Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label Lavrov. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lavrov. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 12, 2019

Is This The Real Russian Collusion?

Investigative Journalist’s Thorough Case Against Dems for Colluding With Russia Explodes Online Over Weekend

 Print
A new report is reviving allegations that Bill and Hillary Clinton colluded with Russia during the early years of the Obama administration to develop projects later identified as security concerns, but which also enriched the Clinton Foundation.
John Solomon, executive vice president for video for The Hill, outlined his case in a piece The Hill published Sunday.
Solomon begins his tale of connections in 2009 and continues through 2016 by noting that allies of the Clintons with ties to Russia presented the now-discredited dossier of claims against President Donald Trump.
Solomon focuses on the 2009 effort to develop a Russian version of Silicon Valley known as Skolkovo, which Clinton, as secretary of state, worked closely on with Russians including Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and then-President Dmitri Medvedev, Solomon wrote.
“Clinton’s handprint was everywhere on the 2009-2010 project, the tip of a diplomatic spear to reboot U.S.-Russian relations after years of hostility prompted by Vladimir Putin’s military action against the former Soviet republic and now U.S. ally Georgia,” Solomon wrote.
TRENDING: Michigan Man Found Guilty of Horrendous Crime Against Childhood Friend
“A donor to the Clinton Foundation, Russian oligarch Viktor Vekselberg, led the Russian side of the effort, and several American donors to the Clinton charity got involved. Clinton’s State Department facilitated U.S. companies working with the Russian project, and she personally invited Medvedev to visit Silicon Valley.
“The collaboration occurred at the exact same time Bill Clinton made his now infamous trip to Russia to pick up a jaw-dropping $500,000 check for a single speech.”
The Skolvo project was savaged last year by Deroy Murdock in National Review. Murdock outlined a pattern in which projects Russia wanted moved forward and the Clinton Foundation received major donations.
Clinton’s advocacy of the Skolkovo project was further outlined in a report by the Government Accountability Institute, a conservative watchdog group, that noted that as secretary of state, she was a major proponent.

Should the Clintons be investigated for their ties to Russia?

  
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
That report further noted that another big winner was the Clinton Foundation.
The report said 60 percent of the project’s partners “have made financial commitments to the Clinton Foundation or sponsored speeches by Bill. The Clinton Foundation only discloses donations in ranges, so it is impossible to determine the precise amount of money the Skolkovo benefactors gave to the Clinton Foundation, but based on those disclosures, the money ranges from $6.5 to $23.5 million. However, keep in mind that the Clinton Foundation has admitted that it has failed to release the names of all of its contributors, so the amount could be substantially higher. “
While the money flowed, so did warnings that are cited by Solomon.

One of them was from the United States European Command, or EUCOM:
“Skolkovo is an ambitious enterprise, aiming to promote technology transfer generally, by inbound direct investment, and occasionally, through selected acquisitions. As such, Skolkovo is arguably an overt alternative to clandestine industrial espionage — with the additional distinction that it can achieve such a transfer on a much larger scale and more efficiently,” EUCOM’s intelligence bulletinwrote in 2013, according to Solomon.
RELATED: It’s Official: Elizabeth Warren Is Running for President
“Implicit in Russia’s development of Skolkovo is a critical question — a question that Russia may be asking itself — why bother spying on foreign companies and government laboratories if they will voluntarily hand over all the expertise Russia seeks?”
By 2014, the project Hillary Clinton helped launch was being publicly questioned by the FBI.

“The (Skolkovo) Foundation may be a means for the Russian government to access our nation’s sensitive or classified research, development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial applications,” Assistant Special Agent in Charge Lucia Ziobro wrote in the Business Journal of Boston.
Solomon also brought in concerns that were raised by the efforts by the Russian agency Rosatom to buy the Canadian firm Uranium One, which had “massive U.S. uranium reserves.”
“The FBI had equal concern about Rosatom’s acquisition of Uranium One. An informer named William Douglas Campbell had gotten inside the Russian nuclear giant in 2009 and gathered evidence that Rosatom’s agents in the United States were engaged in a racketeering scheme involving kickbacks, extortion and bribery,” he wrote.
“Campbell also obtained written evidence that Putin wanted to buy Uranium One as part of a strategy to obtain monopolistic domination of the global uranium markets, including leverage over the U.S.

“Campbell also warned that a major in-kind donor to the Clinton Global Initiative was simultaneously working for Rosatom while the decision for U.S. approval was pending before Hillary Clinton’s department. Ultimately, her department and the Obama administration approved the transaction.
“The evidence shows the Clintons financially benefited from Russia — personally and inside their charity — at the same time they were involved in U.S. government actions that rewarded Moscow and increased U.S. security risks.”
Solomon then brought his concentration to bear on the 2016 election, and the connections between the Clinton camp and Russia that led to the 2016 dossier against Trump.
The Clinton campaign hired the political intelligence firm Fusion GPS for opposition research on Trump, Hill wrote. He noted that Glenn Simpson, co-founder Fusion GPS, and Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence agent hired by Fusion GPS to compile the dossier, both “had Russian-tied business connections, too, while they formulated the dossier.”
At one point, Solomon quoted California Republican Congressman Devin Nunes as saying there was “obvious collusion the Democrats had through Glenn Simpson and through Fusion GPS, that they were talking directly to Russia.”
“Collusion can be criminal if it involves conspiracy to break federal laws, or it can involve perfectly legal, unwitting actions that still jeopardize America’s security against a ‘frenemy’ like Russia,” Solomon wrote in summing up his research.
“There is clear evidence now that shows Hillary Clinton’s family and charity profited from Moscow and simultaneously facilitated official government actions benefiting Russia that have raised security concerns.
“And there’s irrefutable evidence that her opposition research effort on Trump — one that inspired an FBI probe — was carried out by people who got information from Russia and were consorting with Russians,” Solomon wrote.

“It would seem those questions deserve at least some of the scrutiny afforded the Trump-Russia collusion inquiry that is now two-plus years old.”

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

Russia Wants To Re-Set The Relationship, Will It Last?


BREAKING – Vladimir Putin Just Issued THIS Response to President-elect Trump’s Victory, WOW


Vladimir Putin has already reached out to President-elect Donald J. Trump. The Russian leader used Twitter to comment on the outsider Republican’s historic, overwhelming victory over Hillary Clinton.
Putin is looking forward to “cooperation in ending a crisis in Russian-American relations.” The Russian leader also said he is hopeful Donald Trump’s victory can help build a “constructive dialogue between Moscow and Washington on the principles of equality, mutual respect, and real consideration for each other’s position.”


Vladimir Putin believes there are some “burning issues” currently emerging on the international stage, which need to be addressed, RT reports. He appears to hope the United States will now be a valued partner in the “search for effective responses to the challenges of the global security.”

Putin also addressed the failed Russian reset Hillary Clinton embarked upon after becoming the secretary of state. “It is not our fault that Russia-US relations are as you see them,” he added.
“We heard [Trump’s] campaign rhetoric while still a candidate for the US presidency, which was focused on restoring the relations between Russia and the United States,” Putin continued. “We understand and are aware that it will be a difficult path in the light of the degradation in which, unfortunately, the relationship between Russia and the US are at the moment.”
With Donald Trump inside the Oval Office, Putin said he felt confident the dialogue between the two Cold War foes would greatly improve. The two leaders will be able to keep to their own views for running their respective countries while still improving diplomatic relations, the Russian leader also noted.
Russian State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin is also hopeful the Donald Trump victory will help spark constructive communications between the two world powers. “The current US-Russian relations cannot be called friendly. Hopefully, with the new US president a more constructive dialogue will be possible between our countries,” Volodin said after the election results were tallied.
According to Putin’s cabinet member, the Russian Parliament will “welcome and support” any steps which lead to improved relations between Russia and America. A second, and hopefully more successful, Russian reset may begin after Trump is sworn in on January 20th.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said his nation is ready for a fresh start with the United States. According to Layrov’s comments, Russia will judge the Trump administration by its actions and not based on the past eight years of words and deeds by the Obama administration.
“We are ready to work with any US leader elected by the US people,” the Russian Foreign Minister added. “I can’t say that all the previous US leaders were always predictable. This is life, this is politics. I have heard many words, but we will judge by actions.”
It’s a brave new world, fellow patriots. America is once again on her way back to greatness, and world leaders are already taking notice!

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

"Missing In Action" Kerry Proves He Is NOT A Diplomat Nor A Negotiator. He Is What He Has Always Been, A Self Promoting Opportunist.

Whatever Happened to John Kerry

John Kerry returns from his latest Russian visit bearing two baskets of potatoes and a t-shirt.
The t-shirt, given to him by Foreign Minister Lavrov, might as well say, “I wasted my time in Russia and all I got was this shirt.”
It’s a diplomatic success only in relation to Kerry’s previous humiliations such as the time that Russia’s adeptly slimy foreign minister kept him waiting for a week before returning his call while the State Department spokeswoman announced to the world that Kerry was “ready to talk whenever Foreign Minister Lavrov can find the time.”
The Putin regime enjoys humiliating the United States, but even it seems to have tired of degrading Kerry who ruins their fun by failing to realize what is going on. Instead Kerry has become a nonentity; a forgotten messenger boy. It’s a fitting purgatory for the formerly tireless leftist activist in the Senate.
It wasn’t all that long ago that John Kerry was being touted as the last best hope for diplomacy. No one could quite admit that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had made a complete mess, but the sighs of relief when John Kerry got the job instead of Obama’s dishonest crony Susan Rice spoke volumes.
American diplomacy had never before hit the low point that it had under Obama and Clinton. Liberals with an interest in foreign policy had expected professionalism; instead the two politicians used it as their private piggy bank. Obama handed off ambassadorships to key countries to big donors while Hillary spent more time seeing to the interests of Clinton Foundation donors than to our national interests.
Obama had campaigned as an internationalist who would put aside the provincialism of the Bush years to build meaningful multilateral relationships based on his experience with other countries and cultures. But once in office, he treated visits to other countries like domestic campaign trips to obscure states.
Foreign leaders soon found out that an Obama visit was usually a cross between a photo op using their historical landmarks as background and a vacation. While his gaffes and embarrassing behaviors got the most attention, the underlying problem was that he didn’t understand what his job was. His routine of self-important speeches and announcements of billion dollar programs that would never materialize was built for his endless domestic campaign and its lapdog media. And it didn’t play well internationally.
Obama refused to understand how international relationships work. His grand plans for an end to nuclear weapons, wars and industry were big ticket progressive items with no relevance to events in the real world. Two out of three of them quickly ended up being scrapped. His undermining of American allies in the Middle East with the Arab Spring poisoned diplomatic relations in the region. His weak and erratic response to Russian aggression discredited his administration in Eastern Europe.
As it turned out, Obama did not have a foreign policy, he had a domestic policy. His failure to work together with Republicans at home was more than equaled by his failure to work with allies abroad. At home or abroad, he came with a pre-approved progressive program that ignored emerging crises and which he refused to budge from until a crisis became severe enough to threaten his popularity.
An experienced White House staff might have eased the problem, but Obama was surrounded by fellow amateurs and egomaniacs putting the progressive agenda ahead of pragmatic diplomacy. And his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton had little real experience. In the past, she had told a number of lies to compensate for that by manufacturing imaginary achievements.
Hillary claimed that she had “helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland” and negotiated open borders for Kosovo refugees. In the real world, her practical experience was extremely light, but heavy on theory. Hillary Clinton was anxious to present herself as extremely knowledge about foreign affairs, but she preferred to avoid actually putting theory into practice because it might interfere with her future political campaign.
To the misfortune of America and the world, both the White House and the State Department were led by politicians with little understanding of foreign affairs who wanted photo ops for their domestic political campaigns more than they wanted to actually put in the work to get things done. John Kerry was supposed to change all that. An unlikely repeat presidential candidate, Kerry was not holding down the job as a platform for seeking higher office. Instead the career activist would finally have a direct line for putting his feverish foreign policy obsessions into practice.
And Kerry did not disappoint, immediately diving into deep waters, aggressively trying to revive the corpse of the dead peace process between Israel and the terrorists, circling frantically around Syria and even chasing after Russia. It was a striking contrast with Hillary’s empty tours or Obama’s vacation diplomacy. There was finally a Secretary of State willing to take on the big issues.
Kerry cheerleaders had forgotten that while he genuinely did care about foreign affairs, unlike Hillary, his diplomatic adventures had been that of a professional patsy for assorted totalitarian states. It took the rise of a genuinely delusional Democrat like Obama to make Kerry seem like the voice of reason.
Obama was oblivious to the way things were done. Kerry was just oblivious. He understood the forms of diplomacy, but was as inept at assessing the sincerity of the other side as a sucker at a used car lot. When it came to Syria, no one could forget his pandering to Assad, and his confused statements made an already incoherent administration policy seem like it was coming apart at its contradictory seams.
And Kerry couldn’t keep his big mouth shut. Before long the real job of the State Department spokespeople became explaining what Kerry had really meant. Kerry’s infamous ‘for and against’ gaffe had helped take down his presidential bid, but miscommunications in diplomacy are far more damaging. Most governments read comments at a more subtle and convoluted level than the United States does. Kerry’s statements, misstatements and corrections were interpreted as double-dealing by America.
Kerry’s sympathy for the Muslim Brotherhood alienated Egypt. His sympathy for Assad then alienated the Muslim Brotherhood. Iran became his only option because he had alienated everyone else.
Obama let him have his way on Israeli and even lent some of his personal prestige with a visit, but Kerry botched the negotiations by letting the terrorists walk all over him and then insisting that Israel do the same. Then he made the mess into an even bigger disaster by blaming Israel for the failed talks.
That incident reinforced Netanyahu’s conviction that Obama could not be trusted. Netanyahu had gone out on a limb for Kerry by making unpopular concessions while receiving nothing in return. And after all that, Kerry had turned around and stabbed him in the back. Not only had Kerry precluded further Israeli participation, but his promises on Iran were viewed as worthless in Jerusalem.
Obama stopped paying whatever little attention he had to Kerry. And Kerry became the man who totes potatoes back from Russia while imagining that he is changing the world. A clown in a diplomatic circus he is too oblivious to see.
The agenda isn’t set by Kerry. It isn’t even set by Obama. It’s set by anyone and everyone else.
Iran has gotten its way on the nuclear program. The Saudis have turned up their noses at Obama’s summit. Israel has led a loud protest campaign against the nuclear deal. The Saudis still insist on bombing Yemen. Iran insists on raising tensions with its expansionism around the region. The United States is unable to do anything about this because, aside from everything else, it no longer has any relationships abroad or credible voices to carry its message.
Kerry finally had the power to make the changes that he always wanted and proved once and for all that he is not a brilliant diplomat or a deep thinker, but a miserable failure.
And American diplomacy has failed with him.
Reprinted with author’s permission from Sultan Knish

Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/41176/whatever-happened-to-john-kerry-opinion/#SohTzGE4xmULAKrI.99

Sunday, September 15, 2013

Not All Syrians Happy With Putin's Deal

Syrian Rebels Furious At U.S.-Russian Deal

  •  The Alex Jones ChannelAlex Jones Show podcastPrison Planet TVInfowars.com TwitterAlex Jones' FacebookInfowars store
Zero Hedge
September 15, 2013
With major deadlines now pushed off until next year and Assad appearing to come out smelling of (slightly tarnished) roses with his ‘compromise’ agreement with Russia (and the US) to join the chemical weapons treaty, not only is Israel now a major focus but the Syrian rebels – as one might expect – are not happy. As Reuters reports, the head of the opposition Syrian Supreme Military Council said on Saturday a U.S.-Russian agreement to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons was a blow to the two-and-a-half-year uprising to remove President Bashar al-Assad from power.
Crucially, General Salim Idris notes that this allows Assad “to escape being held accountable,” and, while unverified for now, Idris added, “we have told our friends that the regime has begun moving a part of its chemical weapons arsenal to Lebanon and Iraq. We told them do not be fooled.” But another military council official, Qassim Saadeddine, was a little more aggressive: “Let the Kerry-Lavrov plan go to hell. We reject it and we will not protect the inspectors or let them enter Syria.”
Via Reuters,
The head of the opposition Syrian Supreme Military Council said on Saturday a U.S.-Russian agreement to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons was a blow to the two-and-a-half-year uprising to remove President Bashar al-Assad from power.
General Selim Idris said the deal would allow Assad to escape being held accountablefor killing hundreds of civilians in a poison gas attack on Damascus on Aug. 21. Assad has denied responsibility for the attack.
…
“We have told our friends that the regime has begun moving a part of its chemical weapons arsenal to Lebanon and Iraq. We told them do not be fooled,” Idris told reporters in Istanbul.
“All of this initiative does not interest us. Russia is a partner with the regime in killing the Syrian people. A crime against humanity has been committed and there is not any mention of accountability.”
…
But another military council official, Qassim Saadeddine, said: “Let the Kerry-Lavrov plan go to hell. We reject it and we will not protect the inspectors or let them enter Syria.”