EXPANSION OF A COMMENT TO AN ARTICLE BY KIM SENGUPTA IN THE
INDEPENDENT
This story of Christopher Steele and his dossier on Trump
and Russia is as phony as it gets.
Steele, an ex-MI-6 officer now working as a private
consultant, was commissioned for a large fee (said to have been £130,000) from
a Republican opponent of Trump to dig some dirt out on Trump. My guess would be
the extremely sleazy Ted Cruz who had more campaign funds than he knew what to
do with.
After Trump won the nomination, payments were continued by a
Democratic source. Gee, I wonder who? Perhaps a dishonest candidate who won the
Democratic nomination with dirty tricks, who also had more campaign funds than
could be used sensibly, and who proceeded to spend $1.2 billion on a failed campaign?
After Trump’s election, Mr. Steele is said to have continued
his work for free because he “was so concerned.” Have you ever heard of such
wealth-connected operators working for nothing? Out of concern? It’s the
equivalent of a top corporate lawyer claiming he worked away on a brief out of pure
concern. It just does not happen. It is preposterous.
The public can be so gullible about such matters simply because
most of people are honest, and security service people, including former ones earning
big livings on commissions from sleazy politicians, are anything but. Many of
them are even borderline psychopaths who enjoy throwing monkey wrenches into
things, especially when they are paid handsomely for doing so.
Steele’s information supposedly came from “solid gold”
contacts in Russia, but please remember that the politics of any large country
includes wealthy or influential enemies of its current government. Would it be
hard to find such people in America if you were inquiring about the Clintons or
Obama? It would not. Such a statement about sources tells us precisely nothing,
and we have no supporting evidence at all for this silly dossier just as we had
no evidence for claims of Russia’s hacking the DNC.
Steele is said to have given information to MI6 and to have
cut his communication with the FBI, to whom he had earlier supplied it, out of
frustration with their inaction sometime before the election. Finally, he is
said to have turned to the press, to the American magazine, Mother Jones.
For those who don’t know, Mother Jones is a kind of
slushily-progressive publication in part supported by a foundation. It is almost
certainly one of many publications secretly subsidized by CIA. Virtually any
liberal or progressive publication in the United States since the Cold War has
been secretly subsidized by them.
Such support arrangements are not even always even known to
a magazine’s management. CIA used to secretly finance many progressive
publications in the US, such as the old Saturday Review of Literature. It
gathered information from them and used them for planting stories.
Other publications, such as those of the former Time-Life,
were associated secretly to CIA through family ownership connections, in that
case, Henry Luce. It was no accident when Time-Life immediately bought the
Zapruder film of Kennedy’s assassination in 1963, and it was kept out of the
public domain for years with suggestions, when it finally did surface, of
expert editing.
So, we come around full circle back to the CIA associated
with some of the original phony stuff about Trump, undoubtedly manufactured
under Obama’s direction. This is what they do. They did it for the First Gulf
War. They did it for the invasion of Iraq. They did it for the horrors in
Syria. More than half a century later, they still are lying about the
assassination of a president, as well as a host of other matters.
Please remember that much of what security services, such as
MI6 or CIA, do is foment trouble for others, manufacture documents, and create deliberate
confusion and dark operations. They are not harmless information collection
agencies.
Steele is not some honest information broker handing over
his findings a bit late. That is a completely disingenuous, and an unquestionably
contrived, description of what has happened with this dossier.
The description plays to the publicity-created image much of
the public have of security services like MI6 or CIA being honest public
servants. They are not. They have never been. They were not created to be.
The reality is something far closer to a dirty trickster
doing what dirty tricksters do, and for big pay.
