[Peace-discuss] FW: Ray McGovern - Michael Isikoff Cuts His Losses at 'Russian Roulette'

Thu Dec 20 19:50:39 UTC 2018

Michael Isikoff Cuts His Losses at 'Russian Roulette'

December 19, 2018 .
<https://consortiumnews.com/2018/12/19/michael-isikoff-cuts-his-loses-at-rus
sian-roulette/#comments> 29 Comments

https://consortiumnews.com/2018/12/19/michael-isikoff-cuts-his-loses-at-russ
ian-roulette/

<https://consortiumnews.com/2018/12/19/michael-isikoff-cuts-his-loses-at-rus
sian-roulette/> Image removed by sender.

<https://consortiumnews.com/2018/12/19/michael-isikoff-cuts-his-loses-at-rus
sian-roulette/> Michael Isikoff Cuts His Losses at 'Russian Roulette' -
Consortiumnews

A sobering but undeniable fact - ALL reporting is biased and propaganda.
When people are forced to respond or react, their reactions can be
predicted, directed, manipulated, and managed.

consortiumnews.com

Save

Michael Isikoff, one of the biggest proponents of the Russia-gate story now
says that Robert Mueller's investigation is "not where a lot of people would
like it to be," says Ray McGovern.

The analogy with mainstream media regurgitating fraudulent "facts" on
Weapons of Mass Destruction before the invasion of Iraq is complete. How
many recall then-Secretary of State Colin Powell telling the world on
February 5, 2003 that his evidence and conclusions were "irrefutable and
undeniable."

By Ray McGovern
Special to Consortium News

<https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/raymcgovern_face0.jpg
> Image removed by sender.Last Saturday, veteran Washington journalist
Michael Isikoff began a John Ehrlichman/Watergate-style "modified limited
hangout" regarding the embarrassing overreach in his Russia-gate "collusion"
reporting. He picked an unctuous, longtime fan, radio host John Ziegler, to
help him put some lipstick on the proverbial pig. Even so, theinterview
<https://soundcloud.com/freespeechbroadcasting/2018-12-15-2-michael-isikoff>
did not go so well.

Those who can muster some residual empathy for formerly serious reporters
who have gotten Russia-gate so wrong, may feel genuine sadness at this
point. Those fed up with pretense, unprofessionalism, and dodging, however,
will find it hard to listen to the audible squirming without a touch, or
more, of Schadenfreude - the word Germans use to denote taking joy at the
misfortune of others.

In a word, it proved hard to square the circle inside which Isikoff and
other Russia-gate aficionados have been living for more than two years after
last week's disclosures. Ziegler's repeated expressions of admiration for
Isikoff's work, plus his softball questions, utterly failed to disguise
Isikoff's disappointment that Robert Mueller's Russia-gate investigation is
"not where a lot of people would like it to be."

"A lot of people" includes Isikoff.

Commenting on the trove of legal and other documents now available, Isikoff
pretty much conceded that he and his co-writer, journalist David Corn were,
in effect, impersonating serious investigative journalists when they
published in April 2017 their gripping Russia-gate chef d'oeuvre: "Russian
Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of
Donald Trump."

Steele Dossier

<https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/IsikoffTwitter_400x40
0.jpg> Image removed by sender.

Isikoff:   Steele not verified.  (Twitter)

Aware of the credulity given by Isikoff and Corn to the "Steele
<https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/18/steele-dossier-mich
ael-isikoff/2347833002/> dossier," Ziegler began with what he apparently
thought was a soft-ball observation/question. "Would you agree that a lot of
what is in the Steele Dossier has been at least somewhat vindicated?"

"No," said Isikoff flatly.

The conversation turned to so-called "logical" explanations for leaps of
faith rather than analysis. Such as unsubstantiated accusations, like the
so-called "pee-tape" that Isikoff now says is "likely false."

A "modified limited hangout" is when someone's cover story is blown and some
truth needs to be divulged to deflect further inquiry. Isikoff's begins at
the 26:50 mark and goes on, churning one's stomach for 30 minutes.

A better subtitle for Isikoff and Corn's book might be "Based on What We
Wanted to Believe Was a True Story."

Isikoff told Ziegler that unless "Saint" Robert Mueller, as Democrats see
him, can summon a Deus ex Machina
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina>  to provide some actual
evidence linking Trump or his campaign to collusion with Russia, former
Isikoff acquaintances, like me, might legitimately ask, "What the hell
happened to you, Mike?"

Isikoff and Corn have done some serious work together in the past. Their
2006 book, "Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of
the Iraq War" - was an accurate chronicle of the Cheney/Bush March of Folly
into Iraq. That was also against a Republican administration. But they had
interviewed people from both sides of the issues.

Though neither were fans of George W. Bush, they backed up their work with
facts. "Russian Roulette" is a different story. It reads now like
desperation to confirm what the authors hoped Mueller would find. He has
failed them.

Is This Journalism?

Who can adequately explain the abject loss of journalistic standards when it
comes to Russia-gate?

For Isikoff and Corn, as for other erstwhile serious journalists, there
should be more crow than ham or turkey to eat in the weeks ahead.

Others come to mind: Jane Mayer of The New Yorker; James Risen, formerly of
The New York Times; and lesser lights like McClatchy's Greg Gordon; Marcy
Wheeler, Amy Goodman's go-to Russia-gate pundit at <http://emptywheel.com/>
emptywheel.net; and extreme-partisan Democrat Marc Ash, who runs Reader
Supported News.

Many had pinned their hopes on Trump's 24-day national security adviser,
Gen. Michael Flynn, to supply grist for the "collusion" mill. That increased
when word came he'd met 19 times with Mueller's investigators as a
cooperative witness.

Yet, something didn't gel. Prosecutors said they'd go light on Flynn.

In (and Out) Like Flynn

<https://consortiumnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/30020745053_9a6934b8c
8_k.jpg> Image removed by sender.

Flynn: In or out of jail? (Flickr Gage Skidmore)

Philip Ewing, the apparent odd-man-out at National Public Radio, observed
<https://www.npr.org/2018/12/15/676765398/the-russia-investigations-a-case-s
till-unproven> Saturday: "Does that sound like the attitude they [the
prosecutors] would take with someone who had been serving as a Russian
factotum and who had been serving as a foreign agent from inside the White
House as national security adviser, steps away from the Oval Office?"

Flynn was supposed to be sentenced for lying to the FBI on Tuesday. By
afternoon, however, Federal District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan postponed
the sentencing until at least March. The judge said he was "disgusted" by
Flynn's "very serious" crimes but later apologized from the bench for asking
whether his actions might have been treasonous.

He gave Flynn the option of delaying sentencing until he had completed his
cooperation with federal prosecutors, and Flynn agreed. But Sullivan
remained adamant that Flynn could still end up in jail. If His Honor takes
the time to read Professor Jonathan Turley, of the George Washington
University Law School, about
<https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/333764-opinion-th
e-comey-memo-offers-zero-proof-to-impeach>  Comey-endorsed FBI tactics - and
not confine his reading solely to the Washington Post - it seems a safe bet
he will give Flynn a stay-out-of jail card.

In an early morning tweet Tuesday, Trump wished Flynn good luck and
commented: "Will be interesting to see what he has to say, despite
tremendous pressure being put on him, about Russian Collusion." How can one
interpret this? Either Mueller and his score of investigators were unable to
get Flynn to spill the beans on collusion or - could it be possible? - there
are no beans to spill.

Hold That Line

As for Isikoff and Corn, their profession - such as it is these days - can
be expected to circle the wagons and give them the immunity granted 15 years
ago to the faux-journalists who pushed the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
deception so hard - even after no WMD were found in Iraq.

Indeed, in recent days The New York Times and Washington Post have launched
what looks like a stepped-up pre-emptive attack, lest readers start to doubt
their rendering of Russia-gate. The headlines and the drivel that follow
have been caricatures of journalism.

Be not misled about Russia-gate, The Washington Post editorial board wrote
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/russias-support-for-trumps-election
-is-no-longer-disputable/2018/12/17/d194870e-023a-11e9-9122-82e98f91ee6f_sto
ry.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.617566f09458&wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1>
Tuesday morning. "It is no longer disputable."

The analogy with mainstream media regurgitating fraudulent "facts" on
Weapons of Mass Destruction before the invasion of Iraq is complete. How
many recall then-Secretary of State Colin Powell telling the world on
February 5, 2003 that his evidence and conclusions were "irrefutable and
undeniable."

Hardly New

John Swinton, a prominent journalist in New York in 1880, at a banquet,
reportedly responded <https://www.constitution.org/pub/swinton_press.htm>
to a toast to the "independent press," by saying: "There is no such thing as
an independent press. You know it and I know it. . What folly is this
toasting an independent press?

"We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the
jumping jacks; they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our
possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are
intellectual prostitutes."

Plus ca change ..

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical
Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. Part of his job as a CIA
analyst for 27 years was to analyze Soviet propaganda. He now experiences
considerable nostalgia examining the propaganda put out by U.S. mainstream
media. When you get the hang of it, it's pretty easy, IF you know where to
look.

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai
gn=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Image removed by sender.

Virus-free.
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai
gn=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> www.avast.com 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20181220/73a73ed0/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ~WRD000.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20181220/73a73ed0/attachment-0005.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 782 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20181220/73a73ed0/attachment-0006.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3032 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20181220/73a73ed0/attachment-0007.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2316 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20181220/73a73ed0/attachment-0008.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 350 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20181220/73a73ed0/attachment-0009.jpg>