Putin orders another murder of an opposition figure

[Musburger1]

Haiti Official Who Exposed The Clinton Foundation Is Found Dead

Oh wait. Putin isn't responsible? Wrong monster. (Link).

The mainstream media’s silence over Klaus Eberwein’s death is deafening. Eberwein was a former Haitian government official who was expected to expose the extent of Clinton Foundation corruption and malpractice next week. He has been found dead in Miami at the age of 50.

The circumstances surrounding Eberwein’s death are also nothing less than unpalatable. According to Miami-Dade’s medical examiner records supervisor, the official cause of death is “gunshot to the head.“ Eberwein’s death has been registered as “suicide” by the government. But not long before his death, he acknowledged that his life was in danger because he was outspoken on the criminal activities of the Clinton Foundation.

Eberwein was a fierce critic of the Clinton Foundation’s activities in the Caribbean island, where he served as director general of the government’s economic development agency, Fonds d’assistance économique et social, for three years. “The Clinton Foundation, they are criminals, they are thieves, they are liars, they are a disgrace,” Eberwein said at a protest outside the Clinton Foundation headquarters in Manhattan last year. Eberwein was due to appear on Tuesday before the Haitian Senate Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission where he was widely expected to testify that the Clinton Foundation misappropriated Haiti earthquake donations from international donors. But this “suicide” gets even more disturbing…

Eberwein was only 50-years-old and reportedly told acquaintances he feared for his life because of his fierce criticism of the Clinton Foundation. His close friends and business partners were taken aback by the idea he may have committed suicide. “It’s really shocking,” said friend Gilbert Bailly. “We grew up together; he was like family.”

During and after his government tenure, Eberwein faced allegations of fraud and corruption on how the agency he headed administered funds. Among the issues was FAES’ oversight of the shoddy construction of several schools built after Haiti’s devastating Jan. 12, 2010, earthquake. But, according to Eberwein, it was the Clinton Foundation who was deeply in the wrong – and he intended to testify and prove it on Tuesday.

According to Eberwein, a paltry 0.6 percent of donations granted by international donors to the Clinton Foundation with the express purpose of directly assisting Haitians actually ended up in the hands of Haitian organizations. A further 9.6 percent ended up with the Haitian government. The remaining 89.8 percent – or $5.4 billion – was funneled to non-Haitian organizations. –WND

Eberwein was expected to testify against the Clinton Foundation in court and ends up committing suicide shortly before. Where have we heard this before? Untimely deaths seem to follow the Clinton’s around, and this one especially is probably something – considering since the mainstream media is silent about this death.

 

[Musburger1]

And here's another Putin victim who "committed suicide."

 

[militaryhorn]

If it involves the Clinton's, then it didn't happen by their request. There was no intent.

 

[Seattle Husker]

And here's another Putin victim who "committed suicide."

Peter Smith was claiming to be the smoking gun against Trump in the Russia collusion saga in an interview just prior to his death. What incentive would the Clinton's would have to take him out now?

 

[Musburger1]

Peter Smith was claiming to be the smoking gun against Trump in the Russia collusion saga in an interview just prior to his death. What incentive would the Clinton's would have to take him out now?

Interview with Charles Ortel (Link). Here's the key excerpt:

“We had countless discussions,” Ortel recalled of his relationship with Smith. “He was using his unique decades of experience in politics to offer me advice how to expose the Clinton Foundation.”​

 

[Mr. Deez]

So what if Putin didn't have these particular people "rubbed out?" That doesn't make him innocent of killing others. OJ didn't kill them either, but that doesn't make him innocent of killing Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman.

 

[Joe Fan]

Who has a bigger trail of bodies?

Putin or the Clintons?

 

[Musburger1]

So what if Putin didn't have these particular people "rubbed out?" That doesn't make him innocent of killing others. OJ didn't kill them either, but that doesn't make him innocent of killing Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman.

You so badly want to believe the fake news propaganda you've been bombarded with for decades. Just yesterday, the latest BS "Putin is a killer" nonsense had to be deconstructed for the fraudulent nonsense it is.
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2017/07/yasha-mounk-lies.html

The U.S. borg is vehemently trying to set up Russia as an enemy of the "west". Their anti-Russian propaganda has become part of the campaign against U.S. President Trump who seeks détente with Russia. It requires intense efforts to denigrate the country, its citizens and its leaders. Here is an example of how such propaganda is fabricated.

Yascha Mounk is:

a Lecturer on Political Theory at Harvard University's Government Department, a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Transatlantic Academy of the German Marshall Fund, and a Nonresident Fellow at New America's Political Reform Program.
He is a self declared liberal internationalist who has been published and quoted by lots of international media.

Yesterday Mounk tweeted this:


bigger

The Mounk tweet is a series of lies:

lists 82 killed Russian journalists since 1992, most of them died due to war or related to civil crimes or corruption. There are about 80 portraits of journalists in the picture Mounk tweeted.

Two recognizable portraits and names therein are of Vlad Listyev, a TV entertainment producer killed in 1995 over some controversy about lucrative advertisement on public TV. Another portrait is of Dmitry Kholodov, killed in 1994 while investigating mafia connections within the Russian military. At the time of their death Putin was a minor bureaucrat in Saint Petersburg. He did not gain power until he became acting president at the end of 1999.

According to the CPJ numbers more Russian journalists were killed during the eight years of Yeltsin's presidency (1992-2000) than in the 17 years of Putin's presidencies since. Mounk claims "All these are journalists who criticized Putin ..." when more than half of them were already dead before Putin became known and to power. It was during the time of the "Harvard boys" who robbed Russia blind that most of these journalist were killed. The Russian system, thanks to the Harvard driven "reforms" and criminal privatization under Yeltsin, is a rough terrain for investigating oligarchs and mafia businesses. But there is no evidence, none at all, that Putin was ever involved in the decease of any journalist.

The first original publishing of the Mounk picture may have been as early as 2009. A piece on journalists remembrance in Russia from 2014 already includes the pic. The reverse image search shows that the picture has been has been used by several news-outlets since.

Every aspect of the Mounk tweet is a lie.

But Mounk's lies have by now been re-tweeted over 22,000 times. Many of those who see it will believe the claims he makes. They will trust a widely publish Harvard academic. But the tweet, as well as nearly all other claims about Russia one sees in "western" media, is pure propaganda. It is like the editorial in today's New York Times that claims "Russia’s oil-dependent economy [is] in trouble" while all Russian economic numbers turned positive and all indicators point to accelerating growth. It is fake news.

The anti-Russian propaganda campaign is now part of the "liberal" campaign against U.S. president Trump. It is failing. Trump's support is steady if not increasing despite daily new revelation about his (non existent) "collusion with Russia" and the (non existing) "Russian interference" in the U.S. election.

The purveyors of the propaganda stories are in despair. Each and every new fire they try to stoke dies off within a day or two. The temptation then is to invent and push ever bigger lies about Trump, Russia and their non-existing connections.

The fake news Mounk spits out, and which disqualify him as an academic, is a sign of their accelerating panic.

Update:

1. Someone translated the above piece into French: Alors que la campagne anti-Trump / anti-Russie échoue – Yascha Mounk raconte de nouveaux mensonges

2. Mark Ames, who then worked as muckraking journalist in Moscow, addssome information about two of the journalists who's death Mounk blames on Putin:

Kholodov [was] killed investigating Yeltsin's Defense Minister; Yeltsin financier Berezovsky suspected in Listyev murder
"Harvard boys" like Mounk were lauding Yeltsin for allowing them to rape Russia. The two journalists were killed for working against the outright thievery. As Yeltsin's successor Putin no longer goes with the program, Harvard scholar Mounks now blames their death on him. That is a quite brazen disregard of any academic standard.

 

[Musburger1]

Who has a bigger trail of bodies?

Putin or the Clintons?

The Clintons; no contest.

 

[Mr. Deez]

You so badly want to believe the fake news propaganda you've been bombarded with for decades.

Not really. I'm cautious about Putin, but I'm not a hater. I've called for cooperation with him in some areas. I only seem like one next to the nonstop, foaming at the mouth ball-licking you dish out. To a normal person, I'm pretty moderate on Putin, and Leftist commentators would think I was somewhat pro-Putin. But of course they don't like Putin because he doesn't like gays and supported Trump, not because he has had some people killed. After all, the political Left likes all kinds of people who have others killed.

By the way, you do know the Chicago Tribune piece (the only thing you posted that's worth taking somewhat seriously) doesn't clear Putin of responsibility in the deaths of everybody he's believed to have had killed, right?

 

[Musburger1]

Not really. I'm cautious about Putin, but I'm not a hater. I've called for cooperation with him in some areas. I only seem like one next to the nonstop, foaming at the mouth ball-licking you dish out. To a normal person, I'm pretty moderate on Putin, and Leftist commentators would think I was somewhat pro-Putin. But of course they don't like Putin because he doesn't like gays and supported Trump, not because he has had some people killed. After all, the political Left likes all kinds of people who have others killed.

By the way, you do know the Chicago Tribune piece (the only thing you posted that's worth taking somewhat seriously) doesn't clear Putin of responsibility in the deaths of everybody he's believed to have had killed, right?

Look, I don't know if Putin ordered anyone rubbed out or not. I do know that the MSM has a run a propaganda campaign devoid of facts in order to shape public opinion and it's been going on for years. On the other hand, overwhelming circumstantial evidence of Clinton criminality is routinely passed over, dismissed as conspiracy theory, and not investigated by the MSM. Putin is a thuggish killer and the Clintons are champions of liberal America. It's all fake.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Look, I don't know if Putin ordered anyone rubbed out or not. I do know that the MSM has a run a propaganda campaign devoid of facts in order to shape public opinion and it's been going on for years.

If you don't know if Putin has ordered anyone rubbed out, then you can't say you know the MSM campaign against him is devoid of facts. By your own admission, you don't actually know.

I will agree that the American media is almost universally hostile to Putin, but it hasn't always been so. I remember Time making him "Person of the Year" back in the late 2000s, and their assessment wasn't overly hostile. It had some favorable stuff and some negative stuff. It's hard to point to a specific point in time when the MSM decided it hated Putin, but I started seeing the vitriol turned up and stopped seeing anything positive during the winter Olympics, when his views on the gays became commonly known and discussed. I honestly think that's the real source of the contempt. Without the anti-gay stuff, I think the MSM would have at least listened to his justificationof the Crimea annexation. And of course, once it became clear that he was pro-Trump, that put him on their permanent **** list.

On the other hand, overwhelming circumstantial evidence of Clinton criminality is routinely passed over, dismissed as conspiracy theory, and not investigated by the MSM. Putin is a thuggish killer and the Clintons are champions of liberal America. It's all fake.

They like the Clintons' politics. That's why they get treated by with kid gloves.

 

[Musburger1]

If you don't know if Putin has ordered anyone rubbed out, then you can't say you know the MSM campaign against him is devoid of facts. By your own admission, you don't actually know.

I will agree that the American media is almost universally hostile to Putin, but it hasn't always been so. I remember Time making him "Person of the Year" back in the late 2000s, and their assessment wasn't overly hostile. It had some favorable stuff and some negative stuff. It's hard to point to a specific point in time when the MSM decided it hated Putin, but I started seeing the vitriol turned up and stopped seeing anything positive during the winter Olympics, when his views on the gays became commonly known and discussed. I honestly think that's the real source of the contempt. Without the anti-gay stuff, I think the MSM would have at least listened to his justificationof the Crimea annexation. And of course, once it became clear that he was pro-Trump, that put him on their permanent **** list.



They like the Clintons' politics. That's why they get treated by with kid gloves.

The anti-gay stuff is just camouflage for the real reasons Putin is villified. When Putin opposed and turned back the Georgian attack on Ossetia, that was the turning point. When Putin thwarted Obama's move to bomb Syria and strike an agreement for Syria to turn over its chemical weapons that was just too hard to take. And when Putin intervened and prevented massive violence in Crimea and later accepted Crimea back as part of Russia, he was Hitler.

So everything Putin did; arresting ***** Riot, arresting dissenters who broke the law by protesting in areas not approved by permit etc. is a human rights violation. Meanwhile, the Saudis are a greatest ally, whereas Russia is the great evil threat.

 

[Mr. Deez]

The anti-gay stuff is just camouflage for the real reasons Putin is villified.

You're pretty warped on some things (and very sharp on some other things), but this might be the root of your problem. You give the American media far more credit and respect than it deserves. You think they're a bunch of flag-waving American patriots who blindly shill for American interests but who also have very sophisticated reasons for what they do. That's garbage.

The US media doesn't give a two squirts of piss about Georgia and Ossetia. Most of them can barely locate those places on a map and don't care to know. Furthermore, they don't care about US interests. For years, they've fawned over regimes and leaders who opposed the United States. They think Che Guevara was great. They frequently revel in China's ascendency. Back in the day, many of them were favorable to the North Vietnamese, NIcaragua (under Ortega), and the Soviet Union.

However, they DO care about shallow virtue signaling, because it affects their reputations. It looked good to slam Vladimir Putin when people found out he wasn't pro-gay. It looked good to take up for ***** Riot, because of their politics. Yes, the American media really is that shallow. Their reasons for hating Trump are similarly shallow.

 

[Musburger1]

You're pretty warped on some things (and very sharp on some other things), but this might be the root of your problem. You give the American media far more credit and respect than it deserves. You think they're a bunch of flag-waving American patriots who blindly shill for American interests but who also have very sophisticated reasons for what they do. That's garbage.

The US media doesn't give a two squirts of piss about Georgia and Ossetia. Most of them can barely locate those places on a map and don't care to know. Furthermore, they don't care about US interests. For years, they've fawned over regimes and leaders who opposed the United States. They think Che Guevara was great. They frequently revel in China's ascendency. Back in the day, many of them were favorable to the North Vietnamese, NIcaragua (under Ortega), and the Soviet Union.

However, they DO care about shallow virtue signaling, because it affects their reputations. It looked good to slam Vladimir Putin when people found out he wasn't pro-gay. It looked good to take up for ***** Riot, because of their politics. Yes, the American media really is that shallow. Their reasons for hating Trump are similarly shallow.

You are partially correct, but here's what you are missing. The media is a puppet of the deep state. The deep state operatives goal is to villinize Putin (and other global leaders they oppose) and simply steer the left wing media in the desired direction. The left wing media write the stories they and their social warrior followers care about (P----- Riot, etc). The deep state could care less about these issues, but the objective of rallying the country against a perceived enemy is achieved. The reasons are irrelevant. The King of Saudi Arabia cuts off someone's head for blasphemy. Big deal. Putin arrests some lesbians for vandalism and he's a monster.

The press could find human rights atrocities and villains everywhere, but yet they seem to find them almost exclusively where the deep state has designated enemies such as Libya, Syria, and Iran. You don't believe there is a strong correlation between deep state agenda and press coverage? Who are you kidding?

 

[huisache]

the medical examiner says the guy committed suicide and I presume there is a reason for that; med examiners don't automatically assume suicide every time somebody gets shot in the head and the ME in Dade gets a lot of work.

Based on the post I would hazard a guess that the dead guy was part of the Haitian group who were going Haitian on the funds being sent there and then got exposed. Like most of the criminals I represent he decided to lie his way out of the trap and when he saw that wasn't going to work he decided to do the decent thing. A few years ago he was looking forward to being rich in Europe and a few days ago he was looking forward to a life as a pin cushion in a penitentiary. The choice he made was among acceptable alternatives.

Of course, like you guys, I know nothing about this matter for sure but I do see some familiar patterns.

And I am not a knee jerk apologist for the Clintons. I have never voted for either of them for anything, which has been a problem seeing as how I am a default Democrat.