Yes, Foreign Fighters in Ukraine are Covered Under the Geneva Conventions as “Combatants”

We have been seeing new reports for foreign volunteers joining the Ukrainian forces, including Americans, to fight against the Russian invasion. There now appear a sizable number of such volunteers in a modern version of the Lincoln Brigade that fought against fascism in Spain before World War II. The similarities to the Spanish Civil War are striking with the fascists controlling the skies, fielding advanced weaponry, and engaging in war crimes.  Back then, Russia supported the Republican forces against fascism. Now, however, Russia is declaring that foreign volunteers are not considered covered “combatants” under the Geneva Conventions. That is not true.

Russian embassies like the one in Thailand are putting out statements telling men not to join the fight at the risk of being classified “mercenaries.”

Of course, Russia has little credibility on any interpretation of international law today. The irony is crushing. Russia is now openly committing war crimes in attacking civilian areas with indiscriminate weapons and using prohibited weapons. These crimes are in addition to launching an unprovoked and unjustified attack on a sovereign nation.  Moreover, Russia is using mercenaries like the infamous Wagner group. It is also reportedly recruiting Syrians to fight in Ukraine.

Putting aside the hypocrisy, the Russian government is wrong. Indeed, its suggestion that it will treat these foreign fighters as uncovered persons is itself a violation of the Geneva Convention.

Here is the statement from Thailand:

Under the Geneva Conventions, “the best case scenario” is not “detention and prosecution.”

The Ukrainian president and government has officially called on international volunteers to join the Ukrainian military. They are a part of the Ukrainian defense forces and given Ukrainian training, uniforms, and insignia. The Russian position is akin to saying that the French Foreign Legion would be treated as mercenaries because it includes non-French volunteers. The Legion famously opens its ranks to “recruits from all over the world.”

Likewise, the estimated 16,000 foreign fighters are being organized under the “Ukrainian Foreign Legion” and requires a commitment of a year or longer of service.

The Geneva Conventions

While there are areas of ambiguity over private contractors and other participants in conflicts, the current definitions of covered combatants clearly and unambiguously reject the Russian position.  Article 4 contains the core definitional element of lawful combatant status. Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, pt. I, art. 4 (Aug. 12, 1949), 6 U.S.T. 3316.

Article 4(A)(1) includes “Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps performing part of such armed forces.” Thus, both militias and volunteer corps are included.

Article 4(A)(2) also makes clear that “Militias and members of other volunteer corps … belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory” enjoy combatant status and protections.

Under the Geneva Conventions and the Additional Protocols, there is a division drawn between combatants and civilians. The later term can include unlawful combatants, spies, and mercenaries.

However, Article 45 addressed the “Protection of persons who have taken part in hostilities” and affirms that every combatant who is captured shall be presumed to be a prisoner of war. Accordingly, if a foreign fighter is captured “he shall continue to have such status and, therefore, to be protected by the Third Convention and this Protocol until such time as his status has been determined by a competent tribunal.” Article 45 reaffirms the need for a tribunal hearing on the question of status.

The four original Geneva Conventions do not address mercenaries. However, Protocol I does describe this status as “foreign combatants recruited to fight in one specific conflict and motivated by the desire for private gain in an amount in excess of the payment to the armed forces of the recruiting state.” There is also a 1989 International Convention Against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries.

None of these sources support the Russian classification of foreign fighters as mercenaries. Indeed, such definitions would work against Russian military captured in countries like Syria.

History and Hypocrisy

Indeed, the Russians have long embraced such international volunteers in combat operations. One of the largest such efforts was the Soviet Volunteer Group that went, with government support, to China to fight in the  Second Sino-Japanese War between 1937 and 1941. These soldiers wore civilian clothes and traveled to China to become part of their military. That included hundreds of pilots and planes.

The Russians also were foreign combatants in the Spanish Civil War. They were considered particularly key to the defense of Madrid against the fascists, including German forces.

Soviet pilots on the Soto airfield near Madrid.

That included a force of T-26 tanks under Captain Paul “Greize” Arman and Brigadier Dmitriy “Pablo” Pavlov. It also included dozens of Soviet I-15 fighters Tupolev ANT-40 bombers. Under the current interpretation of Russia, all of these men (called Soviet heroes) would now be treated as criminal mercenaries.

Future Enforcement Requires Immediate Clarity

If Russia carries through on its interpretation of the Geneva Conventions to exclude foreign members of the Ukrainian defense force, it would be in flagrant violation of the Geneva Conventions. As I discussed earlier, there have been possible violations on the Ukrainian side in showing videotapes of weeping Russian POWS, though some have contested that assessment. However, Ukraine is by all accounts complying with the Geneva Conventions in other respects. The Russian interpretation would effectively gut the protections of the Geneva Protections.

One could say that this hardly matters when the Russians are shattering international legal principles and committing atrocities in the invasion. However, the violation of the Geneva Conventions exposes military commanders to possible international charges and sanctions. The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (or “the Tokyo Trial”) involved the prosecution of officials responsible for the abuse of POWs.

Article 86(2) of Protocol I was written in light of the World War II cases. It seeks to impose criminal liability on the commander if he knew or should have known that a subordinate was going to commit breaches of the conventions.

The most obvious figures who could be held accountable for such violations in Ukraine include Minister of Defense General Sergey Shoygu and Chief of the General staff, General Valery Gerasimov. They are also subject to charges for the war crimes being committed in the prosecution of the war on civilians.

The world legal community must speak with one voice in rejecting the interpretation put forward by Russia on the Geneva Conventions so there is no question about the knowledge of these commanders in committing such violations. When this war ends, there will hopefully be an accounting for those responsible. However, we must make that clear and unambiguous record now if we going to later vindicate the rights of the victims of this invasion.

 

 

 

 

256 thoughts on “Yes, Foreign Fighters in Ukraine are Covered Under the Geneva Conventions as “Combatants””

  1. Just curious. Where will the Russians who allegedly committed war crimes be tried, and by whom? Probably not the ICC. Only 118 countries have ratified the Rome Statute, which is the instrument that created the ICC. Russia has not done so, nor have Belorussia, the United States, China, Ukraine, and 75 other countries, so the ICC, if I understand IL correctly, lacks jurisdiction over all of them.
    It also lacks a police force, so who will bring the accused to court?
    It is easy to allege war crimes, more difficult to prove them, e.g., shelling a city is not a war crime if it is a legitimate military target, even if civilians are killed. The civlians are, to use an American term, collateral damaged.
    Worse, a civilian can be difficult to define, at least given the claim by at least one country that a combatant is anyone who supports its enemies directly or indirectly, a ‘redefinition’ made to make it easier to use drones and wage counter-insurgency warfare.
    And if I read the excerpts above correctly, volunteers are only considered for POW status if in uniform and within the organizational structure of the enemy armed forces. So hoodies with designer insignia won’t work.
    The Spanish Civil War was a bloody affair which spawned a great many myths. I recommend two older books, Gerald Brenan’s The Spanish Labyrinth and George Orwell’s Farewell to Catalonia to get an idea of how complex it was. There were very few good guys, and everybody did bad things. Franco coopted the Falange, much as the Communists coopted the Republican government. The anarchists controlled some areas, Communists others . . . and the driving force of Franco’s military rebellion were Italian volunteers. War generally is organized slaughter, and civil war adds the extra element of chaos.
    For those who believe war is good, I recommend Michael Walzer’s Just and Unjust Wars; for those who think civil wars and guerrilla war are cool, try Harry Eckstein’s 1965 essay, “On the Etiology of Internal Wars.”
    To risk nuclear war might make a good movie (I enjoyed Dr. Strangelove), but a bad reality (I do not want to see a nuclear winter).

      1. My apologies for the typos — damage, not damaged, and Homage to Catalonia, not Farewell to Catalonia, although Farewell to Arms is a good anti-war novel disguised as a love story. Where you begin an analysis matters, e.g., Russia is an aggressor and Putin quite insane if you begin ten days ago, but not so much if you begin with the coup d’etat of 2014 and the eight years of fighting in Luhansk and Donetsky which followed, as Aaron Mate does.
        https://mate.substack.com/p/by-using-ukraine-to-fight-russia?s=r
        Similarly, if you take a dispassionate view of ‘liberal’ and ‘authoritarian’ states and discuss their actual behavior rather than their professed ideals, things are not quite so black and white, as did Jose E. Alvarez, “Do Liberal States Behave Better? A Critique of Slaughter’s Liberal Theory,” European Journal of International Law (2001). Alvarez observed that liberal states consider some undemocratic states like Libya, “illegitimate” and beyond the “zone of law,” but others like Bahrain legitimate. So they attack the former but support the latter. Alvarez also noted that the United States government has refused to recognize the jurisdiction of both the ICJ and the ICC when their rulings have gone against it.
        Neither international law nor war are simple, and it seems to me that the Russia-Ukraine conflict is more akin to the invasion of Croatia in ’91, with the difference that the international community and the western media tended to side with the aggressor during that military operation.
        As for ad hominem attacks and speculation, I prefer careful arguments supported by evidence.

        1. Old Guy,

          Thank you for an interesting, well-thought comment. I haven’t read all of the references you mention but I did read Homage to Catalonia and came away convinced that the civil war in Spain was more complex than I had imagined. I suspect this war is as well and you make that clear. Thanks.

          1. Thank you, Young. Orwell was an honest man, who tried not to let his politics distort his writing. The Alvarez article may be difficult to access, and Brenan’s work is a classic, so very old & out of print. If you are interested in the Spanish civil war, you might try Hugh Thomas, The Spanish Civil War (Modern Library, 2001) and Stanley G. Payne, The Spanish Civil War (Cambridge, 2012) for two detailed, but distinct, interpretations,
            Unfortunately, I keep making typos — Donetsk, not Donetsky.

            1. Old Guy,

              Thanks.

              I will try the Hugh Thomas book first.

              Looking beyond the civil war I had noticed a couple of things about Franco that were impressive.

              First, despite the enormous pressures brought to bear on him he managed to milk the Axis for support and keep Spain out of WW II while suppressing Communists within Spain who were supported by a hostile Soviet Union. Spain would have been torn apart again if he hadn’t accomplished those things. It reminded me in some way of James I determination, despite criticism, to keep Britain out of the Thirty Years War, sparing his subjects much loss and grief.

              Second, he discreetly helped the Allies in ways that went beyond strict neutrality. Downed Allied pilots headed for Spain where they managed to return to England and fight again. They were instructed to try to get to Spain if downed so some quiet system was in place. If Allied pilots went to Switzerland they were interned, not sent back to England. I think Franco was not the man presented to us these days. I no longer find it unbelievable that stories we are told are unbelievable.

              I look forward to reading Hugh Thomas’ account.

              1. I am not familiar with the escape route for Allied pilots, but its existence does suggest that our image of Franco, and other historical figures, may be less than accurate. By 1971, Franco’s government was home to US bases, but in 1941, he would have joined the Axis had the Germans offered him military and economic support or had the Italians reached Suez. From what I have read, Franco was a realist like Arthur Harris, not a moralist or an ideologue. He led a military insurrection similar to others in Spain after 1810, not a color revolution.
                Thomas is a great read, but the expert on Franco is Stanley G. Payne, who has been published by university presses and translated into Spanish, e.g., Franco and Hitler (Yale UP, 2008) as Franco y Hitler (La Esfera, 2008), and, with Jesus Palacio, Franco: A Personal and Political Biography (U of Wisconsin UP, 2018).

      2. I get fed up of people just posting some wild, unfounded and rather childish accusation just because he has a different viewpoint from the general narrative.

  2. At the outset of the crime, the “police” should have responded with an immediate U.N. no-fly zone over Ukraine.

    The U.N. is absolutely without capacity and purpose.

    The U.N. has egregiously failed the people and the “nation” of Ukraine and, by extension, the “nations” of the world, and the U.N. is manifestly adverse to the interests of the “nation” of America.

    The U.N. has not opposed and, in fact, has facilitated the release of “China Flu, 2019” and Putin’s attack on Ukraine and Europe as the opening salvos of WWIII.

    Evict the U.N. from New York, expel the U.N. from the U.S., and stop all American funding of the U.N.

    The E.U., Great Britain and Romania must immediately establish a discrete, provisional, “European” no-fly zone over Ukraine.

      1. REGARDING ABOVE:

        This is NOT Paul C. Schulte, the longtime commenter that many of us remember from a few years back. This Schulte is just another puppet of the blog stooge.

        1. Anonynmous – I AM the old Paul C. Schulte, sorry you are unable to recognize me.

    1. People often forget that there is a certain moral obligation on governments to spend taxed money on the welfare of the people being taxed. Not on the welfare of others, that is for charities. Government is by the people, for the people, not by the people for someone else. So unless the taxed country or one of its allies (in a formal sense) is under attack, then money spent on supplying a foreign country with arms is, in my view, misappropriation of the people’s money. The rare exception being that some significant benefit to the taxed people is being obtained by the supplying country as a result of the expenditure. In the case of Ukraine, I have my doubts.

  3. Only someone who deludes themselves or is ignorant believes that NATO is “weak, afraid, and willing to do no more than provide lip service outrage in defense of Ukraine,” since both NATO and non-NATO countries are already doing a great deal to help Ukraine and punish Russia (providing offensive weapons and intelligence to Ukraine, enacting Russian financial sanctions, seizing oligarchs’ property, closing SWIFT to Russia, etc.)

    Putin sees the West through the lens of his desires and his dictatorship. But the world doesn’t have to join him in his distorted views. That is what you are doing when you falsely claim “there is no detriment or infliction of punishment on the perpetrator of the crimes.”

    1. This was submitted as a reply to Maj229 ‘s 12:36 PM comment. WordPress sometimes decouples replies from the comment that they were replying to, who knows why.

  4. While Turley’s article was an interesting exercise on the laws of armed conflict, it is meaningless to the actual events taking place in Ukraine. Russia, i.e., Putin, doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the laws of land warfare. Arguing whether or not foreign volunteers are covered are not covered by the Geneva Convention may give the good professor, and the readers who agree with him (and I do), a feeling of righteousness of thought (it doesn’t for me), it is a futile exercise when there is no detriment or infliction of punishment on the perpetrator of the crimes. Just like here where perpetrators of crimes are released after being arrested, only to go back out and commit additional crimes. When there is no consequences, there is no deterrence.

    The Geneva Convention, War Crimes, and how foreign volunteers who fight for Ukraine are not even a blip on his radar screen. He sees the western powers, i.e., NATO and the U.S. as weak, afraid, and willing to do no more than provide lip service outrage in defense of Ukraine, while still buying oil from him, which enables him to wage his war of aggression.

    1. We have loads of independent video of the destruction. And this is completely on Russia. No one provoked them. Russia wanted to take away the sovereign rights of to engage in international relations as an independent country. Russia did not get what they wanted and thus they invaded. Russia and Putin are war criminals and they need to be treated accordingly.

      1. Right, but all that evidence is irrelevant if Putin doesn’t care or believe anything will happen to him. Apparently he believes exactly that. Accusing him of war crimes, regardless of how justified it is, means nothing. Absent all out war against him/Russia, which he has threatened a nuclear response to, anything less is just background noise to him.

        1. We need to follow the spirit of the most just and fair constitution the world has ever seen, the US Constitution. We should pay particular heed to the Pledge Allegiance (An oath to follow it and said in schools before class) which ends with those most profound words: “with liberty and justice for ALL.” Lets first, first because justice begins at home, prosecute Bush and Blair for their illegal invasion of Iraq along with all the servicemen who knowingly obeyed the illegal orders , then go after Putin and his retinue. Only this way will we gain the respect of the world and the chance of lasting peace increased.

      2. I don’t think we can say that no-one has provoked him. We, in the west, fomented a right-wing revolution in a historically connected country on his border and then allowed (or even sent) the revolutionary government to attack those in Donbass who didn’t want to be a part of it. This government then wants to join NATO who can happily bring its forces onto the Russian border. I would say that was provocative. I doubt if the US would like it if Russia did it in Canada!!!

        1. Putin’s conduct in Ukraine was unjustified.
          All the mistakes we have made do not let Putin off the hook for a war of aggression

          That said Putin’s invasion of Ukraine was avoidable.
          Democrats have sought to do most everything they can to cause war between Russian and Ukraine for over a decade.

  5. The destruction of Ukraine is a result of NATO’s inflexible adherence to its own charter.
    Bending rules is a good thing if the result is good.
    Not bending rules is a bad thing if the result is bad.
    The result in Ukraine has been bad…very bad.
    A defensivie organization with more common sense and flexibility would have done
    a better job of preventing so much death and destruction.
    An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
    Now they will need a costly Marshall Plan to rebuild.
    Intervention could have prevented this costly rebuilding.

      1. Yes, Russia is the one that invaded Ukraine. Still, Biden is the one that financed the invasion with his policies especially causing Russia a windfall profit on gas. He also demonstrated weakness. Biden is more interested in CRT in the military than in having trained military men able to fight a war.

    1. No. Putin is the cause of the destruction of UKRAINE. He is dropping the bombs. He wants to bully the Ukraine and take it over and then he wants to bully all of Eastern Europe. Apologists like you need to experience living under Putin’s rule….of course you think you’ll on top. You won’t be. Putin is on top.

    2. Exactly: but that assumes that NATO actually wants peace. The EU is falling apart, as is much of the world, the old structures are crumbling. My view is that the powers that be want a war in Europe and in time to involve NATO: first it mixes everyone up creating a pan-European culture and reducing national identities. Secondly, it is more easy to create a single country out of a large number of countries that have overcome an adversary by working together than out of the same group who have been quarrelling with each other for the same length of time. (eg. Rome was founded from 26 states after beating Hannibal together). Thirdly, Europe and Russia were both growing economically: by getting them to fight each other, both become weaker and certain other countries remain the top dogs. With regards to Russia v Ukraine, the bratski narod – brotherly people are fighting each other and both are getting weaker. The Ukrainians think all will be well if Russia goes home. Well, that is when they will have to pay for the help they have received from the west. As the Russians say, “Free cheese is only in a mousetrap.”

  6. Mespo should be summarily executed for being a Putin sympathizer, just like Vichy France collaborators were.

    1. I rather thought I’d be executed for besting you in every intellectual dust up. At least then calling for my demise would have an honest motivation for you.

      BTW it looks like party time is over in the Ukrainian Capitol and the Russians are ready to decapitate the government.

      1. Mespo,

        Whatever you think.

        I mean, lots of people have to attempt to watch our mouths here.

        I don’t know this Anony’s history but ……….

        He/she is way out of line for this format.

        No doubt he doesn’t know that Putin knows Ukraine is the birthplace of Russian…. 1090 AD ? something , Cathryn the Great….

        That said , P Turley & Mark Levin seem to foolishly entertaining the thought of how great it’d be to Cause the nukes to fly.

        As of now I’m seeing reports of at least 11 Illegal Bio-Weapon, Gain Of Function , labs on or damn close to Russia’s borders, including in Ukraine, not counting the Illegal Bio-Weapons Biden/Lindsey Graham, McConnell, etc. are also funding/ running in the US.

        etc… in a run on rant…..

        In the meantime Draw & Quarter that Anony for the entertainment of the Crowd while we consider/investagate larger events? LOL;)

        1. Oky1:
          “That said , P Turley & Mark Levin seem to foolishly entertaining the thought of how great it’d be to Cause the nukes to fly.”
          *********************
          War seems heroic and glorious until the smoke clears and everything you value is gone. Then you get to wonder just why you put it all the line for an inter-Slavic squabble where neither side has clean knickers. I have no problem with any of these chickenhawks suiting up and forming their own Lincoln Brigade. Just leave me and mine out of it. Like that MMA fighter in Arkansas said the other day, “when they come for Arkansas, I’ll dig my boots in the ground and fight for everything I love, but I’m not going away to fight a war for the politicians.” Amen, brother. Oh and on this anonymous with the death threat, who cares? Another chicken I’ve fricasseed squawking. Want else is new?

  7. **OFF TOPIC QUESTION**
    I noticed each poster has a unique icon identifier (next to the poster name) given by the administrator when we sign up. It’s always the same never changes, that I know of. Some download their own, that’s pretty cool. I want Za Zau Pitts.

    Why do I bring this up? The poster known as “Anonymous” is always calling out posters as sock puppets and other expletives. If everyone has a unique identifier why is Anonymous, Deb, Independent Bob, An Old Guy and few others all the same?

    If Occam still has a sharp razor = same IP, same keyboard? Just asking.

    1. Answer: the icon is assigned by a company called Gravatar, and it is determined by the email address that’s given (an exception is for people who’ve created a Gravatar account, which allows them to download their own icon instead of having one assigned to them; but even then, it’s associated with an email address). If you don’t provide an email address, then the system assigns the gray and brown icon. That’s why the same avatar is assigned to the multiple people who post anonymously, Independent Bob, An Old Guy, etc.: none of us are providing an email address.

      1. Aninny – I like the way you use the description “us”. I’ll let it go, I never respond to your post’s anyway. How about you challenge posters here in a way we can all respect rather then the expletives and the sock puppets? If anyone is using multiple nome de plume they’re only fooling themselves. Try it out, you might find some of us would like to agree with you, maybe.

        1. Margot, it’s quite easy to discern that multiple people post anonymously: just read the diverse views and commenting styles. S. Meyer admits that he frequently posts anonymously. Do you seriously believe that he and I are the same person?

          I used to post under a fixed name and avatar, and it was the behavior of multiple right-wing commenters here who convinced me to post anonymously instead. Your opinions and false beliefs do not govern my choices.

          You aren’t even polite enough to say “thank you” for my having taken the time to answer your question; instead, you reply with insults. That says more about you than about me.

          1. “S. Meyer admits that he frequently posts anonymously. Do you seriously believe that he and I are the same person?”

            Anonymous the Stupid is not the same person as me. I post anonymously when I think the posts should be deleted rather than read to save others time. I’ll post under my specific icon when I respond to someone who is not stupid or if I have something specific to say.

            Don’t waste your time. Delete all anonymous postings without reading.

          1. Whether one is a troll or not doesn’t stop you from:

            a) claiming victimhood
            b) being a liar.

            Chose the answer based on your identity.

  8. Question for the Lefties here…..What should NATO and particularly President Biden do….what actions should they undertake….if the Russian’s cause a Nuclear Disaster at one or more of the many Ukraine Nuclear Power Plants to include Chernobyl and others?

    Is that legitimate justification for NATO Forces to engage in direct combat with Russian Forces involved in the Ukraine Invasion?

    If not….just where do you draw the Line on Russian War Crimes that would earn them the fame of starting World War III?

    1. Apologies not received and certainly not expected.

      This happened days ago with the prosecutors resigned. The story was Bragg did not see any eviddence of crime, and the Grand jury expiring, time to let it go.

      Keep this in mind with every bit of leaked evidence coming from the Jan 6 partisan investigation. The latest flury of leaks assured the masses tha evidence has been gathered, lots. 100 witnesses and with all of that the assured the people all was being forwarded to the DoJ. The Jan 6 committee said clearly that there may sufficient cause to charge some as yet undefined crime.

      President Trump has been proven repeatedly, by Democrats, as the cleanest politician in DC.

      1. Only a liar would say that “President Trump has been proven repeatedly, by Democrats, as the cleanest politician in DC.”

        1. How many investigations have turned up ZERO crimes? This includes violations of his civil rights, by state and federal governments. Even with fabricated evidence, and illegal surveillance.
          The facts are the State of New York, and the city of New York City, subpoenaed records and and empaneled grand jury, with no suspicion of a crime.

          1. With respect to whether or not he’s “clean,” you’re asking the wrong question. We know that he isn’t clean, because there’s public evidence that he isn’t clean. For example, we know that he withheld funds from Ukraine that had been approved by Congress, and he attempted to extort Zelenskyy into investigating a political rival in exchange for those funds — because we have a transcript of him doing it. We know that he appealed to Russia to illegally intervene in the 2016 election because he made that appeal publicly. We know that almost 2 dozen women have credibly accused him of sexual harassment and assault. We know he likely lied under oath in some of his responses to Mueller’s questions because the bipartisan SSCI report provides evidence that he made false statements about material issues and likely knew that his statements were false. We know that he made a false declaration on his Florida absentee ballot application, which is a crime in FL, even though he wasn’t charged. We know that he faced a multimillion dollar Trump University fraud suit and settled. We know that there are multiple open lawsuits against him. And this is only a partial list of the public evidence.

            If you believe him to be “clean” because he has not been convicted of any crimes, OK, but in that case, you’d also have to conclude that Biden is “clean” since he hasn’t been convicted of any crimes either.

            As for “no suspicion of a crime” in NY, you are lying. A crime is suspected. We know that because the Trump Organization and his CFO, Weisselberg, have already been charged with related crimes (criminal tax fraud, grand larceny). Also, the civil investigation at the state level exists because civil infractions can also make someone dirty.

            1. For example, we know that he withheld funds from Ukraine that had been approved by Congress

              The funds dispersal were paused by the President. The Funds were predicated on Ukraine having put in fraud procedures to assure the US there was no skim off the funds as has been past practice in Ukraine. That approval had been granted. But. President Trump asked the assessment be looked at again. Well within the Presidents Plenary powers. Plenary powers. You never have figured out that concept.

              The rest is similar stuff that you keep lying about. All has been answered multiple times.

              And the SSCI report is nothing but propaganda.

              The NY stuff is crumbling…..because evidence does not exist. and things like putting values on real estate to attain loans is not fraud or crime.

              1. Nothing there was a lie, nor have you provided any evidence to substantiate your allegation.

                You assert that the bipartisan SSCI report is “propaganda,” yet you provide zero evidence that any of the contents is false.

                We’ll eventually find out whether he did anything illegal in NY, just like we’ll eventually find out with the other open investigations and with the civil suits filed by citizens.

            2. Boy, is this guy off his rocker. Trump did what the law called for him to do and the money was released and there was no quid pro quo.

              Crimes are left to Biden. We all know that. We are all aware of the 10% rule.

            1. It’s quite common to investigate whether crimes have occurred. That’s the primary role of grand juries, for example. Why do you fail to understand the nature of criminal investigations?

              1. Not this time. This was a political witch hunt. Nothing more. For years nothing was found. Just a waste of time and millions of tax payers money.

                1. While our security forces focused on Trump with lies and deceit, they missed the obvious. They didn’t see what was going on in China and likely made the Wuhan virus worse for America than it would have been. The CIA and other groups that are supposed to protect America weren’t actively doing so at the time.
                  If correctly focused, such groups would have noted the change in China’s purchases, such as masks, and been alerted that something terrible was happening.

                  Additionally, they set the stage for a divided nation, weakening our country. Instead of pulling Russia away from China, the left moved it closer, creating a more dangerous world. That action led to Chinese-Russian agreements, and with the policies of the Biden administration, we now see war in Ukraine and likely a Chinese attack on Taiwan soon.

                  The damage done by the left to destroy political enemies is incalculable, something freedom-loving people would never consider doing.

        2. NUTCHACHA,

          How many guillotines do y’all have?

          John “Dudley Do-Right” Durham is going to need all you can round up!
          ________________________________________________________

          The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious crime in American political history.

          The co-conspirators are:

          Kevin Clinesmith, Bill Taylor, Eric Ciaramella, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Andrew Weissmann,

          James Comey, Christopher Wray, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Laycock, Kadzic, Sally Yates,

          James Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Sir Richard Dearlove,

          Christopher Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Alexander Downer, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper,

          Azra Turk, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Gina Haspel, Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power,

          Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Holder, Brazile, Sessions (patsy), Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, Obama,

          Joe Biden, James E. Boasberg, Emmet Sullivan, Gen. Milley, George Soros, John McCain,

          Marc Elias, Igor Danchenko, Fiona Hill, Charles H. Dolan, Jake Sullivan, Strobe Talbot,

          Cody Shear, Victoria Nuland, Ray “Red Hat” Epps, Don Berlin, Kathy Ruemmler, Rodney Joffe,

          Paul Vixie, L. Jean Camp et al.

            1. Merci beaucoup, Professeur.
              _______________________

              “Never were truer words spoken than some that were spoken to me…

              in 1876 by the late Prince Tcherkasky, when he said that Central Asia is to Russia ‘l’Orient de fantaisie’, while Turkey was ‘l’Orient serieux.'”

              – Sir M. E. Grant Duff
              _________________

              Novlangue ou absurdité?

              Vive la différence!

      2. Don’t call that “pig” “President”: this is an honorarium deserved by people who don’t cheat to get into office, who don’t blow up a successful economy, who don’t lie about a pandemic, who don’t brag about grabbing women, who don’t jail innocent children to punish their parents and who don’t foment an insurrection because they are a sore loser. Trump would have been prosecuted years ago if he hadn’t refused to cooperate with the Mueller investigation.

        1. Trump would have been prosecuted years ago if he hadn’t refused to cooperate with the Mueller investigation.

          That’s a child’s tantrum, from a child that cant even name a single crime.

          1. How about all of the crimes for which Flynn, Manafort and Sone were convicted? That’s a good start. It is a fact that your hero refused to cooperate with Mueller, and for this reason, was not, and never will be, exonerated.

            1. Natacha,

              Have you been or are continuing to be paid by the US Govt/Pharma to take the Deadly mRNA Death/Clot Shots, promote it or hide the deadly truth about them?

              Large parts of the true facts about the mRNA Shots has now been made Public by Pfizer/Modera/HHS…. There’s No Hiding Now for the Promoters.

              Why are all those that have been poisoned by those Deadly/Harmful Shots spoke out about how pissed they are by being Damaged???

            2. Flynn had the case dropped, Manafort was tried and convicted of activity, the Prosecutors took an old case off the shelf they refused to prosecute years earlier, Stone was a process crime, All text book political persecutions, by a corrupt DoJ

              1. Flynn’s case was only dropped because Trump pardoned him (perhaps you lost track of the details). Manafort and Stone were convicted by juries of crimes they’d committed, and then Trump pardoned them too.

                You think the DOJ was corrupt. I think Flynn, Manafort, and Stone were corrupt.

            3. Natacha, remember how Mueller, whose entire special counsel investigation hinged on the Steele dossier, did not know anything about said dossier? His words were, “it’s not my purview.”

              Why would he say that?

              Because it was a hoax, a lie, a conspiracy to take out Trump. And they were all in on it.

              1. No, the Special Counsel investigation did NOT “hinge on the Steele dossier.” It was opened because Trump fired Comey after Comey resisted Trump’s pressure to stop the investigation into why Flynn lied to Pence.

                1. The firing of Comey is not a cause.
                  Flynn’s conversation with Pence is not a cause.

                  Your mind is like a pretzel, so you don’t realize how you take relatively insignificant events and make them into crucial arguments that are part of your fiction.

                  There was a conspiracy of Democrats and the FBI, CIA and IRS headed by Clinton and Obama to remain in power undemocratically.

                  1. DOJ Inspector General Horowitz reported “AD Priestap’s exercise of discretion in opening the [Crossfire Hurricane] investigation was in compliance with Department and FBI policies, and we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced his decision.”
                    Trump fired Comey on 5/9/2017. Comey, who was a Republican, testified under oath that Trump told him “‘I hope you can let this [Flynn investigation] go.’ … I immediately prepared an unclassified memo of the conversation about Flynn and discussed the matter with FBI senior leadership. I had understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in December.”
                    Rosenstein, a Republican and a Trump appointee, appointed Mueller Special Counsel on 5/17/2017. Rosenstein testified under oath that “As a result of events that followed the departure of the FBI Director, I was concerned that the public would not have confidence in the investigation [into Russian election meddling] and that the Acting FBI Director was not the right person to lead it. I decided that appointing a Special Counsel was the best way to complete the investigation appropriately and promote public confidence in its conclusions.”

                    I couldn’t care less what your personal delusions about it are. As always, Meyer, your insults are a projection of your own faults onto others: “Your mind is like a pretzel, so you don’t realize how you take relatively insignificant events and make them into crucial arguments that are part of your fiction.”

                    Iowan was wrong when he claimed that the “entire special counsel investigation hinged on the Steele dossier.” The entire Special Counsel investigation did NOT hinge on the Steele dossier, and nothing you say will change the fact that Iowan was wrong about this.

                    1. Rosenstein said, “I was concerned that the public would not have confidence in the investigation [into Russian election meddling] and that the Acting FBI Director was not the right person to lead it. I decided that appointing a Special Counsel was the best way to complete the investigation appropriately and promote public confidence in its conclusions.”
                      _______________________________________

                      Guess what? NO ONE believes you. There is NO public confidence in any of it.

                      Guess what? There WAS Russian meddling and collusion during the campaigns and it came from Clinton and Democrats! But somehow, after 2 years of turning over every stone, Mueller could not find this connection.

                      It was all a lie. All of them are corrupt.

                    2. Anonymous – It appeared from the hearings that Mueller had no part in the investigation or the report. He was like a lost puppy.

                    3. Paul, I watched Mueller’s testimony, and I think your claim is way too extreme. He testified about decisions he made in both the investigation and the report. There were also decisions made by others, and he wasn’t nearly as on top of the details of the investigation and report as I think he should have been.

                      But your response is in some ways besides the point. Iowan falsely claimed that the “entire special counsel investigation hinged on the Steele dossier.” It did not, and that’s what I was responding to.

                      Whatever you believe about Mueller personally, the Special Counsel’s investigation — which involved multiple people — did not hinge on the Steele Dossier. As AG Horowitz noted,
                      the FBI opened Crossfire Hurricane on J ly 31, 2016, just days after its receipt of information from a Friendly Foreign Government (FFG) reporting that, in May 2016, during a meeting with the FFG, then Trump campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos “suggested the Trump team had received some kind of suggestion from Russia that it could assist this process with the anonymous re lease of information during the campaign that would be damaging to Mrs. Clinton (and President Obama).” The FBI Electronic Communication (EC) opening the Crossfire Hurricane investigation stated that, based on the FFG information, “this investigation is being opened to determine whether individual(s) associated with the Trump campaign are witting of and/or coordinating activities with the Government of Russia.” We did not find information in FBI or Department ECs, emails, or other documents, or through witness testimony, indicating that any information other than the FFG information was relied upon to predicate the opening of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

                      The Special Counsel’s investigation grew out of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. The Steele Dossier played a role in some of the Special Counsel’s investigation, but nowhere near its entirety, as should be clear to anyone who reads the Special Counsel’s report or any related reports (Horowitz’s, the Senate Intelligence Committee’s bipartisan report, …).

                    4. “this investigation is being opened to determine whether individual(s) associated with the Trump campaign are witting of and/or coordinating activities with the Government of Russia.”

                      The above statement is more proof that anonymous is cherry-picking. When it became public that Barbara Boxer’s driver was a Chinese spy, did the FBI open an investigation of Boxer?. When it became public that Schiff’s girlfriend was a spy, did they investigate Schiff? They did provide the spy the time to get out of the US.

                      The individual(s) was a distant part of Trump’s campaign. Papadopoulos has another story to tell, one of entrapment and illegal actions by officials hoping to bind up Trump. Other individuals tied to the Trump campaign were accused of never prosecuted actions when discovered and had no relation to the Trump campaign. Did they inform Trump like they did Boxer and Schiff? No. Why not?

                      They spied on Trump. Did they spy on Boxer or Schiff?

                      What they should have done was to inform Trump of what they found. That was not their purpose. They were trying to find ways of incriminating Trump and failed. They even used the Steel Dossier. The amazing thing is that we see ‘marital’ and family links to the players, the actors in the DOJ and the news media that delivered false data. We found links of spying attached to two powerful Democrats. We found links of potential corruption by the present President of the US and his son where payoffs were made by America’s enemies, particularly Burisma, which was Russian controlled. Let’s not forget the Clinton Russian connection to Uranium One and the money given to the Clintons or their foundation by the Russians or Chinese.

                    5. I started reading and immediately recognized that you do not think. It seems that you combine many tiny facts that lead in many directions and take the position that the assortment of non-dispositive information is better than individual solid facts of proof. That is how you think. Maybe I can change how you view some facts, but I can’t change how you think.

                      For those on the blog that do not realize it, you start at the conclusion you wish to draw and work backward, forgetting anything in the path that disputes your conclusion.

                      How do you do this? You do it with long links wasting people’s time because, more frequently than not, such links matter very little to the discussion at hand.

                      How do people know that? Sometimes you do not entirely read your links. Sometimes they are too old, and sometimes they disprove what you wish to say. To top all of this confusion, sometimes you provide more than one link, and the links don’t even agree.

                      When you provide 5,000 + links of lies by Trump, and another goes to those links and shows how a few don’t pertain, your reputation is ruined. You have done that many times.

                      You also provide a long list of meaningless information. No one will spend hours proving you wrong on so many different issues. That has been done on smaller issues, so one has to learn that what you say, for the most part, is not credible.

                      Though I could continue, I will end with you also are providing cherry-picked quotes where the surrounding information disputes your conclusions. That is what you have done today.

                      You have created your reputation, so one need not respond to your lack of evidence unless you, in your own words, demonstrate a direct line to a legitimate conclusion.

                      Anyone can judge me based on my name and icon. You are anonymous and one who uses multiple names to prevent another from proving how poor your judgment is.

                2. Right, and the president firing someone like Comey, for any reason at all — who would be replaced immediately by their deputy to continue whatever investigation was going on — is not justification for appointing a special counsel.

                  The whole thing was a hoax, a setup to take down Trump. They were all in on it.

                  Mueller spent half of his report talking about how Trump *may have* obstructed the investigation into *the crime of Russian collusion* based on information in the Steele dossier that was leaked all over the airwaves…. but somehow Mueller missed the *fact* that Clinton and Democrat operatives paid for the Steele dossier in order to frame Trump and were the ones doing the *actual colluding* with Russia.

                  That information was not in Mueller’s “purview.” Imagine that.

                  1. The “Steele Dossier” was not the impetus for the Mueller investigation. That’s been explained over and over again, but you disciples are immune to facts It began when an Australian diplomat reported a discussion he had with a member of Trump’s campaign who told him that Hillary’s server had been hacked. The Steele investigation was started by a Republican named Singer who opposed Trump’s nomination. When Trump got the nomination, the information obtained to date was given to the Clinton Campaign. No one “framed” Trump any more than Manafort, Flynn and Stone were framed. Trump is the biggest hoax we’ve ever seen in this country. He’s cheated to get what he wants his whole life. He cheated to get into Wharton by having a guy named Epstein take his SAT test. He cheats on his taxes. He cheats on his wives, he cheats in business dealings and he cheated to get into the White House. He tried to cheat his way into a second term by spreading the Big Lie. Trump refused to cooperate with Mueller, or he’d also be convicted of crimes. And, no, why would Mueller investigate the Steele Dossier, since that’s not why his investigation was started in the first place. And, why would Hillary’s campaign “collude” with Russia to spread lies about herself, which is what Trump’s campaign did? Its been proven that his campaign provided sensitive insider polling information on voters in certain swing states that they believed would be vulnerable to believing lies about Hillary. Why would she spread lies about herself?

                    1. Nothing has been “proven” against Trump. The opposite is true. See the Sussman indictment. See the Danchenko indictment.

                      Turley himself wrote back in 2018 about the origin of the dossier:

                      “In a surprising admission, the author of the controversial dossier used to secure the secret surveillance on Trump officials admitted that it was paid for by Clinton campaign as a type of insurance to challenge the election. At the same time, the reporter who helped break the story, Michael Isikoff now says that many of the specific allegations remain unproven and are likely false.

                      Steele stated in a declaration in a defamation case that the law firm Perkins Coie wanted to be able to challenge the results of the election based on the dossier. In an answer to interrogatories, Mr. Steele wrote: “Fusion’s immediate client was law firm Perkins Coie. It engaged Fusion to obtain information necessary for Perkins Coie LLP to provide legal advice on the potential impact of Russian involvement on the legal validity of the outcome of the 2016 US Presidential election. Based on that advice, parties such as the Democratic National Committee and HFACC Inc. (also known as ‘Hillary for America’) could consider steps they would be legally entitled to take to challenge the validity of the outcome of that election.”

        2. Natacha, that’s not very nice. I’ll bet Donald Trump doesn’t talk like that about you.

    2. If you were paying attention to the news, you’d already know that Dunne and Pomerantz resigned almost 2 weeks ago, and Susan Hoffinger has now been assigned to that investigation.

      If you were paying attention to the news, you’d also know that there are multiple investigations into Trump (not just the one you refer to) and multiple existing lawsuits involving Trump:
      https://www.justsecurity.org/75032/litigation-tracker-pending-criminal-and-civil-cases-against-donald-trump/ (last updated in mid-February so it doesn’t reflect the most recent changes in Bragg’s investigation)

      1. If you were paying attention you would notice that you say the same thing every time Trump is accused of something, found innocent or the case unravels.

        You would also note the political nature of the accusations, and that the cases were built on lies.

        There have been somewhere in the vicinity of a dozen major accusations. To date of the dozen you have been wrong 12 times and Never right.

        That is who this joker is. He goes by a name that clearly identifies his problem.

            1. You’re the Chihuahua, and all you know is how to run around people’s ankles, barking your impotent little bark.

                  1. Anonymous the Stupid, it is really stupid to admit that an “impotent little chihuahua bark” can cause your kingdom to come toppling down.

                    You make yourself sound like the fool you are. Thank you.

                    1. ATS, your impotent little chihuahua bark has no effect on anyone. LOL that you dream in your little chihuahua head about bringing down kingdoms.

                    2. ATS, you are trying to wordplay. That “impotent little chihuahua bark” has toppled your paper kingdom. You are left trying to glue it back together.

                      LOL

    3. The Manhattan case against Trump may not go forward, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with the case being brought by the NY Attorney General or federal prosecutors. What is there to apologize for? That you’re gullible enough to support a loser and crook like Trump? Actually, I AM sorry for this. I AM sorry that your hero praises Putin for starting a war with Ukraine, that yesterday, he suggested putting Chinese insignia on our aircraft and bombing Russians in Ukraine, that he’s so stupid and so pathetically needs to feel powerful that he would even suggest something like this that violates numerous US and international laws, and that no matter how many times he proves the wisdom of the majority of the US citizenry who rejected him twice, there are still people like you who will defend him to the hilt. That is truly something to be sorry about.

      1. Ah yes Natacha , your Trump Derangement Syndrome continues. You say we didn’t get him on RussiaGate. We didn’t get him on LoanGate but you just wait. There has to be something we can get him on you cry out. All of us who have posted on this forum for awhile recall that you said that RussiaGate was the real deal. You also have told us that Hunter’s laptop was not really Hunter’s laptop and was just Russian disinformation. Then you said that CRT was not a being taught in elementary schools. Now you say but, but, but, the walls will soon be closing in on Trump because of other pending cases. You will just have to excuse us if, due to your past history, we find ourselves not giving much credence to your machinations at the present time. Even when the evidence turns against you your whirling never stops. Drugs might help.

        1. As to Russia helping the loser cheat, I believe Dan Coats, former member of Congress, who was appointed by your hero as head of US Intelligence. I believe the report of the Republican Senate Committee that says Russia helped Trump cheat. The Hunter’s laptop scheme came from Rudy Giuliani, who came up with this idea to derail Biden during the second presidential debates after Trump flopped so badly in the first debate. I never said Russia had anything to do with it. Giuliani thought that if your hero came up with salacious accusations against Hunter, Biden would be knocked off his rhythm, but it failed, and Trump flopped again. CRT is not, according to every school official I’ve ever read, being taught in public schools below the university level. So, when you try to make a case against me, you flop just as badly as your hero.

          It is indeed the case that the actions of the Manhattan DA have nothing to do with the cases under investigation by the NY Attorney General or the feds. I was pointing this out to refute the victory lap you were attempting to take.

  9. Dear Mr. Turley! I always admire your unbiased view. You are a person who put law first and then emotions. How do you know that “Russia is now openly committing war crimes in attacking civilian areas with indiscriminate weapons and using prohibited weapons.” Do you trust CNN or other media? Don’t you think that they show bombed buildings in Donbass area and tell you that it’s done by Russians? How can you be so biased when it’s related to Russia? When you say Russian attack is “unprovoked and unjustified” I cannot agree. It’s Biden and his administration who provoked this war. Why to insist that it’s Ukraine’s choice to to be or not to be in NATO? I am sure you remember 1962/Cuba. It’s the same for Russia now. But Biden is ready to fight for Ukraine till the last Ukrainian. Just be unbiased and trust facts when they are available. US media and real facts are far away from each other. It’s about not only USA politics but international one too.

  10. The west and almost all democratic countries are too slow to react. Hesitation kills. You either go ALL IN or don’t at all. In the end, if you don’t go ALL IN, you in fact lower your chances of winning and increase the chances of LOSING. So, go ALL IN.

  11. The republicans committed major war crimes that were especially horrid. Mass torture and executions. Orwell fought for them but even he wrote about the horrors they committed. Please correct the record.

  12. Out of 7 billion people in the world, only about 60 million support Putin, and they are coerced into it, so the actual number is probably less.
    So he only has the support of 0.0085 of the world’s population.
    The other 0.9914 are against him.
    His goose is cooked.
    A billion of the world’s citizens should descend upon Russia with rifles.

  13. Do you really think Putin cares? He’s bombing Ukraine and targeting civilian targets.

  14. A million refugees, half of which are children.
    Putin staying in power with diplomacy should be out of the question at this point.
    Diplomacy is not a good thing if it keeps scoundrels and villains in power.
    War is a good thing if it destroys such scoundrels and villains.

    1. “Diplomacy is not a good thing if it keeps scoundrels and villains in power.
      War is a good thing if it destroys such scoundrels and villains.”
      ******************************
      I knew the Left was stupid but I had no idea they wore a Roman collar. Good guys unite! Drive out the evil! Oh and they are more than very happy to let the kids of the working class fight the wars of virtue, too!

  15. According to a tweet from Washington Post investigative reporter Josh Dawsey, the former president proposed using an American aircraft with the flag of China on them should enter Russian airspace and “bomb the sh*t out of Russia.”

    As Dawsey wrote, “Trump mused to donors that we should take our F-22 planes, ‘put the Chinese flag on them and bomb the shit out’ out of Russia. ‘And then we say, China did it, we didn’t do, China did it, and then they start fighting with each other and we sit back and watch.'”

    Alright Trumpist’s defend Trump’s statement….He said this to GOP donors Saturday night.

          1. Pro tip: just because I say “a Jew, an Italian and a horse walk into a bar,” doesn’t mean that actually saw a Jew, , an Italian and a horse walk into a bar.

            1. mespo – if a Jew, an Italiian and a horse do not walk into the bar, the joke fails. 😉 😉

    1. The Hill reported on the China Flag on F22 story. The Hill shows a tape of his remarks. Nowhere in the tape are F-22s mentioned. You can listen for yourself. https://thehill.com/policy/international/597044-trump-jokes-us-should-put-the-chinese-flag-on-f-22-fighter-jets-and-bomb. Fishhead keeps his nose in the air for stories that smell like his avatar. Fishhead sees the story but he doesn’t take the time to actually listen to Trumps statement. Newsweek reported the story with no tape of Trumps speech. If it stinks Fishhead will spread the smell.

    2. Sounds better than anything Dumbo Biden is doing. Biden is driving China and Russia together. Trump tried to drive them apart.

    3. Recall, Fishy, that Trump did not let this Ukraine invasion happen during his four years. Putin tried nothing. China was on notice. ISIS decimated. Peace was breaking out all over the middle east. Iran isolated. We were energy independent.

      ONE YEAR of Biden and it’s back to WAR. War is profitable, of course. Just one more reason the powers-that-be tried so hard to destroy Trump.

      If only we all knew what was really going on with Ukraine. I bet Hunter Biden knows. So does the Big Guy.

      1. You Trumpstes just blow my mind with your gullible willingness to believe anything and everything pro-Trump. Putin’s demands to Ukraine are very telling. One of his demands is that Ukrainians agree never to join NATO or the EU, and to let him keep the Crimea and certain areas of Ukraine. Putin fears NATO and the EU, so his when his useful idiot was smelling up our White House, Putin didn’t need to do anything, because Trump intended to pull the US out of NATO, which would severely weaken it. He also alienated our allies. In addition to bashing NATO, he also trash-talked the UN and the EU. Peace never “broke out” anywhere, either. Trump threw in the towel in Afghanistan, releasing 5,000 Taliban and drawing down our troops from 14,000 to 2,500, without negotiating for any ongoing presence or any airbase in Afghanistan. He didn’t fininsh the job, either. The Abraham Accords only formalized trade between Israel and UAE that was already happening. There was not “hot war” that was foiled because your fat hero was in office. Trump is a liar and a fool, and proves it constantly. The bulls*it about “China being on notice” is more of his narcissistic bluster. “On notice” of what–name-calling…empty threats? If any American bears responsibility for the Ukrainian invasion, it’s Trump, who has divided this country more than any other US President. The insurrection he caused sent a message that the US is weak because we’re fighting amongst ourselves, and we can no longer point with pride to the peaceful transfer of power that was a hallmark of American democracy. Putin was banking on our internal turmoil and Trump’s alienation of our allies when he invaded Ukraine, thinking that the US couldn’t pull together a unified resistance before he made it to Kyiv and killed Zelenskyy. Putin was wrong. That’s what Biden meant when he declared that “America is back”. Trump could never have pulled together our allies like Biden has because his big, fat ego would get in the way.

        1. You work for Act Blue to spread mis and disinfo don’t you?

          America is not “back.”

          War is back.
          Russia has invaded Ukraine. Last time it happened, Biden was VP.
          Afghanistan is now controlled by the Taliban with Americans and allies left behind.
          British Parliament held President Biden in contempt for his shameful withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan!
          America’s word cannot be depended on by anyone in the world.
          France recalled its ambassador.
          Two US Embassies were evacuated.

          Biden is STILL buying Russian oil while also begging some of the worst actors in the world for oil and refusing to unleash American oil!

          Gas is now over $4/gallon and quickly rising.
          Inflation is at a 40 year high and rising.
          Grocery prices are up 20% and rising.
          Home energy costs are now double and rising.

          America is in decline.
          F Joe Biden.

        2. “The Abraham Accords only formalized trade between Israel and UAE that was already happening.”

          Oh really? Is that all? Wrong again Natty.

          So that explains why then President Trump was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize not once, not twice, but three times.

          1. Your hero was “nominated” for the Nobel prize by friends of his who were probably paid. He tried to take credit for the overblown “Abraham Accords”, which were not peace agreements–just formalization of trade agreements, and only between UAE and Israel who were already trading, and not in conflict. It was actually Jared Kirschner who got the parties to sign, not your hero, who lies about the substance and significance of these agreements and who keeps trying to take credit for bringing peace to the Middle East. Getting nominated is easy. Winning is something else. The one you worship is insanely jealous that Barak Obama won. Getting nominated proves absolutely nothing. It’s kind of like Trump’s fake “Time Man of the Year” covers he displays at Mar A Lago. And, please, it is seriously offensive to call that one you worship “President”. He cheated. He was impeached twice. He started an insurrection because his fragile ego can’t accept the fact that the American public rejected him a second time. It’s hard to find one worst thing he’s done, but his praise of Putin as “genius”, and the invasion as “savvy” and “smart” come pretty close. Trump has proven he’s not very bright and ignorant of world history, but praising a murderer like Putin seriously crosses the line. His praise of Putin, along with that of Pompeo, are being used as propaganda. Putin is trying to get the Russian people to believe that even a former American president and Pompeo think he’s right to invade Ukraine and try to stop NATO. The Russian people, if enough of them stood up against him, could stop Putin. Once again, there’s blood on those tiny hands.

            1. Winning was easy for Barack Hussein Obama. All he had to do was…..literally…..nothing. Trump actually deserved the prize.

              Biden is president now. Everything that happens on his watch is his – including his Afghanistan disgrace. He owns all of it.

            2. Biden just made history! Today, gas prices set a new all-time high of $4.104/gal, surpassing the previous record of $4.103/gal. And they continue to rise.

              Yet President Biden tells us he is doing “everything he can” to lower energy costs for the American people. He feels our pain.

              Joe Biden is a Liar.

            3. That Ukraine impeachment of Trump was to cover up the Biden corruption in Ukraine. If we only knew what Hunter and the Big Guy know about Ukraine, eh?

        3. In just over one year in office President Biden, sitting in his fake White House ‘set,’ has been one of the most divisive and destructive presidents in modern history. That is a fact.

          It’s no wonder he only shows up for work about two days a week before flying back to his Delaware mansion hidden out of sight for days on end.

          And the pitiful thing is that the press hardly ever hears from the guy because he refuses to be questioned. But when we do hear from him, all he does is lie and divide. The man is a delusional failure as president.

          1. You are downright delusional. The most divisive and destructive occupant of the White House was Donald J. Trump, who never showed up for work earlier than 10:30. They had to dumb down the presidential daily briefings because Trump simply didn’t care, and mostly didn’t read them. He trashed out allies, NATO and the UN, because Putin, who helped get him elected, wanted him to. Biden works more hours than Trump ever did, constantly consults with our allies and Ukraine, and has never “hidden out of sight” for days on end. Biden and his team hold more news conferences than Trump ever dreamed of. And, the only one who “lies and divides” is Trump. He started an insurrection for God’s sake! You are the one who is delusional.

            1. “Biden works more hours than Trump ever did…”

              Hahahaha. Yeah no.

              Biden has never had a ‘real’ job his entire adult life other than hanging around Washington DC cashing in, selling his office, and making himself and his family filthy rich. He is lazy, corrupt, entitled, arrogant, nasty, and dumb. Everything he touches turns to sh*t.

            2. It was a Fedsurrection. The truth is coming out no matter how hard Pelosi tries to squash it.

              Trump got our NATO allies to finally start paying their share. The UN is corrupt as hell. Why would Putin want Trump in office when he can roll right over Biden and take whatever he wants? Putin knew to wait until the next guy was in office before he invaded.

            3. Remember when Afghanistan was turning into chaos and Biden, Blinken and Psaki were all on vacation? They were all ON VACATION!

              Biden and those who surround him are some of the most incompetent, unfathomably dumb, weak, lazy and scary people to be making the decisions that affect us all. America is in big trouble with these people at the helm. It is now obvious to the world.

            4. Here’s what the country and the whole world sees about the Biden administration: All of them, including Joe Biden, and especially Kamala Harris, are in way over their heads. And everyone is paying the price for it.

        4. “”The Abraham Accords only formalized trade between Israel and UAE that was already happening”

          That was only happening because of Trump. The accords are a written piece of paper documenting an agreement between two nations, not one, and Israel. Both Bahrain and the UAE are included in the Abraham Accords.

          Natacha is uninformed. Other agreements were made with other Middle Eastern nations, including but not limited to Saudi Arabia and Morocco. Trump brought peace to the area and the ability to settle the Palestinian question peacefully.

          Unfortunately, Biden’s policies caused war and are creating the groundwork for a bigger war that might involve nuclear weapons. That can lead to a world war.

          1. There was no war “in the area” for which your hero “brought peace”. The main source of conflict is Israel’s bullying of Palestinians, refusing to allow them a voice, taking over their terriroty, and it is still going on. The “Palestinian question” IS NOT SOLVED. Where the hell do you get your misinformation from? There were no warring parties that Trump, or, more correctly, Jared Kushner, brought together. The trading between Israel and UAE and Bahrain was happening before Trump ever took office. He had nothing to do with it, but he had to get Jared to get something on paper to make him look good. The “Abraham Accords” are a nothingburger–an insubstantial publicity stunt.

            1. “There was no war “in the area” for which your hero “brought peace.”

              That is right. Trump kept the peace, but (Biden Administration) May 10 hostilities resumed, and by May 12, 2021, the Palestinians launched 1,200 missiles at Israeli civilian populations.

              “The main source of conflict is Israel’s bullying of Palestinians,”

              It was the Palestinians under Hamas that launched the missiles. To you, that means nothing?

              “refusing to allow them a voice,”

              There are Arabs in the Knesset and on the Israeli Supreme Court.

              “taking over their terriroty, and it is still going on.”

              That is nonsense only repeated by those that do not know the history or international law. Jordan illegally occupied Judea and Samaria. Ask any unbiased international attorney, and they will confirm that.

              ‘The “Palestinian question” IS NOT SOLVED. Where the hell do you get your misinformation from?”

              I didn’t say the problem was solved, but Trump managed to go a long way to reduce the hostilities and move everyone toward permanent peace. You don’t seem aware of the law, so I will answer any of your questions if you wish.

              “There were no warring parties that Trump, or, more correctly, Jared Kushner, brought together. ”

              You don’t seem to know that 4 Arab nations broke ranks with the rest of the Arab world under Trump, joining Egypt and having full diplomatic relations with Israel. The UAE and Bahrain formally recognized Israel under Trump’s watch. All of this moved the region toward peace.

              “The trading between Israel and UAE and Bahrain was happening before Trump ever took office. He had nothing to do with it, but he had to get Jared to get something on paper to make him look good. The “Abraham Accords” are a nothingburger–an insubstantial publicity stunt.”

              It is the recognition that was the difficult point. They have always had some dealings but secretly.

              I will provide you with more information in another post. Let’s see if you can discuss the situation with facts. Many Arab nations have taken that step. When will you?

            2. Natacha, I want to clarify the law and the legality of Israel’s territorial borders.

              Much of the dispute involves a severe prejudice against the Jewish state for various reasons that I will explore based on history and the law.

              *The history before the British Mandate and the law:

              Jordan illegally occupied Judea/Samaria for 19 years. They did not have the backing of international law, but the world accepted the occupation.

              Israel cannot possibly be an occupier, for what would they be occupying? They would be occupying land that is legally theirs.

              How can that be? The international community created laws to protect the borders of all nations after the first world war.

              Those laws gave Israel sovereignty over the entire area of Israel, Judea and Samaria that I will detail later.

              But, there is history even before that. The Jewish people lived in that land for over 3,000 years, including the Jewish Kingdom that ruled over Judea and Samaria. That history and continuity make Israel’s claim far greater than any other, especially since no Arab, Palestinian state, or kingdom existed in that territory mandated to Israel.

              *How are borders decided?

              That takes us to 1917 and the subsequent creation of treaties to establish the legal basis for a sovereign nation’s border. The defeat of the Ottoman Empire and other countries created this need. How does one divide up the lands that the Ottoman Empire and other nations had conquered?

              Following WW1, the victors created The League of Nations in 1920. The world needed to oversee a system where nation-building took place in those lands that were former colonies of the defeated nations. The idea was that the victorious powers would not grab political power but create new nation-states overseeing those areas while they were being built.

              *The solution to the modern state:

              The solution was the mandate system. Palestine was one of those areas that had to be overseen while a modern nation-state was being created. This nation-state was made in the same fashion as others in the middle east and was considered the least problematic. There was very little value and no oil in the lands Mandated to Israel.

              Like everywhere else, the world under The League of Nations made a decision. In the case of the British Mandate, Palestine should be a home for the Jewish people.

              Why? As mentioned before, there were 3,000 years of continuous presence and connection to the land that no other group had. Therefore, the Jews had a legitimate right to ‘reconstitute’ a national home.

              If one argues against this decision, then one has to do the same against all the decisions that created the Middle East countries (along with countries all over the world.)

              Article 25 permitted, for convenience sake, a Mandate to be split into parts which the British immediately exercised. The British created Jordan, which lay west of the Jordan River. Has anyone questioned Jordan’s right to exist? The other part was left for the Jewish people. That part contained Judea/Samaria, later known as the West Bank, and all of Jerusalem.

              The British Mandate expired in 1948, and Israel declared its independence.

              *The aftermath:

              Upon Israel’s declaration of independence in 1948, the Arab states attacked the new nation. Judea/Samaria and all of Jerusalem were part of the sovereign territory of Israel. Fighting ceased, based on an armistice agreement where this half of the Mandate was divided again with a green marker pen. The fighting men of both sides agreed to withdraw to their sides of the green line.

              Jordan was now occupying additional land that was sovereign Israeli territory obtained through an act of war. That act of war never changed the legal boundaries constituting the border of Israel. Jordan was an illegal occupying force but was accepted the same way Russia illegally occupies Crimea today, against international law.

              *Enter the League of Nations and International agreements

              Israel’s territorial rights were guaranteed by treaties and agreements between the nations of the world and the League of Nations, as enumerated and partially explained in an earlier prior response.

              One has to ask themselves why those so prejudiced against Israel do not challenge the existence of Jordan? Wasn’t Jordan created under the same set of rules?

              Jordan was guilty of occupying the West Bank also based on those rules. Why weren’t they called illegal occupiers? Prejudice and antisemitism are two explanations. Of course, there are others, such as oil and personal power. Come WW2, and we see the entrance of the Nazis and Arabs like the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, all that wanted to exterminate the Jews.

              *Enter the UN

              There is so much history and duplicity that I haven’t written about and won’t at this time, but one has to cover just a bit about the claims based on actions occurring in the UN.

              The UN’s only binding powers involve the adoption of its budgets. They do not have international law-making abilities. One could say their abilities are similar to the American House passing a law but then following rules to make what they say legal (Senate and Presidential acceptance). To make things simple, that means the UN resolutions have no practical legality. They require the consent of the parties involved.

              However, some assume otherwise even though they will not apply the same rules to other nations. Why? Could prejudice and antisemitism be a reason?

              Rules are supposed to be applied the same to all nations. I wish some of those who hate Israel with such intensity understood what the Rule of Law means. Without that, despotism prevails.

              *One last point:

              Previously, I mentioned “uti posseditis juris.” What does that Latin phrase mean in the context of this discussion?

              According to international law, when a new country is created, its borders are the borders of the last geopolitical administrative unit in that area. That includes countries that are emerging from colonialism. The borders are those of the former colony. Though this might be arbitrary, it nonetheless reflects international law. The alternative would be that everything would be up for the taking, creating a volatile world environment. That is why this rule is applied in every other Mandate.

              *Just one more point. What are settlements?

              What are called settlements are Jewish civilian presence in an area previously illegally occupied by Jordan.

              Some people interpret Article 49 of the Geneva convention wrongfully and use that against Israeli families relocating to parts of Israel inside of Israel’s territorial boundaries. Since such relocation is within Israeli territory, there should be no complaint. Article 49 was written to prevent hostile nations (Germany in the 1930s) from sending large numbers of people into territory outside their territorial boundaries while moving those indigenous to the area elsewhere.

              Israeli citizens are moving individually from one legal place in Israel to another. This act is nothing more than Israeli citizens (Arab, Jew and Christian) moving from one city to another.

              Natacha, I hope this explanation helps clarify this for you. Please feel free to ask questions or for data that you wish.

            3. Natacha, I note that you don’t dispute the facts when presented with the facts. I was hoping you would read them and tell me why any of those facts are wrong. You didn’t, so I assume you agree with me and reject your prior opinion, or you realize that most of what you say is just talk based on an over-emotional personality.

              If you think anything is wrong, I can probably explain it to you or provide you with links to the essential documents that prove your ideas incorrect. If you do not avail yourself of such information or discussion, it means you wish to blow meaningless wind because the truth means nothing to you.

    4. What’s even more telling is that the donors thought he must be joking because even they knew: 1. Russians can identify US aircraft by the size, shape and other visual and audio cues; this has been true as long as we’ve had aircraft. Have you ever seen those charts that the US military used in WWII to identify aircraft, just by size and shape, which was intended to prevent downing an aircraft by friendly fire; so, just painting a Chinese flag wouldn’t even work in the first place; 2. the immense stupidity of even suggesting that we pit two nuclear nations against each other, which would risk starting a nuclear conflagration that would threaten all of Europe, and could spill over into the US.

      The thing is, he wasn’t joking. He really is that stupid. And yet, the disciples will continue to defend him.

  16. “The similarities to the Spanish Civil War are striking with the fascists controlling the skies, fielding advanced weaponry, and engaging in war crimes. ”
    ************************

    Okay, what are the war crimes? As I said on another thread:

    “The western press – and some here- breathlessly accuse Putin of “war crimes” but what exactly are they. Dying civilians? Fallen nuclear reactors? Bombing cities? All could or could not be based on a myriad of factors. Here’s a good nontechnical summary for those willing to learn and not merely vent:”
    https://nypost.com/2022/03/04/has-russia-commit-war-crimes-in-the-ukraine-war/

    1. I can’t say I can find my way back here to this thread in a week or so to address any comment.

      What’s a war crime?

      A war Crime is GW/Cheney’s people went into Iraq as part of what was pre-planed event.

      They shot over sh*t ph’ tons of Depleted Uranium (DU) rounds.

      Dr Doug Rokke, then in the US Military, & his crew were sent in later to clean up some of the DU pollution in Iraq.

      Soon after Rokke saw all of his guys falling ill & starting to dry off.

      Seeing what was going on Rokke went public with interviews on places like Infowars.

      Not long after that all of the crews & Rokke were dead from the DU/ US Mil.

      What’s a War Crime?

      Using something on a battle flied that can’t be cleaned up off the battle field when the war is over.

      But as some of us know Idiots like Bidens Crew/Klaus Schwab, BillGate/Soros & the rest of the Globo Homo Pedos & their banking supporters will 1st destroy the planet before that admit they’ve lost yet again against Jesus & humanity.

    1. Boycott US Biden Administration. Biden still buying Russian energy [after shutting down ours] and financing Russian military.

    2. Imagine how stupid you have to be to support the halt domestic energy production while going to Iran and Venezuela in the midst of a conflict with Russia (while still buying its oil).

      Mind-boggling.

      @davereaboi

      1. Joe Biden likes to say he graduated top of his law school class. The truth is that he graduated at the bottom of his class.

        Joe Biden is a dumb, mercenary, compromised politician whose policies are intentionally harming Americans while benefitting China and Russia. And now he is negotiating with Venezuela and Iran to buy their oil while blocking our own domestic production? Why is he doing this? It is NOT “cleaner” to buy foreign oil and gas than produce and export American energy.

        What Biden is doing to harm Americans is truly mind boggling. Biden is a traitor to his own country.

  17. She’ll Oil and. Gas is buying Putin’s products at a discount. I just posted a Ukrainian flag at a local shell station and left dog poop at their doorway.

Leave a Reply