he has to have played a toady role to get a job like "U.S. Attorney for National Security" in 2006 (Gonzales tenure). He seems to have risen steadily under Gonzales. Boalt Law School means that he's basically competent. And he's pre-Bush (got awards and advancement under Clinton--and, whatever one thinks of Clinton's attachment to global corporate predator economics, and his softening up of Iraq for the Bush kill, he rewarded competence and ran an efficient, lawful "balance of power" government, at least to appearances).
These two bizarre incidents--about the FBI 9/11 informant (refusing to deliver a subpoena), and the "suitcase-full-of-money" covert op against Venezuela and Argentina--to me indicate that he is a high level operative of the Bush Cartel. They have their stupids, their dirty (bribed, blackmailed), their ambitious wingers and toadies, but they also have people like James Baker and David Addington and Donald Rumsfeld--shrewd, cold, Machiavellians, of the kind who don't attend G-8 conferences, or the Bilderberg Group, but whose meetings are far more secret than that, and who consider the U.S. to be merely their lootable, convenient launching pad for World Domination. It seems that Wainstein does special jobs for them. He is reserved for particularly important, high level work--like the 9/11 coverup--not wasted on ordinary Rove-Gonzales (crass, low level) political ops.
Although this Venezuela-Argentina thing is pretty crass and political, it is part of a very high level strategy to regain control of the oil fields in the Andes region, and smash the peaceful, democratic Bolivarian revolution that has occurred there and is quickly spreading. It is also cover for covert ops and black ops in South America. It is the Bushites who are carrying around "suitcases full of money"--in support of fascist political and paramilitary groups. And they need to slander democratic leaders in South America both as cover for their own vile activities, and to retain some control of the narrative in high level financial circles in Europe and other places.
Rumsfeld laid out the general strategy in an op-ed in the WaPo last week, called, "The Smart Way to Defeat Tyrants like Chavez," in which he virtually declares war on Venezuela and on democracy in South America. This covert op against Venezuela and Argentina is no small time, Miami-Cuban political thing. It is part of Corporate Resource War II. Rumsfeld envisions Colombia as the launching pad--Colombia, where they chainsaw union leaders and throw their body parts into mass graves. Rumsfeld wants to bully Congress into a "free trade" deal with Colombia, and is no doubt using billions of dollars stolen from us in Iraq to plan economic war, covert war and outright war against Bolivia, Ecuador, Venezuela and Argentina (allied to the three Boliviarian oil/gas rich countries)--a war that is already under way, in its covert aspects, and has been for some time, in Venezuela (in support of a rightwing military coup attempt, a crippling oil professionals' strike, a rightwing recall election, and the rightwing opposition in several regular elections), and in Bolivia (in support of rich rural rightwing landowners who are trying to split off the oil/gas resource rich provinces from the leftist federal government of Evo Morales).
Smearing and slandering two Bolivarian leaders in one blow--the suitcase caper--is psyops. The op itself was ludicrous. But Wainstein's involvement--using the justice system to further this political plot--is a very serious abuse of power. Wainstein's role was to get the Bushite operative out of Argentina and safely back to Miami, where he is being used as an "informant" in a case filed against three others who are accused of being "agents of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela." But it was the Bushite operative--the "informant"--who was carrying the money: $800,000 in US cash that allegedly was being spirited into Argentina, by the Venezuelan government, to support Cristina Fernandez Kirchner's campaign for president (which she easily won without this money, by way.) The Bushite operative who was carrying the money is wanted in Argentina. They have an extradition request to the U.S. They caught him at the border, confiscated the money, but he somehow got back home to Miami (he is a US citizen). (US/Bush Embassy intervention? I'm not sure. Possibly just a mistake of the Argentinian border authorities.)
Now what is the "U.S. Attorney for National Security" doing involving himself in this matter between Argentina and Venezuela? It is of absolutely no value to US "national security" and the US government has no business whatever in interfering with Argentinian and Venezuelan affairs.
Until you consider Rumsfeld's op-ed. THEN you see whose interests are being served by Wainstein--Exxon Mobile's interests, the Bush Oil Cartel's interests, Blackwater's interests.*
Cristina Fernandez is furious about this smear, as are other officials in Argentina and Venezuela. She publicly stated that she would renew and reinforce Argentina's close alliance with Venezuela, and would not be bullied by the Bushites. They all see it as a Bush covert op and a "divide and conquer" tactic.**
And if that is true--and I side with the Argentinians and Venezuelans on this (it was an absurd and transparent covert op)--Wainstein's corruption becomes clearer. His behavior is in fact outrageous. Here's what he says...
"'The complaint filed today outlines an alleged plot by agents of the Venezuelan government to manipulate an American citizen in Miami in an effort to keep the lid on a burgeoning international scandal,' said Wainstein."**
You hear any crime in there? HOW DARE Venezuelans try to "manipulate an American citizen in Miama"?!
He is alleging that the carrier of the money, who is now his "informant," was the victim of attempted "manipulation" by two Venezuelans and a Uruguayan, who were trying to cover up the source of the money. The money, and the informant's action (trying to take it into Argentina) have NOTHING TO DO WITH THE U.S. The conversations among these people have NOTHING TO DO WITH THE U.S. And I cannot think of ANY U.S. law they broke, merely having conversations about something that occurred in an Argentinian airport, of interest to the Argentinian government (wads of U.S. cash coming in). WHAT is criminal--and of such interest to the "U.S. Attorney for National Security"--about foreign nationals trying to "manipulate"--talk to--an American citizen about a political "scandal" in South America?
Was the money connected to a U.S. crime, or any other crime? There is no evidence of it. And if it was, the money was carried by THE INFORMANT. The other three people involved merely TALKED ABOUT something that is of no interest to the U.S. in any way (except politically to the Bushites). And whether they are "agents of the Venezuelan government" or not, THAT IS NOT A CRIME. What if they had been Bolivians, visiting Miami, and TALKED ABOUT, say, Bush larding billions of dollars in military aid on the Uribe government in Colombia, and were trying to "manipulate an American citizen" (convince him) to expose the real purposes of this money? Would that be a crime? Lobbying? Talking? Trying to convince?
The real criminal here is Wainstein--for unwarranted spying, and abuse of power! And the real crime is the covert op. Because, ONLY IF IT WAS A BUSHITE COVERT OP, is it of ANY interest to a U.S. Attorney, and the only kind of U.S. Attorney it would be of interest to, is a bought and paid for Bushite POLITICAL operative.
I think maybe they're pissed off that they lost their money. It never reached its target--Cristina Kirchner. And they didn't get it back. It was a FAILED op. So then they had to start making shit up, to CREATE a "scandal" where none occurred, and to imply some sort of crime. (Note: It is NOT a crime in Argentina to use foreign money in a political campaign, as it is here and in Venezuela. The crime--why Argentina wants extradition--is the covert op.) The Bushites also, obviously, were UNABLE to successfully tie the money to the Venezuelan government (OR to Kirchner, at the other end), so they had to scramble to invent SOME Venezuelan connection, and likely used their agent (Wainstein's "informant") for that purpose (to lure the other three into conversations that were taped).
If my suspicions on this matter (and those of Venezuelan and Argentinian officials) are true, Wainstein's behavior is totally reprehensible. And you have to wonder at the Bushites' "waste" of this high level operative (Wainstein) on such a sloppy, Keystone cop operation. And you can only conclude that slandering these governments, and trying to break up their alliance, is a TOP PRIORITY of the Bush Junta (a notion reinforced by Rumsfeld's op-ed). They do tend to "burn" their operatives, one after another. They often "waste" people. Only top Bushites get any real protection. Still, a 9/11 coverup operative--someone who used his position to deny Congress key information on pre-9/11 events, in an unusual and notable way (refusing to deliver a subpoena)--would not likely be "wasted" on this suitcase business unless it was very important. Also, it's hard to believe that a smart, Boalt Law School, high level law enforcement official like Wainstein--a former top aid to Mueller--would let himself be used this way, on a ridiculous case--which leads me to wonder: do they have something on him?
--------------------------
*"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.htmlDiscussion here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x323889**
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3001Discussion here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3101040 
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
