President Joe Biden and Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin
Joe Biden's Potemkin presidency is weak and powerless. It's more than just a little cynical. His administration expeditiously dismisses Communist China's interference in the 2020 general election because he was installed as the senile vassal over its newest colony by the current Emperor in Zhongnanhai (Xi Jinping) and a cabal of corporate oligarchs, while the press and social media provided unprecedented biased media coverage. ("Fairness is overrated," according to NBC News anchor Lester Holt.) Like much of corporate America and LeBron James, Biden attributes the Chinese Communist Party's genocide in Xinjiang to 'cultural differences between China's Han and Turkic demographics. Reports surfaced last year beginning with Tina Nguyen of Vanity Fair about Hunter Biden's private equity firm's $1.5 billion business transaction with the state-owned Bank of China. All this was suppressed after news of his potential involvement in human trafficking and Hunter's admission to paying half his salary to his father exploded in October. These matters expose the current administration's paralysis on the international stage due to artificial constraints tied to 'wokeness' and blood money. And China reminds us it's racist to hit them on these issues because, well, we're corrupt white imperialists.
Alas, there's Russia. We'll always have Russia and its ethnic white majority to kick around. In foreign policy, they're the Democrats' piñata because Russia's 'whiteness' is one obstacle that won't impede the dullard Biden's braggadocio and belligerence. Hell, the Biden campaign even called reports of Hunter's crimes' Russian disinformation. For four years, the Left painted the face of 'Emmanuel Goldstein' to be the corrupt elected tsar inside the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin, for the crime of upstaging two Democrat presidents for over a decade. Beginning with Putin repeatedly crossing Obama's soft 'red lines' in Moscow's client state, Syria, the West later toppled another corrupt, democratically-elected government in Ukraine because its president, Viktor Yanukovych, was seen as a puppet of Putin. Yanukovych, like the heroic NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, sought asylum in Moscow. In response, Putin ordered the invasion of the Russian-majority population in Crimea on the Black Sea, launched a proxy war in the east of continental Ukraine, and finally stepped in to clean up the mess from Obama's failed redrawing of the Middle East during the Arab Spring by severely culling ISIS's presence in Syria. For those unaware, ISIS is a fusion of the Islamic State of Iraq with Syria's Nusra Front that were funded, supplied, and trained by U.S. military intelligence around April 2013. Gen. Thomas McInerney explained that ISIS's rise began with the attack at Benghazi in September 2012, in an interview with Fox News.
So why was this all significant? On July 9, 2014, Reutersreported that Iraqi UN Ambassador Mohamed Ali Alhakim informed Gen. Sec. Ban Ki-moon that:
“Terrorist groups have seized control of nuclear material at the sites that came out of the control of the state… (that) can be used in manufacturing weapons of mass destruction. These nuclear materials… can enable terrorist groups… to use it separate or in combination with other materials in its terrorist acts.”
The matter ISIS has used chemical weapons against civilians, and military opposition confirms that the Iraq War was justifiable by George W. Bush, at least on grounds established by the Clinton administration. (This was later verified by The New York Times on October 14, 2014.) But the uncertainty lay in whether Al-Qaeda could acquire them. Given Obama's alliance with Tehran began after handing it de facto dominion over Iraq within days of evacuating U.S. forces in December 2011, Iran's Revolutionary Guard likely unearthed much of what wasn't discovered by American troops and the CIA after 2004. This catastrophe highlights the failures of the Obama-Clinton State Department's 'reset' with Moscow. And all these events transpired well before Trump's election victory in 2016 that ultimately resulted in three years of investigations by Democrats on charges of the campaign colluding with Moscow to throw the election.
Headline from “The Secret Casualties of Iraq’s Abandoned Chemical Weapons” in The New York Times, from October 14, 2014.
These facts partly explain Biden's antipathy towards Russia and why he chose to hammer Putin as a killer. To his credit, Putin's response to Biden was to correctly suggest that "it takes one to know one" before wishing him 'good health' and challenging him to a public debate. And his latest jab at a Democrat in the White House was spot on, given the court case involving the political execution of an unarmed white woman named Ashli Babbit inside the Capitol on January 6 was dismissed at the same time as Derek Chauvin's rushed conviction for the murder of the black George Floyd. Since the January 6 Incident, we've read daily about dangerous calls to violence and suppression against all opposition from pundits throughout the left-wing sphere. Similar to the Nazis capitalizing off the opportunities presented by the Reichstag fire in 1933 (which the party manufactured), and given America's current social and political climate, understanding the Democrats' dangerous growing obsession with gun control and its historical links to persecution and genocide has never been more critical. For example, the current gun control bill reportedly includes 'red flag laws' and a nationwide confiscation plan which, according to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, is designed to combat 'domestic terrorism.' Because all white Americans will inevitably pay for 'slavery reparations,' it isn't inconceivable that an even more radical Democratic Party could someday pass racial legislation that mirrors South Africa's 'anti-white statutes―laws that the late Robert Mugabe inspired in Zimbabwe. Henceforth, the connections between gun control as proposed by the Biden-Harris regime, as it was in Stalin's Soviet Union and under Nazi Germany's 'racial laws', will be similarly targeted along racial and political lines.
Since January 6, the Democrats and their corporate donors have labeled all 74 million Trump voters as 'violent domestic domestics.' Hostile calls to 'unity' by then President-elect Biden devolved into the virtual collapse of all bipartisan dialogue afterward. Democrats now routinely call Republicans' terrorists' and 'enemies' of the state and still falsely accuse Trump of generating a racially motivated insurrection. Ironically, the Capitol breach, similar to the Reichstag fire, may have been orchestrated by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi through her alleged 'failure to follow through on warnings of a pending situation the night before. Similar to the day after the Reichstag Fire when Hitler requested that President Paul von Hindenburg sign the Reichstag Fire Decree by using Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution to suspend most civil liberties in Germany, Pelosi exploited the January 6 Incident by appointing General Russell Honoré, a well-known antagonist of President Trump's, to investigate the incident.
During a presidential primary debate on February 12, 2020, Biden suggested he'd deploy F-15's with hellfire missiles to kill armed gun rights activists. Meanwhile, in the fortnight leading to his inauguration, the National Guard was issued orders to 'shoot to kill' protesters inside Washington, D.C. As of now, thousands of National Guard remain in Washington, D.C., spending their nights in parking garages on Pelosi's orders. And after the new black Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin's McCarthy-like order to purge 'enemies' and 'extremists' promoting 'white supremacy' entrenched in the military, it's not certain whether the same military whose officers openly called for a coup d’étatof Trump wouldn't obey Biden's orders to kill political opponents. With all that in mind, can we afford to underestimate Biden's willingness to order the military to open fire on American citizens, including unarmed protesters, as Communist China did at Tiananmen Square in 1989? Perhaps the real question should be, "Can we afford not to?"
Putin's crypto-dictatorship was sustained similarly to the corrupt elections in the U.S. on November 3, 2020. Of course, Putin applies moral equivalence to Biden's accurate depiction of him as a 'killer', but he does so on a more level playing field than Beijing's genocidal regime. During his first visit to the State Department, Biden hammered Putin, outlining that Washington would no longer roll over "in the face of Russia's aggressive actions." As part of the Democrats' pan-media propaganda corp, NBC News covered this "apparent tougher stance towards Moscow than his predecessor" all out of context (the newest excuse by Facebook and Twitter to sanction conservative users). Yes, the Kremlin continues launching 'anti-corruption campaigns' similar to the Democrats' persecuting political rivals 'guilty' of 'white supremacy’―and that includes labeling Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, slandered as an 'Uncle Tom' for the heinous crime of serving as a black Republican. Upon Putin rival Alexei Navalny's return from Germany after being poisoned in Siberia, he was arrested and sentenced to prison. For its part, the Kremlin believes the Navalny situation is another attempt by an American administration to overthrow a duly elected Russian president via a 'color revolution,' similar to the one stateside throughout 2020 that put Biden in the White House. And considering Biden's demand that Putin immediately releases Navalny won't be met, Moscow has taken its position in questioning whether Western' democratic rights and freedoms' remain sacrosanct within liberal democracy's institutions in Russia's state-run Izvestia.
All this finally leads to Chinese diplomat Yang Jiechi's explosive response to Secretary of State Anthony Blinken's criticism of Beijing's human rights violations. He claimed that Beijing's foreign policy is superior because "we don't believe in invading through the use of force, or to topple other regimes through various means, or to massacre the people of other countries." Lastly, Jiechi suggested (correctly) that "many people within the United States actually have little confidence in the democracy of the United States."
As expected, no response by the 'woke' Blinken was offered. As John Hayward of Breitbart observed:
"The Chinese know what they're doing when they invoke Black Lives Matter rhetoric to hector a Democrat administration about human rights in America. They were merely throwing the rhetoric of Blinken and Sullivan's own party right back in their faces. What response could the Biden team have made? "No, black Americans aren't getting slaughtered in the streets by racist cops, no matter what our party has been saying for the past year! You take that back!"
That's because Biden can't. To respond would delegitimize the Democrats' anti-white socialist manifesto. Even Biden, a 'reformed' proto-segregationist, believes America was founded on systemic racism and only still exists to sustain 'white supremacy.' He targets his political rivals along those lines. When Biden says, things like the January 6 Incident was "a violent attack that threatened lives and took lives. We know now that we must confront and defeat political extremism, white supremacy, and domestic terrorism," he truly shares China's dour view of America. But not a white Russian dictator's.
Help to Keep Special Interests Out of Your News!
Red Liberty Media is a non-partisan multimedia news platform. We’re a growing start–up independent news source. We are not controlled by special interest groups and our work is mostly self-funded. Consider becoming a Red Liberty Media monthly contributor and support our work!
About the Author:
Jonathan P. Henderson (B.A. in History, Minor in Pol. Sci.; Univ. of Tennessee, 2012) is a resident of Knoxville, TN. He is Owner/Administrator/Editor-in-Chief of The Conservative Historical Review and a blogger/columnist for PolitiChicks and Intellectual Conservative.