Article Image

The NYT Reinterprets Russiagate

Written by Subject: Russia

The NYT Reinterprets Russiagate

by Stephen Lendman ( - Home - Stephen Lendman)

The Times tried making a mountain out of a bit player George Papadopoulos, claiming he learned "Moscow had thousands of emails that would embarrass Mrs. Clinton, apparently stolen in an effort to try to damage her campaign."

He knew nothing other than what a Democrat National Committee insider leaked to WikiLeaks.

No Russian US election hacking or theft of Hillary's emails occurred, the heart of the Russiagate scam, along with trying to connect Trump's team to improper or illegal dealings with Moscow, wanting him denigrated and delegitimized for the wrong reasons, along with endless Russia bashing.

Perhaps Russiagate in different form would have emerged if Hillary triumphed last November. 

9/11 gave tyranny a chance to take hold in America. Police state laws weakened and destroyed fundamental freedoms.

The nation became a Big Brother society, the ability to spy on its people increased with improved technology.

Russiagate aids and abets the imperial state's war on its own citizens, getting them to go along with losing freedoms, based on phony threats of barbarians at the gates, along with accepting US aggressive adventurism.

Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov slammed Washington for creating anti-Russia hysteria to serve its interests, including the undermining of bilateral relations.

A previous article explained that the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence intends expanding its Russiagate probe to include anyone of Russian descent or nationality it believes relevant to its work.

How much further will the investigation expand? How many law-abiding Americans will be targeted, denigrated and perhaps criminalized for alleged improper or illegal connections to Russia?

I asked if will independent journalists, political dissidents, anti-war, human and civil rights activists, as well as others critical of US domestic and imperial polices be targeted?

Will respect and support for Vladimir Putin's geopolitical agenda be considered treasonous? Will supporting Iran's war on terrorism in Syria be treated the same way?

The Times is part of the diabolical agenda unfolding in plain sight, an increasingly tyrannical America masquerading as democratic, a notion it deplores.

Times' sources nearly always are unnamed current or former US officials, sinister characters, spreading disinformation, media scoundrels like the Times acting as willing co-conspirators, publishing rubbish instead of cold, hard, verifiable facts.

The Times: "The hacking and the revelation that a member of the Trump campaign may have had inside information about it were driving factors that led the FBI to open an investigation in July 2016 into Russia's attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of President Trump's associates conspired."

No hacking occurred, not by Russia, so-called trolls or anyone else. A likely scenario involved fired FBI director James Comey conspiring against Trump to elect Hillary, maybe promised a higher position in her administration if she won. 

He failed to investigate her wrongdoing, blocked an indictment on far more serious offenses than storing and transmitting State Department emails on her private server.

She's a perjurer, racketeer and war criminal, a more aggressive warrior than Trump.

In July 2016, Comey saying "no reasonable prosecutor" would indict Hillary was a bald-faced lie. Despite her high crimes, she remains unaccountable.

Even Trump won't lay a glove on her after railing against "crooked Hillary" while campaigning - to chants of "lock her up."

Before and throughout the campaign, she's been a media darling, notably for the Times, endorsing in a September 24, 2016 editorial, deplorably saying:

"Our endorsement is rooted in respect for her intellect, experience, toughness and courage over a career of almost continuous public service…one of the most tenacious politicians of her generation."

Separately, the Times called her "one of the most broadly and deeply qualified presidential candidates in modern history."

I justifiably called her the most ruthlessly dangerous presidential aspirant in US history - nuclear war on Russia, Iran, and perhaps other countries perhaps likely with her as president.

The Times is a lying machine, a national disgrace, a proliferator of disinformation, a supporter of all US wars of aggression.

On issues mattering most, its reports lack credibility.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: (Home - Stephen Lendman). Contact at

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: