There is not just one "deep state" in the United States. There is the one which brought Trump to the Presidency, to the great surprise of both the Democratic Party "liberals" and the Republican Grand Old Party. But we are noticing another "deep state", that is an alliance drawn from across liberals, media and secret services. All of them are committed to overthrow the constitutional order and to proceed regardless of the obstacles set by the laws, the rules and the decency.
The "fake news" issue against Trump is a clear evidence of this. They are trying to subvert the election results. This fact is already disturbing, but the methods are even more disturbing, because what is happening in the public eye shows that this is not just an isolated case: the rules are changing and this is going to last long, even after the inauguration. Furthermore, this "deep state" has wide external alliances and its methods, which is euphemistic to call "unscrupulous", have already been exported to Europe. Thus, all this affects us two times. And it affects everybody, even Russia and China. In short, if the Empire totters, the consequences will be global.
The last offensive in order of time, ten days before the inauguration, came from a document of - it seems - 35 folders, which even under the examination of the savviest readers immediately appears completely not credible, unverified, full of gross errors and contradictions. Now we know, after the unfolding of the scandal, that the alleged "author" is unknown even to the content leaker: an anonymous "former agent of the British MI6"; it is unknown if he worked in Moscow or elsewhere; he was recruited by a private agency in Washington which was gathering compromising materials about the candidates of both the competing parties.
One of the problems is that this "document" circulated for some time, even before the elections, and had already been considered useless by the leading members of the American mainstream media. For example, the executive director of the New York Times, Dean Baquet, described it as "totally unsubstantiated. (.) We, like others, investigated the allegations and haven't corroborated them, and we felt we're not in the business of publishing things we can't stand by". Another problem is that the heads of the CIA, FBI and NSA, with varying degrees of certainty, have decided instead that the former MI6 agent was "credible". But it is primarily their own credibility to be questioned: they had all publicly supported the candidate Hillary Clinton. In August the former CIA director, Michael Morell, described Trump as "an "unwitting agent of Russian President Vladimir Putin" on the New York Times. He was echoed, on the Washington Post, by the former director of the CIA and NSA (under George W. Bush), Michael Hayden, who described Trump as "some na´ve soul who's manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind support is happily accepted and exploited."".
After the election we have seen a series of secret services "whistle-blowers" in the CNN offices, the media battleship of the American elite and the universal prompter of all the mainstream fake news. The CNN announced - in the "breaking news" - that the "national intelligence leaders" have reported to both Obama and Trump that Russia had kept "compromising personal and financial information about Trump". Here we see the "fake news" performing a double twist: the Russians (Who? How? When? In which form?) are the ones who have ditched their agent.
Actually, the former MI6 agent would have been the one who "let us understand" that "he had heard" in Moscow (How? From whom? When?) that Trump had been recorded and filmed in a room of the Ritz Carlton Hotel, together with a group of prostitutes who were intent to pee on the bed of the most elegant suite, where Obama and his wife had slept some time before. What is the evidence? "Well, everybody knows that the Ritz is full of Russian secret services cameras".
But, smartly, the CNN did not say anything about this, merely reporting that they could not "verify" the data. The statements of the secret services leaders - known to be the source of all the hoaxes fabricated to prepare the military aggressions of the countries believed to be unfaithful - was considered enough. But - given that the CNN has been the faithful loudspeaker of them since its existence - it was not difficult for it to continue its task. At this point CNN allowed the minor media to peddle the details. The first of them was Buzzfeed. All of them made of course no checks whatsoever. The director of Buzzfeed, Ben Smith, accompanied his decision with the words "even if there are serious doubts about these rumours", but he left the task to decide whether they are credible or not to the public.
Almost unanimously, the European media servants will follow, using the same method with rare exceptions. At every step, doubts will disappear and in the following days there will be a growing number of journalists and politicians ready to swear that they read that Moscow was spying Trump and would be able to blackmail him for all eternity.
The alleged, still anonymous, former MI6 agent added, in his alleged dossier, that Trump had sent his lawyer, Michael Cohen, to Prague, probably to dissuade "the Russians". Cohen has made clear to the press - which ignores his denials - that he has never been in Prague in his entire life. And to no one wonders what Prague has to do with the whole thing. "The Russians" are not in Prague, but in Moscow. Only few savvy people remember that Prague (shifted to the West long time ago) is the right place to raise subliminal memories. It was in Prague indeed, according to the CIA, that the meeting between Saddam Hussein's secret services and the 9/11 hijackers took place. Naturally that meeting never existed; it has been made up by the CIA. With the result that, in the autumn of 2003, when the Iraq war had already been ended, 70% of the Americans believed that Saddam Hussein had organised the attacks against the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.
These are details. At this point, it is essential to remember that all the establishment of the Democratic Party and almost all the liberal press, included its most famous commentators, even Michael Moore, have given full credit and almost total support to this subversive operation. It only remains to add the icing on the cake. It was the Republican Senator John McCain, the man who met the Caliph al Baghdadi before he became the Caliph of the Islamic State, to "give" a copy of the fake report to the FBI.
Link all'articolo in italiano: https://it.sputniknews.com/opinioni/201701133924391-usa-donald-trump-fake-news-rapporto-intelligence/