October 28, 2017

 MY CORNER by Boyd Cathey

More on the Radically-Changing “Russians Did It!” Canard, and Continuing “Silent Coup” Effort

==============================================

Friends,

Additional details continue to trickle out about the deep involvement of the Hillary campaign and the Democratic National Committee [DNC] in the manufacturing of the “Russians Did It!” canard. It appears now that originally the Democratic-leaning investigative/consulting firm, FusionGPS, had been hired to do some initial opposition research on candidate Trump by figures associated with the NeverTrumper, Neoconservative Washington Free Beacon, whose backers include the virulently anti-Trump Bill Kristol (The Weekly Standard) and billionaire, hedge-funder and fierce gay rights supporter, Paul Singer. When Trump appeared certain to win the GOP nomination, that effort ceased.

The supposed “Russian connection” was developed later, when the Clinton campaign and DNC picked up where the NeverTrumpers left off. It was apparently engineered by the Podesta lobbying firm, headed by Tony Podesta, the brother of John Podesta, chairman of the 2016 Clinton presidential campaign, and by the hiring of free-booting British ex-intelligence agent, Christopher Steele, with the payment of approximately $12.4 million dollars, using its Democrat attorney Mark Elias as bagman.  Of course, neither Podesta, nor Hillary, nor former DNC chairman Debbi Wasserman-Schultz knew “anything” about this huge cash transfer—that’s right, like Sergeant Schultz on that once-popular TV sitcom, “Hogan’s Heroes,” they have responded in unison: “I know not’ing!” With sardonic feline smiles on their faces they actually say that…and CNN, MSNBC, NBC, and the Mainstream Media actually repeat that, seriously.  

Yeah, right. But remember the documented (and undeniable) account, detailed by the authors of the campaign memoir, Shattered, that the top Clinton operatives met and actually devised this “Russia card” right after Hillary’s defeat?

What is even more disquieting is that our nation’s major intelligence service, the FBI, decided to use the created fake “dossier” paid for by the Hillary campaign and DNC, produced by foreign rogue ex-agent Steele, and based on spurious and verifiably false information which Steele may have received from shadowy Russians, on which to base its investigation of President Trump. And it is the same fake dossier that forms the basis for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s open-ended, near limitless and politically-weaponized investigation, with its dozens of zealous pro-Hillary attorneys busy at work like hungry termites to find anything that might undermine the president.

Is this not the definition of an attempted “silent coup” by one political group against our elected president?

And just as the news has seeped out that it was the Democrats who were responsible for the fake dossier and for the “Russians Did it!” canard, suddenly—again leaked out to Deep State media “agents” (uh, I mean friends!)—comes the news (via CNN, no less) that Mueller’s investigation will be indicting its first victim, perhaps as early as this coming week.  Coincidence? Is anything that comes out of the bowels of our national Hell (aka, Washington-along-the-Potomac) by coincidence?  Or, does this simply echo the desperate appeals from extreme Leftist pundits like Mother Jones’s David Korn that “we must simply keep this Russian collusion investigation going! We must continue to search for the Trump-Russia connection!”—despite ten months of finding: nothing, absolutely nothing.

It reminds me of the early twentieth century British writer—I think it was Sir Max Beerbohm—who, when he traveled to France, declared: “When I go to France, I speak English; if they do not understand me at first, I speak louder!” It was Sir Max—one of my favorite English humorists—who also wrote: “Good sense about trivialities is better than nonsense about things that matter.”

What we have with the “Russians Did it!” canard is, indeed, “nonsense about things that matter.”  It is nonsense—myth—that has shaken this nation to its very core. It is nonsense that nourishes the effort to weaken, destroy and remove a duly elected president. It is nonsense—fake information—created by a foreign operative, used by the Democratic Party and massaged by its puppeteers in the Mainstream Media. It is nonsense, supplied to our national intelligence service, which was then used to enable a zealous Democratic Special Counsel with virtually limitless powers who now targets anyone he so pleases.   

And other, arguably much more serious events and happenings in our recent political past—the Clinton email scandal, the Benghazi deaths—largely neglected by the Mainstream Media (as best as they can), must take a far back seat in the political bus while the dominant forces of the Deep State pursue their efforts to “get Trump.”

Welcome to America, circa 2017: welcome to the frenetic and unhinged response by our Deep State and establishment overlords to the election of 2016. Welcome to a transformed American government that, should its Framers and Founders miraculously re-appear, they would find unrecognizable, that would appall them, and that would certainly disgust them.

Our perfervid Deep State establishment, our Democrat and Republican elites, our media and educational and entertainment aristocracy have made fashionable and normative an immense fallacy to which all us must genuflect. But as G. K. Chesterton, another great English essayist and poet, once wrote: “Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”

Today I pass on an item by the liberal left-leaning Pew Research Center, once again documenting the overwhelming and zealously oppressive anti-Trump views of our media. Pew offers data that approximately two-thirds of all stories about the president were slanted negatively, with only 5% offering a positive view. Let me repeat that: only 5%  positive (and that would include Fox).

Certainly, any response we engage in faces incredibly contrary odds.

Longtime (and non-neocon) conservative writer, William Lind, in a recent issue of Old Right magazine Chronicles, suggests that traditional Americans must step outside the “false reality” that has been cultivated and created by the Deep State, and that in rejecting it, we must go back and retrieve the wisdom, the lessons, and the “real reality” that once existed and once informed our ancestors.

It is no easy task. To the argument that those traditions and that legacy no longer exist, we must reply with T. S. Eliot that “There is no lost cause because there is no gained cause.” Or, as I would phrase it, using something a dear Spanish friend once told me forty years ago: “A lost cause is never truly lost if the fight is for what is true and what is right.”

And that should—must—be our watchword.

Dr. Boyd D. Cathey

Pew: Trump Coverage Far More Negative Than Past Presidents

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/media-coverage-pew-research-center-mainstream/2017/10/02/id/817210/?ns_mail_uid=61377180&ns_mail_job=1756393_10032017&s=al&dkt_nbr=010104y92h5r

By Jason Devaney    |   Monday, 02 Oct 2017 06:55 PM

News coverage of President Donald Trump's first 100 days was almost two-thirds negative, far more than presidents in recent history, according to a new study.

The Pew Research Center looked at media reports about the Trump presidency in the first three months of the administration and concluded:

·         62 percent of the stories had a negative assessment, with just 5 percent having a positive assessment.

·         20 percent of the stories in President Barack Obama's first three months were negative.

·         28 percent of the stories in President George W. Bush's first three months were negative.

·         28 percent of the stories in President Bill Clinton's first three months were negative.

·         66 percent of all news stories regarding the Trump administration were about these five topics:

·         Political skills (17 percent).

·         Immigration (14 percent).

·         Appointments/nominations (13 percent).

·         U.S.-Russia relations (13 percent).

·         and healthcare (9 percent).

Other studies have come up with similar results, including a Media Research Center study that concluded the three major broadcast networks' coverage of the Trump administration was 89 percent negative.

Another study found the coverage of the Trump White House was 91 percent negative over the summer on nightly news broadcasts.