January 19, 2010:
- State department is concerned that Aristide might try to return to Haiti.
Wikileaks ➝ #25789
January 24, 2010:
- A “major developments report” sent by “MDM” states that Haitians are fed up with Preval rule. They want him out and Aristide in.
Wikileaks ➝ #9355
May 4, 2010:
- Preval threatens to extend the election. Rumor has it he wants to profit from reconstruction aid.
Wikileaks ➝ #28511
January 16, 2011:
- Baby Doc returns to Haiti.
Wikileaks ➝ #29086
January 31, 2011:
- State department receives word that Aristide may have left Africa and is in Cuba. They request more intel.
Wikileaks ➝ #28894
March 14, 2011
- Cheryl Mills, Kenneth Merten, and Thomas Adams discuss notifying Rep. Waters to give her a head’s up that they were not preventing Aristide from returning to Haiti ever, just until after the elections.
Wikileaks ➝ #8287
- Special Coordinator for Haiti, Thomas C. Adams, spoke with Congresswoman Maxine Waters. Waters reiterated the 2004 story that Aristide was kidnapped by US forces and that the Lavalas was barred from the elections. At one point she asked Adams, “what are you going to do when he [Aristide] returns in the company of Danny Glover, Harry Belafonte and maybe me, mow us all down?”
- Wikileaks ➝ #28480
March 15, 2011
- 4:12 pm Email confirms Aristide’s return.
Wikileaks ➝ #8263
- 6:57 pm State Department receives information that Aristide will return on Thursday, March 17.
- Wikileaks ➝ #8272
March 16, 2011
- 10:45 am Jean Max Bellerive tells Cheryl Mills Aristide is set to return on Friday, March 18th–not the 17th.
- Wikileaks ➝ #8269
- 7:13 pm Cheryl Mills reminds Hillary Clinton to speak with Brazil’s Minister of External Relations Antonio de Aguiar Patriota re: Aristide. A subsequent email from Clinton stated that she saw Mills’ email after speaking with Patriota.
- Wikileaks ➝ #28441
- 7:14 pm Jacob Sullivan also advises Hillary Clinton to encourage Brazil’s Antonio de Aguiar Patriota to “not let him [Aristide] transit and should convey unhappiness to SA.”
- Wikileaks ➝ #28428
March 17, 2011
- 2:00 am – 4:30 am Cheryl Mills questions US Ambassador to South Africa Donald H. Gips re: Aristide’s departure and if he will be accompanied with Danny Glover.
- Wikileaks ➝ #28420
- 4:30 am – 5:30 am Gips confirms that Danny Glover will be with Aristide and that Rep. Maxine Waters will be waiting for his arrival in Haiti.
- Wikileaks ➝ #8261
- 10:25 am -10:40 am Cheryl Mills sends out email confirming Aristide will be departing around 9:00 pm.
- Wikileaks ➝ #8259
- 11:13 am Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills discuss a State Department call to South African Minister of International Relations Maite Mashabane
- Wikileaks ➝ #8257
- 9:30 pm The make of the plane, tail number, flight plan, and time of departure for Aristide is passed along to Cheryl Mills who forwards the information to (redacted), Jacob Sullivan, and Huma Abedin.
- Wikileaks ➝ #10500
March 19, 2011
- Hillary Clinton was given numerous updates as the election progressed. One example:
- Wikileaks ➝ #6568
March 20, 2011
- US Haiti Special Coordinator Kenneth Merten comments that media outlets were aware that Aristide and the Lavalas may have been “cheated” out of the election. Thomas C. Adams and Cheryl Mills commend everyone on their efforts during the election. Mills states, “You do nice elections…and make us all look good.”
- Wikileaks ➝ #6568
Disclaimer: Ten thousand more pages of disclaimers to follow.
If you were mentioned in this article because your associate(s) did or said something stupid/dishonest, that’s not a suggestion that you did or said something stupid/dishonest or that you took part in it. Of course, some may conclude on their own that you associate with stupid/dishonest individuals but that’s called having the right to an opinion. If I’ve questioned something that doesn’t make sense to me, that’s not me spinning the confusing material you’ve put out. That’s me trying to make sense out of something that doesn’t make sense. And if I’ve noted that you failed to back up your allegations that means I either missed where you posted it or you failed to back your shiz up.
If I haven’t specifically stated that I believe (my opinion) someone is associated with someone else or an event, then it means just that. I haven’t reported an association nor is there any inference of association on my part. For example, just because someone is mentioned in this article, it doesn’t mean that they’re involved or associated with everyone and everything else mentioned. If I believe that there’s an association between people and/or events, I’ll specifically report it.
If anyone mentioned in this article wants to claim that I have associated them with someone else or an event because I didn’t disclose every single person and event in the world that they are NOT associated with, that’s called gaslighting an audience and it’s absurd hogwash i.e. “They mentioned that I liked bananas but they didn’t disclose that I don’t like apples. Why are they trying to associate me with apples???” Or something similar to this lovely gem, “I did NOT give Trish the thumb drive!” in order to make their lazy audience believe that it was reported they gave Trish the thumb drive when, in fact, that was never reported, let alone inferred.
That’s some of the BS I’m talking about so try not to act like a psychiatric patient, intelligence agent, or paid cyber mercenary by doing these things. If you would like to share your story, viewpoint, or any evidence that pertains to this article, or feel strongly that something needs to be clarified or corrected (again, that actually pertains to the article), you can reach me at firstname.lastname@example.org with any questions or concerns.
I cannot confirm and am not confirming the legitimacy of any messages or emails in this article. Please see a doctor if sensitivity continues. If anyone asks, feel free to tell them that I work for Schoenberger, Fitzgibbon, Steven Biss, the CIA, or really just about any intelligence agency because your idiocy, ongoing defamation, and failure as a human is truly a sight to behold for the rest of us.
This is an Op-ed article. The information contained in this post is for general information purposes only. While we endeavor to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information contained on the post for any purpose. The owner of this blog makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site or found by following any link on this site.
The views or opinions represented in this blog do not represent those of people, institutions or organizations that the owner may or may not be associated with in professional or personal capacity, unless explicitly stated. Any views or opinions are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual.
The owner will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information nor for the availability of this information. The owner will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or use of this information.