Stephen Collinson writes for CNN that the Trump administration’s relationship with Russia is obsessing Washington, and he explains why.
https://apple.news/AypfALO5IS7C2etl03nCqPQ
The administration has given contradictory stories. At one point, Trump said that no one talked to Russian officials, but that wasn’t true.
The administration can’t keep its stories straight. Trump said Jeff Sessions would not recuse himself, and a few hours later, Sessions recused himself.
No one understands Trump’s fawning comments about Putin or the alignment of his foreign policy views with those of Russia.
Many investigations are underway.
Democrats hope the administration gets tied up in knots to slow down its retrogressive agenda.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
For the present, however, DT serves the GOP as a useful distraction from their regressive agenda.
LikeLike
Exactly. Republicans (host for the parasitic Koch organization) are slashing budgets for not just EPA, State Department, NOAA, OSHA, water testing–it’s mind numbing how many environmental health protections are under attack right now. Clean air and water should not be a liberal or conservative issue. Remember to look at the larger picture. US Citizens have got to see how deep the cancer is in our political system and repair it. Follow the money. This entire fiasco is about greedy billionaire plutocrats whose allegiance is only to themselves. Trump and his billionaire buddies are trying to put together the deal of the millennium–and it’s ALL about oil and natural gas.
LikeLike
“Clean air and water should not be a liberal or conservative issue.”
It’s not for those two groups. Nixon signed the EPA act into law.
“Gubmint” protecting the many from the destructive few, those destructive few with lots of money, the reactionary regressive right. Conservatives believe in preserving that which is good about society. The Regressive Right wants to MAGA back into an imaginary time and place for which there never was a MAGA future. Robber baron regressives are still around from that time that never was.
LikeLike
Could someone tell me what “fawning comments” Trump has made about Putin? I googled a bit and about all I found was him saying Putin was a better leader than Obama and that Putin called him a genius (which he didn’t), so he’s going to say “nice things” about him. Mostly just typical contradictory, ill-informed Trump blather that he might say about anyone in power.
LikeLike
Dienne,
I don’t have time to find all the fawning comments Trump made about Putin. From memory, he said when he went to Russia for the Miss Universe contest that he hoped he would meet Putin and become his best friend. He has repeatedly said he was very smart, a better leader than Obama, “if he likes me, I like him.” He has criticized NATO, France, Germany, Belgium, Mexico, but never once uttered a word of criticism of Russia. During the campaign, the Trump team changed only one item in the GOP agenda at the National Convention: a longstanding pledge to aid Ukraine against Russian aggression. That was the only thing Team Trump cared about. Paul Manafort, who received $12 million to work for the anti-Western, pro-Putin leader of Ukraine, worked that one. He was Trump’s campaign manager at the time.
LikeLike
Here’s the best supporting article I can find: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/trump-putin-timeline (complete with a disgusting picture of Putin and Trump kissing – something that would not be tolerated were the subject anyone but Trump).
If that’s the best the Putin-Trump fearmongers can come up with, color me unimpressed. Putin supposedly said that Trump was a “genius”, so Trump said nice things about him (what Putin actually said translates better as “colorful”, which Trump undeniably is). As far as Putin being a better leader, Trump admires strong leaders, which Putin undeniably is and Obama was not. We can certainly argue whether a strong leader is necessarily a good leader, but for Trump, strong=good, so Putin is better than Obama.
On the other hand, Trump has made disparaging remarks about Putin saying he’s never met him and he won’t be pushed around by him. It’s typical Trump – say one thing one day, another thing another day. It’s no different than what he’s said about anyone else. And not that much different than any politician might say about any leader. Remember, for instance, Hillary’s praise for Mubarak?
LikeLike
Dienne, you are possibly one of 12 people in the nation who are incurious about Trump’s admiration for Putin.
LikeLike
Oh I’m very curious, Diane. I’m curious exactly what it is that he’s said that makes people think he admires Putin that much.
If we’re picking random quotes to prove someone’s admiration for another, does this quote bother you: “We look forward to President Mubarak coming as soon as his schedule would permit. I had a wonderful time with him this morning. I really consider President and Mrs. Mubarak to be friends of my family. So I hope to see him often here in Egypt and in the United States.”?
–Hilary Clinton
LikeLike
Dienne,
If you don’t think Trump has expressed his admiration for Putin repeatedly, then I guess we watch and listen to different news casts. I am not speaking of interpretations but of direct statements from Trump. I have heard the Orange One criticize most of our allies. Can you please find a quote where he is equally critical of Putin?
LikeLike
Okay, wait, let me see if I’ve got this straight. So, not criticizing Putin = expressing admiration for him? So now the burden is on me to prove that he has criticized Putin? When you’re the one claiming he admires Putin? Moving the goalposts, aintcha?
LikeLike
DIENNE,
Here are a few articles. Everyone seems to know about the Trump-Putin bromance but you. I could add dozens more, but don’t have time.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-does-trump-go-googly-eyed-for-putin/2017/01/05/42200bee-d36a-11e6-a783-cd3fa950f2fd_story.html?utm_term=.3bf24fc6c282
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2017/01/28/how-much-does-trump-love-putin-and-how-worried-should/ogb4ZD4DyCyKlQyX3knqkJ/story.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/20/1613042/-How-much-does-Trump-love-Putin-Russia-isn-t-on-his-defense-priorities-list
http://deadline.com/2017/02/john-oliver-donald-trump-loves-vladimir-putin-video-1201917222/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/02/05/republicans-whine-about-trump-s-putin-love-do-nothing-else.html
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/09/why_donald_trump_loves_vladimir_putin.html
LikeLike
The first article says that Trump must love Putin because he refuses to accept the evidence of Russia’s hacking of the election. Except that there is no evidence because Russia didn’t hack the election. At most, and that’s if you believe the CIA et al, Russia released emails from the DNC server. No vote tallies were hacked – not even the CIA et all are alleging that.
The second article says that the Israelis were told not to talk to the Trump administration because Trump might tell Putin. Well, that’s convincing.
The third article starts off by asking “So, just how badly does Donald Trump want to lick caviar off of Vladimir Putin’s gleaming, naked chest?” I threw up in my mouth and stopped reading. Really? That’s an article I’m supposed to take seriously? Bias much? (Which said
article also has that picture of Trump and Putin kissing). That’s a blatant example of what’s generally called “assuming the sale”.
The fourth article says that Trump wants to get along better with Russia, ergo, he loves Putin. Do I even need to explain the logical fallacy of that?
The last couple appear to be re-hashes of the article I posted myself above. Nothing all that salacious in there.
Here’s a quote from one of your articles: ” “I do respect [Putin], but I respect a lot of people,” Trump told the Fox host. “That doesn’t mean I’m going to get along with him.”
When O’Reilly described Putin as a “killer,” Trump replied, “There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What do you think, our country’s so innocent?” ” That doesn’t sound like love, that sounds like, as I said above, typical Trumpian blather. (Incidentally, he’s right that our country’s not so innocent.)
LikeLike
Dienne,
I could give you another 50 links demonstrating Trump’s admiration for Putin but I don’t have time to prove what everyone but you knows. Next, you will claim that Obama wire tapped Trump. Must have been Hillary who did it! It is always Hillary! She done it!
LikeLike
Something draws me back to Nixon. And the Answer is
Trump is” a crook “, no sense in denying it . It didn’t work for Nixon either.
LikeLike
Seems to me that Trump is accusing Obama of wiretapping since he doesn’t know how else his “secret” Russian dealings have come to light.
LikeLike
I assume that the Russian officials are wiretapped. Any Trump official who communicated with the Russian ambassador was identified.
If the Trump entourage would stop calling Russian government officials, they would never be subject to wiretapping.
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.
LikeLike
That is a clear and persuasive explanation. The Russian officials were wiretapped and callers were identified. No direct tap of Trump was needed.
Next questions are: Who ordered the wiretaps of Russian officials, when, and where was that information supposed to be filed?
LikeLike
Laura,
I have no doubt that the US routinely wiretaps foreign officials who may be spies, and they do the same to us.
The lesson here is that if you are running for president, don’t place any calls to Russian spies.
LikeLike
I am not so sure that “Russia as a permanent enemy” does either country any good. Was there not detente? Has there not been reduction in nuclear weapons treaties with the Russians? Is not communication better than little to no communication as in the 50-60s?
When does the fear of the Russian Bear stop? When Betsy’s grizzly bear fear stops???
LikeLike
I had to force myself to read Giroux in this piece from Moyers . Its not that I don’t like him, just that if i jumped out my window , I would only break a leg (LOL)
It actually was uplifting
“To be successful, such struggles have to be coordinated, focused and relentless. The age of fractured politics among progressives has to come to an end. Single-issue movements will have to join with others in supporting both a comprehensive politics and a mass collective movement. We would do well to heed the words of the great abolitionist Frederick Douglass, who argues:
http://billmoyers.com/story/to-our-readers/
LikeLike
Well stated. I hope what happened in November wakes up progressives allowing them to get over petty differences in order to present a united front. Progressives need to show up, even in midterm elections, vigorously challenge the retrogressive agenda and sue for fair election districts, if they ever hope to challenge the well oiled Republican machine.
LikeLike
I hardly think the split in the Democratic Party is over “petty differences”. We’re talking about the differences between “free market”, globalist neoliberalism vs. New Deal liberalism. Support of the moneyed class vs. support of the people. Call me petty if you want, but I will not support any Democrat who supports neoliberalism. If that means Republicans keep winning, so be it (although I will never support them either). At least Republicans attack from the front rather than stealth stabs in the back. And at least liberals get off their behinds and fight back with the Republicans do it.
LikeLike
Well stated, Dienne!!
LikeLike
dienne77
Take a chill and read Giroux. He is not talking about the political class. He is talking about the movements . So for example a petty difference between labor and environmental groups.
A united progressive movement will have the same affect on the Democratic party as the tea party did on the Republican party.
As for neo liberals I had this argument all weekend . There is no such thing as a Neo liberal /Liberal . The economic philosophy of Austrian assholes adopted by the likes of Friedman , Greenspan , Reagan and Thatcher. First forced down the throat of the Chilean people by Pinochet and the CIA and the concept of Liberalism are diametrically opposed.
There are other ways to describe those Democrats including Bill, Barrack, ….. who sell out for a pot of gold. .
LikeLike
The “liberalism” in neoliberalism in not that of FDR or LBJ, but of Victorian England and classical economics (property rights, free trade, freedom of contract, etc.).
It may be an unwieldy and confusing term, but it should be understood as the default meaning of liberalism; that which Baby Boomers grew up with, generated by the mass struggles of the 30’s, was an historical outlier, currently being swept away by a combination of all-too-predictable Republican purposefulness and Democratic cravenness and betrayals.
LikeLike
Take ❤️, Me Buckos, 45 ≠ LP
LikeLike
As always, Glenn Greenwald is worth a read: https://theintercept.com/2017/03/06/democrats-now-demonize-the-same-russia-policies-that-obama-long-championed/
LikeLike
Glenn Greenwald and I have a mutual friend. I do not rely on him for political wisdom. He is reflexively opposed to anything that is American.
I am a patriotic American, I love my country, I love its ideals, and the present occupant of the WH makes me fear for the future.
LikeLike
Oh come now, Diane, that was beneath you. Greenwald is not “reflexively opposed to anything that is American”. You used to be so much better than this. Why do you feel the need to personally attack people who disagree with you? Greenwald is one of the biggest patriots there is, because he is attempting to hold America accountable for its promise to be the beacon of civil rights and freedom it claims to be. What Greenwald is reflexively opposed to are things like bombing civilians and eroding civil liberties because of the growing national security state/endless war of empire.
Yes, he looks candidly at the atrocities that America has committed. But, we have in fact committed those atrocities. Looking at them honestly is not anti-American. In fact, it’s anti-American to hide your head in the sand and pretend we have not and are not committing such atrocities. If a kid gets in trouble with the law, which is the better parent – the one who sits the kid down and confronts him about his behavior, or the one who says, “oh, no, not my little Johnny”?
LikeLike
Because I know Greenwald.
LikeLike
“I am a patriotic American, I love my country, I love its ideals. . . ”
And so am I and concur with the those two affections. Being “patriotic”, however, isn’t limited to a certain type of feeling and beliefs. I agree with Dienne about criticizing our country when it should be criticized for the damage, the death and destruction that are more than fully well documented that goes against the ideals of this country and the laws of international society.
Patriotism without criticism is nationalism which has had a tendency to have been a very deadly way of thinking/being in the past.
LikeLike
Duane E Swacker
You have heard me make the argument on American policy. . If you have not read “Confessions of an Economic Hit-man” you should .
But I think we have to get past this . We are dealing with an unstable ‘narcissist’ who wants to turn the clock back to the 1920’s, for the vast majority of American people .
Who like Henry Ford has a love affair with fascism including its racial demagoguery .
I don’t care if Obama and the Clinton’s were the biggest ———– . Whose policy in Latin America, Russia and Eastern Europe and the Mid East was deplorable . As well as at home. I also feel they are almost criminally negligent and account for the rise of Trump. At a minimum should held accountable in the court of public opinion.
But as that moron Shrub said or perhaps Condoleezza Rice
WE HAVE BIGGER FISH TO FRY
LikeLike
Note: These articles come from progressive web sites which are strongly critical of Trump, but also of the CIA, the corporate/war-loving media, neocons who want war with Russia, and the Deep State behind them all.
The Politics Behind ‘Russia-gate’ https://consortiumnews.com/2017/03/04/the-politics-behind-russia-gate/
Trump Retreats on Detente with Russia https://consortiumnews.com/2017/03/01/trump-retreats-on-detente-with-russia/
How the Press Serves the Deep State https://consortiumnews.com/2017/03/01/how-the-press-serves-the-deep-state/
The Deep State vs President Trump https://zcomm.org/znetarticle/the-deep-state-vs-president-trump/
The Basic Formula For Every Shocking Russia/Trump Revelation
View at Medium.com
America’s Secret Planned Conquest of Russia
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/12/americas-secret-planned-conquest-russia.html
Detente and cooperation with nuclear-armed Russia is in the best interests of the U.S. and the world. But neocons, who lied us into the disastrous war on Iraq and the other wars we are still waging on people who do NOT threaten the U.S. (Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen), want complete domination of the entire planet by the militarized U.S., which is the strong-arm thug for the corporations running the United States, especially the war profiteers with subcontractors in every Congressional district.
Here is what one of the most highly-decorated soldiers in U.S. history, Marine Corps Major-General Smedley D. Butler said in the 1930’s, after he retired from more than three decades of military service:
“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”
His conclusion about U.S. wars and foreign policy still, unfortunately, holds true today, as he stated in his book War Is A Racket:
“War is a racket. It always has been… A few profit – and the many pay. But there is a way to stop it. You can’t end it by disarmament conferences. You can’t eliminate it by peace parleys at Geneva. Well-meaning but impractical groups can’t wipe it out by resolutions. It can be smashed effectively only by taking the profit out of war.”
Today, the U.S. war budget takes up 54% of the current discretionary budget, and Trump wants to raise it to 65%, while cutting budgets of agencies such as the EPA.
As more and more Americans grow tired of the 16-year “War on Terror” (which is actually a War OF Terror on seven Muslim nations), the frantic neoconservatives must find another bogeyman to frighten us all into continuing to waste out tax money on yet more bloated military budgets, despite the fact that the U.S. military/war budget is larger than that of the next 15 nations combined, including Russia.
But, as Smedley Butler learned, war is the racket that keeps corporations and their bribed servants in Congress and the White House wealthy, regardless of how many people have to die, and how much of the planet is destroyed. It is time we said NO! to wars and war spending and exposed the lies always told to scare us into supporting more profits for the war profiteers and their bribed politicians, and more death all over the planet. Resist and oppose the drumbeat for war with Russia and China. Cooperation and trade are the better, sane ways.
Putin and Russia want to cooperate with the U.S. and get on better terms with us. But Russia, which withstood invasions from the West in 1812 (Napoleon), 1918 (the U.S. & Allies), and 1941 (Nazi Germany), has vowed to never again allow its land to be invaded. With thousands of nuclear weapons, Russia will not be intimidated by threats from the sociopathic, power-mad neoconservatives and the Deep State monsters behind the neocons who are lying to us about Russian involvement in the 2016 election so as to prepare us for war with Russia.
We must resist their insanity and demand detente with Russia and cooperation, not war, with Russia and China.
LikeLike
Ed,
You write as if in a time machine. The neocons are Republicans, not Democrats. They are found in places like The Weekly Standard. They long ago left the Democratic party.
I was a neocon. I know them far better than you. Hillary is not and never was a neocon.
Can you name the Democrats who want a war with Russia?
LikeLike
Then you didn’t pay attention during the Obama years, and you haven’t paid attention to what Hillary has said and done. She wanted a no-fly zone in Syria for heaven’s sake. That is tantamount to war with Russia.
LikeLike
I wish we had had a no-fly zone over Syria. The UN should have established a no-fly zone over Syria, but Russia vetoed it so it could continue to bomb hospitals and schools and terrorize the population.
What is so good about carnage? Is it because they are only Syrians and their own government wanted to kill them?
Every life has value.
LikeLike
Is Hillary a neocon? Take your pick: https://www.google.com/search?q=is+hillary+a+neocon%3F&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
LikeLike
Dienne,
I was a neocon. I moved in the highest circles of the neocon movement. I dined with Irving Kristol, Midge Decter, Norman Podhoretz. I published in The Public Interest, Commentary, and other neocon journals.
Hillary was not a neocon. She was never part of that world. The real neocons hated the Clintons.
Finding an article that says so on the Internet doesn’t change the truth.
You should know not to believe everything you read.
LikeLike
I didn’t find “an article”, Diane. I found dozens. All of which have internal links with additional support for the argument. The fact is that the neocons flocked to Hillary, not Trump in the last election. It was Hillary who pushed for Libya. It was Hillary who lambasted the Obama administration for their “soft on Russia” stance. It was Hillary who drove the support for the right-wing coup in Honduras. Hillary voted for Iraq. She has never met a military engagement she didn’t support. Tell me how that doesn’t make her a neocon.
LikeLike
Dienne,
You could find 2,000, and they would all be wrong. I was a neoconservative when the movement started. I was on the inside. The Clintons were never neocons and they are not now. I could find articles on the Internet saying all kinds of garbage, and having more garbage doesn’t make it true.
LikeLike
So, instead of examining the reasons for their ignominious loss and trying to remedy their many electoral shortcomings, the Democrats instead double down on using the Deep State to obstruct Trump.
Meanwhile, our crazy-like-a-fox President keeps everyone distracted with his tweets, while the Republican apparat plans to go wild on advances won via mass struggle (what the Democrats wilol do anything, even destroy themselves, to avoid) in the 20th century.
Keep going this way, Dems: there are still a few state governments the Republicans don’t control, but your strategy us sure to hand those over, as well.
LikeLike
Michael,
Having worked in the federal government, I don’t believe the Democrats control “the deep state,” if it even exists. Within the Civil Service, there is a strong nonpartisan commitment to serve the government no matter who is in power. Trump has declared war on the CIA and the FBI. He has declared war on the media. Nice that you want to blame his problems on the Democrats, but it seems to me they are created by his massive ego.
LikeLike
They may not control it, but they are certainly allied with it in this instance, in a way that is extremely dangerous.
Do you really think that, having tasted the power of being able to set aside an election (which seems to be the intention here), the intelligence agencies will stop at Trump, and retreat to their offices?
Would you be cheering the CIA and NSA on if they were engaging in this behavior during a Sanders or other Democratic presidency, for example? Would that be any more dangerous? Rest assured, if they are successful with this, it will happen again, and in ways we can’t begin to fathom or predict.
Also, I draw a clear distinction between Civil Service employees, and employees of the intelligence agencies, whose budgets are classified and, in the case of the NSA, its very charter.
Finally, I blame the Democrats, especially the neoliberal Clinton/Obama wing of the Party, for Trump’s election, and not solely for his problems. The Dems are eager to have us looking under our beds for Putin because they hope that will distract everyone from looking at what a catastrophic failure their politics have been, handing the country over to Trump and his crew.
LikeLike
You have clearly stated my own perhaps naive hope — one I’ve been clinging too since early November: May the Trump administration get tied up in so many knots that it not only slows down, but even completely roadblocks, its own retrogressive agenda.
LikeLike
Dienne is confusing the term Neocon with Neoliberal. The Clintons represent the corporate Neoliberal part of the Democratic Party. Sanders and Warren represent the Progressive part of the Democratic Party. Both Clinton and Obama are too conservative for me. That’s why I no longer belong to the Democratic Party. I only support progressive liberal candidates. The more I read about Putin the more concerned I am about his motives. Putin is no Gorbachov. Putin has been funding far right groups and extremely conservative candidates in Europe. Putin has been conducting numerous cyberattacks against Western countries. He despises liberal democracies.
To better understand Putin and Russia’s agenda, I recommend the following books:
The Plot to Hack America by Malcolm Nance
The Man without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin by Masha Gessen
Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible: The Surreal Heart of the New Russia by Peter Pomerantsev
Also, I recommend Jane Mayer’s book Dark Money and the documentary The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. It wouldn’t hurt to read Orwell’s 1984 and Politics and the English Language.
We are living in an age in which the Republican Party no longer exists. Most Republicans are no longer conservatives. Koch, Singer, and approximately 500 millionaires and billionaires have created a political machine that has infiltrated the Republican Party like a parasite. Whether or not Trump is removed doesn’t matter. They still have Pence to rubber stamp every single one of their bills. They don’t care what the American people want or need. I suspect that many democratic members of congress have been just as corrupted by money. I was a child during Watergate, but I’ll never forget John Dean’s testimony and Deep Throat’s advice to “follow the money.”
LikeLike
Hillary Clinton ( a now-irrelevant historical figure, thankfully) can accurately be described as a neocon – signified by an insistence on the US military as the linchpin of a unipolar, US-dominated world – on foreign policy.
She should also be though of as a neoliberal otherwise, given her support of “free trade” and social liberalism. The terms may be unwieldy and confusing to some, but they seem to be what we’re stuck with.
LikeLike