Aletho News


The Covid-19 Celebrity Humanitarianism – Sean Penn and the Great Reset

By Vanessa Beeley | Unlimited Hangout | November 27, 2020

Actor Sean Penn’s “charitable” NGO, with close ties to USAID and the Clintons, has pivoted its focus from “disaster relief” abroad to now playing a key role in US COVID-19 testing and the promotion of the transnational corporatocracy’s Covid-19 narratives.

On the 12th November 2020, an article appeared in the Daily Mail about three powerful men sharing a beach holiday: Twitter’s Jack Dorsey, Hollywood’s Sean Penn and the reclusive Israeli billionaire, Vivi Nevo. The story slipped under the radar, almost unnoticed by a public caught up in the Covid-19 controversy that continues to sweep the planet. However, the connections between these three elite influencers is well worth a closer look, particularly with regards to their combined role in promoting the transnational corporatocracy’s Covid-19 narratives.

Sean Penn and his altruistic aspirations – valiant, misguided or corrupt?

In Part 1 of this 2 part article, I will review the emergence of Sean Penn as a gladiator for the official Covid-19 narrative and the promotion of ulterior agendas in service to the ruling class who are turning their hybrid war strategy against their own populations with devastating effect.

Sean Penn established Community Organised Relief Effort (CORE) in January 2010 in response to the earthquake that devastated the island of Haiti that same year. Formerly called the J/P Haitian Relief Organisation, CORE claims that “our life-saving programs revolve around building healthier and safer neighbourhoods to mitigate the scale of devastation caused by disaster.”

The Clinton connection

What CORE fails to mention is that the destabilisation and eradication of Haitian culture, heritage, communities and self-sufficiency began long before the earthquake of 2010. It might have something to do with the funding that CORE receives from USAID, a CIA power expansion agency, and Penn’s close relationship with the Clintons whose foundation has been instrumental in the “rapacious role of US imperialism in that impoverished semi-colonial country.”

CORE partners taken from their website

Penn declines to mention that Clinton, Bush and Obama have the blood of Haitians on their hands or that Clinton and Bush were deeply involved in “perpetuating the poverty, backwardness and repression in Haiti” that exacerbated the crisis in January 2010 that Penn responded to.

According to journalist, Patrick Martin:

“Clinton took office in the immediate aftermath of the military coup which ousted Haiti’s first democratically elected president, the populist cleric Jean-Bertrand Aristide. That coup was backed by the administration of Bush’s father, who saw Aristide as an unwanted and potentially dangerous radical.”

The Clinton’s influence on the island of Haiti has been one of unmitigated predation and political piracy – a legacy entirely ignored by Penn, who endorsed Hilary Clinton in the 2016 elections and who visited the imperialism-stricken island with robber baron, Bill Clinton, in 2015. Penn appears to be blissfully ignorant of the scandal surrounding the Clinton response to the 2010 earthquake that left the already scavenged island in tatters.

The Clintons stepped up to lead the global response to the Haiti earthquake. At President Obama’s request, Clinton and George W. Bush created the “Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund,” and began “aggressively fundraising around the world to support Haiti”. The Interim Haiti Recovery Commission (IHRC) selected Bill Clinton as its co-chair. Hillary Clinton was still Secretary of State and was therefore responsible for funnelling USAID “relief” funding to Haiti. A whopping $ 13.3 billion was pledged by international donors to allegedly rebuild Haiti and to restore dignity to the lives of the forcibly impoverished Haitian people. Unsurprisingly, the IHRC response was mired in controversy and accusations of embezzlement levied against the Clintons who, effectively, held the purse strings of the incoming donations.

The IHRC collected and estimated $ 9.9 billion in three years but the deplorable misery and poverty that Haitians endure did not improve. It is widely believed that the Clintons cynically robbed and destroyed Haiti for their own gain. Haitian author, journalist, and historian, Dady Chery, expressed the general view thus:

“In 2016, by all estimates, the cost of the US presidential elections doubled or quadrupled to about $5-10 billion. This is the most expensive presidential bid in history, and Hillary Clinton has vastly outspent Donald Trump. Where did the money come from?”

Rather than express outrage at the Clinton potential involvement in defrauding the people of Haiti, Penn continued a campaign of genuflection to the Clintons. In 2015, at a Haiti benefit event, Penn introduced Bill Clinton as a “once-in-a-generation leader with laser focus, immense curiosity, courage and compassion that can be unequivocally measured by sustainable benefits and the improvement of so many lives around the world.”

During his twenty minute speech, Clinton praised Penn for his work in Haiti and encouraged the star-studded audience to contribute to what is now CORE by stating that “you will never contribute to an organisation that will give you a higher probability of having your good intentions turned into real positive changes in other people’s lives”. The hypocrisy oozed from every honeyed word.

Also present at the fundraising gala was sexual predator, Harvey Weinstein, the Hollywood producer who was sentenced to 23 years in prison for first-degree criminal sexual acts and third-degree rape earlier this year. This will connect to the other two men on the beach (i.e. Jack Dorsey and Vivo Nevo) in Part 2.

In 2012, Hillary Clinton’s aides lavished praise on Penn who had just received the 2012 “Peace Summit Award” from former Soviet Union President, Mikhail Gorbachev, for his work in Haiti. A number of media reports pointed out that the email address had been redacted but was listed as “CIA”.

Whether Penn participated knowingly in the imperialist rape of Haiti or was nothing more than a useful celebrity idiot who served the agenda of the Clinton/Bush vulture policy is a question for serious debate. Penn certainly didn’t slum it when travelling to Haiti. HRO or CORE paid out more than $ 126,000 in first class flights in 2013. This luxury travel was justified by Penn’s celebrity status and “consideration for his safety”.

Penn’s close relationship with the Clintons also apparently brought him into the nefarious orbit of child-sex provider and elite blackmailer, Jeffrey Epstein. It has been claimed that Penn was on the guest list of an intimate dinner between Epstein’s under-age girl procurer, Ghislaine Maxwell and Bill Clinton in 2014.

Covid-19 “response” and a potential ulterior motive for CORE Covid-19 tests

Fast forward to 2020, and we find Sean Penn and CORE intimately involved in Covid-19 drive-through testing centres. In September 2020, CORE had conducted more than one million Coronavirus tests, by November, this had increased to 2.5 million.

The PCR test, DNA harvesting and false positives

The validity of the PCR tests in diagnosing Covid-19 has been the subject of much scientific discussion with a growing number of medical experts and analysts dismissing the PCR test as unreliable and inconclusive due to the high percentage of false positives. It is also claimed that this widespread DNA collection under the pretext of Covid-19 could be a covert genetic information harvest on the pretext of extracting viral DNA from all the genetic material.

I spoke with a medical expert who will remain anonymous for security reasons and he informed me that the PCR test is “not designed to diagnose disease.” He told me:

“The test identifies a genetic sequence being present in a sample and then copies it, thereby increasing the amount of genetic material. Each test cycle copies and increases the genetic material. A specific amount of GM is required to meet a threshold of detection. The test will keep copying until it is possible to say the virus is “detected”. Therein lies the problem. After “Covid” infection, when the virus has been removed by the immune system, some viral genetic debris can remain for many months. A tiny fragment viral, genetic material debris will be found and multiplied by many, many cycles until the detection threshold is reached. This is a false positive.”

He informed me that most labs are running upwards of 40 cycles. “In at least 4 examples of RT PCR testing in the US, it was found that 90% of the positive tests were actually false.”

He also told me “the real reason they are pushing the testing is control. They want a rapid test to be used every day, multiple times per day to gain entry to school, work, restaurants, entertainment centres etc. It is conditioning.”

The sinister question is whether all this genetic DNA information is passed on to undisclosed entities for “research purposes” without the patient’s knowledge.

Prior to the Covid-19 “crisis”, patient privacy in the US was protected by federal laws like the Common Rule and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The Emergency laws or orders introduced on the back of Covid-19 have enabled a widespread genome harvesting strategy with little or no accountability for how the DNA information collected is ultimately used.

The issue of DNA collection is not new. An article by Off-Guardian from 2017 asked why the US Air-force was collecting samples of Caucasian Russian DNA. Predictably, the story was ignored by US/UK state media. At the time, Russian President Putin, speculated that the US was preparing an anti-Russian bioweapon. That theory is no longer so “conspiratorial” with the looming threat of a potential bio terror false flag which will, inevitably, plunge the world into even greater engineered chaos.

As part of my research for this article, I sent an email to CORE asking them what they did with the DNA collected from their testing procedures. Until now, no response has been forthcoming.

CORE now receives funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Jack Dorsey, the Twitter CEO donated $ 10 million to Penn’s initiative. Further sponsors include the Clinton Foundation. The CORE testing site at Dodger Stadium, Los Angeles is the largest in the US – “three times the size of any other location in LA” and can test up to 6,000 people per day. Mouth swabs are used in place of the nasal swabs to avoid the need for medical staff to perform the test.

Penn’s funding from Covid-19 impresario, Bill Gates, is an indicator of the depth of Penn’s involvement in what is the Covid-19 portal to the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset”. Penn is no stranger to the Gates world of “philanthropy”. When Melinda Gates spoke about gender inequality at a 2015 Hollywood Report “women in entertainment” breakfast, it was Penn who introduced her. Penn went on to extol the Gates global immunisation projects. That Penn is wholly supportive of the Covid-19 class war should come as no surprise.

One cannot help but wonder what happened to Penn. In 2002, Penn placed a $56,000 advertisement in the Washington Post asking President George W. Bush to end a cycle of violence. In 2003, he wrote an impassioned anti-imperialist full-page statement for the New York Times opposing the Bush military interventionism in Iraq.

Penn wrote:

“We see Bechtel. We see Halliburton. We see Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Powell, Rice, Perle, Ashcroft, Murdoch, many more. We see no WMDs. We see dead young Americans. We see no WMDs. We see dead Iraqi civilians. We see no WMDs. We see chaos in the Baghdad streets. But no WMDs.”

This could simply be a result of Penn’s fervent support for the Democrats or it could indicate that, once upon a time, Penn had genuine anti-war principles. I will cover Penn’s pro-Democrat-bias and possible connections later in this article.

Today, in 2020, Penn appears to be a fully fledged member of the billionaire and Big Pharma complex that is pushing a high-risk global vaccination roll-out. He has demanded that the “military must be tasked with a full offensive against this virus.” Penn has described the military intervention in Haiti as the US deployment of “the most effective logistical and humanitarian organization the world has ever seen: the US military.” Penn’s own terminology in relation CORE’s Covid-19 response has been littered with military analogy, describing it as a “mission to save lives”, an interesting allusion to “an active shooter scenario” and finally “you become a gun.” That might be a little closer to the truth than Penn intended.

CORE is backed by USAID, the Clintons, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This is not a grass roots volunteer organization, it is an instrument of power. Co-founder of CORE, or J/P HRO as it was in 2010, is a notorious character by the name of Sanela Diana Jenkins ( the J/P stood for Jenkins-Penn).

Jenkins who is of Bosnian (Bosnia and Herzegovina) origin, has consistently underpinned the narratives that led to the NATO bombing of former Yugoslavia in 1999 including the much disputed Srebenica “genocide.” (For a greater understanding of the complexities of this dark period in Yugoslav history, I highly recommend “Media Cleansing, Dirty Reporting,” by Peter Brock.) Jenkins raised $ 1 million for the Clinton Foundation in Haiti and together with actor, George Clooney, she raised $ 10 million for the “Not on Our Watch” organisation, which intervened in Darfur on behalf of US imperialist interests.

Jenkins actively supported regime change in Libya which resulted in the brutal murder of its President, Muammar Gaddafi, which was famously celebrated by Hillary Clinton, who said : “we came, we saw, he died”.

Penn – Maverick or CIA tool?

I mentioned Penn’s support for the Democrats earlier in the article. A deeper delve into Penn’s “journalism” reveals a possible political agenda that is in lock-step with the Democrat policies. On October 23, 2008, Penn met with President Raul Castro of Cuba, less than two weeks before Barack Obama was elected as the first black US President. During the seven-hour meeting, Castro expressed a desire to meet with Obama who had said that he would reverse some of the draconian policies imposed by the preceding Bush administration during his election campaign.

The Mexican drug cartels and the US banking cartel cover-up

According to Penn’s biography as it appears in his controversial Rolling Stone interview with Mexican drug lord, Joaquín Archivaldo Guzmán Loera, i.e. El Chapo, “Actor, writer and director Sean Penn has written from the front lines in Haiti, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela and Cuba.” El Chapo’s arrest almost immediately after meeting with Penn drew accusations of Penn’s involvement in his detection. However, there is evidence that El Chapo was actually not that hard to find and that the entire capture may have been nothing more than elaborate cover for the real billionaire criminals behind the global drug dealing industry, the US banking cartel.

As journalist, Richard Becker, wrote in 2019:

“Joaquin Guzman, also known as “El Chapo,” will likely spend the rest of his life in isolation inside a “supermax” prison in Colorado, after his sentencing on July 17 for drug trafficking, money laundering, and other crimes. No US bankers will be in the adjoining cells, although without vast assistance from the latter, the Mexico-based drug cartels could never have achieved the size and profitability they have.

Despite the banks reaping huge profits as financiers and accomplices of the cartels, the number of bank executives criminally prosecuted for laundering hundreds of billions of dollars in illegal drug money is exactly zero.”

One could be forgiven for speculating that the Penn scandal provided spectacular cover for the oligarchs behind the scenes of El Chapo’s Sinaloa cartel. In March 2010, Wachovia bank agreed “in a settlement to having laundered at least $378 billion in drug money from 2004-2007 for Mexican drug cartels.” The case never went to court.

There is also the additional issue of claims of the discovery of a 50-caliber sniper rifle associated with Obama’s “Operation Fast and Furious” at the hideout of El Chapo. Operation Fast and Furious involved the sale of firearms at retail stores which could then allegedly be tracked to prominent drug cartel figures in Mexico. The operation was an abject failure which resulted in the murder of various individuals with US-supplied weapons, not dissimilar to the Obama “train and equip” programme in Syria, which squandered $500 million on weapons and equipment for the non-existent “moderate opposition.” These weapons, they say, inexplicably fell into the hands of the global terror organisation, ISIS. The US National Rifle Association accused Obama and former Attorney General, Eric Holder of hatching the operation as cover to increase gun violence in Mexico and thus justify more restrictive gun-laws in the US.

At the very least, the timing of Penn’s intervention and the subsequent arrest of El Chapo is interesting.

Penn always in the “right” place at the right time?


In 2012, Penn met with US-approved, former Haiti President, Jean Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier whose father Francois “Papa Doc” Duvalier, had been instated as President-for-life in 1957 with US backing. US warships were reportedly stationed “just off the coast of Haiti to oversee a smooth transition of power to Duvalier’s son.” Under the Duvalier dynasty, more than 60,000 Haitians were murdered and tortured by death squads known as the Tonton Macoutes who regularly burned dissenters alive or publicly hung them. “Baby Doc” had been removed from power in 1986 by a popular uprising. After his meeting with “Baby Doc”, Penn recommended “reconciliation” with this neo-colonialist instrument of injustice, despite the fact that Haitian human rights group and civilians wished to see “Baby Doc” prosecuted for “crimes against humanity” and widespread corruption.

Penn does not specify the date of his 2012 “chance” meeting with “Baby Doc” but perhaps coincidentally, President Bill Clinton met “Baby Doc” in January 2012 in Titanyen, the site of mass graves for the bodies of men, women and children massacred by the Duvalier tyrants over the course of three decades of US-orchestrated and sponsored dictatorship. On the same stage with “Baby Doc” and Clinton was the latest in the line of US-approved puppet leaders, President Michel Martelly also highly promoted by Penn.

Sean Penn holds flag as he walks with Egyptian actor Khaled al-Nabawi in Tahrir Square during a protest against the ruling military council, in Cairo September 30, 2011. REUTERS/Stringer


In 2011, Penn just happened to be in Tahrir Square as the Arab Spring gathered momentum in Egypt. Penn called on military leaders for a “faster transition to democracy”. Penn told the Egyptian daily, Al Ahram, that “the world is inspired by the call for freedom by the courageous revolution of Egypt [..] a transition of power from the military to the people.” Effectively, Penn came out in favour of yet another US/UK-orchestrated regime change – one that would ultimately lead to the reduction of Egypt to a poverty-stricken nation dependent upon foreign aid, conveniently for the US  and Israel who alongside the UK, were instrumental in fomenting the uprising as explained by the Journeyman documentary – “The Revolution Business”.

Iran, Syria and Chavez

In 2009, two American “hitch-hikers”, Josh Fattel and Shane Bauer, were arrested by Iranian border guards after they were accused of entering Iranian territory on the border with Iraqi “Kurdistan” without permission and were jailed for espionage. Penn flew to Venezuela to ask President Hugo Chavez to negotiate their release with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Penn had allegedly been alerted to the plight of Bauer and Fattel by friends in “US intellectual circles.” Penn’s support for Chavez was the subject of much controversy in American media, but that controversy likely provided him with the credibility he needed to be afforded an audience with Syria’s US-media-maligned President Bashar Al Assad in the midst of the US/UK-driven “regime change” war against Syria. The meeting is believed to have taken place during the summer of 2016.

Perhaps it is yet another coincidence, but one of thePenn-rescued “hitch hikers,” Shane Bauer, went on to become a “journalist” member of the western media “regime change” chorus invested in the criminalization of the Syrian government and its elected President Bashar Al Assad. A “journalist” who, without hesitation, regurgitated the now discredited 2018 Douma “chemical weapon” story despite serious doubts from acclaimed journalist, Robert Fisk, who was one of the first to visit the scene of the alleged attack. Evidence that the attack was, almost certainly, a staged event, produced by the UK FCO-midwived White Helmets and Douma’s dominant armed group, Jaish Al Islam, seemed to escape Bauer’s “in depth” journalism. One Syrian commentator on Twitter responded succinctly to Bauer’s tweet.

Bauer, himself, reported that he had been denied a visa by the Syrian authorities because his “journalism” was not considered objective enough. It is quite possible that the decision could also have been influenced by his history of illegal entry into Iran. True to form, Bauer entered Syria illegally with the help of US-proxies, the Kurdish contra forces, the so-called “Syrian Democratic Forces” occupying much of north-east Syria, including the oil fields in order to produce his undercover report which served as thinly veiled PR for the continuation of a ten-year US/UK-led war against Syria.

Celebrity humanitarianism: PR for neoliberal capitalism and US hegemony

Is Sean Penn a Hollywood “honey trap” for the five eyes intelligence alliance, as he was colourfully described by a Twitter commenter recently? Or is Penn nothing more than a member of the rising celebrity cult-humanitarian complex spearheaded by entertainment stars, billionaires and activist “NGOs” that include Bill Gates, George Soros, Angelina Jolie, Bono and Penn’s ex-wife, Madonna? The line between being an intelligence asset and an “innocent” promoter of US hegemony and neoliberal capitalism is an indistinct one in either case.

The three men on the beach, Sean Penn, Jack Dorsey and Vivi Nevo. Photo: the Daily Mail

In many instances, the timing of Penn’s “happenstance” meetings with figures key to US foreign policy and military adventurism raises obvious questions. I have not covered all of Penn’s political publicity stunts in this article, only those I consider to be the primary ones. Effectively, Penn’s political involvement has furthered the foreign policy objectives of the US predatory class, which inevitably result in global inequality, food insecurity and devastation for countries in the cross-hairs, the same global insecurity that Penn’s version of celebrity altruism claims to fight against.

As described in the book, “Celebrity Humanitarianism – the ideology of global charity” by Byllan Kapoor:

“[…] celebrity humanitarianism, far from being altruistic, is significantly contaminated and ideological: it is most often self-serving, helping to promote institutional aggrandizement and the celebrity ‘brand’; it advances consumerism and corporate capitalism, and rationalizes the very global inequality it seeks to redress; it is fundamentally depoliticizing, despite its pretensions to ‘activism’; and it contributes to a ‘post-democratic’ political landscape, which appears outwardly open and consensual, but is in fact managed by unaccountable elites.”

Penn is a Covid-19 fearmongering fanatic. Aside from demanding that the military be involved in the response, Penn has issued an array of stinging attacks on Twitter against President Trump’s Covid-19 measures, deeming them ineffective and disproportionate to the Penn-perceived magnitude of the threat. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Penn is supportive of the Biden power bid, which will bring in a Covid-19 task force comprised of individuals who have voiced support for eugenics and population control.

Who persuaded Penn to take to Twitter earlier this year? None other than Twitter CEO, Jack Dorsey, who will be the main subject of Part 2 of this article, which will cover Dorsey’s role in funding and promoting the Covid-19 Big Pharma programmes and draconian US government population suppression measures.

Sean Penn with Vivi Nevo and Leonardo Di Caprio at the Haiti Rising Gala, 2017. Photo: Getty images, Vogue.

The three men on the beach are instrumental in paving the way for the Great Reset and Dorsey should be held responsible for much of the Twitter censorship of dissenting voices during this unprecedented power grab by the powers that be. Celebrities like Penn and influencers like Dorsey enable their expansionism rather than call for their accountability for the damage being inflicted upon the world’s most vulnerable and increasingly disenfranchised human beings under the guise of “relief.”

December 12, 2020 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Spygate: Why Did Hillary Clinton & Barack Obama Seem So Determined to Impede and Topple Trump?

By Ekaterina Blinova | Sputnik | May 12, 2020

US Attorney John Durham who is currently conducting an investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe should take a look at a role played by Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation in sparking and fanning the Russiagate scandal, says Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel.

The newly released House Intelligence Committee’s transcripts shed some more light on Joseph Mifsud, the mysterious Maltese professor who apparently told then Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos in March 2016 that Moscow had “damning” Hillary Clinton emails. According to one of the transcripts, Mifsud was heard bragging he was a member of the Clinton Foundation.

​Additionally, in a November 2017 interview with Italian newspaper La Repubblica the Maltese professor also admitted that he was in the organisation: “I am a member of the European Council on Foreign relations and you know which is the only foundation I am member of? The Clinton Foundation”. At the same time, Mifsud flatly denied that he had told Papadopoulos about the Clinton emails.

Mifsud & Downer Both Tied to Clinton Foundation

The exposure has prompted a lively debate among social media users, who recollected that following the controversial conversation with Mifsud, Papadopoulos had a drink with the Australian high commissioner to the UK Alexander Downer, also known for his ties with the Clinton Foundation.

​Following this historic meeting Downer approached the FBI to inform the bureau – in a breach of diplomatic protocols – that Papadopoulos somehow knew that the Russians “had dirt” on Hillary Clinton. This information became the trigger for launching the Crossfire Hurricane op against the Trump campaign on 31 July 2016.

“Mifsud was a small donor according to notoriously unreliable and materially false disclosures on the Clinton Foundation website”, says Charles Ortel, a Wall Street analyst who has been looking into the Clinton Foundation’s alleged fraud for several years. “I suspect he may have been involved with the ‘Clinton Global Initiative’, a forum where Clinton supporters (for the most part) interacted with connected globalists, in theory to promote smart giving, but in practice to advance substantial for-profit activities”.

Ortel expresses hope that US Attorney John Durham and his team appointed by AG William Barr to investigate the origins of Crossfire Hurricane operation “will examine Mifsud and every person and project claimed in particular by CGI, which seems to have been a forum where money traded for influence while hiding in plain sight”.

Former Australian diplomat and politician Downer seems to be a bigger fish, according to the analyst.

“As Australia’s foreign minister, Downer channeled millions of his taxpayers’ money towards international projects in the name of ‘Clinton HIV/AIDS Initiative’ (and similar sounding variants) as well as ‘Clinton Climate Initiative’ starting in 2006”, Ortel elaborates. “None of these entities lawfully existed. And there has never been a proper accounting for these grants. Moreover, Downer and Australia signed multiple agreements with Bill Clinton and Ira Magaziner who held themselves out to be lawfully appointed representatives of the Clinton Foundation when they never were”.

According to the Wall Street analyst “Downer had and has much to lose from a Trump victory, so it is not surprising that he has apparently played such an important role attempting to frame Donald J. Trump and others who threaten to expose and punish crony globalists”.

“From the day Hillary announced her second presidential run, she and her backers did all they could to rig the primaries and then the general election”, he says. “Downer’s known and suspected actions, like Mifsud’s are not surprising. They likely gained and thought they would gain more from another Clinton presidency”.

Clinton Knew That Her Campaign Funded Dirt Digging on Trump

Hillary Clinton had either direct or indirect ties with many participants of the Trump-Russia saga, including Mifsud and Downer who initially sparked the so-called Russiagate scandal and Fusion GPS, the firm behind the infamous anti-Trump “dirty” dossier which played a crucial role in “justifying” FBI surveillance operations against Trump aides.

Citing newly released testimonies, American investigative journalist John Solomon reported on 11 May, that Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and Hillary Clinton had been aware that her campaign had funded opposition research and sought for dirt on Trump’s ties to Russia during the 2016 election.

“I think she was – she knew that we had an opposition research staff in-house”, Podesta said in a testimony. “We, the campaign, directly purchased some opposition research… I think that I only learned subsequently that the payments were made through Perkins Coie, 50 percent from the campaign, 50 percent from the DNC”.

Ortel is not surprised that Hillary Clinton appears to be deeply involved in how the Trump-Russia investigation started. According to him, the roots of the “Clinton corruption run deep”, starting in Arkansas where Bill Clinton served as a governor and attorney general.

“Once the Clinton’s moved to the White House, the scale of their corrupt and suspicious activities expanded to the national and international stages”, the Wall Street analyst presumes. “From 1997 onwards, a key instrument in swapping cash for influence has been the network of Clinton ‘charities’ that has never been properly regulated anywhere”.

He suggests that if one wants to understand why Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama seemed so “determined to impede or topple President Trump”, “Durham and his team must go back into history comparing sums that donors claim they sent towards the Clinton Foundation, with the Foundation’s public filings, submitted many places, under penalties of perjury”.

“Unlike the botched attempts to set perjury traps against Flynn and others, the Clinton Foundation public record, evident in plain sight includes multiple confessions of making false statements under oath”, the analyst highlights. May the long overdue indictments, prosecutions, convictions, fines and incarcerations soon begin”.

May 12, 2020 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Russophobia | , , | 1 Comment

Investigation: Joseph Mifsud

The_War_Economy – July 29, 2019

Joseph Mifsud, born in 1960, is a bit of a mystery, in the sense that he has numerous connections to organisations such as the European Union, you can find him in multiple locations, but the moment he was connected to the Spygate scenario, everybody just knew him as the Russian who tried to hire George Papadopoulos for nefarious reasons. Even though he is Maltese.

“I am a member of the European Council On Foreign Relations. And you know which is the only Foundation I am a member of? The Clinton Foundation. Between you and me, my thinking is left-leaning. But I predicted Trump’s victory as well as Brexit. Everyone of us wants peace. If the Governments don’t talk to each other, we citizens must keep talking.” — Joseph Mifsud

At unknown points,

Mifsud studied at the University of Malta, which he graduated from in 1982 with a bachelor’s degree in education. Mifsud also graduated from the University of Padua with a degree in pedagogy in 1989, and then in 1995, Mifsud also graduated from Queens University with a master’s degree in philosophy.

Mifsud later studied at the University of Reading, where he earned his doctorate. Mifsud also became fluent in Maltese, French, Italian, Arabic and English, and has knowledge of Spanish, Portuguese, Russian and Slovenian.

In January 1994, Mifsud published the paper “Partners for Change: The Malta experience”.

From 1996 to 1998, Mifsud served in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Malta, and also served as Malta’s representative to the Council of Europe in Education and at Unesco.

In 1997, Mifsud was appointed as the Head of the Department of Education at the University of Malta.

At some point, Mifsud was a member of the Senate. Towards the late 1990s, Mifsud encountered Manual Delia.

Mifsud has also served as an adviser to the European Union, the European Union Parliament, the Parliament of Malta, organisations in Italy, Spain, Africa, and the Commonwealth Law Bulletin.

On May 1, 2004, Malta officially joined the European Union. Around this time, Mifsud was placed in charge of establishing the European Programmes Unit, and also helped during the negotiations of Malta’s entry into the organisation.

In 2006, Mifsud taught a summer class with Katerina Galanaki, which was attended by Matthew Caruana Galizia, the son of Daphne Caruana Galizia.

From October 1, 2006 to August 30, 2007, Mifsud served as the Head of the Private Secretariat for Dr. Michael Frendo.

On November 15, 2007, Mifsud received a letter from the University of Malta, as an audit done by PriceWaterhouseCoopers suggested that he had mismanaged funds during his time teaching.

The next month, in December 2007, Mifsud left his position at the University of Malta.

On April 9, 2008, the Bank of Valetta won an order and garnished Mifsud’s wages.

On June 9, 2008, the Paris Summit established EMUNI and Euro-Mediterranean higher education.

In November 2008, Mifsud was elected as the first President of the Euro-Mediterranean University (EMUNI) in Slovenia by European and Mediterranean, Rectors and Presidents of Universities. During this time, Mifsud also helped pioneer the Euro-Mediterranean Professional School.

On November 26, 2008, the University’s General Assembly meeting was held in Barcelona, Spain, where 115 members from 32 states adopted the Universidy statute and elected the institutional bodies.

In February 2009, EMUNI University officially became a legal entity in Slovenia.

By April 2009, Mifsud was the representative of Malta on the board of the Bologna Follow-up Group, the Erasmus Mundus Committee and the Tempus Committee, Malta’s Socrates Sub-Committee For Higher- Education and the “Joint Research Center” of the European Commission.

On April 22, 2009, Ian Mundell published the article “Bridging the Mediterranean” in Politico, which featured an interview with Mifsud.

Between June 21–22, 2009, Mifusd and Strobe Talbott attended “G8 and Beyond”, which was convened by the Brookings Institution, Aspen, Club de Madrid and Link Campus.

On June 30, 2009, Mifsud attended the “Seminar On Higher Education In Europe”, hosted by the Foundation For European Progressive Studies.

Mifsud would later leave his position as the President of the Euro-Mediterranean University.

Mifsud may be one of the founders — alongside Giovanni D’Angelo and Giuseppe Picone — of the Mesauro Foundation.

On March 24, 2010, Mifsud attended the “Workshop Multi-Level Governance of Intercultural Dialogue” hosted by the Università di Padova.

On June 14, 2010, Mifsud gave the opening address at the 2nd EMUNI Research Souk — the Euro-Mediterranean Student Research Multi-Conference — hosted by the EMUNI University.

On June 29, 2010, Mifsud met with Secretary General of the Union for the Mediterranean Ahmad Masa’deh at the Headquarters of the Secretairat in the Palacio Real de Pedralbes in Barcelona, Spain.

Between October 20–23, 2010, Mifsud attended the EUA Annual Conference in Palermo, Italy, where he held talks with representatives of EMUNI partner institutions.

On October 24, 2010, Mifsud participated as part of the round table session on Teaching and Learning Diplomacy as part of the Rome Diplomatic Festival, which was attended by others including Nabil Ayad.

Between December 11–13, 2011, Mifsud attended the 4th Global UN Alliance of Civilizations Forum in Doha.

In 2012, Mifsud became the Director of the London Academy of Diplomacy, which is affiliated with Scotland’s University of Stirling, as he left the Euro-Mediterranean University. The same year, the London Academy of Diplomacy received the award “Diplomat of the Year” from Diplomat Magazine. At some point during this, Mifsud also joined the Leading Board for the Albanian Diplomatic Academy.

Simona Mangiante was also introduced to Mifsud during this time by Gianni Pittella while she worked in Brussels as an attorney specialised in child abduction cases.

“I always saw Mifsud with Pittella.” — Simona Mangiante

At the same, Simona worked for Mairead McGuinness and Roberta Angelilli, and she worked as an administrator to the Home Affairs Committee under Martin Schulz.

The London Academy of Diplomacy has a total of 36 faculty members, which includes former diplomats. In September and January each year, students are accepted, with the total usually amounting to 150 new students. The London Academy of Diplomacy is also open to organising visits to the Houses of Parliament, the Commonwealth Secretariat, numerous organisations in London, the Hague, the European Parliament, NATO, the European Union Headquarters and the United Nations.

In the summer of 2012, the London Academy of Diplomacy established cooperation with the Faculty of Global Processes of Moscow State University.

In October 2012, Mifsud met with Enzo Scotti — the President of Link University — Professor Nabil Ayad, Professor Claire Smith and numerous Italian Generals for a training programme on international security, which was arranged by Link Campus University and the London Academy of Diplomacy in Rome, Italy.

In 2012, Mifsud attended Globalistics 2013 at Moscow University, where he suggested that Moscow University join a project to reform Link Campus University in Rome.

In March 2013, Mifsud owed roughly EUR 39,000.00 to the EMUNI University in Slovenia for expenses claimed during his tenure.

On April 3, 2013, Mifsud and Thomas Childs attended the Global Economic Forum: Best Practices in Trade and Investment Promotion in London, which was hosted by the International Business & Diplomatic Exchange (IBDE).

On May 15, 2013, Inverhold Ltd. was founded by Dr. Stephan Roh in London, England.

Between June 11–13, 2013, Mifsud and Nabil Ayad attended the “Global, Regional and National Actors in the Governace of the Atom: A Focus on Europe and the Middle East” international conference at the Academy of Global Governance in Florence, Italy. They presided over a simulation exercise, which was assisted by visiting professor of the London Academy of Diplomacy, Sameh Aoul Enein.

On July 2, 2013, His Excellency Dr. Sultan Al Jaber visited the London Academy of Diplomacy to discuss cooperation between the organisation and the United Arab Emirates, which was attended by Mifsud, Nabil Ayad and Riad Nourallah.

In August 2013, Mifsud received an honorary professorship from the University of East Anglia.

In 2014, the Rome Academy of Diplomacy was founded, and Mifsud played a vital role to its development. Dr. Stephan Roh also became a visiting lecturer at the London Academy of Diplomacy, and bought Link Campus University. In return, Mifsud became a consultant at Roh’s legal firm.

Also in 2014, a Russian intern named Natalia Kutepova-Jamrom visited his office after having worked in the Russian Government as a legislative aide, and she later introduced Mifsud to numerous Russian diplomats and scholars, and secured an invitation to the Valdai Discussion Club.

In January 2014, the University of East Anglia ended their arrangement to validate London Academy of Diplomacy degree courses, with the arrangement then transferred to the University of Stirling.

Between April 24–2015, 2014, Mifsud attended the Global University Summit in Moscow, Russia.

On May 29, 2014, Mifsud met with Ambassador Alexander Yakovenko at the Residence, where Mifsud presented his views on the aftermath of the Global University Summit, and discussed UK-Russia relations.

In mid-November 2014, Mifsud visited Washington, DC, where he attended a lecture at the American University on “Diplomacy and Development in a Global Environment”, which was sponsored by Australia’s Program On International Organizations, Law and Diplomacy. During this time, Mifsud spoke with The Washington Diplomat’s Larry Luxner.

On December 8, 2014, Larry Luxner published the article Maltese Official Raises Profile Of U.K. Diplomacy Academy” in The Washington Diplomat.

On February 23, 2015, Mifsud and Falah Mustafa gave a lecture at the London Academy of Diplomacy about the Islamic State and the future of Kurdistan and Iraq.

On March 12, 2015, the London Academy of Diplomacy hosted the panel “Diplomacy and Social Media”, which was attended by Mifsud, Christian Sys, Sir George Reid and Dr. Martyn Bond.

On April 30, 2015, Euripides Evriviades hosted the conversation “Cyprus, the EU and the Eastern Mediterranean” at the London Academy of Diplomacy, which was introduced by Mifsud.

Between September 8–10, 2015, the XXV Economic Forum was hosted in Krynica-Zdrój, Poland, which was attended by Mifsud on the third day.

On September 11, 2015, Mifsud attended the Senate of the Republic in Piazza della Minerva, Rome, with others including Vincenzo Scotti and Gianni Pittella.

In late October 2015, Mifsud proposed to Anna at a restaurant which overlooked the Kremlin in Moscow during Anna’s sister’s birthday.

On December 8, 2015, Ben Carson announced his foreign policy adviser team, which included both George Birnbaum and George Papadopoulos.

In 2016, Simona’s contract came to an end. As such, Pissetti suggested employment with Mifsud in London, which led to Mifsud offering her a job at the London Centre of International Law Practice, located at Lincoln’s Inn Fields. Simona was promised £2,500.00 per month from a colleague of Mifsud.

On January 29, 2016, Mifsud sent an e-mail to Anna, where he requested the engagement ring and assorted items to be returned to his Rome or United Kingdom address due to Anna cheating on him.

On March 6, 2016, George Papadopoulos learned that he would become a foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign.

Between March 8–9, 2016, Mifsud attended the World Summit On Uncontrolled Migration at the Adelaide Convention Centre in South Australia.

On March 10, 2016, Mifsud hosted a breakfast on behalf of Access European Universities in Adelaide, Australia.

On March 14, 2016, in Italy, Mifsud met with George Papadopoulos, and although initially distant in the conversation, Mifsud became more interested when he learned that Papadopoulos had joined the Trump campaign.

On March 21, 2016, Donald Trump visited the The Washington Post’s headquarters, where he introduced his foreign policy team — including Papadopoulos — to the editorial board.

A few days later, on March 24, 2016, Olga Polonskaya (neé Vinogradova) met and discussed with Mifsud the possibility of an internship. Shortly after this, Papadopoulos met with both Mifsud and Polonskaya, who Mifsud introduced as President Vladimir Putin’s niece, at a café in London. Mifsud also offered to introduce Papadopoulos to the Russian Ambassador in London, Alexander Yakovenko.

“Mifsud underlines that he and Papadopoulos met three or four times overall. ‘He came here in Italy, in Rome, with seven other experts of international relations working for the London Centre of International Law Practice. We were dining and, if I remember well, he announced that we would join Trump’s electoral campaign team. After that, we kept in touch via email or when we subsequently met in person. But, let’s be clear: the Russians didn’t ask me to meet Papadopoulos. Mr. Papadopoulos asked me for contacts in several areas: I proposed someone in the Arabian Gulf, then in Latin America, a hot issue for Trump after his remarks on the wall at the border with Mexico, then in Russia and the European Council. They chose Russia as they were interested in sanctions against Moscow, NATO, Ukraine and a more stable relationship with Russia. A topic very sensitive also for the Russians.’” — Repubblica

After the meeting, Polonskaya texted her brother, Sergei Vinogradov, about the meeting, as she had understood half of the conversation. The text message read: “Because my English was bad”.

Elsewhere, Papadopoulos sent an e-mail to seven members of the Trump campaign in an attempt to arrange a meeting between the campaign and the Russians, with the title of the e-mail being “Meeting with Russian Leadership — Including Putin”, which also discussed his meeting with Mifsud. The proposal was dismissed by the campaign, with concerns raised by Sam Clovis and Charles Kubic.

On March 31, 2016, Papadopoulos attended a national security meeting in Washington, DC with the foreign policy advisers of the Trump campaign and Trump himself. As he introduced himself, he mentioned connections which may assist in arranging a meeting between Trump and President Putin.

Around April 2016, Mifsud was hired on a part-time basis at the University of Stirling.

On April 10, 2016, Papadopoulos sent an e-mail to Polonskaya.

The next day, on April 11, 2016, Polonskaya responded to Papadopoulos’s e-mail, where she suggested she would help build relations between the United States and Russia, which led to a discussion between Papadopoulos, Polonskaya and Mifsud about arranging a foreign policy trip to Russia.

JOSEPH MIFSUD: “This is already been agreed. I am flying to Moscow on the 18th for a Valdai meeting, plus other meetings at the Duma.”
OLGA POLONSKAYA: “I have already alerted my personal links to our conversation and your request… As mentioned we are all very excited by the possibility of a good relationship with Mr. Trump. The Russian Federation would love to welcome him once his candidature would be officially announced.” — The Indictment of George Papadopoulos

On April 13, 2016, Mifsud and Sir George Reid hosted a public talk titled “Controlled or uncontrolled migration — a fortress EU or a global response?” at the University of Stirling.

On April 18, 2016, Mifsud introduced Papadopoulos via e-mail to Ivan Timofeev. Timofeev then said he had connections to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This led to numerous Skype conversations between both Papadopoulos and Timofeev.

“At some point, he started asking whether it would be possible to set up a meeting between Trump and Putin ‘or some other high-ranking Russian politicians.’ Our conversations made it clear that George was not well acquainted with the Russian foreign political landscape. You obviously can’t just go and set up a meeting with the president, for instance. Things just aren’t done that way.” — Ivan Timofeev, August 21, 2017

On April 19, 2016, Mifsud attended a discussion at the Valdai Club, moderated by Ivan Timofeev, with other attendees including Stephan Roh and Igor Tomberg.

On April 22, 2016, Timofeev e-mailed Papadopoulos and thanked him for their talk, and suggested that they meet in either London or Moscow — Papadopoulos suggested a meeting in London between the two of them and Mifsud.

On April 25, 2016, Papadopoulos e-mailed Stephen Miller, where he again pushed for the idea of a meeting between Trump and President Putin.

On April 26, 2016, Mifsud and Papadopoulos met with each other again at a hotel in London, where Mifsud mentioned that he had returned from Moscow and a meeting with Russian Government officials, during which he learned of the existence of dirt on Hillary Clinton held by the Russians.

“They have dirt on her.”
“The Russians had emails of Clinton.”
“They have thousands of emails.” — The Indictment of George Papadopoulos

“Roh claims that Mifsud has done nothing wrong and was set up — and denies having ever told Papadopoulos the Russians had dirt on Clinton.” — BuzzFeed News

“Ok. But what about the emails stolen from Mrs. Clinton? ‘The dirty job’ offered to Papadopoulos? ‘I don’t know. I strongly deny any discussion of mine about secrets concerning Hillary Clinton. I swear it on my daughter. I don’t know anyone belonging to the Russian government: the only Russian I know is Ivan Timofeev, director of the think tank ‘Russian International Affairs Council’. Which is based at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. ‘But this is meaningless’, Mifsud says.” — Repubblica

On April 27, 2016, Papadopoulos e-mailed both Miller and a high-ranking official separately at the Trump campaign, where he again pushed for a trip to Moscow.

On April 30, 2016, Papadopoulos sent an e-mail to Mifsud and thanked him for his assistance in potentially arranging a meeting between the Trump campaign and the Russian Government.

On May 4, 2016, Timofeev sent an e-mail to both Papadopoulos and Mifsud, where he said the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs were open to cooperation, and that Papadopoulos should meet with the North America Desk when he is next in Moscow. Papadopoulos then forwarded the e-mail chain to the high-ranking campaign official for guidance.

On May 5, 2016, Papadopoulos had a phone call with Clovis, and then forwarded the same e-mail chain to him.

On May 13, 2016, Mifsud e-mailed Papadopoulos with an update on their recent conversations.

“We will continue to liaise through you with the Russian counterparts in terms of what is needed for a high level meeting of Mr. Trump with the Russian Federation.” — Joseph Mifsud

The next day, on May 14, 2016, Papadopolous e-mailed the high-ranking campaign official and said that the Russian Government was open to hosting Trump in Russia.

On May 21, 2016, Papadopoulos e-mailed another high-ranking Trump campaign official, which had the subject line “Request from Russia to meet Mr. Trump”, which included the May 4, 2016 e-mail chain.

Between May 21–23, 2016, Mifsud attended the 16th Doha Forum in Qatar, where he represented the London Academy of Diplomacy. The event was also attended by Tobias Ellwood, MP.

On June 1, 2016, Papadopoulos e-mailed the high-ranking Trump campaign official, who then redirected him to the campaign supervisor. Papadopoulos then e-mailed the campaign supervisor about the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs seeking a meeting with Trump, and whether or not he should ignore it.

On June 19, 2016, Papadopoulos e-mailed the high-ranking Trump campaign official again, as Timofeev had suggested to him that a campaign representative could go to Moscow instead to attend the meetings instead of Trump himself.

On June 28, 2016, Mifsud and Soros were two of the signatories of “‘The world will not stop’: a statement from leading Europeans” released by the European Council On Foreign Relations, which was about the Brexit vote.

In July 2016, Mifsud lost his honorary professorship from the University of East Anglia.

On July 21, 2016, Mifsud attended the graduation of students from the London Academy of Diplomacy.

On August 15, 2016, the campaign supervisor sent an e-mail to Papadopoulos and said that he and another foreign policy adviser should visit Moscow and accept the trip offer from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

In September 2016, Simona started to work at the London Centre of International Law Practice, where she received a LinkedIn message from George Papadopoulos, who liked her photograph and noted that they have connections to the same place of employment, followed by an attempt to arrange a meeting with her, which fell through.

In late October 2016, Simona sent an e-mail to Mifsud, where she complained about her employment and how she had been ‘working for nothing’ as she was paying rent on her flat in South Kensington using savings.

On October 27, 2016, Mifsud attended the “International Law and the Territorial Gains and Losses of Non-State Armed Groups in Africa and the Middle East” discussion at Gray’s Inn, which was hosted by the London Centre of International Law Practice.

On October 29, 2016, at 01:30 A.M., Mifsud responded to Simona from his Stirling University e-mail address in Italian from London, having returned from Moscow.

“Dear Simona,
I hope you are fine… I was in Moscow… Now I’m in London. Can we meet in person? I’m here until Tuesday night.
A hug.
J” — The Guardian

On October 31, 2016, Mifsud left London.

In November 2016, Simona quit her position at the London Centre of International Law Practice, having received zero pay. Her work iPhone stopped working afterwards.

On November 14, 2016, Mifsud, Stephan Roh and Nagi Idris attended the “Military Coup Attempt In Turkey and Its Reflections Worldwide” conference, which was hosted by EURAS at Istanbul Aydin University.

In late 2016, Mifsud disappeared from a venture between Link Campus University and Moscow State University.

In 2017, Mifsud remained in touch with Yury Sayamov.

On January 27, 2017, George was interviewed by agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, where he was asked about his interactions with Mifsud.

At the start of February 2017, the Federal Bureau of Investigation found Mifsud in Washington, DC.

Between February 8–11, 2017, Mifsud attended Global Ties’ Unity In Community national meeting at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, DC, a non-profit organisation with a working relationship with the United States Department of State.

On February 11, 2017, Mifsud sent an e-mail about his conversations with Papadopoulos to agents at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and then left Washington, DC.

On February 16, 2017, the Federal Bureau of Investigation interviewed Papadopoulos again, this time with Papadopoulos’s counsel present. Papadopoulos offered to cooperate with the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The next day, on February 17, 2017, Papadopoulos deleted his Facebook account, and then recreated a brand new version of it.

On February 23, 2017, Papadopoulos also changed his contact number.

In March 2017, George and Simona met each other in New York, where they started to date each other.

On March 20, 2017, Mifsud sent a text to Anna to inform her that he would chair a meeting in Saudi Arabia on international security.

The next day, on March 21, 2017, Mifsud sent a photograph to Anna of buildings in Saudi Arabia which showed the flags of the United States and Saudi Arabia.

In April 2017, the London Academy of Diplomacy seemingly closed down.

“Today, there is no sign of the London Academy of Diplomacy on Middlesex Street in London. Phone numbers for the organisation that can be found online do not work and websites lead to error messages. A receptionist at the address said the organisation left the premises six months ago.” — Carole Cadwalladr, The Guardian, October 31, 2017

In early April 2017, Mifsud and Anna met with each other in Kiev, Ukraine, where Mifsud informed Anna that he had been questioned by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

In May 2017, Mifsud started to work as a full-time professional teaching fellow in the politics department at the University of Stirling.

Between May 8–9, 2017, Mifsud attended the G7 International Forum about “Globalization, Inclusion and Sustainability In a Global Century” in Rome, Italy, hosted by Link University Campus and Fondazione Economia Tor Vergata.

On May 12, 2017, Mifsud, Dr. Roh, Vladimir Likhachev and Timofeev held a presentation on the international report “GLOBAL ENERGY 2015–2016”, which was hosted by the Russian International Affairs Council.

The day after, on May 13, 2017, Mifsud and Anna texted each other, where Mifsud accused her of cheating on him after Anna discovered that she was pregnant.

On May 14, 2017, Mifsud and Anna continued to text each other, where Mifsud had moved to celebrate Anna’s pregnancy.

After May 18, 2017, Timofeev was stopped at an airport in the United States by Team Mueller, where he was questioned about his interactions with Papadopoulos.

On May 21, 2017, Mifsud and Secretary Ashton Carter attended the Riyadh Forum On Countering Extremism and Fighting Terrorism in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Between June 26–27, 2017, Mifsud and George Soros attended the annual council meeting for the European Council On Foreign Affairs in Berlin, Germany.

On July 10, 2017, Mifsud met with Ernest Chernukhin, a representative of the Russian Embassy in London.

On July 27, 2017, Papadopoulos was arrested at Dulles International Airport upon his arrival.

In August 2017, Mifsud e-mailed The Washington Post and stated that he had no contact or history with the Russian Government.

On August 21, 2017, Timofeev was interviewed by Gazeta about his involvement with the 2016 presidential election.

Around the start of September 2017, Polonskaya contacted Prasenjit Kumar Singh after they had met at Link Campus University, where she requested for the two of them to meet. Singh and Polonskaya then met to discuss the translation of Singh’s website for the London Executive School from English into Russian, which Polonskaya then proceeded to do.

On September 29, 2017, Mifsud and Anna texted each other about Anna’s pregnancy and Mifsud’s failing health and triple bypass.

In October 2017, BuzzFeed News contacted Anna in Kiev, Ukraine, but she refused to discuss her relationship with Mifsud.

On October 5, 2017, George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty for lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. At the same time, Simona Mangiante received a visit from an agent of Team Mueller while at George’s family home in Chicago, where he served a subpoena signed by Aaron Zelinsky. Later, she visited the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Chicago Field Office, which led to a 2-and-a-half hour interrogation by the agent that served the subpoena and a female agent.

“Among other things she would not discuss with the Guardian, the FBI was interested in her relationship with Papadopoulos. Was it genuine? ‘They asked: ‘Do you love him?’ I replied: ‘yes’. They replied: ‘He [Papadopoulos] is lucky’.’” — The Guardian

On October 19, 2017, Mifsud attended a fundraising dinner in Reading West, which was also attended by Alok Sharma and Boris Johnson, who was a guest speaker at the event. During this time, Mifsud met with both Sharma and Johnson, as Mifsud had planned to speak with Johnson about Brexit. Mifsud when then photographed with Johnson and Prasenjit Kumar Singh.

On October 27, 2017, Mifsud and Anna texted each other about Mifsud’s failing health.

On October 30, 2017, Rosalind S. Helderman and Carol D. Leonnig — with contributions from Tom Hamburger — published the article “Trump campaign adviser admitted to lying about Russian contacts” in The Washington Post.

On October 31, 2017, Stephanie Kirchgaessner, Claire Phipps and Kevin Rawlinson published the article “Joseph Mifsud: more questions than answers about mystery professor linked to Russia” in The Guardian. Anna also texted Mifsud and informed him that Alberto Nardelli had reached out to her to discuss her relationship with him.

ANNA: “Hello” 14:25
ANNA: “Someone from London journalist asks about you.” 14:26
JOSEPH MIFSUD: “Do not reply please” 15:23
ANNA: “so you do not get sick? and you were in Rome 2 days ago?” 16:58 — BuzzFeed News

The same day, Robert Mendick, Alec Luhn and Ben Riley-Smith published the article “Revealed: London professor at centre of Trump-Russia collusion inquiry says: ‘I have clear conscience’” in The Telegraph.

In November 2017, Mifsud disappeared from the public eye.

On November 1, 2017, Paolo G. Brera published the article “Russiagate, mystery professor Joseph Mifsud speaks out: ‘Dirt on Hillary Clinton? Nonsense’” in Repubblica.

On November 2, 2017, Mifsud stopped arriving at Link Campus University in Rome, having taken the advice of a colleague, Vincenzo Scotti, to relocate elsewhere in Italy.

On November 4, 2017, Carole Cadwalladr and Michael Savage published the article “Boris Johnson in spotlight as questions raised over Russian influence on UK” in The Guardian.

On November 9, 2017, Ali Watkins — with contributions from Josh Meyer and Naomi O’Leary — published the article “Mysterious Putin ‘niece’ has a name” in Politico.

On November 10, 2017, Sharon LaFraniere, David D. Kirkpatrick, Andrew Higgins and Michael Schwirtz — with contributions from Iliana Magra and Matt Apuzzo — published the article “A London Meeting of an Unlikely Group: How a Trump Adviser Came to Learn of Clinton ‘Dirt’” in The New York Times.

The same day, Tim Lister and Nic Robertson — with contributions from Frederick Pleitgen, Mary Ilyushina and Carol Jordan — published the article “Academic at heart of Clinton ‘dirt’ claim vanishes, leaving trail of questions” in CNN.

On November 11, 2017, Carole Cadwalladr published the article “Boris Johnson met ‘London professor’ linked to FBI’s Russia investigation” in The Guardian.

On November 23, 2017, Mifsud resigned from his position at the University of Stirling.

On January 1, 2018, Alberto Nardelli published the article “The Bio Of The Professor At The Center Of The Trump-Russia Probe Has DIsappeared From His University’s Website” in BuzzFeed News.

In October 2018, Dr. Roh sent a photograph of Mifsud, taken on May 21, 2018, to BuzzFeed News and The Associated Press, among many other organisations.

On November 12, 2018, Dr. Roh sent an e-mail to BuzzFeed News, where he informed the organisation that they were attempting to arrange a testimonial in front of the United States Senate for Mifsud.

On November 13, 2018, Alberto Nardelli published the article “Joseph Mifsud Wants To Testify Before The Senate, A Lawyer Claims” in BuzzFeed News.

In early 2018, Timofeev met with reporters from CNN in his Moscow office, where they discussed Papadopoulos and Mifsud’s meetings, and his own communications with Papadopoulos.

In January 2018, Simona met with Luke Harding and Stephanie Kirchgaessner of The Guardian, where they interviewed her about her visit from Team Mueller in October 2017.

On January 18, 2018, Luke Harding and Stephanie Kirchgaessner published the article “The boss, the boyfriend and the FBI: the Italian woman in the eye of the Trump-Russia inquiry” in The Guardian.

On February 10, 2018, the editorial board for Agrigento Notizie published the article “‘Unjustified compensation and damage to revenue’, sued ex presidents of the Cupa for trial”, which discussion Italy’s Prosecutor’s Office of the Court of Auditors suing Giuseppe Vella, Mifsud and Maria Immordino, with a court hearing scheduled for July 11, 2018.

On February 27, 2018, Alberto Nardelli published the article “The Professor At The Center Of The Trump-Russia Probe Boasted To His Girlfriend In Ukraine That He Was Friends With Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov” in BuzzFeed News.

On March 2, 2018, Alberto Nardelli published the article “Even Italian Prosecutors Can’t Find The Professor At The Center Of The Trump-Russia Probe” in BuzzFeed News.

On March 21, 2018, John Sweeney and Innes Bowen published the article “Joseph Mifsud: The mystery professor behind Trump Russia inquiry” in BBC News.

On April 18, 2018, Dr. Roh and Thierry Pastor released the book “The Faking of Russia-Gate: The Papadopoulos Case”.

On April 23, 2018, Inverhold Ltd.’s name was changed to The No Vichok Ltd. by Dr. Roh.

On May 21, 2018, Dr. Roh took a photograph of Mifsud in Roh’s office in Zurich, Switzerland using an iPhone.

On June 7, 2018, Marshall Cohen — with contributions from Mary Ilyushina and Tim Lister — published the article “‘Unprofessional’ Papadopoulos couldn’t deliver on promises, his Russian contact says” in CNN.

In August 2018, a reporter from The Associated Press visited Malta in an attempt to track down information about Mifsud and his whereabouts.

On August 13, 2018, a reporter from The Associated Press visited the home of Mifsud’s wife, Janet, who retreated into her home upon realising that the reporter was from the media.

On August 14, 2018, Janet sent an e-mail to the reporter from The Associated Press, where she stated that she had nothing to comment about.

On September 19, 2018, Janet filed for divorce from Mifsud.

On October 22, 2018, Raphael Satter — with contributions from Angela Charlton and Chris Mangion — published the article “Malta academic in Trump probe has history of vanishing acts” in The Associated Press.

October 8, 2019 Posted by | Deception, Russophobia, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

How Kuwait Lobbied Hillary Clinton to Nix Criminal Probe of Defense Contractor

By Russell Mokhiber | CounterPunch | June 2, 2017

In 2009, Kuwait called on then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to intervene with the Justice Department and help nix a criminal fraud case against a Kuwait defense contractor Agility Public Warehousing Company.

The case ended up settling just last week, with the company pleading guilty to theft of government property and paying $95 million for overcharging the Pentagon on food contracts.

In November 2009, the Justice Department criminally indicted Agility and joined a False Claims Act whistleblower lawsuit.

In a letter to Clinton dated December 5, 2009, then Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Mohammed Al-Sabah writes that “in consideration of the special relations between our two friendly countries, we ask that this dispute be settled amicably without having to resort to criminal adjudication.”

Kuwait has donated between $5 million and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation became a major issue in the Presidential campaign last year.

Agility was the prime vendor to feed U.S. and coalition troops in Iraq, Iran and Jordan from between 2003 and 2010, securing $8.5 billion worth of prime-vendor food contracts.

As part of the global settlement, Agility will pay $95 million to resolve civil fraud claims, forgo administrative claims against the United States seeking $249 million in additional payments under its military food contracts, and plead guilty to a criminal misdemeanor offense for theft of government funds.

The Pentagon’s Defense Logistics Agency will also release a claim of $27.9 million against Agility and lift its suspension of Agility, as the company has been suspended from federal government contracting for the last seven years after being indicted.

An administrative agreement entered between the Defense Logistic Agency and Agility requires oversight of an Agility entity by an independent corporate monitor and the maintenance of an ethics and compliance program with a number of detailed requirements.

The civil claims and criminal charges arise out of allegations originally raised in a civil whistleblower lawsuit against Agility and another Kuwaiti company, The Sultan Center Food Products Company.

Kamal Mustafa Al Sultan, a former vendor of Agility, filed the lawsuit under the False Claims Act, which permit private individuals to sue on behalf of the government for false claims and to share in any recovery.

Al Sultan will receive a $38.85 million for his work in bringing the case to justice.

The government alleged that Agility and TSC knowingly overcharged the Department of Defense for locally available fresh fruits and vegetables that Agility purchased through The Sultan Center and falsely charged the full amount of Center’s invoices despite agreeing that Agility would pay 10 percent less than the amount billed.

The United States also alleged that Agility failed to disclose and pass through rebates and discounts it obtained from U.S.-based suppliers, as required by its contracts.

“This is one of the largest military procurement fraud cases in the history of the False Claims Act, passed by Abraham Lincoln to combat war profiteers and one of the largest whistleblower awards ever in a military-procurement fraud case,” said Raymond Moss, Al Sultan’s lawyer. “Mr. Al Sultan’s unrelenting perseverance to see justice done for U.S. taxpayers and the troops who bravely fought in the two Iraq Wars to protect Kuwait, is awe inspiring and a classic David vs. Goliath story. This case proves the power and efficacy of the False Claims Act to right wrongs and expose and deter fraud anywhere in the world.”

The filing of Al Sultan’s lawsuit in 2005 — and its resulting Justice Department investigation — resulted in sweeping governmental changes in prime food vendor contracts to reflect greater pricing transparency, prohibitions on kickbacks and rebates and prompt payment discounts, saving the U.S. government and taxpayers billions of dollars, Moss said.

Moss said that Al Sultan’s whistleblower lawsuit also spawned the initiation of other Department of Justice investigations, whistleblower lawsuits, prosecutions settlements and convictions against other prime vendors and their suppliers for similar conduct.

“Raymond Moss and his team at Moss & Gilmore were highly effective, skilled and tenacious advocates over this entire 13 year battle,” Al Sultan said. “They never took their foot off the gas and, with Department of Justice, went toe to toe against six of the largest and most powerful law firms in the country.”

“As the great ancient Roman politician and lawyer Cicero once said, ‘Any man can make a mistake, only a fool keeps making the same one,’” Al Sultan said.

The company was represented in the criminal case by Richard Marmaro of Skadden Arps, Kristin Tahler of Quinn Emanuel and Richard Deane Jr. of Jones Day,

Russell Mokhiber is the editor of the Corporate Crime Reporter..

June 2, 2017 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

Clinton foundation admits receiving $1mn donation from Qatar that it previously hid


RT | November 5, 2016

On the heels of damning WikiLeaks revelations, the Clinton Foundation has confirmed allegations that it received a $1 million ‘gift’ from Qatar without telling the State Department, breaking a signed agreement requiring it to reveal all foreign donations.

The payment, which was first revealed in an email exchange with Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta a month ago, has just been officially confirmed by the Foundation. The check was reportedly a gift to former President Bill Clinton in 2011 for his 65h birthday. A meeting was to take place between him and Qatari officials at some point, according to an email published last month. It is not clear if this ever took place, however.

Earlier in 2009, when Clinton became Secretary of State, she had to sign an agreement to prevent any conflicts of interest which stipulated that her influential global foundation could not receive any support from foreign sources without her notifying the State Department, according to Reuters. This was intended to ensure transparency and combat public perception that US foreign policy could be dictated by foreign money.

The agreement was also designed to give the State Department time to examine donations and raise any concerns in cases when a foreign entity wanted to “increase materially” the funding for any of the Foundation’s programs.

However, Clinton kept the $1 million check from Qatar a secret. While Foundation officials declined to confirm its existence last month, with just days to go before the election, the daily WikiLeaks revelations, and the FBI’s relaunched investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server gaining momentum, its spokesman, Brian Cookstra, finally admitted to receiving the money, though he insisted that the sum did not qualify as a “material increase” in Qatari support of the foundation.

When Cookstra was asked by Reuters what the Foundation considered an increase in funding, he refused to specify, only saying that the Qatar donations were intended for “overall humanitarian work.”

For additional comments, Reuters tried to contact the Qatari embassy, the Clinton presidential campaign and Bill Clinton personally, but received no response from any.

Although Cookstra said the sum did not constitute an increase in funding, there is evidence of at least eight other countries besides Qatar whose donations can clearly be construed as an ‘increase in funding.’ This includes the UK, which tripled the sum slated for the Foundation’s health project to $11.2 million in the years 2009-2012.

When questioned by Reuters last year, Cookstra admitted that a complete list of donors hadn’t been published since 2010. In other cases, the Foundation said that there was either no increase in funding, or that a particular donation had simply slipped past unnoticed, and should have been caught earlier.

The only thing that’s certain, and spelled out on the Foundation’s website, is that it received up to $5 million from the Gulf Kingdom over the years. However, the Foundation appears to want all of this to be relegated to the past. It promised in August that, if Hillary becomes president, it will stop accepting money from all foreign governments and close down any ongoing programs sustained by those funds.

According to Foundation records and testimony, the Qatar money continued to come in at “equal or lower” levels after 2009, but it declined to specify the differences in the funding before and after that period, or if it had changed significantly after Clinton took on the post of secretary of state.

A former Foundation fundraiser details some $21 million raised for Bill Clinton’s birthday in another email.

The Foundation’s somewhat forced admission that it had received Qatari money comes shortly after a recently leaked email exchange between Clinton and her campaign manager, John Podesta, from 2014 startlingly revealed that she was aware Qatar and Saudi Arabia are directly funding Islamic State [IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL] terrorists. This was discussed at length in John Pilger’s exclusive interview with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange that airs on RT on Saturday and can be viewed in full here.

The WikiLeaks founder points to clear evidence that Clinton knew about her donors’ questionable dealings as early as several years back. The 2014 email from Clinton to Podesta says “that ISIL, ISIS is funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar – the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar,” according to Assange.

Assange admitted to Pilger, “I actually think this is the most significant email in the whole collection.”

“And perhaps because Saudi and Qatari money is spread all over the place, including into many media institutions, all serious analysts know, even the US government has mentioned or agreed with that some Saudi figures have been supporting ISIS, funding ISIS. But the dodge has always been, that’s… what… it’s just some rogue princes using their cut of the oil money to do what they like, but actually the government disapproves. But that email says that – no, it is the governments of Saudi and the government of Qatar that have been funding ISIS.”

Pilger and Assange go on to discuss Clinton as a “cog” in a greater machine involving big business, banks, and “a network of relationships with particular states.” According to Assange, she is “the centralizer that interconnects all these different cogs.”

November 5, 2016 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , , , | 1 Comment

Hillary’s ‘Russian Hack’ Hoax: The Biggest Lie of This Election Season

By Patrick Henningsen | 21st Century Wire | Noember 1, 2016

The longer this soap opera drags on, it’s becoming more and more evident that the Russia government did not ‘hack’ into the DNC, and Moscow is not feeding John Podesta’s emails to Wikileaks. For those who are deeply invested in this now official conspiracy theory, this might be a hard pill to swallow.

The White House and the Hillary Clinton campaign are now married to the idea that ‘Putin is hacking the US elections.’ In response, the President is weighing his options – tougher economic sanctions, revoking diplomatic status to Russian envoys in the US, or even deploying his newly developed ‘malicious cyber-activity’ tools.

Even VP Joe Biden wants in on the action, threatening Moscow by saying,”We’re sending a message. We have the capacity to do it.”

It seems that where ever you turn nowadays, someone in Washington is issuing a threat against Russia. Are US-Russian relations really that bad, or does this trend have more to do with the defense industry and power struggles within the US?

What was previously a stance reserved for right-wing neoconservative hawks and Cold War hold-outs has now infected America’s left-wing, and is a firm plank in the Democratic Party platform, as evidenced by Hillary Clinton’s constant anti-Russian rhetoric throughout this 2016 election cycle. Along with the White House, Clinton has now transformed the Democrats into the vanguard of Washington’s new anti-Russia movement.

On July 27th, Josh Rogin from the Washington Post wrote, “The Clinton campaign has decided to escalate its rhetoric on Russia. After Trump suggested Wednesday that if Russia had indeed hacked Clinton’s private email server it should release the emails, the Clinton campaign sent out its Democratic surrogates to bash Russia and Trump in a manner traditionally reserved for Republicans.”

Anyone who was paying attention back then knew this ‘Russian hack’ talking point was purely political, but then again, who’s really paying attention these days? Certainly not the US media.

Backed by the Obama White House, Clinton and the media pressed ahead blaming Russia – not only for the controversial DNC leaks, but also for hacking into US election systems in Arizona – a charge devoid of any evidence other than innuendo and speculation. The media’s coverage on this issue was deceptive from the onset. In a leading news release, entitled, Russian hackers targeted Arizona election system, we can see how after the cock-sure headline, the first paragraph would always sound definitive:

“Hackers targeted voter registration systems in Illinois and Arizona, and the FBI alerted Arizona officials in June that Russians were behind the assault on the election system in that state.”

But then by the time you advanced down the story, the report would quickly retreat into a zone of uncertainty:

“The bureau described the threat as “credible” and significant, “an eight on a scale of one to 10,” Matt Roberts, a spokesman for Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan (R), said Monday. As a result, Reagan shut down the state’s voter registration system for nearly a week.”

And then, down to almost nothing…

“It turned out that the hackers had not compromised the state system or even any county system. They had, however, stolen the username and password of a single election official in Gila County.”

At no point was any evidence ever given. Only ambiguous statements like, “Cyber security officials agree that this looks very much like a Russian government-directed hack.”

Are American politicians so callous as to tempt geopolitical conflict in order to further their short-term political ambitions? Better yet, has American political life really arrived such a dark cul de sac (translated in French: ‘bottom of the bag’) where politicians in power are so insecure as to make-up and propagate wild international conspiracy theories – in the middle a national election cycle? It’s a very depressing prospect, and yet, this is exactly what we are seeing in this 2016 Presidential Election.

Behind Clinton’s wild hyperbolic rants about the Kremlin and Wikileaks, you will find the White House… 

On October 7th, the Obama Administration formally accused the Russian government of stealing emails from the Democratic National Committee and other high-profile individuals including Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta – giving them to Wikileaks. 

Soon, there was a queue of ‘national security’ politicians eager to hitch a ride on this bandwagon. Senator Ben Sasse (NE-R), a member of the Homeland Security Committee spouted out, “Russia must face serious consequences. Moscow orchestrated these hacks because [Russian President Vladimir] Putin believes Soviet-style aggression is worth it. The United States must upend Putin’s calculus with a strong diplomatic, political, ­cyber and economic response.”

According to a Washington Post report by technology editor, Ellen Nakashima, the only ‘evidence’ that seems to be available on this story is a corporate analysis of the alleged ‘Russian government hacks’ – provided by a US cyber security company called Crowdstrike. No actual specifics are given, so we are meant to take private firm Crowdstrike’s word for it.


IMAGE: Crowdstrike cyber security.

The Post’s Nakashima then added:

The administration also blamed Moscow for the hack of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the subsequent leak of private email addresses and cellphone numbers of Democratic lawmakers.

An online persona calling himself Guccifer 2.0 has claimed responsibility for posting the material. Those sites and that persona are “consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts,” the joint statement said. “… We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

Moscow’s press secretary’s reply: “This is some sort of nonsense,” said Dmitry Peskov.

Despite the constant repetition by Democrat media surrogates, and as CNN’s Maria Cardona said last night, no US national intelligence agency has really “confirmed” that Russia was behind the email hacks – and still no evidence, other than speculative guesswork, has been presented.

Likewise, US intelligence agencies have never actually said definitively on record that “Russia did it,” thus, leaving the door open to walk-back the accusation at a later date. Standard Washington procedure of ambiguity. This little detail doesn’t seem to matter in this hyperbolic political climate though. It seems that the White House, Hillary Clinton and media operatives like Cardona – are quite happy living in what John Kerry recent dubbed as a ‘parallel universe.’

Still, during the final Presidential debate, Hillary Clinton proudly crowed how “17 US intelligence agencies” aka the “Intelligence Community” all agreed that Russia did it. Some might call that propaganda.

“We have 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyberattacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin, and they are designed to influence our election,” said Clinton. “I find that deeply disturbing.”

What’s even more disturbing is the fact that Clinton is lying in front of a national audience. The highest levels of the Kremlin? Really? Here are Clinton’s ’17 agencies’:

Air Force Intelligence, Army Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, Coast Guard Intelligence, Defense Intelligence Agency, Energy Department, Homeland Security Department, State Department, Treasury Department, Drug Enforcement Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Marine Corps Intelligence, National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, National Security Agency, Navy Intelligence and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

What does the Coast Guard Intelligence, National Geospatial Intelligence Agency or the Drug Enforcement Administration know about John Podesta’s emails? Answer: nothing.

The exact same thing happened following Wikileaks first trove of DNC emails back in July 2016. The US government issued a vague accusatory statement, but would not actually name the culprit.

In both instances, the Obama Administration refused to present any evidence. Translated: there was no evidence. If there had been, the White House would have been shouting from the rooftops and using it as leverage to apply muscle in the UN over Washington’s flagging efforts in Syria. Both Obama Administration announcements were nothing more than dog whistles for Democrats and “journalists” working for hopelessly partisan outlets like New York Times and CNN – none of whom have bothered to press the White House for one ounce of evidence pertaining to the Party’s decree that “Russian is hacking the US election process.”

To be fair, Hillary would have every reason to believe that the Kremlin is behind the hack – because her staff read it to her from the campaign’s daily intelligence briefings, presumably, supplied from the US government’s much vaunted Intelligence Community. Of course, that’s the same Intelligence Community that briefed George W Bush about Saddam’s nonexistent nuclear weapons program, and who also briefed Cowell Powell about Iraq’s imaginary “Winnebagos of Death” aka mobile anthrax labs disguised as senior double-wide camper vans. So, of course, they would know if Putin directed the DNC leaks and Podesta email hacks.

For those us who are skeptical of the great oxymoron known as ‘Washington Intelligence,’ I can almost hear the mainstream rebuttal now, “No, that was Iraq, that was Bush. We’re not like that. No, this time it’s different. This time we are sure the Russians did it!”

In 2014, Obama claimed that Kim’s notorious “Bureau 121” hacked into Sony Pictures.

This isn’t the first time that President Obama has cried wolf on a foreign ‘hack’ and then tried to sell it for political purposes. Back in December 2014, Obama claimed that North Korea had hacked Sony Pictures in Hollywood. Pentagon-CIA media proxy CNN quickly chimed in to support Washington’s conspiracy theory, floating a colorful story that Kim Jing-Un had deployed a secret underground hacking unit called Bureau 121.’ Just like with today’s “Russian Hack” theory, no member of the mainstream press dared to question the White House’s ridiculous North Korean claim, and like the ‘Russian Hack’ claims, the only source cited for Sony hack was analysis provided by US firm Crowdstrike.

Jumping the Shark

After their Democratic Party Convention on July 27th, the Clinton campaign machine put all of its chips on their Putin narrative.

Soon after, a cadre of top Clinton national security surrogates then accused Trump of emboldening Russia in their evil plot to “destabilize and dominate the West.” Tom Donilon, a former national security adviser then accused Russia of ‘interfering’ with elections all over Europe and then accused Trump is helping Russia directly. At that point, they were in too deep to turn back.

Clinton spin doctors Josh Schwerin and Michael Fallon would stoop even lower by accusing RT of having possession of the Podesta emails even before Wikileaks did. Their only ‘evidence’ seemed to be Twitter posts by RT News which Clinton held up as ‘proof’ that the Kremlin was front-running Wikileaks email dumps. The Clinton braintrust failed to note that the Podesta emails were posted on Wikileaks own website well before RT News had tweeted about them. At that point that it became obvious that the Clinton campaign was panicking and hysterically grabbing for any excuse they could get their hands on. We then watched, as one RT reporter after another dismantled the Clinton campaign’s desperate claims. It was embarrassing.

They could not face the uncomfortable fact that it was WikiLeaks head Julian Assange who chose the timing of the release of the DNC and Podesta emails. Rather than attack Assange himself, who happens to be popular with millennials (the very group Clinton struggles to connect with), her operatives opted to target Russia and Trump instead.

Either way, the political strategy here is clear – to shoot the messenger. The Clinton campaign is stuck in permanent rear-guard mode, because based on the content of both the DNC Leaks, Wikileaks files, and Project Veritas video – their own Democratic Party has been discredited and exposed as a corrupt political organization.

Their other big problem is that despite all the outrage from Democrats and their mainstream media surrogates, none of the leaked content has been challenged on the basis of its authenticity. The results speak for themselves. The initial DNC leak of 20,000 emails resulted in the resignation of DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. They revealed the unthinkable: the Democratic National Committee actively worked to undermine the Presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders in favor of the establishment choice in Hillary Clinton. Sanders never had a chance. Honest commentators called this an affront to the democratic process, while party insiders and Clinton supporters pretended to be aloof as if it never happened.

To prove this point, both President Obama and Hillary Clinton then gave Wasserman-Schultz glowing endorsement on the way out. “For the last eight years, Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz has had my back. This afternoon, I called her to let her know that I am grateful,” said Obama. Not surprisingly, Clinton thanked Wasserman Schultz, presumably for helping to knock her only competitor Sanders out of the Democrat primary race. “I am grateful to Debbie for getting the Democratic Party to this year’s historic convention in Philadelphia, and I know that this week’s events will be a success thanks to her hard work and leadership,” said Clinton.

The party had sold its soul to devil and no one seemed to care too much about it.

Party Meltdown

Wasserman Schultz’s replacement didn’t fair much better. DNC Vice Chairwoman Donna Brazile was installed to serve as interim chair through the remainder election, but Brazile was soon skewered by subsequent Wikileaks batches – showing how, on more than one occasion, she fed debate questions obtained from corrupt mainstream media operatives – straight to Hillary Clinton.

A March 12 email exchange shows Brazile stating that she received a town hall question from Roland Martin, a TV One host who co-moderated a March 13 town hall with CNN’s Jake Tapper.”

A March 5 email shows that she shared a question with Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and communications director Jennifer Palmieri that was to be asked in a March 6 debate hosted by CNN in Flint, Mich.” (Source: Daily Caller)

Brazile’s audacious fraud also helped contribute to her party’s planned sabotage of Democrat challenger Bernie Sanders. Watch Brazile go into full meltdown when confronted here:

Completely corrupt and still, Brazile even had to temerity to deny doing it when pressed on FOX News last week. Brazile’s reputation is so bad now that even CNN has severed ties with her – and that’s saying a lot.

In addition, it was also revealed how CNN’s head political commentator, Gloria Borger, was named by Podesta as one of a shortlist of ‘journalists’ the Clinton campaign would “work with” to gain favorable coverage. You’d think that CNN would have dropped Borger after this was revealed, but no. Amazingly, Borges is still leading CNN’s election coverage.

Clearly, CNN cannot be trusted to police itself when it comes to matters of outright collusion with Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party.

Worse Than Watergate

Perhaps a bigger scandal which the Obama White House and Clinton campaign operatives would like to bury – is the FBI’s investigation into the Clinton Foundation. Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal confirmed the existence of an internal feud between the FBI and the Justice Department, over whether or not to pursue an investigation into Clinton issue:

“Some investigators grew frustrated, viewing FBI leadership as uninterested in probing the charity, these people said. Others involved disagreed sharply, defending FBI bosses and saying Mr. McCabe in particular was caught between an increasingly acrimonious fight for control between the Justice Department and FBI agents pursuing the Clinton Foundation case. It isn’t unusual for field agents to favor a more aggressive approach than supervisors and prosecutors think is merited. But the internal debates about the Clinton Foundation show the high stakes when such disagreements occur surrounding someone who is running for president.”

There’s more. It was also revealed last week how Jill McCabe, the wife of FBI Deputy Director, Andrew McCabe, received $467,500 in campaign funds in late 2015 for her Virginia State Senate run. This unusually large donation came via a political action committee run by Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe – a Clinton Foundation board member. After the funds were donated, Andrew McCabe was then put in charge of the Clinton Email case. In normal times, this one scandal would be bigger than Watergate, but these are not normal times.

So why is Washington going all out to deflect to Russia, and cover-up the Clinton scandals, and the Wikileaks document dumps? One reason is because the Clinton email issue goes all the way to the top – to the President himself.

What 21WIRE reported on Oct 21st is how President Obama lied when first confronted about whether or not he knew about the existence of Hillary’s unauthorized private server. Obama told CBS News on March 7, 2015 that he only found out about Clinton’s server “the same time everybody else learned it through news reports.” The President’s lie was confirmed when newly released FBI documents showed that:

“Obama used a pseudonym [] when communicating with then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by email, and at least one of those emails ended up on Clinton’s private email server.”

So, not only did Obama lie on national TV, but he also broke strict White House security protocols by carelessly exchanging private emails “off grid” with Hillary Clinton on a unsecured and unauthorized mail server –  maybe to avoid the same scrutiny one would have on a government system. Who knows why he did it.

Sure, he’s not the first US President to lie, but like, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, Obama just joined that exclusive liars club – caught out lying to the American people.

On top of this, any communications made by the President of the United States are de facto labeled as “born classified.” The same goes for any State Department communications with other foreign ministers.

COVER-UP: John Podesta and Huma Abedin on the Hillary campaign jet (Image: ABC News)

It should be well known by now after watching both Attorney Generals Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch in action – that the Obama Justice Department (DOJ) is one of the most politicized in history. Bear that in mind when looking at the latest leg of the Hillary Email case.

On Friday, FBI Director James Comey set the election alight after announcing that the FBI would be reopening the Clinton email case – currently examining 650,000 emails found while investigating a laptop belonging to former US Congressman Anthony Weiner (estranged husband of top Clinton aid and long-time confidant Huma Abedin) who was snared in a ‘sexting’ scandal, allegedly involving a under-aged female. So which DOJ person is in charge of this investigation? None other than Assistant Attorney General Peter J. Kadzik. Who is Kadzik?  Zero Hedge reports:

“Oh yes. Recall our post from last week, “Clinton Campaign Chair Had Dinner With Top DOJ Official One Day After Hillary’s Benghazi Hearing” in which we reported that John Podesta had dinner with one of the highest ranked DOJ officials the very day after Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi testimony? It was Peter Kadzik.”

Incestuous is an understatement, and on the whole, Americans are sick of it.

Blame the Russians

These are just a few scandals surrounding the Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign, along with the many exposés revealed through Wikileaks, and the Podesta email batches. Those are actual scandals with real tangible evidence – unlike the ‘Russians hacking the DNC and John Podesta and passing those to Wikileaks.’ 

Suffice to say, the Democratic Party machine has already demonstrated that it is prepared to say anything in order to deflect and divert attention away from the damning Wikileaks material, and also blame Donald Trump in the process. It should be obvious by now that in their desperation to push a highly comprised Hillary Clinton over the finish line on November 8th, the Washington establishment has concocted the story that ‘Putin is trying to influence our electoral process in the US.’ They’ve tried to lay this at the feet of Donald Trump, who Obama and Clinton claim has some secret special relationship with Vladimir Putin. The liberal mainstream media have made a meal out of this talking point, and anti-Russian war hawks on the Republican side love it too. For the White House and the Clinton campaign this seemed like the ultimate clean sweep – a perfect double entendre.

The geopolitical strategy behind this move was twofold. First, this non event would be used to advance immediate calls for  sanctions against Russia. Secondly, the US could continue to lean on Russia in the UN over Syria. Previously, 21WIRE reported how Washington’s State Dept and UN delegations, led by the dynamic trio of John Kerry, Samantha Power, and John Kirby, already lied when levelling charges against Russia for war crimes in Aleppo, and again while accusing Russia and Syria of conducting an airstrike on a UN Aid Convoy in Syria. As we have already shown – that raid was mostly likely a ground attack carried out of US-backed ‘rebels’ Al Nusra Front, or Nour al-Din al-Zenki.

With so much at stake geopolitically, why would Washington lie about a potential World War III trigger event? If they are prepared to lie about this, what else are they prepared to lie about?

The demonization of all things Russian has definitely accelerated since late 2013 when the US engineered a coup d’etat in Kiev, Ukraine. Ever since then it’s been a go-to talking point for ginning-up and new transaltlantic arms race, as with Republican war hawks – and a convenient scapegoat for any politician requiring misdirection, like Clinton and the Democrats. When the new year rang in 2015, the newly appointed head of the U.S. Broadcasting Board of Governors, Andrew Lack, announced the new challenges facing America’s own state-run media arm that includes U.S. overseas propaganda assets including Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks and Radio Free Asia. Lack said, “We are facing a number of challenges from entities like Russia Today which is out there pushing a point of view, the Islamic State in the Middle East and groups like Boko Haram,” He was forced to resign shortly after that.

What’s clear is that when it comes to all things Russian, there is an established pattern of compulsive lying by this US Administration. The list is too long to chronicle here, although ‘Russian-backed Rebels Shooting Down MH17,’ and ‘Assad Regime Sarin Attack in Damascus in 2013‘ certainly comes to mind.

That said, it’s hard to imagine a lie as egregious and potentially destructive than one which accuses the Russia government, a world nuclear power and member of the UNSC, of ‘Hacking Into the US Electoral Process.’ When you examine history however, you will plenty of evidence documenting exactly how the US government and the CIA have altered and flipped 100 foreign elections throughout history, the attempted assassination of over 50 foreign leaders. Knowing all this, one might find it hard to take seriously Washington’s claims that Putin and Trump are trying manipulate the 2016 Election.

On Oct 9, 2016, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov laid it all on the table:

“We have witnessed a fundamental change of circumstances when it comes to the aggressive Russophobia that now lies at the heart of U.S. policy towards Russia. It’s not just a rhetorical Russophobia, but aggressive steps that really hurt our national interests and pose a threat to our security.”

Self-serving, career political operatives in Washington are playing a dangerous game. History will mark this as one of the biggest political follies of the Obama-Clinton era.

Still, we’re waiting for the emergence of an adult in the room in Washington – before its too late.

November 1, 2016 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , | 3 Comments

Western Nations Under Pressure to Probe Clinton Foundation Spending – Analyst

Sputnik – 01.12.2016

Western European nations are facing growing pressure to end their financial contributions to the Clinton Foundation and investigate its spending, investment analyst Charles Ortel told Sputnik.

“The penny has dropped: The governments have decided not to fund Clinton Foundation activities anymore,” Ortel said Tuesday. “Canada, Sweden and Ireland are countries that may undertake investigations or end their practice of contributing large sums to the Clinton Foundation.”

He was commenting after Norway and Australia announced last weekend that they were ending their annual contributions to the charity, founded in 1997 by then-US President Bill Clinton and first lady Hillary Clinton.

According to the New York Post, the incoming presidential administration of Donald Trump will ask foreign governments investigate how the foundation spent hundreds of millions of donor dollars that it said went to provide low-cost medicine to treat AIDS patients in Africa, among other programs.

Ortel explained that government leaders around the world who had approved big yearly donations to the foundation presumed Hillary Clinton would be elected president on November 8. Her unexpected loss to Trump, however, has led to popular pressure in those countries for governments to disclose the fate of their donations.

“Governments now realize to their shock and horror there are numerous questions that regulators should have asked,” Ortel asserted. “Why didn’t regulators in different countries ask these questions about the enormous unmonitored donations to the Clinton Foundation before?” Germany’s Environment Ministry is being investigated about a donation to the Clinton charity of 4.5 million euros.

In an interview with Sputnik in Germany that was published Tuesday, left-wing member of parliament Niema Movassat questioned why information about his government’s connection to the foundation scandal is coming out only now.

In Ortel’s view, the German investigation illustrates the importance of a provision in New York state law requiring charities to specify in detail how they spend donors’ money.

“The Clinton Foundation has not complied with that requirement,” according to Ortel, a former executive at financial firms Chart Group and Dillon, Tead & Co. He predicted that questions about the foundation will fuel a “media frenzy” worldwide, as public demands for investigations into individual governments’ donations grow. “The German people and the American people deserve answers,” Ortel said. “We need an accounting: How many governments around the world have sent money to the Clinton Foundation? For what projects? In what amounts?”

In 2007, the UK government – led by Prime Minister Tony Blair and then Gordon Brown, both close political allies and personal friends of the Clintons – approved a grant of 1 billion pounds over 20 years to the charity, Ortel pointed out.

November 1, 2016 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Hillary and the Clinton Foundation: Exemplars of America’s Political Rot

By Eric Draitser | CounterPunch | August 29, 2016

Hillary Clinton may be enjoying a comfortable lead in national polls, but she is far from enjoying a comfortable night’s sleep given the ever-widening maelstrom of scandals engulfing her presidential bid.  And while Clinton delights in bloviating about a decades-long “vast, right wing conspiracy” against her, the fact is that it’s the Clinton political machine’s long and storied track record of criminality, duplicity, and corruption that haunts her like Lincoln’s ghost silently skulking through White House bedrooms.

The latest in a string of embarrassing scandals is centered on the powerful Clinton Foundation, and the obvious impropriety of its acceptance of large donations from foreign governments (and wealthy individuals connected to them), especially those governments universally recognized as oppressive dictatorships whose foreign policy orientation places them squarely in the US orbit.

Of particular note are the Gulf monarchies such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar whose massive donations belie the fact that their oppression of women runs contradictory to Clinton’s self-styled ‘feminism’ and belief “that the rights of women and girls is the unfinished business of the 21st Century.” Is collaborating with feudal monarchies whose subjugation of women is the stuff of infamy really Clinton’s idea of feminism? Or, is it rather that Clinton merely uses issues such as women’s rights as a dog whistle for loyal liberals while groveling before the high councilors of the imperial priesthood?

What the Clinton Foundation hullabaloo really demonstrates is that Clinton’s will to power is single-minded, entirely simpatico with the corruption of the military-industrial-financial-surveillance complex; that she is a handmaiden for, and member of, the ruling establishment; that Clinton represents the marriage of all the worst aspects of the political class. In short, Clinton is more than just corrupt, she is corruption personified.

Clinton’s Dirty Dealing and Even Dirtier Laundry

In a hilariously pig-headed, but rather telling, statement, former President Bill Clinton responded to allegations of impropriety with the Clinton Foundation by saying, “We’re trying to do good things… If there’s something wrong with creating jobs and saving lives, I don’t know what it is. The people who gave the money knew exactly what they were doing. I have nothing to say about it except that I’m really proud.”

Leaving aside the fact that such an arrogant comment demonstrates Bill Clinton’s complete contempt for ethics and the basic standards of proper conduct, the salient point is that the argument from the Clintons is that the foundation is inherently good, that it helps people around the world, and that, as such, it can’t possibly be corrupt and unethical. Where there’s smoke, there’s fire – except when it comes to the Clintons who stand proudly enveloped in billowing clouds of smoke swearing up and down that not only is there no fire, but anyone who mentions the existence of flames is both a sexist and Trump-loving Putin stooge.

But indeed there is a fire, and it is raging on the American political scene.  And nowhere is the heat more palpable than in the deserts of the Middle East where wealthy benefactors write massive checks for access to America’s 21st Century Queen of Mean (apologies to Leona Helmsley).

Consider the 2011 sale of $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, a gargantuan deal that made the feudal monarchy into an overnight air power.  Were there any doubts as to the uses of the hardware, look no further than the humanitarian nightmare that is Yemen, a country under relentless air war carried out by the Saudis. And, lo and behold, the Saudis had been major contributors to the Clinton Foundation in the years leading up to the sale. And it should be equally unsurprising that just weeks before the deal was finalized, Boeing, the manufacturer of the F-15 jets that were the centerpiece of the massive arms deal, donated $900,000 to the Foundation.

Of course, according to Bubba and Hil, it’s all conspiracy theory to suggest that the Clinton Foundation is essentially a pay-for-play scheme in which large sums of money translate into access to the uppermost echelons of state power in the US. As the International Business Times noted:

The Saudi deal was one of dozens of arms sales approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department that placed weapons in the hands of governments that had also donated money to the Clinton family philanthropic empire… Under Clinton’s leadership, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation… That figure — derived from the three full fiscal years of Clinton’s term as Secretary of State (from October 2010 to September 2012) — represented nearly double the value of American arms sales made to the those countries and approved by the State Department during the same period of President George W. Bush’s second term.

The Clinton-led State Department also authorized $151 billion of separate Pentagon-brokered deals for 16 of the countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation, resulting in a 143 percent increase in completed sales to those nations over the same time frame during the Bush administration. These extra sales were part of a broad increase in American military exports that accompanied Obama’s arrival in the White House. The 143 percent increase in U.S. arms sales to Clinton Foundation donors compares to an 80 percent increase in such sales to all countries over the same time period.

Additionally, as Glenn Greenwald explained earlier this year,

The Saudi regime by itself has donated between $10 million and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation, with donations coming as late as 2014, as she prepared her presidential run. A group called “Friends of Saudi Arabia,” co-founded “by a Saudi Prince,” gave an additional amount between $1 million and $5 million. The Clinton Foundation says that between $1 million and $5 million was also donated by “the State of Qatar,” the United Arab Emirates, and the government of Brunei. “The State of Kuwait” has donated between $5 million and $10 million.

The sheer dollar amounts are staggering. Perhaps then it comes as no surprise just why nearly every single influential figure in the military-industrial-financial-surveillance complex – from General John Allen to death squad coordinator extraordinaire John Negroponte, from neocon tapeworms such as Max Boot, Robert Kagan, and Eliot Cohen to billionaire barbarocrats like the Koch Brothers, George Soros, and Warren Buffett – is backing Hillary Clinton. Not only is she good for Empire, she’s good for business. And ultimately, that’s what this is all about, isn’t it?

But of course, Hillary’s devotion to the oil oligarchs of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf goes much deeper than simply an exchange of money for weapons. In fact, Hillary is deeply committed to the Saudi royal family’s foreign policy outlook and tactics, in particular the weaponization of terrorism as a means of achieving strategic objectives.

Libya provides perhaps the paragon of Clintonian-Saudi strategy: regime change by terrorism.  Using terror groups linked to Al Qaeda and backed by Saudi Arabia, Clinton’s State Department and the Obama Administration managed to topple the government of Muammar Gaddafi, thereby throwing the former “jewel of Africa” into turmoil and political, economic, and social devastation. To be fair, it was not the Saudis alone involved in fomenting war in Libya, as Hillary’s brothers-from-other-mothers in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates were also directly involved in sowing the seeds of the current chaos in the country.

And of course, this strategic partnership between Clinton and the Gangsters of the Gulf extends far beyond Libya. In Syria, Clinton’s stated policies of regime change and war are aligned with those of Riyadh, Doha, and Abu Dhabi. And, of course, it was during Clinton’s tenure at the State Department that US intelligence was involved in funneling weapons and fighters into Syria in hopes of doing to Syria what had already been done to Libya.

Huma Abedin: Clinton’s Woman in Riyadh

Just in case all the political and financial ties between Clinton and the Gulf monarchies wasn’t enough to make people stop being #WithHer, perhaps the role of her closest adviser might do the trick. Huma Abedin, Clinton’s campaign chief of staff, has long-standing ties to Saudi Arabia, the country where Huma spent her childhood from the age of two. As a Vanity Fair exposé revealed earlier this year:

When Abedin was two years old, the family moved to Jidda, Saudi Arabia, where, with the backing of Abdullah Omar Nasseef, then the president of King Abdulaziz University, her father founded the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs, a think tank, and became the first editor of its Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs… After [Abedin’s father] Syed died, in 1993, his wife succeeded him as director of the institute and editor of the Journal, positions she still holds… Abdullah Omar Nasseef, the man who set up the Abedins in Jidda… is a high-ranking insider in the Saudi government and sits on the king’s Shura Council, there are claims that Nasseef once had ties to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda—a charge that he has denied through a spokesman—and that he remains a “major” figure in the Muslim Brotherhood. In his early years as the patron of the Abedins’ journal, Nasseef was the secretary-general of the Muslim World League, which Andrew McCarthy, the former assistant U.S. attorney who prosecuted the “Blind Sheik,” Omar Abdel Rahman, in the wake of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, claims “has long been the Muslim Brotherhood’s principal vehicle for the international propagation of Islamic supremacist ideology.”

Consider the implications of this information: Clinton’s closest adviser comes from a family connected at the highest levels with the Saudi royal family as well as the Muslim Brotherhood. While right wing pundits portray the Muslim Brotherhood as some sort of straightforward international terror organization, the reality is much more complex as the Brotherhood is more an international political movement whose tentacles stretch into nearly every corner of the Muslim world. Its vast reserves of cash and political influence, backed by Gulf monarchies such as Qatar, allows the Brotherhood to peddle influence throughout the West, while also being connected to more radical salafist elements. An obvious two-for-one for Clinton.

In effect then, Abedin represents a bridge connecting Hillary with both the ruling elites in Riyadh, as well as influential clerics, businesspeople, and political leaders throughout the Middle East. Perhaps then it makes sense why Abedin, in contravention of every standard of ethics, was employed by Teneo Holdings – a pro-Clinton consultancy founded by former Clinton aide Doug Band – while also working for the State Department. Such ethical violations are as instinctive for Hillary as breathing, or calling children superpredators.

Trump, Assange, Putin, and Clinton’s Sleight of Hand

Despite being embroiled in multiple scandals, any one of which being enough to sink the campaign of most other candidates, Clinton and her army of fawning corporate media sycophants, have attempted to deflect attention away from her own misdeeds, corruption, and nefarious ties by instead portraying everyone who opposes them as puppets, stooges, and useful idiots.

Let’s begin with Republican nominee and gasbag deluxe, Donald Trump, who Clinton trolls have attempted to portray as a stooge of Russian President Putin. While it’s indeed quite likely that the Kremlin sees Trump as far less of a threat to Russia’s interests than Clinton – just look at Clinton’s roster of neocon psychopath supporters to see that Putin has a point – the notion that Trump is somehow a creation of Putin, or at the very least is working for him is utterly absurd.

And the “evidence”? Trump’s connections with wealthy Russian oligarchs. I suppose those who have made their homes under rocks these last 25 years might not know this, but nearly every billionaire investor has gone to Russia in that time, forged ties with influential Russians, and attempted to make money by stripping clean the bones of what was once the Soviet Union. Sorry Naomi Klein, I guess the Clintonistas expect no one to have read Shock Doctrine which details the sort of disaster capitalism run amok that took place in Russia in the 1990s.

And then, of course, there’s that great confabulator Julian Assange who has also been smeared as a Putin puppet by the #ImWithHer media somnambulists. I guess the lords of corporate capital didn’t like the fact that Assange and WikiLeaks have managed to expose countless dirty deeds by Clinton’s Tammany Hall of the 21stCentury. From using the DNC as a political appendage of the Clinton campaign (as revealed by the WikiLeaks dump of DNC emails) to his recent promise to make public the “most interesting and serious” dirt on Hillary, Assange has become a thorn in the side – or thumb in the eye, as it were – for Hillary.

And what would a rundown of the specters haunting Clinton’s dreams be without mention of the rabid bear of Russia, big bad Vlad? Clinton recently referred to Putin as the “grand godfather of this global brand of extreme nationalism.” Leaving aside the asinine phraseology, Clinton’s attacks on Putin reveal the weakness of the Democratic nominee, the hollowness of her arguments, and the unmitigated gall of a hypocrite for whom casting stones in glass houses is second nature.

For, at the very moment that she takes rhetorical swipes at Putin, Clinton herself is implicated in a worldwide network of extremism that promotes terrorism, rains death and destruction on millions of innocent civilians, and moves the world closer to global conflict. If Putin represents the éminence grise of a “global brand of extreme nationalism,” then Clinton is the fairy godmother of global extremism and terror. It’s a good thing she has access to the best personal grooming products Goldman Sachs money can buy as it is not easy to wash decades-worth of blood off your hands.

And so, the quadrennial danse macabre that is the US presidential election has turned into an embarrassing sideshow of dull-witted infantilism. But amid the idiocy there is wanton criminality and corruption to be exposed before the world. For while Trump is undoubtedly the bearded lady of America’s freak show, Hillary is the carnival barker.

She knows the ring toss and other games are rigged, but she coaxes the feeble-minded to play nonetheless. She knows the carnies are drunk and reckless, but she urges the children to pay for another ride anyway. She understands that her job is to sell a rigged game, and to call security when someone challenges her lies. And, unfortunately, whether you want it or not, the Hillary Roadshow is coming to a town, or country, near you.

Eric Draitser is an independent geopolitical analyst based in New York City. You can reach him at

August 29, 2016 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Clinton Foundation Should Return All Foreign Donations – Republican Chairman

Sputnik – 23.08.2016

The Clinton Foundation needs to return every dollar it received in foreign donations, the Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Reince Priebus said in a Twitter message on Tuesday.

“All of the Clinton Foundation foreign money should never have been accepted and needs to be returned today,” Priebus stated.

The RNC chairman also said he supported Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s call for a special prosecutor to be appointed to investigate the Clinton Foundation.

The Foundation has come under severe scrutiny for donations it accepted from foreign governments and entities during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as US secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.

The State Department said last week it was not aware of any actions taken by Hillary Clinton that were influenced by the Clinton Foundation.

Clinton stepped down from the Foundation’s board in April 2015 when she decided to run for US president.

In May 2015, former US President Bill Clinton said the non-profit foundation previously accepted between $10 and $25 million from Saudi Arabia, but now only accepts donations from six western countries: Australia, Canada, Germany, Norway, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands.

Last week, the Clinton campaign noted the charity would stop accepting corporate and foreign donations if Hillary Clinton is elected president in November.

August 23, 2016 Posted by | Corruption, Militarism | , , | 1 Comment

State Department Emails Reveal How Unqualified Clinton Donor Was Named to Intelligence Board

By Peter Van Buren | We Meant Well | June 11, 2016

rajivEmails recently released by the State Department give more information on how a securities trader and big-money Clinton donor was appointed by her office to the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB), a group that advises the Secretary of State on nuclear weapons and other security issues.

According to the State Department’s own website, members are “national security experts with scientific, military, diplomatic, and political backgrounds.” The current members show a lot of generals, ambassadors and academics.

So it seemed odd to ABC News that Clinton felt that Rajiv K. Fernando, pictured, qualified for the group, since his background is in high-frequency stock trading and Internet “ventures.” He has donated heavily both to the Clinton Foundation, Hillary Clinton’s two presidential campaigns, and the Obama campaigns.

The newly released emails show he was added to the panel by then Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills. ““Raj was not on the list sent to [the Secretary of State]; he was added at their insistence” reads one 2011 email from Wade Boese, Chief of Staff for the Office of the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, to a press aide.

Fernando’s appointment even confused some staffers, the emails reveal. One press aide wrote internally, “it appears there is much more to this story that we’re unaware of,” and “it’s natural to ask how he got onto the board when compared to the rest of the esteemed list of members.”

That press aide wrote in a separate email: “We must protect the Secretary’s and Under Secretary’s name, as well as the integrity of the Board. I think it’s important to get down to the bottom of this before there’s any response.”

— Fernando declined to comment at the time, and promptly resigned from ISAB.

— The Clinton campaign declined to comment. Why did she decline to comment on a person she hand-selected to advise her? If it’s all just a witch hunt, say so, and explain why.

— The State Department put out a statement saying the ISAB is meant to reflect “a balance of backgrounds and points of view.” Including apparently unqualified points of view. That’s diversity, Clinton-style!

BONUS: Raj Fernando is a superdelegate for Clinton!

June 12, 2016 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , | Leave a comment