Ukrainegate, or the Coup Against President Donald Trump—Phase Three (Part III)
by Barbara Boyd, [email protected] This is a continuation from Part I, and Part II. If you'd like text updates when we release new articles on the Coup attempt against President Trump, text SC20 to (800)929-7566
The United States, 2016-2019
Now, let’s look at Ukraine’s intervention into the 2016 presidential election on behalf of Hillary Clinton. It is known that the following individuals are key players in the coup against the President: Christopher Steele, who authored the dirty MI6 dossier against Trump; Victoria Nuland, who supported Steele’s activities from the State Department; Dmitri Alperovitch, Chief Technical Officer of CrowdStrike, who fabricated the myth that the Russians hacked the DNC; Fusion GPS; the Atlantic Council; and the propaganda apparatus that attacks President Trump worldwide every day. They all played significant roles in the Ukraine coup. We will situate them as we tell the story of the Ukrainian intervention.
On January 11, 2017, Politico published an article, “Ukrainian Efforts to Sabotage Trump Backfire.” Politico’s investigation found that Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office, by accusing him of ties to Russia and Putin, and by implicating Trump Campaign Manager Paul Manafort in corruption. Politico made it clear that now the Ukrainians, led by President Poroshenko, were scrambling to undo the damage their intervention had caused, as President-elect Trump expressed outright hostility to them.
The Ukrainian efforts centered on Alexandra Chalupa, the DNC’s outreach coordinator to the virulently anti-Russia section of the Ukrainian diaspora in the United States. These people are primarily organized in the Central and Eastern European Congress and the Ukrainian Congressional Committee of America, and Chalupa has been their representative to Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party for years. These organizations represent a bloc of some 22 million votes, and their main requirement for those they support is a violent hatred of Russia. Most on the Ukrainian side are outright Banderists.
Politico describes Chalupa as having a strong relationship with the U.S. Embassy in Kiev. Chalupa also enjoyed a strong relationship with the Obama White House. Chalupa began opposition research centered on smearing Trump as a Russian agent, by her account, in December 2015. She told Politico that she developed, “a network of sources in Kiev and Washington, including investigative journalists, government officials, and private intelligence operatives,” for her anti-Trump efforts.
Andrii Telizhenko, who worked in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington, told the Gateway Pundit and others that he met Alexandra Chalupa in the spring of 2016. Chalupa told him she was working for the DNC and Hillary Clinton, “collecting any dirt or background information on Manafort, Trump, or any other campaign officials from the Trump Campaign, and was looking for connections to Russia, or the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB), or the Russian mob, or Ukrainian mob, etc.,” in cooperation with Ukrainian intelligence officials. Telizhenko notes that Ukraine’s Washington Embassy was fully on board and assisting this project, and his claims have been fully supported by others. One goal Chalupa told him about was to use the opposition research to set up well-publicized hearings in Congress about Trump’s ties to Russia, through a Congresswoman she knew. These hearings were intended to dramatically influence the election.
On April 28, 2016, Chalupa and journalist Michael Isikoff attended a forum sponsored by the Open World Leadership Center, an entity sponsored by the U.S. Congress, which, conveniently, was attended by over 68 investigative journalists from Ukraine. Most had received funding from George Soros. According to a Chalupa email released by WikiLeaks, she was put on the program specifically to speak about Paul Manafort. In April, Fusion GPS had produced two phony dossiers on Manafort, both of them painting him nefariously as an outright Russian agent.
Skilled Ukrainian Intelligence Fabricators
Then in May, news suddenly surfaced in Ukraine of the existence of a hand-written so-called “black ledger” coming into possession of the Ukrainian National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU). NABU was a major project of Biden and the Obama State Department working in coordination with the FBI.
It has been claimed that the “black ledger” provides documentation of $12.7 million in cash payments to Paul Manafort for his representation of Ukraine’s Party of the Regions and former President Victor Yanukovych, the man Joe Biden and Victoria Nuland deposed in their 2014 coup. When the “black ledger” was released by Ukrainian “anti-corruption activist” Serhiy Leshchenko, the New York Times published an article on August 14, 2016 detailing it. This was followed by an article by Isikoff on August 19, with Leshchenko as his source, claiming that Ukrainian anti-corruption prosecutors wanted to question Manafort. Then Leshchenko put a fine point on it in an August 28 interview with the Financial Times. According to Leshchenko:
"A Trump presidency would change the pro-Ukrainian agenda in American foreign policy. For me it was important to show not only the corruption aspect, but that he is a pro-Russian candidate who can break the geopolitical balance of the world."
The Clinton Campaign immediately grabbed the work product they had paid for. Robby Mook, Clinton’s Campaign Manager, said in a statement that the Ukraine “black ledger” represents “more troubling connections between Donald Trump’s team and pro-Kremlin elements in Ukraine.” He demanded that Trump “disclose Campaign Chair Paul Manafort’s and all other campaign employees’ and advisers’ ties to Russian or pro-Kremlin activities.”
Robby Mook was working off the provably fake dirty dossier of MI-6 agent Christopher Steele. In July of 2016, Steele claimed to the Clinton Campaign and the FBI that Paul Manafort was coordinating contacts between Russia and the Trump Campaign for purposes of defeating Hillary Clinton, using volunteer Carter Page as the conduit. He also claimed that Manafort and Putin had worked out a deal: Russia would leak the WikiLeaks documents (about Clinton and the DNC’s attempts to rig the Democratic Primary and Wall Street’s control of Hillary Clinton), in return for the Trump Campaign sidelining the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a campaign issue. Right in step, the New York Times and others claimed, falsely, that at the Republican Convention, Trump representatives had stripped out a platform plank calling for “lethal military aid to Ukraine.”
In August, when Manafort resigned from the Trump Campaign, a Justice Department investigation had already been re-opened concerning Manafort’s activities in Ukraine, despite warnings from Ukrainian prosecutors and others to DOJ’s lead attorney, Andrew Weissmann, that the “black ledger” was a complete fake. It was. While it was used by Weissmann for various search warrants against Manafort, it was never introduced in his criminal trial for unrelated financial crimes.
The fake Steele dossier was used by the DOJ and FBI to procure 4 FISA warrants on Carter Page. Leaks concerning Page to the media ruined his business and his life, but he was never charged with anything. Steele met personally with Isikoff, and the DOJ and FBI used the subsequent article he wrote using Steele’s information as “corroboration” for the Page FISA warrant without ever telling the court that Isikoff’s article was dictated by Steele.
“Anti-corruption activist” Serhiy Leshchenko is a journalist who was also a Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellow at the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the United States’ regime-change operation. That is, Leshchenko, who played a key role in the 2014 Ukraine coup and its associated propaganda effort, is funded by the U.S. government through the NED. To support the neo-Nazi rampage on the streets of Kiev in 2014, Leshchenko secured video clips lauding the actions from the notorious mass murderer Zbigniew Brzezinski, as well as from David Kramer, then Executive Director at the CIA quango Freedom House, and Francis Fukuyama, who greeted the fall of the Soviet Union with the absurd idea that history had thereby ended.
Kramer, it will be remembered, was the conduit for leaking the very dirty dossier authored by MI-6’s Christopher Steele about Donald Trump, to Buzzfeed.
On December 11, 2018, a criminal court in Kiev ruled that Leshchenko and NABU Director Artem Sytnyk had “acted illegally” in intervening into the U.S. 2016 elections when they leaked the fake “black ledger” concerning Paul Manafort.
Congressional testimony has also revealed that Leshchenko was a major source for Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele, including through Fusion researcher Nellie Ohr. In fact, suspicions run high that Christopher Steele’s dirty and fake dossier was not the product of Russian sources at all. It is just as likely that Steele’s fabrications are the product of historically very skilled Ukrainian intelligence fabricators, and that Steele was simply a salesman for lies invented elsewhere.
The Information Warriors
The LaRouche PAC website has already reported in depth—Part I, Part II, and Part III—on the anti-Russian information warfare apparatus which was birthed out of the Ukraine coup and includes Britain’s 77th Military Brigade (embedded in social media companies throughout the world), the Integrity Initiative, NATO’s Strategic Communications Center in Latvia, and the State Department’s Global Engagement Center.
All of these military-grade psychological and information warfare groups operated and continue to operate on behalf of the coup in Ukraine and have been critical in the “perception management” surrounding various false-flag atrocities attributed to Russia, such as the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH-17 over Ukraine and the Sergei Skripal poisoning hoax. Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS, the primary propagandists in the 2016-2017 operations against Trump, also operated in Ukraine, with Steele providing Victoria Nuland and John Kerry frequent operational updates through many memoranda concerning developments in that country. In fact, the British Integrity Initiative’s documents, seized and published by the hacking group “Anonymous,” point to a propaganda initiative and censorship effort aimed squarely at Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, conducted, in part, right out of the State Department.
In describing this modern form of information warfare, Joel Harding, who went to work for Ukraine’s newly established “Information Ministry” during the coup, and formerly worked for Hillary Clinton at the State Department, describes a regime in which all information, other than manipulated propaganda, is denied to the target population. A compliant media apparatus publishes daily talking points about key events, over and over again. The talking points are aimed at the “psyche” of targeted populations, with high emotive content, designed to produce desired action. Dissenting views are to be censored or debunked as “conspiracy theories.”
Harding and the Atlantic Council put this into operation in the United States shortly after the election, when the Washington Post published the signal piece, “Propaganda or Not.” It listed every website in the United States that had been deemed to be insufficiently anti-Russian—most of which provided the only independent journalism in the United States—as requiring immediate censorship. No one can doubt that this is what has been at work since election day in the collaboration between the Obama intelligence community and the news media.
George Eliason, an American journalist who lives in the Donbass, has continually studied and detailed this apparatus as it worked in Ukraine. He has documented how Ukrainian-American Banderist groupings working with Alexandra Chalupa, her sister, Andrea Chalupa, and others, ran Digital Maidan, a critical element of the coup. The same groups crowd-sourced funding for the purchase of bullets to conduct the war in the Donbass.
Eliason has also demonstrated that Dmitri Alperovitch maintained contact with the numerous Ukrainian hacking groups and individuals active during the coup and through the resulting civil war. Among other things, these hackers tracked dissenting journalists and others who were subsequently censored by killing them. Irene Chalupa, a longstanding Atlantic Council and State Department employee, also maintained contact with Ukrainian hackers. Alperovitch, sitting at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Research Lab, also was the CrowdStrike investigator who created the bogus narrative that Russia hacked the DNC in 2016 and provided the documents to WikiLeaks—the key claim in the entire Russiagate hoax against Trump. Eliason speculates, not without reason, that these Ukrainian hackers have played a major role in the coup against the President.
The Atlantic Council is known as the think-tank of NATO and is a primary British infiltration conduit into the United States. It is also the favored think-tank of the Banderist Ukrainian diaspora, which helps to fund it. It is hardly accidental that Burisma, its public image cleansed through the efforts of Joe and Hunter Biden, now contributes $250,000 a year to this outfit. Max Blumenthal has led the charge in exposing the nefarious activities of this Washington, D.C. operation, including the Burisma-Biden corruption story and other pay-for-play schemes.
Finally, a Word about Hunter Biden
It’s obvious that Joe Biden was advised—as Washington’s campaign consultants typically do advise—to get ahead of bad facts about his son by putting them all out there in a favorable forum. As a result, the damning details about Hunter Biden come from the campaign itself—rather than from any right-wing “conspiracist”—in the form of an article in the New Yorker, on July 1, 2019. The article reviews Hunter’s numerous battles with addiction, including cocaine and crack cocaine, his relationship with his dead brother’s wife, and his many business ventures, procured in his father’s footsteps and by trading on his father’s name. It otherwise confirms the corruption allegations developed at length in Peter Schweizer’s 2018 book, Secret Empires, allegations which did not suddenly appear in 2019.
It should also be clear that opportunistically exploiting Hunter’s sad story is a cheap shot. On the other hand, taking on the real story, the military-industrial complex, and its British imperial sponsors, which Donald Trump has done, the people who are now at war with this President, is the real battle, the battle that is absolutely necessary if our republic is to survive.
If you'd like text updates when we release new articles on the Coup attempt against President Trump, text SC20 to (800)929-7566