Connect with us

Latest

News

America

Ford-Kavanaugh showdown actually reveals Democrat sickness (VIDEO)

The victim testimony of Dr. Ford served the needs of Democrat senators. And after this scandal ends, Dr Ford will be discarded.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

1,739 Views

Riveting TV.” “Shame of the Nation.” “Hollywood seethes.” The Drudge Report lists these and about thirteen other links at the top of its page as of the time of this writing to describe what was anticipated as a major showdown between the Democrats and Republicans over the fate of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, as his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, got her chance to testify in front of the Senate Committee about her allegations that the Judge sexually assaulted her when she was a teenager at a drinking party back in 1982.

This event was both more – and less – than what either side of supporters probably expected.

In what can likely be seen as a very refreshing display of conservative assertiveness, Judge Kavanaugh was completely unambiguous and forceful in his testimony from beginning to end. Further, and perhaps more significant, Senator Lindsey Graham delivered a scathing lecture to the Democrats who are to a man aligned against Brett Kavanaugh, and to a man, all stating they believe Christine’s story.

Further, the sex-crimes prosecutor who the Republicans hired to question Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford told the senators the case would not hold up in a courtroom, when she talked to them in an overnight meeting where all fifty-one Republican senators were present:

“Mitchell spelled it out and was clear with senators that she could not take this anywhere near a courtroom,” one source told Fox News. She told them she would not charge the Supreme Court nominee and reportedly said she wouldn’t even seek a search warrant.

Mitchell’s opinion could sway fence-sitting senators ahead of a critical Senate Judiciary Committee vote set for Friday morning.

It is not necessary for Kavanaugh to secure majority approval of the committee in order to advance to the full Senate, but a favorable recommendation could bode well for his imperiled nomination — and vice-versa…

“It’s a tough one. She offered good testimony, and so did he,” Flake, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, said Thursday night. “If you’re making an allegation, you want there to be some corroboration. Where is the burden? It’s like impeachment. You don’t know.”

In fact, this is true. Dr Ford was as unwavering in her testimony as Judge Kavanaugh was with his own. However, there was a peculiarity in Dr Ford’s testimony that is suspect. Watch here:

Her story is complete, but she is reading it. It must be taken as strong possibility that this is to help her focus as she was already reported to be “terrified” of testifying. She also appears to be either forcing herself to have emotion, for her voice is cracking, but forced and very rehearsed. At other times she does appear to display genuine emotion. However, this testimony, while detailed, seems “vacant” of some real personal connection.

Naturally, people supporting the idea that Dr Ford actually experienced sexual assault at the hands of Brett Kavanaugh would be inclined to take her emotional display as genuine. In contrast, this clip, at the beginning of her testimony, reveals a somewhat different character to her voice:

She starts with a fairly strong tone of speaking, relative to her recounting of her story. But then, there was this rather strange episode concerning her polygraph test:

Here the sex-crimes prosecutor’s questions get blocked by her attorneys (she is flanked by at least two of them), and yet, she reports the polygraph test as “extremely stressful.”

The questions here seemed to run down a rabbit hole, yet the interesting situation remains that she was walked through this part of the questioning very carefully by her counsel.

She said she was “scared of the test itself.”

Again, why?

This makes no sense. A person with a legitimate claim of wrongdoing by someone else should have no problem stating her case. And, Judge Kavanaugh was not in the room during her testimony.

However, the presentation of this story is almost letter-perfect victim testimony, at least for Hollywood. However, again, the story Dr Ford offered is utterly uncorroborated, even by the people she named as witnesses or at least, corroborating people. They all denied this story.

Brett Kavanaugh’s testimony was refreshingly brutal. Even liberal outlet Vox noted that the Judge’s anger “worked.” The man claimed he was set up by Democrats intent on vengeance for various reasons. In this, he spoke as probably anyone who is on the side of President Trump and his nominee would think and feel if confronted with a situation that looks like nothing less than a last-minute lynching. He was furious. One can see so right here:

Again, the way one receives this testimony probably depends on his or her already-made-up-mind. This, of course is a tragedy, because the hearing was not purposed to make each side more set, but to shed light on the allegations and see what the real story actually is. Yet, as Brett Kavanaugh said himself, the attack was a disgrace.

And unlike Dr Ford, Kavanaugh did not think only of himself. He noted that this tactic is dangerous to the future of the nation as a whole.

He then got down to the brass tacks about Dr Ford’s allegation. He broke when he recounted his ten-year old daughter Ashley suggesting that the family pray for Dr Ford. However, unlike Dr Ford’s tears, which appear “forced”, Kavanaugh showed the much harder task of trying to hold them back. He noted, and acknowledged that it is evident that Dr Ford was abused by someone, but emphatically said he never did anything like that.

He never, ever wavered from this.

At the time of this writing the matter of confirming Judge Kavanaugh has been moved to a committee vote. The Democrats continued to grandstand, with several of them refusing to even answer “no” to the voice vote to continue the process. And, apparently, many of them simply left the room. At this time, the vote to move ahead went 11-8 to proceed.

As continuing attacks come from Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA), the shape of the attacks remarkably resembles the attacks against Donald Trump – efforts to decry Judge Kavanaugh’s decorum as unbefitting of a Justice, and so on, just as Trump’s accusers called him “unpresidential.”

There is one glaring issue about this story: Dr Ford’s story was reportedly leaked by Diane Feinstein (a fact she denies). However, the claims of and surrounding Dr Ford are conflicting. She claims to not want to have had her story revealed, but it was. By whom? If she didn’t want to be brought on display, she was anyway. Why? To serve the Democratic Party’s purpose. Christine Blasey Ford is now twice victimized in this issue. By making her story public, she and her family were reportedly receiving death threats. The same is true for Judge Kavanaugh and his family.

Nothing good came out of this for Dr Ford, and she honestly looks unstable. It seems to be that another tragedy is in the making because this frail woman looks like someone in need of help, and not in need of nurturing of victimhood. But this will not come. And it will not come because like so many other people, victims serve a purpose for stronger people. For Dr. Ford, those stronger people were the members of the Senate in the Democrat Party. And after this scandal ends, Dr Ford will be discarded as soon as she is no longer needed.

This is the sickness of Democrat politics in America.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
24 Comments

24
Leave a Reply

avatar
8 Comment threads
16 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
15 Comment authors
GonzogalGeorge HartwellLisa KarpovaTjoejohn vieira Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Marcia
Guest
Marcia

Jeff Flake doesn’t know where the burden of proof must lie? …. It lies with the accuser Dr. Ford and she has proven nothing. The second person had to call around to see what other people remembered because she was too drunk? … and the gang rape stuff is where this was taken to circus level. I personally think Dr. Ford has taken a half true and non-traumatizing for a normal person situation from her life, a case where it was another man who did something, but less than her story, and she has inflated and embellished the story purposely.… Read more »

a amon
Guest
a amon

” and the gang rape stuff is where this was taken to circus level.” does seem a bit much until you read this article, https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/09/kavanaugh-judge-prep-school-parties.html ” I know what happened at prep school parties in the 1980s. The Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge allegations are upsettingly familiar. ” much more detail in the article.. also try this, by an academic who studied at one of these elite schools and wrote a book about their culture, https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/09/28/kavanaugh-lying-his-upbringing-explains-why watched both statements, Ford seemed scared but kept calm and together.. she seemed real… Kavanagh was emotionally unhinged, is this what passes for judicial… Read more »

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Ford scared????? She is a Professor of Psychiatry, where she specialises at Stanford in ‘Mind Control – MK Ultra’. Her brother is an attorney, representing Fusion, and funnily enough Soros has budgeted $50 million, to carry on the ‘Steele Dossier/Trump Removal’ programme, including still using ‘Fusion’. Then you have her father, together with his history. Not forgetting her husband, who also specialises in ‘mind control’. So how does somebody on the ‘frequent-flyer program’ find she has a ‘selective phobia’, where flying is concerned? How is it possible to fail a ‘polygraph’? Is it not true that sociopaths have a tendency… Read more »

john vieira
Guest

What I loved is how her testimony was able to “fill in the gaps/flaws” that astute posters pointed out in her original testimony…somebody is obviously taking notes and amending the script as it progresses…however she will never remember the house or the fourth guy – who will never surface …and none of the other witnesses or the accused will either as it is all fiction. Very selective memory and intermittent phobias. CIA/Hollywood script no doubt.

Flying Gabriel
Guest
Flying Gabriel

In other words … it is as it seems until you find some material to support your bias. Then even the preposterous becomes believable. – Sums up everything wrong about America. The real context places him neither as a presiding judge nor a representative attorney. He’s simply a man fighting for his life. Even Jesus wouldn’t qualify to be the son of god to you – throwing money lenders out of the temple makes him emotionally unstable. The USA has this dreamlike hollywood disease where any public servant of high office has to resemble Clark Kent. That’s the problem when… Read more »

john vieira
Guest

Nailed it!!!

john vieira
Guest

https://slate..We considered that pulp fiction….akin to “Rhoding School”…”If you are struggling to process a memory of sexual violence you can reach out for help…”says it all…as they will “fill in” the gaps…seen how these filthy minded felons operate…

A.F.
Guest
A.F.

Rape is no crime in the USA…no surprise………………..

Joe
Guest
Joe

???

voza0db
Guest
voza0db

What rape scoundrel?

Donna
Guest
Donna

It certainly is.

john vieira
Guest

Nope…over the years “rape” has been overly reclassified so much so that is barely recognizable. The best that can be ascribed to these events…if they indeed happened – which due to the context, timing and players is highly unlikely… is assault.

Tjoe
Guest
Tjoe

I watched the entire hearing without talking heads polluting it. I spent most of the day, taking breaks and all. The author is bias. I certainly disagree with the author. I voted for Trump because Hillary is a criminal, not because of Trumps virtue. His ego overshadows his virtue’s most times. His puddy grabbing is legendary. It’s not about Trump, but there do seem to be some similarities rooted in privilege…the golden spoon. Trump and Kavanaugh are alike….born to privilege. More important than her testimony, was Kavanaugh’s demeanor when giving his testimony. For a Judge, you would think he would… Read more »

Flying Gabriel
Guest
Flying Gabriel

Attributing hate and menace is pure projection on your part. I’m not American or politically partisan and saw, not a judge presiding over a court room, but a man fighting for his life. I’m sure without the emotion he would have been labelled cold and calculated, emotionless psychopath – not suitable to be a judge. This is the advantage of being neutral – I can see your bias like a blister on your face.

Tjoe
Guest
Tjoe

Did you watch his testimony all the way through Flying Gabriel? He came unhinged and yes, showed “hate and menace” on his face.

Composure is different than literally falling apart. I don’t know where you live, but I don’t want such an unstable man on the US Supreme Court for life, I want to move on to the next candidate….who will by the way, be Republican. Don’t worry about the blister on my face, worry about the LOG in your eye.

geoff
Guest
geoff

“the Democrats who are to a man aligned against Brett Kavanaugh, and to a man, all stating they believe Christine’s story”

The funny part will be when women start making false accusations against these men come election time and their complicity with the Blasey Ford fiasco will come back home to bite them on the arse !!

john vieira
Guest

Deservedly so!!! And I sincerely hope that the biters have SHARP teeth. The world appears to be moving away from the Arthurian model and adopting the “taqiyya” model…which has overwhelmed the D.N.C

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

An outstanding video that dissects the body language and even voice of Dr Ford during her testimony: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGxr1VQ2dPI

George Hartwell
Guest

That is a very interesting analysis of Dr. Ford and the conclusion is not supportive of Ford’s testimony.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

Today the lawyer who questioned Ford during the hearing released a memo she sent to the committee and lists the inconsistencies in Fords testimony: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-01/rachel-mitchell-memo-highlights-weaknesses-ford-testimony

jim bim
Guest
jim bim

Read this link, if true, it turns out that Ms. Ford is the head of Stanford University’s Undergraduate Intern Recruitment Program, for the Central Intelligence Agency. Ms. Ford`s brother Ralph III, used to work for the International Law Firm of . . . Baker Hostetler; the firm that created FusionGPS, the company that wrote the infamous “Russia Dossier” which they later admitted was only a collection of field interviews. Baker Hostetler is located in the same building where the CIA operates three companies: Red coats, Inc. Admiral Security Services and DataWatch Guess who operates those companies? RALPH BLASEY II. He… Read more »

Flying Gabriel
Guest
Flying Gabriel

Any Democrat Senator calling somebody else “Evil” is 100% psychological projection. I’ve never seen a more transparently wicked “gang rape” of a man’s character.
There is evil in America for sure – and in large servings … but it ain’t Brett Kavanaugh.
Hello from NZ.

john vieira
Guest

Seen it too and the evil is supported by a biased sold out and corrupted mainstream media, whose reach is not confined to America…Hello from Ca.

Lisa Karpova
Guest
Lisa Karpova

You can tell who is lying by who the social media is trying to protect. Damning pictures of Ford are being deleted.

Latest

Understanding the Holodomor and why Russia says nothing

A descendant of Holodomor victims takes the rest of us to school as to whether or not Russia needs to shoulder the blame.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

One of the charges that nationalist Ukrainians often lodge against their Russian neighbors is that the Russian government has never acknowledged or formally apologized to Ukraine for the “Holodomor” that took place in Ukraine in 1932-1933. This was a man-made famine that killed an estimated seven to 10 million Ukrainians , though higher estimates claim 12.5 million and lower ones now claim 3.3 million.

No matter what the total was, it amounts to a lot of people that starved to death. The charge that modern-day Russia ought to apologize for this event is usually met with silence, which further enrages those Ukrainians that believe that this issue must be resolved by the Russian acknowledgement of responsibility for it. Indeed, the prime charge of these Ukrainians is that the Russians committed a genocide against the Ukrainian people. This is a claim Russia denies.

To the outside observer who does not know this history of Russia and Ukraine’s relationship, and who does not know or understand the characteristics of the Soviet Union, this charge seems as simple and laid out as that of the Native Americans or the blacks demanding some sort of recompense or restitution for the damages inflicted on these societies through conquest and / or slavery. But we discovered someone who had family connections involved in the Holodomor, and who offers her own perspective, which is instructive in why perhaps the Russian Federation does not say anything about this situation.

Scene in Kharkiv with dead from the famine 1932-33 lying along the street.

The speaker is Anna Vinogradova, a Russian Israeli-American, who answered the question through Quora of “Why doesn’t Russia recognize the Holodomor as a genocide?” She openly admits that she speaks only for herself, but her answer is still instructive. We offer it here, with some corrections for the sake of smooth and understandable English:

I can’t speak for Russia and what it does and doesn’t recognize. I can speak for myself.

I am a great-granddaughter of a “Kulak” (кулак), or well-to-do peasant, who lived close to the Russia/Ukraine border.

The word “кулак” means “fist” in Russian, and it wasn’t a good thing for a person to be called by this label. A кулак was an exploiter of peasants and a class enemy of the new state of workers and poor peasants. In other words, while under Communism, to be called a кулак was to bring a death sentence upon yourself.

At some point, every rural class enemy, every peasant who wasn’t a member of a collective farm was eliminated one way or another.

Because Ukraine has very fertile land and the Ukrainian style of agriculture often favors individual farms as opposed to villages, there is no question that many, many Ukrainian peasants were considered class enemies like my great grandfather, and eliminated in class warfare.

I have no doubt that class warfare included starvation, among other things.

The catch? My great grandfather was an ethnic Russian living in Russia. What nationality were the communists who persecuted and eventually shot him? They were of every nationality there was (in the Soviet Union), and they were led by a Ukrainian, who was taking orders from a Georgian.

Now, tell me, why I, a descendant of an unjustly killed Russian peasant, need to apologize to the descendants of the Ukrainians who killed him on the orders of a Georgian?

What about the Russian, Kazakh golodomor (Russian rendering of the same famine)? What about the butchers, who came from all ethnicities? Can someone explain why it’s only okay to talk about Ukrainian victims and Russian persecutors? Why do we need to rewrite history decades later to convert that brutal class war into an ethnic war that it wasn’t?

Ethnic warfare did not start in Russia until after WWII, when some ethnicities were accused of collaboration with the Nazis and brutal group punishments were implemented. It was all based on class up to that time.

The communists of those years were fanatically internationalist. “Working people of all countries, unite!” was their slogan and they were fanatical about it.

As for the crimes of Communism, Russia has been healing this wound for decades, and Russia’s government has made its anticommunist position very clear.

This testimony is most instructive. First, it points out information that the charge of the Holodomor as “genocide!” neatly leaves out. In identifying the internationalist aspects of the Soviet Union, Ukraine further was not a country identified as somehow worthy of genocidal actions. Such a thought makes no sense, especially given the great importance of Ukraine as the “breadbasket” of the Soviet Union, which it was.

Secondly, it shows a very western-style of “divide to conquer” with a conveniently incendiary single-word propaganda tool that is no doubt able to excite any Ukrainian who may be neutral to slightly disaffected about Russia, and then after that, all Ukrainians are now victims of the mighty evil overlords in Moscow.

How convenient is this when the evil overlords in Kyiv don’t want their citizens to know what they are doing?

We saw this on Saturday – taken to a very high peak when President Petro Poroshenko announced the new leading “Hierarch” of the “Ukrainian National Church” and said not one single word about Christ, but only:

“This day will go down in history as the day of the creation of an autocephalous Orthodox church in Ukraine… This is the day of the creation of the church as an independent structure… What is this church? It is a church without Putin. It is a church without Kirill, without prayer for the Russian authorities and the Russian army.”

But as long as Russia is made the “problem”, millions of scandalized Ukrainians will not care what this new Church actually does or teaches, which means it is likely to teach just about anything.

Russia had its own Holodomor. The history of the event shows that this was a result of several factors – imposed socialist economics on a deeply individualized form of agrarian capitalism (bad for morale and worse for food production), really inane centralized planning of cropland use, and a governmental structure that really did not exist to serve the governed, but to impose an ideology on people who really were not all that interested in it.

Personal blame might well lay with Stalin, a Georgian, but the biggest source of the famine lay in the structures imposed under communism as a way of economic strategy. This is not Russia’s fault. It is the economic model that failed.

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

Latest

Mueller Finally Releases Heavily Redacted Key Flynn Memo On Eve Of Sentencing

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


Having initially snubbed Judge Emmet Sullivan’s order to release the original 302 report from the Michael Flynn interrogation in January 2017, Special Counsel Robert Mueller has finally produced the heavily redacted document, just hours before sentencing is due to be handed down.

The memo  – in full below – details then-national security adviser Michael Flynn’s interview with FBI agents Peter Strzok and Joe Pientka, and shows Flynn was repeatedly asked about his contacts with former Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and in each instance, Flynn denied (or did not recall) any such conversations.

The agents had transcripts of Flynn’s phone calls to Russian Ambassador Kislyak, thus showing Flynn to be lying.

Flynn pleaded guilty guilty last December to lying to the FBI agents about those conversations with Kislyak.

The redactions in the document seem oddly placed but otherwise, there is nothing remarkable about the content…

Aside from perhaps Flynn’s incredulity at the media attention…

Flynn is set to be sentenced in that federal court on Tuesday.

Of course, as Christina Laila notes, the real crime is that Flynn was unmasked during his phone calls to Kislyak and his calls were illegally leaked by a senior Obama official to the Washington Post.

*  *  *

Full document below…

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

Latest

Don’t Laugh : It’s Giving Putin What He Wants

The fact of the matter is that humorous lampooning of western establishment Russia narratives writes itself.

Caitlin Johnstone

Published

on

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone:


The BBC has published an article titled “How Putin’s Russia turned humour into a weapon” about the Kremlin’s latest addition to its horrifying deadly hybrid warfare arsenal: comedy.

The article is authored by Olga Robinson, whom the BBC, unhindered by any trace of self-awareness, has titled “Senior Journalist (Disinformation)”. Robinson demonstrates the qualifications and acumen which earned her that title by warning the BBC’s audience that the Kremlin has been using humor to dismiss and ridicule accusations that have been leveled against it by western governments, a “form of trolling” that she reports is designed to “deliberately lower the level of discussion”.

“Russia’s move towards using humour to influence its campaigns is a relatively recent phenomenon,” Robinson explains, without speculating as to why Russians might have suddenly begun laughing at their western accusers. She gives no consideration to the possibility that the tightly knit alliance of western nations who suddenly began hysterically shrieking about Russia two years ago have simply gotten much more ridiculous and easier to make fun of during that time.

Couldn’t possibly have anything to do with the emergence of a demented media environment wherein everything around the world from French protests to American culture wars to British discontent with the European Union gets blamed on Russia without any facts or evidence. Wherein BBC reporters now correct guests and caution them against voicing skepticism of anti-Russia narratives because the UK is in “an information war” with that nation. Wherein the same cable news Russiagate pundit can claim that both Rex Tillerson’s hiring and his later firing were the result of a Russian conspiracy to benefit the Kremlin. Wherein mainstream outlets can circulate blatantly false information about Julian Assange and unnamed “Russians” and then blame the falseness of that reporting on Russian disinformation. Wherein Pokemon Go, cutesy Facebook memes and $4,700 in Google ads are sincerely cited as methods by which Hillary Clinton’s $1.2 billion presidential campaign was outdone. Wherein conspiracy theories that Putin has infiltrated the highest levels of the US government have been blaring on mainstream headline news for two years with absolutely nothing to show for it to this day.

Nope, the only possibility is that the Kremlin suddenly figured out that humor is a thing.

The fact of the matter is that humorous lampooning of western establishment Russia narratives writes itself. The hypocrisy is so cartoonish, the emotions are so breathlessly over-the-top, the stories so riddled with plot holes and the agendas underlying them so glaringly obvious that they translate very easily into laughs. I myself recently authored a satire piece that a lot of people loved and which got picked up by numerous alternative media outlets, and all I did was write down all the various escalations this administration has made against Russia as though they were commands being given to Trump by Putin. It was extremely easy to write, and it was pretty damn funny if I do say so myself. And it didn’t take any Kremlin rubles or dezinformatsiya from St Petersburg to figure out how to write it.

“Ben Nimmo, an Atlantic Council researcher on Russian disinformation, told the BBC that attempts to create funny memes were part of the strategy as ‘disinformation for the information age’,” the article warns. Nimmo, ironically, is himself intimately involved with the British domestic disinformation firm Integrity Initiative, whose shady government-sponsored psyops against the Labour Party have sparked a national scandal that is likely far from reaching peak intensity.

“Most comedy programmes on Russian state television these days are anodyne affairs which either do not touch on political topics, or direct humour at the Kremlin’s perceived enemies abroad,” Robinson writes, which I found funny since I’d just recently read an excellent essay by Michael Tracey titled “Why has late night swapped laughs for lusting after Mueller?”

“If the late night ‘comedy’ of the Trump era has something resembling a ‘message,’ it’s that large segments of the nation’s liberal TV viewership are nervously tracking every Russia development with a passion that cannot be conducive to mental health – or for that matter, political efficacy,” Tracey writes, documenting numerous examples of the ways late night comedy now has audiences cheering for a US intelligence insider and Bush appointee instead of challenging power-serving media orthodoxies as programs like The Daily Show once did.

If you wanted the opposite of “anodyne affairs”, it would be comedians ridiculing the way all the establishment talking heads are manipulating their audiences into supporting the US intelligence community and FBI insiders. It would be excoriating the media environment in which unfathomably powerful world-dominating government agencies are subject to less scrutiny and criticism than a man trapped in an embassy who published inconvenient facts about those agencies. It certainly wouldn’t be the cast of Saturday Night Live singing “All I Want for Christmas Is You” to a framed portrait if Robert Mueller wearing a Santa hat. It doesn’t get much more anodyne than that.

Russia makes fun of western establishment narratives about it because those narratives are so incredibly easy to make fun of that they are essentially asking for it, and the nerdy way empire loyalists are suddenly crying victim about it is itself more comedy. When Guardian writer Carole Cadwalladr began insinuating that RT covering standard newsworthy people like Julian Assange and Nigel Farage was a conspiracy to “boost” those people for the advancement of Russian agendas instead of a news outlet doing the thing that news reporting is, RT rightly made fun of her for it. Cadwalladr reacted to RT’s mockery with a claim that she was a victim of “attacks”, instead of the recipient of perfectly justified ridicule for circulating an intensely moronic conspiracy theory.

Ah well. People are nuts and we’re hurtling toward a direct confrontation with a nuclear superpower. Sometimes there’s nothing else to do but laugh. As Wavy Gravy said, “Keep your sense of humor, my friend; if you don’t have a sense of humor it just isn’t funny anymore.”

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