Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts

Saturday, April 23, 2022

The Psychology of Manipulation

 

The Psychology of Manipulation: Lessons Learned From the Master of Propaganda

Edward L. Bernays was an American business consultant who is widely recognized as the father of public relations. Bernays was one of the men responsible for “selling” World War 1 to the American public by branding it as a war that was necessary to “make the world safe for democracy”. During the 1920s, Bernays consulted for a number of major corporations, helping to boost their business through expertly crafted marketing campaigns aimed at influencing public opinion.

In 1928, Edward Bernays published his famous book, Propaganda, in which he outlined the theories behind his successful “public relations” endeavours. The book provides insights into the phenomenon of crowd psychology and outlines effective methods for manipulating people’s habits and opinions.

For a book that’s almost 100 years old, Propaganda could not be more relevant today. In fact, its relevance is a testament to the unchanging nature of human psychology.

One of the key takeaways of the book is that mind control is an important aspect of any democratic society. Indeed, Bernays maintains that without the “conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses”, democracy simply would not “work”.


We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.

According to Bernays, those doing the “governing” constitute an invisible ruling class that “understands the mental processes and social patterns of the masses”.

In Propaganda, Bernays draws on the work of Gustave Le Bon, Wilfred Trotter, Walter Lippmann, and Sigmund Freud (his uncle!), outlining the power of mass psychology and how it may be used to manipulate the “group mind”.

If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it?

I recently explored this topic in an essay about how occult rituals and predictive programming are used to manipulate the collective consciousness, influencing the thoughts, beliefs and actions of large groups of people, resulting in the creation of what occultists call “egregores”.

Here I have extracted some key insights from Bernays in an attempt to show how his book Propaganda is, in many ways, the playbook used by the globalist cryptocracy to process the group mind of the masses.


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

1. If you manipulate the leader of a group, the people will follow

Bernays tells us that one of the easiest ways to influence the thoughts and actions of large numbers of people is to first influence their leader.

If you can influence the leaders, either with or without their conscious cooperation, you automatically influence the group which they sway.

In fact, one of the most firmly established principles of mass psychology is that the “group mind” does not “think”, rather, it acts according to impulses, habits and emotions. And when deciding on a certain course of action, its first impulse is to follow the example of a trusted leader.

Humans are, by nature a group species. Even when we are alone, we have a deep sense of group belonging. Whether they consciously know it or not, much of what people do is an effort to conform to the ideals of their chosen group so as to feel a sense of acceptance and belonging.

This exact method of influencing the leader and watching the people follow has been used extensively throughout the last few years. One notable instance that comes to mind is the horrendously inaccurate epidemiological models created by Neil Ferguson, which formed the basis for President Boris Johnson’s lockdown policies.


Once Johnson was convinced of the need to lockdown and mask up, the people gladly followed.

2. Words are powerful and the key to influencing group emotions is through the clever use of language

Certain words and phrases are associated with certain emotions, symbols and reactions. Bernays tell us that through the clever and careful use of language, one can manipulate the emotions of a group and thereby influence their perceptions and actions.

By playing upon an old cliché, or manipulating a new one, the propagandist can sometimes swing a whole mass of group emotions.

The clever use of language has been employed throughout the Covid-19 pandemic to great effect. An obvious example of this was when the definition of “vaccine” was changed to include injections utilising experimental mRNA technology.

You see, the word “vaccine” is associated in the public mind with a certain picture – that of a safe, proven medical intervention that is not only life-saving but absolutely necessary.


If governments had told people to go get their “gene therapies”, the vast majority of the public would likely question the motives behind such a campaign; they would feel extremely sceptical because the phrase “gene therapy” is not associated with the same images, emotions and feelings as “vaccine”.

The same goes for the word “pandemic”, the definition of which was also changed. The word “pandemic” is generally associated in the collective consciousness with fear, death, chaos and emergency (largely thanks to Hollywood and the myriad virus films it has released over the years).

3. Any medium of communication is also a medium for propaganda

Any system of communication, whether phone, radio, print, or social media, is nothing more than a means of transmitting information. Bernays reminds us that any such means of communication is also a channel for propaganda.

There is no means of human communication which may not also be a means of deliberate propaganda.

Bernays goes on to stress that a good propagandist must always keep abreast of new forms of communication, so that they may co-opt them as means of deliberate propaganda.

Indeed, systems that most people would associate with freedom of speech and democracy are none other than means of circulating propaganda. Facebook fact-checkers, Big Tech censorship, and YouTube’s Covid banners certainly fall into this category.

Other examples of this include the recent algorithm updates made by various search engines (including Google and DuckDuckGo) to penalize Russian websites. Although this should come as no surprise (Google has been engaging in this type of “shadow propaganda” for many years).

4. Reiterating the same idea over and over creates habits and convictions

Although Bernays terms this a technique used by the “old propagandists”, he, nonetheless, recognizes its usefulness.

It was one of the doctrines of the reaction psychology that a certain stimulus often repeated would create a habit, or that the mere reiteration of an idea would create a conviction.

Repeating the same idea or the same “mantra” again and again is a form of neuro-linguistic programming aimed at instilling certain concepts or emotions into the subconscious mind. Indeed, people who are feeling sad or depressed are often advised to repeat to themselves an uplifting saying or affirmation.


There are many examples of this simple, yet effective, technique being used to great effect over the last few years. Think Q’s “trust the plan”, the globalist favourite, “build back better” or the incessant repetition of that twisted phrase, “trust the science”. Included in this category are the 24/7-in-your-face death statistics and case numbers, aimed at promoting the illusion of a pandemic.

There are more obvious examples of this as well, such as news anchors in different areas all reading from the exact same script.

5. Things are not desired for their intrinsic worth, but rather for the symbols that they represent

After studying why people make certain purchasing decisions, Bernays observed that people often don’t desire something for its usefulness or value, but rather because it represents something else that they unconsciously crave.

A thing may be desired not for its intrinsic worth or usefulness, but because he has unconsciously come to see in it a symbol of something else, the desire for which he is ashamed to admit to himself.

Bernays gives the example of a man buying a car. From the outside, it may appear as if the man is buying the car because he needs a means of transport, but in actuality, he is buying it because he craves the elevated social status that comes with owning a motor vehicle.

This idea, too, applies to the events over the last few years.

For example, masks are a symbol of compliance. Everyone knows they don’t work but they wear them because of their desire to “fit in”, and to be seen as an upstanding citizen who follows the rules. Covid-19 injections are also a symbol and many people choose to get them because they have a desire to avoid being called an “anti-vaxxer” or a “conspiracy theorist”.

6. One can manipulate individual actions by creating circumstances that modify group customs

Lastly, Bernays tells us that if one wishes to manipulate the actions of an individual, the most effective way to do so is to create circumstances that engender the desired behaviour.

What are the true reasons why the purchaser is planning to spend his money on a new car instead of on a new piano? […] He buys a car, because it is at the moment the group custom to buy cars. The modern propagandist therefore sets to work to create circumstances which will modify that custom.

For example, why all of a sudden does everyone “stand with Ukraine”? According to Bernays, it’s not because there is a war going on and innocent people need our love and support, but rather because it is the new “group custom” to do so.


Preparedness Resources for “Late Preppers”
* Subscribe to The Late Prepper newsletter
* Purchase preparedness supplies
* Inquire about precious metals


The process of altering group customs begins from the top down. In every nation or social clique, there are leaders, public figures, and influencers. Manipulating those with the most sway eventually filters down into the public mind. That is why when a celebrity decides to wear something extravagant on the red carpet, a whole new trend can arise overnight.

Similarly, at the beginning of the Covid saga and then the Russia-Ukraine war, the media were quick to circulate stories of celebs “catching Covid” and urging people to stay home, or public figures condemning Russian actions and calling for stricter sanctions (which just so happened to hurt the West more than they hurt Russia).

The Propaganda Playbook

The world is a volatile place right now. Things seem to change quickly and no one knows what might happen next. However, amid all this chaos there is one thing that has not changed and is unlikely to change any time soon, and that is human psychology.

Because of this, the tactics used to manipulate people’s thoughts, beliefs and actions have not changed either. In fact, most of them were outlined in detail 100 years ago by Edward Bernays in his 1928 book, Propaganda.


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

That’s right, the Puppet Master’s playbook isn’t a secret. It’s right there, freely available to anyone who cares to understand how the powers that be seek to influence them on a daily basis.

(Propaganda by Edward Bernays has now been added to our Forbidden Library. Read it now, along with other forbidden books.)

Tuesday, March 16, 2021

A Study Shows VERY FEW Capitol Hill Rioters ...With Ties to 'Right Wing' Groups

 A survey by the University of Chicago finds that most Capitol Hill rioters had no ties to any fringe right-wing groups and were engaged people outraged by what they believed was a rigged elect

While colorful weirdos with names such as QAnon Shaman and Baked Alaska stole the headlines, people who were arrested by federal officials during and after the riot were a “broader core of people” with a healthy skepticism about the veracity of the November 2020 election, according to the study.

There was plenty of reason for the skepticism, considering the collusion between Big Tech, unions, law fare, and Democrats’ combined efforts to sway the election. Those efforts were at the very least unethical.

As Time Magazine enthused in an article entitled, “The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election,” “there was a conspiracy unfolding behind the [election] scenes” of an “informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans” to “save” the election from Donald Trump.

The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President.

[…]Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smearsRather than being ill-informed, it appears that the Capitol Building rioters may have been better informed than most on these moves to sway the election.

In a “working paper” that is considered to be a “novel approach” to “estimating community-level participation in mass protest events,” Asst. Prof. Austin Wright of the Harris School of Public Policy and David Van Dijcke of the University of Michigan found a surprising number of the people arrested at the Capitol Hill riot who were business owners and other professionals obviously upset over election fraud.

The paper found that those arrested were “more likely to have traveled to the Capitol from Trump-voting “islands,” where residents are surrounded by neighborhoods with higher numbers of Biden supporters.” More than half came from counties that Joe Biden carried.

Though the researchers include the fact that the overwhelming number of people live in Democrat areas, they also highlighted the fact “that proximity to Proud Boy chapters and local levels of engagement with misinformation posted on Parler, the exiled social media platform popular with the far right, are robustly linked to participation in the Capitol rally.”

However, researcher Austin Wright said living in those leftist areas “played a significant role.”

Social isolation and the perception of being threatened by neighboring areas that largely hold opposing political views also played a significant role in who was there. The researchers also looked at cell phone data such as where in the country Capitol rioters called. Most were in the eastern, central, and southern parts of the country. Could the canceled culture and being surrounded by people with Trump Derangement Syndrome, and other anti-conservative have helped trigger the attack?

They claimed some of the rioters were on the social media app Parler, though efforts to discover other social media apps used by the people arrested were not noted. 

The survey found that approximately 10% percent of the Capitol rioters had a connection with Proud Boys, which they describe as a “hate group,” and Oath Keepers.

Nearly 90% had no ties or right-wing affiliations whatsoever.

And they found out that 85% of the people arrested were business owners or held down white collar jobs.

WTTW TV reported that researchers hadn’t even needed a “business owner” category before when looking into protest groups. Robert Pape, a political science professor at the University of Chicago oversaw the study and said the caliber of people at the riot was surprising.

“Normally, we don’t even have a category for ‘business owner’ when we study political violence, so this is a very big sign that we’re dealing with a new political movement with violence at its core that can’t be reduced to the usual suspects.”

riot
Jobs held by Capitol rioters.

President Trump also appealed to a wide variety of Americans from all socio-economic backgrounds. The fact that the rioters were not red meat, right-wing fanatics threw researchers for a loop. It also forced some reflection by researchers about the people who believe there was election fraud, according to the study.

What we are dealing with here is not merely a mix of right-wing organizations, but a broader mass movement with violence at its core. We need to do more to understand who we are dealing with in the new movement. Targeting pre-2021 far right organizations alone will not solve the problem.

Perhaps they should consider that the 2020 election was seen by half the country as rigged. Election integrity efforts, not name-calling, lawfare, and canceling others who hold politically opposing views, will be key in winning back confidence in the elections process. If Democrats pass HR 1, all bets will be off.

 

Victoria Taft is the host of The Adult in the Room Podcast With Victoria Taft” where you can hear her series on “Antifa Versus Mike Strickland.” Find it  here.Follow her on Facebook,  TwitterParlerMeWeMinds @VictoriaTaft 

victoria-taft/2021/03/15/a-study-shows-very-few-capitol-hill-rioters-were-qanon-red-staters-with-ties-to-right-wing-groups-n1430314

Monday, May 18, 2020

Making of a myth: Timeline of media's role in selling 'Trump-Russia collusion' tale


Last Updated:
May 14, 2020 - 11:08pm

March 25, 2016: 

Ukrainian-American operative for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Alexandra Chalupa meets with top Ukrainian officials at Ukrainian Embassy in Washington D.C. to "expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia," according to Politico. Ukrainian embassy proceeds to work "directly with reporters researching Trump, Manafort and Russia to point them in the right directions," according to an embassy official (though other officials later deny engaging in election-related activities).

March 30, 2016: 

Chalupa briefs DNC staff on Russia ties to Manafort and Trump. Ukrainian embassy officials and Chalupa "coordinat[e] an investigation with the Hillary team" into Manafort, according to a source in Politico. This effort reportedly includes working with U.S. media.

April 2016: 

Ukrainian member of parliament Olga Bielkova reportedly seeks meetings with five dozen members of U.S. Congress and reporters including former New York Times reporter Judy Miller, David Sanger of New York Times, David Ignatius of Washington Post, and Washington Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt.

Week of April 6, 2016:

Chalupa begins working with investigative reporter Michael Isikoff, according to her later account.

April 26, 2016: 

Isikoff publishes story on Yahoo News about Manafort's business dealings with a Russian oligarch.

April 27, 2016: 

The BBC publishes an article titled, “Why Russians Love Donald Trump.”

April 28, 2016: 

Chalupa is invited to discuss her research about Manafort with 68 investigative journalists from Ukraine at Library of Congress for Open World Leadership Center, a U.S. congressional agency. Chalupa invites Isikoff to "connect(s) him to the Ukrainians.” After the event, Isikoff accompanies Chalupa to Ukrainian embassy reception.

May 3, 2016: 

Chalupa emails DNC that she'll share sensitive info about Paul Manafort "offline" including "a big Trump component that will hit in next few weeks.”

May 4, 2016: 

Trump locks up Republican nomination.

June 7, 2016: 

Hillary Clinton locks up Democratic nomination.

June 17, 2016: 

Washington Post publishes front page story linking Trump to Russia: "Inside Trump's Financial Ties to Russia and His Unusual Flattery of Vladimir Putin.”

July 2016: 

Ukraine minister of internal affairs Arsen Avakov attacks Trump and Trump campaign adviser Paul Manafort on Twitter and Facebook, calling Trump "an even bigger danger to the US than terrorism.”

Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseny Yatseniuk writes on Facebook that Trump has "challenged the very values of the free world."

Late July 2016: 

Chalupa leaves the (DNC) to work full-time on her research into Manafort, Trump and Russia; and provides off-the-record guidance to "a lot of journalists.”

Aug. 4, 2016: 

Ukrainian ambassador to U.S. writes op-ed against Trump.

Aug. 14, 2016: 

New York Times breaks story about cash payments made a decade ago to Paul Manafort by pro-Russia interests in Ukraine. The ledger was released and publicized by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine.

Aug. 15, 2016: 

CNN reports the FBI is conducting an inquiry into Manafort's payments from pro-Russia interests in Ukraine in 2007 and 2009.

After a meeting discussing the election in FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe's office, FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok texts FBI attorney Lisa Page referring to the possibility of Trump getting elected. "We can't take that risk," he writes. They speak of needing an "insurance policy.”

Aug. 19, 2016: 

Paul Manafort resigns as Trump campaign chairman.

Ukrainian parliament member Sergii Leshchenko holds news conference to draw attention to Paul Manafort and Trump's "pro-Russia" ties.

Sept. 2, 2016: 

FBI officials Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text that "[President Obama] wants to know everything we're doing.”

Sept. 23, 2016:

Yahoo News publishes article by Isikoff about Carter Page's July 2016 trip to Moscow. (The article is apparently based on leaked info from Fusion GPS Steele anti-Trump "dossier" political opposition research.)

End of September 2016: 

Fusion GPS' Glenn Simpson and former British spy Christopher Steele meet with reporters, including New York Times, Washington Post, Yahoo News, the New Yorker and CNN or ABC. One meeting is at office of Democratic National Committee general counsel.

Sept. 23, 2016:

Michael Isikoff and Yahoo News report “U.S. intel officials probe ties between Trump adviser [Carter Page] and Kremlin.” It is later revealed that the FBI improperly wiretapped Page for a year.

Early October 2016: 

Steele, the author of anti-Trump "dossier," meets in New York with David Corn, Washington bureau chief of Mother Jones.

Oct. 14, 2016: 

At the FBI, Strzok emails Page, discussing talking points to convince Deputy Director McCabe to persuade a high-ranking Department of Justice official to sign a warrant to wiretap Page. "At a minimum, that keeps the hurry the F up pressure on him," Strzok emails Page less than four weeks before Election Day.

Mid-Oct. 2016:  

Steele again briefs reporters about Trump political opposition research. The reporters are from the New York Times, the Washington Post, and Yahoo News.

Oct. 24, 2016: 

Benjamin Wittes, confidant of FBI Director James Comey and editor-in-chief of the blog Lawfare, writes of the need for an "insurance policy" in case Trump wins. It's the same phrase FBI officials Page and Strzok used when discussing the possibility of a Trump win.

Late Oct. 2016: 

Steele again briefs reporter from Mother Jones by Skype about Trump political opposition research.

Oct. 30, 2016: 

Mother Jones writer Corn is first to report on the anti-Trump "dossier," quoting unidentified former spy, presumed to be Steele. FBI General Counsel James Baker had reportedly been in touch with Corn, but Corn later denies Baker provided him information.

Oct. 31, 2016: 

New York Times reports FBI is investigating Trump and found no illicit connections to Russia.

Nov. 1, 2016: 

FBI concludes Christoher Steele, who compiled anti-Trump "dossier" using Russian sources, leaked to press and is not suitable for use as a confidential human source. However, Steele continues to "help," according to Jan. 31, 2017 texts to Justice Department official Bruce Ohr.

Nov. 3, 2016: 

Page texts Strzok about her concerns that Clinton might lose and Trump would become president: "The [New York Times] probability numbers are dropping every day. I'm scared for our organization.”

Nov. 8, 2016: 

Trump is elected president.

Nov. 18, 2016: 

Trump announces Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn as his choice for National Security Adviser. Over the next few weeks, Flynn communicates with numerous international leaders.

Nov. 30 - Dec. 28, 2016: 

Two dozen Obama administration officials make requests to unmask the name of National Security Adviser designee Flynn, who was "incidentally" captured by intel surveillance. The officials include: U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and CIA Director John Brennan.

Jan. 5, 2017: 

Obama chief of staff Denis McDonough requests Flynn unmasking. 

Intelligence Community leadership, including FBI Director James Comey, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, CIA Director Brennan and Director of National Intelligence Clapper, provides classified briefing to President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and National Security Adviser Susan Rice on alleged Russia hacking during 2016 campaign, according to notes later written by Rice.

After briefing, according to Rice’s notes, President Obama convenes Oval Office meeting with her, Comey, Biden, and Yates. The "Steele dossier" is reportedly discussed. Also reportedly discussed: Flynn's intercepted talks with Russia's ambassador. 

Jan. 6, 2017: 

Comey and other intelligence leaders meet with President-elect Trump and his national security team at Trump Tower in New York to brief them on alleged Russian efforts to interfere in the election.

Later, Rice would write herself an email stating that Obama suggested they hold back on providing Trump officials with certain info for national security reasons.

After Trump team briefing, Comey meets alone with Trump to "brief him" on Fusion GPS/Steele allegations "to alert the incoming President to the existence of this material," even though it was, as he later put it, “salacious and unverified.” Comey later says Clapper asked him (Comey) to do the briefing personally.

Jan. 7, 2017: 

Clapper and two other Obama administration officials request Flynn unmasking.

January 2017: 

The FBI interviews a main source of Steele's "dossier" and learns his information was merely barroom gossip and rumor never meant to be taken as fact or submitted to the FBI and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to wiretap Page. (The FBI does not notify the court and applies for, and receives, another wiretap against Page).

Jan. 10, 2017:

The 35-page Fusion GPS anti-Trump "dossier" is leaked to the media and published. 

A CIA official makes a Flynn unmasking request.

Jan. 11, 2017: 

Power makes another Flynn unmasking request.

Jan. 12, 2017: 

Obama administration finalizes new rules allowing NSA to spread "certain intel to" other U.S. intel agencies without normal privacy protections.

Vice President Biden and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew request the unmasking of Flynn in intelligence communications.

Someone leaks to David Ignatius of the Washington Post that Flynn had called Russia's ambassador. “What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the US sanctions?” asked Ignatius in the article.

Jan. 20, 2017: 

Trump becomes president.

Fifteen minutes after Trump becomes president, former National Security Adviser Susan Rice emails memo to herself purporting to summarize the Jan. 5 Oval Office meeting with President Obama and other top officials. She states that Obama instructed the group to investigate "by the book" and asked them to be mindful whether there were certain things that "could not be fully shared with the incoming administration.”

Jan. 22, 2017: 

Intel information is leaked to Wall Street Journal, which reports "US counterintelligence agents have investigated communications" between Flynn and Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak to determine if any laws were violated.

Jan. 23, 2017: 

Leak to Washington Post falsely claims Flynn is not the subject of an investigation.

Jan. 24, 2017: 

McCabe sends two FBI agents, including Strzok, to the White House to question Flynn. FBI Director Comey later takes credit for "sending a couple of guys" to interview Flynn, circumventing normal processes.

Notes kept hidden until May 2020 show FBI officials discussing whether the goal of the meeting with Flynn was to "get him to lie" so that he would be fired or prosecuted.

Feb. 9, 2017: 

News of FBI wiretaps capturing Trump national security adviser Flynn speaking with Russia's ambassador is leaked to the press. New York Times and Washington Post report Flynn discussed U.S. sanctions, despite his earlier denials. The Post also reports the FBI "found nothing illicit" in the talks. The Post headline in an article by Greg Miller, Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima reads, “National Security Adviser Flynn Discussed Sanctions with Russian Ambassador, Despite Denials, Officials Say.” 

Feb. 13, 2017: 

Washington Post reports Justice Dept. has opened a "Logan Act" violation investigation against Flynn.

Feb. 14, 2017: 

New York Times reports that FBI had told Obama officials there was no "quid pro quo" (promise of a deal in exchange for some action) discussed between Gen. Flynn and Russian Ambassador Kislyak.

Flynn resigns, allegedly acknowledging he misled Vice President Mike Pence about the content of his discussions with Russia.

Feb. 17, 2017: 

Washington Post reports that "Flynn told FBI he did not discuss sanctions" with Russia ambassador and that "lying to the FBI is a felony offense.”

March 1, 2017: 

Washington Post reports Attorney General Jeff Sessions has met with Russian ambassador twice in the recent past (as did many Democrat and Republican officials). His critics say that contradicts his earlier testimony to Congress. The article by Adam Entous, Ellen Nakashima and Greg Miller raises the idea of a special counsel to investigate. 

March 2, 2017: 

Attorney General Jeff Sessions recuses himself from Russia-linked investigations. Rod Rosenstein, the Deputy Attorney General, becomes Acting Attorney General for Russia Probe. It's later revealed that Rosenstein signed at least one wiretap application against former Trump adviser Carter Page.

March 27, 2017: 

Former Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas admits she encouraged Obama and congressional officials to "get as much information as they can" about Russia and Trump officials before inauguration. "That's why you have the leaking," she told MSNBC.

April 4, 2017: 

Obama former National Security Adviser Rice admits in an interview that she asked to reveal names of U.S. citizens previously masked in intel reports. She says her motivations were not political. When asked if she leaked names, Rice states, "I leaked nothing to nobody."

April 11, 2017:

Washington Post reports FBI secretly obtained wiretap against Trump campaign associate Carter Page the previous summer. (Later, it's revealed the summer wiretap had been turned down, but a subsequent application was approved in October.)

May 3, 2017: 

FBI Director Comey testifies he's "never" been an anonymous news source on "matters relating to" investigating the Trump campaign.

May 8, 2017: 

Former acting Attorney General Yates and former Director of National Intelligence Clapper admit having reviewed "classified documents in which Mr. Trump, his associates or members of Congress had been unmasked," and possibly discussing it with others under the Obama administration.

May 9, 2017: 

President Trump fires FBI Director James Comey. Andrew McCabe becomes acting FBI Director.

May 12, 2017: 

Benjamin Wittes, confidant of ex-FBI Director James Comey and editor in chief of Lawfare, contacts New York Times reporter Mike Schmidt to leak conversations he'd had with Comey as FBI Director that are critical of President Trump.

May 16, 2017: 

New York Times publishes leaked account of FBI memoranda recorded by former FBI Director James Comey. Comey later acknowledges engineering the leak of the FBI material through his friend, Columbia Law School professor Daniel Richman, to spur appointment of special counsel to investigate President Trump.

Trump reportedly interviews, but passes over, former FBI Director Robert Mueller for position of FBI Director.

May 17, 2017: 

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appoints Mueller as Special Counsel for the Russia-Trump probe.

June 8, 2017: 

Former FBI Director Comey admits having engineered leak of his own memo to New York Times to spur appointment of a special counsel to investigate President Trump.

August, 2017: 

CNN hires former Director of National Intelligence and Trump critic Clapper as national security analyst.

Sept. 13, 2017: 

Under questioning from Congress, Obama's former National Security Adviser Susan Rice reportedly admits having requested to see the protected identities of Trump transition officials "incidentally" captured by government surveillance.

Dec. 19, 2017: 

McCabe repeatedly testifies that the wiretap against Trump campaign official Carter Page would not have been approved without the Fusion GPS/Steele dossier info. FBI General Counsel James Baker, who is himself subject of an Inspector General probe into his alleged leaks to the press, attends as McCabe's attorney. McCabe acknowledges that if Baker had met with Mother Jones reporter David Corn, it would have been inappropriate. Baker is reassigned amid investigation into his alleged  contacts with media.

Feb. 2, 2018: 

House Intelligence Committee Republican memo summarizes classified documents revealing for the first time that Fusion GPS political opposition research was used, in part, to justify Carter Page wiretap; along with Michael Isikoff Yahoo News article based on the same opposition research.

Ex-CIA Director Brennan signs on as a contributor to NBC and MSNBC, where he provides routine criticism of Trump and his associates, including providing false information.

Feb. 9, 2018: 

Former FBI Director Comey assistant Josh Campbell leaves FBI for job at CNN.

April 2018: 

A House Intelligence Committee report suggests that Clapper, former Director of National Intelligence and now a CNN analyst, had leaked information from the so-called Steele dossier to CNN, though he denied it to Congress. The report stated that Clapper gave “inconsistent testimony” to Congress when he denied ever “discuss[ing] the dossier or any other intelligence related to Russia hacking of the 2016 election with journalists.” Clapper later admitted he discussed the “dossier with CNN journalist Jake Tapper” and indicated he may have discussed the material with other journalists.

May 4, 2018: 

Amid allegations that he was responsible for improper leaks, FBI general counsel Baker resigns and joins the Brookings Institution, writing for "Lawfare," the anti-Trump blog that first discussed the need for an "insurance policy" in case Trump got elected.

March 2019: 

Mueller signs off on his final report stating that there was no collusion or coordination between Trump — or any American — and Russia.

Black Fragility (Def.) by Mark Dice

  Discomfort and defensiveness on the part of some black people who live in a predominately White culture. Due to fixating on long gone past...