Even Glenn Greenwald And His Fans Should Fear the Trump-Putin Alliance

[nhboy]

" On December 19th Glenn Greenwald went on Fox News to do what he and his Intercept-libertarian acolytes have done since Trump’s victory: minimize and deny the evidence that Russia was responsible for the hacking of Democratic officials that helped deliver the election to Trump. But why the protestations?

Contrary to the assertions of many Intercept fans, the evidence that Russia was responsible is as damning as it can be in cases of international cyber-espionage. It’s true that it’s possible, as Matt Taibbi suggests, that blaming Russia is a bogus political play. But the Obama Administration has been nothing if not overly cautious in this arena, and flailing desperately and deceitfully isn’t this president’s style.

Numerous intelligence services have confirmed Russian involvement, detailing as much evidence as they can without compromising their methods. The New York Times has its own comprehensive report. Russian intelligence services tried to cultivate Donald Trump for years. Donald Trump explicitly asked Russia to hack 30,000 of Clinton’s emails during a July press conference that turned out to be the last of his campaign–showing that at least at the time he believed Russia was behind the Watergate-style theft of private email data from Democrats. And we know that Putin has been openly backing Trump while mocking the Obama administration and the Clinton campaign.

In light of all this, continually and actively denying Russian involvement as Greenwald and crew have done goes beyond Taibbi’s healthy skepticism of government officials and smacks of ideological fervor. Even the Trump campaign has stopped questioning the unanimous judgment of American intelligence services, and moved on to a “who cares?” approach that is already falling apart under pressure and scrutiny. Pretty much only the Russians themselves, the conspiracy theorists at WorldNetDaily and the Intercept libertarians are actively objecting to the evidence against Putin.

Russian self-interest is obvious and conspiracy theorists will do what they always do. But the Intercept agenda is simple: Greenwald and friends have a very strong distrust of Western and particularly American governments, and reflexively attempt to refute any assertions that they believe might help advance an imperialistic or militaristic agenda. Intercept-style libertarians were fiercely opposed to Clinton because they feared that she would advance an interventionist approach to foreign policy, and many were openly attracted to Trump’s faux-isolationism during the campaign.

Intercept libertarians are also obsessed with privacy concerns and government surveillance, issues that Edward Snowden has come to symbolize with Russia acting in a savior’s role to protect him. In this context, opposition to Russia is often seen as a relic of Cold War era belligerence, combined with a desire to advance America’s interests against Russia militarily in Syria and elsewhere. Any attempt to pin blame on Russia for the DNC hacking is viewed with suspicion as saber rattling on behalf of a Western imperialist anti-privacy agenda, which is automatically seen as the worst of all evils. "

http://washingtonmonthly.com/2016/12/31/even-glenn-greenwald-and-his-fans-should-fear-the-trump-putin-alliance/

 

[Merlin99]

" On December 19th Glenn Greenwald went on Fox News to do what he and his Intercept-libertarian acolytes have done since Trump’s victory: minimize and deny the evidence that Russia was responsible for the hacking of Democratic officials that helped deliver the election to Trump. But why the protestations?

Contrary to the assertions of many Intercept fans, the evidence that Russia was responsible is as damning as it can be in cases of international cyber-espionage. It’s true that it’s possible, as Matt Taibbi suggests, that blaming Russia is a bogus political play. But the Obama Administration has been nothing if not overly cautious in this arena, and flailing desperately and deceitfully isn’t this president’s style.

Numerous intelligence services have confirmed Russian involvement, detailing as much evidence as they can without compromising their methods. The New York Times has its own comprehensive report. Russian intelligence services tried to cultivate Donald Trump for years. Donald Trump explicitly asked Russia to hack 30,000 of Clinton’s emails during a July press conference that turned out to be the last of his campaign–showing that at least at the time he believed Russia was behind the Watergate-style theft of private email data from Democrats. And we know that Putin has been openly backing Trump while mocking the Obama administration and the Clinton campaign.

In light of all this, continually and actively denying Russian involvement as Greenwald and crew have done goes beyond Taibbi’s healthy skepticism of government officials and smacks of ideological fervor. Even the Trump campaign has stopped questioning the unanimous judgment of American intelligence services, and moved on to a “who cares?” approach that is already falling apart under pressure and scrutiny. Pretty much only the Russians themselves, the conspiracy theorists at WorldNetDaily and the Intercept libertarians are actively objecting to the evidence against Putin.

Russian self-interest is obvious and conspiracy theorists will do what they always do. But the Intercept agenda is simple: Greenwald and friends have a very strong distrust of Western and particularly American governments, and reflexively attempt to refute any assertions that they believe might help advance an imperialistic or militaristic agenda. Intercept-style libertarians were fiercely opposed to Clinton because they feared that she would advance an interventionist approach to foreign policy, and many were openly attracted to Trump’s faux-isolationism during the campaign.

Intercept libertarians are also obsessed with privacy concerns and government surveillance, issues that Edward Snowden has come to symbolize with Russia acting in a savior’s role to protect him. In this context, opposition to Russia is often seen as a relic of Cold War era belligerence, combined with a desire to advance America’s interests against Russia militarily in Syria and elsewhere. Any attempt to pin blame on Russia for the DNC hacking is viewed with suspicion as saber rattling on behalf of a Western imperialist anti-privacy agenda, which is automatically seen as the worst of all evils. "

http://washingtonmonthly.com/2016/12/31/even-glenn-greenwald-and-his-fans-should-fear-the-trump-putin-alliance/

As soon as I see this part I know the article is full of ####

Donald Trump explicitly asked Russia to hack 30,000 of Clinton’s emails during a July press conference that turned out to be the last of his campaign

I saw that press conference and I, and anyone with more than two brain cells, know it was a facetious remark.

 

[littlelady]

As soon as I see this part I know the article is full of ####

I saw that press conference and I, and anyone with more than two brain cells, know it was a facetious remark.

Good grief, libprogs. Enough, already! Trump won. Get over it. You can't reverse it. Stop insulting Americans that voted for Trump, and got him elected. Oh, and yeah, Jill Stein did US a favor. Her requested vote recount exposed massive voter fraud done in the US; so it was shut down. The Russians/Putin did not get Trump elected. Just stop. You (libprogs) look ignorant.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

" On December 19th Glenn Greenwald went on Fox News to do what he and his Intercept-libertarian acolytes have done since Trump’s victory: minimize and deny the evidence that Russia was responsible for the hacking of Democratic officials that helped deliver the election to Trump. But why the protestations?

Contrary to the assertions of many Intercept fans, the evidence that Russia was responsible is as damning as it can be in cases of international cyber-espionage. It’s true that it’s possible, as Matt Taibbi suggests, that blaming Russia is a bogus political play. But the Obama Administration has been nothing if not overly cautious in this arena, and flailing desperately and deceitfully isn’t this president’s style.

Numerous intelligence services have confirmed Russian involvement, detailing as much evidence as they can without compromising their methods. The New York Times has its own comprehensive report. Russian intelligence services tried to cultivate Donald Trump for years. Donald Trump explicitly asked Russia to hack 30,000 of Clinton’s emails during a July press conference that turned out to be the last of his campaign–showing that at least at the time he believed Russia was behind the Watergate-style theft of private email data from Democrats. And we know that Putin has been openly backing Trump while mocking the Obama administration and the Clinton campaign.

In light of all this, continually and actively denying Russian involvement as Greenwald and crew have done goes beyond Taibbi’s healthy skepticism of government officials and smacks of ideological fervor. Even the Trump campaign has stopped questioning the unanimous judgment of American intelligence services, and moved on to a “who cares?” approach that is already falling apart under pressure and scrutiny. Pretty much only the Russians themselves, the conspiracy theorists at WorldNetDaily and the Intercept libertarians are actively objecting to the evidence against Putin.

Russian self-interest is obvious and conspiracy theorists will do what they always do. But the Intercept agenda is simple: Greenwald and friends have a very strong distrust of Western and particularly American governments, and reflexively attempt to refute any assertions that they believe might help advance an imperialistic or militaristic agenda. Intercept-style libertarians were fiercely opposed to Clinton because they feared that she would advance an interventionist approach to foreign policy, and many were openly attracted to Trump’s faux-isolationism during the campaign.

Intercept libertarians are also obsessed with privacy concerns and government surveillance, issues that Edward Snowden has come to symbolize with Russia acting in a savior’s role to protect him. In this context, opposition to Russia is often seen as a relic of Cold War era belligerence, combined with a desire to advance America’s interests against Russia militarily in Syria and elsewhere. Any attempt to pin blame on Russia for the DNC hacking is viewed with suspicion as saber rattling on behalf of a Western imperialist anti-privacy agenda, which is automatically seen as the worst of all evils. "

http://washingtonmonthly.com/2016/12/31/even-glenn-greenwald-and-his-fans-should-fear-the-trump-putin-alliance/

It's one thing to say that libertarians in general are displeased with government, and more of it. That's generally true. As should most people who've lived in the 21st Century. Obama said his administration was going to be the "most transparent", but has shown nothing but contempt for the media driving James Risen to call Obama the "greatest enemy of press freedom in a generation".
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...ess-obama-first-amendment-James-Risen/385699/

Distrusting our government and their intelligence sources doesn't equate to hating the west. Our intelligence sources and President Obama did this to themselves. Between the secret kill list Obama kept, intelligence officials lying under oath and the intelligence sector's years of being deceitful to the American public while collecting our information in bulk has done this. Remember folks, these are the same intelligence agencies that were sure North Korea was behind the Sony hacks, then weren't.

Even their reasoning behind this (the linked report above), which the article claims is "detailed" is simply a list of ways to protective measures folks can take and doesn't even mention Podesta or the DNC and simply refers to them as a "US political party". All this report did is confirm the New York Time's story that someone clicked on a phishing e-mail in technical language. Instead of offering some sort of independent verification of their assertion that Russia was behind this, they are basically saying "trust us, we k now that we're talking about, it was definitely Russia".

The report doesn't back up or prove their assertion that Russia was trying to "influence the election" or "erode faith in U.S. democratic institutions". No one, including the DNC or Podesta has claimed the e-mails were fake. The e-mails did show that the DNC were the ones eroding faith by bending the process of selecting their candidate and favoring one candidate of the other (Clinton vs. Sanders). No e-mails mention anything about voter or vote tapering. Nothing about voting machines, nothing about the actual process.

The author seems to be missing another point that drives libertarian (and apparently, enough voting Americans) distaste for their government and that's the fact that Obama and his administration knew about this for some time. They moved slowly during the election and had very basic detail-less responses during it. It wasn't until AFTER Clinton lost is this a big deal and they are suddenly open to giving so-called "details" to the public.

If anyone is "sowing doubt about the integrity of our electoral process" it's the federal govt. and the Democratic party who continually use vague and somewhat false language when describing the situation. This isn't an "election hacking", which would lead some (50% of Clinton voters according to a recent poll) to believe that Russia hacked the election results rather than admitting they don't know who it was, for sure, and whomever it was hacked e-mails and to date, no evidence of actual election tampering.

Now, all that being said, and contrary to the author's completely idiotic claim that libertarians were duped into believing Trump was an isolationist, one most raise eyebrows at Trump's responses through all this. Trump praised Putin's "delaying", calling Putin "very smart". When discussing Russia's "hacking", Trump thinks we just need to "move on to bigger and better things". Nothing to see here. Something tells me that would not be his response if it were, say, China, at the heart of all this.