the clinton ragout...

hillaryMore Questions About Russiagate

Durham seems intent on exposing the larger conspiracy, including the Russia dossier and electronic spying by the Clinton campaign.

Here are ten questions and answers about Special Counsel John Durham’s new filing in his Russiagate investigation.

1) Fox says one thing, and CNN says the opposite. Who’s right?

The filing is only 13 pages. The juicy stuff is just a few paragraphs. Read it.

2) Could you give me the gist?

The filing is an exercise in legal housekeeping. It asks that the court consider allowing indicted Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann to retain his current representation, who has a potential conflict of interest.

Sussmann’s representative works for a law firm that also represents other individuals whom Durham may be going after and may have been involved in the events he’s investigating, perhaps as witnesses. Sussmann has been indicted for lying to the FBI. He brought the Trump-Alfa Bank accusations to the FBI pretending to be a patriotic citizen, when he was actually working on Hillary Clinton’s behalf, trying to get the FBI to investigate Trump. Real intelligence officers call that “using cover.”

While the conflict-of-interest issue is interesting, what is newsworthy are claims in the filing that the tech company Neustar and its executive Rodney Joffe (who was also a law client of Michael Sussmann) accessed “dedicated servers for the Executive Office of the President (EOP).” Joffe, per the filing, then allegedly “exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.”

Joffe also “enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university” (likely Georgia Tech) who had access to “large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract.” Real intelligence officers call that “recruiting sources with demonstrated access,” or informally, “spotting.”

This is how Joffe would have gotten access to data from Trump’s private computers. “[Joffe] tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and ‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia,” Durham added. “In doing so, [Joffe] indicated that he was seeking to please certain ‘VIPs,’ referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton campaign.”

3) What is DNS?

Remember metadata, the information about digital communications that Edward Snowden showed us the NSA gathers? DNS data is like that. Metadata shows, among other things, when and where a communication started, and where it ended up. DNS data, a kind of metadata, comes from the server associated with the Domain Name System. When you use a smartphone or type an address into your browser, it contacts a DNS server, which translates words into binary code—the numbers the internet actually runs on. Same thing for email, TikTok, anything online.

If you have access to DNS data, like Joffe did, you know whom a person has communicated with. DNS data is a map, and if you have enough of data, patterns emerge—like regular communication with Russia, perhaps. That’s why real intelligence officers do the same thing against America’s enemies.

4) Isn’t it true Durham never uses the word “spying”?

Neither do real intelligence officers. But what word would you use to describe the secret (and likely illegal) collection of information about an enemy that one intends to use against them? Durham is writing a legal document, and must use precise words. But it is pretty hard to call what actually happened anything other than spying, at least in lay terms.

5) How is what Joffe and Neustar did illegal? They had access to the servers.

There were two sources of DNS information referred to in the filing. Let’s take them separately. The first source was DNS servers inside the White House. Neustar provided these servers under a contract with the government. Contractors like Neustar, who work on sensitive data systems, do not own the data they see. Their legal ability to use that data is specific to the job they were hired to do, like a doctor who knows you’re a drunk but cannot share that with his brother-in-law who sells car insurance.

Real intelligence officers illegally obtain information from people, like foreign diplomats, who have legitimate access to it, all the time. They call that “their job.”

The second source Joffe monitored was the DNS data from Trump Tower and other properties via Georgia Tech. He got those records (along with a trove of other DNS records) as part of an unrelated contract with the Pentagon. Georgia Tech had no obvious right to share its data with Joffe, and he had no right to use the shared data for political purposes. There has to be a crime in there somewhere.

6) But Joffe and others never read any Trump email or listened in on calls. So, it’s not spying, right?

Time to update the definition of spying from 1945. In Joffe’s case, he was trying to establish a pattern of communications between Trump and Russia. Michael Sussmann was then to take that pattern to the FBI and CIA as a patriotic bystander, and those agencies would be able to go deeper. The NSA does this all the time, like when it looks at the people one terrorist has contacted in order to target another. Real intelligence officers know this tactic is the core of modern spying. The Clinton campaign was employing it, and using Michael Sussmann as a false front to peddle it. The FBI took the bait.

7) But didn’t I hear all this DNS monitoring of the White House started under Obama?

Neustar got the contract and installed the DNS servers in the White House during the Obama administration. This may have been for some legitimate cybersecurity task and/or to establish a baseline of “normal” White House-Russia communications. Joffe continued his DNS monitoring of the White House into February 2017, after Trump took office. Having failed to stop his campaign, the data was lined up to aid in driving him out of office. Joffe monitored the other source—Trump’s personal and business DNS data— during the campaign, which of course meant it was while Obama was in the White House but separate from it.

8) This guy Joffe seems straight out of Better Call Saul, huh?

In a quid pro quo, Joffe was offered a top cybersecurity job in the future Hillary Clinton administration. But his background goes deep. Joffe’s other company, Packet Forensics, sells equipment that allows law enforcement to spy on private web-browsers through fake internet security certificates. Joffe could have easily used his access to the White House servers to install this product and then monitor everything.

Joffe’s company has made $40 million through federal contracts, including with the FBI (in 2013, FBI Director James Comey gave Joffe an award recognizing his work on a case) and the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Joffe’s firm also monitors the computers of other government officials for threats, including Justice Department-watchdog Michael Horowitz, who investigated the FBI for its wrongdoing in Russiagate. Joffe is in a position to know a lot. And, small world—Joffe’s company Packet Forensics landed another, new, Pentagon contract, the bid for which was awarded on the day of Joe Biden’s inauguration.

9) What’s next?

Joffe will almost certainly be indicted. Durham may also probe why the FBI and CIA did not question the source of Sussmann’s data, given that it could have only come from White House servers. In addition, if researchers at Georgia Tech paid by the U.S. governmentwere freelancing the data they collected to help the Clinton campaign smear Trump, that would be another area for Durham to explore. It’s likely too late, but Durham might also seize the Neustar-provided DNS servers and see if any malware was ever installed.

One of Durham’s earlier indictments, former FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, has already been found guilty of falsifying data on a FISA application. The case against Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann is ongoing, as is the case against Igor Danchenko, who made up most of the material in Christopher Steele’s dossier.

Keep your eye on Charles Dolan, a long-time Clinton hack. Dolan has close ties not only to the Clintons but Moscow; he did P.R. work for the Russian government and was registered as a foreign agent for Russia. Dolan is credited with, among other things, inventing the “peetape” story and otherwise using cut-outs to push false information about Trump into the dossier.

10) Is anyone going to jail?

Durham’s filings are like lightning bolts, briefly and unpredictably illuminating part of the whole. One thing seems clear, however. The statute of limitations on many process crimes, like perjury, is short. Using little fish to catch bigger fish is a strategy that is likely to time out, at least in terms of prosecutions. So, you-know-who is not going to jail.

Instead, Durham seems intent on exposing the larger conspiracy, including the Russia dossier and now electronic spying by the Clinton campaign. He may also expose more fully the FBI’s role in the affair. One can imagine future hearings in a Republican-controlled House showing what Hillary—never mind Obama and Biden—knew.

Peter Van Buren is the author of We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People, Hooper’s War: A Novel of WWII Japan, and Ghosts of Tom Joad: A Story of the 99 Percent.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/more-questions-about-russiagate/

REE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW.

By Gus Leonisky at 28 Feb 2022 - 5:56pm
Gus Leonisky's blog
Login or register to post comments

stupid woman...

Hillary Clinton has likened the Russian military operation in Ukraine to the Soviet Union’s 1979 invasion of Afghanistan, saying a similar outcome might be achieved by helping to arm Kiev’s resistance just like Washington backed Mujahideen fighters against its Cold War rival.

“Remember, the Russians invaded Afghanistan back in 1980 (sic),” the former US presidential candidate and ex-secretary of state said on Monday in an MSNBC interview. “And although no country went in, they certainly had a lot of countries supplying arms and advice and even some advisers to those who were recruited to fight Russia.”

As Clinton noted, the Afghanistan war “didn’t end well” for the Soviet Union, despite its status as a military superpower. “There were other unintended consequences, as we know,” she added with a smile – apparently referring to the fact that arming radical Islamists in Afghanistan gave rise to Al-Qaeda and led to 9/11 attacks in the US – “but the fact is that a very motivated and then funded and armed insurgency basically drove the Russians out of Afghanistan.”

Yeah that’s also how the US helped to create Al-Qaeda https://t.co/C5sZo9R5ni

— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) March 1, 2022

The CIA’s “Operation Cyclone” program funneled billions of dollars in weaponry to Islamist fighters in Afghanistan in the 1980s. In fact, aid to the Mujahideen continued to flow in even after Soviet troops completed their withdrawal in 1989, helping the insurgents to battle Afghan government forces in a civil war.

Clinton, who has long accused Russia of helping Donald Trump steal the 2016 presidential election from her, conceded that the Afghanistan-Ukraine comparison is problematic. For instance, the terrain and urban fighting in Ukraine are nothing like what the Soviets encountered in Afghanistan.

https://www.rt.com/news/551000-clinton-compares-ukraine-afghanistan/

READ FROM TOP.

the info wars...

BY Valery Kulikov

The development of information systems has led to a dramatic turnaround in information wars, especially between East and West. These wars have long been a war of ideologies, a war for minds, including for political advantage. In this regard, disinformation has been used increasingly actively, especially by the United States and its allies, which is disseminated in accordance with the famous aphorism of the American writer Robert Sheckley: “The saddest fact is that, in an information war, the one who tells the truth always loses. He is limited by truth, while the liar can proclaim whatever he wishes.”

Information wars are widely used by Washington to take over the economies of states. A striking example of this is the recent US-inspired fight in Kazakhstan against 55 Chinese factories, the fight against nuclear power, against the background of which USAID – known worldwide for its actions on behalf of US intelligence agencies – suddenly began to intensively propose green energy programs, the sad results of which could be observed in the US.

The first US official documents on the use and conduct of information warfare are probably the US Department of Defense Directive O-3600.1 dated December 21, 1992, entitled “Information Operations.” In 1993, Committee of Chiefs of Staff Directive No. 30 had already outlined the basic principles of information warfare. Finally, in 1997 the following definition of information warfare was given: “Actions taken to achieve information superiority by affecting adversary information, information-based processes, information systems, and computer-based networks while defending one’s own information, information-based processes, information systems, and computer-based networks.”

At the end of 1998, the Chiefs of Staff of the US Army issued a document Joint Doctrine for Information Operations, which for the first time officially confirmed Washington’s preparations for offensive information operations, not only during war but also during peacetime. Taking this as one of the main areas of foreign warfare, since 1994, the US has held official “scientific” conferences on “information warfare” with prominent representatives of the US military and political leadership. For this purpose, the US has already established the Center for Strategic and International Studies to study the use of information technology in military conflicts in the 21st century, with billions of dollars from the US budget allocated to information warfare. In May 2005, the Pentagon formed a special group tasked with suppressing enemy activity on the Internet and other electronic networks. Millions of dollars are being spent on the program to equip this group with the latest equipment and software.

The existence of the military hacking group project was officially announced at a Senate Armed Services Committee meeting, representatives of the US Department of Defense’s Strategic Command said. This element of the Armed Forces is called the Joint Functional Component Command – Network Warfare (JFCC-NW) and is tasked with, among other things, hacking into enemy computer networks.

A very important stage in the conduct of the United States’ information wars was the 9/11 attack, which, according to many American experts, was an overtly planned provocation. The infamous speech of Secretary of State Colin Powell at the UN Security Council on February 5, 2003 before the invasion of Iraq, which caused thousands of human casualties, chaos in the Middle East region, the Arab “spring”, the war in Syria, etc., is in the same line. Moreover, the western “allies” of Washington never officially rebuked or sanctioned the US in relation to all this White House-induced global damage, nor did the UN, thereby encouraging the US to continue such information wars in the future.

As a result, the US has become consistent and active in the information wars of the 21st century. Thus, in all armed conflicts in which the US has been involved (Desert Storm, the operation in Haiti, the bombing of Yugoslavia, etc.), various types of information weapons have been tested, and positions of officers dealing with information warfare techniques have been introduced in the US army, navy and air force.

After Washington singled out Russia as the main target of information wars, in addition to pushing the Russian Federation and the Russian civilization out of the world community, another important task is being accomplished: depriving the Russian people of a positive historical experience, weakening the connection with Russia and the Russians as much as possible, depriving the Russian population of a real historical foundation, making them uncompetitive and deprived of historical friends and allies by means of historical and social manipulation. Moreover, in such a war, the objective is not to mislead the enemy population, but to reformat the very essence of the people under attack, to change their civilization code and irreversibly transform their identity.

Many foundations and organizations, such as the American Foundation for Peace, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, Freedom House, the Soros Foundation and the NED are among those that in their concrete actions have already demonstrated their focus in waging an information warfare against Russia and its allies. The West has also established several information centers to carry out its information attacks against Russia, most notably the NATO Strategic Communications Center of Excellence in Riga (established in 2015), the European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats in Helsinki (2017) and the Cyberspace Operations Centre in Mons, Belgium (2018).

The problem with fakes and disinformation spread by the United States in the media today is reaching such proportions that, for some audiences, the real picture is being replaced by false information. In particular, the most recent examples are the “war in Ukraine”, the “rebellious people in Kazakhstan” and the anti-Chinese and anti-Russian propaganda of the Western media. The presence of Western players in the media market is abnormally high, unlike that of alternative media. These mouthpieces of Western information warfare often give a distorted picture of events in the country and abroad, creating a positive image of the US, forming a pool of speakers from foreign-agent NGOs who provide comments convenient for the “customer.” It is on their conscience to foment conflict between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan and to blame the CSTO, even though Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan have officially refused the Organization’s or Russia’s assistance in resolving the conflict.

Today, disinformation, lies and slander are becoming constant attributes of the foreign policy of Washington and many of its allies. Thus, for a number of years the US media have been spreading the fiction of alleged Russian meddling in the election overseas, but the investigation and recent US media coverage has clearly shown that the Democrats and Hillary Clinton are the real culprits behind Russia-gate.

Under these circumstances, it is the duty of every citizen, a matter of patriotism and a sense of responsibility for their country, to defend their homeland from aggression, including information aggression.

Valery Kulikov, political expert, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

https://journal-neo.org/2022/03/02/the-provocative-us-policy-of-disinformation/

READ FROM TOP.

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW...

By Gus Leonisky at 3 Mar 2022 - 9:54am
Login or register to post comments

a diplomatic "error"...

The US has recalled a diplomatic cable that instructed its envoys to tell their Indian and UAE counterparts that their countries were “in Russia's camp” due to their neutral stance on the Ukrainian conflict.

The US State Department had on Monday forwarded the cable – labeled “sensitive, but unclassified” – to American embassies in almost 50 countries represented at the UN Human Rights Council (HRC), according to an Axios website report.

The directive was distributed after last week's vote on the US-sponsored UN Security Council (UNSC) resolution condemning the Russian “aggression” in Ukraine, in which India, the United Arab Emirates and China became the only abstaining parties.

Cables usually contain instructions to diplomats abroad on how best to relay Washington’s stance to the authorities in the countries where they’re stationed. This particular one suggested that they shouldn't mince words while trying to persuade India and the UAE to change their minds.

Continuing to call for dialogue, as you have been doing in the Security Council, is not a stance of neutrality; it places you in Russia’s camp, the aggressor in this conflict,” the cable read, according to Axios, which saw parts of the document.

“We strongly encourage you to take the opportunity to support Ukraine in the HRC, an opportunity you failed to seize in the UNSC,” it added.

The Human Rights Council is set to meet in Geneva later on Thursday to discuss its own resolution on the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine.

However, on Tuesday the not-so-diplomatic cable was recalled by Washington. The State Department spokesperson explained the move to Axios by saying that “the language in question was never intended for clearance and the cable was released in error.”

Washington’s apparent hopes to persuade India – which also has close relations with Russia, especially in the defense sector – to become its ally in countering China’s influence in Asia, while the oil-rich UAE has been one of America's key Arab partners for decades.

The US has been actively rallying the international community to denounce the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It had also imposed additional sanctions on Moscow and organized supplies of lethal arms to Kiev.

Russia insisted that sending its troops to Ukraine a week ago was the only way to end a “genocide” being perpetrated by Kiev in the breakaway regions of Donetsk and Lugansk, and to prevent the Ukrainian government from attempting to reclaim those areas by force.

According to Moscow, it has no plans to occupy the neighboring state, the aim of the incursion being to “denazify” and “demilitarize” Ukrainian authorities.Kiev has denied masterminding a full-scale assault on the two south-eastern republics, and accused Moscow of waging an unprovoked war.

https://www.rt.com/news/551154-us-ukraine-india-uae/

READ FROM TOP.

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW...

GusNote: The memo was not released in error... If you know how "diplomacy" work, it's a bit like boxing, you tease your opponent... The memo was a (threatening) tease "in error".

My feet are bigger than my shoes... NOTHING IS DONE IN "ERROR" OR BY ACCIDENT AT THIS LEVEL.

By Gus Leonisky at 4 Mar 2022 - 8:38am
Login or register to post comments

interference...

BY Brian Berletic

On February 28, 2022 the EU ambassador to Thailand, David Daly, would declare in a social media post that Thailand “should speak up to save our rules based international order,” demanding the Kingdom of Thailand vote at the UN with the West regarding Ukraine.

Accompanying his comments were the flags of the United States, the UK, France, Germany, and Canada among others who visited Thailand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs to lecture Thailand over what its reaction to the growing crisis should be.

A Bangkok Post article titled, “Neutral on Russia-Ukraine: PM,” would note, however, that Thailand would remain neutral. The article reported:

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has insisted Thailand will maintain its neutrality in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, a government source said.

The article also noted:

Speaking after the cabinet meeting, Gen Prayut [Chan-o-cha] said Thailand will adhere to Asean’s stance on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine as the grouping has called for dialogue among parties concerned to resolve the Ukraine crisis.

Thailand’s position mirrors that of China – Thailand largest investor, trade partner, and infrastructure partner.

Thailand’s relationship with Russia, like many Southeast Asian countries, is also close and long-standing. The Russian Federation represents for the region a reliable counter-balance to Western influence and interference.

In recent years Thailand has begun replacing aging American aircraft with European and Russian alternatives. This includes 3 Sukhoi Superjets used by the Royal Thai Airforce for transportation, as well as several Mil Mi-17 and Kamov Ka-32 helicopters used for military transport, humanitarian assistance, and disaster response.

Conversely, ties with the West have frayed particularly with the United States who for years now funded and encouraged violent protesters in their bid to overthrow the current China (and also Russia) friendly government from power and replace it with leadership backed by and working for Washington, London, and Brussels.

These same representatives recently lecturing Thailand on its stance regarding Russia and Ukraine have regularly injected themselves into the internal political affairs of Thailand, meeting with opposition leaders, accompanying them to police stations, and regularly condemning the Thai government for policing the often violent protests the Western-backed opposition organizes in Bangkok’s streets.

A 2019 Bangkok Post article titled, “Don slams diplomats for accompanying Thanathorn,” would note:

Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai has accused foreign envoys of breaching diplomatic protocol and intervening in the justice system by being present when Future Forward Party leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit reported to Pathumwan police on a sedition charge.

“That could not happen in their own countries, but they did it in our country. We will ask them to cooperate and not to do that again. It was against the diplomatic protocols of the United Nations,” Mr Don said at Government House on Tuesday

These same representatives blatantly violating Thailand’s sovereignty and interfering in the nation’s internal political affairs in recent years, now want to recruit Thailand to support them and their efforts to do likewise – undermine peace, stability, and sovereignty – in Eastern Europe.

In a bid to pressure the Thai government over Ukraine and Russia, the same Western-backed opposition groups and media platforms attempting to overthrow the current Thai government for years, is now being mobilized to poison the Thai public against Russia and the Thai government for not taking a firm stance alongside (or perhaps at the feet of) the West.

This includes Prachatai, funded by the US government through the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and whose director is an NED fellow. Prachatai has published multiple articles promoting recent anti-Russian protests carried out by US-backed opposition groups and Ukrainian expatriates.

However, the Western-backed opposition in Thailand has made itself incredibly unpopular, particularly from 2019 onward. The fact that the Thai opposition is compromised by its Western backers and financiers is widely known among politically-conscious Thais and the reality behind Ukraine-Russian tensions is openly discussed from a Russian point of view among at least some prominent Thai media platforms.

While US-funded and influenced media will parrot Western talking points regarding Russia, much of Thailand’s media will remain neutral with at least some prominent media platforms presenting the conflict from Russia’s points of view. This includes a recent interview by Thai journalist Suthichai Yoon of Russian Ambassador to Thailand Evgeny Tomikhin.

Thailand’s political and information space could have been more favorably positioned ahead of the current conflict to protect Thai neutrality from Western pressure but for the time being, the hysteria sweeping the West has so far not made any significant inroads in Thailand.

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

https://journal-neo.org/2022/03/03/west-pressures-thailand-to-take-their-side-against-russia/

READ FROM TOP.

a dirty rag doll….

By launching information warfare and sanctions against undesirable countries and politicians, the United States clearly did not consider that these same weapons could very well punish the US, its American “stability”, as well as knock many politicians of this “empire of lies” off pedestal.

So, once Moscow, in response to the White House’s insinuations, blacklisted 13 US politicians on March 15, including President Joe Biden, his son Hunter Biden, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, White House Press Secretary Jennifer Psaki, and Hillary Clinton, approval of the move and strident criticism of the current US political establishment swept the US public.

From Breitbart and its readers, Hillary Clinton, the former Secretary of State who is now trying to reserve her place as the future mistress of the White House, got what they call “what she deserved.” After all, it was she who indirectly benefited when her husband, former President Bill Clinton, received a corrupt fee of $500,000 from a Russian investment bank for a lecture he gave in Moscow in 2010, which even the New York Times wrote about at the time. Moreover, Hillary was also recalled for paying her campaign staff to prepare a fake “dossier” of compromising material concerning the then-candidate, Donald Trump. It is therefore not surprising to see very harsh comments on this article from American readers, in particular IdriveAPontiac: “The same list of wanted persons is posted in the offices of sheriffs all over the country. Lol,” or cylde: “Putin is doing the job for our DOJ.”

The satirical website The Babylon Bee also took a swipe at Hillary, describing Putin’s alleged frustration at “her refusal to cooperate” and the Clinton family’s intention to acquire all disinformation and fake news from domestic sources like The Washington Post.

As for the “first person of the US”, it has completely lost its face and its mind after being blacklisted by Moscow. In particular, he has publicly demonstrated this by speaking at a White House event recently where he called Vice-President Kamala Harris’s husband “the first person of state.”

And a week earlier Joe Biden confused Russia and Ukraine altogether, commenting on the Russian military special operation, and said: “How do we get to the place where, you know, Putin decided he is gonna just invade Russia? Nothing like this has happened since World War II.”

So the stormy reaction to this by users of the Internet and the general shame of Americans for such a “leader” is understandable to all…

Already after the inauguration, having become a laughing stock in the US and beyond, Joe Biden became a “talking head” who too often started to talk a lot of gibberish and voice (probably without proper awareness!) the words of “political prompters”. This is clearly illustrated by the events of March 16, when, during a brief meeting with journalists from the White House pool, Biden, when asked by Fox News to describe Putin, first left the room, and then, apparently having been “prompted” on the sidelines, returned and called the Russian president a “war criminal”.

It is notable that exactly one year ago – on March 16, 2021 – Biden made a high-profile statement in an interview with ABC News when he called Putin a “murderer”. Even then, the Chairman of the State Duma, Vyacheslav Volodin, called Joe Biden’s behavior “impotent hysteria” and Russian Ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov was invited to Moscow “for consultations” to review Russian-American relations.

And following the referendum on Crimean independence eight years ago (again in March), Hillary Clinton called Russian President Putin “the new Hitler”.

There is no doubt that such labels, which US leading politicians are trying to place in official statements, are unacceptable. Not only for reasons of diplomatic etiquette, but also morality, as it is American politicians themselves who are up to their elbows in blood. The same applies to Hillary Clinton, who reacted with undisguised enthusiasm to the White House-organized assassination of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011. And to Joseph Biden, who personally came up with the idea of bombing peaceful Belgrade in 1999 and sent American pilots to destroy all the bridges on the Danube. “Biden, US senators and congressmen were the initiators and perpetrators of the current events in Ukraine. They are the ones who committed crimes against humanity and should be brought to justice,” the Chairman of the State Duma, Vyacheslav Volodin said. “US President Joe Biden is beginning to understand that he will have to answer for what is happening in Ukraine, which is causing hysteria in Washington.”

US President Joe Biden’s rating has fallen to 37%, the lowest mark from voters in his career – but even that figure is almost certainly inflated as the country is “going to hell” because of his decisions, Biden’s predecessor Donald Trump told Fox News in a phone interview.

The Daily Wire polled Joe Biden’s supporters on the UCLA campus. In particular, when students were asked what achievements the US president had made over the past year, no one could recall a single specific White House head’s success.

Four dozen people from the US House of Representatives, including the former White House chief doctor, called in February for Joe Biden to undergo a medical test of his mental capacity. They suspect that the head of state is being consumed by “senile dementia”. Their appeal, citing the Alzheimer’s Association, stresses that Biden’s behavior is on a list of ten signs of diminished mental capacity.

Inflation at a 40-year high is dragging both Biden’s and the Democratic Party’s approval ratings down, threatening to have them lose the mid-term election to the Congress next autumn and result in the formation of a parliament opposed to the White House. And there are also sanctions imposed by Moscow on him and his closest “prompters”! Yes, the “talking head” of the White House can’t take this kind of “overheating”, so he “went berserk”.

However, public accusations (not for the first time, either!) against the leader of a world power may result in more than just impeachment!

Vladimir Platov, expert on the Middle East, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

https://journal-neo.org/2022/03/20/sanctions-against-biden-end-his-career/

READ FROM TOP.

kiss kiss

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By Gus Leonisky at 21 Mar 2022 - 5:59am
Login or register to post comments

Primary links

Search

Recent comments

Democracy Links

Member's Off-site Blogs