Author: Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.

Text of Executive Summary: The Russian Federation has a highly centralized, authoritarian political system dominated by President Vladimir Putin.  The bicameral Federal Assembly consists of a directly elected lower house (State Duma) and an appointed upper house (Federation Council), both of which lack independence from the executive.  The 2018 presidential election and the September 19 State Duma elections were marked by accusations of government interference and manipulation of the electoral process, including the exclusion of meaningful opposition candidates.

The Ministry of Internal Affairs, Federal Security Service, Investigative Committee, Office of the Prosecutor General, and National Guard are responsible for law enforcement.  The Federal Security Service is responsible for state security, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism, as well as for fighting organized crime and corruption.  The national police force, under the Ministry of Internal Affairs, is responsible for combating all crime.  The National Guard assists the Federal Security Service’s Border Guard Service in securing borders, administers gun control, combats terrorism and organized crime, protects public order, and guards important state facilities.  The National Guard also participates in armed defense of the country’s territory in coordination with Ministry of Defense forces.  Except in rare cases, security forces generally report to civilian authorities.  National-level civilian authorities maintained, at best, limited control over security forces in the Republic of Chechnya, which are accountable only to the head of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov.  There were credible reports that members of the Russian security forces committed numerous human rights abuses.

The country’s occupation and purported annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula continued to affect the human rights situation there significantly and negatively.  The Russian government continued to arm, train, lead, and fight alongside Russia-led separatist forces in eastern Ukraine.  Authorities also conducted politically motivated arrests, detentions, and trials of Ukrainian citizens in Russia, many of whom claimed to have been tortured (see Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for Ukraine). Significant human rights issues included credible reports of:  extrajudicial killings and attempted extrajudicial killings, including of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex persons in Chechnya by local government authorities; enforced disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities; pervasive torture by government law enforcement officers that sometimes resulted in death and occasionally involved sexual violence or punitive psychiatric incarceration; harsh and life-threatening conditions in prisons; arbitrary arrest and detention; political and religious prisoners and detainees; politically motivated reprisals against individuals located outside the country; severe arbitrary interference with privacy; severe suppression of freedom of expression and media, including violence against journalists and the use of “antiextremism” and other laws to prosecute peaceful dissent and religious minorities; severe restrictions on internet freedom; severe suppression of the freedom of peaceful assembly; severe suppression of freedom of association, including overly restrictive laws on “foreign agents” and “undesirable foreign organizations”; severe restrictions of religious freedom; refoulement of refugees; inability of citizens to change their government peacefully through free and fair elections; severe limits on participation in the political process, including restrictions on opposition candidates’ ability to seek public office and conduct political campaigns, and on the ability of civil society to monitor election processes; widespread corruption at all levels and in all branches of government; serious government restrictions on and harassment of domestic and international human rights organizations; lack of investigation of and accountability for gender-based violence and violence against women; trafficking in persons; crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting persons with disabilities, members of ethnic and religious minorities, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, and queer person

Leaking information strategically is an area of expertise in which the Chinese regime excels. This week, while most military analysts were busy deciphering events in Russia’s war in Ukraine, Beijing cold-launched a new, anti-ship ballistic missile that appears to be a game-changer in the overall development of Chinese naval weapons systems and spread video images across the Internet. Unlike the country’s standard land-based, anti-ship ballistic missile capabilities, China’s advanced PLAN Type 055 destroyer appears capable of launching this new missile from the close confines of the ship’s Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells. According to the publication, The War Zone, “Layering in even short-range anti-ship ballistic missiles with air-breathing anti-ship cruise missiles would complicate even the most advanced naval adversary’s ability to defend itself.” 

This launch occurred during the same week Washington announced a change in the US’ naval fleet architecture that will impact, according to the US Congressional Research Service, “the given level of overall fleet capability, so as to fit within expected future Navy budgets.” US navy force structure and shipbuilding plans remain vague after the 10-year mark and analysts say the budget plan is unlikely to fully meets US needs. To date, the Navy has not yet submitted an FY2023 30-year (FY2023-FY2052) shipbuilding plan despite statements from the Biden Administration that it will do so. In contrast, China’s President Xi Jinping labels his country’s defense spending a ”top priority” and releases information that point to advances in China’s force strength. The Chinese defense budget this year represents a 7.1% increase in real spending over last year. 

“It is worth noting that a number of very-high-speed Chinese anti-ship cruise missile designs have emerged in recent years,” according to Tyler Rogoway of Defense One. In contrast, the US Navy is investigating whether it is possible to keep some Nimitz-class carrier operational longer to stretch the budget. DOD has yet to accurately define the specifics of its 30-year pipeline of new ships needed to maintain the fleet. 

Earlier this week, another video began circulating on social media sites providing an unprecedented view of a Chinese Xian H-6N bomber carrying an air-launched anti-ship missile (ASBM). The large centerline missile it was carrying appears to be related to the YJ-21 (Eagle Strike 21) ballistic weapon. It is a good indication that Beijing is moving forward with advanced weapons capable of supporting its long-range strategic missions to expand China’s maritime domain while in Washington the US defense budget is seen lagging behind in new technologies and advances in ship-building. The ASBM is part of China’s anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) strategy that can extend China air power approximately 900 miles off shore and provide its PLAAF pilots the option using a “carrier killer” hypersonic missile to attack moving warships at a steep angle of descent that it difficult to repel. Together, this week’s “leaks” by China strongly suggest that that US carrier groups will now need to remain farther from Chinese shores, making US fighter planes useless. What remains uncertain is the quality of China’s targeting capabilities, although US sources estimate that China has been working on the issue for more than a decade. “If China is… pursuing an air-launched hypersonic missile, such as a DF-17 mated to the H-6N, that would parallel similar developments in the United States,” according to Thomas Newdick, writing in “the War Zone.” China’s leadership appears ready to bring key enemy installations within its striking range and is confident enough to let the West know it. Xi Jinping is a strategic thinker and recognizes when and how to manipulate the news to magnify its impact. At a time when political elites and the general citizenry in the West are watching Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine with trepidation, Beijing exhibited technological advances that are likely intended to further challenge US military dominance and increase stress on Western military planners already concerned over Russian actions in Ukraine the speed of advanced military developments in China in recent years. 

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) party seeks to control information technology as a means to shape and censor the communications and opinions of its own people, as well as the communications of individuals beyond China’s borders.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department. She currently teaches at a major university.

The news is filled with horrific images of the physical destruction of Ukraine by Russian troops and missiles. What is missing from the picture is the untold story of the battle inside the cyber and information domains. US intelligence officials have known that the Kremlin has been using “soft” and “hard” tactics to target Ukrainian military, government, and private sites for years. Russia’s attacks on the sovereign nation’s critical infrastructure, including government websites, affiliated organizations, media, and critical financial infrastructure have intensified since the start of President Putin’s current “special military operation,” according to Jamestown Foundation’s Alla Hurka. The Security Service of Ukraine (SSU) announced in late March its “cyber units managed to shut down an inter-regional network of five enemy bot farms with the capacity to direct over 100,000 fake social media accounts,” according to Hurka. The Kremlin is using this invisible bot army to support the war in Ukraine with a highly organized and unprecedented disinformation campaign.

One goal of the cyber attacks is to spread disinformation across a wide sector of the Ukrainian population to incite panic and disrupt the country’s effort to combat Russian aggression. Stories include false narratives about Ukraine’s top leadership. A series of fallacious reports suggested President Zelensky fled the country with his family, leaving the citizenry to fend for themselves. Another reportedly provided false data on the morale of Ukrainian troops indicating they were defecting and soon would be defeated by superior Russian forces. Another provided information that Ukraine over-inflated the number of civilians killed in the country. Repeating the pattern casts doubts into the minds of civilians in Ukraine and in other countries, including the United States. Social media accounts also are filled with suggestions by Russian trolls that “the West doesn’t really know what is happening” or the identity of the bad guys. The SSU acknowledged in a recent report that the network is “supervised by the Russian special services, used various social networks, including those banned in Ukraine, to carry out large-scale information sabotage activities to destabilize the socio-political situation in various regions of Ukraine.”

In a physical search of the bot farm sites conducting cyber warfare, law enforcement officers seized numerous pieces of special equipment, including around “100 GMS gateways, 10,000 mobile phone SIM cards of various mobile operators used to disguise the activities of the bot farms, and an unspecified number of computers and laptops used to run cyber operations,” according to the SSU. Three weeks ago, Ukraine eliminated a bot farm that sent 5,000 cellphone text messages to Ukrainian military and law enforcement personnel pushing them to defect and surrender to the Russians. As fast as Ukraine can identify and neutralize a Russian cyber campaign another springs up to replace it. Artem Dekhtyarenko, a spokesman for the Ukrainian Security Service said “The most interesting thing is that all the equipment was placed in Dnipropetrovsk region, but remotely controlled from the Russian Federation.” 

More than 7,000 cell phones inside Russia are part of Putin’s ongoing disinformation campaign and includes apps such as Telegram, WhatsApp, Facebook, and Viber. The SSU points out in a recent report that one bot farm can create over 10,000 fake social media accounts in a month using Russian domains forbidden in Ukraine, while also conducting attacks on systems of critical infrastructure facilities, sending malware phishing emails and executing distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks on government information resources. Farid Safarov, Ukraine’s deputy minister of energy for digital development, digital transformation, and digitization, estimated that the number of cyberattacks against Ukraine’s energy sector during the first 40 days of the ongoing war exceeded 200,000. Hurka points out that during the week of April 4 alone, there were “approximately 20,000 cybersecurity incidents.” Over 50 of the recorded attacks were directed at Ukraine’s electric supply. In 2021, there were only two such recorded attempts by foreign entities. These attacks aimed to damage high-voltage electrical substations, computers, and networking equipment. 

In response, the Ukrainian government’s Ministry of Digital Transformation and the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy recently created an all volunteer “Internet Army,” which includes an international IT legion of more than 310,000 Ukrainian and foreign IT professionals willing to go to war against Russian’s cyber forces. To join the army, a volunteer goes on Telegram or Discord channels where tasks are assigned. One also can use Viber, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Reddit to help pressure Russian outlets and urge companies to withdraw doing business in Russia. While kinetic warfare rages on the ground in Ukraine, an invisible army is hard at work opposing Putin’s special military operation in cyber space.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept. and teaches at a major university

The Biden defense budget ignores the reality of the soaring military threat facing America, warns Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), Lead Republican of the House Armed Services Committee.

The Alabama Republican He emphasized that “Many of us here, regardless of party, believe we should respond with increased investment in the men and women of our armed forces, and the modernization of our conventional and strategic deterrent. Unfortunately, the President doesn’t see things the same way. For the second year in a row, the President sent us a budget that fails to keep pace with China or Russia. And, yet again, it fails to keep pace with inflation. Despite predictions from leading economists that record high inflation will endure, the White House directed the Pentagon to assume a rate of only 2.2 percent in FY23. We’re at 8 percent now. To average 2.2 percent next year, we would require months of unprecedented record low inflation. Everyone knows that’s not going to happen.  That means nearly every dollar of increase in this budget will be eaten by inflation.  Very little if anything will be left over to modernize and grow capability.”

Rogers is joined by Rob Whittman, (R-Va.), who notes that “We are at a critical juncture in our nation’s history; we must decide if the United States will retain its global primacy, or if we will concede our position to the malign intent of Communist China.”

John Donelly, writing for Roll Call, notes that “Stunning and dangerous cuts would result if the Biden defense budget is approved. Despite predictions from leading economists that record high inflation will endure, the White House directed the Pentagon to assume a rate of only 2.2 percent in FY23. We’re at 8 percent now. To average 2.2 percent next year, we would require months of unprecedented record low inflation. Everyone knows that’s not going to happen.  That means nearly every dollar of increase in this budget will be eaten by inflation.  Very little if anything will be left over to modernize and grow capability.”

The Navy would have company in the race to the bottom.  An Army Times analysis found that “Amid a major land war in Europe, the Biden administration’s fiscal 2023 budget request would temporarily shrink the active duty Army to 473,000 troops if enacted by Congress. That could leave the service at its smallest size since 1940, when it had just over 269,000 troops. Other historical lows include an authorized 476,000 in fiscal 2017 and nearly 478,000 in fiscal 1999 at the nadir of the post-Cold War drawdown.”

The Air Force Association (AFA)   outlines the issue for its service. “The President’s fiscal 2023 budget request falls far short of national defense strategy requirements and will force the Air Force to surrender critical capability while foregoing new weapons purchases. This is particularly precarious as China rapidly increases both capability and capacity, the Air Force Association said after reviewing public budget documents. The AFA called for bipartisan support for increased investment in the Air and Space Forces to ensure the two most indispensable, flexible, and lethal elements of U.S. military force are strengthened in the face of growing threats from China and increasing risk in Europe to our NATO allies in the face of Russian aggression in Ukraine.”

The U.S. military recently endured dramatically inadequate funding during the Obama Administration.  The Obama cuts and the Biden inadequate funding come   on top of the dramatic cuts the military suffered.  Unfortunately, since the USSR’s fall, the threats against the U.S. expanded as Putin restored his military and China become a major threat.

All this shouldn’t come as a surprise.  Candidate Biden campaigned on a a promise to cut defense spending. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, describes Biden’s proposed budget, reflects “the world he wishes for — but not the world as it is.”

Photo: Fast attack missile boats attached to a group with the navy under the PLA Eastern Theater Command steam in formation during a maritime training exercise in waters of the East China Sea on February 22, 2022. (eng.chinamil.com.cn/Photo by Du Kecheng)

The original Iran nuclear deal was seriously flawed. The new version currently under consideration is even worse.

Robert Satloff, writing for the Washington Institute, described the first deal:

“Originally, diplomacy with Iran was supposed to be based on a straight trade-off: America (and its partners) would end nuclear-related sanctions while Iran would end its domestic nuclear program. Then, the United States conceded to Iran the right to have its own nuclear reactors but not to develop indigenous capacity to enrich nuclear fuel, which doubles as the core element of nuclear weapons. Then, the United States conceded to Iran the right to enrich but under strict limitations. Then, the United States conceded to Iran that the strict limitations on enrichment would expire at a certain point in the future. The result was that a deal originally conceived as trading sanctions relief for Iran’s nuclear program evolved, over time, into a deal trading sanctions relief for time-limited restrictions on Iran’s ambitious nuclear plans.”

The Obama White House glossed over the fact that the inspection regime was going to be inadequate, and that Iran would be free to develop nuclear weapons in about a decade. Since the deal was completed, Iran’s supposedly forbidden testing of extended range missiles proceeded unchallenged. Obama lied—there is no gentler way of stating this—about a “moderate” faction in the Tehran regime. It lied about the fact that Obama had a long-standing desire to conclude a deal, that would lift the economic sanctions on Iran.

Even news outlets normally favorable towards the White House criticized Obama’s deception. The NY Daily News, a pro-Democrat outlet, editorialized: “Iranian propaganda went as the mullahs hoped for relief from economic sanctions via a nuclear deal with the U.S. and Western powers. Why would anyone believe such obvious nonsense? One reason — in fact the key reason — is that Obama joined Iran in knowingly peddling the same false propaganda to America”

The Trump Administration rejected the measure due its lack of merit.

Then came its replacement, now being pursued by President Biden.  An open letter, signed by 46 retired generals and admirals, outlines the reason it is even worse than the already terrible version it replaces.

They note that the new deal is shorter and weaker than the original 2015 agreement. It could leave Iran twice as close to a nuclear weapon as its predecessor. It enables the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism to cast its own nuclear shadow over the Middle East. It is poised to instantly fuel explosive Iranian aggression and pave Iran’s path to become a nuclear power.

It will (foolishly) pay Russia to store Iran’s enriched uranium. It does not prohibit Iran’s development of intercontinental ballistic missiles, allowing it to acquire the means to target the American homeland with nuclear weapons.  It would, if Iranian demands are met, take the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Iran’s main terrorist wing responsible for the deaths of at least 600 American troops—off the U.S. terrorist list. It lifts sanctions, earning hundreds of billions of dollars for the radical regime in Tehran to fuel greater aggression against U.S. soldiers and our allies in the region.

The 46 retired top officers stated that “In Ukraine, we are bearing witness to the horrors of a country ruthlessly attacking its neighbor and, by brandishing its nuclear weapons, forcing the rest of the world largely to stand on the sidelines. The new Iran deal currently being negotiated, which Russia has played a central role in crafting, will enable the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism to cast its own nuclear shadow over the Middle East.”

Illustration: Pixabay

1. U.S. State Dept. Statements on Ukraine

The United States, along with its allies and partners, works to ensure the Russian Federation and the Lukashenka regime in Belarus pay a severe economic and diplomatic price for their unprovoked aggression against Ukraine.  
 
With our allies and partners, we have taken these actions: 

• Applied powerful sanctions on Russia’s largest financial institutions and its sovereign wealth fund. 
• Made it difficult for Russia to find funding for its war beyond its borders. 
• Choked off Russian imports of key technologies. 
• Targeted the financial networks and assets of Russian and Belarusian elites, including President Putin and members of his security council. 

There is nowhere for individuals or entities who support the unprovoked war to hide. We already see the effects of these actions, as the Russian and Belarusian economies stumble. With our allies and partners, we will continue to take strong economic and diplomatic actions. 

We are also working with partners, including the Ukrainian authorities and international institutions, to pursue justice and accountability for war crimes and other atrocities committed in Ukraine. We will use every tool available to promote accountability for these acts, including criminal prosecutions.

Analyzing a fake Kremlin video used to justify war with Ukraine

The Kremlin is claiming the atrocities committed by Russian forces in Bucha, Ukraine — documented by satellite imagery — were a provocation staged by the West. Here’s what a staged provocation really looks like.

Evidence suggests Russia used a staged incident to justify its full-scale further invasion of Ukraine on February 24.

The Kremlin has ramped up its disinformation campaign since Russia began its unprovoked war with Ukraine, but there were plenty of false claims leading up to it.

One video was so suspicious — and so gruesome — that it drew scrutiny from Bellingcat, a Netherlands-based investigative journalism group that specializes in fact-checking and open-source intelligence.

The incident in question allegedly took place on a highway between Donetsk and Horlivka on February 22 at approximately 5 a.m. local time. An improvised explosive device (IED) was reported to have detonated on the highway, destroying a van and a car.

The video showed three charred bodies from two vehicles, apparently from a roadside bomb, in the Donbas region, which Russia-backed forces have controlled since 2014, when Russia first invaded Ukraine.

Using state media to spread the falsehoods

Vladimir Putin loyalists and pro-Kremlin media reported that Ukrainian armed forces were behind the alleged IED and targeted a military commander affiliated with the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) in eastern Ukraine.

Among those posting the images on social media and the claim: the state-controlled daily newspaper Izvestiya and the pro-Kremlin DNR People’s Militia.

Bellingcat relied on an explosive weapons expert and a forensic pathologist during its investigation, and what they saw didn’t add up.

• Neither vehicle had number plates.
• Neither vehicle appeared to have moved from the point of detonation, suggesting they were both static when the IED detonated.
• The damage seen on both vehicles was inconsistent with an IED blast.

“In my opinion the images do not represent credible scenario,” Chris Cobb-Smith, an explosive weapons expert and director of Chiron Resources, told Bellingcat. “I believe the incident has been manufactured to give the appearance of an IED blast in which three individuals died.”

Relying on experts

The injuries to the skulls also appeared inconsistent with an IED blast. The skull of one of the bodies appeared to have clear cuts on both sides of the head, cleanly separating the skull cap from the rest of the skull.

Bellingcat looked at open sources and discovered these cuts are more consistent with a procedure carried out during an autopsy. The organization asked Lawrence Owens with the University of Winchester in England to analyze the images. He concluded the people were already deceased before their bodies were placed in the vehicles.

Bellingcat’s final report concludes that the incident involved “the staged use of cadavers and likely faked IED damage.”

The bottom line: the Kremlin used a fake story about a fake IED that didn’t kill anyone to drum up support back in Russia for a war it provoked. The war has killed more than 1,600 civilians and injured more than 2,000 since it was launched more than a month ago.

Xi Jinping’s draconian “Zero Covid” policy is in place as Covid cases in Shanghai top 25,000 on Tuesday. The strict, extended lockdown is taking on new meaning in cities across the country this month as President Xi continues his April 5 order effectively shutting down the Shanghai metropolis, among other major urban areas. The unintended consequences of Xi’s action are reverberating among a population already reeling from global supply chain issues. Children are being separated from parents. Truckers who regularly haul food into Shanghai are refusing to travel into the city over concerns they will be caught in a net and unable to leave once inside it. Many drivers are refusing to make any urban deliveries, leaving residents to scramble for goods and scarce staples in local food stores. Authorities imposed a “two-phase lockdown on its 25 million residents” and extended an existing lockdown in eastern neighborhoods with positive cases by up to nine days, according to Laura He, writing for CNN Business. People who once trusted the government in Beijing to look out for their welfare are increasingly suspicious of Xi’s ability to handle the latest Covid outbreak.

Shanghai, the hardest hit city, is an important container shipping and logistics hub that supplies goods throughout the country. Shànghǎi Gǎng (上海港),the city’s deep-water seaport, is considered the world’s fastest growing port facility and a center for foreign trade with China. It serves as an important link in China’s 21^st century Maritime Silk Road that connects the country to Singapore. This week more than 300 ships are stalled waiting to discharge their cargo. According to Maersk, one of the world’s largest shipping companies, “Trucking service in and out [of] Shanghai will be severely impacted by 30% due to a full lockdown on Shanghai’s Pudong and Puxi areas.” Beijing commonly lies about the country’s economic data. It will be harder now as the government can’t easily conceal the lack of critical food supplies its urban residents need to survive. 

The Chinese government is projecting a 5.5% national growth rate for 2022. As of April, according to Zhuang Pinghui of the South China Morning Post, “Strict pandemic measures across the country could cost US $46 billion per month in lost economic output as social acceptance also wears thin.” It appears that Beijing “will need to fudge its numbers,” according to one analyst, “to reach its target.” People who have not been free to leave their homes in a month are openly angry at the government. Medical care issues, according to Foreign Policy’s James Palmer, are so acute that foreign consulates in Shanghai are relocating staff outside the city. Yet despite over 150,000 recorded Covid cases in the city, China has not reported a single death, casting further doubt on the CCP leadership’s credibility. Palm points out that “One underrated factor shaping the impact of these lockdowns is how many Chinese still live in collective housing. Students are trapped in six-person dorms, migrant workers in temporary shelters at building sites, and waiters or shop staff in employer-provided apartments. Along with limited space and lack of freezers, that has limited the ability of households to effectively stockpile resources for lockdowns.”

The combined pressures are creating and exposing cracks in the image China intends to project to the world. Domestically, rifts are opening between the citizenry and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). This places Xi Jinping and the CCP leadership in a difficult balancing act between keeping his promise of a Zero Covid policy in place and reducing the tensions among the populace inside China. If Xi abandons his program, he will be viewed as failing to keep his word. In a society still adhering to a culture based on “saving face,” Xi’s legacy as a paramount leader is at risk is he misses this year’s GDP figures or allows the virus to spread. The Covid pandemic, coupled with a domestic economic downturn and Xi Jinping’s close relationship with Vladimir Putin, may be enough to raise questions about the stability and legitimacy of the CCP leadership and Xi Jinping himself. That could portend more pressive measures ahead of the people of China.

Photo: Shanghai (Pixabay)

In December of 2020, after the election of his father, “Hunter Biden...announced…that federal prosecutors in Delaware (were) investigating his ‘tax affairs’…looking into Hunter’s business dealings in China and elsewhere, including scrutinizing whether he may have committed tax crimes stemming from those overseas business dealings.” 

That investigation dated back to 2018, and “has expanded to include potential violations of foreign lobbying and money laundering laws. Prosecutors called on Biden’s associates and other witnesses to testify before a grand jury…on whether Biden broke the law through his business relationships in Ukraine, China, Kazakhstan, and elsewhere…”

Once the existence of the laptop was revealed, “(t)he FBI subpoenaed (that) laptop and hard drive…in connection with (the above-described) money laundering investigation, according to a new report…’The FBI cannot open a case without predication, so they believed there was predication for criminal activity,’ a government official told Fox News. ‘This means there was sufficient evidence to believe that there was criminal conduct…(i)f a criminal case was opened and subpoenas were issued, that means there is a high likelihood that both the laptop and hard drive contain fruits of criminal activity,” the official said.” 

As noted with undisguised glee by the New York Post, “(i)n the heat of the presidential race of 2020, the (New York) Times never missed a chance to cast doubt on the laptop, saying the information was ‘purported’ and quoting a letter from former Democratic officials who claimed — with no evidence — that it was Russian disinformation. As recently as September 2021, the Times called the laptop ‘unsubstantiated’ in a news story…(t)hen…in passing, (The Times) notes that Hunter’s laptop is legitimate. ‘People familiar with the investigation said prosecutors had examined emails between Mr. Biden, Mr. Archer and others about Burisma and other foreign business activity,’ the Times writes. ‘Those emails were…from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation.’ Authenticated!!! You don’t say. You mean, when a newspaper actually does reporting on a topic and doesn’t just try to whitewash coverage for Joe Biden, it discovers it’s actually true?” 

There are several reasons the information contained in Hunter Biden’s laptop has been dismissed for so long.  Media support for Joe Biden (or more specifically, disdain for President Trump) is one probable answer; Left-leaning sentiment and support for Democratic policies and politicians by much of the legacy media is another.  There are also a variety of reasons for the sudden acceptance of the Hunter Biden story by media outlets who actively suppressed the initial revelation – among these, increased disappointment in the Biden Administration’s competence, and growing doubt in Biden’s personal capacity to fulfill the duties of his office.  Both of these issues are increasingly the subject of public outcry and dissatisfaction. 

But of more significance is the fact that the revelations of corruption contained in that laptop are now evidence in a federal investigation and Grand Jury presentation, which may lead to the indictment of the President’s son.  Even more important; the evidence gathered from that laptop points to the sins of the son involving the father.

As noted above, these investigations involve the Ukrainian business deal initially reported by the New York Post in 2019.  However, more recently, the focus has shifted to Hunter Biden’s activities in China.  “According to a report last week from The Washington Post, the president’s son signed a contract with an executive with the Chinese energy company CEFC in August 2017. According to the newspaper, ‘Over the course of 14 months, the Chinese energy conglomerate and its executives paid $4.8 million to entities controlled by Hunter Biden and his uncle, according to government records, court documents and newly disclosed bank statements, as well as emails contained on a copy of a laptop hard drive that purportedly once belonged to Hunter Biden.’ Hunter’s uncle James Biden is the president’s brother, and the contract in question, according to The Post, provided Hunter Biden a one-time retainer of $500,000, in addition to monthly stipends of $100,000 for him and $65,000 for his uncle… 

“As the report explains, CEFC, which is financed by Chinese government development banks, is tied to China’s Communist Party and linked to the People’s Liberation Army… Hunter Biden’s contract with CEFC is questionable not only because of the large sums involved in return for services that he appears ill-suited to provide, but also because of the characters it brought him in contact with…Hunter Biden was contacted by an intermediary looking to arrange a meeting between him and Ye Jianming, the chairman of CEFC. Ye had been the deputy secretary of the China Association for International Friendly Contact, which a 2011 U.S. congressional report called ‘a front’ for the People’s Liberation Army. CEFC may claim it’s a ‘private’ company, but when it comes to major Chinese entities, there’s no such thing as private and no way to politely decline the strong arm of the Chinese intelligence services.” 

In an email discovered on Hunter Biden’s laptop, “one of Hunter Biden’s business associates, James Gilliar, pitched the equity stakes for key players in a firm created for a joint venture with CEFC China Energy Co. in March 2017. It read, ’10 held by H for the big guy?,’ suggesting that this person would get 10 percent of the deal. Biden business partner Tony Bobulinski, who was brought in to structure the deal, publicly identified ‘the Big Guy’ as Joe Biden when the emails came to light in the run up to the 2020 election.” 

“Although the White House has disputed the email was a reference to Joe Biden,” according to the Daily Mail,  “others use the same moniker for him going as far back as 2013. A trade union lobbyist referred to President Biden as the ‘big guy’ when he emailed Hunter trying to arrange a meeting between his union boss and the then-vice president in 2014. And an executive at a wealth management firm used the moniker for Joe when he wrote to Hunter about the vice president’s appearance at a 2013 private club dinner in Delaware…. (a) witness testifying to a grand jury in Hunter’s probe was asked who the ‘big guy’ was in the Chinese deal, a source told the New York Post.” 

This matter is now in the hands of a federal Grand Jury.  It seems highly likely that Hunter Biden will be indicted for several counts of money laundering, tax fraud, and failure to register as a foreign agent charges.  Is it also possible that Joe Biden, the “big guy,” will at the very least be named an “unindicted co-conspirator,” if not indicted himself? 

If so, than Donald Trump was right again – Joe Biden is nothing more than another “corrupt politician.” 

Illustration: Pixabay

Judge John Wilson served on the bench in NYC.

Putin expected to spend a few days marching his troops into Kiev and then occupying the whole of Ukraine without much resistance from Ukrainian military forces. Some in Moscow’s political elite went so far as to argue that they would be welcomed there as heroes. It soon became apparent Putin’s “special military operation” was not going to be a simple or short one. As the days turned into weeks, and the weeks developed into months, Western military analysts began reevaluating the real strength of Russia’s military.

One analyst in Washington suggested this week that if Putin was unable to take Ukraine soon, Russian troops certainly could not win a future war against well-disciplined Finish or Swedish forces should Moscow alter plans and try instead to invade Scandinavia. Russian heavy military equipment also receives a failing grade as it is not holding up well on the battlefield. Ukrainian troops, many using donated Western guns, have destroyed large numbers of Russian armored vehicles and tanks and captured or killed several high-ranking Russian military officers. Recently captured Russian drones revealed that they did not contain advanced technology. Their imaging technology was unsophisticated and similar to that of a hand-held Cannon camera. Putin’s miscalculation of the readiness of his forces, the capability of the country’s military technology, and the reaction of the world to his war crimes, has destabilized the region and lad some to call this a post, post-WWII period leading into a pre-WWIII era. 

Putin’s options are narrowing. One unanswered question is: what is the Russian leader capable of doing if faced with the reality that he can’t win in Ukraine? He already is committing atrocities unseen since Hitler’s acts of genocide during WWII. One former US military analyst with an expertise in Russian affairs  suggested examining statements Putin made about his childhood. The Russian leader grew up in a housing project filled with rats, which he passed on a regular basis going to and from school. As he tells the story, one day he encountered a cornered rat facing certain demise. Putin says he learned then that a cornered rat will fight to the very end and its own death rather than be captured. That may be how Putin views the war in Ukraine today.

The Russian president has been unable to locate enough Ukrainians to stage even one small rally in support of Russian occupying forces. Teachers resigned en masse when ordered to change the language in which school children are educated from Ukrainian to Russian. In Melitopol some school directors resigned too, despite offers of bonuses to be paid in Russian denominated rubles, according to a report this week from the Jamestown Foundation. Despite the challenges, Putin appears like the cornered rat he recalled from his childhood, to willingly fight until the bitter end.

Forty-seven days into its invasion of Ukraine, Defense One says, “Russia is regrouping for another battle for the Donbas—and has named a Russian general known for his brutality as head of operations in Ukraine.” His name is Gen. Alexander Dvornikov. He also is known as “the Butcher of Syria” for the indiscriminate killing of civilians in Aleppo and Homs. 

Pentagon press secretary John Kirby says that “Sadly, we can all expect that the same brutal tactics, that same disregard for civilian life and civilian infrastructure, will probably continue as they now focus in a more geographically confined area in the Donbas” under Gen. Dvornikov.

Most analysts in Washington this week seem to agree that Russia is not retreating but simply reorganizing its forces to prepare for a new major assault. Last weekend satellite imagery indicated the massing of large Russian convoys along routes leading to the occupied Donbas region of Ukraine.

In a speech posted to his Facebook account, Ukrainian president Zelensky told his country’s assembly: “Russia wants to dominate and believes it can do this in only one way… Sending its army that was brought up in total lawlessness to destroy everything that allows other nations to live.” If Putin does succeed in capturing more areas in the Donbas, he still will face an indigenous insurgency movement in the region in the coming years. Western government leaders are calling for Putin personally to face war crimes charges after the recent discovery of a number of mass graves. The war is far from over, even if there is a cessation of hostile fire.   

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department. She currently teaches at a major university.