PRESS RELEASE
British Use Flynn Ouster to Gear Up ‘Oust Trump’ Operation: Impeachment, Assassination—Whatever It Takes
Feb. 14, 2017 (EIRNS)—Yes, such Obama operatives as former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and the Washington Post, among others, played their designated roles in orchestrating the ouster of Gen. Michael Flynn as National Security Advisor. However, as Lyndon LaRouche has repeatedly advised, look to the British to find who is directing this chorus, and to what end.
Key British media today flaunted the intent that Flynn’s ouster not be the end, but the beginning of the drive to oust President Donald Trump from office, and to do so on the bandwagon that he has dared propose that the United States and Russia should cooperate for the greater good of all nations.
Look at British Broadcasting Corp., whose lead story throughout the day has been Flynn’s ouster. Remember that BBC still operates under a Royal Charter as it has since its founding in the 1920’s.
BBC’s target is Trump, with no less than six overlapping "news" stories to this effect. "Russia: The Scandal Trump Can’t Shake," one story is headlined. Another trumpets that "the Flynn controversy may sharpen the focus on Donald Trump’s past pro-Russia statements." It insists that
"the really big question [is] what does this say about President Trump’s relationship with Russia?" Why does Trump "stubbornly refuse to say a bad word about ... Vladimir Putin. Not ever"?
BBC shamelessly revives the infamous dossier prepared by former MI6 officer Christopher Steele which circulated what were then admitted to be lies on Trump activities and ties in Russia, to imply that the American President is blackmailed by Russia.
"Why the love-in with Putin? What is driving this? Even if the most lurid things in the dossier were untrue, are there other things that are? Does Putin have some kind of leverage over the new American president?,"
they write.
The City of London’s Economist magazine joins BBC in dismissing Flynn’s ouster as but the sign of "some deeper infection." Both imply the Trump administration could be brought down most efficiently by entrapping it in alleged scenarios of covering-up such Trump White House’s ties to Russia as Obama’s FBI was investigating in the transition period.
Should such a Watergate impeachment scenario not work out, a contributing editor to the London Review of Books today raised another option: assassination of Trump: "There is no inherent harm in fantasising" about such a killing, Adam Shatz wrote on the LRB blog. Shatz repackaged in an only slightly nastier tone, what BBC D.C. correspondent Paul Wood suggested in his Jan. 21 article in London’s Spectator magazine, which asked, "Will Donald Trump Be Assassinated, Ousted in a Coup Or Just Impeached?" Wood’s assassination mootings followed on his Jan. 12 BBC article revealing his own role in coordinating with Obama CIA director John Brennan in fabricating the "Trump Russian agent" lies.
In light of this, whose bidding do you think the Democratic and Republican Congressional leaders are doing as they dutifully line up to call for full-scale investigations into the Flynn affair?
