Click on the above image to play the excerpt of “False narrative connecting Giuliani, Ukrainian American associates and Trump,” from The Duran (with Alex Christoforou and Alexander Mercouris in discussion).
False narratives. That could mean a number of different things. That could mean that facts asserted are not facts. That could mean that facts asserted are facts but the intentions of the reporter or reporters are bad. And then there’s variations on that theme. And that’s just an aside here.
I usually watch Duran videos on Bitchute. The commenting feature is much nicer in some ways than YouTube’s. Not to mention I don’t want to give Google any more support than I’m forced to. For me, If I can avoid Google I will, because it’s not a matter of life and death for me. I’m not faithless like so many are, including those who claim to be Christian while they disprespect God in small and/or great ways.
There’s no transcript for this show, so I can’t easily give you an excerpt and it’s not really necessary. Just from my online (Bitchute, where Disqus seems to be ghosting me, not always, but a lot) comment, below, you’ll get the gist of the conversation that Alex Christoforou is having with his editor-in-chief, Alexander Mercrouris. I can’t use the commenting feature (Disqus) in order to ask those two for help because they don’t have the time for all the commenters on all of their platforms and because it’s rare that Disqus allows my comments on The Duran (evidently). Even if Alex and Alexander weren’t busy putting together their shows, that would be very time consuming. And my fellow commenters at the Duran on Bitchute are few (to my eyes) and just not… on the ball (sometimes with one or two exceptions). So, I’m left with this; Either I succeed in figuring things out on my own (not an ideal learning method) or else I’m never going to be 100% clued in about much that is being reported on by The Duran. (And this is where being a reader saves me. I buy and read books and those are never fiction. I read in order to learn.)
And this is not a problem that I have with The Duran only. Website operators (alt/progressive) are much better at talking at us than with us, for one thing. (That’s partly arrogance, I have no doubt, and partly because of the difficulty that they have in devoting any time to us when they are busy producing content for their websites.) And too few consumers of their products, aka readers like myself who visit various sites where commenting is allowed, are educated (self or otherwise) to be of help to me with my learning curve. Too few read, for one thing. Too few bother to educate themselves and they are cliquish. They stick to one or two website organizations and take the position that by watching their shows and reading their articles they then know all that there is to know about a subject. There’s nothing I can do about any of that.
One of my online (Bitchute) responses to the above linked-to Duran show follows:
I have read the ‘transcript’. (The Duran isn’t troubled by the fact that we don’t really know what exactly was said by those two. I am. If so much wasn’t being hung on that peg, it wouldn’t matter so much, and, as Alexander has pointed out, that phone call was private and should have been treated that way, which I agree with. Still…) It revealed two players without principles. Trump is bonkers. He’s investigating Russiagate while rubbing his hands together in glee (as he listens to Zelensky suck up to him by slamming Russia) over the prospect of working with Zelensky to harrass Russia more! As Ann Garrison said, “The most interesting thing about the transcript of Trump’s phone call with Zelensky is that he reassured Trump that Ukraine is a better partner against Russia than the leading European powers, that it will buy more of Raytheon and Lockheed Martin’s Javelin Anti-Tank Missiles soon, and that it’s buying American oil… Ukraine buys American oil despite being next door to Russia and its 80,000 million barrels of oil reserves, the eighth greatest in the world? This is more evidence that the US acts as a global protection racket…”
Something else is bothered me about all of this. Besides The Duran’s quirky insistence on confusing us with it’s wrong definition of ‘neoliberal’ – How do they define neoconservative?, I now wonder – they seemed to have changed the way they use the phrases “Russiagate” and “Ukrainegate” over the course of airing their shows. They are now saying that Russiagate is intended to coverup Ukrainegate.
If Ukrainegate means the phony impeachment effort (real enough but based on reading more into the phone call than is there, which I still agree was done), then how could Russiagate be intended as the cover for Ukrainegate when that phone call was made long after all that went into Russiagate? What is meant by Ukrainegate?, because now The Duran seems to be saying that it is all of the criminality in Ukraine that the Democrats and their intelligence community allies want to hide by sidetracking William Barr and John Durham. Settle on your definitions guys! Am I missing something? Really, Someone correct me if I’m wrong. I am trying to learn and if I’m missing something here then I want to know it. It’s still the case that I’ve learned a great deal from The Duran and am happy to tell others that it’s a great source of info, even if I do have some criticisms.
Another commenter wrote: “This whole affair is very sordid and it would seem that decent people are getting hurt. If there is an upside, it is the degree to which the curtain has been pulled back on an extremely corrupt ruling class. We can see just how rotten the Dims/Deep State/SDNY prosecutors are. Irredeemable,” to which I responded “Deep State is an interesting thing. I wish folks had settled on ‘permanent State’ or simply the enduring part of the State, because it’s all State. What folks have settled on does help people to see a little more clearly that governance actually resides less in the more fluid part of the State, a good thing. Governments (the conventional meaning) long ago became merely glorified police forces for the 1%. As Peter Phillips and others point out, governments’ policy decisions are greatly affected by what a handful of superpowerful investors decide. As Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page demonstrate throught their research, the public has virtually zero impact on government policies.”
On the YouTube version of this show, I left the following comment (and it’s anybody’s guess whether it will appear to others):
=== === =
The Duran doesn’t have any concerns about the transcript not being verbatim. I do. The Duran says, now, that Russiagate is meant to cover up Ukrainegate, but Russiagate was done and over when Trump made his phone call on the 25th of October (I believe it was). And what is Ukrainegate? Is it the impeachment operation, whereby Trump’s adversaries (the Democrats and their intel community allies), are trying to find something in Trump’s phone call to Zelensky that they can present as grounds? Or does Ukrainegate refer to the criminality of Obama et al in Ukraine, because those are two different things. And, finally, I’m rather bothered that Alexander Mercrouris is not bothered by the contents of that phone call in which Zelensky wants to suck up to Trump by harrassing Russians and buying American, instead of Russian, oil, and weapons. It’s called a protection racket. If the phone call was not improper, that is not to say that the content (to the extent that what is revealed is an accurate protrayal) reflected thinking and behavior that was decent. Those are not decent people.
= === ===
Here’s another excerpt of a recent Duran show (linked to at the bottom of the post) in which Alexander refers to Russiagate as the cover-up for Ukrainegate:
Click on the above image to view the excerpt.
Mercouris implied, in that excerpt, that when Trump hit on his idea to drain the swamp (which I recall him telling an audience member who suggested it that that was a good idea), he meant all of the criminality in Ukraine, which Democratic Party members were largely behind. Has Trump ever said that, explicitly, about his decision to make ‘drain the swamp’ his rallying cry? No. He probably didn’t have anything in particular in mind when he first decided to use that audience member’s phrase “drain the swamp.”
related: “Trump’s Opponents Have Him Beat . . . When It Comes to Incompetence” by David Swanson (Let’s Try Democracy)
related: “Impeachment Watch” by Ann Garrison (Black Agenda Report)
“UKRAINE COVER-UP: From Obama coup to Democrat impeachment hoax” by Alex Christoforou and Alexander Mercouris (The Duran)