In today’s #vatniksoup, I’ll introduce an American politician, Jill Stein (@DrJillStein). She’s best-known for her visits to Moscow, bids for the US presidency, blaming of NATO for the war in Ukraine, and for her inability to condemn Vladimir Putin as a war criminal.
1/23
Stein’s background is in medicine, and she graduated from Harvard Medical School in 1979. During the 90s Stein turned to activism and subsequently received various environmental awards for her work. Stein began her political career by running for governor of Massachusetts...
2/23
...in 2002, but only got 3,5% of the total vote. Her following campaigns were also massive failures, and the only election in which she managed to secure a seat was the local legislative body in Lexington. But that didn’t stop Jill, as in 2012 she decided to run for...
3/23
...president with the Green Party. Her campaign consisted of unrealistic promises of “putting 25 million people to work,” and she was endorsed by people like Russia-funded Chris Hedges, CODEPINK founder Medea Benjamin and academic and genocide denier Noam Chomsky.
4/23
In 2012, Stein received 0,36% of the total vote, which is why she also decided to run again in 2016. This time she decided on a different strategy - in 2015, she travelled to Moscow to attend the RT 10th anniversary party. While there, she criticized US foreign policy...
5/23
...and human rights situation. She was seated together with Vladimir Putin, but somehow failed to remind him that Russian imperialism is bad and Russia should stop annexing and invading sovereign countries. For this, she blamed the language barrier (Putin speaks English).
6/23
Unlike Donald Trump, both Hillary Clinton and Jill Stein released their tax returns. Surprisingly, Stein had around 8,5 million USD invested in funds in industries she had harshly criticized, including energy, financial, tobacco, pharmaceutical and defense contractors.
7/23
Stein ultimately received 1% of the national vote in the 2016 election, but she played a significant role in the swing states of Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, as Trump’s victory margin was smaller than Stein’s total votes in these key battleground states.
8/23
Following Trump’s victory, Stein spearheaded an effort to recount votes in three swing states. The recount was a lost cause, but Stein managed to fundraise 7,3 million USD for it. In May 2018, only 1 million of the money was spent and the rest is allegedly stashed somewhere.
9/23
Naturally, the Republicans and the Russians knew that a third-party candidate could help Trump grab the presidency. Trump-operative Roger Stone had previously used third-party candidates to grab votes from the Democrats, and according to a 2018 report, the Russians...
10/23
...had launched a pro-Stein online campaign promoting Stein and her policies. For example, the employees of Yevgeny Prigozhin-led troll factory Internet Research Agency tweeted the phrase “Jill Stein” over 1000 times during the elections.
11/23
During the 2020 elections Jill was hibernating, but she’s back in the race for the 2024 presidential elections. According to Stein, her main priorities are being “anti-war”, supporting universal healthcare and “pledging to stop genocide” in Palestine.
12/23
On 16 Sep 2024, Mehdi Hasan interviewed Stein over her policies and presidential bid. In one of the most absurd conversations ever, Hasan asked Stein whether Putin was a war criminal, but she failed to condemn him as one (like she did in case of Biden and Netanyahu).
13/23
In addition, Jill’s promoting the main Russian narratives about the war in Ukraine. She’s repeating the lie about NATO agreeing to “not move one inch to the east,” spread the lie about the US formeting a “coup” where “ultra-nationalists and ex-Nazis came to power”.
14/23
When asked about Crimea, Stein stated that “These are highly questionable situations,” and that “Russia used to own Ukraine.” In the same interview, she repeated her lie about a “US-orchestrated coup” in Ukraine. When asked whether Putin was a “incipient despot”,...
15/23
...she answered: “To some extent, yes, but there could be a whole lot worse,” again blaming NATO and the West for the crisis: “we needlessly provoke him and endanger him and surround him with war games,” neatly forgetting Putin’s invasions starting with Chechnya in 1999.
16/23
Stein was also a speaker at the “Rage Against the War Machine” event, where vatniks and tankies gathered around to call for the end of aid to Ukraine, bash the US and NATO and whitewash Russia’s war crimes and crimes against humanity in Ukraine.
17/23
As is tradition, Jill also supports Syria’s brutal dictator Bashar al-Assad. In 2016, she deleted a tweet saying that “The US should be working with Syria, Russia, and Iran to restore all of Syria to control by the [Assad] government.”
18/23
Some (including me!) consider her to be a “spoiler candidate” - a candidate who knows they have no chance of winning, but who can still affect the vote in battleground states and help the other candidate win. I mean, she did the same thing during the 2016 elections.
19/23
In 2016, the Stein campaign - with the help of the Russians - targeted heavily the African-American population. This time they seem to be focusing on the Muslim vote in the swing states, and a recent CAIR survey indicates that this strategy has been fairly successful.
20/23
While Stein is considered to be a general laughing stock over here on X, her supporters and promoters are running a relatively successful campaign on platforms with younger audiences, like TikTok, where she targets mostly Democrat voters.
21/23
Jill Stein has absolutely no path to win the presidency, but just like she did in 2016, she can help Donald Trump to win. Trump has relatively low support among the US Muslim community, which is why using Stein to get those votes is a brilliant and cunning strategy.
22/23
The New Republic’s Peter Rothpletz has claimed that “Jill Stein is killing the Green Party”, and that they should “ditch the malignant narcissist” responsible for its decline. And when you look at her “achievements” throughout the years, it’s hard to disagree.
23/23
My book titled “Vatnik Soup - The Ultimate Guide to Russian Disinformation” has been published, you can order it here:
In this 5th Debunk of the Day, we’ll discuss something that sounds great in theory, but was completely turned upside-down by the tankie kind of vatnik: anti-imperialism. More consistent anti-imperialists call this the “anti-imperialism of idiots”. 1/5
“Anti-imperialism” was popularized by Lenin, who saw imperialism as the ultimate stage of capitalism. Ironically, the largest empire is now… Putin’s Russia, proud heir to both Lenin’s Soviet Union and to the Tsarist Empire. 2/5
Indeed, Russia is an empire that is still ruled by a de facto all-powerful Tsar, that still proudly flies its imperial flag, that still dreams of expanding its already huge territory through brutal conquest and colonization. 3/5
In this 4th Debunk of the Day, we’ll refute an absolute classic of vatnik BS, the crown jewel of peak dishonesty: whataboutism.
Now, not everything that looks like whataboutism is wrong. Seeking consistency or comparing actions or responses is normal. 1/5
But when someone pulls some completely unrelated event, that happened to completely different people, a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, you know what you’re dealing with: a crass denial of the problem at hand, a bad-faith attempt to derail the topic. 2/5
Logic or chronology plays no role here, nor your opinion on these other topics. You could be the staunchest critic or supporter of these other actions thrown into the discussion, it doesn’t matter. It is irrelevant whether these other things are true or not, or bad or not. 3/5
In this 3rd Debunk of the Day, we’ll talk about… “ending” the war by surrendering or ceding territory.
Nearing four years of the 2-day “special military operation”, Russia is desperate to obtain through other means what they failed to conquer on the battlefield. 1/5
An endless army of vatniks therefore tries to demoralize both Ukrainians and supporters.
They sound noble: “anti-war” or concerned about the fate of Ukraine’s civilians, soldiers and cities. They claim that if we just stop fighting or helping, this horror would magically end. 2/5
What they never mention is… WHO started the war, WHO murders Ukrainians, WHO destroys Ukrainian cities: the same monsters they suggest Ukrainians be at the mercy of. Surrendering wouldn’t end the atrocities of the occupation, it would enable them. Surrendering wouldn’t even…3/5
In today’s Debunk of the Day (2), we’ll look at… nuclear blackmail. Vatniks love using Russia’s nuclear threats as a reason for surrendering or for not lifting a finger to help Ukraine: “see, they have nukes, we have to give them whatever they want”.
The argument is absurd: 1/5
Nuclear deterrence has been a reality for decades. Both the US and Russia have lost wars without resorting to nukes. We are not submitting to the whims of Pakistan or North Korea either. For vatniks, it’s just an insidious way of siding with Putin. 2/5
We can’t just give in to the Kremlin’s nuclear blackmail, to the threats their officials and propagandists make five times a day to scare us into letting them have something they know perfectly well is not theirs, with no limit to their appetite. 3/5 vatniksoup.com/en/nuclear-thr…
In today’s Vatnik Soup, we introduce a Ukrainian “scholar” and social media activist, Marta Havryshko (@HavryshkoMarta). She’s best known for spreading anti-Ukraine and pro-Kremlin narratives online, along with a habit of spotting neo-Nazis everywhere in Ukraine.
1/20
Marta hails from Ukraine, where she studied history at Ivan Franko National University of Lviv. She received her PhD in history in 2010. Her academic work focused on gender-based violence and wartime atrocities, including publications on sexual crimes in occupied Ukraine.
2/20
She is currently working as a visiting Assistant Professor at the Strassler Center for Holocaust & Genocide Studies at Clark University in the US. According to the center’s website, Marta teaches courses on antisemitism, racism, and gender-based violence in armed conflicts.
In today’s (first) Debunk of the Day, we’ll talk about… “realistic expectations”.
Russia has the GDP of Italy. NATO — which Russia claims to be fighting — has 20 times their GDP, and a much stronger and more modern military. 1/5
Russia’s full scale invasion was supposed to take 2 days, but we’re nearing 4 years. They’ve lost a million men. Their economy is in shambles.
And yet we're letting them set their red lines instead of massive sanctions, strong support for Ukraine, and an immediate sky shield. 2/5
Russia thought their war was “realistic” because we’d let them get away with it. It wouldn’t be “realistic” to invade a European nation and redraw borders by force if the West had a strong and united response.
What’s “realistic” is what public opinion tolerates and accepts. 3/5