Sexy Friends Toronto

Russia Loves the Impeachment Hearings Because GOP Is Parroting Kremlin Propaganda

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,909
7,812
113
Vladimir Putin could not possibly envision a sweeter gift than Ukraine falling away from the West into the welcoming—albeit bloodied—hands of the Kremlin:

As Russia’s state media watch impeachment proceedings against U.S. President Donald J. Trump they’re loving what they see. They don’t think the man they brag about getting elected is in much danger. They listen in delight as Republicans parrot conspiracy theories first launched by Russians. And they gloat about the way Trump removed U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, because they blame her for promoting democratic “color revolutions” that weakened Moscow’s hold on the former Soviet empire. Best of all, from the Kremlin’s point of view, they see Trump pushing Ukraine back into the Russian fold.

So while the historical impeachment inquiry, after two days of public hearings, has been deemed by some pundits to lack “pizzazz,” the Kremlin is having a ball. Instead of disseminating their usual conspiracy theories, the Russians watch gleefully as the Republicans do that for them. From the long-debunked “Crowdstrike” cyber plot positioning Ukraine as the fall guy for what undoubtedly was Russian interference in the 2016 elections, to anti-Semitic conspiracy theories centering around Jewish financier and philanthropist George Soros, rivers of Russian dezinformatsiya are flowing down from the President of the United States and the GOP, through the impeachment hearings, to Trump’s cult-like devotees.

The Kremlin also enjoys the Trump-GOP treatment of the Mueller report as a colossal hoax, or even a joke, letting Russian President Vladimir Putin off the hook, and putting him in a position to make light of the whole matter.

“Putin 'jokingly' promised to interfere in the upcoming presidential elections.”
During a public appearance for Russian Energy Week, Putin “jokingly” promised to interfere in the upcoming presidential elections in the United States. Speaking at the Paris Peace Forum, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov pledged to “solve the problem” of the American elections in 2020.

When President Trump pulled a news report out of his pocket at his Louisiana rally featuring the picture of Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko denying there was a quid pro quo of security assistance for an investigation of Joe Biden and his son, Olga Skabeeva, the host of Russian state television news show 60 Minutes, complained with sharp irony: “When we—here in Russia—were electing Trump, we were certain that to express his gratitude, he would carry a picture of Putin in his pocket.”

This desensitizing mirth mirrors Trump’s infamous public dare: “Russia, if you’re listening,” but treating a serious matter as a joke does not diminish its real gravity.

Russian experts and state media propagandists constantly reiterate that President Trump cannot and will not be impeached, because the Republicans are controlling the Senate. On 60 Minutes, Skabeeva mockingly told some sacrificial Ukrainian panelists: “We appointed Trump and you can’t unseat him.”

Leading Russian state media outlets repeatedly publicize the name of the alleged whistleblower. State TV channel Rossiya-1 smeared Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch as a Soros-linked architect of post-Soviet color revolutions. The co-host of 60 Minutes, Evgeny Popov, warned Ukraine of the threat if faces if it does not cooperate with Trump’s demands: “If Trump gets re-elected, and you don’t investigate Biden... [Ukraine] won’t get anything from America. Not a thing.”

The Kremlin is eager to help Trump, in fact, because his presidency has proven to be exceedingly beneficial for the Kremlin—having brought chaos into American politics, undermined trust in democratic institutions, weakened transatlantic alliances, delivered Syria into the hands of Putin, Syria's Bashar al-Assad and Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan, thereby elevating the international image of Russia as a global force to be reckoned with.

The ongoing impeachment inquiry is a twofold gift for the Kremlin. On the one hand, President Trump and the Republican Party are doing Putin’s work by assailing U.S. intelligence agencies, career diplomats and institutions. On the other hand, the impeachment inquiry revealed an unprecedented rift between the United States and Ukraine—America’s strategic partner that enjoyed decades of strong bipartisan support.

Witnesses in the impeachment inquiry laid bare President Trump’s reported indifference toward Ukraine’s plight of deterring Russian aggression—treating this fledgling democracy as a mere tool for his personal needs, while disregarding national interests of the United States.

The statement of State Department aide David Holmes revealed a candid assessment by Gordon D. Sondland, the U.S. Ambassador to the European Union, who surmised that President Trump couldn’t care less about Ukraine or its war with Russia. Holmes wrote in his opening statement that—according to Ambassador Sondland—President Trump “did not give a s--t about Ukraine,” concerning himself instead with "big stuff" that could benefit him personally, “like the Biden investigation."

“There is a common thread permeating the Russian media blitz: Ukraine is all alone and has nowhere left to turn, except to Russia.”

In stark contrast to Trump’s ambivalence, Putin hungers after the restoration of Russia’s control and influence over Ukraine. As the late Zbigniew Brzezinski once said, "Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire." During National Security Council staffer Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman’s deposition in the ongoing impeachment probe, he reaffirmed a geopolitical reality that none of Russia’s post-Soviet neighbors are of greater significance than Ukraine.

Putin could not possibly envision a sweeter gift than Ukraine falling away from the West into the welcoming—albeit bloodied—hands of the Kremlin. Popov on 60 Minutes urged all Ukrainians to “finally sober up and understand that the only country willing to lovingly cover Ukraine with its nuclear shield is Russia.”

(Note that when the Soviet empire collapsed, Ukraine was left with a substantial nuclear arsenal which it gave up in exchange for an agreement with Russia that its territorial integrity would remain inviolable—an agreement Putin trampled on when he annexed Crimea and launched the war in eastern Ukraine.)

During a press conference at the BRICS Summit (an association of five major emerging national economies: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) on Thursday, Putin told Ukrainians: “Don’t look for happiness overseas, don’t look across the oceans... but make deals with your neighbors.”

“When Ukrainian panelist Alexander Goncharov said that his country is relying on the support of Republicans, the hosts and other panelists broke out in uproarious laughter.”
Using the treasure trove of documents released during the impeachment inquiry, Russia’s master propagandists are weaponizing the information to demoralize the Ukrainians. State TV hosts, experts and talking heads are browbeating visiting Ukrainian guests and audiences by painting a picture where the West is merely using Ukraine for its own ends—predicting Trump will soon abandon the country just as he did America’s Kurdish allies in Syria. There is a common thread permeating the Russian media blitz: Ukraine is all alone and has nowhere left to turn, except to Russia.

“Everyone is laughing at you,” scoffed Skabeeva, addressing a Ukrainian panelist on 60 Minutes. Maksim Yusin, the editor of international politics at the leading Russian business daily Kommersant exclaimed, “Ukraine is toxic, everyone will want to avoid it now.”

When Ukrainian panelist Alexander Goncharov said that his country is relying on the support of Republicans, the hosts and other panelists broke out in uproarious laughter. “Listen to Rand Paul,” said the co-host of 60 Minutes, playing the clip of the Kentucky senator bluntly stating: “I wouldn’t give them anything.” The Kremlin is poised to reap more rewards from the presidency of Donald Trump—and suddenly, Ukraine seems to be within reach.

Appearing on the Russian state TV program, The Evening with Vladimir Soloviev, analyst Dmitry Drobnitsky said that Trump is fulfilling the dreams of anti-American strategists by withdrawing U.S. forces from the Middle East and retreating to domestic affairs. Drobnitsky predicted: “If Trump manages “to defeat his enemies and gets re-elected, he will start doing whatever he wants—and the world will see ‘Trump unchained.’ He will fulfill all of his promises.” The host, Vladimir Soloviev, threw in another prediction: “And after that, his daughter will become the next president.” The Kremlin sees another trump card in its future.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/watch...mp-doesnt-give-a-s-t-about-ukraine?ref=scroll
 

SchlongConery

License to Shill
Jan 28, 2013
13,662
7,713
113
They listen in delight as Republicans parrot conspiracy theories first launched by Russians.

l. Instead of disseminating their usual conspiracy theories, the Russians watch gleefully as the Republicans do that for them.

From the long-debunked “Crowdstrike” cyber plot positioning Ukraine as the fall guy for what undoubtedly was Russian interference in the 2016 elections, to anti-Semitic conspiracy theories centering around Jewish financier and philanthropist George Soros, rivers of Russian dezinformatsiya are flowing down from the President of the United States and the GOP, through the impeachment hearings, to Trump’s cult-like devotees.

I wonder if any one of those people will ever understand how they have been played by the Soviet tactics?
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,666
5,626
113
Senator McCarthy is laughing in his grave right now.

It's amazing how Russia is once again the Boogie man.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
96,759
25,099
113
Senator McCarthy is laughing in his grave right now.

It's amazing how Russia is once again the Boogie man.
You mean after Trump and Giuliani failed to change the topic to Ukraine?
And you were so close to turning Putin into a love buddy ally, all nice and cuddly.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,666
5,626
113
You mean after Trump and Giuliani failed to change the topic to Ukraine?
And you were so close to turning Putin into a love buddy ally, all nice and cuddly.
Lol. Speaking of useful idiots to the war machine.

So do you support the Iraq war?
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
96,759
25,099
113
Lol. Speaking of useful idiots to the war machine.

So do you support the Iraq war?
Of course not.
Trump's kept it going and is in Syria to 'take their oil'.
More bombings, more killings and more military.
Trump is worse than any dem.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,666
5,626
113
Of course not.
Trump's kept it going and is in Syria to 'take their oil'.
More bombings, more killings and more military.
Trump is worse than any dem.
Except when he tries to take troops out. Then he is a Putin Puppet right.

Should troops stay in Syria?
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,909
7,812
113
Except when he tries to take troops out. Then he is a Putin Puppet right.

Should troops stay in Syria?
Was it okay to pull out the troops without even informing the Kurds who were then massacred?? Especially as the Kurds were the main allies to take down ISIS. Trump only cares about himself and how he can use this sad fact to impress only his base and cult followers!!
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,666
5,626
113
Was it okay to pull out the troops without even informing the Kurds who were then massacred?? Especially as the Kurds were the main allies to take down ISIS. Trump only cares about himself and how he can use this sad fact to impress only his base and cult followers!!
They moved 50 troops. That's it.

Was it ok to arm Al Qaeda and Al Nusra with American weaponry to destabilize the region? Isn't Turkey also a Nato Ally?

Where was the declaration of war constitutionally required to send troops in? What was the reason?

It was a mess of factions. Worse than Iraq. The Kurds were an excuse. You don't actually think at any time they would have let them take pieces of land from Iraq, Syria and Turkey to create a homeland do you?

Right now the Kurds are negotiating peace with Assad. As it should be.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,666
5,626
113
Russia, the US and Turkey should all leave together, not just the US.
All the USA did in starting this with the Iraq war then arming various factions is CAUSE the Russians and Turks to come in. Invited by Assad(Russia) and opportunistic by Turkey.

Their presence helped nothing.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
96,759
25,099
113
They moved 50 troops. That's it.
No, they moved their troops away from protecting their allies, the Kurds, into trying to claim Syria's tiny oil fields.
Trump took them from backing moderates to Ghengis Khan style pillage.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,666
5,626
113
No, they moved their troops away from protecting their allies, the Kurds, into trying to claim Syria's tiny oil fields.
Trump took them from backing moderates to Ghengis Khan style pillage.
Another one who thinks it was about getting the Kurds a homeland.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,909
7,812
113
They moved 50 troops. That's it.

Was it ok to arm Al Qaeda and Al Nusra with American weaponry to destabilize the region? Isn't Turkey also a Nato Ally?

Where was the declaration of war constitutionally required to send troops in? What was the reason?

It was a mess of factions. Worse than Iraq. The Kurds were an excuse. You don't actually think at any time they would have let them take pieces of land from Iraq, Syria and Turkey to create a homeland do you?

Right now the Kurds are negotiating peace with Assad. As it should be.
Wrong it was 100 troops that were embedded with the Kurds in Northern Syria that were first withdrawn, and then followed by 1000 troops stationed in the North of Syria. Those troops were the buffer against the Turks attacking the Kurds. Who on earth said it was okay to arm Al Qaeda? They were initialled armed by the Reagan administration in their fight against the Russians in Afghanistan.

But this withdrawal without a certain truce with Turkey and Kurdistan, was a stab in the back of these Kurds who were instrumental in the battle to take out ISIS. Trump we know did it for his own business interests in Turkey. Again the reason the USA was in Syria was to battle ISIS. It started under Obama and ISIS was on the run thanks to Obama getting the Kurds and Iraq to co-operate in this respect. You then call the Kurds an excuse?? Yes, the Kurds want their own nation, and if Israel did so, why should they not get their own nation?? They have a distinct identity that encompasses different religions and are far more tolerant than either the Iraqis or the Iranians. Peace with Assad??. You trust Assad, and especially after they have had thousands killed by the Turks. Moreover, a number of those ISIS prisoners have escaped thanks to the turmoil and chaos caused by Trump!!
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,666
5,626
113
Wrong it was 100 troops that were embedded with the Kurds in Northern Syria that were first withdrawn, and then followed by 1000 troops stationed in the North of Syria. Those troops were the buffer against the Turks attacking the Kurds. Who on earth said it was okay to arm Al Qaeda? They were initialled armed by the Reagan administration in their fight against the Russians in Afghanistan.

But this withdrawal without a certain truce with Turkey and Kurdistan, was a stab in the back of these Kurds who were instrumental in the battle to take out ISIS. Trump we know did it for his own business interests in Turkey. Again the reason the USA was in Syria was to battle ISIS. It started under Obama and ISIS was on the run thanks to Obama getting the Kurds and Iraq to co-operate in this respect. You then call the Kurds an excuse?? Yes, the Kurds want their own nation, and if Israel did so, why should they not get their own nation?? They have a distinct identity that encompasses different religions and are far more tolerant than either the Iraqis or the Iranians. Peace with Assad??. You trust Assad, and especially after they have had thousands killed by the Turks. Moreover, a number of those ISIS prisoners have escaped thanks to the turmoil and chaos caused by Trump!!
You are so snowed. Al queda is in Syria. And they were armed along with Al Nusra by the USA.

All of the above is disinformation narrative you happily consumed from MSNBC.

The USA armed the factions to destabilize the nation. Then they get to go in as supposed saviors. You still think they are the good guys. The Kurds were used again. As we're the islamics they armed.

The USA had no reason or business in Syria. They exasperated a civil war. And helped create the migrant crisis. Along with their regime change coup in Libya.

And the American people know it.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,909
7,812
113
You are so snowed. Al queda is in Syria. And they were armed along with Al Nusra by the USA.

All of the above is disinformation narrative you happily consumed from MSNBC.

The USA armed the factions to destabilize the nation. Then they get to go in as supposed saviors. You still think they are the good guys. The Kurds were used again. As we're the islamics they armed.

The USA had no reason or business in Syria. They exasperated a civil war. And helped create the migrant crisis. Along with their regime change coup in Libya.

And the American people know it.
You get all your facts 100% wrong. Al Qaeda was formed by Osama Bin Laden. Where do you think Osama Bin Laden started his fighting career if he did not volunteer to do so in Afghanistan??

Al-Qaeda (/ælˈkaɪdə, ˌælkɑːˈiːdə/; Arabic: القاعدة‎ al-Qāʿidah, IPA: [ælqɑːʕɪdɐ], translation: "The Base", "The Foundation" or "The Database", alternatively spelled al-Qaida and al-Qa'ida) is a militant Sunni Islamist multi-national organization founded in 1988[35] by Osama bin Laden, Abdullah Azzam,[36] and several other Arab volunteers during the Soviet–Afghan War.[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

They still battle have a presence in Afghanistan. But Osama Bin Laden was initially funded by the Reagan administration along with the rebels that battled the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. If you have these basic facts wrong then please be quiet for a change and stop making a clown out of yourself. Funding for Al Qaeda was curtailed when they started their acts of terrorism against the West. Now you are praising Omar Gadhaffi for his brutality and the manner that his Government was responsible for acts of terrorism including the bringing down of a Pan AM Flight over Scotland. He deserved what he got, as even Reagan approved of an airstrike against his residence!. But Libya under Gadhaffi holds some responsibility for acts of terrorism in parts of Northern Africa!

You religiously follow some alt right wing websites and then make random allegations against the MSM. But not all Americans but just the Trumptard Cult Followers buy your garbage.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
31,666
5,626
113
You get all your facts 100% wrong. Al Qaeda was formed by Osama Bin Laden. Where do you think Osama Bin Laden started his fighting career if he did not volunteer to do so in Afghanistan??

Al-Qaeda (/ælˈkaɪdə, ˌælkɑːˈiːdə/; Arabic: القاعدة‎ al-Qāʿidah, IPA: [ælqɑːʕɪdɐ], translation: "The Base", "The Foundation" or "The Database", alternatively spelled al-Qaida and al-Qa'ida) is a militant Sunni Islamist multi-national organization founded in 1988[35] by Osama bin Laden, Abdullah Azzam,[36] and several other Arab volunteers during the Soviet–Afghan War.[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

They still battle have a presence in Afghanistan. But Osama Bin Laden was initially funded by the Reagan administration along with the rebels that battled the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. If you have these basic facts wrong then please be quiet for a change and stop making a clown out of yourself. Funding for Al Qaeda was curtailed when they started their acts of terrorism against the West. Now you are praising Omar Gadhaffi for his brutality and the manner that his Government was responsible for acts of terrorism including the bringing down of a Pan AM Flight over Scotland. He deserved what he got, as even Reagan approved of an airstrike against his residence!. But Libya under Gadhaffi holds some responsibility for acts of terrorism in parts of Northern Africa!

You religiously follow some alt right wing websites and then make random allegations against the MSM. But not all Americans but just the Trumptard Cult Followers buy your garbage.
They are in Syria now. Look it up.

And by what right did the USA have to topple Libya?

Can you name the UN declaration, or congressional declaration of war?
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
29,909
7,812
113
They are in Syria now. Look it up.

And by what right did the USA have to topple Libya?

Can you name the UN declaration, or congressional declaration of war?
Did I say they are not in Syria?? But your random and fake allegations about them were pointed out. So you agree that Reagan was the first one that funded them when Osama was one of the mercenaries battling against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan?? Can you not admit for once that you are wrong as no funds are going to Al Qaeda unless Trump is doing so under the table??

The USA did not topple Libya. They supported groups that were in a civil war that wanted to institute democracy. Otherwise, how many USA troops battled with the Libyans as you claim that they "toppled" Syria?? Explain whether it was a declared war on Libya and who approved of it?? Also remember that the big name in Libya is OIL, exactly that the same Trump moron is now sending troops back to Syria to defend the same resource called OIL!!
 
Toronto Escorts