European Steel Industry Facing Potential Collapse
By Paul Homewood | Not A Lot Of People Know That | January 13, 2023
Seeking Alpha, an investment advice website, has rather bad news for the European steel industry.
Vale, by the way, are the world’s largest producer of iron ore:
Summary:
- The EU steel industry seems set to shrink dramatically, squeezed by environmental policies, and a seemingly permanent energy crisis situation that makes production costs unsustainable.
- Vale is mostly shielded from the kind of problems faced by companies that have extensive exposure to Europe, given its mostly Americas-based production infrastructure.
- The prospects of the European steel industry being decimated should help to keep global steel prices relatively high, which should counterintuitively keep iron ore prices high as well.
Investment thesis: There are growing signs that the European steel industry can potentially collapse, becoming just a shell of itself. Vale is shielded from the problems facing companies that have business ties exposure to the European energy crisis, which is compounded by increasingly draconian environmental policies that make it hard for energy-intensive companies to operate. At the moment the EU steel industry, as well as many other industries are kept afloat by hundreds of billions of euros in aid & subsidies, which is not sustainable in the long term. The assumed collapse in EU steel production is a positive factor for those miners supplying the steel companies, such as Vale that are not directly exposed to the difficulties that the European-based steel production facilities are faced with. On the back of assumed higher global steel prices, Vale stock is likely to see more long-term price appreciation, while the very generous dividend is less likely to be cut.
The European steel industry is already working under draconian environmental regulations and carbon taxes which put it at a disadvantage with foreign steel mills. And now of course high energy prices are putting the whole existence of the industry at risk.
Meanwhile the climate zealots who run the EU and UK want steel businesses to spend billions more to close down the efficient manufacturing processes which actually work, and replace them with low carbon technology, all enforced by crippling carbon taxes.
The net result will, of course, be importing more steel from Asia, made with much greater emissions.
Almost all Hungarians oppose sanctions on Russia – survey
RT | January 14, 2023
The overwhelming majority of Hungarians are opposed to sanctions the West has imposed on Russia over Ukraine and believe that they are detrimental to the economy, the nation’s government said on Saturday, citing the results of a countrywide questionnaire, or “consultation.”
In a Facebook post, the Hungarian government revealed that “97% of Hungarians reject sanctions that cause serious damage,“ adding that “The message is clear: the Brussels sanctions policy must be reviewed.”
Szentkiralyi Alexandra, a government spokeswoman, said that the restrictions the EU had imposed on Russia over Ukraine had failed to stop the conflict, but caused a lot of economic issues for Europe. In this vein, Hungarians tend to reject oil restrictions and planned gas sanctions, she noted.
“The people taking part in the consultation say a clear ‘no’ to sanctions that further increase food prices or place additional burdens on European tourism,” Szentkiralyi added.
The spokeswoman pointed out that Hungary is the first EU country to poll its citizens about the sanctions’ impact. She also described the consultation as “a guideline for Hungarian public actors,” with the results set to be delivered to EU authorities in Brussels. “This is quite necessary because they want to introduce new sanctions instead of revising the sanctions policy,” Szentkiralyi explained.
She went on to thank about 1.4 million people that took part in the survey, noting that detailed results would be released in the near future. The consultation on the matter was launched in mid-October and included seven questions about sanctions on the oil, gas, raw materials export, and nuclear and tourism spheres.
In recent months, the sanctions the West imposed on Russia over the Ukraine conflict have exacerbated Europe’s energy crisis, causing fuel prices and costs of living to surge.
Hungary, which is heavily dependent on Russian energy, has long been critical of EU sanctions policy. On Friday, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said that by promoting sanctions in the bloc, German politicians had “miscalculated,” but do not have the courage to admit that.
Last month, Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said that the sanctions were taking a heavy toll on the European economy. He also claimed the US was the only nation benefiting from them, since it has been selling liquified natural gas to Europe at lucrative prices.
Top LNG Producer Qatar Predicts Return of Russian Gas to European Market Within Five Years
Samizdat – 14.01.2023
Gas prices began creeping up in 2021 amid underinvestment in production and fierce competition for limited supplies between European and Asian markets. The supply crunch was exacerbated in 2022, as European countries began rejecting gas from Russia – which accounts for 15 percent of global natural gas output – over the security crisis in Ukraine.
Global instability in natural gas prices and availability won’t be going anywhere in the near term, and Russia will inevitably resume supplying Europe to restore a sense of equilibrium to energy markets, Qatar’s energy minister has indicated.
“It’s going to be a volatile situation for some time to come. We’re bringing a lot of gas to the market, but it’s not enough,” Qatari Energy Minister Saad al-Kaabi said, speaking at an energy forum on Saturday.
Al-Kaabi explained that global energy supply troubles actually started some time before the Ukraine crisis, “where the lack of investment in the oil and gas sector caused really a shortage in gas. And ahead of the Ukraine crisis, the oil and gas prices obviously were clearly going higher due to lack of supply. That lack of investment was driven by many factors, including the bigger push for the green [energy] without having a real plan in how the transition was going to happen. So there was a scarcity of investment over about 5-6 years, and then when the Ukraine situation happened, a big volume was taken out of the market and obviously that would take [prices] even further up.”
Al-Kaabi predicted that the next couple of years would be difficult for Europe, notwithstanding the reprieve granted amid a milder-than-usual winter for much of the region.
“The issue is what’s going to happen when they want to replenish their storages this coming year and the next year. There isn’t much gas coming into the market until 2025, 2026, 2027,” al-Kaabi warned.
The shortages would also mean higher prices, the Qatari official said.
“Prices are a factor of supply-demand. I think some people think that we are very happy for high oil prices and so on. The biggest worry that we would have as oil and gas producers is demand destruction. And you can see that there is demand destruction, whether it’s gas or oil,” he said.
Al-Kaabi also took a jab at Western countries who spent recent years condemning the use of coal for energy on environmental grounds, but turned to the highly polluting resource themselves amid the energy crunch, pointing out that “all the countries that were calling for coal to be stopped are using it at record levels today.”
Buyers Want to Have Their Cake and Eat It Too
Also speaking at the conference was UAE Energy Minister Suhail al-Mazrouei, who echoed al-Kaabi’s concerns about lack of financing in oil and gas, and a basic “lack of understanding what is the future for many countries when it comes to energy strategy – what contributions or what percentages they would have of gas or even the pace of reducing their coal.”
“It’s not clear… And that unclear long-term strategy by many countries put them in a situation where it’s very difficult for them to commit for long-term gas contracts, which has in return made the companies of those who are developing the gas at a very difficult position with their financiers, because they would like to see long-term contracts, and those long-term contracts are not there. Everyone wants to buy, but they want to buy over a two or three year span. And that is not enough for someone to develop gas,” al-Mazrouei said.
Addressing the energy shortages caused by European countries’ politicized decision to reject gas supplies from Russia, the UAE energy minister said the supply crunch was the natural outcome of these policies.
“Of course Russia is a major producer of gas and LNG, and when you shift from one location to another trying to adjust, that takes time. And that’s what happened in 2022 when some of that [Russian] gas had been relocated to another market, and other gas from other markets [was] coming to Europe, especially from the US. But is that sustainable in the longer run? I think you would need more collaboration between the European nations on agreeing on the optimization of the FSRUs [floating storage regasification units, ed.] that are also limited, and also agree on some pipelines. I think that one of the things that contributes to energy security is pipeline gas,” al-Mazrouei said.
Al-Kaabi expressed hope that an “equilibrium” in global energy markets could be achieved after “some kind of a mediation” over Ukraine between Russia and the West, “and the sooner the better.”
“This situation will not last forever, and I understand that the Europeans today are saying there’s no way we’re going back to Russian gas. We’re all blessed to be able to forget and forgive, and I think things get mended with time,” the minister said.
Al-Kaabi clarified that he doesn’t expect countries who relied on Russia for 50, 80, or 100 percent of their gas to return to these same levels of dependence, but emphasized that Russian deliveries will inevitably resume. “They will diversify and they’ll learn from that situation and probably have a much bigger diversity [of supply]. But the Russian gas is going to come back in my view, to Europe. Is it next year, is it in five years, I don’t know, but once this situation is sorted out, and that I think will be a big relief to the whole gas sector, and to the whole market in Europe and will stabilize prices.”
Hypocrisy on Africa’s Energy Needs
Al-Kaabi also addressed the historic underinvestment in energy resources in Africa by Western countries, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund on the grounds that they failed to meet the criteria of the global green agenda.
“We need growth. One billion people today are deprived of basic electricity that we all enjoy. So we need to be fair. And I think one point I’d like to just add to that on the investment side: it’s very, very unfair of some in the West to say that African countries should not invest in oil and gas and they should remain green or whatever you want to call it while this is God-given wealth that they can create for their national growth for their national growth and for their prosperity, and it is oil and gas that is needed for the world,” the minister said.
Qatar is the world’s fifth-largest producer of natural gas, and the second-largest exporter of liquefied natural gas after Australia, exporting over 106 billion cubic meters in 2021, behind Australia’s 108.1 billion. Doha has announced plans to invest some $45 billion in its maritime fields to more than double production by 2027. The Gulf state ramped up gas exports to Europe through 2022, but warned its European partners that supplies are limited, as much of the new production capacity being brought online has already been reserved by Asian clients.
Russian natural gas deliveries to Europe plummeted last year, with Moscow accusing the Royal Navy of blowing up the Nord Stream gas pipelines running through the Baltic Sea and their combined 110 billion-cubic-meter annual transit capacity. Poland shut down overland pipeline gas deliveries via the Yamal-Europe pipeline. Flows to Europe are now limited to supplies sent through the Soyuz pipeline network, which runs through Ukraine, but have been restricted to between 35 and 43 million cubic meters of gas per day.
Moscow: Sweden’s Refusal to Share Nord Stream Findings Suggests They’re ‘Hiding Something’

Samizdat – 14.01.2023
Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman skewered Sweden for staying silent about the identity of the perpetrators of the notorious terrorist attack that crippled Russian revenues and European energy supplies.
Sweden’s refusal to disclose the results of its investigation into the terrorist attack that crippled the Nord Stream pipeline in September suggests Stockholm is “hiding something,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said.
As one of the attack’s primary victims, Russia deserves answers, Zakharova told reporters at a Thursday briefing.
“The refusal of the Swedish side to respond on the merits to another request from the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office for legal aid in the criminal case on Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 pipeline damage in September 2022 is genuinely perplexing,” Zakharova said.
A message sent three months ago by Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin to the head of the Swedish government regarding “the need to conduct a comprehensive and open investigation” of the attacks with Moscow officials still “remains unanswered,” Zakharova explained, noting Sweden’s silence stood “in defiance of all the decorum of international diplomatic communication.”
“Stockholm explains its refusal by saying… that meeting the Russian request will allegedly ‘pose a security threat to Sweden,’” she noted.
“What are the threats to national security that Stockholm is talking about?” Zakharova asked.
“Who committed these sabotage and terrorist acts, who is behind them, who devised and implemented them – withholding the established facts irrefutably testifies to the obvious: the Swedish authorities are hiding something.”
Sweden invoked the same ‘national security’ justification in October when attempting to explain why it was unwilling to commit to a joint investigation on the Nord Stream attack alongside Germany and Denmark.
As the main recipient of Nord Stream’s affordable supply of Russian gas, Germany was arguably the prime beneficiary of the pipelines. But Moscow has also suffered serious economic damage as a result of the act of industrial sabotage.
“We consider ourselves to be the party that sustained material damage, to say nothing of losses,” Zarakhova explained.
As such, “we have the right to receive appropriate information, have the right to ask questions and demand an answer to them,” she said, adding “we must make sure that it doesn’t happen again in the future.”
Hungary in ‘culture shock’ from German policies – Orban

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. © ATTILA KISBENEDEK / AFP
RT | January 13, 2023
Policies introduced by Germany and German politicians within the European Commission and the way they “miscalculated” the effects of anti-Russian sanctions has caused a “culture shock” in Hungary. The EU doesn’t have the courage to admit the fallacy of its sanctions policies, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said in an interview on Friday.
“I grew up with the feeling that the Germans are precise, engineers, they calculate, take their time, they know what they are doing,” Orban told Kossuth Radio, adding that now that perspective has changed.
“Now we see what they are doing, because the European Commission has a German chairman,” Orban continued, referring to EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. “They failed with the sanctions, miscalculated and did not count to the end from a professional point of view,” he added.
According to the PM, the EU doesn’t have the courage to admit the fallacy of its sanctions policies against Russia amid the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Orban noted, however, that Hungary lacked the strength to change the position of larger countries, meaning that sanctions on Moscow will likely continue despite their ineffectiveness.
Hungary, which relies heavily on Russian energy, has on several occasions criticized EU leaders for being responsible for the ongoing energy crisis by introducing “counterproductive” sanctions on Moscow. Budapest has repeatedly asked to scrap the “failed policy of Brussels” in order to stop Europe from “slowly bleeding.” Hungary has also been one of the few Western states that have so far refused to send any weapons to Ukraine or train its troops.
“If it were up to us, there would not be a sanctions policy,” Orban said last month. “It is not in our interest to permanently divide the European and Russian economies into two, so we are trying to save what can be saved from our economic cooperation with the Russians.”
Hungary’s relations with the EU have been particularly strenuous in recent months as Budapest has also clashed with several EU institutions on a number of issues, including LGBTQ rights and migration. Brussels, in turn, has accused Orban’s conservative government of eroding the rule of law while Western establishment media outlets have treated him like an authoritarian leader that is too sympathetic to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Life After Chanel: Most Russians Unruffled By Exodus of Western Clothing Brands, Survey Shows
Samizdat – 13.01.2023
A swathe of Western fashion brands made a great show of exiting the lucrative Russian market, albeit at their own detriment, following the start of Moscow’s special military operation in Ukraine in February 2022. They have been counting their losses since, while the niches that opened up in Russia were not left empty for long.
More than 50 percent of Russians couldn’t care less that a swathe of global fashion brands exited the country last year, a recent survey has revealed. Russia’s consumers are quite content, as they go about their business, browsing the generous array at various shopping centers and online.
In a swirl of elegant skirts and leaving behind an inimitable aftertaste of chic elegance, Chanel, Louis Vuitton, Zara, H&M, and other fashion brands flounced off the Russian market in early 2022. The cavalier exit, carried out with the pomp and circumstance befitting leading fashion conglomerates, was supposed to hit hard at Russian consumers.
Conceived as part of the sanctions campaign punishing Russia for its special operation in Ukraine, the exodus resulted in hefty losses for the brands themselves.
Meanwhile, in Russia market niches were immediately filled by local brands and welcome newcomers eager to set up shop in one of the world’s largest economies in terms of GDP based on purchasing power parity (PPP).
Over 56 percent of respondents questioned by analysts from Kokoc Group, one of the leaders in the field of Internet marketing, revealed that they had barely noticed the departure of foreign clothing brands. In their opinion, there are sufficient choice options at stores across the country. Interviewed Russian consumers revealed that neither their preferences nor their wallets have been impacted by the flight of brands.
Another 23 percent confirmed that while the variety of goods on sale was still really great, the prices had risen steeply. Another 6 percent shared the joy of discovering domestic brands. Russian brands can easily compete with foreign ones, at least 32 of respondents stated. 19 percent of respondents agreed, but said that domestic brands were prone to inflate prices.
Around 39 percent of the Russians surveyed quipped that they were quite oblivious of the country of origin when choosing clothing items for themselves.
Still, around 12 percent told the analysts they were hoping for the return of the fashion giants. No more than 3 percent of those polled were still moping around as they hunted down odd pickings of their favorite brands, such as Zara and H&M, on marketplaces.
Despite the fact that significant changes took place in the world in 2022 against the backdrop of volatile developments, the fashion industry in Russia appears to have risen up to the challenges. It has adapted to the overall mood, and rushed to cater to its ever-growing customer base.
Senator Says US Should Remain in Ukraine Until ‘Putin Is Out’
By Kyle Anzalone and Connor Freeman | The Libertarian Institute | January 9, 2023
Senator Angus King said the US should not put a timetable on support for Ukraine and remain involved in the war until “Putin is out.” Comparing the current situation with Russia to the Allies’ failure to stop Nazi Germany before World War II, the Maine senator insisted on more Western aid for Kiev.
During a virtual press conference following his recent visit to the Ukrainian capital, King was asked how long the United States should continue its role in the conflict, replying that support for Kiev should be indefinite.
“I believe we should remain there until Putin is out,” he said.
It is unclear if King was calling for Putin’s removal from power in a coup d’etat, or merely for Russian troops to vacate all Ukrainian-claimed territory. The two warring parties maintain conflicting territorial claims and King acknowledged the war is now in a stalemate, but he nonetheless claimed the conflict would not be a “20-year struggle” like America’s experience in Afghanistan.
Throughout the virtual presser, King referenced a historical need to prevail over Russia, saying nothing of the potential for escalation to nuclear war between the world’s largest atomic arsenals.
The senator noted that he often receives questions from constituents about the wisdom of US involvement in the war, but went on to cite his own version of a Bush-era epithet: ‘We fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here.’
“I get letters every now and then, people saying, ‘Why are we doing this? Ukraine’s far away. It’s not our fight.’ Well, it is our fight, because if we don’t fight it now, it will spread,” King said. “And it will become something that we can’t avoid being involved in, just as occurred in the late 1930s at the beginning of World War II.”
He went on to claim that if Putin was not stopped in Ukraine, he would go on to conquer more of Europe, comparing the Russian leader to Adolf Hitler several times.
King also suggested the US could give additional aid to Ukraine, pointing to allies who are giving more when compared to their overall gross domestic product. “If you measure it in terms of GDP, we’re between fifth and tenth in the world, and other countries are contributing actually larger shares of their GDP to the defense of Ukraine,” he continued, “Why? Because they recognized, as hopefully we will continue to recognize, that this is really a fight for Western values.”
Since Russia’s invasion kicked off last February, Congress has authorized nearly $120 billion in aid for Kiev, including more than $21 billion in direct military assistance and a series of other financial and humanitarian aid packages. King claimed the American tax dollars are being well spent and accounted for, arguing “The software that they’re using, working with Deloitte and SAP, to track everything coming in – every spare part, every dollar.”
However, CNN has reported that US arms sent to Ukraine quickly fall into a “black hole” and are nearly impossible to track. In October, Finland’s national law enforcement agency warned that weapons being shipped to Ukraine are ending up in the hands of criminal gangs, while Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari warned weeks later that “the situation in the Sahel and the raging war in Ukraine serve as major sources of weapons and fighters that bolster the ranks of the terrorists in the Lake Chad Region.”
King’s latest presser followed a trip to Ukraine last week, where he said he held a “thrilling” meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky and described him as among “the great leaders of the century.”
While the senator claimed Zelensky and Ukraine are champions of democracy, some analysts have argued that Kiev has only continued its transformation into an authoritarian state under his rule. As commentator Ted Galen Carpenter wrote in The American Conservative, “genuine democracies do not ban multiple opposition parties or close opposition media outlets. Nor do they rigorously censor (and put under strict government control) media outlets that they allow to remain open. Genuine democracies do not outlaw churches that advocate policies the government dislikes.” He added, “yet the Ukrainian government has committed not just one or two, but all of those abuses.”
UK businesses to see energy bills soar as government cuts subsidy to firms by 85%
Press TV – January 10, 2023
The UK government is set to scrap the energy subsidies for businesses in the next financial year by 85 percent, leaving small businesses in a dire economic situation, as the cost-of-living crisis squeezes Britons’ lives.
British businesses will see their energy bills soar from April after the government announced the stoppage of the current bills support scheme for firms at the end of March when the price caps for energy bills will expire.
Describing the current level of support as “unsustainably expensive”, the government has decided to reduce the support rate from £18bn to £5.5bn in the planned six-month period.
Speaking to the House of Commons on Monday, Treasury Minister James Cartlidge was at pains to confirm that: “It is not sustainable for the exchequer to continue to support large numbers of businesses at the current level.”
“No responsible, serious government anywhere in the world can permanently shield businesses from this energy price shock,” Cartlidge said, acknowledging the soaring energy costs across the country.
Cartlidge also insisted it was necessary to “cap the taxpayer’s exposure to volatile energy prices” rather than providing open-ended support.
According to the government’s own calculations, a typical pub will see its bills rise by almost £3,000 a month when the new scheme takes effect, while a small shop would pay more than £450 a month, as an increase to its energy bills.
As Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is trying to restore fiscal credibility following the economic shock across the country, manufacturers say they may need to cut jobs and production due to rising energy costs.
Martin McTague, national chair of the Federation of Small Businesses, criticized the government’s new plan and said the reduction in help is a “huge disappointment”.
“This is so out of touch,” McTague said in an e-mailed statement. “The government will inevitably have to come back.”
The cost-of-living crisis across the UK has brought the industries and labor forces under intense pressure, prompting tens of industrial actions over payment disputes each month.
Moreover, the worst impact of the cost-of-living crisis is yet to hit the already struggling Britons, a leading think tank has said, warning that families across the UK have only experienced half of the lost income they are expected to suffer during 2023.
January 6 Two Years On: What Dems Would Risk by Trying to Prosecute Trump After Nothingburger Probe
By Ilya Tsukanov – Samizdat – 06.01.2023
Friday marks the second anniversary of the January 6, 2021 riots at the Capitol by an enraged mob convinced the 2020 presidential election was “stolen” from Donald Trump. Democrats have milked the event for political purposes for two straight years, with President Biden characterizing it as the “worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War.”
Two years since the 2021 unrest outside the Capitol complex, Democrats have failed to provide any rock-solid evidence of Donald Trump’s planning of an “insurrection” in Washington to try to remain in power; still, the governing party may just prove brazen enough to try to prosecute the former president, notwithstanding the tremendous political risks involved, observers have told Sputnik.
On December 22, the House January 6 Committee Investigating the Attack on the Capitol released its final report, charging Donald Trump with a “multi-part conspiracy” to overturn the 2020 election and “block the transfer of power,” and accusing him of orchestrating the spectacular riot at the seat of US legislative power.
Several days prior, the nine-member committee voted to refer Donald Trump and several of his allies to the Justice Department on criminal charges including insurrection, obstruction of an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the United States government, and making false statements to the United States government. If an investigation proceeds and Trump is tried, convicted, and locked up, he could spend the rest of his life in jail, and be permanently barred from ever running for office again.
Much Ado About Nothing?
Trump dismissed the probe’s conclusions and the criminal referral, accusing what he dubbed as the “Democratic Bureau of Investigation” of being out to get him, and comparing the year-and-a-half long, $9 million January 6 investigations to his failed twin impeachments.
“The criminal referrals that the January 6 Committee made regarding President Trump are an exercise in political persecution and wish fulfillment,” says Dr. Nicholas Waddy, a political analyst and associate professor of history at the State University of New York’s Alfred State College.
According to the academic, the January 6 probe failed to provide any solid evidence of criminal wrongdoing by Trump ahead of and during the Capitol riots. At the same time, Trump’s complaining about the 2020 election outcome is an expression of free speech, not criminal behavior, the professor believes.
“He did not encourage anyone to use violence or to violate the law. In fact, he specifically advised his supporters to march ‘peacefully and patriotically’ to the Capitol to lodge a protest against the election results. He did not by any means advise them to use violence or criminal means to overthrow the government,” Waddy said.
Even if one were to discount the former president’s election “fraud” claims, “Trump never did anything in reference to the 2020 election except criticize it and complain about it, and poor sportsmanship is not now, nor has it ever been, a violation of the law,” according to the academic.
Skeletons in Your Closet
Sergio Arellano, an advisory board member of Latinos for Trump, told Sputnik that the January 6 investigation has demonstrated itself to be the “political witch hunt” that Trump has repeatedly described it as, and said that the long-promised “smoking gun” evidence of criminal behavior by the former president and his allies never materialized in the year-and-a-half long probe.
Suggesting there were many politicians who truly deserve to be held criminally liable over allegations far more serious than those against Trump – such as Nancy Pelosi and her husband over their alleged insider trading, Hunter and Joe Biden over their suspected pay to play scandal, and Hillary Clinton over her deleted emails, Arellano lamented that Trump, “the one person who called out the politicians and their BS” and “exposed what really happens in politics,” has been targeted instead.
“We saw it with the ‘Dossier’ and we see it with the weaponization of federal law enforcement agencies who are against not only Donald Trump, but against conservatives in general,” Arellano said – referring to the “Steele Dossier” opposition research commissioned by the Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, which would go on to serve as part of the basis of initial US intelligence probes into the Trump campaign’s suspected ties to Russia (claims which have long since been debunked).
Dr. Waddy believes that the Biden Justice Department may move forward with trying to prosecute Trump on the basis of the January 6 Committee’s conclusions, suggesting that for the governing party, the reasoning may be that the more ordinary Americans talk about Trump instead of the substantive issues affecting their lives, the better.
“For Democrats… the calculation may be as simple as this: They believe that Trump deserves to be prosecuted and convicted, and they believe that, the longer the nation is talking about Trump rather than the sever problems that afflict [the country] (inflation, crime, the border, etc.), the better it will be for Democrats. Democrats have already ridden Trump-hatred to something like ‘victory’ in three consecutive US elections. Why not, they will reason, try for number four?” Waddy said.
Republican political commentator Marc Little echoed Waddy’s sentiments on the case, accusing the January 6 Committee of having “lost all credibility… after recent records revealed internal email communications that place the January 6 debacle squarely on the doorstep of former Speaker Pelosi, who we know refused the protection of the National Guard. Secondly, former President Trump’s emails, formerly concealed, make clear his intentions were not to promote an ‘insurrection’ – a crime requiring intention, but rather just the opposite. His tweet encouraged peace.”
“There is no solid proof to date that shows President Trump as the chief architect and responsible party of the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Look no further than the ‘Twitter Files’ and its exposure of the abrasive, biased and reckless approach toward all conservatives,” Arellano said, referring to the recent media revelations on the chaotic internal debates at the social media company to justify banning Trump after January 6 even though he was not shown to have violated any rules.
Risky Business
Citing Democrats’ desire to see Trump “rot in a jail cell,” even if it means “grasping at straws” to try to prosecute him, Waddy pointed out that there are extreme political risks involved in doing so, even if prosecutors would have a difficult time arguing their case, given the dearth of evidence.
“The evidence that Trump broke the law will revolve around the fact that he allegedly did not take aggressive enough steps to prevent potential violence from threatening lawmakers on January 6, 2021. Prosecutors would have to argue that the events of that day were clearly foreseeable by Trump, and that he sought to achieve them. The problem is that the Capitol riot was foreseen by no one, including Democrats in Congress, who took few if any steps to increase security on what was bound to be a tense day,” Waddy explained. “Prosecutors might also argue that Trump contemplated taking extra-constitutional measures to prolong his term in office, although he did not actually follow through on any of the proposed actions.”
The professor believes the fact that the evidence against Trump is “spectacularly weak” is no guarantee that the justice system will clear him. “The DoJ is populated by Trump haters, and so are large portions of the court system, not to mention the potential pool of jurors in Washington, DC, the most deep blue jurisdiction in America. It is highly questionable whether the most hated man in America, and probably the world, can get a fair trial.”
“Nevertheless,” Waddy notes, prosecuting Trump would carry risks for both the Justice Department and the Democrats, particularly in the event of a trial ending in acquittal or an embarrassing mistrial. Furthermore, a trial would likely increase public sympathy for Trump, including among Republicans who have moved on, “turning him, in effect, into a ‘political prisoner’ and a martyr.”
If Trump is prosecuted and jailed, this would also “effectively reset” the GOP’s field of 2024 candidates, increasing the likelihood of a more electable Republican – like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, taking his place, the professor believes.
“DoJ prosecutors and Democratic Party officials will thus have to ask themselves: is trying to nail Trump to the wall via the justice system truly worth it?” the professor asks.
On the flip side, the president’s party may calculate that a trial would keep Trump occupied “and drag him through the mud – possibly even placing him in prison pending trial,” which would likely limit his effectiveness as a candidate in 2024, and justify the risks.
Fake news about North Korea arming the Wagner PMC as an illustration of new “evidence” trends
By Konstantin Asmolov – New Eastern Outlook – 04.01.2023
It would seem that not long ago we touched on the intricate situation regarding rumors of North Korean or South Korean arms being supplied to the region of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, noting that there was no real evidence of either. Unfortunately, the situation is not evolving for the better and even those in the US establishment, who previously had refrained from making direct and unsubstantiated accusations, have begun to do so.
On December 22, 2022, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters that the DPRK had completed its initial arms delivery to Russia back in November, including infantry rockets and missiles: “We can confirm that North Korea has completed an initial arms delivery to Wagner, which paid for that equipment”. And while Washington does believe “that the amount of material delivered to Wagner will not change battlefield dynamics in Ukraine,” it is still “certainly concerned that North Korea is planning to deliver more military equipment.”
Kirby’s further statements reflected that, for him, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is taking place on some other globe. It turned out that Russian military officials report to the command of this PMC, which has 50,000 fighters. “It’s pretty apparent to us that Wagner is emerging as a rival power center to the Russian military and other Russian ministries”. The Russian reader can only raise a restrained smile, which also applies to the idea that the PMC has not only heavy equipment, but also missiles and heavy artillery in its arsenal.
Nevertheless, Kirby said the US, along with its allies and partners, would raise the issue in the UN Security Council, as the North’s arms deliveries were a clear violation of sanctions resolutions and he promised new sanctions against the Wagner group. US Permanent Representative to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield also said that the US “intends to raise the DPRK’s and Russia’s violations of UN Security Council resolutions in future meetings of the Security Council and will share information of this violation with the Council’s 1718 Sanctions Committee.”
The ROK and Canadian foreign ministries joined in the condemnation. Canadian Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly stressed that the actions of Wagner and Pyongyang “clearly violate international law and United Nations Security Council resolutions.” South Korea’s foreign ministry also condemned the arms trade between North Korea and the PMC, saying it was detrimental to peace and stability in the international community in direct violation of the resolutions.
More interestingly, Stéphane Dujarric, the Spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General, told a briefing that the UN had no information on possible arms deliveries from the DPRK to the Wagner PMC. From the author’s point of view, this is a hint…
Equally interesting is that Kirby’s information was published almost exactly the same way a little earlier by the British media. Reuters quoted a senior US administration official as saying that the ammunition had been bought from the DPRK last month and delivered to Russia: allegedly the volume of shipments is not large enough to seriously affect military operations, but the US fears that this channel will continue to operate.
A little earlier, the Japanese newspaper Tokyo Shinbun had reported that similar missiles were being supplied via the Hasan-Rajin railway.
And all this could not but prompt a comment from the DPRK Foreign Ministry, which on December 22 dismissed the manipulative report by the Japanese media as a completely clumsy and groundless PR stunt. The rest of the statement should be quoted as fully as possible:
“The DPRK remains unchanged in its principled stand on the issue of “arms transaction” between the DPRK and Russia which has never happened.
The international community will have to focus on the US criminal acts of bringing bloodshed and destruction to Ukraine by providing it with various kinds of lethal weapons and equipment on a large scale, rather than lending an ear to the groundless theory of “arms transaction” between the DPRK and Russia cooked up by some dishonest forces for different purposes.
Taking this opportunity, I would like to say that the Russian people are the bravest people with the will and ability to defend the security and territorial integrity of their country without any others’ military support”.
Yevgeny Prigozhin, the owner of the Wagner PMC, also dismissed the allegation of North Korean supplies as “gossip and speculation”, and the author partly agrees with him: there is still no regular railway connection between North Korea and Russia. All the more so since the movement of trains across the border is monitored by US military satellites, among others.
The author also draws attention to the fact that the PMC has far less capacity to procure this type of weapons than the state does, because it would require additional time. Finally, if the PMC had received these weapons back in November, they would have already been used on the battlefields, which would have left an information trail.
This looks like another fake about North Korean shells, but for the author it is an opportunity to talk about two additional things.
First, that accusations are very often based on the method of projection or, as the saying goes, the tongue ever turns to the aching tooth. And in this context, it is worth talking about a series of US pieces in the Western media which suggest that the “arsenal of democracy is depleting” and it is not Russia, but the “free world” which is having problems in supplying arms.
Second, although this version was first published by a British news agency and then voiced by Kirby himself, no evidence was produced. Meanwhile, the author reiterates a very important point: if you accuse your opponent and you have hard, irrefutable facts that incriminate them in some way, you can safely put them out there – without fear that some independent expert will discover that it was a poorly concocted fake. When someone says “we have secret evidence, but we won’t show it to you because it is a military secret”, this approach has been considered rotten since the Dreyfus affair.
The accusations concerning Moscow’s use of Iranian drones include at least debris that is structurally similar to Iranian designs. There is nothing in this case, and the Wagner PMC seems to be attacked because it is today the most demonized armed formation having anything to do with Russia. Moreover, it also operates in the Middle East and Africa, which might have added credibility to the US claims, if there had been any specifics.
The use of accusations, however, which are not backed up by any semblance of credible evidence, did not begin with North Korean shells. One may recall the high-profile doping case in which the Russian side somehow allegedly tampered with urine samples in containers that were not supposed to be opened as per design. One may recall the poisonings of the Skripals or Kim Jong-nam when, in response to a direct question as to how exactly on the technical side the special operation had been carried out, there was no sane answer.
Rather than going into detail and sorting out the extent to which certain actions are technically possible, the analysis is substituted by notions of how capable we think “They” are of doing It. And if They could do it, then They did it, no matter how.
That said, such unsubstantiated information becomes a pretext for imposing sanctions of any level of severity – and this is an important criterion of a post-globalization world in which there is no longer any room for normal investigations and evidence. And this is a worrying sign, because now it is possible to use a fantastic accusation as a pretext for sanctions and if it is said from a high rostrum, the status of the one who said it is confirmation in itself: “How can we doubt the existence of Marquis of Carabas if the talking cat claims it?”
Konstantin Asmolov, PhD in History, leading research fellow at the Center for Korean Studies of the Institute of China and Modern Asia, the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Documents reveal how ‘Russiagate’ was used for Twitter censorship
RT | January 4, 2023
Internal documents from Twitter made public on Tuesday show how the social media platform was pressured to follow the US intelligence community’s lead on censorship back in 2017. Key Democrats in the US Congress, a British university and two media outlets – Politico and BuzzFeed – played a major role in the process, which revolved around the ‘Russiagate’ conspiracy theory, according to research by Matt Taibbi.
In a pattern established in just six weeks, from August to October 2017, Twitter went from being on nobody’s radar to agreeing to take orders from US spies as to whom to censor, Taibbi wrote on Substack.
“Threats from Congress came first, then a rush of bad headlines (inspired by leaks from congressional committees), and finally a series of moderation demands coming from the outside,” he added.
In a 30-tweet thread, Taibbi showed emails and other internal documents he obtained, thanks to Twitter’s new owner Elon Musk.
Democrats had accused Russia of helping Donald Trump defeat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. Their claim that Trump had ties with Moscow was a “dossier” fabricated by a British spy. From there, they insinuated that WikiLeaks publishing internal DNC documents and personal emails of Clinton’s campaign had something to do with Moscow, while “Russian bots and trolls” posted “misinformation” on social media that somehow undermined the elections.
By August 2017, Facebook was purging accounts accused of being “linked to Russia.” Unconcerned, Twitter sent over a list of 22 “possible” Russian accounts to the Senate Intelligence Committee, only to be denounced by Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the ranking Democrat.
By the end of September, Twitter VP for Public Policy Colin Crowell was warning that “Warner has political incentive to keep this issue at top of the news, maintain pressure on us and [the] rest of industry to keep producing material for them.” Crowell also noted the Democrats were “taking cues from Hillary Clinton,” and that only Warner and his House counterpart Congressman Adam Schiff were seeking any comments from social media companies.
Meanwhile, as Taibbi put it, “a torrent of stories sourced to the [committee] poured into the news,” while several Senators – including Warner but also John McCain, an anti-Trump Arizona Republican – proposed bills that would have cracked down on social media.
A “Russia Task Force” set up by Twitter on October 2 found “no evidence of a coordinated approach” by October 13. The final report on October 23 found “32 suspicious accounts and only 17 of those are connected with Russia.” Of those, only two spent anything close to $10,000 on advertising – and one of them was RT.
Policy Director Carlos Monje admits in an October 18 memo that “our ads policy and product changes are an effort to anticipate congressional oversight.” One of these changes was the October 26 ban on advertising by RT and Sputnik.
A November 22 internal email accuses the Senate Intelligence Committee of leaking Twitter’s internal report to the media. A Politico story accusing Twitter of deleting files is followed by a BuzzFeed article alleging a German-language bot network with “signs of being connected to Russia.” The committee demands a report based on the story, which Twitter’s Yoel Roth dutifully writes up.
“You can see how the Russian cyber-threat was essentially conjured into being, with political and media pressure serving as the engine inflating something Twitter believed was negligible and uncoordinated to massive dimensions,” Taibbi wrote.
All of this results in the internal instructions to ban anything “identified by the US intelligence community as a state-sponsored entity conducting cyber-operations.” It was the first step in the process that would eventually lead to the FBI and the Biden White House telling Twitter exactly whom to censor.
