https://twitter.com/johncardillo/status/1523371977737605121?s=20&t=reTRMqVHYIXJac7JdfYsjQ
9 May, 2022 08:09
Russia's Ukraine operation 'preemptive' – Putin
Launching the offensive was “the only right decision,” Russian President insisted at the annual Victory Day parade
Russia’s military operation in Ukraine was a preemptive move against future aggression, President Vladimir Putin has outlined during his address at the Victory Day parade in Red Square in Moscow on Monday.
Putin not only praised the achievement of the Soviet people during World War II, but also addressed the Kremlin's reasons for the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev. Russia had to act because a large-scale offensive against the breakaway republics in the eastern Donbass region was being planned, he claimed.
“We saw the military infrastructure unfolding [in Ukraine]; hundreds of foreign advisers starting their work; there were regular deliveries of the most modern weapons from NATO countries. The danger grew every day,” the president explained.
“Russia gave a preemptive rebuff to aggression – this was a forced, timely and the only right decision by a sovereign, strong and independent country,” he added, referring to the launch of the military operation.
“Despite all the disagreements in international relations, Russia has always advocated the creation of a system of equal and indivisible security,” Putin continued.
He cited Moscow’s attempts to engage in dialogue on security guarantees with Washington late last year, which failed to yield results.
“NATO countries didn’t want to hear us, which means that, in fact, they harbored completely different plans, and we saw it,” he elaborated. There were open preparations for a punitive operation in the Donbass and “an invasion of our historical lands, including Crimea,” Putin insisted, adding that Kiev also announced plans to restore its nuclear capabilities.
Since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the US has increasingly spoken of ‘American exceptionalism,’ Putin pointed out. By spreading those ideas, Washington is “humiliating not only the whole world, but also its satellites, which have to pretend that they don’t notice anything and humbly accept it all. But we are a different country,” he insisted.
Russia has a different character, we’ll never give up on our love for our Motherland, on our faith and traditional values and customs of our ancestors; on respect for all peoples and cultures.
But the West has apparently decided to “cancel” those values, with such “moral degradation becoming the basis for cynical falsifications of the history of World War II, and the incitement of Russophobia,” he said.
“We know that American veterans, who wanted to come to the parade in Moscow, were basically banned from doing so,” Putin added. But he pointed out that Russia remembered the feats of the US servicemen and their contribution to victory in World War II.
Returning to the military operation in Ukraine, the president illustrated that “the self-defense forces of the Donbass Republics together with the Russian military are fighting on their land… for the Motherland, for its future, to make sure that no one forgets the lessons of World War II, so that there would be no place in the world for butchers, punishers, and Nazis.”
Announcing the “special military operation” on February 24, Putin said that Moscow should not repeat the mistakes of the Soviet leadership of 1940-1941. Back then, he explained, the USSR tried not to provoke Nazi Germany by “refraining or postponing the most urgent and obvious preparations it had to make to defend itself from an imminent attack.” As a result, the president continued, the moment was lost and the country was not prepared to counter the invasion.
“The attempt to appease the aggressor ahead of the Great Patriotic War proved to be a mistake which came at a high cost for our people…We will not make this mistake the second time. We have no right to do so,” Putin said.
https://www.rt.com/russia/555178-russia-preemptive-rebuff-aggression-putin/
9 May, 2022 08:23
HomeRussia & FSU
Russia marks victory over Nazi Germany with major military parade
(FULL VIDEO)
More than 10,000 troops participated in the event, along with armored vehicles and aircraft
Up to 11,000 troops marched on Moscow’s iconic Red Square on Monday as Russia celebrated the 77th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany during World War II. The conflict is largely called the Great Patriotic War in Russia, and May 9 is one of the country’s most revered holidays.
The marching columns represented all branches of Russia’s Armed Forces, including airborne troops, military police, national guardsmen and cadets.
More than 130 armored vehicles were led by the iconic T-34-85 tank, which was one of the main ‘workhorses’ of the Red Army during the war. The state-of-the-art T-90M Proryv (Breakthrough) main battle tanks, S-400 air-defense missile systems, and Yars thermonuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles, were among other top-notch weapons showcased on the Red Square.
https://www.rt.com/russia/555152-russia-vday-parade-full/
9 May, 2022 11:43
UK weighs in on Ukraine’s chances against Russia
Kiev’s military success is “very possible,” Defence Secretary Ben Wallace believes
Britain’s defence secretary has expressed belief that Ukraine, which is being supplied with weapons by the UK and other Western nations, is capable of achieving military victory in the conflict against Russia.
“It is very possible that Ukraine will break the Russian army to the extent that they either have to go back to pre-February or they have to effectively fold in on itself,” Ben Wallace said during a speech at the National Army Museum in London on Monday.
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin “must come to terms with how he’s lost in the long run, and he’s absolutely lost. Russia is not what it was,” he added.
Wallace appears to be more optimistic about the events on the ground than some officials in Kiev. On Sunday, President Volodymyr Zelensky’s adviser, Alexey Arestovich, acknowledged that it was currently impossible for Ukraine to reverse the situation on the frontline.
With the effects of international sanctions against Moscow not being felt yet and the West taking too long to approve the deliveries of weapons needed by the Ukrainian military, a new Russian offensive on key cities, including the capital Kiev, can be expected, he warned.
Wallace, who was speaking on May 9 - the day when Russia celebrates victory over the Nazis in World War II, went as far as claiming that “through the invasion of Ukraine, Putin and his inner circle of generals are now mirroring fascism and tyranny of 77 years ago, repeating the errors of the last century’s totalitarian regime.”
The statement completely contradicted the ideas voiced by the Russian president during his address at the Victory Day parade on Moscow’s Red Square the same day.
Putin insisted that Russia’s military operation in Ukraine was the “only right decision” and “a preemptive rebuff to aggression” as Kiev was preparing a large-scale attack on the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, which Russia recognized as independent states.
The self-defense forces of the Donbass republics and the Russian military are now fighting “for the Motherland, for its future, to make sure that no one forgets the lessons of World War II, so that there would be no place in the world for butchers, punishers, and Nazis,” he said.
Putin later said that all of Moscow’s plans as part of the military operation in Ukraine are “being executed.” He assured that “the results will be achieved, there can be no doubt about it.”
The UK has been one of Ukraine’s main backers and arms supplier during the ongoing conflict. London has already sent anti-tank and anti-aircraft missile systems, and armored vehicles to Kiev, among other things, while also providing training for Ukrainian troops in Poland and in Britain.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson made a surprise visit to the Ukrainian capital in April to meet with President Volodymyr Zelensky and personally assure him of London’s support.
https://www.rt.com/news/555187-uk-ukraine-wallace-putin/
9 May, 2022 10:40
HomeRussia & FSU
EU living by ‘law of the jungle’ – Russia
Top diplomat responds to Brussels' idea of seizing government assets
Seizing the foreign-exchange reserves of the Russian state would be an act of “complete lawlessness" and would undermine the very basis of international relations, Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko has said, commenting on an idea floated by the EU’s top diplomat, Josep Borell.
In a recent interview with FT, Borrell suggested seizing Russia's frozen reserves and using them to cover the costs of rebuilding Ukraine once the conflict is over. Responding to these remarks, Grushko told RIA Novosti that the EU's “appetite comes with eating” and that confiscation of the assets would be “complete lawlessness, the destruction of the very foundation of international relations.”
In Grushko’s opinion, such a decision, if taken, “will hit the Europeans themselves, hit the modern financial system and undermine confidence in Europe and in the West in general.”
“This is the law of the jungle,” he concluded.
In coming up with the idea, Borrell referred to the precedent of US President Joe Biden having set aside billions worth of the assets of Afghanistan’s central bank “to be used to benefit the Afghan people.”
“We have the money in our pockets, and someone has to explain to me why it is good for the Afghan money and not good for the Russian money,” the EU foreign policy chief said. He added that one of the key questions the world has to answer is who will be paying the “incredible amount of money” needed for the reconstruction of Ukraine.
Since the beginning of Russian military operation in Ukraine in late February, half of Russia’s international reserves, around $300 billion, have been frozen as part of the Western sanctions. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Moscow could not have foreseen this development and that the freeze, in his opinion, essentially constitutes theft.
(The EU and US when they fail will again double down. Its ego driven at this point)
https://www.rt.com/russia/555184-grushko-borrell-assets-seizure/
9 May, 2022 11:47
Chinese ships detected near disputed islands
Two coast guard vessels entered Japan’s territorial waters near the Senkaku Islands, NHK news reports
On Monday morning, two Chinese coast guard vessels entered Japan’s territorial waters near the uninhabited Senkaku Islands, an East China Sea archipelago which is the subject of longstanding dispute between Beijing and Tokyo, NHK news reports.
The ships entered the waters about 20km off the island of Minami Kojima at around 7am and approached a Japanese fishing boat, the Japanese public broadcaster reported, citing Coast Guard officials.
To “ensure the safety of the fishing boats,” NHK said, the Japan Coast Guard sent patrol ships to the area and asked the Chinese vessels to leave immediately. Later, the Japanese authorities confirmed that the vessels left the waters of the Senkaku Islands.
Monday’s incident, according to the outlet’s figures, marks the seventh time this year that Japan has spotted Chinese ships navigating off the islands, which are known in China as the Diaoyu Islands.
Tokyo has previously condemned the “intrusions” of increasingly large Chinese Coast Guard ships in Senkaku territorial waters and expressed concern over the growing number of vessels armed with automatic cannons.
Beijing insists that its Coast Guard is simply patrolling territorial waters.
“The Diaoyu Islands and affiliated islands are Chinese territory, so the sailing of Chinese Coast Guard ships in those waters is a valid measure based on law,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said in June last year.
Beijing and Taiwan claim the Senkaku Islands have been part of Chinese territory since at least 1534. Japan took control of the islands in the late 19th century during the first Sino-Japanese War. Following World War II, they were placed under US control and returned to Japan in 1972. China, however, continues to claim sovereignty over the islands, which Tokyo considers an integral part of Japan’s territory.
The dispute intensified in the late 1960s as evidence of significant deposits of oil and gas off the coast of the archipelago began to emerge.
Recent years have seen an apparent increase in Chinese activity in the waters surrounding the islands. In 2021, China Coast Guard vessels navigated near the Senkaku Islands almost every day, according to the Japan Coast Guard, and entered their territorial waters 34 times.
https://www.rt.com/news/555191-chinese-ships-islands-disputed-senkaku/
https://twitter.com/mattdizwhitlock/status/1523318321655205888?s=20&t=reTRMqVHYIXJac7JdfYsjQ
Activism is a way for useless people to feel important, even if the consequences of their activism are counterproductive for those they claim to be helping and damaging to the fabric of society as a whole.
https://twitter.com/ThomasSowell/status/1523372098088890369?s=20&t=reTRMqVHYIXJac7JdfYsjQ
https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1523637499817390080?s=20&t=k60eFXhzEy0aJ9qpZFRosQ
Spygate Judge Tries To Protect Hillary Clinton In Latest Pre-Trial Rulings
BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND
MAY 09, 2022
Judge Christopher Cooper’s efforts to counter the impact of the case on Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party extend beyond declaring the ‘co-conspirator’ exception off limits.
Part 1 of 3
The Obama-appointed judge presiding over the criminal case against former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann let politics trump the law when he declared in a weekend opinion he would not rule on whether the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee conspired with others to peddle the Russia collusion hoax.
Special Counsel John Durham charged Sussmann last September in a one-count indictment with making a false statement to then-FBI General Counsel James Baker when Sussmann provided Baker data and “whitepapers” purporting to show a secret communication network between Donald Trump and the Russian-based Alfa Bank. According to the indictment, Sussmann told Baker he was sharing the information on his own, when, in fact, Sussmann represented both tech executive Rodney Joffe and the Clinton campaign.
With trial set to begin in one week, the last month has seen a flurry of pretrial motions—called “motions in limine”—seeking pretrial rulings on the admissibility of evidence. The court previously ruled on several of the issues the parties presented, holding in many cases that a final decision must await trial. Then, late Saturday, presiding Judge Christopher Cooper issued a further opinion resolving many of the still-outstanding evidentiary challenges.
Overall, Cooper’s Saturday night opinion, like his previous rulings in this case, represented a studious and a balanced approach to the legal issues, with Sussmann prevailing at times, but the special counsel succeeding on other issues. For instance, in a victory for Durham, the court ruled that prosecutors could present evidence concerning how the Alfa Bank “data came into being and who was involved in its collection and analysis, as well as how Mr. Sussmann came to possess the data, what he did with it, and why.”
But the court also ruled in Sussmann’s favor, first reiterating its previous holding that unless Sussmann claims at trial that the Alfa Bank data is accurate, the government may not present evidence challenging its validity. Cooper further held that the government could not present evidence that Joffe inappropriately accessed proprietary or sensitive government information to gather the data or write the whitepapers, absent some evidence “showing that Mr. Sussmann had concerns that the data was obtained inappropriately.”
Judge Cooper further demonstrated his baseline when he confronted two more significant issues presented by the opposing parties. Sussmann scored a victory when the court held the government could not admit evidence concerning notes taken by former FBI Assistant Director Bill Priestap and former Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson unless they testified about their previous conversations with Baker. Even then, Judge Cooper indicated that at most the jury would likely only be read the contents of the notes,as opposed to receiving the notes themselves as exhibits to view.
Such a limitation will surely inure to Sussmann’s benefit because seeing in writing Priestap’s notation, “Michael Sussman[n]—Atty: Perkins Coie—said not doing this for any client” and Anderson’s note, “Sussman[n] Mtg w/ Baker,” “No specific client but group of cyber academics talked w/ him abt research,” would likely strike a more solid punch than merely hearing their testimony.
Sussmann, however, failed in his attempt to force the government to provide Joffe immunity so Joffe would be willing to testify in Sussmann’s defense. Sussmann had argued that the government had no reasonable basis to claim that Joffe remained a target of a criminal investigation given that the five-year statute of limitations for false statements had run, and that therefore the special counsel’s threat of prosecution served solely to induce Joffe to plead the fifth and refuse to testify on behalf of Sussmann.
Not only did the court reject this argument, in doing so the court stated—simply and without commentary—that “the Special Counsel’s continued representation that Mr. Joffe is a subject of its investigation, rather than simply a witness, does not amount to prosecutorial misconduct on this record.” Given that Sussmann framed the government’s claim that Joffe remained a target as unbelievable, the court’s refusal to question the special counsel’s representation illustrates Judge Cooper’s baseline apolitical equilibrium.
https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/09/spygate-judge-tries-to-protect-hillary-clinton-in-latest-pre-trial-rulings
Spygate Judge Tries To Protect Hillary Clinton
Part 2 of 3
The Obama appointee faltered, however, on the Clinton campaign and handling the special counsel’s argument that various emails, even if they were hearsay, were admissible under the “co-conspirator statement” exception to the hearsay rule. At issue were emails between Joffe and the Georgia Tech researchers Manos Antonakakis, Dave Dagon, and April Lorenzen, the “originator” of the Alfa Bank data whom Joffe had allegedly tasked to mine internet data to find a Trump-Russia connection.
After concluding some, but not all, of the emails were hearsay, the court addressed the government’s argument that the emails were admissible under federal rules of evidence as “a co-conspirator statement.”
First, Some Lawsplaining
Under federal rules of evidence, a statement made by a “co-conspirator” of a defendant “during and in furtherance of the conspiracy” is admissible even though it is hearsay. Hearsay is an out-of-court statement, oral or in writing, that is presented to the jury to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement.
The “conspiracy” need not be criminal, however, for a statement made by another member of the “conspiracy” to be admissible, with courts typically calling non-criminal conspiracies “joint ventures.” But before a court may admit a statement under this “co-conspirator” exception, it must find “by a preponderance of the evidence” that such a conspiracy or joint venture existed. (A “preponderance of the evidence” means it is more likely that a conspiracy existed than that it didn’t, i.e., that the court is 50.1 percent sure there was such a joint venture.)
The Joint Venture
In the Sussmann case, the special counsel submitted that Joffe, Sussmann, and the Clinton campaign (or its agents) were “acting in concert toward a common goal”—i.e., “assembling and disseminating the [Alfa Bank] allegations and other derogatory information about Trump to the media and the U.S. government.” The Georgia Tech researchers and Lorenzen were also part of this joint venture, according to prosecutors.
Judge Cooper, however, refused to consider whether such a joint venture existed, stating instead that, for a variety of reasons, his court was exercising “its discretion not to engage in the kind of extensive evidentiary analysis that would be required to find that such a joint venture existed, and who may have joined it.”
A court is well within its discretion to refuse to undertake a “lengthy journey” to assess whether a “joint venture” existed and thus whether the various emails are admissible under the “co-conspirator statement” exception to the hearsay rule. But in the same breath that he declared himself unwilling to make this excursion, Judge Cooper contradicted his own reasoning.
“The government has indicated that it intends to call one or both of the Georgia Tech researchers at trial,” Judge Cooper wrote. “Either of them could testify to their role in assembling the data, how they came to be tasked with the project, and whether they believed the research was done for the Clinton Campaign or some other purpose.”
Thus, contrary to the court’s rationale, there is no “lengthy journey” to traverse: The court need only wait until trial to allow the government to elicit from witnesses testimony confirming the “joint venture”—something Cooper ruled they “could” testify about. In fact, in its brief in arguing the emails were admissible as “co-conspirator” statements, the special counsel’s office noted that a court could “preliminarily admit hearsay statements of co-conspirators, subject to connection through proof of conspiracy.”
But Judge Cooper didn’t even need to admit the emails were “subject to connection through proof of conspiracy.” All the Obama appointee needed to do was follow the same approach he did when confronted with other evidentiary issues that were unclear or where the admissibility depended on the proof at trial: wait for trial to issue a ruling.
https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/09/spygate-judge-tries-to-protect-hillary-clinton-in-latest-pre-trial-rulings
Spygate Judge Tries To Protect Hillary Clinton
Part 3 of 3
Further, ruling on the admissibility of the emails based on the “co-conspirator” exception to the hearsay rule during trial would require little effort, as Cooper’s Saturday opinion itself recognized, by noting that it “has already ruled on the admissibility of many of the emails on other grounds.”
That Judge Cooper deviated from the approach he took with other evidentiary issues, namely withholding final ruling until trial, only on the question of whether the Clinton campaign had conspired to peddle the Alfa Bank hoax, suggests politics motivated that approach.
Two Other Supporting Facts
Two other details from Judge Cooper’s opinion bolster that conclusion. First, not only did Cooper declare he would not rule on the co-conspirator exception for purposes of the specific emails the special counsel’s office sought to introduce, he prejudged the importance of other emails “the Court has not yet seen.”
“Whatever few emails remain,” the court noted, “are likely to be either irrelevant or redundant of other admissible evidence,” thus negating, in the court’s view, the need to address the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule.
Tellingly, after announcing he would not consider the co-conspirator exception in deciding whether these still-unseen emails were admissible, Judge Cooper added that during trial he would consider whether those same emails might be admissible for a non-hearsay reason. Again, why not do the same on the co-conspirator exception?
The answer seems clear: A court declaring that Hillary Clinton’s then-lawyer had engaged in a conspiracy to “gather and spread damaging information about a Presidential candidate shortly before the scheduled election” would be a devastating blow to the Democrat.
Trying to Protect Democrats and Clinton
Judge Cooper’s efforts to counter the impact of the case on Clinton, and more broadly the Democratic Party, extend beyond merely declaring the “co-conspirator” exception off limits. Rather, in his weekend opinion, after announcing his plan to punt, Judge Cooper proceeded to question the special counsel’s theory, calling the “contours” of the joint “venture and its participants are not entirely obvious.” He then noted he was “particularly skeptical that the researchers” shared in this common goal.
Beyond being an unnecessary annotation to a case in which he expressly declined to address the co-conspirator exception, Judge Cooper’s analysis constructed a strawman to destroy. Durham’s team never claimed that the researchers joined in a conspiracy with Clinton directly, and never claimed they intended to peddle the Alfa Bank hoax to the FBI.
Rather, the joint venture concerned the shared goal of gathering and spreading damaging information about Trump and involved agents of the Clinton campaign, such as Fusion GPS. And the evidence of that joint venture was overwhelming, easily satisfying the preponderance of the evidence test. But even if Judge Cooper was not so sure about that conclusion, waiting for the trial testimony was the proper procedure, as his many earlier rulings demonstrate.
In refusing to consider the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule, Judge Cooper may see himself as keeping politics out of the case. After all, as the federal judge noted in the opinion, the special counsel did not charge Sussmann with a conspiracy. But a conspiracy need not be charged for the co-conspirator exception to apply, and this case is political to its core—just as the FBI’s investigation of Trump and the corrupt press’ reporting on the Russia collusion hoax was.
And Hillary Clinton was behind it all, whether the court opts to ignore the conspiracy or not.
https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/09/spygate-judge-tries-to-protect-hillary-clinton-in-latest-pre-trial-rulings/
Obama and thug crew got to the judge, now he’s fucking up, guaranteed Durham will have further filings challenging the court turn around
https://twitter.com/BeekmanCruger/status/1523640292729307136?s=20&t=k60eFXhzEy0aJ9qpZFRosQ
https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1523647448010608646?s=20&t=k60eFXhzEy0aJ9qpZFRosQ
More comments on Margot’s article
https://twitter.com/grimrea62895459/status/1523642158976147457?s=20&t=k60eFXhzEy0aJ9qpZFRosQ
https://twitter.com/chrispavlovski/status/1523636053898559490?s=20&t=k60eFXhzEy0aJ9qpZFRosQ
WTF
https://twitter.com/kim_crawley/status/1523305999645298690?s=20&t=k60eFXhzEy0aJ9qpZFRosQ
https://twitter.com/KyleKashuv/status/1523544370934284288?s=20&t=k60eFXhzEy0aJ9qpZFRosQ
https://twitter.com/Vladthe24391754/status/1523381169227665408?s=20&t=k60eFXhzEy0aJ9qpZFRosQ
I hope POTUS never does an interview with FOX again
https://twitter.com/DJTTracker/status/1523314875174469632?s=20&t=k60eFXhzEy0aJ9qpZFRosQ
https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1523654090152189959?s=20&t=fh-RIpCLrGP8nyquXZj7cw
Mules getting revealed!
https://twitter.com/LifesSoaps/status/1523547786267963394?s=20&t=fh-RIpCLrGP8nyquXZj7cw
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1523653429410770945?s=20&t=fh-RIpCLrGP8nyquXZj7cw
https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1523497334314725379?s=20&t=fh-RIpCLrGP8nyquXZj7cw
https://twitter.com/PaulSperry30/status/1523659653754028037?s=20&t=VEc0rQSjJ3oimw_vah9ZnA
https://mobile.twitter.com/PaulSperry30
https://twitter.com/RichardGrenell/status/1523095112620081152?s=20&t=2qyxqs4Vn7xUD_4EtG99CQ
https://twitter.com/RichardGrenell/status/1523095112620081152?s=20&t=2qyxqs4Vn7xUD_4EtG99CQ
https://twitter.com/RichardGrenell/status/1523095387783196673?s=20&t=2qyxqs4Vn7xUD_4EtG99CQ
This is funny if true!
https://twitter.com/mysayjp/status/1523096535072133123?s=20&t=2qyxqs4Vn7xUD_4EtG99CQ