Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Michael McFaul’

No Reassurance for Russia Is Dangerous –

Posted by M. C. on January 13, 2022

The Biden regime has blown the future

Paul Craig Roberts

The situation on the Russian front is far more dangerous than is realized. The reason is that the US-Russian conflict resurrected in the 21st century by the neoconservatives and the US military/security complex is far more dangerous than the 20th century Cold War.

I was a part of the Cold War as a member of the Committee on the Present Danger. The present danger was the Soviet Union, and the committee members were concerned that the situation did not get out of hand. There were two aspects to the situation. One was that the Soviets must not acquire military supremacy. The other was that tensions between the nuclear powers had to be kept from boiling over.

In Cold War days there was debate in the foreign policy community. There were knowledgable people, such as Stephen Cohen, to remind us of the Soviet point of view, which served the purpose of corralling a one-sided patriotic view that, if it got loose, could set off nukes. Even in our committee, which was anti-Soviet, there were people who saw both sides of the issue and kept at bay extreme positions such as the neoconservative one.

Today there is no debate. Indeed, there is no foreign policy community. There is only a collection of Russophobes, who see nothing but evil intent in the Kremlin and nothing but good in Washington’s hegemony. Stephen Cohen and the others who helped to keep things in balance are dead.

Consequently, Washington is unable to comprehend Russian concerns. As Scott Ritter recently wrote, “It is as if both Biden and Blinken are deaf, dumb, and blind when it comes to reading Russia.”

You can see how deaf, dumb, and blind Washington is by looking at who Biden’s national security advisor turned to for advice on how to approach the current meetings with Russia over her security concerns. Remember, the talks are happening because Russia feels threatened by a growing ring of US bases on her borders that are potentially sites for US nuclear missiles. It is Russia that feels insecure, not the US. So what did Biden’s advisor do? He turned to Michael McFaul, Obama’s Russophobic ambassador to Russia who has specialized in worsening the tensions with Russia. McFaul’s advice was to up the ante by rushing more weapons to Ukraine. In other words, make the Kremlin feel more threatened.

None of us would be here if this had been President John F. Kennedy’s response to the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The Kremlin has been trying for years to get Washington to listen. The current talks, I believe, are the Kremlin’s last effort. Personally, I do not believe that the Kremlin gives the talks any chance of success, and is just testing the conclusion that Washington will not even acknowledge, must less accommodate, Russia’s security concerns.

In other words, when one side does not listen, the other side has no one to talk with. This frustration has been building for years within the Kremlin. All the Kremlin ever hears from Washington is “you are wrong, we are right.”

In the United States the situation is so bad that anyone who explains the Russian point of view is dismissed as a “Russian agent.” President Trump was investigated as a Russian agent for wanting to normalize relations with Russia. By the time of Trump’s presidency all of the arms control agreements reached over previous decades had been discarded by Washington, and it was no longer possible for an American president to work to reduce tensions with Russia. To want good relations with Russia was a betrayal of America. The CIA director actually called President Trump a traitor to America, and the FBI director investigated him as if he were.

It is a tribute to the patience and hopefulness of the Russians that they continued to work for a peaceful coexistence despite the evidence that it could not happen.

As I explained yesterday, the crux of the matter is that Washington does not want Russia to be secure:
This leaves Russia with two choices. She can accept American hegemony, or she can roll back NATO from her borders with force and intimidation.

The situation is dangerous, because the Kremlin has concluded that the chance of nuclear war is higher from allowing US nuclear missiles on Russia’s borders than from action to roll back NATO to the pre-1997 membership.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Washington Post and Its Cold War Drums –

Posted by M. C. on July 20, 2020

It is customary for the political rhetoric to get heated during a presidential campaign, which will find Donald Trump and Joe Biden vying for honors in the field of national security and militancy, but there should be some balance and context from the mainstream media.  The increasingly hard line of the Washington Post on the competition with China, Russia, and Iran suggests that the political contenders will be goaded—and not ameliorated—by the nation’s key newspapers.

The Washington Post has taken its Cold War campaign against China, Russia, and Iran to a new level.  In the Sunday edition of its Outlook section, the Post gave front-page coverage to long articles by former ambassador Michael McFaul and former New York Times’ writer Tim Weiner to trumpet Russia’s “constant aggression” and its “brutal Cold War rules.”  There was no hint whatsoever of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s efforts to improve Russian-American relations over the past two decades, and no suggestion that the actions of the United States over the past 25 years have significantly contributed to the poor state of relations between Moscow and Washington.

The companion pieces have supportive titles, which suggests an editorial decision to express an authoritative point of view.  McFaul’s article is titled “Trump always finds a way to let Putin win….”, and Weiner’s screed follows with “….even when Russia plays by brutal Cold War rules.”  Their joint thesis is a simple one: Donald Trump’s complacency has enabled President Putin’s “litany of belligerent acts.”  Neither writer notes U.S. actions over the past quarter-century that have worsened the international environment and helped to create a  revival of the Cold War.  Indeed, they absolve the last four American presidents of any responsibility for the current state of affairs, ignoring their actions that have been consistent with Cold War policymaking.  Is anyone going to address the importance of restoring a Russian-American dialogue revolving around arms control and disarmament as well as Third World conflict resolution?

McFaul’s article is particularly interesting in view of his role as the architect of President Barack Obama’s “reset” policy toward Russia, his standing as one of the leading scholars on post-communist Russia, and his appointment as the first non-career diplomat to be U.S. ambassador to the Kremlin.  His two-year tour was hardly a success as McFaul, only several days after his arrival in Moscow, chose to invite a number of organizers and prominent participants in the anti-Putin protest movement to the U.S. embassy.  McFaul immediately became an Internet celebrity in the tight-knit world of Russian opposition, which demonstrated a lack of awareness of Russian political sensitivities, particularly if the Obama administration was genuinely trying to “reset” relations.

McFaul’s article is totally one-sided.  He argues that “Trump has received nothing” from Moscow despite his concessions to the Russian president, citing “no new arms-control treaty, no help in deal with worsening relations with Iran.”  But it was Trump who backed away from arms control and disarmament with Russia, abrogating the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty and walking away from the Outer Space Treaty.  Conversely, it is Putin who is trying to get back to arms control negotiations, particularly to extend the New START Treaty, which expires in January 2021.  Moreover, it is Putin who supports the Iran nuclear accord, and nowhere does McFaul explain what Russian leaders could possibly do to reverse the damage that the Trump administration has done to relations with Iran as well as to political stability in the Persian Gulf.

Weiner is welcome to his opinion that the CIA’s covert action in Afghanistan was the “last great battle of the Cold War,” but the Russians have dealt with genuine facts for the past 25 years that point to U.S. responsibility for the current disarray in Russian-American relations.  In the 1990s, it was the United States and President Bill Clinton who decided to expand the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, bringing former Soviet republics into NATO, a betrayal of commitments that President George H.W. Bush and Secretary of State James Baker gave to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze not to “leap frog” over Germany in order to go into East Europe.

President George W. Bush went one terrible step further by bringing former Soviet republics into NATO; it took German Chancellor Angela Merkel to get him to stop flirting with membership for Ukraine and Georgia. Merkel convinced Bush that introducing Ukraine and Georgia to NATO would violate Putin’s red line regarding NATO membership.  Assistant Secretary of State for Europe Victoria Nuland used her cell phone to discuss specific individuals who would be in the government or out.  When the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine told Nuland that the European Union would have problems with her intervention, she replied “Fuck the EU.”  The Kremlin intercepted the call and had a field day spreading the news.  The Russian actions toward Ukraine and Georgia that McFaul and Weiner cite were, in fact, a response to U.S. manipulation of the politics and policies of both nations, which followed Putin’s red-line warnings to the United States.

One of the most severe moves reminiscent of the Cold War was President George W. Bush’s abrogation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002.  It was noteworthy that John Bolton served in influential administration positions in 2002 and 2019, when the ABM Treaty and the INF Treaty, respectively, were abrogated.  Bush followed up the abrogation with another offensive maneuver, the deployment of a regional missile defense in Poland and Romania, claiming the defense was designed to counter a possible attack from Iran.  This made no sense at the time, and even less sense during the Obama administration when the Iran nuclear accord was completed.  Not only has Donald Trump demonstrated no interest in the importuning from Putin regarding the need to return to disarmament negotiations, he has created a Cold War-like Space Force and suggested that U.S. troops to be withdrawn from Germany might end up in Poland.  McFaul needs to reconcile the fact that additional U.S. forces will be sent to Poland with his notion that “Trump always finds a way to let Putin win.”

It is customary for the political rhetoric to get heated during a presidential campaign, which will find Donald Trump and Joe Biden vying for honors in the field of national security and militancy, but there should be some balance and context from the mainstream media.  The increasingly hard line of the Washington Post on the competition with China, Russia, and Iran suggests that the political contenders will be goaded—and not ameliorated—by the nation’s key newspapers.

Melvin A. Goodman is a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and a professor of government at Johns Hopkins University.  A former CIA analyst, Goodman is the author of Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA and National Insecurity: The Cost of American Militarism. and A Whistleblower at the CIA. His most recent book is “American Carnage: The Wars of Donald Trump” (Opus Publishing), and he is the author of the forthcoming “The Dangerous National Security State” (2020).” Goodman is the national security columnist for

Be seeing you




Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Lying Schiff’s Star Witness Alexander Vindman Tied to Ukrainian Arms Dealers, Ukrainian Oil and Gas and the Atlantic Council

Posted by M. C. on February 10, 2020

Vindman also admitted during testimony that he tampered with and tried but failed to alter the transcript of President Trump’s call to the Ukrainian President.

He may be a US citizen but he is also Ukrainian.

Kim Philby was a British citizen. That doesn’t mean that was where his loyalties lay.

Joe Hoft

We just keep getting more and more pieces to the corrupt puzzle involving the Democrats, the Deep State, foreign actors and the media.  Here’s some more about Alexander Vindman, Lying Adam Schiff’s start witness two days ago.

We reported yesterday that Yesterday Colonel Alexander Vindman was a witness in Adam Schiff’s basement chamber of secrets.  During questioning on Tuesday Colonel Vindman admitted he shared the read-outs of President Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Zelenzky with several other secret operatives.

When Rep. Jim Jordan asked him who he shared the readouts with — Rep. Adam Schiff SHUT DOWN the questioning!

FOX News investigative reporter Catherine Herridge reported that Colonel Vindman may have violated the federal leaking statute 18 USC 798 when he leaked the president’s classified call to several other operatives.

Vindman also admitted during testimony that he tampered with and tried but failed to alter the transcript of President Trump’s call to the Ukrainian President.

Yesterday we tied Vindman to Obama’s former Russian Ambassador Michael McFaul who spoke out in support of Vindman.  The fact that Vindman is connected to McFaul is alarming. McFaul was one of the first to attack President Trump’s attorney and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani for investigating Ukrainian corruption involved in the Russia collusion scam. During his work, Rudy identified the crimes committed by the Bidens in their pay-for-play scam in the Ukraine.

McFaul is no stranger to controversy or corruption. It goes without saying he was Obama’s Ambassador to Russia, for example.

McFaul has a storied past. D. Manny wrote at Politics Central that McFaul was one of the first individuals to discuss the never verified Russian hack of the DNC –


There is a 06/14/2016 article on Politico written by Daniel Strauss entitled, “Russian Government Hackers Broke into DNC Servers, Stole Trump Oppo; The Hackers had Access to the Information for Approximately One Year.” In that article, Strauss includes a comment attributed to Michael McFaul:

Michael McFaul, who served as U.S. ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014, called the hack “meddling in our personal affairs.”

“I am sure they intended to do this without being caught,” he told POLITICO. “They wanted to obtain the information without it being detected. That’s a kind of target that would make sense — in terms of them wanting to know things about what is going on here. Whether they were doing it to try to try to [sic] manipulate our political process, I’d have to think about that.”

He added: “Russia has tremendous capabilities, both the Russian government and their proxies and people somewhat affiliated with the government. We always underestimate their capabilities.”

First, such an odd choice from whom to seek a comment. What qualifications or expertise render McFaul an authority on matters such as Russian hacking? A search of Michael McFaul’s history shows he served as US ambassador to Russia two years prior to the Politco article, and what’s more, he previously made the news because Obama assigned McFaul to be an ambassador without having any prior diplomatic skills, to a major country like Russia too.

Manny goes on to state that soon after McFaul was appointed Ambassador in Russia he was visited by a number of Communist leaders from Russia at the US Embassy.

Perhaps the most shocking observation of McFaul is related to his invitation in front of Congress at a Foreign Affairs Committee. Pictures of the event are telling, not necessarily because of McFaul, but rather because of the individual he has sitting directly behind him, Natalia Veselnitskaya.

McFaul’s Congressional hearing occurred eight days after the now famous Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya met with Donald Trump Jr. This meeting resulted in Donald Jr. being interrogated for hours by Congress over his meeting with Veselnitskaya.

What is more shocking is that Veselnitskaya met with Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson, before and after her meeting with Donald Jr. Fusion is the firm behind the phony Trump-Russia dossier that was never confirmed and very possibly all made up but nevertheless was used by Obama’s Deep State to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on President Trump.

Vindman is also connected to Glenn Simpson. Vindman was in Eurasia, specializing in Russian affairs, at the same region as Glenn Simpson, who was also specializing in Russian affairs was there, as well as Christopher Steele, who was also specializing in Russian affairs at the time. Trey Gowdy uncovered this in Simpson’s testimony in front of Congress –

Today we have more on Vindman, Shifty Schiff’s star witness ==>>

Yorktown Solutions is a lobbying firm that represents some questionable Ukrainian arms companies and the Ukrainian Oil and Gas industry, interested in undermining the Nordstream 2 Project. (Kiev Post)

Daniel Vajdich is listed as the registered agent for the lobbying firm Yorktown Solutions. He just so happens to be a member of the Atlantic Council. The same Atlantic Council Burisma donated heavily to and welcomed Volker, now a Senior Advisor, after he resigned. (Which opens a whole other can of worms regarding his meeting with Burisma board members at the Atlantic Council Event.)

Yorktown Solutions lists Alexander Vindman in its FARA filing –

On what appears to be their first day of U.S. operations, Vindman received his first email from Yorktown, he then met with them in March, and is listed as corresponding with Yorktown Solutions through email every few weeks since. Important to note, March of 2019 is also when Lutsenko began making allegations against Biden per WAPO’s timeline.

In addition, Chairman of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine Stanislav Shevchuk met with the Special Advisor to the President of the USA, Head of the Russian and Eurasian Section of the US National Security Council Fiona Hill, Head of the Eastern Europe and Russia Division of the US National Security Council Alexander Vindman, former US Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Director of the Eurasian Center at the Atlantic Council of the United States John Herbst, partner of Baker McKenzie law firm Thomas Firestone during which a number of urgent issues were raised, in particular, the protection of the Constitution as part of the stability of the legal system and guarantee the effective functioning of democratic institutions.

What the hell were Hill, Vindman and Firestone doing together in Novermber 2018?   No doubt wasting more tax payer dollars working to overturn the 2016 election and the US Constitution.  This whole Schiff Sham is a disgrace.  Let’s hope and pray for justice.

Happy Halloween from the Schiff Sham and its basement chamber of secrets!

Be seeing you

The Slime People - Wikipedia








Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »