RFK Jr. Sues YouTube and Google, Alleges ‘Misinformation Policies’ Violated His First Amendment Rights
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | August 4, 2023
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Children’s Health Defense founder and chairman on leave, this week filed a lawsuit against YouTube and its parent company, Google, alleging the social media giant violated his First Amendment rights.
According to Kennedy, who is running for the Democratic nomination for president of the U.S., YouTube engaged in a “censorship campaign” that included removing videos of his speech at Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire and interviews he did with clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson and podcaster Joe Rogan.
The complaint, filed Aug. 2 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleges the U.S. government has taken “extraordinary steps” under Joe Biden’s leadership “to silence people it does not want Americans to hear,” including himself and many others.
That censorship makes it difficult for Kennedy to reach millions of voters and also for his supporters to amplify his message, the complaint says.
The lawsuit predicts the censorship will continue throughout Kennedy’s campaign, intensifying as the primaries approach.
“Mr. Kennedy often speaks at length about topics people would like to ignore, including the negative health effects of toxic chemicals and potential safety concerns about the COVID-19 shots,” the complaint reads. Then YouTube uses its “medical misinformation” policies — developed in partnership with federal government agencies and the Biden administration — to justify removing his videos.
In doing so, the platform censored not only Kennedy’s comments on medical issues, but the entire content of his speeches and interviews, according to the suit.
Although YouTube is a private company, it is not simply a publisher, the complaint alleges — it has become “an important platform for political discourse in America, a digital town square that voters trust as a place to get news and opinions about the issues of the day.”
According to the complaint:
“YouTube operates as a public forum, the digital equivalent of a town square. As such, it cannot remove protected speech, especially political speech, based on its viewpoint. …
“There is a sufficiently close nexus between YouTube and the federal government such that YouTube’s actions may be fairly treated as that of the government itself.”
Although YouTube cited its own COVID-19 vaccine misinformation policies to censor Kennedy, those policies “rely entirely on government officials to decide what information gets censored,” according to the lawsuit.
For example, the suit says YouTube doesn’t allow content that “contradicts local health authorities’ (LHA) or the World Health Organization’s (WHO) medical information about COVID-19,” and the guidance on those policies only changes based on government decisions.
Kennedy also called YouTube’s medical misinformation policies “unconstitutional” because they are “vague” and “overbroad” and “because they give unnamed government officials, who the policies depend entirely on, the unfettered discretion to decide what information gets removed from YouTube.”
Kennedy is seeking injunctive relief to prohibit YouTube from further censoring his speech, and the restoration of any videos of his political speech removed during the campaign.
Kennedy also seeks a declaration that Google and YouTube violated his First Amendment rights and that its medical disinformation policies are unconstitutional.
Brenda Baletti Ph.D. is a reporter for The Defender. She wrote and taught about capitalism and politics for 10 years in the writing program at Duke University. She holds a Ph.D. in human geography from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a master’s from the University of Texas at Austin.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
Jim Jordan Demands Answers From Pro-Censorship Activist Group
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | August 4, 2023
On an unanticipated front of the fight to uphold free speech, US Representative Jim Jordan recently entered the ring. Jordan, a staunch proponent of free speech and transparency, has launched a probe questioning the authority and influence of a certain digital entity, namely, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH).
Operating from the perspective that censorship stifles conversation and growth, Jordan aims to expose how the CCDH could have been instrumental in directing the Biden administration’s censorship policies.
At the epicenter of this is a damning report titled “The Disinformation Dozen.” The tract, according to Jordan’s probing letter, has been instrumental in encouraging the Biden administration’s campaign to apply pressure on social media platforms. This is in order to suppress and control content, a move that in the broader picture, clashes with the standard tenets of freedom of speech and open discourse.
We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.
Representative Jordan’s stance, while controversial to some, nonetheless positions him as a bulwark against what many consider an encroachment on constitutionally enshrined freedoms. Whilst dragging the CCDH into the spotlight, Jordan has made clear his commitment to ensuring that checks and balances are preserved in the increasingly murky waters of the digital age.
The decision to question the CCDH has served to underscore the often obscured mechanics of the Biden administration’s strategy, revealing the extent to which outlying groups could potentially be influencing federal policy decisions.
As this probe unfolds, it becomes increasingly evident that the crux of this matter extends beyond the CCDH, or even the Biden administration’s alleged censorship practices. This exploration by Jordan and his associates has made apparent the need for a deeper investigation into the structures that regulate digital discourse in order to safeguard the freedoms that lie at the heart of our democracy. The pivot point here is not just about who gets to decide what can and cannot be said, but also about the incalculable value of a society’s right to open and unrestricted dialogue, as well as for transparency.
This unexpected turn of events demonstrates the ongoing measures and countermeasures by political figures such as Jim Jordan, to ensure that the ideals of free speech and anti-censorship that the nation was built on, sustain in the rapidly evolving internet landscape.
The CCDH is also currently facing a lawsuit from X owner Elon Musk, who alleges that the work of the activist group has been a vindictive move to turn advertisers away from the platform.
“Darkness At Noon”
Eerie shades of Arthur Koestler’s classic 1941 novel
By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | August 5, 2023
This evening at dinner, Dr. McCullough talked about the troubling signs that the noose is tightening on the Medical Freedom movement, with Drs. Paul Marik and Pierre Kory recently receiving ‘Notice of Potential Disciplinary Sanction’ from the American Board of Internal Medicine. The once intellectually sound institution now resembles a Maoist Tribunal. Equally alarming was Chase Bank’s recent decision to shut down the bank account of Dr. Joseph Mercola, apparently for no reason apart from his unorthodox views of health and medicine.
Then there was RFK, Jr.’s abominable treatment at the hands of Democratic members of Congress at a hearing about the federal government’s flagrant violation of the First Amendment. As I watched the shocking rudeness, arrogance, and brutality of the Representatives, I was reminded of accounts I’ve read about so-called People’s Courts and Tribunals—i.e., Kangaroo Courts—that have been erected by various totalitarian regimes. Last but not least is the constant legal harassment of former President Donald Trump, who is accused of being “a threat to democracy,” even though he is apparently the preferred candidate of roughly half the electorate.
All of the above remind’s me of Arthur Koestler’s classic 1941 novel, Darkness at Noon, which he wrote in 1940 while living in France. A Hungarian Jew, Koestler studied at the University of Vienna, and then embarked on an adventurous life, residing in various European countries and in Palestine, working as a reporter and author. A socialist in his youth, he was discerning enough to recognize that for all of its idealistic promises, the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia quickly became a corrupt and tyrannical regime.
Darkness at Noon is set between 1938-1940, after Stalin’s Great Purge of dissidents (real, perceived, and fabricated) and the Moscow Show Trials. The action takes place in an unnamed prison in which the protagonist — an old guard Bolshevik named Nikolai Salmanovich Rubashov — has been arrested as part of Stalin’s campaign to eliminate all potential rivals. Rubashov undergoes a series of interrogations, which initially have a strange air of affability, but then turn progressively more severe and doctrinal.
At no point is it clear what law Rubashov has allegedly broken, or why those who have arrested him perceive him to be a threat. For some mysterious and frightening reason, it seems that he simply cannot be tolerated.
When I first read Darkness at Noon as a junior in high school, I found it fascinating and terrifying, and it left an indelible impression on me. At the same time, I assumed (in the year 1988) that such a scenario could never happen in the United States.
Now I’m not so sure. The English title comes from Job 5:14: “They meet with darkness in the daytime, and grope in the noonday as in the night.” As Koestler recognized, evil may, at any moment, become ascendent and prevail. Unfortunately, most people fail to perceive the gathering darkness until it’s too late to stop it.
Is it too late to stop it now? I’m not sure, but Dr. McCullough and I are bracing for further reprisals against heterodox doctors like Pierre Kory, Paul Marik, and Joseph Mercola, and heterodox political candidates like RFK, Jr.
Dr. McCullough has already been stripped of his entire academic medical career, but he continues to communicate with the citizenry through Substack, Twitter, and independent media outlets. I continue to express my thoughts on Substack.
Will our few remaining free speech platforms be shut down? Will our bank accounts be frozen? Will we ultimately — like Rubashov — be arrested and imprisoned for reasons that aren’t really clear to us, apart from the fact that we express heterodox views?
At this moment it is difficult if not impossible to predict if the disturbing trend we are observing will abate, or if it is the early expression of a regime that will eventually obtain full dictatorial power. If history is any guide, we are justified in feeling very alarmed by what is going on.

Sept. 1, 2022: President Biden gives speech characterizing Donald Trump and his Republican supporters as a dangerous threat to American democracy.
Intrepid Lawyer Sue Grey Wins One Against the Empire
By Emanuel E. Garcia, M.D. | New Zealand Doc | August 4, 2023
When a globalist mafia cartel — or a garden-variety tyranny — wish to silence dissent, they like to make ‘examples’ of those who resist. Here in New Zealand, under the sway of Jacinda Ardern’s ‘single source of truth’, a few doctors who three years ago raised their voices against the government’s woefully destructive covid measures — measures that included severe lockdowns, ineffectual masking, anti-social distancing, and the vehement suppression of early treatment, so that the one-size-fits-all death jab could be introduced as our salvation — found that their practising certificates were suspended by the FSMB-directed Medical Council of New Zealand. I was unfortunately one of these, as I discovered when I went to renew my certificate in November 2021.
If any other doctors dared to uphold the principles of their profession and inveigh against the demolition of informed consent, individualised treatment, and the Hippocratic Oath they swore when they received their medical degrees, they knew what was coming. Thus the silence of the sheep, which paved the way for the consequence of excess deaths and debilities thanks to the mandated jab, along with all of the other globalist paraphernalia, most of which I have described in many other essays.
As I write a number of good decent doctors who dared, for example, to prescribe Ivermectin, or who opposed the topsy-turvy institutional recommendations to jab as many people as possible so that we may all ‘stay safe’, are being persecuted and harassed when they should in fact be commended by the very Medical Council that purports to be protecting the public weal.
Suppressing dissent is something far more contagious than covid, and the New Zealand Law Society, taking a leaf out of the Medical Council’s playbook, decided to go after intrepid lawyer Sue Grey, hauling her before the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal for charges of misconduct and ‘unsatisfactory’ conduct.
Ms Grey represented herself at the Tribunal hearing and a decision has been rendered in her favour.
I frankly admit to being shocked by this decision — not because I questioned Ms. Grey’s fact-founded defense, but because I had resigned myself to believing that the fix was in.
Fortunately, we now have glimmers that truth will out, that not all institutions are irrevocably corrupt, and that standing tall in defense of the rights and principles of free speech can result in victory even within a system that is itself compromised.
This is our first real legal victory, in my opinion, a victory that paves the way for others, such as physician Peter Canaday who, fifteen weeks after his appearance at the Health Professionals Disciplinary Tribunal, has yet to receive a decision.
We’ve been fighting a long and irregular war in defense of freedom and good medical and legal sense, a fight against mandates and against the upending of professional duty and responsibility.
Sue Grey has been a beacon all along and her surprising triumph deserves accolades.
It reminds me, if you will permit a moderately hyperbolic analogy, of George Washington’s pivotal battle against British forces in Trenton on the day after Christmas 1776. Washington’s crossing of the Delaware was a highly risky enterprise that came after a string of woes; with it he turned the tide and the rest, as they say, is history.
Sue Grey has made history. Let us now go forward and press our rightful and truth-inspired advantage.
Washington ‘Terrified’ Trump May Defeat Biden in 2024 Election
By Oleg Burunov – Sputnik – 04.08.2023
The indictment of Donald Trump indicates that the Biden administration is trying to prevent the 45th US president from effectively campaigning in the 2024 election race, analysts have told Sputnik.
Former US President Donald Trump pleaded not guilty on Thursday to four federal charges related to his alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The first hearing for the trial is expected on August 28.
The ex-POTUS was indicted earlier this week as part of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into Trump’s purported push to reverse the results of the election, which was followed by the January 6, 2021 US Capitol breach.
“The case brought against Trump on Thursday is another example of judicial intervention in the electoral process,” Dr. Harvey Schantz, professor of political science at the State University of New York at Plattsburgh, said.
He added that the 45th US president’s indictment “goes to the core of the American political system because it involves the transfer of power” from a Republican Party president to a Democratic Party president. According to Schantz, such a change is “more momentous than ever because the two parties have very alternative views of public policy and markedly different supporters.”
The political scientist argued that the Trump indictment “divides people along party affiliations, exacerbating differences between Democrats and Republicans and between Trump and [US President Joe] Biden voters.”
Schantz pointed out that “the multiple cases” against the former American president “have strengthened his hold on the Republican presidential nomination, and contrary to conventional wisdom, have not as yet hurt Trump in the 2024 general election contest, in which polls have Trump and Biden running neck and neck.”
Dr. Nicholas Waddy, political analyst and Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred State College, for his part, told Sputnik that Thursday’s arraignment of Trump “[…] represents a new low for the Biden Administration, progressives, and the Deep State,” who he said “are, in effect, trying to criminalize dissent, criticism, differences of opinion, and political opposition.”
Waddy insisted that ex-US president “isn’t being charged because of his actions, or his words, but because of who he is and what he represents.”
“The Deep State, including [Attorney General] Merrick Garland and [Special Counsel] Jack Smith, hates Trump with every fiber of its being. They are terrified that he might be able to defeat [President] Joe Biden in the 2024 election and win a second term as president, and thus they, and numerous other state and federal prosecutors, have decided on a strategy of ‘lawfare’ to kneecap him as a candidate,” the political analyst claimed.
According to him, these officials “would love to imprison Trump for the rest of his life, but their primary aim is to tie him up in legal knots throughout 2024 so that he cannot campaign effectively, and so that the entire election revolves around a debate about Donald Trump’s criminality, rather than Joe Biden’s performance in office.”
“The goal here – to interfere with the electoral process itself – is so transparent that no fair-minded person could deny it,” Waddy added. He claimed that “It isn’t Trump that poses an ‘existential’ threat to Democrats, It’s democracy itself, and that’s what they are trying to snuff out.”
Marjorie Taylor Greene: DoJ Committing Election Interference With Trump Charges
Sputnik – 04.08.2023
WASHINGTON – The Department of Justice is committing election interference by attempting to prosecute former President and 2024 presidential hopeful Donald Trump, US Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) said in a statement.
“Biden’s Department of Justice is actively participating in election interference by trying to put his top political opponent, President Donald Trump, behind bars,” Greene said on Thursday.
Earlier in the day, Trump pleaded not guilty to four criminal charges brought against him by Special Counsel Jack Smith for allegedly attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 US presidential election.
Trump called the charges against him “persecution of a political opponent.” Greene characterized the prosecution as “pure corruption.”
The charges against Trump were announced amid his 2024 presidential campaign. Trump currently leads the pack of Republican candidates ahead of the debates and primary elections.
The charges also come as lawmakers in Congress investigate potential weaponization of the US government and its justice system.
On Wednesday, Congressman Matt Gaetz said lawmakers must demand an interview with Smith to provide information on his decision to charge Trump, as well as be willing to issue a subpoena and hold the special counsel in contempt of Congress.
Here’s Why Italy Is The Western Voice Of Pragmatism In The Nigerien Crisis

Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs Antonio Tajani. © Sean Gallup/Getty Images
BY ANDREW KORYBKO | AUGUST 4, 2023
Italy’s reaction to the patriotic military coup in Niger late last month has been surprisingly pragmatic. It could have easily jumped on the bandwagon of supporting the planned NATO-backed Nigerian-led ECOWAS invasion aimed at reinstalling ousted President Mohamed Bazoum and going along with his Ambassador to America’s claim that Russia had a hand in the coup. Instead, the Italian Foreign Minister described any Western military initiative as “a new colonization” and denied any Russian role in events.
Italy supports the West’s anti-Russian sanctions and arms Kiev against that country so Rome wasn’t expected to behave so independently towards a comparatively less significant matter than the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine. That’s not to downplay the devastation that could soon ravage West Africa if it descends into a regional war, but just to point out that the precedent set by Italy’s compliance with Western demands vis-a-vis Russia suggested that it would also comply with their Nigerien policy too.
This exception is explained by the fact that Italy is very serious about combating illegal immigration at its roots, which was the official reason behind its decision to deploy a little less than 500 troops to Niger over half a decade ago in late 2017. While it’s difficult to assess whether this stated mission was a success since information about it has remained suspiciously scarce since then, the pretext for its troops’ deployment remains in place as evidenced by the related rhetoric espoused by its latest premier.
Giorgia Meloni rose to power partially because of her promise to drastically curtail illegal immigration to Italy, which would be very difficult to do if a major war breaks out in West Africa and results in an unfathomable number of desperate people fleeing across the Mediterranean to her country as refugees. It would already be bad enough if Nigeria soon leads an invasion of Niger, but this would be even worse if Italy’s French neighbor joined in and thus played a role in catalyzing another humanitarian crisis.
Italy might not be able to stop the US from coercing Nigeria into doing its bidding against Russia’s regional strategic interests by proxy, but its Foreign Minister’s description of potential Western involvement in this operation as “a new colonization” could make France think twice about participating. Bilateral relations were recently damaged due to their differences over migrants/refugees so it’s likely that Meloni’s top diplomat was sending a signal to Paris through his strong words on this issue.
She’d come under intense pressure on the domestic front if France was responsible for another humanitarian crisis that crashed into her country’s shores, plus responding to this would entail considerable costs that would be better spent on socio-economic investments if war could be averted. These calculations explain why her government broke ranks with the West on this issue since her political career could be threatened if this situation spirals out of control.
Her country’s policymakers are also impressively thinking ahead by tempering their rhetoric in order to avoid provoking the junta into pressuring their troops to leave and thus weakening Rome’s ability to at least keep an eye on this migrant/refugee corridor through their deployment in Niger. They still oppose the patriotic military coup, but they’re doing so in a measured way that reduces the risk of blowback while still at least formally paying lip service to the so-called “rules-based order”.
As for the second part of Italy’s pragmatic response to recent events, this builds upon the motivations that were just described above regarding the self-interested need to not provoke the junta. Rome isn’t suggesting that this regime change was legitimate, but it’s also not fueling the information warfare campaign being waged by some like Bazoum’s Ambassador to America, which is intended to precondition the Western public for NATO’s potential involvement in any possible invasion of Niger.
This stance hasn’t had any influence on reshaping Italian-Russian relations since it’s driven purely by Rome’s interests in retaining its military presence in Niger for the purpose of monitoring the migrant/refugee corridor through that country. These domestic political motivations, which also have an inextricable security dimension to them too, are so important to the present Italian government that they resulted in its top diplomat publicly counteracting fake news about Russia’s involvement in events.
What this insight shows is that it’s possible for Western states to behave independently of their peers on certain issues if sensitive domestic interests are threatened, be they Italy’s migrant/refugee ones in the Nigerien Crisis or Poland’s agricultural interests regarding the subject of importing Ukrainian grain. Each of these two examples is also connected to their leaders’ political interests, which cynically suggests that they’ll only act in a sovereign fashion on these aforesaid sensitive issues if their careers are on the line.
Even so, it’s still intriguing to observe them putting their interests above their de facto New Cold War bloc’s, thus proving that it’s not impossible for this to happen. Under the specific conditions that were just described where sensitive domestic interests converge with the political ones of any given Western leader, it can’t be ruled out that they’ll act more independently than their peers. This has already happened twice thus far in just as many weeks, which makes it a documented fact and not speculation.
New Short-Range Missiles for Su-57 Outpace US Developments
Sputnik – 04.08.2023
MOSCOW — Russia’s fifth-generation Su-57 fighter has been equipped with new short-range missiles, the RVV-MD2, which outperform similar American munitions, representatives of the developer company, JSC GosMKB Vympel, said in an article for the Arsenal Otechestva (lit. Arsenal of the Fatherland) magazine.
“It is a fact that Russia’s development of the fifth generation of ‘air-to-air’ missiles, now in industrial production, is five to ten years ahead of similar developments in the United States,” the report stated.
The authors emphasized that, unlike the United States, Russia has managed to develop and test these missiles quickly, and the stage of their introduction into service has already begun.
The RVV-MD2 can be installed in the internal fuselage compartments of the fifth-generation Su-57 fighter, the specialists explained.
The RVV-MD2 is the first short-range missile to use an inertial guidance system to control and stabilize the missile during autonomous flight, the magazine’s editor-in-chief, Viktor Murakhovskiy, pointed out.
The inertial system allows the munition to autonomously determine its coordinates in space without relying on external references or signals.
In addition, Murakhovskiy noted that the RVV-MD2 is equipped with a radio correction line, which allows the aircraft to refine target coordinates from onboard, increasing the likelihood of hitting enemy aircraft.
According to the editor-in-chief of “Arsenal Otechestva,” another advantage of the new missile is its multi-element dual-band infrared homing head with improved anti-jamming capabilities.
The new missile is capable of attacking targets from all angles, including from the rear. In other words, the RVV-MD2 is launched forward, maneuvers in the air and engages the enemy aircraft located behind the Su-57, Murakhovsky explained.
Judge Andrew Napolitano: Biden Doesn’t Have Coherent Strategy in Ukraine
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 04.08.2023
The Biden Administration’s Ukraine strategy is increasingly disconnected from political and military realities on the ground, Judge Andrew Napolitano told Sputnik’s New Rules podcast.
“Joe Biden cannot articulate what the goal of the American military involvement [in Ukraine] is,” Judge Andrew Napolitano, former New Jersey superior court judge and host of the Judging Freedom podcast, told Sputnik. “The neocons around him just love the concept of war, particularly war against Russia, particularly against Russia while Vladimir Putin is in office.”
Delusional Neocons Set Biden’s Ukraine Agenda
The US has been involved in the Ukraine conflict for 17 months and has already transferred over $68 billion. Nevertheless, Kiev cannot boast any considerable progress on the ground with their much-discussed counteroffensive having eventually stalled. As the conflict is continuing to drag on, Biden administration officials and the US president are still asserting to Kiev that Washington will support it “as long as it takes.”
“If you ask him, as long as it takes to do what he can’t answer the ‘To do what?’ As long as it takes to produce a stalemate? As long as it takes to produce a cease fire? As long as it takes, if you ask Victoria Nuland, to drive President Putin from office? I mean, they can’t answer that question,” Napolitano noted.
Can Trump Strike Ukraine Peace Deal?
The Ukraine conflict has been presented in the Western mainstream press as a way to bleed Russia dry and drain President Vladimir Putin’s “political standing with the Russian people,” the judge opined.
In February 2023, President Biden made a claim in front of a Polish crowd that suggested he wanted to see the Russian president deposed: “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power,” Biden stated. The White House later downplayed this rally cry as a gaffe.
Still, what Team Biden and their neocon allies “don’t understand is that President Putin is enormously popular, that he’s fighting a patriotic war for a return of land, for which there is a valid legal argument, it has always been a part of Russia, culturally a part of Russia, linguistically a part of Russia,” according to Napolitano.
“They think they can use Ukraine as a battering ram to drive President Putin from office. They’re crazy. It’s not going to work. Joe Biden does not have an off ramp. He doesn’t have the ability to say, okay, we’ve we’ve succeeded. It’s time for us to stop. There’s no goal and there’s no off ramp. His internal goal is to run for reelection as a wartime president like his hero, Franklin Delano Roosevelt did in 1940. But this is not a war like World War Two. This is not a war that the American public perceives as a threat to American national security. All the politicians will argue that. But they’re so tied up with the military industrial complex that, you know, you have a majority in the Congress, Republicans and Democrats, that like all wars because it enriches the military industrial complex and keeps people working in the factories.”
What’s more, there is no American national security interest at stake in Ukraine, despite US neocons arguing to the contrary, according to the judge.
US war hawks are continuing to claim that Washington’s military aid to Kiev is a great investment since Russia is being bashed without American lives being lost. “The Russians are dying. The best money we’ve ever spent,” as US Senator Lindsey Graham said back in May. As long as no American body bags are coming home, the public is buying into this argument.
Still, it’s no longer a secret that a limited contingent of US servicemen has been operating on the ground in Ukraine. “We know the US military is there in Ukraine out of uniform. We know it is there in Poland, operating equipment that is shooting projectiles at Russian boys,” noted the judge. US mercenaries have also joined Ukrainian battalions on the battlefield.
And these Americans are dying in Ukraine: a sad statistic has already found its way out, indicating that dozens if not hundreds of US citizens have been killed in the conflict zone since February 2022.
Dissent is Brewing Within the US Military and Intel Community
Meanwhile, the US president and his administration are continuing to assert to the American public that Russia is losing and that Ukraine is going to prevail.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently insisted that Russia had “already lost” while speaking to an American broadcaster. However, this triumphalist stance is not unanimously shared by US Department of Defense officials and the US intelligence community. The so-called Pentagon leak – that caught the headlines in April – shed some light on what the US military and spies really think about the situation on the ground in Ukraine.
“There is a 21 year old young Massachusetts National Guardsman sitting in a federal jail cell as we speak, named Jack Teixeira, who is accused of leaking secret documents – to which he had access by virtue of his work in the National Guard – to a chat room,” said Napolitano.
“The documents, the authenticity and accuracy of which have never been challenged by the government, reveal the government’s own internal deliberations as showing it expects Ukraine to lose. To lose. So if the Department of Defense expects Ukraine to lose and the Secretary of Defense goes before a Senate committee and says under oath ‘Ukraine is going to win’, who are you going to believe? You’re going to believe their candid, unvarnished statements recorded in documents that they believed would forever remain secret.”
Prior to the scandalous leak, American army and intelligence veterans voiced their skepticism with regard to Biden’s Ukraine strategy in their podcasts or interviews with alternative media.
“On my podcast, Judging Freedom, where we have a number of ex-CIA and ex-military harshly critical of the current CIA and the current US government, who are, I believe, giving a far more accurate version of what’s happening there,” Napolitano pointed out, referring to former US Marine Corps intelligence officer Scott Ritter, retired US Army colonel and government official Douglas Macgregor, former CIA analyst Larry Johnson and ex-CIA officer Ray McGovern. All of them have stated loud and clear that “it is inconceivable that the Ukraine military can prevail,” the judge underscored.
On top of that, it has been almost impossible for the US and NATO military officials to ignore massive casualties sustained by the Ukrainian Armed Forces in terms of military equipment and manpower since the beginning of their counteroffensive.
As of mid-July, Ukraine had lost 26,000 servicemen, 21 aircraft, five helicopters, some 1,244 tanks and armored vehicles, including 17 Leopard tanks, five French AMX wheeled tanks, 914 units of special vehicles, two air defense systems, and 25 MLRS vehicles, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense.
Thus, unsurprisingly, Western leaders in private conversations cast doubt on Kiev’s odds of winning at the recent Aspen Security Forum despite publicly trying to put a positive spin on Ukraine’s military efforts.
Why is the US Public Buying Into Biden’s Ukraine Narrative?
Meanwhile, the Western mainstream press has been busy spreading the one-sided Biden administration’s Ukraine narrative since the outset of the conflict. Judging from polls, most of the public in the West appear to have swallowed the bait.
“The American public still seems to be in favor of the war. Again, they only hear one side,” highlighted the judge.
“While the Biden administration, through the American Central Intelligence Agency and British MI6, has succeeded in taming the press,” continued Napolitano. “So the press and the American media, even my friends and former colleagues at Fox, are giving a version of these events which is not based in reality on the ground. The version of events that Americans are getting is that the so-called spring offensive, even though we’re now in the middle of the summer, is slow, methodical, but but a steady movement eastward by the Ukrainian forces, Whereas in reality, as you just pointed out, the Russian military has established three runs of defenses and the Ukrainians haven’t even approached, much less breached the first of those three rings. So the American public is not getting a true and accurate view of the so-called spring effect offensive from mainstream media.”
What’s making the West’s Ukraine narrative even less credible is that there are very few American journalists on the ground, according to the judge.
“The military won’t allow them there, Napolitano said. “The Ukrainians won’t allow them there. They don’t want the true story to be told. So the American public hears that same drumbeat over and over and over again, which you so nicely articulated. But in reality, it is not our war, it is not our fight. We shouldn’t be losing any blood and we shouldn’t be losing any money over it. And we are losing.”
In addition, most US presidential candidates from both sides of America’s political aisle are also promoting the US proxy war in Ukraine. Just two major candidates – Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – are against the conflict. “Everybody else is lockstep in favor of it for a variety of what I think are nonsensical reasons,” Sputnik’s interlocutor added.
However, over the past two weeks or so, a growing number of mainstream media outlets have started to release unflattering reports about the Ukraine situation on the front lines. They are even publishing interviews with Ukrainian soldiers where they talk about how this counteroffensive is not exactly going to plan. This could be a harbinger of some potential change, according to the judge, even though Team Biden is still wearing a brave face.
“It’s very telling that that is beginning to happen. So that would mean the president’s political advisers are taking polls saying the American public’s getting tired of this war. There doesn’t seem to be any progress. We need an off ramp. The off ramp is not going to come all at once. The off ramp is going to come gradually and slowly with the American public acclimated to the coming off ramp. If the Biden administration were to say, that’s it, we’re not involved anymore, well then everybody would say, what about the $68 billion already spent? Are we going to get that back. I mean, was it wasted? What was accomplished by it? So in order to prevent that kind of a blowback, they need this gradual acclimation to the likelihood of Russian success and Ukrainian defeat,” Napolitano concluded.
