Mueller indicts lawyer Alex van der Zwaan. MSM scream: the evil Drumpf is about to fall!
They’re embarrassingly WRONG, of course. And they are MISLEADING you, by not mentioning OTHER names (bombshells incoming). Let me explain.
Some background: Skadden Arps, a global law firm, was hired in 2012 by the Ukraine Ministry of Justice to prepare a report on the trial of former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, a political rival to Viktor Yanukovych. Viktor Yanukovych was elected as President of Ukraine on 7 February 2010. While he portrayed himself as a centrist, in reality he was a Kremlin-backed stooge. Tymoshenko was anti-Putin, so the inevitable occurred and she was arrested after Yanukovych’s election. On 11 October 2011, she was convicted of embezzlement and abuse of power, and sentenced to seven years in prison and ordered to pay the state $188 million.
This caused outrage and condemnation across the world.
Well, looky here: Greg Craig had been White House Counsel to Barack Obama. WTF? Yes! But wait, there’s more: Even more significantly (IMO), Craig had served as assistant to the President and special counsel in the White House of (drum roll)…
President Bill Clinton.
There’s more: Craig directed the team defending Clinton against impeachment. Working with Clinton’s COS, one John Podesta. Yes you can get up off the floor. Actually, wait a sec, stay there. The other partner at Skadden responsible for producing the report? Clifford Sloan?
Well, how about that? Clifford Sloan was Associate White House Counsel to President Bill Clinton. At the same time as Greg Craig.
These two guys are CLINTON people.
FROM WAY BACK.
Ain’t it funny what the media won’t tell you? Anyway, let’s move on. The question : why would two Clinton stooges produce a report in 2012 for the pro-Russian government of Yanukovych? Can anyone guess? Let’s explore a bit, before we try and answer.
Who was SOS between January 21, 2009 – February 1, 2013?
Hillary Rodham Clinton. Now when she took over as SOS, US policy toward Ukraine was clear – very much anti-Putin. Then came the infamous ‘Russian re-set’. July 2, 2010 – Clinton visited Ukraine to meet with Yanukovych & other leaders of the Putin-backed team. Consistent with the re-set but also disappointing for anti-Putin crowd, her tone was surprisingly positive about Yanukovych:
Of course, there were other reasons why it was in Clinton’s private interests to ensure Yanukovych remained in power. Why? Because she & Bill were being paid a fortune by one of Yanukovych’s billionaire backers at the time, Victor Pinchuk. How much? From 2009 up to 2013 (the year the Ukrainian coup erupted), the Clinton Foundation received at least $8.6 million from the Victor Pinchuk Foundation, which is headquartered in Kiev. Oh – also, in 2008 Pinchuk, who had made a fortune in the pipe-building business, had pledged a five-year, $29-million commitment to the Clinton Global Initiative. Many aren’t aware, but Ukrainians (read ‘Pinchuk’) were the single-largest donors to the Clinton Foundation:
Pinchuk is an extremely clever man, who switches sides when the winds dictate. His objective is simple: making more money. LOTS of it, too. He was a solid backer of Yanukovych, which continued until the winds started turning against the Kremlin-backed President in 2013:
When the winds shifted against Yanukovych, he simply switched sides to protect his business interests. The Clinton’s did the same thing when needed. They took money from him the whole time. This included Clinton turning a blind eye while Punchik’s company, Interpipe, screwed US manufacturers of lead piping by pricing them out of the US market. All while under international sanctions, too. More on that here:
Anyway, remember how I pointed out at the start of the thread that the media are missing key names when discussing the Manafort/Gates indictment? We have CRAIG & SLOAN, the two Clinton stooges at Skadden.
The other name? TONY PODESTA.
See, Podesta was working the pro-Yanukovych lobbying scheme with Manafort the whole time, via The Podesta Group. Manafort was also using Mercury LLC, another lobbying group. Mercury did the GOP side of the aisle, Podesta the Democratic side of the aisle. Manafort appears to have been the Russian link. He’d been acquainted with Yanukovych since the mid-2000s and appears to have been advising him from at least 2007-2013 :
Who did Manafort and Gates work for in Ukraine and Russia?
For the Yanukovych project, Podesta worked the Dem side of the aisle, but was also the go-between with Clinton at State. For example, he didn’t disclose at least 32 meetings, emails and other communications between the Podesta Group & State:
Podesta was also a top contributor to the Clinton campaign and is responsible for bringing in big donors for Hillary. What we don’t know is how much money Podesta & Manafort made from this Ukrainian scheme (or Mercury). However, it is likely to be a huge amount, all laundered via bank accounts in places such as Cyprus. We also don’t know how much Manafort/Podesta money was transferred to the Clinton Foundation and / or Clinton campaign. There’s another person who I am certain never knew about all this – Donald Trump. I’ve long argued that Manafort’s presence on the Trump campaign was suspicious. The above, plus his association with Podesta, backs me up. More here:
But back to the indictment of Alex van der Zwaan. I have no idea what Mueller is up to, but what is being revealed to me is a large illegal scheme to conceal lobbying for a pro-Putin stooge in Ukraine – and launder the money. A small part of that scheme was to use a global law firm to produce a report supporting a pro-Russian stooge in Ukraine. Presumably, the weak link in the team is this kid Van der Zwaan. Presumably, he is singing like a canary. What is he saying? If I’m right, he’s revealing that Manafort & Gates paid the Clinton cronies (Craig & Sloan) to write a report propping up Yanukovych.
And that he was directed to lie about that. The anon in the indictment? Could be a Ukrainian, Craig, Sloan – or Tony Podesta himself. Makes sense?