Author Archives: RomanInUkraine

REPORT: FBI Sat On Evidence Tying The Clintons To A Russians Bribery Scheme

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reportedly buried evidence tying the Clinton Foundation to a Russian bribery scheme underway as the Obama administration decided whether or not to give Moscow control over U.S. uranium reserves.

FBI officials collected evidence of a Russian bribery scheme that started as early as 2009, including “an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow,” The Hill reported Tuesday. . . .

Rosatom began its Uranium One takeover in 2009, and U.S. officials approved the Uranium One take over in October 2010. The takeover gave Russia control over 20 percent of U.S. uranium reserves.

The merger lasted through 2013, and during that time donations from the charitable foundation of Uranium One’s chairman donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Former President Bill Clinton also got $500,000 for a speech he gave in Moscow shortly after Rosatom announced its plans to take control of the Canadian mining company. Clinton was paid by a “Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock,” The New York Times reported in 2015.

Report: FBI Uncovers Confirmation of Hillary Clinton’s Corrupt Uranium Deal with Russia

Told you so!!!

New evidence has emerged to confirm Peter Schweizer’s account in his bestselling book Clinton Cash about the corrupt tactics behind former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s approval of Russia’s purchase of 20 percent of U.S. uranium.

Josh Solomon and Alison Spann report in The Hill:

Before the Obama administration approved a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow control of a large swath of American uranium, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the United States, according to government documents and interviews.

Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive financial records, make secret recordings and intercept emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.

They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow, sources told The Hill.

The racketeering scheme was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia who “shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit years later.

Opinion: Ukrainian economy completely unprepared for likely halt of Russian gas transit

For several years, Russia has been warning—consistently and clearly—that it intends to stop using Ukraine as a transit country for sending its energy to Western markets. If this happens, a major hole will open in the Ukrainian economy which Europe and the United States do not appear to be prepared to fill.

Consistently, I am amazed at analysts who produce pages of plans about how to reorient Ukraine’s geopolitical focus Westward and embed Ukraine in the security architecture of the Euro-Atlantic world, yet assume that Ukraine’s economic relationship with Russia will continue unabated. In the 1990s, this was not an unreasonable assumption, because Russia had no choice but to rely on existing Soviet-era infrastructure networks and had no wherewithal to construct alternatives. Thus, the economic-security balance that had emerged after the fall of the USSR—where Russia needed to sustain Ukraine (notably with below-market price energy) in order to guarantee that it could sell the rest at much higher prices to paying European customers—made sense.

It was not always going to be sustainable, and we saw how both Russia and the Baltic States, for their own security interests, moved to alter this implicit bargain: the Baltic States started by developing alternative sources of supply and taking the very painful short-term steps to reform their economies away from the narcotic of lower-cost Russian energy and raw materials. Russia, for its part, after it became clear that Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia would enter both NATO and the EU, developing an entirely new northern export infrastructure based out of the St. Petersburg region that allowed Russia to stop its dependence on Baltic access. . . .

Ukraine . . . has dramatically demonstrated its ability to buy gas, oil and coal from non-Russian sources—with gas being shipped in from European partners to the West and a shipment of U.S.-produced coal arriving in country. But these alternatives are more expensive for a struggling economy—and the real shock will come when Russian transit fees cease. The Ukrainian state energy company will be left with a network of lines, storage depots and pumping stations which will need to find new customers. Perhaps some energy from the Caucasus could be sent via the Odessa-Brody route from the Caspian to Europe, but that will not produce enough replacement income.

Letter to the left

I regard it as a bit of a tragedy that Universalism is dead. More and more conservatives are saying this:

We reject your observations. We reject your logic. We reject your conclusions. And most importantly, we reject your demands. We have no common ground to build on. We have no common vision to work toward. No amount of shaming and pearl-clutching outrage will change my mind – you’ve exhausted your credibility. If you want cooperation, show me what is in it for me, my family, and my extended family.

Mikheil Saakashvili had a rally here in Sumy today

Account of an acquaintance:

Mikheil Saakashvili had a rally here in Sumy today. It was very sad to hear what horrible shape this region is in. There is VERY high unemployment and many young people are going to Russia or elsewhere in order to find work.

Yanukovych closed many factories in this region because they would not support him in his race against Yulia and now Poroshenko is closing factories because they produce sugar and this is a source of competition for him. More proof that the President here couldn’t care less about his people.

He had a reasonably nice sized gathering considering the lousy weather. By the end of his talk, the feeling was that the Sumy Region’s future is extremely dismal.

Ukrainian border guards were kidnapped during consultation meeting

Ukrainian border guards were kidnapped during consultation meeting, – Border Service Head Tsyhykal

The State Border Guard Service has decided to limit the number of border consultation meetings with Russia due to kidnapping of two border guards in the Sumy region.
This was announced by Head of the State Border Service Petro Tsyhykal, Censor.NET reports citing 112 Ukraine.

He said regular border consultation meetings between two neighboring countries is common practice around the world, but given Russia’s unpredictable behavior, the Border Service has decided to limit their number.

“We have decided to limit these meetings to the level of heads [of border guards serviced – ed.] in order to secure personnel who are less prepared,” the head of the agency said.

Tsyhykal said the two border guards from the Sumy unit were kidnapped by Russians during such a meeting. He says the Russians did not necessarily entered the Ukrainian territory but kidnapped the officers from the border. Source:

Ukraine’s National Museum of Art

A beautiful but decrepit building in the center of Kyiv holds this fantastic art. Visiting was great for my soul. I’m reminded that I’m part of a long story. It makes me anxious for professional success, so that I can go back to writing.

(click image for high-resolution version)

Kozak Mamay, singing about the great kingdom which used to be here . . . before the Mongolian apocalypse. We were kings.

In the background is the Podil region of Kyiv. We used to live there.

A portrait of Repin — he’s the artists who painted many scenes of Ukrainian life, include Ukraine’s most famous painting Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks

“Taras Bulba”

“A Victim of Fantaticism”

I love this picture. Look at the warm lights in the village homes.

Bohdan Khmelnytsky enters Kyiv

Appropriate facial expressions for communist art. Appropriately pathetic meal too.

We recognized this right away. It is an old picture from the park near our home.

Lower pictures is a Jacques Hnizdovsky (the diaspora’s most famous artist)


The museum was conducting a survey about some artist’s work which had been destroyed at the nearby Arsenal Museum. One of the questions is whether the Arsenal Museum should be boycotted.

Solzhenitsyn on nationalism, identity

Before the camps, I regarded the existence of nationality as something that shouldn’t be noticed – nationality did not really exist, only humanity. But in the camps, one learns: if you belong to a successful nation, you are protected and you survive. If you are part of universal humanity, too bad for you.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Two Hundred Years Together (2002)

Józef Piłsudski – “There can be no independent Poland without an independent Ukraine”

In the wake of the Russian westward offensive of 1918–1919 and of a series of escalating battles which resulted in the Poles advancing eastward, on 21 April 1920, Marshal Piłsudski (as his rank had been since March 1920) signed a military alliance (the Treaty of Warsaw) with Ukrainian leader Symon Petliura to conduct joint operations against Soviet Russia. The goal of the Polish-Ukrainian treaty was to establish an independent Ukraine and independent Poland in alliance, resembling that once existing within Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth[84] In return, Petliura gave up Ukrainian claims to western lands of Galicia being a historical part of the Crown of Poland, for which he was denounced by Ukrainian nationalist leaders.[55]

The Polish and Ukrainian armies, under Piłsudski’s command, launched a successful offensive against the Russian forces in Ukraine. On 7 May 1920, with remarkably little fighting, they captured Kiev.[85]
Piłsudski (left) and Edward Rydz-Śmigły (right), 1920, during Polish-Soviet War

The Bolshevik leadership framed the Polish actions as an invasion; in response, thousands of officers and deserters joined the Red Army, and thousands of civilians volunteered for war work.[86] The Soviets launched a counter-offensive from Belarus and counter-attacked in Ukraine, advancing into Poland[85] in a drive toward Germany to encourage the German Communist Party in its struggle to take power. . . . Yet over the next few weeks, Poland’s risky, unconventional strategy at the August 1920 Battle of Warsaw halted the Soviet advance.

Treaty of Warsaw (1920)

Piłsudski was looking for allies against the Bolsheviks and hoped to create a Międzymorze alliance; Petliura saw the alliance as the last chance to create an independent Ukraine.

Piłsudski also wanted an independent Ukraine to be a buffer between Poland and Russia rather than seeing Ukraine again dominated by Russia right at the Polish border.[5] Piłsudski, who argued that “There can be no independent Poland without an independent Ukraine”

New Yorker sympathetic to the Frankfurt School

The Frankfurt School Knew Trump Was Coming

In 1950, Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno helped to assemble a volume titled “The Authoritarian Personality,” which constructed a psychological and sociological profile of the “potentially fascistic_ _individual.” The work was based on interviews with American subjects, and the steady accumulation of racist, antidemocratic, paranoid, and irrational sentiments in the case studies gave the German-speakers pause. Likewise, Leo Lowenthal and Norbert Guterman’s 1949 book, “Prophets of Deceit,” studied the Father Coughlin type of rabble-rouser, contemplating the “possibility that a situation will arise in which large numbers of people would be susceptible to his psychological manipulation.”

Adorno believed that the greatest danger to American democracy lay in the mass-culture apparatus of film, radio, and television. Indeed, in his view, this apparatus operates in dictatorial fashion even when no dictatorship is in place: it enforces conformity, quiets dissent, mutes thought. Nazi Germany was merely the most extreme case of a late-capitalist condition in which people surrender real intellectual freedom in favor of a sham paradise of personal liberation and comfort. Watching wartime newsreels, Adorno concluded that the “culture industry,” as he and Horkheimer called it, was replicating fascist methods of mass hypnosis.

My leftist friends can’t imagine . . .

I get the sense that my leftist friends think it a curiosity of history that in communist countries, one in ten (the precise number varied by country) people was a government informant, condemning others to hard labor or death.

The complicity in mass slavery and mass murder should not seem distant and far away. Just imagine people like yourself: trembling with rage at the perceived injustice by members of the oppressor classes. And screaming with the mob for your rightful bounty which, tantalizingly, lies just one execution away.

(Because you couldn’t possibly be responsible for your own failures. No way. It is the fault of the oppressor class.)