Highly Partisan Judge Boasberg Played Key Role in Fomenting “Russiagate” Hoax
Highly Partisan Judge Boasberg Played Key Role in Fomenting “Russiagate” Hoax
Paul Craig Roberts
Obama-appointed district judge Boasberg, who tried to prevent the deportation of a dangerous criminal gang of illegal aliens allowed into the US by the Biden regime, played a key role in fomenting the “Russiagate” hoax used by the FBI in the Democrats’ effort to destroy President Trump during his first term.
It also turns out that this highly partisan judge while presiding over the Foreign intelligence Surveillance Court renewed on false grounds the overreaching surveillance powers for us spy agencies, powers used for the purpose of trying to destroy President Trump.
This partisan Democrat judge seems to be a protege of the US Supreme Court’s Chief Justice, John Roberts, who appointed Boasberg to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and who defended Boasberg against Trump’s response that Boasberg gives higher priority to illegal alien criminal gangs than to the safety of American citizens. The elevation of immigrant-invader “rights” over the rights of US citizens is a foundation of the Democrat Party’s domestic policy.
Questions are being raised over the left-wing company that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is keeping: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/03/if-chief-justice-john-roberts-is-hobnobbing-most/
Is Negotiation the Best Way to End the Proxy War with Russia?
Support your website
Is Negotiation the Best Way to End the Proxy War with Russia?
Paul Craig Roberts
Negotiations have many downsides, such as disputes over compliance, personality conflicts, arousal of anger and contempt, involvement of the egos of the negotiators, and negotiations have not served Russia well. Already Ukraine has violated the partial ceasefire agreement Putin made with Trump:
“A gas pipeline supplying the European Union is on fire in Russia due to an Ukraine Drone strike. A massive pillar of flames is visible near the Kursk(Russia) – Sumy (Ukraine) border. Meanwhile, Russia’s Foreign Affairs Ministry cries foul: “Kyiv has already violated the ceasefire. How will Trump deal with these mad terrorists?”
It was just earlier this week that President Trump and President Putin agreed to a ceasefire against “energy infrastructure.” “Putin agreed and immediately conveyed the appropriate order to Russian Forces. So effective was President Putin’s Order that Russian Forces which had already launched Drones toward Ukraine to attack such targets, used Russia’s own air defenses to shoot down their own drones rather than cause a problem under President Putin’s order!”
Nadezhda Romanenko reports on the immediate violation of the ceasefire agreement:
“This latest incident is not occurring in a vacuum. It is part of a long and well-documented pattern of deception and provocation, especially in the face of good-faith overtures by Russia.”
“As if anyone expected something different,” she adds. Well, Putin and Lavrov did. Negotiation with the West doesn’t seem to be a Kremlin skill. Possibly, Zelensky’s agreement to a ceasefire did not apply to a partial ceasefire, and Ukraine struck the Russian energy infrastructure prior to Trump speaking again with Zelensky.
https://www.rt.com/russia/614599-kiev-gas-attack-trust/
The British prime minister has threatened Russia with “devastating consequences” if Putin violates the ceasefire agreement. He is considering sending British jets to provide air cover for Ukrainian soldiers. A British admiral said that one British submarine with Trident missiles could incinerate 40 Russian cities and it should make Putin afraid. In other words, Washington’s “British ally” and also much of NATO Europe intend to frustrate a peace agreement with air support for Ukraine and perhaps nuclear cover from Britain and France for Ukraine. A question before us is whether a Trump-Putin peace agreement means the death of NATO.
Meanwhile, Putin’s unwillingness to use force to win the conflict brings daily new embarrassments to Russia. On March 20 a massive drone attack was launched from Ukraine on Russia’s air base in Engels, central Russia.
By delaying a victory in the conflict, Putin has revealed to the West all of the Russian weapon systems, thus enabling the West to make compensating adjustments to its weapon systems. Thus, Putin has pissed away the Russian advantage in weapon systems. By not getting the war over with, Putin has also allowed the West to learn all of the vulnerabilities in the Russian air defense system. It does seem that Putin is as unfamiliar with how to fight a war as he is with how to negotiate. Indeed, why is Putin negotiating at all?
Apparently negotiations are a trap that Putin cannot resist. Will the ceasefire be another eight year deception for Putin like the Minsk Agreement?
Before the ink is dry on the ceasefire limited to energy infrastructure, missiles or drones fired by someone from Ukrainian territory struck an oil depot in Russia’s Krasnodar Region the day after the agreement and blew up a gas metering station in Sudzha last Friday.
What did Russia do? Did Putin announce that the other side had violated the agreement within 24 hours, and finally, after three years of dilly-dallying use the force required to end the conflict? No. A military victory would eliminate negotiations, which seem to have the highest value for Putin despite negotiations having a perfect record of being a disaster for Russia. Determined to keep negotiations going, the Russian government “reserves the right to retaliate” perhaps, sometime, maybe.
It seems that Putin will delay a victory in order to continue talks. Putin appears determined that the proxy war with Washington must end in a negotiated settlement, not in a Russian military victory.
Putin says one of his conditions is Washington’s recognition that the areas Russia has reincorporated within herself are Russian. Russian news sources indicate that Putin has offered not to take the Black Sea port of Odessa and the Russian city of Kharkov in exchange for this recognition. Otherwise, Russia has the option of reclaiming these two cities as well.
https://www.rt.com/russia/614638-moscow-issues-warning-kiev/
I have not seen Trump’s response to the attack on Sudzha, a violation of the ceasefire agreement. Perhaps after all the hype, Trump doesn’t want to admit that the agreement only lasted 24 hours before it was violated. If Trump sees it this way, he is not alone. Apparently, Putin doesn’t consider the violation to be a violation and is continuing with the violated agreement. It seems the two leaders are not going to regard Zelensky’s violation as a violation. Thus, Trump-Putin negotiations continue and hope remains.
To reiterate, the best and quickest way to end the conflict is for Trump to abandon Washington’s proxy war against Russia, cease supplying weapons, money, and targeting information, cancel the sanctions, and leave the resolution of the conflict with Putin and Zelensky. Putin will require a Ukrainian election in order to have an elected government with which to deal. The resolution of the conflict will reflect the realities of the situation and prove that Russia has no intention of taking all of Ukraine and threatening Europe.
Russia would be merciful to Ukraine as Ukraine is historically part of Russia broken away by Washington after the internal political collapse of the Soviet government. Ukraine as an independent country has existed for only 30 years. The parts reincorporated into Russia are former territories of Russia herself that were incorporated into the Ukraine province of the USSR by the Soviet leadership in Moscow.
Remember: If Washington and NATO had complied with the Minsk Agreement, there would have been no conflict in Ukraine and the territories that are now part of Russia, excepting Crimea, would still be part of Ukraine. The West forced the conflict on Russia and now blames Russia for the conflict. As the French president and German chancellor said publicly, we deceived Putin with the agreement while the Americans built a Ukrainian army. The conflict is Washington’s fault, and it can be easily ended by Washington’s withdrawal from the conflict. Trump has no stake in the conflict. The question is: Does he acquire an unwanted stake by leading the negotiations? What happens if Trump’s ego gets involved?
No comments:
Post a Comment