Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

2019-04-23 Thread Chris Slee via Marxism
  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I agree with Michael Karadjis that Trump views China rather than Russia as the 
major rival to US imperialism.  But this does not exclude some rivalry and 
conflict between the US and Russia.  An example is US anger over Turkey's 
decision to buy S-400 missiles from Russia.

Michael dismisses the idea that Turkey would try to invade northeastern Syria.  
But Turkey's invasion of Afrin shows its determination to crush the democratic 
experiment in northern and eastern Syria.   A Turkish invasion of northeastern 
Syria can not be ruled out.

Turkey would have to consider Russia's reaction to such an invasion.  While 
Russia gave permission for the Afrin invasion, it would not necessarily do so 
for northeastern Syria.  Russia seems to prefer a negotiated agreement between 
Assad and the Democratic Autonomous Administration.  It could use the threat of 
allowing a Turkish invasion as a tactic to pressure the DAA to accept a bad 
deal.

Chris Slee

From: mkaradjis 
Sent: Tuesday, 23 April 2019 12:41:13 PM
To: Chris Slee; Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition
Subject: Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay 
Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More


Actually I think the Mueller report shows that Trump was up to his eyeballs in 
collaboration with the Russian Tsars, and I’m not sure why there has been a 
rush to exonerate him on the left, when the report clearly does not do that at 
all. Just to make clear, I don’t think Trump’s election victory had much to do 
with the obvious attempts by Russia to interfere in the US elections, the 
obvious and proven collusion by Trump and his entire team with the Russians, 
and wikileaks blatant collaboration with Trump-Putin – I agree entirely with 
all the points that Trump won because of Clinton and the failures of US 
capitalism under Obama, but that’s a different matter.

Was this collaboration due to Trump being an agent of the Russian oligarchy as 
John claims? Trump may well have more special links with the Russian oligarchs 
than others have, but I just don’t think that is necessary to explain US 
policy. The position of the Trump team that China rather than Russia was the 
major rival to US imperialist interests was entirely logical; as any study of 
the massive export of Chinese capital, compared to the pathetic level of 
Russian capital export (Michael Probsting’s book ‘Anti-Imperialism in the age 
of great power rivalry, and Louis’ review of it here on marxmail for reference) 
would suggest. Russian imperialism also rivals US imperialism (as do EU and 
Japanese imperialisms), but I’ve always thought it a mistake to view 
economically weak Russian imperialism as the major rival of US imperialism.

Certainly there is the fact that Russia has greater military power than any of 
the other rivals to US imperialism, so it can throw its weight around more, and 
there is its diplomatic weight and the ideological echoes of history that weigh 
on US and Russian ruling class attitudes to each other in terms of 
“credibility” and such, but while these are important factors they should not 
be confused with more fundamental rivalry.

Actually on the question of “sub-imperialism” which Patrick Bond hammers on 
about, I’ve always found it very useful, except when it comes to drawing the 
line questions. While the BRICS are a good metaphor for sub-imperialism, I 
think we could very usefully add states such as Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey, 
while I think China has clearly emerged as an imperialist power more so than 
Russia. Russia if anything has more characteristics of sub-imperialism than 
China does, and I think it is useful to see US-Russia relations in that light. 
The fact that neither the Obama nor Trump administrations has had any problem 
with the 4-year Russian terror-bombing of Russia and effective occupation of 
parts of that country, and of parts of Syria’s state apparatus, is not some 
coincidence or something unique about both leaders, it is US imperialism 
looking after its interests. The fact that more anti-Russian voices under both 
administrations have tended to be oppositional, and thus rhetorical, is also 
the opposite of coincidence. It corresponds completely to the attitude of major 
US ally in the region, Israel, with its very close relations with Moscow, and 
increasingly with US allies in the Gulf, especially under Trump as the 
US-Saudi-UAE alliance has strengthened while these same states are developing 
excellent relations with Moscow and recognising Assad’s regime.

>From the onset of Russian intervention to bolster Assad – about a year after 
&

Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

2019-04-22 Thread mkaradjis via Marxism
  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Actually I think the Mueller report shows that Trump was up to his eyeballs
in collaboration with the Russian Tsars, and I’m not sure why there has
been a rush to exonerate him on the left, when the report clearly does not
do that at all. Just to make clear, I don’t think Trump’s election victory
had much to do with the obvious attempts by Russia to interfere in the US
elections, the obvious and proven collusion by Trump and his entire team
with the Russians, and wikileaks blatant collaboration with Trump-Putin – I
agree entirely with all the points that Trump won because of Clinton and
the failures of US capitalism under Obama, but that’s a different matter.

Was this collaboration due to Trump being an agent of the Russian oligarchy
as John claims? Trump may well have more special links with the Russian
oligarchs than others have, but I just don’t think that is necessary to
explain US policy. The position of the Trump team that China rather than
Russia was the major rival to US imperialist interests was entirely
logical; as any study of the massive export of Chinese capital, compared to
the pathetic level of Russian capital export (Michael Probsting’s book
‘Anti-Imperialism in the age of great power rivalry, and Louis’ review of
it here on marxmail for reference) would suggest. Russian imperialism also
rivals US imperialism (as do EU and Japanese imperialisms), but I’ve always
thought it a mistake to view economically weak Russian imperialism as the
major rival of US imperialism.

Certainly there is the fact that Russia has greater military power than any
of the other rivals to US imperialism, so it can throw its weight around
more, and there is its diplomatic weight and the ideological echoes of
history that weigh on US and Russian ruling class attitudes to each other
in terms of “credibility” and such, but while these are important factors
they should not be confused with more fundamental rivalry.

Actually on the question of “sub-imperialism” which Patrick Bond hammers on
about, I’ve always found it very useful, except when it comes to drawing
the line questions. While the BRICS are a good metaphor for
sub-imperialism, I think we could very usefully add states such as Saudi
Arabia, Iran and Turkey, while I think China has clearly emerged as an
imperialist power more so than Russia. Russia if anything has more
characteristics of sub-imperialism than China does, and I think it is
useful to see US-Russia relations in that light. The fact that neither the
Obama nor Trump administrations has had any problem with the 4-year Russian
terror-bombing of Russia and effective occupation of parts of that country,
and of parts of Syria’s state apparatus, is not some coincidence or
something unique about both leaders, it is US imperialism looking after its
interests. The fact that more anti-Russian voices under both
administrations have tended to be oppositional, and thus rhetorical, is
also the opposite of coincidence. It corresponds completely to the attitude
of major US ally in the region, Israel, with its very close relations with
Moscow, and increasingly with US allies in the Gulf, especially under Trump
as the US-Saudi-UAE alliance has strengthened while these same states are
developing excellent relations with Moscow and recognising Assad’s regime.

From the onset of Russian intervention to bolster Assad – about a year
after US intervention against ISIS began – the two superpowers have
cooperated closely in Syria. Sure there have been bumps in the road, but
overwhelmingly their agreement to share the Syrian sky as both bomb Syria –
in many cases, bombing the same targets even at the same time - has been
almost a model of cooperation. Is this due to US weakness, or to Trump
being a money-launderer for Russian oligarchs? I my opinion, no, it is due
to US imperialism looking after its interests. Just to be clear, John may
well be right that Trump is also a money-launderer for Russian oligarchs,
but I think that is of minor significance to the rest of the US ruling
class.

Who has the upper hand in Syria in this cooperation? Many would say Russia
does, with the US showing its “weakness” or “retreat” etc. This is
extraordinary nonsense. The US war against ISIS (and often against
Nusra/HTS and sometimes other Islamist or even mainstream rebels) has cost
countless billions of dollars, has destroyed entire cities, has killed
thousands of people, all with full intelligence collaboration with Russia
and the Assad regime. It is not a small war. Russia is waging a much bigger
and far more murderous war in Syria on behalf of the tyrant, because the US
(and even more, Israel) is fine with that happening, in 

Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

2019-04-22 Thread Chris Slee via Marxism
  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

It is true that Trump has had a "decades-long relationship with Russian 
financiers".  But I think John Reimann exaggerates the significance of this in 
determining Trump's foreign policy as president.

Certainly Trump tried to improve relations with Russia early in his presidency. 
 You could attribute this to his links with Russian mafia capital.  But you 
could also say that it made sense for US imperialism to reach an agreement with 
Russian imperialism, its most militarily powerful rival, to minimise conflict, 
agree on spheres of influence, etc.

John is wrong in his interpretation of the dispute over US troops in Syria.  He 
says: "That planned withdrawal [of US troops from Syria] can only be seen as a 
step towards strengthening the position of Russia and its ally in the region - 
Turkey". 

On the contrary, Trump's aim was to re-establish the close collaboration which 
had existed between the US and Turkey, but which had broken down after the US 
began supporting the Syrian Democratic Forces against ISIS.

Turkey is very hostile to the SDF and the Kurdish-led revolutionary movement in 
northern Syria.  Turkey had supported various reactionary armed groups, 
including ISIS, against the YPG/YPJ and SDF.

When the US began supporting the SDF, Erdogan began to seek a deal wth Russia.  
This deal involved Turkey abandoning the goal of overthrowing Assad, in return 
for Russia allowing Turkey to invade parts of Syria to attack the SDF.

Russia, which controlled the airspace over Afrin (a predominantly Kurdish area 
of northern Syria, which was controlled by the SDF but geographically separate 
from the main SDF-controlled area in northeastern Syria), gave Turkey 
permission to invade.

Erdogan has spoken of his intention to invade northeastern Syria.  But the 
presence of US forces in that area, helping the SDF to fight ISIS, was an 
obstacle.

Trump, by ending US support for the SDF, wanted to rebuild relations with 
Turkey and win it away from its increasingly close liinks with Russia.  But 
other sections of the US ruling class were worried about the consequences of 
giving Turkey the green light to invade northeastern Syria.

Such an invasion would disrupt the fight against ISIS, perhaps enabling it to 
grow in strength, not only in Syria but also in Iraq, where it remains very 
active.

The invasion could have other unpredictable effects.  For example, a Turkish 
occupation of northeastern Syria would be strongly resisted, resulting in 
economic costs and casualties that could cause discontent and perhaps a 
revolutionary upsurge in Turkey.

Thus Trump was forced to back down on his withdrawal plan.  But this had 
nothing to do with Trump's supposed support for Russia.

Chris Slee



From: John Reimann <1999wild...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 April 2019 2:21:24 AM
To: Chris Slee
Cc: Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition
Subject: Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay 
Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

I am unsure exactly what Chris Slee is saying. Is he saying that Trump is not 
seriously compromised as far as his (Trump's) ties with Putin and the Russian 
mafia capitalist class? Is he saying that Trump's actions are not in large 
measure guided by his links? Because if so, then Chris has really missed what 
is happening here. To review:

Trump has had a decades-long relationship with Russian financiers, whose money 
he has laundered through is real estate interests. In fact, even prior to that, 
there is evidence that he had made contact with the KGB when he visited 
Czechoslovakia with his first wife, who was from there. (See "House of Trump, 
House of Putin" for the full story on that.) His first act as Republican 
nominee - in fact, before he even was the official nominee - was to send an 
emmissary to the Republican platform committee to eliminate a call for 
sanctions against Russia. (We should keep in mind that the economic sanctions 
against Russia have been an important issue for Putin for quite some time.)

During the election campaign and after, Trump continually caused shock waves 
with his verbal attacks on NATO. Then he had the series of private meetings 
with Putin. After one of these, he publicly took Putin's side against his own 
intelligence agencies. Then there was the planned removal of all US troops from 
Syria. It's true that he has evidently backed down, but this was seen as a huge 
shock at the time - serious enough to cause the resignation of several of his 
top appointees. That planned withdrawal can only be seen as a step towar

Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

2019-04-22 Thread John Reimann via Marxism
  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I am unsure exactly what Chris Slee is saying. Is he saying that Trump is
not seriously compromised as far as his (Trump's) ties with Putin and the
Russian mafia capitalist class? Is he saying that Trump's actions are not
in large measure guided by his links? Because if so, then Chris has really
missed what is happening here. To review:

Trump has had a decades-long relationship with Russian financiers, whose
money he has laundered through is real estate interests. In fact, even
prior to that, there is evidence that he had made contact with the KGB when
he visited Czechoslovakia with his first wife, who was from there. (See
"House of Trump, House of Putin" for the full story on that.) His first act
as Republican nominee - in fact, before he even was the official nominee -
was to send an emmissary to the Republican platform committee to eliminate
a call for sanctions against Russia. (We should keep in mind that the
economic sanctions against Russia have been an important issue for Putin
for quite some time.)

During the election campaign and after, Trump continually caused shock
waves with his verbal attacks on NATO. Then he had the series of private
meetings with Putin. After one of these, he publicly took Putin's side
against his own intelligence agencies. Then there was the planned removal
of all US troops from Syria. It's true that he has evidently backed down,
but this was seen as a huge shock at the time - serious enough to cause the
resignation of several of his top appointees. That planned withdrawal can
only be seen as a step towards strengthening the position of Russia and its
ally in the region - Turkey.

As far as Venezuela: I think it is highly unlikely that Trump will send a
military invasion, but that is more because even that dunce knows what a
morass he'd be getting into if he did so. Yes, his hostility to Maduro in
some ways conflicts with his relationship with Putin, but no capitalist
alliance is always smooth. There are always conflicting interests.

But overall, there is a reason that the more serious heads among the US
capitalist strategists and thinkers - including the NY Times, the
Washington Post and the Council on Foreign Relations - are so concerned.
There is a reason that they denounce Trump's connections with Putin & co.
And it's not that they want war and Trump wants peace. That's for sure. The
reason is that their understanding is accurate.

John Reimann

On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 3:10 PM Chris Slee  wrote:

> John Reimann claims that "...the President of the United States is
> seriously beholden to a rival capitalist class" (i.e  the Russian
> capitalist class).
>
> I see no evidence that Trump is acting in the interests of Russia.  He
> acts in the interests of United States imperialism.
>
> For example, he has imposed a severe economic blockade on Venezuela,
> organised a coup attempt, and threatened to invade.  This is typical
> behaviour for US imperialism in Latin America.
>
> But Russia and China are beginning to challenge US dominance in Latin
> America, as elsewhere.  When the Venezuelan government asked for Russian
> military aid to deter a possible US invasion, Russia sent a small military
> contingent.  Thus there is growing antagonism between US and Russian
> imperialism in Latin America.
>
> Trump's ideas on what is in the interests of US imperialism sometimes
> differ from those of foreign policy "experts".  His stated intention to
> quickly withdraw US troops from northeastern Syria was opposed by some of
> his advisors, and eventually changed into a gradual withdrawal.
>
> But Trump's original plan was not totally irrational from the viewpoint of
> US imperialism.  It would have pleased Erdogan, who wanted to invade
> northeastern Syria and crush the revolution there.  It would thus have
> improved US-Turkish relations, at least in the short term.
>
> But the foreign policy experts were worried about some of the other
> effects of giving a green light to a Turkish invasion of northeast Syria.
> It would have disrupted the fight against ISIS.  It might also, in the
> longer term, have destabilised Turkey, due to economic cost of the
> occupation and the casualties inflicted by the resistance.
>
> Certainly Trump is erratic, and a less than ideal leader for US
> imperialism, but that does not mean he is a servant of Putin.
>
> Chris Slee
>
>
> ________________
> From: Marxism  on behalf of John
> Reimann via Marxism 
> Sent: Sunday, 21 April 2019 7:07:01 AM
> T

Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

2019-04-21 Thread Chris Slee via Marxism
  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

John Reimann claims that "...the President of the United States is seriously 
beholden to a rival capitalist class" (i.e  the Russian capitalist class).

I see no evidence that Trump is acting in the interests of Russia.  He acts in 
the interests of United States imperialism.

For example, he has imposed a severe economic blockade on Venezuela, organised 
a coup attempt, and threatened to invade.  This is typical behaviour for US 
imperialism in Latin America.

But Russia and China are beginning to challenge US dominance in Latin America, 
as elsewhere.  When the Venezuelan government asked for Russian military aid to 
deter a possible US invasion, Russia sent a small military contingent.  Thus 
there is growing antagonism between US and Russian imperialism in Latin America.

Trump's ideas on what is in the interests of US imperialism sometimes differ 
from those of foreign policy "experts".  His stated intention to quickly 
withdraw US troops from northeastern Syria was opposed by some of his advisors, 
and eventually changed into a gradual withdrawal.

But Trump's original plan was not totally irrational from the viewpoint of US 
imperialism.  It would have pleased Erdogan, who wanted to invade northeastern 
Syria and crush the revolution there.  It would thus have improved US-Turkish 
relations, at least in the short term.

But the foreign policy experts were worried about some of the other effects of 
giving a green light to a Turkish invasion of northeast Syria.  It would have 
disrupted the fight against ISIS.  It might also, in the longer term, have 
destabilised Turkey, due to economic cost of the occupation and the casualties 
inflicted by the resistance.

Certainly Trump is erratic, and a less than ideal leader for US imperialism, 
but that does not mean he is a servant of Putin.

Chris Slee



From: Marxism  on behalf of John Reimann 
via Marxism 
Sent: Sunday, 21 April 2019 7:07:01 AM
To: Chris Slee
Subject: Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay 
Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Ralph Johnson, apparently approvingly, quotes Glenn Greenwald: "I think
Donald Trump is a huge danger and
menace to the republic for a lot of reasons that David is very adeptly
covering, and I really hope that we can now turn our attention to those
things, now that we?re done with this espionage thriller that has
dominated us for three years. I hope we can focus on the things that
matter."

Like so much of the left as well as the alt-left, Greenwald completely
misses the point, which is that the President of the United States is
seriously beholden to a rival capitalist class. This is not a matter of
patriotism nor defense of "national interests"; it's a question of
understanding the political crisis of US capitalism, something which
Greenwald is incapable of doing.

That's because he is nothing but a somewhat more subtle version of Max
Blumenthal/Ben Norton. He openly advocates a red-brown alliance, having
equated the Occupy movement with the Tea Party as both being
"anti-establishment" and concluded "I think that left and right as we
understood them for the last four decades are starting to morph into
pro-establishment and anti-establishment dynamics and that will only
continue."

Greenwald supports the Assadist Tulsi Gabbard, and is a collaborator with
the far right Tucker Carlson.

Basically, Greenwald is like so much of the left that sees any opponent of
US imperialism as an ally, which is why he in effect defends Putin & Co. So
I think his views on the Mueller Report have to be considered in this
light. That there was collaboration, or attempted collaboration, between
the Trump campaign and the Putin regime is really beyond doubt. What was
the meeting at Trump Tower all about? What were the frequent contacts
between Trump staffers and Russian representatives about?

And the story goes back decades - to the fact that it was the Russian mafia
capitalist class that provided much of Trump's financing for decades. Even
Don jr. said this. And THAT is the real scandal of the Mueller
"investigation" - that they never tried to lift the lid on that can of
worms.

But Greenwald? His views should not be taken seriously.

John R

Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

2019-04-21 Thread John Edmundson via Marxism
  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

John Reimann writes, quoting Glenn Greenwald:
" I think that left and right as we understood them for the last four
decades
are starting to morph into pro-establishment and anti-establishment
dynamics and that will only continue." That last comment especially, in
which he dismisses a left-right divide, is the exact position of the likes
of Steve Bannon and Alexander Dugin."

I think part of the problem there is the confusion on the left these days.
For the likes of Bannon, anyone in or left of the Democrats is 'left', and
that encompasses a lot of different thinking, some of it having little or
nothing to say about class. So in a sense Greenwald is right. Some on the
"left" are generically anti-establishment. Until there is a genuine
significant movement on the left, distinguishing what left means and
separating it from incoherent anti-establishment thinking will be difficult.

Cheers,
John

On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 9:27 PM John Reimann via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
> I'm not sure if Ralph Johanson was asking me to document my claims about
> Greenwald or if he was just commenting, but in case it's the former, here
> goes:
>
> I had written that he is a somewhat more subtle version of Ben Norton/Max
> Blumenthal and that he supports the Assadist, Tulsi Gabbard. I had
> forgotten to mention that he too supports Assad. He does so in a more
> subtle way than do Blumenthal and Norton, for example in this article:
>
> https://theintercept.com/2017/04/07/the-spoils-of-war-trump-lavished-with-media-and-bipartisan-praise-for-bombing-syria/
> Note
> how he implies that US policy has been regime change in Syria and how he
> casts doubt on who was responsible for the gas attack there.
>
> As for his support for Gabbard, see this article:
>
>
> https://www.businessinsider.com/tulsi-gabbard-homophobic-history-defended-tucker-carlson-glenn-greenwald-2019-1
>   This article also documents his collaboration with Tucker Carlson. This
> article (
>
> https://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-greenwald-rips-msnbc-to-tucker-carlson-they-fed-people-total-disinformation-and-exploited-fears-on-russia/
> )
> does likewise. It also shows how he aligns himself with the likes of Jeremy
> Scahill.
>
>
> As for his defense of the red-brown alliance and his equating the Tea Party
> with Occupy, see this interview he did with RT while he was in Russia
> https://www.rt.com/usa/432042-greenwald-rt-interview-moscow/ In it he is
> quoted as saying, "Two of the most important protest movements in the US –
> one was the Tea Party, the other was Occupy Wall Street – were both
> perceived to be on different ends of the political spectrum. Yet they had
> very similar issues in common. They were protesting the bailout of Wall
> Street after the Wall Street crisis, the domination of corporations I
> think that left and right as we understood them for the last four decades
> are starting to morph into pro-establishment and anti-establishment
> dynamics and that will only continue." That last comment especially, in
> which he dismisses a left-right divide, is the exact position of the likes
> of Steve Bannon and Alexander Dugin.
>
> In that interview, Greenwald continues "There are factions within the
> intelligence community of the United States, the NSA, the CIA, the FBI that
> hate Donald Trump and will do anything to destroy him, including leaking
> classified information against him." While Greenwald dismisses the
> Trump-Russia collusion as "conspiracy theory", it is he, himself, who
> engages in this sort of nonsense here. Why would these "factions" inside
> the CIA, etc. hate Trump? The reason given by his type in the past is that
> "Trump wants peace". Is that what he's claiming?
>
> Greenwald an "exceptionally astute, well-informed spokesperson"? Hardly.
>
> Johanson dismisses my criticisms of Greenwald as being ad hominem attacks,
> but in considering the views of a commentator on a particular issue it is
> perfectly legitimate to consider their overall views. And I do think that
> Greenwald's overall views mean that he's not to be taken seriously.
>
> John Reimann
>
> --
> *“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black
> Jacobins" by C. L. R. James
> Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook
> 

Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

2019-04-21 Thread John Reimann via Marxism
  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I'm not sure if Ralph Johanson was asking me to document my claims about
Greenwald or if he was just commenting, but in case it's the former, here
goes:

I had written that he is a somewhat more subtle version of Ben Norton/Max
Blumenthal and that he supports the Assadist, Tulsi Gabbard. I had
forgotten to mention that he too supports Assad. He does so in a more
subtle way than do Blumenthal and Norton, for example in this article:
https://theintercept.com/2017/04/07/the-spoils-of-war-trump-lavished-with-media-and-bipartisan-praise-for-bombing-syria/
Note
how he implies that US policy has been regime change in Syria and how he
casts doubt on who was responsible for the gas attack there.

As for his support for Gabbard, see this article:

https://www.businessinsider.com/tulsi-gabbard-homophobic-history-defended-tucker-carlson-glenn-greenwald-2019-1
  This article also documents his collaboration with Tucker Carlson. This
article (
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-greenwald-rips-msnbc-to-tucker-carlson-they-fed-people-total-disinformation-and-exploited-fears-on-russia/
)
does likewise. It also shows how he aligns himself with the likes of Jeremy
Scahill.


As for his defense of the red-brown alliance and his equating the Tea Party
with Occupy, see this interview he did with RT while he was in Russia
https://www.rt.com/usa/432042-greenwald-rt-interview-moscow/ In it he is
quoted as saying, "Two of the most important protest movements in the US –
one was the Tea Party, the other was Occupy Wall Street – were both
perceived to be on different ends of the political spectrum. Yet they had
very similar issues in common. They were protesting the bailout of Wall
Street after the Wall Street crisis, the domination of corporations I
think that left and right as we understood them for the last four decades
are starting to morph into pro-establishment and anti-establishment
dynamics and that will only continue." That last comment especially, in
which he dismisses a left-right divide, is the exact position of the likes
of Steve Bannon and Alexander Dugin.

In that interview, Greenwald continues "There are factions within the
intelligence community of the United States, the NSA, the CIA, the FBI that
hate Donald Trump and will do anything to destroy him, including leaking
classified information against him." While Greenwald dismisses the
Trump-Russia collusion as "conspiracy theory", it is he, himself, who
engages in this sort of nonsense here. Why would these "factions" inside
the CIA, etc. hate Trump? The reason given by his type in the past is that
"Trump wants peace". Is that what he's claiming?

Greenwald an "exceptionally astute, well-informed spokesperson"? Hardly.

Johanson dismisses my criticisms of Greenwald as being ad hominem attacks,
but in considering the views of a commentator on a particular issue it is
perfectly legitimate to consider their overall views. And I do think that
Greenwald's overall views mean that he's not to be taken seriously.

John Reimann

-- 
*“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black
Jacobins" by C. L. R. James
Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

2019-04-20 Thread Ralph Johansen via Marxism

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

John Reimann wrote

Ralph Johnson, apparently approvingly, quotes Glenn Greenwald: "I think 
Donald Trump is a huge danger and menace to the republic for a lot of 
reasons that David is very adeptly covering, and I really hope that we 
can now turn our attention to those things, now that we?re done with 
this espionage thriller that has dominated us for three years. I hope we 
can focus on the things that matter."

"But Greenwald? His views should not be taken seriously."
--- 

I accept that you will document what you write about Greenwald on 
request, but what is it that you object to in these three sentences:


"Donald Trump is a huge danger and menace to the republic for a lot of 
reasons...


I really hope that we can now turn our attention to those things, now 
that we're done with this espionage thriller that has dominated us for 
three years.


I hope we can focus on the things that matter."

You may differ about what "things that matter" means to Greenwald, as 
opposed to what it may mean to a Marxist, but to me it's a sort of an 
unobjectionable, fill-in-the-blanks statement.


Moreover, Greenwald whatever his warts is an exceptionally astute, 
well-informed spokesperson for the civil libertarian liberal left, the 
kind I would not parse and quibble over as compared to all the criminals 
in high places out there, And as to his omissions and errors on the 
issues you mention that you oppose, this was hardly the place for him or 
anyone else to focus on them.


Greenwald's observations on the Mueller Report read as if he was 
prepping to represent a litigant, at $750 an hour, rather than as an 
investigative reporter, however much his compensation - which cannot be 
a bad thing for us. Greenwald convinces me that there is no comforting 
life left in this project, either from DOJ or Congress, despite or just 
because of what's not been covered, and projecting politically, won't.


Is It an appropriate time to trot out your list of his other political 
shortcomings, and then in conclusion write, "But Greenwald? His views 
should not be taken seriously."


Sort of calls to mind those ad hominem attacks on Assange for his warts 
at this critical juncture, joining the attack dogs, rather than keeping 
our eyes on the main threat posed by his abduction and 7-year 
confinement to one room in the embassy, convening of a 
Pentagon-neighborhood secret Grand Jury to come up with a guaranteed 
indictment, and impending delivery to the dungeon in order to 
definitively chill whistle blowers and investigative reporters for the 
duration.


We need all the help we can get, including when it comes to speaking 
out, effectively, on behalf of our dwindling civil liberties. Or do you 
think otherwise.



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

2019-04-20 Thread John Reimann via Marxism
  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Ralph Johnson, apparently approvingly, quotes Glenn Greenwald: "I think
Donald Trump is a huge danger and
menace to the republic for a lot of reasons that David is very adeptly
covering, and I really hope that we can now turn our attention to those
things, now that we?re done with this espionage thriller that has
dominated us for three years. I hope we can focus on the things that
matter."

Like so much of the left as well as the alt-left, Greenwald completely
misses the point, which is that the President of the United States is
seriously beholden to a rival capitalist class. This is not a matter of
patriotism nor defense of "national interests"; it's a question of
understanding the political crisis of US capitalism, something which
Greenwald is incapable of doing.

That's because he is nothing but a somewhat more subtle version of Max
Blumenthal/Ben Norton. He openly advocates a red-brown alliance, having
equated the Occupy movement with the Tea Party as both being
"anti-establishment" and concluded "I think that left and right as we
understood them for the last four decades are starting to morph into
pro-establishment and anti-establishment dynamics and that will only
continue."

Greenwald supports the Assadist Tulsi Gabbard, and is a collaborator with
the far right Tucker Carlson.

Basically, Greenwald is like so much of the left that sees any opponent of
US imperialism as an ally, which is why he in effect defends Putin & Co. So
I think his views on the Mueller Report have to be considered in this
light. That there was collaboration, or attempted collaboration, between
the Trump campaign and the Putin regime is really beyond doubt. What was
the meeting at Trump Tower all about? What were the frequent contacts
between Trump staffers and Russian representatives about?

And the story goes back decades - to the fact that it was the Russian mafia
capitalist class that provided much of Trump's financing for decades. Even
Don jr. said this. And THAT is the real scandal of the Mueller
"investigation" - that they never tried to lift the lid on that can of
worms.

But Greenwald? His views should not be taken seriously.

John Reimann
-- 
*“In politics, abstract terms conceal treachery.” *from "The Black
Jacobins" by C. L. R. James
Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] The Mueller Report: Glenn Greenwald vs. David Cay Johnston on Trump-Russia Ties, Obstruction & More

2019-04-19 Thread Ralph Johansen via Marxism

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

https://www.democracynow.org/2019/4/19/the_mueller_report_glenn_greenwald_vs

This exchange between Greenwald and Johnston pretty much puts paid to 
this whole dreary, dragged-out investigation.


As Greenwald concludes: "I think Donald Trump is a huge danger and 
menace to the republic for a lot of reasons that David is very adeptly 
covering, and I really hope that we can now turn our attention to those 
things, now that we’re done with this espionage thriller that has 
dominated us for three years. I hope we can focus on the things that 
matter."

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com