Are Trump & Far-Right Politicians a Virtual “Honey Trap” for Russia?
The FBI case has been exposed, and was exposed in during the election cycle about Donald Trump’s ties to the Russian mafia through Felix Sater and the numerous other Russian and otherwise, organized crime figures surrounding Trump.
Why did this information not reach the public, so that they could make an honest decision about Trump early on, before the election? Why has the Mainstream Media repeated and repeated the Russia ties story, while so much information has been available for so long connecting Trump to the Russian mafia and oligarchs who bought condos in his buildings?
According to a recent expose’ on Who.What.Why., Why FBI Can’t Tell All on Trump, Russia, “Efforts to try to get this information to the public appear to have been aggressively blocked by the DOJ because it would potentially expose their own operations — both those that have been effective and others that have not.”
This in-depth investigation takes readers through the assorted documented contacts between Trump and organized crime.
The interesting portion is the way the situation in Ukraine is framed. It is framed solely depending on the movements of organized crime to “shield” key players and give favor to “Russian causes” involved in the conflict.
No mention of the Western coup is present, nor the $5 billion US dollars spent to facilitate the coup, nor the fact that the Crimean people are ethnic Russians who voted to re-join Russia because of the far-right that had been installed in Ukraine, due to a foreign backed putsch.
Lest we remember US-Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, Victoria Nuland’s role in the coup and designing the post coup government, far more important than the curse word directed towards the EU:
So again, why has the information on Trump not been fully released to the public, even prior to the election, so that voters could make a choice as to whether they wanted a man closely tied to organized crime in the White House?
Looking at the election itself, there were numerous factors that show the election was actually stolen for Trump including:
Voters were purged – meaning removed from the voter rolls while still having absentee ballots sent to them. The vote purges involved Cross Check, investigated by Greg Palast, as a method of purging voters in multiple states using a database that matched only first and last names to fraudulently purge voters of various ethnic groups, that potentially typically vote Democratic. The system was implemented in 27 states and headed by Kris Kobach, Kansas Secretary of State, who shortly after the election was positioned as an adviser to Trump on immigration reform.
Broken scanners were given to poor, Democratic communities in Detroit, Michigan. ” ‘It’s not good,’ Detroit Elections Director Daniel Baxter told the Detroit News Tuesday, before the judge halted the recount. He blamed the discrepancies on the city’s decade-old voting machines, saying 87 optical scanners broke on Election Day, the newspaper reported.” These precincts were not eligible for a recount because of the discrepancies, according to Michigan election law.
Voting machine audit functions and safety protocols were turned off, in Ohio, despite the fact that, “the FBI has raised fears of fiddling these machines by Russian hackers. Yet, the Republican Secretary of State of Ohio, Jon Husted, is allowing county officials to simply turn off these security functions — with no explanation as to why. The counties, Fitrakis discovered, ‘bought state-of-the-art equipment and turned off the security,’ both the ballot imaging function and the audit application that can detect and record evidence of machine tampering.”
So, if the FBI was aware of possible tampering “hacking” of the election, and they were aware of the mafia ties to Trump, why was he allowed to be elected?
Is Trump being used to net a larger fish, or rather bear, at behest of NATO?
Behind this thought process lies the ties to the high tech management of perceptions found in Cambridge Analytica, a company tied to one of Trump’s largest supporters, Robert Mercer. This company has been written about in the Guardian and elsewhere as providing the far-right a vehicle from which to manage and alter perceptions.
According to Carole Cadwalladr in the article, Robert Mercer: the big data billionaire waging war on mainstream media, “there was another reason why I recognised Robert Mercer’s name: because of his connection to Cambridge Analytica, a small data analytics company. He is reported to have a $10m stake in the company, which was spun out of a bigger British company called SCL Group. It specialises in ‘election management strategies’ and ‘messaging and information operations’, refined over 25 years in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan. In military circles this is known as ‘psyops’ – psychological operations. (Mass propaganda that works by acting on people’s emotions.)
“Cambridge Analytica worked for the Trump campaign and, so I’d read, the Leave campaign. When Mercer supported Cruz, Cambridge Analytica worked with Cruz. When Robert Mercer started supporting Trump, Cambridge Analytica came too. And where Mercer’s money is, Steve Bannon is usually close by: it was reported that until recently he had a seat on the board.
“Last December, I wrote about Cambridge Analytica in a piece about how Google’s search results on certain subjects were being dominated by rightwing and extremist sites. Jonathan Albright, a professor of communications at Elon University, North Carolina, who had mapped the news ecosystem and found millions of links between rightwing sites ‘strangling’ the mainstream media, told me that trackers from sites like Breitbart could also be used by companies like Cambridge Analytica to follow people around the web and then, via Facebook, target them with ads.
“On its website, Cambridge Analytica makes the astonishing boast that it has psychological profiles based on 5,000 separate pieces of data on 220 million American voters – its USP is to use this data to understand people’s deepest emotions and then target them accordingly. The system, according to Albright, amounted to a ‘propaganda machine’.”
Looking at the foundation for Cambridge Analytica, it was spun off from SCL (Strategic Communication Laboratories) Group British founded by Nigel Oakes, who also initially set up a research facility set up for strategic communication, potentially international psychological operations, called the Behavioural Dynamics Institute (BDI) that was founded in 1990. This was followed by Strategic Communication Laboratories in 1993, which was able to obtain contracts to influence elections internationally and perceptions for NATO.
From a Wikipedia capture of its website, “SCL has influenced elections in Italy, Latvia, Ukraine, Albania, Romania, South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya, Mauritius, India, Indonesia, Thailand, Taiwan, Colombia, Antigua, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, St. Kitts & Nevis, Trinidad & Tobago.”
“In 2007, SCL paid $20,000 to a Washington lobbying company, Global Policy Partners, to promote it in the US. SCL won contracts with the Pentagon to conduct surveys in Iran and Yemen. ‘Psych-ops was big business and people were just chucking money around,’ said one person familiar with the company,” according to a March 4, 2017 article in the Guardian, Did Cambridge Analytica influence the Brexit vote and the US election?
“In 2015, it secured a $750,000 contract to help Nato states counter Russian propaganda in eastern Europe,” according to a March 4, 2017 article in the Guardian, Did Cambridge Analytica influence the Brexit vote and the US election? More information about the contract is found here.
If SCL/Cambridge Analytica is involved with NATO and Trump, Brexit and potentially other far-right candidates who have seemed to be courting Russian President, Vladimir Putin, what is going on?
Could it be that the far-right’s courtship of Putin is a mere trap to hide the sins of the West in regards to regime change in Ukraine and sponsorship of terrorists in Syria and elsewhere at behest of a clash of civilizations plan for Greater Israel and a Caliphate?
Looking at the current opposition in Russia by Alexei Navalny and his supporters who staged protests last weekend, an interesting parallel can be found. Navalny has long appealed to the far-right while his two main advisers are of Jewish ancestry.
According to the Times of Israel, September 9, 2013 article, Nationalist backed by Jewish advisers fails in Moscow mayor bid, “His campaign strategy was developed by Leonid Volkov and Maksim Kats, two tech-savvy Jews who provided Navalny with outside-the-box strategies designed to offset his disadvantage against Sobyanin.”
When examining the backgrounds of his advisers, one begins to question, is Navalny following a similar pattern to Trump?
Another interesting pattern also emerges with the contacts of the Trump campaign with the Russian government.
With the success achieved by Russia in countering terrorism in Syria that started in September of 2015, Russia took the world by storm and off-set what seemed to be the potential for a full blown Islamic State based on Wahhabist extremism set to operate in Syria. Russia changed the direction of the war, against the terrorists, and returned the strength to Syrian secularism.
Is it a coincidence that Trump advisers began meeting with the Russian government, slowly over time gaining trust that if Trump won, his administration would be committed to working together to fight terrorism in Syria and work to solve the misconceptions regarding Ukraine?
If agencies have information of “Russian hacking,” is it also possible that sophisticated bots impersonated “Russian hackers” in regards to the 2016 election?
However, with so much evidence of domestic vote rigging, was Russia even necessary to steal the election?
Post election, Cambridge Analytica was also given a contract to manage the perceptions of the President and the incoming administration.
“But the role of CA may not end with the election victory of Trump. According to the British newspaper The Guardian CA negotiated ‘two rich contracts’, one to handle the image and message of the new administration, the other to deal with the marketing of the company that bears the name of the new president.
“With the Sole 24 Ore article, CA declined to confirm or deny this negotiation, however, rejecting all other requests for information or interviews. But his influence on future White House will not result only from these two contracts. In its Board of Directors it is to be present Stephen Bannon, the former banker Goldman Sachs became a top manager of ultra-right websites, after directing the campaign of Trump, was named its ‘strategic advisor.’ And the most significant of Cambridge, American investor is Robert Mercer, the inscrutable New York financier, came to prominence during the election campaign to the side before Cruz then Trump and intended to retain an influential role on the new White House.”
As the FBI is aware of the mafia ties, the election rigging and also ongoing foreign perception management by the current administration upon the American public, a key question is why does the American public have to suffer?
It is not only rigging, perception management, an imposed President who clearly could be, and in all likelihood has been, controlled by mafia ties, that also may have an element of sex-blackmail operating in the background to potentially silence opponents, but it is the ongoing daily destruction by the administration of government infrastructure and protections for the people that is occurring.