Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Despite Denials, There Is Evidence of Collusion Between the Trump Campaign and the Kremlin
It is a common talking point among Trump supporters that “there is not one shred of evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.” This statement is far from true. In fact, the evidence is quite extensive.
The Kremlin supported the Trump campaign through a broad spectrum of means, including staff, funds, propaganda, black operations, trolls, and thugs. We address each of these in turn.
Staff
Prominent Trump campaign officials who are known to be paid Kremlin agents include Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort, Campaign Energy Advisor Carter Page, and former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.
Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort was formerly chief henchman to Putin-allied Ukrainian dictator Victor Yanukovych. Manafort was also directly involved in the transferring of millions of dollars of such Russian mob funds into US real estate ventures.
Trump Energy Advisor Carter Page is a major investor in the Russian state owned energy company Gazprom. As a Gazprom investor, Page has a personal financial interest in ending Western sanctions against Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, a move which, along with recognition of the Russian annexation of Crimea, Trump himself said he was considering during the campaign. But it gets worse. Page actually endorsed the Russian invasion of Ukraine, going so far as to compare US support for Ukrainian independence to the killing of black youth by police officers. “The deaths triggered by U.S. government officials in both the former Soviet Union and the streets of America in 2014 share a range of close similarities,” wrote Page in January 2015.
Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn had dinner with Vladimir Putin last year. Such fraternization bore fruit for the Kremlin, as evidenced by the action by Trump operatives to eliminate language in the GOP platform advocating US support for Ukraine’s defense. In exchange for his trip to Moscow, Flynn received $50,000 from Russian state owned TV company RT, a payment which he concealed from federal agents investigating him for purposes of checking his security clearance. Flynn was appointed chairman of the National Security council by President Trump, only to be forced to resign a few weeks later when it was revealed he had lied to Vice President Pence about some of his Kremlin contacts.
Funds
Without a viable business base, Trump could never have mounted his campaign for the Republican nomination, let alone the election. Because his business career has involved a series of swindles against his investors, lenders, vendors, workers, and customers, Trump in recent years has found it difficult to obtain credit from legitimate financial sources. This has opened questions as of how the Trump empire can remain in business. The solution to this mystery is provided, however, by statements made by Trump’s sons. “We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia, Donald Trump Jr. explained in 2008. In 2013, this was further clarified by Eric Trump, who told a reporter: “We don’t rely on American banks. We have all the funding we need out of Russia.” If such confessions of financial dependency require verification, it can no doubt be found in Trump’s tax returns. However, despite pre-election promises to disclose these documents, the President continues to refuse to make them available.
Black Operations
In early July 2016, GRU (Russian military intelligence) hackers broke into the computers at the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, stealing their files. Then, July 22, on the eve of the Democratic National Convention, thousands of emails embarrassing to the Clinton camp drawn from these files were publicly released through WikiLeaks with the clear intention of dividing the Democratic Party and electing Donald Trump President.
Asked about this by the press on July 27, Trump openly proclaimed that he favored such Russian hacking, and he hoped that Putin and company would do more of it to help expose Hillary. This remarkable and potentially felonious statement provoked a firestorm of criticism, so much so that Trump subsequently walked it back – a rare event for the Don – saying that he had been speaking “sarcastically.” The fact, however, that the GRU did actually conduct a black operation inside the United States to assist Trump makes it not so easy to dismiss. Furthermore, it must be noted that the channel used for this and subsequent anti-Clinton operations during the campaign, Wikileaks, is a known Kremlin front.
Propaganda
The Russian state owned propaganda agency Russia Today (RT), which broadcasts internationally, including within the US, was unstinting throughout the nomination and election campaigns in its support for Donald Trump. This support has included not only constant favorable coverage, attacks on opponents, and commentary by talking heads, but personal praise of Donald Trump by Russian dictator Vladimir Putin himself.
Trolls and Thugs
During both the nomination and election campaigns, media websites of all sorts, but most especially conservative ones, were deluged with abusive comments directed against those who refused to adhere to the Trump line. Many of these comments were clearly written by Russian-speaking individuals. Others, perhaps most, were written by American members or adherents of the so-called “Alt-Right,” which also provided critical support for the ground game of the Trump nomination effort. This requires further discussion.
The Alt-Right is part of a Kremlin operation to create pro-Moscow ultranationalist and identarian fifth column movements in the West. The chief composer of the ideological synthesis of communism and fascism that the Kremlin created for this movement, Aleksandr Dugin, endorsed Donald Trump in March 2016. “In Trump we trust,” said Dugin (perhaps proposing the substitution of Trump for God in the American national slogan), as he mobilized the American Alt-Right against Trump’s GOP nomination opponents. It should be noted that the relationship between Dugin and the American Alt-Right is quite direct, as Nina Kouprianova, (pen name “Nina Byzantina”) the former wife of US Alt-Right leader, Richard Spencer, is Dugin’s American translator. Should anyone have further doubts about the Kremlin/Alt-Right links, Spencer and the Alt-Right provided confirmation themselves by holding a rally in Virginia on May 20, in which they chanted “Russia is our friend.”
It should be noted that while Hillary Clinton was the first major Trump opponent to call out the Alt-Right in the course of the campaign, the Alt-Right’s most important effort was directed not so much against her, as Trump’s GOP opponents and NeverTrump dissenters. This was done, as documented by National Review writer David French, through a campaign of terror, including death threats, targeting editors, writers, and others (including French, who at one point contemplated running as a third party conservative candidate against Trump and Clinton, an initiative, which if implemented, could have significantly harmed Trump’s electoral chances). Threats against French also included threats to his wife, which reached such intensity that French found it necessary to post a photograph on Facebook of his wife practicing with an AR-15 to warn off would-be assailants. Other conservatives threatened included NeverTrump supporters Rick Wilson, Erick Erickson, Glenn Beck, Ben Shapiro, Jonah Goldberg, Free the Delegates leader Kendal Unruh, and the editor of one conservative publication who informed me he could no longer carry my articles because of the threats he had received.
We thus see that Kremlin support for Trump’s election was been quite extensive. This support has been reciprocated. Trump has called the Russian dictator “a real leader” and dismissed his many murders of journalists and political opponents at home and abroad as “unproven.” Last January, a British court found that Putin had ordered the murder by Polonium poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko, a former FSB agent who revealed that the 1999 apartment buildings bombings in Moscow that Putin used to seize dictatorial power were the work of Putin’s FSB itself. Disturbingly, the billionaire appears be fine with that too. In May 2017, Trump went so far as to invite Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to the White House, where, on his own initiative, he shared top secret classified information.
Donald Trump has also expressed support for Syrian dictator Bashir Assad, who in alliance with Russian and Iranian military forces, is flooding Europe with refugees, thereby stoking the fortunes of the Kremlin-allied ultraright parties operating as part of Dugin’s fascist international. These include the anti-NATO French National Front, whose founder, Jean-Marie Le Pen, also endorsed Trump. The National Front’s current leader, Marine Le Pen also supported the Russian takeover of Crimea, and is being openly bankrolled out of Moscow. In November 2016, Marine Le Pen traveled to New York to visit Trump Tower. According to Trump spokesman Sean Spicer, she did not meet with Trump. Subsequently, however, Trump openly supported her failed attempt to win the French presidency.
In line with his support of Le Pen, during the campaign, Trump supported the gutting of North Atlantic Treaty Organization, an objective that has been Moscow’s number one foreign policy priority since the beginning of the Cold War. He denounced NATO as being “obsolete,” and called for sharply reducing US commitments to the alliance that has been the bulwark of American security since World War II. Not only that, Donald Trump stated that as President, he would not necessarily honor the United States treaty commitment to defend a NATO ally if attacked by Russia. Trump’s frequent statements during the campaign that the United States should confront China also coheres with Kremlin desires, as Russia’s masters have no fonder wish than to see their two major global rivals take each other down.
Finally, it cannot reasonably be asserted that the combination of Kremlin support for Trump and Trump support for the Kremlin was coincidental. In fact, it has now been documented that, despite repeated false statements made by Trump camp spokesmen, there were at least 18 unreported contacts during the campaign between the Kremlin and Trump agents or representatives.
So, in summary, here was the deal: In exchange for Russian-supplied staff, funds, propaganda, trolls, thugs, and black operations support for his nomination and election, Donald Trump aligned himself with an effort to break the western alliance and deliver Europe to Kremlin domination.
Starting as a near-bankrupt dark-horse candidate with three-percent backing, Trump clearly could not have won the GOP nomination without the support of the Kremlin, its organized crime funding networks, and its Alt-Right foot soldiers. As for the election, it is probably true that Hillary Clinton could have beaten him regardless, had her campaign been run competently and had she not embraced the anti-industrial platform that cost her much of the labor vote in what had previously been the Democrats’ “blue wall’ midwestern stronghold.
Be that as it may, it is also true that the Nazis could almost certainly have conquered Norway in 1940 without the help of the treasonous Norwegian Defense Minister Vidkun Quisling. But the fact remains: Quisling was still a traitor.
Anyone who collaborates with a foreign adversary to seize power in the United States would be equally guilty. Republicans should stop trying to pretend that there is no evidence for such collusion, and instead demonstrate their patriotism by helping the nation’s security agencies get to the bottom of this sordid matter.
Here’s a hint to the GOP members of Congress: Vote with the Democrats to subpoena Trump’s tax returns. The truth will set you free.
Published in Politics
As the topic has progressed from the still-unsubstantiated accusations of collusion to the rather touchier issue of what should and shouldn’t be allowed on Ricochet, I’ll throw in my two cents, again.
I’m new here, and I don’t know what the Contributor tagline implies. I notice that Mr. Zubrin’s post appeared on the main feed with zero likes, so I presume he has a more exalted status than I do as a modest six dollar a month guy.
If being a Contributor means getting to post stuff without having to meet the 12-likes-and-you’re-in threshold, I’d enjoy that myself: sign me up! (Unless it costs money, of course.) But I assume there must be some higher standard to which Contributors are held, if they don’t have to pass the 12 likes filter.
And if that’s the case, I think Mr. Zubrin perhaps fell short here. Maybe he ought to be put on a six likes regimen for awhile. Or two. Or an attaboy. Something. Just to keep really mediocre stuff from pushing those of us who are working hard(er) for our 15 seconds of fame further down the Main Feed stack.
But leave his post up, certainly. A little bit of that stuff is okay.
OK, I’ll start, and, as usual, expend minimal effort in doing so (hey, it’s Friday night!):
Collusion (noun): secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.
synonyms: conspiracy, connivance, complicity, intrigue, plotting.
How much evidence of that is there?
Hat tip @oddhan, BTW.
Let me contrast my reaction to Mona Charen vs Bob Zubrin. Both have shown a distaste for Trump. I have my disagreements with Mona but I believe she thinks things through and just has a different aesthetic, not a different world view. This Zubrin piece has a DNC talking point feel to it. It is not original. It doesn’t really move the ball forward.
“Oh, did you know the CIA started the crack cocaine epidemic to produce a black genocide in this country?” It’s at that level, and that’s why it’s MSNBC, and not spice.
If the piece is so obviously flawed I think that refutation would be easy. That’s how you beat speech you disagree with.
Down with safe spaces.
Mr. Zubrin adds the value of taking care of cats in Paris. That alone allows him the value of posting stuff immediately on the Main Feed.
I read that on the Internet.
@jamielockett, give us your easy refutation of this if you think that having conspiracy theories are a great thing to be published and edited on the public page of Ricochet to prove we are not snowflakes and need of safe spaces. I don’t need a safe space, I just don’t need to be wasting my time.
Oh, yeah. That’s what they want you to believe. I’ve got pictures taken in the parking lot of the Wendy’s in Crystal City which prove otherwise. It starts innocently enough with a Triple w/ Cheese but by the time you get around to the Frosty you’re feeding the Russian army:
Grain Sales To Soviets To Increase
(Yes, this is silly, in keeping with the spirit of the original post. The only difference is that I’m doing it intentionally.)
What about the title? It directly suggests that there’s evidence of collusion, but the piece gives none.
Well, I haven’t read the piece (only so many hours in a day), but I trust my fellow Ricochetti that it’s an embarrassment.
But, please, don’t take it down! I haven’t been this amused by comments since…. since… well, since yesterday. This is Ricochet, after all. Hilarious!
There is circumstantial evidence, but no direct evidence imho.
I would imitate the Honeymooners and say, “To the Moon Zubrin”‘, but we all know he wants to go to Mars.
This article is definitely below the average for contributors.
Exactly. Deleting the post would also delete all the comments and refutations.
Pass, although if you want to write up a post making that argument I’ll wade into the comments to demonstrate how wrong you are.
I believe that Mr. Zubrin’s conclusions here are wrong, the evidence he presents is just that evidence. To reach his conclusion isn’t a conspiracy, it’s a misreading of the evidence.
How do you debunk an article that offers no evidence of its thesis? The title says collusion, but the evidence offered doesn’t mention actual collusion.
The case was made in a fashion that was considered and civil. Which fits the goals of Ricochet. I just think it wrong and based on a series of false premises ( e.g.: definition of collusion ). I would rather it hadn’t been posted but it should not be removed.
I’ll second that.
I assume there are editorial procedures in place to help avoid such low quality Contributor posts becoming commonplace.
(In fairness, this is the first such post I’ve seen.)
You could point out how the evidence doesn’t support the conclusion of collusion. @exjon did a pretty good job in his comment on the first page.
The onion? I’ve seen similar cases made to prove that Jews run everything. That the big three auto makers have suppressed radical new technology, sometimes it’s the energy companies etc. The thing is, if you don’t have the facts at your finger tips, or like me wouldn’t remember them anyway, you don’t know what to say because common sense and judgement won’t work on people convinced by these stories. You know it’s nonsense and conjecture based on a priori conclusions, but it has to be put down piece by piece with skill by those with the facts and enough memory to do it justice because this is constructed by an experienced conspiracy creator.
Yeah, Jon. Since I’m certain you knew ahead of time what reaction you would get on this post, and since you are actually taking credit for participating, why didn’t you put it on the member feed and see if you could get it promoted?
EDIT: Why would you want to take this kind of hit with Mr. Zubrin?
Now this is getting weird. There is no Wendy’s in Crystal city, and there never has been!
I also post 99% of all pro-Trump pieces and the many posts saying that the Russia stuff is a waste of time. I’ve repeatedly said it’s a waste of time on my podcast as well.
The jews have teamed up with the masons in league with Bahamophet. So it couldn’t possibly have been the russians.
I could write a long book about how War and Peace doesn’t prove that Napoleon conquered Russia. I mean…the book is thematically related to my thesis. But it seems like a waste of time, given that War and Peace is about how Napoleon tried and failed miserably to conquer Russia. Explaining point by point how each piece of evidence that Zubrin mentioned is ultimately irrelevant to the actual thesis as stated in the title is a ridiculous waste of time. I just feel like the editors are trolling the members with this one.
Let me ask another way then. Why is this person a contributor? His posts are almost always like this. It’s not as if he is like Mona who gets her stuff published in other places. I’m sure this guy get scientific pieces published other place but not this stuff.
I think you just dodged the question, Jon.
The problem with these vague accusations is, when they’re repeated often enough, they gain acceptance and make possible such injustices as what happened to Scooter Libby or Conrad Black. The Left (and Zubrin) are determined to destroy Trump. They’ll eventually “get him” on something. We all commit, what, three felonies a day?
I think it would have been wiser to post this on the Member Feed to keep it all in the family. JMHO
Well, you say that.
Wheels within wheels, my friend. This thing goes deep.
It’s a False Flag operation. The signs on the building all say “Burger King”. But do you know who was really under that creepy mask?
Достаточно говорить! Писатель был полностью дискредитировали. Вернуться к работе, агенты родины!
This is weak. Unconvincing even to this erstwhile NeverTrumper.