Russo-Ukraine War - A Glitch in the Matrix

 Disrupting the Neo-Con Agenda: Trump's Impact on US Foreign Policy

Donald Trump's presidency, from January 2017 to January 2021, marked a significant departure from traditional US foreign policy, particularly with regard to the neo-con agenda. 

The neo-con movement emerged in the 1970s, advocating for an aggressive US foreign policy that prioritized military intervention, overthrowing governments, and promoting American financial interests worldwide. Neo-conservatives believed in using American power to shape global affairs and viewed international engagement as essential to ensuring US domination and control.

One of the central tenets of Trump's foreign policy was his "America First" approach. He emphasized prioritizing US interests and focusing on domestic concerns, rather than engaging in nation-building and interventionist policies abroad. Trump argued that past interventions had led to costly and disastrous outcomes for the US.

Trump made several high-profile decisions to withdraw from or renegotiate international agreements, including the Paris Agreement on climate change, the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA), and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). These moves were seen as a departure from the neo-con globalist agenda.

However, it is not like Trump is pure amazing, in February 2019, he announced his disastrous decision to withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, a landmark arms control agreement signed between the United States and the Soviet Union in 1987. The treaty had been a key pillar in global efforts to limit the proliferation of intermediate-range nuclear missiles and promote strategic stability between the two nuclear superpowers. What could possibly go wrong?

But unlike traditional neo-conservatives, Trump expressed skepticism towards US military interventions. He sought to reduce American military presence in conflict zones and limit costly military engagements, signalling a shift away from the neo-con policy of military involvement.

Instead of pursuing large-scale multilateral agreements, Trump favoured bilateral negotiations to address specific issues. This approach allowed for a more transactional and pragmatic style of diplomacy, aimed at securing better deals for the US.

While neo-conservatives often viewed Russia and China as strategic competitors and potential adversaries, Trump's approach was more fluid. He pursued a mix of confrontation and cooperation with both nations, depending on the specific issue at hand.

Unravelling Russiagate: The Fake Allegations Against Trump's Presidency

The term "Russiagate" refers to the extensive investigation and allegations of collusion between the 2016 Trump presidential campaign and Russian officials. This sprawling controversy dominated headlines and political discourse throughout Donald Trump's presidency, deliberately forcing a wedge between Trump and Putin and casting a shadow over his administration and what was happening in Ukraine. 

Russiagate emerged during the 2016 US presidential campaign when allegations were made up claiming that Russian intelligence interfered in the election to aid Trump's candidacy. The Democratic National Committee's (DNC) email leak, was blamed on Russian hackers to further fuel suspicions.

In May 2017, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to investigate the alleged Russian interference and potential ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. The investigation spanned nearly two years, leading to intense scrutiny and media coverage.

Throughout the investigation, Trump's opponents and segments of the media claimed that the President and his campaign colluded with Russian officials to sway the election results in his favour. However, no evidence of collusion was ever established by the Special Counsel. 

The Steele Dossier, compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, contained false, unverified, and salacious claims about Trump's connections to Russia. The dossier's inclusion in the investigation raised concerns about the credibility of the allegations.

Russiagate had a significant impact on Trump's presidency, dominating media coverage and hindering his ability to focus on his policy agenda. The investigation's shadow loomed over his administration, contributing to an environment of constant political turmoil and heightened partisan divisions.

Durham Report on FBI's Trump-Russia Probe

The Durham Report, headed by US Special Counsel John Durham, has brought a significant conclusion to the investigation into the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane probe. Launched in 2019 to examine potential collusion between Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and Russia, the report's findings have generated significant attention. 

The report highlighted that the FBI's investigation of Trump was initiated with undue haste, lacking "actual evidence" to support its opening. Durham pointed out that the department relied on "raw, unanalysed and uncorroborated intelligence" instead of concrete proof of contact between Trump campaign staff and Russian intelligence agents. He also noted instances of "confirmation bias" among investigators, leading them to disregard evidence that challenged their case.

The report addressed the FBI's failure to corroborate any substantive allegations from the Steele dossier, funded by Democrats and alleging Trump's collusion with Russia. The lack of verification for the dossier's claims raised questions about the basis of the investigation, prompting calls for introspection on the FBI's actions.

Trump's declaration of running for president in 2024 was met with renewed vigour as he characterized the report as the "crime of the century." The report's release further entrenched existing political narratives, with Trump supporters using it to reveal the corruption of the deep state in a politically motivated "witch hunt." 

The Deep-State has now come after Trump to such an extent that the US is now seen round the world as a Banana Republic, and it has coined the new term 'Lawfare' to refer to the weaponising of the legal system against political opponents.