Update-The Pentagon claims this whole bio weapon lab story is a Russian propaganda effort to accuse their enemy of something they themselves are about to do- in this case perhaps the use of chemical weapons (although the US has no evidence that’s about to happen. This assessment
is based on Russia’s past conduct in blaming the other side for whatever they are doing). Unfortunately the narrative from the Pentagon did not address 1) Are there really bio labs scattered around Ukraine and funded by DOD? 2)If so. what is their purpose? 3) If they exist, what
are they studying and are dangerous pathogens housed there? 4) Was Victoria Nuland correct in saying whatever is in the labs, it would not be a good thing for it to get into Russian hands? 5) If these labs exist, what oversite is there by the DOD? Is it better than that given
to the Wuhan lab? and 6) Have the Russians captured or taken control of any of the labs, and if so, is there any risk to the public ?
@ggreenwald calls out Fox News reporter Jennifer Griffin for reading Pentagon talking points and then declaring, This talk about dangerous level 3 bio research labs in Ukraine is just Russian propaganda- Nothing to see here folks:
I would add that less than one hour earlier, Tucker Carlson covered the same story, but without the Pentagon talking pints. He put on the screen some evidence- a news clipping from 2010 touting the opening of a new bio research lad in Odessa, funded by the DOD. That clip and many
other DOD web pages discussing level 3 bio labs around Ukraine, as legacy facilities from Soviet Union bio weapons research labs, have been removed from the internet.
Now watching Hannity who has Jennifer Grinning on. She’s reading from the Pentagon’s talking points, claiming that the labs are left over from the old Soviet Union (31 years ago) and the mission is to safely dispose of bio weapons and other pathogens from that era. Thirty years?
Jennifer squarely contrasts with what was reported by Tucker Carlson about a lab in Odessa that was built with US dollars in 2010- not 30 years ago. So which Fox News should we believe? Well, Tucker had news clips touting the opening of the Odessa lab. Jennifer just had Pentagon
talking points. Those govt talking points raise more questions. Why are they lying?
Everyone has heard about certain places known for their highly sophisticated research facilities, often associated with world-renown academic institutions. I’m referring to places such as Cambridge and Oxford in the UK, Silicon Valley in the US, the academic triangle in NC , etc
Yesterday we learned, probably for the first time, of another location clearly chosen by the powers that be for its history of academic research: The area in Ukraine within a short driving distance of the Russian border. That’s where the DOD has some bio lab “research” facilities
that appear to have been kept a closely guarded secret for a number of years. They only became public knowledge in the last couple of weeks, after Russia and China accused the US of operating bio weapons factories. Yesterday Victoria Nuland of the State Dept admitted the labs
Lest anyone is still skeptical about some serious monkey business that went on in Wisconsin during the 2020 election, here are documents showing the complete handover by election officials to Democratic operatives of critical election and ballot handling functions. First is an
October 2020 email to election officials from Democratic operative Michael Spitzer-Rubinstein of the National Vote at Home Institute, which claims to be nonpartisan, but is clearly a private organization. empowerwisconsin.org/wp-content/upl…
Michael offers to help in curing absentee ballots “that are missing signatures or witness signature/address.”
@HansMahncke here discusses the latest filing by Durham- a brief in opposition to Sussmann’s motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of materiality. Durham does a good job tearing apart Sussmann’s argument, including pointing out that according to the Supreme Court, materiality
is an issue for the jury. Durham describes what he intends to present to the jury to prove materiality, and the contrast between how Durham correctly views materiality and how Sussmann’s lawyers look at it could not be more stark. Sussmann wants the issue to be binary- should the
FBI investigate the Alfa Bank communications or not? That very narrow view ignores things such as credibility and motives of the source of the information. Indeed, the attitude amongst the Clinton camp conspirators was precisely that: If we can present something to the FBI that
As the investigation by the J6 Committee becomes more and more heated, its true purpose becomes increasingly apparent. The goal is, and always was to make findings of criminal conduct by Trump and his associates in trying to get state legislatures to decertify the election
… results on account of fraud and election irregularities. The Committee teed up the issue in the courts by 1) issuing subpoenas to Trump lawyers, 2) threatening the lawyers with contempt and criminal referral to the DOJ if they refuse to comply; and 3) when witnesses try to
contest the subpoenas in court on the basis of attorney client privilege and attorneys work product, the Committee seeks a holding that there is no privilege because there were crimes committed. In other words, the J6 committee has deliberately placed itself in the posture of