Replies

I’d argue the analogy might be closer to the situations below, if Zelensky’s generals manage to pull off a conventional victory:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Soviet_War_in_1920
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

My sense is that Biden will drag his heels on any aid to Ukraine to the extent he can. Both parties are on his case, so he can’t outright zero out the aid. Troops on the ground would be a no-no for this Putin lapdog, though.

Yanukovich ran to Moscow because he was Putin’s man. Who was Yanukovich’s man, who left Ukraine when Yanukovich scuttled away to his master in Russia? Zlochevsky, who *co-incidentally* owned Burisma, the outfit that bribed Biden through Hunter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mykola_Zlochevsky#Governmental_posts
[Zlochevsky served as Ecology and Natural Resources Minister during most of the first cabinet of Mykola Azarov,[1] and during both the later part of Azarov’s first government and all of Azarov’s second government, he served as deputy secretary on National Security and Defense Council (NSDC) of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych.[1]]

The bottom line? Countries don’t pay bribes. People do. If I had to guess who really bribed Biden, I’d say Putin, through a couple of intermediaries - Zlochevsky who was beholden to Yanukovich who was beholden to Putin. It’s really not that complicated, and makes for plausible deniability.

Why hasn’t the media made the connection? For the same reason it’s completely uninterested in Hunter Biden’s laptop.