Kremlin plot? Russia critics ridiculed for claiming Moscow is behind Chelsea Manning’s Senate run

Anti-Russia conspiracy theorists have developed another outlandish claim, stating that Moscow is behind Chelsea Manning’s Senate bid, since she’s taking on an incumbent who is against so-called “Russian aggression.”

US whistleblower Chelsea Manning confirmed her bid for a Senate seat for the state of Maryland on Sunday, releasing a campaign video alongside a tweet which simply stated: “Yup, we’re running for Senate.”

Manning says she’s running because “we need someone willing to fight… we need to stop expecting that our systems will somehow fix themselves.” But that reason seems too straightforward for those who apparently believe that everything related to US politics is somehow tied to Russia.

Taking to Twitter on Saturday, foreign policy and strategy consultant Molly McKew called Manning’s decision to run “a little too convenient,” noting that she is running against Senator Ben Cardin, who is “one of [the] most active senators on foreign policy and [a] leader in making policy/legislation to respond to Russian aggression.”

Capture

In a separate tweet, she referenced Manning’s whistleblowing and the apparent motive behind it. “The agent of a foreign power coerced this individual, leveraging their emotional distress, into breaking their oath to the country and disclosing classified secrets.” 

Capture

If McKew’s remarks seem hard to comprehend, that’s perfectly understandable. If you need them to be interpreted, it all boils down to the same old line: Russia did it. That’s right. Russia is responsible for Manning’s whistleblowing, and Russia is somehow behind her decision to run for office.

Her statements were called out by Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who helped make Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing a reality. “One of the media’s favorite Russia-obsessed ‘experts’ didn’t even wait an hour before depicting Chelsea Manning’s Senate candidacy as a dastardly Kremlin plot,” he tweeted. He went on to call out the “demonstrable, obvious falsehoods about Manning’s motives & WikiLeaks’ role” which McKew wrote about in her second tweet.

Capture

But McKew isn’t alone in her bold statements. A person by the name of Josh Manning, whose Twitter account says he is a civil rights investigator and something to do with “Army intel,” seems to believe the same.

“Senator Cardin authored and released a 200-page masterpiece on Russian influence in western elections. Suddenly he has a primary from Kremlin stooge Assange’s Wikileaks primary source Chelsea Manning. The Kremlin plays the extreme left to swing elections. Remember that,” he wrote.

Capture

Greenwald also chimed in on Josh Manning’s tweet. “Oh my God: This is how deranged official Washington is. The president of the largest Dem Party think-tank (funded in part by dictators) genuinely believes Chelsea Manning’s candidacy is a Kremlin plot. Conspiracy theorists thrive more in mainstream DC than on internet fringes.”

Capture

So there you have it. Chelsea Manning is running for US Senate, and it’s all Russia’s fault. Stay tuned for other US political developments and more claims on how the Kremlin is allegedly responsible for them.

Top Democrat ‘has seen no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion’ (VIDEO)

Screen Shot 2017-05-05 at 6.07.25 PM

A top Democratic member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has told CNN that she has seen no evidence of collusion between Trump associates and Russian officials during last year’s US presidential election.

*

Dianne Feinstein was interviewed on the news channel following a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday where FBI Director James Comey was questioned about possible collusion between Trump officials and Russia.

READ MORE: FBI director: I have ‘never’ been anonymous source on Clinton, Trump investigations

Referring to a briefing Feinstein attended at CIA Headquarters in Langley on the alleged Russia meddling on Tuesday, host Wolf Blitzer asked: “Do you have evidence that there was in fact collusion between Trump associates and Russia during the campaign?”

“Not at this time,” Feinstein replied.

“Well, that’s a pretty precise answer,” Blitzer said, quickly bringing the interview to an end.

Journalist and co-founder of The Intercept Glenn Greenwald described Feinstein’s answer as significant for several reasons, including “(a) who is saying it, (b) how decisive her answer is, and (c) that she just got back from a CIA briefing on it.”

Former Republican Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin, also tweeted: “This is huge.”

Screen Shot 2017-05-05 at 6.12.19 PM

Members of the House Intelligence Committee have previously implied that they were aware of evidence of collusion. California Representative Adam Schiff said in March that there was “more than circumstantial evidence” of coordination.

While last month, California Representative Eric Swalwell, said “there is evidence of collusion,” but failed to expand on the details, citing “classified information.” 

Washington Post admits article on ‘Russian propaganda’ & ‘fake news’ based on sham research

Facing threats of legal action, the Washington Post has been forced to add an editor’s note distancing the paper from a dubious website, PropOrNot, which it had initially endorsed as a group of nonpartisan experts on “Russian propaganda.”

*

The Post came under fire on social media for its provocative hit piece which claimed that “Russia’s increasingly sophisticated propaganda campaign” actually influenced the US presidential election.

The article, published late last month, referenced “independent researchers” who allegedly determined that Russian state media, RT and Sputnik News among them, produced “misleading articles online with the goal of punishing Democrat Hillary Clinton, helping Republican Donald Trump and undermining faith in American democracy.” 

screen-shot-2016-12-08-at-4-27-26-pm

One of the main sources cited by the Post was PropOrNot, “an independent team of concerned American citizens” who, according to the site’s description, are “volunteering time and skills to identify propaganda – particularly Russian propaganda – targeting a US audience.”

After the publication of its evidence-free article, the newspaper was sent a letter from one of the websites listed, threatening a defamation lawsuit.

*

“We have another post today that describes how the few things that are verifiable on the PropOrNot site don’t pan out, as in the organization is not simply a group of inept propagandists but also appears to deal solely in fabrications,” Naked Capitalism – a US blog on finance, economics and politics – said on its website. 

“If the site is flagrantly false with respect to things that can be checked, why pray tell did the Washington Post and its fellow useful idiots in the mainstream media validate and amplify its message? Strong claims demand strong proofs, yet the Post appeared content to give a megaphone to people who make stuff up with abandon. No wonder the members of PropOrNot hide as much as they can about what they are up to; more transparency would expose their work to be a tissue of lies.”

Jim Moody, an attorney representing the website, stressed in a letter to the Washington Post on Sunday that the newspaper “did not provide even a single example of ‘fake news’ allegedly distributed or promoted by Naked Capitalism or indeed any of the 200 sites on the PropOrNot blacklist.”

Award-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald, significant in bringing Edward Snowden’s US security revelations to the public, labeled the Post story“total journalistic garbage.”

screen-shot-2016-12-08-at-4-28-27-pm

“More troubling still, PropOrNot listed numerous organizations on its website as ‘allied’ with it, yet many of these claimed ‘allies’ told The Intercept, and complained on social media, they have nothing to do with the group and had never even heard of it before the Post published its story, Greenwald wrote in response to the article.

screen-shot-2016-12-08-at-4-29-38-pm

In his article, the Post’s Craig Timberg did not initially include a link to PropOrNot’s website. “If readers had the opportunity to visit the site, it would have become instantly apparent that this group of ostensible experts far more resembles amateur peddlers of primitive, shallow propagandistic clichés than serious, substantive analysis and expertise; that it has a blatant, demonstrable bias in promoting NATO’s narrative about the world; and that it is engaging in extremely dubious McCarthyite tactics about a wide range of critics and dissenters,” Greenwald noted.

screen-shot-2016-12-08-at-4-31-55-pm

Following a storm of negative comments on social media, with many accusing the newspaper of crazy lies,” saying the Post is actually the “real propaganda peddler, the dubious article was appended.

“The Washington Post on Nov. 24 published a story on the work of four sets of researchers who have examined what they say are Russian propaganda efforts to undermine American democracy and interests. One of them was PropOrNot, a group that insists on public anonymity, which issued a report identifying more than 200 websites that, in its view, wittingly or unwittingly published or echoed Russian propaganda. A number of those sites have objected to being included on PropOrNot’s list, and some of the sites, as well as others not on the list, have publicly challenged the group’s methodology and conclusions.

The Post, which did not name any of the sites, does not itself vouch for the validity of PropOrNot’s findings regarding any individual media outlet, nor did the article purport to do so. Since publication of The Post’s story, PropOrNot has removed some sites from its list, the paper said.

screen-shot-2016-12-08-at-4-32-50-pm

Less than a week after the Post published the article, the US House of Representatives passed an intelligence authorization bill containing a provision aimed at tackling what Washington claims is political interference by Russia on a global level.

The 93-page HR 6393 – passed by the House in a 390-30 vote on November 30 – calls for the establishment of a new, interagency panel designed to suppress Russia’s alleged attempts to “exert covert influence over peoples and governments.”  The panel would be tasked with “countering active measures by Russia to exert covert influence, including exposing falsehoods, agents of influence, corruption, human rights abuses, terrorism and assassinations carried out by the security services or political elites of the Russian Federation or their proxies,” the draft legislation goes on to say.

LIMBAUGH: When You Watch The ‘NEWS’ You’re Actually Watching The ‘Clinton Campaign’

Liz Douglas

PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WATCHING PURE PROPAGANDA.
dooglitas

Why should anyone get their “news” from any mainstream source? Alternative media. That’s the only place you can find any real news.
dooglitas

When you watch the “news” you’re watching criminal activity and treason.
dooglitas

The agenda of communism.
jim s

Are the media working for the Clintons and DNC or are the Clintons working for the media? The reason I say this is if you look back on some of the old videos of 8 years ago you find the Clintons complaining about how Obama is getting a pass from the media and gets shown in a better light. Almost to point that he was chosen by the media. To watch these videos you might think the Clintons were republicans. lol

Glenn Greenwald: The U.S. Media Is Essentially 100 Percent United Against Donald Trump

 

by MATTHEW BOYLE

Glenn Greenwald of the Intercept, formerly of The Guardian newspaper, laid out in an interview with Slate magazine that the media in the United States has decided to band together in a last-ditch effort to stop the rise of 2016 GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump.

Greenwald, the progressive journalist who broke the  mass government surveillance storyline, was asked what he thought about Donald Trump’s press conference recently in which Trump joked that Russia should release any emails it has from 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton’s illicit private home-brew email server from her time as President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State.

“What did you think of Trump’s press conference? You’ve gone after people who you thought were smearing those denying a Trump-Russia connection, and you’ve used the word McCarthyite to describe them. But now Trump has encouraged the Russians to find or release more Hillary Clinton emails,” Slate asked Greenwald.

In his response, Greenwald detailed how the media in the United States has decided to bloc together against Trump’s candidacy for the presidency:

OK, so, I am glad you asked about that because this is the conflict that I am currently having: The U.S. media is essentially 100 percent united, vehemently, against Trump, and preventing him from being elected president. I don’t have an actual problem with that because I share the premises on which it is based about why he poses such extreme dangers. But that doesn’t mean that as a journalist, or even just as a citizen, that I am willing to go along with any claim, no matter how fact-free, no matter how irrational, no matter how dangerous it could be, in order to bring Trump down.

Greenwald bashed the New York Times for pushing, in his words, “unmitigated bullsh*t.” He went on to say:

So, literally, the lead story in the New York Times today suggests, and other people have similarly suggested it, that Trump was literally putting in a request to Putin for the Russians to cyberattack the FBI, the United States government, or get Hillary Clinton’s emails. That is such unmitigated bullsh*t. What that was was an offhanded, trolling comment designed to make some kind of snide reference to the need to find Hillary’s emails. He wasn’t directing the Russians, in some genuine, literal way, to go on some cybermission to find Hillary’s emails. If he wanted to request the Russians to do that, why would he do it in some offhanded way in a press conference? It was a stupid, reckless comment that he made elevated into treason.

But then Greenwald questioned whether, ultimately, the media’s tactics against Trump would be successful. He compared them to the media’s and establishment’s tactics against the Brexit campaign in the United Kingdom, which obviously failed as Brits voted overwhelmingly to “Leave” the European Union. He continued:

You interviewed Chris [Hayes] about Brexit and I just want to submit to you that the mistake the U.K. media and U.K. elites made with Brexit is the exact same one that the U.S. media and U.S. elites are making about Trump. U.K. elites were uniform, uniform, in their contempt for the Brexit case, other than the right-wing Murdochian tabloids. They all sat on Twitter all day long, from the left to the right, and all reinforced each other about how smart and how sophisticated they were in scorning and [being snide] about UKIP and Boris Johnson and all of the Brexit leaders, and they were convinced that they had made their case. Everyone they were talking to—which is themselves—agreed with them. It was constant reinforcement, and anyone who raised even a peep of dissent or questioned the claims they were making was instantly castigated as somebody who was endangering the future of the U.K. because they were endorsing—or at least impeding—the effort to stop Brexit. This is what’s happening now.

Greenwald said most people supporting Donald Trump for president won’t care about the media spin against him on this front.

“Do you think the people voting for Donald Trump because they feel their economic future has been destroyed, or because they are racist, or because they feel fear of immigrants and hate the U.S. elite structure and want Trump to go and blow it up, give the slightest sh*t about Ukraine, that Trump is some kind of agent of Putin?” Greenwald said. “They don’t! Just like the Brexit supporters. The U.K. media tried the same thing, telling the Brexit advocates that they were playing into Putin’s hands, that Putin wanted the U.K. out of the EU to weaken both. They didn’t care about that. That didn’t drive them. Nobody who listened to Trump could think that was genuinely a treasonous request for the Russians to go and cyberattack the U.S. government.”

VISITING WEBSITES ABOUT PRIVACY GETS YOU PUT IN AN NSA DATABASE OF “EXTREMISTS”

Merely expressing an interest in anonymity makes you a target

by PAUL JOSEPH WATSON | JULY 3, 2014

Searching for online articles about privacy is enough to get someone put in an NSA database of “extremists,” according to new revelations published today.

In an article for German news outlet Tagesschau (translation here), Lena Kampf, Jacob Appelbaum and John Goetz reveal how the NSA’s “deep packet inspection” rules, which it uses to determine who to target for deep surveillance, include looking for web users who search for articles about Tor and Tails, an anonymous browser and a privacy-friendly operating system.

Those whose Internet traffic patterns suggest merely an interest in Tor or Tails are immediately put on a list of “extremists,” as is anyone who actually uses the Tor network.

“Tor and Tails have been part of the mainstream discussion of online security, surveillance and privacy for years. It’s nothing short of bizarre to place people under suspicion for searching for these terms,” writes Boing Boing’s Cory Doctorow, adding that the NSA’s goal is, “to split the entire population of the Internet into “people who have the technical know-how to be private” and “people who don’t” and then capture all the communications from the first group.”

The revelation once again highlights the fact that the NSA’s data dragnet has little to do with catching terrorists and everything to do with targeting anyone who values their right to privacy. The mass collection of such information only serves to make it easier for actual bad guys to evade detection since the federal agency is building such vast and unwieldy databases.

Earlier this week, journalist Glenn Greenwald announced that he was set to release new information based on leaked documents obtained by whistleblower Edward Snowden which would reveal which individuals and institutions were the targets of NSA spying.

However, at the last minute Greenwald said the story would be postponed as a result of the U.S. government, “suddenly began making new last-minute claims which we intend to investigate before publishing.”

GOVERNMENT STOPS GLENN GREENWALD FROM PUBLISHING HIS BIG SNOWDEN REVELATION

GOVERNMENT STOPS GLENN GREENWALD FROM PUBLISHING HIS BIG SNOWDEN REVELATION

But Others Will Release ALL of the Snowden Documents to Prevent a War

by WASHINGTON’S BLOG | JULY 1, 2014

It’s been a dramatic day for whistleblowing news.

A month ago, Glenn Greenwald announced that he was going to publish his biggest story yet: the names of those the NSA has been spying on.

Earlier today, Greenwald tweeted that he would finally publish the story tonight at midnight.

8 hours later, he tweeted:

After 3 months working on our story, USG [the United States government] today suddenly began making new last-minute claims which we intend to investigate before publishing
Many responded that it’s a trap, and that the government is dishonestly and illegally censoring Greewald.

At the same time, Cryptome announced that all of the Snowden documents will be released in July … supposedly in order to avert a war.

As the Daily Register notes:

All the remaining Snowden documents will be released next month, according t‪o‬ whistle-blowing site ‪Cryptome, which said in a tweet that the release of the info by unnamed third parties would be necessary to head off an unnamed “war”.‬

‪Cryptome‬ said it would “aid and abet” the release of “57K to 1.7M” new documents that had been “withheld for national security-public debate [sic]“.

The site clarified that will not be publishing the documents itself.

***

“July is when war begins unless headed off by Snowden full release of crippling intel. After war begins not a chance of release,” Cryptome tweeted on its official feed. “Warmongerers are on a rampage. So, yes, citizens holding Snowden docs will do the right thing,” it said.

“For more on Snowden docs release in July watch for Ellsberg, special guest and others at HOPE, July 18-20: http://www.hope.net/schedule.html,” it added.