Connect with us




Donald Trump has a REAL connection to Russia

Donald Trump admires President Putin’s success even without knowing or caring much about Russian history or culture.




It’s time to come clean, Donald Trump has a real connection to Russia. This connection is not anything to do with the mythical Russiagate which has been debunked as much as the existence of Santa Clause and the Tooth Fairy. Furthermore, it is not a connection to Russia’s history, culture or society.

Donald Trump did not acknowledge the 9th of May on Twitter, nor did he send the Russian President fraternal greetings on Russia day, although many other leaders did including North Korea’s Kim Jung-Un.

Donald Trump likewise has never talked about listening to Tchaikovsky or reading Pushkin. He’s been pictured eating a Mexican style taco bowel and plenty of burgers and fried chicken but has never been seen eating golubtsy or Olivier salad. He drinks Diet Coke, not Kvass.

Donald Trump is thoroughly American and this means that he loves his country but tends to known little about the history of other countries. This is fine, he was not elected to be President of Russia and if he stood in the Russian elections, he would probably have to battle for fourth place with Sergey Mironov, though to be fair he’d probably get more votes than Grigory Yavlinsky at this stage.

Donald Trump’s real connection to Russia is an intellectual curiosity and it generally derives from Trump’s apparent interests in the accomplishments and personal biography of Vladimir Putin.

If for example Dmitry Medvedev or Gennady Zyuganov were the President of Russia, one could imagine Trump having far less engagement and interest. If Vladimir Zhirinovsky was President, one could imagine a very different dynamic, one of engagement but not intrigue, after all Zhirinovsky’s historical genius far surpass that of just about any American politician and yet he has compared his style to that of The Donald. While Trump could learn from Zhirinovsky, he probably wouldn’t be interested in doing so, historical knowledge isn’t the kind of knowledge which intrigues Trump or most Americans.

Trump admires achievement more than intellect and by Trump’s standards, Vladimir Putin is a winner. He literally ‘Made Russia Great Again’ after a disastrous 1990s and an uncertain late 1980s that most Russians rightly view negatively.

Vladimir Putin also shares something else with The Donald, both Putin and Trump are one part elite but one part hardworking everyday people.

As a respected intelligence officer in the Soviet Union, Vladimir Putin could have been justifiably called a member of the Soviet elite. Likewise, as a wealthy businessman who was acquaintances with multiple celebrities and politician figures, Donald Trump was a kind of American elite too.

But Donald Trump was never an effete elite, he prefers burgers to fine dining, he talks like a regular person and made his image one of accessibility rather than that of condescension. He was not the cartoon elite American businessman that The Simpsons’ Mr. Burs represented, nor was Donald Trump ever a globalist billionaire like George Soros. After all, the most American thing about Soros is the paper in his passport and that assumes that American passports aren’t printed in China or Vietnam.

Luckily, the Soviet Union and modern Russia dose not have the snobbish culture of elitism that the west has. Most of Russia’s leading politicians and businessmen talk in a straight forward manner. Effected dialects and accents is not part of the Russian national psyche.

This partly explains why Trump is able to connect with Russian officials whether it be Sergey Lavrov with whom he famously shared a laugh or with Vladimir Putin. By contrast, it seems that Trump has difficulty grasping Chinese officials on a personal level.

Chinese culture dictates that protocol, a very formal way of showing respect and a stratified manner of governmental bureaucracy is very much the norm. It is a norm that Trump has not yet come to grips with which is why his relationship with China often seems condescending–something the Chinese take as an insult.

Ironically, the post-modern, politically correct American way of doing business is becoming increasingly similar to the rigid Chinese bureaucracy minus the intelligence, respect, background of Confucianism and class. Trump by contrast is the archetypal straight-shooting American.

Russian culture is likewise one of the most individualistic cultures in the world, although the Russian idea of individualism is very different than that which exists in the US. American free speech is all about being provocative which has its upsides (erstwhile robust political exchanges) and downsides (men wearing women’s cloths). By contrast, from the Tsarist period straight through to the Soviet days and of course up to the present, Russian individualism meant patriotism, piety and loyalty (to state, family and comrades) but beyond this, Russian’s show a great deal of tolerance for people doing as they please.

Unlike in many European societies, one’s mannerisms, the price of one’s clothes, the style of one’s hair and one’s manner of speech is not held against them in Russia. In Russia, friends can disagree about their world-view and still be friends because the personal and spiritual is ultimately more important to Russians than worldly considerations that modern westerners tend to take far too seriously.

In spite of the myth of Soviet conformity, Russia’s have always ridiculed the system, whatever that system is. Russians are sceptical and scepticism is in many ways incompatible with conformity. At the recent meeting between Chinese and Russian officials and members of the business community in both countries, each Chinese representative bowed to their President to show respect. In Russia this isn’t done, but not wanting Russians to appear less respectful than their Chinese partners, some tried a kind of awkward semi-bow to Putin as if to say, “we respect you as much as the Chinese respect their President, but we’re not particular good at rigid protocol”. Far from being cross, Putin almost certainly saw the well intentioned good-humour of it all. Sergey Lavrov, one of Putin’s most important ministers briskly walked off, clearly the sign of a man whose had 2 days of solid work and in desperate need of a cigarette, but no one would dream of saying Lavrov isn’t respectful, he’s Russian and he’s a regular man with extraordinary ability, nothing less and nothing more.

And hence we get to the other element of Putin’s ‘self-made’ side. While many political leaders who came of age (politically speaking) during the 1990s admitted that it was a hellish time, few would have been so bold as to do something about it and accomplish it without a revolution or other acts of violence.  Yetsin, the darling of the west, did use violence to consolidate his power, Putin did not. Instead, Putin peacefully drained Russia’s political and financial swamp and won the trust and later the affection of a Russian public who barely knew his name prior to his rapid rise to political power.

Trump likewise went into politics in a meteoric rise that caught the US mainstream media totally off guard. The truth is that Trump would like to be America’s Putin. He would like to have Putin’s respect and popularity and would like to emulate a legacy of turning a broken society, economy and a state around.

This is the beginning and end of Trump’s Russia connection. It used to be that some on the liberal left would moan about Americans having too little interest in learning from foreign examples. To this day, Bernie Sanders on the self-styled American socialist left says that America should emulate the British National Health Service.

But when Donald Trump stated that he admired Putin’s leadership and strength during the campaign, the seeds were sown in the minds of Trump’s opponents to make more of these remarks than was ever there.

How can it be a bad thing for any foreign leader to admire Putin? Vladimir Putin’s accomplishments as President and Prime Minister of the Russian Federation were history making. If Putin were to retire tomorrow, and far from that he may stand for and win another term in office, people would look back at his legacy and say that he left Russia in a far better condition than that which he inherited in 1999.

Donald Trump likes a winner and he likes an honest man, a man’s man, a doer rather than a frivolous individual. Putin fulfils all these criteria. In this sense Trump’s only Russia connection should be praised. What is a good leader if not someone who makes things better rather than worse. All men interested in leadership ought to study Vladimir Putin, it would frankly make less sense not to do so.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Notify of


US media suffers panic attack after Mueller fails to deliver on much-anticipated Trump indictment

Internet mogul Kim Dotcom said it all: “Mueller – The name that ended all mainstream media credibility.”





Via RT

Important pundits and news networks have served up an impressive display of denials, evasions and on-air strokes after learning that Robert Mueller has ended his probe without issuing a single collusion-related indictment.

The Special Counsel delivered his final report to Attorney General William Barr for review on Friday, with the Justice Department confirming that there will be no further indictments related to the probe. The news dealt a devastating blow to the sensational prophesies of journalists, analysts and entire news networks, who for nearly two years reported ad nauseam that President Donald Trump and his inner circle were just days away from being carted off to prison for conspiring with the Kremlin to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

Showing true integrity, journalists and television anchors took to Twitter and the airwaves on Friday night to acknowledge that the media severely misreported Donald Trump’s alleged ties to Russia, as well as what Mueller’s probe was likely to find. They are, after all, true professionals.

“How could they let Trump off the hook?” an inconsolable Chris Matthews asked NBC reporter Ken Dilanian during a segment on CNN’s ‘Hardball’.

Dilanian tried to comfort the CNN host with some of his signature NBC punditry.

“My only conclusion is that the president transmitted to Mueller that he would take the Fifth. He would never talk to him and therefore, Mueller decided it wasn’t worth the subpoena fight,” he expertly mused.

Actually, there were several Serious Journalists who used their unsurpassed analytical abilities to conjure up a reason why Mueller didn’t throw the book at Trump, even though the president is clearly a Putin puppet.

“It’s certainly possible that Trump may emerge from this better than many anticipated. However! Consensus has been that Mueller would follow DOJ rules and not indict a sitting president. I.e. it’s also possible his report could be very bad for Trump, despite ‘no more indictments,'” concluded Mark Follman, national affairs editor at Mother Jones, who presumably, and very sadly, was not being facetious.

Revered news organs were quick to artfully modify their expectations regarding Mueller’s findings.

“What is collusion and why is Robert Mueller unlikely to mention it in his report on Trump and Russia?” a Newsweek headline asked following Friday’s tragic announcement.

Three months earlier, Newsweek had meticulously documented all the terrible “collusion” committed by Donald Trump and his inner circle.

But perhaps the most sobering reactions to the no-indictment news came from those who seemed completely unfazed by the fact that Mueller’s investigation, aimed at uncovering a criminal conspiracy between Trump and the Kremlin, ended without digging up a single case of “collusion.”

The denials, evasions and bizarre hot takes are made even more poignant by the fact that just days ago, there was still serious talk about Trump’s entire family being hauled off to prison.

“You can’t blame MSNBC viewers for being confused. They largely kept dissenters from their Trump/Russia spy tale off the air for 2 years. As recently as 2 weeks ago, they had @JohnBrennan strongly suggesting Mueller would indict Trump family members on collusion as his last act,” journalist Glenn Greenwald tweeted.

While the Mueller report has yet to be released to the public, the lack of indictments makes it clear that whatever was found, nothing came close to the vast criminal conspiracy alleged by virtually the entire American media establishment.

“You have been lied to for 2 years by the MSM. No Russian collusion by Trump or anyone else. Who lied? Head of the CIA, NSA,FBI,DOJ, every pundit every anchor. All lies,” wrote conservative activist Chuck Woolery.

Internet mogul Kim Dotcom was more blunt, but said it all: “Mueller – The name that ended all mainstream media credibility.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Canadian Lawmaker Accuses Trudeau Of Being A “Fake Feminist” (Video)

Rempel segued to Trudeau’s push to quash an investigation into allegations that he once groped a young journalist early in his political career



Via Zerohedge

Canada’s feminist-in-chief Justin Trudeau wants to support and empower women…but his support stops at the point where said women start creating problems for his political agenda.

That was the criticism levied against the prime minister on Friday by a conservative lawmaker, who took the PM to task for “muzzling strong, principled women” during a debate in the House of Commons.

“He asked for strong women, and this is what they look like!” said conservative MP Michelle Rempel, referring to the former justice minister and attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould, who has accused Trudeau and his cronies of pushing her out of the cabinet after she refused to grant a deferred prosecution agreement to a Quebec-based engineering firm.

She then accused Trudeau of being a “fake feminist”.

“That’s not what a feminist looks like…Every day that he refuses to allow the attorney general to testify and tell her story is another day he’s a fake feminist!”

Trudeau was so taken aback by Rempel’s tirade, that he apparently forgot which language he should respond in.

But Rempel wasn’t finished. She then segued to Trudeau’s push to quash an investigation into allegations that he once groped a young journalist early in his political career. This from a man who once objected to the continued use of the word “mankind” (suggesting we use “peoplekind” instead).

The conservative opposition then tried to summon Wilson-Raybould to appear before the Commons for another hearing (during her last appearance, she shared her account of how the PM and employees in the PM’s office and privy council barraged her with demands that she quash the government’s pursuit of SNC-Lavalin over charges that the firm bribed Libyan government officials). Wilson-Raybould left the Trudeau cabinet after she was abruptly moved to a different ministerial post – a move that was widely seen as a demotion.

Trudeau has acknowledged that he put in a good word on the firm’s behalf with Wilson-Raybould, but insists that he always maintained the final decision on the case was hers and hers alone.

Fortunately for Canadians who agree with Rempel, it’s very possible that Trudeau – who has so far resisted calls to resign – won’t be in power much longer, as the scandal has cost Trudeau’s liberals the lead in the polls for the October election.


Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Why Joe May be Courting Stacey

Joe Biden has a history on compulsory integration dating back to the 1970s that Sen. Jesse Helms called “enlightened.”

Patrick J. Buchanan



Authored by Patrick Buchanan via The Unz Review:

Of 895 slots in the freshman class of Stuyvesant High in New York City, seven were offered this year to black students, down from 10 last year and 13 the year before.

In the freshman class of 803 at The Bronx High School of Science, 12 students are black, down from last year’s 25.

Of 303 students admitted to Staten Island Technical High School, one is African-American.

According to The New York Times, similar patterns of admission apply at the other five most elite high schools in the city.

Whites and Asians are 30 percent of middle school students, but 83 percent of the freshman at Bronx High School of Science, 88 percent at Staten Island Technical and 90 percent at Stuyvesant.

What do these numbers tell us?

They reveal the racial composition of the cohort of scientists and technicians who will lead America in the 21st century. And they tell us which races will not be well represented in that vanguard.

They identify a fault line that runs through the Democratic Party, separating leftists who believe in equality of results for all races and ethnic groups, and those who believe in a meritocracy.

Mayor Bill de Blasio has expressed anger and frustration at the under-representation of blacks and Hispanics in the elite schools. But Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the state legislature have ignored his pleas to change the way students are admitted.

Currently, the same test, of English and math, is given to middle school applicants. And admission to the elite eight is offered to those who get the highest scores.

Moreover, Asians, not whites, are predominant.

Though 15 percent of all middle school students, Asians make up two-thirds of the student body at Stuyvesant, with 80 times as many slots as their African-American classmates.

The egalitarian wing of the Democratic Party sees this as inherently unjust. And what gives this issue national import are these factors:

First, the recent scandal where rich parents paid huge bribes to criminal consultants to get their kids into elite colleges, by falsifying records of athletic achievement and cheating on Scholastic Aptitude Tests, has caused a wave of populist resentment.

Second, Harvard is being sued for systemic reverse racism, as black and Hispanic students are admitted with test scores hundreds of points below those that would disqualify Asians and whites.

Third, Joe Biden has a history on compulsory integration dating back to the 1970s that Sen. Jesse Helms called “enlightened.”

Here are Biden’s quotes, unearthed by The Washington Post, that reflect his beliefs about forced busing for racial balance in public schools:

“The new integration plans being offered are really just quota systems to assure a certain number of blacks, Chicanos, or whatever in each school. That, to me, is the most racist concept you can come up with.

“What it says is, ‘In order for your child with curly black hair, brown eyes, and dark skin to be able to learn anything, he needs to sit next to my blond-haired, blue-eyed son.’ That’s racist!

“Who the hell do we think we are, that the only way a black man or woman can learn is if they rub shoulders with my white child?

“I am philosophically opposed to quota systems. They insure mediocrity.”

That was 44 years ago. While those views were the thinking of many Democrats, and perhaps of most Americans, in the mid-’70s, they will be problematic in the 2020 primaries, where African-Americans could be decisive in the contests that follow Iowa and New Hampshire.

Biden knows that just as Bernie Sanders, another white male, fell short in crucial South Carolina because of a lack of support among black voters, he, too, has a problem with that most loyal element in the Democratic coalition.

In 1991, Biden failed to rise to the defense of Anita Hill when she charged future Justice Clarence Thomas with sexual harassment. In the Senate Judiciary Committee, he was a law-and-order champion responsible for tough anti-crime legislation that is now regarded as discriminatory.

And he has a record on busing for racial balance that made him a de facto ally of Louise Day Hicks of the Boston busing case fame.

How, with a record like this, does Biden inoculate himself against attacks by rival candidates, especially candidates of color, in his run for the nomination?

One way would be to signal to his party that he has grown, he has changed, and his 2020 running mate will be a person of color. Perhaps he’ll run with a woman of color such as Stacey Abrams, who narrowly lost the 2018 governor’s race in Georgia.

An ancillary benefit would be that Abrams on the ticket would help him carry Georgia, a state Donald Trump probably cannot lose and win re-election.

Wrote Axios this morning:

“Close advisers to former Vice President Joe Biden are debating the idea of packaging his presidential campaign announcement with a pledge to choose Stacey Abrams as his vice president.”

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


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

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

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


Quick Donate

The Duran
Donate a quick 10 spot!


The Duran Newsletter