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.