The Real Robert F. Kennedy (Pt. 2) - Fighting Corruption & Organized Crime
RFK: Communism & Racketeers
Originally recorded 07/11/24 as the outro for Episode 66 – Jeff Hays: The Real RFK Jr.
Podcast Version: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6
Essay Version: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6
Robert and John F. Kennedy advocated foreign policies rooted in diplomacy, nonaggression, peace and demilitarization. However, this should not cause us to the mistake these men as pushovers.
Rather, they recognized the true threats facing the constitutional republic of the United States were domestic. That we need not go abroad chasing monsters, when we had enemies at home to confront. Namely, the forces of corruption and organized crime.
Robert Kennedy was admitted to the Massachusetts Bar in 1951 after earning his J.D. from the University of Virginia. He began working as a lawyer in the Internal Security Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.[i] He spent several months with the Criminal Division to help prepare a fraud case against former Truman administration officials. Bobby resigned in June 1952 to manage his brother John’s victorious Senate campaign in Massachusetts.
After John won, Bobby was appointed by family friend, Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy, as one of 15 assistant counsels to the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI). Robert Kennedy,[ii] “feuded bitterly with the committee’s chief counsel; Roy Cohn, young, brash, ambitious and free-wheeling. Though he liked McCarthy personally Bobby was unhappy with the chairman’s reckless methods in hunting domestic Communists, as well as with the antics of Cohn. He quit the committee after six months to work with former President Hoover’s commission on government reorganization. But he returned to the committee in 1954 as counsel for the Democratic minority.”
Joseph McCarthy’s PSI was a unique period in American history. His subcommittee held 169 hearings throughout 1953 and 1954, calling 653 people to answer questions about alleged involvement in espionage and subversion on behalf of Communists.[iii]
McCarthy’s crusade against Communists, along with Congress’s House Un-American Activities Committee, led to a cultural backlash against “McCarthyism”. McCarthyism became associated with the political repression and persecution of left-wing individuals, and a campaign spreading fear of alleged Communist influence on American institutions and of Soviet espionage in the United States during the 1940s through the 1950s.[iv]
As we reexamine the events of American history, it will be worthwhile to take another look at the “McCarthyism” phenomenon. While I have no doubt that individuals like Roy Cohn and FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover abused the “fear of Communism” to persecute their opponents, the threat of subversive activities destroying the United States from inside was and is a real. The playbook outlined by Marxist-Leninist ideology, which ultimately ends in the destruction of the nuclear family and the abolition of private property, has been unfolding in front of our eyes for generations.
In 1970, a former KGB agent named Yuri Bezmenov defected to the United States.[v] He became an outspoken anti-Marxist, determined to prevent Communism from destroying the United States as it had the Soviet Union. Fourteen years after his defection, Bezmenov gave the following interview on the process of ideological subversion:[vi]
Reporter: “We spoke several times before about ideological subversion. That is a phrase that I’m afraid some Americans don’t fully understand. When the Soviets use the phrase ideological subversion, what do they mean by it?”
Yuri Bezmenov: “Ideological subversion is the process, which is legitimate, overt, and open. You can see it with your own eyes. All you have to do, all American mass media has to do is to unplug the bananas from their ears, open up their eyes and they can see it. There is no mystery. It has nothing to do with espionage.
I know that espionage intelligence gathering looks more romantic. It sells more deodorants through the advertising, probably. That’s why your Hollywood producers are so crazy about James Bond type of thrillers. But in reality, the main emphasis of the KGB is not in the area of intelligence at all. According to my opinion and of many defectors of my caliber, only about 15% of time, money and manpower is spent on espionage as such.
The other 85% is a slow process which we call either ideological subversion, or active measures. [Russian phrase], in the language of the KGB. Or psychological warfare. What it basically means is to change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that despite of the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.
It’s a great brainwashing process which goes very slow and is divided in four basic stages. The first one being demoralization. It takes from 15 to 20 years to demoralize a nation. Why that many years? Because this is the minimum number of years which requires to educate one generation of students in the country of your enemy.
Exposed to the ideology of the enemy. In other words, Marxist-Leninism ideology is being pumped into the soft heads of at least three generations of American students. Without being challenged or counterbalanced by the basic values of Americanism, American patriotism.
The result? The result you can see. Most of the people who graduated in the 60s, drop-outs or half-baked intellectuals, are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, educational system.
You are stuck with them. You cannot get rid of them. They are contaminated, they are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern. You cannot change their mind, even if you expose them to authentic information. Even if you prove that white is white and black is black. You still cannot change the basic perception. And the logical behavior.
In other words, these people, the process of demoralization is complete and irreversible. To get rid society of these people, you need another twenty or fifteen years to educate a new generation of patriotically minded, and common-sense people, who would be acting in favor of, and in the interests of United States society.”
Reporter: “And yet these people who have been programmed, and as you say, in place? And who are favorable to an opening with the Soviet concept, these are the very people who would be marked for extermination in this country?”
Bezmenov: “Most of them, yes. Simply because the psychological shock, when they will see in the future. What the beautiful society of equality and social justice means in practice. Obviously, they will revolt. They will be very unhappy, frustrated people. And Marxist-Leninist regime does not tolerate these people.
They obviously, they will join the leagues of dissenters, dissidents. Unlike in present United States, there will be no place for dissent in future Marxist-Leninist America. Here you can, you can get popular like Daniel Ellsberg, and filthy rich like Jane Fonda, for being dissident. For criticizing your Pentagon. In future, these people will be simply squashed like cockroaches. Nobody is going to pay them nothing for their beautiful, noble ideas of equality. This they don’t understand, and it will be the greatest shock for them, of course.
The demoralization process in the United States is basically completed already. For the last twenty-five years, actually it’s overfulfilled because demoralization now reaches such areas where not even Comrade Andropov and all his experts would even dream of such a tremendous success. Most of it is done by Americans to Americans. Thanks to lack of moral standards.
As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him. Even if I shower him the information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures.
Even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him concentration camp, he will refuse to believe it. Until he, he is going to receive a kick in his fat bottom. When a military boot crashes his, then he will understand. But not before that. That’s the tragic of the situation of demoralization.
So, basically America is stuck with demoralization. And unless, even if you stop here right now, here this minute, you start educating a new generation of Americans, it will still take you fifteen to twenty years to turn the tide of ideological perception of reality back to normalcy and patriotism.
The next stage is destabilization. This time, subverter does not care about your ideas and the patterns of your consumption. Whether you eat junk food and get fat and flab, it doesn’t matter anymore. This time, and it takes only from two to five years to destabilize a nation. What matters is essentials – economy, foreign relations, defense systems.
And you can see it quite clearly that in some areas, in such sensitive areas as defense and the economy. The influence of Marxist-Leninist ideas in the United States is absolutely fantastic. I could never believe it fourteen years ago when I landed in this part of the world. That the process would go that fast.
The next state, of course, is crisis. It may take only up to six weeks to bring a country to the verge of crisis. You can see it in Central America right now.
And after crisis, with a violent change of power, structure, and economy, you have the period of normalization. It may last indefinitely. Normalization is a cynical expression. Borrowed from Soviet propaganda, borrowed from when the Soviet tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia in ‘61. Comrade Brezhnev said, ‘Now the situation in brotherly Czechoslovakia is normalized.’
This is what will happen in the United States if you allow these schmucks to bring the country to crisis. To promise people all kinds of goods and paradise on Earth. To destabilize your economy, to eliminate the principle of free market competition, and to put Big Brother government in Washington D.C. with benevolent dictators like Walter Mondale. Who will promise lots of things, never mind whether these promises are fulfilled or not.
He will go to Moscow to kiss the bottoms of new generation of Soviet assassins. Never mind, he will create false illusions that the situation is under control. The situation is not under control. The situation is disgustingly out of control.
Most of the American politicians, media and educational system trains another generation of people who think they are living at peacetime. False. The United States is in a state of war. Undeclared, total war. Against the basic principles and the foundations of this system.
And the initiator of this war is not Comrade Andropov, of course. It’s the system, however ridiculous it may sound, the world Communist system. Or the world Communist conspiracy. Whether I scare some people or not, I don’t give a hoot. If you’re not scared by now, nothing can scare you.
But you don’t have to be paranoid about it. What actually happens now, that unlike myself, you have literally several years to lean on, unless United States wake up. The timebomb is ticking, with every second, the disaster is coming closer and closer.
Unlike myself, you will have nowhere to defect to. Unless you want to live in Antarctica with penguins. This is it. This is the last country of freedom and possibility.”
From 1957 to 1959, Robert Kennedy served as chief counsel to the Senate’s Select Committee on Improper Activities in Labor and Management.[vii] Both Bobby and John Kennedy were on the Committee, during which time the Kennedy brothers faced off against Teamsters Union president, Jimmy Hoffa.
Kennedy’s investigations convinced him that Hoffa had worked with mobsters, extorted money from employers, and raided Teamster pension funds. Bobby Kennedy left the committee in September 1959 to manage his brother’s presidential campaign, being appointed as the youngest ever Attorney General after John won. The following year, Bobby published The Enemy Within, a book describing the corrupt practices of the Teamsters and other unions he had investigated.
Here are some of the fiery exchanges between the Kennedy brothers & Hoffa:[viii] [ix]
Robert Kennedy: “Would you allow as a Teamster official a man who is a Communist, who was elected by the membership?”
Jimmy Hoffa: “We don’t have any Communists in our Teamsters –”
R. Kennedy: “Just answer the question.”
Hoffa: “Just a moment, please - that I know of. But if the membership saw fit to elect a man who had been tagged. Tagged, mind you, as a Communist who disavowed the fact that he was a Communist and no proof was presented. Under our Constitution of the International Union, we would not be in a position to dislodge him from his elected position. Neither would the courts let us do it. However, the provision you’re looking for in our Constitution is very clear. And it talks about the question of Communism, I helped write the article, so I know it. You don’t need to read it to me.
And I say to you, though, that I am talking about tagged individuals. And Bridges and Goldblatt are tagged. Tagged…
But I want to have if you will sir, the record cleared. That there are no aspersions on me being associated with, controlled, or any part of the Communist party in America.”
Judge: “Alright, as of now, there is no such implication.”
Hoffa: “That isn’t correct, sir.”
Judge: “Just a moment. Just a moment, now. If there is, they’ll read the record back and straighten it out.”
Hoffa: “Thank you sir.”
Judge: “Is there any such implication?”
R. Kennedy: “In an alliance with Mr. Harry Bridges and Mr. Goldblatt –”
Hoffa: “And you’re going to get (indiscernible)-”
R. Kennedy: “and the fact that they are, have been associated with the Communist party –”
Hoffa: “and then you’ll be sued saying (indiscernible) sued you.”
R. Kennedy: “and that you’ve made an alliance with them. And I think it’s a very critical situation...”
Question: “Did you receive any of the fees that he obtained, the $40,000 that he got in that case, directly or indirectly?”
Hoffa: “Absolutely not!”
R. Kennedy: “You had been in business with Mr. Matheson, had you not?”
Hoffa: “With my own money.”
R. Kennedy: “But you had been in business?”
Hoffa: “With my own money, yes.”
R. Kennedy: “Do you have any evidence of the $20,000 dollars in cash that you put into the business?”
Hoffa: “I don’t need any evidence. You’ll take my word for it, as the Internal Revenue [Service] has.”
John Kennedy: “Could you describe a little of it, Mr. Hoffa?”
Hoffa: “No sir, I cannot. And I don’t care, I don’t care to try and recall back my entire lifetime since I started to work at the age of 17 as to how I accumulated money or how I spent it. To finally arrive at having $20,000 I could afford to invest and finally lost.”
J. Kennedy: “Did you answer, was it in cash?”
Hoffa: “Yes.”
J. Kennedy: “Well sir, do you have any record of it?”
Hoffa: “No.”
J. Kennedy: “Did you tell us where you got the cash?”
Hoffa: “I accumulated it.”
J. Kennedy: “From your salary?”
Hoffa: “From whatever investments I had, or salary, or income. But it was accumulated.”
J. Kennedy: “Did any of this come out of the winnings that Mr. Brennan made at the racetrack?”
Hoffa: “It could very easily have. Very easy it could have.”
J. Kennedy: “Could I ask you whether Mr. Brennan is still winning at the track?”
Hoffa: “I believe he is. I hope we have luck this year, we haven’t finished it.”
J. Kennedy: “How much have you turned over to him to gamble?”
Hoffa: “So far this year, nothing. You’ve kept me too busy. I will.”
J. Kennedy: “And how much has he won for you? How much has he won for you?” …
R. Kennedy: “Mr. Hoffa, that would make a great deal of sense, and I would be very sympathetic, if it wasn’t for the fact that a majority of these people are in the central state conference. And people under your jurisdiction. You’ve got people in Detroit, at least fifteen, who have a police record. You’ve got Joey Glimco in Chicago. I say you’re not tough enough to get rid of these people now! You’re in with every gangster and hoodlum in the United States.”
Hoffa: “I know a lot of people.”
R. Kennedy: “You’re in with - every place that you go you’re associated with the leading gangsters-”
Hoffa: “Mr. Kennedy,”
R. Kennedy: “and racketeers in the United States.”
Hoffa: “Mr. Kennedy,”
R. Kennedy: “And it’s not so shocking that you should be involved in taking the Greenley’s money.”
Hoffa: “Mr. Kennedy, it is shocking. To even involve a man with that kind of blood hate money. And I don’t go for that Mr. Kennedy, I don’t go for that kind of action.”
R. Kennedy: “Well, then you could have arranged that – not going for that kind of action – by disassociating yourself many years ago from Joe Costello.”
Hoffa: “Why, Mr. Kennedy?”
R. Kennedy: “You could have done it from John Vitale. Every place you go, we’ve checked your telephone numbers, you’re calling every gangster in the United States.”
Hoffa: “Mr. Kennedy, what has happened maybe in the past life of people. But they may be different.”
R. Kennedy: “You’ve got (indiscernible)’s son working for the Teamsters Union today.”
Hoffa: “They may be nice people today. You know? Give them a chance to prove they’re nice. They may be nice people.”
As questions have grown since the assassinations of the 1960s, many have suggested that organized crime and/or intelligence agencies played a role in them. Investigators who trace the history of “black operations” have discovered it’s nearly impossible to determine where organized crime ends and where intelligence operations begin.
Some have suggested corruption runs even deeper and say the modern forces of organized crime and intelligence have merged with much older weapons of oligarchy. The weapons of royalty, organized religion, military armaments, central banking, and corporate capture. That the families ruling these crime tentacles are entangled through a dark web of secret societies. That this transnational cabal, or Deep State, has been using weapons old and new to steal wealth from the masses and to subjugate their freedoms.
As farfetched as that possibility may sound, the lockdowns of the COVID-19 pandemic have forced the public to consider that perhaps the world doesn’t operate quite as we thought it did. As we reexamine history with a fresh perspective, it’s worth revisiting the warnings issued by the two presidents who preceded Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ).
First, here’s what Dwight Eisenhower had to say in his famous Farewell Adress on January 17, 1961:[x]
President Dwight Eisenhower: “Good evening my fellow Americans. First, I should like to express my gratitude to the radio and television networks for the opportunity they have given me over the years to bring reports and messages to our nation. My special thanks go to them for the opportunity of addressing you this evening.
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening, I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.
Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all…
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among peoples and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt, both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology-global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration.
To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle - with liberty at stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research - these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs. Balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage. Balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between action of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peace time, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United State corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence - economic, political, even spiritual - is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system-ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.”
Present day Americans often cite this speech as a warning against the corrupting influence of the military-industrial complex. However, we too often forget the equally important warning against the capture of scientific research and discovery by a scientific-technological elite. If you still think that was an idle warning, I’d recommend critically examining the actions taken by the top journals - The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), British Medical Journal (BMJ), Science and Nature - during the COVID-19 pandemic.[xi]
Three months after leaving office, Eisenhower’s successor issued this warning to the American Newspaper Publishers’ Association:[xii]
John F. Kennedy: “The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.
But I do ask every publisher, every editor, and every newsman in the nation to reexamine his own standards, and to recognize the nature of our country's peril. In time of war, the government and the press have customarily joined in an effort based largely on self-discipline, to prevent unauthorized disclosures to the enemy. In time of "clear and present danger," the courts have held that even the privileged rights of the First Amendment must yield to the public's need for national security.
Today no war has been declared - and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger. And yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired.
If the press is awaiting a declaration of war before it imposes the self-discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent.
It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions - by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence - on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day.
It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.”
For some reason, a stubborn group of citizens never believed the Warren Commission findings after President Kennedy was assassinated. You know, where the lone gunman with the magic bullet was murdered two days later by another lone gunman. They have been under the crazy idea that there’s more to the story behind JFK’s murder.
These individuals have suggested Kennedy’s “Peace Speech” represented his crossing the Rubicon moment. Publicly announcing his intentions to take on the stranglehold of power held by the oligarchy, the central-bank financed, military-industrial complex. Moralizing young students with a vision of hope, in opposition to the ideologically subversive messages conveyed by our universities.
Warning the Pentagon salad brass that he intended, as he promised after the Cuban Missile Crisis, to splinter the CIA into 1,000 pieces and scatter it to the winds. But perhaps, the CIA got to him first, before he could complete this mission.
Allen Dulles, the former CIA Director who Kennedy fired after the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion, also happened to be a member of the Warren Commission. You can think of Allen Dulles as the John Brennan of the 1960s.
Dulles would address the concerns raised about the Commission in a 1966 interview. He would also discuss the Commission’s curious decision to seal their unpublished records for 75 years:[xiii]
Allen Dulles, former Director of the CIA: “I don’t think that if you had ten more Commissions, you’d ever get away from the idea that maybe there was a plot. We just didn’t find any traces of it.
Here’s the Commission’s report, I keep achieving my right hand here, and here are the various volumes. 26 of them, and we put in that everything we thought was – the Commission thought –was really important and really valuable to enable others to reach their own judgements. And we can’t complain if some people didn’t agree with us entirely. But here are the facts, anyway.”
Reporter: “Some of the papers and some of the documents that are in the archives are there but are withheld from public view by the FBI, the CIA – an organization with which you have some experience. Is there anything in there, which years from now when they may be released, will upset apple carts?”
Dulles: “Oh no, I don’t think so. I think everything that really is vital insofar as forming a judgement as to what really happened has been made available.”
Reporter: “And you’re satisfied with the judgement?”
Dulles: “I am satisfied with the judgement, yes. I know of no new fact, no new evidence that has been presented. Many rumors, surely.”
Reporter: “Mr. Dulles, let me put some of the criticisms to you.”
Dulles: “Surely.”
Reporter: “Was it a hasty job?”
Dulles: “No. I don’t understand where that came from. We had no time limit.”
Reporter: “Was it a shoddy job? A slipshod job?”
Dulles: “No, I don’t think so. I think we examined all the witnesses that were available who we felt would add anything new.”
Reporter: “The differences inside the Commission - substantive, or were they on minor matters?”
Dulles: “Well, there were some rather substantive. For example, as has come out recently and as brought out in the report, Governor Conolly had certain rather strong views on certain points, as to whether he was or was not hit by the same bullet that went through the president’s throat. And there were certain points, but nothing that could not be resolved. When we disagreed, we indicated that there was some disagreement.”
Reporter: “Mr. Dulles, you say you welcome the criticism of the report. Would you welcome a reopening of the investigation into President Kennedy’s death?”
Dulles: “Well, I don’t see that – if there isn’t any new evidence to consider, that it would be very useful to do it. But that’s beyond my ken, that’s up to the president or others that - the Congress possibly. I don’t see that it’s useful to investigate, just to go over the same ground that we went over.”
Well, I’m convinced.
Dulles died of pneumonia three years after giving this interview on January 29, 1969, at the age of 75.[xiv] Spoiler alert: in the 55 years since Dulles’s death, there have been declassified documents about JFK’s assassination that have upset apple carts.
One month to the day after President Kennedy’s assassination, former President Harry S. Truman wrote an article for the Washington Post titled “Limit CIA to Intel”. President Truman himself had established the CIA when he signed the 1947 National Security Act into law.[xv] In this article, Truman wrote:[xvi]
“I think it has become necessary to take another look at the purpose and operations of our Central Intelligence Agency - CIA. At least, I would like to submit here the original reason why I thought it necessary to organize this Agency during my Administration, what I expected it to do and how it was to operate as an arm of the President.
I think it is fairly obvious that by and large a President's performance in office is as effective as the information he has and the information he gets. That is to say, that assuming the President himself possesses a knowledge of our history, a sensitive understanding of our institutions, and an insight into the needs and aspirations of the people, he needs to have available to him the most accurate and up-to-the-minute information on what is going on everywhere in the world, and particularly of the trends and developments in all the danger spots in the contest between East and West. This is an immense task and requires a special kind of an intelligence facility.
Of course, every President has available to him all the information gathered by the many intelligence agencies already in existence. The Departments of State, Defense, Commerce, Interior and others are constantly engaged in extensive information gathering and have done excellent work.
But their collective information reached the President all too frequently in conflicting conclusions. At times, the intelligence reports tended to be slanted to conform to established positions of a given department. This becomes confusing and what's worse, such intelligence is of little use to a President in reaching the right decisions.
Therefore, I decided to set up a special organization charged with the collection of all intelligence reports from every available source, and to have those reports reach me as President without department "treatment" or interpretations.
I wanted and needed the information in its "natural raw" state and in as comprehensive a volume as it was practical for me to make full use of it. But the most important thing about this move was to guard against the chance of intelligence being used to influence or to lead the President into unwise decisions—and I thought it was necessary that the President do his own thinking and evaluating.
Since the responsibility for decision making was his—then he had to be sure that no information is kept from him for whatever reason at the discretion of any one department or agency, or that unpleasant facts be kept from him. There are always those who would want to shield a President from bad news or misjudgments to spare him from being "upset."
For some time, I have been disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas.
I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations. Some of the complications and embarrassment I think we have experienced are in part attributable to the fact that this quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue—and a subject for cold war enemy propaganda.
With all the nonsense put out by Communist propaganda about "Yankee imperialism," "exploitive capitalism," "war-mongering," "monopolists," in their name-calling assault on the West, the last thing we needed was for the CIA to be seized upon as something akin to a subverting influence in the affairs of other people.
I well knew the first temporary director of the CIA, Adm. Souers, and the later permanent directors of the CIA, Gen. Hoyt Vandenberg and Allen Dulles. These were men of the highest character, patriotism and integrity—and I assume this is true of all those who continue in charge.
But there are now some searching questions that need to be answered. I, therefore, would like to see the CIA be restored to its original assignment as the intelligence arm of the President, and that whatever else it can properly perform in that special field—and that its operational duties be terminated or properly used elsewhere.
We have grown up as a nation, respected for our free institutions and for our ability to maintain a free and open society. There is something about the way the CIA has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic position and I feel that we need to correct it.”
I wonder what could have inspired President Truman to write this article?
Thankfully, as wild “conspiracy theories” arose about JFK’s assassination, The New York Times and the rest of the mainstream media were ready and willing to quash those counter-narratives. In 1977, The Times published a declassified cable sent by the CIA on April 1, 1967, to its overseas bases and stations with instructions on how to “discredit critics of the Warren Report”.[xvii] That cable read as follows:[xviii]
1. Our Concern. From the day of President Kennedy’s assassination on, there has been speculation about the responsibility for his murder. Although this was stemmed for a time by the Warren Commission Report (which appeared at the end of September 1964), various writers have now had time to scan the Commission's published report and documents for new pretexts for questioning, and there has been a new wave of books and articles criticizing the Commission's findings. In most cases the critics have speculated as to the existence of some kind of conspiracy and often they have implied that the Commission itself was involved. Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren Commission's Report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved. Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse, results.
2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S government, including our organization. The members of the Warren Commission were naturally chosen for their integrity, experience, and prominence. They represented both major parties, and they and their staff were deliberately drawn from all sections of the country. Just because of the standing of the Commissioners, efforts to impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole leadership of American society. Moreover, there seems to be an increasing tendency to hint that President Johnson himself, as the one person who might be said to have benefited, was in some way responsible for the assassination. Innuendo of such seriousness affects not-only the individual concerned, but also the whole reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts we contributed information to the investigation. Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material for countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.
3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active, however, addressees are requested:
a. To discuss the publicity problem with liaison and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.
b. To employ propaganda assets to answer and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passage to assets. Our play should point out as applicable that the critics are (i) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (ii) politically interested, (iii) financially interested, (iv) hasty and inaccurate in-their research, or (v) infatuated with their own theories…
4. In private or media discussion not directed at any particular writer or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:
a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case the attacks on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits have been convincingly identified, and there is no agreement among the critics. (A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might be with the Reichstag fire of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, A.J.P. Taylor, D.C. Watt) now believe was set by Van der Lubbe on his own initiative, without acting for either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the blame on the Communists but the latter have been much more successful in convincing the world that the Nazis were to blame.)
b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual eyewitnesses (which are less reliable-and more divergent - and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) and less on ballistic, autopsy, and photographic evidence. A close examination of the Commission's records will usually show that the conflicting eyewitness accounts are quoted out of context, or were discarded by the Commission for good and sufficient reason.
c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc. Note that Robert Kennedy, Attorney General at the time and John F. Kennedy's brother, would be the last man to overlook or conceal any conspiracy. And as one reviewer pointed out, Congressman Gerald R. Ford would hardly have held his tongue for the sake of the Democratic administration, and Senator Russell would have had every political interest in exposing any misdeeds on the part of Chief Justice Warren. A conspirator moreover would hardly choose a location for a shooting where so much depended on conditions beyond his control: the route, the speed of the cars, the moving target, the risk that the assassin would be discovered. A group of wealthy conspirators could have arranged much more secure conditions.
d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other. Actually, the make-up of the Commission and its staff was an excellent safeguard against over-commitment to any one theory, or against the illicit transformation of probabilities into certainties.
e. Oswald would not have been any sensible person's choice for a co-conspirator. He was a "loner,” mixed-up, of questionable reliability and an unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service.
f. As to charges that the Commission's Report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.
g. Such vague accusations as that "more than ten people have died mysteriously” can always be explained in some more natural way: e.g., the individuals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes; the Commission staff questioned 418 witnesses (the FBI interviewed far more people, conducting 25,000 interviews and reinterviews), and in such a large group a certain number of deaths are to be expected. (When Penn Jones, one of the originators of the "ten mysterious deaths” line, appeared on television, it emerged that two of the deaths on his list were from heart attacks, one from cancer, one was from a head-on collision on a bridge, and one occurred when a driver drifted into a bridge abutment.)
5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission's Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the Report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.
So, the next time someone questions the JFK assassination, just tell them that The New York Times told you that the CIA told them - there’s no such thing as conspiracy theories! So, they better shut the fuck up, and never again question what happened to President John F. Kennedy that day in Dealey Plaza.
One of those conspiracy loonies who refused to submit to the Times/CIA narrative was film director Oliver Stone. Stone directed the controversial 1991 film JFK, focused on the investigation by New Orleans district attorney, Jim Garrison, into the conspiracy to kill the president. Stone also directed the documentary JFK Revisited, 30 years after JFK was released, and two documentaries on Ukraine titled Ukraine on Fire and Revealing Ukraine. I highly recommend all four films.
Here is a scene from JFK, in which Jim Garrison receives information “on background” as to why JFK was killed, from a man who introduces himself as “Mr. X”:[xix]
Mr. X: “I could give you a false name, but I won’t. Just call me ‘X’.”
District Attorney Jim Garrison: “I’ve already been warned by the Agency, Mr. Whoever, so if this is another type of threat-”
Mr. X: “I’m not with the Agency, Mr. Garrison. I assume if you’ve come this far what I have to say interests you. But I’m not going to name names or tell you who or what I represent. Except to say you’re close. You’re closer than you think, okay?
Everything I’m going to tell you is classified, top secret. I was a soldier, Mr. Garrison. Two wars. I was one of those secret guys in the Pentagon that supplies the military hardware - planes, bullets, rifles. They’re what we call black operations - black ops. Assassinations, coup états, rigging elections, propaganda, psych warfare, and so forth.
In World War II, I was in Romania, Greece, Yugoslavia. I helped evacuate part of the Nazi intelligence apparatus just before the end of the war. We used those guys in the fight against the Communists.
In Italy, ’48, we stole the elections. France, ’49, broke the strikes. Overthrew Quirino in the Philippines, Arbenz in Guatemala, Mossadegh in Iran. We were in Vietnam in ‘54, Indonesia, ’58, Tibet, ‘59. Got the Dalai Lama out.
We were good. Very good. Then we got into the Cuban thing – not so good. Set up all the bases for the invasion, supposed to take place in October ‘62. Khruschev sent the missiles to resist the invasion, Kennedy didn’t invade. We were standing out there with our dicks in the wind. A lot of pissed off people, Mr. Garrison. You understand? I’ll come to that later.
So, 1963. I spent much of September ’63 working on the Kennedy plan for getting all U.S. personnel out of Vietnam by the end of 1965. This plan was one of the strongest, most important papers issued from the Kennedy White House.
His National Security Action Memo 263 ordered home the first 1,000 troops for Christmas. But then in November, one week after the murder of Vietnamese President Diem in Saigon and two weeks before the assassination of our president, a strange thing happened to me.”
Mr. X: “I got a note saying you wanted to see me, General?”
General Y: “Indeed. You are going to the South Pole.”
Mr. X: “I am?”
General Y: “You are. Dr. Mooney’s got all the details. I want you to check with him. Have yourself a nice vacation.”
Mr. X: “I was sent by my superior officer – we’ll call him ‘Y’. I was sent by General Y to the South Pole as a military escort for a group of international VIPs. I was on my way back, in New Zealand, when the President was killed.
Now, Oswald was charged at 7:00pm, Dallas time, with Tippit’s murder. That’s 2:00 in the afternoon of the next day, New Zealand time. But already their papers had the entire history of this unknown 24-year-old man Oswald. Studio picture, detailed biographical data, Russian information, and we’re pretty sure of the fact that he killed the president alone. Although it took them four more hours before they even charged him with that crime in Dallas. It felt to me as if, well, a cover story was being put out. Like we would in a black op.
Anyway, after I came back, I asked myself why was I, the Chief of Special Ops, selected to travel to the South Pole then to do a job that any number of others could have. And I wondered if it could have been because one of my routine duties, if I had been in Washington, would have been to arrange for additional security in Texas?
So, I decided to check it out and sure enough, I found out that someone had told the 112th military intelligence group at 4th Army headquarters at Fort Sam Houston to stand down that day over the protests of the Unit Commander, Colonel Reich. This is significant because it is standard operating procedure, especially in a known hostile city like Dallas, to supplement the Secret Service.
I mean even if we had not allowed the bubble top to be removed from the limousine, we would’ve placed at least 100 to 200 agents on the sidewalk, without question. I mean only a month before in Dallas, U.N. Ambassador Adlai Stevenson was spit on and hit. There’d already been several attempts on De Gaulle’s life in France.
We would have arrived days ahead of time. Studied the route, checked all the buildings. Never would have allowed all those wide-open windows overlooking Dealey. Never. We would have had our own snipers covering the area. The minute a window went up, they’d have been on the radio. We’d have been watching the crowd, packages, rolled up newspapers, coats opening up. We’d never have let a man open an umbrella along the way. Never would have allowed that limousine to slow down to ten miles per hour, much less take that unusual curve at Houston and Elm.
You would have felt an Army presence in the streets that day. None of this happened. It was a violation of the most basic protection codes we have, and it is the best indication of a massive plot in Dallas.
Now who could’ve best done this? Black ops, Mr. Garrison. People in my business. People like my superior officer could’ve called Colonel Reich and said, ‘Look, we have another unit coming from so and so. Providing security, you’ll stand down.’
I mean, that day in fact there were some individual Army intelligence people in Dallas. I’m still trying to figure out who and why. But they weren’t protecting the client.
And of course, Oswald. I mean Army intel had a Harvey Lee Oswald on file, but all those files have been destroyed. Many strange things were happening, and your Lee Harvey Oswald had nothing to do with them.
We had the entire cabinet on a trip to the Far East. We had one third of the combat division returning from Germany in the air above the United States at the time of the shooting. At 12:34pm, the entire telephone system went out in Washington for a solid hour. And on the plane back to Washington, word was radioed from the White House Situation Room to Lyndon Johnson that one individual performed the assassination. Does that sound like a bunch of coincidences to you, Mr. Garrison?”
Garrison: “No.”
Mr. X: “Not for one moment. The cabinet was out of the country to get their perceptions out of the way. Troops were in the air for possible riot control. The telephones didn’t work to keep the wrong stories from spreading if anything went wrong with the plan. Nothing was left to chance. He could not be allowed to escape alive.
Well, I never thought things were the same after that. Vietnam started for real, there was an air of, I don’t know, make believe in the Pentagon and CIA. Those of us who’d been in secret ops since the beginning knew that the Warren Commission was fiction. But there was something, something deeper. Uglier.
I know Allen Dulles very well. I briefed him many times in his house. But for the life of me, I still can’t figure out why he was appointed to investigate Kennedy’s death, the man who had fired him. Dulles, by the way, was General Y’s benefactor. I got out in ’64. Resigned my commission.”
Garrison: “I never realized Kennedy was so dangerous to the establishment. Is that why?”
Mr. X: “Now, that’s the real question, isn’t it? Why? The how and the who is just scenery for the public – Oswald, Ruby, Cuba, the Mafia. It keeps them guessing, like some kind of parlor game.
Prevents them from asking the most important question – why? Why was Kennedy killed? Who benefited? Who has the power to cover it up? Who?
In 1961, right after the Bay of Pigs – very, very few people know about this. I participated in drawing up National Security Action Memos 55, 56, 57. These are crucial documents, classified, top secret. But basically, in them, Kennedy instructed General Lemnitzer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, that from here on forward, the Joint Chiefs of Staff would be wholly responsible for all covert, paramilitary action in peacetime.
This basically ended the reign of the CIA. Splintered it, as JFK promised he would, into one thousand pieces. And now he was ordering the military to help him to do it. This was unprecedented! I can’t tell you the shock waves that this sent along the corridors of power in Washington.
This, and of course the firing of Allend Dulles, Richard Bissell, and General Charles Cabell - all of them sacred cows in intel since World War II. They got some very upset people here.
Kennedy’s directives were never really implemented because of bureaucratic resistance. But one of the results was, the Cuban operation was turned over to my department as Operation Mongoose.
Mongoose was pure black ops. It was secretly based on the south campus of Miami’s University, which was the largest domestic CIA station. Budgeted annually, over hundreds of millions of dollars. 300 agents, 7,000 select Cubans, 50 fake business fronts for laundering money. They waged nonstop war against Castro. Industrial sabotage, crop burning, the works.
And all of this came under the control of General Y. All he did was take the rules of covert warfare he’d used abroad and brought them into this country. Now he had the people, the equipment, the bases, and the motivation.
And don’t underestimate the budget cuts that Kennedy called for in March of ‘63. Nearly 52 military installations in 25 states, 21 overseas bases, you’re talking big money. Do you know how many helicopters have been lost in Vietnam? Hmm? Nearly 3,000 so far. Who makes them? Bell Helicopter. Who owns Bell? Well, Bell was nearly bankrupt when the First National Bank of Boston approached the CIA about developing the helicopter for Indochina usage.
How about the F-111 fighter? General Dynamics of Fort Worth, Texas. Who owns that? Find out the defense budget since the war began. 75, going on 100 billion. Nearly 200 billion will be spent before it’s over.
In 1949, it was 10 billion. No war, no money. The organizing principle of any society, Mr. Garrison, is for war. The authority of the state over its people resides in its war powers. Kennedy wanted to end the Cold War in his second term.
He wanted to call off the moon race in favor of cooperation with the Soviets. He signed a treaty with the Soviets to ban nuclear testing. He refused to invade Cuba in 1962, and he set out to withdraw from Vietnam.
But all of that ended on the 22nd of November 1963. As early as 1961, we knew Kennedy was not going to go to war in Southeast Asia. Like Caesar, he is surrounded by enemies, and something is underway. But it has no face, yet everybody in the loop knows.”
Joint Chiefs of Staff Meeting: “Forget about your combat troops. He told McNamara, he is going to pull out the god damned advisors!”
“He fucked us in Laos, and now he is going to fuck us in god damn Vietnam!”
“He won’t implement it before the election. He can’t afford to.”
“I hear the NSC meeting was a real barn burner.”
“I wouldn’t have missed it for the world. Heads are going to roll everywhere. Did you hear what Lemnitzer did?”
“What happened?”
“Kennedy tried to rub Lem’s nose into shit, saying, ‘If we didn’t go into Cuba, which is so close, why should we go into Vietnam, which is so far away?’”
“Little bitch, there he goes again. He’s got his hands on the chicken switch.”
“Anyway, Lem said that that Chiefs still think that we ought to go into Cuba.”
Mr. X: “Money is at stake. Big money. $100 billion. Kennedy brothers target voting districts for those defense donors. They give TSX fighter contracts only to those counties that are going to make a difference in ‘64. And the people in the loop, they fight back – their way.”
Joint Chiefs: “We have to control the intelligence from Saigon.”
“Well, just don’t let McNamara start sticking his damned nose in this thing. Every time he goes over to Saigon on some fucking fact-finding mission, he comes back and just scares the shit out of the president. Now, I want Max Taylor on him night and day, like a fly on shit. Now, you control McNamara, you control Kennedy.”
Mr. X: “I think it started like that – in the wind. Defense contractors, Big Oil, bankers. Just conversations, nothing more. Then, a call is made. Maybe to someone like my superior officer, General Y.”
Phone Call – General Y: “Yeah?”
Unknown voice: “We’re going, we need your help.”
General Y: “When?”
Unknown voice: “In the fall, probably the south. We want you to come up with a plan.”
General Y: “I can do that.”
Mr. X: “Everything is acellularized. No one has said, ‘He must die.’ There’s been no vote. Nothing’s on paper. There’s no one to blame. It’s as old as the crucifixion. A military firing squad. 5 bullets, one blank, no one’s guilty because everyone on the power structure who knows anything has a plausible deniability.
There are no compromising connections, except at the most secret point. But what’s paramount is that it must succeed. No matter how many die, no matter how much the cost, the perpetrators must be on the winning side. And never subject to prosecution for anything, by anyone. That is a coup état.
Kennedy announces the Texas trip in September. At that moment, second Oswalds start popping up all over Dallas, where they have the mayor and the cops in their pocket.
General Y flies in the assassins. Maybe from a special camp we keep outside of Athens, Greece - pros. Maybe locals – Cubans, Mafia hired. Separate teams. Does it really matter who shot from what rooftop? Part of the scenery, right?
I keep thinking about that day, Tuesday, the 26th of November. The day after they buried Kennedy.”
President Johnson: “Gentlemen, I want you to know. I’m not going to let Vietnam go like China did. I’m personally committed, and I’m not going to take one soldier out of there till they know we mean business in Asia.”
Mr. X: “Lyndon Johnson signs National Security Memo 273, which essentially reverses Kennedy’s new withdrawal policy, and gives a green light to covert action against Vietnam, which provoked the Gulf of Tonkin incident.”
Johnson: “Just get me elected and I’ll give you your damn war.”
Mr. X: “In that document, lay the Vietnam War.”
Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?
RFK Jr.: Environmental Protection & Vaccine Injury Advocacy
RFK Jr. was born the third of Robert and Ethel’s eleven children. He was nine and fourteen years old, respectively, when his uncle and his father were assassinated. The tragedies soon led RFK Jr. to drugs, which he struggled with for the next fourteen years of his life. Once he kicked the addiction, he became involved in a movement that would become a bedrock of his life – protecting our waterways.
The following clip comes from Jeff Hays’ film, The Real RFK Jr., covering his environmental law work. The film continues with how that work led him into the controversial world of vaccine injury advocacy:[xx]
Dick Russell, author of The Real RFK Jr.: “Coming out of rehab, he had to do community service. And an opportunity arose, where there was an organization in New York on the Hudson River called Riverkeeper. The mission of the Riverkeepers was to do something about the terrible pollution that was impacting the Hudson River.
Because the Hudson at the time was one of the most polluted waters in the world. And Bobby Kennedy Jr. knew this from having been out there, you know, with his father, who was very disturbed about this. You could not swim in the river because it was so polluted. People couldn’t eat the fish because they were contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls, of this very toxic compound that was being dumped into the Hudson River by these big corporations. Who were violating the Clean Water Act, landmark legislation that had been passed in the early 1970s that demanded you take measures to mitigate and make sure that you weren’t just pouring your toxic waste and chemicals into the waterway.
What Bobby did was study the laws to make sure that the laws were being followed, and in most cases they were not. And in fact, what he also discovered at the same time was there was collusion between the Department of Environmental Protection, supposed to be protecting people from these big corporations. Who were basically being bought and paid for by these companies.
Gradually, he got to know a guy named John Cronin, who was already out there on the water making waves against these big polluters like ExxonMobil and Monsanto, which were dumping PCBs into the river. And Bobby and he hit it off right away and became partners in this Riverkeeper venture. And Bobby became the guy who, because he now had his law degree, was taking on these corporations large and small. And they went to war on this.
First of all, doing their homework, getting out there on the river. You know, going into the pipes that were pouring this stuff into the waterway, and seeing what was in there, and measuring it scientifically. Now they began mounting lawsuits.”
Robert Kennedy Jr.: “And so when I got sober, I wanted to be true to myself. And I knew that I wanted to work in the outdoors, and I wanted to protect nature. When my dad died when I was fourteen-years-old, I felt something of an obligation to pick up the torch and follow his footsteps.
And, you know, so I ended up going to the same college he went to, and the same law school he went to. And then I went into the DA’s office. But, it was something disjointed about that experience. It wasn’t authentic for me. It was something that I was doing out of a sense of obligation that in retrospect, my father wouldn’t have wanted to happen. He wanted us all to take our own paths.
So, I went back to law school at night, at Pace University, which was a newer law school that was specializing in environmental law. And it was perfect for me. It was a few minutes from my home. I ended up staying two years at night school and getting the first master’s degree in environmental law.
Riverkeeper was founded initially in 1966 by a blue-collar coalition of commercial and recreational fisherman. And John hired me as the first full time attorney of that organization. I went to work for them, you know, as a volunteer.
While I was volunteering for them, I was walking creek beds looking for polluters. I found 26 polluters on one creek in Newburgh, New York, Quassaick Creek, and we sued every one of them on the same day. And did a big press conference. And that was the beginning of my litigation career…”
Dick Russell: “Riverkeeper became a hugely important factor in the cleanup of the Hudson River which today is one of the cleanest waterways in the country. Largely because of what they were doing in the 80s and 90s there.”
Robert Kennedy Jr.: “Ultimately, we brought over 500 lawsuits against Hudson River polluters, we forced polluters on the river to spend over $5.5 billion remediating the Hudson. And today, as a result of our work and the work of many other people, the Hudson is an international model for ecosystem protection.
It’s the richest waterway in the North Atlantic. And this is water that was dead for twenty mile stretches north of New York City, south of Albany.
In 1966, it caught fire, it turned colors depending on what color they were painting the trucks at the GM plant in Tarrytown. Today it’s the richest waterway in the North Atlantic. It produces more pounds of fish per acre, more biomass per gallon than any other waterway in the Atlantic Ocean north of the Equator.
It’s the last major river system left that still has strong spawning stocks in all of its historical species of migratory fish. And the miraculous resurrection of the Hudson inspired the creation of the Waterkeepers and Riverkeepers, not only in our country, but the world…”
Dick Russell: “So, as a lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council, Bobby became part of an international environmental program. So, there was a situation that occurred also in the 1990s around this same time. Where a huge utility called Hydro Quebec wanted to build these massive dams in a region of Canada where it would have wiped out a number of native villages.
One phase of this project had already gone through, it was called the James Bay Project. The Quebecian leadership was that they were going to sell this hydro power being generated to the United States. In fact, New York had signed an agreement, a $5 billion contract initially to accept this hydro power that would be coming, you know, through a series of pipes and so on, down through New York state.”
Mark Mattsen: “So, Hydro Quebec is one of the biggest dam builders in the world. And they were expanding into Northern Quebec. These were the traditional Cree territories. And these rivers were basically dislocating communities.
And they were doing it without really much compensation or consultation at the time. There was this idea back then that this was for the good of everyone.”
Russel: “So, in this case, the people were known as the Cree. They had been around for centuries living on the same land. And all of a sudden it was all being taken away from them. Mercury pollution was happening in their rivers that was astounding to see. The caribou were dying by the droves. And at the same time, the largest, cheapest, abundant energy source in North America was looming on the horizon for New Yorkers.
If the community had been, you know, some lovely upper middle-class area of this country, of course the people would have said, ‘No, we don’t want this here.’ And it wouldn’t have happened. But they were expendable, you know. Nobody knew much about the Cree, and there were 12,000 of them. And they were, you know, brown people, and it could go ahead.”
Lise Bacon, Quebec Minister of Energy: “The campaign that the Crees have had in the states and all over the world. Maybe they were successful at it. But are they Quebecers or not? They live in our territory, they live with us, and they’re penalizing Quebecers for that. And that’s what I cannot accept, and I will never accept. Their territory that they claim is theirs is still ours. We haven’t given It up yet.”
Robert Kennedy Jr.: “It’s important that people know that this is a reenactment of what’s been happening to Indian people since the beginning of time. And that’s the picture that we want to draw. Because people are outraged by that. And it’s exactly what’s happening here, it’s just wearing a different cloak.
And that’s why people get emotional about this. Because it’s the same thing that’s been happening for 500 years. It’s the same thing that happened in the Black Hills, and everywhere else. It’s just done with all this cloak of legality. And what we’re doing is we’re tearing apart the legality and we’re going back and showing that this is a metaphor for what’s been happening to the Indians since the beginning of time.”
Russel: “So, one of the tribal leaders named Matthew Coon-Come led an expedition by canoe to New York, which is where Bobby met him and came to be aware of the problem. Matthew Coon-Come was amazing. He was a brilliant activist, willing to fight for the rights of his people. And Bobby joined him.
And then Bobby had political clout. Bobby first buttonholed Governor Mario Cuomo, at a reception one time and said, you know, told him what was going on. Eventually, there was a State Assemblyman from New York named Eric Hoyt. Who went up there on one of his river expeditions.
Came back and he was outraged at what he saw, and the disease he saw in these native villages. And he was trying to get a bill through the New York State Assembly to cut off this deal that New York had for the hydro power with Hydro Quebec Utility when he collapsed of a heart attack and died on the floor of the Senate. Well, it was a terrible thing to happen, but it also resulted in the legislature going along with what he had wanted to do. Governor Cuomo stopped the project, so Hydro Quebec had to come up with something else…”
Robert Kennedy Jr.: “In 2003, FDA and the National Academy of Sciences published the results of a study that showed that every freshwater fish in America had dangerous levels of mercury in its flesh. And it struck me that we were living in a kind of science fiction nightmare. I was going around our country and the provinces of Canada doing lectures to thousands of people about mercury contamination.
I started noticing that these women started showing up at my speeches. And they were mothers, and they would sit in the front seats. They would come early, and they would then stay late. And it turned out that all of them were the mothers of intellectually disabled children who believed that vaccines had caused their children’s injuries.
I would listen to these moms. And they were very eloquent, they were articulate. I did a little research that showed that, you know, learned that the public health agencies were saying this isn’t true.
But I also had had the experience on the Hudson where fishermen would know things that the environmental agencies didn’t. And many, many times, and it was always the fishermen who were right. They saw what was happening in the river.
My inclination was, how would all of these mothers make the exact same observation? I didn’t have it in me to just dismiss them. Somebody should be listening to them; I just didn’t want it to be me. Because I had other plans for my life.”
Sarah Bridges: “I had no plan to be on this path to advocacy. In fact, if you could pick someone who is least likely – in terms of openness to exploring issues with vaccines – I would’ve fallen in that camp.
So, I am the mother of four children. My first child was a daughter, and she was also fully vaccinated and as far as we could tell, no issues arose. When I had my son, I was doing my Ph.D. in neuropsychology. I was working full time in the med school.
And I was as pro every vaccine and science as a person could be. And I took my second child in, my first son, and he had eight vaccines. And we brought him home, he was four months old. And as we came out, everything was fine, but about twelve hours later, he just had a severe reaction. Which we later learned from the neurologist at the hospital was a brain infection caused by his pertussis vaccine. And that was the start of the path.
Porter is still severely developmentally delayed. Doesn’t have receptive language, so can’t answer questions. Has intractable seizures - many, many a week. I mean, we had no clue how severe this path was going to be.
So, there’s something called the National Vaccine Compensation Program. This started in 1986 and it came after many, many multi-million lawsuits against Big Pharma for vaccine reactions. Pharma goes to Congress saying, ‘You want us to create these vaccines for public good. And we’re just getting sued like crazy. It’s not working.’
They end up figuring out kind of a compromise system. Pharma has no liability for their products – still doesn’t. And what they would do is charge a small surcharge on every vaccine. You and me pay for the Vaccine Compensation Program that would be created and maintained for children and adults that are injured or killed by mandated vaccines.
And we were pursuing a claim in the Vaccine Compensation Program. If you have something called a table injury, literally on a table of injuries and you can prove that. And that it’s not caused by something else. It’s meant to be what they call “swift justice”. Well, our swift justice took eight years and was just agonizing trying to get through it. We did get through it. Porter did win his case.
And from there, just started digging in. Doing research. Understanding the scope of this problem, other people involved. And got more involved in activism at that point.
What then happened was I became aware of the work that Booby Kennedy was doing. And so, I went out to Hyannis Port, which is where his family has a vacation house. And I showed up on his porch when he was out there vacationing.
I had a whole slew of women who helped me in gathering a ton of scientific data to bring him. I literally brought a banker’s box of articles. I knocked on the door, I asked for Bobby, and he came out. And I told him who I was and what I was doing, and that I wanted to talk to him.
And he said, ‘I don’t want to get involved in the vaccine issue.’ He was not just a no, he was a hard no. He was not interested. And he tried to cut in, and I just kept going. I told him about my son, and the vaccine court, and the brain injury. And he said, ‘I need to go sailing.’
And he left, and he went sailing. And he was gone for hours, it must have been quite a sail. And I waited, there was a little chair on his front porch, and I waited. And he came back, and he said, ‘You’re still here.’ And then he looked at me, and he said, ‘You’re not going to leave, are you?’
And I said, ‘I will leave, but I need you to read these. I just need you to even read some of these.’ And he said, ‘Come back tomorrow.’
Kennedy Jr.: “Sarah Bridges came to my house in the summer of 2005. And she’s like all of these other women. She’s very presentable, you know, and smart. She’s a psychologist. She had a son Porter who she felt had gotten autism from the vaccine. Not only did she feel that, but the vaccine court acknowledged her claim and gave her a $20 million award.
You know, I’m used to reading science. My job is about reading and deconstructing science. That’s what I do. You know, I’ve had hundreds and hundreds of lawsuits and almost all of them involved scientific controversies. So, all of them involved scientists who were saying one thing on one side. And scientists who were looking at the same data and saying completely different things. And my job is to discredit the ones who were not telling the truth.
I started reading these, I was reading just the abstract, not the whole study. There’s a summary at the beginning of every scientific study called the abstract that summarizes the key points. And I started reading the abstracts, and before I was three inches down in that pile, I was saying, ‘Holy cow. This is real science. And it’s saying that, it’s confirming what these women have been saying to me.’
Bridges: “So, he sat up and he read most of this through the night. And I came back the next day and said, ‘What do you think about it?’ And he said, ‘Something is wrong. I’m going to make some calls.’”
Kennedy Jr.: “I talked to Francis Collins, I talked to Marie McCormick, who is the head of the Institute of Medicine at the National Academy of Sciences. And another doctor, Kathleen Stratton, who is the Chief Staffer there. And I started saying to her, ‘Here’s what I’m reading in these studies, can you make sense of this?’
My presumption is there was an explanation. And they couldn’t answer my questions. All three of those people said to me, ‘You should talk to Paul Offit.’ Paul Offit is an industry insider. He’s a vaccine developer. He’s a business partner at Merck. And I caught him in a lie.
He cited a study by a CDC scientist called Pichichero that I had read, that I knew was not true. And Pichichero gave tuna fish sandwiches to one group of people, kids. And then he gave vaccines to the other. And the mercury in the vaccines was a different kind of mercury, it’s called ethyl mercury. And it disappeared from their blood within a week. Whereas the methyl mercury from the tuna fish was still in their blood sixty-four days later.
Pichichero said, ‘Okay, well mercury is safe in vaccines because it leaves, it’s excreted by the body.’ But immediately when he wrote that, a bunch of scientists, including a very famous toxicologist called Boyd Haley, the world’s authority on mercury contamination, had written letters to the journal saying, ‘Well, what happened to the mercury?’
Because Pichichero couldn’t find it in the children’s feces, or their sweat, or their urine, or their hair, or their fingernails. And then, so NIH had then commissioned a study by a guy called Thomas Burbacher, which I’d also read by this time.
And Burbacher gave, did the same experiment, but on monkeys. And what he found out is the mercury does leave the blood very fast. But it’s leaving the blood because it crosses the blood brain barrier much easier than methyl mercury. And it was going into their brains, and it was staying there. And it was metabolizing into the most toxic form of mercury, which was organic mercury. And it was just sitting in their brain. We now know, you know, from subsequent experiences, that twenty-seven years later, it’s still there.
And Offit cited the Pichichero study to tell me that the mercury was excreted immediately. And everybody knew that Burbacher had debunked that study. And I said to him, ‘What about the Burbacher study?’
There was dead silence on the phone. And that was the moment that he knew, and I knew, that he was lying. And we both knew that I knew that he was lying. He said, ‘Well, you’re right. It’s not the Pichichero study. It doesn’t really tell us anything. But it’s a whole mosaic of studies.’ That was the phrase he used. And I said, ‘Could you cite one for me?’ And he said, ‘I’ll get back to you.’ And he never called back.”
Then, when dark forces emerged in the COVID-19 pandemic, committing one of the worst human rights atrocities in the history of humanity, RFK Jr. did not pull any punches for the men and women responsible. He published two books since the beginning of the pandemic, The Real Anthony Fauci and The Wu-Han Coverup. If you have not yet read these books, I highly encourage you to do so.
Here’s what Kennedy had to say in their respective introductions. First, in The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, narrated by Bruce Wagner:[i]
“The first step is to give up the illusion that the primary purpose of modern medical research is to improve Americans’ health most effectively and efficiently. In our opinion, the primary purpose of commercially funded clinical research is to maximize financial return on investment, not health.”
—John Abramson, M.D., Harvard Medical School
I wrote this book to help Americans—and citizens across the globe—understand the historical underpinnings of the bewildering cataclysm that began in 2020. In that single annus horribilis, liberal democracy effectively collapsed worldwide. The very governmental health regulators, social media eminences, and media companies that idealistic populations relied upon as champions of freedom, health, democracy, civil rights, and evidence-based public policy seemed to collectively pivot in a lockstep assault against free speech and personal freedoms.
Suddenly, those trusted institutions seemed to be acting in concert to generate fear, promote obedience, discourage critical thinking, and herd seven billion people to march to a single tune, culminating in mass public health experiments with a novel, shoddily tested and improperly licensed technology so risky that manufacturers refused to produce it unless every government on Earth shielded them from liability.
Across Western nations, shell-shocked citizens experienced all the well-worn tactics of rising totalitarianism—mass propaganda and censorship, the orchestrated promotion of terror, the manipulation of science, the suppression of debate, the vilification of dissent, and use of force to prevent protest. Conscientious objectors who resisted these unwanted, experimental, zero-liability medical interventions faced orchestrated gaslighting, marginalization, and scapegoating.
American lives and livelihoods were shattered by a bewildering array of draconian diktats imposed without legislative approval or judicial review, risk assessment, or scientific citation. So-called Emergency Orders closed our businesses, schools and churches, made unprecedented intrusions into privacy, and disrupted our most treasured social and family relationships. Citizens the world over were ordered to stay in their homes.
Standing in the center of all the mayhem, with his confident hand on the helm, was one dominating figure. As the trusted public face of the United States government response to COVID, Dr. Anthony Fauci set this perilous course and sold the American public on a new destination for our democracy.
This book is a product of my own struggle to understand how the idealistic institutions our country built to safeguard both public health and democracy suddenly turned against our citizens and our values with such violence. I am a lifelong Democrat, whose family has had eighty years of deep engagement with America’s public health bureaucracy and long friendships with key federal regulators, including Anthony Fauci, Francis Collins, and Robert Gallo. Members of my family wrote many of the statutes under which these men govern, nurtured the growth of equitable and effective public health policies, and defended that regulatory bulwark against ferocious attacks funded by industry—and often executed by Republican-controlled congressional committees intent on defunding and defanging these agencies to make them more “industry friendly.” I built alliances with these individuals and their agencies during my years of environmental and public health advocacy. I watched them, often with admiration. But I also watched how the industry, supposedly being regulated, used its indentured servants on Capitol Hill to systematically hollow out those agencies beginning in 1980, disabling their regulatory functions and transforming them, finally, into sock-puppets for the very industry Congress charged them with regulating.
My 40-year career as an environmental and public health advocate gave me a unique understanding of the corrupting mechanisms of “regulatory capture,” the process by which the regulator becomes beholden to the industry it’s meant to regulate. I spent four decades suing the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and other environmental agencies to expose and remedy the corrupt sweetheart relationship that so often put regulators in bed with the polluting industries they regulated. Among the hundreds of lawsuits I filed, perhaps a quarter were against regulatory officials making illegal concessions to Big Oil, King Coal, and the chemical and agricultural polluters that had captured their loyalties. I thought I knew everything about regulatory capture and that I had armored myself with an appropriate shield of cynicism.
But I was wrong about that. From the moment of my reluctant entrance into the vaccine debate in 2005, I was astonished to realize that the pervasive web of deep financial entanglements between Pharma and the government health agencies had put regulatory capture on steroids. The CDC, for example, owns 57 vaccine patents and spends $4.9 of its $12.0 billion-dollar annual budget (as of 2019) buying and distributing vaccines. NIH owns hundreds of vaccine patents and often profits from the sale of products it supposedly regulates. High level officials, including Dr. Fauci, receive yearly emoluments of up to $150,000 in royalty payments on products that they help develop and then usher through the approval process. The FDA receives 45 percent of its budget from the pharmaceutical industry, through what are euphemistically called “user fees.” When I learned that extraordinary fact, the disastrous health of the American people was no longer a mystery; I wondered what the environment would look like if the EPA received 45 percent of its budget from the coal industry!
Today many of my liberal chums are still crouched in a knee jerk posture defending “our” agencies against Republican slanders and budget cuts, never quite realizing how thoroughly the decades of attacks succeeded in transforming those agencies into subsidiaries of Big Pharma.
In this book, I track the rise of Anthony Fauci from his start as a young public health researcher and physician through his metamorphosis into the powerful technocrat who helped orchestrate and execute 2020’s historic coup d’état against Western democracy. I explore the carefully planned militarization and monetization of medicine that has left American health ailing and its democracy shattered. I chronicle the troubling role of the dangerous concentrated mainstream media, Big Tech robber barons, the military and intelligence communities and their deep historical alliances with Big Pharma and public health agencies. The disturbing story that unfolds here has never been told, and many in power have worked hard to prevent the public from learning it. The main character is Anthony Fauci.
During the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Fauci, who turned 80 that year, occupied center stage in a global drama unprecedented in human history. At the contagion’s beginnings, the US still enjoyed its reputation as the universal standard-bearer in public health. As the world’s faith in American leadership dwindled during the Trump era, the singular US institutions that were seemingly immune from international disillusionment were our public health regulators; HHS—and its subsidiary agencies CDC, FDA, and NIH— persisted as role models for global health policies and gold standard scientific research. Other nations looked to Dr. Fauci, America’s most powerful and enduring public health bureaucrat, to competently direct US health policies, and rapidly develop countermeasures that would serve as state-of-the-art templates for the rest of the world.
Dr. Anthony Fauci spent half a century as America’s reigning health commissar, ever preparing for his final role as Commander of history’s biggest war against a global pandemic. Beginning in 1968, he occupied various posts at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), serving as that agency’s Director since November 1984. His $417,608 annual salary makes him the highest paid of all four million federal employees, including the President. His experiences surviving 50 years as the panjandrum of a key federal bureaucracy, having advised six Presidents, the Pentagon, intelligence agencies, foreign governments, and the WHO, seasoned him exquisitely for a crisis that would allow him to wield power enjoyed by few rulers and no doctor in history.
During the epidemic’s early months, Dr. Fauci’s calm, authoritative, and avuncular manner was Prozac for Americans besieged by two existential crises: the Trump Presidency, and COVID-19. Democrats and idealistic liberals around the globe, traumatized by President Trump’s chaotic governing style, took heart from Dr. Fauci’s serene, solid presence on the White House stage. He seemed to offer a rational, straight-talking, science-based counterweight to President Trump’s desultory, narcissistic bombast. Navigating the hazardous waters between an erratic President and a deadly contagion, Dr. Fauci initially cut a heroic figure, like Homer’s Ulysses steering his ship between Scylla and Charybdis. Turning their backs to the foreboding horizon, trusting Americans manned the oars and blindly obeyed his commands—little realizing they were propelling our country toward the desolate destination where democracy goes to die…
Cost of Quarantines—Deaths
As Dr. Fauci’s policies took hold globally, 300 million humans fell into dire poverty, food insecurity, and starvation. “Globally, the impact of lockdowns on health programs, food production, and supply chains plunged millions of people into severe hunger and malnutrition,” said Alex Gutentag in Tablet Magazine. According to the Associated Press (AP), during 2020, 10,000 children died each month due to virus-linked hunger from global lockdowns. In addition, 500,000 children per month experienced wasting and stunting from malnutrition —up 6.7 million from last year’s total of 47 million—which can “permanently damage children physically and mentally, transforming individual tragedies into a generational catastrophe.” In 2020, disruptions to health and nutrition services killed 228,000 children in South Asia. Deferred medical treatments for cancers, kidney failure, and diabetes killed hundreds of thousands of people and created epidemics of cardiovascular disease and undiagnosed cancer. Unemployment shock is expected to cause 890,000 additional deaths over the next 15 years.
The lockdown disintegrated vital food chains, dramatically increased rates of child abuse, suicide, addiction, alcoholism, obesity, mental illness, as well as debilitating developmental delays, isolation, depression, and severe educational deficits in young children. One-third of teens and young adults reported worsening mental health during the pandemic. According to an Ohio State University study, suicide rates among children rose 50 percent. An August 11, 2021 study by Brown University found that infants born during the quarantine were short, on average, 22 IQ points as measured by Baylor scale tests. Some 93,000 Americans died of overdoses in 2020—a 30 percent rise over 2019. “Overdoses from synthetic opioids increased by 38.4 percent, and 11 percent of US adults considered suicide in June 2020. Three million children disappeared from public school systems, and ERs saw a 31 percent increase in adolescent mental health visits,” according to Gutentag. Record numbers of young children failed to reach crucial developmental milestones. Millions of hospital and nursing home patients died alone without comfort or a final goodbye from their families. Dr. Fauci admitted that he never assessed the costs of desolation, poverty, unhealthy isolation, and depression fostered by his countermeasures. “I don’t give advice about economic things,” Dr. Fauci explained. “I don’t give advice about anything other than public health,” he continued, even though he was so clearly among those responsible for the economic and social costs.
And now, The Wu-Han Cover-up: And the Terrifying Bioweapons Arms Race:[ii]
On my seventh birthday, January 17, 1961, three days before my uncle, John F. Kennedy, took his oath of office as Untied States President – his predecessor, President Dwight Eisenhower, appeared on national television to deliver his farewell address, which history increasingly regards as one of the most important and prophetic speeches in American history:
‘In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.’
President Eisenhower took special care to include an expanded definition of his term “military-industrial complex” that would include the top bureaucrats at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Eisenhower warned that the federal government’s rising medical and scientific technocracy posed its own unique threats toward our democracy and freedom.
‘In this revolution, [scientific/medical] research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government…
Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity… The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded… [W]e must also be alert to the… danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.’
Eisenhower ended his speech with an admonition that echoes now in rebuke as we emerge from the COVID era that trampled the core principles that had, for 240 years, maintained America as the global exemplar for democracy, constitutional government, and personal freedom.
‘It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system – ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.’
Eisenhower had recognized that America could not be both a democracy at home and an imperial power abroad. But to justify its existence, that cartel would drum up endless wars and emergencies that ensured its own wealth and power while transforming America from an exemplary democracy into a national security state abroad and surveillance state at home.
Seven years later, Dr. Anthony Fauci joined the National Institutes of Health, where he would never face combat. There he began a fifty-year sojourn that would put him at the summit of the nation’s scientific and technological elite, an apex that he would use to militarize and monetize medical research and to consolidate the seamless alliance between government, science, the military and intelligence agencies, and private contractors in ways that would consummate President Eisenhower’s worst nightmares about the threat this cartel posed to democracy.
The cartel would reach its apogee in 2022. As the COVID pandemic commenced, the rising medical technocracy – with Anthony Fauci at the helm – took on all the menacing features President Eisenhower warned against. A powerful syndicate, composed of government public health technocrats, a rapacious pharmaceutical industry, military and intelligence officials, and media and social media titans, appropriated awesome new powers to override constitutional and civil rights, censor information, suppress dissent, and engineer compliance with arbitrary diktats. These mandates culminated in mass submission to inoculation with risky, ineffective, shoddily tested, and unlicensed vaccines. And no one is liable for any damage they cause.
Claiming unprecedented new powers as necessary to fight the war against germs, government and industry officials predictably abused them, dealing blows to democracy with no discernible benefits to public health. Just as the CIA and military apparatus paradoxically profit from war, not peace, the medical cartel and its Big Pharma allies benefit from illness, not health. Dr. Fauci and his cronies amplified this power through an orchestrated propaganda campaign bent on maintaining a level of public terror and germophobia.
The eminent sociologist C. Wright Mills had anticipated Eisenhower’s prescient warning four years earlier in his durable 1956 work, The Power Elite. Since World War II, America has been dominated by “a permanent-war economy,” in the words of the maverick sociologist. This war establishment maintained its power and profits by creating a constant, free-floating state of anxiety and animosity. “For the first time in American history, men in authority are talking about an ‘emergency’ without a foreseeable end.” Mills wrote, “Such men as these are crackpot realists; in the name of realism they have constructed a paranoid reality all their own.”
Three days after Eisenhower’s farewell address, on a frozen day in Washington, I sat under a clear sky in a frigid bleacher and watched my uncle, the incoming president, John F. Kennedy, take the oath of office. In his own inaugural in 1933, at the height of a terrifying global depression, JFK’s idol Franklin Delano Roosevelt had warned the nation that fear was the most potent tool of totalitarians. In Europe, despots from the left and right had wielded public fear of the same depression to transform Russia into a communist nation and Italy, Germany, and Spain into fascist totalitarian states. FDR had preserved both capitalism and democracy by a steady hand and confidence that kept fear at bay.
My uncle’s truncated administration would be a three-year battle to secede from the reign of fear. His first bitter battle with his security apparatus occurred three months later during the failed Bay of Pigs invasion. Even as he took public blame for the calamity, he realized that his military brass and CIA panjandrums had lied to him to trick him into allowing an invasion they knew would fail. Their plan was to trap a young president, faced with this humiliating failure three months into a presidency; into complying with the demands of his Joint Chiefs for a full US invasion of Cuba, something that JFK had vowed never to do.
I chronicled this struggle in my 2018 book, American Values. JFK recognized that the CIA’s function was no longer securing US interests. It had devolved into a rogue agency, taking on the implicit ambition of US multinational corporations, including oil companies and Big Agriculture. In this case, CIA’s partners were Texaco, United Fruit Company, and the American mafia. JFK recognized that the CIA’s essential function was no longer national security but providing the Pentagon and its military contractors a steady pipeline of continuous wars.
In May 1961, now only four months into his presidency, my uncle stood inside the Oval Office telling his closest aide that he wanted to “splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” Between November 1961 and February 1962, he fired the agency’s three top officers – Allen Dulles, Charles Cabell, and Richar Bissell.
American Values recounts my family’s sixty-year fistfight with that agency. Today, powerful pharmaceutical companies have joined Big Oil as the engine of US foreign policy, and US intelligence is still playing the same insidious role. This book explores that history.
My 2021 book, The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, also examines the rise of the biosecurity agenda and the remarkable alliance between Western public health regulators, military and intelligence agencies, and odd allies at the apex of the Chinese military in creating the bugs that cause pandemics and crafting responses that have advanced the agenda of a security and surveillance state. Their efforts hide the shadowy influences of these puppeteers who manipulated every feature of the pandemic. The coordination of these forces is nowhere more evident than in their orchestration of the cover-up of the origins of the COVID bug.
The biosecurity agenda – Pandemic Preparedness and Response (PPR), as it is euphemistically called – is the organizing principle of the post-Cold War military-industrial complex – or, more accurately, the military/medical-industrial complex. CIA and Pentagon planners played key roles in a series of tabletop simulations, beginning in 1999, that served as secret training exercises for tens of thousands of US officials and foreign leaders in responding to global pandemics with a series of authoritarian “countermeasures” that function as a coup état against democratic and constitutional rights. This syndicate includes the Pentagon and intelligence apparatus, pharmaceutical companies, traditional media and social media platforms, and Big Data – which all have incestuous financial entanglements with each other that drive clear but perverse incentives to develop and periodically release infectious bioweapons and reap profits and power from the response.
Anthony Fauci and billionaire Bill Gates became the visible faces of pandemic response, but in this book I expose them as frontmen for a much larger enterprise: a military/medical-industrial complex driven by elements within the CIA and Pentagon, which – even more than Anthony Fauci – contributed to creating the COVID-19 coronavirus in a Chinese lab, dictated the official countermeasures, managed and controlled the vaccine rollout, and managed the cover-up of the source. Hiding their role in the creation of the COVID-19 coronavirus is critical because its exposure would reveal the corruption and the players. It is their Achilles’ heel.
Starting to understand why Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is so hated by the establishment? In case it’s not, here is what Kennedy had to say during his “Declare Your Independence” speech:[iii]
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.: “Our campaign has ignited a movement that has been smoldering for years. A movement to reclaim democracy, to resurrect the promise of our republic, a promised land. And that’s the real reason that the party elites in Washington, the insiders, are terrified of my candidacy. They recognize an authentic challenge to their power when they see one.
There have been anti-establishment candidates before. But none of them who understands actually how to get the job done. Unlike President Trump, I’ve been fighting corporate corruption and suing government agencies for forty years.
I know how they work, and I know how to clean them up. And unlike any president since 1963, I will stand up to the military-industrial complex. I will cash in the peace dividend. And I’ll bring our troops home with honor. I’ll rebuild America’s strength from the inside out.
What really terrifies the elites, though, is not me. It’s what I represent. A populist movement that defies left-right division. I am merely the ballast of a ship that is going to cut through the armadas of corruption, of secrecy, of lies.”
Joe Biden: Burisma, DuPont, & Metabiota
How is Joe Biden Jr.’s track record on combating corruption and organized crime? First of all, what was that whole “Burisma” thing about? You know, that Ukrainian natural gas company where Joe’s son Hunter was a member of the Board of Directors. A role which Hunter took on while Joe Biden was Vice President, directing much of President Obama’s foreign policy, including that of Ukraine.
Hunter Biden emailed Devon Archer, his business partner at their private equity firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, on March 16, 2014. The email included an article titled, “Joe Biden Lurks Behind Every U.S. Action on Ukraine.”[iv] Archer replied to Hunter by stating, “There is a unique timing here in this upcoming opportunity. One door closes, another opens.”[v]
Seventeen days before this email, Ukraine had come under the control of an interim government led by Arseniy Yatsenyuk. The Yatsenyuk government replaced that of Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych, who had fled Ukraine for Russia on February 23, 2014. Why did Yanukovych flee? Internal revolution, or coup état, depending on who you ask.
The winter of 2013-2014 was an extremely volatile period for Ukraine. Protests had broken out in November 2013 after Ukraine announced the suspension of a political and trade agreement with the European Union, choosing instead to focus on trade with Russia and other former Soviet states. The decision ended four years of negotiations to bring Ukraine into a trade partnership with Western Europe.
Ukrainian protesters organized via social media and in person, specifically in Kiev’s Maidan Square. The protests allegedly arose organically, due to outrage over President Yanukovych’s decision on the EU trade agreement. Others would suggest the groundwork had been laid long beforehand, and the end of trade negotiations was simply the spark that lit the fire of revolution.[vi]
The protests extended throughout the winter and received support from many noteworthy U.S. politicians. These included Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, Senator Chris Murphy, & Congressman John McCain. The messaging from these U.S. leaders clearly supported the protesters, and the radical realignment of Ukrainian government with the West.
Yanukovych’s administration claimed these actions helped to create and deepen the violent conflict in Maidan. Yanukovych claimed he spoke with Vice President Joe Biden frequently during this time, but that Biden’s actions would contradict those conversations. U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, also frequently took meetings with opposition leaders during the Maidan protests.[vii]
Exhibit 15[viii]
Nuland called Ambassador Pyatt on February 4, 2014, to discuss the situation in Ukraine. The phone call was intercepted and leaked by the Russian government. During the conversation, Victoria Nuland made prescient comments about the Ukrainian government that would soon run the country:[ix]
Robert Parry, investigative journalist: “In early February of 2014, as the Maidan crisis was getting more violent, there was a phone call that was intercepted. It was a call between the Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt.”
Reporter: “Questions of credibility are being raised after a private chat between two top US diplomats was leaked online.”
Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland: “I think Yats [Arseniy Yatsenyuk] is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the guy, you know. What he needs is Klitsch [Vitali Klitschko] and [Oleh] Tyanhnybok on the outside. I just think Klitsch going in, he’s going to be at that level working for Yatsenyuk, it’s just not going to work.”
Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt: “Yeah, no, I think that’s right. Good, do you want us to try to set up a call with him as the next step?”
Nuland: “[Jake] Sullivan [National Security Advisor to Vice President Biden] has come back to me VFR [direct to me], saying, ‘You need Biden?’. And I said, ‘Probably tomorrow for an atta-boy and to get the deets [details] to stick’. So, Biden is willing.”
Parry: “So, you had this remarkable phone call where you had these two senior officials of the US government apparently talking about a coup, or how they were planning to restructure the government of Ukraine.”
Nuland: “Fuck the EU!”
Pyatt: “No, exactly.”
Sixteen days after this call, on February 20, 2014, hell broke out in Maidan square. Shooting started from buildings controlled by Maidan revolutionary forces. In the violence that followed, 100 Ukrainians were killed by snipers in twenty minutes.[x] The “Heavenly Hundred” became a sacred symbol of the revolution, and two days later forced President Yanukovych to flee for Russia.[xi] In total, 123 people were killed, 23 of them policemen, and 1,500 protesters were injured.[xii]
While most media outlets outside of Russia blamed the killings on the Berkut, the Ukrainian police, the formal investigations have been unsuccessful in identifying who the snipers were or who was responsible for the outbreak of violence. Citizens of the world have a duty to the Heavenly Hundred to figure out who is responsible for the massacre that fateful day in February 2014, and to hold them responsible.[xiii] The answer to this question, like the question of who is responsible for John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr., and Robert F. Kennedy’s assassinations, holds significance for the public interest.
The day after Yanukovych fled Ukraine, February 23, 2014, Ukraine’s Parliament voted for the Speaker, Oleksandr Turchynov, to become interim President. Four days later, Arseniy “Yats” Yatsenyuk was designated as Ukraine’s new Prime Minister. The former boxer and mayor of Kiev, Vitali “Klitsch” Klitschko and the leader of the opposition Svoboda party, Oleh Tyanhnybok, were left outside the inner circle of the new government, just as Toria Nuland had instructed.
Yanukovich was removed outside of the constitutional procedures for impeachment. The Ukrainian constitution requires at least ¾ of the Parliament to vote to impeach, or 338 of Ukraine’s 450 seats. Only 328 deputies voted “Yes” to removing Yanukovich. Despite this, the US State Department almost immediately recognized the new government as legitimate.
Exhibit 16[xiv]
Less than one and a half months later, Devon Archer joined the board of Burisma.[xv] Archer received this position despite having no experience working in oil & gas, no domain expertise about Ukraine, and no understanding of the language. Three weeks after that, on April 18, Hunter Biden also joined the board of Burisma, even though he too had no experience working in oil & gas, no domain expertise about Ukraine, and no understanding of the language.
Burisma is the largest gas producer in Ukraine, and is involved in the exploration, production, processing, transportation and sale of hydrocarbons.[xvi] Burisma produced about 450 million cubic meters of gas in 2013, becoming the largest independent gas producer in Ukraine by volume in 2014. According to the Wall Street Journal:[xvii]
“Burisma is one of a handful of privately owned gas companies that together account for a little more than 10% of Ukraine's domestic production. The rest of the production comes from gas companies fully or partially owned by the Ukrainian state. Burisma's biggest subsidiary, Esko Pivnich, pumps gas from the Poltava region east of Kiev.”
On April 12, the White House released a statement announcing that Vice President Joe Biden would visit Ukraine in ten days to “consult on the latest steps to enhance Ukraine’s short and long-term energy security”.[xviii]
The following day, Devon laid out how he and Hunter could benefit from the Biden boys’ involvement on both sides of Ukraine’s public and private sectors. He explained the strategy in an email he sent to Hunter. This email and many others in this section came from Hunter Biden’s “laptop from hell”. Hunter abandoned this laptop at a computer repair shop in 2019, a topic which I’ll cover shortly.
Devon’s key points, sent April 12, 2014, included:[xix]
After receiving Archer’s key points, Hunter sent him a long memo about leveraging Joe’s position as the “public face” of the U.S. administration’s policy on Ukraine.[xx] I have a dream that one day, the writings of Hunter R. Biden will be preserved in our greatest libraries, alongside the works of William Shakespeare & Voltaire.
In laymen’s terms, Hunter Biden & Devon Archer are strategizing to navigate their near-term priorities with Burisma, taking advantage of the chaos in Ukraine and manufactured energy crises while doing so. Hunter describes their dual priorities of (i) price gouging citizens of Europe to maximize profits for Burisma and (ii) managing the company’s public perception about the rate hikes. Hunter references “my guy” several times, in likely reference to his father, Vice President Joe Biden. He closes the email by instructing Archer to buy a burner cell phone at 7/11 and says he’ll do the same, just like two street-level drug dealers.
On April 16th, two days before Hunted Biden joined Burisma’s board, Devon Archer visited the White House under the pretense of his son’s school project.[xxi] On April 21, Joe Biden arrived in the Ukraine. During the flight, Joe’s staff briefed reporters about the US plan to help Ukraine extract their “unconventional” gas resources.[xxii]
The next day, Vice President Biden appeared in front of the Rada, Ukraine’s Parliament. Joe made sure to highlight the importance of Ukrainian energy independence:[xxiii]
And as you attempt to pursue energy security, there’s no reason why you cannot be energy secure. I mean there isn’t. It will take time. It takes some difficult decisions, but it’s collectively within your power and the power of Europe and the United States. And we stand ready to assist you in reaching that. Imagine where you’d be today if you were able to tell Russia: Keep your gas. It would be a very different world you’d be facing today. It’s within our power to alter that. It will take some time, but it’s within our power. Very difficult decisions, but within our power.
Who needs that dirty Russian gas when we’ve got homegrown hydrocarbons right here in Ukraine? Hunter then sent Archer an email regarding Vice President Biden’s hypocritical remarks to the Rada about Ukrainian corruption:[xxiv]
Joe Biden: "Also to be very blunt about it, and this is a delicate thing to say to a group of leaders in their house of parliament, but you have to fight the cancer of corruption that is endemic in your system right now.”
Archer replied to Hunter’s email by joking about colluding with the interim, post-coup Ukrainian government: [xxv] “Wow. We need to make sure this rag tag temporary Government in the Ukraine understands the value of Burisma to its very existence.” To which Hunter replied: “You should send to Vadim – makes it look like we’re adding value.”
Exhibit 19[xxvi]
Vadim refers to Vadim Pozharskyi, a Burisma executive who works for Burisma’s owner, Mykola Zlochevsky. Mykola - who also goes by Nikolay - served as Minister of Ecology under President Yanukovych, the exact position responsible for deciding which companies received licenses to extract Ukraine’s natural resources. The National Anti-Corruption Bureau had an ongoing investigation into the Ministry’s granting of permits between 2010-2012, and now that Yanukovych was out, Zlochevsky’s troubles were deepening.
On April 28, 2014, authorities in the United Kingdom froze $23 million of Zlochevsky’s assets in his London bank accounts.[xxvii] This came shortly after UK Home Secretary Theresa May announced they would, “provide practical leadership and assistance to the Ukrainian government as they identify and recover assets looted under the Yanukovich regime”.[xxviii] The frozen funds were held in bank accounts with BNP Paribas, and related to proceeds of the sale of an oil storage facility Zlochevsky had owned via a shell company in the British Virgin Islands. The $23 million had arrived to London from Latvia, an Eastern European country with minimal regulations, notoriously affiliated with money laundering.[xxix]
In Britain’s case, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) argued that, “there were reasonable grounds to believe that the defendant [Zlochevsky] had engaged in criminal conduct in Ukraine and the funds in the BNP account were believed to be the proceeds of such criminal conduct”.[xxx] SFO investigator Richard Gould claimed that Zlochevsky’s dual position as both politician and businessman gave, “rise to a clear inference of a willful and dishonest exploitation of a direct conflict of interest by a man holding an important public office such as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in him”.[xxxi]
On May 12, Vadim Pozharskyi wrote Hunter and Devon Archer an email which read:[xxxii]
“We urgently need your advice on how you could use your influence to convey a message / signal, etc. to stop what we consider to be politically motivated actions.”
The same day Pozharskyi sent this email, Burisma publicly announced that Hunter had joined its board. On May 13, Burisma posted a photo of Joe and Archer at the White House.
Exhibit 21,[xxxiii] Exhibit 22[xxxiv], Exhibit 23[xxxv]
Biden’s lawyer demanded Burisma remove the photo and the company eventually complied.[xxxvi] However, the damage was done. Word got out to the public, and American citizens started to question… corruption? Even the Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post acknowledged, “the appointment of the vice president's son to a Ukrainian oil board looks nepotistic at best, nefarious at worst.”[xxxvii]
While the roots of the Biden/Burisma scandal were growing, Zlochevsky believed his legal issues had been cleared up. Subsequent investigations show that just eight months after Hunter Biden joined the board of Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company may have paid a $7 million bribe to the local prosecutors investigating the firm for corruption.[xxxviii]
State Department officials, including George Kent, believed the bribe took place within the May to December 2014 timeframe. This was confirmed by one of the Ukrainian prosecutors involved in the case, Danylenko. While the concerns were reported to the , it is not clear whether the allegations were ever investigated more fully.[xxxix]
In May of 2014, Hunter’s prediction proved accurate when Petro Poroshenko, an oligarch known as the “Chocolate King” due to the confections company Roshen he founded, was elected president in snap elections. The new Ukrainian government had moved swiftly to accept punitive loans from the IMF and World Bank, a move which would impose draconian austerity on Ukrainian citizens and resulted in a massive spike in gas prices.
In 2014, the Oakland Institute reported that:[xl] [xli]
“International financing has played a significant—although not always reported—role in the current conflict in Ukraine. In late 2013, conflict between pro-European Union (EU) and pro-Russian Ukrainians escalated to violent levels, leading to the departure of President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 and prompting the greatest East-West confrontation since the Cold War.
A major factor in the crisis that led to deadly protests and eventually President Yanukovych’s removal from office was his rejection of an EU Association agreement that would have further opened trade and integrated Ukraine with the EU. The agreement was tied to a $17 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Instead of the EU and IMF deal, Yanukovych choose a Russian aid package worth $15 billion plus a 33% discount on Russian natural gas. This deal has since gone off the table with the pro-EU interim government accepting the new multi [sic – billion] dollar IMF package in May 2014…
The relationship with [international financial institutions] IFIs changed swiftly under the pro-EU government put in place at the end of February 2014. Just a week after the instatement of the new government, the IMF rushed a mission to Kiev. Assessing the conditions of the $17 billion loan, Reza Moghadam, the IMF European Department Director, declared at the end of this visit that he was “positively impressed with the authorities’ determination, sense of responsibility and commitment to an agenda of economic reform and transparency…”
In March 2014, the acting Prime Minister, Arseny Yatsenyuk, welcomed strict and painful structural reforms as part of the $17 billion IMF loan package, dismissing the need to negotiate any terms. The IMF austerity reforms will affect monetary and exchange rate policies, the financial sector, fiscal policies, the energy sector, governance, and the business climate. The loan is also a precondition for the release of further financial support from the EU and the US. If fully adopted, the reforms may lead to significant price increases of essential consumer goods, a 47 to 66% increase in personal income tax rates, and a 50% increase in gas bills. It is feared that these measures will have a devastating social impact, resulting in a collapse of the standard of living and dramatic increases in poverty.”
I wonder if Yats and Toria Nuland handed out cookies to the Ukrainian citizens they impoverished through these austerity measures?
Then, in late 2015, the heat was back on Zlochevsky, as the new Ukrainian Prosecutor General, Viktor Shokin, reopened the Burisma investigation. On December 3, 2015, Chocolate King Poroshenko received a call from U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. I refer to John Kerry “Heinz” as the Ketchup King, as his wife, Teresa Heinz, is the heiress to the Heinz family fortune.
Here is a clip from that phone call, which was subsequently leaked in 2020 by Ukrainian Member of Parliament, Andriy Derkach:[xlii]
Kerry: “To see if there’s a way to get Biden’s problem of replacing the Prosecutor General, you know, Shokin. Because from my perception he’s blocked the cleanup of the Prosecutor Generals’ Office, and I know the Vice President is very concerned about it. And I think it would be good to try and have some resolution of that before the Vice President comes, if it’s possible.
And have real clarity as to the steps that we are going to take forward. I think his visit and his speech to the Rada are a good opportunity to showcase your successes as we continue forward.”
Now, here’s a fun fact you may not have known about the Ketchup King. John Kerry’s stepson, Christopher Heinz, is also business partners with Hunter Biden and Devon Archer. Chris Heinz and Devon Archer were old Yale buddies who later co-founded Rosemont Capital. Rosemont Capital owns 50% of Rosemont Seneca Partners.[xliii] Secretary of State Kerry also has longstanding ties with Devon Archer, who served on his 2004 presidential campaign as Vice Chairman of Finance.[xliv] Archer also served as a trustee of the Heinz Family Office.[xlv] So, when Ketchup King Kerry says, “Biden’s problem of replacing the Prosecutor General”, could he also mean his problem of replacing the Prosecutor General?
Exhibit 24[xlvi][xlvii][xlviii]
On Joe Biden’s trip to Ukraine that December, his fourth visit to the country since the Maidan Revolution, he again spoke in front of the Rada.[xlix] In that address to parliament on December 9, 2015, he slammed the “cancer of corruption” in the country and declared, “the Office of the General Prosecutor desperately needs reform.”[l]
By early February 2016, the intensity of Prosecutor General Shokin’s case against Zlochevsky had intensified. On February 2nd, the Prosecutor General’s Office filed a petition to court to arrest all of Zlochevsky’s property – including a 922 square meter housing estate, a 0.24-hectare land plot, three garden houses, another land plot, a Rolls-Royce Phantom car, and a Knott 924-5014 trainer.[li]
The leaked phone calls also included one between Vice President Biden and President Poroshenko, which took place two weeks after Zlochevsky’s assets were seized, on February 18, 2016:[lii]
President Petro Poroshenko: “Joe, I have a second positive news for you. Yesterday, I met with the General Prosecutor Shokin.”
Vice President Joe Bident: “Yes.”
Poroshenko: “And despite the fact that we didn’t have any corruption charges, we don’t have any information about him doing something wrong, I specially asked him – no, it was day before yesterday – I specially asked him to resign. In, as his position as a state person. And despite the fact that he has support, in the power. And as a finish of my meeting with him, he promised me to give me the statement on resignation. And one hour ago, he bring me the written statement of his resignation.”
Biden: “Great.”
Poroshenko: “And this is my second step for keeping my promises.”
Biden: “I agree.”
Then on March 2, 2016, Archer got together with his old friend/employer, Secretary of State John Kerry, in Washington D.C.:[liii]
Vice President Biden again spoke to Poroshenko on March 22, 2016:[liv]
Biden: “Well, I'm on Air Force Two, and I think we're going to stay connected. We just took off and I'm hoping this connection with stay open ... Tell me that there is a new government, and a new Prosecutor General. I am prepared to do a public signing of the commitment for the billion dollars. Again, I'm not suggesting that's what you want or don't want, I'm just suggesting that's what we're prepared to do, and again, it wouldn't be finalized until the IMF pieces are written.”
Poroshenko: “Extremely strong motivation. One of the possible candidates was leader of my fraction, Lutsenko, who is the public figure. If you think that the political motivated figure would be not very good, from your point of view, I recall this proposal and I do not propose, because nobody knows that I want to propose Lutsenko. In this situation I take all the political motivated figures out from this process.”
Biden: “All right. Well, look, let me, when you and I finish speaking let me huddle with my team, talk over what you and I just talked about. I agree with you, there is a sense of urgency here.”
Then what do you know? Shokin was fired on March 29, 2016, and replaced by Yuriy Lutsenko.[lv] A few weeks later, Vice President Biden & Chocolate King Poroshenko confirmed the billion-dollar fund commitment would proceed, finalizing their arrangement.[lvi]
Biden: “Well, you are doing very well. Congratulations on getting the new Prosecutor General. I know there’s a lot more of that that has to be done, but I really, I really think that’s good, and I understand you’re working with the Rada in the coming days on a number of additional laws to secure the IMF so, but congratulations on installing the new Prosecutor General.
It’s going to be critical for him to work quickly to repair the damage Shokin did, and I’m a man of my word, and now that the new Prosecutor General is in place we’re ready to move forward in signing that new one-billion-dollar loan guarantee.”
Guess they don’t call him ‘Quid pro Joe’ for nothing, huh?
The phone calls weren’t leaked until 2020, but in 2018 Biden was brazen enough to brag about what he’d done publicly at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), an organization I covered in “Globalism vs. Self-Governance: How David Defeats Goliath”.[lvii]
Here’s what Biden had to say then in front of his CFR cronies:[lviii]
Biden: “I’m desperately concerned about the backsliding on the part of Kiev in terms of corruption. They made me, I’ll give you one concrete example. I was - not I – it just happened to be that that was the assignment I got. I got all the good ones. So, I got Ukraine.
And I remember going over, convincing our team that we should be providing for loan guarantees. And I went over for I guess the 12th or 13th time to Kiev and I was supposed to announce that there was another $1bn loan guarantee. And I’d gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor. And they didn’t.
So, they said, they were walking out to the press conference, and I said, ‘No, we’re not going to give you the $1bn.’ They said: ‘You have no authority. You’re not the President. The President said’. I said: ‘Call him.’ I said: ‘I’m telling you; you’re not getting the billion dollars.’ I said: ‘You’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was, what, six hours?’ I looked and I said: ‘We’re leaving in six hours, if the prosecutor is not fired. You’re not getting the money.’
Well, son of a bitch! He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid.”
In case it wasn’t explicitly clear what they had done, in 2020, at a private Biden campaign event, John Kerry said this:[lix]
John Kerry: “I will tell you, because as Secretary of State I was deeply involved in this – ALL of us in the administration were trying to get rid of that prosecutor, from Obama, to the Secretary of State, to the Vice President – ALL of us were working on that – the Ambassador, and, and, we knew if Ukraine was going to survive, and win the revolution in the end, the Maidan, they had to get rid of that prosecutor. And they did.”
Here’s what Devon Archer had to say about this situation when Tucker Carlson interviewed him last year:[lx]
Carlson: “But then comes the question of General Shokin, the Prosecutor. Tell us - that seems to me – that’s when it gets heavy.”
Archer: “Right.”
Carlson: “So, what was that?”
Archer: “So Shokin was the – I’m going to get the dates wrong – but Shokin was the prosecutor, the head prosecutor in Ukraine. And he was taking a close look at Burisma.”
Carlson: “So maybe not so different from an Attorney General?”
Archer: “Right, right. But he was taking, much more case active, I think. An Attorney General is more of like a manager of people that handle cases, and they have their independence.”
Carlson: “But this guy is the law.”
Archer: “He’s, like, the law, yeah. So, the buck stops with him. Hence the signals are more important - countries outside of the United States.”
Carlson: “Yes.”
Archer: “So, Shokin is taking a close look at, a close look at Burisma. There were allegations that some of the, you know, some of the deposits or some of the reserves were not, you know, authentically gotten. Authentically acquired, or whatever it may be.”
Carlson: “Yes.”
Archer: “So I think that was the genesis of the complaints. And there were always, being in Ukraine and being in that part of the world, there were always, kind of, challenges that they were facing. From not being able to get a visa, to money being tied up in London. And this was just another, you know, in a series of issues that law firms and strategic advisory firms were hired for, to you know, to handle these kinds of things. Right?”
Carlson: “Yeah.”
Archer: “So, the Shokin, the Shokin case was he was taking a look at Burisma, and there was a big push by European leaders, the Atlantic Council, etc., etc., to fire Shokin because he was corrupt. Like, it’s hard to, kind of, decipher who is corrupt -”
Carlson: “Can I just ask you, as a side bar, why would the Atlantic Council be getting involved in Shokin here? I mean that’s -”
Archer: “I mean, I don’t know, I don’t know on the Shokin piece.”
Carlson: “I mean this is the lead prosecutor in Ukraine. So, if Ukraine is actually a country with sovereignty, and not just a colony of say, the neocons in the United States, like, why wouldn’t they just let Ukraine deal with their own… Why would Western powers even get involved in who the chief prosecutor in Ukraine is?”
Archer: “That’s a question that I don’t know.”
Carlson: “Yeah. I couldn’t control myself. But within Burisma, Shokin was considered a threat to your business?”
Archer: “Shokin was considered, cuz Shokin was considered a threat to the business. I think anyone in, again you’ve got to get the signals to the government. I think anyone in government is always a threat, and always trying to shake down these businesses that were highly successful and enriching the owners and the staff and the Board.”
Carlson: “Yeah.”
Archer: “And so at the end of the day, Shokin was taking a look. And again, I wasn’t involved in Shokin or any of this. But, he was a threat. He ended up seizing assets of Nikolay [Zlochevsky], a house, some cars, a couple of properties. And Nikolay actually never went back to Ukraine after Shokin seized all of his assets. And the case was, I mean and obviously this is all out there, the case was that there was all this pressure to fire Shokin from the larger community, and then he was fired, and then somehow Burisma was let off the hook. That’s what the story was.”
Carlson: “Was - and Joe Biden of course was the driving force behind his firing?”
Archer: “Yeah, he was involved in that. There’s obviously video.”
Carlson: “Involved!? I mean, Biden bragged at the Council on Foreign Relations.”
Archer: “Yeah.”
Carlson: “You know, they had a billion dollars coming from IMF. And [Biden] said, ‘If you don’t fire this man, you’re not getting the $1 billion’.”
Archer: “Right, right. But it’s, you know, on this one, it certainly wasn’t made clear to us at the Board level, you know, that that was, that there was any, that that was a favor to be done. The narrative – I don’t know the narrative, and I don’t want to lead anyone down that, kind of, path that that’s what happened. Because I don’t know the narrative.”
Carlson: “But Joe Biden knew that his son was on the Board of this company that was being hassled by the prosecutor whose firing he was calling for?”
Archer: “Right.”
Carlson: “Yeah. And this took place three years after he sent you a letter saying thanks for all the work you’re doing with Hunter. So, like, clearly, he would know that this would benefit the family?”
Archer: “Right, and I don’t want to get in… But, the narrative was that, that Shokin was already taken care of. That was the popular narrative. That’s the only thing that I –.”
Carlson: “That he was already on his way out?”
Archer: “Yeah, exactly. That was the narrative that was fed to the Board.”
Carlson: “Okay, so you were told when Shokin got fired that, like, it had nothing to do with –”
Archer: “No, we were told that was bad. And we don’t want a new prosecutor. Shokin was taken care of.”
Carlson: “Ohhhh.”
Archer: “So, it’s very… I mean, this is not like, you know, checkers. There’s multiple dimensions here. So, so…”
Carlson: “This is like connect four.”
Archer: [Laughs] “Yeah, no exactly…”
Carlson: “When Biden called for Shokin to be fired.”
Archer: “Right.”
Carlson: “Very publicly, and then got it done like – bam!”
Archer: “Right.”
Carlson: “What did you think?”
Archer: “Again, the nar – this has been, they tried to beat this into my head a million times because it does work on paper.”
Carlson: “Yeah.”
Archer: “As far as the, you know, the logical steps. But we were told that Shokin had already been taken care – you know, that he was under control. And that this was going to be a whole, big problem for Burisma now.”
Carlson: [Sarcastically] “Yeah, it’s a huge problem!”
Archer: “Because [Laughs]. I mean, I don’t know what – I’m sorry –”
Carlson: [Sarcastically] “The guy who was going to shut our business down just got fired! Oh, no!” [Laughs]
Archer: “It’s just what, it was, kind of, pounded into our heads. Obviously, as I look back into the rearview, it was, it doeen’t, it doesn’t paper as well. But it, but it, you know it looks like there was something -”
Carlson: “I’m asking you because you said at the outset, that well, first of all that you liked Hunter.”
Archer: “Absolutely.”
Carlson: “Who was a very likable – I can attest personally; a very likable guy.”
Archer: “Absolutely.”
Carlson: “And, but that you thought it was, you know, useful. He knows his way around Washington, his dad is the Vice President of the United States, all this stuff. It’s all good. But that there was the Icarus problem.”
Archer: “Right.”
Carlson: “That like if you use those contacts too much, maybe it hurts you? Maybe you get burned by it?”
Archer: “Absolutely.”
Carlson: “Did you feel that, when Shokin got fired, like woo! That maybe this was a little bit –”
Archer: “No!”
Carlson: “A little close to the sun here!”
Archer: [Laughs] “On that one, I just was kind of… Listen I was, I was, I was, I was, I was, I was believing the narrative because we were – where I felt the Icarus was when. Right when he announced, we were in Doha.”
Carlson: “As one is.”
Archer: “As one is, running around with some of the Royal Family at another conference… And we’re in Doha. And they release some picture on the website that Hunter had joined the board. And that was kind of my, that was like, the tipping point where Icarus had arrived a little too close to the sun.”
Carlson: “Yeah.”
Archer: “And the rest of my story has, you know, been a slow, downward – yeah.”
Carlson: “Yeah. The trajectory changed at that point.”
Archer: “Woo! Like this [downward slope]. And that was the Icarus moment. When I saw that release. And I saw, it was the middle of the night.”
Carlson: “And was it Burisma that had released that?”
Archer: “Burisma released it, didn’t tell us. And it was, like, the most Googled news story, like in the world, for 18 hours.”
Carlson: “Yeah.”
Archer: “And I was like, this is going to be a different -”
Carlson: “Well, because to a civilian, you’re thinking. Okay, huge, super lucrative, Eastern European natural gas company.”
Archer: “Right, I thought it was incredible!”
Carlson: “Sort-of semi-employed, kind of, lawyer-lobbyist from DC. Like, what is he doing on their board? Like it just seemed -”
Archer: “Right.”
Carlson: “Yeah.”
Archer: “Yeah.”
Shokin would testify before Ukrainian court regarding the circumstances of his dismissal, testimony which included the following statement:[lxi]
5. The General Prosecutor of Ukraine is appointed to office by the President of Ukraine with the consent of the Verkhovna Rada (‘the Rada’, i.e. parliament). I was accordingly appointed during the presidency of President Poroshenko by 318 votes of members of the Ukrainian Parliament, which constituted a constitutional majority. Whilst occupying this post I was staunchly politically unaffiliated.
6. The circumstance of my dismissal were that I tendered my resignation to the Rada at the request of President Poroshenko. Poroshenko asked me to resign due to pressure from the US Presidential administration, in particular from Joe Biden, who was the US Vice-President. Biden was threatening to withhold USD$ 1 billion in subsidies to Ukraine until I was removed from office. After I yielded to the President’s request and submitted my voluntary resignation, Poroshenko commented about it in the media. He said that I had carried out a colossal amount of work as General Prosecutor, which is something none of my predecessors had been able to do, especially with regards to my work on reforming the different bodies of the prosecutor’s office, on creating the Specialised Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office, which enabled the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine to conduct legal work, and on creating self-governing prosecution authorities.
7. The official reason put forward for my dismissal was that I had allegedly failed to secure the public’s trust. Poroshenko and other state officials, including representatives of the US presidential administration, had never previously had any complaints about my work, however. There were no grievances against me or any allegations that I had committed any corruption-related (or, indeed any other) criminal offenses. Biden never stated anything of the kind either. Furthermore, all sanctions in respect of Yanukovich and his supporters remained in force and were not lifted whilst I occupied the post. Moreover, these sanctions were extended.
8. The truth is that I was forced out because I was leading a wide-ranging corruption probe into Burisma Holdings (“Burisma”), a natural gas firm active in Ukraine, and Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, was a member of the Board of Directors. I assume Burisma, which was connected with gas extraction, had the support of the US Vice-President Joe Biden because his son was on the Board of Directors.
9. On several occasions President Poroshenko asked me to have a look at the criminal case against Burisma and consider the possibility of winding down the investigative actions in respect of this company, but I refused to close this investigation. Therefore, I was forced to leave office, under direct and intense pressure from Joe Biden and the US administration. In my conversations with Poroshenko at the time, he was emphatic that I should cease my investigations regarding Burisma. When I did not, he said that the US (via Biden) were refusing to release the USD$ 1 billion promised to Ukraine. He said that he had no choice, therefore, but to ask me to resign.
10. When Poroshenko asked me to resign, the way that he put it to me was that he was making it for the good of our country, and that I should agree, also as an act of patriotism. I agreed to tender my resignation on this basis.
11. After my dismissal Joe Biden made a public statement, saying – even bragging – that he had me fired. This is when it became clear that the real reason for my dismissal was my action regarding in Burisma and Biden’s personal interest in that company, which was demonstrated by the following:
a) it was Biden’s order and wish that I be removed from office, not Poroshenko’s decision;
b) the reason was because it was precisely the state officials from the US administration of President Obama – and Joe Biden in particular – who were telling the heads of the Ukraine law-enforcement system how to investigate and whom to investigate, including members of the Yanukovych regime team. I was not complying with their will (in respect of Zlochevsky, in particular, who was a minister under Yanukovich) so I had to be removed from office;
c) it was not Poroshenko being patriotic, it was Poroshenko submitting to the demands of state officials from the US administration of President Obama for reasons of political economy and the personal interests of the US Vice President Biden, amongst others.
12. When I found out about the actual reason for my dismissal from Biden’s statement. I went to the courts and asked for recognition that I had been forced to submit my ‘voluntary’ resignation (and therefore that my dismissal be declared unlawful). I was refused to have my case examined on its merits due to the fact that I had supposedly missed the deadlines for applying to the courts. When I had exhausted all domestic legal remedies, I petitioned the ECtHR [European Court of Human Rights], on the basis that my fundamental rights had been breached and that my dismissal was politically motivated and therefore unlawful.
Shokin would inform the Ukrainian publication Strana in 2019 that he had been planning “to interrogate [Hunter] Biden & [Devon] Archer” before he was fired.[lxii]
The Hunter Biden / Burisma scandal was bad for Vice President Joe Biden when it first broke in 2014. The magnitude of the problem only grew over time, in particular after Hunter Biden’s “Laptop from Hell” was released to the public.
In December 2019, the FBI took possession of a laptop previously owned by Hunter Biden, following months of back-and-forth with a computer repair shop owner named John Paul Mac Isaac.[lxiii] Hunter had abandoned the device at Mac Isaac’s shop in Wilmington, Delaware in April 2019. Mac Isaac, who’d been exposed to the laptop’s contents while repairing it, wanted it out of his shop because he believed it contained evidence of felonies. When the FBI agents finally acquired the laptop, their subpoena was issued under the pretense of a money laundering investigation.
For the next several months, despite Mac Isaac’s pushing on the Department of Justice and Republican party leadership, nothing came of the laptop’s contents.[lxiv] In August of 2020 therefore, Mac Isaac sent Rudy Giuliani’s lawyer, Robert Costello, a copy of the hard drive. Giuliani would vet the hard drive, and after determining their contents were legitimate, shared it with The New York Post. After The Post also concluded the contents were legitimate, they published the first of a series of articles on October 14, less than one month before the 2020 presidential election.
Shortly after sharing their article via Twitter, The Post’s account was locked because its article about the Biden laptop broke the social network’s rules against “distribution of hacked material”,[lxv] despite the lack of evidence the materials had been hacked.
Exhibit 26[lxvi]
The public would later learn that Twitter, Google, and Facebook, as well as other major tech platforms, had worked in coordination with members of the federal government & intelligence agencies to suppress news about the laptop. When Elon Musk later acquired Twitter, he worked with a team of independent journalists to disclose the subservience to intelligence agencies practiced by prior management.
This was done through an investigative series known as the “Twitter Files”.[lxvii] In these shocking revelations, internal Twitter documents show that “former” intelligence agents were employed throughout the company.[lxviii] The documents show old Twitter management colluded with intelligence agents in the months leading up to the 2020 presidential election to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story,[lxix] in what many would later argue was a textbook example of election interference.
If that weren’t bad enough, on October 19, 2020, 51 former [?] intelligence agents signed a letter in which they claimed:[lxx]
“We are all individuals who devoted significant portions of our lives to national security. Some of us served in senior positions in policy departments and agencies, and some of us served in senior positions in the Intelligence Community. Some of us were political appointees, and some were career officials. Many of us worked for presidents of both political parties.
We are all also individuals who see Russia as one of our nation’s primary adversaries. All of us have an understanding of the wide range of Russian overt and covert activities that undermine US national security, with some of us knowing Russian behavior intimately, as we worked to defend our nation against it for a career. A few of us worked against Russian information operations in the United States in the last several years.
Perhaps most important, each of us believes deeply that American citizens should determine the outcome of elections, not foreign governments. All of us agree with the founding fathers’ concern about the damage that foreign interference in our politics can do to our democracy.
It is for all these reasons that we write to say that the arrival on the US political scene of emails purportedly belonging to Vice President Biden’s son Hunter, much of it related to his time serving on the Board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.
We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement - just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.
If we are right, this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote in this election, and we believe strongly that Americans need to be aware of this.”
Exhibit 27[lxxi]
The list of operatives who signed this letter includes John Brennan, the CIA director under the Obama/Biden regime, and Jim Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence under Obama/Biden. Weren’t these the same two guys who led the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment on “Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections”, right before President-elect Trump took office?[lxxii]
You know, the spark that ignited the “Russiagate” conspiracy, claiming Donald Trump was a subversive agent acting on behalf of the Russians? A conspiracy theory that dominated mainstream media for three years, which proved to be a baseless accusation from the beginning? And weren’t Brennan & Clapper the same guys who setup the Department of Homeland Security unit targeting the threat of “Domestic Terrorism”, a threat that happened to come from “supporters of the former president [Donald Trump]”?[lxxiii] Weird coincidence.
Shockingly, Biden didn’t mention any potential conflicts of interest when he used this Intelligence Community letter to refute the legitimacy of Hunter’s “Laptop from Hell” during his third and final debate with Donald Trump on October 22, 2020:[lxxiv]
Donald Trump: “Excuse me, if this stuff is true about Russia, Ukraine, China, other countries, Iraq. If this is true, then he’s a corrupt politician. So don’t give me this stuff about how you’re this innocent baby. Joe, they’re calling you a corrupt politician. (indiscernible) the laptop from hell.”
Kristen Welker, NBC News White House Correspondent: “Hey President Trump, I want to stay on the issue of race. We’re talking about the issue –”
Trump: “The laptop from hell.”
Welker: “President Trump, we’re talking about race right now. And I do want to stay on the issue of race. President Trump, you’ve just –”
Joe Biden: “Can I – I have to respond to that.”
Welker: “Please. Very quickly.”
Biden: “Because look. There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that this – what he’s accusing me of – is a Russian plan. They have said this is, has all the character – four, five former heads of the CIA, both parties – say what he’s saying is a bunch of garbage. Nobody believes it except him and his good friend Rudy Giuliani.”
Trump: “You mean the laptop is now another Russia, Russia, Russia hoax?”
Biden: “That’s exactly what – that’s exactly what–”
Trump: “You’ve got to be… Is this where you’re going? This is where he’s going. The laptop is Russia, Russia, Russia.”
Welker: “Gentlemen, I want to stay on the issue of race.”
Trump: “You have to be kidding. Here we go again with Russia.”
Welker: “Mr. President, we’re going to continue with the issue of race.”
Trump: “Can’t believe that one.”
Turns out, it wasn’t just President Trump and his good friend Rudy Giuliani who believed the laptop to be authentic. Here is Senator John Kennedy, no relation to Robert F. Kennedy’s family, grilling FBI Director Chris Wray about their handling of the laptop.[lxxv] Their exchange is followed by Congressman Matt Gaetz’s testimony about it:[lxxvi]
Senator John Kennedy (R-LA): “We had a controversy during the election about Mr. Hunter Biden, Biden’s laptop. And at that time, you had 80 agents interfacing with social media, doing whatever they were doing. The FBI had the Hunter Biden laptop and got it on December 9, 2019. The New York Post story, which, which a lot of the social media companies, at the suggestion of government, took down. The story came out on 10/14, 2020. Why didn’t the FBI just say hey, the laptop is real? Why didn’t you just tell everybody the laptop is real? We’re not vouching for what’s on it, but it’s real? This isn’t a fiction?”
FBI Director Christopher Wray: “Well, I – as you might imagine, the FBI cannot, especially at a time like that, be talking about an ongoing investigation. Second, I would tell you that – at least my understanding is that – both the FBI folks involved in the conversations and the Twitter folks involved in the conversations, both say that the FBI did not direct Twitter to suppress –.”
Kennedy: “But others were in government.”
Wray: “Well, I can’t. Again, I can’t speak to others in government. That’s part of the point that I was trying to make. Because the –”
Kennedy: “Yes, but you’re the FBI. You’re not part of the White House and part of Homeland Security. You’re not supposed to be political. You see all of this controversy going out, why didn’t the FBI say, ‘Time out folks. We’re not getting in the middle of this, but the laptop is real’.”
Wray: “Again, we have to be very careful about what we can say. Especially in the middle of an election season. Because that’s precisely some of the problems that led to my predecessor’s negative findings from the Inspector General.” …
Congressman Matt Gaetz (R-FL): “Impeachment nostalgia always warms my heart, but we are here focused on a weaponized government. A whole of government approach that has been turned against the American people.
And while Rudy Giuliani may have been running around with the laptop in 2020, what is an indisputable fact is that the FBI had the laptop in 2019.
And it appears that the last round of questioning misses the boat. That it’s true! The information is authentic. The pictures, the videos, the emails. There hasn’t been a single allegation that there is a single, a single doctored email.
Unlike what we saw before the FISA courts! Where the FBI itself was doctoring emails to try to smear President Trump.”
So, the “laptop from hell” is real. A lot of explosive, incriminating evidence about crimes in the Ukraine and Burisma, including the emails I just read. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Here’s what John Paul Mac Isaac had to say about the laptop’s contents. Mac Isaac is the man whose life was turned upside-down when Hunter abandoned his felonious laptop in Mac Isaac’s repair shop:[lxxvii]
John Paul Mac Isaac: “The FBI came to my house; I explained the situation in about the beginning of November. Yeah, about mid-November [2019]. And I presented them with some stuff I had printed up because during this time, the impeachment hearings had started. Now, there were whispers of it; it was getting close.
Now the big concern – sure I’m fearful of my safety. I’ve definitely witnessed criminal activity on this device. But now, there’s an impeachment that’s, whispers of impeachment that’s occurring over a phone call about the previous administration in Ukraine. And I had seen enough information on that laptop to know that there was a blatant pay-for-play scheme. The Bidens made out like bandits during the 2014 Ukrainian conflict. And in my opinion, from what I had seen, President Trump had every reason to call Zelensky. Considering Zelensky was created by Igor Kolomoisky, who was Hunter Biden’s business partner.”
Vincent Oshana: “Wow.”
Mac Isaac: “And when, when the Bidens could no longer protect Kolomoisky and his billions that he embezzled during the Ukraine conflict, Kolomoisky did the next best thing. He made his own president. He took his prize actor from his TV series, or TV station, and groomed him to be the president. Got him elected. So now he doesn’t have to worry
First thing Zelensky did when he got elected was the privatization of PrivatBank, which was Ihor’s bank. He made that illegal so Igor could have his bank back, have his money back. And return to the country.
So, it was, and to watch what’s happening in Ukraine happen all over again. It’s scary, except this time we’re sending $40 billion instead of $18 billion.”
Wow, a lot of threads worth exploring out of Mac Isaac’s discoveries. There’s a lot more the public has to learn about the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop. Marco Polo is a nonprofit research group who published a 644-page forensic analysis of the laptop, which I recommend you all check out at marcopolo501c3.org/p/report-on-the-biden-laptop. I found pages 136-165 on Ukraine to be of particular interest.
Miranda Devine is the investigative journalist who broke the Biden Laptop story at the New York Post and who went on to publish a book about it titled The Laptop From Hell. Here she is discussing the laptop with Jordan Peterson:[lxxviii]
Jordan Peterson: “When is it that Biden is in contact with the Ukrainian authorities to get the prosecutor who is going after Burisma fired?”
Miranda Devine: “So, that was in December of 2015. He first tied the $1 billion in US aid to the firing of Viktor Shokin. And he did that pretty much off his own bat. I mean, it was U.S. policy, State Department policy, to clean up corruption in the Prosecutor General’s office.
Viktor Shokin had been brought in just about a year before. Actually, less than a year before, he’d been brought in in February 2015. As a kind of a clean-skin by Poroshenko, who was the American-backed president of Ukraine, to clean things up. Because there’d been a huge scandal with his predecessor. Do you want me to go back into the details of that?”
Peterson: “Well yeah, there’s a loose end here I guess for me. And that is, well, Trump is being accused of collaborating inappropriately with members of a foreign country, Russia in this case. But we also have, at the same time, Biden who has made reference to this on the world stage – getting a prosecutor fired. And my understanding is that that prosecutor was going after Burisma. Have I got that right? Okay. And it’s the same Burisma that Hunter is involved in and that’s paying him $1 million a year?”
Devine: “Yeah. So, Burisma was owned by a guy called Zlochevsky, who was a “mini-garch” they call him, a billionaire. But behind Zlochevsky was a really odious oligarch called Igor Kolomoisky, who would have people’s eyeballs gouged out. And Zlochevsky had been a minister in the previous Yanukovych government. Which had been, sort of, Russia-aligned. And the Americans wanted him out. And, I mean, I don’t think it’s controversial or incorrect to say that the CIA was involved in the coup. You know, how much they were involved – whether they nudged or whether they were more involved. Who knows? But they certainly were involved.
And so, Yanukovych was thrown out. And his sort of, corrupt – I mean Ukraine is the most corrupt country in Europe. One of the most corrupt countries in the world. And all the ministers fled from that government, taking billions of dollars of Ukrainian people’s money. Except for one! A guy called Nikolay Zlochevsky, who owned Burisma! While he did flee to Russia initially, and then to Dubai, he was allowed to keep his business, his oil and gas business Burisma. And to continue to make money from it. Which I think is a curious point. Everybody, every other person involved with that Yanukovych government was forced out and had to flee. But, Zlochevsky, while he wasn’t allowed back into the country, could continue to earn money. And in fact, could put Americans like Hunter Biden and his friend Devon Archer onto the Board of his company to try and legitimize it and keep the Americans sweet. And to put pressure on Ukrainian authorities not to investigate him.
And, you know, Victor Shokin was brought in as I said after a scandal. And the scandal was that his predecessor who ran the Prosecutor General’s office, a guy called Yarema, had presided over the collapse of a case that had been brought by the British Serious Fraud squad in conjunction with the FBI against Zlochevsky. They had frozen $24mn of Zlochevsky’s money in a London bank account. And this was a very important case for the Serious Fraud squad. Because it was the showpiece that the government was boasting about. And the head of the Serious Fraud squad had a whole conference about that they were going to claw back the ill-gotten gains of the Ukrainian oligarchs that had been banished from that country. Because they were aligned with Russia.
So, this was a really important case. And a bribe was paid to the Prosecutor General’s office, people in the Prosecutor General’s office, and the case collapsed. And the money, a British judge unfroze that money, and Zlochevsky could take it back.
And so, this was hugely embarrassing to the U.S. Embassy, which really was running things in Ukraine. And they were being pressured. The Ambassador, Geoffrey Pyatt, was getting a lot of grief from the British who were completely furious about the fact that, you know. They blamed the Americans for this happening. ‘Well, why didn’t you have control over this corrupt Prosecutor General’s office?’
And Poroshenko, the president, was under pressure as well. So, he brought in this guy, reluctantly - Viktor Shokin. Who was, sort of a, you know, a kind of a superstar. He was a very popular prosecutor. He was always a line prosecutor. Had never wanted to be a boss. And he had been responsible for some very high-profile convictions.
And, you know, he was quite flamboyant in the way - for instance, one time he busted a corrupt politician. And he went into the Rada, the Ukrainian Parliament. And he played video to all the Parliamentarians of this guy, sort of, clandestine video of this politician accepting a bribe. Or asking for a bribe and getting one. And, you know, that was a major story.
And he’d also arrested the killers of this journalist who’d been beheaded. And his body had been trussed up and left in a forest. And that was seen as, you know, he’d been writing stories that were damaging to the previous regime and various oligarchs. So, he also busted that story and that case open. And arrested those people. And he was still pursuing the people behind them, the powerful people behind them. So, he was kind of a “without fear or favor” prosecutor. He’d already suffered one assassination attempt, when a sniper fired through a window in a meeting he was at. And so, he was sort of a good choice for Poroshenko to appoint as the Prosecutor General.
And Shokin says that he didn’t want to do it. But he agreed. He knows that it’s political, and you know, politics in Ukraine is very ugly. And so, but anyway he reluctantly took it. Because, he said, Poroshenko appealed to his patriotism. And you know, I’ve spent a lot of time talking to Shokin. I mean, not in his - I can’t speak Ukrainian and he can’t speak English. But through translators and through Google translate. And he does strike me as a very patriotic, proud Ukrainian. And proud of his record as prosecutor. And there’s evidence that he’s given me to show that he was a very successful prosecutor.
And as Prosecutor General, every year, there’s a lot of bureaucracy there. And a lot imposed by the Americans and Europeans on the Prosecutor General’s office. So, there was a lot of reporting going on. And he’s shown me reports where – you know, he had three times as many prosecutions of corrupt people as either of his two predecessors. So, there is some evidence. And I’ve also seen, kind of, in the background where he lives. And he doesn’t seem to live lavishly. And so, you know, I can’t see any evidence that he is corrupt. And no one has ever brought forward any evidence that he is corrupt.”
Peterson: “So how did Biden, how did Biden have him fired? And why?”
Devine: “Well, Shokin says that he was investigating Zlochevsky and Burisma at the time. And there is evidence for that. Because in February of 2016, about six weeks before he was removed, Shokin issued a warrant for seizing all of Zlochevsky’s property in Kiev. And that was, you know, a couple of mansions, three plots of land, a Rolls-Royce silver Phantom car.
That was reported in the Ukrainian media, but in other European media as well. So, that’s established that that happened, and no one has ever denied that. And so, you know, that’s evidence that what Shokin is saying is true. Is that he was - he said he had more than one case. He had several cases afoot against Zlochevsky for money-laundering and corruption and so-on.
And so, you know, therefore, I come at this from - well, why are these lies being told by Joe Biden? By his allies? Also, by people at the Atlantic Council? People who are, sort of, affiliated with that. The Atlantic Council is, sort of, the NATO front. So, with NATO people. And the sort of Russia hawks that abound in American academia. They all backed Joe Biden. Also, there were some Europeans as well.
But, again, I’ve interviewed – for instance a guy called Jan Tombiński, who was the EU Ambassador to Ukraine at that time. He was quoted as welcoming, you know, Shokin’s removal. And there was always anonymous sources quoted by the Washington Post, and New York Times, and so on. Bloomberg and the Financial Times. All saying that the Europeans, the EU wanted Shokin removed because he was corrupt.
But Jan Tombiński, when I interviewed him said, ‘No. Look, I knew there were problems in the Prosecutor General’s office. And it all comes back to that bribe that was paid and the Zlochevsky Serious Fraud squad case in London falling apart. Everybody was up in arms about that. But that was not Shokin!’ And Tombiński says, ‘I didn’t make any comment about Shokin because those kinds of details were up to the Ukrainians’. Which is the proper way to behave.
Not only that. I mean, you know, I found a European Commission report from December of [sic – 2015].[lxxix] In fact, it was about a week after Joe Biden traveled to Ukraine on December 9 and gave that ultimatum to Poroshenko. That you fire Shokin, or you don’t get the billion dollars in aid. This European Commission report was the final report of their, sort of, investigation and, sort of, riding Ukraine to do various things. Including, very importantly, to clean up corruption in order to qualify for visa-free travel. Which was very important to the Ukraine.
And this report said, ‘Yes, they’ve satisfied everything. And in fact, they now can qualify for visa-free travel. And on the corruption front, they’ve done very well. There’s been a lot of progress’. And they actually identified Shokin’s office as having made strides, including setting up a new, anticorruption office inside the Prosecutor General’s office. And that Shokin had just appointed someone to that.
And, you know, there are letters as well from the Summer – you know, August/September of 2015. From John Kerry and Victoria Nuland. John Kerry, who was then the Secretary of State. Victoria Nuland was a senior State Department person. Congratulating Shokin! To Victor Shokin, I’ve seen them. Saying, you know, ‘Good on you for your progress and the good work that you’re doing’.” [lxxx]
By now, I hope you realize there’s more to the Burisma story than a mild abuse of soft power and nepotism by Joe and Hunter Biden. That the implications of this scandal are far-reaching, and they are not going away anytime soon.
So, what exactly was Burisma doing illegally? And does the money trail connect directly to Joe Biden? We’ll return to both of these questions, but here’s what Former Prosecutor General Shokin had to say:[lxxxi]
Brian Kilmeade, Fox News: “Do you believe they were, they were up to no good? Were they up to doing something corrupt with Burisma? Was the company of Burisma corrupt, as has been alleged? Which since has been disbanded?”
Viktor Shokin: “I have no doubt that there were illegal activities engaged in by Burisma. As a matter of fact, the criminal case had been started before me. It continued to expand. And Zlochevsky, who at the time held the post of Minister, and was the founder and CEO of Burisma. Started bringing in people who could provide protection for him. Hunter Biden was among them. And the corruption network expanded as a result. So, yes. To answer your question - there’s no doubt in my mind that Burisma was engaged in illegal activities…”
Kilmeade: “What corrupt activities did you suspect they were engaged in?”
Shokin: “It would take half a day for me to discuss every single count. But I can say that Burisma illegally produced, sold and utilized gas. Zlochevsky, the founder of Burisma, recently made a plea deal with the prosecution in a case where he was accused of giving a $6 million bribe. Which is the kind of money that you don’t just give away if you’re not really engaging in anything illegal. So, his plea deal was to cover up a $6 million bribe that he gave earlier.”
Kilmeade: “Do you believe that Joe Biden or Hunter Biden got bribes?”
Shokin: “I do not want to deal in unproven facts. But my firm personal conviction is that - Yes, this was the case. They were being bribed. The fact that Joe Biden gave away $1 billion in US money in exchange for my dismissal. My firing. Isn’t that alone a case of corruption?”
The Burisma corruption network expanded as a result of people like Hunter Biden being brought in to protect the company and Zlochevsky. The corruption network expanded how, exactly?
Well, one man who may have an idea is Henri du Pont. As I was poking around Hunter’s laptop, as I’d recommend you all do at bidenlaptopemails.com, I came across an interesting email to Hunter from Mr. du Pont. The du Pont family is one that appears frequently when researching the history of organized crime, and so my ears perked up when I came across Henri’s name.
On April 26, 2016, Henri du Pont wrote Hunter Biden an email, subject “Burisma”, which read:[lxxxii]
The du Pont family has a significant and controversial history. Their impact has been particularly profound in the Biden home state of Delaware.
Pierre du Pont’s family emigrated to the U.S. in 1799, settling in Wilmington, Delaware. At Thomas Jefferson’s request, he started a plan for national education in this country. Jefferson arranged for the first gunpowder order from the American government when the du Ponts went into the gunpowder business.
Pierre’s son, Eleuthère Irénée (or E.I.) du Pont founded the DuPont gunpowder company in Delaware. E.I. du Pont’s mill went from making 39,000 pounds of gun powder in 1804 to tripling that the following year.[lxxxiii] DuPont’s growth accelerated during the War of 1812. E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company was on its way to becoming one of the world’s largest producers of explosives.
Now, cynical people might suggest that the world’s largest manufacturer of gunpowder and explosives would have an economic incentive to foment wars and internal revolutions. So that they could then sell gunpowder and explosives to both sides of those wars and revolutions, of course.
Continuing to expand after the Civil War, by 1902 DuPont operated forty gunpowder and explosives plants, leading to antitrust claims. The Sherman Antitrust Act forced the 1913 creation of Hercules Powder Company and Atlas Powder Company.[lxxxiv] The connection between them and the parent company remained largely intact.
During World War I, the company expanded its Carney’s Point plant to nearly seventy times its prewar capacity and opened five additional plants.[lxxxv] Long after the war, in 1934, DuPont Company’s wartime production led to accusations of profiteering. The duPonts denied the charges when testifying before the Senate Munitions Investigation Committee.[lxxxvi]
The du Pont family built dozens of beautiful estates across Delaware in the 20th century, several of which would come to be owned by members of the Biden family.
Exhibit 29[lxxxvii]
After World War II broke out, the DuPont family became heavily involved in the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the intelligence agency precursor to the CIA.[lxxxviii] DuPont also designed, constructed and operated a plutonium plant for the Manhattan Project during WWII.[lxxxix]
DuPont became a chemical empire built on synthetics, including shatterproof glass, paints, rayon, nylon, dyes, photo film rubber, drugs, etc. DuPont led a multi-decade cover-up of toxic chemical PFOA, used to make the nonstick coating in Teflon. [xc] Teflon was introduced in 1946 and for more than 60 years, PFOA (or C8) was an essential ingredient.[xci]
After an epic 15-year class action legal battle involving 3,500 personal injury claims, legal discovery revealed that PFOA and associated compounds such as PFOS and GenX cause severe harms to health.[xcii] The chemicals are linked to cancer, reproductive and developmental harm, liver problems, and immune dysfunction.[xciii]
The documents revealed that DuPont scientists had closely studied the chemicals for decades and knew about the dangers it posed, yet rather than informing workers, impacted households, or regulatory agencies, DuPont repeatedly kept its knowledge secret.[xciv] The deadly chemical that DuPont continued to use after it knew it was linked to health problems is now everywhere – including the blood of 99.7% of Americans as well as newborn human babies, breast milk, and umbilical cord blood.[xcv]
DuPont and its spin-off companies Chemours and Corteva would eventually establish and contribute $1.185 billion to a settlement fund to the victims of PFAS-related drinking water claims.[xcvi] This scandal was covered in the documentary The Devil We Know and the Hollywood drama Dark Waters. One of the attorneys leading the trial team against DuPont was an environmental lawyer named Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.[xcvii]
DuPont’s legal defense against the EPA during the PFOA litigation was led by a man named Michael McCabe. Prior to working for DuPont, McCabe had served on the other side of the public-private revolving door - as Joe Biden’s Communications and Projects Director (1987 to 1995) and as the Deputy Administrator of the EPA at the end of the Clinton Administration.[xcviii] After the 2020 election, McCabe walked back through the revolving door to serve on President-elect Biden’s Transition Team for the EPA.[xcix]
DuPont’s only real competition in the chemicals market came from Dow Chemicals, and the two companies merged in 2017.[c] Two years later, DowDuPont spun off Dow Inc. and Corteva, Inc., the company’s agricultural division.[ci] The remaining, legacy business operates under the name DuPont de Nemours, Inc. and generated over $12 billion in sales in 2022.[cii]
Biden’s home state of Delaware, the first state in the union, has a history entangled with that of the du Pont family. Despite being the second smallest U.S. state, Delaware’s status as the U.S.’s corporate tax haven gives it disproportionate importance in American politics. Delaware has been the home for American business since 1792, when the state established its Court of Chancery to handle business affairs.[ciii] By the early 20th century, the state wrote friendly corporate and tax laws to lure companies to its domicile.
Federal authorities worry that, in addition to legitimate businesses, drug traffickers, embezzlers, and money launderers are increasingly heading to Delaware, where shell companies can be easily established with no questions asked. Nearly half of all public corporations in the U.S. are incorporated in Delaware, which has more corporate entities than people.[civ]
Delaware tops lists of domestic and foreign tax havens because it allows companies to lower their taxes in another state by shifting royalties to holding companies in Delaware, where they are not taxed. This arrangement is known as the “Delaware loophole”, which has enabled corporations to lower their taxes owed to other states by an estimated $9.5 billion over the last decade.[cv] Delaware has established itself as the state offering the least transparency and the most secrecy for its corporations. As such, it has become a haven for transnational crime.
In 2019, Tim Murphy of Mother Jones magazine published an article about Delaware’s shady history and its ties to the DuPont and Biden families. Here are sections of his article, “House of Cards: How Joe Biden helped build a financial system that’s great for Delaware banks and terrible for the rest of us”:[cvi]
“In early 1973, as Joe Biden was settling into his new job in Washington, DC, Ralph Nader published a deconstruction of what made the freshman Democratic senator’s state of Delaware, the most anodyne of states, so exceptional. The answer, The Company State explained, had to do with the unique relationship between government and commerce: Delaware was less a democracy than a fiefdom, contorting its laws to meet the demands of its corporate lords.
Preeminent among them was the chemical giant DuPont. Nader took readers to Rodney Square, in the heart of Wilmington. There was the ritzy Hotel du Pont, housed in a building owned by DuPont, next to a theater built by DuPont, connected to a bank controlled by the du Pont family, surrounded by law offices and brokerages—all affiliated in some way with what was known simply as “The Company.”
The du Ponts owned the state’s two largest newspapers and employed a tenth of the state legislature. The governor was a former executive. The state’s member of Congress for most of the 1970s was Pierre Samuel du Pont IV.
“General Motors could buy Delaware,” Nader quipped, “if DuPont were willing to sell it.”
Over the next two decades, as Biden rose through the ranks of the Democratic Party, the state’s center of gravity began to shift from the world of chemicals to the big business of other people’s business—banking, accounting, law, and telemarketing. But if the industry had changed, the ethos remained: Delaware was the Company State. It owed its prosperity to its willingness to give corporations what they wanted.
Though he’s now a millionaire thanks to book sales and speaking fees, Biden has long positioned himself as the champion of the middle class, a scrappy kid from Scranton who’s fought the good fight for decades. His adopted home state is part of that identity too—an unglamorous enclave of scrapple and toll roads, the Acela Corridor’s own Flyover Country. But as he pursues his third and likely final quest for the Democratic presidential nomination, his record haunts him, because the interests of Delaware are often at extreme odds with everyone else’s.
Biden did not create this system, but he used his influence to strengthen and protect it. He cast key votes that deregulated the banking industry, made it harder for individuals to escape their credit card debts and student loans, and protected his state’s status as a corporate bankruptcy hub.
Biden’s career in the Senate placed him on the wrong side of some of the biggest financial fights of his generation and brought him into conflict with some of the same rivals he faces today. If you want to understand how Biden became Biden, you have to understand how Delaware became Delaware.
Delaware is a tiny state, and because it is tiny, it has had to get creative to survive. Small countries sell shipping rights, citizenship, and secrecy. Delaware offers an American variation of the same—a legal and administrative sanctuary that allows businesses to do things there that they could not do elsewhere.
The foundation for the state’s economy began with its 1776 constitution, which created a special venue for the handling of business disputes, called the chancery court. But Delaware’s role as America’s corporate epicenter traces back to 1899, when—with the backing of the du Ponts—legislators passed the General Corporation Law, allowing anyone in the United States who wanted to form a company in Delaware to do so. The number of corporations based in the state grew quickly, and when New Jersey—the OG of lax incorporation laws—decided to crack down on trusts, Delaware welcomed the exiles.
The incorporation law made it easy to set up shop in Delaware, and the chancery court made it convenient to stay. Companies knew they’d get a reliable pro-business forum for their disputes. Today, there are nearly twice as many Delaware-incorporated companies as there are Delaware voters, and incorporation fees constitute the second-largest share of the state’s annual revenue.
But Delaware’s windfall comes at the expense of other states. Corporations can place their profits in Delaware-based holding companies to avoid paying taxes in the places where they actually operate. Delaware LLCs can also be incorporated anonymously via third-party agents, stifling transparency. “Setting up a company in Delaware,” the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy says, “requires less information than signing up for a library card.”
When the economy sagged in the late 1970s, the cash-strapped state began looking for ways to supplement its income. In 1981, it passed a new law, written by banking lobbyists and backed by DuPont, with the hopes of becoming, in the words of the governor who signed it (a du Pont, naturally), “the Luxembourg of the United States.” While other states were setting caps on usury rates, Delaware told banks they could charge whatever they wanted in annual interest and late fees; the banks could also foreclose on debtors’ homes if they fell behind on payments. The state even cut corporate taxes.
The result was a corporate gold rush. A dozen companies, including JP Morgan and Chase Manhattan (now JP Morgan Chase), opened offices in Delaware in the first year alone. By the late ’90s, four of the five largest credit card firms in the country had set up in Wilmington, and the industry employed at least 35,000 people. The Company State had pulled off a lucrative turnaround.
The state’s decision to turn itself into New Luxembourg ushered in an era of economic prosperity that coincided with a political era of good feelings. The rebooted Delaware was emblematic of the kind of gauzy comity that Biden has sometimes gotten in trouble for waxing nostalgic about. Elected officials from both parties prided themselves on what they called “the Delaware Way”—a willingness to put aside partisanship for the good of the state, which invariably meant aiding its business climate. Revenue from corporate taxes and LLCs kept government coffers full, and the state’s low-income tax rates kept voters happy.”
Investigative journalist Miranda Devine expanded on Biden’s abuse of “the Delaware Way” in her book Laptop from Hell:[cvii]
The Delaware Way
It was a simple plan Joe devised for his sons.
Beau was the golden-haired prodigy who would go into politics as the next JFK, remaining squeaky clean and above reproach on his road to the White House. He would move from federal prosecutor to Delaware’s attorney general, en route to the governorship and perhaps the Senate.
Hunter, who would have preferred to be an artist or a writer, was assigned the role of paying the bills for the rest of the family through lucrative grace-and-favor jobs and sweetheart deals facilitated by Joe’s network of connections in Delaware and, later, throughout the world.
To understand the Biden family’s international influence-peddling operation, you have to know where it all began, in the chummy political culture of the small state of Delaware.
For more than four decades as the senator for Delaware, Joe had leveraged a quid pro quo system of cronyism and trading favors for political influence, which has come to be known as the “Delaware Way.”
He and his associates have spun it as a cordial system of bipartisanship where everyone comes out a winner.
But federal prosecutors investigating corrupt campaign donations involving the Bidens described the Delaware Way more accurately as “a form of soft corruption, intersecting business and political interests, which has existed in this State for years.” …
By the time he became vice president, Joe had mastered crony politics in his home state. Soon he would extend the “Delaware Way” template internationally, by using Hunter, under the guidance of Joe’s devoted younger brother Jim Biden, as bagman for the family…
In 1997, a newly married Hunter lucked into a rare real estate goldmine, buying a historic house set in the lushly landscaped 1,000 acre-ground of the Winterthur estate of Henry Francis du Pont, regarded as the loveliest of the two dozen Du Pont estates dotted throughout the bucolic countryside about six miles north of Wilmington…
The following year Hunter sold the house for “roughly twice what he’d paid for it,” he told the [New Yorker] magazine. In his memoir, he claims it was the hard work he and his family put in on weekends restoring the house that accounted for the price delta. “We scraped, caulked, primed and repainted every square inch of the place.”
Like his father, early on Hunter evidenced an uncanny knack for making money from Delaware real estate.
A five-minute drive south of Hunter’s place, down the Brandywine Valley Scenic Parkway, past the Wilmington Country Club, in the exclusive enclave of Greenville, Joe had bought a Du Pont mansion of his own in 1975, when he was a thirty-two-year-old recently widowed senator on a salary of $44,600 per year.
The grand 10,000 square-foot five-bedroom estate, with pool house, basketball court, and manicured gardens, was “the kind of place a thousand Italian guys died building-hand-carved doorways, a curving hand-carved grand staircase that Clark Gable could have carried a girl down, a library fit for a Carnegie, or Bernard Baruch, someone like that,” wrote Richard Ben Cramer in his 1988 book on presidential candidates, What It Takes…
Joe paid $185,000 for the two-acre property he dubbed “the Station”. He sold it twenty-one years later, in 1996, for $1.2 million, in circumstances that would later attract controversy. The buyer of Joe’s house was John Cochran, the vice-chairman of MBNA, the Delaware credit card giant that would give Hunter his first job…
Joe’s Republican opponent [in his 1996 reelection campaign] was suggesting what a lot of people were whispering, that Cochran had paid more than twice what the house was worth in a corrupt “sweetheart” deal.
Joe Biden would build an astounding real estate track record over his decades in the Senate. Critics have suggested these schemes enabled Biden’s corruption, in which he would purchase real estate at below market rates, flip the property at a significant mark-up, and pocket the profit.
Devine later expanded upon Joe’s influence peddling scheme in her interview with Jordan Peterson:[cviii]
Jordan Peterson: “How is Joe involved? And what’s the evidence for that as far as you’re concerned?”
Miranda Devine: “Well, first of all, I mean this is Joe Biden’s business. This is how he has supported his family in a lavish way. Lived in DuPont mansions. And put all of his kids through schools, and all of his nephews and nieces and so-on.
He’s run an influence-peddling operation that his family. First of all, his brothers ran for him out of Delaware. Delaware is a very peculiar state. It’s like the Liechtenstein of America. It has the most opaque corporate laws, you know, rules. And practically every corporation in America is headquartered in Delaware. That gives this tiny state, that gives the Senator from Delaware this enormous power. Because he has all these very wealthy companies wanting favors from him.
Also, because when he came into the Senate, he was clay to be molded by the older Senators there. And they felt sorry for him because he was newly widowed. And so, they took him under his wing. He doesn’t like to admit this, but it was the, sort of, racist Dixiecrat Senators who did that. Democrats.
And he got these very highfalutin jobs. Powerful jobs. He was for many years Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Therefore, Judiciary Committee - he had power over who became judges.
And also, in the Foreign Relations Committee he was wooed very early on by China. He went over there as a young Senator. Was taken to their equivalent of Martha’s Vineyard for a weekend. They filled his head with propaganda. He came back and he was so embarrassingly pro-China that the Weekly Standard had a front-page article, just excoriating him and saying he is an embarrassment.
And Joe Biden, as this very influential head of the Foreign Relations Committee - in 2001 was instrumental in getting China into the WTO. Which was a disaster for American manufacturing, for the very American working class that Joe Biden purports to care about. He was very influential with his reluctant Democrat colleagues. I think the Republicans were into it, but the Democrats weren’t. Bill Clinton wasn’t into it.
So that was, you know - Joe Biden, for all his nonsense and his clownish behavior and his lies and his - the fact that he is laughed at by people as simply harmless, silly Joe. He did carry a lot of clout. And he did make things - get legislation through for those donors, those credit card donors in Delaware. That were again to the detriment of the little people.
And in return he, you know, got cheap houses. And his previous, less good houses were bought at an inflated price. As I said, his son got jobs at inflated salaries. And who knows what else? It worked for him.
So, he had this influence-peddling operation going on. It was in his DNA in Delaware. And then when he became Vice President. And Hunter now comes into the family business. He was already a lobbyist in Washington, so that was working. And now Joe starts flying him around the world with him.
Flew him famously to China in 2013. When Joe was going to China to do America’s important business, like stop China from aggressing in the South China Sea, militarizing those islands, stop China’s stealing America’s intellectual property, and so on. And Joe walked away from that meeting with, you know, the Chinese CCP leaders with nothing on behalf of America. But Hunter walked away with a 10% stake in a Chinese firm that had $2.5 billion.”
Hunter Biden and Henri du Pont would continue their collaboration on Ukraine when Henri emailed Hunter on October 11, 2016, saying:[cix]
Now, is Burisma the only economic interest the du Pont family has in Ukraine? You’ll be shocked to learn that – it’s not. The listener is likely familiar with the flag of Ukraine, blue on top, yellow on bottom. The blue represents Ukraine’s sky, the golds its fields of wheat.
Ukraine is recognized worldwide for its fertile farmland, a natural resource that has not been overlooked by greedy oligarchs. Remember those pesky, 2014 IMF loan conditions that forced a spike in natural gas prices onto Ukrainian citizens? Turns out, there were also conditions for Ukraine’s farmland tied to those loans.
Here’s what the Oakland Institute had to say in 2014:[cx] [cxi]
“Grabbing the Breadbasket of Europe
The East-West competition over Ukraine involves the control of natural resources, including uranium and other minerals, as well as geopolitical issues such as Ukraine’s membership in NATO. The stakes around Ukraine’s vast agricultural sector, the world’s third largest exporter of corn and fifth largest exporter of wheat, constitute a critical factor that has been often overlooked.
With its ample fields of fertile black soil that allow for high production volumes of grains and cereals, Ukraine is often referred to as the “breadbasket of Europe.” In the last decade, the agricultural sector has been characterized by a growing concentration of production within very large agricultural holdings that use large-scale intensive farming systems.
The presence of foreign corporations in the agricultural sector and the size of agro-holdings are both growing quickly. In recent years, more than 1.6 million hectares (ha) have been signed over to foreign companies for agricultural purposes. The largest land deals involve 405,000 ha to a company listed in Luxembourg, 444,800 ha to Cyprus-registered investors, 120,000 ha to a French corporation, and 250,000 ha to a Russian company. China signed an agreement for 3 million ha of prime farmland in Eastern Ukraine in September 2013, but it is unclear if this deal will go forward with the change of government. According to media reports, this deal is now “disputed.” If it is implemented, the agreement would give China control over an area roughly the size of Belgium that accounts for 5% of all arable land in Ukraine.
Whereas Ukraine does not allow the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture, Article 404 of the EU agreement, which relates to agriculture, includes a clause that has generally gone unnoticed: it indicates, among other things, that both parties will cooperate to extend the use of biotechnologies. There is no doubt that this provision meets the expectations of the agribusiness industry. As observed by Michael Cox, research director at the investment bank Piper Jaffray, “Ukraine and, to a wider extent, Eastern Europe, are among the “most promising growth markets for farm-equipment giant Deere, as well as seed producers Monsanto and DuPont…”
THE CORPORATE TAKEOVER OF UKRAINIAN AGRICULTURE
COUNTRY FACT SHEET – DECEMBER 2014
SUMMARY
In Walking on the West Side: the World Bank and the IMF in the Ukraine Conflict, a report released in July 2014, the Oakland Institute exposed how international financial institutions swooped in on the heels of the political upheaval in Ukraine to deregulate and throw open the nation’s vast agricultural sector to foreign corporations.
This fact sheet provides details on the transnational agribusinesses that are increasingly investing in Ukraine, including Monsanto, Cargill, and DuPont, and how corporations are taking over all aspects of Ukraine’s agricultural system. This includes circumventing land moratoriums, investing in seed and input production facilities, and acquiring commodity production, processing, and transportation facilities….
In the midst of the crisis, the Oakland Institute produced a report detailing various lesser-known aspects of the dispute – for instance, aid packages and economic reforms that were to be imposed by the International Monetary Fund as a condition of the EU trade deal. Along with exposing the harsh austerity measures included in these deals, the Oakland Institute also found evidence of significant investment in Ukraine’s agricultural system by transnational agribusinesses.
Interest from large agribusinesses in Ukraine’s agricultural land is unsurprising. The country was once known as the “breadbasket of Europe” and it is home to over 32 million hectares of incredibly fertile soils, known as “black soil.” Because of its history of collectivized farming, Ukraine’s agricultural sector has been long seen as underdeveloped. Indeed, as stated by Jeff Rowe, the regional director of DuPont Europe, “Ukraine [is] one of the fastest-growing agricultural markets in the world and an important player in the global food security issue.” Unsurprisingly, businesses want to invest.
This fact sheet provides details on large-scale agribusiness investments in Ukraine since 2010. By examining investments in land, agricultural inputs, and commodities, it exposes how all aspects of the Ukrainian food system and supply chain are being acquired by transnational corporations.
ACQUISITION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND
Ukraine is a country with rich agricultural potential. It is home to over 32 million hectares (ha) of fertile, arable land. This is equivalent to one-third of the entire arable land in the European Union. Agriculture is also a significant player in Ukraine’s economy. It accounts for eight percent of the country’s GDP and 17 percent of its employment. In addition, Ukraine is the third-largest exporter of corn and fifth largest exporter of wheat in the world.
Ukraine’s agricultural land is currently under a moratorium that bans its sale until January 1, 2016. Despite this moratorium, at least 1.6 million ha of Ukrainian agricultural land is currently in foreign hands. According to several reports, just 10 large agribusinesses control as much as 2.8 million ha…
When Ukraine separated from the Soviet Union in 1990, collectivized farms were disbanded and land was distributed in parcels of approximately four hectares each to people living on the collectivized farms. However, there were significant issues in the decade following these reforms. For instance, most people received notice of their claim to land but were not designated a specific plot of land, making cultivation nearly impossible…
AGRICULTURAL INPUTS
Alongside land, opportunities in Ukraine for the development, production, and use of agricultural inputs like seeds, agrochemicals, and fertilizers have attracted investment by agribusiness giants Monsanto, Cargill, and DuPont.
While all three companies have been in Ukraine for quite some time, their investments in the country have grown significantly over the past few years. For instance, Cargill has been in Ukraine for more than 20 years. Their activities include, but are not limited to, the sale of pesticides, seeds, and fertilizers. In recent years, they have expanded their agricultural investments to include additional grain storage, an animal nutrition company, and a stake in UkrLandFarming.
Monsanto has had operations in Ukraine since 1992, and has a focus on seeds and agrochemicals. News reports indicate that in 2012, Monsanto’s Ukraine team doubled in size, and in March 2014 – just weeks after President Yanukovych was deposed – the company invested $140 million in building a new seed plant.
Finally, DuPont has also expanded its investments in Ukraine of late. In June 2013, the company announced that it too would be investing in a new seed plant “to meet increasing demand in the region.” Jeff Rowe, DuPont’s regional director for Europe, noted that the company would be working hard to produce seeds with resistance to drought and heat stress for the country. An extension of this seed facility was completed in September 2014 to support “increased customer demand for Pioneer brand corn hybrids in Ukraine”…
CONCLUSION
On October 9, 2014, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) announced that it had ten private agribusinesses willing to invest $1 billion in the coming year in Ukrainian agriculture as part of a newly created Private Sector Action Plan. The EBRD’s press release noted that these investments would require several changes to regulation relating to taxes, import and export laws, and land sales.
Calls for such regulatory changes have been made before by many other investors. In January 2014, a meeting took place between Ukrainian officials and representatives from twenty large German agribusinesses. News reports noted that these companies felt it was “necessary to simplify doing business in Ukraine.” This specifically referred to issues such as taxation, VAT refunds, the ongoing land moratorium, and genetic modification. Likewise, in June 2011, Cargill CEO Greg Page stated that Ukraine is a “great place for the world to grow more food. But all the gifts that nature provides can be undone with bad policies.”
The EBRD and other international financial institutions argue that regulatory changes and tax breaks for agribusinesses will increase investments and stimulate economic growth. However, it is unclear how foreign investments in agriculture aided by such measures will improve Ukraine’s economy and people’s standard of living and not just the interests of large-scale agribusinesses abroad. The current surge of foreign investment in the country’s agriculture and the expected lifting of the moratorium on land sales actually raise important concerns. What will be the impact on Ukraine’s 7 million farmers? How will it affect Ukraine’s ability to control its own food supply and manage its economy?”
Spoiler alert - these reforms negatively impacted Ukraine’s seven million farmers, their ability to control their own food supply and their ability to manage their economy.
Fast forward to February 2024, and here’s what RFK Jr. had to say about the impact of the Ukraine War and the actions of multinational corporations like DuPont in its wreckage:[cxii]
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr: “This is a war that should have never happened. It’s a war the Russians tried repeatedly to settle on terms that were very, very beneficial to Ukraine and us. The major thing they wanted was for us to keep NATO out of the Ukraine.
The big military contractors want to add new countries to NATO all the time. Why? Because then that country has to conform its military purchases to NATO weapon specifications. Which means certain companies – Northorp Grumman, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Boeing, and Lockheed – get a trapped market.
In March of 2022, we committed 113 billion dollars. Just to give you an example, we could have built a home for almost every homeless person in this country. We then committed another 24 billion since then, two months ago. And now President Biden is asking for another 60 billion.
But the big, big expenses are going to come after the war, when we have to rebuild all the things that we destroy. Mitch McConnell was asked, ‘Can we really afford to send 113 billion to Ukraine?’ He said, don’t worry, ‘It’s not really going to Ukraine. It’s going to American defense manufacturers.’
So, he just admitted it’s a money-laundering scheme. And who do you think owns every one of those companies? Yeah, Blackrock.
So, Tim Scott during the Republican debate said, ‘Don’t worry, it’s not a gift to Ukraine, it’s a loan.’ Raise your hand if you think that that loan is ever getting paid back. Yeah of course it’s not.
So, why do they call it a loan? Because if they call it a loan, they can impose loan conditions. And what are the loan conditions that we have imposed on them?
Number one, an extreme austerity program. So, that if you’re poor in Ukraine, you’re going to be poor forever. Number two, most important. Ukraine has to put all of its government-owned assets up for sale to multinational corporations. Including all of its agricultural land. The biggest single asset in Europe, in Ukraine.
There’s been a thousand years of war fought over that land. It’s the richest farmland in the world. It’s the breadbasket of Europe. 500,000 kids almost, Ukrainian kids have died to keep that land as part of Ukraine. They almost certainly didn’t know about this loan condition.
They’ve already sold 30% of it. The buyers were DuPont, Cargill, and Monsanto. Who do you think owns all of those companies? Yeah, Blackrock. And then, in December, President Biden gave out the contract to rebuild Ukraine. And who do you think got that contract? Blackrock.
So, they’re doing this right in front of us. They don’t even care that we know anymore. Because they know that they can get away with it. And how do they know that? Because they have a strategy. And that strategy is an old, old strategy. Which is they keep us at war with each other. They keep us hating on each other. They keep the Republicans and Democrats fighting each other, black against white, and all these divisions that they sow.”
The punchline is that as we look to determine the Biden family’s relationship with corruption and organized crime, its critical we evaluate their ties to DuPont and to the du Pont family.
Finally, to conclude part two of this essay, we need to look at Hunter Biden & Devon Archer’s shady Ukrainian business. No, not Burisma again. Their other shady Ukrainian investment – Metabiota.
In May 2015, Metabiota raised $30mn in a Series A venture capital financing round led by Rosemont Seneca Technology Partners (RSTP), a related party of Rosemont Seneca Partners.[cxiii] The Series A was a follow-on to RSTP’s seed investment in the company in December 2013.[cxiv]
Exhibit 31[cxv]
RSTP would market the investment as “digitizing the microbial world; what Palantir is to the CIA, Metabiota is to the USDA”. As I covered in “Globalism vs. Self-Governance”, Palantir is a private defense contractor founded by Big Tech oligarchs Peter Thiel & Alex Karp. Palantir has developed the Big Data technology for intelligence agencies to permanently surveil foreign and domestic populations. Real defenders of democracy, those guys.
Archives of Metabiota’s website, now deleted, claimed the company’s mission is, “making the world more resilient to epidemics” by providing “data, analytics, advice, and training to prepare for global health threats and mitigat[ing] their impacts”.[cxvi] Metabiota highlights their “disease surveillance”, helping to “plan, support, and execute surveillance activities of humans and animals together with local authorities”.[cxvii]
Metabiota was founded by a man named Nathan Wolfe in 2008. Wolfe received his doctorate in immunology and infectious disease from Harvard. He started the company with the thesis that the diseases most impactful to humanity are those that started with animals, and then jumped to humans. These are known as zoonotic pathogens.
Based on this questionable assumption, he created a global network of research sites. These sites are located in viral hot spots where people are exposed to animals and are thought most at risk of infection from viruses making the zoonotic leap. Wolfe’s career has been spent working in biological laboratories in those high-risk geographies.[cxviii]
Exhibit 32[cxix]
Wolfe has a decades-long history with many organizations tied to the biopharmaceutical-military-intelligence-industrial complex. These include EcoHealth Alliance, DARPA, Black & Veatch, In-Q-Tel, the National Institutes of Health & NIAID, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the US Department of Defense, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Wired Magazine, and the World Economic Forum.[cxx]
Coincidentally, Wolfe is also a known associate of human trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell. Wolfe also thanked Ghislaine’s handler, the notorious pedophile & intelligence asset, Jeffrey Epstein, in his 2011 book The Viral Storm: The Dawn of a New Pandemic Age.[cxxi]
Exhibit 33[cxxii]
Also, Wolfe is a “Contributor” to the Edge Foundation, an organization I discussed in length in “Globalism vs. Self-Governance: How David Defeats Goliath”. The Edge Foundation hosted annual “Billionaire Dinners” and marketed itself as a gathering that brought together the computer wizards of Silicon Valley with biology wizards like Nathan Wolfe.
However, it is widely suspected that Edge, which was funded almost exclusively by Jeffrey Epstein, also served as a forum for Epstein to expand his influence network and to compromise rising biological & technology leaders.[cxxiii] Members of the scientific, technological elite, you could say.
It’s almost enough to make you ask – is Nathan Wolfe involved in weird sex crimes?
Another Rosemont Seneca boy allegedly tied to Ghislaine Maxwell is Devon Archer. On Substack, I’ve included a photo from Hunter’s “laptop from hell” showing Archer’s Skype account, with contact information saved for none other but Madame Ghislaine.
Exhibit 34[cxxiv]
Did you know that the Ukraine is an international hub for child trafficking?[cxxv] Did you know that the Finger Lakes region of New York is also a large hub for human trafficking?
The same Finger Lakes region where Hunter Biden’s mother was raised, where he spent his summers growing up? A place he loved so much that he inked a giant tattoo of the body of water all across his back? And named all his business ventures after them? Seneca, Owasco, Skaneateles.
Exhibit 34.5[cxxvi]
It’s almost enough to make you ask – has Burisma been trafficking contraband besides natural gas?
Starting in 2014, Metabiota, Nathan Wolfe, and his viral load have partnered with EcoHealth Alliance. The Metabiota / EcoHealth partnership is part of the US Agency for International Development’s (USAID) “PREDICT” project. PREDICT seeks to “predict and prevent global emerging disease threats”.[cxxvii]
In Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book, The Wuhan Cover-up, he describes the sordid background of these organizations:[cxxviii]
“[USAID is] a State Department subagency that has historically acted as a front for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and as a cover for its covert activities. During the COVID pandemic, USAID was the lead agency coordinating US government-sponsored mass vaccination programs abroad, spending over $10.6 billion in that enterprise. Former USAID director John Gilligan once confessed that USAID was “infiltrated from top to bottom with CIA people.” Gilligan explained that “[t]he idea was to plant operatives in every kind of activity we had overseas, governments volunteer, religious, every kind.” …
My uncle, President John F. Kennedy, created the USAID in November 1961 to administer humanitarian assistance and to promote democracy and economic development worldwide… Following JFK’s murder, military and corporate interests within President Lyndon Johnson’s administration co-opted USAID into working for the CIA. USAID became the spy agency’s instrument of choice for conducting espionage and regime-change operations bent on installing foreign leaders who were friendly to US multinationals…
Today, USAID is active in over one hundred countries. The US State Department funds USAID’s $64 billion annual budget. While State Department diplomats utter lofty bromides about self-determination, civil liberties, and democracy, USAID’s function of protecting the profits of multinationals often means using whatever means necessary to destabilize independent democracies that balk at US hegemony.
By 1989, the CIA, often with support of USAID, had either overthrown or attempted to topple the governments of about one third of the world’s nations, most of which were democracies…
USAID’s principal vessel for bioweapons research was the “PREDICT” program which USAID launched in 2009, just prior to [Rajiv] Shah’s arrival [as head of USAID]. USAID established the PREDICT program as a global surveillance program that promised to predict pandemics by monitoring zoonotic diseases to protect the welfare of citizens worldwide.
PREDICT was run by USAID’s Emerging Pandemic Threats (EPT) program. USAID poured $210 million into PREDICT for ten years under an oddball virologist, Dennis Carroll, on loan from the CDC. The PREDICT program never lived up to its promise. In fact, it’s likely that, instead of predicting a pandemic, PREDICT actually facilitated the one that began in Wuhan - and then, ironically, failed to predict even the pandemic that USAID helped start.
From 2009 to 2019, USAID partnered with EcoHealth Alliance and the PREDICT program to enhance and develop sixty research laboratories, spanning the globe from West Africa to Ukraine and Thailand…
EcoHealth began its existence in 1971 under the name “Wildlife Trust”, a conservation group bent on preserving wild places. In September 2010, the organization rebranded itself EcoHealth Alliance. Under [Peter] Daszak, [a British zoologist and bioweapons fanboy,] EcoHealth quickly found a niche in the emerging pandemic preparedness enterprise by expanding its mission to include inventorying animal diseases that might jump to humans at the interface where settler encroachments intrude on traditional wilderness… Early in the game, Daszak intuited that there were richer rewards in biowarfare, bioterrorism, archiving and, especially, creating deadly pathogens [than there were in ecosystem conservation] …
By far, Daszak’s largest funding pool was the CIA surrogate, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Through USAID, the CIA funneled nearly $65 million in PREDICT funding to EcoHealth between 2009 and 2020. DOD was the NGO’s second largest donor, giving $38 million during the same period. The majority of that Pentagon lucre - $34.6 million – came from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), a Pentagon branch tasked to “counter and deter weapons of mass destruction and improvised threat networks.” DTRA funneled money to EcoHealth Alliance for various projects relevant to bioweapons development – including gain-of-function experiments and collecting the pathogens that cause bat-borne zoonotic diseases. Some of these grants appear to be ongoing.
EcoHealth provided direct support for every aspect of gain-of-function research, paying for the collection of viruses with weapons potential from Eastern Europe to South Asia and Africa and financing experiments by US and Chinese scientists in Wuhan to amplify their virulence.”
As part of PREDICT, researchers from Metabiota, EcoHealth Alliance, and the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) collaborated on a study relating to bat infectious diseases in China. The researchers from the 2014 paper include Shi Zhengli, the Director of the Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases at the Chinese Communist Party’s Wuhan Lab. Another author was EcoHealth Alliance’s Peter Daszak, a longtime collaborator of Shi’s and the WIV. [cxxix] Two others were Corina Monagin and Bradley Schneider of Metabiota.
In this paper, the authors argued that, “bats are recognized reservoirs for many emerging zoonotic viruses of public health importance. Identifying and cataloguing the viruses of bats is a logical approach to evaluate the range of potential zoonoses of bat origin.”[cxxx]
Exhibit 36,[cxxxi] Exhibit 37[cxxxii]
Shi Zhengli, director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology – China’s first biosafety level 4 (BSL-4) laboratory - would come to be known as “Bat Woman”. Since 2011, the NIH has funded at least sixty scientific projects at the Wuhan lab, almost 63% of all NIAID’s historical funding for gain-of-function research.[cxxxiii] NIAID is the NIH subsidiary which was controlled by Dr. Tony Fauci for almost four decades. Fauci funneled most of these grants through Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance.
On February 1, 2020, Fauci famously emailed his deputy and subsequent replacement as head of NIAID[cxxxiv] - Dr. Hugh Auchincloss – an article from Science Magazine about Shi, which argued in favor of the bat-origin hypothesis of COVID-19.[cxxxv] Critics have suggested this article was the foundation to Fauci’s argument about the origins of COVID-19. That it originated of zoonotic origin, specifically from a bat. That it couldn’t possibly have leaked from a lab, accidentally or intentionally.
Exhibit 38[cxxxvi]
Fauci and team would then collude with mainstream and social media to censor any discussions of the lab leak possibility, instead enforcing the orthodoxy that a naturally occurring virus jumped from bats to humans. Peter Daszak was later recused in 2021 from the Lancet’s COVID-19 commission studying the origins of the pandemic due to several conflicts of interest.[cxxxvii]
Exhibit 39[cxxxviii]
Pandemic catastrophists like Shi, Daszak, and Wolfe had been warning for decades about the risks of zoonotic viruses. It’s why Wolfe became interested in viruses in the first place, why he claims to have started Metabiota. In an interview with the Edge Foundation in 2009, Wolfe stated:[cxxxix]
One of the things that we have found in analyzing the diversity of important infectious diseases is that most of them have animal origins. The way that almost all of these important diseases started is as diseases of animals that bubble up into humans who for whatever reason are exposed, through contact with water, mosquitoes, blood, by hunters, which is a lot of the work we do. They are exposed to these agents, these agents are constantly bubbling up, and you have this constant chatter, this viral chatter, individuals who are exposed to these agents.
In his Ted Talk that same year, he claimed:[cxl]
“In fact, this is not unique to HIV. The vast majority of viruses come from animals. And you can kind of think of this as a pyramid. Of this bubbling up of viruses from animals into human populations. But only at the very top of this pyramid do these things become completely human. Nevertheless, we spend the vast majority of our energy focused on this level of the pyramid. Trying to tackle things that are already completely adapted to human beings. That are going to be very, very difficult to address – as we’ve seen in the case of HIV.
So, during the last 15 years I’ve been working to actually study the earlier interface here. What I’ve labeled “viral chatter”. Which was a term coined by my mentor, Don Burke. This is the idea that we can study the, sort of, pinging of these viruses into human populations. The movement of these agents over into humans. And by capturing this moment, we might be able to move to a situation where we can catch them early.”
NIH supports Wolfe’s claims, citing that some 60-75 percent of human diseases result from pathogens that jumped from animal populations to humans.[cxli] Yet these figures are provided without evidence to support them, and mainstream journalists have failed to challenge this assumption.
As Robert Kennedy Jr. highlights:[cxlii]
“This self-serving estimate of risk of zoonotic spillover is almost certainly highly exaggerated. The many scientists who exacerbate public fears of the zoonotic spillover bogeyman to justify their careers in gain-of-function [GOF] grants have never published a study that rigorously quantified the actual historical risk of zoonosis. Similarly, these scientists have not published a rigorous study that credibly quantifies the risk of gain-of-function research, including the risk of laboratory leaks. [“Gain-of-function” describes research intended to increase the transmissibility and/or virulence of pathogenic organisms] …
In his article,[cxliii] “A short History of Laboratory Leaks and Gain-of-Function Studies,” Professor Paul R. Goddard derides the official supposition that most pandemics originate from so-called zoonotic events as a self-serving “myth” promoted by the bioweapons cartel. Professor Goddard particularly blames the World Health Organization (WHO), Anthony Fauci, MD, and his generously funded huckster and charlatan, Peter Daszak, for aggressively and successfully promoting the bugaboo to justify dangerous experiments that bring them prestige, power, and wealth.
According to Professor Goddard: “Research shows that the escape of viruses from laboratories and supposedly contained experiments, such as vaccine research and programmes, is a common occurrence. In addition, many pandemics have arisen from lab escapes and almost all have not been directly zoonotic. Even when viruses do ultimately originate in animals and make the jump into humans, they mostly fester in a separated community of human beings for many years – centuries or millennia – before spreading during abnormal movements of people.”
Goddard concludes:
“Drs. Daszak and Fauci hold that most pandemics are zoonotic in origin. They say that pandemics start from a disease spreading from an animal, but they do not state the time period involved. I would suggest that pandemics never occur from the immediate spread from an animal. In order for a pandemic to occur, a reservoir of the infection, adapted to human beings, must develop. This usually takes many years. Moreover, the spread usually occurs due to the unnaturally large movement of people that occurs due to wars and famines.””
Kennedy summarizes his consideration of the risks of GOF research relative to zoonotic spillover by stating:[cxliv]
“1. The benefits of GOF, if any, have never been quantified and appear to be negligible;
2. The risks have never been quantified but appear to be monumental;
3. The cataclysmic impacts of a pandemic, multiplied by the frequency of escape, makes such research intolerable and unacceptable to society, and;
4. The risks of zoonotic spillover have never been quantified and seem quite low.”
While the researchers from Metabiota, Eco Health, and the Wuhan Institute of Virology overestimate the risk of zoonotic viruses causing pandemics, they consistently gloss over the far greater risks of lab leaks. They furthermore fail to question the logic of exploring the depths of China’s cave systems for bat pathogens that never otherwise would have seen the light of day.
In 2015, Peter Daszak presented to the CIA’s venture capital firm, In-Q-Tel, about “Identifying predictable patterns in disease emergence”. This presentation, which includes a slide of USAID and PREDICT literally fishing for toxic animal pathogens, lists Metabiota and the Wuhan Institute of Virology as collaborators as well as USAID, DTRA, and Fauci’s NIAID as funders.
Exhibit 41[cxlv]
In 2017, Metabiota would announce an investment from In-Q-Tel, as well as a partnership with reinsurance giant Munich Re to sell corporations pandemic insurance.[cxlvi] You might find it interesting to know that Burisma was also working with USAID, through a partnership known as the “USAID Municipal Energy Reform Project in Ukraine”.
Exhibit 42[cxlvii]
Metabiota would later secure an $18.4 million federal contract with the Defense Threat Reduction Agency as a subcontractor for Black & Veatch in Georgia and Ukraine.[cxlviii] Black & Veatch is a private Department of Defense contractor. Black & Veatch had separately received close to $128.5 million in DTRA funding to build and equip Pentagon biolaboratories in Ukraine.[cxlix]
Exhibit 43[cl] Exhibit 44[cli]
When Devon Archer introduced Metabiota to his and Hunter’s Burisma buddy, Vadim Pozarzhskyi, they referred to the company as their “Science Ukraine” project. Vadim would ask about their subcontracting partnership with Black & Veatch, the ultimate goals of Metabiota in Ukraine, and Metabiota’s lack of competition in the country. As the email thread took place in April 2014 during the interim Ukrainian government period, Vadim made sure to ask whether Metabiota was looking for help in reestablishing ties with the respective ministries in Ukraine.
Exhibit 45[clii]
Archer and Hunter then passed along Vadim’s questions to Metabiota, to which Mary Guttieri, their Vice President of Science & Technology Administration, replied with detailed responses in both English and Ukrainian.
Exhibit 46[cliii]
So, if you had any questions about whether there is a direct relationship between Burisma and Metabiota, there 100% is. In fact, it was this same email thread in which Hunter Biden ultimately confirmed his decision to join Burisma’s Board of Directors with Devon Archer. Boy, I bet they wish they could take back that decision!
Exhibit 47[cliv]
This email thread took place just a few days after Hunter met with Guttieri and her colleague, Kathy Dimeo, in person. In her thank you email to Hunter, Guttieri stated, “I’ve prepared the attached memo, which provides… concepts to assert Ukraine’s cultural and economic independence from Russia and continued integration into Western society.”[clv]
Seems weird that a company tasked with predicting pandemics would be interested in “asserting Ukrainian cultural and economic independence from Russia”. What could she have meant by this?
Exhibit 48[clvi]
One last email to highlight as we wrap up this section on corruption and organized crime. The email involves an internal thread between the Rosemont Seneca Technology Partners team. The email chain, titled “GP/Management Company Ownership”, took place in April 2014 as RSTP finalized their investment committee memo for Metabiota’s Series A financing.
In this chain, John DeLoche and Devon Archer argue about how their ownership of the partnership will be diluted for their employee, William Lee. On one side of the argument stood DeLoche and Neil Callahan – the private equity deal guys / front men. On the other side, you had Devon Archer and Hunter Biden – the guys with the shady political connections.
In this thread, DeLoche argues both sides of the partnership - the DeLoche/Callahan side and the Archer/Biden side – should be diluted equally for Lee’s 20% ownership in the General Partnership (GP). Archer disagrees. In his response, he states: “I do not agree nor [sic] does Hunter. I may agree with a compromise but absolutely not equal dilution at 20%s. Hunter is 50/50 with his team and I'm 50/50 with Heinz so we're already lower percentages than you and Neil. Discuss with you Monday.”[clvii]
Exhibit 49[clviii]
“Hunter is 50/50 with his team, and I’m 50/50 with Heinz”. What Archer admits here is that half of his economics go directly to the Heinz family, and by extension, Ketchup King / Secretary of State John Kerry. He doesn’t explicitly state who is on “Hunter’s team”. But I’d be willing wager that - the Chairman, the Big Guy, acting President of the United States - Joe Biden, is the captain.
Exhibit 50[clix] Exhibit 51[clx] [clxi] [clxii]
So, what these emails show is that the Biden and Kerry/Heinz families have direct financial interest in Metabiota, a company conducting shady biological “research” in laboratories around Ukraine. Economic interests today managed by private equity firm Pilot Growth.
This all took place during a time when Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry were directly involved in shaping the domestic and foreign policy of Ukraine. This same company had close ties to CIA fronts USAID & EcoHealth Alliance, and to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. EcoHealth, the WIV, and Metabiota published research in 2014, laying the “evidence” to support zoonotic transmission of viruses. A few years later, the COVID-19 pandemic ravished the world.
JRB. CIA?
In summary, it’s important - as we enter the final months before the 2024 election - that every American research Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Burisma, DuPont, the du Ponts, & Metabiota. You do that, and you may conclude that Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. embodies the LBJ of our generation, not the RFK.
[i] “Robert Kennedy”. Wikipedia. Accessed June 9, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Kennedy
[ii] “Robert F. Kennedy climbed the mountain where it was steepest”. Daily News. June 7, 1968. Accessed June 9, 2024. https://www.nydailynews.com/2015/11/20/robert-f-kennedy-climbed-the-mountain-where-it-was-steepest/
[iii] “United States Senate Homeland Security Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations”. Wikipedia. Accessed June 9, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_Homeland_Security_Permanent_Subcommittee_on_Investigations
[iv] “McCarthyism.” Wikipedia. June 9, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism
[v] “Yuri Bezmenov.” Wikipedia. Accessed June 9, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Bezmenov
[vi] “Yuri Bezmenov - How To Demoralize A Nation”. YouTube. 1984. Accessed Jun 9, 2024.
[vii] “Robert F. Kennedy.” Wikipedia. Accessed June 9, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Kennedy
[viii] “Jimmy Hoffa, RFK, JFK McClellan Senate Testimony”. YouTube. Accessed June 9, 2024.
[ix] “1957 Robert F Kennedy Interrogates Jimmy Hoffa”. YouTube. 1957. Accessed June 9, 2024.
[x] “Eisenhower Farewell Address (Best Quality) - 'Military Industrial Complex' WARNING”. YouTube. January 17, 1961. Accessed June 9, 2024.
[xi] See The Real Anthony Fauci and The Wuhan Cover-up for more information.
[xii] “President John F. Kennedy Speech to the National Press Association”. YouTube. April 27, 1961. Accessed June 6, 2024.
[xiii] “1966 THROWBACK: "ALLEN DULLES SPEAKS ON THE WARREN COMMISSION AND JFK ASSASSINATION"”. YouTube. 1966. Accessed June 11, 2024.
[xiv] “Allen Dulles.” Wikipedia. Accessed June 11, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Dulles
[xv] “National Security Act of 1947”. Wikipedia. June 11, 2024. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Act_of_1947
[xvi] Truman, Harry S. “Limit CIA Role to Intelligence.” Washington Post. December 22, 1963. Accessed June 18, 2024. https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP75-00149R000700550045-9.pdf
[xvii] “Cable Sought to Discredit Critics of Warren Report”. The New York Times. December 26, 1977. Accessed June 11, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/1977/12/26/archives/cable-sought-to-discredit-critics-of-warren-report.html
[xviii] “Countering Criticism of the Warrant Report.” CIA. April 1, 1967. Accessed June 11, 2024. https://ia600207.us.archive.org/33/items/CIADOC1035960/CIA%20DOC%201035-960.pdf
[xix] Stone, Oliver (dir.) JFK. Ixtlan Corporation: 1991. Accessed June 9, 2024. https://www.amazon.com/JFK-Kevin-Costner/dp/B0B6HRYKNS
[xx] “Documentary: "The Real RFK Jr." (Premiere)”. YouTube. February 22, 2024. Accessed June 10, 2024.
[i] Kennedy, Robert F., Jr. The Real Anthony Fauci Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health. Narrated by Bruce Wagner. November 16, 2021. Accessed June 11, 2024. https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Real-Anthony-Fauci-Audiobook/B09LVXS3L4
[ii] Kennedy, Robert F., Jr. The Wuhan Cover-Up And the Terrifying Bioweapons Arms Race. Narrated by Bruce Wagner. December 12, 2023. Accessed June 11, 2024. https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Wuhan-Cover-Up-Audiobook/B0CG7MJZM6
[iii] “WATCH LIVE: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announces he'll run as an independent in 2024”. YouTube. October 9, 2023. Accessed Jun 10, 2024. https://www.youtube.com/live/S_4-jrxzSFk?si=ydi2jyQdgwX-5xBJ
[iv] Koren, Marina. “Joe Biden Lurks Behind Every U.S. Action on Ukraine,” National Journal. March 2014. Accessed January 10, 2024.https://archive.ph/6Iku8
[v] “Report on the Biden Laptop”. Marco Polo. 2022. Accessed January 10, 2023. https://bidenreport.com/#p=1
[vi] See The Ukraine Hoax documentary and book by Michael Caputo, Ukraine on Fire & Revealing Ukraine by Oliver Stone, One America News’ 4-part investigation into Ukraine, & Glenn Beck’s 4-part series on Ukraine.
[vii] Ibid
[viii] Malic, Nebojsa. “Nuland's cookies again: Maidan midwife's plan for US policy on Russia is dumb, delusional, dangerous”. RT. June 19, 2020. Accessed February 7, 2024. https://www.sott.net/article/436792-Nulands-cookies-again-Maidan-midwifes-plan-for-US-policy-on-Russia-is-dumb-delusional-dangerous
[ix] Lopatonok, Igor (dir.). Ukraine on Fire. 2016: Another Way Productions. Accessed January 7, 2024. https://rumble.com/vwxxi8-ukraine-on-fire.html
[x] Ibid
[xi] Caputo, Michael. “The Ukraine Hoax: Impeachment, Biden Cash, Mass Murder”. One America News. 2020. Accessed February 19, 2024. https://rumble.com/v2wgw0q-the-ukraine-hoax-impeachment-biden-cash-mass-murder.html
[xii] Ibid
[xiii] See The Ukraine Hoax documentary and book by Michael Caputo.
[xiv] Ibid
[xv] Ibid
[xvi] Kennedy, Dana. “Hunter Biden’s Ukraine contact allegedly a ‘fixer’ for shady oligarchs”. New York Post. October 31, 2020. Accessed January 17, 2024. https://archive.ph/DHy5E
[xvii] Sonne, Paul and James Grimaldi. “Biden's Son, Kerry Family Friend Join Ukrainian Gas Producer's Board”. The Wall Street Journal. May 13, 2014. Accessed January 19, 2024. https://archive.ph/uPufR#selection-3803.5-3803.73
[xviii] “Vice President Biden to Travel to Ukraine”. The White House: Office of the Press Secretary. April 12, 2014. Accessed January 10, 2024. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/12/vice-president-biden-travel-ukraine
[xix]“Report on the Biden Laptop”. Marco Polo. 2022. Accessed January 10, 2023. https://bidenreport.com/#p=1
[xx] Ibid
[xxi] Ibid
[xxii] Neuman, Scott. “Biden Visits Ukraine In Show Of U.S. Support”. April 21, 2014. Accessed January 10, 2024. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/04/21/305634031/biden-visits-ukraine-to-offer-energy-economic-aid
[xxiii] “Remarks by Vice President Joe Biden at a Meeting with Ukrainian Legislators”. The White House. Rada, Kyiv, Ukraine. April 22, 2014. Accessed January 19, 2024. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/22/remarks-vice-president-joe-biden-meeting-ukrainian-legislators
[xxiv] Report on the Biden Laptop”. Marco Polo. 2022. Accessed January 10, 2023. https://bidenreport.com/#p=1
[xxv] Ibid
[xxvi] Ibid
[xxvii] “Money laundering investigation opened”. Serious Fraud Office. April 28, 2014. Accessed January 15, 2024. https://archive.ph/Is4Ed#selection-891.0-891.37
[xxviii] Bullough, Oliver. “The money machine: how a high-profile corruption investigation fell apart”. The Guardian. April 12, 2017. Accessed January 15, 2024. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/12/the-money-machine-how-a-high-profile-corruption-investigation-fell-apart
[xxix] Ibid
[xxx] Ibid
[xxxi] Ibid
[xxxii] Report on the Biden Laptop”. Marco Polo. 2022. Accessed January 10, 2023. https://bidenreport.com/#p=1
[xxxiii] Burisma Holdings. May 2014. Accessed January 10, 2024. https://archive.ph/iC8Og
[xxxiv] Hunter Biden joins the team of Burisma Holdings,”. Burisma Holdings. May 2014. Accessed January 10, 2024. https://archive.ph/ZYIOM
[xxxv] Zoria, Yuri. “All you wanted to know about the Trump-Zelenskyy scandal, but were afraid to ask”. Euromaidan Press. September 27, 2019. Accessed January 18, 2024. https://euromaidanpress.com/2019/09/27/ukraines-gordian-knot-for-the-us-biden-trump-zelenskyy-and-ukrainian-prosecutors/
[xxxvi] Report on the Biden Laptop”. Marco Polo. 2022. Accessed January 10, 2023. https://bidenreport.com/#p=1
[xxxvii] Taylor, Adam. “Hunter Biden’s new job at a Ukrainian gas company is a problem for U.S. soft power”. Washington Post. April 14, 2014. Accessed January 18, 2024. https://archive.ph/2XBHh#selection-4495.34-4495.148
[xxxviii] Solomon, John. “State Department reported Burisma paid bribe while Hunter Biden served on board, memos show”. Just the News. September 11, 2020. Accessed January 17, 2024. https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/monamholdstate-dept-feared-burisma-paid-bribe-while
[xxxix] Ibid
[xl] “Walking on the West Side: the World Bank and the IMF in the Ukraine Conflict”. Oakland Institute. July 28, 2014. Accessed March 3, 2024. https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/walking-west-side-world-bank-and-imf-ukraine-conflict
[xli] “THE CORPORATE TAKEOVER OF UKRAINIAN AGRICULTURE”. Oakland Institute. December 2014. Accessed March 3, 2024. https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/Brief_CorporateTakeoverofUkraine_0.pdf
[xlii] “"Biden-Kerry-Poroshenko tapes" reveal push for prosecutor general's dismissal”. Yhiah. May 19, 2020. Accessed January 18, 2024. https://www.unian.info/politics/biden-kerry-poroshenko-tapes-reveal-push-for-prosecutor-general-s-dismissal-11003090.html
[xliii] Sonne, Paul and James V. Grimaldi. “Biden's Son, Kerry Family Friend Join Ukrainian Gas Producer's Board”. Wall Street Journal. May 13, 2014. Accessed January 17, 2024. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303851804579560542284706288
[xliv] Report on the Biden Laptop”. Marco Polo. 2022. Accessed January 10, 2023. https://bidenreport.com/#p=1
[xlv] Ibid
[xlvi] Schweizer, Peter. “Inside the shady private equity firm run by Kerry and Biden’s kids”. New York Post. March 15, 2018. Accessed January 17, 2024. https://nypost.com/2018/03/15/inside-the-shady-private-equity-firm-run-by-kerry-and-bidens-kids/
[xlvii] Report on the Biden Laptop”. Marco Polo. 2022. Accessed January 10, 2023. https://bidenreport.com/#p=1
[xlviii] Alexander, Harriet. “Hunter Biden called Joe at least TWENTY-FOUR TIMES during business meetings with clients when his father was VP, First Son's ex-best friend will tell Congress”. Daily Mail. July 24, 2023. Accessed January 20, 2024.
[xlix] Bonner, Brian. “Biden’s 6 visits to Ukraine as vice president”. Kyiv Post. November 13, 2020. Accessed February 11, 2024. https://www.kyivpost.com/post/7350
[l] “Vice President Joe Biden Delivers Remarks Before the Ukrainian Rada”. The Obama White House. YouTube. The Rada, Kyiv, Ukraine. December 9, 2015. Accessed February 1, 2024.
[li] Interfax-Ukraine. “Court seizes property of ex-minister Zlochevsky in Ukraine – PGO”. Kyiv Post. February 4, 2016. Accessed January 19, 2024. https://www.kyivpost.com/post/10691
[lii] “LEAKED BIDEN UKRAINE PHONE CALL”. YouTube. Professional Commentator. May 19, 2020. Accessed January 18, 2024.
[liii] Chasmar, Jessica, and Cameron Cawthorne. “Burisma's Devon Archer met with then-Secretary of State Kerry just weeks before Shokin was fired”. Fox News. August 27, 2023. Accessed January 19, 2023. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/burismas-devon-archer-met-secretary-state-kerry-weeks-before-shokin-fired
[liv] Ibid
[lv] Kramer, Andrew. “Ukraine Ousts Viktor Shokin, Top Prosecutor, and Political Stability Hangs in the Balance”. The New York Times. March 29, 2016. Accessed January 18, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/30/world/europe/political-stability-in-the-balance-as-ukraine-ousts-top-prosecutor.html
[lvi] “LEAKED BIDEN UKRAINE PHONE CALL”. YouTube. Professional Commentator. May 19, 2020. Accessed January 18, 2024.
[lvii] See “Globalism vs. Self-Governance: How David Defats Goliath” for more information on the Council on Foreign Relations.
[lviii] “Phone Calls Leaked Of Biden And Ukraine’s Poroshenko Detailing $1 Billion “Quid Pro Quo””. Centipede Nation. May 19, 2020. Accessed January 19, 2024. https://centipedenation.com/analysis-and-reports/phone-calls-leaked-of-biden-and-ukraines-poroshenko-detailing-1-billion-quid-pro-quo/
[lix] “John Kerry admits Obama was involved in getting Victor Shokin fired to protect Hunter Biden.”. Facts First (Lets Go Brandon). YouTube. February 5, 2020. Accessed January 19, 2024.
[lx] @TuckerCarlson. “Ep. 13 Part 2. Devon Archer”. Tucker on X. August 4, 2023. Accessed January 19, 2024. https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1687436522625159168
[lxi] “Shokin Statement”. Scribd. Uploaded by John Solomon. September 26, 2019. Accessed January 19, 2023. https://www.scribd.com/document/427618359/Shokin-Statement
[lxii] Devine, Miranda. Laptop from Hell: Hunter Biden, Big Tech, and the Dirty Secrets the President Tried to Hide. Post Hill Press: 2021, New York.
[lxiii] Report on the Biden Laptop”. Marco Polo. 2022. Accessed January 10, 2024.
https://bidenreport.com/#p=1
[lxiv] Ibid
[lxv] Manskar, Noah. “Twitter, Facebook censor Post over Hunter Biden exposé”. New York Post. October 14, 2020. Accessed December 23, 2023. https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/facebook-twitter-block-the-post-from-posting/
[lxvi] https://assets.realclear.com/images/52/524120.jpg
[lxvii] “The Twitter Files: The Complete Series”. Twitter. @shovas. Dec 26, 2022. Accessed Jan 13, 2023. https://twitter.com/shovas/status/1607468172914966528
[lxviii] Taibbi, Matt. “1.THREAD: The Twitter Files How Twitter Let the Intelligence Community In”. Twitter. @mtaibbi. January 3, 2023. Accessed January 13, 2023.
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1610372352872783872
[lxix] Shellenberger, Michael. “1. TWITTER FILES: PART 7 The FBI & the Hunter Biden Laptop”. Twitter. @ShellenbergerMD. December 19, 2022. Accessed January 13, 2023. https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/1604871630613753856
[lxx] “Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Email”. Politico. October 19, 2020. Accessed June 15, 2024. https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000175-4393-d7aa-af77-579f9b330000
[lxxi] Ashworth, Nate. “Named and Shamed: The 51 Intel Officials Who Lied About the Hunter Biden Laptop Emails”. Election Central. March 21, 2022. Accessed June 15, 2024. https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/03/named-and-shamed-the-51-intel-officials-who-lied-about-the-hunter-biden-laptop-emails/
[lxxii] “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections”. Director of National Intelligence. January 6, 2017. Accessed June 15, 2024. https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf
[lxxiii] “The DHS unit set up explicitly”. @MikeBenzCyber. X. June 21, 2024. Accessed June 24, 2024. https://x.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/1804129246874366160
[lxxiv] “Final 2020 Presidential Debate Between Donald Trump, Joe Biden | NBC News”. YouTube. NBC News. March 30, 2022. Accessed June 15, 2024.
[lxxv] “FBI Director Wray provides no justification for the FBI’s failure to come forward”. @ProdigalThe3rd. X. December 5, 2023. Accessed June 15, 2024. https://x.com/ProdigalThe3rd/status/1732106816241193334
[lxxvi] “Matt Gaetz on Hunter Biden's laptop:”. @CitizenFreePres. X. March 9, 2023. Accessed June 15, 2024. https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1633884465452974082
[lxxvii] “The Man Who Found Hunter Biden’s Laptop w/ John Paul Mac Isaac | PBD Podcast | Ep. 170.” PBD Podcast. July 2022. Accessed July 9, 2024.
[lxxviii] “386. The Laptop From Hell | Miranda Devine”. The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast. October 2023. Accessed January 30, 2024.
[lxxix] “Commission Progress Report: Ukraine meets criteria for visa liberalization”. European Commission – Press Release. Brussels. December 18, 2015. Accessed January 30, 2024. https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2023-09/Commission_Progress_Report__Ukraine_meets_criteria_for_visa_liberalisation.pdf
[lxxx] “Victoria Nuland – Letter to Victor Shokin”. Embassy of the United Sates of America. June 11, 2015. Accessed January 30, 2024. https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2023-08/NulandtoShokinJune2015.pdf
[lxxxi] Chasmar, Jessica and Cameron Cawthorne. “Burisma's Devon Archer met with then-Secretary of State Kerry just weeks before Shokin was fired.” Fox News. August 27, 2023. Accessed January 19, 2024. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/burismas-devon-archer-met-secretary-state-kerry-weeks-before-shokin-fired
[lxxxii] “Burisma”. Hunter Biden Laptop Emails. Sent from: Henri du Pont, April 26, 2016. Accessed March 1, 2024. https://bidenlaptopemails.com/email.php?id=20160426-023740_60705
[lxxxiii] Burdick, Kim. “Gunpowder Industry“. The Encyclopedia of Greater Britannica. Accessed March 1, 2024. https://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/essays/gunpowder-industry/
[lxxxiv] Burdick, Kim. “Gunpowder Industry“. The Encyclopedia of Greater Britannica. Accessed March 1, 2024. https://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/essays/gunpowder-industry/
[lxxxv] Ibid
[lxxxvi] Ibid
[lxxxvii] Andriotis, Mary Elizabeth. “Everything You Need to Know About Joe Biden's Former Mansion That Went Viral on Twitter”. House Beautiful. October 21, 2020. Accessed March 2, 2024. https://www.housebeautiful.com/design-inspiration/a34430021/joe-biden-mansion-greenville-wilmington-delaware-dupont-nemours/
[lxxxviii] Webb, Whitney. One Nation Under Blackmail – Vol. 1: The Sordid Union Between Intelligence and Organized Crime that Gave Rise to Jeffrey Epstein. Trine Day: 2022.
[lxxxix] Burdick, Kim. “Gunpowder Industry“. The Encyclopedia of Greater Britannica. Accessed March 1, 2024. https://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/essays/gunpowder-industry/
[xc] Lerner, Sharon. “BIDEN EPA TRANSITION TEAM MEMBER HELPED DUPONT DODGE RESPONSIBILITY FOR PFOA”. The Intercept. November 11, 2020. Accessed March 2, 2024. https://archive.ph/BHO4c
[xci] Lerner, Sharon. “THE TEFLON TOXIN”. The Intercept. August 11, 2015. Accessed March 2, 2024. https://archive.ph/qEvlb
[xcii] Ibid
[xciii] Lerner, Sharon. “DID THE WHITE HOUSE STOP THE EPA FROM REGULATING PFAS?”. The Intercept. September 29, 2020. Accessed March 3, 2024. https://archive.ph/N99Ve#selection-537.0-537.54
[xciv] Lerner, Sharon. “THE TEFLON TOXIN”. The Intercept. August 11, 2015. Accessed March 2, 2024. https://archive.ph/qEvlb
[xcv] Ibid
[xcvi] “Chemours, DuPont, and Corteva Reach Comprehensive PFAS Settlement with U.S. Water Systems”. BusinessWire. June 2, 2023. Accessed March 2, 2024. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230602005091/en/Chemours-DuPont-and-Corteva-Reach-Comprehensive-PFAS-Settlement-with-U.S.-Water-Systems
[xcvii] “Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.” JW Howard Attorneys. Accessed June 16, 2024. https://jwhowardattorneys.com/member/rfk-jr/
[xcviii] Lerner, Sharon. “BIDEN EPA TRANSITION TEAM MEMBER HELPED DUPONT DODGE RESPONSIBILITY FOR PFOA”. The Intercept. November 11, 2020. Accessed March 2, 2024. https://archive.ph/BHO4c
[xcix] “AGENCY REVIEW TEAMS”. Biden-Harris Transition. November 20, 2020. Accessed March 3, 2024. https://archive.ph/xjHxJ
[c] “DowDuPont Merger Successfully Completed”. DowDuPont. August 31, 2017. Accessed March 2, 2024. https://corporate.dow.com/en-us/news/press-releases/dowdupont-merger-successfully-completed.html
[ci] “DowDuPont Completes Spin-off of Dow Inc.”. DuPont. April 1, 2019. Accessed March 2, 2024. https://www.dupont.com/news/dowdupont-completes-spin-off-of-dowinc.html
[cii] “DuPont Overview: A premier multi-industrial company”. DuPont Investor Relations. February 27, 2023. Accessed March 2, 2024. https://s23.q4cdn.com/116192123/files/doc_presentations/2023/02/DD-Marketing-Deck-FEB-2023.pdf
[ciii] Wayne, Leslie. “How Delaware Thrives as a Corporate Tax Haven”. The New York Times. June 30, 2012. Accessed March 3, 2024. https://archive.ph/WOneW#selection-441.0-441.45
[civ] Ibid
[cv] Ibid
[cvi] Murphy, Tim. “House of Cards: How Joe Biden helped build a financial system that’s great for Delaware banks and terrible for the rest of us.” Mother Jones. November/December 2019 issue. Accessed March 3, 2024. https://archive.ph/sFCXU
[cvii] Devine, Miranda. Laptop from Hell: Hunter Biden, Big Tech, and the Dirty Secrets the President Tried to Hide. Post Hill Press: 2021, New York.
[cviii] “386. The Laptop From Hell | Miranda Devine”. The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast. October 2023. Accessed January 30, 2024.
[cix] “Re: Test”. Hunter Biden Laptop Emails. Sent from: Henri du Pont, October 11, 2016. Accessed March 3, 2024. https://bidenlaptopemails.com/email.php?id=20161011-220747_44984
[cx] “Walking on the West Side: the World Bank and the IMF in the Ukraine Conflict”. Oakland Institute. July 28, 2014. Accessed March 3, 2024. https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/walking-west-side-world-bank-and-imf-ukraine-conflict
[cxi] “THE CORPORATE TAKEOVER OF UKRAINIAN AGRICULTURE”. Oakland Institute. December 2014. Accessed March 3, 2024. https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/sites/oaklandinstitute.org/files/Brief_CorporateTakeoverofUkraine_0.pdf
[cxii] “Here’s the truth about the war in Ukraine.” @RobertKennedyJr. X. February 10, 2024. Accessed June 16, 2024. https://x.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1756561127557718286
[cxiii] “Metabiota Breaks Out with $30M Series A”. Pitchbook. May 22, 2015. Accessed January 21, 2024. https://pitchbook.com/newsletter/metabiota-breaks-out-with-30m-series-a
[cxiv] Buhr, Sarah. “Metabiota Pulls In $30 Million In Funding To Help Predict The Global Spread Of Disease”. Tech Crunch. May 20, 2015. Accessed January 21, 2024. https://techcrunch.com/2015/05/20/metabiota-pulls-in-30-million-in-funding-to-help-predict-the-global-spread-of-disease/
[cxv] “Re: Metabiota next week”. RSTP Email Thread regarding Metabiota Series A. Hunter Biden Laptop Emails. March 5, 2014. Accessed January 28, 2024. https://bidenlaptopemails.com/email.php?id=20140305-150246_118044
[cxvi]“Metabiota”. Metabiota. Accessed January 21, 2024. https://web.archive.org/web/20200926094124/https://metabiota.com/
[cxvii] “Metabiota – Services”. Metabiota. Accessed January 21, 2024. https://web.archive.org/web/20200915103548/https://metabiota.com/services.
[cxviii] “RSTP II, L.P. - $25mn Metabiota Series A Preferred Investment”. November 18, 2014. Accessed January 21, 2024. https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21557099/2014-confidential-metabiota-deal-memo.pdf
[cxix] Ratliff, Evan. “We Can Protect the Economy From Pandemics. Why Didn't We”. Wired. June 16, 2020. Accessed January 27, 2024. https://www.wired.com/story/nathan-wolfe-global-economic-fallout-pandemic-insurance/
[cxx] Ibid
[cxxi] @hashTigre. “In 2014, Nathan Wolfe’s Cia/Rosemont Seneca-funded firm”. X. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1497745370620645379.html
[cxxii] Ibid
[cxxiii] See “Globalism vs. Self-Governance: How David Defeats Goliath” for more information.
[cxxiv] @459crimes. “The Web of Connections Unravels.” X. July 7, 2024. https://x.com/459Crimes/status/1810065742999543960/photo/1
[cxxv] “General Flynn on Ukraine.” @wear_mind. X. July 9, 2024. Accessed July 10, 2024. https://x.com/wear_mind/status/1810857148848775577
[cxxvi] “Finger Lakes region = one of the largest human trafficking hubs in the US.”. @goldenheart1223. X. June 1, 2023. Accessed July 10, 2024.https://x.com/goldenheart1223/status/1664428769371893760/photo/2
[cxxvii] “Metabiota – Services”. Metabiota. Accessed January 21, 2024. https://web.archive.org/web/20200915103548/https://metabiota.com/services.
[cxxviii] Kennedy, Robert F., Jr. The Wuhan Cover-up and the Terrifying Bioweapons Arms Race. Skyhorse Publishing, 2023: New York.
[cxxix] Lihong, Yuan, Zhengli, Daszak, et. al.“Evidence for retrovirus and paramyxovirus infection of multiple bat species in china”. National Library of Medicine. 2014 May 16;6(5):2138-54. Accessed January 27, 2024. doi: 10.3390/v6052138.
Winters, Natalie. “WATCH: CCP’s ‘Bat Lady’ Thanks NIH & ‘Longtime Collaborator’ Peter Daszak.” June 11, 2021. Accessed January 21, 2024. https://archive.ph/lRV4j
[cxxx] Lihong, Yuan, Zhengli, Daszak, et. al.“Evidence for retrovirus and paramyxovirus infection of multiple bat species in china”. National Library of Medicine. 2014 May 16;6(5):2138-54. Accessed January 27, 2024. doi: 10.3390/v6052138.
[cxxxi] Ibid
[cxxxii] Winters, Natalie. “WATCH: CCP’s ‘Bat Lady’ Thanks NIH & ‘Longtime Collaborator’ Peter Daszak.” June 11, 2021. Accessed January 21, 2024. https://archive.ph/lRV4j
[cxxxiii] Kennedy, Robert F., Jr. The Wuhan Cover-up and the Terrifying Bioweapons Arms Race. Skyhorse Publishing, 2023: New York.
[cxxxiv] Puzzanghera, Jim. “Hugh Auchincloss was Anthony Fauci’s longtime deputy. Now he’s taking his job as House Republicans probe the pandemic”. Boston Globe. February 10, 2023. Accessed January 27, 2024. https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/02/10/nation/hugh-auchincloss-was-anthony-faucis-longtime-deputy-now-hes-taking-his-job-house-republicans-probe-pandemic/
[cxxxv] Cohen, Jon. “Mining coronavirus genomes for clues to the outbreak's origins”. Science. January 31, 2020. Accessed January 27, 2024. https://www.science.org/content/article/mining-coronavirus-genomes-clues-outbreak-s-origins
[cxxxvi] Bettendorf, Natalie and Jason Leopold. “Anthony Fauci’s Emails Reveal The Pressure That Fell On One Man”. BuzzFeed News. June 1, 2021. Accessed January 27, 2024. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/nataliebettendorf/fauci-emails-covid-response
[cxxxvii] “SCALP: Daszak Recused From COVID Commission After National Pulse Exposés.” The National Pulse. June 21, 2021. Accessed January 21, 2024. https://archive.ph/QYZND#selection-587.2-587.73
[cxxxviii] “SCALP: Daszak Recused From COVID Commission After National Pulse Exposés.” The National Pulse. June 21, 2021. Accessed January 21, 2024. https://archive.ph/QYZND#selection-587.2-587.73
[cxxxix] “WAITING FOR ‘THE FINAL PLAGUE’ – A Talk with Nathan Wolfe”. Edge Foundation. January 30, 2009. Accessed January 27, 2024. https://www.edge.org/conversation/nathan_wolfe-waiting-for-the-final-plague
[cxl] Wolfe, Nathan. “The jungle search for viruses“. Ted Talks. February 2009. Accessed January 27, 2024. https://www.ted.com/talks/nathan_wolfe_the_jungle_search_for_viruses
[cxli] Ellwanger, Johel Henrique and Jose Artur Bogo Chies. “Zoonotic spillover: Understanding basic aspects for better prevention”. Genetics and Molecular Biology, June 2021. Vol. 44, no. 1 suppl 1. Accessed January 27, 2024. https://doaj.org/article/90e45b3edbeb4d5cb751b6ea3ea36919
[cxlii] Kennedy, Robert F., Jr. The Wuhan Cover-up and the Terrifying Bioweapons Arms Race. Skyhorse Publishing, 2023: New York.
[cxliii] Goddard, Paul. “A short history of laboratory leaks and gain-of-function studies “. GM Watch. February 19, 2022. Accessed January 27, 2024. https://gmwatch.org/en/106-news/latest-news/19991-a-short-history-of-laboratory-leaks-and-gain-of-function-studies
[cxliv] Kennedy, Robert F., Jr. The Wuhan Cover-up and the Terrifying Bioweapons Arms Race. Skyhorse Publishing, 2023: New York.
[cxlv] Daszak, Peter. “Identifying predictable patterns in disease emergence “. EcoHealth Alliance – Presentation to In-Q-Tel. October 2015. Accessed January 28, 2024. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/Peter-Daszak-InQTel-October-2015.pptx.pdf
[cxlvi] “Munich Re & In-Q-Tel Select Metabiota to Gain Deeper Insights into Epidemic Risk and Global Preparedness for Infectious Diseases “. August 22, 2017. Accessed January 28, 2024. https://www.iqt.org/news/munich-re-in-q-tel-select-metabiota-to-gain-deeper-insights-into-epidemic-risk-and-global-preparedness-for-infectious-diseases/
[cxlvii] Ibid
[cxlviii] McBreen, Kelen. “How Are Hunter Biden, Klaus Schwab & CIA Connected To US Biolabs In Ukraine? – Pt. 2”. InfoWars. March 8, 2022. Accessed January 28, 2024. https://www.infowars.com/posts/what-do-hunter-biden-klaus-schwab-the-cia-have-to-do-with-us-biolabs-in-ukraine-pt-2/
[cxlix] Gaytandzhieva, Dilyana. “The Pentagon's secret biolabs”. Dilyana.BG. April 29, 2018. Accessed January 28, 2024. https://dilyana.bg/the-pentagon-bio-weapons/
[cl] Ibid
[cli] “Ukraine is a Field for Pentagon's Biological Tests”. CyberBerkut. August 23, 2017. Accessed January 28, 2024. https://archive.ph/50GNl
[clii] “Re: MEMO: Ukraine Science”. Vadim Pozharskyi Email to Devon Archer. Hunter Biden Laptop Emails. April 8, 2014. Accessed January 28, 2024. https://bidenlaptopemails.com/email.php?id=20140409-163243_73114
[cliii] Ibid
[cliv] “Re: MEMO: Ukraine Science”. Email from Devon Archer to Hunter Biden. Hunter Biden Laptop Emails. April 11, 2024. https://bidenlaptopemails.com/email.php?id=20140411-173544_97419
[clv] “MEMO: Ukraine Science”. Email from Mary Guttieri to Hunter Biden & RSTP Team. Hunter Biden Laptop Emails. April 4, 2014. Accessed January 28, 2024. https://bidenlaptopemails.com/email.php?id=20140404-011459_26046
[clvi] Ibid
[clvii] “Re: GP/Management Company Ownership”. Email regarding RSTP Fund II GP Economics. Hunter Biden Laptop Emails. April 19, 2014. Accessed January 29, 2024. https://bidenlaptopemails.com/email.php?id=20140419-232403_97679
[clviii] Ibid
[clix] Report on the Biden Laptop”. Marco Polo. 2022. Accessed January 10, 2023.
https://bidenreport.com/#p=1
[clx] Ibid
[clxi] Devine, Miranda. “Hunter Biden’s biz partner called Joe Biden ‘the Big Guy’ in panicked message after Post’s laptop story”. New York Post. July 27, 2022. Accessed January 29, 2024. https://archive.ph/lkHpb
[clxii] Jo-Farris, Emma and Gabrielle Fonrouge. “Emails reveal how Hunter Biden tried to cash in big on behalf of family with Chinese firm”. New York Post. October 15, 2020. January 29, 2024. https://archive.ph/5L9k9