Tag: ukraine

MSM Flips on Zelensky, Starts Reporting on Ukraine Corruption – Kiev Regime Leader Backtracks and Files New Bill Restoring Independence to Anti-graft Agencies

The war made Zelensky famous – and the corruption of the Kiev regime made him infamous.

The mainstream media – and people who give credence to their reporting – live in an upside-down world.

Take Ukraine leader Volodymyr Zelensky, for example: described as a ‘new Winston Churchill’, a heroic figure of nearly mythological standing.

In real life, Zelensky is a ‘president’ whose mandate ended more than a year ago, who leads a via martial law a regime packed with real-life Nazis, rampant corruption, censure of the press, outlawing of opposition parties, arresting or exiling popular opponents… the list goes on – and don’t even get us started with his widely rumored substance abuse.

Now, all of a sudden, the world’s MSM is slowly but surely turning a cold shoulder to the ‘moderately successful comedian’.

The reason is simple: the Kiev regime was reportedly on the verge of being struck by corruption investigations targeting the close circle around Zelensky.

So, they fast-tracked a bill defanging the anti-corruption agencies NABU and SAPO, subjecting them to the control of the Presidency via the prosecutor general.

Everyone and their uncle came public to protest, including the European Union and the US.

Keep reading

More Promises Of Western Aid Emboldened Ukraine To Neutralize Anti-Corruption Institutions

The EU and NATO recently promised more aid for Ukraine. The first did so in late May after the European Council created the “Security Action For Europe” (SAFE) instrument, which will provide up to €150 billion in low-interest loans for defense investments in the bloc’s members and also Ukraine, while the second came in mid-July when Trump announced that NATO members agreed to pay full price for new US arms that they’ll transfer to Ukraine. These promises emboldened Ukraine to raid its anti-corruption bureau.

Bloomberg condemned the move in a sharp opinion piece while The Economist warned that “something sinister is at work” after Zelensky then signed a law that was rushed through the Rada shortly afterwards for subordinating the anti-corruption bureau and its prosecutorial counterpart to presidential control. 

Protests have since erupted in several Ukrainian cities over the latter move, which could only be possible with the SBU’s tacit approval, but it’s premature to conclude that a power struggle is underway.

In any case, a security-related pretext was exploited to justify intimidating and then subordinating anti-corruption institutions to the presidency ahead of more promised aid from the West.

Had those promises not been made, then there’d be a lot less money to steal, thus making it less likely that Ukraine would risk negative Western media coverage by doing what it just did. After all, those moves generated more negative attention than any of its anti-corruption institutions’ accusations against state officials.

Nevertheless, precedent suggests that the West won’t curtail its promised aid despite credible concerns that some of it will be stolen, including some of the arms that NATO might soon send. Russia’s First Deputy Representative to the UN Dmitry Polyanskiy claimed last October that “15% to 20% of all military goods received by Kiev end up on the gray and black markets within the next two weeks.”

The Swiss-based Global Initiative against Transnational Organized Crime also warned about this threat in February.

The reason why Western aid will likely continue flowing into Ukraine in spite of it brazenly neutralizing its anti-corruption institutions is because that bloc has already accepted that some of it will be stolen as the price to pay for continuing their proxy war on Russia.

Keep reading

Is Trump’s Ukraine Arms Deal a Deception?

U.S. President Donald Trump has consistently insisted that the war in Ukraine “is not Trump’s war. This is a Biden war, this is a Democrat war.” But on July 14, it started to look a lot like Trump’s war, as Trump announced “billions and billions” of dollars of American military equipment to be sent to Ukraine along with “severe tariffs” to be applied to any country who buys oil from Russia if a peace deal is not reached in fifty days. But that appearance may be illusory, and the new weapons deal may be a deception.

From one perspective, Trump’s reversal may be celebrated in Ukraine as America reentering the war with the first weapons package and the first tariffs of the Trump administration. From another perspective, the U.S. just made public that its new policy direction is to pull out of the war, stop providing Ukraine with free military equipment, and leave the war to Europe if they wish to continue fighting it.

“We’re sending weapons to NATO, and NATO is paying for those weapons, a hundred percent,” Trump said. The U.S. will no longer approve weapons packages for Ukraine. Instead, they will sell weapons to NATO who will then send those weapons to Ukraine, or they will sell weapons to NATO countries to replenish weapons they have sent to Ukraine.

Though Kiev may celebrate America’s reengagement in the war, the European countries who are financing it may see it differently. “If we pay for these weapons, it’s our support,” European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas rebutted. “So it’s European support…. If you promise to give the weapons, but say that somebody else is going to pay for it, it’s not really given by you, is it?”

The Trump announcement that American weapons would once again be flowing to Ukraine may simultaneously be America’s withdrawal from the war in Ukraine, returning the burden to Europe where Trump has long said it should be.

And it is not just a question of who is supplying Ukraine with the weapons. The new weapons deal may not even be what it seems. 

The Financial Times has reported that Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky if the Ukrainian armed forces were able to bring the war to Russia and “make them feel the pain” by striking military targets deep inside Russia. “Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow?… Can you hit St Petersburg too?” Trump asked. “Absolutely. We can if you give us the weapons,” Zelensky replied. But there are reports that Trump is not willing to give them the weapons.

The same Financial Times article reports that Trump told reporters at the White House that Zelensky “shouldn’t target Moscow” and that the U.S. is “not looking” to supply long-range missiles to Ukraine. 

Keep reading

THE DAY AFTER: Zelensky Arrests Anti-corruption Officials, Signs Law Stripping Agencies of Power – Protesters Flood the Streets, and Ukraine Will Never Be the Same

The ‘defender of democracy’ is now openly challenged by his own citizens.

Many were caught by surprise by yesterday’s protests in Kiev, Lvov, Odessa, and other parts of Ukraine – after all, these are the absolute first since the war began three and a half years ago.

But here at TGP we have been closely following the escalating tensions inside the war-torn country.

Four days ago (19), we reported that Amid Collapsing Morale, Ukrainians ‘Lost Faith’ in Zelensky, With 70% Convinced That Kiev Regime Leaders Are Using the War to Enrich Themselves: REPORT.

The following day (20), there was this thought-provoking development: Pulitzer Prize Winner Seymour Hersh Reports That US May Move to Oust Zelensky, Even by Force – General Zaluzhny Would Be Tasked for Succession.

On Monday (21), we showed Zelensky’s efforts to change the image of his regime: CHARM OFFENSIVE: Zelensky Reshuffles His Government, Aiming to Show a Different Side of Ukraine for the US and the World.

Meanwhile, on the same Monday, Ukraine’s domestic security agency detained two NABU (Anti-corruption agency) officials on ‘suspicion of links to Russia’.

Finally, yesterday, after the Parliament voted to strip the Anti-Corruption agencies of any real power, it was the final straw, and Massive Protests Erupt Against Zelensky in Ukraine.

Keep reading

Russia reaffirms nuclear doctrine amid U.S.-Ukraine weapons speculation

Kremlin reaffirmed Russia’s nuclear doctrine on Wednesday, July 16. This announcement comes amid rumors that the United States might supply Ukraine with longer-range weapons capable of striking deeper into Russian territory.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov emphasized the continued validity of Russia’s nuclear doctrine, stating, “The nuclear doctrine remains in force, and consequently, all its provisions apply.”

This statement was made in response to a question about whether the doctrine’s provision, which considers any attack by a non-nuclear state supported by a nuclear power as a joint attack, was still in effect.

Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered last year to revise the doctrine in response to the U.S. allowing Ukraine to use ATACMS missiles, with a range of about 190 miles, against Russian targets. The amendments expanded the scope of countries and military alliances subject to nuclear deterrence and broadened the list of military threats. The doctrine now classifies any attack by a non-nuclear state, backed by a nuclear power, as a joint attack. This change reflects Russia’s growing concern over the involvement of Western nations in the Ukraine conflict. (Related: Putin revises nuclear doctrine, making it easier for Russia to target Ukraine with nukes.)

The situation took a dramatic turn when reports emerged that President Donald Trump had privately encouraged Ukraine to intensify its strikes on Russian territory. According to sources briefed on the discussions, Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky if his forces could hit Moscow or St. Petersburg if the U.S. provided longer-range weapons. Although Trump later denied considering such a move, the conversation highlighted his frustration with Putin’s reluctance to engage in ceasefire talks.

Keep reading

Five Reasons Why No Amount of Additional NATO Support to Ukraine Can Stop Russian Steamroller

The US and its European NATO allies are working on new arrangements to keep the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine going for as long as possible. Here’s why the outcome will be the same no matter how much additional support is delivered.

  1. Ukraine Has Already Lost

Long term, “there is no material-technical nor political strategy” to avoid Ukraine’s defeat, Quincy Institute fellow Almut Rochowanski told Responsible Statecraft this week, stressing that the West simply doesn’t have the capacity to arm Kiev sufficiently to stop it from losing more territory, troops, arms and infrastructure.

  1. Russia’s Advance Has Become Unstoppable

Case in point? The ongoing summer offensive, which even the Russophobic NYT admits has scored “its biggest monthly gains in territory since the beginning of the year” in June – attributable to advantages in troops, airpower and the “methodical” destruction of Ukraine’s army.

  1. Any New Resources Delivered Will Be Wasted

Currently, new deliveries include promises of additional Patriot batteries, sourced from European (not US) stocks, and 49 used Australian M1 Abrams tanks.

Keep reading

GERMANY wants IMMEDIATE ATTACKS ON RUSSIAN Territory. After Moscow threat of 2,000 Drone vs Ukraine

Freuding, head of the German Ministry of Defense’s Ukrainian Situation Center, stated that attacks on airfields and military infrastructure could prevent the Russian military from unleashing its offensive potential. He stated that attacks should be conducted with long-range weapons and aircraft, striking before Russian forces can commit their own resources. In addition to airfields, the general suggested targeting the Russian defense industry, while acknowledging Moscow’s significant progress in missile production. He emphasized the need to find ways to limit the development of the Russian military-industrial complex in order to slow the buildup of military potential.

Previously, Freuding announced that Germany would finance the production of several hundred long-range missiles for Ukraine, which are expected to enter service with the Ukrainian Armed Forces as early as 2025. These systems are designed to strike targets deep within the territory, including warehouses, command posts, and airfields. The production agreement was signed in Kiev in July 2025 between the Ukrainian defense industry and the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, with the support of Germany. However, the general clarified that Berlin does not plan to supply German TAURUS missiles to Ukraine, despite Kiev’s requests.

Keep reading

American Father Who Fled to Russia is Tricked and Sent to Fight on Frontlines Against Ukraine

The family of a Texas man who moved to Russia to escape liberal indoctrination says he has been “fed to the wolves” after being sent to the frontlines in Ukraine.

Derek Huffman, 46, relocated to Moscow in search of “traditional values” and joined the Russian military to gain citizenship, having been assured he would not be placed in a combat role.

The Huffmans settled in a village outside Moscow founded by American blogger Tim Kirby, which markets itself to Western families looking to reject “liberal gender norms” and avoid liberal indoctrination of American society.

Although Huffman was initially promised work as a war correspondent or vehicle mechanic, he has instead received rushed combat training and is now being deployed to the frontlines of the war with Ukraine.

“He feels like he is being thrown to the wolves right now, and he is kind of having to lean on faith,” his wife DeAnna said.

“Derek was told he would not be training for two weeks and going straight to the front lines.”

“But it seems as though he is getting one more week of training, closer to the front lines, and then they are going to put him on the front lines.”

Keep reading

Russian Drones Overwhelm Ukrainian Defenses

Russian drone attacks appear to be overwhelming Ukraine’s besieged air defenses with their highest hit rates since the war began, it was reported Monday.

Moscow’s military has used “swarm” tactics, with drones striking targets at three times the typical rate in recent months, Financial Times reported, citing official data.

Roughly 15% of Iranian-designed drones, manufactured in Russia, penetrated defenses on average between April and June. That was up from only 5% during the previous three months.

The war began in February 2022 when, in an unprovoked attack, Russia invaded Ukraine.

The increased effectiveness of the slow-moving Shaheds — drones that Russians have renamed Gerans — is due to modifications that have allowed them to fly faster and beyond the range of Ukrainian truck-mounted machine guns, Financial Times reported.

“The problem is not [that] the Ukraine air defense is getting worse. Instead, what we see is that new swarming tactics and drones are now flying in higher altitude, [which] makes them more effective,” according to Yasir Atalan, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“The increase in sheer size in launches saturates the defense systems which increases the hit rate.”

The Ukrainian air force has used electronic warfare to jam the drones’ GPS guidance systems, and anti-aircraft guns including the advanced German Oerlikon Skynex, an advanced air defense cannon.

Keep reading

Analyzing The Ambiguity Over The American-NATO Arms Arrangement For Ukraine

The offensive dimension of Trump’s new three–pronged approach to Ukraine involves the sale of American weapons to NATO who’ll in turn transfer them to Ukraine.

This aligns with what Trump told NBC several days prior to the aforesaid announcement.

According to Reuters’ sources, however, “Trump presented a framework – not a fleshed-out plan”, and some of the six countries that NATO chief Rutte mentioned will participate in this scheme allegedly only found out about it during that time.

Other reports then circulated about France, Italy, and Czechia’s refusal to participate on various pretexts ranging from their principled support for the European defense industry, which would struggle to fulfill its potential if EU countries buy more expensive US arms, to simple budgetary concerns.

The resultant ambiguity over the American-NATO arms arrangement for Ukraine that Trump announced accordingly raises questions about what’s really going on.

There are three likely explanations.

  • The first is that there were innocent communication issues between the US, NATO, and the bloc’s individual members, but that’s difficult to believe since everyone just gathered for the latest NATO Summit less than a month ago. This arrangement was presumably discussed during that time. It would also contextualize their agreement to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP, especially if the Europeans expected to purchase more expensive arms for transfer to Ukraine as part of this arrangement.
  • The second explanation is that nothing concrete was agreed to, at least with all members, during that summit. This would account for why some of them were reportedly caught by surprise and others refuse to participate. In this scenario, Trump’s announcement would have been meant to pressure them into this profitable arrangement to “save face” since all but Hungary and Slovakia (which also won’t participate) have consistently claimed that they’ll support Ukraine “for as long as it takes”.
  • And finally, the last possibility is that the analyzed media reports are part of a deception campaign along the lines of what Israeli media claimed that Trump and Bibi pulled off ahead of them bombing Iran. This version of events assumes that there’s much more agreement between NATO members behind the scenes than has been reported. The purpose of claiming otherwise would be to get Russia’s guard down ahead of what could be NATO’s rapid rearmament of Ukraine with American weapons.

Whichever explanation(s) one adheres to, more clarity will be forthcoming from Russian media reports, which will reveal the existence of these new arms on the battlefield or lack thereof ahead of the expiry of Trump’s 50-day deadline. If lots of US arms flood into Ukraine, then it’ll show that there was enough agreement and capacity to back up his threat. If not, then he might blame the Europeans for fumbling it, after which he might only impose some secondary sanctions but no longer militarily escalate.

Keep reading