[Beren]

How is Fox News maximising their profit that way? Is that how the free market is supposed to work?

[anna]

Nice twitter list from the Daily Beast's Rick Wilson:

1/ The great thing about this morning was you could see the Trump spin shaping up early...

2/ ... they were going to build the entire defense around there being "zero evidence of collusion in the Manafort indictment"

3/ the special prosecutor knew this, and did an almost perfect bookend play from the media perspective and from the legal side

4/ we now have confessed collusion *and* a complex electronic trail from Pap to his fellow Trump campaign members.

5/ Folks trying to change the subject should have known all along this isn't boob bait for the comments section of trumpbart

6/ these are serious people running a serious investigation and you're either a cooperating witness or a target.

7/ and if you haven't inferred why it was so easy it was to bust Papadopoulos, may I remind you once again...

8/ ... that the intelligence community has a royal flush. Team Treason has a pair of twos on their best day.

9/ and even more disappointing given how much narrative heavy lifting the clickservatives have been doing, that information existed...

10/ ... existed either before, separately from, or verifies the steele information

11/ so clutch that fig-leaf of "no collusion" tight because if you think this is the worst day for you, think again.

[anna]

Monday, Monday, so good to me
Monday mornin', it was all I hoped it would be...



Good stuff at Lawfare:

The first big takeaway from this morning’s flurry of charging and plea documents with respect to Paul Manafort Jr., Richard Gates III, and George Papadopoulos is this: The President of the United States had as his campaign chairman a man who had allegedly served for years as an unregistered foreign agent for a puppet government of Vladimir Putin, a man who was allegedly laundering remarkable sums of money even while running the now-president’s campaign, a man who allegedly lied about all of this to the FBI and the Justice Department.

The second big takeaway is even starker: A member of President Trump’s campaign team now admits that he was working with people he knew to be tied to the Russian government to “arrange a meeting between the Campaign and the Russian government officials” and to obtain “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of hacked emails—and that he lied about these activities to the FBI. He briefed President Trump on at least some them.

Before we dive any deeper into the Manafort-Gates indictment—charges to which both pled not guilty to today—or the Papadopoulos plea and stipulation, let’s pause a moment over these two remarkable claims, one of which we must still consider as allegation and the other of which we can now consider as admitted fact. President Trump, in short, had on his campaign at least one person, and allegedly two people, who actively worked with adversarial foreign governments in a fashion they sought to criminally conceal from investigators. One of them ran the campaign. The other, meanwhile, was interfacing with people he “understood to have substantial connections to Russian government officials” and with a person introduced to him as “a relative of Russian President Vladimir Putin with connections to senior Russian government officials.” All of this while President Trump was assuring the American people that he and his campaign had "nothing to do with Russia."

The release of these documents should, though it probably won’t, put to rest the suggestion that there are no serious questions of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government in the latter’s interference on the former’s behalf during the 2016 election. It also raises a profound set of questions of its own about the truthfulness of a larger set of representations Trump campaign officials and operatives have made both in public, and presumably, under oath and to investigators.

And here’s the rub: This is only Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s opening salvo.

As opening salvos go, it’s a doozy.

Let’s start with the surprise unsealing of the Papadopoulos plea agreement and stipulation of fact. Papadopoulos first became publicly affiliated with the Trump campaign in March 2016. That month, Trump faced significant pressure to announce foreign policy advisors after numerous Republican foreign policy and national security experts publicly vowed never to work for him. In response, Trump produced a list of names of purported experts, a list that included both Papadapoulos and Carter Page.

The Washington Post reported back in August of this year that Papadopoulos, between March and May of 2016, had “offered to set up ‘a meeting between us and the Russian leadership to discuss US-Russia ties under President Trump,’” but that the campaign had rebuffed his numerous attempts. It turns out he did a lot more than that.

His guilty plea is for lying to FBI investigators in a January 27, 2017 interview regarding his own conduct and contacts. As we’ve discussed in the past, it isn’t uncommon for false statements to the Bureau to be prosecuted under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 offenses in these sorts of cases. Proving someone is lying is often easier than proving that the underlying offense violates the law. Here, for example, Papadopoulos’s underlying activity—working with Russian government officials to obtain “dirt” on Clinton and set up a Putin-Trump meeting—may have been legal, if wholly disreputable. Lying about it, however, is a crime. We can assume that Mueller had the goods on Papadopoulos beyond lying to the Bureau in some manner. The lying, after all, is merely the charge he pled to in the context of a plea deal in which prosecutors have cut him a break.

That said, the Papadopoulos stipulation offers a stunningly frank, if probably incomplete, account of what was occurring in the spring of 2016 in the Trump campaign. To wit, during that period, members of the Trump campaign team were actively working to set up a meeting with Russian officials or representatives. And from a very early point in the campaign, those meetings were explicitly about obtaining hacked, incriminating emails.

It isn’t clear which emails the various parties might have been discussing here. There are, after all, the hacked emails of the Democratic National Committee, which first became public on June 14, 2016 though the breach had occurred more than a year prior. There are the hacked emails of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, a breach the occurred on March 19, 2016 but did not become public until October 9, 2016. And there are also the purported 30,000 emails from Hillary Clinton’s time at the State Department, a matter stretching back to 2015, which may not have ever been hacked but which Trump campaign folks clearly believed had been. There is also possibly some other category of alleged emails that wasn’t a matter of public discussion. But it’s clear that Trump campaign officials were after emails and, well, let’s just say they didn’t go to the FBI when they found themselves in conversations with Russian officials about them.

The stipulation also contains some rather damaging information about President Trump himself. Papadopoulos says he attended a “national security” meeting on March 31, 2016 with Trump personally in attendance, along with his other foreign policy advisors. In that meeting, Papadopoulos told the group that he had connections to arrange a meeting between Trump and President Putin. This means that Trump either knew or should have known about his campaign’s effort to interface with Russia, even as news of various criminal hacking and attempts to interfere with the US election were becoming public.

The Manafort-Gates indictment is, in a different way, also dramatic. The amount of money allegedly at issue in breathtaking. According to paragraph 6 of the indictment, “more than $75,000,000 flowed through the offshore accounts” that Manafort and Gates controlled. Eighteen million of these dollars are specifically alleged to have been laundered. This money laundering “to hide Ukraine payments from United States authorities” allegedly took place through the entire period of Manafort’s service in the Trump campaign.

Manafort’s alleged unregistered foreign agency on behalf of Ukraine and its Party of Regions, by contrast, allegedly ended in 2014, when then-Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovych was ousted. So President Trump can at least claim that his campaign manager is not under indictment for being an unregistered foreign agent at the time he was running Trump’s campaign.

But that’s about the only good news in the indictment for the President. Because Manafort is alleged to have lied about his foreign agent status and made false statements into this year. In other words, at the same time as Papadopoulos admits he was working Russian government officials for Clinton emails and for a Trump-Putin meeting, Manafort was allegedly still laundering the money he had obtained by illegally representing one of Putin’s allied strongmen.

In the wake of the document releases, Trump naturally took to Twitter to dismiss it all:

We will say this: Mueller’s opening bid is a remarkable show of strength. He has a cooperating witness from inside the campaign’s interactions with the Russians. And he is alleging not mere technical infractions of law but astonishing criminality on the part of Trump’s campaign manager, a man who also attended the Trump Tower meeting.

Any hope the White House may have had that the Mueller investigation might be fading away vanished this morning. Things are only going to get worse from here.

[Deutschmania]

In relation to this case , when it comes to the alleged evidence contained in the Fusion GPS dossier , I would say of the Clinton campaign "pot meet kettle " . From what I have heard , and read , it was them whom colluded with foreign agents to try to undermine Donald Trump's candidacy .

< https://www.rt.com/usa/407885-trump-dossier-russia-nothingburger/ ,http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/26/politics/trump-clinton-podesta-steele-dossier-fusion-gps/index.html , http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/dossier-christopher-steele-fusion-gps-opposition-research/2017/10/24/id/821854/ > So it would seem to me that potentially more than one foreign power acted to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election , one way or another .

[mikema63]

On an issue involving Russia it is perhaps not best practice to cite their propaganda machine.

[Beren]

8/ ... that the intelligence community has a royal flush. Team Treason has a pair of twos on their best day.

A house of cards is all they have. But let's focus on the Dems, Hillary, and marvellous tax cuts! Or even better: hamburger emojis!

[Deutschmania]

On an issue involving Russia it is perhaps not best practice to cite their propaganda machine.

Which was exactly why I also cited print articles from various American publications , both those considered conservative , and regarded as having a more liberal slant . I figured that someone would tend to end up responding to my post with a genetic fallacy / appeal to motive . < https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/9/Ad-Hominem-Circumstantial , https://debunkingdenialism.com/2012/07/06/the-role-of-motives-in-arguments/

[mikema63]

People have already discussed the non point you are pulling out again. The only thing I had to add was to generally discourage using bad sources. Justifying spreading bad sources by using other sources isn't really reasonable either.

As for the genetic fallacy, I didn't attack your point by attacking your source, I merely pointed out that you were using a propaganda outfit as a source which is indeed bad practice.

The "Russia dossier" wasn't created through collusion with a foreign government. It was created through standard opposition research not the methods generally being alleged against the Trump campaign.

[blackjack21]

Just remember, the fish rots from the head down. When the leader of the group is so blatantly and inherently dishonest and dirty as Trump, everyone below takes their cues from him to be just as dishonest and dirty. Persons of integrity such as Obama have administrations born of integrity.

That has to be the funniest thing I think you have ever said. What's rotting from the head down is the neoconservatives, and that includes the Bushes, Obamas, and Clintons. They're all part of the same cabal. The best of that bunch are the Bush family by far. Using the Clintons as a front was a tactical error that is leading to a strategic failure on their part.

The Gobalists succeeded in bringing down Nixon, America's greatest president, so its certainly possible, they could bring down Trump. Trump needs to remember that W Bush was on the downhill slope till he got involved in war.

Well, simply calling them "globalists" might be over simplifying. It's not as if Nixon were an anti-trade nationalist that reflexively opposed communism, etc. He was responsible for opening relations with China. Maybe he was a threat to DNC hegemony from the FDR days. However, they are much weaker and desperate these days.

It would apparently take more charges before this can be connected to Trump or Russia... it doesn't take much to keep the media going though.

I don't think that's the point of indicting Manafort. I think it is a show whereby we are meant to believe that Manafort will cough up all sorts of dirt on Trump, because Manafort is ostensibly desperate to stay out of prison. It's simply a pretext for the next bit of show in their bag of tricks. However, I think the establishment's game isn't what it used to be, or maybe their adversaries are a lot smarter than they used to be.

The White House must be in extreme panic mode right now.

If I were Donald Trump, I'd be cool as a cucumber right about now--but, I'm not Donald Trump.

The reporting about this says something about American politics at the moment.

It says something about the capital interests behind the media outlets.

8/ ... that the intelligence community has a royal flush. Team Treason has a pair of twos on their best day.

"Royal flush" is not the best choice of words, given the involvement of a former MI-6 agent in the manufacture of the Trump Dossier, but that choice of words does tend to betray involvement of a government other than Russia in the US elections... (and I don't mean the US government re Comey and Lynch).

Monday, Monday, so good to me
Monday mornin', it was all I hoped it would be...

I think this is Mueller trying to save his job and continue the show. The media has already reported that the Trump Dossier was paid for by the DNC and Hillary Clinton for President campaign funds. I have said from before Trump even got into the race that there was a big fight between large capital factions behind the scenes--basically, between Tea Party friendly types and the establishment represented by both parties, essentially Wall Street-funded neoconservatives. Well-researched books like Clinton Cash were laying the foundation for something much bigger than an exposé or tell all. It wasn't just the typical sort of cottage-industry stuff of political publications. The establishment keeps fucking up in underestimating (or misunderestimating as George W. Bush would put it) their opposition.

The media is replete with very well educated people (usually journalists with law degrees) who are missing the most basic analysis, which now gets to people over the internet irrespective of the MSMs efforts to repress and spread misinformation. YouTube now routinely suppresses these people from their recommendations lists and search results, so you have to dig to get them.

Some of the best political conspiracy analysis I've heard recently comes from an attorney who goes by SonofNewo on YouTube. I don't know his exact identify. I suppose he could be the son of someone name Owen, or he is part of the Owen & Fonos publications I've looked up. However, his analysis puts together some pretty excellent timelines.

Paul Manafort, the Mole? Part 1: Unpacking CNN's Wiretap Report
Paul Manafort the Mole? Part 2: LAND OF THE MOLES

Manafort was under FBI investigation until he went to work for the Trump campaign. After Trump fired him, the FBI began investigating Manafort again. Since the FBI has a history of getting people to work as informants, it's very possible that he was a mole for the deep state. The reason to suspend the investigation into Manafort with no finding would be so that they didn't tip Trump off that Manfort was a mole. In the foregoing videos, SonofNewo highlights how the FBI and deep state actors may have used Manfort to establish a basis for eavesdropping (or "wiretapping" as Trump calls it; I call it WyreSharking as modern eavesdropping uses protocol analyzers like Wireshark) on the Trump campaign.

My analysis, including the above links, is that Manfort's involvement was too limited to suggest that Trump and Manafort were close. Trump was closer to Corey Lewandowski and was going through personnel rather rapidly as he sealed the nomination and was running toward the finish.

However, SonofNewo released another video unpacking the DNC/Hillary/MI6/Russia connection, and the use of the manufactured Trump Dossier and Manafort to wiretap the Trump campaign. One of the rather interesting aspects is that Manafort has ties to the Podesta group. John Podesta was Hillary Clinton's campaign manager. Someone with business ties to the Podesta Group, Paul Manafort, became the Trump team's campaign manager, only to be fired by Trump when there were accusations that Manafort was involved with the governments of Russia and the Ukraine? What's even more interesting is that the Fusion GPS team also has ties to the Russian lawyer who was at the meeting in Trump Tower--a lawyer who needed to get immigration parole from high up in the DoJ, because her visa application was rejected. Ironically, Fusion GPS represented them in an effort to get a repeal of the Magnitsky Act, the very topic she brought up in the meeting at Trump Tower when Donald Trump Jr. was told that he was going to be given information damaging to Hillary Clinton.

Here's the latest from SonofNewo: Clinton Collusion: Fusion GPS, the Steele Dossier, Russians and the FBI
Most of you won't watch, because it doesn't confirm your bias and your apparent love of the Democratic Party in the US. Some of you who are interested won't watch, because SonofNewo is somewhat long-winded. The above video is almost an hour. However, it's worth watching if you don't like getting caught by surprise, as people have been with Trump for several years now.

In relation to this case , when it comes to the alleged evidence contained in the Fusion GPS dossier, I would say of the Clinton campaign "pot meet kettle ". From what I have heard, and read, it was them whom colluded with foreign agents to try to undermine Donald Trump's candidacy.

That appears to be the case. Increasingly, it looks as if there is some deep state involvement too, as the FBI was apparently about to start paying Fusion GPS for the Dossier after the Hillary campaign stopped. Also, the so-called "Dossier" became newsworthy after Comey presented it to Trump. Comey testified that he thought having personal meetings with Trump was uncomfortable and inappropriate, but apparently initiated this one himself--leading the media to publish the Dossier.

On an issue involving Russia it is perhaps not best practice to cite their propaganda machine.

The RT is every bit as credible or unbelievable as the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, etc. Remember, we're in the post-Wikileaks era with respect to the DNC and media, and James O'Keefe has been rattling the US MSM cages pretty regularly now.

The only thing I had to add was to generally discourage using bad sources.

Well, then we wouldn't use any mainstream media outlet in the US either. The RT isn't a "bad" source. It is Russian. Similarly, the NPR isn't necessarily bad either. It is American. The big MSM outlets in the US are controlled by six corporations who are all controlled by the same capital interests.

Justifying spreading bad sources by using other sources isn't really reasonable either.

It is critical to understanding what is taking place in a world that is 100% propaganda. For example, no major US media outlet published the Trump Dossier before Comey showed it to Trump, because they could not independently verify any of the allegations in it (and it was an obvious fake), so it was a non-story. Yet, Comey said he felt uncomfortable meeting alone with Trump; yet, initiated a meeting to show Trump this "dossier" thereby making it newsworthy.

And Manafort? What did he do for Trump? Oh... well, he only ensured that all of the delegates to Trump would actually vote for him, while the NeverTrumpers were in open revolt. Why would he do this if he had ties to the Podesta Group and a Hillary friendly Russia? Isn't it because at that time the DNC, the MSM, and even the Republican establishment all thought Trump would lose bigly?

I'm a pretty smart guy, and don't need to point it out incessantly like some people here. Yet, most of you have been hopelessly wrong about this stuff for years now. At what point are you going to reflect on the holes in your analysis?

[Beren]

Special counsel Robert Mueller just sent a searing missile across the bow of the Trump administration in the form of an indictment of Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager. The indictment is a prosecutorial work of art. It is highly specific and identifies multiple transactions reaching back several years. The charges include tax evasion, money laundering, failing to register as a foreign agent, and even the suggestion of mortgage fraud involving a Manafort relative. Without doubt, the indictment signals a very significant turn in the investigation. Let's be clear: none of the charges relate to Manafort's role in the Trump campaign and all of the alleged illegal activities took place well before he became Trump's campaign manager. But the indictment is important for three reasons. First, it gives Mueller and his team job security for the time being. No one is going to fire a special counsel who has just indicted the President's former campaign manager. So for now, Mueller has a complete path to continue and expand his investigation with no interference from the administration or Congress. He can use the full resources of the federal government and FBI to investigate just about anything he wants to. This will likely include matters well-beyond the campaign such as Trump's taxes, business deals, and the activities of Trump's family and friends. Mueller's work may never reach the concept of Russian "collusion" (which, by the way, is not a federal crime), if he can find criminal violations apart from the campaign itself. Next, the indictment signals to anyone who is targeted that Mueller is serious and he is playing hardball. The Manafort indictment is chock full of very specific transactions and includes money laundering counts, which are some of the most serious in the federal system and could lead to many years in jail. No one can doubt Mueller's resolve to use the most extreme prosecutorial tools to pursue his prey. The indictment – along with the search of Manafort's house and use of the grand jury to subpoena a Manafort lawyer - sends a clear message to the defense bar that Mueller means business. Finally, Mueller now has someone at the top of the Trump pyramid he can squeeze. The next step will be for Mueller to suggest to Manafort and his team that he can reduce his prison exposure by "cooperating" with the investigation - meaning giving information about others and talking about the campaign. This gives Mueller a tremendous advantage in the investigation. Manafort is facing very serious charges that could include a relative as well. There will be a tremendous amount of pressure on him to try to resolve the case in a way that avoids him spending the rest of his life in jail. Most defendants can't deal with this type of pressure, and the prosecutors are going to insist that Manafort give them what they want to hear. Whether Manafort "flips" is anyone's guess. But this could play out badly for the president. So what does all of this mean? At a minimum, the country is looking at a long slog of a special counsel investigation through the rest of the Trump administration. None of this is going away anytime soon. Whether or not the the investigation ends with impeachment proceedings, we can be certain that the administration is going to be distracted with this investigation for some time. The focus of the Mueller investigation will likely go far afield of the election issues alone. The Mueller team is composed of some very talented and persistent prosecutors who are not going to rest until every stone is turned. One thing is certain - for the rest of the time Trump is in office, his agenda and administration will be consumed by dealing with the special counsel and news stories about prosecutions.

Commentary by John F. Lauro, a former federal prosecutor in New York City and currently a criminal defense lawyer with a national practice, where he represents high-profile clients in federal, criminal and civil cases.

I'm going to love this.

Trump: "Here's my agenda...Wait...What? Someone's indicted again? Who? Jared??? Holy shit!"

[Prosthetic Conscience]

FREDERICK RYAN JR., WASHINGTON POST PUBLISHER: We’ve heard you’re going to be announcing your foreign policy team shortly… Any you can share with us?

TRUMP: Well, I hadn’t thought of doing it, but if you want I can give you some of the names… Walid Phares, who you probably know, PhD, adviser to the House of Representatives caucus, and counter-terrorism expert; Carter Page, PhD; George Papadopoulos, he’s an energy and oil consultant, excellent guy; the Honorable Joe Schmitz, [former] inspector general at the Department of Defense; [retired] Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg; and I have quite a few more. But that’s a group of some of the people that we are dealing with. We have many other people in different aspects of what we do, but that’s a representative group.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/po ... 3eef555a2f

He is 3rd from left in Trump's own boast of how he'll Make America Great Again:

I hereby propose that Sarah Huckabee Sanders replaces the 2003 Iraqi Government Spokesman as the Official PoFo Lying Government Lackey.

[skinster]

The RT is every bit as credible or unbelievable as the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, etc.

[Hong Wu]

Calling it a "prosecutorial artwork" sounds a lot like "we have a lot of spinning to do" to me.

NBC: https://archive.fo/SasEd

Some people are saying that the unnamed companies in the indictment are Podesta Group and Mercury (I'm not sure what that is), the former being connected to Uranium One. Neither is a Trump company.

This article also claims that Podesta stepped down from leadership of the Podesta Group on Monday... what a coincidence. If it's not the Podesta Group then he's basically acting like it is to throw people off.

Politico: https://archive.fo/zGc8H#selection-2929.199-2929.288

Tony Podesta (brother of John Podesta) supposedly said "I need to fight this as an individual" which is to say that he expects to be indicted or otherwise called up. He's attempting to limit exposure of the company but I doubt resigning would have much of an impact there.

[Suntzu]

Holy bat, Shitman! I just found out the collusion was not a crime!

[4cal]

One of the good things about the Manafort indictment is that you see, a little bit, where Mueller's focus has to have been; the money.

There is always a money trail.

The huge problem for the Trump crime family is that the money is the only asset it has so it will show up quite easily if there is an examination of the process that points the investigators in that direction. The huge problem for Mueller is that getting access to foreign bank accounts is not exactly easy to do so there is no "see-saw" where one account clearly goes down and another account clearly goes up by nearly the same amount.

Again, however, those who were motivated by money are usually more motivated by wanting to stay out of jail. The Don may have trouble bribing those who can only spend their money in the prison commissary.

[Suntzu]

He can always just pardon them all.

[Godstud]

Excellent.

[Hindsite]

He can always just pardon them all.

No one has been convicted of a crime yet. However, I don't see why Trump would want to pardon any of these guys charged, because he hardly knew them. The guy pleading guilty to giving the wrong date for a meeting with a Russian was only on one committee as an unpaid volunteer. And the other guy volunteered to be an unpaid campaign manager for a couple months, until they realized he had never done it before after his poor performance and replaced him. And that guy was not charged with anything related to the campaign, but for financial dealing dating back from 2006 to 2014 or 2015 while working for a pro-Russian outfit in Ukraine long before he volunteered to help the Trump campaign.

[Hong Wu]

Here's Papadoughboy's (couldn't resist) guilty plea for those of you who might bother to read such a thing: https://apps.npr.org/documents/document ... he-Offense

Usually, a guilty plea will prevent further crimes related to the same thing from attaching to you. So a good lawyer in this area might be able to extrapolate from this what the scope of Mueller's investigation is. If things were said to have stemmed from Papa's efforts with the Russians, it might be a "songbird" thing but the plea seems to specifically say that nothing came of his efforts which suggests that this may not go on for much longer regarding Trump's staff's attempts to collude with Russians. The fact that Manafort's charges have nothing to do with collusion with the Russian government seem to match up with this. Just my amateur analysis of course, in a forum that doesn't have a lot of this anymore.

[Potemkin]

While the Balfour declaration and the UN partition plan certainly revealed the terrifying power of international Jewry over the West, American presidents were not controlled by Tel Aviv, that was clearly demonstrated in the Suez crisis. Israel owed its early survival to Joseph Stalin. The Soviet Union only became anti Israel after his death as part of the de-Stalinisation of the Soviet Union.

Your post is correct, with the exception that the anti-Zionist turn of Soviet foreign policy occurred before Stalin's death, not after it. Stalin felt disillusioned with the new Israeli state once it started cuddling up to the USA - the Americans (rather wisely) decided to bribe the Israelis to join the Western camp as the Cold War started in the late 1940s, and they could out-bribe the Soviet Union, which was broke in the aftermath of WWII. The sudden volte-face in Soviet foreign policy caught many of the Soviet elite off-guard. It led, among other things, to the arrest of Polina Molotova, the wife of the Soviet Foreign Minister, though he himself managed to escape being purged by denouncing her as a 'Zionist agent'.