Soros Is Corrupting Politics in Small European Nation with His Money

Liberal Billionaire George Soros Is Corrupting Politics in Small European Nation with His Money https://t.co/bYDudHmfka

— CNSNews.com (@cnsnews) March 3, 2017

...In fact, the tiny Balkan state is becoming emblematic of a battle royale taking place in Europe between conservative parties that support traditional values and national sovereignty, and those—often funded by the liberal billionaire—with an ambitious agenda that includes liberal drug and sexual orientation policies as well as trans-nationalism.

Making things even more complicated are the Kremlin’s routine strategic interferences into the equation. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s vast propaganda network often intrudes into these disputes, whether invited in or not, by ostensibly taking up the traditionalists’ cause and going to war with his arch-nemesis, Soros.

In some places, such as Macedonia itself, there is one added variable: Obama-era embeds.

The Obama-appointed U.S. ambassador in Skopje, Jess Baily, has come under congressional scrutiny over accusations that he has shown a political bias against the Macedonian conservative party, VMRO, and that he facilitated coalition negotiations between the main leftist party and ethnic Albanian parties.

In a letter sent to Baily on Jan. 17, Republican members of the House and the Senate also asked him to explain reports that his embassy had selected Soros’ Open Society Foundations as the main implementer of U.S. Agency for International Development projects in Macedonia.

The State Department’s Feb. 6 response, which I had the chance to read, was thin on details regarding funding for Soros’ foundation and groups it controls.

Grants to them were awarded through a “competitive procurement process,” the letter said. The aid, it added, was to “strengthen the rule of law, increase economic growth, support regional security,” and pursue other nebulous goals.

But in fact, a Feb. 27 USAID announcement of a $2.54 million contract with the foundation revealed that the project included paying for training in “civic activism,” “mobilization,” and “civic engagement.”...

Of course, by suggesting that Russian interests are aligned with the left, instead of Trump, that's "McCarthyism."

◼ "Mountain gave birth to a mouse: all accusations against Russia are based on ‘confidence’ and assumptions. US was sure about Hussein possessing WMD in the same way." - Althouse

From the comments: EDH said... If Hillary was indeed the target of Russian espionage (phishing) and propaganda, it seems to me the long-range Russian strategy was more likely intended to facilitate the ascendency of the Sanders-Warren wing of her party over the establishment rather than to specifically aid Trump.

After all, much of the inculpatory information released revealed how the DNC establishment, the Clinton campaign and the media coordinated to rig the primary process against Sanders.

The underlying inconsistency of the intelligence report's assessment of Russian strategic intent is revealed in the “Annex,” which describes RT “Strategic Messaging” on behalf of Russian government “interests in areas such as foreign and energy policy.”

The content of that messaging is summarized in the report by several bullet points that read like a Bernie Sanders stump speech:

Occupy Wall Street. "Information warfare aimed at promoting popular dissatisfaction with the US Government. RT created a Facebook app to connect Occupy Wall Street protesters via social media. In addition, RT featured its own hosts in Occupy rallies.”
Civil Liberties. The United States as a "surveillance state" with “widespread infringements of civil liberties, police brutality, and drone use.”

Economic Injustice. “RT has also focused on criticism of the US economic system, US currency policy, alleged Wall Street greed, and the US national debt. Some of RT's hosts have compared the United States to Imperial Rome and have predicted that government corruption and "corporate greed" will lead to US financial collapse.

Anti-Fracking. “RT runs anti-fracking programming, highlighting environmental issues and the impacts on public health. This is likely reflective of the Russian Government's concern about the impact of fracking and US natural gas production on the global energy market and the potential challenges to Gazprom's profitability.”

Non-Intervention. “RT is a leading media voice opposing Western intervention in the Syrian conflict and blaming the West for waging "information wars" against the Syrian Government. In an earlier example of RT's messaging in support of the Russian Government, during the Georgia-Russia military conflict the channel accused Georgians of killing civilians and organizing a genocide of the Ossetian people.“

Of course, by suggesting that Russian interests are aligned with the left, instead of Trump, that's "McCarthyism."

Read more, and join the discussion, at the link.

Missing from the Intelligence Report: The Word 'Podesta' https://t.co/JWxMFOpZCE

— WhiteHousePressCorps (@whpresscorps) January 10, 2017

US meddled in 117 foreign presidentl elections between 1946 & 2000

US meddled in 117 foreign presidentl elections between 1946 & 2000 https://t.co/bIQCQydjvC

— Judith Miller (@JMfreespeech) January 7, 2017

...Take the CIA’s self-professed involvement in the military coup that overthrew democratically elected secular Iranian president Mohammad Mosaddeq in 1953: it was “carried out under CIA direction as an act of US foreign policy, conceived and approved at the highest levels of government”, as the agency later confessed. The nature of the 1979 Iranian revolution cannot be understood without it. Or what of CIA backing for Augusto Pinochet’s murderous overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973?

There are more recent examples too. Take the military overthrow of Honduras’ Manuel Zelaya in 2009. The then secretary of state – a certain Hillary Clinton – refused to describe the toppling of Zelaya as a “military coup”, which would have required the suspension of US aid, including to the armed forces. Rather than call for Zelaya’s reinstatement, Clinton called for new elections. US assistance – including military aid – continued as dissidents were treated brutally; as death squads re-emerged; as violence against LGBT people surged; and as widely boycotted unfair elections took place....

Does anybody remember when #Obama tried to influence the #Israeli elections. https://t.co/AJpmDXmNrV

— Joe Lewis (@BigMouthJoe) December 30, 2016

Israeli Official Spills: We Knew Obama Wanted ‘Revenge’

◼ The Times of Israel got it straight from an anonymous “senior Jerusalem official”: Obama wanted “revenge” in the wake of Netanyahu’s speech to Congress. - PJ Media

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told The Times of Israel that “it’s no secret” that the Obama administration had attempted to influence the outcome of the election…

…“The White House is driven by three main motives,” the senior official said. “The first is revenge [over the Congress speech]. The second is frustration: It’s no secret that they were involved in an attempt to bring down the Netanyahu government – something that we have clear knowledge of – and failed. The third [motive] is the administration’s attempt to divert attention from the negotiations with Iran to the Palestinian issue.”

Not only do Israeli policymakers have a full understanding of Obama’s involvement in Israeli elections, they have also already reasoned their way around Obama’s potential politicking at the UN...

And are at ease portraying Obama as the hypocrite who is busy covering his tracks:

…“They come and accuse us of torpedoing negotiations even though they know that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas himself said no [to a deal], twice — once to then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton in 2011, and once to Secretary of State John Kerry last year.”

The plans of the White House and shame of American Jewish Left aren’t bothering members of an Israeli administration who have higher priorities than being #1 on Obama’s popularity list.

Likud pollster: Obama played direct role in effort to defeat Netanyahu

Likud pollster: Obama played direct role in effort to defeat Netanyahu http://t.co/qpJzDXJ8Xb pic.twitter.com/9xCYfJKb5L

— The Hill (@thehill) March 23, 2015

GROUND ZERO: Why Israel Is Ground Zero In the War Between Good and Evil http://t.co/p91j0BGLic

— slone (@slone) March 23, 2015

McDonough talking about Obama’s Nowruz message to the Iranian people. read @EliLake on that: http://t.co/iQU1HjCGtZ

— Rosie Gray (@RosieGray) March 23, 2015

◼ Mark Levin EXPOSES why Obama really called Netanyahu, and it wasn’t to congratulate him - The Right Scoop

Mark Levin has apparently gotten the insider details on the phone conversation between Obama and Netanyahu, and reveals that Obama did NOT call Bibi to congratulate him on his victory. Instead, he called him to make demands on him:

I want to give you a little back information that’s not widely available publicly. When Barack Obama called Benjamin Netanyahu, it was not to congratulate him. They spoke for 30 minutes.

Barack Obama insisted that Benjamin Netanyahu remove his ambassador to the United States, Ron Dermer. Netanyahu said he would not. Obama pressed the case. Netanyahu said he will not.

Obama attacked Netanyahu, he said, for the last days of the campaign when he called out the Arabs. And he attacked Netanyahu for his statements about the two state solution.

Unfortunately Netanyahu’s position is that he still supports a two-state solution. However he said as long as that other state is committed to Israel’s demise, as long as they won’t disarm, as long as they will not recognize Israel as a Jewish state, how can there be a two state solution? As I say, the two-state solution would be a final solution.

And so it was a disrespectful, rude conversation on Obama’s part, not a congratulatory ‘oh you won’.

Audio at the link.

After Netanyahu win, Obama takes off the gloves

◼ All aspects of relationship up for reevaluation; coming weeks critical as US waits to hear if PM will dial down anti-two-state, anti-Arab rhetoric
- Times Of Israel

The Obama administration woke up Wednesday morning to a sobering new reality on the ground in Jerusalem – instead of a weakened or rejected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Washington will now face the return of “King Bibi.” The White House has to come to terms with a Netanyahu who, defying the predictions, has been shored up by a strong mandate for his rightward-turning campaign.

In the final days before the election, the Obama administration was on good behavior – both the State Department and the White House barely responded to campaign statements by Netanyahu that walked back his previous comments in support of a two-state agreement. They also abided not-very-veiled accusations of US meddling in an effort to undermine Netanyahu’s candidacy. But on Wednesday, the gloves came off....

Jennifer Rubin: Not hard to follow. Obama rethinking Israel relationship while on same day sucking up to Iran. Helllllooo Dems, anyone home?

— slone (@slone) March 20, 2015