Like French Pres. Charles de Gaulle, his grandson Pierre admires Russia, has no interest in being subservient to US-UK, says traditional values have disappeared in the West

 .

President “de Gaulle considered the US as “an occupying state interfering in all economic, military and political processes in the world…opposed NATO, expelled NATO institutions from France [on March 7, 1966]…Throughout the war, the US supported the Vichy government, headed by the Nazi collaborator Marshal Pétain.“

11/21/2023, “Grandson of war hero Charles de Gaulle wants Russian citizenship,” Hannah Thompson, connexionfrance.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Map of Vichy and occupied France, 1940, “France in Defeat”]

“The 60-year-old said ‘traditional values have disappeared in the West’”

“A grandson of French war hero General Charles de Gaulle has said that he wants to apply to be Russian, after lamenting the “values that have disappeared from the West”. 

Pierre de Gaulle, 60, was attending a cultural forum event in St Petersburg on November 16, [2023] when he said: “I would be honoured to receive Russian citizenship. I am happy to see that you fight for traditional values; family, spirituality…all these values have disappeared in Western countries.”

He later told the TASS news agency that he intended to apply for Russian citizenship, and said that Russia offers “big possibilities”.

“Pierre de Gaulle on the left, and his grandfather Charles on the right. Pierre said he would be ‘honoured’ to receive Russian citizenship. Pic: Abaca Press / dpa picture alliance / Alamy Stock Photo”

Since the start of the war in Ukraine, Mr de Gaulle has repeatedly said that he is a supporter of Russian President Vladimir Putin. He has since said that he believes that the West has “lost” the war.

Also in St Petersburg, he said: “Neither NATO nor the West can continue the war,” suggesting that he espouses Mr Putin’s [truthful statements] rhetoric that the US and NATO are the ‘real’ antagonists in the war, and are using it as a way to weaken Moscow. He then said: “It is necessary to stop this tragedy.”

Last January [2023], Mr de Gaulle told Le Figaro: “I am struck by this single-minded thought process that systematically presents Putin as the ‘bad guy’, and his [US controlled] Ukrainian [so-called] counterpart [President Volodymyr Zelensky] as the ‘good guy’.”

In February [2023], he travelled to Volgograd (previously Stalingrad) to attend the

80-year anniversary commemorations to mark the Soviet

victory over the Germans in 1943 [in which 27 million Soviet citizens gave their lives saving the world from Hitler].

As a grandson of General de Gaulle-who led the fight against the Germans in France during World War Two and later became President of France – Mr de Gaulle comes from a family that is typically considered to represent French pride and values.

He is the fourth son of Philippe de Gaulle, General de Gaulle’s eldest son.

His pro-Russia stance clearly puts him [very much in agreement with his grandfather but apparently] at odds with [some of] his family, who have previously moved to distance themselves from his comments.”

………………………………………………..

Added: Like his grandfather Charles de Gaulle, Pierre de Gaulle has no interest in being subservient to US or its dollar monopoly, and thinks Russia is a fine and important friend:

1/4/23, “Grandson of former French President Charles de Gaulle defends ‘under attack’ Russia and slams EU,” Euroweeklynews.com, Matthew Roscoe

“Pierre de Gaulle, the grandson of former French President General Charles de Gaulle, has shared his opinions on the war [in Ukraine] and has defended Russia, which he believes is being conspired against.

The grandson of former French President General Charles de Gaulle said the West had planned a “conspiracy” against Russia in advance and believes Putin is just defending himself against sanctions.

Speaking to AgoraVox at the Russian Centre for Science and Culture, Pierre de Gaulle said that he considers it “extremely important for France to maintain and develop relations of mutual understanding and cooperation with Russia, primarily through historical ties, the common destinies that unite us.”

He added: “Europeans should not forget that only maintaining relations with Russia is

a guarantee of stability and prosperity in Europe and in the world. Unfortunately, the

consequences of the current crisis are reflected primarily in Europe.

“Of course, the whole world suffers as a result of anti-Russian sanctions. But above all, Russia’s recent partners in Europe are suffering, and France is among them. This crisis greatly

weakens the balance that my grandfather always tried to maintain, even in the most difficult times.”

Speaking about Russian and French historical relations, Pierre de Gaulle added: “France managed to maintain this balance throughout the Cold War, it began to be established between France and the USSR immediately after the Second World War.

“After all, then Russia found itself in the same camp with the countries that defeated the Nazi occupiers, and therefore with France.

And that is why my grandfather

always, always tried to maintain respectful relations with Russia.”

The grandson of Charles de Gaulle, who was also a French army general, said that he believes it is in “France’s interest to continue this policy and to maintain a balance between East and West in our policy, because this is essential for the stability of Europe.”

He then slammed the US for its part in the war.

He said: “I think that public opinion in France is beginning to understand what the evil game of the Americans is today. By using lies primarily when communicating with allies within NATO, the United States has managed to

use the Ukrainian crisis to destabilise Europe.”

“The Americans, as it were, cut off Europe from Russia, set the Europeans against the Russians. Why would they do that? Because Europe in alliance with Russia could be a strong bloc both politically and economically, culturally and socially – in general, up to 500 million people live in the EU and Russia,” he added.

“Ever since the Vietnam War and the economic crises that followed, Americans have always tried by force, cunning and other dishonest means to make up for the loss of their economic and political influence, although it is inevitable.

“In particular, the Americans are trying to slow down the dollar’s loss of its status as the only

(that is, monopoly) world exchange currency. And this policy continues.”

Speaking about the EU, de Gaulle was quick to accuse the European Commission of being

a haven for thieves.

“With regard to Europe, my grandfather really advocated a Europe of nations, that is, for each country to cooperate with others in the name of the European Union, economic and political, but with a certain autonomy in politics and decision-making,” the Frenchman [Pres. De Gaulle’s grandson] said.

“Instead, we ended up in a system dominated by a technocracy that imposes its directives on each of the member states. This technocracy is, unfortunately, extremely corrupt.”

He added: “For some reason, they stopped writing about this in the press, but when Ursula von der Leyen was appointed President of the European Commission, she was also credited with the remaining unexplained expenses of about 100 million euros associated with the hiring of external consultants, consulting firms, when she was defence minister.

“These questions are passed over in silence. There is also a lot of talk about the ties between the President of the European Commission and pharmaceutical companies. Let me remind you that her son works for an American biotechnology company and that the CEO of Pfizer was recently called twice to testify about strange contracts with his company. He was supposed to speak before the European Commission. But both times he refused.”

“I would like a little more honesty and transparency at the level of the European Commission, which adopts certain laws. After all, when we talk about the leaders of the European Commission, we are talking about people who were not elected by the citizens of European states,” he said.

“Unfortunately, these gentlemen from the European Commission still do not know how to keep their word. It’s a disaster, but today’s European leaders are like that. I would like at least a little more transparency in their actions.

“Recently, as part of the case of bribery by Qatar of “Eurocrats”, who undertook to speak only positive things about this Arab emirate

in exchange for money, whole bags of money were strangely found …

in the house of one of the officials of the European Commission.”

************************

Added: de Gaulle wasn’t an “Atlanticist,” had no interest in being a US-UK colony. “de Gaulle took every opportunity to express his discontent with the dollar as a reserve currency: ”US imperialism leaves no field unoccupied. It takes every form, but the dollar is the most insidious”….

8/11/2022, “Charles de Gaulle on the US, NATO and the Dollar,” United World International

“Russia’s campaign in Ukraine has opened new debates about Europe’s historical and prospective positions

on the US-Russia axis.

In 20th century European history, Charles de Gaulle is one of the most prominent figures to be considered in this context.

We interviewed Ali Rıza Taşdelen, a journalist and Vatan Party (Türkiye) executive who closely follows French politics, about de Gaulle’s life, thoughts and policies.”

The symbol of the resistance against nazi occupation…

Charles de Gaulle is the symbol of the resistance to the Nazi occupation of France in the Second World War. He is the national hero of the French nation. Besides being a good soldier, he is a world-class statesman who

defended France’s independence against the USA and NATO.

De Gaulle and [vs.] the Social Democrats…[Map of Vichy and occupied France, 1940, “France in Defeat”]

France’s political confrontation with the Nazi occupation and its aftermath, as well as during the Cold War, can give us an idea of

who de Gaulle is and what he means to France:

On the one side, the Social Democrats, led by their General Secretary Paul Faur, surrendered to fascism during the Second World War and adopted a collaborationist policy, accepted to come under the shelter of the US after the war, brought France into NATO and paved the way for NATO’s Gladio organization in the country,

in short, pursued an Atlanticist line.

On the other side, General Charles de Gaulle, who resisted together with the Communists the invasion of Hitler fascism and became

the symbol of the resistance,

opposed NATO,

expelled NATO institutions from France [on March 7, 1966],

became the target of the US and NATO Gladio, and

defended a more popular and welfare state against the economic

system imposed by the US

and the reign of the dollar.

Could you elaborate on de Gaulle’s opposition to the US?

De Gaulle is known for his resistance against the Nazi occupation and for taking France out of NATO. France’s withdrawal from NATO on March 7, 1966 is only a consequence. The process started in the 1940s when the Nazis occupied France.

The US hostility towards De Gaulle

began not with the anti-American line he pursued in the 1960s,

but with de Gaulle’s national resistance movement against the Nazi occupation.

Throughout the war, the US supported the Vichy government, headed by the Nazi collaborator Marshal Pétain.

While the Vichy government surrendered

to Hitler with the armistice agreement,

Charles de Gaulle was preparing to fight against the occupation in London.

On June 18, 1940, de Gaulle called for resistance for a “Free France” against the invaders and then on September 24, 1941, he announced that the “French Committee of National Liberation” was formed to unite all resistance groups. On 24 December 1941, Jean Moulin returned to France on De Gaulle’s orders to organize and unite resistance groups. In Lyon, he founded the “United Resistance Movement”, which included communists. Maurice Thorez, Secretary General of the French Communist Party in Moscow, was in contact with De Gaulle. On September 26, Stalin announced that the Soviet Union had recognized De Gaulle’s “Free France”.

De Gaulle arrived in Algiers from London and took over the Provisional Government on June 3, 1944. On June 6, Anglo-Saxon Allied Forces (the US, UK and Canada) under the command of General Dwight D. Eisenhower,

landed in Normandy, France.

As the Allied forces advance towards Paris, on August 10, railroad workers, led by the FKP, went on strike. Subsequently, General Confederation of Labour called for a general strike and took a stand against the US. On August 25, 1944, Paris was liberated and De Gaulle returned to Paris.

CIA’s aim in the Normandy landings

De Gaulle declared that the aim of CIA in the Normandy landings of the Anglo-Saxon Allied Forces led by the US was to eliminate him and form a government close to the US. On June 6, 1964, de Gaulle refused to attend the 20th anniversary celebrations of the Normandy landings in France, and told Prime Minister Pompidou, who advocated attending the ceremony the following: “The landings on June 6 were an Anglo-Saxon affair from which France was excluded. They were determined to settle in France, which they saw as enemy territory! Just as they had done in Italy and were going to do in Germany! They had prepared the Allied Military Government of Occupied Territories, which would rule France as their armies marched forward. They had printed counterfeit money. They would have behaved as if they were in a conquered country. And now you want me to commemorate their landings.”

De Gaulle considered the US as “an occupying state interfering in all economic, military and political processes in the world”.

NATO as a camouflage for the US takeover of Europe

What was de Gaulle’s view of NATO?

De Gaulle believed that NATO was a tool for the US to take Europe in hand. He opposed US hegemonism. In one of his conversations, he told Ahmet the following about NATO:

“NATO is an academy of empty words. It is an organization that weakens our defense capabilities, instills the idea that defense is inconceivable without it, thus numbing our sense of national independence. NATO is in fact a deception, a camouflage for the US takeover Europe”.

The process of withdrawal from NATO’s military wing

Before withdrawing from NATO’s military wing, he announced

the withdrawal of the French representative to the Atlantic Council and

France’s Mediterranean fleet from NATO’s Mediterranean Command on March 7, 1959.

In June of the same year [1959], he banned US nuclear storage on French territory.

In 1963, French naval power in the Atlantic and the Manche

was withdrawn from NATO command, and

in 1964, French officers from NATO’s naval command.

On March 7, 1966, de Gaulle sent a letter to US President Johnson, in which he stated France’s withdrawal from NATO’s military wing. In the letter he stressed that the world had changed since NATO was founded in 1949, and since then France has improved its defense capabilities, no longer requiring any Allied military presence on French territory, and also that France had taken sovereignty into its own hands and no longer putting French military forces under NATO’s order.

Killing de Gaulle

Some say that the US attempted a coup d’état against de Gaulle and to assassinate him. Is this true?

Yes, that is true. The US, along with Britain, tried everything to eliminate de Gaulle during the war. The US and Britain continued to do so after the war, from the time De Gaulle became head of government until his departure in 1969. The CIA monitored De Gaulle’s every move and attempted to assassinate him.

Coup attempt against de Gaulle

Besides, de Gaulle’s anti-US and anti-NATO policies and his efforts to resolve the problem in Algeria by negotiating with the insurgents caused a great uneasiness in the US. With the support of NATO’s secret organization in France (stay-behind organization), an unsuccessful coup attempt was organized against De Gaulle by the “Secret Army Organization” (Organisation de l’armée secrete – OAS), which consists of officers who were against De Gaulle and supported the French occupation of Algeria. General Challe, a French General who had previously commanded NATO’s Allied Forces in Central Europe, led the coup.

A great Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals

Did de Gaulle’s struggle with the United States have an international aspect? Did he seek alliances against the US?

In 1964, de Gaulle officially recognized the People’s Republic of China and welcomed China’s development of the atomic bomb. In the same year he traveled to South America. In 1966, on a trip to Asia, he criticized the US policy in Vietnam in a speech in Phnom-Penh, the capital of Cambodia. He then moved on to Moscow to discuss with Brezhnev a Pan-European defence system based on a Soviet-French basis. He had in mind a great Europe “from the Atlantic to the Urals”.

The third path between capitalism and collectivism

We would also like to talk about his views on economic affairs in addition to his political views. You mentioned that De Gaulle was in favor of a welfare state. Could you elaborate on this?

De Gaulle was on the path between capitalism and collectivism. Alain Peyrefitte, de Gaulle’s spokesman, wrote in his book “C’etait de Gaulle” that de Gaulle said of the economic system:

“The world is divided between two rival systems in fierce struggle: capitalism and collectivism.

Capitalism is unacceptable in its social consequences. It crushes the most modest. It turns man into man’s wolf (author’s note: surprising to hear a Marxist slogan).

Collectivism is also unacceptable: it deprives humans of the will to fight transforming them into sheep.

A third path must be invented between the wolves and the sheep.”

When Peyrefitte asked de Gaulle, “Which one?” he replied: “Participation and planning. Participation, since one must involve employees in the functioning of the company, giving them back the dignity that capitalism has taken away from them; and planning, because it makes it possible to correct the failures of the market, which would blind us if we completely loose control over it.” “The state should intervene in the public interest, when necessary. Workers should participate in the development of their companies”.

For De Gaulle, nothing is above the nation and the state. He especially opposes the market economy imposed by the US: “The market is not above the nation and the state. It is the nation and the state that must dominate the market. If the market rules, the Americans would rule over it; it is all a disguise for American hegemony. If we have put our faith in the free market, we would have been colonized by the Americans. If the state does not take the necessary initiatives, nothing will work.”

Against the Dollar as reserve currency

De Gaulle took every opportunity to express his discontent with the dollar as a reserve currency: ”US imperialism leaves no field unoccupied. It takes every form,

but the dollar is the most insidious”.

“We pay the US to purchase us. So each time we have dollars, we will convert them into gold. Everyone should do the same… Political pressures will no longer be used to manipulate money.”

De Gaulle was convinced that the international monetary system of the day would not work, and one day the domination of the dollar would come to an end….

Social democrats have adopted an anti-Gaullist line from the Nazi occupation to the present day. Today, the de Gaullean tradition persists to a lesser extent in the nationalist parties of the left and right. The Gaullist legacy is partly alive in Marine Le Pen’s Rassemblement National and Jean Luc Melenchon La France Insoumise. In addition, a few relatively small parties also support de Gaulle.

The last representative of the de Gaulle tradition

Former president Jacques Chirac was the last representative of the de Gaulle tradition. Chirac opposed the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.

In Chirac’s time, France was in favour of the

alliance between Germany and Russia against the US-UK alliance.

At that time, a Paris-Berlin-Moscow axis was formed. The leaders of this alliance were Chirac, Schröder and Putin.

After the election to the presidency in 2007 of Nicolas Sarkozy, who had risen rapidly as the representative of the pro-Atlantic wing within Chirac’s party, the party broke with the tradition of Charles de Gaulle and aligned itself with the US. Today, there is an important faction within the Republican Party that maintains the de Gaulle tradition.

[Really? Where is it? I’d like to join. To my knowledge, the entire US political class including the entire Republican Party is fully on board with endless US wars which are funded by enslaving US taxpayers from birth. Not one single elected person has stood up for us and demanded that we be freed from enslavement to US global genocide which most certainly includes flattening Russia and Syria. As Philip Giraldi accurately observed, Endless war is Deep State’s only business, it has no other excuse for bleeding US taxpayers. (Blog editor)].

Today, these de Gaullist groups and parties still oppose the US and NATO and are in favor of friendly relations with Russia and Bashar al-Assad.”

 

************************

FBI seizes phones of New York City Mayor Eric Adams, approached him on street, climbed into his SUV, in escalation of campaign finance investigation-NY Times, 11/10/23 (Sat.,11/11/23 print ed.)

 .

“New York’s mayor claimed that the city is full as migrants were sleeping on the street while waiting for their asylum applications to be processed, amid sweltering summer temperatures.” 8/1/23, AFP

8/1/23, “Hundreds of migrants sleep in line early on Aug. 1, 2023, for placement at the Roosevelt Hotel intake center in New York,” NY Daily News

11/10/23, “F.B.I. Seizes Eric Adams’s Phones as Campaign Investigation Intensifies,” NY Times, (Sat., 11/11/23 print ed.), by William K. Rashbaum, Dana Rubenstein, Michael Rothfeld

[Image above, Aug. 1, 2023, AFP,  Migrants outside Roosevelt Hotel in midtown Manhattan. “Since April last year, more than 93,000 migrants, mostly from Central and South America, have arrived in New York, which is required by [current] law to offer free housing to anyone who requests it.”]

“Days after a raid at Mr. Adams’s chief fund-raiser’s home, federal agents took the mayor’s phones and iPad, two people with knowledge of the matter said.”

“The F.B.I. seized electronic devices from Mayor Eric Adams in a dramatic escalation of a federal campaign contribution investigation.Credit…Stephanie Keith for The New York Times”

“F.B.I. agents seized Mayor Eric Adams’s electronic devices early this week in what appeared to be a dramatic escalation of a criminal inquiry into whether his 2021 campaign conspired with the Turkish government and others to funnel money into its coffers.

The agents approached the mayor after an event at New York University on Monday evening and asked his security detail to step away, a person with knowledge of the matter said.

They climbed into his S.U.V. with him

and, pursuant to a court-authorized warrant, took his devices, the person said.

The devices — at least two cellphones and an iPad — were returned to the mayor within a matter of days, according to that person and another person familiar with the situation. Law enforcement investigators with a search warrant can make copies of the data on devices after they seize them.

A lawyer for Mr. Adams and his campaign said in a statement that the mayor was cooperating with federal authorities, and had already “proactively reported” at least one instance of improper behavior.

“After learning of the federal investigation, it was discovered that an individual had recently acted improperly,” said the lawyer, Boyd Johnson. “In the spirit of transparency and cooperation, this behavior was immediately and proactively reported to investigators.”

Mr. Johnson said that Mr. Adams has not been accused of wrongdoing and had “immediately complied with the F.B.I.’s request and provided them with electronic devices.” Mr. Adams had attended an anniversary celebration for the ASD Nest Support Project, an initiative at New York University that works with public schools to enhance education for autistic learners.

The statement did not identify the individual, detail the conduct reported to authorities or make clear whether the reported misconduct was related to the seizure of the mayor’s devices. It was also not immediately clear whether the agents referred to the fund-raising investigation when they took the mayor’s devices.

Mr. Adams, in his own statement, said that “as a former member of law enforcement, I expect all members of my staff to follow the law and fully cooperate with any sort of investigation — and I will continue to do exactly that.” He added that he had “nothing to hide.”

The surprise seizure of Mr. Adams’s devices was an extraordinary development and appeared to be the first direct instance of the campaign contribution investigation touching the mayor. Mr. Adams, a retired police captain, said on Wednesday that he is so strident in urging his staff to “follow the law” that he can be almost “annoying.” He laughed at the notion that he had any potential criminal exposure

Spokesmen for the F.B.I. and the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York, whose prosecutors are also investigating the matter, declined to comment.

The federal investigation into Mr. Adams’s campaign burst into public view on Nov. 2, when F.B.I. agents searched the home of the mayor’s chief fund-raiser and seized two laptop computers, three iPhones

and a manila folder labeled “Eric Adams.”

The fund-raiser, a 25-year-old former intern named Brianna Suggs, has not spoken publicly since the raid.

Mr. Adams responded to news of the raid by

abruptly returning from Washington, D.C., where he had only just arrived for a day of meetings with White House and congressional leaders

regarding the migrant influx,

an issue he has said threatens to “destroy New York City.”

On Wednesday, he said his abrupt return was driven by his desire to be present for his team, and out of concern for Ms. Suggs, who he said had gone through a “traumatic experience.”

“Although I am mayor, I have not stopped being a man and a human,” he said.

But he also said he did not speak with Ms. Suggs on the day of the raid, to avoid any appearance of interfering in an ongoing investigation.

“The seizure of Mr. Adams’s devices took place days after the F.B.I. raided the Brooklyn home of his chief fund-raiser, Brianna Suggs.Credit…Stephanie Keith for The New York Times”

The warrant obtained by the F.B.I. to search Ms. Suggs’s home sought evidence of a conspiracy to violate campaign finance law between members of Mr. Adams’s campaign, the Turkish government or Turkish nationals, and a Brooklyn-based construction company, KSK Construction, whose owners are originally from Turkey. The warrant also sought records about donations from Bay Atlantic University, a Washington, D.C., college whose founder is Turkish and is affiliated with a school

Mr. Adams visited when he went to Turkey as Brooklyn borough president in 2015.

The warrant, reviewed by The New York Times, indicated authorities were looking at whether the Turkish government or Turkish nationals funneled donations to Mr. Adams using a so-called straw donor scheme, in which the contributors listed were not the actual source of the money. The warrant also inquired about Mr. Adams’s campaign’s use of

New York City’s generous public matching program, in which New York City offers an eight-to-one match of the first $250 of a resident’s donation.

The federal authorities also sought evidence of whether any Adams campaign member provided any benefit to Turkey or the construction company in exchange for campaign donations.

The Turkish Consulate in Manhattan on Thursday.Credit…Sara Hylton for The New York Times

This is not the first time Mr. Adams or people in his orbit have attracted law enforcement scrutiny.

In September [2023], Eric Ulrich, Mr. Adams’s former buildings commissioner

and senior adviser, was indicted 

by the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg,

on 16 felony charges, including counts of bribetaking and conspiracy.

[5/3/22, “Mayor Adams appoints Eric Ulrich as Dept. of Buildings Commissioner”]

In July, Mr. Bragg indicted six people, including a retired police inspector who once worked and socialized with Mr. Adams, on charges of conspiring to funnel illegal donations to the mayor’s 2021 campaign.

Separately, the city’s Department of Investigation was investigating the role of Timothy Pearson, one of the mayor’s closest advisers, in a violent altercation at a migrant center in Manhattan.

Mr. Adams has also had skirmishes with the law before becoming mayor. Soon after he was elected Brooklyn borough president, he organized an event to raise money for a new nonprofit, One Brooklyn, which had not yet registered with the state. The invitation list was based on donor rolls for nonprofits run by his predecessor, records show.

A city Department of Investigation inquiry concluded Mr. Adams and his nonprofit appeared to have improperly solicited funding from groups that either had or would soon have matters pending before his office. Mr. Adams’s office emphasized to investigators that the slip-ups had occurred early in his administration and promised to comply with the law going forward.

Earlier, while Mr. Adams was a New York state senator, the state inspector general found that he and other Senate Democrats had fraternized with lobbyists and accepted significant campaign contributions from people affiliated with contenders for a video lottery contract at Aqueduct Racetrack.

In response to a Times examination of his fund-raising record in 2021,

Mr. Adams attributed the scrutiny in part to his race.

“Black candidates for office are often held to a higher, unfair standard — especially those from lower-income backgrounds such as myself,” he said in a statement then. “No campaign of mine has ever been charged with a serious fund-raising violation, and no contribution has ever affected my decision-making as a public official.” He added: “I did not go from being a person that enforced the law to become one that breaks the law.”

Mr. Adams is not the first city mayor whose fund-raising has attracted federal scrutiny. In 2017, federal prosecutors examined episodes in which Bill de Blasio, who was then the mayor, or his surrogates sought donations from people seeking favors from the city, and then made inquiries to city agencies on their behalf.

In deciding not to bring charges, the acting United States attorney, Joon H. Kim, cited “the particular difficulty in proving criminal intent in corruption schemes where there is no evidence of personal profit.” Mr. de Blasio received a warning letter about those activities from the city’s Conflicts of Interest Board.”

……………………………………………

“William K. Rashbaum is a senior writer on the Metro desk, where he covers political and municipal corruption, courts, terrorism and law enforcement. He was a part of the team awarded the 2009 Pulitzer Prize for Breaking News. More about William K. Rashbaum

Dana Rubinstein is a reporter on the Metro desk covering New York City politics. Before joining The Times in 2020, she spent nine years at the publication now known as Politico New York. More about Dana Rubinstein

Michael Rothfeld is an investigative reporter on the Metro desk and co-author of the book “The Fixers.” He was part of a team at The Wall Street Journal that won the 2019 Pulitzer Prize for national reporting for stories about hush money deals made on behalf of Donald Trump and a federal investigation of the president’s personal lawyer. More about Michael Rothfeld”

“A version of this article appears in print on Nov. 11, 2023 of the New York edition with the headline: INQUIRY WIDENS AS F.B.I. SEIZES ADAMS’S PHONES.”

.................

 

Curtis Sliwa and Sid Rosenberg Recommend Pro Law and Order Candidates for New York City Council, final day to vote Tues., Nov. 7, 2023

 .

Nov. 2, 2023, “Curtis and Sid’s List of Pro Law & Order Candidates for New York City Council,” WABCRadio.com

Among 12 recommendations:

Dist. 47, Ari Kagan

Dist. 19, Vickie Paladino

Dist. 22, Kelly Klingman

………………………………….

Find my district

.............................................

Early voting ends 11/5/23, Election Day 11/7/23.

…………………………….

51 districts and current office holders

………………………………

Map of 51 NY City Council districts

…………………………….

Added: Two candidates in Queens districts are running on Animal Welfare Party line:

Kelly Klingman, dist. 22, Queens, is running on Republican Party, Conservative Party, and Animal Welfare Party lines in New York City Council elections to represent District 22.

Robert Holden dist. 30, Queens, is running on Democratic Party, Republican Party, Conservative Party, Medical Freedom Party, and Animal Welfare Party lines is running for re-election to the New York City Council to represent District 30.

 

 

....................

Laughing Neocon Kevin McCarthy wears Ukraine flag and Ukraine lapel pin on floor of US taxpayer funded Congress, March 1, 2022

 .

Kevin McCarthy-Neocon, displays Ukraine flag in his suit pocket while laughing it up on floor of US Congress, March 1, 2022:

3/1/2022, "President Biden Delivers His First State Of The Union Address To Joint Session Of Congress," gettyimages.com, Washington, DC

"House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) wears a Ukrainian flag lapel pin and a pocket hanky in the colors of Ukraine while waiting for U.S. President Joe Biden's State of the Union address in the U.S. Capitol's House Chamber March 01, 2022 in Washington, DC."  (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)," gettyimages.com

.............................................................

.Added: Better view of last of "Young Guns:"

Above, 5/9/2022, “I refuse to let people forget about this image and all it stands for.” BowTiedRanger twitter

..........................................

Good riddance to last of the "Young Guns:"

 

 

ADIOS to phony "Young Guns:" Kevin McCarthy, Paul Ryan, and Eric Cantor. Their Sept. 2010 book was supposed to divert attention from the Tea Party....which in Nov. 2010 despite the Establishment's usual sabotage efforts--delivered an historic landslide of 63 seats to the GOP House. The GOP was enraged, urgently set out to "co-opt" the new people we gave them.

 

......................

 

................

200 Jumpers, September 11, 2001

 .

• Above, Jumpers, 9/11/2001, Reuters photo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Above, “The Falling Man,” 9/11/2001, ap photo by Richard Drew, via Esquire

............................... 

9/10/2011, “The 9/11 victims America wants to forget: The 200 jumpers who flung themselves from the Twin Towers who have been ‘airbrushed from history',” UK Daily Mail, Tom Leonard

• “Almost all of them jumped alone, although eyewitnesses talked of a couple who held hands as they fell.”…

…………………………….

Added:

9/10/2011, “Children of 9/11: Life with a parent missing,” Newsday, Carol Polsky

“Nearly 3,000 children under the age of 18 lost a parent on Sept 11. The average age was 9. A total of 108 were born in the months after their fathers died.”…

[Alternate link for 3000 children citation: “More than 3,000 children lost a parent on 9/11,” BBC]

…………………………………

Added:

9/6/2010, “September 11: Recalling my day at the World Trade Center,” the experiencejunkie.com by msw

“Then the crowd let out a collective gasp, I looked to see the first of many people falling through the sky. The television stations and the newspapers downplayed this aspect of a day already filled with enough shock and terror, but I place great importance on it because it immediately human-ised the situation for both myself and those around me. This wasn’t just a burning building; it was suddenly full of people, friends, and family. For me, it is the most haunting memory of the day. When I focussed on what the crowd had noticed, I too let out a cry so involuntary and so primeval that I barely recognised it as my own. It was not a piece of building falling to the ground, but a man, recognisable by his flapping tie and flailing arms and legs as he fell through the air. The situation was surreal no longer; my body shook with shock, my knees buckled and a light-headedness overwhelmed me with such severity that I thought I was either going to throw-up or fall down.

I sat down and looked up only to see more people jumping. I thought for a moment that they might have fallen, but there were too many people, their arms windmilling as they subconsciously tried to fight gravity and avoid the inevitable. Haunted by these visions numerous times since the incident, I have tormented myself by trying to imagine the extreme conditions that those people must have faced that they should choose certain death by leaping from the building over clinging to any hope of rescue. What were they thinking when they jumped; what did they think on the way down?…But my fear is that to forget is to fail the lesson and lose the opportunity. That’s why this raw wound will never completely heal and that things can never go back to ‘normal’. Because even as a simple bystander I have a responsibility to incite change for the rest of my life or I watched all those people die in vain.”

• ——————————————–

 

 .................

 

 

Surprise! Vivek Ramaswamy is a close friend of Jared Kushner and dined with Mr. Trump and Jared in Bedminster, New Jersey in 2021-NY Times, 5/28/2023

 .

“A close friend of Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, Mr. [Vivek] Ramaswamy dined with Mr. Trump and Mr. Kushner at the former president’s New Jersey club, Bedminster, in 2021, according to two people familiar with the event.”…May 28, 2023, “Trump Looks Like He Will Get the 2024 Crowd He Wants,” NY Times, Shane Goldmacher, Jonathan Swan, Maggie Haberman

 

............. 

Who hired Deborah Birx as White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator? Answer: Her “friend,” National Security Council #2 man, Matt Pottinger with help from another "friend," Pottinger's virologist wife-Debbie Lerman

 .

"Q: Who offered you the job? A: My friend Matt [Pottinger], the deputy national security advisor (p. 32)”…Virologist Yen Duong reported to Dr. Birx at CDC for 3 years sometime between 2005-2014...In 2014 virologist Yen Duong married Matt Pottinger…Pottinger was working at a Manhattan hedge fund when he was offered a job as Asia director in newly elected Pres. Trump’s National Security Council. In Sept. 2019 Pottinger was promoted to #2 man in Trump’s National Security Council behind Robert O’Brien.

8/4/2022, “How Did Deborah Birx Get the Job?,“ Brownstone.org, Debbie Lerman

“Reading Deborah Birx’s badly written, poorly edited The Silent Invasion, published at the end of April 2022, is not easy. In fact, it’s mind-numbingly tedious, especially if you try to read every word and not skim over the myriad digressions, repetitions, and multi-paged meanderings.

Nevertheless, according to The Atlantic, it is “the most revealing pandemic book yet,” detailing how “Trump’s team botched the pandemic.”

I agree that this 521-page “excruciating story” (as The New York Times calls it) is indeed revealing. However, it has little to do with Trump or what The Atlantic might consider pandemic botching.

The most revealing parts of the book are: 

1) the claims about Birx herself that, upon close inspection, make little sense, contain strange inconsistencies, or contradict other claims made in the book and elsewhere; and

2) the absurd claims about epidemiology and public health generally, and SARS-CoV-2 specifically, endlessly repeated by Birx as scientific truths when in fact they are anything but. 

Investigating these claims is important because they touch on crucial pandemic questions:

Who made the terrible pandemic policy decisions and,

perhaps most mysteriously and importantly, why?

Here I investigate the

obfuscation surrounding  Deborah Birx’s appointment

as White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator, and then the garbage science she so forcefully pushed once she got there.

How did she get the job?

I have not interviewed Dr. Birx in person, but I have read her book, as well as articles about her and interviews with her. Based on all of these, I put together a Q&A in which the questions are mine, and the answers are verbatim quotes from The Silent Invasion, as well as Dr. Birx’s testimony before the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis in the US House of Representatives on October 12, 2021, and other interviews.

Page numbers from the book and line numbers from the hearing transcript are in parentheses. Links to other articles and interviews are also included.

Q: Dr. Birx, you were officially hired as White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator on February 27, 2020.

Who offered you the job?

A: My friend Matt [Pottinger], the deputy national security advisor (p. 32)

In the Congressional hearing on October 12, 2021,

you said you did not know why Matt Pottinger was the one

to approach you for this job (lines 1505-1507). It does seem odd that Matt would be in charge of appointing a pandemic response coordinator,

since public health and epidemiology were not at all part of his experience.

As Lawrence Wright reports in The New Yorker in December 2020, “in a very noisy Administration, he had quietly become one of the most influential people shaping American foreign policy.”

So why did he hire you again?

I’ve known him through his wife. I really knew his wife. I worked with her at the CDC. [Sometime between 2005-2014] (lines 1507-1509)

Matt’s wife, Yen Pottinger, is a friend of yours?

A former colleague at the CDC and a trusted friend and neighbor (p. 32)

So Matt Pottinger was not really a friend, it was his wife you were friends with? 

I had known Matt through her eyes for the last three or four years. (lines 1526-1529)

What did you say in your Face the Nation interview on January 24, 2021 about your relationship with Matt and Yen Pottinger?

I’ve known him and I’ve known his wife for a very long time. We’ve worked on pandemics together. Both of us were in Asia during SARS. And so we understood how serious this can go.

Follow-up questions:

Matt and Yen married in 2014. Did you know Matt before that? 

[ANSWER NOT FOUND]

When you say you’ve worked on pandemics together, you do not mean you and Matt Pottinger. You mean you and Yen Pottinger [then Yen Duong] worked on AIDS research at the CDC at some point while you were there, between 2007 and 2014. Correct?

Yes

As far as you and Matt, when you say both of you were in Asia during SARS – you mean back in 2002-2003, you were in Thailand doing research on an AIDS vaccine that never came to fruition,

and Matt was a reporter for Reuters and the Wall Street Journal in China?

Yes [ref ref]

You were Yen Pottinger’s [then Yen Duong] boss at the CDC when you worked at the Division of Global HIV/AIDS,

a position you left in 2014.

What can you tell us about your friendship with Yen from the time you left that job

until Matt offered you the Covid Task Force position?

In our three years working together at the CDC, I had marveled at her abilities in the lab. (p. 32)

As early as mid-January [2020], Yen and I had been in communication about the outbreak in China. As events unfolded, we shared whatever insights, information, and anxiety we had. (p. 32)

You and Yen were communicating about your anxieties starting in mid-January [2020]. You say you were communicating with Matt even earlier than that?

Off and on in early January 2020, I’d share my thoughts with Matt: about the larger picture, about how the virus response in the United States should go, and about how the White House could better manage its messaging around the virus (p. 33)

How did you communicate with Matt?

In my back-channel communications with Matt, I pulled together all the publicly available data I’d been compiling and analyzing, connecting the dots to create a concerning picture,

and sent it to Yen to forward to him. (p. 34)

So were you communicating with Yen as a friend or as someone who conveyed your concerns, through her husband, to the White House?

In communicating with Matt, I had ensured they would have everything I was seeing, to use during White House meetings. I let Yen know that the earliest data available showed that the Wuhan outbreak and subsequent spread would be, at a minimum, ten times what SARS had been. (p. 34-35)

Why were you communicating with a deputy national security advisor through his wife?

For privacy and security reasons, I wasn’t ready to use official White House email. I trusted that Matt would share the information with those who needed it and not reveal that I was his source. (p. 34)

When you say “privacy and security reasons,” what do you mean?

Fearing blowback for stepping outside my area of responsibility, I asked him not to use my name when discussing the opinions and data I was providing. (p. 60)

You were sending Matt Pottinger, a deputy national security advisor with high security clearance, data that you say was publicly available, through his wife’s private email,

to pass on to the White House without revealing you as his source?

I had access to more unreported, real-time global data (p. 57)

Through her work, Irum [Zaidi, my PEPFAR chief epidemiologist and data person] knew another “data person,” who had access to figures about the novel coronavirus from around the world and very specific data from China. This individual was taking a great risk in passing it along to Irum, and his courage serves as an example for all of us. (p. 59)

So now you’re saying you were getting secret data (not publicly available) from China that was unavailable to Matt Pottinger (although he was the Deputy National Security Advisor for Asia), and

passing it along to him

through personal communications with his wife,

in the hopes of influencing White House policy?

What I wanted to do was define the actions being taken on the emerging virus based on the data. In my years of working with high-level leaders around the world,

I had wielded metrics to move minds

and formulate policies, standing behind data

to justify the changes (p. 34)

I communicated to Matt that we needed

to break this chain linking the novel coronavirus to SARS and the seasonal flu

and reprioritize testing, full mitigation,

mask wearing,

improved hygiene,

and more social isolation. (p. 38)

So you felt it was your job to give Matt Pottinger very specific public health policy recommendations for the White House

long before you were hired for the task force position.

But he had offered you a job as early as November 2019, correct? 

In November 2019, shortly after settling into his new role, Matt had communicated to me that he wanted me to work at the White House in some capacity as a public health security advisor. (p. 33)

Were you aware that the timing of Matt’s offer coincided with an intelligence report (denied by the Pentagon) from the National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI) about a potentially dangerous virus already circulating in China in November 2019?

[ANSWER NOT FOUND]

What is a public health security advisor? Is that related to the National Security Council (NSC) which, in your book, you say hired you through Matt?

The NSC had seen the early reports out of China and Asia before my arrival. Indeed, through Matt Pottinger, it was they who had recruited me to the White House to reinforce their warnings. (p. 169)

The NSC and Matt Pottinger had already seen the early data from China that

you said you were passing along to Matt through Yen? 

The NSC had seen the early reports out of China and Asia before my arrival. (p. 169)

When you recount how Matt called to offer you the task force job on February 23rd and 24th, you state that he had access to information you did not, correct?

Matt’s urgency represented another degree of concern: the unknown. If he was this concerned, what else was happening? What else would happen? With one of the highest security clearances, Matt had access to all kinds of information that I did not. (p. 61)

So was Matt Pottinger, Deputy National Security Advisor for Asia and a top influencer on foreign policy, with one of the highest security clearances,

depending on you for information unavailable to him otherwise,

or not? 

[SEE ABOVE ANSWERS]

At the Congressional hearing in October 2021, what did you say about your communications with Matt and Yen Pottinger regarding the pandemic?

[They] reached out to me about what I was seeing globally, what I thought this was going to become, and we were communicating primarily around what we were seeing globally on the pandemic. And more about the global response than specifically the White House response. (lines 308-309)

As mentioned earlier, you received a White House job offer from Matt Pottinger back in November 2019. At the Congressional hearing you were asked when your conversations with Yen and Matt shifted into the possibility of you “taking on a role.” (line 318) What was your answer to the Committee?

The end of January [2020], they were looking for someone to talk to the American people about the pandemic and what was being done. (lines 319-321)

In your book you describe that offer, on January 28th, as being arranged

through Yen, Matt’s wife. Correct?

On January 28th [2020]… I received a text from Yen Pottinger. (p. 32) Yen knew I would be on the White House complex for my meeting with Erin Walsh, and

the text she sent me said that Matt had a “proposition” for me.

She didn’t know any of the details, but Matt had apologized for the short notice and said he hoped we could meet face-to-face.

Yen arranged so that I could meet him in the West Wing,

and once we were both there, Matt got to the point quickly. He offered me the position of White House spokesperson on the virus. (p. 33)

Let’s recap: You’re saying the offer of a job as White House spokesperson on the coronavirus came from Matt Pottinger, a high-level national security advisor whose wife, a senior technical advisor for laboratory surveillance at Columbia University, arranged your meeting in the West Wing.

Why was Yen involved in this hiring process?

How did Yen have the authority or connections

to arrange such a meeting?

[ANSWERS NOT FOUND]

After you refused the spokesperson job several times, Matt Pottinger came back with a different offer: White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator. According to Lawrence Wright’s New Yorker article,

it was Yen’s idea to offer you the position. The article also makes it sound like this was the first time Matt considered you for a job:

At home, Pottinger fumed to Yen that eight hundred million dollars was half the sum needed just to support vaccine development through Phase III trials.

“Call Debi,” Yen suggested.

Debi was Deborah Birx, the U.S. global AIDS coördinator. 

From 2005 to 2014, she led the C.D.C.’s Division of Global H.I.V./AIDS (making her Yen Pottinger’s boss). Birx was known to be effective and data-driven, but also autocratic. Yen described her as “super dedicated,” adding, “She has stamina and she’s demanding, and that pisses people off.” That’s exactly the person Pottinger was looking for.

What are other reasons you’ve given for why you were the right person for the Task Force job?

As early as February 13 [2020], the day before I left for South Africa,

Yen and I exchanged texts.

Matt had told her

that there was a lack of leadership and direction

in the CDC and the White House Coronavirus Task Force. (p. 54)

[from Yen’s text:] He thinks you should take over Azar, Fauci, and Redfield’s jobs, because you’re such a better leader than they are. He has been underwhelmed thus far. (p. 38)

On February 26 [2020], Matt called me expressing greater worry.

He told me that every moment I delayed making my decision, 

I could potentially be costing American lives. (p. 62)

Matt seemed certain I was the missing piece. He knew I had worked on RNA viruses like SARS-CoV-2, from the laboratory bench to the community, developing tests, therapeutics, and vaccines. (p. 65)

More specifically, what epidemics or pandemics have you dealt with?

I’ve also seen the devastation that viruses mete out. HIV, SARS-CoV-1, MERS-CoV, Ebolavirus—I’ve been on the front lines and have worked with many other experts in the field as the world navigated these public health crises. (p. 3)

But in your work you actually dealt with…?

HIV, TB and malaria (p. 26)

What did your family think about the White House job offer?

Yen and I had a bit of a laugh when she asked me what my husband thought of my taking on a new role. I’d told her that, given that I was still in South Africa and he was in the United States, I hadn’t yet told him (not to mention my adult daughters) about the possible White House move. (p. 63)

How long had you been married?

I’d married only a few months before (p. 202)

You did not tell your brand new husband that you were offered a top level position at the White House?

I was that concerned about information being leaked. Who knew who was monitoring our communications? (p. 63)”

***********

“EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: HOW SHE GOT THE JOB“

“Deborah Birx, an immunologist and Army Colonel who worked for the Department of Defense and US Military on AIDS research, served as Director of the CDC’s Division of Global HIV/AIDS and as the US Global AIDS Coordinator [ref], was appointed White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator on February 27th, 2020.

She had no training or experience in epidemiology, novel pathogen pandemic response, (unless you consider combating well-established and known diseases like AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria in developing countries such response), or airborne respiratory viruses like the coronavirus.

She was offered the position by Matt Pottinger, Deputy National Security Advisor for China, who told Birx

if she did not take the job American lives could be lost.

According to Yen Pottinger (Matt’s wife) Matt thought Birx was a better leader than the heads of NIAID, the CDC and other senior public health officials.

The basis for Matt’s very high opinion of Birx’s leadership capabilities

and the importance of her appointment

to saving American lives

is unknown. 

Yen Pottinger was a researcher who had worked in Dr. Birx’s CDC lab.

Yen and Deborah may or may not have been good friends who kept in touch

after Birx left her job at that lab in 2014, the year Matt and Yen married.

Birx may or may not have been friends with Matt independently of Yen.

Yen may or may not have been the person to suggest Birx for the Task Force Coordinator job. 

Before the Coordinator job, way back in November 2019 when nobody was talking about a potential coronavirus pandemic, [#2 man at National Security Council] Matt Pottinger had offered Birx a public health security advisor job.

This may or may not have actually been a job offer from The National Security Council, which may or may not have known at the time of a potentially dangerous virus circulating in China.

At the end of January 2020, Matt offered Birx a different job, as White House coronavirus spokesperson.

Birx first learned of this through

a text from Yen Pottinger,

who claimed not to know what Matt wanted to propose, and then proceeded

– through unknown security clearances and connections –

to coordinate a meeting in the West Wing where the job offer was made.

Birx declined.

Starting in mid-January 2020, or maybe earlier, weeks before that spokesperson job offer,

Birx communicated with Yen and Matt about the novel coronavirus that she supposedly learned about on January 3rd from the news (The Silent Invasion, p. 3).

Birx was mostly communicating with Yen about her fears and anxieties and/or she was communicating with Yen and Matt about

her global observations.

Or maybe she was giving Matt specific advice through Yen regarding pandemic policies

that she wanted him to transmit to the White House.

Birx was basing her public health policy recommendations, which she may or may not have been sending to Matt through Yen in early or mid-January 2020 (when she was officially working on AIDS in Africa) on publicly available data. Or she may have had access to secret data from China. 

Matt [as an NSC official] had access to secret data that Birx did not have and seemed very concerned about the situation,

possibly due to that secret data. 

Throughout her communications with Matt and Yen Pottinger, Birx was very worried about security and secrecy,

which is why

she was using personal emails and texts rather than Matt’s official White House email.

She did not even tell her grown daughters or her husband about the big White House job offer, because she thought this was such sensitive information and who knew who was monitoring her communications.

It is unknown when Birx’s new husband learned of his wife’s big White House appointment.”

“Author: Debbie Lerman, 2023 Brownstone Fellow, has a degree in English from Harvard. She is a retired science writer and a practicing artist in Philadelphia, PA.”

……………………………………………..

Added from Ms. Lerman, 7/10/2023:

“The consensus was achieved through what Robert Malone has described as “military-grade information warfare capability and technology that was designed for our opponents outside the US and has been

turned on American citizens.”

Basically, the intelligence and national security agencies in many countries, not just the US, turned their military propaganda playbooks, originally intended to counter terrorists and topple foreign regimes,

on their own people.

We must expose as much of the propaganda network as possible, in order to dismantle the consensus narrative and arrive at the truth.”…

View all posts

********************