Thursday, May 9, 2019

Craig Murray — The Real Muellergate Scandal

Craig Murray alleges that Robert Mueller did not conduct an actual investigation. It was fixed from the start by Mueller's priors.

Craig Murray Blog
The Real Muellergate Scandal
Craig Murray, formerly British ambassador to Uzbekistan and Rector of the University of Dundee


Kaivey said...

Such despicable, horrible people. No integrity, no honour, no decency, no humanity, the whole top end is rotten to the core.

Most people have a strong sense of right and wrong and don't realise they were being duped by this lot, and some will even go to war and die for them.

It makes you sick to see how these people repeatedly get away with their crimes.

Bob Roddis said...

1. We must blame this on the completely brain dead American public. Trump appears to be in the process of starting WWIII with Iran and/or Venezuela and we're still hysterical about Russian "collusion"?

2. On Page 144 of his report, Mueller clearly states that the Russian government and the Trump gang didn't even know how to contact each other AFTER Trump won the election. What part of that and its implications are so hard to comprehend?

IMMEDIATE POST-ELECTION ACTIVITY. As soon as news broke that Trump had been elected President, Russian government officials and prominent Russian businessmen began trying to make inroads into the new Administration. THEY APPEARED NOT TO HAVE PREEXISTING CONTACTS AND STRUGGLED TO CONNECT WITH SENIOR OFFICIALS AROUND THE PRESIDENT-ELECT.

Calgacus said...

Tom Hickey:Craig Murray alleges that Robert Mueller did not conduct an actual investigation.

The word is "proves", not "alleges". And I use the word "prove" as a mathematician who has been told he has a real talent for picking out gaps in published "proofs", and that his personal standards of rigor are impractically high - for mathematics!.

Here is what I commented there; don't know if I've said it here already.

Craig Murray:The Real Muellergate Scandal:

Mueller, as a matter of determined policy, omitted key steps which any honest investigator would undertake. He did not commission any forensic examination of the DNC servers. He did not interview Bill Binney. He did not interview Julian Assange. His failure to do any of those obvious things renders his report worthless.

What is so important about this is that it is logically provable. It is based on nothing but pure logic and very simple, innocent facts that everybody across the board accepts – but do not all follow the implications of. What Mueller did was what Captain Renault (Claude Rains) did in Capablanca: Rick (Humphrey Bogart) shoots Major Strasser (Conrad Veidt) in front of his eyes. Then he gives an order to round up the usual suspects. If the Mueller “investigation” was an investigation, so was Captain Renault’s. Another more obscure (undeservedly) cinematic reference that is in some ways even closer to Russiagate is Elio Petri’s Investigation of Citizen Above Suspicion.

Note again, the rock-solid fact that Mueller is a deeply corrupt fraud doesn’t depend on the first-order facts of the matter. Maybe Rick was actually firing a blank. Maybe one of the usual suspects was the second shooter, firing from a grassy knoll in Capablanca, and he actually killed Major Strasser. Maybe the Podesta emails actually were hacked by Boris Badunov & Natasha Nogoodnik, and Murray, Assange, Binney etc are lying and deceived. Maybe examining the servers would show Boris & Natasha’s Russian DNA-filled borscht had been spilled on the servers. None of that changes the fact that Captain Renault and Special Counsel Mueller DID NOT INVESTIGATE.

These Russiagate arguments can go on forever; that’s what TPTB want. But this argument is decisive in practice. Whenever I make it on the interwebs, the opposition simply can’t think of anything to say. Because there is nothing. At worst they fume and electronically stamp their feet and walk away. Often enough, it actually helps people change their mind a bit.

Tom Hickey said...

@ Calcagus

I agree AND I also thought a bit about the most appropriate term to use in this instance.

I would not claim that CM "proves" what he asserts. He makes allegations that appear to be the case based on what we know from the Internet. But only forensic investigation can prove this. I would agree that on the surface of it, the available facts (considering that only a very few people have seen the Mueller report in toto) suggest that CM's analysis follows logically from the evidence — and importantly, the lack of evidence, since key evidence appears to have been ignored. But we do not yet know the extent of the investigation, and the report may never be released in full.

I chose "alleges" to provoke thinking about what really went down. So far, we don't know and that seems to be deliberate. Inquiring minds wonder why this is in a matter of such key importance not only nationally for the US but also internationally.

The whole point seems to be keeping secret key elements so that "proof" in terms of reasoning and evidence can never be reached. Reasoning without access to all the actual facts is dismissed as conspiracy theory. This is both a political strategy and a tactic in specific cases. It seems to be deliberate obfuscation. But here we come back to whether we are ruled by morons dominated by ignorance or thugs in fancy suits.

CM has similarly dissected the Skripal affair and he came to a similar conclusion.

Interestingly, this also seems to have the case in many previous investigation, where more questions remain than answers established — the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations, 9/11, the fixing of intel that lead to the Iraq War, CIA torture, etc.

It's all part of the propaganda effort, including gaslighting the public, and in the end, stonewalling.