Nothing Conspiratorial About Trump/Putin Meetings and Discussions
They met face-to-face for summit talks in Helsinki, on the sidelines of G20 and APEC summits, along with a number of phone conversations – similar to what all leaders do with their counterparts.
No US presidents in memory were accused of conspiratorial dealings with other world leaders, let alone acting as their agent or asset.
Yet the self-styled newspaper of record NYT, the closest thing in the media to a propaganda ministry, and the neocon/CIA-connected Washington Post suggested Trump may wittingly or unwittingly be working for Russia against the US – because of his “behavior.”
There’s plenty about it to criticize, nothing suggesting he’s a possible Manchurian president, nothing indicating improper or illegal dealings with Putin.
Yet it’s why FBI and Mueller witch hunts were begun – finding no damning evidence backing the above allegations because there’s nothing to find.
Media I call scoundrels for good reason won’t quit, the Times at it again, claiming it’s unknown what Trump and Putin discussed when they met, suggesting something conspiratorial between them.
After many months of House, Senate, FBI, and Mueller probes, nothing damning was found, not even smoke, let alone fire.
Yet in its latest hit piece for the wrong reasons, the Times slammed what it called “(t)he unusually secretive way (Trump) has handled these meetings…fuel(ing) suspicions about” his relationship with Putin, leaving people “guessing what happened…”
The issue is only raised about Trump, no other US president in his dealings with counterparts, and only about Trump’s interactions with Putin – a preeminent leader, world’s apart from the array of anti-democratic and despotic ones all US presidents have good relations with, to their shame.
There’s no “mystery surrounding” Trump’s meetings with Putin, no collusion, improper, or illegal behavior, no justifiable furor raised over their discussions, nothing “adversar(ial)” about Russia’s relationship with the US, plenty the other way around by virtually the entire Congress and bureaucracy.
Trump’s only redeeming quality is wanting improved relations with Russia, a way to avoid belligerent confrontation between the world’s dominant nuclear powers – an aim everyone in Washington should support, including the major media.
Detailed notes of Trump’s meetings with Putin and other foreign leaders matter little – just policies the US and other countries have toward each other as well as toward other nations.
Among other reasons, Trump is criticized for daring to believe no Russian US election meddling occurred. Without evidence backing claims, they’re baseless, part of longstanding Russia bashing.
The Times, WaPo, and most other US media are furious over Trump winning an election he was supposed to lose, wanting better relations with Russia, and at times favoring the idea of pulling out of NATO, ideas I strongly support.
Unmentioned or short shrift is given to his endless wars of aggression against invented enemies because no real ones exist, along with a domestic agenda serving privileged monied interests at the expense of the general welfare – major issues demanding tough criticism.
My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”