so, i'm not commenting on the russia thing, but my predictions heading into the trump presidency were startling, frighteningly, accurate: what i deduced was happening was that the cia set the whole wikileaks things up, and then tried to deflect the blame to the russians. i predicted that the deep state would drag on the russian narrative, and use it as an excuse to consolidate it's own power by expanding it's ability to spy on people.

there was tremendous interference in the last election, but it was coming from inside the deep state, which saw clinton as a vulnerability, both due to her clear intent to involve herself in bureaucratic processes, and her allegiances being open to the highest bidder, regardless of nationality or design.

the russians maybe knew about it. maybe they even helped, a little. i wouldn't go so far as to suggest that putin would have a preference for trump, as he is hardly an ideal alternative, but he certainly had a distaste for a hillary clinton presidency, which was pretty much the worst thing that russia could imagine, given that what set the current events in motion happened under her tenure as secretary. i think jill stein was more right than she realizes: the chances of hillary clinton starting a hot war with russia were not minimal.

if i were to be actively commenting on this story, it would come off as some kind of morbid chess game, where i'm just deflecting accusations back upon the accusers. when the headlines say russia did something, the correct way to read it is that the cia did that thing, and then blamed it on russia. apply it across the board. there are few exceptions.

so, instead, i just post these periodic updates that key in on specific events.

so, trump is supposedly taking on the fbi. right. don't be surprised if the outcome of this is a power grab of some sort, as that is what this is all eventually leading up to: this is a crisis generated to consolidate power.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42922995

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.

there was an announcement by the ndp a little while ago that i interpreted as a broadcast that they would be using the #metoo thing as an opportunity to put singh backers in key positions, and here it is.

erin weir is a prominent voice in caucus and a reasonable candidate for this position, but he's also a white male. i would expect the new caucus chair to, in the end, be female.

the federal ndp has a unique type of incompetence. first, they can't even do a purge without being obvious. second, the basis of this purge appears to be trivial, and the effects of a trivial pure are inevitably going to be harmful.

the predicament that the ndp is in, right now, is as much a consequence of the mulcair purges, which destroyed a lot of the party's best mps, as it is of his eventual electoral defeat. it is because of the mulcair purges that the people that ought to be shaping the party's rebuild are stuck on the outside of it; this created the vacuum that allowed singh to hijack the party, as well.

in the near future, certainly until 2019, expect the effects of these changes to be to hollow out the party by removing even more of the party's most outspoken and individually-minded mps in favour of a more visibly diverse caucus that is also conveniently chosen to be more easily led from head office.

and, this is going to backfire very badly in 2019, which is when the party will hit rock bottom, in it's transformation from a dying worker's party in a post-industrial state to one that seeks to elevate the voices of new canadians in a neo-colonial one.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/singh-allegation-ndp-1.4514117

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.