Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)

William Browder, economic rape of Russia and Magnitsky Act

News Russiagate Pathological Russophobia of the US elite William Browder and Magnitsky Death Litvineno poisoning case Post Georgian war disinformation campaign
Pussy Riot Provocation and "Deranged Pussy Worship Syndrome" MSM Sochi Bashing Rampage DNC and Podesta emails leak and subsequent false flag operation to blame Vladimir Putin using Crowdstrike honchos  Demonization of Putin Malaysian flight MH17 shoting down compaign Nemtsov assassination
           

Some superficial observations:

  1. It is not too much of a stretch to assume that Browder was somehow connected with MI6 or, at least, have some contacts in intelligence community that helped him to navigate Russian reality in 1996-2008 with such an amazing efficiency and protect him in really dangerous environment in Moscow, while he sptpped on too many toes.  After Russians started to go after him he quickly changed his citizenship from the USA to British. This change of citizenship was never explained.  Move taken by Russian to deny his entry as a "security threat" is an unprecedented move and imply some kind of information about nefarious connections. They probably should arrest and jail him as he  did not possess diplomatic immunity, but were afraid of worsening relations with Great Britain and thus let this financial racketeer go. 
  2. His business scheme would be criminal in the US or GB: first to blackmail some Russian company by buying press and spreading rumors and/or exposing some shady dealing by its management. Wait for stock to drop. Buy it on cheap. Wait until blackmail effect subside. Profit. He grow his Hermitage Capital  from 40 millions to one billion in just two years (1996 to 1998).
     
  3. Russia now claims connections of Brower to MI6 and his involvement in the attempt to stage a color revolution  in Russia in 2011-2012  (Agent William F. Browder The Smoking Gun)
    The film, entitled “The Browder Effect,” was assembled by the channel’s investigative reporter and presenter in his own right, Yevgeni Popov. The full version of “The Browder Effect” will be aired on Wednesday evening, 13 April on Russia’s flagship network, Pervyi Kanal. However, from the lengthy segments shown on Sunday it is possible to draw some conclusions about the sensational material it sets out.

    Both Vesti 24 and Pervyi Kanal are Russian language stations directed at the domestic audience. From the standpoint of their management, whatever is sensational about the film has to do with the way it conclusively details Navalny’s recruitment by Bill Browder in 2007 for a program run by Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, also known as Military Intelligence (MI6), intended to destabilize the Russian government. Navalny came to the attention of MI6 because Browder determined he was “the most suitable candidate for future political leader” given his creativity, new media mastery and speaking skills on politics, law and economics.

    ...

    The truly sensational nature of Yevgeny Popov’s film lies elsewhere, in its material on Browder. If Navalny was recruited by Browder, then Popov was obliged to show how it was that the billionaire co-founder and owner of Hermitage Capital, which was at one point the largest foreign portfolio investment company in Russia, could be an agent, code named “Solomon,” in the MI6 documents presented on screen.

    To answer this question, the film flashes back to 1995, and a Memorandum for the Chief of Secret Intelligence dated 12 July describing the attraction of Browder for his new bosses: “he is an important figure in integration of financial structures into the Russian economy. [He] has extensive contacts with [sic] international banking community and has [sic] wide range of relations with representatives of business communities in the UK, the USA, Europe, China and India.”

    This was about the time when Browder was making a transition from highly paid employee heading up the section of private investing in Russia at Salomon Brothers (hence the coy code name, a corruption of Salomon) to setting up his own investment company with seed capital from the elderly Syrian-Jewish-Brazilian banker and entrepreneur Edmond Safra. It was also the time when Browder, a US citizen became a British subject.

    And so that we may understand why such talents and contacts could be useful to British (and by extension to American) intelligence, a further flashback to 28 August 1986 shows us a CIA document entitled “Change the Constitutional and Political System in Eastern Europe and the USSR” signed by the agency director Wiliam Casey. Among the specific actions within the scope of this program would be “getting control over financial flows and removing assets from the economies of developed countries.”

    The narrator explains that even more than 25 years after the disappearance of the USSR, this CIA policy, known as “The Quake” (Drozh’, in Russian) remains in effect.

    Not content with proving that a billionaire investment fund owner could also be an MI6 operative, the film’s producer also saw fit to demolish via documentary proof the entire Browder story about the reasons for his being declared persona non grata in Russia in 2006 as a threat to national security and about the persecution of his loyal retainer Magnitsky at the hands of rapacious Moscow officials plundering the remains of his company.

    It emerges from a memorandum to the Director of Central intelligence written on CIA letterhead and dated 20 September 2009 that Browder had discussed with MI6 the deteriorating health of Magnitsky in detention and that he was involved in plans to have the penitentiary service arrange the termination of medical services. The report went on to say that this ‘medical error’ could lead to Magnitsky’s death.

    A follow-on interview with one political analyst explains that Browder was the only one who could profit from Magnitsky’s demise. We are told his former protégé was about to start talking to prosecution against his employers. Then his death provided the material for the cause célèbre that Browder would ride to nation-wide prominence in the USA and in Europe with the eventual passage of the sanctions on Russia he promoted as the just punishment for corrupt and murderous officials of the Putin regime.

    Thus, the collateral damage resulting from Yevgeni Popov’s exposé amounts to a devastating attack on the political situation in the United States, where the CIA is shown to have been complicit in setting up the case used to move the American political mood and legislation in a harshly anti-Russian direction via the Magnitsky Act sanctions. Here is a smoking gun of great potential importance for those who care about who is actually controlling the US government if not our elected leaders.

  4. Sergey Magnitsky was an accountant (an auditor by training) not a lawyer (this is complete misinformation by Browder with the explicit aim to ramp up support; it was a lie, which  he admitted in court) and as happens with people of  this profession instead of fighting financial crime, he was engaged in questionable dealings  himself at the service of powers that be. Hiring mentally retarded people as financial analysts to avoid taxes of shadow companies he organized to transfer assets is an interesting trick, if you think about it.  And his death was extremely beneficial for Browder as he knew too much and as such was for Browser a Damocles sword to hang over his head. Lee Harvey Oswald was in a somewhat similar position in a different country.
  5. It looks more and more to me that the "Economic rape of Russia" after dissolution of the USSR was a well organized and pretty  much coordinated intelligence operation, not an accident.  Those guys want to destroy Russia economically once and forever. Like Romans used to "Carthago delenda est"
  6. Sergey Magnitsky is not the only one dead. Edmond Safra, Browder partner in creation of Hermitage capital (the money were provided by Safra) is dead too. And like some notable accomplices of Intelligence services related crimes he died in a rather suspicious circumstances. http://suspiciousdeaths.blogspot.com/2011_08_01_archive.html   There were a couple of other "strange" deaths documented in Nekrasov's film (avableve via VIMEO, see News section for links). See also review of the film atNew Cold War Ukraine and Beyond (Film by Andrei Nekrasov 'The Magnitsky Act. Behind the Scenes' )
  7. Russia submitted Browder name to Interpol for financial machination with Gasprom shares.  Later in 2018 they added his possible participation of Magnitsky murder by corrupting prison doctors to withdraw care from Sergey.
  8. Looks like in the USA Russophobia by-and-large replaced anti-Semitism, as the latter became too dangerous as those guys now own the country or at least its foreign policy. I still remember humiliation of Chuck Hagel in the hands of Israel lobby before his appointment to the position of the Secretary of Defense.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5eVsO_NWdw
     
  9. Nekrasov's film is a a very interesting testimony on Browder personality and shady dealings. See the fooloing references fro more indormation (extracted from Film by Andrei Nekrasov 'The Magnitsky Act. Behind the Scenes' - New Cold War Ukraine and Beyond ):
  10. Alex Kramer book The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder’s Dangerous Deception is well worth reading (Grand Deception The Truth About Bill Browder, the Magnitsky Act and Anti-Russian Sanctions)

    Harley Schlanger on Oct 05, 2017  ·  at 4:00 pm EST/EDT

    I have read Alex Krainer’s book. It is a devastating critique of Browder, which exposes him as the corrupt thug he is. Browder is no more interested in “democratizing” Russia than the U.S. Deep State is in protecting the integrity of the U.S. election process! That Browder was the “star witness” for the Congress before it overwhelmingly passed the latest sanctions bill against Russia shows why it is important that he be exposed.

    I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to know something about the networks and individuals acting to prevent a rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia.

  11. Grand Deception The Truth About Bill Browder, the Magnitsky Act and Anti-Russian Sanctions Alex Krainer 9780692131954 Amazo

Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Aug 16, 2018] An authorised version of Nekrasov's movie is available on Vimeo now

Aug 16, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

MAGNITSKIY MOVIE. An authorised version is available on Vimeo here. I urge you to watch it: not only does it complete destroy Browder's case, it is an interesting detective process as the film-maker gradually perceives the inconsistencies and manipulations. Browder's story has been extremely important at setting up the anti-Russia dancing mania : if it's a lie, then what?

[Aug 16, 2018] 'Bill Browder Should Be in Jail' Says Philip Giraldi, Widely Respected Pundit and Retired CIA Officer

Aug 16, 2018 | russia-insider.com

'Bill Browder Should Be in Jail' Says Philip Giraldi, Widely Respected Pundit and Retired CIA Officer The Browder story keeps getting more and more airplay, and it is not complimentary to him. Patrick Fleming 10 min ago | 29 13 Giraldi, one of the most popular writers on the conservative Unz.com , is one of the superstars of the alt-media landscape. He has been outspoken about the pernicious effects of Israel and wealthy pro-Israeli American Jews on American politics. You can see many of his articles on RI here .

This was from a radio interview with Lee Stranahan, formerly of Breitbart, now with Sputnik, the Russian state-owned news agency.

You can listen to the whole thing here. Key quotes below:

Listen to "Connecting the Dots on Bill Browder and Mikhail Khodorkovsky" on Spreaker.

"He's basically been the one who appears on the networks, appears before Congress," "

"He is someone that they've [US officials] decided has to be the spokesperson in terms of what's going on in Russia, and yet he has a hidden agenda as a potential criminal."

"I think the story is growing; I'm seeing more and more references to Browder in a negative way."

"The problem is that we have to get this at a level where Browder is doing his damage, and that's in the mainstream media, places like The New York Times, and also to have some people in Congress begin to speak up and say, 'Hey, what about the Magnitsky Act and everything that we did to provoke a crisis with Russia based on what Browder was telling us?'".

"Once you understand that, you realize that Browder, if anything, should be in jail."


This post first appeared on Russia Insider

Anyone is free to republish, copy, and redistribute the text in this content (but not the images or videos) in any medium or format, with the right to remix, transform, and build upon it, even commercially, as long as they provide a backlink and credit to Russia Insider . It is not necessary to notify Russia Insider . Licensed Creative Commons

[Aug 14, 2018] Book: RAND DECEPTION: The TRUTH ABOUT BILL BROWDER, the MAGNITSKY ACT, and ANTI-RUSSIAN SANCTIONS

Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

RobinG , August 14, 2018 at 4:25 am GMT

Re. RUSSIAGATE: the 2nd edition of Alex Krainer's book is now available, with new title.

GRAND DECEPTION: The TRUTH ABOUT BILL BROWDER, the MAGNITSKY ACT, and ANTI-RUSSIAN SANCTIONS https://www.redpillpress.com/shop/grand-deception-bill-browder-magnitsky-act-russian-sanctions/

In 2015, Bill Browder published Red Notice – purportedly a true story about his experience in Russia between 1996 and 2005. Upon closer scrutiny however, his story doesn't add up and demonstrably fails to stand up in a court of law. Nonetheless, on the dubious strength of that story, Browder has been able to lobby the U.S. Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act in 2012 which needlessly damaged the relations between the U.S. and Russia. Where he failed in courts of law, however, his campaign of relentless demonization of Russia and of Vladimir Putin has been successful in the court of public opinion in the West. As humanity finds itself on the precipice of yet another great war, what we need are bridges of mutual understanding and constructive engagement, not demonization.

[Aug 14, 2018] Is not it ironic that the neocon and MI6 corrected Browder is a grandson of two KGB agents?

Aug 14, 2018 | www.unz.com

annamaria , August 14, 2018 at 1:24 am GMT

@Sean

" and so Putin immediately issued orders for him to be sadistically murdered "
What an amazing consistency in supporting the Browder/Steele line "Putin did it." Which is understandable, considering the efforts and investment made into the MSM memes. You made a very strong impression that the presstituting MSM is your main source of information.
Here are some excerpts from the honest sources.

"Poisoned Russian spy was close to Christopher Steele consultant:" http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/poisoned-russian-spy-close-steele-consultant-report-article-1.3862516
"Jonathan Winer was not only a point man for the Steele "dossier" at the State Department in 2016 (and Steele dossiers of yore), he was also a father of the Magnitsky Act in 2012. Yes, longtime Senate staffer Winer is the "old friend" Browder credits with envisioning the legislative strategy that culminated in passage of the law. (More recently, Winer is serving as Browder's bulldog-lawyer -- story here.)
"Cardin knew there were problems with Browder's story about Magnitsky's death and yet brought him into Congress to testify to secure the vote. That's suborning perjury:" https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-04/magnitsky-trio-pushes-war-russia-new-sanctions

"Litvinenko's circle also included Boris Berezovsky, Alexander Goldfarb, Vyacheslav Zharko, and Akhmed Zakayev, most of whom have received asylum in the U.K. In the 1990s, Boris Berezovsky worked with Mikhail Khodorkovsky and George Soros' International Science Foundation which was headed by Alexander Goldfarb for almost ten years. He was also involved in money laundering millions of dollars through the Bank of New York and the Republic Bank of New York which was owned by Bill Browder's now deceased partner, Edmond Safra:" https://jimmysllama.com/2018/05/07/11191/

– Is not interesting, how so many Browder's connections met an untimely death yet Browder the Scoundrel is well supported and protected by the "deciders." -- See the fate of a DOCUMENTARY about Browder, Magnitsky, and a bloody trail of the dead former employees of Browder whom he used for his very profitable if criminal enterprise.
Alexander Perepelichny" was the key witness who could potentially destroy the scam with highest political stakes on Magnitsky dossier. As Browder responds with "I do not recall" and "I do not know" on any substantial inquiry in the court, the US judiciary could be very interested in hearing Perepelichny. This menace to Magnitsky Act was eliminated one week before the bill passed the US House: on Nov 10, 2012 Alexander Perepelichny was found dead outside his mansion in London."

[Aug 08, 2018] Christopher Steele, FBI s Confidential Human Source by Publius Tacitus

Highly recommended!
A foreign intelligence asset was used to justify surveillance of Trump[ and some of his associates
Notable quotes:
"... What is clear from the new records is that Christopher Steele, a foreign intelligence officer, had frequent and extensive contacts with the FBI. Who was his FBI Case Agent? ..."
"... The main thing I want to know is WHEN was the decision made to tar Trump with Russia - both at the FBI (and likely CIA) and at the DNC (over the leak) - and WHO was the deciding entity - Comey, Brennan, Clinton, Obama or someone else? And perhaps who came up with the idea in the first place (at the DNC, it was very likely Alexandra Chalupa, the Ukrainian-American DNC "consultant"). ..."
"... The bad thing is that our MSM is so reverent of our Intel agencies that I see them encouraged to increasingly put their hand on the scale. ..."
"... Recently, I saw arm flailing by a Congressman, Dan Coats, and Mueller about how the Russians are still at it. They are trying to disrupt or influence the 2018. Really, then I demand to get a list of the pro-Kremlin candidates. How long before the mere threat of being outed as a Kremlin agent is used to punish elected officials if they are not sufficiently hawkish or don't support certain programs. Unchallenged claims by Intel agencies gives them a lot of political power. ..."
"... I am skeptical. Russia has a lot of fish to fry, why would they expend resources on midterm elections. Now everyone in the U.S. hates them, both traditional hawk Republicans and born again uber-hawk Democrats. There is a tiger behind both doors. ..."
"... if Steele had been a CHS since at least February of 2016, what was the purpose of passing the Dossier to the FBI through Fusion GPS? Why not just going to his FBI handler? Was Steele collaboration with Fusion even in compliance with FBI regulations? Did the FBI know? ..."
"... Because part of the plan was to leak the information in order to damage Trump. FBI could not do that. Would have exposed them to some real legal jeopardy. This was a dual track strategy. Diabolical almost. ..."
"... Don't forget the Nellie Ohr (Fusion GPS) -> Bruce Ohr (DOJ) back channel. The husband & wife tag team. Yes, the same Nellie that was investigating using ham radio to communicate to avoid NSA mass surveillance. ..."
"... From the very beginning that information about all this was slowly leaking from the Congressional investigation, this whole thing smelled very fishy. Then add intense effort at DOJ & FBI to obstruct and obfuscate. And the unhinged tweets and interviews by Brennan, Clapper & Comey. ..."
"... He was working with FBI and GPS at the same time. GPS was in the dark supposedly about his work with the FBI and Steele got their approval to hand over what he had delivered to GPS to the FBI as a cover for his work with the FBI. ..."
"... its also likely FBI had some input into the content of what was delivered to GPS, and more importantly what was not delivered. ..."
"... Re the 'standing agreement to not recruit each other's intelligence personnel for clandestine activities.' As Steele was not by this time a current employee of MI6, was the FBI in technical violation of this? ..."
"... A central question in regard to Steele, as with quite a number of former intelligence/law enforcement/military people who have started at least ostensibly private sector operations, is how far these are being used as 'cover' for activities conducted on behalf of either the state agencies for which they used to work, or other state agencies. ..."
"... It is at least possible that one advantage of such arrangements may be that they make it possible to evade the letter of agreements between intelligence agencies in different countries ..."
"... If, as seems likely, both current and former top FBI and DOJ people – very likely Mueller as well as Comey, Strzok and many others – were intimately involved in the conspiracy to subvert the constitution, then a means of making it possible for Steele to combine feeding information to the FBI while also engaging in 'StratCom' via the MSM could have been necessary. ..."
"... An obvious means of 'squaring the circle' would have been to issue a formal 'termination' to Steele, while creating 'back channels' to those who were officially supposed not to be talking to him ..."
"... A report yesterday by John Solomon in 'The Hill' quotes from messages exchanged between Steele and Bruce Ohr after the supposed termination ..."
"... 'In all, Ohr's notes, emails and texts identify more than 60 contacts with Steele and/or Simpson, some dating to 2002 in London. But the vast majority occurred during the 2016-2017 timeframe that gave birth to one of the most controversial counterintelligence probes in American history.' ..."
"... I have just finished taking a fresh look at Sir Robert Owen's travesty of a report into the death of Litvinenko. In large measure, this develops claims originally made in Christopher Steele's first attempt to provide a convincing account of why figures close to Putin might have thought it made sense to assassinate that figure, and to do so with polonium. The sheer volume of fabrication which has been deployed in an attempt to defend the patently indefensible almost beggars belief. ..."
"... Just as a question arises as to whether Steele is essentially acting on behalf of MI6, a question also arises as to whether the FBI leadership were knowledgeable about, and possibly involved with, the various shenanigans in which Shvets and Levinson were involved. Given that claims about Mogilevich have turned out to be central to 'Russiagate', that seems a rather important issue, and I am curious as to whether Ohr's communications with Steele may cast any light on it. ..."
"... Apparently the FBI got Deripaksa to fund the rescue of Levinson from Iran. Furthermore apparently FBI personnel maybe including McCabe visited with Deripaksa and showed him the Steele dossier. He supposedly had a nice guffaw and dismissed it as nonsense. So on the one hand while they make Russia out to be the most evil they play footsie with Russian oligarchs. ..."
"... Thinking about "Christopher Steele was terminated as a Confidential Human Source for cause.", something that doesn't seem to have gotten as much attention is that Peter Strzok failed his poly: ..."
"... Steele's relationship with the FBI extends far further back than February 2016. Shortly after he left MI6, he contracted with the Football Association to investigate possible FIFA corruption. Once he realized the massiveness of this corruption he contacted his old friends at the FBI Eurasian Crimes Task Force in 2011. Thus began his association with the FBI as a CHS. That investigation culminated in the 2015 FIFA corruption indictments and convictions. ..."
"... One thing I don't understand...we have the anti-Trumpers saying that Donald Junior meeting with a Russian national to get 'dirt' on Hillary is illegal...due to some law about candidates collaborating with foreigners or something like that...[obviously I'm foggy on the technical details]... Yet we know that the Hillary campaign worked with a foreign national, Steele, to get dirt on Trump...how is this not the same...? ..."
"... What role did Stefan Halper and Mifsud play as Confidential Human Sources in all this? ..."
"... Why was British Intelligence allegedly collecting and passing along info about Donald Trump in the first place? Or could this have been a pretext created to give cover and/or support to the agenda here in the US to insure his defeat? Could a foreign intelligence source such as this trigger/facilitate/justify the US counterintelligence investigation of Trump, or give cover to a covert investigation that may have already begun? ..."
"... British intelligence was collecting / passing on info about Trump because of his campaign stance on NATO (he said it was obsolete), his desire to end regime change wars (he castigated the fiasco in Iraq, took Bush to task over it etc.), and his often stated desire to get along with Russia (and China). Trump also talked of ending certain economic policies (NAFTA, TPP, etc.) and reenacting others (Glass-Steagall, the American System of Economics i.e. Hamilton, Carey, Clay), If Trump had acted on those, which he has not so far, he would changed the entire world system, a system in place since the end of WW II, or earlier. That was a risk too big to take without some kind of insurance policy - I believe Christopher Steele was that insurance policy. ..."
"... British Intelligence is verifiably the foreign source with the most extensive and effective meddling in the 2016 election. Perfidious Albion. ..."
"... Or, GSHQ was hovering up signint on Trump campaign early-on (using domestics US resources and databases via their 5-Eyes "sharing agreement" with NSA) cuz Brennan asked them to do it? ..."
"... Trump announced his run for President in 2015. I'm pretty sure that every intel service on the planet was watching him, they would be derelict not to. GCHQ may have been collecting intel on all the candidates, ..."
"... Trump announced his run for President in 2015. I'm pretty sure that every intel service on the planet was watching him, they would be derelict not to. GCHQ may have been collecting intel on all the candidates, ..."
"... I've heard that the Echelon system is used by the Five Eyes IC to do something similar. The Brits spy on US, and give the NSA the data so the NSA can evade US laws prohibiting spying on us, and we return the favor to help them evade what (few) laws they have that prohibits spying on their people. ..."
"... still wonder why the US would need to rely so much on British intelligence sources ..."
"... I've read that Steele's cover was blown 20 years ago and he hasn't even been to Russia since, so I wonder why he was considered such a reliable source by both the US and UK? In my opinion as an absolute naif about such things, Steele seems like he may be a has-been when it comes to Russia. ..."
"... Here is a simple explanation from someone who knows almost nothing about how any of the people in power work: Most of them are not as clever and smart as they think they are. And most of the regular people who are just citizens are smarter than these people think they are. ..."
"... It's simply that their arrogant assessment of their own superiority caused them to do really stupid things ..."
Aug 08, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

The revelations from US Government records about the FBI/Intel Community plot to take out Donald Trump continue to flow thanks to the dogged efforts of Judicial Watch. The latest nugget came last Friday with the release of FBI records detailing their recruitment and management of Britain's ostensibly retired Intelligence Officer, Christopher Steele. He was an officially recruited FBI source and received at least 11 payments during the 9 month period that he was signed up as a Confidential Human Source.

You may find it strange that we can glean so much information from a document dump that is almost entirely redacted . The key is to look at the report forms; there are three types--FD-1023 (Source Reports), FD-209a (Contact Reports) and FD-794b (Payment Requests). There are 15 different 1023s, 13 209a reports and 11 794b payment requests covering the period from 2 February 2016 thru 1 November 2016. That is a total of nine months.

These reports totally destroy the existing meme that Steele only came into contact with the FBI sometime in July 2016. It is important for you to understand that a 1023 Source Report is filled out each time that the FBI source handler has contact with the source. This can be an in person meeting or a phone call. Each report lists the name of the Case Agent; the date, time and location of the meeting; any other people attending the meeting; and a summary of what was discussed.

What is clear from the new records is that Christopher Steele, a foreign intelligence officer, had frequent and extensive contacts with the FBI. Who was his FBI Case Agent?


richardstevenhack , a day ago

Indeed we do need more information.

The main thing I want to know is WHEN was the decision made to tar Trump with Russia - both at the FBI (and likely CIA) and at the DNC (over the leak) - and WHO was the deciding entity - Comey, Brennan, Clinton, Obama or someone else? And perhaps who came up with the idea in the first place (at the DNC, it was very likely Alexandra Chalupa, the Ukrainian-American DNC "consultant").

We can be pretty sure this predates any alleged Russian "hacking" (unless it occurred as a result of alleged Russian hacking of the DNC in 2015).

This needs to be pinned down if anyone is to be successfully prosecuted for creating this treasonous hoax.

chris chuba , 5 hours ago
A very closely related topic, Victor Davis Hanson is onto something but it is darker than he suggests, https://www.nationalreview.... Paraphrasing, he gives the typical, rally around the flag we must stop the Russians intro but then documents how govt flaks abused their power to influence our elections and then makes the point, 'this is why the public is skeptical of their claims'.

The bad thing is that our MSM is so reverent of our Intel agencies that I see them encouraged to increasingly put their hand on the scale.

Recently, I saw arm flailing by a Congressman, Dan Coats, and Mueller about how the Russians are still at it. They are trying to disrupt or influence the 2018. Really, then I demand to get a list of the pro-Kremlin candidates. How long before the mere threat of being outed as a Kremlin agent is used to punish elected officials if they are not sufficiently hawkish or don't support certain programs. Unchallenged claims by Intel agencies gives them a lot of political power.

I am skeptical. Russia has a lot of fish to fry, why would they expend resources on midterm elections. Now everyone in the U.S. hates them, both traditional hawk Republicans and born again uber-hawk Democrats. There is a tiger behind both doors.

Leonardo Facchin , 20 hours ago
Thanks for the explanation.

What I can't figure out is: if Steele had been a CHS since at least February of 2016, what was the purpose of passing the Dossier to the FBI through Fusion GPS? Why not just going to his FBI handler? Was Steele collaboration with Fusion even in compliance with FBI regulations? Did the FBI know?

Publius Tacitus -> Leonardo Facchin , 17 hours ago
Because part of the plan was to leak the information in order to damage Trump. FBI could not do that. Would have exposed them to some real legal jeopardy. This was a dual track strategy. Diabolical almost.
blue peacock -> Leonardo Facchin , 13 hours ago
Don't forget the Nellie Ohr (Fusion GPS) -> Bruce Ohr (DOJ) back channel. The husband & wife tag team. Yes, the same Nellie that was investigating using ham radio to communicate to avoid NSA mass surveillance.

From the very beginning that information about all this was slowly leaking from the Congressional investigation, this whole thing smelled very fishy. Then add intense effort at DOJ & FBI to obstruct and obfuscate. And the unhinged tweets and interviews by Brennan, Clapper & Comey. And of course the media narrative that Rep. Nunes, Goodlatte and others were endangering "national security" by casting aspersions on the "patriotic" law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

Paul M -> Leonardo Facchin , 16 hours ago
He was working with FBI and GPS at the same time. GPS was in the dark supposedly about his work with the FBI and Steele got their approval to hand over what he had delivered to GPS to the FBI as a cover for his work with the FBI.

Of course, he had most likely already done so and its also likely FBI had some input into the content of what was delivered to GPS, and more importantly what was not delivered.

David Habakkuk , 4 hours ago
PT,

Fascinating.

Re the 'standing agreement to not recruit each other's intelligence personnel for clandestine activities.' As Steele was not by this time a current employee of MI6, was the FBI in technical violation of this?

The point is not merely a quibble. A central question in regard to Steele, as with quite a number of former intelligence/law enforcement/military people who have started at least ostensibly private sector operations, is how far these are being used as 'cover' for activities conducted on behalf of either the state agencies for which they used to work, or other state agencies.

It is at least possible that one advantage of such arrangements may be that they make it possible to evade the letter of agreements between intelligence agencies in different countries.

Another related matter has to do with the termination of Steele as a 'Confidential Human Source.'

It has long seemed to me that it was more than possible that this was not to be taken at face value. If, as seems likely, both current and former top FBI and DOJ people – very likely Mueller as well as Comey, Strzok and many others – were intimately involved in the conspiracy to subvert the constitution, then a means of making it possible for Steele to combine feeding information to the FBI while also engaging in 'StratCom' via the MSM could have been necessary.

An obvious means of 'squaring the circle' would have been to issue a formal 'termination' to Steele, while creating 'back channels' to those who were officially supposed not to be talking to him.

A report yesterday by John Solomon in 'The Hill' quotes from messages exchanged between Steele and Bruce Ohr after the supposed termination.

(See http://thehill.com/person/d... .)

When on 31 January 2017 – well after the publication of the dossier by BuzzFeed – Ohr provided reassurance that he could continue to help feed information to the FBI, Steele texted back:

"If you end up out though, I really need another (bureau?) contact point/number who is briefed. We can't allow our guy to be forced to go back home. It would be disastrous."

At that point, Solomon tells us that 'Investigators are trying to determine who Steele was referring to.' This seems to me a rather important question. It would seem likely, although not certain, that he is talking about another Brit. If he is, would it have been someone else employed by Orbis? Or someone currently working for British intelligence? What is the precise significance of 'forced to go back home', and why would this have been 'disastrous'?

Another crucial paragraph:

'In all, Ohr's notes, emails and texts identify more than 60 contacts with Steele and/or Simpson, some dating to 2002 in London. But the vast majority occurred during the 2016-2017 timeframe that gave birth to one of the most controversial counterintelligence probes in American history.'

The earlier contacts may be of little interest, but there again they may not be.

As it happens, it was following Berezovsky's arrival in London in October 2001 that the 'information operations' network he created began to move into high gear. It is moreover clear that this was always a transatlantic operation, and also fragments of evidence suggest that the FBI may have had some involvement from early on.

I have just finished taking a fresh look at Sir Robert Owen's travesty of a report into the death of Litvinenko. In large measure, this develops claims originally made in Christopher Steele's first attempt to provide a convincing account of why figures close to Putin might have thought it made sense to assassinate that figure, and to do so with polonium. The sheer volume of fabrication which has been deployed in an attempt to defend the patently indefensible almost beggars belief.

The original attempt came in a radio programme broadcast by the BBC – which was to become known to some of us as the 'Berezovsky Broadcasting Corporation' – on 16 December 2006, presented by Tom Mangold, a familiar 'trusty' for the intelligence services.

(A transcript sent out from the Cabinet Office at the time is available on the archived 'Evidence' page for the Inquiry, at http://webarchive.nationala... , as HMG000513. There is an interesting and rather important question as to whether those who sent it out, and those who received it, knew that it was more or less BS from start to finish.)

The programme was wholly devoted to claims made by the former KGB operative Yuri Shvets, who was presented as an independent 'due diligence' expert, without any mention of the rather major role he had played in the original 'Orange Revolution.'

Back-up was provided by his supposed collaborator in 'due diligence', the former FBI operative Robert 'Bobby' Levinson. No mention was made of the fact that he had been, in the 'Nineties, a, if not the lead FBI investigator into the notorious Ukrainian Jewish mobster Semyon Mogilevich.

The following March Levinson would disappear on the Iranian island of Kish, on what we now know was a covert mission on behalf of elements in the CIA.

Just as a question arises as to whether Steele is essentially acting on behalf of MI6, a question also arises as to whether the FBI leadership were knowledgeable about, and possibly involved with, the various shenanigans in which Shvets and Levinson were involved. Given that claims about Mogilevich have turned out to be central to 'Russiagate', that seems a rather important issue, and I am curious as to whether Ohr's communications with Steele may cast any light on it.

Jack -> David Habakkuk , 2 hours ago
David

Apparently the FBI got Deripaksa to fund the rescue of Levinson from Iran. Furthermore apparently FBI personnel maybe including McCabe visited with Deripaksa and showed him the Steele dossier. He supposedly had a nice guffaw and dismissed it as nonsense. So on the one hand while they make Russia out to be the most evil they play footsie with Russian oligarchs.

Keith Harbaugh , 19 hours ago
Thanks for this informative article.

Thinking about "Christopher Steele was terminated as a Confidential Human Source for cause.", something that doesn't seem to have gotten as much attention is that Peter Strzok failed his poly:

Seems rather surprising to me. Anyone have any comment on this?

TTG , an hour ago
Steele's relationship with the FBI extends far further back than February 2016. Shortly after he left MI6, he contracted with the Football Association to investigate possible FIFA corruption. Once he realized the massiveness of this corruption he contacted his old friends at the FBI Eurasian Crimes Task Force in 2011. Thus began his association with the FBI as a CHS. That investigation culminated in the 2015 FIFA corruption indictments and convictions. His initial contact with old friends at the FBI Eurasian Crime Task Force is awfully similar to his contacting these same friends in 2016 after deciding his initial Trump research was potentially bigger than mere opposition research.
FB , 3 hours ago
One thing I don't understand...we have the anti-Trumpers saying that Donald Junior meeting with a Russian national to get 'dirt' on Hillary is illegal...due to some law about candidates collaborating with foreigners or something like that...[obviously I'm foggy on the technical details]... Yet we know that the Hillary campaign worked with a foreign national, Steele, to get dirt on Trump...how is this not the same...?

Even worse is that the FBI was using this same foreign agent that a presidential candidate had hired to get dirt on an opponent... Even knowing nothing about legalities this just doesn't look very good...

Wally Courie , 4 hours ago
Stupid question? As the Col. has explained, the President can declassify any document he pleases. So, why doesn't Donaldo unredact the redacted portions of these bullcrap docs? What is he afraid of? That the Intel community will get mad and be out to get him? Isn't time for him to show some cojones?
blue peacock , 16 hours ago
What role did Stefan Halper and Mifsud play as Confidential Human Sources in all this?
akaPatience , 19 hours ago
Why was British Intelligence allegedly collecting and passing along info about Donald Trump in the first place? Or could this have been a pretext created to give cover and/or support to the agenda here in the US to insure his defeat? Could a foreign intelligence source such as this trigger/facilitate/justify the US counterintelligence investigation of Trump, or give cover to a covert investigation that may have already begun?
Navstéva يزور 🐐 -> akaPatience , 17 hours ago
British intelligence was collecting / passing on info about Trump because of his campaign stance on NATO (he said it was obsolete), his desire to end regime change wars (he castigated the fiasco in Iraq, took Bush to task over it etc.), and his often stated desire to get along with Russia (and China). Trump also talked of ending certain economic policies (NAFTA, TPP, etc.) and reenacting others (Glass-Steagall, the American System of Economics i.e. Hamilton, Carey, Clay), If Trump had acted on those, which he has not so far, he would changed the entire world system, a system in place since the end of WW II, or earlier. That was a risk too big to take without some kind of insurance policy - I believe Christopher Steele was that insurance policy.
unmitigatedaudacity -> Navstéva يزور 🐐 , 16 hours ago
British Intelligence is verifiably the foreign source with the most extensive and effective meddling in the 2016 election. Perfidious Albion.
Bryn Nykrson -> Navstéva يزور 🐐 , 14 hours ago
Or, GSHQ was hovering up signint on Trump campaign early-on (using domestics US resources and databases via their 5-Eyes "sharing agreement" with NSA) cuz Brennan asked them to do it? And therefore without having to mess about with any formal FISA warrant thingy's ... But, then use what might be found (or plausibly alleged) to try to get a proper FISA warrant later on (July 2016)? 'Parallel Discovery' of sorts; with Fusion GPS also a leaky cut-out: channelling media reports to be used as confirmation of Steele's "raw intelligence" in the formal FISA application(s)?
Biggee Mikeee -> akaPatience , 17 hours ago
Trump announced his run for President in 2015. I'm pretty sure that every intel service on the planet was watching him, they would be derelict not to. GCHQ may have been collecting intel on all the candidates,

" Trump announced his run for President in 2015. I'm pretty sure that every intel service on the planet was watching him, they would be derelict not to. GCHQ may have been collecting intel on all the candidates, "

That's a good question, could it legally enable an end run around the FISC until enough evidence was gathered for a FISC surveillance authorization?.

richardstevenhack -> Biggee Mikeee , 13 hours ago
I've heard that the Echelon system is used by the Five Eyes IC to do something similar. The Brits spy on US, and give the NSA the data so the NSA can evade US laws prohibiting spying on us, and we return the favor to help them evade what (few) laws they have that prohibits spying on their people.

Only a matter of time until someone figured out the same method could be used to "meddle" in national affairs.

akaPatience -> Biggee Mikeee , 15 hours ago
I understand, but still wonder why the US would need to rely so much on British intelligence sources such as Steele about a very high profile American citizen and businessman -- aren't our intelligence services competent enough to have known and discovered as much if not more about Trump than other countries' intelligence services? I've read that Steele's cover was blown 20 years ago and he hasn't even been to Russia since, so I wonder why he was considered such a reliable source by both the US and UK? In my opinion as an absolute naif about such things, Steele seems like he may be a has-been when it comes to Russia.
DianaLC -> akaPatience , 4 hours ago
Here is a simple explanation from someone who knows almost nothing about how any of the people in power work: Most of them are not as clever and smart as they think they are. And most of the regular people who are just citizens are smarter than these people think they are.

It's simply that their arrogant assessment of their own superiority caused them to do really stupid things.

[Aug 08, 2018] Russiagate Cover for Real Scandal by Finian Cunningham

Notable quotes:
"... During his election campaign, Donald Trump reportedly received a $20 million donation from the American-Israeli casino mogul Sheldon Adelson. Adelson has Israeli citizenship. Is that not foreign help, according to definition of US laws? ..."
"... Russiagate is a cover to conceal the really disturbing scandal which was, and continues to be, the attempt to subvert American democracy by US intelligence agencies working in cahoots with the Obama administration and Clinton's election campaign. To cover up those crimes, Russia is being maligned for "attacking American democracy". ..."
Aug 06, 2018 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

So the US news media are in uproar over President Trump's latest admission that a meeting between his son and a Russian lawyer more than two years ago was about "getting dirt" on Hillary Clinton.

With self-righteous probity, Trump's political and media enemies are declaring him a felon for accepting foreign interference in the US presidential election.

Admittedly, President Trump appears to have been telling lies about the past meeting, which took place at Trump Tower in New York City in the summer of 2016. Or maybe it's just this American president shooting himself in the foot -- again -- with his inimical gibberish-style.

However, the burning issue of "foreign interference" is being stoked out of all proportion by Trump's enemies who want him ousted from the White House.

US constitutional law forbids candidates from receiving help from foreign governments or foreign nationals.

Are You Tired Of The Lies And Non-Stop Propaganda?

Get Your FREE Daily Newsletter No Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media

Thus, by appearing to accept a meeting with a Russian lawyer in June 2016 -- during the presidential campaign -- the Trump election team are accused of breaking US law.

The alleged transgression fits in with the wider narrative of "Russiagate" which posits that Republican candidate Donald Trump colluded with the Kremlin to win the race to the White House against Democrat rival Hillary Clinton .

Russia has always denied any involvement in the US elections, saying the allegations are preposterous. Moscow also points out that in spite of indictments leveled by American prosecutors, there is no evidence to support claims that Russian hackers meddled in the presidential campaign, or that the Kremlin somehow assisted Trump.

The Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya , who met with the Trump campaign team in early June 2016 is described in US media as "Kremlin-linked". But that seems to be just more innuendo in place of facts. She denies any such connection. The Kremlin also says it had no relation with the attorney on her business of approaching Team Trump.

In any case, what is being totally missed in the latest brouhaha is the staggering hypocrisy in the US media circus over Trump. Let's take Trump at his word -- not a reliable source admittedly -- that his campaign team were trying to "get dirt" on Clinton. That would appear to be a violation of US law.

If Trump is going to be nailed for improper conduct with regard to alleged foreign assistance, then where does that leave Hillary Clinton and US intelligence agencies?

During the presidential campaign, Clinton's team contracted a British spy, Christopher Steele, to dig up dirt on Trump in the form of the so-called "Russian dossier". That was the pile of absurd claims alleging that the Kremlin had blackmailing leverage over Donald Trump. It was Steele's fantasies that largely turned into the whole Russiagate affair which has dominated US media and politics for the past two years.

Not only that, but now it transpires that the Federal Bureau of Investigation also paid the same British spy to act as a source for the FBI's wiretapping of Trump's associates, according to declassified documents obtained by Judicial Watch, a US citizens' rights group.

In other words, the foreign interference that the FBI engaged in under the Barack Obama administration, as well as by Hillary Clinton's campaign team, is on a far greater and more scandalous scale that Trump seems to have clumsily endeavored to do with a Russian lawyer.

The real, shocking interference in US democracy was not by Russia or Trump, but by American secret services working in collusion with the Clinton Democrats to distort the presidential elections. This scandal which Princeton Professor Stephen Cohen has labeled "Intelgate" is far more grievous than the Watergate crisis which resulted in President Richard Nixon's ignominious resignation back in the mid-1970s.

The Obama administration's intelligence agencies and the Democrats attempted to sabotage the 2016 presidential election in order to keep Trump out of the White House. They failed. And they have never gotten over that defeat to their illegal scheming.

The Russiagate claims are just a sideshow. As American writer Paul Craig Roberts, among others, has commented , the media-driven "witch hunt" against Trump and Russia is blown out of all proportion in order to distract from the real scandal which is Intelgate -- and how millions of American voters were potentially disenfranchised by the US intelligence apparatus for a political power grab.

Another staggering hypocrisy in the US media kerfuffle over Trump and alleged Russian interference is that all the fastidious hyperbole completely ignores actual foreign interference in American democracy -- foreign interference that is on an absolutely colossal scale.

As American critical thinker Noam Chomsky points out , "Israeli intervention in US elections overwhelms anything Russia may have done".

Israel's interference includes the multi-million-dollar lobbying by such groups as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and its financial sponsorship of hundreds of lawmakers in both houses of Congress. Many critics maintain that the entire Congress is in effect "bought" by AIPAC.

Chomsky referred specifically to the occasion in 2015 when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu snubbed then President Obama by addressing the US Congress with a speech openly calling for lawmakers to reject the internationally-backed nuclear deal with Iran.

During his election campaign, Donald Trump reportedly received a $20 million donation from the American-Israeli casino mogul Sheldon Adelson. Adelson has Israeli citizenship. Is that not foreign help, according to definition of US laws?

Trump has since shown himself to do Adelson's and Israel's bidding by walking away from the Iran deal and in pushing stridently pro-Israeli interests in the conflict with Palestinians.

Another foreign benefactor in US politics is the so-called Saudi lobby and other oil-rich Gulf Arab states. Millions of dollars are funneled into Congress by these dubious regimes to shape US government foreign policy in the Middle East. For several decades, Saudi oil money is also documented to be a major contributor to the CIA and its off-the-books covert operations around the world.

Foreign interference in US politics -- in which often nefarious foreign interests are promoted over those of ordinary American citizens -- is conducted on a gargantuan and systematic scale. But this massively illegal interference in flagrant violation of US laws is stupendously ignored by the American media.

Trump is being assailed over an alleged scandal regarding Russia which is, by any objective measure, negligible.

The whole Russiagate narrative is sheer hysteria driven by anti-Trump forces who do not want to accept the result of the 2016 election. It is, in effect, a coup attempt by unelected political forces.

Russiagate is a cover to conceal the really disturbing scandal which was, and continues to be, the attempt to subvert American democracy by US intelligence agencies working in cahoots with the Obama administration and Clinton's election campaign. To cover up those crimes, Russia is being maligned for "attacking American democracy".

Such lies are an odious distortion of the truth by America's real enemies who are its own domestic political and media operators trying to cover up their anti-constitutional crimes. What's even more despicable is that these people are willing to inflame US-Russia relations to the point of starting a war between two nuclear powers.

Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent.

This article was originally published by " Sputnik " -

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

[Aug 08, 2018] Political War! Washington Goes Full Retard on the Russia Hoax - Antiwar.com Original

Aug 08, 2018 | original.antiwar.com

Political War! Washington Goes Full Retard on the Russia Hoax

by David Stockman Posted on August 08, 2018 August 7, 2018 It's hard to identify anything that's more uncoupled from reality than the Donald's Trade War and reckless Fiscal Debauch. Together they will soon monkey-hammer today's delirious Wall Street revilers and send main street's aging and anemic recovery back into the drink.

Except, except. When it comes to unreality, Trump's crackpot economics is actually more than rivaled by the full retard Russophobia of the MSM, the Dems and the nomenclatura of Imperial Washington.

In fact, their groupthink mania about the alleged Russian attack on American democracy is so devoid of fact, logic, context, proportion and self-awareness as to give the Donald's tweet storms an aura of sanity by comparison.

Their endless obsession with the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with a Russian nobody by the name of Natalia Veselnitskaya proves the point. She was actually in New York doing god's work, as it were, defending a Russian company against hokey money-laundering charges related to the abominable Magnitsky Act and its contemptible promoter, Bill Browder.

The latter had pulled off an epic multi-billion swindle during the wild west days of post-Soviet Russia and was essentially chased from the country in 2005 by Putin for hundreds of millions in tax evasion. Thereafter he turned the murky prison death of his accountant, Sergei Magnitsky, who was also charged with massive tax evasion, into a revenge crusade against Putin.

That resulted in a huge lobbying campaign subsidized by Browder's illicit billions and spearheaded by the Senate's most bloodthirsty trio of warmongers – Senators McCain, Graham and Cardin – to enact the 2012 Magnitsky Act.

The latter, of course, is the very excrescence of Imperial Washington's arrogant meddling in the internal affairs of other countries. It imposes sweeping sanctions on Russians (and other foreigners) deemed complicit in Magnitsky's death in a Russian jail and for other alleged human rights violations in Russia and elsewhere.

Needless to say, imperial pretense doesn't get any more sanctimonious than this. Deep State apparatchiks in the US Treasury Department get to try Russian citizens in absentia and without due process for vaguely worded crimes under American law that were allegedly committed in Russia, and then to seize their property and persons when involved in any act of global commerce where Washington can browbeat local satrapies and "allies" into cooperation!

Only in an imperial capital steeped in self-conferred entitlement to function as global hegemon would such a preposterous extraterritorial arrangement be even thinkable. After all, what happens to Russians in Russian prisons is absolutely none of Washington's business – nor by any stretch of the imagination does it pose any threat whatsoever to America's homeland security.

So the irony of the Trump Tower nothingburger is that the alleged Russian agent was here fighting Washington's meddling in Russia , not hooking up with Trump's campaign to further a Kremlin plot to attack American democracy.

You could properly call this a case of the pot calling the kettle black, but Imperial Washington and its shills among the ranks of Dem politicians and megaphones in the MSM wouldn't get the joke in the slightest. That's because Washington is in the business of meddling in the domestic affairs of virtually every country in the world – friend, foe and also-ran – on a massive scale never before imagined in human history.

That's what the hideously excessive $75 billion budget of the so-called 17-agency "intelligence community" (IC) gets you. To wit, a backdoor into every access point and traffic exchange node on the entire global internet, and from there the ability to hack, surveil, exfiltrate or corrupt the communications of any government, political party, business or private citizen virtually anywhere on the planet.

And, no, this isn't being done for the noble purpose of rooting-out the terrorist needles in the global haystack of communications and Internet traffic. It's done because the IC has the resources to do it and because it has invested itself with endless missions of global hegemony.

These self-serving missions, in turn, justify its existence, keep the politicians of Washington well stocked in scary bedtime stories and, most important of all, ensure that the fiscal gravy train remains loaded to the gills and that the gilded prosperity of the beltway never falters.

Indeed, if Washington were looking for corporate pen name it would be Meddling "R" Us. And we speak here not merely of its vast and secretive spy apparatus, but also of its completely visible everyday intrusions in the affairs of other countries via the billions that are channeled through the National Endowment for Democracy and the vast NGO network funded by the State Department, DOD and other organs of the national security complex.

The $750 million per year Board For International Broadcasting, for example, is purely in the propaganda business; and despite the Cold War's end 27 years ago, still carries out relentless "agit prop" in Russia and among the reincarnated states of the old Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact via Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and the Voice of America.

For example, here is a Voice of America tweet from this morning falsely charging Russia with the occupation of the former Soviet state of Georgia.

In fact, Russia came to the aid of the Russian-speaking population of the breakaway province of South Ossetia in 2008; the latter felt imperiled by the grandiose pretensions of the corrupt Saakashvili government in Tbilisi, which had unilaterally launched an indiscriminate military assault on the major cities of the province.

Moreover, even an EU commission investigation came to that conclusion way back in 2009 shortly after the events that the inhabitants of South Ossetia feared would lead to a genocidal invasion by Georgia's military.

An investigation into last year's Russia-Georgia war delivered a damning indictment of President Mikheil Saakashvili today, accusing Tbilisi of launching an indiscriminate artillery barrage on the city of Tskhinvali that started the war.

In more than 1,000 pages of analysis, documentation and witness statements, the most exhaustive inquiry into the five-day conflict dismissed Georgian claims that the artillery attack was in response to a Russian invasion

The EU-commissioned report, by a fact-finding mission of more than 20 political, military, human rights and international law experts led by the Swiss diplomat, Heidi Tagliavini, was unveiled in Brussels today after nine months of work.

Flatly dismissing Saakashvili's version, the report said: "There was no ongoing armed attack by Russia before the start of the Georgian operation Georgian claims of a large-scale presence of Russian armed forces in South Ossetia prior to the Georgian offensive could not be substantiated

The point is, whatever the rights and wrongs of the statelets and provinces attempting to sort themselves out after the fall of the Soviet Union, this was all happening on Russia's doorsteps and was none of Washington business even at the time. But wasting taxpayer money 10 years later by siding with the revanchist claims of the Georgian government is just plain ludicrous.

It's also emblematic of why the Imperial City is so clueless about the rank hypocrisy implicit in the Russian meddling hoax. Believing that America is the Indispensable Nation and that Washington operates by its own hegemonic rules, they are now Shocked, Shocked! to find that the victims of their blatant intrusions might actually endeavor to fight back.

Even then, the Russophobes have been frantically making a mountain out of a molehill. We investigated the Russian troll farm in St. Petersburg, for example, and found that it was actually the hobby horse of a mid-sized Oligarch. The latter had been minding his own business trolling the Russian Internet, as the oligarchs of that country are wont to do – until the US sponsored coup in Kiev in 2014 became the occasion for Washington's relentless vilification of Russia and Putin.

Accordingly, this particular Russian patriot hired a few dozen students at $3-4 per hour who mostly spoke English as a third-language. Operating on 12-hour shifts, they randomly trolled Facebook and other US based social media, posting crude and sometimes incoherent political messages from virtually all points on the compass – messages that were instantly lost in the great sea of social media trivia and mendacity.

Still, there is no evidence that this two-bit hobby farm was an instrument of Kremlin policy or that its tiny $2 million budget could hold a candle to the $200 million per year round-the-clock propaganda of Voice of America, and multiples thereof by the other Washington propaganda venues.

me title=

In any event, turning the Trump Tower meeting into evidence of Russian meddling and collusion actually gives the old saw about turning a molehill into a mountain an altogether new meaning. That is to say, on any given evening Anderson Cooper will be interviewing a lathered-up ex-general or ex-spook admonishing that Natalia Veselnitskaya was actually a nefarious Russian "cut out" sent by Putin to infiltrate the Trump campaign.

Really?

We have no brief for Vlad Putin, but one thing we are quite sure of is that he is anything but stupid. So would he really send a secret agent to Trump Tower – who neither speaks nor writes a word of English and has been to America only once – in order to plot a surreptitious attempt to manipulate the American election?

The fact is, the meeting happened because Veselnitskaya wanted to reach the Trump campaign in behalf of her anti-Magnitsky Act agenda, and to do so used the good offices of what appears to be the Russian Justin Bieber!

Specifically, the offer came to Don Trump Jr. via a London-based PR flack named Rob Goldstone, a music publicist who knew the Trumps through the Miss Universe pageant that was held in Moscow in 2013. Goldstone didn't know his head from a hole in the ground when it comes to international affairs or Russian politics, but he did represent the Russian pop singer Emin Agalarov, whose father was also a Trump- style real estate developer and had been involved in the 2013 pageant.

Said the London PR flack in an email to Don Jr:

"Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting .The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father .( this is) "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump."

And a very big so what!

For one thing, the last "Crown prosecutor of Russia" was assassinated by the Bolsheviks in 1917, suggesting Goldstone's grasp of the contemporary Russian government was well less than rudimentary.

Secondly, there was neither a crime nor national security issue involved when a campaign seeks to dig-up dirt from foreign nationals. The crime is when they pay for it, and do not report the expenditure to the Federal Elections Commission.

Of course, that's exactly what Hillary Clinton's campaign did with its multi-million funding of the Trump Dossier, generated by foreign national Christopher Steele and intermediated to the FBI and other IC agencies by Fusion GPS.

And that gets us to the mind-boggling silliness of the whole Trump Tower affair. Self-evidently, the dirt on Hillary suggestion was a come-on so that Veselnitskaya (through her Russian translator) could make a pitch against the Magnitsky Act; and to point out that after 33,000 Russian babies had been adopted by Americans before its enactment, that avenue of adoption had been stopped cold when the Kremlin found it necessary to retaliate.

Don's Jr. emails to his secretary from the meeting long ago proved that he immediately recognized Natalia's bait and switch operation, and that he wanted to be summoned to the phone so he could end what he saw was a complete waste of the campaign's time.

But here's the joker in the woodpile. Its seem that Glenn Simpson, proprietor of Fusion GPs, had also been hired by Veselnitskaya Russian clients to make a case in Washington against the Magnitsky Act, and to also dig up dirt on the scoundrel behind it: Bill Browder.

More fantastically yet, Natalia had meet with Simpson both before and after the Trump Tower meeting apparently to be coached by him on her anti-Magnitsky pitch to the Trump campaign.

So if Veselnitskaya was part of a Russian collusion conspiracy, then so was the Glenn Simpson, the midwife of the Trump Dossier!

It doesn't get any crazier than that – meaning that the Donald could not be more correct about this entire farce:

This is a terrible situation and Attorney General Jeff Sessions should stop this Rigged Witch Hunt right now, before it continues to stain our country any further. Bob Mueller is totally conflicted, and his 17 Angry Democrats that are doing his dirty work are a disgrace to USA!

In truth, the only basis for Natalia Veselnitskaya's alleged Putin ties was through Russia's prosecutor general, Yuri Chaika.

And exactly why was Chaika interested in making American contacts?

Why, because he was pursuing one Bill Browder, fugitive from Russian justice and the driving force behind the abominable Magnitsky Act – an instrument of meddling in the domestic affairs of foreign countries like no other. As one report described it:

Chaika's foray into American politics began in earnest in April 2016. That is when his office gave Republican congressman Dana Rohrabacher and three other US representatives a confidential letter detailing American investor Bill Browder's "illegal scheme of buying up Gazprom shares without permission of the Government of Russia" between 1999 and 2006, one month after Rohrabacher returned from Moscow.

As it happened, Veselnitskaya had apparently brought a memo to the Trump Tower meeting that contained many of the same talking points as one written by Chaika's office two months earlier.

There you have it.

At the heart of the Russian collusion hoax and the wellspring of the current Russophobia is nothing more than a half-baked effort by Russians to tell their side of the Magnitsky story, and to expose the real villain in the piece – a monumentally greedy hedge fund operator who had stolen the Russian people blind and then conveniently gave up his American citizenship so that he would neither do time in a Russian jail or pay taxes in America.

Spoiler Alert for next part: When both economic policy and politics have gone full retard in the Imperial City is there anything which could possibly go wrong – that might pollute the punch bowl on Wall Street?

Stay tuned!

David Stockman was a two-term Congressman from Michigan. He was also the Director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan. After leaving the White House, Stockman had a 20-year career on Wall Street. He's the author of three books, The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed , The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America and TRUMPED! A Nation on the Brink of Ruin And How to Bring It Back . He also is founder of David Stockman's Contra Corner and David Stockman's Bubble Finance Trader .

Read more by David Stockman

[Aug 08, 2018] The Magnitsky Trio Pushes For War With Russia With New Sanctions by Tom Luongo

Aug 08, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

If half of what I have come to understand about the Curious Case of Bill Browder is true, then the "Magnitsky Trio" of Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Ben Cardin are guilty of espionage, at a minimum.

Why? Because they know that Browder's story about Sergei Magnitsky is a lie. And that means that when you tie in the Trump Dossier, Christopher Steele, Fusion GPS, the Skripal poisoning and the rest of this mess, these men are consorting with foreign governments and agencies against the sitting President.

As Lee Stranahan pointed out recently on Fault Lines, Cardin invited Browder to testify to Congress in 2017 to push through last year's sanctions bill, a more stringent version of the expiring Magnitsky Act of 2011, which has since been used to ratchet up pressure on Russia.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/JziUpEPIjxs

Cardin knew there were problems with Browder's story about Magnitsky's death and yet brought him into Congress to testify to secure the vote.

That's suborning perjury, as Lee points out.

Just the holes in Browder's story about Magnitsky's death are alone enough to warrant a perjury charge on him. If you haven't read Luck Komisar's detailed breakdown of Browder's dealings then you owe it to yourself to do so.

I'd read it a few times, because it's about as murky as The Swamp gets. And, still my eyes glaze over.

The Magnitsky Act and its sequel have been used to support aggressive policy actions by the U.S. against Russia and destroy the relationship between the world's most prominent militaries and nuclear powers.

The new bill is said to want to put 'crushing sanctions' on Russia to make 'Putin feel the heat.' In effect, what this bill wants to do is force President Trump to enforce sanctions against the entire Russian state for attempting to do business anywhere in the world.

The new financial penalties would target political figures, oligarchs, family members and others that "facilitate illicit and corrupt activities" on behalf of Putin.

It would also impose new sanctions on transactions tied to investments in state-owned energy projects, transactions tied to new Russian debt, and people with the capacity or ability to support or carry out a "malicious" cyber act.

In addition, if it wasn't clear enough already, that he's no friend of the President, Graham is trying to tie the President's hands on NATO withdrawal, requiring a two-thirds majority.

Now, why would Graham be worried about that, unless it was something the President was seriously considering? This is similar to last year's sanctions bill requiring a similar majority for the President to end the original sanctions placed on Russia in 2014 over the reunification with Crimea.

And behind it all stands Bill Browder.

Because it has been Browder's one-man campaign to influence members of Congress, the EU and public opinion the world over against Putin and Russia for the past 10 years over Magnitsky's death.

Browder's story is the only one we see in the news. And it's never questioned, even though it has. He continually moves to block films and articles critical of him from seeing distribution.

Browder is the epicenter around which the insane push for war with Russia revolves as everyone involved in the attempt to take over Russia in 1999 continues to try and cover their collective posteriors posterities.

And it is Browder, along with Republic National Bank chief Edmond Safra, who were involved together in the pillaging of Russia in the 1990's. Browder's firm hired Magintsky as an accountant (because that's what he was) to assist in the money laundering Heritage Capital was involved in.

The attempted take over of Russia failed because Yeltsin saw the setup which led him to appoint Putin as his Deputy Prime Minister.

Martin Armstrong talked about this recently and it is featured prominently in the film about him, The Forecaster, which I also recommend you watch.

There was $7 billion that was wired through Bank of New York which involved money stolen from the IMF loans to Russia. The attempt to takeover Russia by blackmail was set in motion. As soon as that wire was done, that is when Republic National Bank ran to the Department of Justice to say it was money-laundering. I believe this started the crisis and Yeltsin was blackmailed to step down and appoint Boris A. Berezovsky as the head of Russia.

Clearly, Republic National Bank was involved with the US government for they were sending also skids of $100 bills to Russia. It was written up and called the Money Plane . Yeltsin then turned to Putin realizing that he had been set up. This is how Putin became the First Deputy Prime Minister of Russia on August 9th, 1999 until August 16th, 1999 when he became the 33rd Prime Minister and heir apparent of Yeltsin.

So, now why, all of a sudden, do we need even stronger sanctions on Russia, ones that would create untold dislocation in financial markets around the world?

Look at the timeline today and see what's happening.

  1. Earlier this year Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicts 13 people associated with Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian troll farm, for influencing the 2016 election.
  2. Then Mueller indicts twelve members of Russian intelligence to sabotage the upcoming summit between Trump and Putin while the Russia Hacked Muh Election narrative was flagging.
  3. Three days later President Trump met with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. There a Putin let the world know that he would assist Robert Mueller's investigation if in return the U.S. would assist Russia in returning Bill Browder, who was tried and convicted in absentia for tax evasion.
  4. All of a sudden Browder's story is all over the alternative press. Browder is all over U.S. television.
  5. Earlier this week Facebook comes out, after horrific earnings, to tell everyone that IRA was still at it, though being ever so sneaky, trying to influence the mid-terms by engaging Democrats and anti-Trumpers to organize... In that release, Facebook let it be known it was working with the political arm of NATO, The Atlantic Council, to ferret out these dastardly Russian agents.

And now we have a brand-new shiny sanctions bill intended to keep any rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia from occurring.

Why is that? What's got them so scared of relations with Russia improving?

Maybe, just maybe, because Putin has all of these people dead to rights and he's informed Trump of what the real story behind all of this is.

That at its core is a group of very bad people who attempted to steal trillions but only got away with billions and still have their sights set on destroying Russia for their own needs.

And Lindsay Graham is their mouthpiece. (all puns intended)

That all of U.S. foreign policy is built on a lie.

That our relationship with Russia was purposefully trashed for the most venal of reasons, for people like Bill Browder to not only steal billions but then have the chutzpah to steal the $230 million he would have paid in taxes on those stolen billions.

And the only way to ensure none of those lies are exposed is for Trump to be unable to change any of it by forcing him to openly side with the Russian President over members of his own political party.

The proposed sanctions by the Graham bill are so insane that even the Treasury department thinks they are a bad idea. But, at this point there is nothing Graham won't do for his owners.

Because they are desperate they will push for open warfare with Russia to push Putin from power, which is not possible. All of this is nothing more than a sad attempt to hold onto power long enough to oust Trump from the White House and keep things as horrible as they currently are.

Because no one gives up power willingly. And the more they are proven to be frauds the more they will scream for war.


Skip -> ???ö? Sat, 08/04/2018 - 18:35 Permalink

TrumpHate rises to new heights. Will it work?
July 17, 2018 by Kevin MacDonald

I should also mention Putin's treatment of certain Jewish oligarchs who have attempted to influence Western policies toward Russia (e.g., Mikhail Khodorkovsky). A truly stunning moment in the Trump-Putin presser (all but ignored in the MSM) was Putin saying that Bill Browder and his associates had illegally earned $1.5 billion in Russia ("the way the money was earned was illegal") without paying taxes either to Russia or the United States where the money was transferred. And that he and his associates had contributed $400 million to Hillary Clinton's campaign. While the charges back and forth are impossible for me to evaluate, Browder's firm, Hermitage Capital Management, has been involved in other accusations of fraud. Browder was the main force promoting the Magnitsky Act, signed by President Obama in 2012, that barred Russian officials said to be involved in the death of Sergei Magnitsky, a Browder associate, from entering the U.S. or using the U.S. banking system.

Here the point is that American neocons have been in the forefront of hostility over Putin's treatment of Jewish oligarchs, taking the view that Browder et al. are completely innocent victims of Russian evil. Along with Russian foreign policy, Putin's actions toward the oligarchs is one factor in neocon and hence some factions of the GOP toward Russia. It's no surprise that they are now eagerly joining the hate-Trump chorus throughout the American establishment.

MoreSun -> BigJim Sun, 08/05/2018 - 00:43 Permalink

Regarding Article:

Do we need to know anything else?

"William Felix "Bill" Browder was born into a Jewish family in Chicago, Illinois.

Browder's paternal grandfather was Earl Browder , who was born in Kansas in 1891. [1] He was a radical and had lived in the Soviet Union for several years from 1927 and married Raisa Berkman, a Jewish Russian woman, while living there. [1]

After his return to the United States in 1931, [1] Earl Browder became the leader of the Communist Party USA , and ran for U.S. president in 1936 and 1940. [13]

After World War II, Earl Browder lost favor with Moscow and was expelled from the American Communist party . [1]

Remove all jew supremacists from all positions of power, no matter how small-NOW!

Get It, Read It:

"A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind" Stephon Mitford Goodson

https://www.walmart.com/ip/A-History-of-Central-Banking-and-the-Enslave

Hapa -> MoreSun Sun, 08/05/2018 - 02:54 Permalink

Magnitsky film back up on Bitchute:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/kHqYoFm3q2Ll/

Thoresen -> Hapa Sun, 08/05/2018 - 06:50 Permalink

Great film that takes you from Browder the poor defrauded good guy with a hero lawyer Magnitsky, to a bad guy with Magnitsky the long employed accountant who made none of the assertions injected into the Russian -English translations that no one reviewed. But why is this film banned in the West? (/s)

JSBach1 -> Skip Sat, 08/04/2018 - 21:19 Permalink

Not only is Steele part of this shady group but there are ties with Alexander Litvinenko, Boris Berezovsky, Alexander Perepelichny (who all meet thier untimely deaths) around Bill Browder (directly/indirectly)"

As Browder responds with "I do not recall" and "I do not know" on any substantial inquiry in the court, the US judiciary could be very interested in hearing Perepelichny. This menace to Magnitsky Act was eliminated one week before the bill passed the US House: on Nov 10, 2012 Alexander Perepelichny was found dead outside his mansion in London. The police investigation did not bring any tangible result but the theory of "Russian mafia" involved was timely injected into the international media. One month later Magnitsky Act was signed by president Obama

https://off-guardian.org/2018/03/13/fatal-quad-who-is-assassinating-former-mi6-assets-on-british-soil/

MK ULTRA Alpha -> caconhma Sat, 08/04/2018 - 20:30 Permalink

McCain hand carried the Steele Dossier to Comey. McCain was in Canada when MI6 operative Sir Andrew Wood enlisted McCain. Then McCain took the bait, no he was working to take Trump out.

He tried to get out of it in his new book, The Restless Wave.

I've watched McCain for years, I believe he has brain damage from the Vietnam War.

serotonindumptruck -> madashellron Sat, 08/04/2018 - 19:37 Permalink

The documentary has been completely scrubbed from the internet in the West.

As soon as someone posts a link to a download site, the website is shut down within a half hour by US gov intel agencies.

I'm actually surprised that IMDB still has a listing for it. Some of the reviews there are interesting.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6028446/?ref_=rvi_tt

Jackprong Sat, 08/04/2018 - 20:48 Permalink

I can understand repealing Jackson-Vanik because it pertained to how U. S. deals with "non-market economies." Free market mechanisms were introduced in Russia and China since the 1970s so there needed to be changes. However, if there's government corruption in other nation states, how does this rate an act of Congress? Why repeal the law that required annual reviews of trade relations and replace it with normalization of trade only to sanction foreign government officials that have never even had a trial? What about all the financial misdeeds, money laundering, abuse of the banking system that can be traced to Browder, the congressional instigator? How does Graham, McCain and Cardin benefit by derailing relations with Russia over ONE GUY's WORD with a dicey past?

Law

In June 2012, the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs reported to the House a bill called the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012 (H.R. 4405). The main intention of the law was to punish Russian officials who were thought to be responsible for the death of Sergei Magnitsky by prohibiting their entrance to the United States and their use of its banking system. The legislation was taken up by a Senate panel the next week, sponsored by Senator Ben Cardin , and cited in a broader review of the mounting tensions in the international relationship.

In November 2012, provisions of the Magnitsky bill were attached to a House bill (H.R. 6156) normalizing trade with Russia (i.e., repealing the Jackson–Vanik amendment ) and Moldova . On December 6, 2012, the U.S. Senate passed the House version of the law, 92-4. The law was signed by President Barack Obama on December 14, 2012.

In 2016, Congress enacted the Global Magnitsky Act which allows the US Government to sanction foreign government officials implicated in human rights abuses anywhere in the world.

[Aug 08, 2018] What is left unsaid in the Anglo-Saxon accusations against Russia by Thierry Meyssan

Aug 08, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

In 16 November 2009, tax specialist lawyer Sergey Magnitsky died in Matrosskaya Tishina prison (Moscow). Immediately, the US Press claimed that he had been in possession of information concerning a State scandal, and had been tortured by the " régime ".

The Magnitsky Act

The death of Magnitsky shut down the legal procedures that had been launched against him by the Russian Minister of Justice. Billionaire William ("Bill") Browder declared in Washington that the tax expert possessed proof that Russian Power had stolen 3 billion dollars from him. Despite lobbying by Goldman Sachs, the US Congress believed it had clarified the affair, and in 2012 adopted a law sanctioning the Russian personalities suspected of having murdered the lawyer. Goldman Sachs, which did not believe the information forwarded by the parliamentarians, hired the lobbying firm Duberstein Group in an attempt to block the vote on the law [ 1 ].

On this model, in 2016, the Congress extended the " Magnitsky Act " to the whole world, requesting the President to implement sanctions against all people and all states which violate individual property. Presidents Obama and Trump obeyed, placing about twenty personalities on the list, including the President of the Republic of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov.

These two laws were aimed at giving back to the United States the role it had assumed during the Cold War as defender of individual property, even though they had no communist rival.

The two versions of the " Magnitsky affair "

As for the Russian State Duma, it responded to its US counterpart by forbidding the adoption of Russian children by US families, and by denouncing the responsibility of US personalities in the legalisation of torture (the Dima Yakovlev Law, from the name of the Russian child adopted in the USA who died as a result of negligence by the parents). President Putin applied this text in 2013, also forbidding ex-US Vice President Dick Cheney access to Russian territory.

The " Magnitsky affair " could have ended there. It seems to be independent of the " Khodorkovsky affair ", exploited by NATO in order to accuse Russia of interference in Western democracies by way of disinformation or " fake news " [ 2 ]. However, the Russian Prosecutor General contests the narrative presented by William Browder to the US Congress.

According to William Browder, his company Hermitage Capital invested in Russia, particularly in Gazprom. He allegedly discovered signs of irregular practices and attempted to warn the Kremlin. However, his resident's visa was then cancelled. Then his Russian companies were allegedly robbed by Lieutenant-Colonel Artem Kuznetsov, a civil servant from the Financial Brigade of the Russian Ministry of the Interior. Kuznetsov apparently seized the property documents during a search, then used them to register a new owner. Lawyer Sergey Magnitsky, who apparently blew the whistle on the embezzlement, was arrested, tortured and finally died in prison. In the end, Lieutenant-Colonel Artem Kuznetsov and " godfather " Dmitry Klyuev were allegedly able to deposit the 3 billion stolen dollars in a Cypriot bank. This is a classic case of theft by the Russian mafia with the help of the Kremlin [ 3 ]. This narrative inspired the seventh season of the Showtime TV series, Homeland .

On the contrary, according to Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika, William Browder illegally acquired 133 million shares in Gazprom on behalf of the Ziff brothers, via various straw men. Not only did Browder avoid paying 150 million dollars in taxes, but the acquisition of part of this crown jewel of the Russian economy is in itself illegal. Furthermore, his financial advisor, Sergey Magnitsky, who had developed another scam for the same Browder, was arrested and died of a heart attack in prison [ 4 ].

It is obviously impossible to tell the truth from the lies in these two versions. However, it is now recognised that Sergey Magnitsky was not a lawyer working freelance, but was employed by William Browder's companies. He was not investigating embezzlement, but was tasked by Browder

with the creation of financial structures which would avoid him having to pay taxes in Russia. For example, the two men imagined remunerating mentally handicapped people as front men in order to benefit from their tax exempt status. Browder had much experience with tax evasion – which is why he lived for ten years in Russia with a simple tourist visa, then abandoned his US citizenship and became a British citizen.

These last elements prove William Browder wrong, and are compatible with Prosecutor Chaika's accusations. In these conditions, it seems at the least imprudent for the US Congress to have adopted the Magnitsky Act , unless of course the operation was aimed not at defending individual property, but at hurting Russia [ 5 ].

A leader of the Russian opposition paid by Browder

Alongside the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Browder abundantly finances the work of a young lawyer, Alexeï Navalny. Thanks to the help of US ambassador Michael McFaul, the young man pursued his studies in the USA at Yale in 2010. He created an Anti-Corruption Foundation in order to promote Browden's version and accuse Putin's administration.

Having become a leader of the political opposition, Navalny and his Foundation directed a first documentary accusing the family of Prosecutor Chaika of corruption. But although the video is convincing at first look, it presents no proof of the facts it relates.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/3eO8ZHfV4fk

Simultaneously, Navalny ordered a second documentary from a Russian film director and member of the opposition about the " Magnitsky affair ". But this journalist turned against his employer during the investigation, which was finally broadcast by Russian public television.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/QgK7MlZDuJ8

A spook and an ambassador paid by Browder

Thereafter, William Browder engaged an ex-agent of MI6 in Moscow (1990-93), Christopher Steele, and the ex-US ambassador to Moscow (2012-14), Michael McFaul.

It so happens that it was Christopher Steele who, in 2006 – while he was with MI6 – accused President Vladimir Putin of having ordered the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko with Polonium. In 2016, he also worked – freelance this time – for the US Democratic Party. That was when he wrote the famous dossier accusing candidate Donald Trump of being under the threat of blackmail by the Russian secret services [ 6 ] ; an unwarranted charge which has just resurfaced after the bilateral Summit in Helsinki. We find Steele once again, in 2018, involved in the Novitchok poisoning of Sergueï Skripal – as a " consultant " for MI6, he of course accused the inevitable Vladimir Putin.

The Russian riposte

During the US Presidential campaign of 2016, Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika attempted to influence a member of Congress who was open to Russian thinking, Dana Rohrabacher (Republican, California). He sent her a note concerning his version of the Browder-Magnitsky affair. Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya met the son and son-in-law of candidate Donald Trump at Trump Tower, in order to inform them that a part of Browder's dirty money was being used to finance the candidacy of Hillary Clinton [ 7 ].

Thereafter, William Browder became the main source of the enquiry run by Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller about possible Russian interference in " US Democracy ". A long time before he became the Director the FBI, Mueller – who officially has no link to the CIA – had been responsible for the enquiry on the Lockerbie attack, which he attributed to Mouammar Kadhafi. Let's remember that Libya never recognised that it was implicated in this affair, although it accepted to pay a compensation to the victims. Above all, Scottish Justice established the fact that fragments of the detonator found on site were placed there by the CIA in order to accuse Libya. Mueller used the meeting of Trump's team with Natalia Veselnitskaya as " proof " of the subordination of Donald Trump to the Russian Intelligence services.

In the USA, Natalia Veselnitskaya represents the interests of several of Browder's Russian victims. She also acted in 2014 on behalf of one of the companies that Browder accused of being connected to " godfather " Dmitry Klyuev. She also raised the question about the manner in which an agent of Homeland Security, Todd Hyman, had transmitted a trial document without proceeding with the usual verifications.

There will be no moment of truth

During the US-Russia summit in Helsinki, President Vladimir Putin proposed that his US counterpart allow US investigators to question those Russian civil servants suspected of interference in the US Presidential campaign, on the condition that Russian investigators would also be allowed to question suspects in the USA. Donald Trump is reserving his answer.

However, when the office of Prosecutor Yury Chaika transmitted the list of witnesses to be questioned, Washington panicked. Not only did Chaika ask to question British subjects William Browder and Christopher Steele if they should travel in the United States, but also ambassador Michael McFaul, lawyer Jonathan Winer, researcher David J. Kramer, and finally, agent Todd Hyman.

Jonathan Winer was in charge of the Lockerbie dossier at the State Department during the 1990's. He is a personal friend of Christopher Steele, and transmitted his reports to the neo-conservatives for a decade [ 8 ].

During Bush Jr.'s first term, David J. Kramer played an important role in the management of the propaganda system for the State Department as well as looking after the stay-behind agents in Eastern Europe and in Russia. After having worked in various think tanks, he became the president of Freedom House, and campaigned on the " Magnitsky affair ". He is today a researcher at the McCain Institute.

Although, so far, nothing enables us to tell which of the Browder and Chaika versions is accurate, the truth will soon emerge. It is possible that Russian interference may be no more than fake news, but US interference (by introduction into the crown piece of the Russian economy as well as via Alexeï Navalny) may in fact be a reality.

In the context of' Washington's unanimous anti-Russian stand, President Trump declines Vladimir Putin's proposition. Thierry Meyssan

Translation
Pete Kimberley
[ 1 ] " Bank of Putin. Goldman Sachs lobbying against human rights legislation ", Adam Kredo, Free Beacon, July 19, 2012.

[ 2 ] " The NATO campaign against freedom of expression ", by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network , 5 December 2016.

[ 3 ] " Foreigner's Investment in Russia Is Derailed by Kremlin's Might ", Clifford J. Levy, The New York Times , July 24, 2008.

[ 4 ] Note from Yury Chaika Office to Dana Rohrabacher, June 2016.

[ 5 ] " Intouchable, Mr. Browder ? ", par Israël Shamir, Traduction Maria Poumier, Entre la plume et l'enclume (France), The Unz Review (USA), Réseau Voltaire , 22 juin 2016.

[ 6 ] " The Steele Report ".

[ 7 ] " Natalia Veselnitskaya Memo on the William Browder & Sergei MagnitskyCase ", by Natalia Veselnitskaya, Voltaire Network , 1 June 2016.

[ 8 ] " Devin Nunes is investigating me. Here's the truth ", Jonathan Winer, The Washington Post , February 8, 2018.

[Aug 06, 2018] What is left unsaid in the Anglo-Saxon accusations against Russia by Thierry Meyssan

Aug 06, 2018 | www.voltairenet.org

n 16 November 2009, tax specialist lawyer Sergey Magnitsky died in Matrosskaya Tishina prison (Moscow). Immediately, the US Press claimed that he had been in possession of information concerning a State scandal, and had been tortured by the " régime ".

The Magnitsky Act

The death of Magnitsky shut down the legal procedures that had been launched against him by the Russian Minister of Justice. Billionaire William ("Bill") Browder declared in Washington that the tax expert possessed proof that Russian Power had stolen 3 billion dollars from him. Despite lobbying by Goldman Sachs, the US Congress believed it had clarified the affair, and in 2012 adopted a law sanctioning the Russian personalities suspected of having murdered the lawyer. Goldman Sachs, which did not believe the information forwarded by the parliamentarians, hired the lobbying firm Duberstein Group in an attempt to block the vote on the law [ 1 ].

On this model, in 2016, the Congress extended the " Magnitsky Act " to the whole world, requesting the President to implement sanctions against all people and all states which violate individual property. Presidents Obama and Trump obeyed, placing about twenty personalities on the list, including the President of the Republic of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov.

These two laws were aimed at giving back to the United States the role it had assumed during the Cold War as defender of individual property, even though they had no communist rival.

The two versions of the " Magnitsky affair "

As for the Russian State Duma, it responded to its US counterpart by forbidding the adoption of Russian children by US families, and by denouncing the responsibility of US personalities in the legalisation of torture (the Dima Yakovlev Law, from the name of the Russian child adopted in the USA who died as a result of negligence by the parents). President Putin applied this text in 2013, also forbidding ex-US Vice President Dick Cheney access to Russian territory.

The " Magnitsky affair " could have ended there. It seems to be independent of the " Khodorkovsky affair ", exploited by NATO in order to accuse Russia of interference in Western democracies by way of disinformation or " fake news " [ 2 ]. However, the Russian Prosecutor General contests the narrative presented by Wiliam Browder to the US Congress.

According to William Browder, his company Hermitage Capital invested in Russia, particularly in Gazprom. He allegedly discovered signs of irregular practices and attempted to warn the Kremlin. However, his resident's visa was then cancelled. Then his Russian companies were allegedly robbed by Lieutenant-Colonel Artem Kuznetsov, a civil servant from the Financial Brigade of the Russian Ministry of the Interior. Kuznetsov apparently seized the property documents during a search, then used them to register a new owner. Lawyer Sergey Magnitsky, who apparently blew the whistle on the embezzlement, was arrested, tortured and finally died in prison. In the end, Lieutenant-Colonel Artem Kuznetsov and " godfather " Dmitry Klyuev were allegedly able to deposit the 3 billion stolen dollars in a Cypriot bank. This is a classic case of theft by the Russian mafia with the help of the Kremlin [ 3 ]. This narrative inspired the seventh season of the Showtime TV series, Homeland .

On the contrary, according to Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika, William Browder illegally acquired 133 million shares in Gazprom on behalf of the Ziff brothers, via various straw men. Not only did Browder avoid paying 150 million dollars in taxes, but the acquisition of part of this crown jewel of the Russian economy is in itself illegal. Furthermore, his financial advisor, Sergey Magnitsky, who had developed another scam for the same Browder, was arrested and died of a heart attack in prison [ 4 ].

It is obviously impossible to tell the truth from the lies in these two versions. However, it is now recognised that Sergey Magnitsky was not a lawyer working freelance, but was employed by William Browder's companies. He was not investigating embezzlement, but was tasked by Browder

with the creation of financial structures which would avoid him having to pay taxes in Russia. For example, the two men imagined remunerating mentally handicapped people as front men in order to benefit from their tax exempt status. Browder had much experience with tax evasion – which is why he lived for ten years in Russia with a simple tourist visa, then abandoned his US citizenship and became a British citizen.

These last elements prove William Browder wrong, and are compatible with Prosecutor Chaika's accusations. In these conditions, it seems at the least imprudent for the US Congress to have adopted the Magnitsky Act , unless of course the operation was aimed not at defending individual property, but at hurting Russia [ 5 ].

A leader of the Russian opposition paid by Browder

Alongside the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Browder abundantly finances the work of a young lawyer, Alexeï Navalny. Thanks to the help of US ambassador Michael McFaul, the young man pursued his studies in the USA at Yale in 2010. He created an Anti-Corruption Foundation in order to promote Browden's version and accuse Putin's administration.

Having become a leader of the political opposition, Navalny and his Foundation directed a first documentary accusing the family of Prosecutor Chaika of corruption. But although the video is convincing at first look, it presents no proof of the facts it relates.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/3eO8ZHfV4fk

Simultaneously, Navalny ordered a second documentary from a Russian film director and member of the opposition about the " Magnitsky affair ". But this journalist turned against his employer during the investigation, which was finally broadcast by Russian public television.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/QgK7MlZDuJ8

A spook and an ambassador paid by Browder

Thereafter, William Browder engaged an ex-agent of MI6 in Moscow (1990-93), Christopher Steele, and the ex-US ambassador to Moscow (2012-14), Michael McFaul.

It so happens that it was Christopher Steele who, in 2006 – while he was with MI6 – accused President Vladimir Putin of having ordered the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko with Polonium. In 2016, he also worked – freelance this time – for the US Democratic Party. That was when he wrote the famous dossier accusing candidate Donald Trump of being under the threat of blackmail by the Russian secret services [ 6 ] ; an unwarranted charge which has just resurfaced after the bilateral Summit in Helsinki. We find Steele once again, in 2018, involved in the Novitchok poisoning of Sergueï Skripal – as a " consultant " for MI6, he of course accused the inevitable Vladimir Putin.

The Russian riposte

During the US Presidential campaign of 2016, Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika attempted to influence a member of Congress who was open to Russian thinking, Dana Rohrabacher (Republican, California). He sent her a note concerning his version of the Browder-Magnitsky affair. Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya met the son and son-in-law of candidate Donald Trump at Trump Tower, in order to inform them that a part of Browder's dirty money was being used to finance the candidacy of Hillary Clinton [ 7 ].

Thereafter, William Browder became the main source of the enquiry run by Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller about possible Russian interference in " US Democracy ". A long time before he became the Director the FBI, Mueller – who officially has no link to the CIA – had been responsible for the enquiry on the Lockerbie attack, which he attributed to Mouammar Kadhafi. Let's remember that Libya never recognised that it was implicated in this affair, although it accepted to pay a compensation to the victims. Above all, Scottish Justice established the fact that fragments of the detonator found on site were placed there by the CIA in order to accuse Libya. Mueller used the meeting of Trump's team with Natalia Veselnitskaya as " proof " of the subordination of Donald Trump to the Russian Intelligence services.

In the USA, Natalia Veselnitskaya represents the interests of several of Browder's Russian victims. She also acted in 2014 on behalf of one of the companies that Browder accused of being connected to " godfather " Dmitry Klyuev. She also raised the question about the manner in which an agent of Homeland Security, Todd Hyman, had transmitted a trial document without proceeding with the usual verifications.

There will be no moment of truth

During the US-Russia summit in Helsinki, President Vladimir Putin proposed that his US counterpart allow US investigators to question those Russian civil servants suspected of interference in the US Presidential campaign, on the condition that Russian investigators would also be allowed to question suspects in the USA. Donald Trump is reserving his answer.

However, when the office of Prosecutor Yury Chaika transmitted the list of witnesses to be questioned, Washington panicked. Not only did Chaika ask to question British subjects William Browder and Christopher Steele if they should travel in the United States, but also ambassador Michael McFaul, lawyer Jonathan Winer, researcher David J. Kramer, and finally, agent Todd Hyman.

Jonathan Winer was in charge of the Lockerbie dossier at the State Department during the 1990's. He is a personal friend of Christopher Steele, and transmitted his reports to the neo-conservatives for a decade [ 8 ].

During Bush Jr.'s first term, David J. Kramer played an important role in the management of the propaganda system for the State Department as well as looking after the stay-behind agents in Eastern Europe and in Russia. After having worked in various think tanks, he became the president of Freedom House, and campaigned on the " Magnitsky affair ". He is today a researcher at the McCain Institute.

Although, so far, nothing enables us to tell which of the Browder and Chaika versions is accurate, the truth will soon emerge. It is possible that Russian interference may be no more than fake news, but US interference (by introduction into the crown piece of the Russian economy as well as via Alexeï Navalny) may in fact be a reality.

In the context of' Washington's unanimous anti-Russian stand, President Trump declines Vladimir Putin's proposition. Thierry Meyssan

Translation
Pete Kimberley

[ 1 ] " Bank of Putin. Goldman Sachs lobbying against human rights legislation ", Adam Kredo, Free Beacon, July 19, 2012.

[ 2 ] " The NATO campaign against freedom of expression ", by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Pete Kimberley, Voltaire Network , 5 December 2016.

[ 3 ] " Foreigner's Investment in Russia Is Derailed by Kremlin's Might ", Clifford J. Levy, The New York Times , July 24, 2008.

[ 4 ] Note from Yury Chaika Office to Dana Rohrabacher, June 2016.

[ 5 ] " Intouchable, Mr. Browder ? ", par Israël Shamir, Traduction Maria Poumier, Entre la plume et l'enclume (France), The Unz Review (USA), Réseau Voltaire , 22 juin 2016.

[ 6 ] " The Steele Report ".

[ 7 ] " Natalia Veselnitskaya Memo on the William Browder & Sergei MagnitskyCase ", by Natalia Veselnitskaya, Voltaire Network , 1 June 2016.

[ 8 ] " Devin Nunes is investigating me. Here's the truth ", Jonathan Winer, The Washington Post , February 8, 2018.

[Aug 06, 2018] The Magnitsky Trio Pushes For War With Russia With New Sanctions by Tom Luongo,

Aug 06, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

If half of what I have come to understand about the Curious Case of Bill Browder is true, then the "Magnitsky Trio" of Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Ben Cardin are guilty of espionage, at a minimum.

Why? Because they know that Browder's story about Sergei Magnitsky is a lie. And that means that when you tie in the Trump Dossier, Christopher Steele, Fusion GPS, the Skripal poisoning and the rest of this mess, these men are consorting with foreign governments and agencies against the sitting President.

As Lee Stranahan pointed out recently on Fault Lines, Cardin invited Browder to testify to Congress in 2017 to push through last year's sanctions bill, a more stringent version of the expiring Magnitsky Act of 2011, which has since been used to ratchet up pressure on Russia.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/JziUpEPIjxs

Cardin knew there were problems with Browder's story about Magnitsky's death and yet brought him into Congress to testify to secure the vote.

That's suborning perjury, as Lee points out.

Just the holes in Browder's story about Magnitsky's death are alone enough to warrant a perjury charge on him. If you haven't read Luck Komisar's detailed breakdown of Browder's dealings then you owe it to yourself to do so.

I'd read it a few times, because it's about as murky as The Swamp gets. And, still my eyes glaze over.

The Magnitsky Act and its sequel have been used to support aggressive policy actions by the U.S. against Russia and destroy the relationship between the world's most prominent militaries and nuclear powers.

The new bill is said to want to put 'crushing sanctions' on Russia to make 'Putin feel the heat.' In effect, what this bill wants to do is force President Trump to enforce sanctions against the entire Russian state for attempting to do business anywhere in the world.

The new financial penalties would target political figures, oligarchs, family members and others that "facilitate illicit and corrupt activities" on behalf of Putin.

It would also impose new sanctions on transactions tied to investments in state-owned energy projects, transactions tied to new Russian debt, and people with the capacity or ability to support or carry out a "malicious" cyber act.

In addition, if it wasn't clear enough already, that he's no friend of the President, Graham is trying to tie the President's hands on NATO withdrawal, requiring a two-thirds majority.

Now, why would Graham be worried about that, unless it was something the President was seriously considering? This is similar to last year's sanctions bill requiring a similar majority for the President to end the original sanctions placed on Russia in 2014 over the reunification with Crimea.

And behind it all stands Bill Browder.

Because it has been Browder's one-man campaign to influence members of Congress, the EU and public opinion the world over against Putin and Russia for the past 10 years over Magnitsky's death.

Browder's story is the only one we see in the news. And it's never questioned, even though it has. He continually moves to block films and articles critical of him from seeing distribution.

Browder is the epicenter around which the insane push for war with Russia revolves as everyone involved in the attempt to take over Russia in 1999 continues to try and cover their collective posteriors posterities.

And it is Browder, along with Republic National Bank chief Edmond Safra, who were involved together in the pillaging of Russia in the 1990's. Browder's firm hired Magintsky as an accountant (because that's what he was) to assist in the money laundering Heritage Capital was involved in.

The attempted take over of Russia failed because Yeltsin saw the setup which led him to appoint Putin as his Deputy Prime Minister.

Martin Armstrong talked about this recently and it is featured prominently in the film about him, The Forecaster, which I also recommend you watch.

There was $7 billion that was wired through Bank of New York which involved money stolen from the IMF loans to Russia. The attempt to takeover Russia by blackmail was set in motion. As soon as that wire was done, that is when Republic National Bank ran to the Department of Justice to say it was money-laundering. I believe this started the crisis and Yeltsin was blackmailed to step down and appoint Boris A. Berezovsky as the head of Russia.

Clearly, Republic National Bank was involved with the US government for they were sending also skids of $100 bills to Russia. It was written up and called the Money Plane . Yeltsin then turned to Putin realizing that he had been set up. This is how Putin became the First Deputy Prime Minister of Russia on August 9th, 1999 until August 16th, 1999 when he became the 33rd Prime Minister and heir apparent of Yeltsin.

So, now why, all of a sudden, do we need even stronger sanctions on Russia, ones that would create untold dislocation in financial markets around the world?

Look at the timeline today and see what's happening.

  1. Earlier this year Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicts 13 people associated with Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian troll farm, for influencing the 2016 election.
  2. Then Mueller indicts twelve members of Russian intelligence to sabotage the upcoming summit between Trump and Putin while the Russia Hacked Muh Election narrative was flagging.
  3. Three days later President Trump met with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. There a Putin let the world know that he would assist Robert Mueller's investigation if in return the U.S. would assist Russia in returning Bill Browder, who was tried and convicted in absentia for tax evasion.
  4. All of a sudden Browder's story is all over the alternative press. Browder is all over U.S. television.
  5. Earlier this week Facebook comes out, after horrific earnings, to tell everyone that IRA was still at it, though being ever so sneaky, trying to influence the mid-terms by engaging Democrats and anti-Trumpers to organize... In that release, Facebook let it be known it was working with the political arm of NATO, The Atlantic Council, to ferret out these dastardly Russian agents.

And now we have a brand-new shiny sanctions bill intended to keep any rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia from occurring.

Why is that? What's got them so scared of relations with Russia improving?

Maybe, just maybe, because Putin has all of these people dead to rights and he's informed Trump of what the real story behind all of this is.

That at its core is a group of very bad people who attempted to steal trillions but only got away with billions and still have their sights set on destroying Russia for their own needs.

And Lindsay Graham is their mouthpiece. (all puns intended)

That all of U.S. foreign policy is built on a lie.

That our relationship with Russia was purposefully trashed for the most venal of reasons, for people like Bill Browder to not only steal billions but then have the chutzpah to steal the $230 million he would have paid in taxes on those stolen billions.

And the only way to ensure none of those lies are exposed is for Trump to be unable to change any of it by forcing him to openly side with the Russian President over members of his own political party.

The proposed sanctions by the Graham bill are so insane that even the Treasury department thinks they are a bad idea. But, at this point there is nothing Graham won't do for his owners.

Because they are desperate they will push for open warfare with Russia to push Putin from power, which is not possible. All of this is nothing more than a sad attempt to hold onto power long enough to oust Trump from the White House and keep things as horrible as they currently are.

Because no one gives up power willingly. And the more they are proven to be frauds the more they will scream for war.

[Aug 02, 2018] Nekrasov's film is fatal to Browder's story.

Aug 02, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

BROWDER MOVIE. A Russian documentary maker believed everything Browder said and started a film to justify him. As it progressed, he discovered anomalies and came to realise the story was false. See here . It is moving around the Net now and it's worth looking for because Browder's story is a primary founding myth of the Putin hysteria. The film is fatal to Browder's story.

[Jul 29, 2018] Russians exposed a CIA spook who's implicated not only in Secret Agent Browder's war propaganda

Notable quotes:
"... So Kramer is a good example of how CIA runs the State Department. When a CIA vital interest like impunity comes up, they parachute a mole in to get their criminals off the hook. ..."
Jul 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

HO-LY COWW , Next New Comment July 29, 2018 at 6:41 pm GMT

@anon

Yes indeed, first Britain, and now Russia has pantsed the US too. In a virtuosic dick move, they exposed a CIA spook who's implicated not only in Secret Agent Browder's war propaganda ( http://russiahouse.org/current_news.php?language=eng&id_current=1454 ) but in CIA crimes against humanity -- specifically, 'legal pretexts for manifestly illegal acts."

David Kramer, Tufts/Harvard Political Science/Russian studies, **PNAC** , DoS focal point, then CIA's famous captive NGO **Freedom House** , and a featherbed job at the McCain Institute for Freedom, Democracy, and Abandoning Thousands of MIAs in Vietnam to Die Slow Agonizing Deaths in Penal Camps.

Here he is talking to his co-conspirator Robert Otto, "Only idiots like Kerry think we have common interests in Syria."

https://freeworld556.wordpress.com/2017/07/12/us-state-department-official-robert-otto-got-hacked/

Needless to say, Kramer wouldn't know a human right from a bar of soap. He's a knuckledragger. CIA sent Kramer to DRL when Alfreda Bikowsky got her tit caught in the crimes-against-humanity wringer for systematic and widespread torture.

The US was five years late reporting to the Committee Against Torture and got a mind-boggling eight (8) follow-on inquiries for urgent derogations of non-derogable rights. So Kramer had to think fast and make up some bullshit why simulated live burial, object rape, death by dryboard suffocation, and penis-slitting is not torture. Kramer is not the brightest bulb, but that's not a hard job. During the Bush administration all the delegation did was say, "The US does not Torture," robotically over and over.

So Kramer is a good example of how CIA runs the State Department. When a CIA vital interest like impunity comes up, they parachute a mole in to get their criminals off the hook.

[Jul 28, 2018] 'He was not killed, he died' Kremlin critic's Magnitsky movie premiers in US, exposing Browder

Notable quotes:
"... "a calculated attempt to harm our campaign and to make people doubt the legacy of Sergey Magnitsky," ..."
"... "This is a core issue about getting points of view into the public domain," ..."
"... I believe Magnitsky died ..."
"... Questions remain, but the fact that he was not killed, as Mr Browder says, by the same people who investigated his case and had a 'motive' to make him silent as a whistleblower – this is totally certain. ..."
"... "The story of Magnitsky turned out to be made-up," ..."
"... "I saw facts that do not add up, that prove that the story of Magnitsky was faked by Browder," ..."
"... "There is no evidence that he [Magnitsky] was killed or even was beaten," ..."
"... "I am a critic of the Russian authorities and I continue to be this critic, but in this particular case, the West made a mistake by adopting the Magnitsky Act and the Magnitsky resolutions, as they are based on a made-up story," ..."
"... "it is not in the interests of the US to remain trammelled by prejudice against Russia." ..."
"... "I thought I was filming about great the whistleblower Magnitsky. But it became my story of coming together basically with a lie, and with a lot of selfishness, and cynicism," ..."
"... "You have become a foot soldier of the propaganda war," ..."
"... "I am ashamed for you, Andrei. You will have to live with that." ..."
"... "I am a critic of the Russian regime and still am. I had a sort of political affiliation to Browder and his friends," ..."
"... "It goes against your ideology and your worldview to say that actually the Russian cops did not kill Magnitsky, the Russian cops didn't steal the money. Russia is still a very corrupt country, but in this case it was different." ..."
Jun 14, 2016 | www.rt.com
Despite threats of a libel lawsuit, a documentary about the Magnitsky case by a prominent critic of the Russian government has been shown in Washington. The film rejects the narrative about the case accepted in the West, on which the US Magnitsky Act is based. The film, titled 'The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes', was presented to the public for the first time on Monday at the Newseum, a private museum dedicated to the news industry and freedom of speech in Washington, DC. The two-hour production is part documentary, part dramatization of the events that surround the death of Russian lawyer Sergey Magnitsky six years ago. Read more Hermitage Capital investment fund CEO William Browder (AFP Photo / Bertrand Guay) After Magnitsky: Dead lawyer's boss Browder and his legal hurdles – now in US

Magnitsky worked as an accountant for US-British investor William F. Browder, who made millions in Russia during the 1990s, but was later accused of tax evasion and fled the country. The lawyer was detained by the Russian police as part of a separate fraud investigation and died in police custody in November 2009.

Browder claimed that Magnitsky had been investigating corrupt police officers and was thrown into jail and murdered by them. He declared a crusade against what he called endemic corruption in the Russian government and lobbied across Europe and the US for punishment of the individuals whom he accused of involvement in Magnitsky's death.

In 2012 the US passed an act named after the Russian lawyer, which imposed sanctions against 40 Russian citizens – a move that Moscow saw as blatantly anti-Russian, and apparently retaliated against by banning the adoption of Russian orphans by US citizens.

'Story of coming together with lie, selfishness & cynicism'

Director Andrei Nekrasov struggled for months to have his controversial work shown to the public. Scheduled screenings in three European venues, including the European Parliament, were canceled because Browder threatened multimillion-dollar libel lawsuits against producers or would-be broadcasters of the film.

Browder opposes the film because he believes it to be "a calculated attempt to harm our campaign and to make people doubt the legacy of Sergey Magnitsky," as he told euobserver.com back in April.

Read more The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Smolenskaya-Sennaya Square in Moscow. © Natalia Seliverstova Russia slaps travel ban on 5 US ex-officials over 'legalization of torture'

Newseum was threatened in the same way, but rejected the pressure, saying that publishing Nekrasov's film was an issue of freedom of speech.

"This is a core issue about getting points of view into the public domain," investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, who moderated the event, told the audience before the screening.

Nekrasov says he wanted to make a docudrama film about Magnitsky ever since he heard of his story. He received funding for the project from eight European film foundations and state broadcasters and got in touch with Browder as part of his work.

But he found inconsistencies in the evidence presented by Browder's campaign to back his story, saying most of it was circumstantial at best. When he confronted the businessman about them, he said Browder broke off all contact and started to oppose the film.

The director believes that the narrative of Magnitsky as the brave whistleblower killed by corrupt Russian cops, as it was accepted in the West, is a scam by Browder, who capitalized on the lawyer's death to shield himself from all past and future accusations from Russian law enforcement, which he could claim to be politically motivated.

" I believe Magnitsky died ," Nekrasov told journalists in response to a question on whether he believed the lawyer was killed or died. " Questions remain, but the fact that he was not killed, as Mr Browder says, by the same people who investigated his case and had a 'motive' to make him silent as a whistleblower – this is totally certain. "

"The story of Magnitsky turned out to be made-up," Nekrasov told journalists as he commented on revelations he made during the making of his film. "I saw facts that do not add up, that prove that the story of Magnitsky was faked by Browder," he added.

Read more Aleksandr Perepelichny Key Magnitsky case witness may have been poisoned – report

Documents show that the evidence presented by Browder as proof that Magnitsky was a whistleblower was in fact a transcript of Magnitsky's interrogations, which were conducted before he made his statements, Nekrasov claimed, stressing that police officers had no motive for killing Magnitsky as he did not expose them.

"There is no evidence that he [Magnitsky] was killed or even was beaten," the film director told journalists.

"I am a critic of the Russian authorities and I continue to be this critic, but in this particular case, the West made a mistake by adopting the Magnitsky Act and the Magnitsky resolutions, as they are based on a made-up story," Nekrasov said, adding that "it is not in the interests of the US to remain trammelled by prejudice against Russia."

"I thought I was filming about great the whistleblower Magnitsky. But it became my story of coming together basically with a lie, and with a lot of selfishness, and cynicism," Nekrasov told RT in May, when the screening of the film was cancelled at the last moment in Brussels.

The director's view didn't go well with some of the first viewers of the film, including Russian opposition politicians and rights activists.

"You have become a foot soldier of the propaganda war," exclaimed Ilya Yashin, a veteran opposition figure in Russia. "I am ashamed for you, Andrei. You will have to live with that."

The outcry was perhaps to be expected. Nekrasov himself has been a critic of the Russian government for years. Some of his earlier works explored alleged involvement of the Kremlin in very serious issues, including the Chechnya war, the murder of Aleksandr Litvinenko, corruption in security agencies and others.

His documentaries, both political and otherwise, were praised by critics and won a number of awards, including the prestigious German Grimme-Preis award. Georgia named him person of the year 2009 for a film about the 2008 war against Russia.

"I am a critic of the Russian regime and still am. I had a sort of political affiliation to Browder and his friends," Nekrasov said of his latest film. "It goes against your ideology and your worldview to say that actually the Russian cops did not kill Magnitsky, the Russian cops didn't steal the money. Russia is still a very corrupt country, but in this case it was different." Where to watch Schedule Subscribe to RT newsletter to get stories the mainstream media won't tell you

[Jul 28, 2018] Alex Krainer's book. It is a devastating critique of Browder,

Jul 28, 2018 | thesaker.is

Harley Schlanger on October 05, 2017 , · at 4:00 pm EST/EDT

I have read Alex Krainer's book. It is a devastating critique of Browder, which exposes him as the corrupt thug he is. Browder is no more interested in "democratizing" Russia than the U.S. Deep State is in protecting the integrity of the U.S. election process! That Browder was the "star witness" for the Congress before it overwhelmingly passed the latest sanctions bill against Russia shows why it is important that he be exposed.

I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to know something about the networks and individuals acting to prevent a rapprochement between the U.S. and Russia.

[Jul 28, 2018] Putin Is Right to Question Browder and McFaul - One Meddled in Russia's Elections, One Ripped Off her People

Jul 28, 2018 | whatreallyhappened.net

At the press conference following their summit meeting in Helsinki, Russian President Vladimir Putin and American President Donald Trump discussed the possibility of resolving potential criminal cases involving citizens of the two countries by permitting interrogators from Washington and Moscow to participate in joint questioning of the individuals named in indictments prepared by the respective judiciaries. The predictable response by the American nomenklatura was that it was a horrible idea as it would potentially require U.S. officials to answer questions from Russians about their activities.

Putin argued, not unreasonably, that if Washington wants to extradite and talk to any of the twelve recently indicted GRU officers the Justice Department has named then reciprocity is in order for Americans and other identified individuals who are wanted by the Russian authorities for illegal activity while in Russia. And if Russian officials are fair game, so are American officials.

[Jul 28, 2018] Putin Vs. McFaul, DHS, Browder And Why

Notable quotes:
"... Included in the documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday is a one-page document submitted by Paul Manafort, the former campaign chairman for Donald Trump's 2016 effort. Manafort was serving in that role on June 9, 2016, when he joined Donald Trump Jr. and campaign adviser Jared Kushner in a meeting with a Kremlin-linked attorney who had promised incriminating information about Hillary Clinton. ..."
"... Those notes, apparently taken on Manafort's phone , are as follows. ..."
"... Offshore -- Cyprus ..."
"... Not invest -- loan ..."
"... Value in Cyprus as inter ..."
"... Active sponsors of RNC ..."
"... Browder hired Joanna Glover ..."
"... Tied into Cheney ..."
"... Russian adoption by American families ..."
"... In the absence of other context, the notes are cryptic and include words that certainly seem to wave red flags. "Offshore," "Illici[t]" -- even an apparent mention of former vice president Richard B. Cheney. ..."
Jul 28, 2018 | www.trevorloudon.com

Included in the documents released by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday is a one-page document submitted by Paul Manafort, the former campaign chairman for Donald Trump's 2016 effort. Manafort was serving in that role on June 9, 2016, when he joined Donald Trump Jr. and campaign adviser Jared Kushner in a meeting with a Kremlin-linked attorney who had promised incriminating information about Hillary Clinton.

Those notes, apparently taken on Manafort's phone , are as follows.

In full:

In the absence of other context, the notes are cryptic and include words that certainly seem to wave red flags. "Offshore," "Illici[t]" -- even an apparent mention of former vice president Richard B. Cheney.

[Jul 28, 2018] How my book unmasking Bill Browder was censored by Amazon by Alex Krainer

Notable quotes:
"... [ Note by the Saker : for my review of Alex Krainer's book please click here ] ..."
"... "I always say the truth is best even when we find it unpleasant. Any rat in a sewer can lie. It's how rats are. It's what makes them rats. But a human doesn't run and hide in dark places, because he's something more. Lying is the most personal act of cowardice there is." ― Nancy Farmer, "The House of the Scorpion" ..."
"... Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch. Nay, you may kick it about all day, and it will be round and full at evening. ..."
"... Alex Krainer is a hedge fund manager based in Monaco. His book, "The Killing of William Browder" may still be available in paperback at Book Depository , Barnes&Noble (USA), Amazon.fr , Amazon.co.uk , or ..."
Oct 05, 2017 | thesaker.is
[ Note by the Saker : for my review of Alex Krainer's book please click here ]

"I always say the truth is best even when we find it unpleasant. Any rat in a sewer can lie. It's how rats are. It's what makes them rats. But a human doesn't run and hide in dark places, because he's something more. Lying is the most personal act of cowardice there is." ― Nancy Farmer, "The House of the Scorpion"

In January 2015 I received a book titled "Red Notice" written by Bill Browder, once a hedge fund manager running Hermitage Capital the largest foreign-owned hedge fund in Russia. In the past, my path had crossed with Browder's on two occasions. In 2005, I was invited to his presentation, only days before he was expelled from Russia. On that occasion Browder surprised me because he was the first credible person I ever heard speaking positively about Vladimir Putin. The next time I met Browder was in 2010 during an investment conference in Monaco. This time he was very anti-Putin. When I received his book, it was recommended to me as an excellent read.

Through his book, Browder presents himself in glowing colors. By contrast, he portrays Russia as a sinister, backward tyranny and President Putin as the greediest, most ruthless tyrant since Genghis Khan. The book's main plot shapes up as an appealing story about the struggle of good against evil, about a lone maverick (Browder himself), taking on a powerful network of dangerous criminals and corrupt government officials in selfless pursuit of justice. It would be a beautiful story – if only it were true.

I was familiar with Parts of Browder's story, so his tale seemed fishy to me. A few days after reading it I had to re-read it from the beginning. Sure enough, I discovered quite a number of things that didn't add up which prompted me to do some research of my own. Much about it bothered me enough that I ended up writing a whole book which I titled "The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception." In August of this year I finally finished it and self-published it on Amazon.com.

My book's main object is to unmask Browder's brazen and dangerous deception. Beyond this, I've also sought to put his story into proper context by including a rather detailed account of the relevant events that led to the collapse of the USSR, Russia's subsequent transition from Communism to Capitalism and what 17 years of Vladimir Putin's leadership have changed . I've also included a section discussing the person and character of Vladimir Putin (since Browder relentlessly demonizes him). The book's last chapter discusses the history of the relations between the U.S. and Russia from the beginnings of the 19 th century, including the U.S. Civil War when Russia came to Abraham Lincoln's aid and played the key role in preserving the Union and what the future relations between the U.S. and Russia might, or should be.

As it turned out, my book was surprisingly well received by its readers and during the first few weeks it received very encouraging reader reviews (seven five-star and one four-star review). Unfortunately, by mid-September "The Killing of William Browder" came up on Browder team's radar and my problems began. It seems that in the free world, the freedom of expression comes with some restrictions. Exposing Bill Browder is one of them.

On 13 th September, University of Tulsa professor Jeremy Kuzmarov cited some of the materials from my book in his own Hffington Post article about Bill Browder, titled "Raising the Curtain on the Browder-Magnitsky Story." I was flattered by that article, but Huffington Post scrubbed it from their website within hours. A week later, Amazon's publishing company, CreateSpace "suppressed" my book, purging it from Amazon.com website and from its Kindle store.

CreateSpace explained that a third party claimed that my book "may contain defamatory content," and that to resolve the issues I needed to contact Mr. Jonathan M. Winer, Mr. Browder's legal counsel. Mr. Winer's word was all that was necessary for Amazon to oblige and remove my book from its bookstore. My protest and subsequent communications with CreateSpace had no effect and my only venue was to "work" with Browder's lawyers to "resolve the issues." In other words, I was put in the situation to have Browder censor my book and decide on whether it could be published or not. At first I rejected idea and refused to contact Mr. Winer offering instead my book for free to whoever requested a copy. But subsequently I decided to write to Mr. Winer anyway to find out what, if anything went wrong. So far, I have received no response.

This is not the first time Bill Browder – and whoever is backing him – has effectively censored what the Western public may or may not know about his story. In 2016, Russian film-maker Andrei Nekrasov made the documentary film, "The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes."

Over the years, Nekrasov had built a reputation for producing documentaries that were critical of the Russian government, and with the Magnitsky affair, he initially followed Browder's narrative of the events and even envisioned Browder as the film's narrator. But his research into the subject turned up a number of problems with Browder's story. Nekrasov reached out to him for an explanation, but was unable to get in touch with Browder for several months. Nekrasov finally tracked down Browder at a book signing event where he tried and failed to get clarifications from him. Ultimately however, Nekrasov managed to meet with Browder and with the cameras rolling, he began to lay out his findings. As he did so, Browder became visibly vexed until at one moment he abruptly interrupted Nekrasov with an accusation that he was spreading Russian propaganda.

When Nekrasov's film was completed, Browder took aggressive action to block its screenings. With threats of lawsuits, he prevented an already scheduled screening to a group of Members of the European Parliament in Brussels. He did the same with another screening in Norway, and even managed to pressure the Franco-German television network "Arte" to call off the showing of Nekrasov's film on its channel. In June 2016, Browder tried to force The Newseum in Washington DC to cancel the screening of Nekrasov's film. Thankfully, The Newseum, whose laudable mission is to promote freedom of expression and "the five freedoms of the First Amendment to the U.S. Consitution," refused to be cowed by Browder's intimidation and showed the film to a Washington audience.

No, unfortunately this did not happen. Freedom of expression – which should be sacrosanct – is dangerously compromised in the west.

Open, civilized societies seek resolution of contentious issues by allowing proponents of different sides in any dispute to present their respective points of view. An informed, open debate is by far the best mechanism of conflict resolution because we can only arrive at constructive solutions to problems by taking different stakeholders' points of view into consideration. Browder's approach is contrary to that of civilized societies: he seeks to silence all points of view but his own. He seeks to persuade not by initiating an informed debate, but by suppressing all debate. This is not the conduct of a truth teller pursuing elevated objectives like human rights, justice, and truth. Truth does not need such forceful defense. As Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, " Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch. Nay, you may kick it about all day, and it will be round and full at evening. " Browder is clearly anxious that his story cannot take any kicking at all. Meanwhile in the western world, we appear to be at the mercy of lawyered-up elites for what we are allowed to know and what we are not.

In the end, I have no doubt that truth will prevail and that Bill Browder will lose his battle to keep his deception going. It is because there's something sacrosanct about truth and most people will reject a lie once they are aware of it.

Alex Krainer is a hedge fund manager based in Monaco. His book, "The Killing of William Browder" may still be available in paperback at Book Depository , Barnes&Noble (USA), Amazon.fr , Amazon.co.uk , or Amazon.de ­


bengo on October 05, 2017 , · at 11:20 am EST/EDT

Does anybody know how to get access to the movie?

This shocking tale of alleged Russian official corruption and brutality drove legislation that was a major landmark in the descent of U.S.-Russian relations under President Barack Obama to a level rivaling the worst days of the Cold War.

.But what the film shows is how Nekrasov, as he detected loose ends to the official story, begins to unravel Browder's fabrication which was designed to conceal his own corporate responsibility for the criminal theft of the money. As Browder's widely accepted story collapses, Magnitsky is revealed not to be a whistleblower but a likely abettor to the fraud who died in prison not from an official assassination but from banal neglect of his medical condition.

The cinematic qualities of the film are evident. Nekrasov is highly experienced as a maker of documentaries enjoying a Europe-wide reputation. What sets this work apart from the "trade" is the honesty and the integrity of the filmmaker as he discovers midway into his project that key assumptions of his script are faulty and begins an independent investigation to get at the truth .

RC on October 05, 2017 , · at 11:49 pm EST/EDT
The reason nekrasov has a following among European liberal snowflakes is that his documentaries have had a sarcastic jaded and negative tinge with respect to Russia (even BBC News has aired his documentaries as recently as 2016). He is rather pessimistic regarding Russia. That's what makes this revelation that even he (Nekrasov, a darling of the debauch liberals of the west, and Putin critic) found browder to not be credible. Coming from Nekrasov, that allegation and documentary would really destroy the battering ram (and useful fraud) that browder had provided the Western establishment.

Nekrasov is now getting a painful reality check as to how sophisticated the West's totalitarian nature is: they are not crude like the Chinese who will arrest small time nobodies for being too honest or critical, the West focusses it's blunt oppression for high value targets; just as outlined in 1984, the higher up you are and the greater your reach, the greater the scrutiny and the more blunt the instrument used to keep you in line. One must admit that the Anglo empire and their hypocrit vassals/covert-competitors in the EU, have refined this to an art and are far more efficient at it than their poor understudies in CCP China, or the Soviet Union.

Krainer is right though, the truth is going to prevail and eventually browder will be exposed (especially when the deep state decides he's too much of an annoying liability – as times progresses or as the deep state finds browder's agenda and his supporters getting in the way of the state's own agenda).

There is one thing that no one has clarified: Why was magnitsky allowed to die, why was he denied medical treatment, who was responsible for that? What are the facts around magnitsky's death?

Alex Krainer on October 06, 2017 , · at 4:40 am EST/EDT
Hi RC – a few great point. In Nekrasov's defence, I think I can understand him. I'm Croatian and if we started discussing Croatia, you'd find me very critical. My inclination would be to expose negative developments – not because I'm anti-Croatian but becauseI would want to draw public attention to problems that need to be addressed. To his credit, when he realized truth was different from what he initially believed, he made a turn to pursue truth when he could have made the film that would have been far better for his career.

I agree with you that Browder will probably end up thrown under the bus. That's what I'm afraid of (and the #1 reason for my book's title). But they will try to first make Browder a household name (crusader for human rights and justice, bla, bla..) with their Hollywood movie. Then they'll try to make it look like Putin had him killed.

As to why Magnistky died – that's a mystery. It was definitely a massive cock-up on the part of Russian law enforcement, but there's also the angle that his death was VERY convenient for Browder and his goodfellas.

Mulga Mumblebrain on October 06, 2017 , · at 5:44 am EST/EDT
Magnitsky died of his alcoholism, as alcoholics do.
Johan Vermeulen on December 25, 2017 , · at 5:10 am EST/EDT
I think that Magnitsky was such a pain in the ass ( he made 450 complaints about the prison-conditions during 358 days in prison, most ofwhich nobody could solve without a much larger budget) that doctors and staff prefered to not hear or to look the other way when Magnitsky came into a psychosis. He got into this psychosis after a court case from where he returned very disappointed. Future looked a lot worse than he had expected.

During the psychosis his heart stopped.

­
anonymoose on October 05, 2017 , · at 3:16 pm EST/EDT
"The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes" can be seen online @:

https://my.mail.ru/bk/n-osetrova/video/71/18682.html?time=155&from=videoplayer

Anonymoose

­
Anonymous on October 06, 2017 , · at 7:11 pm EST/EDT
Parry's article mentions that he viewed the film on Vimeo, using a password provided by Piraya Film, the Norwegian production company.

This is a fairly standard way that independent producers shop their films around, looking for a distribution deal. I.e., a journalist or distributor contacts them, and they are given a Vimeo link and password for a private, limited-time viewing of the film. Journalists get this access because their writing helps to promote the film. The simplest distribution deal would then be through a subscription-based streaming platform. DVDs are more complicated and usually happen later.

However, in this case, the film is a co-production with four other companies, including ZDF and ARTE, which are large European networks, and all of whom have been threatened with litigation, presumably by Browder's lawyers.

In effect, then, the film in its original version has been censored. It is not available, unless or until somebody pirates it. There are several scammy-looking streaming sites that claim to have it, but they want your credit card number and they might just have the same Russian-dubbed version that you can watch for free via the link posted above.

I suspect the version of the film with the Russian voice-over was not done by Piraya Film, as the production of the sound doesn't seem very high compared to the quality of the original. This might have been done with authorization of Piraya, but if not, it means somebody has a illegitimate copy of the film to which they added the Russian voice-over. This means, they could also post the film in its original form. If they really want to increase awareness in the West of how the new Cold War is playing out, such a move could help.

Given the legal threats and the fact that few small distribution companies have the resources to fight legal battles, this might be a situation in which we are waiting for somebody to pirate the film, somebody who has access to the original, and to distribute it via a torrent.

Anonymous on October 08, 2017 , · at 2:24 pm EST/EDT
I wonder whether Nekrasov himself knows of the level of interest (at least in some quarters) in seeing the film, and could find a way to make one available somehow. . .

Katherine

Alex on October 09, 2017 , · at 3:08 pm EST/EDT
Something tells me he doesn't want to push this too much as money for this film came from French and German sources. It is nice to see him sticking his neck out to uphold the Truth.

When I watched the US rep. who supposedly investigated this Magnitzky affair for the US gov. state under oath that he never verified any of the info that Browder gave him, I kept thinking "Is this guy serious ?" But when you realize that they never did any investigation then it all seems logical.

[Jul 27, 2018] The story Browder refuses to tell is far more interesting than the one he wrote for the book

Not one review mentions possible close tied of Brower and MI6. Not a single review compare his book with Netrasov story or Alex Krainer's book
Jul 27, 2018 | www.amazon.com
1.0 out of 5 stars

By J. Koerner on January 9, 2018

The story Browder refuses to tell is far more interesting than the one he wrote for the book.

I found the book quite easy to put down: I got tired of all the chapters about how he made so much money following the fall of the Soviet Union. But Norman Pearlstine's statement that "Browder's business saga meshes well with the story of corruption and murder in Vladimir Putin's Russia" is more true than he realizes. With the release of Glenn Simpson's 20 hours of testimony before three Senate committees we now know that there is a great deal of information Browder failed to disclose. I'll let Simpson tell it:

He was willing to, you know, hand stuff off to the DOJ anonymously in the beginning and cause them to launch a court case against somebody, but he wasn't interesting in speaking under oath about, you know, why he did that ... All of this -- his determined effort to avoid testifying under oath, including running away from subpoenas and changing -- frequently changing lawyers and making lurid allegations against us, including that, you know, he thought we were KGB assassins in the parking lot of Aspen, Colorado when we served the subpoena, all raised questions
in my mind about why he was so determined to not have to answer questions under oath about things that happened in Russia.

I'll add that, you know, I've done a lot of Russia reporting over the years. I originally met William Browder back when I was a journalist at the Wall Street Journal when I was doing stories about corruption in Russia. I think the first time I met him he lectured me about -- I was working on a story about Vladimir Putin corruption and he lectured me about how have Vladimir Putin was not corrupt and how he was the best thing that ever
happened to Russia.

But returning to the detailed discussion of my work, we investigated William Browder's business practices in Russia, we began to understand maybe what it was he didn't want to talk about, and as we looked at that we then began to look at his decision to surrender his American citizenship in 1998. At that point somewhere in there the Panama papers came out and we discovered that he had incorporated shell companies offshore in the mid 1990s, in 1995 I believe it was in the British Virgin Islands, and that at some point his hedge fund's shares had been transferred to this offshore company. This offshore company was managed -- several of his offshore companies were managed by the Panamanian law firm called Mossack Fonseca, which is known now for setting up offshore companies for drug kingpins, narcos, kleptos, you name it. They were servicing every bad guy around. And I'm familiar with them from other money laundering and corruption and tax evasion investigations that I've done.I'll note parenthetically that William Browder talks a lot about the Panama papers and the Russians who are in the Panama papers without ever mentioning that he's in the Panama papers.

Now, I choose to believe Simpson, who not only chose to submit to 20 hours of Senate committee but then demand that it be made public, and not Browder, who fled from Simpson in the parking lot of an Aspen resort, later claiming he thought Simpson was KBG.

By Decorum on December 13, 2017
Heed the titular warning! Stay well away!

This is not a book to be set aside lightly... in the words of Dorothy Parker. It has been many years since I have read a book this bad. And many more since I finished one this bad. In recent years I have been more able to simply give up on bad books, ignoring the sunk cost fallacy that previously drove me to soldier on - perhaps it's an increasing awareness of the value of time, but nowadays I will bail out when it is clear I've made a big mistake. But this one was recommended by a friend whose taste I had no reason to doubt so I kept on, chapter after gruelling chapter, hoping for some epiphany or quality uptick. Let me save you from the same mistake.

One service this book does render, though, is to remind you, if you need it, that writing is hard. You may be the world's most fabulous person (well, second most fabulous - the author of this book is pretty clear about who occupies the top spot) but it don't make you a good writer, see. So the first important thing to know is that Bill Browder cannot write. He strings together cliches, name drops, humble brags (and regular brags too) but he can't write. No matter; perhaps the content can make up for it? I'm sure there are plenty of books where the content redeems the awful style, such as... well, I'm sure there are plenty. But the second thing to know going in is that the story is a pretty tedious, linear tale of BB's triumphs in the world of finance and then, as he calls it, "human rights". The problem, I think, is that the tone of the book is very smug and, despite the occasional and obviously cynical self-deprecation, deeply self-satisfied. The author has a real tin ear for his tone, I think, and it's well illustrated by a very early part of the story. He arrives in Poland in his first job, charged with the assessment and, hopefully, revival of a failing bus company. He expresses his deep sorrow and pity for the poor, poor workers and wonders what he can do to help. Meanwhile, he comes across a class of stocks in Poland that seem to him to be ridiculously underpriced. Aha! thinks the naive reader - I know where this is going: he will get the bus company to invest in these stocks ad save the day. But no! It turns out that these narratives shall not meet: he buys the stocks himself and makes out like a bandit, and he recommends that the bus company be shut down, throwing all the workers on the street. He is very, very sorry about the latter, of course, but, on the other hand, he has discovered his true calling as a value investor! Gaudeamus!

The author seems to have absolutely no appreciation of his role as a functionary in a very particular social system and it makes all of his carefully laid out social conscience ring hollow and renders his thoroughly documented tears crocodilian.

By EBaiz on February 15, 2018
two wrongs dont make a right

Both sides of this story are doing horrible things and the writer thinks what he did was correct!
This is a story where the writer only criticizes the horrible things the russian goverment did to him and how some oligarchs steal tax money (as everywhere but blatantly) but fails to realize that what he did, purchasing people-owned companies at fractions of a penny on the dollar and knowing it, while taking advantage of the imperfect systems put in place for the distribution of those companies' wealth to the people of that country, as he perfectly describes in this book, is also wrong in the first place. He fails to understand he actually hurt the people of that country when he bought shares at a "steal" price as he writes, he thinks he is doing the right thing because of his wall street mentality, no rules, prey on whomever gives an opportunity. Sad, but it's the world we live in today

By NYNYGuy on May 30, 2016
Greedy Hedgie's Delusions of Ritousness

Browder's story seems like a complete scam. First, he personally profited to the tune of $2 BN off the backs of the Russian people, taking advantage of inequities in the voucher system used with the dissolution of the USSR. He never mentions how much he personally made, as that would have cast too much reality on the sheer vanity, self-aggrandizement, and sanctimonious rubbish that is the rest of the story. More pointedly, he does not speak to how his money provided access to the highest levels of government, John McCain, and greased the wheels of the European legal system. Take for example, his ability to miraculously get two Interpol Red Notices removed within days of their placement. The Magnitsky case was terrible but he clearly uses it as a sanctimonious shield to get public sympathy and protection. I could go on but the bottom line is do not waste your time or money. Browder is one of the bad guys- at best a delusional narcissist, or more likely a greedy scam artist, pulling the wool over everyone's eyes.

By Critical Rationalist on July 18, 2015
What a greedy narcissist. Sheesh.

After finishing Masha Gessen's "Man Without a Face" (insightful) Karen Dawisha's "Putin's Kleptocracy" (a mind-boggling, devastating indictment of Putin and his cronies), and David Hoffman's "Billion Dollar Spy" (reads like a thriller novel), I was hoping that Bill Browder's book would provide some additional depth and an interesting perspective on the thoroughly corrupt workings of post-Soviet Russia. It does not.

Like Browder, I went to Russia numerous times -- but didn't have an office there as he did -- during the 90s and did a number of deals there. Unlike Browder, I speak the language and know Russian business and legal culture quite well. (I'm an average American, born and raised in Ohio, where I still live, but I do have a Russian wife, whom I met on one of my trips there in the 1990s.)

Browder is an extremely unsympathetic figure: Although he doesn't admit to it in the book, he was blinded by greed and arrogance to the point where he viewed his marriage and his son as of only trivial importance compared to his mission in life to get rich. He went to Russia to get something for nothing, thinking he was being shrewd. His utter ignorance of Russian business and Russian culture permeate the book -- his condescending attitude is similar to that of a British governor-general back in 1940s Iran, when the British role was limited to exploiting Iran by grabbing its oil for a pittance while speaking contemptuously of the locals. Browder contemptuously describes Russian attempts to reign him in: "Russians will gladly -- gleefully even -- sacrifice their own success to screw their neighbor." Yet he is oblivious to the fact that he himself, without any second thoughts, sacrificed his own family for the prospect of making just one more deal, just one more deal, and then just one more deal. American citizenship too was just another expendable in his all-consuming quest for riches.

Russia in the 1990s was a sea of corruption, intrigue, mafia protection rackets, turf battles, economic chaos, incompetence, and power grabs. Browder injected himself into it, completely ignorant of what he was getting into, determined to take advantage. He got burned.

"Red Notice" doesn't provide any perspective or depth; it isn't even particularly interesting. Browder's narcisssm and self-justifications permate the book, making it extremely unpleasant to read.

By AlanH on September 26, 2017
Russophobe Shill

The author is, inter alia, wanted in Russia for tax fraud and so, obviously, will say everything he can that is negative about Russia. His background and backers are also very suspicious, to my mind anyway.

I found the book to be nothing but hype. This was confirmed when I read Alex Krainer's "The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception." This excellent book - with factual content and well referenced - tears Browder to shreds. As he deserves to be.

But the sheeple will continue to want to believe this fiction - it suits the current american meme.

By Sorin Strugariu on October 29, 2017
I recommend to turn off the TV ( tel-a-vision or the-lies-on-vision ...

The ' truth ' and the brainwashed herd of the sheeple. The death of the Anglo-American-Zionist Empire. For those who think for themselves and cares for the others, here in the USA ( former United States of America, now United Slaves of America ) and all-over the World, for those of you in the research of ' whatreallyhappened ', I recommend to turn off the TV ( tel-a-vision or the-lies-on-vision ) and read...R E A D INDEPENDENT books and watch INDEPENDENT documentaries ! Books like ' The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deceptions ' - NOT for sale on 'amazon.com' - WHY ???!!!...Documentaries like ' The Magnitsky act: Behind the Scenes ', produced by filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov ( a fierce critic of President Putin ).

By Maria S Plaksina on June 6, 2015
Crook got his chances in Russia ----- HE IS A LIER!!!!

Complete Rubbish! Not only he concealed a lot of facts - he fabricated a lot of them. The book is complete fiction, Why he doesnt mention that Magnitsky helped Hermitage create schemes to avoid taxes, crate shell-companies to buy stocks of Gazprom (foreigners can not buy Gazprom stocks), created shell companies in Cyprus and Kalmikia to pay joke taxes, hired disabled people to again lower taxes? etc He is a joke

Mr. Browder went to Russian in the early 90s to make quick cash - he did it by buying stocks from uneducated russians (similar to other russian oligarchs). Story of another greedy individual who wanted to become a billionaire fast - once he had to pay the price he become outraged by injustice of the system... XOXOXOXOXOX next time when you, Mr Browder, go to another developing country with the intention to rob the system be prepared to take the responsibility and do not whine about it like a little girl. A crook got upset that he didnt make as much money as he wanted and got kicked out from the country - what a joke.

BTW - the youtube video with Mr. Browder running away from the officer who served him subpoena is hilarious. If Mr Browder is so ethical and clean why he doesn't want to testify in court?

By max2015 on March 8, 2015
20% what readers want, the rest is poop!

This book came highly recommended to me by someone in the hedge fund industry. I was surprised at how bad it was. I was looking into insight as to how Bill Browder, who once ran the largest Russian hedge fund, made his fortune, estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Instead the book was a very self serving book which I would identify as 20% self aggrandizement, self serving, 20% discussion of the arbitrage trades that made him rich, 60% discussion of the Sergie Magnitsky Act which he worked to pass. The book is full of contradictions including Browder's moral position and his self righteousness. It makes you wonder if anyone thought about this book in context of the 2008 financial markets collapse or did any research on Browder when reading it. Also, why does Browder today actively evade subpoenas to testify about what happened in American court as shown in Youtube videos?

The book is full of villains on both sides. Browder is the grandson of the former head of the US communist party. He gave up his US citizenship to become a British citizen in 1997. He worked for the criminal Robert Maxwell who had misappropriated corporate pension funds to live a flamboyant lifestyle, then he went to work with Edmond Safra as a partner in Hermitage Capital. Not only these global speculators but the book includes Mossad and a host of Russian oligarchs (all financed by Fred Goodwin's Royal Bank of Scotland). Browder's arbitrage was that Russian companies were severely undervalued because no other investors trusted Russian corporations and Russian rule of law. Whereas most other investors thought Russian companies were 100% un-investable, Browder figured many of them were only 50% un-investable and he invested in that 50% that was investable. After that arbitrage went away, he decided to start investigating Russian corporations for inside dealing and his activist strategy paid off but made many enemies. He was warned by numerous other investors that his life and others would be in danger for this. Everyone he works with leaves wreckage behind until he does the same. When one of his lawyers who gets less than 1% of coverage in the first half of the book dies in a Russian prison, he goes all out to try to get revenge on the Russians who he claims made tax fraud on the Russian government and him by seizing control of companies he owned. Many questions arise from the book some of which I list below.

(1) Browder's hedge fund is domiciled in Guernsey and Cayman Islands, notorious tax evasion locales, yet the premise of the second half of the book is to get revenge on corrupt Russian officials for stealing Russian tax money (his hundreds of millions of dollars)
(2) Browder is drawn to evil people and shady characters (Maxwell, oligarch companies, mossad, etc) like moths to a flame. Is it force of habit for him to fall into bad situations with them? Is it the US government's role to spend taxpayer money on exacting revenge for him on the crooked crowd he deals with? His friends are spoken with in great superlatives, his enemies despised. It is easy to imagine if you were a friend and became an enemy he would label you with epithets thus immediately.
(3) Browder becomes a British citizen (but a hedge fund deci or centi millionaire) yet he easily gets access to John McCain, Joe Lieberman and other US elected officials to get the Magnitsky act passed. Ultimately the Magnitsky act passes and Russia responds by banning all US adoptions of Russian children. For all you childless women looking to adopt Russian babies, thank the egotist Browder for your inability to do so going forward. Were you screwed in the 2008 financial markets collapse? The system may not work for you but it works for a global speculator who wants vengeance.
(4) But its worse. Browder goes to war with the Oligarchs who were funded by Royal Bank of Scotland and who defaulted on their loans from RBS. The UK citizens had to bail out RBS. Browder tries to utilize the British government to exact vengeance on the very same Oligarchs the British government is bailing out in some ways.
(5) Browder is the great example of the speculative hedge fund trader of the 90's and 00's run amok. He is a speculator, he was warned about the risks, he jumps headlong into them and knows Russia does not have American or British rule of law. But he expects the US and Britain to jump to his aid for his recklessness and bail him out like the other crooks of the 2008 vintage. EVEN THOUGH HE IS A BRITISH CITIZEN.
(6) Lookup the Wall Street Journal articles or Youtube videos about how the cowardly Browder runs away from being served by a subpoena and has constantly sought to avoid subpoena's from the Russians who are countersuing him in US and British court. If he is for rule of law, why not work his way through the legal systems. Seems like there is another side to the story.

By Jeremy J. Glover on August 19, 2015
Crack Cocaine Seller

Hey, guys and gals, the man is a shark. An investment banker. He'd sell his own grandmother if he thought he's make a profit. And now he's trying to profit by selling his own story, all teary-eyed about his lawyer and his quest for "justice." Barf. He wants to expose Kremlin corruption, happily forgetting Wall St. corruption that he hoped would make HIM millions. He only saw the light when other folks made millions and he got arrested. Kinda like any low-life Baltimore drug pusher. Please don't buy his line of crack cocaine.

By Jeremiah Gelles MD on August 18, 2017
The Kettle is Black

This is a thrilling page-turner of financial and political intrigue. The problem is that it is much like the pot calling the kettle black. Just about everything of which Browder accuses the Russian kleptocrats is equaled or excelled by the US robber barons and the agencies of violence wielded by the US government. Browder also digresses from time to time into the history of the USSR about which he knows nothing except the propaganda that we have been fed, most of which originates, ironically enough, from the very oligarchs he so justifiably criticizes.

By J. wilson on June 23, 2018
Paean to self

Very interesting to hear an insider's experience of Russia privatization and the politics of the 90's and early 2000s. I enjoyed that part.
That said, I found Browder spent a lot of time tooting his own horn and virtue signaling . He seemed quite impressed with himself and spends much of the book detailing why you should be too.
I never thought Putin was a good guy.
I never thought neocon/ deep state John McCain was a good guy. ( Browder does).
I don't think Browder made his gazillions by being a good guy. A lot of ordinary Russians got ripped off . Browder and a lot of others got rich.

By A.I. 8706 on May 18, 2015
The narrator ruins the narrative

This is a fairly interesting, if pretty unsurprising, story of high-level graft and corruption in Russia. Yes, Putin and the Russian government are rife with corruption, and the rules are subject to change on a whim. That should be obvious to anyone who paid any attention to Russia's preparation for the Sochi Olympics. I'm even inclined to take Browder's story about the torture and eventual death of Sergei Magnitsky (who he describes as a tax lawyer, but was actually an accountant) at face value.

But where Browder really grates is with his remarkable lack of self-awareness and out-of-touch declarations. At one point, for instance, in the run-up to the 1996 elections, in which there was a chance that the Communist candidate, Gennady Zyuganov, would win the presidency and potentially re-nationalize state companies, Browder said that he could deal with food shortages, hyperinflation, or any number of terrible conditions, but what he couldn't stomach was re-nationalization of industry. So, according to this guy, people starving and their savings evaporating into thin air is tolerable, but the worst thing imaginable is him losing his gains from fleecing Russian peasants. Solid guy, Browder.

For some background-- when the USSR fell, Russia embarked on a program of "voucher privatization" where every citizen received vouchers that they could use to bid on the shares of previously state-owned enterprises. Since Russia has incredible resource wealth, these were quite valuable. Unfortunately, in a country with no history of any kind of capital markets, the overwhelming majority of people had no clue what use they could get out of stock ownership. Immediately after they were issued, you could buy a voucher for a bottle of cheap vodka. And the people who became the oligarchs, as well as western vultures like Browder, did just that. Eventually, these shares sold at incredibly low valuations, and investors made a killing. But what Browder doesn't mention is that these absurdly low valuations almost certainly came about, in large part, from the fact that investors hate uncertainty. The possibility that a Zyuganov would come to power and re-nationalize state-owned enterprises was a real possibility, so plenty of investors stayed on the sidelines. Not Browder-- he jumped in, and when (surprise!) the Russian government behaved like the Russian government is wont to do, he acted like he was the victim of the world's worst injustice. Sure, what happened was in some way unfair. So was all the vultures jumping in to take advantage of peasants. Browder had no problem ripping off Russian peasants while extolling himself as a "great capitalist," but, when the Russian government took him in, he complained about the big bad Russians. It was extremely tiresome.

There were other places where his tone was equally annoying. He spent time talking about how "sexy" his second wife was/is, how she's "not like those other Russian girls that are just after money," and how many other people wanted to date her and how awesome he was because she chose him. Sergei Magnitsky's death is a sad story from a sad place. It's too bad the person to tell it is such a wildly out of touch hypocrite.

By Patricia5115 on March 22, 2015
A Self-Congratulatory Book with a Mission

The book was fun to read, like a Marvel comic book. Truly Bill Browder is, according to Bill Browder, a brilliant man willing to take daring risks where he sees an opportunity for personal gain. And I have to agree with him. With his inherited genetic intelligence, and some of the best education money can buy, he made himself enormously rich profiting from financial transactions that produced nothing of real value. I found this book to be quite self-congratulatory, written with no embarrassment for taking advantage of a whole population.
As Browder writes, "I found that to transition from communism to capitalism, the Russian government had decided to give away most of the state's property to the people. The government was going about this in a number of ways, but the most interesting was something called voucher privatization. The government granted one privatization certificate to every Russian citizen---roughly 150 million people in total -- and taken together these were exchangeable for 30 % of nearly all Russian companies." "The market price of the vouchers equaled 3 billion this meant that the valuation of the entire Russian economy was only 10 billion! That was one-sixth the value of Wal-Mart!" "Russia had 24% of the word's natural gas, 9% of the world's oil, and produced 6.6 % of the world's steel, among many other things. Yet this incredible trove of resources [owned by ordinary Russian citizens] was trading for a mere 10 billion! Even more astonishing was that there were no restrictions on who could purchase these vouchers. I could buy them, anyone could buy them." He recounts, "The Russian people had no idea what to do with the vouchers when they received them for free from the state and, in most cases, were happy to trade them for a $7 bottle of vodka or a few slabs of pork." Mr. Browder took advantage of their ignorance and brought millions of vouchers from the Russian people for a pittance of their true value. This is something to brag about? It is not laudable to buy something for a pittance of its real worth, from owners who have no idea of its true value. It is reprehensible. It was disturbing to me to see no introspection on the rightness or wrongness of beating someone out of his or her money.
Mr. Browder describes in his Sidanco deal the feeling he has when an opportunity for ungodly gains presents itself, "I had that tingling, greedy tension in my gut, similar to when I saw my $2,000 Polish investment multiply by nearly ten times, or when I unearthed the Russian voucher scheme."
Greed is not a virtue, Mr. Browder. It is a vice.

Reviewer Ian Kaplan wrote:
The second half of the book is about how Putin's gang tried to crush Hermitage Capital and everyone associated with it."

And, I would add, how Browder's gang is trying to crush Putin.
It makes me think that a large part of Mr. Browder's dogged determination in pushing the Maginsky Act through Congress, and signed into law, was not so much a humanitarian turn of the leaf for him, but a strategy to enlist the whole backing of the United States into his personal war with Putin, who put him out of a lucrative business in Russia.

By william schaffer on March 21, 2018
Confirmation that Russia is a very bad place.

I was familiar with Hermitage and Browder so it was not "news" to me. I feel Browder makes himself look good when in reality he was a jerk.
I don't wish him well!
Bill Schaffer

By exurbanite on February 25, 2018
Skepticism Advisable

Bill Browder is a shrewd fellow, at least up to a point. He saw an opportunity to make money after the collapse of Communism in Russia. He moved to Moscow, started a hedge fund, and succeeded in a big way. He made piles of money in essentially the same way the Russian oligarchy made it, by purchasing formerly state owned assets at hugely discounted rates.

It all worked beautifully for a while, but clever as he was Browder didn't realize he was living in a fool's paradise. Rather than remaining cool and quiet while making money, he publicly accused certain local enterprises of corruption. He did this, rather naively, in a country notoriously resentful of foreign interference in its affairs. Furthermore, there are indications that he himself was not above involvement in dodgy dealings, including fudging on taxes and sneaking funds into tax havens.

Not surprisingly, Browder, away on a trip, was barred from reentering Russia. Authorities raided his Moscow offices, confiscating files and computers. Although Browder managed to get his staff out of Russia, a man named Sergei Magnitsky whom Browder calls his lawyer, though he was apparently only an auditor, chose not to leave. This was a grave error, as poor Magnitsky became the foil for Russian displeasure with Browder. He was jailed, beaten, denied medical treatment, and died in prison. Meanwhile, a couple of thugs attached to the KGB, Russia's secret police, extorted large sums of money from Browder via a complex fraud, presumably accomplished with the tacit consent of establishment superiors.

Browder used Magnitsky's death to launch a major and eventually successful lobbying campaign for a U.S. law which came to be known as the Magnitsky Act. The law imposing sanctions on Russian officials responsible for Magnitsky's death. The Russians retaliated by placing Browder on the Interpol wanted list and later sentencing him in absentia to nine years in prison for tax fraud.

"Red Notice" is written in the fashionably breezy and colloquial style seemingly favored by many professional ghost writers. Not surprisingly, it portrays Browder as a skilled and principled financier who, prompted by the Magnitsky tragedy, turns himself into a towering figure in the world of human rights.

There are odd omissions in descriptions of Browder's family life. Divorce from his first wife is mentioned only in passing; although much ado is made over his meeting his glamorous Russian second wife, she fades entirely from later portions of the manuscript. "Red Notice" is a work of considerable interest. However, given the many controversies that hover over Browder's life and reputation, I believe it wise to view its contents with a generous degree of skepticism.

By El Briano on February 15, 2015
Hero with Somewhat Tarnished Halo

Other reviewers have accurately summarized the book, and justly praised Browder's commitment and courage in seeking a measure of justice for the brutal treatment, leading to death, of Sergei Magnitsky. My comment will focus on a disquieting subtext babout browder's activities in setting up and running his hedge fund.

Browder's rise to prominence with his Hermitage Fund followed the classic MBA playbook: find and exploit undervaluation. Fair enough in a financial world of transparency and disclosure where "consenting adults" can presumably fend for themselves. But this was not exactly the environment in Russia in the early 1990s. In its attempted transition from communism to some form of capitalism, the Russian government granted "privatization certificates" to the people - one certificate per citizen, about 150 million in total. Browder found that these certificates, in the aggregate, were exchangeable for about a 30 percent interest in newly privatized Russian companies.

In theory, this should have been a promising financial arrangement for the impoverished Russian people, particularly given the country's wealth of natural resources and the p[otential of its energy sector. But after decades of communism, capitalism was a largely unknown concept in day-to-day practice. Controlling interests were diverted to a well-connected oligarchical minority, who saw the companies more as ATMs rather than what we in the West would call modern corporations with appropriate disclosure and governance standards. Companies were valued at a tiny fraction of comparable Western entities, and the Russian stock market, such as it was, had little volume and virtually no transparency.

Browder had the insight to realize that the participation certificates were ludicrously undervalued in relation to the potential net worth of Russian companies. By purchasing large numbers of these certificates from the essentially clueless Russian citizenry for the functional equivalent of pennies on the dollar in relation to underlying value, Browder was able to position his Hermitage Fund to get in on the ground floor of a stock market that was virtually certain to rise dramatically as the potential of the Russian economy came to be understood in the Western world.

Depending on one's perspective, this is either an instance of brilliant, if amoral, take-the-world-as-it-is MBA-ism, or a classic example of a city slicker fleecing the rubes in a manner that would be much more difficult to pull off in a more sophisticated financial environment. I lean toward the latter position, and surely am not the only one dazed by the irony of Browder, grandson of a one-time head of the U.S. Communist Party, so unapologetically exploiting the ignorance of the Russian populace for capitalist gain.

Browder deserves all the kudos he's received for his work on the Magnitsky matter. But his Hermitage Fund (and its progeny and imitators) helped give visibility (though not transparency) and liquidity, as well as an aura of respectability, to the previously "undernourished" Russian stock market. Browder's investors did well, as did numbers of average Russians (though not necessarily those who sold the participation certificates). Principal beneficiaries, however, were the oligarchs and the well-connected favored few, the value of whose controlling interests soared greatly. In part, Browder was an enabler of the system he came (rightly) to despise and fight against.

By Scott Shorey on July 31, 2015
Whitewash Job

It seems Browder is trying to whitewash his own reputation and the part he played in the disasterous privitazation of Russian businesses after the collapse of the Soviet Union. He was an active and avid participant in buying up shares of companies for pennies on the dollar which helped to impoverish Russians for a generation. In addition his part in the death of Sergei Magnitsky was shameful. Yes Browder and Magnitsky uncoverd massive fraud but ultimately Browder decided that the money was more important than his "friend's" life. Passige of the Magnitsky Law slightly punished the perpetrators but he didn't need to die and Browder should be ashamed of himself as well.

[Jul 27, 2018] Grand Deception The Truth About Bill Browder, the Magnitsky Act and Anti-Russian Sanctions Alex Krainer 9780692131954 Amazo

Jul 27, 2018 | www.amazon.com
Product details
0 out of 5 stars Jareth Copus on July 19, 2018
A must read, regardless of political party of choice. A book that could save America, literaly

Well written, stringently researched and truly shines a light on the dark dealings of Bill Browder. Seamlessly disects the chapters of Bill browders book red notice bit by bit. Everyone should read this book.

[Jul 27, 2018] "Semi-intelligence agences" is a very sad joke: When I watched the US rep. who supposedly investigated this Magnitzky affair for the US gov. state under oath that he never verified any of the info that Browder gave him, I kept thinking "Is this guy serious ?"

Jul 27, 2018 | thesaker.is

­ Alex on October 09, 2017 , · at 3:08 pm EST/EDT

Something tells me he doesn't want to push this too much as money for this film came from French and German sources. It is nice to see him sticking his neck out to uphold the Truth.

When I watched the US rep. who supposedly investigated this Magnitzky affair for the US gov. state under oath that he never verified any of the info that Browder gave him, I kept thinking "Is this guy serious ?" But when you realize that they never did any investigation then it all seems logical.

[Jul 27, 2018] Key Magnitsky case witness may have been poisoned report

Notable quotes:
"... "no third-party involvement." ..."
"... "heartbreak grass." ..."
"... "cause for very serious concern," ..."
May 19, 2015 | www.rt.com
Russian businessman Aleksandr Perepelichny, a key witness in the Sergey Magnitsky case who died in southern England in November 2012, may have been poisoned, British media reported. Perepelichny allegedly cooperated with Swiss investigators looking into the death of Sergey Magnitsky and a $240 million money laundering case, involving Russian officials and organized crime.

Magnitsky was a Russian lawyer, who was held in pre-trial detention in connection with tax fraud, and died in 2009 due to being denied crucial medical treatment by prison officials.

His death caused an international outcry and led to the passing of the so-called Magnitsky Act by the US Congress in 2012, which punished a group of Russian state officials and law enforcers with a US asset freeze and a visa ban over alleged human rights violations.

READ MORE: 'Key witness' in Magnitsky case suddenly dies in UK - report

Shortly before testifying in the Magnitsky case, Perepelichny collapsed and died while jogging near his home near in Surrey, south of London.

The Surrey police initially found nothing suspicious about the 44-year-old man's death, saying that there was "no third-party involvement."

However, a pre-inquest hearing Monday has shed light on new facts in the case, which contradicted the initial conclusions by the police.

A top poisons expert examined a sample of Perepilichny's stomach contents last year and discovered the presence of a chemical strongly associated with a lethal plant toxin, the Independent newspaper reported.

Professor Monique Simmonds from Royal Botanic Gardens in Kew, London, told the court that the substance was extremely rare in nature and could only be obtained from gelsemium, a poisonous plant also known as "heartbreak grass."

The plant only grows in remote areas in Russia and China, and became known as a poison used by assassins in the two countries.

READ MORE: After Magnitsky: Dead lawyer's boss Browder and his legal hurdles – now in US

However, it isn't used very often. The most recent known use of gelsemium as a poison was the assassination of Chinese billionaire Huang Guang in 2011.

Lawyers representing the police at Surrey Coroner's Court in Woking acknowledged that the presence of the chemical "ion" in Perepilichny's system was a "cause for very serious concern," the Independent reported.

The new finding prompted the judge to reschedule a hearing in Perepilichny's case, due to begin Monday, until September as to allow more tests to be performed.

According to the Independent, the Surrey police may find themselves in hot water for negligence if Perepilichny's poisoning is confirmed, as the case would resemble the high-profile murder of Aleksandr Litvinenko in London in 2006.

Litvinenko, a former Russian security officer, died in hospital after being poisoned with radioactive Polonium 210, with his death acting as a stumbling block in relations between Russia and the UK.

[Jul 27, 2018] Browder Is Censoring a Film about Magnitsky

Notable quotes:
"... A documentary screening of Andrei Nekrasov's investigation comes to a halt due to behind-the-scenes schemes of an American billionaire. ..."
"... Originally appeared at Rusplt , translated by Mona Lita exclusively for SouthFront ..."
Jun 03, 2016 | southfront.org
A documentary screening of Andrei Nekrasov's investigation comes to a halt due to behind-the-scenes schemes of an American billionaire.

Nekrasov (c) in a scene from his new film (Photo: greens-efa.eu)

Originally appeared at Rusplt , translated by Mona Lita exclusively for SouthFront

Seems like the world has turned upside down. After decades of living under the conditions of censorship, Russia has generated an unprecedented desire for freedom. Europe, by contrast, is increasingly resorting to banning facts that are inconvenient for her. Myths that benefit politicians of the Old World are claimed as truth, while all the rest is, for example, Russian "propaganda". On this basis the obstacles to Mass Media activities are being fixed, while access to individual documentaries is being cut off from the viewer. One of these types of works is a film "the Magnitsky Act – behind the scenes", made by a Russian director Andrei Nekrasov, which is dedicated to a famous story about tax evasion, which later becomes the reason for the adoption of the American law with the same name.

Another screening of Nekrasov's film was to be held today, on May 27th as one of the short films at a festival in Grimstad, Norway [ SF editor: It wasn't screened]. Whether it will happen or not is not yet clear. The fact is that the film's authors now have a powerful opponent, an American billionaire and CEO of Hermitage Capital – William Browder, an author of the Sergei Magnitsky myth and his self-proclaimed political executor. Unhappy with Nekrasov's investigation, in which a version of an innocent businessman is being refuted, Browder launched an opposition campaign. He is not hesitating to use a whole arsenal of tools for this: direct political pressure, defender assaults and prosecution. A Norwegian publication Dagbladet writes about this.

According to the publication, for the sake of counteracting the film's circulation Browden held separate meetings with the Storting parliament members – Ingerd Skou from the "Høyre" Party and Morten Wold from the Progress Party. Both of them are also members of the Storting delegation in PACE, and this means they have European-scale influence. Moreover, Browder met with the leader of the Norwegian Party Venstre, Trine Skei Grande. In respect to Nekrasov's film the policy is set to be very critical, calling it propaganda. "Everyone knows that Russia is a master at conducting such campaigns", a publication quotes her words. It turns out she has not seen the film itself but believes in Browder's version.

In addition to politicians' support, Browder – an American with a British passport, enlisted the sympathy of human rights activists. The Norwegian Helsinki Committee is entirely on his side. A corresponding meeting took place during the visit of this country's businessman.

A sacrifice is required for human rights activists to exist. Magnitsky is the suitable candidate. Death in a Russian prison makes him a desirable target to human rights fanatics. In case this resource is not enough, Browder prepared a court appeal. "I have hired Norwegian attorneys. They have been ordered to take up the case", he explained to Dagbladet. Browder wants to sue not only the film director but also the film festival in Grimstad, if he did not remove the film from screening.

Right now, the festival organizers are resisting. According to the Executive Director Anita Svingen, they will refuse the showing of Nekrasov investigation only if the creators themselves will withdraw the film for legal reasons. Despite Browder's threats to sue the festival, its organizers invited him to a discussion that will take place after the viewing. They recalled that it was a Norwegian company that created the film, which guarantees him a sufficient level of confidence.

It should be noted that funding for Nekrasov's work is also European. The film received millions of krones from the Nordic Film and TV Fond, the Norwegian Film Institute (NFI), Norsk Film Institute and the Foundation Fritt Ord ("Free Word"). If those politicians who oppose the showing are outraged by this circumstance, then the Representative of NFI Mette Taraldsen reasonably noted that the very "form and task of documentaries is to raise critical questions and to cover the case from different angles". At the same time he also reminded that Andrei Nekrasov is one of the most experienced documentarians, and it makes no sense not to trust him.

Europe is afraid of free speech?

In fact, the Russian director is considered one of the masters in European documentary films. A partnership with Andrei Tarkovsky, training in Bristol and work on the British television network allowed him to sustain a professional status. His work has received numerous awards, including one at the Cannes Film Festival. An important factor in Nekrasov's reputation is that he is the current Russian president's enemy. Accusations that he "sold out" to the Kremlin obviously have no ground to stand on. "I used to make films that were quite critical of Putin, and such allegations hurt me deeply", he said.

When Nekrasov first began shooting the film, he implicitly believed in Browder's version. After all, all the major Western media consistently wrote and spoke about it with one voice. The adaptation of the story "about the conspiracy of Russian policemen killing the fighter of Magnitsky corruption" was assumed. It was only during the process of filming, when the director was introduced to the documents that he realized he was filming a lie. The version of the story that Browder circulated has little to do with reality, but rather serves the businessman's personal interests. This explains the powerful complex program to counter the film's showing and threats with multi-million dollar lawsuits to anyone involved in its spread. It's just that Browder's pride was hurt.

The first documents Nekrasov learned of were from Browder's famous site "the Untouchables", where Magnitsky exposes the corruption of investigators Karpov and Kuznetsov. As it turns out, there was no exposure. "There was an interrogation, and there was protocol, which shows that Magnitsky is in the midst of a heavy defensive struggle with the investigation. And he is not blaming any MIA officers, and doesn't even mention them", writes Nekrasov in his blog on the website "Echo of Moscow". "Since then (Fall of 2014) my "based on a true story" film began ripping at the seams. Each day I was more certain that it was based on a lie".

As a result, the director developed his own version of events that was built as a result of personally studying all sources. According to Nekrasov, Magnitsky was not an auditor but an accountant who was arrested for tax fraud. He died in prison not because of beatings or other illegal pressures but as a result of a fatal deterioration of health caused by being confined. Browder, as a political attack on Russia used his tragic death in retaliation for his expulsion from the country in 2005 and termination of business. And this is how his interests coincided the U.S. foreign policy objectives: it is how the "Magnitsky Act" was born, the effect of which has recently spread globally. The main thing that Nekrasov understood was that Magnitsky was not murdered and has not pressed charges against the investigators.

It is not surprising that Browder was so ready to actively oppose the showing of Nekrasov's film. Forces all too powerful are drawn into the story. The previous film showing in the European Parliament that was scheduled for April 27th, and it too met resistance and was cancelled. The organizers received a letter with threats from Browder and were unable to withstand pressure. A member of the European Parliament Heidi Hautala particularly mentioned this. She called the pressure "sudden and strong". The fact that the premier of this film was so easily removed from a scheduled screening in the European Parliament shows that the right to the freedom of speech is offered only to one side", said the film's screening organizer Natalia Veselnitskaya.
A near future will show how another attack of this unscrupulous billionaire will end. Nekrasov himself seems to hope for the best, and that the Europeans will still see his honest investigation and will draw conclusions. "An 'Oscar' is not necessary. But we will see the idols fall", said the director.

[Jul 26, 2018] EXCLUSIVE Russian TV Bill Browder is CIA agent, recruited Navalny. Browder furious! Navalny sues! - YouTube

Jul 26, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Russia Insight Published on Jul 17, 2016

This documentary caused an uproar in Russia when it appeared in April of 2016.

This film was made by the main Russian government news broadcasting company, Rossiya 1.

It alleges that Bill Browder, the legendary American hedge fund manager who from 1995 - 2005 was the largest foreign investor in Russia, controlling billions of $ and a significant share of Russia's leading companies, was in fact a CIA front.

At one point his funds owned 7% of Gazprom, using what the film argues were illegal schemes to acquire shares

The film argues that Browder's whole involvement with Russia was a CIA operation to disrupt Russia politically and economically
It alleges that in 2006, Browder was instructed by the CIA to provide financial support to the rising opposition politician, Alexei Navalny, and that the two then closely cooperated for the next 5 years.

As evidence, the film cites hacked CIA email and skype correspondence which it claims fell into Russian hands during the government upheaval in Kiev in 2014.

When the film appeared, Browder and Navalny charged that the evidence was faked, and Navalny sued Rossiya 1 for libel. As of the translation of this video, (July 2016), the suit has not been concluded.

Browder was expelled from Russia in 2006, after which he led a highly successful public campaign criticizing Russia and Putin. The film argues that the campaign was financed by the CIA.

The campaign demanded sanctions against Russia for what Browder alleged was the murder of one of his employees, Sergei Magnitsky, and theft from his companies, by corrupt Russian officials.

His campaign resulted in the famous "Magnitsky Act" sanctions against Russia, passed by Congress in 2012.

The film alleges that this cynically misrepresents the facts. It alleges that Magnitsky ended up in jail for carrying out major fraud for Browder, and that he was on the verge of testifying against Browder when he died. It cites the hacked CIA mail as evidence that the CIA managed to orchestrate Magnitsky's death in prison.

The film argues that the only people with a motive for Magnitsky's death were Browder and the CIA, because his testimony about the tax fraud would have been devastating.

The film includes embarrassing details of tax avoidance schemes used by Browder and Magnitsky, including hiring barely literate invalids in remote corners of Russia as fake executives in order to receive tax breaks amounting to 100s of millions of $.

The film then alleges, again citing the hacked CIA correspondence, that in 2010 Browder paid Navalny $300,000 to conduct a PR campaign in Russia in support of the Magnitsky Act.

This documentary was never aired separately, rather appeared as a segment within the April 13, 2016 episode of the popular Russian political talk show "Spetsialnii Korrespondent" https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAkt...

The episode consisted of an emotional 1.5 hour discussion of the film, with several people who appeared in the film present https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37GZ3... (only in Russian)

Of the 10-plus guests, all but one, an American journalist, argued heatedly that Browder had clearly committed gross financial crimes and agreed with the film.

The comment leading into the beginning of the film is typical of the tone of the talk show, where the Deputy Chairman of Russia's parliament compares Browder to an "intestinal tapeworm".

At the conclusion of the film, the talk show guests discussed the film for a further 1.5 hours. About half of the guests were also featured in the film, and they were able to go into much more detail about their knowledge of the Browder case.

The discussion became very emotional, with some guests shouting about what they alleged are Browder's crimes.

Russia Insider website https://www.russia-insider.com/en

Support Russian Insider website http://russia-insider.com/en/support

[Jul 26, 2018] Report Russia Implicates Browder In Magnitsky 'Murder' Probe, Citing Widely Mocked MI6 'Expose' by Carl Schreck

Smoke without fire ?
Oct 24, 2017 | www.rferl.org

In April 2016, the head of Russia's powerful Investigative Committee instructed his subordinates to examine the potential " complicity " of U.S.-born British businessman William Browder -- once Russia's largest portfolio investor -- in the "murder" of his former employee, Sergei Magnitsky.

It was a bizarre twist in the saga of Magnitsky, whose 2009 death in a Moscow jail resulted in a 2012 U.S. law bearing his name that slaps sanctions on Russians deemed to be human rights abusers. Browder vigorously lobbied for the law, arguing that Magnitsky was tortured and denied medical treatment for blowing the whistle on a massive tax fraud allegedly involving Russian law enforcement and tax officials.

Russia, which says Magnitsky's death was a tragedy but denies allegations that he was abused while in custody, has undertaken an aggressive, multipronged effort in recent years aimed at discrediting Browder and the narrative underpinning the U.S. Magnitsky Act.

The law was said to be at the center of a meeting between a Russian lawyer, Donald Trump Jr., and other confidants of U.S. President Donald Trump at a controversial meeting in New York in June 2016.

Investigative Committee chief Aleksander Bastrykin's call last year to probe allegations of Browder's possible role in Magnitsky's death was explicitly linked to a documentary on Russian state TV that alleged a byzantine conspiracy between Browder, British intelligence, and Russian opposition leader Aleksei Navalny.

But for 18 months, it was unclear if this probe had gone anywhere.

According to an October 22 report by The New York Times, however, Russian authorities are indeed pursuing a possible murder charge against Browder -- and citing evidence that parrots widely mocked claims presented in the documentary broadcast on Rossia-1 television a day prior to the Investigative Committee's announcement.

Citing documents obtained from a court docket by a lawyer for Magnitsky's family, the Times reported that Russian prosecutors allege Browder colluded with a representative of Britain's MI6 to convince doctors to withhold medical care to "cause the death of S.L. Magnitsky" while he was in custody.

RFE/RL reached out to Browder, who said he was not immediately able to provide a copy of the documents in question.

Prosecutors, according to the Times report, also cite alleged intercepts of intelligence communications and suggest the goal of the purported plot was to start "a significant news trigger to discredit" Russia.

They also cite claims made in the Rossia-1 documentary, including that Browder was in cahoots with Navalny in a purported secret operation titled "Quake" -- with Browder supposedly using the code name "Solomon" and Navalny using the moniker "Freedom."

Clumsy Fakes

The documentary featured scans of alleged secret U.S. and British documents concerning Browder, Navalny, and Magnitsky that were widely ridiculed as crude fakes based on their clumsy syntax and grammatical mistakes -- including improper use of English indefinite and definite articles that often stymie native Russian speakers.

The claims by Russian prosecutors, as reported by the Times, echo one alleged CIA document from 2009 shown in the Rossia-1 program with the awkward subject line: "Report on the health status of a Sergei Magnitsky."

The document purports that Browder ("Agent Solomon") "was offered by proxies in the Russian Federal Penitentiary Service to arrange the termination of any medical services for Magnitsky...which could lead to his death."

That document is signed by "V. Plame" -- an apparent reference to former CIA covert officer Valerie Plame, who was exposed by officials in the administration of President Georgia W. Bush after her husband criticized the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Plame on Twitter called the document, purportedly from 2009, " such nonsense " and noted that she left the CIA in 2007.

The Russian Investigative Committee did not respond to an e-mail seeking comment on The New York Times report, and officials there could not immediately be reached by telephone.

The report was published just days after Canada on October 19 passed its version of the Magnitsky Act, a move that Russian President Vladimir Putin called " unconstructive political games ."

Browder U.S. Travel Blocked?

Browder, meanwhile, is claiming that Russia has placed him on an Interpol list, and that his U.S. "global entry status" -- which can expedite entry to the United States -- has been revoked by U.S. officials, The Guardian reported.

Interpol has previously refused to place the investor, whom Russia convicted in absentia on tax-evasion charges in 2013, on an international wanted list at Moscow's request.

The Guardian reported over the weekend that Russia had used a loophole allowing governments to place individuals on the Interpol database unilaterally.

A spokesperson for U.S. Customs and Border Protection said in an e-mailed statement that Browder's visa waiver had been "manually approved" on October 18, though Browder told the Associated Press that he had been informed by U.S. authorities of his rejection on October 19.

Browder said on Twitter late on October 23 that his waiver had been " restored " and that he has "successfully checked into a U.S. flight."

[Jul 26, 2018] Who Is Assassinating MI6 Assets On British Soil The Millennium Report

Notable quotes:
"... I do not recall ..."
Mar 15, 2018 | themillenniumreport.com

It took place in New York on Feb 3, 2015, when marshals from the U.S. District Court in Manhattan tried to serve him a subpoena to give evidence as part of the only trial thus far on US soil proceeding from the Magnitsky Act. (The details of that case can be found here .) The reason for Mr. Browder's nervous behavior is obvious: his arguments served only political aims and were intended for cases in which the verdict is known from the beginning. But none of his claims could stand up to scrutiny by any experienced lawyer once real business interests were at stake, and this is exactly what happened with Mark Cymrot from BakerHostetler during Browder's court deposition on Apr 15, 2015.

Returning to Perepelichny, we have to acknowledge that he was a key witness who could potentially destroy the high-political-stakes scam being conducted with the Magnitsky dossier. As Browder was responding with " I do not recall " and " I do not know " to any real question asked him in court, the US judiciary system might have been very interested in hearing from Perepelichny. This menace to the Magnitsky Act was eliminated one week before the bill passed the US House: on Nov. 10, 2012 Alexander Perepelichny was found dead outside his mansion in London. The police investigation did not yield any tangible results, but the theory of "Russian mafia" involvement was implanted in the international media at the proper time. One month later the Magnitsky Act was signed by President Obama

... ... ...

https://orientalreview.org/2018/03/12/fatal-quad-who-is-assassinating-former-mi6-assets-on-british-soil/

[Jul 26, 2018] Agent William F. Browder The Smoking Gun by Gilbert Doctorow

Notable quotes:
"... When some Washington (politician) was asked why he opposed Trump - He is not part of the Security establishment. "Security establishment" = insider ..."
Apr 13, 2016 | euvsdisinfo.eu

The common conclusion of my two encounters with Bill Browder was that his intensity and the time he was devoting now to putting in place anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behavior of a top level international businessman. It was clear to me that some other game was in play.

One of the clear missions of Russian state television in 2016, the year of elections to the State Duma has been to discredit Alexei Navalny, the long established blogger, wily critic of the Kremlin and leader of the new generation 'non-systemic' opposition by exposing him as a fraud in the pay of Russia's Western rivals and ill-wishers.

Several weeks ago Russian state television broadcast hidden camera recordings of Navalny's first meeting with Carl Bildt, former Swedish premier and foreign minister, best known in this part of the world for leading the Eastern Partnership program aimed at removing former Soviet republics, notably Ukraine, from the Russian sphere of influence.

A screen shot from the documentary, with what is allegedly a conversation between Browder and Navalny

This past Sunday, the Vesti nedeli program, a prime time Sunday evening wrap-up of the week's news presented by the senior journalist and manager of Russia's informational broadcasting resources, Dmitry Kiselyov, showed excerpts from a documentary film about Navalny and his mentor, or handler, William F. Browder. (Video below - in Russian only)

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Pjv48NPdst4

The film, entitled "The Browder Effect," was assembled by the channel's investigative reporter and presenter in his own right, Yevgeni Popov. The full version of "The Browder Effect" will be aired on Wednesday evening, 13 April on Russia's flagship network, Pervyi Kanal. However, from the lengthy segments shown on Sunday it is possible to draw some conclusions about the sensational material it sets out.

Both Vesti 24 and Pervyi Kanal are Russian language stations directed at the domestic audience. From the standpoint of their management, whatever is sensational about the film has to do with the way it conclusively details Navalny's recruitment by Bill Browder in 2007 for a program run by Britain's Secret Intelligence Service, also known as Military Intelligence (MI6), intended to destabilize the Russian government. Navalny came to the attention of MI6 because Browder determined he was "the most suitable candidate for future political leader" given his creativity, new media mastery and speaking skills on politics, law and economics.

We then follow Navalny's progress as a foreign-paid trouble-maker engaged in standing up for minority shareholders and exposing corruption in major Russian, partly state-owned companies, meaning that he was busily attacking Vladimir Putin's direct appointees. We are told Navalny was next a useful aid to U.S. authorities in compiling a list of high Russian judicial and penal administrative officials for inclusion in the Magnitsky List on the basis of their alleged involvement in the torture and murder in detention of Browder's erstwhile accountant, Sergei Magnitsky. One document from 2010 indicates Navalny received large sums of money, at one point a $300,000 payment, from his overseas handlers to apply his skills with social media and disseminate a positive spin on American sanctions to Russia's liberals and creative classes. The objective was to undermine popular trust in the courts.

The last documents involving Navalny shown on the Vesti nedeli program Sunday date from just before the State Duma elections on 4 December 2011, which were followed by massive street demonstrations against what was called electoral fraud perpetrated by the ruling party. Notwithstanding the advice from his mentor, Browder, to stick with his economic warfare on Russian big business and stay out of politics, this was the point when Navalny went on to emerge as a key leader in the new generation of forces opposed to the Kremlin.

For Western observers, there is nothing sensational in the exposé of Navalny as a paid agent of British intelligence operating under the code name "Freedom." He is a remote personality, has been denounced by some in the West as a Russian nationalist and he is at liberty, not a prisoner of conscience. The truly sensational nature of Yevgeny Popov's film lies elsewhere, in its material on Browder. If Navalny was recruited by Browder, then Popov was obliged to show how it was that the billionaire co-founder and owner of Hermitage Capital, which was at one point the largest foreign portfolio investment company in Russia, could be an agent, code named "Solomon," in the MI6 documents presented on screen.

To answer this question, the film flashes back to 1995, and a Memorandum for the Chief of Secret Intelligence dated 12 July describing the attraction of Browder for his new bosses: "he is an important figure in integration of financial structures into the Russian economy. [He] has extensive contacts with [sic] international banking community and has [sic] wide range of relations with representatives of business communities in the UK, the USA, Europe, China and India."

This was about the time when Browder was making a transition from highly paid employee heading up the section of private investing in Russia at Salomon Brothers (hence the coy code name, a corruption of Salomon) to setting up his own investment company with seed capital from the elderly Syrian-Jewish-Brazilian banker and entrepreneur Edmond Safra. It was also the time when Browder, a US citizen became a British subject.

And so that we may understand why such talents and contacts could be useful to British (and by extension to American) intelligence, a further flashback to 28 August 1986 shows us a CIA document entitled "Change the Constitutional and Political System in Eastern Europe and the USSR" signed by the agency director Wiliam Casey. Among the specific actions within the scope of this program would be "getting control over financial flows and removing assets from the economies of developed countries."

The narrator explains that even more than 25 years after the disappearance of the USSR, this CIA policy, known as "The Quake" (Drozh', in Russian) remains in effect.

Not content with proving that a billionaire investment fund owner could also be an MI6 operative, the film's producer also saw fit to demolish via documentary proof the entire Browder story about the reasons for his being declared persona non grata in Russia in 2006 as a threat to national security and about the persecution of his loyal retainer Magnitsky at the hands of rapacious Moscow officials plundering the remains of his company.

It emerges from a memorandum to the Director of Central intelligence written on CIA letterhead and dated 20 September 2009 that Browder had discussed with MI6 the deteriorating health of Magnitsky in detention and that he was involved in plans to have the penitentiary service arrange the termination of medical services. The report went on to say that this 'medical error' could lead to Magnitsky's death.

A follow-on interview with one political analyst explains that Browder was the only one who could profit from Magnitsky's demise. We are told his former protégé was about to start talking to prosecution against his employers. Then his death provided the material for the cause célèbre that Browder would ride to nation-wide prominence in the USA and in Europe with the eventual passage of the sanctions on Russia he promoted as the just punishment for corrupt and murderous officials of the Putin regime.

Thus, the collateral damage resulting from Yevgeni Popov's exposé amounts to a devastating attack on the political situation in the United States, where the CIA is shown to have been complicit in setting up the case used to move the American political mood and legislation in a harshly anti-Russian direction via the Magnitsky Act sanctions. Here is a smoking gun of great potential importance for those who care about who is actually controlling the US government if not our elected leaders.

Part of the documentary rests on expert testimony of Russian political analysts. Part rests on skype texts and on telephone conversations intercepted by the Russian intelligence agencies. But the most important material, including the aforementioned 'smoking gun' come from documents in a cache prepared by Kremlin-nemesis Boris Berezovsky in London as he tried to negotiate with Vladimir Putin a possible return to his motherland that would land him in good graces and not in a prison cell.

One sequence in the documentary introduces us to Sergei Sokolov, the former chief of security for Berezovsky who, at his boss's instructions, hid copies of this cache of documents in several locations and eventually brought a set with him to Moscow, where we may assume Russian intelligence officers pored over them. Sokolov is not a new face to viewers of Russian state television. Several months ago he was shown in a documentary examining the death of Berezovsky in one of his London properties. The cache of documents was mentioned then but not described.

This peculiar provenance of the documents means that they should have been subjected to special scrutiny by Mr. Popov's team before presentation to the general public. Considering the possible impact of the content of these documents on US-Russian relations, such caution would be doubly recommended. Regrettably, that appears not to have been the case.

In the information war that has been ongoing and escalating to fever pitch ever since Vladimir Putin made his famous accusatory speech directed against the United States at the Munich Security Conference in February 2007, I have examined closely a succession of key documents produced by the American side and its close allies and discovered patent fraud and forgeries.

In my essay on the article "Containing Russia" signed but not written by Yulia Tymoshenko and published in Foreign Affairs magazine in the spring of 2007, I demonstrated how textual analysis could turn up inconsistencies that give the lie to official attribution.

The same essay pointed out the fraud perpetrated by the German Marshall Fund in the summer of 2008 when it commissioned an open letter denouncing Barack Obama's recently launched policy of re-set which was distributed to and published by The New York Times and other mainstream media as a cri de coeur from Lech Walesa, Vaclav Havel and other Cold War heroes in the struggle against Soviet domination.

Still another essay of mine devoted to the launch of the EU's Eastern Partnership Program at a summit in Prague in May 2009 pointed to the American spelling used in the Southern Corridor papers presented in the concurrent summit on the New Silk Road for energy. While interference by MS Word spellcheck cannot be totally eliminated as an explanation, the greater likelihood was that these ostensibly European documents on a new, anti-Russian energy policy were written in Washington, D.C. See my book Stepping Out of Line, pp. 315 ff.

It is with this background of interest in textual analysis that I have approached the documents presented by the film "The Browder Effect" and at once serious questions arose. In one or two documents, my reservations are at the level of tell-tale signs of Russian speakers' intervention: namely absence of or poor control over the use of articles. In the one memo where this occurs most, it could be just telegraphic style, but it stands out and differs from the other texts. Another document has one specifically Russian turn of speech. More generally, it is disconcerting that memorandums from the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) and the one memorandum on CIA letterhead are formatted identically. The most recent document, from MI6, the "Report on performing duties under special operation 'Magnitsky list'" is dated 'Jan 23, 2010,' American style; it has the American spelling of "program" and British punctuation. Such mongrel style does not usually exist in nature.

It is impossible to say what is the source of the problems cited. One possibility is that the documents, which are said to have come from the US embassy in London, were copied out by hand and mistakes were made in the transcription. Then they were retyped in a single style. Another possibility is that they are forgeries, pure and simple.

Having called attention to these issues, I hasten to add that the content of the documents as they concern Bill Browder ring true to my understanding of his possible role in the entire Magnitsky case. I say this on the basis of my personal reading of Browder during his two visits to Brussels in 2013 when I saw him and his road show exhibits up close.

In his first visit, at a public seminar on Russian political prisoners held in the European Parliament building on 5 June 2013, Browder brought a collection of spiteful witnesses intent on blackening the reputation of Vladimir Putin and his 'regime.' The seminar, which was sponsored by the neo-Liberal ALDE faction in the Parliament, was scheduled to take place one day after the publication of an Address to Foreign and Interior Ministers of the EU signed by 47 European Parliamentarians pressing on the EU executive the adoption of a law similar to the so-called Magnitsky Act.

Notwithstanding the various particular messages and particular concerns of the diverse panel, united only in its opposition to the Putin regime, the event was called to promote such a Magnitsky bill and those on the podium spoke in unison in its favor, disseminating the (manifestly false) idea that the bill enjoyed broad support within Russia and was only opposed by the regime itself. The entire proceedings were video recorded, presumably for future use in the halls of power by the event's sponsors.

At that event, Browder spoke very little. His task as master of ceremonies was to introduce his assembled witnesses. These included Mikhail Kasyanov, former prime minister and leader of the Parnas Party, together with Boris Nemtsov, the allied party to ALDE in the Russian Federation. A tearful speech was delivered by Pavel Khodorkovsky, son of the then still imprisoned oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky. But perhaps the most passionate speech was by the iconic freedom fighter Ludmila Alexeeva, former leading personality in the Moscow Helsinki Group. In her mid-80s but still very active, Alexeeva likened the environment in Russia to 1937, year of the Great Purge.

When I saw mention in one document presented by Popov of the Moscow Helsinki Group as the vehicle that MI6 used to get money to Navalny, this clicked perfectly with the reality Browder brought with his road show to Brussels on that day .

I wrote up my impressions of Browder's second visit to Brussels that year, in a November essay . On that occasion, which was nominally to present a book he financed promoting a Magnitsky Act for Europe at the Brussels Press Club, Browder once again presented assorted witnesses, including the particularly odious Vladimir Kara Murza, an unrestrained propagandist against the Putin regime and fellow-traveler of the Parnas group. What was most revealing was the Q&A session in which Browder dropped his genial mask and spoke openly about the need to punish by sanctions the million thieves and murderers who run Russia. His stated objective was regime change.

The common conclusion of my two encounters with Bill Browder was that his intensity and the time he was devoting now to putting in place anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behavior of a top level international businessman. It was clear to me that some other game was in play. But at the time, Browder was enjoying vast popularity in the USA, was not doing badly in Europe and no one could stand up and suggest the man was a fraud, an operative of the intelligence agencies.

Whatever the final verdict may be on the documents presented by the film "The Browder Effect," it raises questions about Browder that should have been asked years ago in mainstream Western media if journalists were paying attention. Yevgeni Popov deserves credit for highlighting those questions, even if his documents demand further investigation before we come to definitive answers.


The author is the European Coordinator of The American Committee for East West Accord Ltd. His most recent book, "Does Russia Have a Future", was published in August 2015. This post first appeared on Russia Insider


American Graffiti • 2 years ago ,

I never liked Browder. His background reminds me too much of Armand Hammer (named after Arm & Hammer). He had relatives that were jailed in the US as Stalin-era NKVD spies. He renounced his US citizenship in part, for what the US did to them and the persecution of his father. The apple never falls far from the tree. Another Berezovsky-type.

Jane • 2 years ago ,

After what has happened in Ukraine, regardless of this programme; the Parnas party are going nowhere, this just adds to the commonly held negative views of people like Navalny and his liberal gang

Kjell Hasthi 2 years ago ,

- it is disconcerting that memorandums from the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) and the one memorandum on CIA letterhead are formatted identically

Simon Parkes' mother was employed by MI5 but worked for CIA. Not much difference then, same bosses.

Anja K. Boettcher Kjell Hasthi 2 years ago ,

Apart from preparing the ground for destabilizing Russia from within, the US is already planning other Ukraine-like destabilisation of Latvia, in order to further promote a further escalation of the NATO-Russian relationship up to the moment they want to enforce a Russian response to violence against the Latvian Russian minority with the use of tactile nuclear weapons which would then allow a full war-response by NATO. The want to incite a rebellion of that minority, to which the Latvian government, after first attempts to reconcile, is pressed by Poles and Ukrainians to react toughly, so that step for step the situation becomes worse – up to the moment of physical violence against the Russian minority which then would provoke a Russian reaction for their support.

The plan was figured out by a thinktank for a US-conference entitled "Rethinking Amageddon – Planning Scenarios for the Second Nuclear Age" on the 12th February 2016.

http://csbaonline.org/2016/...

According to the plans, worked out their by US-thinktanks, they have sketched their an elaborate path to a full scale war in scripts available in the net.

The link can be found here:

https://www.futureworldfoun...

While they know that unwilling and (in their eyes) too compromising and de-escalting EU countries like Germany, Italy, Austria, the Chechs and the Greeks, could be an obstacle, they have as well started various taskforce for the "information warfare". One which is directed to make Europe's population swallow the idea of NATO airstrikes against Russia held a conference in Novermber 2015 in Essen, Germany. Their strategic report can as well be found in the internet. It shows the direction of NATO propaganda and the determination to abuse all our media for that purpose:

https://www.japcc.org/wp-co...

It's all quite obvious, they do not even hide it. They are so damn sure that the public might be distracted to the degree of complete disregard to all these plans – although they are publicly available.

What can we do to prevent their scenario of a full scale Amageddon of Europe?

THESE FASCISTS WANT TO MURDER US ALL!!!

teddyfromcd Anja K. Boettcher 2 years ago ,

imo...

with all due consideration to potential and likely inevitable LOSSES .. the RUSSIANS - EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM - no matter how remotely russian MUST BEGIN PREPARATIONS TO LEAVE -- and start transferring assets, however that goes n the procedures...

i am talking about REAL ''PICK UP AND START LIFE" AGAIN..it is going to be a painful process and they will have to sacrifice much of what they have established for generations in the baltics...IT SHOULD ALSO be noted that the DUMA is about to approve the 1 hectare free , no tax for ''every russian citizen and foreigner that wants to establish in Russia for any business or personal reasons -- EXCEPT to sell to foreigners" anyway.. And at least whatever the limitations of that -- they DO have something to ''go home to" .. a dacha, a new house, to build on free land, something...

RATHER THAN WAIT for their possessions to be confiscated, burned, and their lives miserable BECAUSE they are russian in latvia, and baltics as will SURELY COME because they are going to be used as ''BAIT" BY NATO/USA BALTICS to provoke russia.

but it is ALSO CLEAR that WORSE will come unless they already do it now. it is better that whatever 'losses" they have to make for picking up - houses to sell, even at lower prices, etc...are NOTHING COMPARED to if the USA/NATO/BALTICS

EVENTUALLY will provoke something like what happened in UKRAINE. AND BY LEAVING THEY REMOVE A VERY, VERY LARGE part of national assets with them TO their true homeland in russia. and at least -- literally -- BE SAFE.

IT HAS come to that point and the lessons of Ukraine, etc...have already shown they are RUNNING OUT OF TME and can not rely on HOPE that things will be better and the worst can be avoided. NOT AT ALL - THE USA ANGLO-AMERICAN regme changers through the baltics are INTENT on creating a 'vietnam" RIGHT IN THAT AREA.

AND THE RUSSIAN ETHNICS better make their preparations now . bank accounts, etc...businesses to liquidate -- invest again in russia, simply MAKE their chilldren understand the critical importance that their very LIVES are at stake FOR BEING RUSSIANS.

AND it partly removes the EXCUSE by the USA/NATO/BALTICS. ''the russians left -- all of them" WHERE IS THIS RUSSIAN EXPANSION YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT? "IF you cross even an inch of russian borders -- your shps SINK, PERIOD".

it HAS TO be that kind of ''red line" now. as the LUNATICS OF the west and baltcs can't and WON'T stop their lunacy. it is really time for KREMLIN RUSSIA - FORTRESS russia to make the decisions without further delay , imo. and it has to now include the russian ethnics - they MUST FLEE - just like CRIMEA AND EAST UKRAINE HAVE DONE -- FROM WESTERN FASCISTS that are impending in descending upon them.

Kjell Hasthi Anja K. Boettcher 2 years ago ,

- Apart from preparing the ground for destabilizing Russia from within, the US is already planning

I haven't gone through the sources yet. But are you telling the sources tells "US" wants to destabilize Russia, and also start a WW? US is a superpower in decline -> US has more important problems to worry about US think tank - does not have to mean the client is US
A Russian think tank may be pro-Putin or anti-Putin. In last case that is not a "Russian" think tank, more an Oligarch think tank

... ... ...

Anja K. Boettcher Kjell Hasthi 2 years ago ,

The US either wants to topple an independent Russian government or to go step for step up a pre-planned escalation ladder. The fictitious scenario in the script, composed by a thinktank for that conference, shows something like a chess arrangement: We will make move x1, then they either will have to surrender or they will go step y1. Secondly we make move x2, then they will either have to.... and so on.

In this scenario (which really names the dates of the described chain of events, supposed to start next year) they really think through any use of the weapons they have at their disposal.

And a second aspect becomes obvious: They are determined never to allow any of their "allies" turning out to be a possible game-changer. They take into consideration that they may always use Poland and Lithuania for the next step of escalation, if it's convenient, and the German government to slow things down, if they need it. But that any other country could persuade them to alter any of their steps or even the general course is definitely outruled.

Nuclear war is not at all a no-go for the US, while I am absolutely sure that the Russians would only make use of it under the inescapble threat of physical extinction - following the clear message: "If you decide, we have to die, we won't go alone."

This is as well Ron Paul's view, that of Clinton's defense secretary William Perry and Andre Damon's interpretation of John Kerry's current message to Japan.

Kjell Hasthi Anja K. Boettcher 2 years ago ,

Your source (1) is Washington DC / Pentagon related http://csbaonline.org/publi... We may equal that with Hillary in US. Your source (2) "FutureWorld Fundation"

View Hide

Anja K. Boettcher Kjell Hasthi 2 years ago ,

My source (1) is from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment. The persons who sign responsible are all US congressmen. They have as well produced the script I have linked (even if the link was as well given on the sites of Future World.)

Wikipedia says about the CSB:

"The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) is an independent, non-profit, Washington, D.C.-based think tank specializing in US defense policy, force planning, and budgets. It is headed by Andrew Krepinevich, a West Point graduate. According to its website, CSBA's mission is "to promote innovative thinking and debate about national security strategy, defense planning and military investment options [and] to enable policymakers to make informed decisions in matters of strategy, security policy and resource allocation."[1] CSBA emphasizes initiatives the United States and its allies can take to wisely invest in the future, even during periods of fiscal austerity and uncertainty. CSBA evaluates its policy proposals through the net assessment methodology, wargaming, and by estimated impact on the Department of Defense budget over multiple Future Years Defense Programs."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

How can you claim it has nothing to do with the US-administration?

teddyfromcd Kjell Hasthi 2 years ago ,

the destabilizing of Russia project goes apace, even accelerating - it is what the USA has to do in order to preserve its primacy - that's the whole point. it knows it is a vicious rabid dog cornered in its exposed brutality so now -- it is lashing out in all directions -- it's an all-out war, . that has actually been going from the USA FOR A LONG TIME NOW. it can't help itself -- it's what the USA IS AND DOES.

Kjell Hasthi teddyfromcd 2 years ago ,

When some Washington (politician) was asked why he opposed Trump - He is not part of the Security establishment. "Security establishment" = insider

... ... ..

[Jul 26, 2018] According to MI6 and CIA internal documents, Alexei Navalny had been recruited to work for MI6 by UK hedge fund manager Bill Browder

Not very plausible, as Navalny spend time int he USA in YYale, so if he was recruted it is probably during his stay in the USA, but connection of Bill Browder and MI6 is plausible
EU vs DISINFORMATION

According to MI6 and CIA internal documents, Alexei Navalny had been recruited to work for MI6 by UK hedge fund manager Bill Browder. His task is to carry out operation "Quake" which aims to undermine the existing constitutional order of the Russian Federation. He is being paid handsomely for his services via the Moscow Helsinki Group (MHG) human rights organisation.

[Jul 26, 2018] Bill Browder US visa revoked, accused of murder by Russia by Natasha Bertrand

Oct 23, 2017 | www.businessinsider.com

Russia has claimed Magnitsky died of natural causes and, in a new twist, is now accusing Browder of colluding with a British spy in 2009 "to cause the death of S. L. Magnitsky by persuading Russian prison doctors to withhold care," according to The New York Times .

[Jul 25, 2018] Is Bill Browder The Most Dangerous Man In The World

From Vimeo site comment section: "Cynthia Buckner, 22 hours ago What a detective story, I watched it two times. This is what making a documentary is all about, uncovering truth under layers of lies. This is why today's News Media is nothing but "Fake News".
Jul 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

beemasters -> loveyajimbo Wed, 07/25/2018 - 22:47 Permalink

It's no longer available on Bitchute site. In any case, the two I have downloaded have been dubbed in Russian. I was hoping to watch it later, but it's going take me awhile to learn the language.

JSBach1 -> beemasters Wed, 07/25/2018 - 22:49 Permalink

Great that Philip Giraldi uses the embedded Vimeo llink in his article that is still operational since the bitchute link has been taken down.

Or follow this same link to the Vimeo English version:

THE MAGNITSKY ACT - BEHIND THE SCENES

https://vimeo.com/281295276

Courtesy of another poster:

Bill Browder April 15, 2015 Deposition in case of U.S.A. vs. Prevezon Holdings LTD. (watch his reactions):

full transcript: https://c1.100r.org/media/2017/10/Browder-Deposition-April-15-2015.pdf

sarcrilege -> beemasters Wed, 07/25/2018 - 22:53 Permalink

still here:

https://youtu.be/QgK7MlZDuJ8

beemasters -> sarcrilege Wed, 07/25/2018 - 22:58 Permalink

Great. Thanks! English version. Downloading it on clipconverter.cc before it gets taken down again.

samsara -> beemasters Wed, 07/25/2018 - 23:10 Permalink

'THE MAGNITSKY ACT - BEHIND THE SCENES'

https://vimeo.com/281295276

Giant Meteor -> sarcrilege Wed, 07/25/2018 - 23:09 Permalink

Yep watching now, thank you.

Never One Roach -> Giant Meteor Wed, 07/25/2018 - 23:10 Permalink

Amazing story of lies and deceit on the part of Browder seems like. I don't judge people by the way they look, but just looking and listening to this guy makes me believe he is one BIG slimey fellow, even without watching the movie.

I'd turn him over to the Russians for questioning. After all, he has nothing to worry about if he has nothing to hide.

[Jul 24, 2018] Is Bill Browder the Most Dangerous Man in the World by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... The contrary narrative to that provided by Browder concedes that there was indeed a huge fraud related to as much as $230 million in unpaid Russian taxes on an estimated $1.5 billion of income, but that it was not carried out by corrupt officials. Instead, it was deliberately ordered and engineered by Browder with Magnitsky, who was actually an accountant, personally developing and implementing the scheme, using multiple companies and tax avoidance schemes to carry out the deception. Magnitsky, who was on cardiac medication, was indeed arrested and convicted, but he, according to his own family, reportedly died due to his heart condition, possibly exacerbated by negligent authorities who failed to medicate him adequately when he became ill. ..."
"... As Nekrasov worked on the documentary, he discovered that the Browder supported narrative was full of contradictions, omissions and fabrication of evidence . By the time he finished, he realized that the more accurate account of what had occurred with Browder and Magnitsky had been that provided by the Russian authorities. ..."
"... The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes," ..."
"... A single viewing of "The Magnitsky Act" ..."
"... "The Magnitsky Act" ..."
"... When one gets past all of his bluster and posturing, by one significant metric Bill Browder might well be accounted the most dangerous man in the world. ..."
"... That the U.S. media and Congress appear to be entranced by Browder and dismissive of Moscow's charges against him is symptomatic of just how far the Russia-phobia in the West has robbed people of their ability to see what is right in front of them. To suggest that what is taking place driven by Browder and his friends in high places could well lead to tragedy for all of us would be an understatement. ..."
"... Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org. ..."
Jul 24, 2018 | www.unz.com

At the press conference following their summit meeting in Helsinki, Russian President Vladimir Putin and American President Donald Trump discussed the possibility of resolving potential criminal cases involving citizens of the two countries by permitting interrogators from Washington and Moscow to participate in joint questioning of the individuals named in indictments prepared by the respective judiciaries. The predictable response by the American nomenklatura was that it was a horrible idea as it would potentially require U.S. officials to answer questions from Russians about their activities.

Putin argued, not unreasonably, that if Washington wants to extradite and talk to any of the twelve recently indicted GRU officers the Justice Department has named then reciprocity is in order for Americans and other identified individuals who are wanted by the Russian authorities for illegal activity while in Russia. And if Russian officials are fair game, so are American officials.

A prime target for such an interrogation would be President Barack Obama's Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, who was widely criticized while in Moscow for being on an apparent mission to cultivate ties with the Russian political opposition and other "pro-democracy" groups. But McFaul was not specifically identified in the press conference, though Russian prosecutors have asked him to answer questions related to the ongoing investigation of another leading critic, Bill Browder, who was named by Putin during the question and answer session. Browder is a major hedge fund figure who, inter alia , is an American by birth. He renounced his U.S. citizenship in 1997 in exchange for British citizenship to avoid paying federal taxes on his worldwide income.

Bill Browder is what used to be referred to as an oligarch, having set up shop in 1999 as Hermitage Capital Management Fund, a hedge fund registered in tax havens Guernsey and the Cayman Islands. It focused on "investing" in Russia, taking advantage initially of the loans-for-shares scheme under Russia's drunkard President Boris Yeltsin, and then continuing to profit greatly during the early years of Vladimir Putin. By 2005 Hermitage was the largest foreign investor in Russia.

Yeltsin had won a fraudulent election in 1996 supported by the oligarch-controlled media and by President Bill Clinton, who secured a $20.2 billion IMF loan that enabled him to buy support. Today we would refer to Clinton's action as "interference in the 1996 election," but at that time a helpless and bankrupt Russia was not well placed to object to what was being done to it. Yeltsin proved keen to follow oligarchical advice regarding how to strip the former Soviet Union of its vast state-owned assets. Browder's Hermitage Investments profited hugely from the commodities deals that were struck at that time.

Browder and his apologists portray him as an honest and honorable Western businessman attempting to operate in a corrupt Russian business world. Nevertheless, the loans-for-shares scheme that made him his initial fortune has been correctly characterized as the epitome of corruption by all parties involved, an arrangement whereby foreign investors worked with local oligarchs to strip the former Soviet economy of its assets paying pennies on each dollar of value. Along the way, Browder was reportedly involved in money laundering, making false representations on official documents and bribery.

Browder was eventually charged by the Russian authorities for fraud and tax evasion. He was banned from re-entering Russia in 2005 and began to withdraw his assets from the country, but three companies controlled by Hermitage were eventually seized by the authorities. Browder himself was convicted of tax evasion in absentia in 2013 and sentenced to nine years in prison.

Browder, who refers to himself as Putin's "public enemy #1," has notably been able to sell his tale of innocence to leading American politicians like Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Ben Cardin and ex-Senator Joe Lieberman, all of whom are always receptive when criticizing Russia, as well as to a number of European parliamentarians and media outlets. In the wake of the Helsinki press conference he has, for example, claimed that Putin named him personally because he is a threat to continue to expose the crimes of the mafia that he claims is currently running Russia, but there is, inevitably, another less discussed alternative view of his self-serving narrative.

Central to the tale of what Browder really represents is the Magnitsky Act , which the U.S. Congress passed into law to sanction individual Kremlin officials for their treatment of alleged whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky, arrested and imprisoned in Russia. Browder has sold a narrative which basically says that he and his "lawyer" Sergei Magnitsky uncovered massive tax fraud and, when they attempted to report it, were punished by a corrupt police force and magistracy, which had actually stolen the money. Magnitsky was arrested and died in prison, allegedly murdered by the police to silence him.

The Magnitsky case is of particular importance because both the European Union and the United States have initiated sanctions against the identified Russian officials who were allegedly involved. In the Magnitsky Act , sponsored by Russia-phobic Senator Ben Cardin and signed by President Barack Obama in 2012, the U.S. asserted its willingness to punish foreign governments for human rights abuses. The Act, initially limited to Russia, has now been expanded by virtue of 2016's Global Magnitsky Act , which enabled U.S. sanctions worldwide.

Russia reacted angrily to the first iteration of the Act , noting that the actions taken by its government internally, notably the operation of its judiciary, were being subjected to outside interference, while other judicial authorities also questioned Washington's claimed right to respond to criminal acts committed outside the United States. Moscow reciprocated with sanctions against U.S. officials as well as by increasing pressure on foreign non-governmental pro-democracy groups operating in Russia. Some have referred to the Magnitsky Act as the start of the new Cold War.

The contrary narrative to that provided by Browder concedes that there was indeed a huge fraud related to as much as $230 million in unpaid Russian taxes on an estimated $1.5 billion of income, but that it was not carried out by corrupt officials. Instead, it was deliberately ordered and engineered by Browder with Magnitsky, who was actually an accountant, personally developing and implementing the scheme, using multiple companies and tax avoidance schemes to carry out the deception. Magnitsky, who was on cardiac medication, was indeed arrested and convicted, but he, according to his own family, reportedly died due to his heart condition, possibly exacerbated by negligent authorities who failed to medicate him adequately when he became ill.

The two competing Browder narratives have been explored in some detail by a Russian documentary film maker Andrei Nekrasov, an outspoken anti-Putin activist, who was actually initially engaged by Browder to do the film. An affable Browder appears extensively in the beginning describing his career and the events surrounding Magnitsky.

As Nekrasov worked on the documentary, he discovered that the Browder supported narrative was full of contradictions, omissions and fabrication of evidence . By the time he finished, he realized that the more accurate account of what had occurred with Browder and Magnitsky had been that provided by the Russian authorities.

When Nekrasov prepared to air his work " The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes," he inevitably found himself confronted by billionaire Browder and a battery of lawyers, who together blocked the showing of the film in Europe and the United States. Anyone subsequently attempting to promote the documentary has been immediately confronted with 300 plus pages of supporting documents accompanying a letter threatening a lawsuit if the film were to be shown to the public.

A single viewing of "The Magnitsky Act" in Washington in June 2016 turned into a riot when Browder supporters used tickets given to Congressional staffers to disrupt the proceedings. At a subsequent hearing before Congress, where he was featured as an expert witness on Russian corruption before a fawning Senate Judiciary Committee, Bill Browder suggested that those who had challenged his narrative and arranged the film's viewing in Washington should be prosecuted under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (FARA), which includes penalties of up to five years in prison.

Because of the pressure from Browder, there has never been a second public showing of "The Magnitsky Act" but it is possible to see it online at this site .

Bill Browder, who benefited enormously from Russian corruption, has expertly repackaged himself as a paragon among businessmen, endearing himself to the Russia-haters in Washington and the media. Curiously, however, he has proven reluctant to testify in cases regarding his own business dealings. He has, for example, repeatedly run away , literally, from attempts to subpoena him so he would have to testify under oath.

When one gets past all of his bluster and posturing, by one significant metric Bill Browder might well be accounted the most dangerous man in the world. Driven by extreme hatred of Putin and of Russia, he personally and his Magnitsky Myth have together done more to launch and sustain a dangerous new Cold War between a nuclear armed United States and a nuclear armed Russia. Blind to what he has accomplished, he continues to pontificate about how Putin is out to get him when instead he is the crook who quite likely stole $230 million dollars and should be facing the consequences. That the U.S. media and Congress appear to be entranced by Browder and dismissive of Moscow's charges against him is symptomatic of just how far the Russia-phobia in the West has robbed people of their ability to see what is right in front of them. To suggest that what is taking place driven by Browder and his friends in high places could well lead to tragedy for all of us would be an understatement.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is www.councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.


tac , July 24, 2018 at 4:45 am GMT

PG:

Please take a look at the documentary that has been quashed by Bill Browder and his enablers, as it has not only been nixed in its premiere in many EU countriu, except Norway, but has been deleted almost immediately when it was made available on YouTube. Now, however, it is still available on bitchute and has almost 13K hits in almost four days after being posted (as of this post):

As an aside, Thank you to Robin and S2C for spreading it so that people can make up their own minds.

tac , July 24, 2018 at 4:51 am GMT
PG:

A special thanks should be made to Robin and S2S for distributing this film. The video is almost at 13K as of this posting. We all have to work together in order to reveal the truth. Perhaps we will benefit in the end, but that is to be determined yet. Nontheless, we must try!

tac , July 24, 2018 at 5:05 am GMT
@tac

Sorry the video on bitchute which you have in your presentation was not present when first losded in my browser, but I must admit from the time I first encountered this video, having just 38 views until now, almost four days later, at almost 13K views, people are certainly paying attention!

RobinG , July 24, 2018 at 5:08 am GMT
YES!!!!

Phil,

Please team up with Stranahan in his campaign to make Senators answer the question, "Have you seen Bill Browder's 2015 deposition in the U.S. vs. Prevazon case?"

Full research sources here , including links to Browder's deposition. See for yourselves how Browder contradicts himself in depositions, Senate testimony and his book. Sad, but maybe not for us!

https://populist.tv/2018/01/20/bill-browder-links-and-resources-to-understand-controversy/

Anonymous [337] Disclaimer , July 24, 2018 at 5:11 am GMT

The darling of the war party

Q: Which party is that?

A: Both of them.

Anon [613] Disclaimer , July 24, 2018 at 6:44 am GMT
SAME THING HAPPENED WITH THE AL JAZEERA DOCUMENTARY ON ISRAELI LOBBY IN AMERICA

For the past year, Qatar has been under tremendous pressure from other US puppet Gulf states (SAudi ARabia, UAE, Egypt etc) and from US and Israeli lobby. There was a economic blockade of Qatar. WHY? Because Al Jazeera was about to release a documentary on Israeli lobby in the US. Its documentary on Israeli lobby in UK had already been embarassing for zionists.

Because of the extreme economic pressure put on Qatar and the threat of sanctions and worse, Qatar (which owns Al Jazeera) shelved the documentary. They also had to grease a lot of zionist organizations in US.

Not only did the Israeli lobby pressure Qatar into shelving the Al Jazeera documentary on the lobby in America, they also shook them down for money.

Qatar donated $250,000 to some of the most extreme pro-Israel organizations in the United States, including one that funds senior Israeli military officers to go on propaganda tours.

Joseph Allaham, a lobbyist working for the Qatari government, transferred the money through his firm Lexington Strategies in late 2017 and early 2018.

The sums included $100,000 to the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), $100,000 to Our Soldiers Speak and $50,000 for Blue Diamond Horizons, Inc.

jilles dykstra , July 24, 2018 at 6:57 am GMT
The USA idea about justice is best expressed by a USA law, allowing an invasion of the Netherlands, if a USA citizen would be in the The Hague prison of the International Court.

To liberate this USA citizen. " far the Russia-phobia in the West has robbed people of their ability to see what is right in front of them " Nothing new, in the 30ties Kennan was unable to make USA ambassador Davies see through Stalin's show trials.
George F. Kennan, ´Memoirs 1925 – 1950', New York 1967, 1972

Greg Bacon , Website July 24, 2018 at 7:43 am GMT

" American politicians like Senators John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Ben Cardin and ex-Senator Joe Lieberman "

American? I beg to differ. All of those turncoats serve their Master Israel and kiss the nether regions of those TBTF Wall Street Casinos.

Browder is one of those nine Russian oligarchs – eight of whom are Jews – who stole hundreds of billions from Russia when it was decompressing from being the USSR, helped by the drunken buffoon Yeltsin and a battery of Wall Street financial sharpies who also filled their pockets.

Watch the tough guy Browder run like a scared bunny rabbit in NYC from a process server.

Browder needs to be arrested by Interpol, tried, convicted and spend the rest of his sorry life in a Super Max prison for his thefts, frauds and helping to poison the relationship between the USA & Russia, in an effort to save his sorry ass from prosecution.

Tom Welsh , July 24, 2018 at 8:33 am GMT
"Central to the tale of what Browder really represents is the Magnitsky Act, which the U.S. Congress passed into law to sanction individual Kremlin officials for their treatment of alleged whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky, arrested and imprisoned in Russia".

Hmmm. The USA has its whistleblowers, too. Maybe Russia (and other civilized countries) should impose their own sanctions on all American officials in any way involved with the persecution of Chelsea Clinton, Edward Snowden, Julian Assange and others.

Although the existing US sanctions are a dead letter, since they will not get their hands on the people they are trying to harm, they still give the world a wholly misleading impression.

The sanctions insidiously suggest to the people and governments of the world that the US government is somehow entitled to decide what is legal and what is illegal everywhere – not just within its own jurisdiction – and moreover that it has the power to be prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner against any of the world's citizens.

That is wrong, illegal, immoral, and unconscionable, and should not be tolerated.

Tyrion 2 , Website July 24, 2018 at 8:45 am GMT
As a Jew, I look at Bill Browder and feel how I imagine decent black Americans feel when they look at thuggish ebonic-speaking black street dealers.

If you're going to be an awful bloke can you at least not conform to racist stereotypes?

Den Lille Abe , July 24, 2018 at 10:22 am GMT
He is "just" another robber baron
The Alarmist , July 24, 2018 at 10:37 am GMT

"Yeltsin had won a fraudulent election in 1996 supported by the oligarch-controlled media and by President Bill Clinton, who secured a $20.2 billion IMF loan that enabled him to buy support. Today we would refer to Clinton's action as "interference in the 1996 election," but at that time a helpless and bankrupt Russia was not well placed to object to what was being done to it."

[emphasis mine]

So Mother Russia was raped, and by Bill Clinton, of all people. Where is the outrage?

#MeToo

Cagey Beast , July 24, 2018 at 10:58 am GMT
@tac

This is most likely the one you mean:

THE MAGNITSKY ACT – BEHIND THE SCENES

https://www.bitchute.com/video/lQ3qEwX66pIL/

vinteuil , July 24, 2018 at 11:01 am GMT
Andrei Nekrasov's documentary is absolutely damning – how, after viewing it, could anybody see Browder as anything but a shameless serial liar? The closest I can find on the internet to a rebuttal is from the Daily Beast:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/dissident-director-helped-trumps-russia-comrade-attack-us

a ridiculous hatchet job which doesn't even begin to engage with Nekrasov's evidence.

Cagey Beast , July 24, 2018 at 11:07 am GMT
@Cagey Beast

Ooops, I posted this comment before seeing that this video was already posted above in the article. I got a link to it from an entirely different source. It shows how it's getting around! Good.

geokat62 , July 24, 2018 at 11:18 am GMT
@Greg Bacon

Browder needs to be arrested by Interpol

Although I posted this comment under another thread, I think it bears repeating here (especially relevant to your point is the bolded part):

I think debunking the vulture capitalist Bill Browder's false claim of being, of all things, a human rights advocate is the key to unraveling the Russia-gate hoax. I also think the following information goes a long way in doing that:

1. Nekrasov's documentary, The Magnitsky Act: Behind The Scenes, now available for viewing

2. Alex Krainer's The Killing of William Browder, now available online; and

3. Bill Browder's Previzon deposition in which he claims "I can't remember" at least 50 times and answers "I don't know" fully 211 times.

Notwithstanding these facts, it appears Mr. Browder is an untouchable. The Russians have issued a Red Notice at least six times and he has managed to walk away scot free on each occasion.

The zinger was when the Senate Judiciary Committee invited him to testify as an expert witness against Fusion GPS, arguing that it should have registered under FARA because it was working on behalf of a foreign government, in this case the Russian. The irony of this scene was incredible. The hallowed chamber in which this inquiry took place is completely bought and paid for by The Lobby but not a peep about having it register under FARA. Totally surreal!

jilles dykstra , July 24, 2018 at 11:27 am GMT
@Tyrion 2

Is jewish eyesight different from non jewish eyesight ?
I never look as a Dutchman, or a Frysian, whatever you like.

PasDeTout , July 24, 2018 at 11:58 am GMT
Thanks again to Philip Giraldi for another informative article. The film you linked is on my to-do list today.
Anonymous lurker , July 24, 2018 at 12:00 pm GMT
An interesting thing about this that has gone almost completely unreported is that HSBC quietly held a series of closed-door meetings with Russian authorities earlier this year regarding the tax fraud charges leveled at Browder and his businesses (HSBC jointly managed Hermitage) and decided to pay up some of the cash he illegally siphoned out of the country (22 million dollars I believe, so a drop in the ocean given the scale of his endeavors, but it's something.)

"Bill Browder declined to comment" according to one of the few articles on the matter.

Isn't all of that more or less tantamount to an admission of guilt?

Anonymous [128] Disclaimer , July 24, 2018 at 12:11 pm GMT
Questions I have:

(1) Why is he so protected?

(2) How does a respectable congress pass a law based solely on the testimony of someone convicted of a crime by another country? No jury in the world would reach a verdict based solely on the word of a convict, without it being substantiated by numerous pieces of other circumstantial and direct evidence.

(3) Even if he paid everyone oodles of money and brought a thousand lawsuits, why would gazillionaire corporations cave in to his demands to ban books, movies, organizations, etc.?

There is something more powerful about Bill Browder than just his pile of money.

Johnny Smoggins , July 24, 2018 at 1:04 pm GMT
You'd think that a man who gave up his US citizenship to dodge his tax bill would be seen as a villain, not defended by presidents and congressmen.
Andrei Martyanov , Website July 24, 2018 at 1:24 pm GMT
@Anonymous

How does a respectable congress pass a law based solely on the testimony of someone convicted of a crime by another country?

US Congress has an approval rating slightly above that of Al Qaeda and Ted Bundy.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/207579/public-approval-rating-of-the-us-congress/

In fact, most (not all) US lawmakers long ago became a euphemism for incompetence, corruption and lies. So, no–modern US Congress is not respectable by people and numbers reflect that. Hopefully, sometime in the future, some honorable and loyal to their country people will make it there.

DESERT FOX , July 24, 2018 at 1:26 pm GMT
Browder is a Zionist Bolshevik of the stripe that murdered some 60 million Russians from 1917 to 1957 and as such is not only an enemy of Russia but an even greater enemy of America and is a typical communist who wrecks and destroys countries.

Read THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION, Browder is a poster boy for these thieves and murderers .

vinteuil , July 24, 2018 at 1:28 pm GMT
You'd think that a man who gave up his US citizenship to dodge his tax bill would be seen as a villain, not defended by presidents and congressmen.

Yeah, you'd think that.

Anatoly Karlin , Website July 24, 2018 at 1:28 pm GMT
Couple of other standard narrative-critical articles on the Magnitsky Affair:

* kovane: Sergei Magnitsky, Bill Browder, Hermitage Capital Management and Wondrous Metamorphoses

* Lucy Komisar: The Man Behind the Magnitsky Act Did Bill Browder's Tax Troubles in Russia Color Push for Sanctions?

Stel , July 24, 2018 at 1:31 pm GMT
@jilles dykstra

The 'Netherlands Invasion Act' is a former fact popularized by Noam Chomsky. The Netherlands invasion provisions were quietly repealed because it was too embarrassing and disruptive to US policy. What remains is a prohibition against US assistance to certain criminal investigations. Putin poked at the same neuralgic spot in Helsinki when he proposed reciprocity in mutual legal assistance. The issue is US impunity for war propaganda and coercive interference.

The US government has asserted a specific reservation to the international prohibition of war propaganda (ICCPR Article 20.) And legal experts are chipping away at the nonsense rationale behind the US reservation. The US claims it is defending free speech, so Article 19 and other NGOs propose an important distinction:

. Dumb broke Joe Blow with his bumper sticker that says Make Iran a Parking Lot
. Concerted government and media campaigns advocating war.

Only the latter constitutes illegal war propaganda, which is illegal under conventional international law (UN Charter Article 2(4)), customary international law (E/Conf. 6/C.i/ig of 1948 and other resolutions), and legal precedent (Nuremberg Count 1).

So when Russia gets fed up and decapitates the US regime, Browder will be in the cage at the war crimes tribunal under the Streicher, Fritzsche, Dietrich, and von Weizsaeker Nuremberg precedents.

Prester John , July 24, 2018 at 2:05 pm GMT
@The Alarmist

Where is the outrage? You ain't gonna get it from Big Media, who sold out a long time ago. BM has all but ignored the Clinton Administration collusion with Yeltsin in the Russian 1996 election. It was an, er, "inconvenient truth."

John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan , July 24, 2018 at 2:30 pm GMT
Can someone help me remember the names of those 9 oligarchs?

These are the ones I remember:

1) Anatoly Chubais
2) Browder
3) Boris Berezovsky
4) Mikhail Khodorkovsky
5) Vladimir Gusinsky

Who were the others? Thanks.

Of these 5, Chubais remained in Russia but the others fled. Chubais was the one who was instrumental in starting the loans-for-shares scheme. My understanding is that those who fled are real scum, since Putin offered all oligarchs the chance to keep their money so long as they avoided politics. Most vulture capitalists agreed to this arrangement, but the worst of the Jewish oligarchs were too greedy and lustful to give in. So I have heard, anyway.

[Jul 23, 2018] Who is Bill Browder and Why is Putin so Interested in Him?

Jul 21, 2018 | ronpaulinstitute.org

At the now-famous Helsinki press conference with Presidents Trump and Putin the name of a former US businessman, Bill Browder, came up as a person of interest to the Russian president. Let's make a deal, he said: you can come to Moscow and question the 12 GRU officers you accuse of hacking the DNC computers and we'll question Bill Browder and a group of other businessmen who had done business in Moscow. And the former US ambassador to Moscow. While the usual suspects shrieked at such a deal, many wondered what was wrong with trying to get to the bottom of the indictments and "Russiagate."

So what's the deal with Browder? RPI's Daniel McAdams spoke to RT America about the former hedge fund operator who reportedly gave up his US citizenship to avoid US taxes and is wanted in Moscow for tax avoidance...

https://www.youtube.com/embed/JHZEEqYN9GA


Copyright © 2018 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

[Jul 23, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis THE BROWDER DOCUMENTARY (by Patrick Armstrong)

Jul 23, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Attached is the URL for the Nekrasov film on Browder. The producer tells me it is an illegal pirate copy but I assured him I would buy a copy if it ever became available in Canada and he seemed to be happy with that. He tells me "There is an upcoming proper release."

Some background. You've all heard the story: Browder hired a smart Moscow lawyer to investigate a crime. Said lawyer, Sergey Magnitskiy, discovers that two policemen and some thieves-in-law have managed to steal a quarter of a billion dollars from the Russian state pretending to be Browder companies. Magnitskiy goes to the police to complain, is arrested, tortured and beaten to death in prison. Browder has been going around the world, telling this story over and over again and getting laws passed to sanction Russians. The story is a very important part of the foundation of the anti-Russian house.

The film-maker Andrey Nekrasov, who has made several anti-Putin documentaries, is attracted to the story, completely believing Browder. The first 30 minutes of the documentary are him interviewing Browder and, through actors, running the movie as Browder says it.

But, he noticed an anomaly in the story: how can six lumpy cops plus truncheons fit into the tiny cell to beat Magnitskiy to death. He starts pulling on that thread; he finds others, pulls on them, and the entire sweater Browder has knitted falls apart.

Very much worth watching because it not only exposes a very important lie, every repetition of which brings us a step closer to becoming radioactive dust, but also does it in a rather thrilling way as the sweater is unravelled. So, apart from anything else, it's a good mystery.

Two things we learn: 1) that everybody who has "investigated" the story has accepted everything Browder has said without the slightest questioning 2) the whole story depends on people being unable to read Russian so that when Browder shows them a document they are unable to see that it doesn't actually say what Browder is telling them it says.

Also note the German "human rights expert" who is uninterested in mere details.

Oh. Magnitskiy was the "the smartest lawyer in Moscow" and specially hired by Browder to investigate; he was actually an accountant who worked for Browder for years.

So, if you watch this, make a mental note to buy it so that the film team get the royalties they deserve.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/lQ3qEwX66pIL/

[Jul 20, 2018] The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes

unz.com

geokat62 , July 20, 2018 at 11:13 am GMT

Okay then! Cue the real story of [lying filth] Bill Browder, a film by Andrei Nekrasov. Watch and share before it disappears!

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/lQ3qEwX66pIL/

The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes

geokat62 , July 20, 2018 at 11:13 am GMT
@RobinG

As the saying goes "timing is everything." I have to admit I was incredulous that you were somehow able to link to a functioning version of the Nekrosov film. I've been trying to get my hands on that documentary for the last few years, but to no avail. I finally managed to read a comment on another blog that recommended that people who were interested in viewing the film could do so by reaching out to the producer to request a personalized link, after which you had to request a password from another individual affiliated with the film.

I managed to do all of that a few weeks ago and was able to watch the video on Vimeo for the full 2 hours. It was riveting, to say the least. After viewing it again, I thought about making it available to others.

Due to the pressures by Browder and his lawyers, however, Nekrosov was prevented from making his film available to a wider audience. He got around this limitation by making it available for private viewing only.

And to prevent a private viewer from uploading it onto the internet he cleverly placed a watermark on each film, indicating the owner of each copy of the video by displaying a number on the screen.

I was surprised to see the version you linked to indeed has this watermark shown on the screen. Somehow, this did not deter the individual tied to that number from uploading it and being the one identified as doing so.

That said, I'm glad the film is more widely available as it should be viewed by as many people as possible so that they can realize what a despicable liar Browder really is and how the passage of The Magnitsky Act was a travesty of justice which must be reversed.

AnonFromTN , July 20, 2018 at 2:31 pm GMT
@RobinG

The very fact that this movie was deleted almost everywhere suggests that it must be true. Lies are never so consistently deleted from all Western resources. This is only natural: nobody is scared of lies much, as they can be debunked. The truth can only be deleted. That's what Soviet propaganda under Stalin and German propaganda under Hitler did.

Zumbuddi , July 20, 2018 at 2:35 pm GMT
@nagra

You make a good point, nagra, there are many, many evils that demand exposure, most of them of greater importance than Browder. For example, I don't care a bit abot Clinton-Steele dossier etc etc etc -can't be bothered to try to figure it out.

She fricking destroyed a country & laughed like a deranged hyena at the assassination-by-sodomy, on film, of its leader! And women in USA dress up like cunts and adore her for her righteousness!

But re Browder -- against the forces and the wealth that , ie financed the pussy hat rally in Jan 2017, and similarly for Browder himself, who can finance his massive PR coverup. From money he stole! ANDis tied i to HSBC, where Stuart Levey, the former head of US Dept of Treasury Office of Terror Finance, is now head of legal department -- well, you have to recognize that all of the things you complain about are connected: Browder is connected to the Russian Jewish crime gang, which is connected to the American Jewish crime gang thru Ben Cardin & US Senate, fer chrissske, and tbru Levey to USTreasury, fer chrissake!; US Treasury may be complicit in Browder's crimes, same for Cardin.

Cicero lost his head for less.

It's a big ball of string, and you have to start somewhere to unravel it. The Loose String of the Browder case may or may not connect t to the core of this tangled mess, but it is a start.

"Once begun is half done."

RobinG , July 20, 2018 at 4:50 pm GMT
@geokat62

First, H/T to commenter tac, who found the link. 2nd, thanks for the background. I had no idea. The whole watermark/private viewing thing underscores, this is Limited Time Only! 3rd, in 2 days there are over 2000 views. I've been sharing this as much as possible. Let's keep it going!

https://www.bitchute.com/video/lQ3qEwX66pIL/

RobinG , July 20, 2018 at 5:06 pm GMT
@nagra

Good comment to you by Zumbuddi.

You greatly underestimate the significance of Browder re. the inflaming of a new Cold War and the coup against Pres. Trump. He is a KEY FIGURE behind all this Russia hysteria.

The notorious Trump Tower meeting concerned Browder's Magnitsky Act, money stolen [from Russia] by Browder, etc.

THIS is the Man Putin Said Gave Hillary Money

[Jul 19, 2018] The Magnitsky Hoax by Philip Giraldi

A more serious question is: Was Browder MI6 agent or not? His conversion from the US to UK citizenship is highly unusual.
Notable quotes:
"... "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes," ..."
"... Red Notice: A True Story of High Finance, Murder and One Man's Fight for Justice ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
Jun 28, 2016 | www.unz.com

... ... ...

... I had the privilege of attending the first by invitation only screening of a documentary "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes," produced by Russian filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov. The documentary had been blocked in Europe through lawsuits filed by some of the parties linked to the prevailing narrative but the Newseum in Washington eventually proved willing to permit rental of a viewing room in spite of threats coming from the same individuals to sue to stop the showing.

Nekrasov by his own account had intended to do a documentary honoring Magnitsky and his employers as champions for human rights within an increasing fragile Russian democracy. He had previously produced documentaries highly critical of Russian actions in Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine, and also regarding the assassinations of Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko in London as well as of journalist Anna Politkovskaya in Moscow. He has been critical of Vladimir Putin personally and was not regarded as someone who was friendly to the regime, quite the contrary. Some of his work has been banned in Russia.

After his documentary was completed using actors to play the various real-life personalities involved and was being edited Nekrasov returned to some issues that had come up during the interviews made during the filming. The documentary records how he sought clarification of what he was reading and hearing but one question inevitably led to another.

The documentary began with the full participation of American born UK citizen William Browder, who virtually served as narrator for the first section that portrayed the widely accepted story on Magnitsky. Browder portrays himself as a human rights campaigner dedicated to promoting the legacy of Sergei Magnitsky, but he is inevitably much more complicated than that. The grandson of Earl Browder the former General Secretary of the American Communist Party, William Browder studied economics at the University of Chicago, and obtained an MBA from Stanford.

From the beginning, Browder concentrated on Eastern Europe, which was beginning to open up to the west. In 1989 he took a position at highly respected Boston Consulting Group dealing with reviving failing Polish socialist enterprises. He then worked as an Eastern Europe analyst for Robert Maxwell, the unsavory British press magnate and Mossad spy, before joining the Russia team at Wall Street's Salomon Brothers in 1992.

He left Salomon in 1996 and partnered with the controversial Edmond Safra, the Lebanese-Brazilian-Jewish banker who died in a mysterious fire in 1999, to set up Hermitage Capital Management Fund. Hermitage is registered in tax havens Guernsey and the Cayman Islands. It is a hedge fund that was focused on "investing" in Russia, taking advantage initially of the loans-for-shares scheme under Boris Yeltsin, and then continuing to profit greatly during the early years of Vladimir Putin's ascendancy. By 2005 Hermitage was the largest foreign investor in Russia.

Browder had renounced his U.S. citizenship in 1997 and became a British citizen apparently to avoid American taxes, which are levied on worldwide income. In his book Red Notice: A True Story of High Finance, Murder and One Man's Fight for Justice he depicts himself as an honest and honorable Western businessman attempting to function in a corrupt Russian business world. That may or may not be true, but the loans-for-shares scheme that made him his initial fortune has been correctly characterized as the epitome of corruption, an arrangement whereby foreign investors worked with local oligarchs to strip the former Soviet economy of its assets paying pennies on each dollar of value. Along the way, Browder was reportedly involved in making false representations on official documents and bribery.

As a consequence of what came to be known as the Magnitsky scandal, Browder was eventually charged by the Russian authorities for fraud and tax evasion. He was banned from re-entering Russia in 2005, even before Magnitsky died, and began to withdraw his assets from the country. Three companies controlled by Hermitage were eventually seized by the authorities, though it is not clear if any assets remained in Russia. Browder himself was convicted of tax evasion in absentia in 2013 and sentenced to nine years in prison.

Browder has assiduously, and mostly successfully, made his case that he and Magnitsky have been the victims of Russian corruption both during and since that time, though there have been skeptics regarding many details of his personal narrative. He has been able to sell his tale to leading American politicians like Senators John McCain, Ben Cardin and ex-Senator Joe Lieberman, always receptive when criticizing Russia, as well as to a number of European parliamentarians and media outlets. But there is, inevitably, another side to the story, something quite different, which Andrei Nekrasov presents to the viewer.

Nekrasov has discovered what he believes to be holes in the narrative that has been carefully constructed and nurtured by Browder. He provides documents and also an interview with Magnitsky's mother maintaining that there is no clear evidence that he was beaten or tortured and that he died instead due to the failure to provide him with medicine while in prison or treatment shortly after he had a heart attack. A subsequent investigation ordered by then Russian President Dimitri Medvedev in 2011 confirmed that Magnitsky had not received medical treatment, contributing to this death, but could not confirm that he had been beaten even though there was suspicion that that might have been the case.

Nekrasov also claims that much of the case against the Russian authorities is derived from English language translations of relevant documents provided by Browder himself. The actual documents sometimes say something quite different. Magnitsky is referred to as an accountant, not a lawyer, which would make sense as a document of his deposition is apparently part of a criminal investigation of possible tax fraud, meaning that he was no whistleblower and was instead a suspected criminal.

Other discrepancies cited by Nekrasov include documents demonstrating that Magnitsky did not file any complaint about police and other government officials who were subsequently cited by Browder as participants in the plot, that the documents allegedly stolen from Magnitsky to enable the plotters to transfer possession of three Hermitage controlled companies were irrelevant to how the companies eventually were transferred and that someone else employed by Hermitage other than Magnitsky actually initiated investigation of the fraud.

In conclusion, Nekrasov believes there was indeed a huge fraud related to Russian taxes but that it was not carried out by corrupt officials. Instead, it was deliberately ordered and engineered by Browder with Magnitsky, the accountant, personally developing and implementing the scheme used to carry out the deception.

To be sure, Browder and his international legal team have presented documents in the case that contradict much of what Nekrasov has presented in his film. But in my experience as an intelligence officer I have learned that documents are easily forged, altered, or destroyed so considerable care must be exercised in discovering the provenance and authenticity of the evidence being provided. It is not clear that that has been the case. It might be that Browder and Magnitsky have been the victims of a corrupt and venal state, but it just might be the other way around. In my experience perceived wisdom on any given subject usually turns out to be incorrect.

Given the adversarial positions staked out, either Browder or Nekrasov is essentially right, though one should not rule out a combination of greater or lesser malfeasance coming from both sides. But certainly Browder should be confronted more intensively on the nature of his business activities while in Russia and not given a free pass because he is saying things about Russia and Putin that fit neatly into a Washington establishment profile. As soon as folks named McCain, Cardin and Lieberman jump on a cause it should be time to step back a bit and reflect on what the consequences of proposed action might be.

One should ask why anyone who has a great deal to gain by having a certain narrative accepted should be completely and unquestionably trusted, the venerable Cui bono? standard. And then there is a certain evasiveness on the part of Browder. The film shows him huffing and puffing to explain himself at times and he has avoided being served with subpoenas on allegations connected to the Magnitsky fraud that are making their way through American courts. In one case he can be seen on YouTube running away from a server, somewhat unusual behavior if he has nothing to hide.

A number of Congressmen and staffers were invited to the showing of the Nekrasov documentary at the Newseum but it is not clear if any of them actually bothered to attend, demonstrating once again how America's legislature operates inside a bubble of willful ignorance of its own making. Nor was the event reported in the local "newspaper of record" the Washington Post , which has been consistently hostile to Russia on its editorial and news pages.

A serious effort that a friend of mine described as "hell breaking loose" was also made to disrupt the question and answer session that followed the viewing of the film, with a handful of clearly coordinated hecklers interrupting and making it impossible for others to speak. The organized intruders, who may have gained entry using invitations that were sent to congressmen, suggested that someone at least considers this game being played out to have very high stakes.

The point is that neither Nekrasov nor Browder should be taken at their word. Either or both might be lying and the motivation to make mischief is very high if even a portion of the stolen $230 million is still floating around and available. And by the same measure, no Congressman or even the President should trust the established narrative, particularly if they persist in their hypocritical conceit that global human

Notheroldguy , August 8, 2017 at 9:12 pm GMT

Gee, I know G. was a spook of some kind and I always read his articles wherever they turn up.. but how could he get this wrong unless on purpose: Magnitsky was no lawyer. He was an accountant and he was a co-conspirator in the frauds being perpetrated that resulted in the charges. He died alright but there is some shading to the thesis that the fraudsters had him bumped off because they knew he was a weak link. They bribed somebody in the prison to deny him medical care. Hey, much like they did to Milosevic knowing they couldn't convict him of their trumped up charges. Why would G. get wrong such a simple thing to determine? Hmm. I wonder..
anon Disclaimer , August 8, 2017 at 9:45 pm GMT
Why would you continue the falsehood of calling Magnitsky a lawyer? He was not a lawyer. Ever. He is and was an accountant and will remain that until Judgement Day. On the other other hand, calling him a lawyer is perhaps an even greater insult than calling him an accountant.

[Jul 18, 2018] feinstein.senate.gov INTERVIEW OF GLENN SIMPSON BEFORE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. TUESDAY, AUGUST 22, 2017 WASHINGTON, D.C.

Jul 18, 2018 | feinstein.senate.gov

Glenn Simpson August 22, 2017

Washington, DC -800-FOR-DEPO www.aldersonreporting.com

DEPO www.aldersonreporting.com

Alderson Court Reporting

Page 37 Prevezon who were part of the case. Other people were brought in -- you know, were brought in either by Prevezon or by the lawyers and I didn't always try to pin that down.

Q. In general would the decision whether you would share Fusion's information with them be dependent then upon the attorneys introducing you to them?

A. It would be dependent on the direction of the attorneys. I basically -- you know, in all these cases for reasons of privilege and simply just professionalism you work at the direction of the lawyers and you do what they instruct you to do.

Q. Did anyone from Fusion ever help arrange for other entities to be hired by Prevezon or Baker Hostetler for the Prevezon case?

A. I don't think you could say we arranged for others to be hired. If you're asking me if we made referrals, we would refer -- you know, we made quite extensive -- fairly extensive efforts to get a PR firm hired for the trial that we were expecting and we made a number of referrals in that case, in that matter.

Q. What was the name of that PR firm?

A. There were several. We actually, you know, had a series of screening sessions. I think Weber Shandwick was the one we ended up with.

Q. You mentioned that Fusion was conducting litigation support in regard to the Prevezon case. Could you expand a little more about what type of litigation support activities you undertook?

MR. LEVY: Beyond what he's already told you?

MR. DAVIS: With a little more detail.

BY THE WITNESS:

A. Yes. In the original period of the case the question -- the client's explanation for or response to the government's allegations was that they originated with an organized crime figure in Russia who had been extorting them and who they had reported to the police and who had been jailed and convicted for blackmailing them, and they claimed that that was where these allegations originated, which, you know, seemed remarkable because it was in a Justice Department complaint.

So the first thing, you know, in any case really is to sort of try and figure out whether your own client's story can be supported or whether it's not true, and the lawyers -- you know, we work with a lot of prominent law firms and in many cases the first thing the lawyers need to know is whether their client's story is real, whether it can be supported, you know, because in any new case you don't know whether your own client is telling you the truth.

So originally one of the first things we were hired to do was to check out whether this was, in fact, the case. So they claimed that the allegations originated with a mobster named Demetri Baranovsky, B-A-R-A-N-O-V-S-K-Y, who was, in fact, jailed for running a shake-down operation in which he posed as an anticorruption campaigner for the purpose of extorting money from people by threatening to accuse them of some kind of corrupt activities. As you know, Russia is rife with corruption and there's a lot of anger over corruption.

We were able to ascertain that Mr. Baranovsky was, in fact, associated with Russia's biggest organized crime family, the Solntsevo Brotherhood, S-O-L-N-T-S-E-V-O brotherhood, which is the major dominant mafia clan in Moscow. So as far as it went, the client seemed to be telling the truth. You know, there was extensive record of these events and we found some indications from western law enforcement that western law enforcement did consider Baranovsky to be a lieutenant in this organized crime family. So we did that for a while. Edward Baumgartner helped a lot with that because of his Russian language skills and his ability to interface with the court system in Russia.

And, you know, around the -- similarly, there was a deposition of a customs agent by one of the lawyers who -- you know, in this initial effort to trace the origin of these allegations, where they came from, how they could have ended up with the Justice Department, the first thing we did was interview the client, got their story, and interviewed the agent who worked on the case for the DOJ and that agent said he got all his information from William Browder.

So at that point I was asked to help see if we could get an interview with William Browder. They wrote a letter to Browder and asked him to answer questions and he refused. Then the lawyers wanted to know, you know, whether he could be subpoenaed. So a lot of what I did in 2014 was help them figure out whether he could be subpoenaed in the United States to give a deposition, and the first thing that we did was we researched the ownership and registration of his hedge fund, which was registered in Delaware and filed documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

was registered in Delaware and filed documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

So we subpoenaed his hedge fund. A lot of the early work I did was just documenting that his hedge fund had presence in the United States. So we subpoenaed his hedge fund. He then changed the hedge fund registration, took his name off, said it was on there by accident, it was a mistake, and said that he had no presence in the United States and that, you know -- as you may know, he surrendered his citizenship in 1998 and moved outside the United States. That was around the time he started making all the money in Russia. So he's never had to pay U.S. taxes on his profits from his time in Russia, which became important in the case later.

In any case, he said he never came to the United States, didn't own any property here, didn't do any business here, and therefore he was not required to participate in the U.S. court system even though he admitted that he brought the case to the U.S. Justice Department. So we found this to be a frustrating and somewhat curious situation.

He was willing to, you know, hand stuff off to the DOJ anonymously in the beginning and cause them to launch a court case against somebody, but he wasn't interesting in speaking under oath about, you know, why he did that, his own activities in Russia. So looking at the public record we determined that he did come to the United States frequently, and I discovered through public records that he seemed to own a house in Aspen, Colorado, a very expensive mansion, over $10 million, which he had registered in the name of a shell company in a clear attempt to disguise the ownership of the property. We were able to ascertain that he does use property. We were able to ascertain that he does use that property because he registered cars to that property with the Colorado DMV in the name of William Browder.

So we began looking for public information about when he might be in Aspen, Colorado, and I found a listing on the Aspen Institute Website about an appearance he was going to make there in the summer of 2014. So we -- I served him a subpoena in the parking lot of the Aspen Institute in the summer of 2014 using two people -- two subcontractors. Actually, those other subcontractors were -- their names escape me, but I forgot about those. We can get you that. This is all in the Pacer court record, the public court record.

In any event, the three of us served -- there was another subcontractor working for the law firm whose name I also forget. I did not retain him, but I was asked to work with him on this. He is a private investigator and we can get you his name. In any event, we served him the subpoena and he ran away. He dropped it on the ground and he ran away.

He jumped in his car and went back to his mansion.

At that point he tried to suppress -- tried to quash the subpoena on the grounds it hadn't been properly served. We didn't get a video, but there are sworn affidavits from my servers in the court record about the service. But he objected to it on a number of grounds. A, he continued to insist he had nothing to do with the United States and didn't come here very often even, though we caught him here, clearly has cars in Colorado. He also said that you can't serve a subpoena for a case in that you can't serve a subpoena for a case in New York in the state of Colorado, it's outside the primary jurisdiction. He also began to raise questions about whether Baker Hostetler had a conflict of interest because of some previous work he did with one of the Baker lawyers.

This led to a long, drawn-out discovery battle that I was in the center of because I served the subpoenas and I helped find the information for the first set of subpoenas that lasted, you know, through 2014. This was, you know, a lot of what I did. This was -- the main focus was on trying to get William Browder to testify under oath about his role in this case and his activities in Russia.

All of this -- his determined effort to avoid testifying under oath, including running away from subpoenas and changing -- frequently changing lawyers and making lurid allegations against us, including that, you know, he thought we were KGB assassins in the parking lot of Aspen, Colorado when we served the subpoena, all raised questions in my mind about why he was so determined to not have to answer questions under oath about things that happened in Russia.

I'll add that, you know, I've done a lot of Russia reporting over the years. I originally met William Browder back when I was a journalist at the Wall Street Journal when I was doing stories about corruption in Russia. I think the first time I met him he lectured me about -- I was working on a story about Vladimir Putin corruption and he lectured me about how have Vladimir Putin was not corrupt and how he was the best thing that ever happened to Russia. There are numerous documents that he published himself, interviews he gave singing the praises of Vladimir Putin. At that time I was already investigating corruption in Putin's Russia.

So this made me more curious about the history of his activities in Russia and what that might tell me about corruption in Russia, and as part of the case we became curious about whether there was something that he was hiding about his activities in Russia. So through this period while we were attempting to get him under oath we were also investigating his business practices in Russia and that research -- and I should add when I say "we," I mean the lawyers were doing a lot of this work and it wasn't -- I can't take responsibility or pride of place on having done all this work. We were doing it all together. It was a -- you know, there were a number of lawyers involved, other people.

In the course of doing this research into

25 what he might not want to be asked about from his history in Russia we began to learn about the history of his tax avoidance in Russia and we began to deconstruct the way that his hedge fund structured its investments in Russia and, you know, we gradually accumulated through public records, not all from Russia, that he set up dozens of shell companies in Cyprus and other tax havens around the world to funnel money into Russia and to hold Russian securities.

He also set up shell companies inside of Russia in order to avoid paying taxes in Russia and he set up shell companies in a remote republic called Kalmykia, K-A-L-M-Y-K-I-A, which is next to Mongolia. It's the only Buddhist republic in Russia and there's nothing much there, but if you put your companies there you can lower your taxes. They were putting their companies in Kalmykia that were holding investments from western investors and they were staffing these companies -- they were using Afghan war veterans because there's a tax preference for Afghan war veterans, and what we learned is that they got in trouble for this eventually because one of Putin's primary rules for business was you can do a lot of things, but you've got to pay your taxes.

In fact, William Browder famously said in 2005 at Davos everybody knows under Putin you have to pay your taxes, which is ironic because at the time he was being investigated for not paying taxes. Ultimately they were caught, some of these companies were prosecuted, and he was forced to make an enormous tax payment to the government of Russia in 2006.

I will add that Sergei Magnitsky was working

10 for him at this time and all of this happened prior to the events that you are interested in involving the Russian treasury fraud and his jailing. This precedes all that.

But returning to the detailed discussion of my work, we investigated William Browder's business practices in Russia, we began to understand maybe what it was he didn't want to talk about, and as we looked at that we then began to look at his decision to surrender his American citizenship in 1998. At that point somewhere in there the Panama papers came out and we discovered that he had incorporated shell companies offshore in the mid 1990s, in 1995 I believe it was in the British Virgin Islands, and that at some point his hedge fund's shares had been transferred to this offshore company.

This offshore company was managed -- several of his offshore companies were managed by the Panamanian law firm called Mossack Fonseca, M-O-S-S-A-C-K, Fonseca, F-O-N-S-E-C-A, which is known now for setting up offshore companies for drug kingpins, narcos, kleptos, you name it. They were servicing every bad guy around. And I'm familiar with them from other money laundering and corruption and tax evasion investigations that I've done.

I'll note parenthetically that William Browder talks a lot about the Panama papers and the Russians who are in the Panama papers without ever mentioning that he's in the Panama papers. This is, again, a public fact that you can check on-line.

So that's an overview of the sort of work I was doing on this case. In the course of that I also began reaching back, I read his book Red Notice to understand his story and the story of his activities in Russia. I'll add also that I was extremely sympathetic for what happened to Sergei Magnitsky and I told him that myself and I tried to help him. It was only later from this other case that I began to be curious and skeptical about William Browder's activities and history in Russia.

MR. FOSTER: Can I ask you a follow-up question. I appreciate the narrative answer, but at the very beginning of the narrative you talked about beginning this journey by interviewing -- conducting an interview of the case agent who said he'd gotten all of his information -- the case agent or the attorney, the primary person at the DOJ, you said they got all their information from Bill Browder. Can you tell us who that was and who conducted the interview?

MR. LEVY: Mr. Simpson should definitely answer that question. I just want to make sure for the record that he hadn't finished his answer. He can talk more extensively about the litigation support that he provided for Baker -- MR. FOSTER: We're happy to get into that if he wants to do that. We're just coming up at the end of our hour. MR. LEVY: No problem. MR. FOSTER: and I wanted to get that follow-up in before --

A. I'll just finish with one last thing and I'm happy to answer that question. So in the course of this, you know -- I mean, one of my interests or even obsessions over the last decade has been corruption in Russia and Russian kleptocracy and the police state that was there. I was stationed in Europe from 2005 to 2007 or '8. So I was there when Putin was consolidating power and all this wave of power was coming. So it's been a subject that I've read very widely on and I'm very interested in the history of Putin's rise.

You know, in the course of all this I'll tell you I became personally interested in where Bill Browder came from, how he made so much money under Vladimir Putin without getting involved in anything illicit. So I read his book and I began doing other research and I found filings at the SEC linking him quite directly and his company, Salomon Brothers at the time, to a company in Russia called Peter Star, and I had, as it happens, vetted Peter Star and I knew that Peter Star was, you know, at the center of a corruption case that I covered as a reporter at the Wall Street Journal. When I went back into the history of Peter Star I realized that Bill Browder did business with the mayor's office in Saint Petersburg when Vladimir Putin was the deputy mayor and was responsible for dealing with western businessmen and corporations.

I then went and looked in Red Notice, this was a large deal, it was the biggest deal ever for Salomon at that time, they sold $98 million worth of stock on NASDAQ. There's no mention of William Browder's deal with Peter Star in Red Notice. I can't tell you why, but I can tell you that Peter Star later became the subject of a massive Star later became the subject of a massive corruption investigation, Pan-European, that I exposed a lot of and that led to the resignation of Putin's telecoms minister. So I assume he might not have -- this is kind of a pattern with Browder, which is he tends to omit things that aren't helpful to him, and I think we've seen a good bit of that lately in his allegations against me, which I'm sure you're going to ask me about.

So your question about the ICE agent, he was deposed by John Moscow of the New York office of Baker Hostetler. John is an old associate of mine from my days as a journalist. John's an expert on tax evasion and money laundering. He was the head of the rackets bureau for the district attorney's office in New York.

MR. FOSTER: You're talking about a formal deposition in the litigation?

MR. SIMPSON: Yeah.

MR. FOSTER: I just wanted to clarify that.

MR. SIMPSON: Again, it's in the court record. One of the frustrating things about this whole issue for me is everything I'm talking about or most of it is in the court record. You know, I don't take a lot of credit for my work. So you won't see my name scattered through the court record, but a lot of this is what I did.

MR. DAVIS: I think that's concludes our first hour. Let's take a short break before we begin a new one.

[Jul 18, 2018] Israel Shamir

Notable quotes:
"... The New Republic ..."
"... The documents had been doubted for some linguistic reasons discussed by Gilbert Doctorow who comes to a reasonable conclusion: "Bill Browder['s] intensity and the time he was devoting to anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behaviour of a top level international businessman. It was clear to me that some other game was in play. But at the time, no one could stand up and suggest the man was a fraud, an operative of the intelligence agencies. ..."
"... We do not know whether Browder is, or had been, a spy. This should not surprise us, as he was closely connected to Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky, the financiers with strong ties in the intelligence community. ..."
"... Perhaps he outlived his usefulness, Mr Browder did. He started the Cold war, now is the time to keep it in its healthy limits and to avoid a nuclear disaster or rapid armaments race. This is the task we may hope will be entertained by the next US President, Mr Donald Trump. ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.unz.com

June 20, 2016 2,700 Words 124 Comments Reply Email This Page to Someone
Remember My Information


=>
Bookmark Toggle All ToC Add to Library Remove from Library B Show Comment Next New Comment Next New Reply Search Text Case Sensitive Exact Words Include Comments

List of Bookmarks William F. Browder, Chief Executive Officer Hermitage Capital Management. Copyright by World Economic Forum swiss-image.ch/Photo by Michael Wuertenberg. Credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Chapeau, Mr Browder! Hats off for this incredible man. Last month, he succeeded in stopping a film screening in the European parliament and took off a few articles from American web sites. This week, he turned the only US screening of a film critical to his version of events into a ruckus . No freedom of speech for his enemies! His lawyers prowl around and issue summons to whoever digs in his sordid affairs. His hacks re-wrote his Wikipedia entry, expunging even discussions of the topic: despite hundreds of edits, nothing survived but the official version. Only a few powerful men succeed purifying their record to such an extent. Still, good fortune (a notoriously flighty lady) is about to desert Mr Browder.

Who is this extremely influential man? A businessman, a politician, a spy? The American-born Jewish tycoon William Browder, says The Jewish Chronicle , considers himself Putin's Number One enemy. For him, Putin is "no friend of the Jews", "cold-blooded killer" and even "criminal dictator who is not too different from Hitler, Mussolini or Gadhafi". More to a point, Browder is the man who contributed most to the new cold war between the West and Russia. The roots were there, still he made them blossom. If the US and Russia haven't yet exchanged nuclear salvos, do not blame Browder: he tried. For a valid reason, too: he was hit by cruel Hitler-like Mr Putin into his most susceptible spot, namely his pocket. Or was there even a better reason?

Browder, a grandson of the US Communist leader, came to Russia at its weakest point after the Soviet collapse, and grabbed an enormous fortune by opaque financial transactions. Such fortunes are not amassed by the pure of spirit. He was a ruthless man who did as much as any oligarch to enrich himself.

Eventually he ran afoul of Mr Putin, who was (and is) very tolerant of oligarchs as long as they play by the rules. The oligarchs would not be oligarchs if they would found that an easy condition. Some of them tried to fight back: Khodorkovsky landed in jail, Berezovsky and Gusinsky went to exile. Browder had a special position: he was the only Jewish oligarch in Russia who never bothered to acquire the Russian citizenship. He was barred from returning to Russia, and his companies were audited and found wanting.

As you'd expect, huge tax evasion was discovered. Browder thought that as long as he sucked up to Putin, he'd get away with bloody murder, let alone tax evasion. He was mistaken. Putin is nobody's fool. Flatterers do not get a free ride in Putin's Russia. And Browder became too big for his boots.

It turned out that he did two unforgivable things. Russians were afraid the foreigners would buy all their assets for a song, using favourable exchange rates and lack of native capital, as had happened in the Baltic states and other ex-Communist East European countries. In order to avoid that, shares of Russian blue-chip companies (Gazprom and suchlike) were traded among Russian citizens only. Foreigners had to pay much more. Browder bought many such shares via Russian frontmen, and he was close to getting control over Russian oil and gas. Putin suspected that he had acted in the interests of big foreign oil companies, trying to repeat the feat of Mr Khodorkovsky.

His second mistake was being too greedy. Russian taxation is very low; but Browder did not want to pay even this low tax. He hired Mr Magnitsky, an experienced auditor, who used loopholes in the Russian tax code in order to avoid taxes altogether. Magnitsky established dummy companies based in tax-free zones of Russia, such as pastoral Kalmykia, small, Buddhist, and autonomous. Their tax-free status had been granted in order to improve their economy and reduce unemployment; however, Browder's companies did not contribute to economy and did not employ people; they were paper dummies swiftly bankrupted by the owner.

Another Magnitsky trick was to form companies fronted by handicapped people who were also freed from paying tax. In the film, some of these persons, often illiterate and of limited intelligence, told the filmmaker of signing papers they could not read and of being paid a little money for the millions passing through their account.

(Mr Browder does not deny these accusations; he says there is nothing criminal in trying to avoid taxes. You can read about Browder and Magnitsky tricks here and here , and learn of the ways they attacked companies using minority shareholders and many other neat schemes.)

Eventually Magnitsky's schemes were discovered and he was arrested. Ten months later, in 2009, he died in jail. By that time, his patron Mr Browder was abroad, and he began his campaign against Russia hoping to regain his lost assets. He claimed Mr Magnitsky had been his lawyer, who discovered misdeeds and the outright thievery of government officials, and was imprisoned and tortured to death for this discovery.

The US Congress rushed in the Magnitsky Act, the first salvo of the Cold War Two. By this act, any Russian person could be found responsible for Mr Magnitsky's untimely death and for misappropriation of Browder's assets. His properties could be seized, bank accounts frozen – without any legal process or representation. This act upset the Russians, who allegedly had kept a cool $500 billion in the Western banks, so tit for tat started, and it goes to this very day.

The actual effect of the Magnitsky Act was minimal: some twenty million dollars frozen and a few dozen not-very-important people were barred from visiting the US. Its psychological effect was much greater: the Russian elite realised that they could lose their money and houses anytime – not in godless Putin's Russia, but in the free West, where they had preferred to look for refuge. The Magnitsky Act paved the road to the Cyprus confiscation of Russian deposits, to post-Crimean sanctions and to a full-fledged Cold War.

ORDER IT NOW

This was painful for Russia, as the first adolescent disillusionment in its love affair with the West, and rather healthy, in my view. A spot of cold war (very cold, plenty of ice please) is good for ordinary people, while its opposite, a Russian-American alliance, is good for the elites. The worst times for ordinary Russian people were 1988-2001, when Russians were in love with the US. The oligarchs stole everything there was to steal and sold it to the West for pennies. They bought villas in Florida while Russia fell apart. That was bad time for everybody: the US invaded Panama and Afghanistan unopposed, Iraq was sanctioned to death, Yugoslavia was bombed and broken to pieces.

As the Cold War came back, some normalcy was restored: the Russians stopped the US from destroying Syria, and Russian officials learned to love Sochi instead of Miami. For this reason alone, Browder can be counted as a part of the power which eternally wills evil and eternally works good. The Russian government, however, did not enjoy the cold shower.

The Russians denied any wrongdoing or even political reasons for dealing with Browder. They say Magnitsky was not a lawyer, just an auditor and a tax code expert. They say that he was arrested and tried for his tax avoidance schemes, and he died of natural causes while in jail. Nobody listened to them, until they demanded that Browder testify under oath. He refused. For two years lawyers tried to give him a summons , but he was a quick runner. There are funny videos showing Browder running away from summons.

Some good sense began to seep into American minds. The New Republic wondered : if Browder was indeed the victim of persecution in Russia and had enlisted the U.S. justice system to right the balance, why was he so reluctant to offer his sworn testimony in an American courtroom?

Enter Mr Andrey Nekrasov , a Russian dissident filmmaker. He made a few films considered to be highly critical of Russian government. He alleged the FSB blew up houses in Moscow in order to justify the Chechnya war. He condemned the Russian war against Georgia in 2008, and had been given a medal by Georgian authorities. He did not doubt the official Western version of Browder-Magnitsky affair, and decided to make a film about the noble American businessman and the brave Russian lawyer fighting for human rights. The European organisations and parliamentarians provided the budget for the film. They also expected the film to denounce Putin and glorify Magnitsky, the martyr.

However, while making the film, Mr Nekrasov had his Road to Damascus moment. He realised that the whole narrative was hinging on the unsubstantiated words of Mr Browder. After painstaking research, he came to some totally different conclusions, and in his version, Browder was a cheat who run afoul of law, while Magnitsky was his sidekick in those crimes.

Nekrasov discovered an interview Magnitsky gave in his jail. In this interview, the accountant said he was afraid Browder would kill him to prevent him from denouncing Browder, and would make him his scapegoat. It turned out Browder tried to bribe the journalist who made the interview to have these words expunged. Browder was the main beneficiary of the accountant's death, realised Nekrasov, while his investigators were satisfied with Magnitsky's collaboration with them.

Nekrasov could not find any evidence that Magnitsky tried to investigate the misdeeds of government officials. He was too busy covering his own tax evasion. And instead of fitting his preconceived notions, Nekrasov made the film about what he learned. ( Here are some details of Nekrasov's film)

While the screening in the EU Parliament was been stopped by the powerful Mr Browder, in Washington DC the men are made of sterner stuff. Despite Browder's threats the film was screened , presented by the best contemporary American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, who is 80 if a day, and still going strong. One has to recognise that the US is second to none for freedom of speech on the globe.

What makes Browder so powerful? He invests in politicians. This is probably a uniquely Jewish quality: Jews outspend everybody in contributions to political figures. The Arabs will spend more on horses and jets, the Russians prefer real estate, the Jews like politicians. The Russian NTV channel reported that Browder lavishly financed the US lawmakers. Here they present alleged evidence of money transfers: some hundred thousand dollars was given by Browder's structures officially to the senators and congressmen in order to promote the Magnitsky Act.

Much bigger sums were transferred via good services of Brothers Ziff, mega-rich Jewish American businessmen, said the researchers in two articles published on the Veteran News Network and in The Huffington Post .

These two articles were taken off the sites very fast under pressure of Browder's lawyers, but they are available in the cache. They disclose the chief beneficiary of Browder's generosity. This is Senator Ben Cardin, a Democrat from Maryland. He was the engine behind Magnitsky Act legislation to such an extent that the Act has been often called the Cardin List . Cardin is a fervent supporter of Hillary Clinton, also a cold warrior of good standing. More to a point, Cardin is a prominent member of Israel Lobby.

Browder affair is a heady upper-class Jewish cocktail of money, spies, politicians and international crime. Almost all involved figures appear to be Jewish, not only Browder, Brothers Ziff and Ben Cardin. Even his enemy, the beneficiary of the scam that (according to Browder) took over his Russian assets is another Jewish businessman Dennis Katsiv (he had been partly exonerated by a New York court as is well described in this thoughtful piece).

Browder began his way to riches under the patronage of a very rich and very crooked Robert Maxwell, a Czech-born Jewish businessman who assumed a Scots name. Maxwell stole a few million dollars from his company pension fund before dying in mysterious circumstances on board of his yacht in the Atlantic. It was claimed by a member of Israeli Military Intelligence, Ari Ben Menashe, that Maxwell had been a Mossad agent for years, and he also said Maxwell tipped the Israelis about Israeli whistle-blower Mordecai Vanunu. Vanunu was kidnapped and spent many years in Israeli jails.

Geoffrey Goodman wrote Maxwell "was almost certainly being used as – and using himself as – a two-way intelligence conduit [between East and West]. This arrangement included passing intelligence to the Israeli secret forces with whom he became increasingly involved towards the end of his life."

ORDER IT NOW

After Maxwell, Browder switched allegiance to Edmond Safra, a very rich Jewish banker of Lebanese origin, who also played East vs West. Safra provided him with working capital for his investment fund. Safra's bank has been the unlikely place where the IMF loan of four billion dollars to Russia had been transferred -- and disappeared. The Russian authorities say that Browder has been involved in this "crime of the century," next to Safra. The banker's name has been connected to Mossad: increasingly fearful for his life, Safra surrounded himself by Mossad-trained gunmen. This did not help him: he died a horrible death in his bathroom when his villa was torched by one of the guards.

The third Jewish oligarch on Browder's way was Boris Berezovsky, the king-maker of Yeltsin's Russia. He also died in his bathroom (which seems to be a constant feature); apparently he committed suicide. Berezovsky had been a politically active man; he supported every anti-Putin force in Russia. However, a few months before his death, he asked for permission to return to Russia, and some negotiations went on between him and Russian authorities.

His chief of security Sergey Sokolov came to Russia and purportedly brought with him some documents his late master prepared for his return. These documents allege that Browder had been an agent of Western intelligence services, of the CIA to begin with, and of MI6 in following years. He was given a code name Solomon, as he worked for Salomon Brothers. His financial activity was just a cover for his true intentions, that is to collect political and economic data on Russia, and to carry out economic war on Russia. This revelation has been made in the Russia-1 TV channel documentary Browder Effect , (broadcasted 13.04.2016), asserting that Browder was not after money at all, and his activities in Russia, beside being very profitable, had a political angle.

The documents had been doubted for some linguistic reasons discussed by Gilbert Doctorow who comes to a reasonable conclusion: "Bill Browder['s] intensity and the time he was devoting to anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behaviour of a top level international businessman. It was clear to me that some other game was in play. But at the time, no one could stand up and suggest the man was a fraud, an operative of the intelligence agencies. Whatever the final verdict may be on the documents presented by the film "The Browder Effect," it raises questions about Browder that should have been asked years ago in mainstream Western media if journalists were paying attention. Yevgeny Popov deserves credit for highlighting those questions, even if his documents demand further investigation before we come to definitive answers".

We do not know whether Browder is, or had been, a spy. This should not surprise us, as he was closely connected to Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky, the financiers with strong ties in the intelligence community.

Perhaps he outlived his usefulness, Mr Browder did. He started the Cold war, now is the time to keep it in its healthy limits and to avoid a nuclear disaster or rapid armaments race. This is the task we may hope will be entertained by the next US President, Mr Donald Trump.

This article was first published in The Unz Review .


JL , June 20, 2016 at 9:14 am GMT

" Browder was not after money at all " Uh, no. Browder was notorious for his greed and obsession with money. This is someone who had a program that calculated his personal net worth online and would check it no less than every half hour. Think Gordon Gekko but too cheap to even buy a decent suit. While there may have been some intelligence connections somewhere along the way, as the article states, he went political only when his honey pot was removed. Without Russia, his fund management business quickly tanked.
AmericaFirstNow , Website June 20, 2016 at 10:54 am GMT
US pushing a Zionist PNAC Neocon agenda vs Russia: :

http://america-hijacked.com/2014/02/24/us-has-neocon-agenda-in-ukraine-russia-analyst/

http://tinyurl.com/neoconmeddling

annamaria , June 20, 2016 at 11:20 am GMT
@Kiza

This is priceless: "We do not know whether Browder is, or had been, a spy. This should not surprise us, as he was closely connected to Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky, the financiers with strong ties in the intelligence community."

Could Mr. Browder hope for a better end of life than Maxwell, Safra and Berezovsky? And what would be the fate of Mr. Cardin, the famous congressional prostitute? http://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/new/?p=3742#.V2fRqzc5FCo

"Israel's Agent of Influence: Senator Ben Cardin shows how it's done:"

"So who does Cardin actually represent? I would suggest that he fits the mold of the classic agent of influence in that his allegiance to the United States is constrained by his greater loyalty to a foreign nation."

Israel Shamir , June 20, 2016 at 5:17 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

In Russia, everybody criticises Putin. No danger at all. Andrey Nekrasov was a foremost critic of Putin, made him no harm. Russia has as much freedom of speech as Europe; still less than the US.

Oscar Peterson , June 20, 2016 at 10:25 pm GMT
Incredible–well, not really–that our mainstream media resolutely refuses to print, much less discuss, the two main pieces of information here:

1. Browder was the one who gained most from Magnitsky's death as evidenced by the interview in which the latter asserted a fear of being killed by Browder.

2. Nekrasov, the film's director, has a history of making films very critical of Putin and the Russian government and state.

US media coverage either omits any mention of these two points or buries allusions to them in the article. The NYT piece on Browder's attempt to block the film's screening at the Newseum in Washington was filed in the "Europe" section of the paper.

Freedom of speech is under assault in the West and, again and again, we see the common denominator of these despicable efforts to suppress key information.

JL , June 21, 2016 at 7:52 am GMT
How funny to hear people question Browder's Jewishness, in the Unz comments section of all places. Lest there be any doubt, he, himself, very much identified as being a Jew, to the extent that he had a Mezuzah on his office doorway and hired only Jewish employees.

Concerning Magnitsky's indeed unusual posthumous trial, this was actually at the behest of his own mother who refused to sign the legal papers closing the criminal case due to his death. This is usually a mere formality. However, the Russian legal system is a stickler for the letter of the law and so the trial went ahead. His mother's motivation was unclear, though it probably had something to do with extra publicity.

tbraton , June 21, 2016 at 2:41 pm GMT
When I first became aware of Mr. Browder a number of years ago, I was curious about his name, since I was aware of Earl Browder, the former head of the American Communist Party when I was growing up. After I subsequently learned of the familial connection, I was highly amused to discover the leap from Communist to capitalist in three generations. But then I recalled that Dr. Armand Hammer, eventually the controlling shareholder of Occidental Petroleum, had a father who was also a doctor, an emigrant from Odessa, and a founder of the Communist Party U.S.A. That was a mere two generations to make the leap from Communist to capitalist.

A few years ago I happened to read an amusing memoir of the girl who was my date to my high school prom but who went on to achieve a modest fame and acquaintance with many prominent Americans and foreigners. (I am being intentionally vague.) When I was dating her in high school and college, I operated under the false assumption that her mother (whom I met) was Jewish and her natural father (whom I never met); I met her stepfather, who was Jewish) was Catholic, which I thought was kind of cool, since I was totally nonreligious. You can imagine my disappointment to learn nearly a half century later that both of her natural parents were Jewish. Elsewhere in her memoir, my friend referred to her mother's sister, who was a member of the Communist Party and got caught up in the Hollywood blacklist and lost her job. (That was the first I heard of it, btw.) Things turned out well for her since she hooked up with and married a wealthy Jewish doctor, who left her a sizable fortune when he died. She eventually moved to Israel where she found nirvana, marrying a much younger man and enjoying late in life "fantastic sex." So, it appears that what motivates many young Communists is the dream of becoming fantastically wealthy and enjoying life as a plutocrat, not the BS of improving life for the downtrodden. If I weren't such a natural skeptic, I would have been very disillusioned, but not as much as I was to discover late in life that her father was Jewish and not Catholic. Apologies to all those women I dated in my 20′s and 30′s whom I regaled with the story of my half-Jewish, half-Catholic prom date.

Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] , Website June 21, 2016 at 7:03 pm GMT

For two years lawyers tried to give him a summons, but he was a quick runner. There are funny videos showing Browder running away from summons.

I thoroughly enjoyed the video:-)

Seraphim , June 22, 2016 at 2:08 am GMT
@tbraton

It became tedious to evoke the murky relations of Bolshevism with the Jewish bank cartel in the financing of Lenin, Trotsky &Co by Jacob Schiff ("a banker who grew up in House of Rothschild Frankfurt, monopolized American rail system, funded the Rockefellers through First City Bank, ADL and the NAACP. Schiff's granddaughter married Al Gore's Son" From his base on Wall Street, he was the foremost Jewish leader from 1880 to 1920 in what later became known as the "Schiff era", grappling with all major Jewish issues and problems of the day, including the plight of Russian Jews under the Tsar, American and international anti-semitism, care of needy Jewish immigrants, and the rise of Zionism" – per Wikipedia), and Warburg ("Paul Warburg was a planner for the U.S. Federal Reserve System which is a collection of private banks, and attended as American representative, the Treaty of Versailles conference, where his brother Max was on the German side of the bargaining table" by Wiki). One can see why Lenin was 'permitted' to pass through Germany!

Schiff financed the Japanese for their attack on Russia ("He extended loans to the Empire of Japan in the amount of $200 million, through Kuhn, Loeb & Co Schiff saw this loan as a means of answering, on behalf of the Jewish people, the anti-Semitic actions of the Russian Empire, specifically the then-recent Kishinev pogrom"), the 1905 Revolution and the 1917 Revolution. "In addition to his famous loan to Japan, Schiff financed loans to many other nations, including those that would come to comprise the Central Powers Schiff made sure none of the funds from his loans ever went to the Russian Empire, which he felt oppressed Jewish people. When the Russian Empire fell in 1917, Schiff believed that the oppression of Jews would end. He formally repealed the impediments within his firm against lending to Russia". It's true that Communist Russia quickly opened the door for foreign investment (NEP) and the looting of Russia.
When Stalin tried to reduce USSR's dependence on foreign investments, he became instantly the monster. It is remarkable that America stood behind Trotsky in the case of the so-called "Show Trials" (The Dewey Commission).
Particularly interesting is that (per Wikipedia);
"Some ten years later, the Dewey Commission was cited in great detail, when in an open letter to the British press dated 25 February 1946, written by George Orwell and signed by Arthur Koestler, C. E. M. Joad, Frank Horrabin, George Padmore, Julian Symons, H. G. Wells, F. A. Ridley, C. A. Smith and John Baird, among others, it was suggested that the Nuremberg Trials then underway were an invaluable opportunity for establishing "historical truth and bearing upon the political integrity" of figures of international standing. Specifically, they called for Rudolf Hess to be interrogated about his alleged meeting with Trotsky and that the Gestapo records then in the hands of Allied experts be examined for any proof of any "liaison between the Nazi Party or State and Trotsky or the other old Bolshevik leaders indicted at the Moscow trials "

tbraton , June 23, 2016 at 12:33 am GMT
@tbraton

BTW I wonder how many people, including posters here, are aware that the U.S., under President Wilson, sent a military expedition to Russia after the Communist takeover there in 1917 and kept them there for about a year and a half. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Expeditionary_Force_Siberia When I was in college in the early 60′s, I bought a paperback of George Kennan's "Russia and the West, Under Lenin and Stalin" (hardcover ed. 1961), the first book of Kennan that I read, and was startled to learn of our military invasion of Russia at the end of WWI and after, something I didn't remember being taught in high school American history a few years earlier. That was about 50 years ago. This past year I got around to reading A. Scott Berg's much acclaimed biography, "Wilson." I didn't remember reading anything in that biography re Wilson's commitment of military forces to Russia. I have just reviewed the index and found one obscure reference to "military intervention in Russia" (p. 590 of hardcover ed.) and George Kennan. More important, I reviewed the Bibliography and found no reference to George Kennan's "Russia and the West, Under Lenin and Stalin." I don't know what to make of the gross omission by a highly-regarded biographer, but it is clear that an effort has been made to downplay this aspect of Wilson's policy, for reasons that escape me.

Kiza , June 23, 2016 at 1:52 am GMT
@tbraton

Maybe because I was educated in a different country I was very well aware of this item of information. It was not only the US, then most of the Western countries from both sides of WW1, including Britain, France, Italy, then also Czechoslovakia (Austria-Hungary), Japan, Germany and so on, which sent troops to Russia on the side of Belaya Gvardiya fighting the Lenin's Bolsheviks, even whilst WW1 was still ongoing. They fought with Belaya Gvardiya in Siberia, Ukraine and Crimea (part of Russia, not part of Ukraine until 1953 when given to Ukraine by the Communist leader Nikita Khrushchev).

This is possibly the best reference about this second, less well known, part of WW1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_movement

The US contingent was supposed to support the Siberain Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_Army but shipped back without fighting.

Sam Shama , June 23, 2016 at 1:56 am GMT
@tbraton

Fascinating, thank you. Reading more, I find that Wilson was motivated to safeguard almost a billion dollars in armaments and equipment [including railway cars] given to Russia by the U.S in the hopes of Russia prevailing over the Central Powers and thereafter adopting the capitalist model. Alas the men and hardware [including frozen machine guns] did not hit the right wavelength with the Siberian winter.

Anatoly Karlin , June 23, 2016 at 2:41 am GMT
@Quartermaster

Just ask Khodorkovsky.

Why don't you ask the ECHR while you're at it?

Seraphim , June 23, 2016 at 5:47 am GMT
Many of us are aware of the 'Allied Intervention in the Russian civil war' which occured in the aftermath of the Peace of Brest-Litovsk while the Entante was still at war with Germany. The chaos which ensued as a result of the misguided policies of the HLH (Hindenburg, Ludendorff, Hoffman), especially the 'Napoleonic complex' of Ludendorff compounded by the greedy desires of many petty German 'Fuersten' for crowns in the East, determined the Allies to intervene, motivated by the following considerations:
- prevent the German or Bolshevik capture of Allied material stockpiles in Arkhangelsk
- mount an attack helping the Czechoslovak Legions stranded on the Trans-Siberian Railroad
– resurrect the Eastern Front by defeating the Bolshevik army with help from the Czechoslovak Legions and an expanded anti-Bolshevik force of local citizens and stop the spread of communism and the Bolshevik cause in Russia.

Now, this is news only for graduates of American schools where history is no more taught. The Wikipedia entry ('Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War') would have been sufficient (for beginners) to set the record straight:

"Severely short of troops to spare, the British and French requested that President Wilson provide American soldiers for the campaign. In July 1918, against the advice of the United States Department of War, Wilson agreed to the limited participation of 5,000 United States Army troops in the campaign. This force, which became known as the "American North Russia Expeditionary Force" (a.k.a. the Polar Bear Expedition) were sent to Arkhangelsk while another 8,000 soldiers, organised as the American Expeditionary Force Siberia, were shipped to Vladivostok from the Philippines and from Camp Fremont in California. That same month, the Canadian government agreed to the British government's request to command and provide most of the soldiers for a combined British Empire force, which also included Australian and Indian troops. Some of this force was the Canadian Siberian Expeditionary Force; another part was the North Russia Intervention. A Royal Navy squadron was sent to the Baltic under Rear-Admiral Edwyn Alexander-Sinclair. This force consisted of modern C-class cruisers and V- and W-class destroyers. In December 1918, Sinclair sailed into Estonian and Latvian ports, sending in troops and supplies, and promising to attack the Bolsheviks "as far as my guns can reach". In January 1919, he was succeeded in command by Rear-Admiral Walter Cowan.
The Japanese, concerned about their northern border, sent the largest military force, numbering about 70,000. They desired the establishment of a buffer state in Siberia, and the Imperial Japanese Army General Staff viewed the situation in Russia as an opportunity for settling Japan's "northern problem". The Japanese government was also intensely hostile to communism.
The Italians created the special "Corpo di Spedizione" with Alpini troops sent from Italy and ex-POWs of Italian ethnicity from the former Austro-Hungarian army who were recruited to the Italian Legione Redenta. They were initially based in the Italian Concession in Tientsin and numbered about 2,500.
Romania, Greece, Poland, China, and Serbia also sent contingents in support of the intervention."
All these troops have been involved, in a way or another, in the Russian Civil War, but by 1920 all have been withdrawn. Only the Japanese stayed in the Maritime Provinces of the Russian Far East until 1922 and in northern Sakhalin until 1925.

There is obviously no space here to talk about the 'Treaty of Rapallo' between Russia and Germany of 1922 and of the 'Genoa Conference' held in Genoa in 1922, where "the representatives of 34 countries gathered to discuss global economic problems following World War I. The purpose was to formulate strategies to rebuild central and eastern Europe, particularly Russia, after the war, and also to negotiate a relationship between European capitalist economies, and the new Russian Bolshevik regime". These were signals for the introduction of NEP (New Economic Policy) and the policy of 'concessions' which was, in Lenin's terms " a strategic retreat from socialism".
Anyhow, I think that a BA is a minimum requirement in order to gain a modicum of understanding of these problems. For sure Wikipedia is not sufficient.

tbraton , June 28, 2016 at 3:31 pm GMT
@Kiza

There is no question the involvement of U.S. troops in Russia following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 is downplayed in the U.S. As I noted, the issue wasn't touched on in my high school history class, and I was surprised to learn of our military involvement in Russia's civil war only when I went to college and bought the small paperback of Kennan's "Russia and the West Under Lenin and Stalin." In fact, I have a one-volume history of the U.S. written by one of the U.S.'s leading historians, Samuel Eliot Morison, who was the highly acclaimed biographer of Christopher Columbus and John Paul Jones and a long-time professor of history at Harvard. He was also the author of the highly acclaimed "History of the United States Naval Operations in World War II," a 15-volume effort. In his "The Oxford History of the American People" (1965, 1122 pages, ending with the 1963 assassination of JFK), he states briefly at p. 878 that "President Wilson went along [with efforts of France and Britain to overthrow the Bolsheviks] to the extent of sending a small American force to Archangel, ostensibly to prevent a cache of military supplies reaching Germany, and participating in a Japanese-directed invasion of Siberia, to see that Japan did not go too far." Rather cryptic reference to a somewhat small military involvement that lasted for more than a year and a half, but, in defense of Morison, his history was a one-volume affair (published by the Oxford University Press) and the American involvement in Russia had no effect on the Russian Revolution, other than to sour the relationship between the new Communist government and the U.S., which did not diplomatically recognize the new regime until FDR became President in 1933.

A. Scott Berg has no such defense. His detailed biography of Wilson runs to 743 pages, and he makes no reference at all to the U.S. military contingent that was sent to Russia in 1918 by Wilson and remained there for more than a year and a half. You would think that Berg could have added a few brief sentences alluding to the military expeditionary force and a brief summary of its impact, but not a word. This from an author who discusses the infamous "Palmer raids" at the end of the Wilson Administration and the bombs which set off those raids. I am just puzzled about the omission and fail to see what agenda is being served, other than it highlights the utter hypocrisy of Wilson with his vaunted "Fourteen Points," which impliedly called for respect of international borders. Wilson was also the hypocrite who won reelection in a close race in 1916 running on a campaign that "he kept us out of war" and the declared war against Germany a month after he was reinaugurated in March 1917.

BilDing , August 2, 2017 at 2:58 am GMT
Alternate title

Benefits of Friends in High Places

Clinton has Congress in a frenzy over a Russian illusion.
Browder has Congress in a frenzy over a Russian illusion.

Is it little wonder that real America has been taken to the cleaners over the past 4 decades?

Robert Magill , August 3, 2017 at 10:00 am GMT

BTW I wonder how many people, including posters here, are aware that the U.S., under President Wilson, sent a military expedition to Russia after the Communist takeover there in 1917 and kept them there for about a year and a half.

Actually this 'invasion' was to help stabilize Russia during the revolution and to block Japan in the far east. Russia and the US had been good friends and allies since we helped Russia during the Crimean War, and with the purchase of Alaska and they had helped us during the US Civil War.
Harry Truman put an end to all that 'good neighbor policy" when he needed a scapegoat to launch the National Security State and prevent another depression. On it goes.

http://robertmagill.wordpress.com

TheJester , August 4, 2017 at 10:38 am GMT
Seems like the entire Browder/Magnitsky hustle is nothing more than Jews protecting Jews in a kind of international crime syndicate. When found out, they even have the network in place to control the narrative about their crimes to the point that trying to hold them accountable quickly morphs into a fundamental violation of their human rights.

"What do you mean you can't rip off a country's assets and hide the loot in offshore accounts? What do you do when you see a $10 bill laying in the street? You take it, of course! What else is a person suppose to do? When opportunity strikes, you make the best of it."

Browder and Magnitshy . How history repeats itself! I recall reading that something similar happened in the Weimar Republic when Germany was stripped of its assets after WWI. Indeed, even then there was an ((( international syndicate ))) in place to control the narrative and protect the shysters.

Don bass , August 4, 2017 at 6:39 pm GMT
@Quartermaster

"""Meaning, Putin gets a healthy cut. If he doesn't get a piece of the action, you will suddenly be found to have evaded taxes, or worse. And, heaven forfend, if you decided to use your wealth to oppose Putin politically, just as Khodorkovsky."""
What evidence do you have for this libellous allegation?? These assertions are made habitually in the western media. However this article on Browder demonstrates who are the parties making such claims and why.

Hibernian , August 5, 2017 at 12:41 am GMT
@Uebersetzer

We're talking about his grandson, an international businessman active in Russia at one time. The WASP grandfather who eventually became CPUSA chief married a Jewish woman and their mathematician son was the international businessman grandson's father.

Try to get your facts straight before you call everybody and his brother a Nazi.

n230099 , August 6, 2017 at 12:03 pm GMT
@Kiza

"The most interesting, previously unknown, detail to me in this article was that Browder's grandfather was the leader of the US Communist Party. "

That's funny. The first thing I thought upon seeing the name and the topic was "oh good grief could it be?'

Kiza , August 10, 2017 at 3:48 am GMT
@Skeptikal

Being English speaking and brought up in the Anglo-world but with good understanding of Russia through Communism, made this Jewish Godfather much more damaging to Russia than the other forced Jewish emigres: Berezovsky, Gusinsky and Khodorovsky.

Browder's ties with Mossad and CIA make him a prototypical Deep-Stater, spreading Anglo-Zionist dominance of the World (Globalism) and getting personally rich in the process. If the Anglo-Zionists manage to bring down Russia (say, kill Putin) then Browder could become the Paul Bremer III of Russia (perhaps titled William Browder I).

Jacques , Website September 10, 2017 at 8:26 am GMT
There a book, a merciless, factual excoriation of the Browder Hoax: The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception by Alex Krainer

https://www.amazon.com/Killing-William-Browder-Deconstructing-Dangerous-ebook/dp/B074TJ5LCK/

Fran800 , February 9, 2018 at 4:38 am GMT
@NewModelArmy

Earl Browder, born into a Kansas Methodist farm family became the head of the Communist party in the U.S. in the 30′s, probably for idealistic reasons. As a Communist, he became an atheist. He went to Russia and married a Russian Jewish woman. Their son, Felix, raised as a Jew by his mother, became a mathematician. Felix Browder married a Jewish woman and their son is the William Browder, subject of this article. William Browder is thus 3/4 Jewish. His one grandfather, from whom he got his name, was born a Christian gentile, but chucked it up to become a Communist leader. Through marriage to Jewish women, his grandson, William, is a ruthless capitalist Jewish oligarch who contributed to scavenging the decaying body of the former Soviet Union.

Sean , July 18, 2018 at 5:26 am GMT

intensity and the time he was devoting to anti-Russian sanctions in Europe was in no way comparable to the behaviour of a top level international businessman.

The writer does not know much about the business world, does he? Browder is still looking to get paid off, and businessmen can be motivated by vengeance (Warren Buffet included). Anyway, Mr. Browder seems far too focused on his wallet and effective an operator on that account to have been directed by MI6.

There is this myth that secret intelligence agents are more competent than lesser mortals (such as policemen). I like reading memoirs and novels about spys as much as anyone, but rich, tax dodging/philanthropic and litigious people like Browder are the real 007s of this world. I dare say there are a few holes in his story.

AnonFromTN , July 18, 2018 at 2:33 pm GMT
I can only tell Mr. Shamir that if he had stolen as much money as Browder, he'd be untouchable, too. Look at any dollar bill. It says "IN GOD WE TRUST". This is THE God Americans trust in. All the other gods are subject to freedom of religion.
HBM , July 18, 2018 at 3:01 pm GMT
@TheJester

Exactly right. Looting Russia– and later working to destroy it for objecting -- is their YHWH-given right. The Jewish criminality and evil Browder embodies is of so great a magnitude that it's difficult for a decent person to process such a creature.

Svigor , July 18, 2018 at 3:29 pm GMT
Funny, I heard (((Big Media's))) glowing take on Browder the other day and figured he must be a piece of shit. I don't base conclusions on such hunches, of course, so I guess I'll have to read the article and check around.

But it's funny how race-realism, countersemitism, and hatred of (((Big Media))) have such predictive power.

[Jul 18, 2018] Browder was heavily involved in the looting. He is heavy in distributing anti-Russian propaganda in a heavily Jewish controlled media, and he was all in for Clinton.

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com


I Am Jack's Ma -> overbet Mon, 07/16/2018 - 18:56 Permalink

8 of 10, and all top 5 of Hillary's (on the books) donors were Jews - a group that is under 3% of the US population.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/10/top-five-clinton-donors-are-jewish-how-anti-semitic-is-this-fact.html

It has been reported in multiple mainstream and Jewish news sources that Jews contribute about 50% of donations to the Democratic Party.

Wherever one looks in print or tv news media, given that Jews are <3% of the US *and* Russian population, any objective review of

anti-Russian commentators would reveal a massive over-representation of Jews.

https://russia-insider.com/en/politics/its-time-drop-jew-taboo/ri22186

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/06/phil-giraldi/hating-russia-is-a-full-time-job/

After the collapse of the USSR, under Yeltsin, a large handful of 'oligarchs' grew immensely wealthy by buying Russian assets on the cheap. This was part of a privitization drive largely overseen by American economists.

The oligarchs were mostly Jews. The chief economic advisors were largely Jews.

http://www.softpanorama.org/Skeptics/Pseudoscience/harvard_mafia.shtml

https://www.thenation.com/article/harvard-boys-do-russia/

These are *facts*

Responding to my thanks for granting me the audience at such a hectic time, Boris Abramovich commented with a faint smile: "You would be writing the book in any case ..."

I understood that my visit was somewhat imposed on him so I got right to the point:

"Boris Abramovich, the real reason for writing this book is this. As you probably know there is a television show called 'The Puppets.' Puppets of Yeltsin, Yastrzhembsky, Chernomyrdin, Kulikov, and others perform. But the main puppeteer is behind the scenes -- his name is Shenderovich. And in real life there are Yeltsin, Kiriyenko, Fedorov, Stepashin and the others. But the main puppeteer has a long Jewish name: Berezovsky-Gusinsky- Smolensky-Khodorkovsky, and so on.

"This is to say that for the first time in a thousand years, since the first Jews settled in Russia, we hold the real power in this country. I want to ask you straight out: How do you intend to use it? What do you intend to do in this country? Cast it into the chaos of poverty or raise it from the mud? Do you understand that a chance like this comes only once in a thousand years? Do you understand your responsibility to our [Jewish] people for your actions?"

Boris Abramovich responded with some difficulty: "Of course, as you see, financial power is in Jewish hands, but we have never looked at this from the point of view of historical responsibility."

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n6p13_Michaels.html

Putin stopped the fire sale, essentially by dividing the oligarchs, leveraging some against others.

Browder was heavily involved in the looting. He is heavy in distributing anti-Russian propaganda in a heavily Jewish controlled media, and he was all in for Clinton.

And he wants Trump impeached (I recommend reading the article below if you read just 1 link)

Most readers will identify Bill Broder with Hermitage Capital, but few will recall that the investment firm was also funded by one Beny Steimetz, the Israeli oligarch and financier just arrested (August 14) by Israeli and Swiss anti-corruption officials for widescale fraud and money laundering. The Russia privatization shark who was once Israel's richest man is a subject for another report. I only bring him up here to point at two facets of this war on Putin. First, the Jewish connection in all this is something that just needs to come out. Secondly, the ring of profiteers bent on Putin's demise all have gigantic skeletons in their wardrobes. A story citing one Putin hater, when investigated, always leads to ten more. This is no coincidence.

Back to Browder, his Hermitage was at one time was the largest foreign portfolio investor in Russia. That was before Vladimir Putin put a stop to the rape of Russia's legacy and the theft of her assets. This is undeniable fact, and even the lowliest of Russian peasants know it by now. Browder, a Chicago Jew, set out to profit from Russian privatization after Yeltsin, but was thwarted like other sharks when Putin's hammer fell on other mafiosos. RICO suits, libel cases, tax evasion charges, and ties to some of the seediest characters in world finance highlight the man who pushed the now famous Magnitsky Act into US foreign policy play. It's no coincidence that Browder has emerged as a central player in the ongoing investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 elections. The privateer who made billions off Russia privatization turned into a human rights activist, and now he's bent on seeing Donald Trump impeached!

https://m.journal-neo.org/2017/09/16/vladimir-putin-and-russia-versus-zionist-fairytales/

The war on Russia is very heavily a product of Jews pursuing Jewish group interests, internationally.

A man named Henry Ford once wrote a book on the topic. Of all the criticism it received and receives, that it is 'hate,' one will seldom find any effort to dispute its accuracy.

RationalLuddite -> I Am Jack's Ma Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:33 Permalink

Terrific post I Am Jack. And also thank you for emphasising the unholy convergence of vested interests in Putin Russia demonization - the Jewish bankers raping Rusdia in the 90s on a scale not seen since the Mongols hordes, and Western oligarchs seeing a chance to become even more insanely wealthy (hence the London, Wall St, Pentagon, Fed, DC, Brussels etc involvement).

Putin is an extraordinary and immensely intelligent and brave individual who divided and knee-capped the world mafia. THIS is why he is demonised, not because he is some evil Tsar of Mordor. That being said he hasn't done it alone - the people of Russia made huge mistakes by allowing communism in, and economic genocide in the 1990s was wilful influcted upon them, but their resilience is extraordinary.

I hope they are all watching their backs. Putin if all people stated that he is careful about cornering rats with now way out, so i have a feeling that things are going to get unpredictable ...

RationalLuddite -> El Vaquero Mon, 07/16/2018 - 18:26 Permalink

http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/hating-russia-is-a-full-time-job/

Good article. Remember that Bill Browder's grandfather was head of the American Communist Party in the 1930s ...

The Killing of William Browder is compulsory reading if you want to sssure yourself about that lying theiving NPD sack of s*** Browder. Lots on him on Sott etc.

https://youtu.be/ryVavTF6hR0

Yeah - he's got nothing to hide.

I did post about 3 months back that Browder and the trillion dollar rape Russia in the 1990s , the Money Plane etc are the key to understand current events, Putin and what is being covered up now, in my opinion, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to get traction.

Cardinal Fang -> RationalLuddite Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:09 Permalink

Yeah but $400 mill is what he put on the table, you know there is more shit behind this...

[Jul 18, 2018] Russia would like to ask a few questions to the US officials believed to have HELPED Browder funnel 400K to Clinton and probably avoid paying tax on 1.5 billion in Russia AND the US...

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Whoa Dammit -> I Am Jack's Ma Tue, 07/17/2018 - 10:39 Permalink

I'd not seen the AP reporters question that triggered this before. It looks like the reporter was trying to embarrass both Putin and Trump but wound up getting his ass, Clinton's ass, and the asses of the intelligence community handed to him instead.

wafm -> Whoa Dammit Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:39 Permalink

too right. If I remember correctly, it was in the context of Putin saying Russia is open to have FBI guys come to question the 12 GRU guys indicted (no proof yet) by Mueller.

In return, he then said Russia would like to ask a few questions to the US officials believed to have HELPED Browder funnel $400K to Clinton and probably avoid paying tax on 1.5 billion in Russia AND the US...

Browder has to be on top of the US wanted list in the not too distant future or there really is no fuckin justice.

BROWDER IS A FUCKIN TRAITOR, LOCK HIM UP!

[Jul 18, 2018] Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception Alex Krainer: with review by The Saker

Aug 18, 2017 | thesaker.is
The Saker:
Today I want to introduce you to a book whose importance simply cannot be overstated: The Killing of William Browder: Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception by Alex Krainer. I consider that book as a *must read* for any person trying to understand modern Russia and where the new Cold War with Russia came from.
Most of you must have heard of the Magnitsky Act or even maybe of William Browder himself. You probably know that Browder was a British businessman who founded Hermitage Capital Management investment fund which Sergei Magnitsky represented as a lawyer and auditor. Finally, you must have heard that Magnitsky died (was killed) in a Russian jail while Browder was placed by the Russian government on a black list and denied entry. For the vast majority of you, that is probably as much thought as you ever gave this topic and I have to confess that this is also true for me. I never bothered really researching this issue because I knew the context so well that this, by itself, gave me a quasi-certitude that I knew what had happened. Still, when I read this book I was amazed at the fantastically detailed account Krainer provides to what is really an amazing story.
In his book Alex Krainer offers us the truth and truly shows us how deep the rabbit hole goes....
The Vineyard of the Saker
Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception – Alex Krainer: with review by The Saker The Saker

See also

As Congress still swoons over the anti-Kremlin Magnitsky narrative, Western political and media leaders refuse to let their people view a documentary that debunks the fable, reports Robert Parry.
Consortium News (Updated Aug. 4, 2017)
A Blacklisted Film and the New Cold War
Robert Parry

[Jul 18, 2018] Russia wants to question Christopher Steele, Michael McFaul, top politicians for aiding Bill Browder -- RT World News

Notable quotes:
"... "Browder's long-standing partners in crime." ..."
"... "on even terms." ..."
"... "meet US authorities half-way" ..."
"... "on the condition" ..."
"... "Realizing that the Russian prosecutors wouldn't let go off him easily, Browder has tried to cultivate connections with political influencers in in the US, and this can be seen through the Ziff brothers, and their support for the Democratic Party in the last election," ..."
"... Think your friends would be interested? Share this story! ..."
Jul 18, 2018 | www.rt.com

Russia's prosecutor general will demand interviews with American congressmen, security services staff, and other high-profile individuals as it seeks to involve the US in its investigation into convicted financier Bill Browder. Moscow accuses Browder of illegally taking $1.5 billion out of Russia and fabricating evidence that led to the passing of the sanctions-imposing Magnitsky Act. As part of the investigation, the prosecutor general wants to speak to ex-MI6 agent Christopher Steele, author of the notorious Trump dossier, and former ambassador to Moscow Michael McFaul, who campaigned on behalf of Browder. Michael McFaul and Hillary Clinton in 2016. / Reuters

Other persons of interest on what Russia said was an incomplete list included David Kramer, former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and president of think tank Freedom House, and the billionaire Ziff brothers, who are described as "Browder's long-standing partners in crime."

This was announced by Aleksandr Kurennoy, the head of the mass media department of the prosecutor general's office in Moscow, who said that Russia was ready to share its findings with US law enforcement agencies "on even terms."

Read more Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks during a joint news conference with U.S. President Donald Trump in Helsinki, Finland, July 16, 2018. © Grigory Dukor If Mueller investigation sends official request to question suspects, Russia will do that - Putin

The announcement follows hot on the heels of a proposal made by Vladimir Putin during his press conference with Donald Trump in Helsinki on Monday, in which he offered to "meet US authorities half-way" and allow the Mueller investigation into Moscow's election meddling to interview suspects in Russia, "on the condition" that Russian investigators could speak to suspects in the Browder investigation. Russia has previously tried to extradite Browder and gain access to others, but without success, though the businessman was briefly arrested in Spain in May, before being set free.

"Realizing that the Russian prosecutors wouldn't let go off him easily, Browder has tried to cultivate connections with political influencers in in the US, and this can be seen through the Ziff brothers, and their support for the Democratic Party in the last election," said Kurennoy, explaining the intertwining of business and politics that has led to the current investigation.

Browder has responded to Putin's words in the Washington Post, claiming that the Russian leader's offer meant he was "rattled" by Browder's accusations of corruption against Moscow officials.

US-born Browder made a fortune as an investor in Russia, starting in the 1990s, but was barred from entering the country in 2005, and has since become an arch-critic of the Kremlin. His allegations over the treatment of one of his staff, Sergei Magnitsky, while in custody, led to the sanctioning of select Moscow officials in the 2012 Magnitsky Act, but the legislation has since been expanded and can be applied to any foreign official, who is deemed to have violated human rights.

Browder was convicted in Russia in absentia in 2013 for fraud and tax evasion, and again, at the end of last year.

The 54-year old investor has also been a prominent voice in the Mueller investigation itself, though it does not concern him directly, and he submitted a scathing testimony about Russia to the US Senate a year ago.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Jul 18, 2018] Grand Deception The Truth About Bill Browder, the Magnitsky Act and Anti-Russian Sanctions by Alex Krainer

Jul 18, 2018 | www.amazon.com

In 2015, Bill Browder published Red Notice - purportedly a true story about his experience in Russia between 1996 and 2005. Upon closer scrutiny however, his story doesn't add up and demonstrably fails to stand up in a court of law. Nonetheless, on the dubious strength of that story, Browder has been able to lobby the U.S. Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act in 2012 which needlessly damaged the relations between the U.S. and Russia. Where he failed in courts of law, however, his campaign of relentless demonization of Russia and of Vladimir Putin has been successful in the court of public opinion in the West. As humanity finds itself on the precipice of yet another great war, what we need are bridges of mutual understanding and constructive engagement, not demonization. This book's modest hope is to contribute to the construction of those bridges.

"I consider [this] book as a must read for any person trying to understand modern Russia and where the new Cold War with Russia came from. ... Krainer offers us the truth and truly shows us how deep the rabbit hole goes. ... Get the book, read it, and then give it to your friends. This is one of the most important books to have come out in the recent years (and an excellent read too!)." --The Saker

"True to form, Alex brings to life the shenanigans and the deception of those who have gone out of their way to stay in the shadows, in this gripping true-life-detective non-fiction thriller." --Daniel Estulin, author of The True Story of the Bilderberg Group

"Krainer's book is an indispensable contribution to understanding the connection between the looting of Russia during the disastrous shock therapy of the Yeltsin years, and the dangerous anti-Russian provocations of today. His insight into the duplicitous role of Bill Browder provides compelling evidence of how unscrupulous greed can lead to much larger crimes." --Harley Schlanger, Schiller Institute

A commodities trader and hedge fund manager by day, Alex Krainer took up writing in an effort to uncover the truth about the pressing social, economic and political issues of the day, and share it broadly with the public. He was born in Croatia, one of the republics of former Yugoslavia, to a Croatian father and a Serbian mother. As a young man in the 1990s he lived through the downfall of the 'Communist Bloc' and served in the Croatian Army during the war in that country. Having observed first-hand the events that led to the destructive and tragic wars in former Yugoslavia, he believes that truth is the single most important requirement needed to preserve peace. This book represents Alex's personal endeavor to contribute an important element of truth toward a peaceful resolution of the dangerous yet needless new Cold War between the United States and Russia so that the relations between these two great nations may develop in the spirit of friendship, mutual cooperation and widespread prosperity.

You can visit Alex's blog at thenakedhedgie.com and the website for this book at thirdalliance.ch.

[Jul 18, 2018] The Killing of William Browder Deconstructing Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception by Alex Krainer

The book is delisted. You can read it at https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKilli free pdf download 218 pages
Jul 18, 2018 | www.amazon.com

David Gortner on April 27, 2018

Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately ...

The book does make a compelling case against much of Browder's version of events in Russia over the years from the fall of the USSR through most of Putin's time as leader of Russia. But there is nothing about democracy in Russia since Putin came to power. How is democracy left out of the equation? Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately afterward but there is no appearance of anything like democracy. We have seen nothing in the leadership of Russia; only Putin since 2000 (alternating with Medvedev). Read more

Darth Nerd on August 31, 2017

Very import to look behind the scenes of the demonization of Russia!

I agree with the reviews posted prior to mine. I only want to add that I feel it is extremely important that Browder's tale, which is based on his word only, be countered. It amazes me how many have swallowed Browder's (and his backers) bait. Alex Krainer shows that there is probably a hook hidden by the bait. The demonization of Putin and Russia seems to me very, very dangerous, and as best I can tell it's completely unfounded. This book shows that it is not only unfounded, it contradicts various facts.

I bought this book because of the news that Browder was blocking distribution and screening of Andrei Nekrasov"s documentary "The Magnitsky Act. Behind the Scenes".

This made me very suspicious that Browder has something to hide. If Nekrasov's documentary is untruthful I feel it would be much better to let it be distributed and then counter it with evidence than with legal bullying and other means to prevent it's distribution.

This book strongly reinforced my suspicions.

Avery on September 16, 2017
Needs a read

This book starts off slow, but the more you read, the more you will realize the menacing extent of Browder's deception. Krainer describes how Browder built a web of deception and lies in order to paint Russia as an evil place and America's enemy. Browder's book preys on America's wounded sense of global supremacy and casts the US as a victim in a country where we served as predators. Anyone who read Browder's book should read this one for sure.

Dostoyevsky on October 25, 2017
Things are not what they seem to be in the USA

A highly intelligent, frank and entertaining take-down of one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the US public and the world - The Magnitsky Act.

The Bill Browder of the title, who has positioned himself both as victim and champion of the downtrodden is revealed as anything but that.
The picture painted of a vulture/hedge fund manager who took advantage of the lawlessness of the Yeltsin years to steal from the poorest of the poor of a broken USSR is chilling.

Browder's carefully cultivated and paid for image in the West (he was planning a movie about himself with the Weinstein brothers) is so at odds with the reality exposed here as to make up a kind of horror story effect out of Bram Stoker. Yet the way Alex Krainer tells it is both compelling and convincing. The thing is, no one else has looked at Browder's story critically. It was accepted as fact, with no corroboration of any sort, by a gullible, and probably complicit, US political establishment.

An even more terrifying question raised by the very existence of this book is: What was the interest of the US Senate and Congress in unquestionably believing this 'scheister,' Bill Browder, and using his outlandish and unsubstantiated claims to restart the Cold War and bring us to the brink of nuclear confrontation?

Get the book while you can. As with a documentary about him by Nekrasov, called 'The Magnitsky Act - Behind the Scenes,' Browder has armies of lawyers trying to squelch any information coming out about him and the events he fabricated. Understandably, since the story he told is so shabby and full of holes that any light cast on it at all begins to crumble the fabric of it.

Mark Boberg on October 23, 2017
Every Concerned American Should read this, then make up his or her own mind!

An interesting alternative view of Russia, Russia's President Vladimir Putin, and Bill Browder. Something every concerned American should read and consider, and then make up his or her own mind. Also some really good background on events in Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union and the subsequent rise and popularity of Pres. Putin.

His explanation of the Deflationary Gap in the Appendix helped to clarify several related ideas that I have picked up or thought of in the past,but never put together clearly the way Mr.Krainer does.

Roman on August 22, 2017
Riveting Expose of one of the Century's Big Hoaxes.

Alex Krainer's second book, "Killing of William Browder: Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception" is a meticulously scrupulous research of a fascinating tale whose protagonist has all the traits of a fiendish movie villain. Needless to point out, in the cacophonic pandemonium of relentless anti-Russian propaganda that permeates both political and mass-media scene in the West throughout 2017, Bill Browder, by trade a vulture investor, is depicted as akin to a holy warrior against the Devil himself, the Russian president Vladimir Putin.

In our increasingly insane world a fascinating tale of William Browder's role in pushing the Magnitsky Act, that was passed in the U.S. Senate in order "to punish those suspected of being involved in the death of Russian tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky," might have eluded you. The Magnitsky Act that has passed the Congress on 3rd of January, 2012 resulted in blacklisting of five Russian nationals on 9th of January, 2017 and elevated Bill Browder, at least in his own eyes, to the status of a global human rights activist.

Enters "Killing of William Browder: Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception" and shatters that delusion. Krainer mercilessly dissects Browder's tale in the most minute details and, as he examines Browder's numerous statements, he portrays Browder as he truly is: not a magnanimous human rights champion but rather a wicked purveyor of (other man's) tragedy and salesman of (his own) self-aggrandizing fantasies. Bill Browder seems to me as a somehow cartoonish villain who makes us chuckle even while we shudder.

Krainer writing possesses a great sense of drama and a fine sense of irony. His book reads like a horrific thriller sprinkled with taunting humor. Even when he excoriates Browder's own "Red Notice" and his posing, he does it with penetrating wit: "Browder didn't neglect to throw in more ugly smears on Russia and the Russian people. He assures us that – 'Most Russians don't operate on high-minded principles Everything in Russia was about money. Making it, keeping it and making sure no one took it ' – (that) stands in stark contrast with Bill Browder and his goodfellas who did everything they did out of selfless desire to make the world a better place."

Krainer's study of Bill Browder's book and actions is a riveting, unflinching expose of what might end up being pivotal in revealing one of this decade's big hoaxes.

"Killing of William Browder: Bill Browder's Dangerous Deception" is a monumental work of an extraordinary skilled writer who pulls no punches as he bravely swims upstream.

darbycook on October 4, 2017
Who knew I'd like a subject matter this dry

Who knew I'd like a subject matter this dry, but I found myself LMFAO so many times I can't keep count. Beautifully done, Mr. Krainer!

Y. on September 29, 2017
Must read!

Well researched. Insightful and thought provoking

Amazon Customer on August 30, 2017
Excellent!

A well researched and interesting read. Recommended for those that would like to understand much more of the browder myth.

David Gortner on April 27, 2018
Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately ...

The book does make a compelling case against much of Browder's version of events in Russia over the years from the fall of the USSR through most of Putin's time as leader of Russia. But there is nothing about democracy in Russia since Putin came to power. How is democracy left out of the equation? Russia may be in much better shape economically now than during the 1990s and immediately afterward but there is no appearance of anything like democracy. We have seen nothing in the leadership of Russia; only Putin since 2000 (alternating with Medvedev).

Daniel Good on December 30, 2017
It is amazing that Browder has been able to prevent the showing ...

It is amazing that Browder has been able to prevent the showing of an important documentary by Andrei Nekrasov on the Magnitsky Act and also prevent the distribution on the Amazon site of this excellent well written intelligent exposé of the fraud perpetrated by him. One wonders who is behind Browder that gives him such power and influence.

Who should Browder fear more: those who are supporting him or Vladimir Putin?

In this book, unavailable on Amazon, can be found:

1. one of the best summaries of the Yeltsin years;

2. a useful review of US-Russia relations in the XIX century; 3. a counter-view of the personality of V.V. Putin; 4. copious footnotes and a very valuable bibliography; 5. a deconstruction of William Browder's thriller, Red Notice.

Only the people who make those decision at Amazon know why the book is not available on their site.

[Jul 18, 2018] From what I know of Browder, he went to Russia in the 90's. Ten years later he owned a good chunk of Russian oil and other assets and pulling in profits of around $125 million per year.

See https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKilli free pdf download 218 pages
Jul 18, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

This book by Alex Krainer has been delisted by amazon Pft , Jul 17, 2018 11:30:45 PM | 183

I need to read this book by alex krainerthats which has been delisted by amazon. I bet Bill Browder is not a fan

http://mikenormaneconomics.blogspot.com/2017/08/deconstructing-bill-browders-dangerous.html?m=1

[Jul 18, 2018] Putin handed Trump a means of openly investigating Killary s/CIA s manipulation of US politics via the Browder investigation, the crime of manipulating the DNC to remove Bernie can also loop into the mix

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Boing_Snap -> eclectic syncretist Tue, 07/17/2018 - 09:43 Permalink

Putin handed Trump a means of openly investigating Killary's/CIA's manipulation of US politics via the Browder investigation, the crime of manipulating the DNC to remove Bernie can also loop into the mix.

Let's hope Trump follows through and exposes the nest of vipers. The majority of people are now seeing the light, only the people with skin the game or those far too controlled through an excellent propaganda/mass mind control experiment do not.

Edward Bernays and Joseph Goebels could only dream that their methods would go this far.

"But being dependent, every day of the year and for year after year, upon certain politicians for news, the newspaper reporters are obliged to work in harmony with their news sources."
Edward L. Bernays , Propaganda

[Jul 18, 2018] Putin certainly didn't pluck that lying idiot's name randomly

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

RationalLuddite -> overbet Mon, 07/16/2018 - 18:37 Permalink

+50 Overbet. I posted before i read yours. I have tired of trying to convince people that 90s Russia and the thefts then and subsequent covering of crimes is STILL the key to understanding the Deep States obsession and fear of Putin and Russia. Soros, Clinton's, Chubias, the FED's off the books money printing, London money laundering , EU buying the stolen movables etc - they are all there. Browder's animus is also driving much behind the scenes with 'Russiagate'. Look people - you will see. Putin certainly didn't pluck that lying idiot's name randomly.

I urge people to at least read the 90s chapter in the Killing of William Browder (free online PDF) to begin to understand what is going on now.

shrimpythai -> RationalLuddite Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:34 Permalink

https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/TheKilli free pdf download 218 pages

RationalLuddite -> shrimpythai Mon, 07/16/2018 - 19:44 Permalink

Thanks heaps Shrimp.

The appendix on Jacob Rothschild alone and Yukos makes it worth the read. But if you read nothing else, read the chapters on Browder's interrogation and Russia in the 1990s - easy reads and give a great introduction to this orgy of psycopathy and mendacity. They are all connected

[Jul 17, 2018] Browder admitting Sergei Magnicky was not a lawyer. He was an accountant who was stealing money with shitbag Bill Browder.

Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Thordoom -> onewayticket2 Mon, 07/16/2018 - 17:31 Permalink

Everybody should watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pu9DMxfTGhY Billy boy admitting Sergei Magnicky was not a lawyer. He was an accountant who was stealing money with shitbag Bill Browder.

[Jul 17, 2018] I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn t hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked.

Highly recommended!
Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

NumNutt -> 847328_3527 Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:41 Permalink

I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn't hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked. If you follow the money a lot of what happened during the election and afterwards in regards to Russia and Trump start to make sense. Could it be that we are finally witnessing the removal the last layers of the center of the onion?

[Jul 17, 2018] Deep State agent Bill Browder operated at the very nexus of the US and UK Intelligence Communities that conspired to produce both the fake Russiagate and very real Spygate

Jul 17, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Super Sleuth -> css1971 Tue, 07/17/2018 - 13:55 Permalink

BILL BROWDER: The CIA Asset and Neocon Zionist Who Was Used to Restart the Cold War with Russia

---

http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=101126

" Deep State agent Bill Browder operated at the very nexus of the U.S. and U.K. Intelligence Communities that conspired to produce both the fake Russiagate and very real Spygate ."

-- Intelligence Analyst & Former Military Officer

Creative_Destruct -> King of Ruperts Land Tue, 07/17/2018 - 10:23 Permalink

" The US fabricated evidence to start the Vietnam war and the US fabricated WMD talk on the second war in Iraq. US intelligence had no idea the Berlin Wall was about to fall. The US meddled in Russia supporting a drunk named Yeltsin because we erroneously thought we could control him."

YUP! AMEN.

It's amusing to me that the Leftist's NOW have a blind-faith trust in government, whereas during the Vietnam war, and at the start of the Iraq war the opposite was (justifiably) the case.

And remember, the [neoliberal] Left was all OVER how we manipulated Russia into an Oligarchy:

https://www.thenation.com/article/harvard-boys-do-russia/

Boing_Snap -> eclectic syncretist Tue, 07/17/2018 - 09:43 Permalink

Putin handed Trump a means of openly investigating Killary's/CIA's manipulation of US politics via the Browder investigation, the crime of manipulating the DNC to remove Bernie can also loop into the mix.

Let's hope Trump follows through and exposes the nest of vipers. The majority of people are now seeing the light, only the people with skin the game or those far too controlled through an excellent propaganda/mass mind control experiment do not.

Edward Bernays and Joseph Goebels could only dream that their methods would go this far.

"But being dependent, every day of the year and for year after year, upon certain politicians for news, the newspaper reporters are obliged to work in harmony with their news sources."
Edward L. Bernays , Propaganda

Boing_Snap -> eclectic syncretist Tue, 07/17/2018 - 09:43 Permalink

Putin handed Trump a means of openly investigating Killary's/CIA's manipulation of US politics via the Browder investigation, the crime of manipulating the DNC to remove Bernie can also loop into the mix.

Let's hope Trump follows through and exposes the nest of vipers. The majority of people are now seeing the light, only the people with skin the game or those far too controlled through an excellent propaganda/mass mind control experiment do not.

Edward Bernays and Joseph Goebels could only dream that their methods would go this far.

"But being dependent, every day of the year and for year after year, upon certain politicians for news, the newspaper reporters are obliged to work in harmony with their news sources."
Edward L. Bernays , Propaganda

wafm -> NumberNone Tue, 07/17/2018 - 11:24 Permalink

Unless Herr fuckin Mueller comes up with some damn FUCKIN PROOF, and SOON, he should hang.

Browder IS a major scumbag and there is plenty of fuckin proof of that. Putin knows. 400 millions to the Clinton campaign. The sooner she fuckin hangs the better.

[Jul 16, 2018] Putin Claims U.S. Intelligence Agents Funneled $400K To Clinton Campaign Zero Hedge

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... For instance, we can bring up Mr. Browder, in this particular case. Business associates of Mr. Browder have earned over $1.5 billion in Russia and never paid any taxes neither in Russia or the United States and yet the money escaped the country. They were transferred to the United States. They sent [a] huge amount of money, $400,000,000, as a contribution to the campaign of Hillary Clinton. Well that's their personal case. ..."
"... we have solid reason to believe that some [US] intelligence officers accompanied and guided these transactions. So we have an interest in questioning them. ..."
"... Browder is notoriously the man behind the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which exploited Congressional willingness to demonize Russia and has done so much to poison relations between Washington and Moscow. ..."
"... Browder, a media favorite who self-promotes as "Putin's enemy #1," portrays himself as a selfless human rights advocate, but is he? He has used his fortune to threaten lawsuits for anyone who challenges his version of events, effectively silencing many critics. He claims that his accountant Sergei Magnitsky was a crusading "lawyer" who discovered a $230 million tax-fraud scheme that involved the Browder business interest Hermitage Capital but was, in fact, engineered by corrupt Russian police officers who arrested Magnitsky and enabled his death in a Russian jail. ..."
"... William Browder is again in the news recently in connection with testimony related to Russiagate. On December 16th Senator Diane Feinstein of the Senate Judiciary Committee released the transcript of the testimony provided by Glenn Simpson, founder of Fusion GPS. According to James Carden, Browder was mentioned 50 times, but the repeated citations apparently did not merit inclusion in media coverage of the story by the New York Times, Washington Post and Politico. ..."
Jul 16, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

07/16/2018

Vladimir Putin made a bombshell claim during Monday's joint press conference with President Trump in Helsinki, Finland, when the Russian President said some $400 million )should be $400K) in illegally earned profits was funneled to the Clinton campaign by associates of American-born British financier Bill Browder - at one time the largest foreign portfolio investors in Russia. The scheme involved members of the U.S. intelligence community, said Putin, who he said "accompanied and guided these transactions."

Browder made billions in Russia during the 90's. In December, a Moscow court sentenced Browder in absentia to nine years in prison for tax fraud, while he was also found guilty of tax evasion in a separate 2013 case. Putin accused Browder's associates of illegally earning over than $1.5 billion without paying Russian taxes, before sending $400 million to Clinton. After offering to allow special counsel Robert Mueller's team to come to Russia for their investigation - as long as there was a reciprocal arrangement for Russian intelligence to investigate in the U.S., Putin said this:

For instance, we can bring up Mr. Browder, in this particular case. Business associates of Mr. Browder have earned over $1.5 billion in Russia and never paid any taxes neither in Russia or the United States and yet the money escaped the country. They were transferred to the United States. They sent [a] huge amount of money, $400,000,000, as a contribution to the campaign of Hillary Clinton. Well that's their personal case.

It might have been legal, the contribution itself but the way the money was earned was illegal. So we have solid reason to believe that some [US] intelligence officers accompanied and guided these transactions. So we have an interest in questioning them.

From a report we noted in February by Philip Giraldi of The Strategic Culture Foundation :

Israel Shamir, a keen observer of the American-Russian relationship, and celebrated American journalist Robert Parry both think that one man deserves much of the credit for the new Cold War and that man is William Browder, a hedge fund operator who made his fortune in the corrupt 1990s world of Russian commodities trading.

Browder is also symptomatic of why the United States government is so poorly informed about international developments as he is the source of much of the Congressional "expert testimony" contributing to the current impasse. He has somehow emerged as a trusted source in spite of the fact that he has self-interest in cultivating a certain outcome. Also ignored is his renunciation of American citizenship in 1998, reportedly to avoid taxes. He is now a British citizen.

Browder is notoriously the man behind the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which exploited Congressional willingness to demonize Russia and has done so much to poison relations between Washington and Moscow. The Act sanctioned individual Russian officials, which Moscow has rightly seen as unwarranted interference in the operation of its judicial system.

Browder, a media favorite who self-promotes as "Putin's enemy #1," portrays himself as a selfless human rights advocate, but is he? He has used his fortune to threaten lawsuits for anyone who challenges his version of events, effectively silencing many critics. He claims that his accountant Sergei Magnitsky was a crusading "lawyer" who discovered a $230 million tax-fraud scheme that involved the Browder business interest Hermitage Capital but was, in fact, engineered by corrupt Russian police officers who arrested Magnitsky and enabled his death in a Russian jail.

Many have been skeptical of the Browder narrative, suspecting that the fraud was in fact concocted by Browder and his accountant Magnitsky. A Russian court recently supported that alternative narrative, ruling in late December that Browder had deliberately bankrupted his company and engaged in tax evasion. He was sentenced to nine years prison in absentia.

William Browder is again in the news recently in connection with testimony related to Russiagate. On December 16th Senator Diane Feinstein of the Senate Judiciary Committee released the transcript of the testimony provided by Glenn Simpson, founder of Fusion GPS. According to James Carden, Browder was mentioned 50 times, but the repeated citations apparently did not merit inclusion in media coverage of the story by the New York Times, Washington Post and Politico.

Fusion GPS, which was involved in the research producing the Steele Dossier used to discredit Donald Trump, was also retained to provide investigative services relating to a lawsuit in New York City involving a Russian company called Prevezon. As information provided by Browder was the basis of the lawsuit, his company and business practices while in Russia became part of the investigation. Simmons maintained that Browder proved to be somewhat evasive and his accounts of his activities were inconsistent. He claimed never to visit the United States and not own property or do business there, all of which were untrue, to include his ownership through a shell company of a $10 million house in Aspen Colorado. He repeatedly ran away , literally, from attempts to subpoena him so he would have to testify under oath.

Per Simmons, in Russia, Browder used shell companies locally and also worldwide to avoid taxes and conceal ownership, suggesting that he was likely one of many corrupt businessmen operating in what was a wild west business environment.

My question is, "Why was such a man granted credibility and allowed a free run to poison the vitally important US-Russia relationship?" The answer might be follow the money. Israel Shamir reports that Browder was a major contributor to Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, who was the major force behind the Magnitsky Act.

[Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder , search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions

Highly recommended!
Jul 03, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Recently came across the following article written by F. William Engdahl in 1996 which might be of interest to some here:

The secret financial network behind "wizard" George Soros

The last page of the above article can be found here:

Soros's looting of Ibero-America

Posted by: integer | Jul 2, 2018 4:49:45 AM | 35

[Jun 27, 2018] Crawfurdmuir

Jun 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

says: June 5, 2018 at 3:50 pm GMT 100 Words

The Communist diaspora in Europe and America was also largely Jewish, including the cabal of founders of neoconservativism in New York City. The United States Communist Party was from the start predominantly Jewish. It was in the 1930s headed by Jew Earl Browder, grandfather of the current snake oil salesman Bill Browder, who has been sanctimoniously proclaiming his desire to punish Vladimir Putin for various alleged high crimes.

Earl Browder was not, so far as I know, born a Jew. While living in the Soviet Union he married a Russian Jewess named Raisa Berkman. One of their sons, Felix, married another Jewess, Eva Tislowitz, and Bill Browder was their son. He is matrilineally Jewish.

Apart from this minor quibble, the description of Bill Browder's career seems quite accurate.

[Mar 16, 2018] And now that Berezovsky is dead who is more dodgy than his comrade-in-arms Bill Browder whose spectral image keeps flickering in the background of this whole Russiagate hysteria.

Notable quotes:
"... And now that Berezovsky is dead who is more dodgy than his comrade-in-arms Bill Browder whose spectral image keeps flickering in the background of this whole Russiagate hysteria. This is the same Bill Browder who has already succeeded in poisoning relations between Russia and the West with his successful lobbying for the Magnetsky Act. He succeeded despite strong objections from the Obama administration which, at that time, was attempting a reset in relations with Russia. In other words Browder had more of an impact in the shaping American foreign policy vis-a-vis Russia than Obama and his State Dept. ..."
"... Browder has been the driving force behind the implementation of the so-called Magnetsky Amendment into the Criminal Finances bill, which has been making its way through Parliament since December. It has been met with some resistance. ..."
"... In the American edition of Russiagate one also gets glimpses of Browder's machinations. In August in testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Glenn Simpson, a Fusion co-founder (Fusion had hired Christopher Steele), testified that Browder "was willing to, you know, hand stuff off to the DOJ anonymously in the beginning and cause them to launch a court case against somebody ," but that he wasn't interested "in speaking under oath about, you know, why he did that, his own activities in Russia." ..."
"... Which begs the question of whether Browder was covertly involved in the production and dissemination of the infamous Steele dossier. ..."
Mar 16, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

pantaraxia | Mar 15, 2018 4:45:16 PM | 133

@38 Mina
Concluding statment from the article:

"Perhaps it is time to realise that if your country becomes a haven for dodgy people like Berezovsky then dodgy things are likely to happen."

And now that Berezovsky is dead who is more dodgy than his comrade-in-arms Bill Browder whose spectral image keeps flickering in the background of this whole Russiagate hysteria. This is the same Bill Browder who has already succeeded in poisoning relations between Russia and the West with his successful lobbying for the Magnetsky Act. He succeeded despite strong objections from the Obama administration which, at that time, was attempting a reset in relations with Russia. In other words Browder had more of an impact in the shaping American foreign policy vis-a-vis Russia than Obama and his State Dept.

In what turns out to be an onimous bit of foreshdowing, a November 2017 Vesti news report on Bill Browder concluded with "...( Browder) will speak in the British Parliament to convince lawmakers to increase sanctions against Russia". (h/t to integer from previous thread) And in an uncanny coincidence the Skripals are poisoned shortly before Browder began giving testimony to a UK Commons select committee where he stated it was a "Kremlin hit" and "I believe they want to kill me. They haven't figured out a way yet where they can kill me and get away with it." As The Times put it: "Since he said that, suspicions have deepened that the Russian state was behind the poisoning..."

Browder has been the driving force behind the implementation of the so-called Magnetsky Amendment into the Criminal Finances bill, which has been making its way through Parliament since December. It has been met with some resistance.

From the Financial Times:

MPs to vote on Magnitsky human rights amendment
https://www.ft.com/content/d1aabfd8-b890-11e6-961e-a1acd97f622d

"A "Magnitsky Amendment"...has been added to the Criminal Finances bill, which aims to clamp down on money-laundering and terror financing.

and
...the initiative could strain Britain's relations with Moscow,...at a time when prime minister Theresa May has said she is open to improving ties.

and
...successive British governments have resisted efforts by Mr Browder's campaign to persuade them to introduce legislation.


Now, as a consequence of the Skripal poisoning, not only are new sanctions imposed on Russia but according to The Telegraph:

"The attempted murder of a former Russian spy in Salisbury has given fresh impetus to plans to introduce a UK version of the so-called "Magnitsky Act"....Senior Conservatives campaigning for the move said ministers had agreed to implement "Magnitsky amendments" into the Sanctions Bill currently in the Commons."


So game, set and match. Coincidence???

In the American edition of Russiagate one also gets glimpses of Browder's machinations. In August in testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Glenn Simpson, a Fusion co-founder (Fusion had hired Christopher Steele), testified that Browder "was willing to, you know, hand stuff off to the DOJ anonymously in the beginning and cause them to launch a court case against somebody ," but that he wasn't interested "in speaking under oath about, you know, why he did that, his own activities in Russia."

Which begs the question of whether Browder was covertly involved in the production and dissemination of the infamous Steele dossier.

[Mar 10, 2018] From Yeltsin to Putin: Chubais, Liberal Pathology, and Harvard's Criminal Record

Highly recommended!
Mar 10, 2018 | www.rusjournal.org

From Yeltsin to Putin: Chubais, Liberal Pathology, and Harvard's Criminal Record

Matthew Raphael Johnson

Johnstown, PAWhen the USSR collapsed in 1990-1991, Gorbachev was incapable of handling thesituation. Boris Yeltsin came to power both bureaucratically and popularly. He was named theChief of the Presidium, but in June of 1991, he was elected in a popular election where heearned 57% of the popular vote.

With a small army of American advisers, Yeltsin began selling off Soviet era assets.The problem was that the process had nothing to do with markets. Privatization of assets wentto a handful of well-connected politicians and bureaucrats who came to control the economyas a whole.1 They had amassed a huge number of shares by 1995, and hence, the post-Sovietoligarchy was born. The fact is that the work of 70 years of Soviet labor went to the pocketsof two or three dozen people.2

The rising oligarchs could easily manipulate the court system and tax police, sincethere was no real law governing private enterprise. Russia was led to the brink of anarchy. By1998, according to a paper by Sergei Guriev and Andrei Rachinsky, the oligarchs comprisedabout 700 individuals that completely controlled Russia's economic assets.3

The Western Elites and the Ivy League as a Criminal Syndicate

In NS Leonov's book (only in Russian), The Way of the Cross: Russia from 1991-2000, he states, as the first "reform" of Yeltsin's government :

Government "reforms" that began Gaidar's privatization scam was the seizure of the savings of the people. These were taken by force, though not directly. Inflation and economic collapse made the transfer of funds easy. State control was removed from prices and the "free market" would ensure the enrichment of corruption. This was the level of cynicism the new democracy had reached, while simultaneously preaching the sanctity of private property. What did not melt away in the deliberate fleecing of the people was taken by other means. An estimate of the total taken thisway is about 300 billion rubles, and it had the proper effect: without money, rebellion was difficult. They cried out in frustration.4

Nothing was done according to democratic norms, which is odd since democracy was the buzzword that made these economic decisions seem political. At almost no time in the history of the USSR did one man, Chubais and his allies, have such total and irresponsible control over the Russian economy. When the voucher program was introduced in 1992, massive inflation resulted. Soon, each 10,000 ruble voucher was worth very little. It was rendered null regardless, since the state refused to consider the vouchers as legal tender.

1 Hoffman, D. The Oligarchs: Wealth And Power In The New Russia. Public Affairs Books, 2011 (cf esp ch12).

2 Kotz, D.M. Russia's Financial Crisis: The Failure of Neoliberalism? Z Magazine, (1998), 28-32

3 Guriev, S. and Andrei Rachinsky. The Role of Oligarchs in Russian Capitalism. Journal of EconomicPerspectives, 19(1), (2005), 131-150 http://pages.nes.ru/sguriev/papers/GurievRachinsky.pdf

4 Leonov, NS. The Way of the Cross: Russia from 1991-2000. Moscow: Russia House, 2002 (All citations aremy translations from the Russian.

Making the entire scam even more blatant, Chubais inserted a rider to the law stating that the value of the voucher would only exist until late 1993. In 1992, Yeltsin's popularity went from 50% in January to 30% in August, and from there to single digits.

By July of 1992, Chubais was hated. This led Yeltsin to limit the power of parliament, increase his executive power and totally dominate the regions. This was done with western backing and was a far greater centralization of power than Putin was later to be condemned for. He had already banned the Communist Party, helping to break his main opposition and prevent their imminent reelection in Parliament. The fraud of democracy was clearly open.

Soon Chubais and his crew stated that there was no benchmark value for any sold property. The institution in charge of this, the Russian Federal Property Fund and related agencies, therefore, began from arbitrary benchmarks. Ultimately, major firms were being sold for 1-5% of their value. Worse, some of these were defense plants, bought up by shallcompanies operates by the CIA – this was Hay's job. Therefore, scientific advances of the USSR were now entirely in American hands.

In 1992, Yeltsin did fairly well in a referendum, receiving about 50% approval, but at this date, privatization had just begun. Elections a bit later were to belie this vote. Yeltsin himself clearly had no confidence in this referendum. Having no confidence in that vote, Yeltsin then, again with western backing, banned all opposition protests in Moscow. Then, making matters worse, he signed order 1400 in September of 1993 which stripped the Congress of People's Deputies of all power. For the upcoming elections, Yeltsin passed a law saying that only 25% of voters needed to show for it to be valid. This was a means of making sure that opposition boycotts could not win. Yeltsin soon after banned the main opposition newspaper.

Russia's privatization scam was created, directed and imposed by Harvard University and carried out by two "professors" whose incompetence is rivaled only by their lack of accountability. Anatoly Chubais, probably the most hated man in Russia, was an old friend of Harvard "economist" Andrei Shleifer, who was also working with Harvard don Jonathan Hay (who according to the FSB, is CIA). Chubais, functioning as a Russian dictator since Yeltsin was not functional at the time, put the privatization scheme into Harvard's hands. Apparently having no workable knowledge of Russian life, the Harvard elite, believing themselves infallible, quickly proved their theories not only false, but directly responsible for ruining thelives of millions.5

1994-1995 was the period of the solidification of the oligarchic clans, their connection with the United States, and the complete collapse of the state. Oligarchic clans, created by Chubais, filled the vacuum with private armies, political machines and newspapers. In the US, conservative and liberal alike called this the "free market" and democracy. Vladimir Zhirinovsky, of Jewish origin and endlessly changing political positions, became the government's ace in the hole: whenever the US questioned the increasingly obvious destruction of Russia, Yeltsin would trot this clown out to make some typically outrageous statement. In 1995, it was clear that Zhirinovsky both "loved Hitler" and was "proud" of Russia's victory in the Great Patriotic War. Clearly in the pocket of Yeltsin, Zhirinovsky a)kept US aid money coming into his efforts, b) siphoned off serious criticism, c) easily associated nationalist views with this kind of rhetorical nonsense.

Chubais continued to hang onto power. Not being a Russian citizen (and yet having all that power), he clearly equated the oligarchic clans as "democracy." In Davos, 1996, he met with the heads of all the clans including Guzinsky, Berezovsky, Khodorkovsky, Friedman, Potanin and many others, and formed a political movement designed to keep nationalist and communists out of power.

5 McClintick, D. How Harvard Lost Russia. Institutional Investor, 2006. http://www.institutionalinvestor.com/Article/1020662/How-Harvard-lost-Russia.html?ArticleId=1020662&single=true#.UY7blLWG2So

This move shows that Chubais backed the oligarchs, did not consider them "unintended consequences" and sought their assistance to stay in power: All in the name of democracy.

Yeltsin, now at 3% (with the same margin of error) began to implement populist measures, but now was isolated. Winning a strangely high 33% of the vote in the 1996 elections, it can only be attributed to a) electoral fraud, or b) the fact that Gen. Alexander Lebed had been talked into entering a sort of coalition with Yeltsin. If they won, then Lebed's rival Pavel Grachev, would be history. Yeltsin won the second round with just over 50%, as the oligarchs and Chubais personally spend a small fortune bribing artists, journalists, writers and, making an even worse mockery of democracy, busing thousands of urban youth into Moscow to ensure their support.

Harvard's Sinister Role

Harvard University spent quite a bit of its money to restructure Russia. The US government sued some of them, specifically, Andrei Shleifer, for breach of contract. Many economists from Harvard worked for the State Department so as to be able to control Russia for the better. The fraud of the Russian economy was in part blamed on these advisers, whowere forced to pay more than $31 million to the US government for "conspiracy to defraud."

Harvard had authored the plan that Gorbachev had requested to turn Russia into a capitalist state. This was the plan that was enacted. The Harvard Institute for International Development in Russia was the group created at Harvard and sponsored by the US government. This is what was sued over. The US government argued that the reform program was a failure, and the planners, living in America, knew it was a failure and continued to defend it – with taxpayer money. Even worse, as it turns out, Shleifer was rigging some of the auctions himself, investing his own money in firms that he knew would turn a profit, even if overseas.

The US Justice Department in 2000 sued, among others, Shleifer and Hay for defrauding the US government. The Justice Department stated:

The United States alleges that Defendants' actions undercut the fundamental purpose of the United States' program in Russia -- the creation of trust and confidence in the emerging Russian financial markets and the promotion of openness, transparency, the rule of law, and fair play in the development of theRussian economy and laws.6

Since they were using $40 million in taxpayer money, the cold-blooded desolation of Russia implicated the US. The civil lawsuit argued, to simplify, that Harvard's economists, especially Shleifer (and his wife), was investing taxpayer money in Russian companies about which they were giving financial advice. Harvard admitted guilt in the form of a $25 million settlement. How much of this assisted their victims in Russia is not known.7

In response to the suit, lawyers for Shleifer and his co-conspirator, Jonathan Hay, sneered to the press: "We are confident that, as the civil case unfolds, the court will confirm that the Harvard program significantly fostered Russian reform and that the government received its money's worth." As it turns out, even their lawyers did not believe this, since their defense rested, not on the denial that conflict of interest existed, but that they were never bound by such ethical rules.8

6 "United States of America, Plaintiff v. the President and Fellows of Harvard College, Andrei Shleifer, Jonathan Hay, Nancy Zimmerman, and Elizabeth Hebert, Defendants" (2000)

7 His crimes and the full nature of the lawsuit and evidence can be found here: Wedel, J. Who Taught CronyCapitalism to Russia? How Harvard and the 'U.S. Government's Aid Agency became part of the RussianProblem. The Wall Street Journal Europe, March 19, 2001

In 2005, a federal judge found Shleifer guilty of professional fraud. The disgraced "professor" paid the US government $2 million, and his wife, operating yet another scam, settled out of court for $1.5 million. Harvard paid about $10 million in legal fees to defend their role in the starvation of Russia.9

For all that, Shleifer remains a celebrated professor at Harvard and the toast of academia worldwide. His academic stock has not suffered in theleast from this. Just as puzzling, Harvard suffered no diminution in prestige. This is especially puzzling in that ivy league scandals erupt seemingly on a daily basis. This Teflon world exists partly due to the protection of former Harvard President, World Bank economist and Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers, also a pivotal figure in the Russian fiasco.10

Summers is partly to blame for the American sub-prime mortgage disaster since hewas pivotal in removing many of the regulatory barriers that forbade predatory lendingpractices. Therefore, the execrable Summers is the co-author of not one but two national meltdowns. Summers, after being forced to resign from Harvard based on an unrelated set of sins,11 was quickly rehired as a "professor" by the government. Then, Summers became a leading figure in Obama's economic brain trust, was soon after appointed as part of the "oversight"panel for the UN's economic programs and became a member of the Group of 30, a highlyelite and secretive organization created by the Rockefeller family.

Like Summers and Shleifer, Chubais was also handsomely rewarded for his direct role in the Russian cataclysm. He was soon placed on the board of JP Morgan, and, to no one's surprise, was granted a seat on the ultra-elite Council on Foreign Relations, another powerful conclave within the Rockefeller cult.12

Summer's career, his almost comic legacy of failure and ignorance, and the criminal impoverishment of Russia (not to mention the 2007 US meltdown) wholly destroy the "elitestatus" of places like Harvard.13 This set of scandals, largely unknown to a bewildered and exhausted American public, shows the profound and pervasive putrescence of academia, especially in the Ivy leagues. It brought into question academic tenure, unearned salaries, and the famed academic insulation from consequences arising from their theories. The Harvard civil suit and all it entails demonstrates the incompetence of those paid to implement policy and their ability to get their hands on taxpayer money. It shows a reprehensible and reckless disregard for the welfare of others that is rewarded with academic posts, social prestige, ostentatious wealth and immense power.

It might be worth mentioning that the behavior patters of Chubais conforms almost perfectly to the Triarchic diagnostic model of psychopathy as developed by Skeem, et al in 2011. First, it is typified by a pathological arrogance. The victim has full confidence that he is above the law, or that the law only applies to others. Second, the victim shows an impulsive and anti-social temper that focuses only on short term gratification based on the lowest motives. Because of these two symptoms, the victim either does not perceive or does not have any restraints on his destructive behavior. Finally, and most significantly, the victim feels no remorse for the consequences of his actions. Other criteria related to these includeparasitic behavior, superficial charm, grandiosity, ingenious criminal ideas, and assertive narcissism.14 Yeltsin, quoted in Leonov's book, called Chubais "an absolute Bolshevik by temperament and mentality." The basic consensus about Chubais' behavior is that he cared little for construction, and only for destruction.

8 Seward, Z. Harvard To Pay $26.5 Million in HIID Settlement. Crimson, July 20059 The guilty verdict and settlement issues are summarized in the Crimson article above.

10 Finucane, M "Feds Sue Harvard over Russia Advisers." ABD News; also see Wedel, Janine R. The HarvardBoys Do Russia. The Nation, 2008; and "Larry Summers, Robert Rubin: Will The Harvard Shadow EliteBankrupt The University And The Country?" The Huffington Post, Jan 2010: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/harry-r-lewis/larry-summers-robert-rubi_b_419224.html

11 These had something to do with comments about intellectual differences between men and women. That this contrived controversy erupted just as Harvard was paying off the federal government is no coincidence.

12 Levy, Ari. Summers Joins Andreessen Horowitz as a Part-Time Adviser to Entrepreneurs. Bloomberg, June2011 and Greenwald, Glenn. Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Wall Street's ownership of government.Salon, 2009

13 As far as ivy league fraud and incompetence go, this is just one scandal out of hundreds.

The political lesson of this is unfortunate: the diagnostic criteria for criminal psychopathy are precisely the qualities required for success in big business and government. Even the best intentioned politician or businessman must display some combination of thesevices in order to successfully compete in these fields. What passes as virtue in libera lcapitalism is actually an undisguised form of mental illness.

Leonov speaks in more detail about his pathology:

Evil lurks in Chubais' colorless eyes. He arrogantly uses his supporters in public. Assertiveness and phony composure is his cynical way. Yeltsin was seen by him as merely manageable. Yeltsin was easy to manipulate due to his unpopularity. He did not have the intellectual wherewithal to fight back. He was compliant and signed anything on cue. He saw the Duma as mere formalism that can be bypassed. In reality, he just relied on Presidential decrees.

Of course, all of this in the name of democracy. Rather than deal with the fallout for the sins of others, Yeltsin did one excellent thing for Russia – appointed Vladimir Putin astemporary president on new year's eve, 1999. As was proper, Putin guaranteed Yeltsin immunity from prosecution, which meant he could no longer be used as a scapegoat. Putin, to make a long story very short, brought Russia from a GDP that was 98th in the world to 2014,where it is 8th. For the period 1991-1997, the transfer of wealth from Russia to the oligarchs was roughly $1.75 trillion. This was not "lost" to Russia, since wealth is not "lost." It merely changed hands. Under Chubais and Harvard, the economic contracted by almost 90%.

For all that, Yeltsin's party received 15% of the vote. With instructions from the US, Yeltsin, after this humiliation, created the idea of a "consensus document." The point is to create the illusion of agreement. Several western NGOs designed a position paper which supported "free market" reforms. Representatives of the new rich in Russia signed this document, which was then trumpeted as proof of social cohesion around Yeltsin.

Bernard Black et al, writing in 2009, described the devastation of this shock treatment for Russia and Ukraine in 1994:Russia's mass privatization. . . permitted insiders (managers and controlling shareholders) to engage in extensive "self" or "inside" dealing. . . which the government did nothing to control. Later privatization "auctions" were a massive giveaway of Russia's most important companies at bargain prices to a handful of well-connected "kleptocrats". . . Medium-term prospects are grim; the Russian ruble has plunged; the Russian government has defaulted on both its dollar denominated and ruble-denominated debt; most banks are bankrupt; corruption is rampant; tax revenues have collapsed; capital flight is pervasive; and the government (whomever the Prime Minister happens to be at the moment) seems clueless about what to do next.15

14 Skeem, JL, Polaschek, DLL, Patrick, CJ, and S Lilienfeld. Psychopathic Personality: Bridging the GapBetween Scientific Evidence and Public Policy. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 12 (3): 95–1622011

15 Black, et al, 1

This scheme represents one of the most luridly thoroughgoing, colossal and overwhelming failures in economic history. The role of the US government, international financial agencies and elite academia in this monumental disaster is well known. During the well publicized destruction and starvation of Russia, the British journal Euromoney named Chubais the "Worlds Greatest Finance Minister," as yet another means of displaying theelite's lack of accountability. In the Financial Times of 2004, A. Ostrovsky states "Chubais makes no excuses and feels no remorse over the most controversial privatization of all - the 'loans-for-shares' deal, in which he handed control of Russia's largest and most valuable assets to the group of tycoons [sic] in return for loans and support in the 1996 election for the then ailing Yeltsin."16

Once this became plain, the architects of the plan backed off, blaming everyone else for the issues. He writes in Foreign Affairs that the "Russian people" must vote for "democracy" in the 2000 elections. At the time, his own popularity was running about 2-3%. Hence, he did not mean "democracy" in the normal sense of the word. The real change was between 1994-1996. Here, the oligarchs were openly ruling with Yeltsin, who was often drunk and would disappear for weeks on end. It didn't matter. The oligarchs bought up most of the banks, then issued licenses to trade internationally that only they could have. As the government got desperate, the oligarchs stepped in and loaned Moscow the money to continue to function. Russian was not a "government" in any sense of the word. About 700 major families controlled almost the entire Russian economy and hence, the state as well.

The Results of the Scam

Government revenues went down by over 50% in this same time. Wages went down by about 75% by 1998. In 1992, the inflation rate was almost 1000%. Light industry, that is, the consumer sector, lost about 90% of its capital, the hardest hit sector of all. Machinery of all kinds fell by about 75%, meaning that 75% of the machines useful in the Russian economy had been liquidated (or were just not used) by 1998. The only thing that kept Russiaafloat was the black market.17

The state could no longer enforce its laws, and hence, men started not showing up for the draft. Republic after republics declared independence, to be immediately recognized by the US. So, what can we conclude here? Very few deny that Yeltsin was a failure, but a failure of the worst kind. This kind of economic destruction has never been seen before outside of warfare. Government revenues and expenditures collapsed, hence, an already bad infrastructure was made far worse. Believe it or not, from 1992-1999, the Russian government collected about $6 billion all told. Hence, the state did not function.

Interest rates were high, about 300% in 1994, so credit was available only to the very rich, who controlled the (now private) central bank in the first place. Nearly everyoligarchical bank was connected with organized crime. In fact, there is no substantial difference between the oligarchs and organized crime.18

Under the oligarchs, tax collection collapsed. Industrial production went down by 25% in just a few years. By 1997, Russia had defaulted on its debts. Between 1991 and 1998,Russian GDP fell by almost 40%. Life expectancy went down from 68 to 56 years. Russians became impoverished. Money was so scarce that, by 1996, most trade was done through barter. Importantly, these oligarchs became a state within a state. Tax collection had collapsed, and the new Russia was completely broke. With the Asian meltdown in 1998, interest rates for Russian borrowing went to 300%. 19

16 Arkady Ostrovsky, Father to the Oligarchs. Financial Times, 2004.

17 Graham, Thomas. From Oligarchy to Oligarchy: The Structure of Russia's Ruling Elite. Demokratizatsiya7(3), (1997) 325-340

18 ibid

Yeltsin's popularity by 1998 went to about zero. Since then, pro-western (that is, pro freemarket) parties have polled no more than 5-7% of the vote combined. Yeltsin resigned the Presidency in 1999 and appointed Vladimir Putin as president.

A man of immense mental and physical strength, he sought to discipline the oligarchs, rebuild Russia and create a modern economy. As soon as Putin took office, he went after the media monopoly of Vladimir Guzinsky. Soon, numerous oil firms and banks were investigated for tax fraud. Some oligarchs fled the country, others like Mikhail Khordokovsky, ended up in prison. Attempting to split the oligarchs, playing one fraction against another, Putin's popularity soared, and Russian economic growth recovered.20 Since the meltdown in 1998, the Russian economy has gone from $1 trillion to $2.5 trillion by 2011. Growth rates remain high, and Russia enjoys both a trade and budget surplus. In the first eight years of Putin's presidency, the Russian GDP increased by over 75%.

Near the end of 1993, about 18-20 billion rubles had fled the country. As 1994 dawned, the population was impoverished. Malnutrition was becoming a problem, and alcoholism was increasing, as was suicide and all manner of social pathology. By 1994, thedeputy interior minister, Vladimir Kozlov, stated that about 40% of the economy is nowcriminalized. Leonov writes,

V. Polevanov [deputy prime minister at the time] notes that the total nominal valueof the voucher fund (about $1.5 trillion rubles) was 20 times less than the cost fixed assets industry, fired up for auction. One Moscow, where privatization was notcarried out on the residual and by market value, gained 20% of the enterprises 1.8 trillion rubles, while income from the rest of Russia in the first two years of privatization amounted to only $1 trillion rubles.

The above argument is abstract. In this section, a case study will be analyzed in detail to show how these forces come to be, how they operate, and how they attempt to insulate themselves from its consequences. Traumatic economic events do not occur due to abstract or impersonal forces. People, very powerful people, create the conditions that destroy entire economies. Economic self-interest is the engine of these irrational policies. Economics depicts social actors and institutions as calculating machines with no identity or purpose. The result is that economics is always treated in the passive voice, which is a fundamental mystification.

The Second Half of the 1990s

Showing Chubais complete rejection of supporting Russian interests, Leonov writes,

Soon, it became clear that Chubais committed his sins only because he was controlled by others. The real owners of Russia. In 1998, Russia was continuing to disaster, that is, total bankruptcy. At this point, even after the default, American investors finally got the message and moved their cash out of Russian securities. This strengthened the effect of the default. As he became CEO of RAO (etc), he sold to foreigners a 32% chunk of Russian energy concerns, which violated all Russian laws. This meant, of course, that foreigners now could block Russian energy policy.

Chubais and his Harvard friends did not believe in their own rhetoric. Their had quickly moved into the most luxurious apartments and appointed to themselves very high salaries. Nothing about their world was based on the market principles they hypocriticallyadvocated. While advocating the rule of law, the oligarchical firms allied with Chubais werenot paying taxes; but it just so happens that the criminal code recently passed did not considerthis a crime. In 1997, there was no question that Chubais was evading taxes as well.

19 Ibid, cf esp 330-332

20 Sakwa, R. Putin and the Oligarchs. New Political Economy, 13(2) (2008): 185-191

Admitting his guilt, he paid about 500 million rubles, which was just a small amount of what he owed. His power did not diminish, but it remains a fact that no dictator in Russian history had the power that Chubais had. In the name of market reform and the rule of law,Chubais was receiving millions from shall companies for non existent services. Alexander Lebed remained the sole source of opposition to Chubais once Yeltsin sought treatment for heart illness. Chubais, realizing the general's recent spike in popularity for negotiating successfully with Chechen rebels, invented a slew of charges that the general conspired with these same militants. Chubais had become so powerful that he was no longer required to be creative. Lebed was dismissed from his post, proving that Chubais was, in fact, a dictator.21

In the name of the rule of law, Chubais made mafia gangster Boris Berezovsky "deputy director of the security council." Potanin, another underworld billionaire, was named "Deputy Prime Minister." Chubais was rubbing Russia's face in his power, typical of thepsychotic. Soon, all major television channels were in the hands of two mafia dons, Berezovsky and Guzinsky.

Leonov writes:

By 1996, all the financial power was concentrated in the hands of a small group of businessmen almost exclusively Jewish. It consisted of Boris Berezovsky, Vladimir Gusinsky, Alexander Smolensky, Pyotr Aven, Boris Chait, and Vitaly Malkin. Major bankers also included gentiles Potanin and Vinogradov, the only two.

Since the state had collapsed, these oligarchs acted as the state treasury and profited from it. Billions continued to be looted and wound up in banks in Israel, Britain and the US. Yet, elections were coming up. An ailing Yeltsin dismissed Chernomyrdin's "government," which included Chubais. Boris Berezovsky began, in his words, to rally all the "democraticand reformist forces in Russia" to prevent his own possible dispossession.

Typical of the psychotic, these men knew no limits. They began issuing high yield junk bonds, eventually promising to pay out, in some cases, 180%. Foreigners were buying these bonds to the point where almost 30% of all marketable securities of the Russian "state"were owned by outsiders. It was another scam, and the bankers refused to pay anypercentage, and even more, demanded the return of Chubais to government. Chubais quicklyflew to Washington, warning of a communist-nationalist resurgence. $6 billion was quickly given, which was never seen again.

Forming a shadow government, Russia's bankers dictated terms to Yeltsin. In their generosity, they agreed to not demand immediate debt payment from the Russian taxpayer. Yet, to punish Yeltsin, this oligarchy declared that it will reduce the sale of foreign currency. Putting downward pressure on the ruble, the oligarchs got their revenge for the tepid rebellion of Yeltsin. This is what drove the junk bonds as high as 180%; the ruble was suddenly worth nothing. In fear, Yeltsin put the banker's friend, Chernomyrdin, back in power in late summer, 1998.22

21 Ostrovsky, Arkady. Father to the Oligarchs. Financial Times, 2004

22 Russian Federation: Selected Issues 2012 International Monetary Fund IMF Country Report No. 12/218http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2012/cr12218.pdf and Oliker, O, and T. Paley. Assessing Russia's

As typical of capitalist democracies, the political clique took the fall for the private sector. Yeltsin was blamed for the disaster, though his power was nil. That winter, Russia froze with millions unable to buy fuel. The perfect man was chosen for the prime ministership, Yevgeny Primakov, with no apparent beliefs of any kind. Quickly, Primakov demanded the return of Chubais and others who caused the mess, in order to repair it.

The default that August destroyed any bank not immediately under the oligarchs. GDPfell by 200-300 billion rubles. Industry was devastated. In one month, September of 1998, the average Russian income fell by over 30%. The Federation Council, too late, officially declared Chubais and crew as "negligent and incompetent." At the same time, the banking oligarchy was speculating in currency markets, making a profit estimated at the time of 5.5billion rubles in 1997.

Bill Clinton at the time cared only about the possibility of the Lebed coup. Primakov, however, began to strengthen the state as the only possibly solution to the total dissolution of Russia as a political entity. Soon, the dependable Zhirnovsky was again trotted out, with the occasional spray painted swastika to re-direct attention and create the "extremist" threat. More political groups, heretofore unknown, showed up in Moscow with strange uniforms and rallies. Gaidar was quick to link them with the communists, creating a convenient, single group for the masses to visualize.

In the midst of the meltdown, the system took advantage of the perfectly timed murder of Galina Starovoitova, a westernizing politician. 15,000 members of the opposition were rounded up and the "democratic forces" demanded emergency powers. The westenizers even created their own "nationalist" political group, "Fatherland" in order to siphon off opposition activists. In a display showing excellent acting, Yeltsin, in December of 1998, disbanded the group as a "threat" to "democracy." Of course, western Russia experts breathed a sigh of relief that "fascism" was not coming to Russia.

Solzhenitsyn refused to be a part of the charade, refusing to accept the Medal of St. Andrei from Yeltsin. A long time nationalist, Solzhenitsyn realized that in giving this award, Yeltsin was currying favor. Another misdirection was the attempted impeachment of Yeltsin in 1998, as if he was in charge of the disaster he only vaguely understood. Like the Clinton impeachment, it was an absurdity, deliberately designed to protect those with actual power (that is, the private sector) who created the disaster. The Commission decided that Yeltsin had "exceeded his power" as president, as if this is the reason why Muscovites just froze the previous winter. Using political figures to cover for the banking cartel is as old as the Medicis in Florence. Then, in another mockery of Russia, Yeltsin was blamed 100% for the disaster ofthe previous decade.23

Given all this, you are now ready to understand Putin. He came to power as Premier under Yeltsin when the latter resigned in 1999. Yeltsin's popularity rating was between 3-5%. All aid from the IMF was stolen and funneled into the hands of the oligarchs. Oil and gas firms had their profits pocketed in the same way, tax free. As Yeltsin retired, he gave many of his friends immunity from prosecution.

Putin as the Restorer of Sanity

Putin's leadership restored confidence in the currency, the state and the law. Oligarchystill exists in Russia (as elsewhere), but the monopoly position they used to wield is no more.Russian oil firms have come under the control, though not the ownership, of the state, sinceoligarchs were planning on selling assets to Exxon-Mobil, which led to the "KhordokovskyDecline. The Rand Corporation, 2002http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/2007/MR1442.pdf23 Guriev, S. and Andrei Rachinsky (2005). The Role of Oligarchs in Russian Capitalism. Journal of EconomicPerspectives, 19(1), (2005) 131-150 http://pages.nes.ru/sguriev/papers/GurievRachinsky.pdfaffair." Mikhail Khordokovshy was an oligarch who controlled YUKOS, one of Russia's mostpowerful oil firms. In the interest of national security, Putin placed Khordokovsky under arrest. He was indeed guilty of tax evasion, but his plans to see Russian strategic assets to Americans was too much for Putin to stomach. The more oligarchs Putin put in jail, the more popular he becomes.

Putin's policy has been to tread softly, taking on only the most powerful and obnoxious of the oligarchs. He has made strategic alliances with some in order to intimidate others While Russia has been rebuilt and the state became powerful, the oligarchs still have fight left in them, and Putin acts cautiously. Putin's basic approach has been to guide investment and control the flow of investment funds so they benefit Russia, not the oligarchy. The state does not own the economy, but it does oversee it. The oligarchy gave Putin no other choice.

The oligarchs financed all of Yeltsin's election campaigns and public image in Russia at the time. The point was to keep Yeltsin in power long enough so that the oligarchs could get their cash out of the country. They knew that eventually, a popular government would punish them. Putin, to a great extent, was this punishment.

Putin created an entirely new Russian government, when local districts under his control. Needless to say, the regional governments had been bought, and Putin could have no dealings with them. Some of them even had their own foreign policy! All those sent to govern the regions were from the security services or the army. This was no accident. Putin restructured the Upper House (the Federation Council) so as to permit his government to have a say in who gets appointed to it. 24

Putin insisted that local law must be consistent with federal law. This is because local leaders were creating their own countries, and this could not stand. Putin then permitted oligarchs and their puppets to be tried as violators of the constitution. Let me give you one example. In 2003, the oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky had taken over the Russian oil giant Yukos. Now, Putin got intelligence that Khodorkovsky was planning on entering intobusiness with Exxon-Mobil, permitting their penetration into the Russian market. Realizing this was a security threat (which it was, since it would mean that Exxon would control much of Russia's oil), he had Khodorkovsky arrested. Is list of crimes was well known, but the stategot him on taxes, which was a no-brainier. Putin was immediately attacked or "authoritarianism" by the press in the west.

So why does the west heap abuse on this man?

He reformed the tax code, putting in place a 13% flat tax on all income and investments. About half of regional prosecutors were removed from their positions due toe xtreme corruption. All Russians knew that already. He quickly ended the war in Chechnya, making sure a Chechen, pro-Russian government was put in charge.

He brought together the top 13 oligarchical families to a conference he organized. He told them that their rule was over. He forced them to pay millions in back taxes to the state, and to create several important charitable funds with their stolen money.

He was going to use the state to pressure their media into being more objective, pro-Russian and pro-state. Since the oligarchs controlled the press, it made sense that this had to be fought. To call this "assaulting press freedom" is absurd.

He realized that the political opposition in Russia was created by the oligarchy. Hence, there was no actual party development. Few parties had an agenda (except the communists, who did well), and these were mostly personal vehicles for their founders.

Putin also shifted investment away from oil and towards higher end items. This was needed to diversify the economy. The judiciary is independent. Today, about 70% of people who sue the state for various reasons win. Putin also introduced the jury.25

24 Sakwa, R. Putin and the Oligarchs. New Political Economy, 13(2), (2008), 185-191

It's tough to argue with Putin's success:

Labor productivity grew 49 percent 1995-2005, ranging from a 23 percent improvement in retailing to a 73 percent rise in construction. Total factor productivity grew by 5.8 percent per year, and the World Bank estimates that only one third of that increase came from increased capacity utilization. Firm turnover (i.e. the exit of inefficient firms and the entry of new ones) accounts for half the total improvement. Stock market capitalization rose to 44 percent of GDP by 2005, while the RTS index went from 300 in 2000 to 2,360 in December 2007.

In September 2006 the market capitalization of the 200 biggest firms was $833 billion (one third of which was Gazprom). The percent of the population living in poverty fell from 38 percent in 19998 to 9.5 percent in 2004, and the share of family budgets spent on food fell from 73% in 1992to 54% in 2004.

The only macroeconomic indicator that gives cause for concern is inflation, which dropped from 20 percent in 2000 to 9 percent in2006, before creeping back up to 11-12 percent level.26

Now, "market capitalization" and other such elite measures are not the whole story. They can exist with an economy failing in other respects. However, before wealth can b eredistributed, it has to exist. Accumulating what can then be redistributed are what these numbers are telling us. Given all this, however, it should come as no surprise that those who are condemning Putin today backed the privatization deals 20 years ago.

W. Thompson, writing in the Guardian in the Summer of 2003, states:

Fiscal consolidation has probably contributed more than any other single factor to restoring the authority and legitimacy of the formerly bankrupt state. Exceptionally favorable economic circumstances account for much of this improvement, but so also do better expenditure management, the reform of tax legislation and more efficient administration. The state's rule-making capacity has also grown markedly.

Unlike Yeltsin, Putin has a compliant parliament and presides over a government that, for all its internal divisions, is not riven by the factional conflicts that marked the 1990s. The result has been a flood of new legislation, much of it directly concerned with state reconstruction.27

Thompson speaks the truth. "Exceptionally favorable economic circumstances "can not cause national success. They do not in Ukraine, much of Africa or Detroit. They must be identified and utilized with substantial skill. Circumstances, of themselves, tell us nothing. The "compliant parliament" exists because of Putin's popularity, though Thomas seems to suggest that such legislative cooperation is required in times of emergency. Worried about bureaucratic corruption, Putin passed several laws limiting the discretionary power of federal agencies. Reform has reduced corruption, endemic at onepoint. Business is much easier to accomplish. Putin's reelection numbers roughly mirror his popularity in the country, and his opposition, backed by the US, has no agenda whatsoever.

25 Lavelle, P Putin's "Authoritarianism" vs. the "Commentariat". Commentary, 2004ahttp://www.futurebrief.com/peterlavelle004.asp and Lavelle, P Russia's Economic Future. Commentary,2004 http://www.futurebrief.com/peterlavelle.asp

26 Rutland, P. Putin's Economic Record. Wesleyan University, CT, 2008

27 Thompson, W. Putin's Success. The Guardian; June 2003 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jun/08/russia.theworldtodayessays

They simply want more Yeltsinism.

As of January 1 of this 2013, Russia's anti-bribery legislation is the toughest in the world. In Russia, about 92% of American businesses think that Russian investment is a good thing, and that Russia is a decent place to do business. The IMF has stated that part of Putin's success is is utilization of capital that was left idle. Utilization of the country's resources has increased from about 50% in 2000 to over 76% today. But in order to do this, he needed to destroy the power of the oligarchs at the regional level.

Conclusion

The simple fact is that Putin's authoritarianism was forced upon him. He did use a heavy hand, but not nearly as heavy as Yeltsin. He realized that it was either a strong hand or chaos. As the state has been rebuilt, so have oversight bodies empowered to check it'sbehavior. Putin launched a bunch of commissions to look into corruption in different areas o the country, knowing full well that his popularity is based on that, plus economic growth.Putin needed to increase the potential of the state before the state itself could grow. Hence,the reformation of all police agencies gave them a direct line to the Kremlin, but, by 2002,crime was still rife. Now, all that has changed.

It makes sense to call Putin a reaction to Yeltsin, chaos and oligarchy. His policies make no sense without the background. Things appear differently when contrasted with the free-fall collapse of the Yeltsin years.

Putin then did two things: first, to build up the rudiments of a new state, one that can permit business to thrive and destroy oligarchy. He needed a new law code, more centralized structures and an end to regional independence. Second, he was to create a new macroeconomic structure, with strong fiscal and oversight measures. Russia now runs a trade and budget deficit. He then stabilized the currency.

Once economic growth took off, he tried to get as much money out of foreign banks as possible. He first backed big business (for the sake of growth), then shifted more recently to backing smaller business. He then engaged in education and pension reform. He turned Russia to the east, allying with China to cooperate in their tremendous economic growth.

It is easy to forget that all that Putin is "blamed" for was suggested by western elites for Yeltsin. Liberal democracy in the eastern bloc has, without exception, merely been a cover for the most cynical sort of exploitation. In the name of "democracy" the eastern bloc melted into the bank accounts of both foreign and local elites. Warlords developed with private armies that, in the 1990s, were the subject of some journalistic treatment. A Russia in collapse is far more dangerous for the west than anything Putin has dreamed about.

Rationally, the enforced, rehearsed and studied contempt of Putin can only exist because the west had other plans for Russia, as a hinterland for cheap, educated labor and resources. Western collapse is assured precisely because Russia is not prostrate and under the thumb of Exxon-Mobil. Putin will have the last laugh, which, when the smoke clears, is the only real cause of the west's irrational hatred.

... ... ...

[Mar 08, 2018] Every crook in Russia who feels the long hand of the law about to nab him runs off to the West and claims asylum. This says much more about the West than about Russia

Notable quotes:
"... Actually an interesting metamorphose happen right at the border crossing. A crook instantly became the staunch defender of western democracy and its (aka neoliberal) values against Russian backwardness, paranoia and kleptocratic state headed by evil Putin who personally torture innocent girls from Pussy Riot wearing his old KGB uniform ..."
"... BTW I would object about the term "Stubborn Deniers of Reality" applied to Western Journalism. I think a more proper definition is "Creators of artificial reality". Masters of illusion, so to speak. And that's would be a proper classification of Bachelor and Masters degree in journalism instead of "Bachelor of arts", etc. used today. And truth be told this esoteric art reached the level of perfection and sophistication in comparison with which all those circus magicians are just children. ..."
Mar 08, 2018 | marknesop.wordpress.com

kievite , June 1, 2013 at 8:48 am

Actually an interesting metamorphose happen right at the border crossing. A crook instantly became the staunch defender of western democracy and its (aka neoliberal) values against Russian backwardness, paranoia and kleptocratic state headed by evil Putin who personally torture innocent girls from Pussy Riot wearing his old KGB uniform :-)

I would call this sudden attraction to democratic values at the border crossing a "crooks survival instinct" in action. Crooks are always crooks.

BTW I would object about the term "Stubborn Deniers of Reality" applied to Western Journalism. I think a more proper definition is "Creators of artificial reality". Masters of illusion, so to speak. And that's would be a proper classification of Bachelor and Masters degree in journalism instead of "Bachelor of arts", etc. used today. And truth be told this esoteric art reached the level of perfection and sophistication in comparison with which all those circus magicians are just children.

BTW who would explain to me the meaning of the term of BS in English. Is this about deception, or an attempt to cover own incompetence (posturing as an expert in subject about which the BS artist has no clue) or about pure propaganda or about meaningless drivel designed to hide the real motives ?

Reply kirill ,

[Feb 02, 2018] Meet the Corrupt Billionaire Who Has Brought About a New Cold War by >Philip M. GIRALDI

Feb 02, 2018 | www.strategic-culture.org

William Browder is notoriously the man behind the 2012 Magnitsky Act, which exploited Congressional willingness to demonize Russia and has done so much to poison relations between Washington and Moscow.

[Dec 11, 2017] How Russia-gate Met the Magnitsky Myth by Robert Parry

Highly recommended!
Looks like Browder was connected to MI6. That means that intellignece agances participated in economic rape of Russia That's explains a lot, including his change of citizenship from US to UK. He wanted better protection.
Notable quotes:
"... The Russian lawyer, Natalie Veselnitskaya, who met with Trump Jr. and other advisers to Donald Trump Sr.'s campaign, represented a company that had run afoul of a U.S. investigation into money-laundering allegedly connected to the Magnitsky case and his death in a Russian prison in 2009. His death sparked a campaign spearheaded by Browder, who used his wealth and clout to lobby the U.S. Congress in 2012 to enact the Magnitsky Act to punish alleged human rights abusers in Russia. The law became what might be called the first shot in the New Cold War. ..."
"... Despite Russian denials – and the "dog ate my homework" quality of Browder's self-serving narrative – the dramatic tale became a cause celebre in the West. The story eventually attracted the attention of Russian filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov, a known critic of President Vladimir Putin. Nekrasov decided to produce a docu-drama that would present Browder's narrative to a wider public. Nekrasov even said he hoped that he might recruit Browder as the narrator of the tale. ..."
"... Nekrasov discovered that a woman working in Browder's company was the actual whistleblower and that Magnitsky – rather than a crusading lawyer – was an accountant who was implicated in the scheme. ..."
"... Ultimately, Nekrasov completes his extraordinary film – entitled "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes" – and it was set for a premiere at the European Parliament in Brussels in April 2016. However, at the last moment – faced with Browder's legal threats – the parliamentarians pulled the plug. Nekrasov encountered similar resistance in the United States, a situation that, in part, brought Natalie Veselnitskaya into this controversy. ..."
"... That was when she turned to promoter Rob Goldstone to set up a meeting at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr. To secure the sit-down on June 9, 2016, Goldstone dangled the prospect that Veselnitskaya had some derogatory financial information from the Russian government about Russians supporting the Democratic National Committee. Trump Jr. jumped at the possibility and brought senior Trump campaign advisers, Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner, along. ..."
"... By all accounts, Veselnitskaya had little or nothing to offer about the DNC and turned the conversation instead to the Magnitsky Act and Putin's retaliatory measure to the sanctions, canceling a program in which American parents adopted Russian children. One source told me that Veselnitskaya also wanted to enhance her stature in Russia with the boast that she had taken a meeting at Trump Tower with Trump's son. ..."
"... But another goal of Veselnitskaya's U.S. trip was to participate in an effort to give Americans a chance to see Nekrasov's blacklisted documentary. She traveled to Washington in the days after her Trump Tower meeting and attended a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, according to The Washington Post. ..."
"... There were hopes to show the documentary to members of Congress but the offer was rebuffed. Instead a room was rented at the Newseum near Capitol Hill. Browder's lawyers. who had successfully intimidated the European Parliament, also tried to strong arm the Newseum, but its officials responded that they were only renting out a room and that they had allowed other controversial presentations in the past. ..."
"... Their stand wasn't exactly a profile in courage. "We're not going to allow them not to show the film," said Scott Williams, the chief operating officer of the Newseum. "We often have people renting for events that other people would love not to have happen." ..."
"... So, Nekrasov's documentary got a one-time showing with Veselnitskaya reportedly in attendance and with a follow-up discussion moderated by journalist Seymour Hersh. However, except for that audience, the public of the United States and Europe has been essentially shielded from the documentary's discoveries, all the better for the Magnitsky myth to retain its power as a seminal propaganda moment of the New Cold War. ..."
"... Over the past year, we have seen a growing hysteria about "Russian propaganda" and "fake news" with The New York Times and other major news outlets eagerly awaiting algorithms that can be unleashed on the Internet to eradicate information that groups like Google's First Draft Coalition deem "false." ..."
"... First Draft consists of the Times, the Post, other mainstream outlets, and establishment-approved online news sites, such as Bellingcat with links to the pro-NATO think tank, Atlantic Council. First Draft's job will be to serve as a kind of Ministry of Truth and thus shield the public from information that is deemed propaganda or untrue. ..."
"... From searches that I did on Wednesday, Nekrasov's film was not available on Amazon although a pro-Magnitsky documentary was. I did find a streaming service that appeared to have the film available. ..."
"... Why are so many people–corporate executives, governments, journalists, politicians–afraid of William Browder? Why isn't Andrei Nekrasov's film available via digital versatile disk, for sale on line? Mr. Parry, why can't you find it? Oh, wait: You did! Heaven forbid we, your readers, should screen it. Since you, too, are helping keep that film a big fat secret at least give us a few clues as to where we can find it. Throw us a bone! Thank you. ..."
"... Hysterical agit-prop troll insists that world trembles in fear of "genuine American hero" William Browder. John McCain in 2012 was too busy trembling to notice that Browder had given up his US citizenship in 1998 in order to better profit from the Russian financial crisis. ..."
"... Abe – and to escape U.S. taxes. ..."
"... Excellent report and analysis. Thanks for timely reminder regarding the Magitsky story and the fascinating background regarding Andrei Nekrasov's film, in particular its metamorphosis and subsequent aggressive suppression. Both of those factors render the film a particular credibility and wish on my part to view it. ..."
"... I am beginning to feel more and more like the citizens of the old USSR, who, were to my recollection and understanding back in the 50's and 60's:. Longing to read and hear facts suppressed by the communist state, dependent upon the Voice of America and underground news sources within the Soviet Union for the truth. RU, Consortium news, et. al. seem somewhat a parallel, and 1984 not so distant. ..."
"... Last night, After watching Max Boot self destruct on Tucker Carlson, i was inspired to watch episode 2 of The Putin Interviews. I felt enlightened. If only the Establishment Media could turn from promoting its agenda of shaping and suppressing the news into accurately reporting it. ..."
"... Media corruption is not so new. Yellow journalism around the turn of the 19th century, took us into a progression of wars. The War to End All Wars didn't. Blame the munitions makers and the Military Industrial Complex if you will, but a corrupt medial, at the very least enabled a progression of wars over the last 120 or so years. ..."
"... Nekrasov, though he's a Putin critic, is a genuine hero in this instance. He ulitimately put his preconceptions aside and took the story where it truly led him. Nekrasov deserves boatloads of praise for his handling of Browder and his final documentary film product. ..."
"... "[Veselnitskaya] traveled to Washington in the days after her Trump Tower meeting and attended a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, according to The Washington Post." The other day I saw photos of her sitting right behind Amb. McFaul in some past hearing. How did she get a seat on the front row? ..."
"... "The approach taken by Brennan's task force in assessing Russia and its president seems eerily reminiscent of the analytical blinders that hampered the U.S. intelligence community when it came to assessing the objectives and intent of Saddam Hussein and his inner leadership regarding weapons of mass destruction. The Russia NIA notes, 'Many of the key judgments rely on a body of reporting from multiple sources that are consistent with our understanding of Russian behavior.' There is no better indication of a tendency toward 'group think' than that statement. ..."
"... "The acknowledged deficit on the part of the U.S. intelligence community of fact-driven insight into the specifics of Russian presidential decision-making, and the nature of Vladimir Putin as an individual in general, likewise seems problematic. The U.S. intelligence community was hard wired into pre-conceived notions about how and what Saddam Hussein would think and decide, and as such remained blind to the fact that he would order the totality of his weapons of mass destruction to be destroyed in the summer of 1991, or that he could be telling the truth when later declaring that Iraq was free of WMD. ..."
"... Magnitsky Act in Canada has been based on made-up `facts` as Globe & Mail reporting proves. Not news, but deepens my concern about Canada following the Cold War without examination. ..."
"... Bill Browder's grandfather was Earl Browder, leader of the CPUSA from the the late 30s to late 40s. His father was also a communist. Bill jr parlayed those connections with the Soviet apparatchiks to gain a foothold in looting Russia of its state assets during the 1990s. No he was not a communist but neither were the leaders of the Soviet Union at the time of its dissolution (in name yes, but in fact not). ..."
"... I've also heard that it was the Jewish commissars who, when the USSR fell apart, rushed off to grab everything they could (with the help of outside Jewish money) and became the Russian oligarchs we hear about today. This is probably what Britton is getting at: "His father has a communist past." You go from running the government to owning it. Anti-Putin because Putin put a stop to them. ..."
"... backwardsevolution: I worked with a Soviet emigre engineer – Jewish – on the same project in an Engineering design and construction company during early 1990's. He immigrated with his family around 1991. In Soviet Union, there being no private financial institutions or lawyers so to speak , many Jews went into science and engineering. A very interesting person, we were close work place friends. His elder brother had stayed behind back in Russia. His brother was in Moscow and involved in this plunder going on there. He used to tell me all these hair raising first hand stories about what was going on in Russia during that time. All the plunder flowed into the Western Countries. ..."
"... I have read all the comments up to yours you have told it like it was in Russia in those years. Browder was the king of the crooks looting Russia. ..."
"... I remember reading Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine," but I just could not get through the chapter on the USSR falling apart. I started reading it, but I didn't want to finish it (and I didn't) because it just made me angry. The West was too unfair! Russia was asking for help, but instead the West just looted. I'd say that Russia was very lucky to have someone like Putin clean it up. ..."
"... The Canadian Minister Chrysta Freeland met with William Brawder in Davos a few months ago " -- Birds of a feather flock together. Mrs. Chrystal Freeland has a very interesting background for which she is very proud of: her granddad was a Ukrainian Nazi collaborator denounced by Jewish investigators: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/02/27/a-nazi-skeleton-in-the-family-closet/ ..."
Jul 13, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

Exclusive: A documentary debunking the Magnitsky myth, which was an opening salvo in the New Cold War, was largely blocked from viewing in the West but has now become a factor in Russia-gate, reports Robert Parry.

Near the center of the current furor over Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with a Russian lawyer in June 2016 is a documentary that almost no one in the West has been allowed to see, a film that flips the script on the story of the late Sergei Magnitsky and his employer, hedge-fund operator William Browder.

The Russian lawyer, Natalie Veselnitskaya, who met with Trump Jr. and other advisers to Donald Trump Sr.'s campaign, represented a company that had run afoul of a U.S. investigation into money-laundering allegedly connected to the Magnitsky case and his death in a Russian prison in 2009. His death sparked a campaign spearheaded by Browder, who used his wealth and clout to lobby the U.S. Congress in 2012 to enact the Magnitsky Act to punish alleged human rights abusers in Russia. The law became what might be called the first shot in the New Cold War.

According to Browder's narrative, companies ostensibly under his control had been hijacked by corrupt Russian officials in furtherance of a $230 million tax-fraud scheme; he then dispatched his "lawyer" Magnitsky to investigate and – after supposedly uncovering evidence of the fraud – Magnitsky blew the whistle only to be arrested by the same corrupt officials who then had him locked up in prison where he died of heart failure from physical abuse.

Despite Russian denials – and the "dog ate my homework" quality of Browder's self-serving narrative – the dramatic tale became a cause celebre in the West. The story eventually attracted the attention of Russian filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov, a known critic of President Vladimir Putin. Nekrasov decided to produce a docu-drama that would present Browder's narrative to a wider public. Nekrasov even said he hoped that he might recruit Browder as the narrator of the tale.

However, the project took an unexpected turn when Nekrasov's research kept turning up contradictions to Browder's storyline, which began to look more and more like a corporate cover story. Nekrasov discovered that a woman working in Browder's company was the actual whistleblower and that Magnitsky – rather than a crusading lawyer – was an accountant who was implicated in the scheme.

So, the planned docudrama suddenly was transformed into a documentary with a dramatic reversal as Nekrasov struggles with what he knows will be a dangerous decision to confront Browder with what appear to be deceptions. In the film, you see Browder go from a friendly collaborator into an angry adversary who tries to bully Nekrasov into backing down.

Blocked Premiere

Ultimately, Nekrasov completes his extraordinary film – entitled "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes" – and it was set for a premiere at the European Parliament in Brussels in April 2016. However, at the last moment – faced with Browder's legal threats – the parliamentarians pulled the plug. Nekrasov encountered similar resistance in the United States, a situation that, in part, brought Natalie Veselnitskaya into this controversy.

Film director Andrei Nekrasov, who produced "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes."

As a lawyer defending Prevezon, a real-estate company registered in Cyprus, on a money-laundering charge, she was dealing with U.S. prosecutors in New York City and, in that role, became an advocate for lifting the U.S. sanctions, The Washington Post reported.

That was when she turned to promoter Rob Goldstone to set up a meeting at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr. To secure the sit-down on June 9, 2016, Goldstone dangled the prospect that Veselnitskaya had some derogatory financial information from the Russian government about Russians supporting the Democratic National Committee. Trump Jr. jumped at the possibility and brought senior Trump campaign advisers, Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner, along.

By all accounts, Veselnitskaya had little or nothing to offer about the DNC and turned the conversation instead to the Magnitsky Act and Putin's retaliatory measure to the sanctions, canceling a program in which American parents adopted Russian children. One source told me that Veselnitskaya also wanted to enhance her stature in Russia with the boast that she had taken a meeting at Trump Tower with Trump's son.

But another goal of Veselnitskaya's U.S. trip was to participate in an effort to give Americans a chance to see Nekrasov's blacklisted documentary. She traveled to Washington in the days after her Trump Tower meeting and attended a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, according to The Washington Post.

There were hopes to show the documentary to members of Congress but the offer was rebuffed. Instead a room was rented at the Newseum near Capitol Hill. Browder's lawyers. who had successfully intimidated the European Parliament, also tried to strong arm the Newseum, but its officials responded that they were only renting out a room and that they had allowed other controversial presentations in the past.

Their stand wasn't exactly a profile in courage. "We're not going to allow them not to show the film," said Scott Williams, the chief operating officer of the Newseum. "We often have people renting for events that other people would love not to have happen."

In an article about the controversy in June 2016, The New York Times added that "A screening at the Newseum is especially controversial because it could attract lawmakers or their aides." Heaven forbid!

One-Time Showing

So, Nekrasov's documentary got a one-time showing with Veselnitskaya reportedly in attendance and with a follow-up discussion moderated by journalist Seymour Hersh. However, except for that audience, the public of the United States and Europe has been essentially shielded from the documentary's discoveries, all the better for the Magnitsky myth to retain its power as a seminal propaganda moment of the New Cold War.

Financier William Browder (right) with Magnitsky's widow and son, along with European parliamentarians.

After the Newseum presentation, a Washington Post editorial branded Nekrasov's documentary Russian "agit-prop" and sought to discredit Nekrasov without addressing his many documented examples of Browder's misrepresenting both big and small facts in the case. Instead, the Post accused Nekrasov of using "facts highly selectively" and insinuated that he was merely a pawn in the Kremlin's "campaign to discredit Mr. Browder and the Magnitsky Act."

The Post also misrepresented the structure of the film by noting that it mixed fictional scenes with real-life interviews and action, a point that was technically true but willfully misleading because the fictional scenes were from Nekrasov's original idea for a docu-drama that he shows as part of explaining his evolution from a believer in Browder's self-exculpatory story to a skeptic. But the Post's deception is something that almost no American would realize because almost no one got to see the film.

The Post concluded smugly: "The film won't grab a wide audience, but it offers yet another example of the Kremlin's increasingly sophisticated efforts to spread its illiberal values and mind-set abroad. In the European Parliament and on French and German television networks, showings were put off recently after questions were raised about the accuracy of the film, including by Magnitsky's family.

"We don't worry that Mr. Nekrasov's film was screened here, in an open society. But it is important that such slick spin be fully exposed for its twisted story and sly deceptions."

The Post's gleeful editorial had the feel of something you might read in a totalitarian society where the public only hears about dissent when the Official Organs of the State denounce some almost unknown person for saying something that almost no one heard.

New Paradigm

The Post's satisfaction that Nekrasov's documentary would not draw a large audience represents what is becoming a new paradigm in U.S. mainstream journalism, the idea that it is the media's duty to protect the American people from seeing divergent narratives on sensitive geopolitical issues.

Over the past year, we have seen a growing hysteria about "Russian propaganda" and "fake news" with The New York Times and other major news outlets eagerly awaiting algorithms that can be unleashed on the Internet to eradicate information that groups like Google's First Draft Coalition deem "false."

First Draft consists of the Times, the Post, other mainstream outlets, and establishment-approved online news sites, such as Bellingcat with links to the pro-NATO think tank, Atlantic Council. First Draft's job will be to serve as a kind of Ministry of Truth and thus shield the public from information that is deemed propaganda or untrue.

In the meantime, there is the ad hoc approach that was applied to Nekrasov's documentary. Having missed the Newseum showing, I was only able to view the film because I was given a special password to an online version.

From searches that I did on Wednesday, Nekrasov's film was not available on Amazon although a pro-Magnitsky documentary was. I did find a streaming service that appeared to have the film available.

But the Post's editors were right in their expectation that "The film won't grab a wide audience." Instead, it has become a good example of how political and legal pressure can effectively black out what we used to call "the other side of the story." The film now, however, has unexpectedly become a factor in the larger drama of Russia-gate and the drive to remove Donald Trump Sr. from the White House.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com ).

Joseph A. Haran, Jr. , July 13, 2017 at 2:13 pm

Why are so many people–corporate executives, governments, journalists, politicians–afraid of William Browder? Why isn't Andrei Nekrasov's film available via digital versatile disk, for sale on line? Mr. Parry, why can't you find it? Oh, wait: You did! Heaven forbid we, your readers, should screen it. Since you, too, are helping keep that film a big fat secret at least give us a few clues as to where we can find it. Throw us a bone! Thank you.

Rob Roy , July 13, 2017 at 2:45 pm

Parry isn't keeping the film viewing a secret. He was given a private password and perhaps can get permission to let the readers here have it. It isn't up to Parry himself but rather to the person(s) who have the rights to the password. I've come across this problem before.

ToivoS , July 13, 2017 at 4:01 pm

Parry wrote: I did find a streaming service that appeared to have the film available.

Any link?? I am willing to buy it.

Lisa , July 13, 2017 at 6:28 pm

This may not be of much help, as the film is dubbed in Russian. If you want to look for the Russian versions on the internet, search for: "????? ?????? ????????? "????? ???????????. ?? ????????"

https://my.mail.ru/bk/n-osetrova/video/71/18682.html?time=155&from=videoplayer

I'll keep looking for the film with translation into some other language.

Lisa , July 13, 2017 at 6:31 pm

Sorry, the Russian text did not appear. Try with latin alphabet: Film Andreia Nekrasova "Zakon Magnitskogo. Za kulisami"

Lisa , July 13, 2017 at 6:45 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8d1ylakLMNU

This is the same dubbed version, on youtube.

Abe , July 13, 2017 at 5:21 pm

Hysterical agit-prop troll insists that world trembles in fear of "genuine American hero" William Browder. John McCain in 2012 was too busy trembling to notice that Browder had given up his US citizenship in 1998 in order to better profit from the Russian financial crisis.

backwardsevolution , July 13, 2017 at 5:51 pm

Abe – and to escape U.S. taxes.

incontinent reader , July 13, 2017 at 6:24 pm

Well stated.

Vincent Castigliola , July 13, 2017 at 2:38 pm

Mr. Parry,

Excellent report and analysis. Thanks for timely reminder regarding the Magitsky story and the fascinating background regarding Andrei Nekrasov's film, in particular its metamorphosis and subsequent aggressive suppression. Both of those factors render the film a particular credibility and wish on my part to view it.

Is there any chance you can share information regarding a means of accessing the forbidden film?

I am beginning to feel more and more like the citizens of the old USSR, who, were to my recollection and understanding back in the 50's and 60's:. Longing to read and hear facts suppressed by the communist state, dependent upon the Voice of America and underground news sources within the Soviet Union for the truth. RU, Consortium news, et. al. seem somewhat a parallel, and 1984 not so distant.

Last night, After watching Max Boot self destruct on Tucker Carlson, i was inspired to watch episode 2 of The Putin Interviews. I felt enlightened. If only the Establishment Media could turn from promoting its agenda of shaping and suppressing the news into accurately reporting it.

Media corruption is not so new. Yellow journalism around the turn of the 19th century, took us into a progression of wars. The War to End All Wars didn't. Blame the munitions makers and the Military Industrial Complex if you will, but a corrupt medial, at the very least enabled a progression of wars over the last 120 or so years.

Demonizing other countries is bad enough, but wilfully ignoring the potential for a nuclear war to end not only war, but life as we know it, is appalling.

Anna , July 13, 2017 at 5:54 pm

"After watching Max Boot self destruct on Tucker Carlson "
Am I the only one who thinks that Max Boot should have been institutionalized for some time already? He is not well.

Vincent Castigliola , July 13, 2017 at 9:41 pm

Anna,
Perhaps Max can share a suite with John McCain. Sadly, the illness is widespread and sometimes seems to be in the majority. Neo con/lib both are adamant in finding enemies and imposing punishment.

Finding splinters, ignoring beams. Changing regimes everywhere. Making the world safe for Democracy. Unless a man they don't like get elected

Anna , July 14, 2017 at 9:31 am

Max Boot parents are Russain Jews who seemingly instilled in him a rabid hatred for everything Russian. The same is with Aperovitch, the CrowdStrike fraudster. The first Soviet (Bolshevik) government was 85% Jewish. Considering what happened to Russia under Bolsheviks, it seems that Russians are supremely tolerant people.

orwell , July 14, 2017 at 3:44 pm

Anna, Anti-Semitism will get you NOWHERE, and you should be ashamed of yourself for injecting such HATRED into the rational discussion here.

Cal , July 14, 2017 at 8:03 pm

Dear orwell

re Anna

Its not anti Semitic if its true .and its true he is a Russian Jew and its very obvious he hates Russia–as does the whole Jewish Zionist crowd in the US.

Kiza , July 15, 2017 at 1:02 am

orwell, I wonder why the truth always turns out to be so anti-semitic!?

Taras77 , July 13, 2017 at 11:17 pm

I hope you caught the preceding tucker interview with Ralph Peters, who says he is a retired us army LTC. He came off as completely deranged and hysterical. The two interviews back to back struck me as neo con desperation and panic. My respect for Tucker just went up for taking on these two wackos.

Zachary Smith , July 13, 2017 at 2:51 pm

The fact that the film is being suppressed by everybody is significant to me. I don't know a thing about the "facts" of the Magnitsky case, and a quick look at the results of a Google search suggests this film isn't going to be available to me unless I shell out some unknown amount of money.

If the producers want the film to be seen, perhaps they ought to release it for download to any interested parties for a nominal sum. This will mean they won't make any profit, but on the other hand they will be able to spit in the eyes of the censors.

Dan Mason , July 13, 2017 at 6:42 pm

I went searching the net for access to this film and found that I was blocked at every turn. I did find a few links which all seemed to go to the same destination which claimed to provide access once I registered with their site. I decided to avoid that route. I don't really have that much interest in the Magnitsky affair, but I do wonder why we are being denied access to information. Who has this kind of influence, and why are they so fearful. I'm really afraid that we already live in a largely hidden Orwellian world. Now where did I put that tin foil hat?

orwell , July 14, 2017 at 3:48 pm

The Orwellian World is NOT HIDDEN, it is clearly visible.

Drew Hunkins , July 13, 2017 at 2:53 pm

Nekrasov, though he's a Putin critic, is a genuine hero in this instance. He ulitimately put his preconceptions aside and took the story where it truly led him. Nekrasov deserves boatloads of praise for his handling of Browder and his final documentary film product.

backwardsevolution , July 13, 2017 at 3:30 pm

Drew – good comment. It's very hard to "turn", isn't it? I wonder if many people appreciate what it takes to do this. Easier to justify, turn a blind eye, but to actually stop, question, think, and then follow where the story leads you takes courage and strength.

BannanaBoat , July 13, 2017 at 6:12 pm

Especially when your bucking an aggressive billionaire.

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 1:49 am

BannanaBoat – that too!

Zim , July 13, 2017 at 3:11 pm

This is interesting:

"In December 2015, The Wall Street Journal reported that Hillary Clinton opposed the Magnitsky Act while serving as secretary of state. Her opposition coincided with Bill Clinton giving a speech in Moscow for Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank! for which he was paid $500,000.

"Mr. Clinton also received a substantial payout in 2010 from Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank whose executives were at risk of being hurt by possible U.S. sanctions tied to a complex and controversial case of alleged corruption in Russia.

Members of Congress wrote to Mrs. Clinton in 2010 seeking to deny visas to people who had been implicated by Russian accountant Sergei Magnitsky, who was jailed and died in prison after he uncovered evidence of a large tax-refund fraud. William Browder, a foreign investor in Russia who had hired Mr. Magnitsky, alleged that the accountant had turned up evidence that Renaissance officials, among others, participated in the fraud."

The State Department opposed the sanctions bill at the time, as did the Russian government. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov pushed Hillary Clinton to oppose the legislation during a meeting in St. Petersburg in June 2012, citing that U.S.-Russia relations would suffer as a result."

More: http://observer.com/2017/07/natalia-veselnitskaya-hillary-clinton-magnitsky-act/

Virginia , July 13, 2017 at 6:13 pm

Very interesting, Zim.

Bart in Virginia , July 13, 2017 at 3:15 pm

"[Veselnitskaya] traveled to Washington in the days after her Trump Tower meeting and attended a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, according to The Washington Post." The other day I saw photos of her sitting right behind Amb. McFaul in some past hearing. How did she get a seat on the front row?

Now I remember that Post editorial. I was one of only 20 commenters before they shut down comments. It was some heavy pearl clutching.

Cal , July 13, 2017 at 3:31 pm

WOW..excellent reporting.

BobH , July 13, 2017 at 3:35 pm

nice backgrounder for an ever evolving story censorship is censorship by any other name!

BobH , July 13, 2017 at 3:38 pm

afterthought couldn't the film be shown on RT America?

Kiza , July 15, 2017 at 1:11 am

Would that not enable Bowder's employees online to claim that this documentary is Russian state propaganda, which it obviously is not because it would have been made available for free everywhere already just like RT. I believe that Nekrasov does not like RT and RT probably still does not like Nekrasov. The point of RT has never been the truth then the alternative point of view, as they advertised: Audi alteram partem.

Abe , July 13, 2017 at 3:41 pm

"The approach taken by Brennan's task force in assessing Russia and its president seems eerily reminiscent of the analytical blinders that hampered the U.S. intelligence community when it came to assessing the objectives and intent of Saddam Hussein and his inner leadership regarding weapons of mass destruction. The Russia NIA notes, 'Many of the key judgments rely on a body of reporting from multiple sources that are consistent with our understanding of Russian behavior.' There is no better indication of a tendency toward 'group think' than that statement.

Moreover, when one reflects on the fact much of this 'body of reporting' was shoehorned after the fact into an analytical premise predicated on a single source of foreign-provided intelligence, that statement suddenly loses much of its impact.

"The acknowledged deficit on the part of the U.S. intelligence community of fact-driven insight into the specifics of Russian presidential decision-making, and the nature of Vladimir Putin as an individual in general, likewise seems problematic. The U.S. intelligence community was hard wired into pre-conceived notions about how and what Saddam Hussein would think and decide, and as such remained blind to the fact that he would order the totality of his weapons of mass destruction to be destroyed in the summer of 1991, or that he could be telling the truth when later declaring that Iraq was free of WMD.

'President Putin has repeatedly and vociferously denied any Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. Those who cite the findings of the Russia NIA as indisputable proof to the contrary, however, dismiss this denial out of hand. And yet nowhere in the Russia NIA is there any evidence that those who prepared it conducted anything remotely resembling the kind of 'analysis of alternatives' mandated by the ODNI when it comes to analytic standards used to prepare intelligence community assessments and estimates. Nor is there any evidence that the CIA's vaunted 'Red Cell' was approached to provide counterintuitive assessments of premises such as 'What if President Putin is telling the truth?'

'Throughout its history, the NIC has dealt with sources of information that far exceeded any sensitivity that might attach to Brennan's foreign intelligence source. The NIC had two experts that it could have turned to oversee a project like the Russia NIA!the NIO for Cyber Issues, and the Mission Manager of the Russian and Eurasia Mission Center; logic dictates that both should have been called upon, given the subject matter overlap between cyber intrusion and Russian intent.

'The excuse that Brennan's source was simply too sensitive to be shared with these individuals, and the analysts assigned to them, is ludicrous!both the NIO for cyber issues and the CIA's mission manager for Russia and Eurasia are cleared to receive the most highly classified intelligence and, moreover, are specifically mandated to oversee projects such as an investigation into Russian meddling in the American electoral process.

'President Trump has come under repeated criticism for his perceived slighting of the U.S. intelligence community in repeatedly citing the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction intelligence failure when downplaying intelligence reports, including the Russia NIA, about Russian interference in the 2016 election. Adding insult to injury, the president's most recent comments were made on foreign soil (Poland), on the eve of his first meeting with President Putin, at the G-20 Conference in Hamburg, Germany, where the issue of Russian meddling was the first topic on the agenda.

"The politics of the wisdom of the timing and location of such observations aside, the specific content of the president's statements appear factually sound."

Throwing a Curveball at 'Intelligence Community Consensus' on Russia By Scott Ritter http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/did-17-intelligence-agencies-really-come-to-consensus-on-russia/

Joe Tedesky , July 13, 2017 at 4:13 pm

Thanks Abe once again, for providing us with news which will never be printed or aired in our MSM. Brennan may ignore the NIC, as Congress and the Executive Branch constantly avoid paying attention to the GAO. Why even have these agencies, if our leaders aren't going to listen them?

Virginia , July 13, 2017 at 6:16 pm

Abe, I'm always amazed at how much you know. Thank you for sharing. If you have your comments in article form or on a site where they can be shared, I'd really like to know about it. I've tried, but I garble the many points you make when trying to explain historical events you've told us about.

Skip Scott , July 14, 2017 at 9:08 am

Thanks Abe. You are a real asset to us here at CN.

John V. Walsh , July 13, 2017 at 3:54 pm

Very good article! The entire Magnitsky saga has become so convoluted and mired in controversy and propaganda that it is very hard to understand. I remember vaguely the controversy surrounding the showing of the film at the Newseum. it is especially impressive that Nekrasov changed his opinion as fcts unfolded.

I will now try to get the docudrama and watch it.
If anyone has suggestions on how to do this, please let me know via a response. here.
Thanks.

Roger Annis , July 13, 2017 at 4:02 pm

A 'Magnitsky Act' in Canada was approved by the (appointed) Senate several months ago and is now undergoing fine tuning in the House of Commons prior to a third and final vote of approval. The proposed law has the unanimous support of the parties in Parliament.

A column in today's Globe and Mail daily by the newspaper's 'chief political writer' tiptoes around the Magnitsky story, never once daring to admit that a contrary narrative exists to that of Bill Browder.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/when-it-comes-to-magnitsky-laws-its-clear-what-russia-is-looking-for/article35678618/

John-Albert Eadie , July 13, 2017 at 5:01 pm

Magnitsky Act in Canada has been based on made-up `facts` as Globe & Mail reporting proves. Not news, but deepens my concern about Canada following the Cold War without examination.

backwardsevolution , July 13, 2017 at 5:56 pm

Roger Annis – just little lemmings following the leader. Disgusting. I hope you posted a comment at the Globe and Mail, Roger, with a link to this article.

Britton , July 13, 2017 at 4:05 pm

Browder is a Communist Jew, his father has a Communist past according to his background so I know I can't trust anything he says. Hes just one of many shady interests undermining Putin I've seen over the years. His book Red Notice is just as shady. Good reporting Consortium News. Fox News promotes Browder like crazy every chance they get especially Fox Business channel.

Joe Average , July 13, 2017 at 5:06 pm

"Browder is a Communist " Hedge Fund managers are hardly Communist – that's an oxymoron.

ToivoS , July 13, 2017 at 6:02 pm

Bill Browder's grandfather was Earl Browder, leader of the CPUSA from the the late 30s to late 40s. His father was also a communist. Bill jr parlayed those connections with the Soviet apparatchiks to gain a foothold in looting Russia of its state assets during the 1990s. No he was not a communist but neither were the leaders of the Soviet Union at the time of its dissolution (in name yes, but in fact not).

Joe Average , July 13, 2017 at 6:34 pm

ToivoS,

thank you for this background information.

My main intention had been to straighten out the blurring of calling a hedge fund manager communist. Nowadays everything gets blurred by people misrepresenting political concepts. Either the people have been dumbed-down by misinformation or misrepresenting is done in order to keep neo-liberalism the dominant economical model. On many occasions I had read comments of people seemingly believing that Nationalsocialism had been some variant of socialism. Even the ideas of Bernie Sanders had been misrepresented as socialist instead of social democratic ones.

backwardsevolution , July 13, 2017 at 6:21 pm

Joe Average – Dave P. mentioned Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's book entitled "Two Hundred Years Together" the other day. I've been reading a long synopsis of this book. What Britton says appears to be quite true. I don't know about Browder, but from what I've read the Jews were instrumental in the communist party, in the deaths of so many Russians. It wasn't just the Jews, but they played a big part. It's no wonder Solzhenitsyn's book has been "lost in translation", at least into English, for so many years.

I've also heard that it was the Jewish commissars who, when the USSR fell apart, rushed off to grab everything they could (with the help of outside Jewish money) and became the Russian oligarchs we hear about today. This is probably what Britton is getting at: "His father has a communist past." You go from running the government to owning it. Anti-Putin because Putin put a stop to them.

Dave P. , July 13, 2017 at 7:37 pm

backwardsevolution: I worked with a Soviet emigre engineer – Jewish – on the same project in an Engineering design and construction company during early 1990's. He immigrated with his family around 1991. In Soviet Union, there being no private financial institutions or lawyers so to speak , many Jews went into science and engineering. A very interesting person, we were close work place friends. His elder brother had stayed behind back in Russia. His brother was in Moscow and involved in this plunder going on there. He used to tell me all these hair raising first hand stories about what was going on in Russia during that time. All the plunder flowed into the Western Countries.

In recent history, no country went through this kind of plunder on a scale Russia went through during ten or fifteen years starting in 1992. Russia was a very badly ravaged country when Putin took over. Means of production, finance, all came to halt, and society itself had completely broken down. It appears that the West has all the intentions to do it again.

Bruce Walker , July 13, 2017 at 9:29 pm

I have read all the comments up to yours you have told it like it was in Russia in those years. Browder was the king of the crooks looting Russia. Then he got to John McCain with all his lies and bullshit and was responsible for the sanctions on Russia. All the comments aboutBrowders grandfather andCommunist party are all true but hardly important. Except that it probably was how Browder was able to get his fingers on the pie in Russia. And he sure did get his fingers in the pie BIG TIME.

I am a Canadian and am aware of Maginsky Act in Canada. Our Minister Chrystal Freeland met with William Brawder in Davos a few months ago both of these two you could say are not fans of Putin, I certainly don't know what they spoke about but other than lies from Browder there is no reason she should have been talking with him. I have made comments on other forums regarding these two meeting. Read Browders book and hopefully see the documentary that this article is about. When I read his book I knew instantly that he was a crook a charloten and a liar. Just the kind of folk John McCain and a lot of other folks in US politics love. You all have a nice Peacefull day

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 12:38 am

Joe Average – "I guess that this book puts blame for Communism entirely on the Jewish people and that this gave even further rise to antisemitism in the Germany of the 1930's."

No, it doesn't put the blame entirely on the Jews; it just spells out that they did play a large part. As one Jewish scholar said, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was too much of an academic, too intelligent to ever put the blame entirely on one group. But something like 40 – 60 million died – shot, taken out on boats with rocks around their necks and thrown overboard, starved, gassed in rail cars, poisoned, worked to death, froze, you name it. Every other human slaughter pales in comparison. Good old man, so civilized (sarc)!

But someone(s) has been instrumental in keeping this book from being translated into English (or so I've read many places online). Solzhenitsyn's "Gulag Archipelago" and his other books have been translated, but not this one. (Although I just found one site that has almost all of the chapters translated, but not all). Several people ordered the book off Amazon, only to find out that it was in the Russian language. LOL

Solzhenitsyn does say at one point in the book: "Communist rebellions in Germany post-WWI was a big reason for the revival of anti-Semitism (as there was no serious anti-Semitism in the imperial [Kaiser] Germany of 1870 – 1918)."

Lots of Jewish people made it into the upper levels of the Soviet government, academia, etc. (and lots of them were murdered too). I might skip reading these types of books until I get older. Too bleak. Hard enough reading about the day-to-day stuff here without going back in time for more fun!

I remember reading Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine," but I just could not get through the chapter on the USSR falling apart. I started reading it, but I didn't want to finish it (and I didn't) because it just made me angry. The West was too unfair! Russia was asking for help, but instead the West just looted. I'd say that Russia was very lucky to have someone like Putin clean it up.

Keep smiling, Joe.

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 12:58 am

Dave P. – I told you, you are a wealth of information, a walking encyclopedia. Interesting about your co-worker. Sounds like it was a free-for-all in Russia. Yes, I totally agree that Putin has done and is doing all he can to bring his country back up. Very difficult job he is doing, and I hope he is successful at keeping the West out as much as he can, at least until Russia is strong and sure enough to invite them in on their own terms.

Now go and tell your wife what I said about you being a "walking encyclopedia". She'll probably have a good laugh. (Not that you're not, but you know what she'll say: "Okay, smartie, now go and do the dishes.")

Chucky LeRoi , July 14, 2017 at 9:56 am

Just some small scale, local color kind of stuff, but living in the USA, west coast specifically, it was quite noticeable in the mid to late '90's how many Russians with money were suddenly appearing. No apparent skills or 'jobs', but seemingly able to pay for stuff. Expensive stuff.

A neighbor invited us to her 'place in the mountains', which turned out to be where a lumber company had almost terra-formed an area and was selling off the results. Her advice: When you go to the lake (i.e., the low area now gathering runoff, paddle boats rentals, concession stand) you will see a lot of men with huge stomachs and tiny Speedos. They will be very rude, pushy, confrontational. Ignore them, DO NOT comment on their rudeness or try to deal with their manners. They are Russians, and the amount of trouble it will stir up – and probable repercussions – are simply not worth it.

Back in town, the anecdotes start piling up quickly. I am talking crowbars through windows (for a perceived insult). A beating where the victim – who was probably trying something shady – was so pulped the emergency room staff couldn't tell if the implement used was a 2X4 or a baseball bat. When found he had with $3k in his pocket: robbery was not the motive. More traffic accidents involving guys with very nice cars and serious attitude problems. I could go on. More and more often somewhere in the relating of these incidents the phrase " this Russian guy " would come up. It was the increased use of this phrase that was so noticeable.

And now the disclaimer.

Before anybody goes off, I am not anti-Russian, Russo-phobic, what have you. I studied the Russian language in high school and college (admittedly decades ago). My tax guy is Russian. I love him. My day to day interactions have led me to this pop psychology observation: the extreme conditions that produced that people and culture produced extremes. When they are of the good, loving , caring, cultured, helpful sort, you could ask for no better friends. The generosity can be embarrassing. When they are of the materialistic, evil, self-centered don't f**k with me I am THE BADDEST ASS ON THE PLANET sort, the level of mania and self-importance is impossible to deal with, just get as far away as possible. It's worked for me.

Joe Average , July 13, 2017 at 8:10 pm

backwardsevolution,

thanks for the info. I'll add the book to the list of books onto my to-read list. As far as I know a Kibbutz could be described as a Communist microcosm. The whole idea of Communism itself is based on Marx (a Jew by birth). A while ago I had started reading "Mein Kampf". I've got to finish the book, in order to see if my assumption is correct. I guess that this book puts blame for Communism entirely on the Jewish people and that this gave even further rise to antisemitism in the Germany of the 1930's.

The most known Russian Oligarchs that I've heard of are mainly of Jewish origin, but as far as I know they had been too young to be commissars at the time of the demise of the USSR. At least one aspect I've read of many times is that a lot of them built their fortunes with the help of quite shady business dealings.

With regard to President Putin I've read that he made a deal with the oligarchs: they should pay their taxes, keep/invest their money in Russia and keep out of politics. In return he wouldn't dig too deep into their past. Right at the moment everybody in the West is against President Putin, because he stopped the looting of his country and its citizens and that's something our Western oligarchs and financial institutions don't like.

On a side note: Several years ago I had started to read several volumes about German history. Back then I didn't notice an important aspect that should attract my attention a few years later when reading about the rise of John D. Rockefeller. Charlemagne (Charles the Great) took over power from the Merovingians. Prior to becoming King of the Franks he had been Hausmeier (Mayor of the Palace) for the Merovingians. Mayor of the Palace was the title of the manager of the household, which seems to be similar to a procurator and/or accountant (bookkeeper). The similarity of the beginnings of both careers struck me. John D. Rockefeller started as a bookkeeper. If you look at Bill Gates you'll realize that he was smart enough to buy an operating system for a few dollars, improved it and sold it to IBM on a large scale. The widely celebrated Steve Jobs was basically the marketing guy, whilst the real brain behind (the product) Apple had been Steve Wozniak.

Another side note: If we're going down the path of neo-liberalism it will lead us straight back to feudalism – at least if the economy doesn't blow up (PCR, Michael Hudson, Mike Whitney, Mike Maloney, Jim Rogers, Richard D. Wolff, and many more economists make excellent points that our present Western economy can't go on forever and is kept alive artificially).

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 12:50 am

Joe Average – somehow my reply to you ended up above your post. What? How did that happen? You can find it there. Thanks for the interesting info about John D. Rockefeller, Gates, Jobs and Wozniak. Some are good managers, others good at sales, while others are the creative inventors.

Yes, Joe, I totally agree that we are headed back to feudalism. I don't think we'll have much choice as the oil is running out. We'll probably be okay, but our children? I worry about them. They'll notice a big change in their lifetimes. The discovery and capture of oil pulled forward a large population. As we scale back, we could be in trouble, food-wise. Or at least it looks that way.

Thanks, Joe.

Miranda Keefe , July 14, 2017 at 5:48 am

Charlemagne did not take over from the Merovingians. The Mayor of the Palace was not an accountant.

During the 7th Century the Mayor of the Place more and more became the actual ruler of the Franks. The office had existed for over a century and was basically the "prime minister" to the king. By the time Pepin of Herstal, a scion of a powerful Frankish family, took the position in 680, the king was ceremonial leader doing ritual and the Mayor ruled- like the relationship of the Emperor and the Shogun in Japan. In 687 Pepin's Austrasia conquered Neustria and Burgundy and he added "Duke of the Franks" to his titles. The office became hereditary.

When Pepin died in 714 there was some unrest as nobles from various parts of the joint kingdoms attempted to get different ones of his heirs in the office until his son Charles Martel took the reins in 718. This is the famous Charles Martel who defeated the Moors at Tours in 732. But that was not his only accomplishment as he basically extended the Frankish kingdom to include Saxony. Charles not only ruled but when the king died he picked which possible heir would become king. Finally near the end of his reign he didn't even bother replacing the king and the throne was empty.

When Charles Martel died in 741 he followed Frankish custom and divided his kingdom among his sons. By 747 his younger son, Pepin the Short, had consolidated his rule and with the support of the Pope, deposed the last Merovingian King and became the first Carolingian King in 751- the dynasty taking its name from Charles Martel. Thus Pepin reunited the two aspects of the Frankish ruler, combining the rule of the Mayor with the ceremonial reign of the King into the new Kingship.

Pepin expanded the kingdom beyond the Frankish lands even more and his son, Charlemagne, continued that. Charlemagne was 8 when his father took the title of King. Charlemagne never was the Mayor of the Palace, but grew up as the prince. He became King of the Franks in 768 ruling with his brother, sole King in 781, and then started becoming King of other countries until he united it all in 800 as the restored Western Roman Emperor.

When he died in 814 the Empire was divided into three Kingdoms and they never reunited again. The western one evolved into France. The eastern one evolved in the Holy Roman Empire and eventually Germany. The middle one never solidified but became the Low Countries, Switzerland, and the Italian states.

Anna , July 14, 2017 at 9:45 am

The Canadian Minister Chrysta Freeland met with William Brawder in Davos a few months ago " -- Birds of a feather flock together. Mrs. Chrystal Freeland has a very interesting background for which she is very proud of: her granddad was a Ukrainian Nazi collaborator denounced by Jewish investigators: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/02/27/a-nazi-skeleton-in-the-family-closet/

Since the inti-Russian tenor of the Canadian Minister Chrysta Freeland is in accord with the US ziocons anti-Russian policies (never mind all this fuss about WWII Jewish mass graves in Ukraine), "Chrysta" is totally approved by the US government.

Joe Average , July 14, 2017 at 11:32 pm

I'll reply to myself in order to send a response to backwardsevolution and Miranda Keefe.

For a change I'll be so bold to ignore gentleman style and reply in the order of the posts – instead of Ladies first.

backwardsevolution,

in my first paragraph I failed to make a clear distinction. I started with the remark that I'm adding the book "Two Hundred Years Together" to my to-read list and then mentioned that I'm right now reading "Mein Kampf". All remarks after mentioning the latter book are directed at this one – and not the one of Solzhenitsyn.

Miranda Keefe,

I'm aware that accountant isn't an exact characterization of the concept of a Mayor of the Palace. As a precaution I had added the phrase "seems to be similar". You're correct with the statement that Charlemagne was descendant Karl Martel. At first I intended to write that Karolinger (Carolings) took over from Merowinger (Merovingians), because those details are irrelevant to the point that I wanted to make. It would've been an information overload. My main point was the power of accountants and related fields such as sales and marketing. Neither John D. Rockefeller, Bill Gates nor Steve Jobs actually created their products from scratch.

Many of those who are listed as billionaires haven't been creators / inventors themselves. Completely decoupled from actual production is banking. Warren Buffet is started as an investment salesman, later stock broker and investor. Oversimplified you could describe this activity as accounting or sales. It's the same with George Soros and Carl Icahn. Without proper supervision money managers (or accountants) had and still do screw those who had hired them. One of those victims is former billionaire heiress Madeleine Schickedanz ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madeleine_Schickedanz ). Generalized you could also say that BlackRock is your money manager accountant. If you've got some investment (that dates back before 2008), which promises you a higher interest rate after a term of lets say 20 years, the company with which you have the contract with may have invested your money with BlackRock. The financial crisis of 2008 has shown that finance (accountants / money managers) are taking over. Aren't investment bankers the ones who get paid large bonuses in case of success and don't face hardly any consequences in case of failure? Well, whatever turn future might take, one thing is for sure: whenever SHTF even the most colorful printed pieces of paper will not taste very well.

Cal , July 13, 2017 at 10:13 pm

History's Greatest Heist: The Looting of Russia by the Bolsheviks on

http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1nppst

History's Greatest Heist: The Looting of Russia by the Bolsheviks . EVER SINCE THE Emperor Constantine established the legal position of the church in the

Many Bolsheviks fled to Germany , taking with them some loot that enabled them to get established in Germany. Lots of invaluable art work also.

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 1:54 am

Cal – read about "History's Greatest Heist" on Amazon. Sounds interesting. Was one of the main reasons for the Czar's overthrow to steal and then flee? It's got to have been on some minds. A lot of people got killed, and they would have had wedding rings, gold, etc. That doesn't even include the wealth that could be stolen from the Czar. Was the theft just one of those things that happened through opportunism, or was it one of the main reasons for the overthrow in the first place, get some dough and run with it?

Cal , July 14, 2017 at 2:22 pm

@ backwards

" Was the theft just one of those things that happened through opportunism, or was it one of the main reasons for the overthrow"'

imo some of both. I am sure when they were selling off Russian valuables to finance their revolution a lot of them set aside some loot for themselves.

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 4:09 pm

Cal – thank you. Good books like this get us closer and closer to the truth. Thank goodness for these people.

Brad Owen , July 14, 2017 at 11:45 am

An autocratic oligarch would probably be a better description. He probably believes like other Synarchist financiers that they should rightfully rule the World, and see democratic processes as heresy against "The Natural Order for human society", or some such belief.

Brad Owen , July 14, 2017 at 12:13 pm

Looking up "A short definition of Synarchism (a Post-Napoleonic social phenomenon) by Lyndon LaRouche" would give much insight into what's going on. People from the intelligence community made sure a copy of a 1940 army intelligence dossier labelled something like "Synarchism:NAZI/Communist" got into Lyndon's hands. It speaks of the the Synarchist method of attacking a targeted society from both extreme (Right-Left) ends of the political spectrum. I guess this is dialectics? I suppose the existence of the one extreme legitimizes the harsh, anti-democratic/anti-human measures taken to exterminate it by the other extreme, actually destroying the targeted society in the process. America, USSR, and (Sun Yat Sen's old Republic of) China were the targeted societies in the pre-WWII/WWII yearsfor their "sins" of championing We The People against Oligarchy. FDR knew the Synarchist threat and sided with Russia and China against Germany and Japan. He knew that, after dealing with the battlefield NAZIs, the "Boardroom" NAZIs would have to be dealt with Post-War. That all changed with his death.The Synarchists are still at it today, hence all the rabid Russo-phobia, the Pacific Pivot, and the drive towards war. This is all being foiled with Trump's friendly, cooperative approach towards Russia and China.

mike k , July 13, 2017 at 4:11 pm

Big Brother at work – always protecting us from upsetting information. How nice of him to insure our comfort. No need for us to bother with all of this confusing stuff, he can do all that for us. The mainstream media will tell us all we need to know .. (Virginia – please notice my use of irony.)

Joe Tedesky , July 13, 2017 at 4:21 pm

Do you remember mike K when porn was censored, and there were two sides to every issue as compromise was always on the table? Now porn is accessible on cable TV, and there is only one side to every issue, and that's I'm right about everything and your not, what compromise with you?

Don't get me wrong, I don't really care how we deal with porn, but I am very concerned to why censorship is showing up whereas we can't see certain things, for certain reasons we know nothing about. Also, I find it unnerving that we as a society continue to stay so undivided. Sure, we can't all see the same things the same way, but maybe it's me, and I'm getting older by the minute, but where is our cooperation to at least try and work with each other?

Always like reading your comments mike K Joe

Joe Average , July 13, 2017 at 5:09 pm

Joe,

when it comes to the choice of watching porn and bodies torn apart (real war pictures), I prefer the first one, although we in the West should be confronted with the horrible pictures of what we're assisting/doing.

Joe Tedesky , July 13, 2017 at 5:27 pm

This is where the Two Joe's are alike.

mike k , July 13, 2017 at 6:07 pm

I do remember those days Joe. I am 86 now, so a lot has changed since 1931. With the 'greed is good' philosophy in vogue now, those who seek compromise are seen as suckers for the more single minded to take advantage of. Respect for rules of decency is just about gone, especially at the top of the wealth pyramid.

Cal , July 13, 2017 at 10:15 pm

Yep

BannanaBoat , July 13, 2017 at 6:36 pm

Distraction from critical thinking, excellent observation ( please forget the NeoCon Demos they are responsible for half of the nightmare USA society has become.

ranney , July 13, 2017 at 4:37 pm

Wow Robert, what a fascinating article! And how complicated things become "when first we practice to deceive".
Abe thank you for the link to Ritter's article; that's a really good one too!

John , July 13, 2017 at 4:40 pm

If we get into a shooting war with Russia and the human race somehow survives it Robert Parry' s name will one day appear in the history books as the person who most thoroughly documented the events leading up to that war. He will be considered to be a top historian as well as a top journalist.

Abe , July 13, 2017 at 7:01 pm

"Browder, who abjured his American citizenship in 1998 to become a British subject, reveals more about his own selective advocacy of democratic principles than about the film itself. He might recall that in his former homeland freedom of the press remains a cherished value."

A Response to William Browder
By Rachel Bauman
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/response-william-browder-16654

Abe , July 13, 2017 at 7:16 pm

William Browder is a "shareholder activist" the way Mikhail Khodorkovsky is a "human rights activist".

Both loudly bleat the "story" of their heroic "fight for justice" for billionaire Jewish oligarchs: themselves.

http://www.haaretz.com/polopoly_fs/1.686922.1447865981!/image/78952068.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_625/78952068.jpg

Abe , July 13, 2017 at 7:19 pm

"never driven by the money"
https://www.thejc.com/culture/books/be-careful-of-putin-he-is-a-true-enemy-of-jews-1.61745

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 2:50 am

Abe – "never driven by the money". No, he would never be that type of guy (sarc)!

"It's hard to know what Browder will do next. He rules out any government ambitions, instead saying he can achieve more by lobbying it.

This summer, he says he met "big Hollywood players" in a bid to turn his book into a major film.

"The most important next step in the campaign is to adapt the book into a Hollywood feature film," he says. "I have been approached by many film-makers and spent part of the summer in LA meeting with screenwriters, producers and directors to figure out what the best constellation of players will be on this.

"There are a lot of people looking at it. It's still difficult to say who we will end up choosing. There are many interesting options, but I'm not going to name any names."

What the ..? I can see it now, George Clooney in the lead role, Mr. White Helmets himself, with his twins in tow.

Kiza , July 15, 2017 at 1:56 am

Is it not impressive how money buys out reality in the modern world? This is why one can safely assume that whatever is told in the MSM is completely opposite to the truth. Would MSM have to push it if it were the truth? You may call this Kiza's Law if you like (modestly): " The truth is always opposite to what MSM say! " The 0.1% of situations where this is not the case is the margin of error.

Abe , July 13, 2017 at 7:39 pm

"no figure in this saga has a more tangled family relationship with the Kremlin than the London-based hedge fund manager Bill Browder [ ]

"there's a reticence in his Jewish narrative. One of his first jobs in London is with the investment operation of the publishing billionaire Robert Maxwell. As it happens, Maxwell was originally a Czech Jewish Holocaust survivor who fled and became a decorated British soldier, then helped in 1948 to set up the secret arms supply line to newly independent Israel from communist Czechoslovakia. He was also rumored to be a longtime Mossad agent. But you learn none of that from Browder's memoir.

"The silence is particularly striking because when Browder launches his own fund, he hires a former Israeli Mossad agent, Ariel, to set up his security operation, manned mainly by Israelis. Over time, Browder and Ariel become close. How did that connection come about? Was it through Maxwell? Wherever it started, the origin would add to the story. Why not tell it?

"When Browder sets up his own fund, Hermitage Capital Management -- named for the famed czarist-era St. Petersburg art museum, though that's not explained either -- his first investor is Beny Steinmetz, the Israeli diamond billionaire. Browder tells how Steinmetz introduced him to the Lebanese-Brazilian Jewish banking billionaire Edmond Safra, who invests and becomes not just a partner but also a mentor and friend.

"Safra is also internationally renowned as the dean of Sephardi Jewish philanthropy; the main backer of Israel's Shas party, the Sephardi Torah Guardians, and of New York's Holocaust memorial museum, and a megadonor to Yeshiva University, Hebrew University, the Weizmann Institute and much more. Browder must have known all that. Considering the closeness of the two, it's surprising that none of it gets mentioned.

"It's possible that Browder's reticence about his Jewish connections is simply another instance of the inarticulateness that seizes so many American Jews when they try to address their Jewishness."

http://forward.com/news/376788/the-secret-jewish-history-of-donald-trump-jrs-russia-scandal/

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 3:15 am

Abe – what a web. Money makes money, doesn't it? It's often what club you belong to and who you know. I remember a millionaire in my area long ago who went bankrupt. The wealthy simply chipped in, gave him some start-up money, and he was off to the races again. Simple as that. And I would think that the Jews are an even tighter group who invest with each other, are privy to inside information, get laws changed in favor of each other, pay people off when one gets in trouble. Browder seems a shifty sort. As the article says, he leaves a lot out.

Abe , July 14, 2017 at 11:37 pm

In 1988, Stanton Wheeler (Yale University – Law School), David L. Weisburd (Hebrew University of Jerusalem; George Mason University – The Department of Criminology, Law & Society; Hebrew University of Jerusalem – Faculty of Law). Elin Waring (Yale University – Law School), and Nancy Bode (Government of the State of Minnesota) published a major study on white collar crime in America.

Part of a larger program of research on white-collar crime supported by a grant from the United States Department of Justice's National Institute of Justice, the study included "the more special forms associated with the abuse of political power [ ] or abuse of financial power". The study was also published as a Hebrew University of Jerusalem Legal Research Paper

The research team noted that Jews were over-represented relative to their share of the U.S. population:

"With respect to religion, there is one clear finding. Although many in both white collar and common crime categories do not claim a particular religious faith [ ] It would be a fair summary of our. data to say that, demographically speaking, white collar offenders are predominantly middle-aged white males with an over-representation of Jews."

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2632989

In 1991, David L. Weisburd published his study of Crimes of the Middle Classes: White-Collar Offenders in the Federal Courts, Weisburd found that although Jews comprised only around 2% of the United States population, they contributed at least 9% of lower category white-collar crimes (bank embezzlement, tax fraud and bank fraud), at least 15% of moderate category white-collar crimes (mail fraud, false claims, and bribery), and at least 33% of high category white-collar crimes (antitrust and securities fraud). Weisburg showed greater frequency of Jewish offenders at the top of the hierarchy of white collar crime. In Weisbug's sample of financial crime in America, Jews were responsible for 23.9%.

Kiza , July 15, 2017 at 2:26 am

What I find most interesting is how Putin handles the Jews.

It is obvious that he is the one who saved the country of Russia from the looting of the 90s by the Russian-American Jewish mafia. This is the most direct explanation for his demonisation in the West, his feat will never be forgiven, not even in history books (a demon forever). Even to this day, for example in Syria, Putin's main confrontation is not against US then against the Zionist Jews, whose principal tool is US. Yet, there is not a single anti-Semitic sentence that Putin ever uttered. Also, Putin let the Jewish oligarchs who plundered Russia keep their money if they accepted the authority of the Russian state, kept employing Russians and paying Russian taxes. But he openly confronted those who refused (Berezovsky, Khodorovsky etc). Furthermore, Putin lets Israel bomb Syria under his protection to abandon. Finally, Putin is known in Russia as a great supporter of Jews and Israel, almost a good friend of Nutty Yahoo.

Therefore, it appears to me that the Putin's principal strategy is to appeal to the honest Jewish majority to restrain the criminal Jewish minority (including the criminally insane), to divide them instead of confronting them all as a group, which is what the anti-Semitic Europeans have traditionally been doing. His judo-technique is in using Jewish power to restrain the Jews. I still do not know if his strategy will succeed in the long run, but it certainly is an interesting new approach (unless I do not know history enough) to an ancient problem. It is almost funny how so many US people think that the problem with the nefarious Jewish money power started with US, if they are even aware of it.

Cal , July 16, 2017 at 5:41 am

" His judo-technique is in using Jewish power to restrain the Jews. "

The Jews have no power without their uber Jew money men, most of whom are ardent Zionist.
And because they get some benefits from the lobbying heft of the Zionist control of congress they arent going to go against them.

Abe , July 15, 2017 at 5:11 pm

Bill Browder with American-Israeli interviewer Natasha Mozgovaya, TV host for Voice of America.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbgNeQ_xINM

In this 2015 tirade, Browder declared "Someone has to punch Putin in the nose" and urged "supplying arms to the Ukrainians and putting troops, NATO troops, in all of the surrounding countries".

The choice of Mozgovaya as interviewer was significant to promote Browder with the Russian Jewish community abroad.

Born in the Soviet Union in 1979, Mozgovaya immigrated to Israel with her family in 1990. She became a correspondent for the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronoth in 2000. Although working most of the time in Hebrew, her reports in Russian appeared in various publications in Russia.

Mozgovaya covered the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, including interviews with President Victor Yushenko and his partner-rival Yulia Timoshenko, as well as the Russian Mafia and Russian oligarchs. During the presidency of Vladimir Putin, Mozgovaya gave one of the last interviews with the Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya. She interviewed Garry Kasparov, Edward Limonov, Boris Berezovsky, Chechen exiles such as Ahmed Zakaev, and the widow of ex-KGB agent Alexander Litvinenko.

In 2008, Mozgovaya left Yedioth Ahronoth to become the Washington Bureau Chief for Haaretz newspaper in Washington, D.C.. She was a frequent lecturer on Israel and Middle Eastern affairs at U.S. think-tanks. In 2013, Mozgovaya started working at the Voice of America.

HIDE BEHIND , July 13, 2017 at 7:43 pm

Gramps was decended from an old Irish New England Yankee lineage and in my youth he always dragged me along when the town meetings were held, so my ideas of American DEmocracy stem from that background, one of open participation.
The local newspapers had more social chit chat than political news of international or for that mstter State or Federal shenanigansbut everu member in that far flung settled communit read them from front to back; ss a child I got to read the funny and sports pages until Gramps got finidhed reading the "News Section, always the news first yhen the lesser BS when time allowed,this habit instilled in me the sence of
priority.
Aftrr I had read his dection of paper he would talk with me,even being a yonker, in a serious but opinionated manner, of the Editorial section which had local commentary letterd to the editor as large as somtimes too pages.
I wonder today at which section of papersf at all, is read by american public, and at how manyadults discuss importsn news worthy tppics with their children.
At advent of TV we still had trustworthy journalist to finally be seen after years of but reading their columns or listening on radios,almost tottaly all males but men of honesty and character, and worthy of trust.
They wrre a part of all social stratas, had lived real lives and yes most eere well educated but not the elitist thinking jrrks who are no more than parrots repeating whatevrr a teleprompter or bias of their employers say to write.
Wrll back to Gramps and hid home spun wisdom: He alwsys ,and shoeed by example at those old and somrtimes boistrous town Halls, that first you askef a question, thought about the answer, and then questioned the answer.
This made the one being question responsible for the words he spoke.
So those who have doubts by a presumed independent journalist, damn right they should question his motives, which in reality begin to answer our unspoken questions we can no longer ask those boobs for bombs and political sychophants and their paymasters of popular media outlets.
As one who likes effeciency in prodution one monitors data to spot trends and sny aberations bring questions so yes I note this journalist deviation from the norms as well.
I can only question the why, by looking at data from surrounding trends in order to later be able to question his answers.

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 2:07 am

Hide Behind – sounds like you had a smart grandpa, and someone who cared enough about you to talk things over with you (even though he was opinionated). I try to talk things over with my kids, sometimes too much. They're known on occasion to say, "Okay, enough. We're full." I wait a few days, and then fill them up some more! Ha.

Joe Tedesky , July 13, 2017 at 10:53 pm

Here's a thought; will letting go of Trump Jr's infraction cancel out a guilty verdict of Hillary Clinton's transgressions?

I keep hearing Hillary references while people defend Donald Trump Jr over his meeting with Russian Natalia Veselnitskaya. My thinking started over how I keep hearing pundits speak to Trump Jr's 'intent'. Didn't Comey find Hillary impossible to prosecute due to her lack of 'intent'? Actually I always thought that to be prosecuted under espionage charges, the law didn't need to prove intent, but then again we are talking about Hillary here.

The more I keep hearing Trump defenders make mention of Hillary's deliberate mistakes, and the more I keep hearing Democrates point to Donald Jr's opportunistic failures, the more similarity I see between the two rivals, and the more I see an agreed upon truce ending up in a tie. Remember we live in a one party system with two wings.

Am I going down the wrong road here, or could forgiving Trump Jr allow Hillary to get a free get out of jail card?

F. G. Sanford , July 14, 2017 at 12:42 am

I've been saying all along, our government is just a big can of worms, and neither side can expose the other without opening it. But insiders on both sides are flashing their can openers like it's a game of chicken. My guess is, everybody is gonna get a free pass. I read somewhere that Preet Bharara had the goods on a whole bunch of bankers, but he sat on it clear up to the election. Then, he got fired. So much for draining the swamp. If they prosecute Hillary, it looks like a grudge match. If they prosecute Junior, it looks like revenge. If they prosecute Lynch, it looks like racism. When you deal with a government this corrupt, everybody looks innocent by comparison. I'm still betting nobody goes to jail, as long as the "deep state" thinks they have Trump under control.

Joe Tedesky , July 14, 2017 at 1:29 am

It's like we are sitting on the top of a hill looking down at a bunch of little armies attacking each other, or something.

I'm really screwy, I have contemplated to if Petraues dropped a dime on himself for having a extra martial affair, just to get out of the Benghazi mess. Just thought I'd tell you that for full disclosure.

When it comes to Hillary, does anyone remember how in the beginning of her email investigation she pointed to Colin Powell setting precedent to use a private computer? That little snitch Hillary is always the one when caught to start pointing the finger .she would never have lasted in the Mafia, but she's smart enough to know what works best in Washington DC.

I'm just starting to see the magic; get the goods on Trump Jr then make a deal with the new FBI director.

Okay go ahead and laugh, but before you do pass the popcorn, and let's see how this all plays out.

Believe half of what you hear, and nothing of what you see.

Joe

Lisa , July 14, 2017 at 4:22 am

"Believe half of what you hear, and nothing of what you see."

Joe, where does this quote originate? Or is it a paraphrase?
I once had an American lecturer (political science) at the university, and he stressed the idea that we should not believe anything we read or hear and only half of what we see. This was l-o-o-ng ago, in the 60's.

Joe Tedesky , July 14, 2017 at 10:59 am

The first time I ever heard that line, 'believe nothing of what you see', was a friend of mine said it after we watched Roberto Clemente throw a third base runner out going towards home plate, as Robert threw the ball without a bounce to the catcher who was standing up, from the deep right field corner of the field .oh those were the days.

Gregory Herr , July 14, 2017 at 9:12 pm

JT,
Clemente had an unbelievable arm! The consummate baseball player I have family in western PA, an uncle your age in fact who remembers Clemente well. Roberto also happened to be a great human being.

Joe Tedesky , July 14, 2017 at 9:56 pm

I got loss at Forbes Field. I was seven years old, it was 1957. I got separated from my older cousin, we got in for 50 cents to sit in the left field bleachers. Like I said I loss my older cousin so I walked, and walked, and just about the time I wanted my mum the most I saw daylight. I followed the daylight out of the big garage door, and I was standing within a foot of this long white foul line. All of a sudden this Black guy started yelling at me in somekind of broken English to, 'get off the field, get out of here'. Then I felt a field ushers hand grab my shoulder, and as I turned I saw my cousin standing on the fan side of the right field side of the field. The usher picked me up and threw me over to my cousin, with a warning for him to keep his eye on me. That Black baseball player was a young rookie who was recently just drafted from the then Brooklyn Dodgers .#21 Roberto Clemente.

Gregory Herr , July 14, 2017 at 10:12 pm

You were a charmed boy and now you are a charmed man. Great story life is a Field of Dreams sometimes.

Zachary Smith , July 15, 2017 at 9:00 pm

Believe half of what you hear, and nothing of what you see.

My introduction to this had the wording the other way around:

"Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you see."

This was because the workplace was saturated with rumors, and unfortunately there was a practice of management and union representatives "play-acting" for their audience. So what you "saw" was as likely as not a little theatrical production with no real meaning whatever. The two fellows shouting at each other might well be laughing about it over a cup of coffee an hour later.

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 2:01 am

Sanford – "But insiders on both sides are flashing their can openers " That's funny writing.

Gregory Herr , July 14, 2017 at 10:20 pm

yessir, love it

Kiza , July 15, 2017 at 2:41 am

Absolutely, one of the best political metaphors ever (unfortunately works in English language only).

Kiza , July 15, 2017 at 6:19 pm

BTW, they are flashing at each other not only can openers then also jail cells and grassy knolls these days. But the can openers would still be most scary.

Abe , July 14, 2017 at 2:13 am

Israeli banks have helped launder money for Russian oligarchs, while large-scale fraudulent industries, like binary options, have been allowed to flourish here.

A May 2009 diplomatic cable by the US ambassador to Israel warned that "many Russian oligarchs of Jewish origin and Jewish members of organized crime groups have received Israeli citizenship, or at least maintain residences in the country."

The United States estimated at the time that Russian crime groups had "laundered as much as $10 billion through Israeli holdings."

In 2009, then Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara charged 17 managers and employees of the Conference on Jewish Material Claims for defrauding Germany 42.5 million dollars by creating thousands of false benefit applications for people who had not suffered in the Holocaust.

The scam operated by creating phony applications with false birth dates and invented histories of persecution to process compensation claims. In some cases the recipients were born after World War II and at least one person was not even Jewish.

Among those charged was Semyon Domnitser, a former director of the conference. Many of the applicants were recruited from Brooklyn's Russian community. All those charged hail from Brooklyn.

When a phony applicant got a check, the scammers were given a cut, Bharara said. The fraud which has been going on for 16 years was related to the 400 million dollars which Germany pays out each year to Holocaust survivors.

Later, in November 2015, Bharara's office charged three Israeli men in a 23-count indictment that alleged that they ran a extensive computer hacking and fraud scheme that targeted JPMorgan Chase, The Wall Street Journal, and ten other companies.

According to prosecutors, the Israeli's operation generated "hundreds of millions of dollars of illegal profit" and exposed the personal information of more than 100 million people.

Despite his service as a useful idiot propagating the Magnitsky Myth, Bharara discovered that for Russian Jewish oligarchs, criminals and scam artists, the motto is "Nikogda ne zabyt'!" Perhaps more recognizable by the German phrase: "Niemals vergessen!"

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 3:00 am

Abe – wow, what a story. I guess it's lucrative to "never forget"! Bandits.

Cal , July 14, 2017 at 2:14 pm

https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=6180

National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS)
NCJRS Abstract
The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

NCJ Number: NCJ 006180
Title: CRIMINALITY AMONG JEWS – AN OVERVIEW

United States of America
Journal: ISSUES IN CRIMINOLOGY Volume:6 Issue:2 Dated:(SUMMER 1971) Pages:1-39
Date Published: 1971
Page Count: 15
.
Abstract: THE CONCLUSION OF MOST STUDIES IS THAT JEWS HAVE A LOW CRIME RATE. IT IS LOWER THAN THAT OF NON-JEWS TAKEN AS A WHOLE, LOWER THAN THAT OF OTHER RELIGIOUS GROUPS,

HOWEVER, THE JEWISH CRIME RATE TENDS TO BE HIGHER THAN THAT OF NONJEWS AND OTHER RELIGIOUS GROUPS FOR WHITE-COLLAR OFFENSES,

THAT IS, COMMERCIAL OR COMMERCIALLY RELATED CRIMES, SUCH AS FRAUD, FRAUDULENT BANKRUPTCY, AND EMBEZZLEMENT.

Index Term(s): Behavioral and Social Sciences ; Adult offenders ; Minorities ; Behavioral science research ; Offender classification

Country: United States of America
Language: English

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 4:21 pm

Cal – that does not surprise me at all. Of course they would be where the money is, and once you have money, you get nothing but the best defense. "I've got time and money on my side. Go ahead and take me to court. I'll string this thing along and it'll cost you a fortune. So let's deal. I'm good with a fine."

A rap on the knuckles, a fine, and no court case, no discovery of the truth that the people can see. Of course they'd be there. That IS the only place to be if you want to be a true criminal.

Skip Scott , July 15, 2017 at 1:57 pm

Thanks again Abe, you are a wealth of information. I think you have to allow for anyone to make a mistake, and Bharara has done a lot of good.

BannanaBoat , July 14, 2017 at 10:45 am

USA justice for Oilygarchs; Ignore capital crimes and mass destruction ; concentrate on entertaining shenanigans.

Cal , July 13, 2017 at 11:39 pm

If Trump wants to survive he better let go of his son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Lets start here:

Trump's personal attorneys are reportedly fed up with Jared Kushner
http://www.businessinsider.com/jared-kushner-trump-lawyers-donald-jr-emails-2017-7

Longtime Trump attorney Marc Kasowitz and his team have directed their grievance at Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and senior White House adviser.
Citing a person familiar with Trump's legal team, The Times said Kasowitz has bristled at Kushner's "whispering in the president's ear" about stories on the Russia investigation without telling Kasowitz and his team.
The Times' source said the attorneys, who were hired as private counsel to Trump in light of the Russia investigation, view Kushner "as an obstacle and a freelancer" motivated to protect himself over over Trump. The lawyers reportedly told colleagues the work environment among Trump's inner circle was untenable, The Times said, suggesting Kasowitz could resign

Second
Who thinks Jared works for Trump? I don't.
Jared works for his father Charles Kushner, the former jail bird who hired prostitutes to blackmail his brother in law into not testifying against him. Jared spent every weekend his father was in prison visiting him.,,they are inseparable.

Third
So what is Jared doing in his WH position to help his father and his failing RE empire?

Trying to get loans from China, Russia, Qatar,Qatar

And why Is Robert Mueller Probing Jared Kushner's Finances?

Because of this no doubt:..seeking a loan for the Kushners from a Russian bank.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/03/sergei-gorkov-russian-banker-jared-kushner

The White House and the bank have offered differing accounts of the Kushner-Gorkov sit-down. While the White House said Kushner met Gorkov and other foreign representatives as a transition official to "help advance the president's foreign policy goals." Vnesheconombank, also known as VEB, said it was part of talks with business leaders about the bank's development strategy.
It said Kushner was representing Kushner companies, his family real estate empire.

Jared Kushner 'tried and failed to get a $500m loan from Qatar before
http://www.independent.co.uk › News › World › Americas › US politics
2 days ago –
Jared Kushner tried and failed to secure a $500m loan from one of Qatar's richest businessmen, before pushing his father-in-law to toe a hard line with the country, it has been alleged. This intersection between Mr Kushner's real estate dealings and his father-in-law's

The Kushners are about to lose their shirts..unless one of those foreign country's banks gives them the money.

At Kushners' Flagship Building, Mounting Debt and a Foundered Deal
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/03/nyregion/kushner-companies-666-fifth-avenue.html
The Fifth Avenue skyscraper was supposed to be the Kushner Companies' flagship in the heart of Manhattan -- a record-setting $1.8 billion souvenir proclaiming that the New Jersey developers Charles Kushner and his son Jared were playing in the big leagues.
And while it has been a visible symbol of their status, it has also it has also been a financial headache almost from the start. On Wednesday, the Kushners announced that talks had broken off with a Chinese financial conglomerate for a deal worth billions to redevelop the 41-story tower, at 666 Fifth Avenue, into a flashy 80-story ultraluxury skyscraper comprising a chic retail mall, a hotel and high-priced condominiums"

Get these cockroaches out of the WH please.,,,Jared and his sister are running around the world trying to get money in exchange for giving them something from the Trump WH.

BannanaBoat , July 14, 2017 at 10:52 am

The NYC skyline displays 666 in really really really HUGE !!!! numbers. Perhaps the USA government as Cheney announced has gone to the very very very DARK side.

Cal , July 14, 2017 at 2:16 pm

Yea 666 probably isn't a coincidence .lol

Chris Kinder , July 14, 2017 at 12:15 am

What I think most comments overlook here is the following: the US is the primary imperialist aggressor in the world today, and Russia, though it is an imperialist competitor, is much weaker and is generally losing ground. Early on, the US promised that NATO would not be extended into Eastern Europe, but now look at what's happened: not only does the US have NATO allies and and missiles in Eastern Europe, but it also engineered a coup against a pro-Russian regime in Ukraine, and is now trying to drive Russia out of Eastern Ukraine, as in Crimea and the Donbass and other areas of Eastern Ukraine, which are basically Russian going back more than a century. Putin is pretty mild compered to the US' aggressive stance. That's number one.

Number two is that the current anti-Russian hysteria in the US is all about maintaining the same war-mongering stance against Russia that existed in the cold war, and also about washing clean the Democratic Party leadership's crimes in the last election. Did the Russians hack the election? Maybe they tried, but the point is that what was exposed–the emails etc–were true information! They show that the DNC worked to deprive Bernie Sanders of the nomination, and hide crimes of the Clintons'! These exposures, not any Russian connection to the exposures, are what really lost Hillary the election.

So, what is going on here? The Democrats are trying to hide their many transgressions behind an anti-Russian scare, why? Because it is working, and because it fits in with US imperialist anti-Russian aims which span the entire post-war period, and continue today. And because it might help get Trump impeached. I would not mind that result one bit, but the Democrats are no alternative: that has been shown to be true over and over again.

This is all part of the US attempt to be the dominant imperialist power in the world–something which it has pursued since the end of the last world war, and something which both Democrats and Republicans–ie, the US ruling class behind them–are committed to. Revolutionaries say: the main enemy is at home, and that is what I say now. That is no endorsement of Russian imperialism, but a rejection of all imperialism and the capitalist exploitative system that gives rise to it.

Thanks for your attention -- Chris Kinder

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 1:58 am

Chris – good post. Thanks.

mike k , July 14, 2017 at 11:35 am

Chris, I think most commenters here are aware of everything you summarized above, but we just don't put all that in each individual post.

Paranam Kid , July 14, 2017 at 6:40 am

It is ironic that Browder on his website describes himself as running a battle against corporate corruption in Russia, and there is a quote by Walter Isaacson: "Bill Browder is an amazing moral crusader". http://www.billbrowder.com/bio

HIDE BEHIND , July 14, 2017 at 10:02 am

One cannot talk of Russian monry laundering in US without exposing the Jewish Israeli and many AIPAC connections.
I studied not so much the Jewish Orthodoxy but mainly the evolution of noth their outlook upon G.. but also how those who do not believe in a G.. and still keep their cultural cohesiveness
The largest money laundering group in US is
both Jewish and Israeli, and while helping those of their cultural similarities, their ecpertise goes. Very deep in Eastern U.S. politics and especially strong in all commercial real estate, funding, setting up bribes to permitting officials,contractors and owners of construvtion firms.
Financials some quite large are within this Jew/Israel connections, as all they who offshore need those proper connections to do so. take bribes need the funding cleaned and
flow out through very large tax free Jewish Charity Orgd, the largest ones are those of Orthodox.
GOV Christie years ago headed the largest sting operation to try and uproot what at that time he believed was just statewide tax fraud and laundering operations, many odd cash flows into political party hacks running for evrry gov position electefd or appointed.
Catchng a member of one of the most influential Orthofox familys mrmbers, that member rolled on many many indivifuals of his own culture.
It was only when Vhristies investigative team began turning up far larger cases of laundering and political donations thst msinly centered in NY Stste and City, fid he then find out howuch power this grouping had.
Soon darn near every AIPAC aided elected politico from city state and rspecially Congress was warning him to end investigation.
Which he did.
His reward was for his fat ass to be funded for a run towards US Presidency, without any visibly open opposition by that cultural grouping.
No it is not odd for Jewery to charge goyim usury or to aid in political schemes that advance their groups aims.
One thing to remenber by the Bible thumpers who delay any talks of Israel ; Christian Zionist, is that to be of their culture one does not have to believe in G.
There are a few excellent books written about early days Jewish immigrant Pre Irish andblre Sicilian mafias.
The Jewish one remainst to this day but are as well orgNized as the untold history of what is known as "The Southern mafia.

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 1:55 pm

Hide Behind – fascinating! I guess if we ever knew half of what goes on behind the scenes, we'd be shocked. We only ever know things like this exist when people like you enlighten us, or when there's a blockbuster movie about it. Thanks.

Deborah Andrew , July 14, 2017 at 10:03 am

With great respect and appreciation for your writing about the current unsubstantiated conversations/writing about 'Russia-gate' I would ask if 'the other side of a story' is really what we want or, is it that we want all the facts. Analysis and opinions, that include the facts, may differ. However, it is the readers who will evaluate the varied analysis and opinions when they include all the facts known. I raise this question, as it seems to me that we have a binary approach to our thinking and decision making. Something is either good or bad, this or that. Sides are taken. Labels are added (such as conservative and progressive). Would we not be wiser and would our decision making not be wiser if it were based on a set of principles? My own preference: the precautionary principle and the principle of do no harm. I am suggesting that we abandon the phrase and notion of the 'other side of the story' and replace it with: based on the facts now known, or, based on all the facts revealed to date or, until more facts are revealed it appears

BannanaBoat , July 14, 2017 at 11:00 am

HEAR -- HEAR -- Excellent --

Zachary Smith , July 14, 2017 at 11:04 am

I would ask if 'the other side of a story' is really what we want or, is it that we want all the facts.

Replying to a question with another question isn't really good form, but given my knowledge level of this case I can see no alternative.

How do you propose to determine the "facts" when virtually none of the characters involved in the affair appear trustworthy? Also, there is a lot of evidence (displayed by Mr. Parry) that another set of "characters" we call the Mainstream Media are extremely biased and one-sided with their coverage of the story.

Again – Where am I going to find those "facts" you speak of?

Kiza , July 15, 2017 at 2:52 am

Spot on.

backwardsevolution , July 14, 2017 at 2:02 pm

Deborah Andrew – good comment, but the problem is that we never seem to get "the other side of the story" from the MSM. You are right in pointing out that "the other side of the story" probably isn't ALL there is (as nothing is completely black and white), but at least it's something. The only way we can ever get to the truth is to put the facts together and question them, but how are you going to do that when the facts are kept away from us?

It can be very frustrating, can't it, Deborah? Cheers.

Cal , July 14, 2017 at 8:52 pm

Nice comment.

None of us can know the exact truth of anything we ourselves haven't seen or been involved in. The best we can do is try to find trusted sources, be objective, analytical and compare different stories and known the backgrounds and possible agendas of the people involved in a issue or story.

We can use some clues to help us cull thru what we hear and read.

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with – a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of theircharacter by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen. .

Note: There are other ways to attack truth, but these listed are the most common, and others are likely derivatives of these. In the end, you can usually spot the professional disinfo players by one or more of seven (now 8) distinct traits:

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
by H. Michael Sweeney
copyright (c) 1997, 2000 All rights reserved

(Revised April 2000 – formerly SEVEN Traits)

1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.

2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. .

3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.

4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.

6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.

7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.

8) BONUS TRAIT: Time Constant. Wth respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:
1) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT – FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
2) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR – there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.
3) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay – the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.

Michael Kenny , July 14, 2017 at 11:22 am

I don't really see Mr Parry's point. The banning of Nekrasov's film isn't proof of the accuracy of its contents and even less does it prove that anything that runs counter to Nekrasov's argument is false. Nor does proving that a mainstream meida story is false prove that an internet story saying the opposite is true. "A calls B a liar. B proves that A is a liar. That proves that B is truthful." Not very logical! What seems to be established is that the lawyer in question represents a Russian-owned company, a money-laundering prosecution against which was settled last May on the basis of what the company called a "surprise" offer from prosecutors that was "too good to refuse". This "Russian government attorney" (dixit Goldstone) had information concerning illegal campaign contributions to the Democratic National Committee. Trump Jr jumped at it and it makes no difference whether he was tricked or even whether he actually got anything, his intent was clear. In addition DNC "dirt" did indeed appear on the internet via Wikileaks, just as "dirt" appeared in the French election. MacronLeaks proves Russiagate and "Juniorgate" confirms MacronLeaks. The question now is did Trump, as president, intervene to bring about this "too good to refuse" offer? That question cannot just be written off with the "no evidence" argument.

Skip Scott , July 14, 2017 at 1:40 pm

God, you are persistent if nothing else. Keep repeating the same lie until it is taken as true, just like the MSM. You say that Russia-gate, Macron leaks, etc can't be written off with the "no evidence" argument (how is that logical?), and then you trash a film you haven't even seen because it doesn't fit your narrative. Maybe some evidence is provided in the film, did you consider that possibility? That fact that Nekrasov started out to make a pro Broder film, and then switched sides, leads me to believe he found some disturbing evidence. And if you look into Nekrasov you will find that he is no fan of Putin, so one has to wonder what his motive is if he is lying.

I am wondering if you ever look back at previous posts, because you never reply to a rebuttal. If you did, you would see that you are almost universally seen by the commenters here as a troll. If you are being paid, I suppose it might not matter much to you. However, your employer should look for someone with more intelligent arguments. He is wasting his money on you.

Abe , July 14, 2017 at 9:27 pm

Propaganda trolls attempt to trash the information space by dismissing, distracting, diverting, denying, deceiving and distorting the facts.

The trolls aim at confusing rather than convincing the audience.

The tag team troll performance of "Michael Kenny" and "David" is accompanied by loud declarations that they have "logic" on their side and "evidence" somewhere. Then they shriek that they're being "censored".

Propaganda trolls target the comments section of independent investigative journalism sites like Consortium News, typically showing up when articles discuss the West's "regime change" wars and deception operations.

Pro-Israel Hasbara propaganda trolls also strive to discredit websites, articles, and videos critical of Israel and Zionism. Hasbara smear tactics have intensified due to increasing Israeli threats of military aggression, Israeli collusion with the United States in "regime change" projects from the Middle East to Eastern Europe, and Israeli links to international organized crime and terrorism in Syria.

Kiza , July 15, 2017 at 3:04 am

Gee Abe, you are a magician (and I thought that you only quote excellent articles). Short and sharp.

Abe , July 15, 2017 at 4:15 pm

When they have a hard time selling that they're being "censored" (after more than a dozen comments), trolls complain that they're being "dismissed" and "invalidated" by "hostile voices".

exiled off mainstreet , July 14, 2017 at 1:54 pm

Aaron Kesel, in Activistpost documents the links between Veselnitskaya and Fusion GPS, the company engaged by the Clintons to prepare the defamatory Christopher Steele Dossier against Trump later used by Comey to help gin up the Russian influence conspiracy theory. In the article, it is true the GPS connection may have involved her lobbying efforts to overturn the Magnitsky law, not the dossier, but it is also interesting that she is on record as anti-Trump and having associations with Clinton democrats. Though it may have been part of the beginnings of a conspiracy, the conspiracy may have developed later and the meeting became something they related back to to bolster this fraudulent dangerous initiative.

mike k , July 14, 2017 at 2:01 pm

I think as you say Skip that most on this blog have seen through Michael Kenny's stuff. Nobody's buying it. He's harmless. If he's here on his own dime, if we don't feed him, he will get bored and go away. If he's being payed, he may persist, but so what. Sometimes I check the MSM just to see what the propaganda line is. Kenny is like that; his shallow arguments tell me what we must counter to wake people up.

Skip Scott , July 14, 2017 at 5:51 pm

Yeah mike k, I know you're right. I don't know why I let the guy get under my skin. Perhaps it's because he never responds to a rebuttal.

Kiza , July 15, 2017 at 3:14 am

Then you would have to waste more time rebutting the (equally empty) rebuttal.

The second thing is that many trolls suffer from DID, that is the Dissociative Identity Disorder, aka sock puppetry. There is a bit of similarity in argument between David and Michael and HAWKINS, only one of them rebuts quite often.

Philippe Lemoine , July 14, 2017 at 3:41 pm

Another excellent article! I wrote a very detailed blog post in which I methodically take apart the latest "revelation" about Donald Trump Jr.'s emails. I talk a lot about the Magnitsky Act, which is very relevant to this whole story.

Joe Tedesky , July 14, 2017 at 4:43 pm

I always like reading your articles Philippe, you have a real talent. Maybe read what I wrote above, but I'm sensing this Trump Jr affair will help Hillary more than anything, to give her a reprieve from any further FBI investigations. I mean somehow, I'm sure by Hillary's standards and desires, that this whole crazy investigation thing has to end. So, would it not seem reasonable to believe that by allowing Donald Jr to be taken off the hook, that Hillary likewise will enjoy the taste of forgiveness?

Tell me if you think this Donald Trump Jr scandal could lead to this Joe

PS if so this could be a good next article to write there I go telling the band what to play, but seriously if this Russian conclusion episode goes on much longer, could you not see a grand bargain and a deal being made?

Philippe Lemoine , July 14, 2017 at 5:14 pm

Thanks for the compliment, I'm glad you like the blog. I wasn't under the impression that Clinton was under any particular danger from the Justice Department, but even if she was, she doesn't have the power to stop this Trump/Russia collusion nonsense because it's pushed by a lot of people that have nothing to do with her except for the fact that they would have preferred her to win.

Abe , July 14, 2017 at 6:48 pm

Excellent summary and analysis, Philippe. Key observation:

"as even the New York Times admits, there is no evidence that Natalia Veselnitskaya, the lawyer who met Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort for 20-30 minutes on 9 June 2016, provided any such information during that meeting. Donald Trump Jr. said that, although he asked her about it, she didn't give them anything on Clinton, but talked to him about the Magnitsky Act and Russia's decision to block adoption by American couples in retaliation. Of course, if we just had his word, we'd have no particularly good reason to believe him. But the fact remains that no documents of the sort described in Goldstone's ridiculous email ever surfaced during the campaign, which makes what he is saying about how the meeting went down pretty convincing, at least on this specific point. It should be noted that Donald Trump Jr. has offered to testify under oath about anything related to this meeting. Moreover, he also said during the interview he gave to Sean Hannity that there was no follow-up to this meeting, which is unlikely to be a lie since he must know that, given the hysteria about this meeting, it would come out. He may not be the brightest guy in the world, but surely he or at least the people who advised him before that interview are not that stupid."

Philippe Lemoine , July 14, 2017 at 10:27 pm

Thanks!

exiled off mainstreet , July 16, 2017 at 1:31 pm

Your own necpluribus article was one of the best I've seen summarising the whole controversy, and your exhaustive responses to the pro-deep state critics was edifying. I am now convinced that your view of Veselnitskaya's role in the affair and the nature her connections to the dossier drafting company GPS being based on their unrelated work on the magnitsky law is accurate.

Mike , July 14, 2017 at 9:36 pm

Pretty interesting:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-jr-russia-bill-browder-testify-senate-links-natalia-veselnitskaya-steele-dossier-a7840061.html

Big Tim , July 15, 2017 at 12:31 am

"Bill Browder, born into a notable Jewish family in Chicago, is the grandson of Earl Browder, the former leader of the Communist Party USA,[2] and the son of Eva (Tislowitz) and Felix Browder, a mathematician. He grew up in Chicago, Illinois, and attended the University of Chicago where he studied economics. He received an MBA from Stanford Business School[3] in 1989 where his classmates included Gary Kremen and Rich Kelley. In 1998, Browder gave up his US citizenship and became a British citizen.[4] Prior to setting up Hermitage, Browder worked in the Eastern European practice of the Boston Consulting Group[5] in London and managed the Russian proprietary investments desk at Salomon Brothers.[6]"

Rake , July 15, 2017 at 9:13 am

Successfully keeping a salient argument from being heard is scary, given the social media and alternative media players who are all ripe to uncover a bombshell. Sy Hersh needs to convince Nekrasov to get his documentary to WkiLeaks.

Anna , July 15, 2017 at 10:25 am

"Sy Hersh needs to convince Nekrasov to get his documentary to WkiLeaks."
Agree.

P. Clark , July 15, 2017 at 12:01 pm

When Trump suggested that a Mexican-American judge might be biased because of this ethnicity the media said this was racist. Yet these same outlets like the New York Times are now routinely questioning Russian-American loyalty because of their ethnicity. As usual a ridiculous double standard. Basically the assumption is all Russians are bad. We didn't even have this during the cold war.

Cal , July 15, 2017 at 8:10 pm

Yes indeed P. Clark .that kind or hypocrisy makes my head explode!

MichaelAngeloRaphaelo , July 15, 2017 at 12:17 pm

Enough's Enough
STOP DNC/DEMs
#CryBabyFakeNewsBS

Support Duly ELECTED
@POTUS @realDonaldTrump
#BoycottFakeNewsSponsors
#DrainTheSwamp
#MAGA

Roy G Biv , July 15, 2017 at 12:50 pm

CN article on 911 truthers:

https://www.consortiumnews.com/2011/011511.html

Finnish wonderer , July 15, 2017 at 1:19 pm

Wow, I just learned via this article that in US Nekrasov is labeled as "pro-Kremlin" by WaPo. That's just too funny. He's in a relationship with a Finnish MEP Heidi Hautala, who is very well known for her anti-Russia mentality. Nekrasov is defenetly anti-Kremlin if something. He was supposed to make an anti-Kremlin documentary, but the facts turned out to be different than he thought, but still finished his documentary.

Mark Dankof , July 15, 2017 at 3:21 pm

The lengths to which the Neo Conservative War Cabal will go to destroy freedom of speech and access to alternative news sources underscores that the United States is becoming an Orwellian agitation-propaganda police state equally dedicated to igniting World War III for Netanyahu, the Central Banks, our Wahhabic Petrodollar Partners, and a pipeline consortium or two. The Old American Republic is dead.

Roy G Biv , July 15, 2017 at 4:38 pm

Interesting to note that each and everyone of David's comments were bleached from this page. Looks like he was right about the censorship. Sad.

Abe , July 15, 2017 at 5:41 pm

Note "allegations that are unsupported by facts".

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/01/19/a-reminder-about-comment-rules-2/

David , July 16, 2017 at 3:51 pm

Duly noted Abe. But you should adhere to the first part of the statement that you somehow forgot to include:

From Editor Robert Parry: At Consortiumnews, we welcome substantive comments about our articles, but comments should avoid abusive language toward other commenters or our writers, racial or religious slurs (including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia), and allegations that are unsupported by facts.

Kiza , July 15, 2017 at 6:06 pm

My favorite was David's claim that he contributed to this zine whilst it was publishing articles not to his liking (/sarc). I kindly reminded him that people pay much more money to have publishing the way they like it – for example how much Bezos paid for Washington Post, or Omidyar to establish The Intercept.

Except for such funny component, David's comments were totally substance free and useless. Nothing lost with bleaching.

Roy G Biv , July 16, 2017 at 5:44 am

You're practicing disinformation. He actually said he contributed early on and had problems with the recent course of the CN trajectory. Censorship is cowardly.

Abe , July 16, 2017 at 1:53 pm

Consortium News welcomes substantive comments.

"David" was presenting allegations unsupported by facts and disrupting on-topic discussion.

Violations of CN comment policy are taken down by the moderator. Period. It has nothing to do with "censorship".

Stop practicing disinformation and spin, "Roy G Biv".

David , July 16, 2017 at 3:57 pm

I stopped contributing after the unintellectual dismissal of scientific 911 truthers. And it's easy for you to paint over my comments as they have been scrubbed. There was plenty of useful substance, it just ran against the tide. Sorry you didn't appreciate it the contrary viewpoint or have the curiosity to read the backstory.

Abe , July 16, 2017 at 5:02 pm

The cowardly claim of "censorship".

The typical troll whine is that their "contrary viewpoint" was "dismissed" merely because it "ran against the tide".

No. Your allegations were unsupported by facts. They still are.

Martyrdom is just another troll tactic.

dub , July 15, 2017 at 9:44 pm

torrent for the film?

Roy G Biv , July 16, 2017 at 5:56 am

Here is the pdf of the legal brief about the Magnitsky film submitted by Senator Grassly to Homeland Security Chief. Interesting read and casts doubt on the claims made in the film, refutes several claims actually. Skip past Chuck Grassly's first two page intro to get to the meat of it. If you are serious about a debate on the merits of the case, this is essential reading.

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2017-04-04%20CEG%20to%20DHS%20(Akhmetshin%20Information)%20with%20attachment.pdf

Abe , July 16, 2017 at 1:16 pm

Yes, very interesting read. By all means, examine the brief.

But forget the spin from "Roy G Biv" because the brief actually refutes nothing about Andrei Nekrasov's film.

It simply notes that the Russian government was understandably concerned about "unscrupulous swindler" and "sleazy crook" William Browder.

After your finished reading the brief, try to remember any time when Congress dared to examine a lobbying campaign undertaken on behalf of Israeli (which is to say, predominantly Russian Jewish) interests, the circumstances surrounding a pro-Israel lobbying effort and the potential FARA violations involved. or the background of a Jewish "Russian immigrant".

Note on page 3 of the cover letter the CC to The Honorable Dianne Feinstein, Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Feinstein was born Dianne Emiel Goldman in San Francisco, to Betty (née Rosenburg), a former model, and Leon Goldman, a surgeon. Feinstein's paternal grandparents were Jewish immigrants from Poland. Her maternal grandparents, the Rosenburg family, were from Saint Petersburg, Russia. While they were of German-Jewish ancestry, they practiced the Russian Orthodox faith as was required for Jews residing in Saint Petersburg.

In 1980, Feinstein married Richard C. Blum, an investment banker. In 2003, Feinstein was ranked the fifth-wealthiest senator, with an estimated net worth of US$26 million. By 2005 her net worth had increased to between US$43 million and US$99 million.

Like the rest of Congress, Feinstein knows the "right way" to vote.

David , July 16, 2017 at 1:50 pm

So you're saying because a Jew Senator was CC'd it invalidates the information? Read the first page again. The Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee is obligated to CC these submissions to the ranking member of the Committee, Jew heritage or not. Misinformation and disinformation from you Abe, or generously, maybe lazy reading. The italicized unscrupulous swindler and sleazy crook comments were quoting the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov after the Washington screening of Nekrasov's film and demonstrating Russia's intentions to discredit Browder. You are practiced at the art of deception. Hopefully readers will simply look for themselves.

Abe , July 16, 2017 at 2:11 pm

Ah, comrade "David". We see you're back muttering about "disinformation" using your "own name".

My statements about Senator Feinstein are entirely supported by facts. You really should look into that.

Also, please note that quotation marks are not italics.

And please note that the Russian Foreign Minister is legally authorized to present the view of the Russian government.

Browder is pretty effective at discrediting himself. He simply has to open his mouth.

I encourage readers to look for themselves, and not simply take the word of one Browder's sockpuppets.

David , July 16, 2017 at 2:55 pm

It won't last papushka. Every post and pended moderated post was scrubbed yesterday, to the cheers of you and your mean spirited friends. But truth is truth and should be defended. So to the point, I reread the Judiciary Committee linked document, and the items you specified are in italics, because the report is quoting Lavrov's comments to a Moscow news paper and "another paper" as evidence of Russia's efforts to undermine the credibility and standing of Browder. This is hardly obscure. It's plain as day if you just read it.

David , July 16, 2017 at 2:59 pm

Also Abe, before I get deleted again, I don't question any of you geneological description of Feinstein. I merely pointed out that she is the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, and it is normal for the Chairman of the Committee (Republican) to CC the ranking member. Unless of course it is Devin Nunes, then fairness and tradition goes out the window.

Abe , July 16, 2017 at 4:01 pm

It's plain as day, "David" or whatever other name you're trolling under, that you're here to loudly "defend" the "credibility" and "standing" of William Browder.

Sorry, but you're going to have to "defend" Browder with something other than your usual innuendo, blather about 9-11, and slurs against RP.

Otherwise it will be recognized for what it is, repeated violation of CN comment policy, and taken down by the moderator again.

Good luck to any troll who wants to "defend" Browder's record.

But you're gonna have to earn your pay with something other than your signature unsupported allegations, 9-11 diversions, and the "non-Jewish Russian haters gonna hate" propaganda shtick.

David , July 16, 2017 at 5:07 pm

I wish you would stop with the name calling. I am not a troll. I have been trying to make simple rational points. You respond by calling me names and wholly ignoring and/or misrepresenting and obfuscating easily verifiable facts. I suspect you are the moderator of this page, and if so am surprised by your consistent negative references to Jews. I'm not Jewish but you're really over the top. Of course you have many friends here so you get little push back, but I really hope you are not Bob or Sam.

Anonymous , July 16, 2017 at 10:26 am

We can see that it was what can be considered to be a Complex situation, where it was said that someone had Dirt on Hillary Clinton, but there was No collusion and there was No attempted collusion, but there was Patriotism and Concern for Others during a Perplexing situation.

This is because of what is Known as Arkancide, and which is associated with some People who say they have Dirt on the Clintons.

The Obvious and Humane thing to do was to arrange to meet the Russian Lawyer, who it was Alleged to have Dirt on Hillary Clinton, regardless of any possible Alleged Electoral advantage against Hillary Clinton, and until further information, there may have been some National Security Concerns, because it was Known that Hillary Clinton committed Espionage with Top Secret Information on her Unauthorized, Clandestine, Secret Email Server, and the Obvious cover up by the Department of Justice and the FBI, and so it was with this background that this Complex situation had to be dealt with.

This is because there is Greater Protection for a Person who has Dirt or Alleged Dirt on the Clintons, if that Information is share with other People.

This is because it is a Complete Waste of time to go to the Authorities, because they will Not do anything against Clinton Crimes, and a former Haitian Government Official was found dead only days before he was to give Testimony regarding the Clinton Foundation.

We saw this with Seth Rich, where the Police Videos has been withheld, and we have seen the Obstruction in investigating that Crime.

The message to Leakers is that Seth Rich was taken to hospital and Treated and was on his way to Fully Recovering, but he died in hospital, and those who were thinking of Leaking Understood the message from that.

There was Also concern for Rob Goldstone, who Alleged that the Russian Lawyer had Dirt on the Clintons.

We Know that is is said Goldstone that he did Not want to hear what was said at the meeting.

This is because Goldstone wanted associates of Candidate Donald Trump to Know that he did Not know what was said at that meeting.

We now Know that the meeting was a set up to Improperly obtain a FISA Warrant, which was Requested in June of 2016, and that is same the month and the year as the meeting that the Russian Lawyer attended.

There was what was an Unusual granting of a Special Visa so that the Russian Lawyer could attend that set up, which was Improperly Used to Request a FISA Warrant in order to Improperly Spy on an Opposition Political Candidate in order to Improperly gain an Electoral advantage in an Undemocratic manner, because if anything wrong was intended by Associates of Candidate Donald Trump, then there were enough People in that meeting who were the Equivalent of Establishment Democrats and Establishment Republicans, because we Know that after that meeting, that the husband of the former Florida chair of the Trump campaign obtained a front row seat to a June 2016 House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing for the Russian Lawyer.

There are Americans who consider that the 2 Major Political Party Tyranny has Betrayed the Constitution and the Principles of Democracy, because they oppose President Donald Trump's Election Integrity Commission, because they think that the Establishment Republicans and the Establishment Democrats are the Bribed and Corrupted Puppets of the Shadow Regime.

We Know from Senator Sanders, that if Americans want a Political Revolution, then they will need their own Political Party.

There are Americans who think that a Group of Democratic Party Voters and Republican Party Voters who have No association with the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, and that they may be named The Guardians of American Democracy.

These Guardians of American Democracy would be a numerous Group of People, and they would ask Republican Voters to Vote for the Democratic Party Representative instead of the Republican who is in Congress and who is seeking Reelection, in exchange for Democratic Party Voters to Vote for the Republican Party Candidate instead of the Democrat who is in Congress and who is seeking Reelection, and the same can be done for the Senate, because the American People have to Decide if it is they the Shadow Regime, or if it is We the People, and the Establishment Republicans and the Establishment Democrats are the Bribed and Corrupt Puppets of the Shadow Regime, and there would be equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats replaced in this manner, and so it will Not affect their numbers in the Congress or the Senate.

There could be People who think that Debbie Wasserman Schultz was Unacceptability Biased and Unacceptability Corrupt during the Democratic Party Primaries, and that if she wants a Democratic Party Candidate to be Elected in her Congressional District, then she Should announce that she will Not be contesting the next Election, and there could be People who think that Speaker Paul Ryan was Unacceptability Disloyal by insufficiently endorse the Republican Presidential nominee, and with other matters, and that if he wants a Republican Party Candidate to be Elected in his Congressional District, then he Should announce that he will Not be contesting the next Election, and then the Guardians of American Democracy can look at other Dinos and Rinos, including those in the Senate, because the Constitution says the words: We the People.

There are Many Americans who have Noticed that Criminal Elites escape Justice, and Corruption is the norm in American Politics.

There are those who Supported Senator Sanders who Realize that Senator Sanders would have been Impeached had he become President, and they Know that they Need President Donald Trump to prepare the Political Landscape so that someone like Senator Sanders could be President, without a Coup attempt that is being attempted on President Donald Trump, and while these People may not Vote for the Republicans, they can Refuse to Vote for the Democratic Party, until the conditions are there for a Constitutional Republic and a Constitutional Democracy, and they want the Illegal Mueller Team to recuse themselves from this pile of Vile and Putrid McCarthyist Lies Invented by their Shadow Regime Puppet Masters,

There are Many Americans who want Voter Identification and Paper Ballots for Elections, and they have seen how several States are Opposed to President Donald Trump's Commission on Election Integrity, because they want to Rig their Elections, and this is Why there are Many Americans who want America to be a Constitutional Republic and a Constitutional Democracy.

MillyBloom54 , July 16, 2017 at 12:31 pm

I just read this article in the Washington Monthly, and wish to read informed comments about this issue. There are suggestions that organized crime from Russian was heavily involved. This is a complicated mess of money, greed, etc.

http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/07/10/trumps-inner-circle-met-with-no-ordinary-russian-lawyer/

Abe , July 16, 2017 at 1:32 pm

Yes, very interesting read. By all means, examine the article, which concludes:

"So, let's please stay focused on why this matters.

"And why was Preet Bharara fired again?"

Israeli banks have helped launder money for Russian oligarchs, while large-scale fraudulent industries have been allowed to flourish in Israel.

A May 2009 diplomatic cable by the US ambassador to Israel warned that "many Russian oligarchs of Jewish origin and Jewish members of organized crime groups have received Israeli citizenship, or at least maintain residences in the country."

The United States estimated at the time that Russian crime groups had "laundered as much as $10 billion through Israeli holdings."

In 2009, then Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara charged 17 managers and employees of the Conference on Jewish Material Claims for defrauding Germany 42.5 million dollars by creating thousands of false benefit applications for people who had not suffered in the Holocaust.

The scam operated by creating phony applications with false birth dates and invented histories of persecution to process compensation claims. In some cases the recipients were born after World War II and at least one person was not even Jewish.

Among those charged was Semyon Domnitser, a former director of the conference. Many of the applicants were recruited from Brooklyn's Russian community. All those charged hail from Brooklyn.

When a phony applicant got a check, the scammers were given a cut, Bharara said. The fraud which has been going on for 16 years was related to the 400 million dollars which Germany pays out each year to Holocaust survivors.

Later, in November 2015, Bharara's office charged three Israeli men in a 23-count indictment that alleged that they ran a extensive computer hacking and fraud scheme that targeted JPMorgan Chase, The Wall Street Journal, and ten other companies.

According to prosecutors, the Israeli's operation generated "hundreds of millions of dollars of illegal profit" and exposed the personal information of more than 100 million people.

Why was Bharara fired?

Any real investigation of Russia-Gate will draw international attention towards Russian Jewish corruption in the FIRE (Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate) sectors, and lead back to Israel.

Ain't gonna happen.

David , July 16, 2017 at 3:22 pm

Remember Milly that essentially one of the first things Trump did when he came into office was fire Preet, and just days before the long awaited trial. Then, Jeff Sessions settled the case for 6 million without any testimony on a 230 million dollar case, days after. Spectacular and brazen, and structured to hide the identities of which properties were bought by which investors. Hmmmm.

David , July 16, 2017 at 3:33 pm

By the way Milly, great summary article you have linked and one that everyone who is championing the Nekrasov film should read.

Abe , July 16, 2017 at 4:37 pm

The "great" article was not written by a journalist. It's an opinion piece written by Martin Longman, a blogger and Democratic Party political consultant.

From 2012 to 2013, Longman worked for Democracy for America (DFA) a political action committee, headquartered in South Burlington, Vermont, founded by former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean.

Since March 2014, political animal Longman has managed the The Washington Monthly website and online magazine.

Although it claims to be "an independent voice", the Washington Monthly is funded by the Ford Foundation, JP Morgan Chase Foundation, and well-heeled corporate entities http://washingtonmonthly.com/about/

Longman's credentials as a "progressive" alarmist are well established. Since 2005, he has been the publisher of Booman Tribune. Longman admits that BooMan is related to the 'bogey man' (aka, bogy man, boogeyman), an evil imaginary character who harms children.

Vladimir Putin is the latest bogey man of the Democratic Party and its equally pro-Israel "opposition".

Neither party wants the conversation to involve Jewish Russian organized crime, because that leads to Israel and the pro-Israel AIPAC lobby that funds both the Republican and Democratic parties.

Very interesting.

[Dec 10, 2017] blamePutin continues to be the media s dominant hashtag. Vladimir Putin finally confesses his entire responsibility for everything bad that has ever happened since the beginning of time

Highly recommended!
Guardian in Russia coverage acts as MI6 outlet. Magnitsky probably was MI6 operation, anyway.
Notable quotes:
"... The Observer fabricated a direct quote from the Russian president for their propaganda purposes without any regard to basic journalistic standards. They wanted to blame Putin personally for the suspicions of some Russian investigators, so they just invented an imaginary statement from him so they could conveniently do so. ..."
"... What is really going on here is the classic trope of demonisation propaganda in which the demonised leader is conflated with all officials of their government and with the targeted country itself, so as to simplify and personalise the narrative of the subsequent Two Minutes Hate to be unleashed against them. ..."
"... In the same article, the documents from Russian investigators naming Browder as a suspect in certain crimes are first "seen as" a frame-up (by the sympathetic chorus of completely anonymous observers yellow journalism can always call on when an unsupported claim needs a spurious bolstering) and then outright labelled as such (see quote above) as if this alleged frame-up is a proven fact. Which it isn't. ..."
"... No evidence is required down there in the Guardian/Observer journalistic gutter before unsupported claims against Russian officials can be treated as unquestionable pseudo-facts, just as opponents of Putin can commit no crime for the outlet's hate-befuddled hacks. ..."
Dec 10, 2017 | off-guardian.org

by VT

The decline of the falsely self-described "quality" media outlet The Guardian/Observer into a deranged fake news site pushing anti-Russian hate propaganda continues apace. Take a look at this gem :

The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has accused prominent British businessman Bill Browder of being a "serial killer" – the latest extraordinary attempt by the Kremlin to frame one of its most high-profile public enemies.

But Putin has not been reported anywhere else as making any recent statement about Browder whatever, and the Observer article makes no further mention of Putin's supposed utterance or the circumstances in which it was supposedly made.

As the rest of the article makes clear, the suspicions against Browder were actually voiced by Russian police investigators and not by Putin at all.

The Observer fabricated a direct quote from the Russian president for their propaganda purposes without any regard to basic journalistic standards. They wanted to blame Putin personally for the suspicions of some Russian investigators, so they just invented an imaginary statement from him so they could conveniently do so.

What is really going on here is the classic trope of demonisation propaganda in which the demonised leader is conflated with all officials of their government and with the targeted country itself, so as to simplify and personalise the narrative of the subsequent Two Minutes Hate to be unleashed against them.

When, as in this case, the required substitution of the demonised leader for their country can't be wrung out of the facts even through the most vigorous twisting, a disreputable fake news site like The Guardian/Observer is free to simply make up new, alternative facts that better fit their disinformative agenda. Because facts aren't at all sacred when the official propaganda line demands lies.

In the same article, the documents from Russian investigators naming Browder as a suspect in certain crimes are first "seen as" a frame-up (by the sympathetic chorus of completely anonymous observers yellow journalism can always call on when an unsupported claim needs a spurious bolstering) and then outright labelled as such (see quote above) as if this alleged frame-up is a proven fact. Which it isn't.

No evidence is required down there in the Guardian/Observer journalistic gutter before unsupported claims against Russian officials can be treated as unquestionable pseudo-facts, just as opponents of Putin can commit no crime for the outlet's hate-befuddled hacks.

The above falsifications were brought to the attention of the Observer's so-called Readers Editor – the official at the Guardian/Observer responsible for "independently" defending the outlet's misdeeds against outraged readers – who did nothing. By now the article has rolled off the site's front page, rendering any possible future correction nugatory in any case.

Later in the same article Magnitsky is described as having been Browder's "tax lawyer" a standard trope of the Western propaganda narrative about the case. Magnitsky was actually an accountant .

A trifecta of fakery in one article! That makes crystal clear what the Guardian meant in this article , published at precisely the same moment as the disinformation cited above, when it said:

"We know what you are doing," Theresa May said of Russia. It's not enough to know. We need to do something about it.

By "doing something about it" they mean they're going to tell one hostile lie about Russia after another.


michaelk says November 26, 2017

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov/26/big-issue-who-will-step-in-after-bullies-have-silenced-dissenters

From the 'liberal' Guardian/Observer wing of the rightwing bourgeois press, spot the differences with the article in the Mail on Sunday by Nick Robinson?

michaelk says November 26, 2017
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-5117723/Nick-Robinson-Putin-using-fake-news-weaken-West.html

This thing seems to have been cobbled together by a guy called Nick Robinson. The same BBC Nick Robinson that hosts the Today Programme? I dunno, one feels really rather depressed at how low our media has sunk.

michaelk says November 23, 2017
I think huge swathes of the media, in the eyes of many people, have never really recovered from the ghastly debacle that was their dreadful coverage of the reasons for the illegal attack on Iraq.

The journalists want us to forget and move on, but many, many, people still remember. Nothing happened afterwards. There was no tribunal to examine the media's role in that massive international crime against humanity and things actually got worse post Iraq, which the attack on Libya and Syria illustrates.

rtj1211 says November 29, 2017
Exactly: in my opinion there should be life sentences banning scribblers who printed lies and bloodthirsty kill, kill, kill articles from ever working again in the media.

Better still, make them go fight right now in Yemen. Amazing how quickly truth will spread if journalists know they have a good chance of dying if they print lies and falsehoods ..

michaelk says November 23, 2017
At a time when the ruling elite, across virtually the entire western world, is losing it; it being, political legitimacy and the breakdown of any semblance of a social contract between the ruled and the rulers the Guardian lurches even further to the political right . amazing, though not really surprising. The Guardian's role appears to be to 'coral' radical and leftist ideas and opinions and 'groom' the educated middle class into accepting their own subjugation.

The Guardian's writers get so much, so wrong, so often it's staggering and nobody gets the boot, except for the people who allude to the incompetence at the heart of the Guardian. They fail dismally on Trump, Brexit and Corbyn and yet carry on as if everything is fine and dandy. Nothing to complain about here, mover along now.

I suppose it's because they are actually media aristocrats living in a world of privilege, and they, as members of the ruling elite, look after one another regardless of how poorly they actually perform. This is typical of an elite that's on the ropes and doomed. They choose to retreat from grubby reality into a parallel world where their own dogmas aren't challenged and they begin to believe their propaganda is real and not an artificial contruct. This is incredibly dangerous for a ruling elite because society becomes brittle and weaker by the day as the ruling dogmas become hollow and ritualized, but without traction in reality and real purpose.

The Guardian is a bit like the Tory government, lost and without any real ideas or ideals. The slow strangulation of the CIF symbolizes the crisis of confidence at the Guardian. A strong and confident ruling class welcomes criticism and is ready to brush it all off with a smile and a shrug. When they start running scared and pretending there is no dissent or opposition, well, this is a sign of decadence and profound weakness. They are losing the battle of ideas and the battle of solutions to our problems. All that really stands between them and a social revolution is a thin veneer of 'authority' and status, and that's really not enough anymore.

All our problems are pathetically and conviniently blamed on the Russians and their Demon King and his vast army of evil Trolls. It's like a political version of the Lord of the Rings.

WeatherEye says November 21, 2017
Don't expect the Guardian to cover the biggest military build-up (NATO) on Russia's borders since Hitler's 1941 invasion.

John Pilger has described the "respectable" liberal press (Guardian, NYT etc) as the most effective component of the propaganda system, precisely BECAUSE it is respectable and trusted. As to why the Guardian is so insistent in demonising Russia, I would propose that is integrates them further with a Brexit-ridden Tory government. Its Blairite columnists prefer May over Corbyn any day.

rtj1211 says November 29, 2017
The Guardian is now owned by Neocon Americans, that is why it is demonising Russia. Simple as that.
WeatherEye says November 29, 2017
Evidence?
Harry Stotle says November 21, 2017
The Guardian is trying to rescue citizens from 'dreadful dangers that we cannot see, or do not understand' – in other words they play a central role in 'the power of nightmares' https://www.youtube.com/embed/LlA8KutU2to
rtj1211 says November 21, 2017
So Russians cannot do business in America but Americans must be protected to do business in Russia?

If you look at Ukraine and how US corporations are benefitting from the US-funded coup, you ask what the US did in Russia in the 1990s and the effect it had on US business and ordinary Russian people. Were the two consistent with a common US template of economic imperialism?

In particular, you ask what Bill Browder was doing, his links to US spying organisations etc etc. You ask if he supported the rape of Russian State assets, turned a blind eye to the millions of Russians dying in the 1990s courtesy of catastrophic economic conditions. If he was killing people to stay alive, he would not have been the only one. More important is whether him making $100m+ in Russia needed conditions where tens of millions of Russians were starving .and whether he saw that as acceptable collateral damage ..he made a proactive choice, after all, to go live in Moscow. It is not like he was born there and had no chance to leave ..

I do not know the trurh about Bill Browder, but one thing I do know: very powerful Americans are capable of organising mass genocide to become rich, so there is no possible basis for painting all American businessmen as philanthropists and all Russians as murdering savages ..

michaelk says November 21, 2017
It's perfectly possible, in fact the norm historically, for people to believe passionately in the existence of invisible threats to their well-being, which, when examined calmly from another era, resemble a form of mass-hysteria or collective madness. For example; the religious faith/dogma that Satan, demons and witches were all around us. An invisible, parallel, world, by the side of our own that really existed and we were 'at war with.' Satan was our adversary, the great trickster and disseminator of 'fake news' opposed to the 'good news' provided by the Gospels.

What's remarkable, disturbing and frightening is how closely our media resemble a religious cult or the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages. The journalists have taken on a role that's close to that of a priesthood. They function as a 'filtering' layer between us and the world around us. They are, supposedly, uniquely qualified to understand the difference between truth and lies, or what's right and wrong, real news and propaganda. The Guardian actually likes this role. They our the guardians of the truth in a chaotic world.

This reminds one of the role of the clergy. Their role was to stand between ordinary people and the 'complexities' of the Bible and separate the Truths it contained from wild and 'fake' interpretations, which could easily become dangerous and undermine the social order and fundamental power relationships.

The big challenge to the role of the Church happened when the printing press allowed the ordinary people to access the information themselves and worst still when the texts were translated into the common language and not just Latin. Suddenly people could access the texts, read and begin to interpret and understand for themselves. It's hard to imagine that people were actually burned alive in England for smuggling the Bible in English translation a few centuries ago. That's how dangerous the State regarded such a 'crime.'

One can compare the translation of the Bible and the challenge to the authority of the Church and the clergy as 'guardians of the truth' to what's happeing today with the rise of the Internet and something like Wikileaks, where texts and infromation are made available uncensored and raw and the role of the traditional 'media church' and the journalist priesthood is challenged.

We're seeing a kind of media counter-reformation. That's why the Guardian turned on Assange so disgracefully and what Wikileaks represented.

WeatherEye says November 21, 2017
A brilliant historical comparison. They're now on the legal offensive in censoring the internet of course, because in truth the filter system is wholly vulnerable. Alternative media has been operating freely, yet the majority have continued to rely on MSM as if it's their only source of (dis)information, utilizing our vast internet age to the pettiness of social media and prank videos. Marx was right: capitalist society alienates people from their own humanity. We're now aliens, deprived of our original being and floating in a vacuum of Darwinist competition and barbarism. And we wonder why climate change is happening?
tutisicecream says November 21, 2017
Apparently we are "living in disorientating times" according to Viner, she goes on to say that "championing the public interest is at the heart of the Guardian's mission".

Really? How is it possible for her to say that when many of the controversial articles which appear in the Guardian are not open for comment any more. They have adopted now a view that THEIR "opinion" should not be challenged, how is that in the public interest?

In the Observer on Sunday a piece also appeared smearing RT entitled: "MPs defend fees of up to £1,000 an hour to appear on 'Kremlin propaganda' channel." However they allowed comments which make interesting reading. Many commenter's saw through their ruse and although the most vociferous critics of the Graun have been banished, but even the mild mannered ones which remain appear not the buy into the idea that RT is any different than other media outlets. With many expressing support for the news and op-ed outlet for giving voice to those who the MSM ignore – including former Guardian writers from time to time.

Why Viner's words are so poisonous is that the Graun under her stewardship has become a agitprop outlet offering no balance. In the below linked cringe worthy article there is no mention of RT being under attack in the US and having to register itself and staff as foreign agents. NO DEFENCE OF ATTACKS ON FREEDOM OF THE PRESS by the US state is mentioned.

Surely this issue is at the heart of championing public interest?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/18/mps-kremlin-propaganda-channel-rt#comments

The fact that it's not shows clearly the fake Guardian/Observer claim and their real agenda.

WE ARE DEFINITELY LIVING IN DISORIENTATION TIMES and the Guardian/Observer are leading the charge.

tutisicecream says November 21, 2017
Correction: DISORIENTATING TIMES
Peter says November 21, 2017
For the political/media/business elites (I suppose you could call them 'the Establishment') in the US and UK, the main problem with RT seems to be that a lot of people are watching it. I wonder how long it will be before access is cut. RT is launching a French-language channel next month. We are already being warned by the French MSM about how RT makes up fake news to further Putin's evil propaganda aims (unlike said MSM, we are told). Basically, elites just don't trust the people (this is certainly a constant in French political life).
Jim says November 21, 2017
It's not just that they don't allow comments on many of their articles, but even on the articles where CiF is enabled, they ban any accounts that disagree with their narrative. The end result is that Guardianistas get the false impression everyone shares their view and that they are in the majority. The Guardian moderators are like Scientology leaders who banish any outsiders for fear of influencing their cult members.
BigB says November 20, 2017
Everyone knows that Russia-gate is a feat of mass hypnosis, mesmerized from DNC financed lies. The Trump collusion myth is baseless and becoming dangerously hysterical: but conversely, the Clinton collusion scandal is not so easy to allay. Whilst it may turn out to be the greatest story never told: it looks substantive enough to me. HRC colluded with Russian oligarchy to the tune of $145m of "donations" into her slush fund. In return, Rosatom gained control of Uranium One.

A curious adjunct to this corruption: HRC opposed the Magnitsky Act in 2012. Given her subsequent rabid Russophobia: you'd have thought that if the Russians (as it has been spun) arrested a brave whistleblowing tax lawyer and murdered him in prison – she would have been quite vocal in her condemnation. No, she wanted to make Russia great again. It's amazing how $145m can focus ones attention away from ones natural instinct.

[Browder and Magnitsky were as corrupt as each other: the story that the Russians took over Browder's hedge fund and implicated them both in a $230m tax fraud and corruption scandal is as fantastical as the "Golden Shower" dossier. However, it seems to me Magnitsky's death was preventable (he died from complications of pancreatitis, for which it seems he was initially refused treatment ) ]

So if we turn the clock back to 2010-2013, it sure looks to me as though we have a Russian collusion scandal: only it's not one the Guardian will ever want to tell. Will it come out when the FBI 's "secret" informant (William D Cambell) testifies to Congress sometime this week? Not in the Guardian, because their precious Hillary Clinton is the real scandal here.

jag37777 says November 20, 2017
Browder is a spook.
susannapanevin says November 20, 2017
Reblogged this on Susanna Panevin .
Eric Blair says November 20, 2017
This "tactic" – a bold or outrageous claim made in the headline or in the first few sentences of a piece that is proven false in the very same article – is becoming depressingly common in the legacy media.

In other words, the so-called respectable media knowingly prints outright lies for propaganda and clickbait purposes.

labrebisgalloise says November 20, 2017
I dropped a line to a friend yesterday saying "only in a parallel universe would a businessman/shady dealer/tax evader such as Browder be described as an "anti-corruption campaigner."" Those not familiar with the history of Browder's grandfather, after whom a whole new "deviation" in leftist thinking was named, should look it up.
Eric Blair says November 20, 2017
Hey, MbS is also an "anti-corruption" campaigner! If the media says so it must be true!
Sav says November 20, 2017
Some months ago you saw tweets saying Russophobia had hit ridiculous levels. They hadn't seen anything yet. It's scary how easily people can be brainwashed.

The US are the masters of molesting other nations. It's not even a secret what they've been up to. Look at their budgets or the size of the intelligence buildings. Most journalists know full well of their programs, including those on social media, which they even reported on a few years back. The Guardian run stories by the CIA created and US state funded RFE/RL & then tell us with a straight face that RT is state propaganda which is destroying our democracy.

A Petherbridge says November 20, 2017
Well said – interesting to know what the Guardian is paid to run these stories funded by this arm of US state propaganda.
bevin says November 20, 2017
The madness spreads: today The Canary has/had an article 'proving' that the 'Russians' were responsible for Brexit, Trump, etc etc.

Then there is the neo-liberal 'President' of the EU charging that the extreme right wing and Russophobic warmongers in the Polish government are in fact, like the President of the USA, in Putin's pocket..

This outbreak is reaching the dimensions of the sort of mass hysteria that gave us St Vitus' dance. Oh and the 'sonic' terrorism practised against US diplomats in Havana, in which crickets working for the evil one (who he?) appear to have been responsible for a breach in diplomatic relations. It couldn't have happened to a nicer empire.

Admin says November 21, 2017
The Canary is publishing mainstream russophobia?

[Nov 01, 2017] Guardians of the Magnitsky Myth by Robert Parry

It would be interesting to explore possible connection of Browder and MI6. Why he changed his citizenship to British as the scandal unfolded?
Notable quotes:
"... For those who believe in a meaningful democracy, those tactics may be troubling enough, but the Magnitsky case, an opening shot in the New Cold War with Russia, has demonstrated how aggressively the Western powers-that-be behave toward even well-reported investigative projects that unearth inconvenient truth. ..."
"... The documentary – "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes" – was produced by filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov, who is known as a fierce critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin but who in this instance found the West's widely accepted, anti-Russian Magnitsky storyline to be a lie. ..."
"... However, instead of welcoming Nekrasov's discoveries as an important part of the debate over the West's policies toward Russia, the European Parliament pulled the plug on a premiere in Brussels and – except for a one-time showing at the Newseum in Washington – very few Americans have been allowed to see the documentary. ..."
"... This summer, Browder testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee and argued that people involved in arranging the one-time showing of Nekrasov's documentary should be prosecuted for violating the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA), which carries a five-year prison term. ..."
"... Yet, the Times article bows to Browder as the ultimate truth-teller, including repetition of his assertion that Sergei Magnitsky was a whistleblowing "tax lawyer," rather than one of Browder's accountants implicated in the tax fraud. ..."
"... While Magnitsky's profession may seem like a small detail, it gets to the heart of the mainstream media's acceptance of Browder's depiction of Magnitsky – as a crusading lawyer who died of medical neglect in a Russian prison – despite overwhelming evidence that Magnitsky was really a clever accountant caught up in the scheme. ..."
"... The "lawyer" falsehood – so eagerly swallowed by the Times and other mainstream outlets – also bears on Browder's overall credibility: If he is lying about Magnitsky's profession, why should anyone believe his other self-serving claims? ..."
"... In that adversarial setting, when Browder was asked if Magnitsky had a law degree, Browder said, "I'm not aware that he did." When asked if Magnitsky had gone to law school, Browder answered: "No." ..."
"... Yet, the Times and the rest of the mainstream media accept that Magnitsky was a "lawyer," all the better to mislead the American public regarding his alleged role as a whistleblower. ..."
"... From my book, "The Killing of William Browder," suppressed by Amazon courtesy of Browder's lawyer Jonathan Winer (Amazon obliged, no questions asked): ..."
"... Mr. Cymrot: When you told people Mr. Magnitsky's a lawyer, did you also tell them he never went to law school and never had a law license? Browder: I'm sorry. I Mr. Cymrot: When you tell – how many times have you said, "Mr. Magnitsky is a lawyer?" Browder: I don't know. Mr. Cymrot: 50? 100? 200? Browder: I don't know. Mr. Cymrot: Many, many times, right? Browder: Yes Mr. Cymrot: Have you ever told anybody that he didn't go to law school and didn't have a law degree? Browder: No. ..."
"... The fact that anyone who does scratch the surface, like yourself, is immediately attacked shows that Browder is serving the oligarchy. They wish very much to return to the rape, pillage, and plunder of Russia that they enjoyed under Yeltsin. Just like Russia-gate, they seek to control the narrative. The MSM carries their water, and people have to go to sites like this one to find the truth. Thank you very much for your work. ..."
"... Natalia Veselnitskaya herself has ties to Fusion GPS, and was given visas with the knowledge of the FBI. The whole affair smells of an FBI sting against the Trump campaign, ..."
Oct 28, 2017 | consortiumnews.com

Guardians of the Magnitsky Myth

Exclusive: In pursuit of Russia-gate, the U.S. mainstream media embraces any attack on Russia and works to ensure that Americans don't hear the other side of the story, as with the Magnitsky myth, reports Robert Parry.

As Russia-gate becomes the go-to excuse to marginalize and suppress independent and dissident media in the United States, a warning of what the future holds is the blacklisting of a documentary that debunks the so-called Magnitsky case.

The emerging outlines of the broader suppression are now apparent in moves by major technology companies – under intense political pressure – to unleash algorithms that will hunt down what major media outlets and mainstream "fact-checkers" (with their own checkered histories of getting facts wrong) deem to be "false" and then stigmatize that information with pop-up "warnings" or simply make finding it difficult for readers using major search engines.

For those who believe in a meaningful democracy, those tactics may be troubling enough, but the Magnitsky case, an opening shot in the New Cold War with Russia, has demonstrated how aggressively the Western powers-that-be behave toward even well-reported investigative projects that unearth inconvenient truth.

Throughout the U.S. and Europe, there has been determined effort to prevent the American and European publics from seeing this detailed documentary that dissects the fraudulent claims at the heart of the Magnitsky story.

The documentary – "The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes" – was produced by filmmaker Andrei Nekrasov, who is known as a fierce critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin but who in this instance found the West's widely accepted, anti-Russian Magnitsky storyline to be a lie.

However, instead of welcoming Nekrasov's discoveries as an important part of the debate over the West's policies toward Russia, the European Parliament pulled the plug on a premiere in Brussels and – except for a one-time showing at the Newseum in Washington – very few Americans have been allowed to see the documentary.

Instead, we're fed a steady diet of the frothy myth whipped up by hedge-fund investor William Browder and sold to the U.S. and European governments as the basis for sanctioning Russian officials. For years now, Browder has been given a free hand to spin his dog-ate-my-homework explanation about how some of his firms got involved a $230 million tax fraud in Russia.

Browder insists that some "corrupt" Russian police officers stole his companies' corporate seals and masterminded a convoluted conspiracy. But why anyone would trust a hedge-fund operator who got rich exploiting Russia's loose business standards is hard to comprehend.

The answer is that Browder has used his money and political influence to scare off and silence anyone who dares point to the glaring contradictions and logical gaps in his elaborate confection.

So, the hedge-fund guy who renounced his U.S. citizenship in favor of a British passport gets the royal treatment whenever he runs to Congress. His narrative just fits so neatly into the demonization of Russia and the frenzy over stopping "Russian propaganda and disinformation" by whatever means necessary.

This summer, Browder testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee and argued that people involved in arranging the one-time showing of Nekrasov's documentary should be prosecuted for violating the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA), which carries a five-year prison term.

Meanwhile, the U.S. mainstream media helps reinforce Browder's dubious tale by smearing anyone who dares question it as a "Moscow stooge" or a "useful idiot."

Magnitsky and Russia-gate

The Magnitsky controversy now has merged with the Russia-gate affair because Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, who traveled to America to challenge Browder's account, arranged a meeting with Donald Trump Jr. and other Trump campaign advisers in June 2016 to present this other side of the story.

Though nothing apparently came from that meeting, The New York Times, which always treats Browder's account as flat fact, led its Saturday editions with a breathless story entitled, " A Kremlin Link to a Memo Taken to Trump Tower ," citing similarities between Veselnitskaya's memo on the Magnitsky case and an account prepared by "one of Russia's most powerful officials, the prosecutor general Yuri Y. Chaika." Cue the spooky music as the Times challenges Veselnitskaya's honesty.

Yet, the Times article bows to Browder as the ultimate truth-teller, including repetition of his assertion that Sergei Magnitsky was a whistleblowing "tax lawyer," rather than one of Browder's accountants implicated in the tax fraud.

While Magnitsky's profession may seem like a small detail, it gets to the heart of the mainstream media's acceptance of Browder's depiction of Magnitsky – as a crusading lawyer who died of medical neglect in a Russian prison – despite overwhelming evidence that Magnitsky was really a clever accountant caught up in the scheme.

The "lawyer" falsehood – so eagerly swallowed by the Times and other mainstream outlets – also bears on Browder's overall credibility: If he is lying about Magnitsky's profession, why should anyone believe his other self-serving claims?

As investigative reporter Lucy Komisar noted in a recent article on the case, Browder offered a different description when he testified under oath in a New York court deposition in a related criminal case.

In that adversarial setting, when Browder was asked if Magnitsky had a law degree, Browder said, "I'm not aware that he did." When asked if Magnitsky had gone to law school, Browder answered: "No."

Yet, the Times and the rest of the mainstream media accept that Magnitsky was a "lawyer," all the better to mislead the American public regarding his alleged role as a whistleblower.

The rest of Browder's story stretches credulity even more as he offers a convoluted explanation of how he wasn't responsible for bogus claims made by his companies to fraudulently sneak away with $230 million in refunded taxes.

Rather than show any skepticism toward this smarmy hedge-fund operator and his claims of victimhood, the U.S. Congress and mainstream media just take him at his word because, of course, his story fits the ever-present "Russia bad" narrative.Plus, these influential people have repeated the falsehoods so often and suppressed contrary evidence with such arrogance that they apparently feel that they get to define reality, which – in many ways – is what they want to do in the future by exploiting the Russia-gate hysteria to restore their undisputed role as the "gatekeepers" on "approved" information.

Which is why Americans and Europeans should demand the right to see the Nekrasov documentary and make their own judgments, possibly with Browder given a chance after the show to rebut the overwhelming evidence of his deceptions.

Instead, Browder has used his wealth and connections to make sure that almost no one gets to see the deconstruction of his fable. And The New York Times is okay with that.

[For details on the Nekrasov documentary, see Consortiumnews.com's " A Blacklisted Film and the New Cold War. "]

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America's Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com ).

BobH , October 28, 2017 at 9:48 pm

It seems the neo-liberal establishment in the West is ready to take in any Russian dissident seeking refuge while the victims of Western aggression are denied asylum.
http://en.rfi.fr/culture/20171019-russian-artist-detained-over-paris-bank-blaze

Sam F , October 29, 2017 at 9:10 am

Yes, Congress measures human worth in bribes: more from rich immigrants than from poor refugees. We are fortunate to have Mr. Parry expose the corruption of oligarchy and its control of mass media and elections.

Those who would like to petition the NYT to make Robert Parry their senior editor may do so here:
https://www.change.org/p/new-york-times-bring-a-new-editor-to-the-new-york-times?recruiter=72650402&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink
While Mr. Parry may prefer independence, and we all know the NYT ownership makes it unlikely, and the NYT may try to ignore it, it is instructive to them that intelligent readers know better journalism when they see it. A petition demonstrates the concerns of a far larger number of potential or lost subscribers.

BobH , October 29, 2017 at 11:54 am

Yes, Sam F, I signed on to that one some time ago I'm sure the NYT has a waste basket somewhere that is full of "Russian trolls".

orayates5454 , October 28, 2017 at 11:01 pm

Commence your Home Business right now. Hang out with your Family and Earn. Start bringing $75/hr just over a computer. Very easy way to choose your Life Happy and Earning continuously. Begin here

. http://bit.do/online-Job-today44

Sendero Santos , October 30, 2017 at 3:25 am

Spam a lot.

Abe , October 28, 2017 at 11:07 pm

"no figure in this saga has a more tangled family relationship with the Kremlin than the London-based hedge fund manager Bill Browder [ ]

"there's a reticence in his Jewish narrative. One of his first jobs in London is with the investment operation of the publishing billionaire Robert Maxwell. As it happens, Maxwell was originally a Czech Jewish Holocaust survivor who fled and became a decorated British soldier, then helped in 1948 to set up the secret arms supply line to newly independent Israel from communist Czechoslovakia. He was also rumored to be a longtime Mossad agent. But you learn none of that from Browder's memoir.

"The silence is particularly striking because when Browder launches his own fund, he hires a former Israeli Mossad agent, Ariel, to set up his security operation, manned mainly by Israelis. Over time, Browder and Ariel become close. How did that connection come about? Was it through Maxwell? Wherever it started, the origin would add to the story. Why not tell it?

"When Browder sets up his own fund, Hermitage Capital Management -- named for the famed czarist-era St. Petersburg art museum, though that's not explained either -- his first investor is Beny Steinmetz, the Israeli diamond billionaire. Browder tells how Steinmetz introduced him to the Lebanese-Brazilian Jewish banking billionaire Edmond Safra, who invests and becomes not just a partner but also a mentor and friend.

"Safra is also internationally renowned as the dean of Sephardi Jewish philanthropy; the main backer of Israel's Shas party, the Sephardi Torah Guardians, and of New York's Holocaust memorial museum, and a megadonor to Yeshiva University, Hebrew University, the Weizmann Institute and much more. Browder must have known all that. Considering the closeness of the two, it's surprising that none of it gets mentioned.

"It's possible that Browder's reticence about his Jewish connections is simply another instance of the inarticulateness that seizes so many American Jews when they try to address their Jewishness."

http://forward.com/news/376788/the-secret-jewish-history-of-donald-trump-jrs-russia-sca