.@Guardian has published an article co-authored by Harding on "what are assessed to be leaked Kremlin documents" which "suggest" that Russian officials had a conversation which delivers "apparent confirmation that the Kremlin possesses kompromat" on Trump
Note the highly qualified language, an ever-present phenomenon in the thinly sourced Russiagate stories we were inundated with throughout the entirety of Trump's presidency: "suggest", "assessed to be", "apparent", "appearing to", "seem to".
Also note how Harding and company do not know what's in the appendix referenced which supposedly elaborates on their most incendiary claim.
Also note how "Western intelligence agencies" are the authoritative sources behind these claims.
Beyond this, the actual document provided by The Guardian has come under scrutiny for containing numerous linguistic errors unlikely to have been made by native Russian speakers.
Then there's the little itty bitty problem that the president who the authors claim was beholden to the Kremlin via kompromat was indisputably far more hawkish toward Moscow than the president who preceded him... caityjohnstone.medium.com/25-times-trump…
...and also, so far at least, was more hawkish toward Moscow than the president who has replaced him.
If the Kremlin did compromise Trump with blackmail, then it was a very poor investment indeed as it clearly had no impact on US foreign policy.
But the most damning evidence of all against this claim is the fact that serial fabulist Luke Harding had anything to do with it.
This is after all the same reporter who authored The Guardian's notorious 2018 claim that Trump crony Paul Manafort had meetings with Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy. consortiumnews.com/2018/12/01/the…
This was an evidence-free claim that was clearly false from the moment it was published and discredited even further by the fact that the Mueller investigation found no evidence for it. theintercept.com/2018/11/27/it-…
This is the same author who was involved in publishing a WikiLeaks password which led to unredacted documents becoming public. caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/02/26/deb…
The same author who was humiliatingly incapable of substantiating his allegations of Trump-Russia collusion when he finally encountered an interviewer who challenged him to defend the titular claim in his book, Collusion.
Luke Harding should not be able to find employment anywhere more influential than the far side of a cashier's counter, yet here he is still getting his ridiculous stories published by one of the most influential news media outlets in the English-speaking world.
Given legitimacy by The Guardian's publication, the western political/media class is picking up this transparently bogus story and hyping it through the roof.
These articles will generate plenty of clicks, and they will make sure mainstream liberals maintain their virulent hatred of Russia. What they will not do is help anyone form a truth-based worldview.
If you needed any more proof that western media do not exist to tell you the truth about the world, there you go. The news in our society exists not to create an informed populace but to preserve partisan worldviews which protect the interests of the imperialist oligarchic class.
Luke Harding's Continued Employment Discredits All Western Media (Audio)
The US Government Threatens Tech Companies To Push Censorship Agendas
"So while antitrust laws ostensibly exist to protect the citizenry from corporate power, here they are being leveraged to ensure the union of corporate power and state power." caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/the-us-gover…
The elephant in the room with the US government demanding increasing amounts of censorship from online platforms is that the platforms understand the government can easily bring painful regulation or devastating antitrust cases against them and break them up if they don't obey.
After Press Secretary Jen Psaki admitted on Thursday that the administration has given Facebook a list of accounts to ban for spreading "misinformation" about the Covid vaccine, she has now doubled down:
The elephant in the room with the US government demanding increasing amounts of censorship from online platforms is that the platforms understand the government can easily bring antitrust cases against them and break them up if they don't obey.
Antitrust laws were made to protect the people from corporate power. Now they're being used to merge corporate power and state power.
"The Roosevelt administration sued successfully to break up such monopolies as John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil Co. and J.P. Morgan’s Northern Securities Co., a railroad conglomerate that the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, dissolved." politico.com/story/2018/12/…
Biden Administration Completely Kills The "It's A Private Company So It's Not Censorship" Argument
"In a corporatist system of government, where there is no separation between corporate power and state power, corporate censorship is state censorship." caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/biden-admini…
In what's surely the biggest "Imagine the outrage if Trump had done that" moment to date, the Biden administration has admitted that it is giving Facebook a list of accounts to censor for spreading "disinformation" about the Covid-19 response.
It's fine to think all governments are bad, as long as you're also aware that one of those governments is far, far more powerful and destructive than any of the others and that the behavior of other governments is largely a defensive response to the aggressions of the worst one.
If your anti-state commentary doesn't reflect this reality, then it can only ever benefit the agendas of the most powerful and murderous state on the planet. Just firing indiscriminate scattergun criticisms at all states equally only advances US imperialist propaganda agendas.
It seriously seems like half the time a black flag anarchy account shows up in my mentions it's to promote US imperialist propaganda narratives against Syria, China, Russia etc, and it's like yeah nice anarchy dude, being a pro bono propagandist for the worst government on earth.
"Freedom is not free," goes the old bumper sticker slogan, commonly accompanied by an image of a flag or soldiers or some other bullshit.
Freedom is not free, the saying goes, because military personnel are out there laying their lives on the line fighting for your right to do as you're told and toil away at a meaningless job making some rich asshole even richer.