Hillary Clinton and The Giant Rake

As it is known, the “Russiagate” is closed. However, it is not just closed. It ended with a deafening failure of the American intelligence services, which in 2016 were getting help from Russian, Ukrainian, Australian, British, Estonian, Czech, and Italian intelligence services. At this point, we must make a reservation: all these intelligence services worked exclusively against Trump, and only one of them, Russia, worked against both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The proof is a new dirty business—instead of failed Russiagate, Washington is seething today with Ukrainegate.  Of course, Ukrainegate was born just because of the botched Russiagate.

At first glance, both pseudo-scandals, Russiagate and Ukrainegate, have nothing in common. However, they have the same origins: Hillary Clinton.

Let us recall that during the 2008 election campaign, the main opponent of Hillary Clinton was her Democratic Party comrade, then-leader of the ratings, Barack Obama. And then suddenly, there was an assertion that Obama was allegedly born, not in America, but in Kenya (which would have immediately disqualified him from the White House bid).  As we now know, this fake-out was fabricated by Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

In the 2016 election campaign, Donald Trump was the main opponent of Hillary Clinton. And then suddenly, everyone was talking about an accusation that Trump was allegedly Putin’s puppet, so Russiagate was born.  As we now know, this fake news was also made-up (and paid for) by Hillary Clinton’s campaign.  The bulk of dirty material for the “Russian dossier” on Trump was a clever dump of disinformation by Russian intelligence services.

At this stage of the 2020 election campaign, Hillary Clinton’s main adversary is her ideological comrade and current rating leader, former Vice President Joe Biden. No wonder we suddenly obtain information that Biden’s son Hunter was involved in some kind of dirty business in Ukraine.  Consequently, both Biden and his son, Hunter, are mentioned in this piece of the information warfare somewhat tangentially, and the case is presented so that it is Trump, not Biden, who is involved in some kind of dirty affairs in Ukraine.

THE MACHIAVELLIAN PLOT

This is put together as a devilishly twisted plot, a correctly set smokescreen, and a stunning Machiavellian directness, exactly as the Clinton clan always does. We must pay tribute to the political strategists of Hillary Clinton: make your move based on factual events in Ukraine without being distracted by secondary goals, then concentrate all your efforts in the direction of the main blow.

Hunter Biden was a member of the board of directors of the Ukrainian gas production company Burisma from May 2014 to April 2019.  He was hired to work in the international arena.  But Ukrainian laws prohibit the export of natural gas produced in the country, and Ukrainian gas must be supplied only to the domestic market. Therefore, under no circumstances could Hunter Biden promote Ukrainian gas to the international markets.

Hunter Biden’s responsibilities included attending corporate board meetings once, at most twice a year. At first glance, Hunter Biden was engaged in the company Burisma for no compensation; however, he received 50 thousand dollars a month for this. Everyone should understand that this money is nothing more than a primitive corruption scheme that allowed the Ukrainian authorities to go directly to the American vice president. But why the vice president of the United States, and not someone else in the Obama administration? To answer this question, we turn to history.

THREE GENERATIONS OF SOVIET SYMPATHIZERS

Who was the patron of the young Joe Biden? Who brought him into big politics? This person was Senator Albert Gore, Sr., father of the future Vice President Al Gore. And who was the patron of Senator Gore himself, who brought him into the big league of American politics? None other than the notorious Armand Hammer, an American billionaire, the owner of the oil company Occidental Petroleum, a Soviet spy, and a man who spent more time with Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin than any other foreigner. Lenin’s sympathy for Armand Hammer was based, in part, on the fact that he knew his father well, the American Communist Julius Hammer, whom he met at the Congress of the 2nd International.

The ideological continuity of three generations of American left-wing politicians is a serious matter. Armand Hammer, Senator Gore (and then Gore Jr.), and Joe Biden have always been supporters of both the Soviet Union and all the foreign policy initiatives of the Soviet Politburo. Biden strongly opposed Ronald Reagan’s initiatives to combat Soviet expansionism. He was an ardent critic of the Strategic Defense Initiative. In the Obama administration, Joe Biden played the role of liaison between the post-socialist fragments of the former USSR and the US, just as Armand Hammer served as a liaison between the Soviet and American Communists.

In Ukraine, Joe Biden played the role of a patron, and this role was played by him easily.  In fact, after the collapse of the USSR, in Ukraine, as well as in neighboring Russia, all people who came to power had undergone impressive communist training in their youth. 

Almost everyone who opposed Trump and helped Hillary Clinton in 2016 was, to one degree or another, an adherent of the leftist ideology.  For example, Nellie Ohr, a key figure in Russiagate and the wife of the former associate deputy attorney general under Obama, is a well-known American Stalinist. Her Ph.D. dissertation dealt with Stalin’s collectivization, where she made an attempt to justify the Stalin-initiated deliberate Ukrainian famine, known as Holodomor.

CLINTONISTAS IN UKRAINE

We cannot pinpoint the exact date that former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko was recruited into the ranks of the Clintonistas. Most likely, this happened during the period 2009-2010, when both Petro Poroshenko and Hillary Clinton held the posts of Foreign ministers in Ukraine and the US, respectively.

The mistake of Petro Poroshenko was not that he worked closely with the American administration. Petro Poroshenko’s mistake was that he enthusiastically collaborated with the openly anti-American administration of American President Barack Hussein Obama, and Joe Biden had been an integral part of his anti-American White House for eight years.

The Obama administration sent large amounts of American taxpayer money to corrupt Ukrainian leaders. These leaders quickly found a way to send most of these funds back to the Clinton Foundation. In fact, the Clinton Foundation was created as a conduit for exactly such avenue of campaign financing. The Obama administration exerted serious political pressure on European leaders, who in the end, also began to allocate money to Ukraine.

Most of these funds were returned to America through various charitable and political foundations of Democrats. As a result, neither the Ukrainian nor the American people received any practical benefit—all the so-called humanitarian and military assistance to Ukraine was simply a mechanism for financing the Democratic Party at the expense of American and European taxpayers.

TRUMP AND ZELENSKY

It was destined that Hillary Clinton would lose the 2016 election, and currently at the helm of the American administration is the exact opposite. Pro-American President Donald Trump, who, as it is known, can be very vindictive. He remembers the participation of the Ukrainian authorities on the side of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 elections, and the new President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky will have to make a lot of truly titanic efforts to “melt the ice” in the US-Ukrainian relations. A lesson for all politicians here—it is not only possible, but necessary to cooperate with American presidents, but only if an American president does not take an anti-American position.

Trump, however, handed Zelensky a lifesaver. The fact is that in parallel with the Russiagate investigation by the Special Counsel and Mueller, the Department of Justice has long been investigating the origins of this failed palace coup.

The chronology of the latest key developments is as follows: in April 2019, Mueller’s report was released, but Hillary Clinton supporters once again did not accept the obvious defeat. Democrats pinned their last hopes on Mueller’s hearings in the Congress, but Mueller’s testimony on July 24, 2019, had crossed all t’s. There was no collusion between Trump and Putin. The next day, on July 25, a telephone conversation took place between Trump and Zelensky, in which Trump did not just ask, but demanded the help of the current Ukrainian authorities in investigating the role that the previous Ukrainian government played in the 2016 elections.

The basis for this was the treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, adopted by the governments of the United States and Ukraine in 1999.  Under this Treaty, countries undertake to assist each other in the investigation of criminal offenses. An investigation by federal prosecutors has uncovered the footsteps of the failed palace coup that lead from Obama, Clintons, and Biden to the United Kingdom, Italy, Ukraine, and Australia. The current authorities of Australia and Italy are already actively helping in the investigation, and Trump demanded the same from Ukraine.

THE DEEP STATE IS IN DEEP TROUBLE

No wonder the Deep State has a headache. Clintonistas realized that they were not only on the verge of being publicly exposed but also on the verge of prosecution. To neutralize the inevitable failure, they decided to try to hit two targets with one bullet. First, hit Biden as the main opponent of Hillary Clinton in the 2020 primaries, and second, hit Trump as the main opponent of Hillary Clinton in the 2020 general elections. So, an unknown “whistleblower” appeared, who proposed his own strike, convenient for the Clintonistas interpretation of the telephone conversation between Trump and Zelensky.  According to the whistleblower’s complaint, Trump allegedly demanded that Zelensky unearth dirt on Joe Biden, his potential opponent in the general election.

However, Hillary Clinton supporters, imbedded in the Trump administration, acted in an old-fashioned way and in an unforgivable hurry.  For some reason, they forgot that now it is Trump’s people who are at the helm in most of the government agencies. As a result, both the whistleblower’s complaint and the entirely new pseudo-scandal, Ukrainegate, were put on hold. They were detained in the bowels of the Washington bureaucracy for about a month.  In other words, the Ukrainegate conspirators in 2019 do not even remotely have the resources that they possessed in 2016 when Russiagate was invented.

This allowed Trump not only to get acquainted in advance with the next palace coup attempt but also to develop a strategy for suppressing it in advance, even before the conspirators had the opportunity to act.

As a result, Trump’s counterattacks rained down quickly, efficiently, and mercilessly.  All documents in the new case were promptly declassified and made public. The Trump opponents did not anticipate that. They hoped that the new scandal would help them to continue the political circus until November 2020, but they were mistaken. Since the publication of Ukrainegate documents, Trump’s rating has grown, and money to the Trump campaign and the Republican Party not only poured in, but also broke all the records. 

The Ukrainegate began to fall apart right after its launch.

If the history of the Clinton clan teaches us anything, then an American of Ukrainian descent, Alexandra Chalupa, who was the liaison between the Ukrainian embassy in Washington and the DNC in 2016, should pay attention to the list of unexplained deaths linked to the Clintonistas, and start worrying about her life.

 It seems that they collected all remaining materials at hand in Washington and made a gigantic political rake out of them, which the Democrats predictably stepped on, a second time. 

[Originally published at New Right Network]

One thought on “Hillary Clinton and The Giant Rake”

  1. Right on the money in so many ways, but it was actually Obama who started the “born in Keny” thing by applying to schools in the US as a “Foreign Student” and by saying he was one in his first book. As for Ms Chalupa…was she a spy? Will she ever be prosecuted as one, or is she like Hillary, untouchable?

Leave a Reply