Tag Archives: Trump

FTAC: A Note on President Trump and the ‘Far White Right’

04 Wednesday Nov 2020

Posted by in 21st Century Feudal, 21st Century Modern, American Domestic Affairs, Conflict - Culture - Language - Psychology, FTAC - From The Awesome Conversation, North America, United States of America

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

https://www.businessinsider.com/trumps-history-of-support-from-white-supremacist-far-right-groups-2020-9

Boogaloo Bois, Oath Keepers, Patriot Prayer, Proud Boys, and The Base, among others, appear to love him.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/18/white-nationalist-hate-groups-southern-poverty-law-center

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/oct/06/joe-biden/fbi-director-warned-about-white-supremacist-violen/

I’ll agree that leftward spin attempts to conflate the President’s attitude with laxity toward these groups, but that these groups find hope with Trump and number among his supporters — and they have grown with his presidency — tells us about the character of his mission despite the harness that comes with high office.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/10/fbi-wont-have-doc-on-domestic-terror-until-after-election.html

Trump’s enthusiasm for Alex Jones, his several felons (start with his initial selection of “campaign manager” Paul Manafort), and his positive relationship with conspiracy theories tell us about us and what we are willing to endorse.

Of course no American President would endorse the Far White Right cadre of committed supremacists, but the persistent relationship — they like him! — plus soft stance from Trump’s podium remain. While The Donald may wrestle with the phantom of father Fred (e.g., https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/28/in-1927-donald-trumps-father-was-arrested-after-a-klan-riot-in-queens/ | https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/politics/donald-trump-housing-race.html), his here-and-now image has been and will probably remain besmirched by the tolerance so far shown those bigoted apparently for fear of displacement or narcissistic want of exception, both predicated on white Christian identity.

Post-Election — and the FBI will soon publish a report on domestic terrorism that includes an assessment of white-supremacist threats — race and religious issues will continue to fester in America despite so much progress made through civil rights and other activism across decades. They will do so — we will have this region of domestic conflict — because of the resonance between “camps” set up by those who foster and harbor fear and hate in relation to their chosen targets among fellow Americans.

E Pluribus Unum?

–33–

FTAC: Kavanaugh and President Trump’s Power — The Equivalent of Two Senate Votes

07 Sunday Oct 2018

Posted by in 21st Century Feudal, American Domestic Affairs, Conflict - Culture - Language - Psychology, FTAC - From The Awesome Conversation, Political Psychology, Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

KavConf-181006-1602

I would say about half the country — and the country’s political power — mistrust the President, 50:48.

Democracy is being treated as a religion — a belief we promote perhaps more than the way of life we live — and we are being “feudalized”, driven backward toward a way of life in which more may transpire out of party, personal, and political loyalties than out of the kind of admiration of virtue and reason with which our nation was born.

On the healthy side, President Trump’s presidential victory and subsequent political “wins” have been similarly controversial and marginal. He may be winning as an authoritarian president, but as much seems persistently by the equivalent of two Senate votes.

BackChannels may let the above live as rhetoric rather than get into the around-the-world and the through-the-nation report card.  He has so far been the President that lies to his base — “Fake News!” should be enough for a start — and keeps over his head a cloud of dark associates (e.g., Michael Cohen, Paul Manafort) and near-but-not-quite relationships (as with Felix Sater), with much having to do with the laundering of dirty money through real estate investments.

As the related mistrusting of power deepens — “50:48” — one may expect the street to become more restive and state power brought to bear on the political sidewalk.  We seem to be far from that today, but the divisive politics would seem to move the nation toward further rancor and shouting. Yesterday’s arrested deserved the privilege, no doubt, but that as much took place speaks ill of the health of the nation.

Also Related on BackChannels

https://conflict-backchannels.com/2017/02/02/united-states-of-america-basic-training/

https://conflict-backchannels.com/2018/09/12/ftac-forked-loyalty-to-a-united-states-president-v-obligation-to-the-constitution-of-the-nation/

–33–

FTAC: Putin, Terrorism, Autocracy, and the New Nationalism

14 Wednesday Feb 2018

Posted by in 21st Century Feudal, American Domestic Affairs, Conflict - Culture - Language - Psychology, Europe, FTAC - From The Awesome Conversation, Hungary, Middle East, Political Psychology, Political Spychology, Politics, Russia, Turkey, United States of America

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

When Russian jets first overflew Turkish airspace in 2015, Erdogan stood fast in his refusal of apology.

https://www.cnn.com/2015/11/26/middleeast/syria-turkey-russia-warplane-shot-down/index.html

Six months later, he did what Netanyahu had done in relation to the Mavi Marmara: he apologized.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/27/kremlin-says-erdogan-apologises-russian-jet-turkish

Setting aside the Israeli story a moment, points of leverage may have involved the “Turkish Stream” energy project, a piece of “realpolitik”, and an appeal to the narcissistic concept of cultural leadership and state in which the “Great Leader” is the embodiment of the living state concept _and entitled_ to aggrandizement and glory without limit (or, clinically, “unlimited narcissistic supply). Putin’s vision appears to me to be that of the medieval world sustained with raw power put in place of democracy.

The look of the mode — big palaces, nepotism on a royal scale, confusion in relation to the boundaries of person and state (and the state’s treasury) — marks the medieval mind and related revanche.

Men like Putin, Assad, Khamenei, Erdogan, Orban may consider true popular democratic government as impeding their own authority, sovereignty, and will. While the term “autocrat” sounds quite bureaucratic, similar concepts — caliph, emperor, king, sultan — fit these guys.

Because we know of the “Moscow Apartment Bombings” and that Russia has been arming the Taliban in Afghanistan — and there’s more back there with Zawahiri and others — it may not be too far fetched to suggest that Moscow has manipulated terrorism to induce in struck targets a predictable patriotic new nationalism and that “the terrorists” — ISIS or PKK — now provide a platform for conflict, all against all, and without end. Where Putin has held sway, he has turned back history’s clock.

Our President Trump has had no issues bearing and wearing the mantle of authority, but it would be facile to say he hasn’t had some issues with the “Estates” of a matured democracy.  In that regard, he may fit the world to which Putin has wished to return the world.

Inspiration for the above note:

–33–

FTAC: Kurds, Trump, Democracy

10 Saturday Jun 2017

Posted by in 21st Century Feudal, American Domestic Affairs, Conflict - Culture - Language - Psychology, FTAC - From The Awesome Conversation, Political Psychology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

The gang was indulging in Trump bashing and only loosely discussing the surfacing of the “Kurdish Question” — should Kurdistan become a state representing the autonomous self-determination of 35 million souls now subjugated in suzerainty across five states: Armenia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey?

Not to poop on the party, but you know that’s what I’m going to do. 😦

Prepare.

🙂

On the surface and pro-Kurdistan:

–The Kurds have been producing a rapidly developing and modernizing society;

–The Kurds appear inherently communal and tolerant in their views of themselves and others;

–Of course, the Kurdish Peshmerga and separate men’s and women’s defense units form the advanced line against ISIS in Iraq and Syria;

–For a glimpse of Utopian values in place, it would be hard to beat the experience of Rojava (enjoy the look-up).

On the surface and negative:

–Since we’re all just one big family, what’s your may be theirs, at least in the minds of remote brigands;

–The suzerainties (Armenia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey) support about 35 million people governed by many chiefs. Having been defeated by the arms of militarized states, they’re seeking a sub-state state of confederation, which may work for peace and prosperity but remain far from the American and other western experiences;

–Finally, the push-back against stronger states involved a guerrilla movement / terrorist organization aligned with the Soviet Union (1978) known as the PKK, and although the organization has been displaced by updated banners, it may be that the same personalities continue the good fight for autonomy and statehood. (Look-up Kyle Orton’s piece in The New York Times).

I explore a little bit at a time from the desktop; try to get in some background reading; and certainly try to “meet” (virtually) personalities much closer to the politics at hand.

The United States has betrayed the Kurdish desire for independence numerous times; however, noting that, the Kurdish leadership has also leaned back toward Moscow — effectively a dictatorship today — in its development politics, rather like India and Pakistan in earlier days playing east against west and back and forth, the ambivalence of the west would seem understandable.

http://www.nrttv.com/EN/birura-details.aspx?Jimare=6333 – “A Russian Revolution: Can the Rosneft Deal Reverse Kurdistan’s Fortunes?” by Megan Connelli. 

Between the Feudal and Modern Worlds

I’ve gotten the impression that the Kurds in earlier days had used the mountains as their defensive barrier against the barbarism of others, but the greater world and changes in the technology of martial force have put them in the position of leveraging decent ideals and values, would that they would keep to them.

Those who patiently make their way through my words (more than once) know that I regard Putin’s Russia as representing feudal absolute power bent on compromising the economies, ideals, and values of the EU and NATO states, and toward that end, Russia has gotten its way with Erdogan in Turkey, a NATO signatory but no longer NATO in at least official spirit. Putin’s preference in leadership has involved other autocrats, and not so much for exacting cooperation, which he gets, but most for reinstalling the feudal and medieval worldviews in the modern democracies.

Now: tell me how Putin has done so far and where Donald J. Trump fits in that scheme.

That, I believe, is what the fussing is all about in Washington.

Do Americans want a real democracy and greater cohesion around it or rather another of the world’s sham democracies masking elite governance and kleptocracy (that’s how things usually work out with autocrats)?

You decide.

–33–

FTAC: Comey, Lynch – Authority

09 Friday Jun 2017

Posted by in 21st Century Feudal, American Domestic Affairs, Conflict - Culture - Language - Psychology, FTAC - From The Awesome Conversation

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Are all conversations between American presidents and government employees classified?

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news-other-administration/336985-trump-lawyer-attacks-comey-over-leaks

It appears that the President attempted to leverage Comey’s personal loyalty to take care of an uncomfortable “matter” being investigated by the FBI. Comey then shared the experience with a friend who forwarded the same to the press, and so Comey lost the executive’s confidence. Where was the classification for the memos; where is the nondisclosure covering the conversation?

As AG Loretta Lynch has been relieved of her position, her blocking actions regarding Clinton will probably be ignored, imho. The elections over; she’s over: attention has shifted to where public attention is most needed: America’s political character, Russia’s political character, and the relationship between the two at the highest levels of governance.

The note on Comey’s so-called “leak” may reflect the fact that classification and discretion were within Comey’s authority to call, and given the President’s behavior and the FBI’s mission to defend the Constitution, the antagonism developed between the two would seem to have developed naturally in the defense of the democracy.

Lynch: old news.

Related on BackChannels for any newly arriving from Mars: Moscow’s Rules.

–33–

Orwell in America – President Trump’s Sudden Firing of FBI Director Comey

10 Wednesday May 2017

Posted by in 21st Century Feudal, American Domestic Affairs, Conflict - Culture - Language - Psychology, Epistemology, Political Psychology, Political Spychology, Politics, Psychology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

“It is essential that we find new leadership for the FBI that restores public trust and confidence in its vital law enforcement mission,” Mr. Trump wrote in a letter to Mr. Comey.

“The FBI is unlikely to regain public and congressional trust until it has a director who understands the gravity of the mistakes and pledges never to repeat them,” he wrote.  “Having refused to admit his errors, the director cannot be expected to implement the necessary corrective actions.”

Ballhaus, Rebecca.  “Trump Fires FBI Director Comey.”  The Wall Street Journal, A1, A4, May 10, 2017.

Comey’s errors?

Publicly commenting after close of investigation on Clinton’s e-mails, an act with which then candidate Trump and later President Trump appeared to have had no issue.

That’s one error.

That’s it.

One possible other, not cited as an error, might be Comey’s heading up the investigation into possible collusion between Trump’s 2016 campaign effort and Moscow.

The format of Trump’s ire and its delivery appears to BackChannels that of j’accuse, the Jacobin’s pointing the finger at all suspected of political heresy.

Regarding the President’s claim of having had no business with Russia — it might be true; however, the query may be also complicated by Russia’s feudal gaming over time plus the business class in which he resides.

 

At this point, the reader may wish to keep in mind Moscow’s duplicitous and manipulative feudal character and its kleptocratic ends:

https://conflict-backchannels.com/2017/03/11/reflexive-control-process-allahu-akbar-terrorism-new-nationalism-neo-feudalism/

Motivation?

Feudal wealth; feudal power; absolute and above and beyond questioning — if not rule by divine right, then by way of most worldly thuggery.

Reminder: Flynn

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/04/donald-trump-2016-russia-today-rt-kremlin-media-vladimir-putin-213833 – 5-6/2016:

I saw the relation with Russia as necessary to the U.S., for the interests of the U.S. We worked very closely with them on the Sochi Olympics. We were working closely with them on the Iranian nuclear deal. We beat Hitler because of our relationship with the Russians, so anybody that looks on it as anything but a relationship that’s required for mutual supporting interests, including ISIS, … that’s really where I’m at with Russia. We have a problem with radical Islamism and I actually think that we could work together with them against this enemy. They have a worse problem than we do.

Flynn’s statement sounds true enough on the surface, but place it beside this analysis of ISIL and it’s role in the east v west, feudal v modern contest:

https://conflict-backchannels.com/2017/04/09/ftac-reprise-how-isil-serves-moscow-damascus-and-tehran/

BackChannels thesis: Moscow, Damascus, and Tehran ditched a mild revolutionary opposition in favor of the al-Qaeda type organizations, so as to produce for themselves and the west a political spectacle, “Assad v The Terrorists”, certain to aggrandize themselves while blackmailing and goading the west in the direction of complicity with — or weakness in the face of — each their own totalitarian dictatorships and kleptocracies.

General Michael T. Flynn, proving less than one-hundred percent honest with Vice President Pence in relation to his Moscow-related experience got himself fired in much the same brusque manner as now former FBI Director Comey.

Here’s a smattering of related URLs, but the main thing here is to remind of Flynn’s connection to Trump’s denial of his initial team having had nothing to do with Russia.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/08/15/trump-adviser-michael-t-flynn-on-his-dinner-with-putin-and-why-russia-today-is-just-like-cnn/

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-michael-flynn-russia-money-20170316-story.html – 3/16/2017

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/russians-paid-mike-flynn-45k-moscow-speech-documents-show-n734506 – 3/16/2017

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/31/michael-flynn-new-evidence-spy-chiefs-had-concerns-about-russian-ties – 3/31/2016

Reminder: Manafort

The header alone should operate like Proust’s fabled taste of Madeleine, for Manafort falls into place with Yanukovych, Putin’s puppet deposed by cause of his own corruption in Ukraine, and then Sergei Millian — http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/donald-trump-russia-sergei-millian (1/19/2017), Konstantin Kilimnik — http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/trump-russia-manafort-235850 – 3/8/2017 – and on to the dreaded “Steele Dossier”, which has done Trump’s reputation some damage while being simultaneously dismissed for appearing itself beyond corroboration — http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/08/comey-intel-community-could-not-corroborate-trump-dossier/ – 5/8/2017.

Still, “kompromat” aside, there’s Manafort — and then question of how the leading consultant to the world’s bloodiest dictators got on to Trump’s campaign team in the first place.

One may leave that question in the shadows because that’s where it’s bound to live given the silence prized by political mafia and political consultants alike.  However, one may take note of this passage in the Politico article:

Manafort stressed that his work in Ukraine was intended to steer Yanukovych towards more pro-Western policies and more engagement with the European Union. And Kilimnik told POLITICO that “one thing that was grossly under-reported to date is the effort that Paul Manafort undertook to help Ukrainian leaders defend Ukraine’s interests and move the country towards [a European Union] Free Trade Agreement.”

Yet Yanukovych in 2013 backed away from a commitment to that agreement, and fled Ukraine for Russia under the protection of Russian President Vladimir Putin amid widespread protests over government corruption.

We’re a suspicious lot, we Americans, a condition amplified always by missing datum.

At the same time, we have been also subject to traditional KGB “Active Measures”, i.e., efforts to massively disinform and misguide EU / NATO constituencies, and it may take both an army of responsible editor-readers and plain curious and independent Americans to get a true measure on states of affairs.

Here’s the problem:

Manafort could be the “good guy”, a guy making great money transitioning the world’s worst leaders toward western and conscionable standards.  

How would BackChannels or the public know?

It seems in the President Trump “Trust Me” stories — on the economy, foreign affairs, immigration — that suspect alleys dead-end in political space.

It also seems to BackChannels that former FBI director Comey’s tenure has been particularly scrupulous as regards the investigator’s legal permit to share information with the public.  As much appeared in play before the public last month during the “House hearing on Russia’s involvement in the 2016 election.” The same may be shared in closed sessions with select elected public representatives: is the public to trust whom it has elected to oversight?

The public has no choice beyond what it has with its vote, and it either elects its officials for their integrity or it fails and suffers endless doubts.

The leftward Mother Jones has gone full tilt on news of Comey’s firing.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/05/donald-trump-james-comey-firing-watergate-russia-1 :

Not since Watergate.

How else can one start an article about President Donald Trump summarily firing FBI chief James Comey?

. . . This is reminiscent of when President Richard Nixon dismissed Archibald Cox, the special Watergate prosecutor who was getting too close to the truth. Nixon canned Cox rather than cooperating with his investigation.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/05/donald-trump-firing-james-comey-investigation-fbi-russia (by David Corn, May 10, 2017):

Last month, Comey appeared before the House intelligence committee, and his testimony put Trump in a bad spot. Comey noted that the FBI had no information to support Trump’s baseless charge that President Barack Obama had wiretapped Trump before the election. He was practically calling Trump a nut or a liar. Then Comey, in an unprecedented move, revealed that the FBI had been investigating interactions between Trump associates and Russia since last July. It was a stunning moment: the FBI chief disclosing his bureau was running an investigation that could lead to his boss, the president. All of this showed the Trump-Russia scandal was still on fire.

If Trump fired Comey to impede the Russia investigation, he possibly engaged in obstruction of justice. That is a crime. That is a case for impeachment.

Naturally, Trump was enraged. He has dismissed the Russia story as fake news and a hoax. Comey said it was nothing but.

What don’t we know?

In an Orwellian society, the matter would end with authoritarian contempt, Orwell’s communist-socialist totalitarian “boot in the face”, a world in which the government’s monopoly on information and continuous diversion and suppression of criticism and truth were so notorious that interpreted through the work of the socialist George Orwell — Eric Arthur Blair — the same has left its stamp indelible on the informed western conscience.

 

http://www.george-orwell.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Orwell_Matters

President Trump’s imperious and sudden decapitation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation smacks of the feudal approach to criticism and threat to authority.  Instead of allowing James Comey and his organization to come up empty handed, which result may have required only the President’s inaction, President Trump will now forever have appeared to have lashed out at someone he perceived as an actor and source intending to undermine this authority.

MOSCOW (AP) — He visited imperial palaces and construction sites. He presided at a Miss Universe pageant. He hobnobbed with city officials at gala functions and seemed to particularly enjoy dining on Russian sausage.

But Donald Trump did not strike any real estate deals here.

The New York real estate tycoon has his name on hotels, resorts and other properties from South Korea to Turkey to Panama, but none in Russia, though he repeatedly said he wanted to build a Trump tower in Moscow and discussed various deals in three visits dating back to 1987.

Vasilyeva, Nataliya.  “Russian real estate deals never materialized for Trump.”  AP, March 4, 2017.

One more excerpt, this from Reuters:

A Reuters review found that at least 63 individuals with Russian passports or addresses have bought at least $98.4 million worth of property in seven Trump-branded luxury towers in southern Florida.

Layne, Nathan, Ned Parker, Svetlana Reiter, Stephen Grey, Ryan McNeill.  “Russian elite invested nearly $100 million in Trump buildings.”  Reuters, March 17, 2017:

The Reuters review of investors from Russia in Trump’s Florida condominium buildings found no suggestion of wrongdoing by President Trump or his real estate organization. And none of the buyers appear to be from Putin’s inner circle.

Addendum – Odd ‘n’ Ends

http://www.salon.com/2017/05/10/russia-is-trolling-the-u-s-over-james-comeys-firing-accusations-of-trumps-russian-connections/ 5/10/2017.

FTAC – Syria and the Checking of Feudal Political Absolutism

07 Friday Apr 2017

Posted by in 21st Century Feudal, American Domestic Affairs, Conflict - Culture - Language - Psychology, Extreme Brown vs Red-Green, FTAC - From The Awesome Conversation, Political Psychology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Leave the Left (and Far Right) alone!

Post-Soviet “Active Measures” and related infiltration into EU / NATO intellectual assets may account for the promotion of polarized “Brown v Red-Green” politics.

The post-Cold War narrative arc spans American Administrations, but the general public (I’ve become accidentally a little bit specialized) tends to see the moment, i.e., a span of months to years, when it should be seeing decades of process in removing the holdovers from the Soviet Era.  For good reasons, Saddam Hussein and Muammar Qaddafi are gone, but it’s at Assad’s Syria, the gateway to Iran in the old politics coming apart, that Putin visibly returned to the old KGB walk and the reinforcement of old relationships. As no one in the west has wanted another “cold war” or a strong “Moscow” on the tracks that it’s on, the purchase of time combined with sanctions and deflated oil pricing has substantially weakened the Moscow-Damascus-Tehran (more truly, “Moscow-Tehran” axis).

Now: enter Trump.

Just so it’s known: Moscow’s cash reserves have been deeply drawn down not only by years of reduced oil revenues and political sanctions but by the regime’s own abuse of the nascent Russian business system and the flight of capital from it. Most of what isn’t at hand has been parked in the western (rule-of-law) banking system or similarly stable high-value assets (most obviously real estate), and that may add to the discouragement of Moscow’s propensity for armed aggression. However, Putin is a bit of a wildcard as regards his own behavior, and he knows that when faced with a nuclear gambit, the United States will stand firm but elide the issue, returning that aspect of war to equilibrium.

For the Cold War days, moving “Jupiter rockets” sufficed to fully resolve the Cuban Missile Crisis. http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/moment.htm

In this day, NATO may have forward dual use conventional-nuclear warheads, giving paranoid Moscow perhaps some legitimate fits as regards its own state of risk. Here is the kind of article one runs into when encountering the nuclear arms control field:

http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/02/07/progress_on_strategic_arms_control_110760.html

To stay (in the old sense of that word) the course toward nuclear exchange, diplomacy and indirect confrontation have held off the contemplation of direct conflict engagement between Russian and NATO and western forces, but as history tells time and again with despots, that kind of leadership busts through its own boundaries, internal, psychological, external, political until firmly checked.

I think what you’re going to see in Syria will be the “checking” of Moscow’s revanchist (Soviet-style) ambitions and encouragement for it to engage the west in a once again responsible fashion.

It may help to keep in mind, whatever conclusions may be drawn here, that Russia has its own robust internal politics now forming up some challenge to the regime even though the regime holds the strong hand in its expression of absolute power.

The Obama Administration for both political and practical purposes put off confrontation in the field with the “phantoms of the Soviet” most likely to buy time, encourage change, and both financially and politically weaken the regimes that require politics in the feudal mode to sustain their own kleptocracies (“Different Talks — Same Walk!” is the BackChannels trope for how those relationships hold together).

Arguments about the legitimacy of political power are arguments about the future:

“What is to be done?”

“How are we to live?”

“Moscow”, the metonym for the Russian State as devised and held together by President Putin, knows how to make itself look good in superficial ways, but its less remarked positions have not been so wonderful.

Web search “Russia, Economy” brought up these three news pieces a few minutes ago:

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/07/news/economy/russia-us-syria-economy-sanctions/

http://rbth.com/business/2017/04/05/poll-the-economy-is-now-more-important-to-russians-than-crimea_735282

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/feb/21/anthony-tata/how-have-sanctions-impacted-russias-economy/

Related on BackChannels

https://conflict-backchannels.com/2016/08/12/also-in-media-an-economy-that-did-not-want-to-grow-the-russia-file-kennan-institute-blog/

https://conflict-backchannels.com/2016/10/16/russias-nuclear-scarum/

https://conflict-backchannels.com/2016/09/09/russias-pr-cocktail-new-nationalism-meets-falling-reserves-with-religion/

https://conflict-backchannels.com/2016/08/21/russia-flexes-and-goes-hungry/

Related Opinion

http://www.russia-direct.org/opinion/why-does-russia-continue-protect-assad-syria 4/20/2016

–33–

Private Domain: USA: A Note on “Proprietary Government”

21 Tuesday Mar 2017

Posted by in 21st Century Feudal, American Domestic Affairs, Conflict - Culture - Language - Psychology, Journalism

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Read as I do.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was poised to ride this momentum into Northeast Asia last week, but instead sustained a series of self-inflicted wounds. Before even departing Washington, he broke tradition by not inviting the State Department press corps on his plane, needlessly damaging relations with the media and forgoing the opportunity to better explain the contours of his mission. (“I’m not a big media press access person,” he said later, as if the only purpose of talking to reporters would be to serve his own agenda. “I personally don’t need it.”)

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/tillerson-bumbles-around-asia-214936 – 3/20/2017

It appears President Trump’s Administration wishes to be seen as imperious as well.

Within the past month, it has managed to slight the most impartial BBC and others by excluding the targeted similar in bona fides from an informal “press gaggle” before moving on to the direct insult that is the cry of “Fake News!”, that insults the reading and broadly discerning public.

As all against Bashar al-Assad are in Assad’s estimation “The Terrorists”, it appears that all news not fitting President Trump’s image or ends becomes “Fake News!”.  From being held to standards over the scale of the inauguration turnout (which news turned up wildly varying estimates — to Trump it looked like 1.5 million; by the estimates of authorities, fewer than a million were expected — without any official observation and measurement available to settle the score) to “kompromat” and the Christopher Steele dossier; Manafort-Yanukovych–Millian–Kilimnick; and the FBI’s investigation of the 2016 election hack and potential related relationships, all would seem to fit the “Fake News!” concept or serve (“the whole Russian thing”) as a ruse (but for what and for whom)?

“People knew that he represented various countries, but I don’t think he represented Russia, but represented various countries,” Mr. Trump said at a news conference in February. “That’s what he does. People know that. That’s Mr. Manafort, by the way, a respected man, a respected man, but I think he represented the Ukraine or Ukraine government or somebody, but everybody knew that.”

BackChannels thought the comment obfuscating and vague, the verbal equivalent of a bully’s shrug (“I don’t know nothin’ about it; I didn’t do nothin'”).

Here’s the source of the quotation:

And here is a little bit more about the very respected Paul Manafort:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/04/paul_manafort_isn_t_a_gop_retread_he_s_made_a_career_of_reinventing_tyrants.html – 4/28/2016.

If you click on the link — or either of the links in this section — you may soon know more about Paul Manafort than the dissembling President of the United States a) either knows or b) cares to share with the public.

Here’s a potential positive spin: could Manafort have been urging his clients away from “political absolutism” and toward the graces of the modern democratic and rule-of-law world?

Anything’s possible — but how would the public know with the curtain drawn closed with mumbles?

Let’s move on to something thornier.

In its apprehension of geography and history, where is America’s voting public?

How ignorant a people are we?

How well informed?

Should the public know so many of the details of deals — like “Uranium One”, which took years to form during a period in which Moscow and Washington appeared to be at peace and not running headlong into a Cold War sequal — and policies that well  may not be so much a part of its daily cultural (and intellectual) experience?

Or is the public sufficiently active and informed in all of the dimensions of public interest and well deserving of engagement with its Administration by way of responsible 24/7 press coverage?

If the ignorance proves vast, well then perhaps Americans deserve the development of a “privatized government” in the hands of “people who know best” and who need not be forthcoming as regards their goals, ideas, strategies, or tactics.

In fact, is there anything wrong with the idea of a paternal government packed with powerful actors — CEOs and generals — that within its own ranks chooses to operate with autonomy behind a curtain of increasing silence?

The question is trick: ask Orwell — there’s a lot wrong with the notion of government left to unchecked elites, and it’s that thought prompted the title of this post (and as generally true around here, a title a little larger than the content intended to support it).  Sigh.

Back to Tillerson’s comment at the top of the post — here’s another tack and one especially appropriate to relations between Moscow and Washington, both nerve centers attached to the prospect of nuclear war: perhaps for Tillerson and others, private no-access space is of necessity for national security as well as consideration and quiet.  After all, the press appears welcome to hound officials at their destinations.  Getting cozy, getting the scoop, getting the inside skinny in flight — do the “journos” or public need that unknown moment so badly?

Give it break, guys and gals, and let the real “Fake News!” people, the writers of fiction, have their turn.

Journalism affords practitioners flexibility in methods of attribution.  The most general options involving acquisition or interview for information are these:

  • On the record (for dissemination) / off the record (for background only)
  • For attribution (use the name) / not with attribution (use “official” or “spokesman”)

For a sophisticated businessman to complain that that a news item lacked a named source would seem not only disingenuous but contemptuous of the audience as well.

Posted to YouTube February 24, 2017.

A similar clip appeared in Real Clear Politics —  http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/02/24/president_trump_fake_news_media_making_up_anonymous_wh_sources.html – on February 24 and readers will find there a transcript of much of the above address.

Another suggested BackChannels question: who is — who was — “they”?

And when will we know that “they” have cleaned up their respective acts?

BackChannels readers may keep in mind that the editor interprets America’s political polarization with the model “Brown v Red-Green” and with that division between Republican “New Nationalists” and Democratic “Old Comrades and Neo-Islamists”, the use of so much polemic would seem of equal opportunity.

Most likely, elements in the press would have dogged Clinton too, and she would have bit back.

It so happens, the “New Nationalist” won, and what he’s doing in the above video is not slamming lowly bloggers cutting and pasting cyberspace junk from  remote shores but calling out CNN and similar others and thereby degrading confidence in the reporting and opining of the strongest part of the Fourth Estate.

–33–