Bernie Sanders, who was attacked for the alleged support his campaign received from "Kremlin trolls," is now accused of supporting a false story about how his campaign worked with that of Hillary Clinton against those trolls.

The Mueller investigation's indictment of 13 Russians, who are accused of using false identities and failing to register as foreign agents while running a clickbait operation in the US, mentions that part of their efforts were aimed at drumming up support for Sanders. Consequently, the Vermont senator found himself on the defensive, as the US media questioned how much his campaign for the Democrat nomination benefited from the alleged "Russian trolls" and whether he was aware of that help.

Last week, Sanders released a lengthy statement condemning alleged Kremlin meddling in the US election and expressing support for his rival Hillary Clinton, who "had to run against not only Donald Trump, but also the Russian government."

The Russian deputy prime minister in charge of the defense industry, Dmitry Rogozin, has said that despite Western sanctions state arms orders are being fulfilled and Russian arms exports are growing.

In a major interview with business-oriented daily Kommersant, Rogozin said that President Vladimir Putin had signed a new state program for weapons with emphasis on high-precision arms. He noted that this was particularly important for urban warfare, where the use of conventional weapons can cause huge civilian casualties which, in turn, can lead to increased support for terrorists.

"To prevent this, we should 'hit the squirrel in the eye' as hunters say. It is better to deliver one expensive but well aimed strike than 100 indiscriminate ones," Rogozin said. "We should not also forget about the realization of the global strike concept by the United States and their intention to deploy weapons into space and develop the strategic high-precision conventional weapons. For all this we will have a decent answer, believe me," the Russian deputy PM added.

On Wednesday, February 21st, the UK's Minister of Defence, Conservative Gavin Williamson, announced that the United Kingdom is changing its fundamental defence strategy from one that's targeted against non-state terrorists (Al Qaeda, etc.), to one that's targeted instead against three countries: Russia, China, and North Korea. He acknowledged that a massive increase in military spending will be needed for this, and that "savings" will have to be found in other areas of Government-spending, such as the health services, and in military spending against terrorism.

The headline in the London Times on February 22nd was "Russia 'is a bigger threat to our security than terrorists'". Their Defence Editor, Deborah Haynes. reported:

The threat to Britain from states such as Russia and North Korea is greater than that posed by terrorism, the defence secretary said yesterday, marking a significant shift in security policy.

Gavin Williamson suggested to MPs that more money and a change in the structure of the armed forces would be needed as part of a defence review to meet the challenge of a state-on-state conflict, something that Britain has not had to consider for a generation. ...

It is a departure from the national security strategy published in 2015, which listed international terrorism first, and chimes with a decision by the United States last month to declare "strategic competition" from countries such as China and Russia as its top focus instead of counterterrorism. ...

He described the Kremlin's "increased assertiveness", such as a ten-fold increase in submarine activity in the North Atlantic, a growing Russian presence in the Mediterranean region and their involvement in the war in Syria. "But then you are seeing new nations that are starting to play a greater role in the world, such as China. ...

Asked whether Mr Williamson accepted that this would have a knock-on effect for how Britain's military was structured and its readiness for war, "Yes it does," Mr Williamson replied.

"The compulsive hatred of Putin by many who have almost zero idea about Putin or Russian history is disproportionate to any rational analysis, but not surprising. Trump and Putin are like weird doppelgangers in the liberal imagination."

- John Steppling, Trump, Putin, and Nikolas Cruz Walk into a Bar

The Trump and Netanyahu governments have a problem: How to start a greatly expanded Middle-Eastern war without having a justifiable reason for one. No doubt they are working hard to solve this urgent problem. If they can't find a "justification" (which they can't), they will have to create one (which they will). Or perhaps they will find what they have already created. Whatever the solution, we should feel confident that they are not sitting on their hands. History teaches those who care to learn that when aggressors place a gun on the wall in the first act of their play, it must go off in the final act.

These sinister players have signaled us quite clearly what they have in store. All signs point toward an upcoming large-scale Israeli/U.S. attack on Lebanon and Syria, and all the sycophantic mainstream media are in the kitchen prepping for the feast. Russia and Iran are the main course, with Lebanon and Syria, who will be devoured first, as the hors d'oeuvres. As always, the media play along as if they don't yet know what's coming. Everyone in the know knows what is, just not exactly when. And the media wait with baited breath as they count down to the dramatic moment when they can report the incident that will compel the "innocent" to attack the "guilty."

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and former Speaker Nancy Pelosi want to explain to you, why the taxpayers should give the FBI another 300 million dollars. Is it to prevent terrorism...no. What about sexual predators, not at all. The alarming amount of insane people gunning people down in the streets, no, no, no...they apparently need the funds to keep The KGB out of your twitter feed.

This comes as it's been revealed the FBI already knew about the mindset of the deranged Florida shooter as far back as September, and did nothing but admit "processes weren't followed". Don't just take it from us, deep state darling CNN has already reported on this. Watch as a top analyst Lionel slams the ridiculous initiative.

Syrian government forces discovered warehouses stocked with weapons and ammunition, including arms produced in Israel, in Deir Ez-Zor, which had been liberated from the terrorist group Daesh (ISIS) on February 14. A day later, the Syrian state news agency released footage of the weapons.

Warehouses stocked with a large number of rockets, mortars, tank shells and other ammunition were discovered in Al Boukamal and Al Mayadin areas, according to SANA, Syria's state-run news agency. As the report specified, some of the found weapons were produced in Israel.

The agency, which cited sources, said the Syrian government forces also found a factory manufacturing shells and explosives as well as barrels with a strange essence that could be used for manufacturing toxic substances in one of the tunnels in al-Sbikhan village, to the east of al-Mayadin.

However, no official comments on the reports from the Syrian or Israeli side followed.

President Yameen declared a state of emergency earlier this month after the Supreme Court unexpectedly ordered that some jailed opposition members be released and that parliamentary defectors from the pro-government camp be allowed to function as opposition members like they wanted. Had this abrupt announcement entered into legal force, then the opposition would have had enough parliamentary support to initiate impeachment proceedings against the country's incumbent leader, and former President Nasheed - who's in self-imposed exile abroad in order to avoid what he claims are politically motivated terrorism charges - could have returned to his homeland and likely ruled.

Illustrating how government hides information from the American public, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch used a fake name to conduct official Department of Justice (DOJ) business in agency emails obtained by Judicial Watch. As the nation's chief law enforcement officer Lynch, Barack Obama's second attorney general, skirted public-records laws by using the alias Elizabeth Carlisle in emails she sent from her official DOJ account. In the records provided to Judicial Watch, the DOJ explains it as necessary to "protect her security and privacy and enable her to conduct Department business efficiently via email."

This begs the question of how many other government officials use fake names and whether those aliases are searched when agencies process Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Besides Lynch, we have only discovered the use of such aliases among government operatives to conduct official business at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Obama's EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson, famously used the alias Richard Windsor in a government email account to conduct official business and communicate with staff. Jackson even took required EPA computer training under the fake identity with the handle Windsor.Richard@epa.gov. She eventually resigned over the scandal, which brought to light the agency's violations of federal open-records laws.

The ongoing litigation of the DNC Fraud Lawsuit and the appeal regarding its dismissal took a stunning turn yesterday. The defendants in the case, including the DNC and former DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, filed a response brief that left many observers of the case at a loss for words.

The document, provided by the law offices of the Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the case, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, and appears to argue that if the Democratic Party did cheat Sanders in the 2016 Presidential primary race, then that action was protected under the first amendment. Twitter users were quick to respond to the brief, expressing outrage and disgust at the claims made by representatives of the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

The Defense counsel also argued that because of Jared Beck's outspoken twitter posts, the plaintiffs were using the litigation process for political purposes: "For example, Plaintiffs' counsel Jared Beck repeatedly refers to the DNC as "shi*bags" on Twitter and uses other degrading language in reference to Defendants." Fascinatingly, no mention is made regarding the importance of First Amendment at this point in the document.

The defense counsel also took issue with Jared Beck for what they termed as: "...Repeatedly promoted patently false and deeply offensive conspiracy theories about the deaths of a former DNC staffer and Plaintiffs' process server in an attempt to bolster attention for this lawsuit."

This author was shocked to find that despite the characterization of the Becks as peddlers of conspiracy theory, the defense counsel failed to mention the motion for protection filed by the Becks earlier in the litigation process. They also failed to note the voice-modulated phone calls received by the law offices of the Becks which contained a caller-ID corresponding to the law offices of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a defendant in the case. In light of this context, the Becks hardly appear to be peddlers of conspiracy theory.

The DNC defense lawyers then argued that: "There is no legitimate basis for this litigation, which is, at its most basic, an improper attempt to forge the federal courts into a political weapon to be used by individuals who are unhappy with how a political party selected its candidate in a presidential campaign."

The brief continued: "...To recognize any of the causes of action that Plaintiffs allege based on their animating theory would run directly contrary to long-standing Supreme Court precedent recognizing the central and critical First Amendment rights enjoyed by political parties, especially when it comes to selecting the party's nominee for public office."

It appears that the defendants in the DNC Fraud Lawsuit are attempting to argue that cheating a candidate in the primary process is protected under the first amendment.

If all that weren't enough, DNC representatives argued that the Democratic National Committee had no established fiduciary duty "to the Plaintiffs or the classes of donors and registered voters they seek to represent."

It seems here that the DNC is arguing for its right to appoint candidates at its own discretion while simultaneously denying any "fiduciary duty" to represent the voters who donated to the Democratic Party under the belief that the DNC would act impartially towards the candidates involved.

Adding to the latest news regarding the DNC Fraud Lawsuit was the recent finding by the UK Supreme Court, which stated that Wikileaks Cables were admissible as evidence in legal proceedings.

If Wikileaks' publication of DNC emails are found to be similarly admissible in a United States court of law, then the contents of the leaked emails could be used to argue that, contrary to the defendant's latest brief, the DNC did in favor the campaign of Hillary Clinton over Senator Sanders and that they acted to sabotage Sanders' campaign.

The outcome of the appeal of the DNC Fraud Lawsuit remains to be seen. Disobedient Media will continue to report on this important story as it unfolds.

Its allegations and practices suggest disdain for American institutions, principles, best interests, and indeed for the American people.
Stephen F. Cohen, professor emeritus of Russian Studies and Politics at NYU and Princeton, and John Batchelor continue their (usually) weekly discussions of the new US-Russian Cold War. (Previous installments, now in their fourth year, are at TheNation.com.)

The nearly two-year-long series of allegations and investigations now known as "Russiagate" was instigated by top American political, media, and (probably) intelligence elites (mostly Democratic or pro-Democratic, but not only). What they have wrought suggests profoundly disturbing characteristics of people who play a very large role in governing this country. Cohen specifies six such barely concealed truths, which he and Batchelor then discuss.