"Clinton lied about her perceived rival Tulsi Gabbard," the lawsuit, filed in U.S. district court in New York, read. "She did so publicly, unambiguously, and with obvious malicious intent. Tulsi has been harmed by Clinton's lies — and American democracy has suffered as well."Twitter was quick to jump on the court filing, which included a dig at the long string of mysterious deaths that seem to follow the Clinton Machine:
In October, Clinton said that an unnamed Democratic presidential candidate was "the favorite of the Russians."
"I'm not making any predictions, but I think they've got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate," Clinton said, speaking on a podcast with David Plouffe, a former adviser to President Obama.
Although she never named Gabbard, a four-term congresswoman from Hawaii, there were just five women running for president at the time: Gabbard, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Marianne Williamson.
When a CNN reporter asked Clinton's spokesperson, Nick Merril, whether Gabbard, who has served in the Army National Guard, was the candidate she was referring to, he said: "If the nesting doll fits," a reference to Russian nesting dolls.
Gabbard's suit claimed she suffered "significant actual damages, personally and professionally, that are estimated to exceed $50 million — and continue to this day."
Clinton's remarks at the time ignited a political firestorm, evoking responses in defense of Gabbard from both President Trump and fellow Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders. Clinton has not responded publicly to the suit and did not immediately respond to a FOX Business request for comment.
Gabbard's suit suggests that Clinton targeted her with a false accusation for "retribution" over her endorsement of Sanders, Clinton's rival in the Democratic primary, in 2016. (Sanders eventually endorsed Clinton for president in July 2016).
"Tulsi was told that the Clinton team would never forget this," the suit says.
We have long maintained that the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria, on April 7 2018 was faked by Jihadists shortly before they were evicted from that Damascus suburb.See also:
By the end of last year leaked documents and a whistle blower from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had proven that the OPCW managers had manipulated the report their staff had written about the incident. The OPCW inspectors who had investigated the case on the ground in Douma found that there was evidence that a chemical attack had happened. The murdered people seem in videos from the alleged attack must have died of other causes. The yellow canisters found at the locations of the alleged attack were not dropped from helicopters but clearly manually placed.
Using the Arria-formula, a procedure to have witnesses testify to the UN Security Council, Russia and China invited other UN members to listen to the testimony of OPCW inspector Ian Henderson. He denounced the false final report the OPCW management had published. Henderson, a South African engineer, was a team leader at the OPCW where he had worked for more than twelve years.
Henderson's testimony can be watched here. Transcript here.
[...]
In his closing remarks at the UNSC Russia's Permanent Representative at the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, said:Videos from Douma at the time of the incident showed some 30 bodies of dead persons. Most were children. It is up to day unknown who they were and who had murdered them. The OPCW manipulation of the original reports of its inspectors' findings is a cover up for that huge crime.Today's discussions reveal one thing clearly - that something fishy is cooking in the OPCW. When we point at it, our colleagues tell us every time that OPCW, the 2013 Nobel peace prize laureate, is the gold standard of professionalism, integrity and impartiality. We would like it to be such and we adopted a PRST in November 2019 exactly aiming at this. Unfortunately, the impartiality and integrity of the OPCW TS is seriously questioned, and not just by us and other member states, as today's presentation demonstrated. Members of the "Courage Foundation" can hardly be labeled as "Russian agents". They are reputable personalities and include such figures as Jose Bustani, first OPCW DG, respectable members of academic community, former senior officials of the US and UK intelligence community, and such names as Noam Chomsky and Oliver Stone to name a few. (You were provided with a copy of their letter and related materials).Why do some of our colleagues so vehemently defend the reports by the OPCW FFM, which some are believed were fabricated? Because any seed of doubt about chemical episodes conclusions would lead to challenging the expediency and legitimacy of already illegitimate missile attacks against a sovereign UN member state. In that light the Douma incident plays a key role. Because if it transpires that the FFM report was made up, it would lead to questioning earlier episodes like Khan-Shaykhun and others, which resulted in the termination of [Joint Investigation Mechanism].
...
Our colleague from Viet Nam asked what to do next, what are the nest steps. I think that this issue must be discussed at the OPCW. Legitimate questions and issues that member states face should be addressed and discussed. The question why the first report of the OPCW FFM was shelled initially, and then disappeared and destroyed should be answered. So far we are denied - we and other member states - are denied such an opportunity.
Comment: The virus is feared to be adapting too fast for China to deal with. It has asked for help from WHO: