Opinion Original Patrick Lawrence

Patrick Lawrence: Why Is The New York Times Still Hyping ‘Russiagate’?

Veteran foreign correspondent Patrick Lawrence takes issue with this Sunday's New York Times Magazine.
Billie Grace Ward from New York, USA, CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

By Patrick Lawrence / Original to ScheerPost

I have a perverse taste for books and newspaper pieces titled “The Untold Story of Whatever It Is That Hasn’t Been Told.” The cliché on the front cover or in the headline is among my favorites. And then what follows: It has been told before, or it is not worth telling, or—often the case—it is conjured nonsense, a mass of dots that don’t connect, which is why nobody previously thought to tell it. 

The Untold Story of Why Leaves Fall in Autumn. The Untold Story of George W. Bush’s Subtle Mind. The Untold Story of Antony Blinken’s Brilliant Diplomacy.  Yes, readers, I’ve read ’em all.

And now I have read “The Untold Story of ‘Russiagate’ and the Road to War in Ukraine.” Jim Rutenberg wrote it and The New York Times published Sunday, November 6. This is the tale, the tallest I have read in years, of how Russia’s long-alleged and long-disproven interference in the 2016 election in Donald Trump’s behalf was but a prelude to Russia’s intervention, with the connivance of Trump and his adjutants, in Ukraine. “Putin’s American adventure,” Rutenberg writes, “might be best understood as advance payment for a geopolitical grail closer to home: a vassal Ukrainian state.”

What a piece. Phony logic, omissions, false presumptions, and misrepresentations of this magnitude do not come along every day. There is enough fanciful mythmaking and fabulist lore in this yarn to interest the animated film editors at Disney. And the wedding-cake prose is over-the-top delightful.  

But this untold story is not the same as most others, I have to say. It isn’t at all fun, this one. If ever we needed an example of how journalists of Rutenberg’s kind bear responsibility for sending us down the sinkhole of Russiagate and going on to promote the perilous proxy war Washington wages in Ukraine in the name of imperial dominance, this is it. 

Neither do I like to see the gutter depths to which my profession has sunk. This is not fun, either. I do not like being reminded that the paper where I once worked has made itself nothing more than a servant of the Democratic elite that built the Russiagate edifice and now defends the late-phase imperium’s lust for war against nations that do not bow to it. 

Jim Rutenberg, to put this point another way and if my editors will permit the infelicity, is a reckless bullshitter. The four years of incessant, now-discredited falsehoods American media infused into our public discourse to keep the Russiagate narrative alive have led us into very dangerous circumstances. Let us now make them that much more dangerous: It is good for career advancement. 

I thought Russiagate was at last behind us and our polity might begin some long convalescence back to sanity. Nothing doing: Rutenberg has it that Russiagate, never mind the narrative teetered on a cliff for years and finally fell into the sea two years ago, implicates key Trump aides and indirectly the former president in the war that began last February. 

Here are two passages that appears high up in Rutenberg’s long story:

To a remarkable degree, the long struggle for Ukraine was a bass note to the upheavals and scandals of the Trump years, from the earliest days of the 2016 campaign and then the presidential transition, through Trump’s first impeachment and into the final days of the 2020 election.

And a little further on:

But to view the record left behind through the blood-filtered lens of Putin’s war, now in its ninth month, is to discover a trail of underappreciated signals telegraphing the depth of his Ukrainian obsession—and the life-or-death stakes that America’s domestic travails would have for some 45 million people nearly 5,000 miles away.

Do you understand what Rutenberg is saying here? Do you get the line of logic? After several readings, I don’t, either. I finished this piece concluding there is no line of logic to get. 

As soon as I saw Rutenberg’s byline I figured we might be in for sheer hocus-pocus of this kind. As alert readers may recall, it was our Jim, The Times’s media correspondent at the time, who announced in July 2016—on page one, if you please—that his newspaper would no longer observe the conventions of objectivity now that Donald Trump had risen in national politics. “Let’s face it,” he wrote. “Balance has been on vacation since Mr. Trump stepped onto his golden Trump Tower escalator last year to announce his candidacy.” 

I gave the Times credit for honesty in that case. But I have never since understood why I am supposed to take seriously anything this or any other Times reporter writes if it concerns Donald Trump. Rutenberg’s stuff, like much else that appears in The Times, is useful only as an indication of what we are supposed to think of this or that development; never can we assume we have read an accurate account of developments.

The dark malefactors in Rutenberg’s piece, which is now published in the Sunday Magazine dated November 6, are Paul Manafort and Konstantin Kilimnik. These names will be familiar to those who suffered through the years of Russiagate fabrications. The former is a public relations man who had a profitable practice in Kyiv. In the course of things, he advised Viktor Yanukovych, the duly elected president of Ukraine before he was ousted and hounded into exile during the U.S.–cultivated coup of February 2014. Manafort went on to serve briefly as an unpaid strategist in Trump’s presidential campaign. 

Kilimnik was born in Ukraine during the Soviet era, served as Manafort’s man in Kyiv for some years, and helped get the flacking done for Yanukovych. Now we must step carefully, for we are about to be disinformed.  

Rutenberg either reports or insinuates eight times in his piece that Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence agent. And—key to Rutenberg’s tale—it was as an agent that he played a key role in Russia’s intervention during the 2016 elections. Yes, Rutenberg includes a brief, boilerplate denial on Kilimnik’s part, but only to continue, in time-tested Times tradition, to report as if Kilimnik is lying and we can safely take him to be a Russian spook.

This is shamelessly insidious. As Aaron Maté, an independent journalist, pointed out in The Grayzone last year, no U.S. agency identifying Kilimnik as a spy—and there are several—has ever presented a shred of evidence to support these assertions. “Despite his supposed central role in the Trump–Russia saga,” Maté reported, “Kilimnik says that no U.S. government investigator has ever contacted him.” This includes investigators from the FBI and the special investigation run by Robert Mueller.

This is how Russiagate worked: Make it up and never stray near available facts. 

Here is Kilimnik, in an interview with Maté, on why his identity as a Russian agent was necessary to make the Russiagate fictions work: “They needed a fucking Russian. I happen to be that fucking Russian.” 

It is a good thing Rutenberg starts in with his disinformation early in his piece. It prepares us for what this unethical hack is about to serve up in many thousands of words.

Here is the crux of Rutenberg’s thesis. 

By July 2016, Manafort and Kilimnik were discussing something called the Mariupol plan, named—by whom and when, I wonder—for the Ukrainian port Russia later took over in its intervention. It seems these two, both of whom had a sound grasp of Ukraine’s political, social, and ethnic dynamics, thought the nation’s best path forward would be to make the eastern provinces an autonomous region. It was taboo to use the term at the time, I recall, but the thought was to federalize Ukraine to preserve its unity.

There are a few things to note here. 

One, by mid–2016, Petro Poroshenko, who replaced Yanukovych as president, was two years into a ground, artillery, and rocket campaign against Ukrainians in the eastern provinces in response to their objections to the coup two years earlier. This campaign—western Ukrainians bombarding eastern Ukrainians—lasted eight years, until Russia’s intervention, and would claim 14,000 lives; 80 percent of the casualties were from the eastern provinces. 

Two, by the time Manafort and Kilimnik were talking about autonomous regions, Ukraine, Russia, Germany, and France had signed two accords, the Minsk I and Minsk II Protocols, calling for none other than a federalized Ukraine with the express purpose of holding the nation together. Moscow strongly backed these accords in the name of Ukrainian unity. Kyiv continued shelling its own citizens and did nothing to implement them, and Paris and Berlin did nothing to urge Kyiv to stop the shelling and abide by its commitment.

Three, Ukraine is among those nations that sit on the fault line between East and West. Eastern Ukraine is Russian-speaking, Orthodox Russian, and bound to Russia by way of shared historical, cultural, and familial ties. The west of the country is, naturally, tilted toward Europe and is heavily influenced by vigorous anti–Russian sentiments. I have never heard of a national structure for Ukraine that makes more sense than a federalized state. The Minsk Protocols were written to accommodate these realities. 

Four, when Kilimnik and Manafort began talking about an autonomous region in the east, the shared thought was that they could resume working for the exiled Yanukovych: Business seems to have been business for these two. The deposed president’s Party of Regions had deep roots in the eastern provinces; he seems to have entertained the idea that he could lead the newly autonomous east in a federal system. 

I have just set down four perfectly legible facts. The extent to which Rutenberg mutilates these facts to the point we cannot recognize them is quite beyond belief. 

The Kyiv regime’s daily bombardment of its own citizens goes down as “Kremlin-armed, –funded and –directed ‘separatists’… waging a two-year-old shadow war that [by 2016] had left nearly 10,000 dead.” This is an outright lie.

Manafort’s thinking, as shared with Kilimnik, as to accommodating differences among Ukrainians to preserve national unity is reported in Rutenberg-speak this way: “For all the talk of extending a bridge to the West, Manafort soon began plying his battle-tested and poll-driven politics of division—exploiting fissures over culture, democracy and the very notion of nationhood to excite the Party of Regions base, the Russian-speaking voters in the east and south.” This is what I mean by mutilation. 

The problem with the Minsk Protocols was not that Ukraine ignored them after committing to them. Oh, no: It was “Putin’s maximalist interpretation of accords…  that tied a ceasefire in the east to a new Ukrainian constitutional provision granting ‘special status’ to the two main territories there.” Our Jimbo goes on: “Russia interpreted that fuzzy term as giving the territories autonomy—under its proxies—with veto power over Ukraine’s foreign policy. Ukraine viewed it as a more limited expansion of local governance.”

Unforgivable, this old chestnut. It doesn’t matter how Ukraine viewed the accords: It took not a single step to honor them. The U.S. has been using “Putin’s maximalist interpretation” to cover up Ukraine’s breach ever since its betrayal was clear. The terms of autonomy were spelled out clearly and had nothing to do with Putin’s interpretation. 

It is much worth noting that Poroshenko, who signed the Minsk Protocols for Kyiv, has recently acknowledged that Ukraine never had any intention of keeping its word: It was simply buying time, he said, to build fortifications along the line of contact from which to launch an all-out attack on the eastern provinces. Nothing on this from Rutenberg. 

On and on, this rubbish goes. We get, among much else, the familiarly dishonest cover-up of the Hunter Biden affair, wherein Rutenberg turns everything upside down: Biden wanted Viktor Shokin fired as Kyiv’s chief prosecutor not because he was about to investigate Burisma, the energy company from which Hunter Biden was drawing a large retainer, but because Shokin refused to do so. As a Polish émigré I once knew used to say, “Gimme break.”

In the bargain, we read yet again that in mid-2016, CrowdStrike, the cybersecurity firm, “had determined that Russian hackers had been responsible for breaching the Democratic National Committee’s computer systems.” No mention from Jim that in 2020, Shawn Henry, CrowdStrike’s chief security officer, testified in the Senate and retracted all claims that the firm ever had evidence of Russia’s involvement in what we now know was an internal leak, not an outside hack by Russia or anyone else. 

What a difference an oath makes, I always say. In this case it sent Russiagate’s cornerstone falsehood over that cliff I mentioned earlier.

Here is the weirdest part of Rutenberg’s tale. He proposes that Trump bears responsibility for licensing Putin to intervene in Ukraine because Manafort and Kilimnik wanted to sell him on the rather wispy Mariupol plan. I don’t get it and I don’t think Rutenberg does, either:

The Mariupol plan would become a footnote, all but forgotten. But what the plan offered on paper is essentially what Putin—on the dangerous defensive after a raft of strategic miscalculations and mounting battlefield losses—is now trying to seize through sham referendums and illegal annexation.

I’m always good for a nonsensical teleology. And then, icing on Rutenberg’s Danielle Steele prose:

And Mariupol is shorthand for the horrors of his war, an occupied city in ruins after months of siege, its hulking steelworks spectral and silenced, countless citizens buried in mass graves.

I get it, I get it. Mariupol the plan, Mariupol the ruined city: Straight-ahead evidence of… of I cannot tell what.

Having hacked for more years than I will ever tell you, I take a professional interest in why reporters such as Rutenberg file pieces this bad. Is it a good chess move in the career game? Was he put up to it? Is he some kind of driven ideologue serving the liberal cause? Is this, maybe, the best he can do? People frequently ask me these kinds of questions when they read something like this, but I find certain answers difficult. 

There is, of course, the obvious matter of the midterm elections this week and Trump’s apparent intention to announce he will run for president again in 2024—both of which have mainstream Democrats quaking. Best get going ASAP with another impossible update on the Russiagate theme. 

Rutenberg does have the nerve to describe this piece as “the second draft of history.” Wow. This leaves me with the strong impression that The Times, having made a spectacle of itself as it abandoned objective reporting only to be exposed as lying its way through the Russiagate years, may be nervous as to what the historians will have to say about it. 

They should be nervous. Due in part to the work of independent publications such as this one, the better historians will have nothing good to write into the record about what The Times has done to America’s public discourse and, not least, its legitimacy and credibility as the once-but-no-more newspaper of record. 

When you’re in a hole, the Brits say, the first thing to do is stop digging. Rutenberg and his colleagues on Eighth Avenue don’t seem to have got this yet. They’re still digging.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

* indicates required
Patrick Lawrence
Patrick Lawrence

Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune, is a media critic, essayist, author and lecturer. His most recent book is Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century. His web site is Patrick Lawrence. Support his work via his Patreon siteHis Twitter account, @thefloutist, has been permanently censored without explanation.

32 comments

  1. Thank you dear Patrick for yet another beam of wisdom illuminating the darkness within this cave of abysmal ignorance we are trapped in at the moment. The answer to your question however is simple. They persist in their futile attempt because they are not yet prepared to face the reality that Russia will never be defeated. The truth is that they are only succeeding in destroying themselves. And the evidence is mounting by the hour. . .

    1. Eloquently said, Mr. Holland! I second it and Patrick’s journalistic integrity and exposing the false narratives in the fast-declining American Empire is a Treasure of Truth for those of us not fooled by the false, adjective addicted presstitutes like Rutenberg, a disgrace to his profession! And the NYT? The “paper of record?” Maybe toilet paper, but no, better for cat litter boxes, then to contaminate someone’s derriere with toxic ink.

      Thank you Mr. Lawrence and Scheerpost for printing this truthful expose!

  2. So, who was Guccifer? Was he Russian intelligence? Did he work with Seth Rich? Did either or both work with Wikileaks? Certainly, there was fraud committed by the DNC during the primaries to thwart Sanders, for which they tried to blame Russia to cover up their own malfeasance. Why is it preposterous that they would be working to help Trump who had financial interests in Russia and had become buddy-buddy with Putin?

    Hope someone will respond to answer my questions.

    1. Sure, I’ll respond: Trump was “buddy-buddy” with Putin? You are not a serious person interested in facts when you say stupid, childish things like that. Okay? Try harder and do better.

    2. Trump didn’t have “financial interests in Russia”. He had applied for permits to develop one of his fancy hotels, with Russian funding, and the Russian government told him to take a hike. From all available reports, Putin detests the man and considers him a fool.

  3. Even to have the patience to wade through the rubbish would be too much for me. How can the NYT have any credibility?
    The USA always assumes it has somebody trying to interfere with its “democracy”. It constantly interferes with anyone it decides is a potential enemy, disregarding all sense and all legality. What business at all does the USA have for going thousands of miles into a country known for its corruption, indebtedness, Nazi influence (hardly secret and still visible on youtube at least since 2014)and hatred of its neighbor Russia by some percentage of its population, aided by laws and “education”. Russia wanted neutrality by Ukraine-surely reasonable when NATO stated that Russia was its enemy. What is terrible about that? why not a special status for the Donbass? Canada, Switzerland, Belgium!!!and other countries use more than one language, and Putin wanted the two “breakaway republics” to remain part of Ukraine. The USA has no business at all, and of course the Hunter, the Obama, the Joe Biden, the Nuland, the biolabs, the removal of Opposition Parties add to the nonsense of the “guarding Ukraine’s independence …” which the intrusive USA/NATO claims.

    1. What passes for “election interference” in the US is specifically based on who is allegedly doing it. The fact that Israel is pouring millions indirectly into PACs to defeat any candidate that dares criticize its policy toward the Palestinians—and has done for decades—is dutifully ignored by the mainstream media.

  4. This only emphasizes how much we are being lied to about Ukraine!!! why don’t they ever mention the coup that the US staged, Hunter Biden working there for millions, and Joe Biden refusing to negotiate and stop this war before it Started. Are we really screwed?

  5. Mr. Lawrence asks why. Here’s why:

    Just as people were beginning to connect the dots between Russiagate and Ukraine war, the NYT comes along and doubles down on worse than Iraq WMD propaganda.

    They are trying to kill the baby in its crib. It’s not just Aron Matte writing the story anymore.

    If Russiagate is fully exposed as the fraud it is and is then linked to Ukraine as a proxy war of US/NATO imperialism, then not only The NY Times goes down, but so does the Clinton Democrats and the National Security State.

  6. It’s just amazing how many putinistas among trump supporters. The article has been written by Patrick who knows nothing and wants to know nothing other than party line.

  7. Brilliant writing, Patrick Lawrence!

    Reading or listening to the US’s corporate media, particularly regarding Russia/Ukraine/NATO, I can no longer handle the stress from the outrageous lies, it is the ultimate insult playing us all as dopes.

    You are one of the finest journalists in the country. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

  8. Always insightful, honest, clear. With an unerring eye for the historical narrative and attempts to muddy the truth.

  9. Many writers and American politico’s seem to be over thinking 2016. Putting aside the proposed espionage angle, what 2016 came down to was this. The GOP chose to hitch their wagon to a carnival barker. A phony rich man who had been living on borrowed money for thirty years, up to and including a whole lot of cash he had borrowed from foreign banking concerns, some linked to Russian oligarchs and oily emirates, and of course that those debts were the singular motivating factor in his entry into politics, and could be ultimately used to “motivate” him and his sleazy administration.

    The other story of 2016 was that the democrats had already promised Hillary Clinton the nomination, and come hell and high water, she was going to get it. The Dems conveniently ignored the fact that she was so unpopular among so many voters in 2008 that she lost a nomination that was set up to be hers. The Dems starting having 2008 nightmares, so the fix was set.

    In the end, both parties had populist uprisings in 2016. The GOP embraced theirs and won, the Dems shunned theirs and lost. Did pro-Russian interests play a role in the GOPs big win? Of course they did. But no more so than the AIPAC, Saudi Arabia, or even British intelligence.
    Bottom line, Hillary ran a lazy, shitty campaign in 2016 and lost. Trump backed in to the White House, but was compromised by his previous misdeeds, indiscretions, and his crushing debt to every one from Russian oligarchs to Vinny the loan shark.

  10. The New York Times promotes Russiagate because branding Trump a traitor is their Cold War brand. For four years the NYT & Dem establishment bought votes disseminated this lie, it is a big lie. This fraud sets the groundwork for governmental distrust & insurrection. Tragically when the organs of propaganda are used against citizens all the time the legitimate rage it creates will lose the ability to distinguish between fact based coverage and fictional manipulation. Both the New York Times and Fox News spread disinformation are equally illegitimate corporate fraudsters. I’m sickened every issue of the NYTs I read to have business, international, and OpEd always say the Russians are embargoing oil, when it’s the West that’s embargoing itself for war profits. Corp culture Blames the Russians and the Chinese, the South Americans and African Americans for their crimes in left and right corp media — cause it has worked for seventy years — but you can’t fool all the people all the time.

  11. One correction: Shawn Henry testified before the House Intelligence Committee in December 2017. Adam Schiff kept his testimony hidden from the public until May of 2020.

  12. “Russiagate”???

    “The powerful Russian businessman and a close Putin ally Yevgeny Prigozhin has admitted to interfering in US elections on the eve of a midterm vote in which Republicans will seek to take control of Congress and state-wide offices across the country.

    “Gentlemen, we interfered, we are interfering and we will interfere,” Prigozhin, who has previously been accused of influencing the outcome of elections across continents, said in a statement posted by his catering company, Concord.”

    Indeed!!!

    1. Because, as we all know, there’s nothing more reliable than an announcement from a Russian oligarch presented with absolutely no evidence to indicate how the alleged interference was or is being implemented. For all we know, that was yet another example of Russian sarcasm, which goes way over the heads of those whose sense of humor was lost due to Trump derangement syndrome.

  13. I am so glad that there seems to be someone to proceed with Prof. Stephen Cohen’s work – THANK YOU for writing all these fact based articles Mr Lawrence (I just wish they would be published in the MSM, where everybody could see it). And back to Mr Cohen, who said that Russiagate is the biggest threat to US and international security (we can see where we are heading now – straight to the abyss, or will we, or better the people in power, stop and THINK???)

  14. Another excellent piece by the writer. Methinks they continue with the narrative because narrative is all they have. They built up a straw man and are frantically trying to keep it stuffed. Without it, their whole house of cards comes crashing down and there can be real consequences for all of the lying, manipulation, and (with respect to the political party they support) illegal activity federal agencies have engaged in to support them, all of which continues unabated to this day. Despicable.

    I’m no fan of the red team, but I hope the blue team gets what’s coming to them tomorrow: unquestionable electoral defeat followed by investigations and swift prosecutions. We must have justice – somewhere, ANYwhere – or else, how much worth does this “democracy” they say is worth saving have?

  15. Save this column because it’s one of the greats. A callback to Alexander Cockburn in the 90’s, it brilliantly educates on events and reasoning, with a literary style laced with priceless wit: “And the wedding-cake prose is over-the-top delightful” and “never mind the narrative teetered on a cliff for years and finally fell into the sea two years ago.”

    Condensing a mountain range of nonsense into a ten-minute read is also an impressive achievement, managing to moderate the daily sting of the dangerous, narcissistic blundering of a crashing empire.

    My last fallback these days, as long as a nuclear exchange is averted, is the final, welcome, long-overdue ejection of the US-dominated West from the center of world affairs will work out. Global warming remains a grave existential threat, but the scant odds of survival are somewhat better in a multi-polar world.

  16. It remains to be seen and believed if American voters will tomorrow take the time and really have the courage and hindsight to vote for the mid-terms of this Tuesday the 8 th with some ascertained knowledge of the facts after a hard-search in your country…Because I spent the last 2 weeks of October in Nevada, and the TWO morning papers rolled up together under plastic and thrown on the lawn where I resided out there had – on its unique last page devoted to “The World” NOTHING of what alternate media (Kim Iversen, France Soir, Grayzone, Consortium News, Stratpol, Radio Liberté, Scott Ritter, RT, The New Atlas, Richard Medhurst, TéléSur, Sheerpost, etc…of course not the more and more disappointing shrinking pseudo-leftist Democracy Now amongst these) has the guts to unveil, explain and elucidate. All the Associate Press, Reuters dispatches (and even AFP) used in these daily small papers of eccentric states within America are often faking a signature of a “reporter” under some “articles” s headlines, and most if not all REPEAT and AMPLIFY the main discourse trumpeted into one ILLLOGICAL, FACETIOUS official story about this “war”, or sliding away to avoid tarnishing the Biden family’s controversial “son” and contributing to restore his virginal luster: EVERYWHERE the ridicule of the local politics, and in international news all the malinformation or disinformation of these culprits self-serving journalists who magnify dissonances by obliterating and altering any sane memory of the real facts: it’s so fake, it’s such a mascarade. How can these abused American citizens go and vote with serenity and assurance? They are so busy driving like madmen on those highways all over Megapolis when not jammed, so exhausted from work and the iterative itinerary to the kid’s school where their infants are subject in full blast to the woke revolution, such a rat race… that my adorable hosts only talk disarray at the dinner table when not avoiding political subjects, and then they have no time to live life and search with TRUST for truth amidst the specious values imposed . Not to mention the cost of living now 40 per cent higher for food and lodging than in French Canada (it used to be the other way around) . I persist in my admiration or love for the ideal of America as defined in its democracy from its onset, it is where I studied freely literature, but this present harsh reality of compulsive lies and dissimulations is saddening to observe. Again thank you Mr Lawrence for denouncing the imposteurs at the NYT. Le Monde isn’t any better but we read it quickly with dismay, to know what we are supposed to think…and immediately begin searching elsewhere for what the facts really are. I used to love reading the International Herald Tribune during these 25 years I lived mostly in Paris, it’s all gone: it was such a paper…until the Berlin Wall fell and there’s now a huge wall being built around facts. Will it fall? Can it fall?

    1. Eric, Wonderful comment. Unfortunate, too few of our fellow citizens of the world feel the way we do about the false narratives fed 24/ by the MSM, and journalists like Patrick Lawrence are shinning stars illuminating the darkened nights AND days of calculated misinformation for mind conditioning by the ruling-elite for control of the planet.

  17. KEEP DIGGING

    The Ivy Ds, self-designated meritocracy, are “The Best and the Brightest” 2.0. Same elite who brought us Vietnam doing same with Ukraine. That the cost of empire to benefit the few means the sacrifice of the American Dream for the many doesn’t matter. Enabling econopathy? Fine. Who cares if irrelevant humans or invisible biota are killed? What matters to oligarchy is power. Or at least the appearance of power.

    But rather than stop, keep digging. Dig to find the truth beneath the b.s. Dig to let in some oxygen to refresh the rotting roots.

    If you’re in a hole, then dig some steps by which to get out.

  18. Outstanding work Patrick! Keep exposing the liars and the frauds for who and what they are, I suspect as Russia begins its winter offensive the west’s final veneer of unity will collapse as the Europeans freeze in the dark of winter and recognize their so called defender in NATO is a paper tiger. Oh no worries the USA to the rescue with oil priced four times higher than Russian natural gas! With friends like these who needs enemies!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: