again in 2020 if we waste all our time and energy trying to show that the only reason we lost was because “the Russians did it”.
    If it makes you feel any better, there is a chance that the Republicans (in Congress) will throw Trump overboard themselves (impeach him) if their rollback of everything decent and progressive proves to be disastrous and unpopular. They don’t like Trump and they don’t like many of his policies. The only thing they like about him is that he got elected and I doubt they’d mind getting rid of him and have Pence replace him after he’s done all the damage that he’s promised. And those weren’t empty promises, either.
    And that’s why I think wasting all our time and efforts in pursuit of “the Russians did it” which – at best – will only prevent Trump from effecting a rapprochement w/Russia, is a bad choice and shows that our party still has badly disordered priorities which are likely to come back to haunt us.

    • PT Caffey March 6, 2017, 11:09 pm

      // These counter narratives are usually never aired in the MSM and, when they are, they are done so in a disparaging and dismissive manner. The MSM is wholly unethical and unprincipled.//

      Dan, contrary to your assertion, Glenn Greenwald, co-founder of The Intercept, appears regularly on Fox News. Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of The Nation, appears often on MSNBC. From what I’ve observed, their views are given a fair hearing and not disparaged.

      To say that the MSM is “wholly unethical and unprincipled” does not reflect a reasoned judgment, in my opinion. Was the publication of the Pentagon Papers unprincipled? How about Seymour Hersh’s
      exposés of My Lai and Abu Ghraib? Or James Risen’s reports on the NSC and CIA? Risen was prepared to go to prison to protect his sources. Unethical? Unprincipled?

      Respectfully, that’s hogwash.

      //The investigation that you want is a waste of time and a distraction.//

      “Obviously, Russian interference in the election merits investigation. Prior collusion would constitute possible grounds for impeachment. Secret financial dealings or perverse stunts in Russia that could compromise the president need to be exposed.” –The Nation, March 1, 2017

      //Perez represents the Obama/Clinton wing of the party…//

      Yes, that’s my wing, too. Perez is a terrific, accomplished progressive leader. But I also like and respect Keith Ellison. I don’t see why they–and we–can’t work together to defeat Trumpism.

      //And that’s why I think wasting all our time and efforts in pursuit of “the Russians did it” which – at best – will only prevent Trump from effecting a rapprochement w/Russia…//

      I believe a “rapprochement” with Russia, on Russia’s terms alone, would be bad for America.

      On this, I stand with Bernie Sanders and against tyranny:

      “We have a president who criticizes our allies, yet when it comes to the authoritarian president of Russia he has only nice things to say.” –Bernie Sanders, March 5, 2017

      • Royal Calkins March 7, 2017, 11:11 pm

        Dan, the Jim Risen that PT mentions is the friend I mentioned earlier, the one who has a real understanding of why intelligence officers are talking to reporters.

  • bill leone March 6, 2017, 8:44 am

    Dan, I must tell you as a friend, you are protesting Way too much.

    • Dan Turner March 6, 2017, 8:58 pm

      Bill, I have not yet begun to protest.
      P.S. : That wasn’t a reference to Shakespeare, was it?

  • Dan Turner March 6, 2017, 9:53 pm

    The following is the first sentence in an article that you can access via the link below :
    March 06, 2017 “Information Clearing House” – “Counterpunch” – The strange sight of liberal America participating in a neo-McCarthyite assault on Trump appointees, not on the grounds not of their inherent racism and stupidity, but because they have contacts with Russia, is among the more surreal spectacles of modern political history.
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/03/06/have-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-a-secret-agent-of-vladimir-putin/

    • PT Caffey March 6, 2017, 11:24 pm

      Having “contacts with Russia” is a reductive caricature of the critique. Trump’s associates were in contact with Russian individuals DURING an alleged Russian disinformation and hacking campaign that targeted the Democratic candidate. Then they repeatedly LIED about these contacts. Flynn was fired for his lies. Sessions was forced to recuse himself for his.

      Hey, Look, what’s that sound?

      “BLOOMBERG – March 6 -Russian hackers are targeting U.S. progressive groups in a new wave of attacks, scouring the organizations’ emails for embarrassing details and attempting to extract hush money, according to two people familiar with probes being conducted by the FBI and private security firms.

      “At least a dozen groups have faced extortion attempts since the U.S. presidential election, said the people, who provided broad outlines of the campaign. The ransom demands are accompanied by samples of sensitive data in the hackers’ possession.”

      https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-06/russian-hackers-said-to-seek-hush-money-from-liberal-u-s-groups

  • bill leone March 17, 2017, 11:39 pm

    Yes, indeed, for those who read more than just Russian Propaganda, & watch RT News:
    “The lady doth protest too much methinks,” is a famous line from Hamlet, spoken by his mother, Gertrude while watching Hamlet’s play within a play…..in which one of the court players, who represents Hamlet’s mother, exclaims in an overly dramatic manner (at the sight of her murdered husband, the king of Denmark), “O, but I will never marry again!!!” At which point Hamlet asks his mother, how she likes the play, & she replies with that line, to which Hamlet answers sarcastically, “O, but she will keep her word.” However, very soon Gertrude (Hamlet’s mother) marries Hamlet’s uncle, his father’s murderer.

    Hamlet was probably The Bard’s greatest masterpiece, for the very reason that it portrayed
    modern psychology in the late 1600’s.

  • bill leone March 17, 2017, 11:42 pm

    Here’s a more detailed (MSM) explanation of that line:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_lady_doth_protest_too_much,_methinks

Leave a Comment