Russian and alt-right Interference in democracies.

Billy86

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

So you think there's nothing to the story?

Feel free to address the four articles you have been given.

MightyMandarin

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Isn't the whole political debate about ideology?

I haven't claimed Soros to be some under the bed monster, what I do think is something is extremely wrong when people outside the state department, like Soros and Blumenthal, are influencing foreign policy.

Bold part, I don't agree with her landing the job and it's one of his choices I have no problem with people scrutinizing.

In certain cases. In the case of the Alt Right however, I don't see them as legitimate in any sense other than the fact that they're a bunch of fascists who are well-spoken, intelligent people who regularly conjure up complete lies in order to fund their agenda. I respect libertarianism, anarchism, fiscal and social conservatism as legitimate ideologies, but not the Alt Right, no.

But would you say he's any worse than the Koch Brothers? They do pretty much the same thing.

Hank Scorpio

Billy86 wrote: »

Feel free to address the four articles you have been given.

I've read through them. From the WaPo

Individuals related to Uranium One and UrAsia, including Giustra and Telfer, donated to the Clinton Foundation, totaling about $145 million.

From the NYT

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock."

Those are the parts that don't add up for me. If she had no influence with the sale, why did people directly involved pay that amount of money directly to the Clinton Foundation and BC. It doesn't make much sense. The logical conclusion is obvious.

Hank Scorpio

MightyMandarin wrote: »

But would you say he's any worse than the Koch Brothers? They do pretty much the same thing.

They've told the state department point by point on what to do in foreign relations even though they're not democratically elected? Same thing with Blumenthal. It's not the same. Soros funding organisations is one thing, but directly writing memos with bullet points on what to do in foreign countries is another.

http://www.ibtimes.com/benghazi-hillary-clinton-adviser-sidney-blumenthal-had-financial-stake-us-libya-2134111

"Blumenthal was not merely acting as a steward of information to Secretary Clinton but was acting as her de facto political adviser," Gowdy said in a blistering letter to Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the Benghazi panel's top Democrat. "While Blumenthal, an old friend of Clinton's, admittedly knew little about Libya and had not ever been to Libya, Clinton seemingly read every one of his emails on the topic that began appearing out of nowhere in February 2011."

My issue is that the only reason we got to see that email is because as stated it mentioned "other channels", which makes me believe there was a lot more going on behind the scenes than what we get to see.

demfad

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I've read through them. From the WaPo

Individuals related to Uranium One and UrAsia, including Giustra and Telfer, donated to the Clinton Foundation, totaling about $145 million.

From the NYT

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock."

Those are the parts that don't add up for me. If she had no influence with the sale, why did people directly involved pay that amount of money directly to the Clinton Foundation and BC. It doesn't make much sense. The logical conclusion is obvious.

Facts of that conspiracy theory from Bannon/Mercer funded 'Clinton Cash' is here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/10/26/the-facts-behind-trumps-repeated-claim-about-hillary-clintons-role-in-the-russian-uranium-deal/?utm_term=.8660129f2871

Yourself isit

The American deep state is clearly trying to influence elections (and post elections) in the US as it has everywhere. That's a bit more scary than a few Internet posters of the alt right not liking Clinton.

Demfaq doesn't really get why the deep state doesn't like Trump either, but it isn't because of nice happy clappy liberalism but because he might interfere with the long range plans to leave the middle east in ashes.

demfad

Yourself isit wrote: »

The American deep state is clearly trying to influence elections (and post elections) in the US as it has everywhere. That's a bit more scary than a few Internet posters of the alt right not liking Clinton.

Demfaq doesn't really get why the deep state doesn't like Trump either, but it isn't because of nice happy clappy liberalism but because he might interfere with the long range plans to leave the middle east in ashes.

Everyone agrees that the Russians deliberately tried to influence the electiosn even Donald Trump eventually (except Russia).

Apparrently a lot of the leaks are coming from European intelligence who have more than enough on their own on Trump and his merry gang. Any conspiracy theories there?

Harika

Yourself isit wrote: »

The American deep state is clearly trying to influence elections (and post elections) in the US as it has everywhere. That's a bit more scary than a few Internet posters of the alt right not liking Clinton.

Who is the american deep state?
And if there such a state exists, why did they let Obama win, and before that Bush and then Trump over Rubio? Three completely different presidents, that makes no sense as it doesn't offer continuity. Or else they have no influence at all, and then we don't need to worry about it.

demfad

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I've read through them. From the WaPo

Individuals related to Uranium One and UrAsia, including Giustra and Telfer, donated to the Clinton Foundation, totaling about $145 million.

From the NYT

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock."

Those are the parts that don't add up for me. If she had no influence with the sale, why did people directly involved pay that amount of money directly to the Clinton Foundation and BC. It doesn't make much sense. The logical conclusion is obvious.

You are saying these are from newspapers but providing no quotes or links.

Yourself isit

Harika wrote: »

Who is the american deep state?
And if there such a state exists, why did they let Obama win, and before that Bush and then Trump over Rubio? Three completely different presidents, that makes no sense as it doesn't offer continuity. Or else they have no influence at all, and then we don't need to worry about it.

All of these candidates were controllable. Trump isn't. He's looking into the expenditure for these agencies and not as interested in war aa they would like.

I mean they obviously have influence if you are believing that Russia "hacked" the election you are in fact controlled by them.

The deep state is the security services CIA, FYI etc.

Harika

Yourself isit wrote: »

All of these candidates were controllable. Trump isn't. He's looking into the expenditure for these agencies and not as interested in war aa they would like.

I mean they obviously have influence if you are believing that Russia "hacked" the election you are in fact controlled by them.

The deep state is the security services CIA, FYI etc.

What makes Trump not controllable? And if the Deep State can influence elections, why couldn't they promote a controllable over a "non controllable" candidate?

demfad

Yourself isit wrote: »

All of these candidates were controllable. Trump isn't. He's looking into the expenditure for these agencies and not as interested in war aa they would like.

I mean they obviously have influence if you are believing that Russia "hacked" the election you are in fact controlled by them.

The deep state is the security services CIA, FYI etc.

Trump has picked his cabinet based on 3 influences:

The council for national policy: Religious Statists which include leaders of all right religious groups. Familiar members inc. Steve Bannon (leader tea party) and KellyAnne Conway is on the executive board. Their boss is Rebekah Mercer middle daughter of Robert Mercer.
When Cruz was beaten Trump promised this group ALL of their demands, every one. They are deep in the whitehouse with Bekah Mercer controlling the transition and her 'man' Bannon whispering in Trumps ear.

Vladimir Putin
3 FBI investigations and 2 house investigations into Trump Russia ties.
More revelatiosn day by day. The obvious is becoming obvious:
'Russian' cabinet members are Tillerson (former Exxon CEO) freeman of Russia and with a halted $500 billion oil deal between Exxon/Rosneft.
Wilber Ross: Big Russian connections through teh Russian owned bank of Cyprus.
Deal is simple. Russian sanctions need to be dropped. Price of oil needs to go up (US tells Saudi)

Trumps Kleptocracy

Satisfying his masters above, Trump is free to make money. Neither the small government Evangelists nor the small US Putin mind him stripping the Government and country down. Infact Cabinet picks are there to dismantle rather than build.

Made money on security and onvious stuff with Ivanka.
Small fry compared to dropping Pacific trade deal (he and Kushner owe a couple of billion each to China), and the awarding of 1.1 trillion infrastructure deal to crony and fellow China debtor Steve Roth.

Yourself isit

Harika wrote: »

What makes Trump not controllable? And if the Deep State can influence elections, why couldn't they promote a controllable over a "non controllable" candidate?

Obviously they can't always. Instead they make up stories about Russians hacking to influence the masses.

Yourself isit

demfad wrote: »

Trump has picked his cabinet based on 3 influences:

The council for national policy: Religious Statists which include leaders of all right religious groups. Familiar members inc. Steve Bannon (leader tea party) and KellyAnne Conway is on the executive board. Their boss is Rebekah Mercer middle daughter of Robert Mercer.
When Cruz was beaten Trump promised this group ALL of their demands, every one. They are deep in the whitehouse with Bekah Mercer controlling the transition and her 'man' Bannon whispering in Trumps ear.

First time I've seen bannon being associated with religious groups. But most republicans have ties to local religious nutcases.

Vladimir Putin
3 FBI investigations and 2 house investigations into Trump Russia ties.
More revelatiosn day by day. The obvious is becoming obvious:
'Russian' cabinet members are Tillerson (former Exxon CEO) freeman of Russia and with a halted $500 billion oil deal between Exxon/Rosneft.
Wilber Ross: Big Russian connections through teh Russian owned bank of Cyprus.
Deal is simple. Russian sanctions need to be dropped. Price of oil needs to go up (US tells Saudi)

This is a world away from Russia's hacking the election. All American politicians have investments overseas. The country most invested in controlling US politicians is Israel. Saudi Arabia also buys influence.

Trumps Kleptocracy

Satisfying his masters above, Trump is free to make money. Neither the small government Evangelists nor the small US Putin mind him stripping the Government and country down. Infact Cabinet picks are there to dismantle rather than build.

Made money on security and onvious stuff with Ivanka.
Small fry compared to dropping Pacific trade deal (he and Kushner owe a couple of billion each to China), and the awarding of 1.1 trillion infrastructure deal to crony and fellow China debtor Steve Roth.

He's dropping the Pacific trade deal because he's in debt to the Chinese but is pro Russian because he's in debt to the Russians?

demfad

Yourself isit wrote: »

First time I've seen bannon being associated with religious groups. But most republicans have ties to local religious nutcases.

The Mercer/Bannon candidate was Ted Cruz. A dominionist. They had to take on Trump. Sessions, Pence, DeVos, Flynn all Mercer people.

Heres Bannon talking at a Vatican conference. His philosophy laid out.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfeder/this-is-how-steve-bannon-sees-the-entire-world?utm_term=.pukE8Dx5Z#.js2O6NGnL

This is a world away from Russia's hacking the election. All American politicians have investments overseas. The country most invested in controlling US politicians is Israel. Saudi Arabia also buys influence.

Sanctions are $100B a year. Exxon deal = $500 billion. Low oil price = loads more. Thats 1.3 trillion minimum the difference between a Trump win Vs Clinton win.
3 FBI investigations, 2 congress investigations and half the Steele dossier verified to date. All this relating to Russian ties with Trump team. Manafort, Page, Flynn all resigned through Russian contacts. Leaked 'constant' contact during campaign between Trump team and Russian Intelligence officers.
Leaked: All Russian to Russian contacts in Steele dossier verified as true.
Second in command of Rosneft found murdered. (source for Steele dossier was very high in Rosneft). 4 Russian spies arrested for treason in Moscow who worked on US hacking etc. etc.
None of this is normal. Trump offers NO explanation to media. Everyone in Washington now (including congress Republicans) privately accept he is compromised.

He's dropping the Pacific trade deal because he's in debt to the Chinese but is pro Russian because he's in debt to the Russians?

Yes. Also Deutsche bank have been fined $10 billion for Russian money laundering. They lent Trump up to $ 1.3 billion when no other bank would touch him. (his trick of going bust instead of paying debts).
Now FBI are investigating his money ties to Russia. And there is 40 years of material there. https://www.palmerreport.com/politics/fbi-probes-trump-russia-laundering-bank/1599/

demfad

https://euvsdisinfo.eu/behind-the-scenes-at-the-swedish-troll-factory/

Johan’s boss at the troll factory also suggested that the newcomer troll should call the Washington correspondent of a major Swedish newspaper and an expert commentator and challenge claims that Russia authorities have been involved in leaks and hacking.
The investigation ties the trolling network to the extreme right wing in Sweden via identifying shared internet servers. The agenda of the political movement affiliated with the trolls is, according to the investigation, “xenophobia and Islamophobia”, combined with promotion of commentators who “support Russia after the occupation of the Crimea and the Russian-backed civil war in Ukraine”.

Yourself isit

demfad wrote: »

The Mercer/Bannon candidate was Ted Cruz. A dominionist. They had to take on Trump. Sessions, Pence, DeVos, Flynn all Mercer people.

Heres Bannon talking at a Vatican conference. His philosophy laid out.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfeder/this-is-how-steve-bannon-sees-the-entire-world?utm_term=.pukE8Dx5Z#.js2O6NGnL



Sanctions are $100B a year. Exxon deal = $500 billion. Low oil price = loads more. Thats 1.3 trillion minimum the difference between a Trump win Vs Clinton win.
3 FBI investigations, 2 congress investigations and half the Steele dossier verified to date. All this relating to Russian ties with Trump team. Manafort, Page, Flynn all resigned through Russian contacts. Leaked 'constant' contact during campaign between Trump team and Russian Intelligence officers.
Leaked: All Russian to Russian contacts in Steele dossier verified as true.
Second in command of Rosneft found murdered. (source for Steele dossier was very high in Rosneft). 4 Russian spies arrested for treason in Moscow who worked on US hacking etc. etc.
None of this is normal. Trump offers NO explanation to media. Everyone in Washington now (including congress Republicans) privately accept he is compromised.



Yes. Also Deutsche bank have been fined $10 billion for Russian money laundering. They lent Trump up to $ 1.3 billion when no other bank would touch him. (his trick of going bust instead of paying debts).
Now FBI are investigating his money ties to Russia. And there is 40 years of material there. https://www.palmerreport.com/politics/fbi-probes-trump-russia-laundering-bank/1599/

Do you have any sane links?

Those of you think the russians have a manchurian candidate think that a few years ago they picked trump. A guy so unlikely no pollster rated him at more than 1/100 a year ago.

The Russians had however something up their sleeves. They control wikileaks. Nobody thought this a few years ago. Or a few months ago when wikileaks was cool with the cool kids. Because they don't.

In fact wikileaks didn't have nothing. Nothing that was materially advantageous to the trump campaign anyhow. It did have something advantageous to Sanders campaign though, one email regarding how the DNC (which should have remained neutral) supported HRC during the primaries. This got him a few points.

Of course, by sane logic, if the Russians had leaked to wikileaks to benefit Trump they should have leaked after the primaries and if they wanted to harm HRC during the primaries they failed.

In any case supporting Sanders makes no sense. Trump would have lost to Sanders, after all, as Sanders would have picked up the disaffected working class whites ( he is not pro globalisation).

However the leaks benefited nobody but Sanders.

demfad

Yourself isit wrote: »

Do you have any sane links?

Those of you think the russians have a manchurian candidate think that a few years ago they picked trump. A guy so unlikely no pollster rated him at more than 1/100 a year ago.

The Russians had however something up their sleeves. They control wikileaks. Nobody thought this a few years ago. Or a few months ago when wikileaks was cool with the cool kids. Because they don't.

But in fact wikileaks didn't have nothing. Nothing that was materially advantageous to the trump campaign anyhow. It did have something advantageous to Sanders campaign though, one email regarding how the DNC (which should have remained neutral) supported HRC during the primaries. This got him a few points.

And of course, by sane logic, if the Russians had leaked to wikileaks to benefit Trump they should have leaked after the primaries and if they wanted to harm HRC during the primaries they failed.

But also supporting Sanders makes no sense. Trump would have lost to Sanders, after all, as Sanders would have picked up the disaffected working class whites ( he is not pro globalisation).

However the leaks benefited nobody but Sanders.

No problem supplying links but these have already been linked on this thread. Do you accept the 5 investigations into Trump Russia? What do you need? Trump Mentioned wiki leaks 141 times (will link) in the last month of presidential race. Instead of investigating Yrumps corrupt and Dodgy connections to Russia and China the media were investigating emails... Which was the whole point. Even though the emails were clean it hurt Clinton because of the 'crooked' propaganda. And the leak of the new investigations knocked her out. Trump avoided any thorough investigation into his dealings. NTtimes actually knew of the FISA FBI investigation by chose to deny. Links will follow. You too please

Yourself isit

demfad wrote: »

No problem supplying links but these have already been linked on this thread. Do you accept the 5 investigations into Trump Russia? What do you need? Trump Mentioned wiki leaks 141 times (will link) in the last month of presidential race. Instead of investigating Yrumps corrupt and Dodgy connections to Russia and China the media were investigating emails... Which was the whole point. Even though the emails were clean it hurt Clinton because of the 'crooked' propaganda. And the leak of the new investigations knocked her out. Trump avoided any thorough investigation into his dealings. NTtimes actually knew of the FISA FBI investigation by chose to deny. Links will follow. You too please

I have no links because I'm merely explaining what went on just last year. The wikileaks happened long before the primaries ended.

(As for FBI investigations these go on all the time. They will be dropped).

You haven't addressed any of my points. You've deflected. Care to?

KingBrian2

demfad wrote: »

No problem supplying links but these have already been linked on this thread. Do you accept the 5 investigations into Trump Russia? What do you need? Trump Mentioned wiki leaks 141 times (will link) in the last month of presidential race. Instead of investigating Yrumps corrupt and Dodgy connections to Russia and China the media were investigating emails... Which was the whole point. Even though the emails were clean it hurt Clinton because of the 'crooked' propaganda. And the leak of the new investigations knocked her out. Trump avoided any thorough investigation into his dealings. NTtimes actually knew of the FISA FBI investigation by chose to deny. Links will follow. You too please

The media did not take the time to research Trump's past as they already saw the result as a for gone conclusion. The media certainly dropped the ball during the election ah but sure lies and disinformation was common currency during the election by both sides. No excuses should be given to the politicians, pundits and media personalities who assisted in getting Trump elected due to their arrogance and contempt for the voters.

demfad

Yourself isit wrote: »

I have no links because I'm merely explaining what went on just last year. The wikileaks happened long before the primaries ended.

I have updates my previous post with links substantiating the 5 investigations into Trump/Russia ties, The Deutche bank 10 billion fine for Russian money laundering, the fact that Intel has corroborated much of the Steele dossier etc. etc.

Your post above simply is not good enough. In fact your assertion is completely false. You have offered no reason or substantiation for any of your points.

This link points to the first major wikileak dump being two days before the first presidential debate, displaying the strategic nature of the dumps to inflict massive damage on Clinton and help Trump.

October 9, 2016:
Just two days after Wikileaks releases their first batch of hacked emails from Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta, there is a presidential debate in St. Louis, Missouri, and it includes a contentious exchange between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton over her use of a private email server while she is secretary of state.

(As for FBI investigations these go on all the time. They will be dropped).

Can you provide another example in US history where there was 5 investigations for collaboration with an enemy State into a US president?
Can you provide an example of how and why senate intelligence comittee investigatiosn get dropped? Are you saying there is no evidence?

You haven't addressed any of my points. You've deflected. Care to?

I'm getting sick of this and I wont be tolerating it again. Please improve the quality of your posting with reason and/or substantiation. As the OP I have an interest in making this an informative thread. And I will do so. These are historical times.

BoJack Horseman

From Politico I seen elsewhere.

Donald Trump wasn’t the only presidential candidate whose campaign was boosted by officials of a former Soviet bloc country.

Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.

Understandably Kiev was bricking it when Trump was elected, but it doesn't seem to have changed their relationship wrt Washington thus far.

demfad

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The media did not take the time to research Trump's past as they already saw the result as a for gone conclusion.

There is some truth in that. But the media campaign was dominated by the Clinton emails.

The media certainly dropped the ball during the election ah but sure lies and disinformation was common currency during the election by both sides.

The use of Fake news and disinformation was massively used to benefit Trump as most of it was staged and amplified through Camridge Analytica or Russian architecture:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook?utm_term=.ocOOnkRr9#.pad0a25KN

No excuses should be given to the politicians, pundits and media personalities who assisted in getting Trump elected due to their arrogance and contempt for the voters.

I would actually gave Hillary Clinton break there. She sufferred under a massive smear campaign.

demfad

http://www.france24.com/en/20170220-interview-neera-tanden-russia-putin-media-usa-trump-france-macron-presidential-election?ns_campaign=reseaux_sociaux&ns_source=twitter&ns_mchannel=social&ns_linkname=emission&aef_campaign_ref=partage_user&aef_campaign_date=2017-02-20

'The Russians are doing what they can to bring down Macron'
France's foreign minister warned Russia this week against trying to steer France's own election towards right-wing parties with an affinity for Vladimir Putin.

Elmer Blooker

I take it you are unaware of these allegations?
https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012/

This anti-Russia propaganda has been around since the 19th century when Russia was seen as a threat to the British empire, especially India.
Goebbel's manipulated the German population about the Bolshevik threat and we know all about the red-under-the-bed 1950s McCarthy witch-hunts. Nothing new - all old hat!

demfad

The Americans interfered in 2012? Fair enough!
How is this relevant to Russians interfering today?

This anti-Russia propaganda has been around since the 19th century when Russia was seen as a threat to the British empire, especially India.
Goebbel's manipulated the German population about the Bolshevik threat and we know all about the red-under-the-bed 1950s McCarthy witch-hunts. Nothing new - all old hat!

Are you saying that reports of comtemporary Interference by Russians is propaganda? Source? reasoning?

demfad

Leaders of Germany's AFP party recently visited Moscow:

Potential Russian influence over western elections has become a sensitive issue since U.S. intelligence agencies accused their Russian counterparts of seeking to disrupt the U.S. election through hacking and cyber attacks. Moscow has denied the allegations.

Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the ultra-nationalist leader of the pro-Kremlin Liberal Democratic Party of Russia and a fan of U.S. President Donald Trump, was present at the talks with Petry, a statement posted on the Russian parliament website said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-election-afd-idUSKBN16012C

Yourself isit

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I take it you are unaware of these allegations?
https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012/

This anti-Russia propaganda has been around since the 19th century when Russia was seen as a threat to the British empire, especially India.
Goebbel's manipulated the German population about the Bolshevik threat and we know all about the red-under-the-bed 1950s McCarthy witch-hunts. Nothing new - all old hat!

It is reminiscent of the McCartney era for sure.

Yourself isit

demfad wrote: »

The Americans interfered in 2012? Fair enough!
How is this relevant to Russians interfering today?



Are you saying that reports of comtemporary Interference by Russians is propaganda? Source? reasoning?

Of course it is.

The reasoning is simple, America wants to control the middle east and overthrow dictators that it finds unfavourable to its empire. Russia interfered in Syria and it was then that the real hatred of the Russians - virulent russopobia - began.

Gatling

Yourself isit wrote: »

. Russia interfered in Syria and it was then that the real hatred of the Russians - virulent russopobia - began.

That's original but a false statement,
For some it began in Georgia ,then Ukraine , then Syria and likely the south China sea and Korea next