by Brad Lacerda
In a recent article I discussed media manipulation and suppression otherwise referred to as “fake news” and how it is applied to control the public. Right now as I write this there are several stories being force fed by the media that have a dual purpose. These stories aim to control the public and hide fraud and criminality at the same time.
Examples of stories meant to confuse and lead followers to black hole dead ends filled with speculation are non-stop Michael Cohen news, updates from Stormy Daniels lawyer, and reports of bickering in the White House.
Here are a few examples of what is omitted from the bulk of news outlets.
NYC AG Eric Schneiderman — a never-Trump champion of women’s rights — was forced to resign after powerful allegations he beats and degrades women he dates surfaced. In at least one case his brutality sent a woman to the hospital, bleeding from the ear he struck her so hard. He says it was “role playing.” Though this has been on CNN, compared to Roy Moore, this is a blackout.
There was likely an FBI spy planted in the Trump campaign, possibly before the Popadopoulous meeting which the FBI claimed kicked off their investigation. Devin Nunes is working to get that name released while Washington, D.C. and conservative outlets are on fire working on figuring out who it may be. The “spy” or spies are also suggested to have attached themselves to members of the Trump team and team members that they would unwittingly reveal information to the “spies” on the FBI payroll. True blackout.
The news on which I am basing this article is regarding the Special Counsel’s indictment of the three Russian “troll farm” companies and 16 Russian nationals for interfering with the 2016 U.S. elections. Charged with buying Facebook ads to foment discord and division, we are persuaded by the MSM to think that these ads somehow swung the opinion of the voting public to Trump.
Permission was granted to the special counsel deputy AG Rod Rosenstein to pursue these Russian outfits and bring indictments, somehow justifying this as in the purview of the special counsel and relevant to Donald Trump’s campaign “colluding” with the Russians. CNN contributed to the narrative by digging through dumpsters for clues in Russia. Many conservatives on the other hand point out the mortally-flawed logic of Rosenstein and the special counsel, by arguing that after a year of investigation, millions of taxpayer dollars, and zero convictions that this was a way to present some scalps to the American public and prove they are relevant and necessary.
The entire setup is a conflict of interest.
Democrats and the media treated these Russian troll indictments as another “bombshell” vindicating the special counsel of all misgivings and justifying the office. Conservatives called it a stunt to justify the special counsel’s existence, and pointed out that these Russian outfits are no longer on American soil and would never face the indictments.
With this maneuver no one gets hurt, there will never be a trial, the Russia narrative bolstered with no way to prove otherwise. Blank signed check from the taxpayers still on the special counsel’s desk.
During a press conference held by Rod Rosenstein he pointed out the defendants’ actions had no bearing on the 2016 elections, and they were innocent until proven guilty using sufficient evidence in a court of law.
Case closed. The Russians charged would never return to face these allegations. Victory for the special counsel! Correct? A DNC and MSM talking point etched in stone, Russians were “guilty.” Everything from the special counsel’s narrative was looking strong. Big win for the Democrats! Correct?
Yes, correct, until May 9, 2016. The day of the court hearing.
Counsel for the Russian outfit Concord Management showed up.
The judge asked the defense for Concord Management if they were aware of the charges. They were. The judge asked if the defense for Concord Management was also defending Concord Catering, another of the three companies charged. The defense said no, and answered that “Concord Catering” didn’t exist as a legal entity during the time period alleged by the Government.
The defense then waived a formal reading of the indictment and entered a bold plea of “not guilty” and wished to exercise their right to a speedy trial. The defense then stated “the government has indicted the proverbial ham sandwich” and then asked to see all of Mueller’s evidence of this “collusion” as part of their discovery rights.
The prosecutor Jeannie Rhee, representing the Government, immediately asked for a delay in the trial. Denied. Judge ruled the case will proceed on schedule in early July.
Some thoughts I’ve had about the Democrat double-standard regarding the rules relevant to this issue regarding “meddling.” In April 2016 Obama gave a lecture to the British about the consequences of leaving Brexit, suggesting it would hurt U.S and British trade. Was Obama meddling with a foreign ballot, trying to sway the vote for political gain? The Russians are alleged to be very sneaky and subtle with their meddling. Obama was about as bold as it gets with meddling on behalf of the U.S., or at the very least on his own behalf.
Let me pose another example. The Clinton Foundation received many millions of dollars from foreign countries, several in the Middle East with ideology which clashes brutally with America’s ideology, and in many cases their laws and beliefs in their home countries are against the law on American soil. For example, we do not condemn homosexuals to death — it is accepted as that person’s nature.
Donations for political purposes, not philanthropic purposes. The Clinton campaign used these funds to not only run ads on Facebook, but to fund her entire campaign, and to some extent the DNC. This included millions of dollars worth of ads on cable TV and elsewhere.
Not just Facebook.
Money was coming from foreign interests by the millions with the intent of influencing the outcome of the U.S. presidential election. My point is, the donations were themselves basically foreign interests meddling by donating to their choice of candidate, and the Clintons laundering that money through the Clinton Foundation. Very different outfit from a Russian troll farm. Very brazen.
Rod Rosenstein’s legalese describes the Russian troll farm as “Russian conspirators who want to promote discord in the United States and undermine public confidence in democracy.” Adrian Chen, staff writer for The New Yorker and journalist who first profiled the troll farms in 2015, described colorfully what a troll farm is when he said, “It’s 90 people with a shaky grasp of English and a rudimentary understanding of U.S. politics shitposting on Facebook.” Despite very different descriptions, both make it clear the “troll farm” had no bearing on the 2016 presidential election. Which definition do you prefer?
Back to the beginning, all of these stories discussed here are very important to the direction of the country and are being largely ignored and deflected by the MSM as damage control.
Information to help you decide is out there if one wishes to look. Some do. Some are not aware. Some suppress.
Take control over what you believe with more information; it is critical in these days of misinformation.
Brad Lacerda is a freelance writer and Respvblica contributor.