Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

Covington and Burling: The secret conspiracy undermining Michael Flynn

The well runs deep – the other side of the Michael Flynn scandal.

Published

on

12,064 Views

Here’s an earth-shaking, time-stopping truth you won’t read anywhere in the world, except The Duran: Michael Flynn’s attorney—which today persuaded Flynn to take a “plea deal” and admit to making a false statement (18 USC 1001)—is the same law firm that in 2009 not only worked with Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Loretta Lynch,  and Eric Holder at the State Department, Justice Department, Treasury Department, CIA, and the Military to conspire to confiscate and hide 19,000 Union Bank of Switzerland  bank accounts used for laundering funds for terrorist financing from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and the same law firm protecting Saudi Arabian clients funneling millions of dollars into Wahhabi mercenaries invading and waging war in Libya, in Syria and killing Russians, Iranians, Syrians, and some Americans, and the same law firm that hired Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer and Roger Zakheim after their government service,  but is also the same law firm that helped advise Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation on not only the Clinton Presidential campaign, but how to transform that potential Clinton Presidency into the most corrupt syndicate of international terrorism, human trafficking, financial fraud, racketeering, and extortion since the invention of death itself.  This law firm is Covington and Burling, and their website and client list and history tells the story—but not all of it.  I’ll tell the best parts here, and no doubt outrage those who are guilty of the most outrageous government criminality in America.

Covington and Burling is a global law firm, headquartered in Washington DC, that represents, among others, Saudi Arabia and Union Bank of Switzerland as separate clients, yet with suspiciously profitable mutual interests and relationships.  If we draw out a schematic and connect the dots of these interests and relationships—like Sean Hannity clumsily tried to do on Fox News a few weeks ago—we will see that Covington and Burling is directly connected to Hillary Clinton, former President Barack Obama, former President Bill Clinton, former Attorney General Eric Holder, former Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, House Armed Services attorney Roger Zakheim and his father and Booz Allen Hamilton and Pentagon Comptroller Dov Zakheim, U.S. Central Command’s terror financing operation, and General Michael Flynn as Defense Intelligence Agency Director in 2012.

This original schematic connecting all of these people, and others, was originally filed on September 25, 2012 as a military intelligence whistleblowing report by an Army Psychological Warfare and Booz Allen Hamilton counterterrorism analyst with a Top Secret/ Sensitive Compartmentalized Information security clearance, who happened to have worked at the State Department Coordinator for Counterterrorism, and the Joint Intelligence and Operations Center at U.S. Central Command, and was the liaison officer for U.S. Special Operations Command.

Interestingly, General Michael Flynn and his agency (D.I.A.) wrote intelligence cables, disclosed later by WikiLeaks, that described these very same Saudi-Qatar terrorist financing operations and networks.  Hillary Clinton cited these materials in her report calling attention to Saudi-Qatar terrorist financing, as did Vice President Joe Biden and others.  Ironically,  WikiLeaks also released these Hillary Clinton emails and cables.

The only State Department cables and Clinton emails not yet released by the American mainstream media, have been those in 2009 describing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s desire to “make a deal with Switzerland in exchange for making the Union Bank of Switzerland issue ‘go away’ and stave off any further disruptions caused by the 2008 financial crisis.”  Make no mistake, these materials WILL be coming out eventually, and will most likely be the climax of the corruption of the Clinton-Obama saga because intrinsic to this story is the false imprisonment of an American Swiss Bank (UBS) whistleblower named Brad Birkenfeld who originally presented these materials to the American government—and was betrayed and jailed to hide his information.  Miraculously, or mysteriously, this falsely imprisoned Swiss bank whistleblower Brad Birkenfeld met with, debriefed over six (6) months, and physically provided these banking documents and communications to a U.S. Army Officer whose very job was tracking down and destroying terrorist networks and operations at U.S. Central Command.  This Army Officer, and Booz Allen Hamilton contractor, not only worked with Edward Snowden and his team in Hawaii, but is also the author of this article you are reading now.

Because of the recent dishonest and unconstitutional condemnation of RT as a “foreign espionage asset”, these materials will be shared here by The Duran, and are available for verification and review in the original report titled “SHELL GAME: A Military Whistleblowing Report to Congress” available at www.shellgamewhistleblower.com  and www.lulu.com and https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Scott_Bennett

CONCLUSION:

Essentially these materials prove the accuracy of the WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden revelations: that from 2009 to present, Michael Flynn’s attorney Covington and Burling and its attorneys Stuart Eizenstat and others, was a co-conspirator with the Clinton Foundation, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Attorney General Eric Holder, Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, Loretta Lynch, and UBS Chairman of the Americas Robert Wolf, in various money laundering, terrorist financing, pay-to-play, and other criminal conspiracies and racketeering schemes that has not only killed millions of Syrian Christians and Muslims, and numerous Russians, Turks, and Iranians, but also thousands of American, Britons, Germans, and soldiers from other NATO allies illegally present in Syria.  Treasonously, many American politicians and military officials were informed about this story between 2012 and 2016 by the American Army Officer who compiled the report, and chose to do absolutely nothing.  For this they will ultimately be prosecuted if not in the courts of law, then certainly in the courts of public opinion as the materials are digested.

For this reason, Covington and Burling should not be recognized as Flynn’s attorney, but rather considered a criminal conspirator in the larger Michael Flynn-Russian investigation-Uranium One cases.  To do otherwise indicates either a corrupt court, or a lazy and ignorant court which must be informed about this material as “Newly Discovered Evidence of Fraud on the Court” in the form of an Amicus Brief; which most likely could be submitted by Judicial Watch and Jay Sekulow, with the direct witness testimony of Senator Dick Black of Virginia—who can confirm the validity of this article.

This material also explains why Covington and Burling is far too eager to throw Michael Flynn under the bus and shackle him with a “plea deal” that will force Flynn to falsely answer every question posed by Robert Mueller in a manner intentionally designed  by Mueller to construct a trap of lies and propaganda and treasonous acts implicating Trump and essentially guaranteeing a Presidential impeachment.  Unless of course, the entire case against Flynn, and Paul Manaforte, is thrown out on the legal basis of “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” which argues that everything derived from the wiretaps and investigations resulting from the fake Russian dossier written by Christopher Steele and paid for by the Democrats and Clinton Presidential campaign is absolutely and irreconcilably inadmissible in a court of law because it violates the Constitutional rights of the people targeted, and thereby jeopardizes the rights of every American citizen.   In that case, it opens up another possibility: that the Justice Department knows this, and will use the Flynn-Manaforte indictments as a smokescreen to indict, arrest, and prosecute the larger criminal actors involved—such as Tony and John Podesta, Huma Abedin and her Muslim Brotherhood agents, Clinton Foundation agents Donna Chalela and her nephew David Chalela, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and her brother at the Washington DC Courts incompetently investigating the Seth Rich murder (DNC staffer who allegedly released the DNC emails to British political figure Craig Murray, who in turn gave them to Julian Assange at WikiLeaks).  If that’s the case, Trump may very well be taking chess lessons from Russian President Putin.

The reason why The Duran is sharing the links to these materials is not only because it is an authentic champion of the freedom of speech, honesty and transparency in government, and believes that truth and justice are natural antibodies against corruption and deceit, but because the American mainstream media has demonstrated its agenda—and I would even say its religion—is willfully anti-truth and anti-justice as a means to global neocon-Zionist subjugation of the world using the license of “democracy” and the boot of “human rights”—as ridiculous as that may sound.

And since the American people, and indeed the world, deserve to know every single corrupt and criminal act perpetrated by those entrusted with government service, The Duran will honor that right, and enact it, even if those in the American government refuse to.

–to be continued…

Advertisement
Comments

Latest

Denmark As A Model For American Socialists?

In Denmark, everyone pays at least the 25% value-added tax (VAT) on all purchases. Income tax rates are high.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Lars Hedegard via The Gatestone Institute:


Here are some facts to consider before American “democratic socialists” look to Denmark for guidance, as Senator Bernie Sanders did during the 2016 presidential campaign.

First of all, Danes actually pay for their brand of socialism through heavy taxation. In Denmark, everyone pays at least the 25% value-added tax (VAT) on all purchases. Income tax rates are high. If you receive public support and are of working age and healthy enough to work, the state will require that you look for a job or it will force a job on you.

The willingness of all the Danes to pay high taxes is predicated on the country’s high degree of homogeneity and level of citizens’ trust in each other, what sociologists call “social capital.” By and large, Danes do not mind paying into the welfare state because they know that the money will go to other Danes like themselves, who share their values and because they can easily imagine themselves to be in need of help — as most of them, from time to time, will be.

Whenever politicians propose tax cuts, they are met with vehement opposition: So, you want to cut taxes? What part of the welfare state are you willing to amputate? And that ends the debate.

Danes, in contrast to American socialists gaining ground in the Democratic Party, are increasingly aware that the welfare state cannot be sustained in conditions of open immigration. A political party agitating for “no borders” could never win a Danish election. Danes do not suffer from historical guilt: they have not attacked any other country for more than two centuries and have never committed a genocide.

Moreover, there is an even deeper truth to ponder: Denmark is not really socialist but constitutes a sui generis fusion of free-market capitalism and some socialist elements. Denmark has no minimum wage mandated by law. Wages, benefits and working conditions are determined through negotiations between employers and trade unions. 67% of Danish wage-earners are members of a union, compared to 19% in Germany and 8% in France. Strikes and lockouts are common, and the government will usually stay out of labor conflicts unless the parties are unable to agree.

It is uncomplicated for enterprises to fire workers, which gives them great flexibility to adapt to shifting market conditions. To alleviate the pain, the state has in place a number of arrangements such as generous unemployment benefits and programs to retrain and upgrade redundant workers.

Danish companies must make ends meet or perish. They generally will not get handouts from the government.

Denmark is more free-market oriented than the US. According to the Heritage Foundation’s 2018 Index of Economic Freedom, Denmark is number 12, ahead of the United States (number 18). Venezuela is at the bottom, one place ahead of number 180, North Korea.

Mads Lundby Hansen, chief economist of Denmark’s respected pro-free-market think tank CEPOS, comments:

“Very high taxes and the vast public sector clearly detract in the capitalism index and reduce economic freedom. But Denmark compensates by protecting property rights, by low corruption, relatively little regulation of private enterprise, open foreign trade, healthy public finances and more. This high degree of economic freedom is among the reasons for Denmark’s relatively high affluence.”
Trish Regan recently claimed on Fox Business that Danes pay a “federal tax rate” of 56% on their income. This is misleading. The 55.8% is the levied on the marginaltax for the top income bracket, only on the part of their income above DKK 498,900 ($76,500). Any income under DKK 498,900 is taxed at lower rates. And the 55.8% marginal rate does not represent a “federal” or “national” rate. It represents the total of all taxes on income: national tax, regional tax, municipal tax and labor market tax. It does not, however, include Denmark’s 25% value-added tax (VAT), paid on all purchases.

Regan also claimed that Danes pay a 180% tax on cars. While it is true that there was once a maximum tax of 180% on care in Denmark, the vehicle tax rates have been lowered in recent years. Today, the first DKK 185,100 ($28,400) of the price of a gas- or diesel-powered car is taxed at 85%, and if the car’s price is above DKK 185,100, the remaining amount is taxed at 150% — which is of course bad enough.

Denmark’s total tax burden amounts to 45.9% of GDP, the highest of all countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

As pointed out in the Fox Business segment, all education for Danes is tuition-free, all the way through to a Ph.D. Not only that; the state will, within certain time constraints, pay students to study. For students at university level no longer living with their parents, the monthly cash grant comes to almost $1,000 per month. No fewer than 325,000 students out of a total population of 5.6 million benefit from this generous arrangement setting the state back to the tune of DKK 20.9 billion or 1% of GDP (latest 2018 figures just in and supplied by Mads Lundby Hansen). Denmark even pays student support to 20,000 foreign students.

Attempts by fiscal conservatives to cut down on payments to students have been successfully resisted by the vociferous and influential student organizations; at present it would appear impossible to muster anything like a parliamentary majority to limit the student handouts.

Fox Business is right that a great many Danes are on public transfer payments. Government figures from 2017 indicate that 712,300 Danes of working age (16-64) — not including recipients of student benefits — get public financial support. But Regan’s claim that most Danes do not work is ludicrous. According to Statistics Denmark, 69.9% of Danes aged 16-64 are active in the labor market.

How can Denmark pay for its comprehensive welfare state, which includes free medical care regardless of the severity of your condition? Regan claims that Denmark is “heavily in debt.” Not so. As it turns out, Denmark is among the least indebted countries in the world, even when compared to other Western countries. The Danish government’s gross debt stands at 35.9% of GDP. Compare that to, e.g., The United Kingdom (86.3 %), The United States (108%), Belgium (101%), Canada (86.6%), France (96.3%), Germany (59.8%), The Netherlands (53.5%), Italy (129.7%), Spain (96.7%) and even Switzerland (41.9%).

Comparing Denmark to the US, Madsen notes that the latter has a problem with fiscal sustainability that may necessitate tax increases. Denmark enjoys what he labels fiscal “oversustainability” (“overholdbarhed”).

At a time when socialism appears to be popular among certain sections of the American population, its proponents would do well not to cite Denmark as a model. The Danish fusion of free-market capitalism and a comprehensive welfare state has worked because Denmark is a small country with a very homogeneous population. This economic and social model rests on more than 150 years of political, social and economic compromises between peasants and landowners, business-owners and workers, and right- and left-leaning political parties. This has led to a measure of social and political stability that would be hard to emulate in much larger and more diverse counties such as the United States.


Lars Hedegaard, President of the Danish Free Speech Society, is based in Denmark.

Continue Reading

Latest

Ron Paul: Protectionism Abroad and Socialism at Home

One of the most insidious ways politicians expand government is by creating new programs to “solve” problems created by politicians.

Ron Paul

Published

on

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity:


One of the most insidious ways politicians expand government is by creating new programs to “solve” problems created by politicians. For example, government interference in health care increased health care costs, making it difficult or even impossible for many to obtain affordable, quality care. The effects of these prior interventions were used to justify Obamacare.

Now, the failures of Obamacare are being used to justify further government intervention in health care. This does not just include the renewed push for socialized medicine. It also includes supporting new laws mandating price transparency. The lack of transparency in health care pricing is a direct result of government policies encouraging overreliance on third-party payers.

This phenomenon is also observed in foreign policy. American military interventions result in blowback that is used to justify more military intervention. The result is an ever-expanding warfare state and curtailments on our liberty in the name of security.

Another example of this is related to the reaction to President Trump’s tariffs. Many of America’s leading trading partners have imposed “retaliatory” tariffs on US goods. Many of these tariffs target agriculture exports. These tariffs could be devastating for American farmers, since exports compose as much as 20 percent of the average farmer’s income.

President Trump has responded to the hardships imposed on farmers by these retaliatory tariffs with a 12 billion dollars farm bailout program. The program has three elements: direct payments to farmers, use of federal funds to buy surplus crops and distribute them to food banks and nutrition programs, and a new federal effort to promote American agriculture overseas.

This program will not fix the problems caused by Tramp’s tariffs. For one thing, the payments are unlikely to equal the money farmers will lose from this trade war. Also, government marketing programs benefit large agribusiness but do nothing to help small farmers. In fact, by giving another advantage to large agribusiness, the program may make it more difficult for small farmers to compete in the global marketplace.

Distributing surplus food to programs serving the needy may seem like a worthwhile use of government funds. However, the federal government has neither constitutional nor moral authority to use money taken by force from taxpayers for charitable purposes. Government-funded welfare programs also crowd out much more effective and compassionate private efforts. Of course, if government regulations such as the minimum wage and occupational licensing did not destroy job opportunities, government farm programs did not increase food prices, and the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies did not continuously erode purchasing power, the demand for food aid would be much less. By increasing spending and debt, the agriculture bailout will do much more to create poverty than to help the needy.

Agriculture is hardly the only industry suffering from the new trade war. Industries — such as automobile manufacturing — that depend on imports for affordable materials are suffering along with American exporters. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka (who supports tariffs) has called for bailouts of industries negatively impacted by tariffs. He is likely to be joined in his advocacy by crony capitalists seeking another government handout.

More bailouts will only add to the trade war’s economic damage by increasing government spending and hastening the welfare–warfare state’s collapse and the rejection of the dollar’s world reserve currency status. Instead of trying to fix tariffs-caused damage through more corporate welfare, President Trump and Congress should pursue a policy of free markets and free trade for all and bailouts for none.

Continue Reading

Latest

In Monsters We Trust: US Mainstream Media No Friend of the American People

Over 300 US newspapers ran editorials on the same day denouncing Trump, an event in itself that points to some high degree of collusion and groupthink.

Published

on

Authored by Robert Bridge via The Strategic Culture Foundation:


Over the course of his turbulent presidency, Donald Trump has accused various media companies, with special attention reserved for CNN, as being purveyors of ‘fake news.’ In one early-morning Tweet last year, he slammed the “FAKE NEWS media” as the “enemy of the people.”

This week, over 300 US newspapers ran editorials on the same day – an event in itself that points to some high degree of collusion and groupthink – denouncing Trump’s insensitive portrayal of them, as if the notion that journalists were not in the same sleaze league as lawyers, politicians and professional con artists never crossed anyone’s mind before. Even the peace-loving Mahatma Gandhi recommended “equality for everyone except reporters and photographers.”

But is the MSM really an “enemy of the people?”

First, it cannot be denied that the US media, taken in all its wholesomeness, has been overwhelmingly consistent in its ‘style’ of reporting on Donald Trump, the 45th POTUS. And by consistent I mean unprecedentedly critical, misleading and outright aggressive in its guerilla coverage of him. If one is not convinced by the gloom-and-doom Trump stories featured daily in the Yahoo News feed, then a study by the Media Research Center (MRC) should do the job. From January 1 through April 30, evening news coverage of the US leader – courtesy of ABC, CBS and NBC – were 90 percent negative, which is pretty much the same incredible average revealed by MRC one year earlier.

The study looked at every one of the 1,065 network evening news stories about Trump and his administration during the first four months of 2018. Total negative news time devoted to Trump: 1,774 minutes, or about one-third of all evening news airtime. That’s pretty much the definition of a circle jerk.

“Nearly two-fifths (39%) of the TV coverage we examined focused on Trump scandals and controversies, while 45 percent was devoted to various policy issues,” MRC wrote in its report.

Meanwhile, the farcical Russia ‘collusion’ story was consistently the main grabber — clocking in at 321 minutes, or nearly one-fifth of all Trump coverage. Of the 598 statements MRC calculated about Trump’s personal scandals, virtually all of them (579, or 97%) came out of the media wash cycle tarred and feathered.

If this represents an orchestrated attack on the Commander-in-Chief, and in light of those numbers it would be difficult to argue it isn’t, the strategy appears to be falling flat. Despite, or precisely because of, the avalanche of negative media coverage, Trump’s popularity rating smashed the 50 percent ceiling in early August and continues to remain high.

In Monsters We Trust

Although it can be safely stated that the MSM is an entrenched and relentless enemy of Donald Trump, that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s an “enemy of the American people,” as Trump argues it is. Let’s be a bit more diplomatic and say it isn’t our friend.

One yard stick for proving the claim is to consider the steadily mounting concentration of media holdings. In 1983, 90 percent of US media were controlled by 50 companies; today, 90 percent is controlled by the Big Six (AT&TComcastThe Walt Disney Company21st Century FoxCBS and Viacom control the spoken and printed word from sea to shining sea).Although many people are aware of the monopolistic tendencies of the US mainstream media, it’s important to understand the level of concentration. It means the vast majority of everything you see and hear on any electronic device or printed publication is ‘democratically’ controlled by six average white guys and their shareholders.

However, keeping track of who owns what these days is practically impossible since the dozens of subsidiary companies that fall under each main company are themselves fiefdoms, each with their own separate holdings. In fact, the already short ‘Big Six’ list is already dated, since National Amusements, Inc. has gobbled up both Viacom and CBS, while 21st Century Fox merged with Disney this year. As for the 350 US newspapers that penned tortured editorials decrying Trump’s critical opinion of them, many of those ‘local’ publications get their marching orders from either the Hearst Communications or the Gannett Company on the East Coast.

Now, with this sort of massive power and influence lying around like dynamite, it stands to reason, or unreason, that the corporate and political worlds will succumb to the law of attraction and gravitation, forging powerful and impregnable relationships. It’s no secret that the politicians, our so-called ‘public servants,’ are mostly in the game to make a fast buck, while the corporations, desperate for ‘democratic representation’ to control regulation and market share, have an inexhaustible source of funds to secure it. Naturally, this oligarchical system precludes any sort of democratic participation from the average person on the street, who thinks just because he remembers to yank a lever once every several years he is somehow invested in the multibillion-dollar franchise.

As far as media corporations being ‘private enterprises’ and therefore free to demolish the freedom of speech (even censoring major media players, like Infowars, simply because they whistle to a different political tune), that is quickly becoming revealed as nothing more than corporate cover for state-sponsored machinations.

“In a corporatist system of government, wherein there is no meaningful separation between corporate power and state power, corporate censorship is state censorship,” writes Caitlin Johnstone. “Because legalized bribery in the form of corporate lobbying and campaign donations has given wealthy Americans the ability to control the US government’s policy and behavior while ordinary Americans have no effective influence whatsoever, the US unquestionably has a corporatist system of government.”

Meanwhile, it cannot be denied, from the perspective of an impartial observer, that the mainstream media is nearly always positioned to promote the government narrative on any number of significant issues. From the media’s unanimous and uncritical clamoring that Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11 (even the FBI has admitted it has no “hard evidence” that bin Laden carried out the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon), to its gung-ho enthusiasm for the 2003 Iraq War, to the sycophantic cheerleading for a war in Syria, the examples of media toeing the government line are legion. And if US intel is in bed with Hollywood you can be damn sure they’re spending time in the MSM whorehouse as well.

Is it any surprise, then, that public trust in the US media is reaching all-time lows, while news consumers are increasingly looking to alternative news sites – themselves under relentless attack – to get some semblance of the elusive truth, which is the God-given right of any man? Truth is our due, and we should demand nothing less.

As Thomas Paine reminded the world in the face of a different foe: “Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives everything its value.”

Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Advertisement

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...

Advertisement
Advertisements

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement

Advertisements

The Duran Newsletter

Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending