https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/08/michael-cohen-files-stormy-daniels/

Michael Cohen Files To Get His Money Back From Stormy Daniels

10:09 AM 09/08/2018

Scott Morefield | Reporter

Michael Cohen’s shell company, Essential Consultants, on Friday filed a status report to cancel the original deal made with porn star Stormy Daniels and requested that the paid hush money be returned.

“Today, Essential Consultants LLC and Michael Cohen have effectively put an end to the lawsuits filed against them by Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels,” said Cohen attorney Brent Blakely, CNN reported. “The rescission of the Confidential Settlement Agreement will result in Ms. Clifford returning to Essential Consultants the $130,000 she received in consideration, as required by California law.”

According to a CNN source, since Daniels has already told her story to the media there is no longer any benefit to Cohen.

When Daniels attorney Michael Avenatti was asked about the then-breaking report by CNN’s Chris Cuomo on Friday night he called the move a “Hail Mary,” but acknowledged that the chances are “100 percent” that Cohen would get his money back.

WATCH:

“What they’re trying to do — it’s pretty transparent at least at first blush to me — is they don’t want me to get a chance to depose Michael Cohen and Donald Trump,” said Avenatti. “This is a Hail Mary to try to avoid that, that’s my first guess.”

“Ultimately if the agreement is rescinded then the chance is 100 percent — he gets his $130,000 back, there’s no question,” he said, adding that they “offered to do that early on in the case” and were “told to go pound sand.”

Follow Scott on Facebook and Twitter.

So was Stormy Daniels Fake News/Distraction?

Wendy

‏ @auntcinnywinny

@StormyDaniels You’re a vindictive whore! Whether you slept with him or not why would you be doing what you’re doing if it weren’t for attention and money!??? You’re a sad excuse for a woman! Disgusting!!

Stormy Daniels

‏Verified account @StormyDaniels

4h4 hours ago

Stormy Daniels Retweeted Wendy

Thanks babe! xoxo

PS if you're too stupid to know the answer, I can't help you.

>>2938175

Michael Avenatti

‏Verified account @MichaelAvenatti

55m55 minutes ago

I have been practicing law for nearly 20 yrs. Never before have I seen a defendant so frightened to be deposed as Donald Trump, especially for a guy that talks so tough. He is desperate and doing all he can to avoid having to answer my questions. He is all hat and no cattle.

>>2937565 (pb)

I wonder if there have been other GITMO flights when Q has posted the Flag??

>>2938279

I thought Apple was building a new plant here??

Is Apple got anything to do with Building 8?

>>2938335

She earned well over her $130,000 on this fake news. We want here from her anymore.

Facebook's moonshots: Making brains type and skin hear

The social network finally unveils what its secretive Building 8 hardware lab has been working on for the past year. Communication might never be the same.

by

Richard Nieva

April 19, 2017 11:08 AM PDT

https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-f8-building-8-moonshot-projects-zuckerberg-regina-dugan/

It looks like just another beige office park building next to a dental office in Menlo Park, California. Yet Building 8, across the street from Facebook's main campus, houses the social network's biggest bets on out-there products.

The tech industry has a term for what people inside Building 8 work on: moonshots. Think potentially groundbreaking projects that could reshape Facebook's long-term future and even how all of us communicate.

CEO Mark Zuckerberg unveiled Building 8 (named for the number of letters in Facebook) at last year's F8 developer conference. He also revealed he'd recruited Regina Dugan from Google's Advanced Technology and Projects (ATAP) group to head Facebook's skunkworks efforts, as part of Zuckerberg's 10-year strategic plan.

Since then, Facebook has given tantalizing hints about Building 8's mission, saying only that it's focused on "seemingly impossible" hardware in augmented and virtual reality, artificial intelligence, connectivity and "other important breakthrough areas," with "clear objectives for shipping products at scale." The one thing we knew for sure: The company had been amassing a dream team of hardware veterans from the likes of Apple, Motorola, Google and other industry heavyweights.

Some of that secrecy faded Wednesday, when the group unveiled its first two projects: a "brain-to-computer interface" that would allow us to send thoughts straight to a computer, and technology to "hear" or absorb language through vibrations on our skin.

>>2938433

"If I'm doing my job well, we should deliver things people didn't know to ask for," Dugan – who previously headed Darpa, the Defense Department's famed tech arm – tells me Monday from a working space on Facebook's campus. "There's the risk of failure. But that's precisely the price you pay for the honor of working on something new."

You might not expect off-the-wall hardware products from a social network known for the Like button, status updates and baby photos shared among nearly 2 billion people each month. Yet the company already has its hand in everything from virtual reality headsets to massive drones meant to blanket the earth with Wi-Fi signals. It can't afford to let up.

That's because Silicon Valley is on a constant quest to find the next big thing. Like Alphabet, Apple, Amazon and other major tech players, Facebook's future depends on ambitious moonshots that could open new business opportunities.

"Even if the technology is out there and never gets turned into a product, the R&D work that goes into it can often be used for things being created in the real world right now," says Jan Dawson, chief analyst at Jackdaw Research. Just as important, moonshots "attract and retain smart employees," says Dawson.

In the Valley, that's a competitive advantage in its own right.

"OK, computer"

Building 8's brain-to-computer project comes straight from the top. "One day, I believe we'll be able to send full, rich thoughts to each other directly using technology," Zuckerberg said in a Q&A on Facebook two years ago.

"You'll just be able to think of something and your friends will immediately be able to experience it too, if you'd like," he said.

facebook-f8-2017-0112.jpg

Mark Zuckerberg kicks off the 2017 F8 developer conference in San Jose, California.

James Martin/CNET

Now it's up to Dugan and Mark Chevillet, the initiative's technical lead, to make the technology practical. And not in some nebulous future, either. Like Google's ATAP – whose projects include fabric with built-in sensors and radar interfaces you could control with gestures – Building 8's efforts all have two-year deadlines. That's possible in part because of a collaboration deal it signed in December with 17 universities, taking months out of the time it would normally take to ramp up a project, Dugan said in a Facebook post at the time.

So before the two-year period lapses, Building 8 hopes to develop a system that lets us "type" 100 words a minute on a computer, just by thinking what we want to say. That's about five times faster than people can type on smartphones, and quicker than most of us can type on a computer.

"Imagine what would be possible if you could type directly from your brain," Dugan says.

Building 8's technology works by using sensors that tap into the speech center of your brain – the part that's active when you've thought of something to say, formed the words and are getting ready to speak them. The technology would then feed those signals to a computer, kind of like how speech-to-text software works. But instead of inputting an audio feed, you're inputting your neural activity.

When I asked if this project is particularly close to Zuckerberg's heart, Dugan tells me he's enthusiastic. (Facebook declined to make Zuckerberg available for this story.)

>>2938441

The challenge for Facebook is that many of the brain-to-computer projects rely on micro-electrodes implanted into the brain. Facebook is only working on "noninvasive" technology, with signals transferred through wearable sensors.

For sure, universities and researchers have been developing brain-computer interfaces for decades, typically aimed at helping stroke victims, people with ALS and paraplegics with spinal cord injuries regain basic communication or motor skills.

Three years ago, for example, a paraplegic man used a mind-controlled exoskeleton to kick off the World Cup in Brazil. A university collaboration called BrainGate has developed a system that lets people control a computer cursor by thinking about the movement of their own paralyzed hand and arm. And the BioSense lab at the University of California at Berkeley's School of Information is working on identifying people through their brainwaves, in what could become the ultimate personal ID protector.

Still, even researchers worry about the potential ethical complications of this sort of work. Some fear that a government could use it to monitor thoughts or to amp up an interrogation. There's also the fear that data could fall into the wrong hands.

"One of the challenges is we still don't know what the [brain] data means," says Nick Merrill, a UC Berkeley doctoral candidate working with the BioSense lab. "You have to consider the very consequential privacy problems that could happen if the data were leaked and mishandled."

Chevillet, a former program manager of applied neuroscience at Johns Hopkins University, counters that Building 8's tech isn't trying to read every random thought in your head. It's just tapping into the part of the brain for already formed speech. "These are things you want to say," he says. It's not concerned with other thoughts. "That's your stuff."

Dugan compares it to – what else for a Facebook executive – sharing photos. "You take many photos but choose to only share some of them," she says.

Now what?

Why speak directly from your brain? Facebook says your brain can process a terabyte of data every second, which is about the same as streaming 40 high-definition movies. The speed of thought is much faster than speaking, which functions more like a "1980s dial-up modem," Dugan says.

In other words, the speed matters.

"You have to consider the very consequential privacy problems that could happen if the data were leaked and mishandled."

Nick Merrill, UC Berkeley

The technology could be game-changing for something like augmented reality glasses, suggests Dugan. Simple "yes" and "no" buttons in front of your eyes could be helpful in a number of situations. For instance, answering "yes" to the question "Do you want to see in the dark?" might activate a night-vision mode. All you'd have to do is think of moving a cursor to the "yes" button, and visualize clicking it.

Facebook has already made a big bet on augmented reality. On Tuesday, the social network unveiled a platform that lets software developers create digital graphics that are overlaid on real-world images.

For the brain-to-computer project, Facebook is partnering with a team of more than 60 engineers and scientists from universities including University of California at San Francisco and Johns Hopkins to develop the technology.

Even though some universities are using the technology to develop mind-controlled limbs, Building 8 isn't taking that route. Chevillet tells me Facebook isn't working on prosthetics because the company's mission has more to do with communication.

"We're just focused on getting people to communicate better," adds Dugan.

And while Zuckerberg's vision of transmitting "full, rich thoughts" is further out in the future, the people in Building 8 say it's possible with this kind of research.

I hear you

Dugan's Building 8 team is also working on a project that could let you "hear" and decipher words through vibrations on your skin.

The concept is similar to braille, in which tiny bumps represent letters and other elements of language. But instead of running your hand over those bumps, you'd feel frequencies in different patterns on your forearm from a sleeve worn on your wrist. Each pattern represents a different word. The hope is that, in practice, the deaf could communicate quickly.

>>2938473

To try out the method, the company developed tests in which someone is taught nine "vocabulary" words, like sphere, cone, black and blue – and assigned those words different vibrations. That person could then decipher words and phrases, like "blue sphere," based on the vibrations.

The project isn't as far along as the brain-computer interface initiative. This one doesn't yet have an end goal for the two-year deadline, Dugan says.

Dugan says the aim of both projects – and everything else at Building 8 – is to take us beyond the phone as the primary communication tool.

"This thing has allowed us to connect with people far away, but at the expense of people sitting next to us," she says, holding up her own phone.

"It's the first time in a long time we've been able to crawl out of this little black box and be in the room again."

>>2938433

Regina E. Dugan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigation

Jump to search

Regina E. Dugan

Portrait.png

19th Director of DARPA

19th Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

In office

July 2009 – March 2012

President Barack Obama

Preceded by Anthony Tether

Succeeded by Arati Prabhakar

Personal details

Born Regina E. Dugan

March 19, 1963 (age 55)

New York, New York, USA

Nationality United States

Residence Los Altos, California, USA

Alma mater

Virginia Tech (BS, MS)

Caltech (PhD)[1]

Scientific career

Fields Engineering

Institutions

Facebook

Google ATAP

DARPA

RedXDefense

Dugan Ventures

NASA

Caltech

Thesis Axisymmetric buoyant jets in a cross flow with shear: Transition and mixing (1993)

Doctoral advisor E. John List[2]

Regina E. Dugan is an American businesswoman, inventor, and technology developer. She served as the 19th Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). In March 2012, she left government to take an executive role at Google. Just prior to the acquisition, it was announced that she would create, and lead, the Advanced Technology and Projects (ATAP) group at Google-owned Motorola Mobility. In January 2014, Google announced the acquisition of Motorola Mobility by Lenovo but retained Dugan and her ATAP team.[3] In 2016 she left Google and joined Facebook to lead a newly formed team called Building 8.[4] In October 2017, Dugan announced she would be leaving Facebook in early 2018 to focus on building and leading a new endeavor.[5]

Eric ZUESSE | 18.11.2016 | WORLD / Americas

The Noose that Obama Had Wanted to Hand to President Hillary to Hang U.S. Democracy (III)

See Part I, Part II

Part Three of Three

(continued from Part Two)

Knowledge is Power

Given all this it is hardly surprising that in 2012, a few months after Highlands Forum co-chair Regina Dugan left DARPA to join Google as a senior executive, then NSA chief Gen. Keith Alexander was emailing Google’s founding executive Sergey Brin to discuss information sharing for national security. In those emails, obtained under Freedom of Information by investigative journalist Jason Leopold, Gen. Alexander described Google as a «key member of [the US military’s] Defense Industrial Base», a position Michele Quaid was apparently consolidating. Brin’s jovial relationship with the former NSA chief now makes perfect sense given that Brin had been in contact with representatives of the CIA and NSA, who partly funded and oversaw his creation of the Google search engine, since the mid-1990s.

In July 2014, Quaid spoke at a US Army panel on the creation of a «rapid acquisition cell» to advance the US Army’s «cyber capabilities» as part of the Force 2025 transformation initiative. She told Pentagon officials that «many of the Army’s 2025 technology goals can be realized with commercial technology available or in development today», re-affirming that «industry is ready to partner with the Army in supporting the new paradigm». Around the same time, most of the media was trumpeting the idea that Google was trying to distance itself from Pentagon funding, but in reality, Google has switched tactics to independently develop commercial technologies which would have military applications the Pentagon’s transformation goals.

Yet Quaid is hardly the only point-person in Google’s relationship with the US military intelligence community.

One year after Google bought the satellite mapping software Keyhole from CIA venture capital firm In-Q-Tel in 2004, In-Q-Tel’s director of technical assessment Rob Painter — who played a key role in In-Q-Tel’s Keyhole investment in the first place — moved to Google. At In-Q-Tel, Painter’s work focused on identifying, researching and evaluating «new start-up technology firms that were believed to offer tremendous value to the CIA, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, and the Defense Intelligence Agency». Indeed, the NGA had confirmed that its intelligence obtained via Keyhole was used by the NSA to support US operations in Iraq from 2003 onwards.

A former US Army special operations intelligence officer, Painter’s new job at Google as of July 2005 was federal manager of what Keyhole was to become: Google Earth Enterprise. By 2007, Painter had become Google’s federal chief technologist.

That year, Painter told the Washington Post that Google was «in the beginning stages» of selling advanced secret versions of its products to the US government. «Google has ramped up its sales force in the Washington area in the past year to adapt its technology products to the needs of the military, civilian agencies and the intelligence community», the Post reported. The Pentagon was already using a version of Google Earth developed in partnership with Lockheed Martin to «display information for the military on the ground in Iraq», including «mapping out displays of key regions of the country» and outlining «Sunni and Shiite neighborhoods in Baghdad, as well as US and Iraqi military bases in the city. Neither Lockheed nor Google would say how the geospatial agency uses the data». Google aimed to sell the government new «enhanced versions of Google Earth» and «search engines that can be used internally by agencies».

>>2938624

White House records leaked in 2010 showed that Google executives had held several meetings with senior US National Security Council officials. Alan Davidson, Google’s government affairs director, had at least three meetings with officials of the National Security Council in 2009, including White House senior director for Russian affairs Mike McFaul and Middle East advisor Daniel Shapiro. It also emerged from a Google patent application that the company had deliberately been collecting «payload» data from private wifi networks that would enable the identification of «geolocations». In the same year, we now know, Google had signed an agreement with the NSA giving the agency open-ended access to the personal information of its users, and its hardware and software, in the name of cyber security — agreements that Gen. Alexander was busy replicating with hundreds of telecoms CEOs around the country.

Thus, it is not just Google that is a key contributor and foundation of the US military-industrial complex: it is the entire Internet, and the wide range of private sector companies — many nurtured and funded under the mantle of the US intelligence community (or powerful financiers embedded in that community) — which sustain the Internet and the telecoms infrastructure; it is also the myriad of start-ups selling cutting edge technologies to the CIA’s venture firm In-Q-Tel, where they can then be adapted and advanced for applications across the military intelligence community. Ultimately, the global surveillance apparatus and the classified tools used by agencies like the NSA to administer it, have been almost entirely made by external researchers and private contractors like Google, which operate outside the Pentagon. …

As the nature of mass surveillance suggests, its target is not merely terrorists, but by extension, ‘terrorism suspects’ and ‘potential terrorists,’ the upshot being that entire populations — especially political activists — must be targeted by US intelligence surveillance to identify active and future threats, and to be vigilant against hypothetical populist insurgencies both at home and abroad. Predictive analytics and behavioural profiles play a pivotal role here.

Mass surveillance and data-mining also now has a distinctive operational purpose in assisting with the lethal execution of special operations, selecting targets for the CIA’s drone strike kill lists via dubious algorithms, for instance, along with providing geospatial and other information for combatant commanders on land, air and sea, among many other functions. A single social media post on Twitter or Facebook is enough to trigger being placed on secret terrorism watch-lists solely due to a vaguely defined hunch or suspicion; and can potentially even land a suspect on a kill list.

The push for indiscriminate, comprehensive mass surveillance by the military-industrial complex — encompassing the Pentagon, intelligence agencies, defense contractors, and supposedly friendly tech giants like Google and Facebook — is therefore not an end in itself, but an instrument of power, whose goal is self-perpetuation. But there is also a self-rationalizing justification for this goal: while being great for the military-industrial complex, it is also, supposedly, great for everyone else.

The ‘long war’

No better illustration of the truly chauvinistic, narcissistic, and self-congratulatory ideology of power at the heart of the military-industrial complex is a book by long-time Highlands Forum delegate, Dr. Thomas Barnett, The Pentagon’s New Map. Barnett was assistant for strategic futures in the Pentagon’s Office of Force Transformation from 2001 to 2003, and had been recommended to Richard O’Neill by his boss Vice Admiral Arthur Cebrowski. Apart from becoming a New York Times bestseller, Barnett’s book had been read far and wide in the US military, by senior defense officials in Washington and combatant commanders operating on the ground in the Middle East.

Barnett first attended the Pentagon Highlands Forum in 1998, then was invited to deliver a briefing about his work at the Forum on December 7th 2004, which was attended by senior Pentagon officials, energy experts, internet entrepreneurs, and journalists. Barnett received a glowing review in the Washington Post from his Highlands Forum buddy David Ignatius a week later, and an endorsement from another Forum friend, Thomas Friedman, both of which helped massively boost his credibility and readership.

>>2938630

Barnett’s vision is neoconservative to the root. He sees the world as divided into essentially two realms: The Core, which consists of advanced countries playing by the rules of economic globalization (the US, Canada, UK, Europe and Japan) along with developing countries committed to getting there (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and some others); and the rest of the world, which is The Gap, a disparate wilderness of dangerous and lawless countries defined fundamentally by being «disconnected» from the wonders of globalization. This includes most of the Middle East and Africa, large swathes of South America, as well as much of Central Asia and Eastern Europe. It is the task of the United States to «shrink The Gap», by spreading the cultural and economic «rule-set» of globalization that characterizes The Core, and by enforcing security worldwide to enable that «rule-set» to spread.

These two functions of US power are captured by Barnett’s concepts of «Leviathan» and «System Administrator». The former is about rule-setting to facilitate the spread of capitalist markets, regulated via military and civilian law. The latter is about projecting military force into The Gap in an open-ended global mission to enforce security and engage in nation-building. Not «rebuilding», he is keen to emphasize, but building «new nations».

For Barnett, the Bush administration’s 2002 introduction of the Patriot Act at home, with its crushing of habeas corpus, and the National Security Strategy abroad, with its opening up of unilateral, pre-emptive war, represented the beginning of the necessary re-writing of rule-sets in The Core to embark on this noble mission. This is the only way for the US to achieve security, writes Barnett, because as long as The Gap exists, it will always be a source of lawless violence and disorder. One paragraph in particular sums up his vision:

«America as global cop creates security. Security creates common rules. Rules attract foreign investment. Investment creates infrastructure. Infrastructure creates access to natural resources. Resources create economic growth. Growth creates stability. Stability creates markets. And once you’re a growing, stable part of the global market, you’re part of the Core. Mission accomplished».

Much of what Barnett predicted would need to happen to fulfill this vision, despite its neoconservative bent, is still being pursued under Obama. In the near future, Barnett had predicted, US military forces will be dispatched beyond Iraq and Afghanistan to places like Uzbekistan, Djibouti, Azerbaijan, Northwest Africa, Southern Africa and South America. …

Barnett’s Pentagon briefing was greeted with near universal enthusiasm. The Forum had even purchased copies of his book and had them distributed to all Forum delegates, and in May 2005, Barnett was invited back to participate in an entire Forum themed around his «SysAdmin» concept.

[That ends this abbreviated version of Nafeez Ahmad’s article.]

>>2938645

THE BROADER CONTEXT

Here is the famous article by James Bamford in the 17 November 2005 Rolling Stone about John Rendon: «The Man Who Sold the War: Meet John Rendon, Bush's general in the propaganda war». In 1990 right before George Herbert Walker Bush nearly destroyed Iraq in the First Gulf War, Rendon worked with Britain’s Hill & Knowlton PR firm to get an attractive young Kuwaiti woman — «Nayirah» is the only way she publicly identified herself, and she refused to give her last name in order «to respect her need to protect her family» — to testify to Congress (see the video of it here) about Saddam Hussein’s ‘cruelty to Kuwaitis’. The American public weren’t told that she was Nayirah al-Sabah, the daughter of Saud Nasir al-Sabah, the Kuwaiti ambassador to the U.S. Even more importantly, that family own Kuwait and its oil. The Sabah family are the royal family of Kuwait. Nayirah was the daughter of the nephew (who was serving then as Kuwait's U.S. Ambassador) of the Emir or king, of Kuwait, Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah. Her father subsequently became Kuwait's Prime Minister, 2006-2011. THAT'S HOW HIGH UP AND CONNECTED 'Nariyah' WAS. And that testimony she gave to the U.S. Congress was lies, engineered by GHW Bush and his team, which included all of the Arabic royals, including especially the Sabahs. Saddam Hussein was at war against Shiite Iran but was, like post-1979 Iran was, on friendly terms with Russia, which GHWB wanted his successors ultimately to conquer, either by coup or by invasion, even after the USSR ended. So, the U.S. regime and its ‘news’ media spread its propaganda about «Iraqi atrocities in Kuwait», and the Sabah family got to keep its ancestral loot.

And Rendon continued to be paid after the First Gulf War in order to set up ultimately an overthrow of Saddam Hussein. He worked continuously on that campaign, starting under GHW Bush and then straight through Bill Clinton’s and into G.W. Bush’s Presidency, when Rendon’s decade-plus U.S.-government-funded propaganda-operation to deceive the American public in order for the U.S. government to invade Iraq and kill Saddam culminated in 2003.

So, with a government that for decades deceives its own public in order to carry out what are essentially atrocities against foreign countries, and which cost U.S. taxpayers over $5 trillion, how can one reasonably call that a ‘democracy’? It’s obviously an aristocracy, otherwise known as an «oligarchy».

Eric Schmidt, the top person at Google (now called «Alphabet Corporation»), worked along with Jared Cohen of Hillary Clinton’s State Department, in 2011, helping them to set up the coup d’etat that culminated in February 2014 by overthrowing the democratically elected President of Ukraine, who had been elected Ukraine’s President barely a year before Schmidt started working with the State Department to organize the coup. And then, Schmidt provided the Hillary Clinton Presidential campaign with crucial advice that helped defeat Bernie Sanders, but that subsequently failed to defeat Donald Trump.

Whether Trump’s victory turns out to restore democracy to America will become known only by what Trump now does, and by what he avoids doing. It’s too early to tell.

>>2938654

In order to understand all of this in its broadest realistic context, see my «Understanding the Power-Contest Between Aristocracies». Basically (starting on 24 February 1990, and up till at least the election of Donald Trump) what we’ve had is an alliance of the U.S. and Saudi aristocracies and their respective vassal-aristocracies, against Russia and Iran and their vassal-aristocracies. The two nuclear superpowers remain the superpowers even after the end of the Cold War, and the U.S.-led group have, with increasing ferocity been building toward nuclear war, and proceeded very near to the precipice in their aggression against the Russia-led group.

Here is how U.S. President Barack Obama phrased the matter, to graduating West Point cadets, on 28 May 2014:

«the United States is and remains the one indispensable nation. That has been true for the century passed and it will be true for the century to come. But the world is changing with accelerating speed. This presents opportunity, but also new dangers. We know all too well, after 9/11, just how technology and globalization has put power once reserved for states in the hands of individuals, raising the capacity of terrorists to do harm. Russia’s aggression toward former Soviet states unnerves capitals in Europe, while China’s economic rise and military reach worries its neighbors. From Brazil to India, rising middle classes compete with us, and governments seek a greater say in global forums».

He was saying that Russia and any nation that allies with it is «dispensable», only the United States is not; and that the military is central to, and serves, the economic sphere — guns exist to protect dollars not people. It was a quintessential aristocratic statement.

And Hillary Clinton was supposed to culminate it.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/11/18/noose-obama-wanted-hand-president-hillary-hang-us-democracy-iii.html

>>2938652

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/11/18/noose-obama-wanted-hand-president-hillary-hang-us-democracy-iii.html

>>2938624

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/11/18/noose-obama-wanted-hand-president-hillary-hang-us-democracy-iii.html