Posts

Russia: Putin Approves Coronavirus Vaccine, Claims Daughter Took It

President Vladimir Putin claimed on Tuesday that he approved Russia’s experimental Chinese coronavirus vaccine and the nation was readying mass distribution, alleging that his daughter was one of the test subjects and is feeling well since taking it.

An official claimed that the vaccine still needed to clear Phase Three testing, however, which would place its development behind the leading American-made vaccine. . .

Russia is one of a number of rogue states — including China itself, Iran, and North Korea — claiming to be developing a vaccine against the Chinese coronavirus. No vaccine currently exists for any known coronavirus, including those responsible for the SARS and MERS outbreaks in the past two decades.

“As far as I know, this morning for the first time in the world a vaccine against the novel coronavirus infection was registered,” Putin proclaimed on Tuesday, according to the Russian news agency TASS. Putin claimed that some who have taken the vaccine “do not have any symptoms at all” and that his daughter was among the experimental patients.

“I know this very well, because one of my daughters got vaccinated, so in this sense, she took part in testing,” he claimed, stating that she developed a fever after both doses of the vaccine, but “after the second shot, she had a slight fever again, and then everything was fine, she is feeling well and has a high [antibody] count.” (Read more from “Russia: Putin Approves Coronavirus Vaccine, Claims Daughter Took It” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Russia Sends Former Marine to Prison Established ‘as Part of the Gulag Under Stalin’

Russian authorities have sent imprisoned Michigan native Paul Whelan to “a strict regimen camp” established “as part of the gulag under Stalin,” according to the former Marine’s twin brother. . .

Whelan has been sentenced to 16 years of imprisonment on charges of espionage based on allegations that his family says were trumped up by Russian security services with the assistance of a supposed friend who owed him money. His family believes that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s government wants to swap Paul Whelan in a prospective deal involving high-profile Russian criminals in American prisons, but U.S. officials have dismissed the idea of a trade.

“We seem to be at sort of an impasse where if there are discussions going on, it’s not clear they’re going on,” David Whelan said. “And in fact, Paul being sent out to the labor camp suggests that there aren’t any activities going on between the two countries.”

The lack of communication was evident on Monday, when State Department officials made a routine inquiry about Paul Whelan’s status at Lefortovo Prison only to learn that he “wasn’t there anymore.” Prison authorities declined to provide any information about his whereabouts to the U.S. government, his brother said, but they told British officials on Tuesday that he had been sent by train to a camp in Mordovia.

“It is no surprise that once again the Russian authorities violated Russian law, by failing to notify our family about Paul’s whereabouts,” David Whelan wrote in an email to journalists and supporters. “It also shows how easily American citizens held in Russia can disappear from view, as consular access is now even more curtailed than it has been since Paul was first wrongly detained.” (Read more from “Russia Sends Former Marine to Prison Established ‘as Part of the Gulag Under Stalin'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Lincoln Project Founders Have Ties to Russia and Tax Troubles, Docs Reveal

By New York Post. The founders of the Lincoln Project, a headline-grabbing anti-Trump political action committee formed by GOP operatives who describe the president as a “crook” and “huckster,” have their own checkered dealings with Russia and the tax man, documents obtained by The Post reveal.

Since its inception last November — announced with a blistering New York Times op-ed — the brainchild of George Conway, Steve Schmidt, Rick Wilson and John Weaver has raked in more than $19.4 million, according to FEC filings, and has needled President Trump repeatedly with provocative TV ads.

But the group — which the National Review on Monday dubbed “The Grifter Project” and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) last week dismissed as a “cabal of political consultants all in it for the money” — don’t exactly practice what they preach.

Co-founder Weaver, a political consultant known for his work on John McCain’s and John Kasich’s presidential campaigns, registered as a Russian foreign agent for uranium conglomerate TENEX in a six-figure deal last year, filings with the Department of Justice show.

TENEX’s parent company is Rosatom, a Russian state-owned corporation that also owns Uranium One — the company that paid Bill Clinton $500,000 in speaking fees and millions to the Clinton Foundation after then-President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed off on the controversial merger in 2010. (Read more from “Lincoln Project Founders Have Ties to Russia and Tax Troubles, Docs Reveal” HERE)

____________________________________________________

The Grifter Project

By National Review. The four founders of the Lincoln Project — Steve Schmidt, Rick Wilson, George Conway, and John Weaver — introduced their new venture to the world in a New York Times op-ed in which they described their aims as to prevent President Trump’s reelection by “persuading enough disaffected conservatives, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents in swing states” to vote against him and to take down as many Republican members of Congress as possible.

But the project is a scam — little more than the most brazen election-season grift in recent memory. And it is working. As the ragtag band of three otherwise unemployed strategists plus one lawyer hoped, the allure of Republican-on-Republican violence has proven irresistible to the MSNBC set. Per their most recent FEC filing, the group has raised $19.4 million since its inception this past November.

The gap between the group’s rhetoric and its actions is enormous. The Times op-ed declared that “national Republicans have done far worse than simply march along to Mr. Trump’s beat. Their defense of him is imbued with an ugliness, a meanness and a willingness to attack and slander those who have shed blood for our country, who have dedicated their lives and careers to its defense and its security, and whose job is to preserve the nation’s status as a beacon of hope.” And yet the group’s focus thus far has been on vulnerable Senate Republicans, notably the moderate Susan Collins and the mainstream Cory Gardner, who haven’t exhibited any such behavior. Neither has Joni Ernst, another target.

The Lincoln Project’s ads don’t attack these GOP senators for supporting profligate federal spending, contributing to explosive debt, or enabling feckless foreign policy, nor do they bash President Trump for his incoherent trade policy or his failure to tame an ascendant administrative state. Rather, they attack Republicans from the left, in terms that please the Lincoln Project’s predominantly progressive funders. Rarely, across dozens of ads, is a political principle recognizable to anyone as center-right to be found. Is the Lincoln Project aware of who Abraham Lincoln was?

That most spots sound instead like Democratic boilerplate — the type of partisan schlock a Democratic candidate might run against a GOP opponent in a D+5 district — may go some way to explaining where the Lincoln Project is coming from. One ad slams North Carolina senator Thom Tillis for proposed cuts to federal education funding and Obamacare while claiming he supports putting “kids in cages.” Another sandbags Colorado’s Cory Gardner for siding with Trump on health care and the environment. Yet another lectures Susan Collins that she works “for Maine, not Mitch McConnell.” In an ad assailing the Senate majority leader, the group dubs him “Rich Mitch” and smears him as someone who has used his office to accumulate wealth (ignoring that most of McConnell’s wealth comes from his wife, Elaine Chao, not from anything he did during his time as a senator). (Read more from “The Grifter Project” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Russian Elites Reportedly Given Access to Experimental Coronavirus Vaccine

A group of Russian tycoons, business executives and government officials were given early access to an experimental coronavirus vaccine, according to a report.

They were given shots developed by the state-run Gamaleya Institute in Moscow as early as April, which last week completed a phase 1 trial on military personnel, Bloomberg News reported.

Gamaleya, backed by the Defense Ministry and the state-run Russian Direct Investment Fund, hasn’t published results of the study and has moved on to the next round of trials.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said he doesn’t know the names of those who received the vaccine. . .

The Health Ministry said in a statement that only those participating in the trials are eligible for a shot. (Read more from “Russian Elites Reportedly Given Access to Experimental Coronavirus Vaccine” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Adam Schiff Reportedly Learned of Russian Bounty Allegations in February

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA)’s aides first learned in February of allegations that a Russian military intelligence unit offered bounties for American troops in Afghanistan, according to a report.

Top Intelligence Committee staff for Schiff were briefed during a congressional trip to Afghanistan on intelligence that Russia offered the Taliban bounties in Afghanistan, but Schiff took no action in response to the briefing, sources told The Federalist.

Schiff has so far refused to acknowledge that his staff was aware of the allegations. “I can’t comment on the specifics,” he said when asked by a reporter whether he indeed knew of the intelligence before the New York Times story. He has also acknowledged that Trump was never briefed on the intelligence. . .

The Federalist’s Sean Davis and Mollie Hemingway wrote:

Schiff’s recent complaints that Trump took no action against Russia in response to rumors of Russian bounties are curious given that Schiff himself took no action after his top staff were briefed by intelligence officials. As chairman of the intelligence committee, Schiff had the authority to immediately brief the full committee and convene hearings on the matter. Schiff, however, did nothing. He did not brief his committee on the matter, nor did he brief the gang of 8, which consists of top congressional leadership in both chambers.

(Read more from “Adam Schiff Reportedly Learned of Russian Bounty Allegations in February” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Top Intelligence Officials Release Statements Criticizing Leaking of Russian Bounties Information

Top U.S. intelligence officials released statements Monday criticizing leaks to the media as the Trump administration continues to defend against allegations that it knew Russia had offered bounties to incentivize Taliban-linked militants to kill coalition troops in Afghanistan.

CIA Director Gina Haspel and Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe released similar statements Monday night slamming leaks as detrimental to intelligence investigations.

“The selective leaking of any classified information disrupts the vital interagency work to collect, assess, and mitigate threats and places our forces at risk. It also, simply put, a crime,” Ratcliffe said in a statement.

. . .Neither official directly addressed the reported intelligence assessing Russia had offered bounties to militants to kill U.S. troops in Afghanistan. (Read more from “Top Intelligence Officials Release Statements Criticizing Leaking of Russian Bounties Information” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Trump: Intel Doesn’t Back up NYT Bombshell on Russian Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops

President Trump late Sunday said U.S. intelligence could not confirm an explosive story that Russian military officials offered bounties to militants linked to the Taliban to kill U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

The New York Times, citing unnamed officials, reported Friday that it is believed that some “Islamist militants” or “criminal elements” collected payouts. The report pointed out that 20 Americans were killed there in 2019. It was not clear if any of those deaths were the result of a bounty. . .

TASS, the state news agency, reported that the Russian Foreign Ministry called the reports “information fakes.” A Taliban spokesman also denied any truth to the report.

Thomas Joscelyn, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a think tank, told the Wall Street Journal that “Moscow’s willingness to embrace the Taliban openly and publically dates back several years” and he would not be surprised if there is truth to the report.

“The truly shocking revelation that if the Times report is true, and I emphasize that again, is that President Trump, the commander in chief of American troops serving in a dangerous theater of war, has known about this for months, according to the Times, and done worse than nothing,” Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, said during a virtual town hall. (Read more from “Trump: Intel Doesn’t Back up NYT Bombshell on Russian Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Russia Secretly Offered Afghan Militants Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops, Intelligence Says

American intelligence officials have concluded that a Russian military intelligence unit secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing coalition forces in Afghanistan — including targeting American troops — amid the peace talks to end the long-running war there, according to officials briefed on the matter.

The United States concluded months ago that the Russian unit, which has been linked to assassination attempts and other covert operations in Europe intended to destabilize the West or take revenge on turncoats, had covertly offered rewards for successful attacks last year.

Islamist militants, or armed criminal elements closely associated with them, are believed to have collected some bounty money, the officials said. Twenty Americans were killed in combat in Afghanistan in 2019, but it was not clear which killings were under suspicion. (Read more from “Russia Secretly Offered Afghan Militants Bounties to Kill U.S. Troops, Intelligence Says” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Russia: Trump Has Sanctioned Us More in Three Years Than Obama in Eight

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said at a press conference on Tuesday that the Trump administration has made more sanctions decisions against Russia in three years than the Obama administration did in eight.

“I’ve lost count already, trying to sum up the number of decisions made by both the Obama and the Trump Administrations. The Trump Administration, by the way, has already long surpassed Obama’s by the sheer amount of persons and legal entities covered by these decisions,” said Lavrov, as quoted by Russia’s state-run Tass news agency.

Of course, Lavrov did not render this verdict in an approving manner. He grumbled that the United States has grown less interested in resolving international disputes through negotiations than Russia or China.

“Our American colleagues have basically long ago embarked on abandoning diplomacy as a method of conducting business at the international arena. Unless it is a very exotic diplomacy, comprised of primitive simple moves: a demand is put forth, and, unless the demand meets total capitulation, then sanctions are threatened, complete with an ultimatum terms, and, if there is again no capitulation, the US imposes those sanctions,” he complained. (Read more from “Russia: Trump Has Sanctioned Us More in Three Years Than Obama in Eight” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

What U.S. Leaving Open Skies Treaty Means for U.S.-Russia Relations

When making foreign policy decisions, one must be careful not to view the world prescriptively (the way we want it to be), but rather to view it descriptively (the harsh reality of what is).

That’s easier said than done.

After President Donald Trump announced May 21 that the United States would withdraw from the 1992 Treaty on Open Skies, many jumped to accuse the president of taking another step to dismantle a stable world order where relationships with U.S. adversaries are fine and dandy, and any international security agreement has independent value.

Fortunately, the Trump administration identified the harsh reality: While Open Skies can indeed benefit the United States by enabling imagery intelligence collection on relatively short order and by easing information-sharing with allies, regrettably, years of Russian violations and abuse of the treaty have become too grave to continue turning a blind eye.

Russia has denied the United States and its allies observation flights over key military sites, which not only violates the treaty, but also defeats its very purpose of instilling confidence and security among parties to the treaty.

Russia has also exploited the treaty for its own hostile and revisionist purposes, including to collect information to target U.S. civilian infrastructure and to justify its regional aggression against the sovereign states of Ukraine and Georgia.

After years of Russian violations of not only Open Skies, but nearly every other international agreement to which Russia has been a party, such as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the Trump administration is correct to finally take a stand and show Russia and the world that such behavior will have consequences.

So, what does this mean for U.S.-Russian relations?

Far from the notion that withdrawing from Open Skies begins a retreat to a spiraling arms race, the decision can place the United States on stronger footing for future arms control negotiations.

It’s first worth noting that the administration has made clear that should Russia return to full compliance with the Open Skies Treaty, the United States might reconsider withdrawal. After all, trust- and confidence-building agreements like Open Skies can indeed be stabilizing—when all parties comply.

But more significantly, withdrawing from Open Skies can strengthen the U.S. position in renegotiating the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia, an agreement that limits U.S. and Russian deployed nuclear warheads and delivery systems and which is set to expire in February 2021.

In initial discussions with his Russian counterpart, special presidential envoy Marshall Billingslea has begun to highlight U.S. concerns with New START.

Russia has taken advantage of New START’s flaws by developing a robust capacity to upload more nuclear warheads to its missile arsenal, growing its unconstrained stockpile of nuclear weapons to use on the battlefield, and developing new delivery systems not covered by New START.

While the State Department has reported Russian compliance with New START, its exploitation of weak treaty rules is no different from its exploitation of Open Skies.

Trump has also made it clear that the next arms control agreement must include China, which has been pursuing freely an unconstrained nuclear triad and warhead arsenal.

Withdrawing from Open Skies in response to Russian noncompliance and abuse demonstrates the very real fact that the United States will walk away from New START negotiations if we do not get what we want, which includes help from the Russians in bringing China into a trilateral arms control agreement.

Considering that the Russians have repeatedly offered to extend New START, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the United States can gain the upper hand in negotiations.

But to reap the benefits of a strengthened negotiating posture, the United States needs to do two things.

First, we can expect Russia to ramp up anti-U.S. propaganda in the coming weeks that blames the United States for the demise of Open Skies, but the U.S. government, the American public, and our NATO allies and partners cannot buy into it.

Russia has become adept at rampantly spreading misinformation that accuses the United States of breaking down arms control agreements, even though viewing the world descriptively reveals Russia’s penchant to cheat and exploit.

Republicans and Democrats alike should unite around the correct narrative depicting that behavior.

Second, the United States must stick to its nuclear modernization plan.

Any cuts to nuclear recapitalization programs such as the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent or plutonium pit production would hinder U.S. leverage and help ease Russian and Chinese worries about U.S. capabilities that induce them to negotiate in the first place.

By taking real action against Russian violations and abuse of international security agreements, the Trump administration has demonstrated that it does not view the world through rose-colored glasses.

All can agree on the goal of forming verifiable confidence-building agreements, but doing so requires negotiating from a position of strength.

Hopefully, an exit from Open Skies, if necessary, will prove to Russia, China, and the rest of the world that when it comes to effective arms control and other security agreements, the United States means business. (For more from the author of “What U.S. Leaving Open Skies Treaty Means for U.S.-Russia Relations” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE