Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

FINALLY: Russian doping case FAILS in court. Time to revisit Russia-gate?

What would happen if all the lies of our age were put to trial?

Published

on

3,871 Views

It happened…Pandora’s Box was torn open, and out came Russia-gate, the Syrian Crisis, The Ukraine Crisis, and so much more, including the Russian Olympic doping scandal. By an odd turn of fate, however, it may be the resolution of the doping scandal, which brings hope for the other greater issues. Evidence for the Russian Olympic doping scandal, including the key testimony of Grigory Rodchenkov, was finally tried with fire – and found severely lacking. According to RT:

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has published two reasoned awards in the matter of 39 Russian athletes accused of doping, describing Grigory Rodchenkov’s evidence as “hearsay with limited probative value.”

Grigory Rodchenkov was, of course, the erstwhile head of Russia’s anti-doping lab, before resigning under shame, and fleeing to the US, where he made his accusations of “state-sponsored doping” against the Russian Olympic committee.

Pandora’s Box

It is ironic that the Olympics began in Ancient Greece, because the Doping scandal – along with the rest of Russia-gate, and many events going back to Maidan in Ukraine, opened Pandora’s box. It is fitting in more ways than one, to draw this analogy, because Pandora’s box, was in fact, more accurately a jar, which contained the evils of the world, perhaps not unlike the vials that contained the doping samples.

Rodchenkov (left) with his…samples…yeah…I…I want Pandora back

When Pandora’s box was opened, according to myth and song, all the evils were released, but they were not the only thing contained within. There was also hope, which was sealed back inside, but as the Russian saying goes “Hope dies last”. If that is true, let’s hope it can outlast evil.

Never the less, the resolution of the Rodchenkov case may just have reopened Pandora’s box, releasing hope that Russia will have her justice, even if this is a story the corporate media will never tell.

Rodchenkov’s slander came crumbling down, and he even withdrew a major part of his testimony against Russian athletes. Russian officials and people are now hoping this will begin to change rulings made against athletes based on false evidence. Sputnik quoted Putin’s Press Secretary Peskov as saying:

“Now the fact that the man [Rodchenkov] is confused in his testimony is obvious. The fact that he actually confirms that he lied and that his previous words were groundless. Of course, we hope that this situation will force various organizations to very seriously look at the all reasons behind the decisions taken against our athletes again,” Peskov said.

RT further quoted Peskov as saying:

“It’s clear Rodchenkov is mixing up his stories, and his new testimony is evidence that the previous ones were fabrications,” said Dmitry Peskov, Vladimir Putin’s press secretary.

RT also quoted Igor Lebedev, the deputy chairman of the Russian Duma, speaking in a similar light saying:

“Rodchenkov lied about doping in our country, which was to be proved. I recommend that a commission is assembled that would gather all false publications about Russian athletes in the Western media, and sue them for defamation.”

It’s clear Russians have been roused by the court’s just ruling. RT has a great in-depth article about Rodchenkov, and the doping case here, which goes into further detail than I, because this article is dedicated to something far bigger than Rodchenkov. Still, the RT article spoke on how this story was received in the West with a media blackout:

A polite silence. Aside from specialist websites writing about Olympic sport, no major Western outlet has covered the story.

This is particularly telling in view of the fact that the entire doping scandal was not started by investigators, but German documentary makers from ARD, who managed to create the biggest Olympics upheaval since the fall of the Soviet Union with the help of little more than interviews with two other runaway Russian insiders, the Stepanovs.

Since then, there has been a consistent barrage of accusations, all of them reported without question within the wider context of Moscow’s new image of an international rogue state, from Crimea to the US voting booths to the running track.

It is that media silence, which is worth our discussion. We should be happy that the court revealed the truth, but this story is bigger than just doping.

It’s time to ask a major question.

What if all slander was tried by such fire?

The Rodchenkov case, Dear Reader, represents a precedent, a microcosm, but microcosms are important models. It allows us to pose a powerful rhetorical question, but one with an even greater and more scandalous suggestion.

If the Rodchenkov case was the West’s strongest evidence against Russia in the doping scandal, and it not only failed to stand up in court, but was utterly demolished, what would happen if all accusations against Russia were put under the same judicial scrutiny, and tried beneath such a titanic tribunal.

What would happen if Russia-gate, The Ukraine Crisis, Maidan, and MH17, along with the Skripal case, and all the scandals against Russia were examined, cross-examined, and tried in a court of law by the same Promethean flame?

What would happen if Russia was finally given the due-process afforded to every human being according to the basic international law – would all the false narratives from Russia-gate to Maidan melt like wax before the fire, like dew before the sun?

The accusations against Russia are never based on evidence

Russia is never afforded such justice, but it only further proves the lies of the stories against her. It is interesting that in the Old Slavic language, is it is difficult to make a distinction between the words “Truth”, “Law” and “Right”, hence why the ancient 11th century Russian code of laws, which were more progressive than those in some countries today, which even banned capital punishment was called Russkaya Pravda.

This can be translated either as Russian law, The Russian Right, or Russian truth, as unlike in the west, it is difficult for the Russian soul to imagine a law can be false, and if something is not Right, it can not possibly be the law, and must be based on lies.

But accusations against Russia, such as Russia-gate are not only based on lies, they are based on the belief that people will accept the testimony of western officials without any real, irrefutable evidence.

Think of most major western accusations, and controversial actions, even beyond the scope of Russia, including the invasion of Iraq, the Vietnam War, the events in modern Syria including the chemical attacks.

Whenever the West presents “evidence” – if at all – what actually is this evidence? Actually think about it, aside from what they claim, or you heard on TV, how can you independently varify?

Is the evidence presented to an international body, an unbiased court in which chain of custody is observed, and the highest standards of fair scrutiny are applied to all evidence? No. Never!

In many cases, the evidence is based on “anonymous sources” or the testimony of “intelligence agencies” (part of whose job is literally subterfuge). Sometimes the evidence is simply “We said so. Trust us.” and those journalists, lawyers, or citizens who question more are treated like unpatriotic criminals, traitors, or foreign agents. Evidence samples are never given to a third party, much less the accused party, to test, just like when the UK refused to give Russia a sample of the Skripal nerve agent.

It does not matter the case, whatever the situation, the answer, and narrative is the same, and looks something like this:


“Russia/Assad/Iraq/China/[insert victem] did it.”

Reporter: “Can you present some evidence?”

“Evidence! Of course we have evidence, don’t worry, our experts proved it.”

Reporter: And those experts would be who? How can we reach them?

“Well, they’re mostly annonymous to protect them…you know, from [insert accused party], because they totally did it. But don’t worry, 17 different intelgence agencies proved they did it. And this lab in an allied country.”

Reporter: We are unable to independently verify that, is it possible you can share a sample of the evidence with several of these highly respected international bodies, accepted by all parties as being unbiased? We really need a clear, transparent investigation to prove guilt.

What do you mean? Didn’t you just hear? They did it! We said so!


That is essentially the level of evidence presented in these situations – and once again – that’s even if you consider the testimony of the accusing parties intelligence agencies to be substantial evidence. From Iraq WMDs, to Syria, and the Ukraine Crisis, to this doping scandal, whatever the situation, we hear the same anonymous sources present evidence that amounts to “They did it because we said so.”

For those who don’t remember, Colin Powell is actually holding up a vial they claimed was anthrax. The Mythical Iraq WMDs. From Pandora’s Box to the Doping Scandal, what is it with vials containing the vile evils of the world

What is even worse, is this ridiculous standard of evidence was even understood to be a logical fallacy in the classical world!

Ipse Dixit

The Great Roman Writer Cicero himself coined the Latin term Ipse Dixit, which essentially means “He said it himself”, but has come to mean when someone defends an argument, or event as being fact, purely on the basis of the dogmatic opinion of the “expert testimony”. Ipse Dixit is essentially saying “It’s true because X said so. It’s a fact, and it’s not up for negotiation.”

Ipse Dixit is exactly the core argument the West uses in all these examples against Russia, but US law has on two separate occasions set a clear precedent, upholding the understanding that Ipse Dixit alone is NOT conclusive. In National Tire Dealers & Retreaders Association, Inc. v. Brinegar, 491 F.2d 31, 40 (D.C. Cir. 1974), Circuit Judge Wilkey found that the US Secretary of Transportation’s:

“Statement of the reasons for his conclusion that the requirements are practicable is not so inherently plausible that the court can accept it on the agency’s mere ipse dixit

Moreover, according to this log from Cornell University, the Supreme Court of the United States clearly stated in 1997 that:

“Nothing in either Daubert or the Federal Rules of Evidence requires a district court to admit opinion evidence which is connected to existing data only by the ipse dixit of the expert.”

What must be understood here is that no one is saying the testimony of an expert means nothing, only that the testimony of one expert alone is not enough to substantiate such serious accusations. When we are dealing with States, and their Intelligence Agencies, we must recognize that it does not matter if 6 or 66 of them gave testimony, the agents of a state actor are obviously biased towards their own state.

It’s actually not unreasonable to accept this. World leaders, military and state officials, and civil servants take oaths to their nations. Because of this, however, it is also not unreasonable to require additional third-party expert testimony, or call into scrutiny what was heard, if all the “experts” are agents of the same country, or its allies, accusing another country.

The Media Blackout – The Main Stream Media must also be questioned

Of course, a key requirement of ipse dixit to work, is for the general populous to NOT be experts, able to examine the evidence, or at the very least, to not be well informed, as there is so much misinformation and fake news out there.

Just as we can’t assume agents of the accusing country are unbiased, even if 17 intelligence agencies say the same thing, we can likewise not assume that just because 17 news agencies say the same thing, it makes it true.

The reality is people don’t realize how much news organizations from the highest echelons to the smallest websites rely on one another’s reporting. Sometimes even if it isn’t copied, if the same story is broken at once place, it will simply be mirrored by other agencies relying on the same original sources. So you can have 50 stories, but all backed by the same evidence. That is not completely bad, provided the evidence was solid, but it can give the illusion that all 50 stories were based on 50 separate sources.

For example, one news agency can say “Assad is doing x”, and then another says “According to [origonal source] Assad just did x” and then like a massive game of telephone, an uncorroborated story, possibly based on complete lies, becomes accepted as fact.

Even well-intentioned people who are not informed can believe it, simply because of the volume (in every sense of the word) of the reporting. If you hear it one hundred times, it must be correct, right? Inexperienced people can also simply assume that the “reputation” of these “established” news sources and Intelligence agencies is proof alone. They’d be surprised how very amateurish and unprofessional the mainstream media can be. Case in point, major MSM sources actually thought that acclaimed Syrian Journalist #SyrianGirl is a robot.

No, they did not mean they think she is lying, they actually thought her social media accounts were simply bots, and she was not real. In other words, they did not perform any professional fact checking such as the secret art of sending her a private message or an email, or noticing her account had the “verified” checkmark. These are the “experts”, Dear Readers.

This is the danger of Ipse Dixit, misinformed or possibly misleading “expert testimony” can be passed off and circulated to the extent it seems like a fact, especially to untrained eyes.

But you don’t have to be an expert to notice an obvious truth before your eyes, it simply needs to get past the media blackout.

A perfect example is this video, in which the White Helmets, a UK/UK backed group in Syria touted by the West as being heroes, use children in false flag attacks.

The White Helmets, know that the only thing that can save their terrorist allies losing the war in Syria, is a Western-backed intervention, the kind which a chemical attack committed by the Government could trigger. As a result, they despicably train children who can’t even understand what is happening, to help them fake chemical attacks, which they blame on the Government.

UK behind false flag chemical attack in Syria, evidence shows

These false flag attacks provide very weak evidence – the only kind needed or wanted for that matter, in order for the West to justify attacking Syria. There is never any critical examination of evidence, neither of the chemical attack itself, or of this video demonstrating the White Helmets faking chemical attacks. Instead, they simply say “There was a chemical attack. Assad did it. Ipse Dixit, the White Helmets said so, and our intelligence – which we won’t share – proved it.”

There is no response to refutation – no accountability

The West seldom even responds to evidence such as that video. Take note, this is not to say they respond and claim it is fake, but very often, they simply don’t respond at all. Real evidence never makes it past the media blackout, and the narrative continues onward as if no evidence to the contrary was ever presented. When it is presented, it is most often ignored, as if it doesn’t exist.

This insanity can inspire in a reasonable individual the incredible frustration which men like Galileo must have felt, when he was desperately trying to explain the world was NOT flat. It is maddening having to explain to so-called experts, that two plus two does NOT equal 17 intelligence agencies.

The sad thing is, it does not even matter to the West when clear as day evidence is brought forward. There is no accountability. Even when videos like the one above come forward, or when someone actually goes boots on the ground, and speaks to the real people on the scene, it does not change anything. They keep peddling the same narrative, and no one is held responsible even if it is revealed, and becomes accepted as mainstream knowledge that the narrative is false.

Syrian children should be seen, not heard

In the link above, you will find accounts of actual Syrians which don’t matter to the West. Likewise, the fact that Russia is not even one of the top five countries known for doping also is ignored.

That is why this issue is bigger than just the Doping, or even Russia-gate, the Syrian War, and the Ukraine Crisis, because this issue – the lack of accountability and evidence is what allows for all of this.

How many people are actually discussing this issue? The sad truth is, for all this discussion, the west will soon forget about this, about all of this. All evidence will be ignored, and new “evidence” will be invented. Most people won’t even be aware of this. To this sad and cynical reality of our world, RT quoted Nikolay Durmanov, the ex-chief of the Russian anti-doping agency, regarding the Rodchenkov case saying:

“This will change nothing.Yes we can enjoy some moral satisfaction, but in the eyes of the world Russian sport has been painted a rich black color, and there is nothing we can do to wash that reputational stain off this generation. This was an information war waged against us.”

If that upsets you, then spread the word. The reality of life is often different than what should be, but it does not mean that this grim fate is what must be, for the future. That is up to all humanity to purpose a better future, and God to dispose in his own season.

The Tide is Changing

This is the world we live in, we can not change the past, but it is within our power to leave our children a world in which truth and human life matters.

We have seen from the Rodchenkov doping case that it is possible for the truth to prevail. All that is necessary, is for the truth to be presented to stand on its own merits. Too often the issue is not a lack of clear truth, merely that there is never any actual debate. Accusations are made, and actions are taken extra-judicially.

In the Rodchenkov case, we have seen that it’s easy to make unsubstantiated claims in the court of public opinion, but such delusions fall apart quickly under actual investigation. Just imagine what would happen if a serious investigation was opened into Russia-gate, The Ukrainian Crisis, and the events in Syria alone.

In all of those situations, it was those who lied, who opened Pandora’s box, releasing evil upon the world and allowing millions to die. The Box has already been opened. Now, we can only hope that Pandora’s Box will be reopened…but this time…in place of evil…something good will come out.

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

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Russia Gives US Red Line On Venezuela

Political force is out. Military force is out. Respect international law and Venezuela’s sovereignty. That’s Russia’s eminently reasonable ultimatum to Washington.

Published

on

Authored by Finian Cunningham via The Strategic Culture Foundation:


At a high-level meeting in Rome this week, it seems that Russia reiterated a grave warning to the US – Moscow will not tolerate American military intervention to topple the Venezuelan government with whom it is allied.

Meanwhile, back in Washington DC, President Donald Trump was again bragging that the military option was still on the table, in his press conference with Brazilian counterpart Jair Bolsonaro. Trump is bluffing or not yet up to speed with being apprised of Russia’s red line.

The meeting in the Italian capital between US “special envoy” on Venezuelan affairs Elliot Abrams and Russia’s deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov had an air of urgency in its arrangement. The US State Department announced the tête-à-tête only three days beforehand. The two officials also reportedly held their two-hour discussions in a Rome hotel, a venue indicating ad hoc arrangement.

Abrams is no ordinary diplomat. He is a regime-change specialist with a criminal record for sponsoring terrorist operations, specifically the infamous Iran-Contra affair to destabilize Nicaragua during the 1980s. His appointment by President Trump to the “Venezuela file” only underscores the serious intent in Washington for regime change in Caracas. Whether it gets away with that intent is another matter.

Moscow’s interlocutor, Sergei Ryabkov, is known to not mince his words, having earlier castigated Washington for seeking global military domination. He calls a spade a spade, and presumably a criminal a criminal.

The encounter in Rome this week was described as “frank” and “serious” – which is diplomatic code for a blazing exchange. The timing comes at a high-stakes moment, after Venezuela having been thrown into chaos last week from civilian power blackouts that many observers, including the Kremlin, blame on American cyber sabotage. The power grid outage followed a failed attempt by Washington to stage a provocation with the Venezuelan military over humanitarian aid deliveries last month from neighboring Colombia.

The fact that Washington’s efforts to overthrow the elected President Nicolas Maduro have so far floundered, might suggest that the Americans are intensifying their campaign to destabilize the country, with the objective of installing US-backed opposition figure Juan Guaido. He declared himself “acting president” in January with Washington’s imprimatur.

Given that the nationwide power blackouts seem to have failed in fomenting a revolt by the civilian population or the military against Maduro, the next option tempting Washington could be the military one.

It seems significant that Washington has recently evacuated its last remaining diplomats from the South American country. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo commented on the evacuation by saying that having US personnel on the ground “was limiting” Washington’s scope for action. Also, American Airlines reportedly cancelled all its services to Venezuela in the past week. Again, suggesting that the US was considering a military intervention, either directly with its troops or covertly by weaponizing local proxies. The latter certainly falls under Abrams’ purview.

After the Rome meeting, Ryabkov said bluntly: “We assume that Washington treats our priorities seriously, our approach and warnings.”

One of those warnings delivered by Ryabkov is understood to have been that no American military intervention in Venezuela will be tolerated by Moscow.

For his part, Abrams sounded as if he had emerged from the meeting after having been given a severe reprimand. “No, we did not come to a meeting of minds, but I think the talks were positive in the sense that both sides emerged with a better understanding of the other’s views,” he told reporters.

“A better understanding of the other’s views,” means that the American side was given a red line to back off.

The arrogance of the Americans is staggering. Abrams seems, according to US reporting, to have flown to Rome with the expectation of working out with Ryabkov a “transition” or “compromise” on who gets the “title of president” of Venezuela.

That’s what he no doubt meant when he said after the meeting “there was not a meeting of minds”, but rather he got “a better understanding” of Russia’s position.

Washington’s gambit is a replay of Syria. During the eight-year war in that country, the US continually proffered the demand of a “political transition” which at the end would see President Bashar al Assad standing down. By contrast, Russia’s unflinching position on Syria has always been that it’s not up to any external power to decide Syria’s politics. It is a sovereign matter for the Syrian people to determine independently.

Nearly three years after Russia intervened militarily in Syria to salvage the Arab country from a US-backed covert war for regime change, the American side has manifestly given up on its erstwhile imperious demands for “political transition”. The principle of Syrian sovereignty has prevailed, in large part because of Russia’s trenchant defense of its Arab ally.

Likewise, Washington, in its incorrigible arrogance, is getting another lesson from Russia – this time in its own presumed “back yard” of Latin America.

It’s not a question of Russia being inveigled by Washington’s regime-change schemers about who should be president of Venezuela and “how we can manage a transition”. Moscow has reiterated countless times that the legitimate president of Venezuela is Nicolas Maduro whom the people voted for last year by an overwhelming majority in a free and fair election – albeit boycotted by the US-orchestrated opposition.

The framework Washington is attempting to set up of choosing between their desired “interim president” and incumbent Maduro is an entirely spurious one. It is not even worthy to be discussed because it is a gross violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty. Who is Washington to even dare try to impose its false choice?

On Venezuela, Russia is having to remind the criminal American rulers – again – about international law and respect for national sovereignty, as Moscow earlier did with regard to Syria.

And in case Washington gets into a huff and tries the military option, Moscow this week told regime-change henchman Abrams that that’s a red line. If Washington has any sense of rationale left, it will know from its Syria fiasco that Russia has Venezuela’s back covered.

Political force is out. Military force is out. Respect international law and Venezuela’s sovereignty. That’s Russia’s eminently reasonable ultimatum to Washington.

Now, the desperate Americans could still try more sabotage, cyber or financial. But their options are limited, contrary to what Trump thinks.

How the days of American imperialist swagger are numbered. There was a time when it could rampage all over Latin America. Not any more, evidently. Thanks in part to Russia’s global standing and military power.

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

Latest

With RussiaGate Over Where’s Hillary?

Hillary is the epitome of envy. Envy is the destructive sin of coveting someone else’s life so much they are obsessed with destroying it. It’s the sin of Cain. She envies what Trump has, the Presidency.

Published

on

Authored by Tom Luongo:


During most of the RussiaGate investigation against Donald Trump I kept saying that all roads lead to Hillary Clinton.

Anyone with three working brain cells knew this, including ‘Miss’ Maddow, whose tears of disappointment are particularly delicious.

Robert Mueller’s investigation was designed from the beginning to create something out of nothing. It did this admirably.

It was so effective it paralyzed the country for more than two years, just like Europe has been held hostage by Brexit. And all of this because, in the end, the elites I call The Davos Crowd refused to accept that the people no longer believed their lies about the benefits of their neoliberal, globalist agenda.

Hillary Clinton’s ascension to the Presidency was to be their apotheosis along with the Brexit vote. These were meant to lay to rest, once and for all time, the vaguely libertarian notion that people should rule themselves and not be ruled by philosopher kings in some distant land.

Hillary’s failure was enormous. And the RussiaGate gambit to destroy Trump served a laundry list of purposes to cover it:

  1. Undermine his legitimacy before he even takes office.
  2. Accuse him of what Hillary actually did: collude with Russians and Ukrainians to effect the outcome of the election
  3. Paralyze Trump on his foreign policy desires to scale back the Empire
  4. Give aid and comfort to hurting progressives and radicalize them further undermining our political system
  5. Polarize the electorate over the false choice of Trump’s guilt.
  6. Paralyze the Dept. of Justice and Congress so that they would not uncover the massive corruption in the intelligence agencies in the U.S. and the U.K.
  7. Isolate Trump and take away every ally or potential ally he could have by turning them against him through prosecutor overreach.

Hillary should have been thrown to the wolves after she failed. When you fail the people she failed and cost them the money she cost them, you lose more than just your funding. What this tells you is that she has so much dirt on everyone involved, once this thing started everyone went along with it lest she burn them down as well.

Burnin’ Down da House

Hillary is the epitome of envy. Envy is the destructive sin of coveting someone else’s life so much they are obsessed with destroying it. It’s the sin of Cain

She envies what Trump has, the Presidency.

And she was willing to tear it down to keep him from having it no matter how much damage it would do. She’s worse than the Joker from The Dark Knight.

Because while the Joker is unfathomable to someone with a conscience there’s little stopping us from excising him from the community completely., even though Batman refuses.

Hillary hates us for who we are and what we won’t give her. And that animus drove her to blackmail the world while putting on the face of its savior.

And that’s what makes what comes next so obvious to me. RussiaGate was never a sustainable narrative. It was ludicrous from the beginning. And now that it has ended with a whimper there are a lot of angry, confused and scared people out there.

Mueller thought all he had to do was lean on corrupt people and threaten them with everything. They would turn on Trump. He would resign in disgrace from the public outcry.

It didn’t work. In the end Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen and Roger Stone all held their ground or perjured themselves into the whole thing falling apart.

Andrew Weissman’s resignation last month was your tell there was nothing. Mueller would pursue this to the limit of his personal reputation and no further.

Just like so many other politicians.

Vote Your Pocketbook

With respect to Brexit I’ve been convinced that it would come down to reputations.

Would the British MP’s vote against their own personal best interests to do the bidding of the EU?

Would Theresa May eventually realize her historical reputation would be destroyed if she caves to Brussels and betrays Brexit in the end?

Always bet on the fecklessness of politicians. They will always act selfishly when put to the test. While leading RussiaGate, Mueller was always headed here if he couldn’t get someone to betray Trump.

And now his report is in. There are no new indictments. And by doing so he is saving his reputation for the future. And that is your biggest tell that HIllary’s blackmail is now worthless.

They don’t fear her anymore because RussiaGate outed her as the architect. Anything else she has is irrelevant in the face of trying to oust a sitting president from power.

The progressives that were convinced of Trump’s treason are bereft; their false hope stripped away like standing in front of a sandblaster. They will be raw, angry and looking for blood after they get over their denial.

Everyone else who was blackmailed into going along with this lunacy will begin cutting deals to save their skins. The outrage over this will not end. Trump will be President when he stands for re-election.

The Wolves Beckon

The Democrats do not have a chance against him as of right now. When he was caving on everything back in December it looked like he was done. That there was enough meat on the RussiaGate bones to make Nancy Pelosi brave.

Then she backed off on impeachment talk. Oops.

But the Democrats have a sincere problem. Their candidates have no solutions other than to embrace the crazy and go full Bolshevik. That is not a winning position.

Trump will kill them on ‘socialism.’

The Deep State and The Davos Crowd stand revealed and reviled.

If they don’t do something dramatic then the anger from the rest of the country will also be palpable come election time. Justice is not done simply by saying, “No evidence of collusion.”

It’s clear that RussiaGate is a failure of monumental proportions. Heads will have to roll. But who will be willing to fall on their sword at this point?

Comey? No. McCabe? No.

There is only one answer. And Obama’s people are still in place to protect him. I said last fall that “Hillary would indict herself.” And I meant it. Eventually her blackmail and drive to burn it all down led to this moment.

The circumstances are different than I expected back then, Trump didn’t win the mid-terms. But the end result was always the same. If there is no collusion, if RussiaGate is a scam, then all roads lead back to Hillary as the sacrificial lamb.

Because the bigger project, the erection of a transnational superstate, is bigger than any one person. Hillary is expendable.

Lies are expensive to maintain. The truth is cheap to defend. Think of the billions in opportunity costs associated with this. Once the costs rise above the benefits, change happens fast.

If there is any hope of salvaging the center of this country for the Democrats, the ones that voted against Hillary in 2016, then there is no reason anymore not to indict Hillary as the architect of RussiaGate.

We all know it’s the truth. So, the cheapest way out of this mess for them is to give the MAGApedes what they want, Hillary.

And hope that is enough bread and circuses to distract from the real storm ahead of us.

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

Latest

Trump’s CIA Now Unbound And Back To Its Traditional Hijinks

There is further evidence that suggests the neo-cons, in cahoots with Haspel at the CIA, set out to disrupt the Hanoi summit.

Strategic Culture Foundation

Published

on

Authored by Wayne Madsen via The Strategic Culture Foundation:


Under the directorship of torture and black site maven Gina Haspel, Donald Trump’s Central Intelligence Agency has returned to its traditional roots of conducting “black bag” operations and disrupting electrical grids through cyber-attacks.

The Venezuelan government has accused the Trump administration of giving the green light for a series of crippling power failures in Venezuela, which affected 22 of Venezuela’s 23 states, including the capital of Caracas. The long-duration power failures were cited by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo as a reason for the US withdrawing its diplomats from Caracas. Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro announced that an international commission assisted by specialists from Russia, China, Iran, and the United Nations would help his country analyze the sources of the Venezuelan electrical grid cyber-attack. Initial cyber-forensics by Venezuela traced some of the cyber warfare being waged against Venezuela to nodes in Houston and Chicago.

In addition to electricity, water service was disrupted in Venezuela. From Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas, Maduro tweeted on March 12: “From the Presidential Command Post, we monitored minute-by-minute the progress of the recovery of the National Electric System.”

Cyber-attacks on a country that puts its civilian population in jeopardy might, at first glance, appear to be a violation of the Geneva Conventions on warfare. However, without a Digital Geneva Convention, civilian populations are not covered by the current Geneva Conventions. However, in 2015, the United Nations Group of Governmental Experts on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security (UN GGE), which included experts from the United States, China, Russia, France, the United Kingdom, and other nations, agreed that current international law does apply to cyberspace. Most international legal experts agree that the Geneva Conventions require a digital annex to cover the type of cyber-disruption of the Venezuelan electrical grid carried out by the US intelligence services.

Hybrid warfare against Venezuela, which includes economic, diplomatic, and cyber, has the backing of the neo-conservatives who now call the shots for the Trump White House. They include, in addition to Pompeo, national security adviser John Bolton; Iran-Contra felon Elliott Abrams, Trump’s special envoy to the US-backed opposition-led rump Venezuelan government of Juan Guaido; Cuban-American Mauricio Claver-Carone, the senior director for Western Hemisphere affairs at the National Security Council; and Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio, a Cuban-American, who represents the interests of South Florida’s right-wing oligarch exiles from Venezuela and other Latin American countries.

While Trump was preparing for his Hanoi summit meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, Trump’s second summit with Kim, Haspel’s CIA dug into its old bag of black operations, while also engaging in the more modern form of cyber-attack in targeting North Korea.

On February 22, 2019, ten males, all wearing masks, broke into the North Korean embassy, which is located in the residential suburb of Aravaca, north of Madrid, Spain, and subjected eight embassy staff members to brutal interrogation tactics, including tying up the diplomats, throwing black bags over their heads (a specialty of Ms. Haspel), and subjecting them to beatings. One female diplomat managed to escape through a second-floor window and her screams alerted a neighbor, who promptly called the police. Two embassy employees required medical attention from their injuries.

The Spanish police and National Intelligence Center (CNI) linked two of the embassy invaders to the CIA. “El Pais,” a Spanish national newspaper, reported that the CIA issued one of its standard “denials,” however, the paper stated that Spanish authorities found the denial from Langley, Virginia to be “unconvincing.” “El Pais” reported that the invasion of the North Korean embassy by the CIA had severely harmed relations between Madrid and Washington.

The National Police Corps’ General Commissariat of Information (CGI) and CNI concluded that the attack and occupation of the North Korean embassy was not carried out by common criminals but was the work of a “military cell” that stole mobile phones and computers. Two of the embassy invaders were identified as Koreans and, based on CGI’s and CNI’s analysis of security camera video footage, they were further recognized as Koreans linked to the CIA. Spanish authorities did not rule out the possibility that South Korea’s National Intelligence Service assisted the CIA in the embassy invasion. The embassy invaders escaped from the embassy using two North Korean luxury sedans bearing diplomatic plates. The cars were later found abandoned.

The criminal inquiry into the incident is now before the Spanish High Court, the Audiencia Nacional, which could order the arrests of the embassy attackers and, if they are in the United States or South Korea, have Spain’s INTERPOL national bureau put out a Red Notice for their arrest and extradition to Spain to stand trial.

Spanish authorities believe the CIA’s embassy attackers were looking for information on Kim Hyok Chol, the former North Korean ambassador to Spain, who was declared “persona non grata” by the Spanish government in 2017. Kim Hyok Chol, a career diplomat from one of North Korea’s elite families who studied French at the Pyongyang University of Foreign Studies and speaks fluent English, is now one of Kim Jong Un’s trusted diplomatic advisers on nuclear talks with the Trump administration and he traveled with Chairman Kim to the failed Hanoi summit with Trump.

With certainty, Kim Hyok Chol thoroughly briefed Kim Jong Un on the CIA’s storming of his old diplomatic post in Spain. When Trump and Chairman Kim met in Hanoi on February 27 and if the issue of the CIA’s siege of the North Korean embassy was brought up, that could have been enough to derail the summit. Considering the fact that war hawks like Bolton, Abrams, and Pompeo are now calling the foreign policy shots for the Trump administration, the attack on the North Korean embassy in Madrid, just five days prior to the Hanoi summit, may have been ordered by Washington’s neo-con cell with the intention of scuttling the second meeting between Trump and Kim and put on ice any future meetings.

There is further evidence that suggests the neo-cons, in cahoots with Haspel at the CIA, set out to disrupt the Hanoi summit. While Trump was meeting with Kim in Vietnam, the CIA is believed to have launched a cyber-attack on the Korean American National Coordinating Council (KANCC) in New York, an organization with ties to the Pyongyang government. KANCC is a non-governmental organization with offices in the Interchurch Center building, near Columbia University in Manhattan. It champions the dropping of US sanctions against North Korea, a sore point in Hanoi between Trump and Kim.

The Trump-Kim Hanoi summit was reported to have hit a roadblock over North Korea’s request for a partial lifting of US sanctions on North Korea, in return for the continued North Korean moratorium on nuclear testing and a partial freeze on production of fissile material. With the CIA’s attack on the North Korean embassy in Spain still fresh in the minds of the North Korean side and the neo-cons’ insistence, pushed by Bolton and Pompeo, for complete North Korean nuclear disarmament, the Hanoi summit was destined for failure. And, with Bolton, Abrams, Pompeo, and other dangerous neo-cons in charge at the White House and the State Department — and Haspel dancing to their tune at the CIA – North Korea and Venezuela are not the only countries currently in the gunsights of the Trump administration.

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

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

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...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending