All hat, no cattle cowboy Trump

First of all, it is obvious that Donald Trump will fully fulfill his current presidential term in the White House. The color revolution against him launched by rogue elements within the US intelligence agencies and Democratic Party brass (dominant Clinton wing) failed. Ukrainegate actually increased Trump chances. If House DemoRats censure him Trump wins, if they will send article of impeachment to Senate Trump wins big; you can only imagine the effect of Schiff testifying under oath about his contact with Ciaramella, or Hunter Biden testified about his role as mule for money paid for his father lobbing of Ukrainian interests. Moreover nether Republicans not Democrats in this Kabuki theater will dare to touch real issues, such as how to restore middle class jobs in the USA, why Obama crashed fragile constitutional order in Ukraine and installed far right junta. Or Trump role in fueling Yemen war and false flag Douma operation (which brought the world close to the war between the USA and Russia). the ill talk about superficial crap, but never about the real issues.

Many things in this fake drama defy an explanation: if we assume that Trump is the first Zionist president (or may be second after LBJ) then why members of Zionist lobby such as Schiff, Schumer, Pelosi, etc are relentlessly attacking him? Is this issue of skeletons in the closet that they are afraid can be revealed by Trump (so far he behaves as Washington neocon swamp expected and classified JFK documents, 9/11 documents and other damaging to three letter agencies staff) , or something deeper. Why MIC which is royally fed under Trump and Trump militarism at least verbally probably exceeds militarism of all previous three presidents combined; there is only thing he so far avoided -- starting a war with Iran (the war which could became fatal for the USA centered neoliberal empire, like WWI and WWII were for the British)

In view of increase of Military budget under Trump (which might be a part of military keyseanism strategy, who knows) it is unexplanable why we have this Neo-McCarthyism campaign against his supported by both Parties and all major MSM: is the reason the danger to neoliberal globalization that still Trump represents, or just his unpredictability ? Of the fact that due to the ciris of neoliberalism inthe USA and loss on confidence of deplorables in neoliberal elite, the neoliberal elite now needs a permamnt scapegoat (Look Jonny skwirrel) to distract people from real problems and preserve its power?

The other question is why Trump administration recycled the same compromised set of neocons as Bush II administration (including several war criminals who were instrumental in unleashing the Iraq invasion) ? Now incompetent, reckless and greedy warmongering careerists like Fiona Hill and Eric Ciaramella got to NSC? Is Trump completely detached from reality and he did not particulate in selection of key positions in his administration allowing it to be run by neocon who was his Chief of Staff? If so why he decided to run for Presidency at all? To became a joke ?

Most probably Trump will be the Presidential Candidate from the Republican Party in 2020 elections. Accordingly, the "tradition" of re-election of the current US presidents, which has been consistently maintained since Bill Clinton he has a good chances to be reelected. Several factors outlined below works in his favor. crimes that he did committed (Douma false flag, war crmes in Yemen, economic blockade of Venezuela, abrogation of international treaties, etc) committed does no bother the US electorate much. With Mueller final report he got considerable boost. which doubled with the Pelosi impeachment gambit which spectacularly low up in her face.

Some observers think that Mueller final report and Schiff-Pelosi impeachment fiasco decided 2020 election for Trump essentially painting Democratic leadership as traitors of the country for the electorate of critical for the victory Midwestern stated. Uncontrolled and greedy elite, which are are ready to perform to any dirty trick to get back to power: (MoA, May 28, 2019):

Now it is clear that people who voted for Trump in a hope of positive changes declared him during his election campaign are brutally deceived. Same faction fo former Trump voters will not vote again. They probably will not vote again: neither for Trump or for anybody else as sequence of Obama betrayal of blue collar voters following by Trump betrayal delegitimized the idea of election in the USA.

At the same time Trump tenure was not absolutely negative. He proved to be quite adept exposing the Deep State and the perverted nature of the US neoliberal empire. Which tried to depose his launching RussiaGate and the Ukrainegate (which is Russiagate 2.0) of false premises. He survived to vicious witch hunts, which is not easy and is a real achievement. For that we can be eternally grateful for him and his Twits. It is role of Trump of exposing the Deep State that was the most positive aspect of his Presidency.

The rise of the "alt-right" (and Trumps is a side effect of this rise) in the US and Europe is a response to neoliberal globalization's and its social consequences for workers. In the US, the working class was so desperate for someone to speak to their economic anxieties, that a large portion of them placed their hopes on Trump. Or at least they have shown middle finder to DemoRats (Neoliberal Democrats, or Clinton, the dominant wing of the Democratic Party) -- the Party which completely betrayed their interests and was sold by Bill Clinton to Wall Street.

Neoliberal and controlled by them intelligence agencies tried to make 2016 elections a formal procedure similar to one which were held in the USSR. You just vote, but you decide absolutely nothing. You only legitimize the rule the oligarchy ( Party Nomenklatura in case of the USSR, financial oligarchy in case of the USA). But this time they miscalculated. The level of anger against neoliberalism was such that their candidate Hillary Clinton suffered the most devastating political fiasco in memory. And this situation might repeat in 2020 as DemoRats "forgot nothing and learned nothing" -- the same situation Talleyrand spoke about in his famous quite. Pelosi gang overplayed their hand in Ukrainegate and now need to face confusedness.

Moreover if Trump sails into recession he is finished. Meanwhile many economists predict the next the USA recession can be in the cards in late 2020 anyway. And with his trade war with China Trump definitely can speed up onset of this next recession. While it is difficult to predict the start of recession, 2019 feels a little bit like 2017 using, for example, in such metric as overinflated housing prices. As well of the level of complacency in the stock market.

When DemoRats (Clinton wing of Democratic Party) dusted off and added Joe Biden to the already overclouded roster of candidates (and probably somewhat falsified polls to show that he is a leader and thus artificially created a strong following for his candidacy), that was clearly a move favorable to the reelection of Trump. A very favorable for Trump event. Biden has zero chances against Trump, because like Hillary he represents "kick the neoliberal can down the road" policies, which electorate already rejected in 2016.

And it is true that DemoRats in DNC are afraid of Bernie Sanders more then of Trump, so DNC will try to derail his candidacy again by what ever means possible including fraud (in this case it can take selection of candidate by the party brass in the second vote, when Superdelegates will become the decisive voting block; that's probably why Biden was dusted off -- to get to the second round of voting where Superdelegates decide the Party candidacy)

In case DNC manipulates the result in favor of Creepy Joe Biden, Trump probably will crush him. Biden is just a pale shadow of Bill Clinton -- corrupt to the core neoliberal with a lot of skeletons in the closet. Among the major for Creepy Uncle Joe (as WaPo nicknamed him) are

The main facts about Trump presidency

So there are many "known unknowns" in the current race. But as for the results of Trump two years in power most key facts are know. We can speak about the main five:

Some of this items in Trump score card are covered below, but here is a pretty biting satire that summarizes Trump 'achievements" much better that I ever could (from a comment at zerohedge.com, Apr 15, 2019)

Trump betrayal of his 2016 voters

Trump surprise victory in 2016 has shown that back in November of 2016, the American people were so fed up with the neoliberal oligarchy that they actually elected Donald Trump president, despite his obvious flaws, just to show middle finger to the neoliberal establishment.

But the part of Trump voters that sincerely believed in his election rhetoric and assumed that Trump like FDR before him is the traitor of his class and will institute the necessary reforms to help blue-collar workers and lower middle class is up to a rude awakening.

He betrayed them both in domestic and foreign policy. He did very little useful for the majority of his voters (blue color voters) -- outscoring of US jobs continued unabated. Trying to hide his fiasco, Trump tries to prop up the stock market and brags about low unemployment (U3 measure) but U3 measure is fake and U6 measure which is more realistic stands currently at around 8% (Current U-6 Unemployment Rate ). Gallup U6 unemployment rate estimate is no longer available, but it used to be 1%-1.4% higher then official figure, so it is reasonable to assume that in reality it is still hovering around 9-10%. Ten percent is a very scary figure which means "one out of ten." Only during Great Depression the US unemployment was over ten percent for several years (at this time they measured only U6, U3 was invented later to hide the real unemployment statistics):

Official U-6 Unemployment was 10.1% in January 2017 when Trump term started, with a long term peak at 17.9% in February 2010. The standard of living of lower 90% of the US population continued to drop (with large swats of US population living essentially in the third world conditions), good, well paying job are even more scarce, outsourcing and offshoring continues, and medical costs and the cost of education are higher then they were before. So two years of Trump was a kind of "Trump university" training for Trump electorate. In case of Trump university he took the money and run, in this case he took votes and run ;-).

So far, Donald Trump has passed only one significant piece of legislation: the 2017 tax cut. Corporations and rich were principal beneficiaries. They already saved more than $150 billion, and over the course of a decade the Trump tax cut will probably increase the budget deficit by around $2 trillion. It did little to nothing for key Trump voters. The tax cut was supposed to do more than just give stockholders more money. It was supposed increase economic growth, 3 percent or more at an annual rate. In reality, the expectation that the tax cut would work miracles were based on a specific story about what is holding the US economy back. And that story was all wrong. So it was a brief sugar high after which GDP growth started to decelerate.

Economics probably will work against the Trump re-election: it is slowing and in late 2019 or early 2020 might start slipping into recession. While GDP is a questionable metric of economic performance (especially in in economics with the large financial sector like the USA), the trend shown on the picture below is not favorable for Trump.

Some early sign of mental degradation

During Russiagate neoliberal MSM tried to present Trump as crazy. Throughout the campaign and Trump's first year in office, news articles, op-eds, and tweets critical of him have routinely used words such as "crazy," "insane," and "unstable" as epithets. But this is a typical war propagandaa tactics that implied demonization of the enemy, just extended to using mental health language in political battles?

Paradoxically like in case with Hillary we now are more concerted about Trump mental health because of his narcissistic overt behaviour and the fact that he is over 70 and at this age many people already display early signs of mental degradation. Donald Trump at the time of his inauguration was older than half of the US deceased former presidents at the age when they died.

And persons over 70 usually have some mertal deseases at least at very eary stages Not necessary dementia or Alseyment (Trump father dies of Alseimer), but often mild signs of Aphasia. Aphasia is best thought of as a collection of different disorders, rather than a single problem. Each individual with aphasia will present with their own particular combination of language strengths and weaknesses. In a common form of Aphasia called Progressive Jargon Aphasia speech is fluent and effortless with intact syntax and grammar, but the person has problems with the selection of some nouns. They just can't be retrieved from the memory. For example, they know that Forrester is produced by the Japanese company but can't name the company (Subaru) despite knowing it in the past, unless reminded. After that they use if effortlessly. They just can't retrieve the word from the memory. People with jargon aphasia often invent substitutes for nouns that went "into the black hole"

Also at age over 70 the real physical and mental load of running the President Office might be neurologically destructive. At this age this level of stress and mental load greatly speed up development of any pre-existing mental conditions. Most observer note Trump's “psychological instability” and “unpredictable behavior.” You can see on YouTube video how strangely he handle Melania Trump presence (he usually does pay any attention to her presence at all):

Stimulants have caused stroke, heart attack, and sudden death in people with heart conditions and/or high blood pressure. Of cause NYT alarmist article with the claim that high cholesterol necessarily entails additional risk should be discarded (it matter mostly for people with pre-existing heart conditions and/or procedures like cardiac stents or cardiac bypass), but for a man over 70 with not very healthy diet (Trump rumored to have unbalanced diet with way too much meat) and hectic lifestyle inherent for the President everything might matter.

While sign of mental degradation of Trump are less evident then in case of Hillary some on them are objectively present.

Here the goal is not to define the problem, but just to warn that he probably is not the person to vote for.

Trump 2016 platform that he completely betrayed

As comment in Economist's View stated during election cycle of 2015-2016 "Trump has a four point platform that was anti-neoliberal in its essence":

Factors the will work for Trump relection in 2020

Lost categories of voters

As he almost completely betrayed his 2016 election platform by his actual policies and he probably will lose certain categories of voters. So we can expect lesser voters enthusiasm and lower percentage of Republican voters participating in the 2020 elections. As Trumps was hypocritical on the illegal immigration issue because he has an opportunity to do something his first year in office when Republican has the majority in the Congress but did absolutely nothing, mainly continuing his propaganda campaign and implementing some superficial measure like directed against arrival in the USA Muslim extremists (with the exception of Saudis of cause). Even more grave was his open and blatant betrayal of blue collar voters and lower middle class voters which can result in the defection of significant chunk of his dormer voters. To add insult to injury he proved to be argent militarist and militarism is the most sure way to further impoverishment of the middle class. Among them:

He can no longer present himself as kind of political "Tabula rasa" in newcomer, pristine candidate against corrupt Washington oligarchy into which one can project his/her own desires. Now he has political baggage and it is not pretty. Looks like he is completely in pocket of neocons and Israel lobby. In this sense appearance of the books like Kushner Inc will do some damage among highly educated independents, who previously voted for Trump (not a major group, but still...)

You might be surprised, but this page is the page written by former Trump supporter as is evident from the coverage of 2016 election campaign on this site.

In one short sentence the net result of "two years of Trump" is "buffoonery." Often very dangerous buffoonery which in foreign policy was intermixed with bulling and bizarre moves done without any consultation with key administration members, only of request of Kushner Inc. I like how discredited by Iraq war fiasco neocons like Max Boot or Robert Kagan derisively talk about authoritarians in foreign countries they do not like ;-) Now we have the same problem at home, but those despicable MIC stooges will never admit that.

In any case, this "very stable genius" proved to be impulsive and utterly incompetent, especially in foreign policy area. But usually the foreign policy of American presidents (and Trump in this case is no exception) does not have much influence on domestic political life. An old joke about the average American voters is that "half of his brain is occupied by a hamburger, and the other half by American football" still applies. If this is true then for foreign policy there is simply no place. And for the majority of American voters, therefore, it does not matter much what the us President does outside the country and what foreign policy course he follows as long as it does not directly affect his well-being or standard of living.

In domestic policy Trump became a marionette of Goldman and Sachs propagating "National neoliberalism" (which includes Neoliberal Deregulation and continuation of outsourcing and offshoring with decimation of well-paying US jobs and replacement them with McJobs and perma-temps). His tax cut was a travesty and did not affect positively his votes, outsourcing continues, financial firms continue to loot the country, banks, monopolies like Amazon and Google and transnational companies have outsize political influence in Washington. In other words swap consumed Trump and his claim that he will drain the swamp is not a bad joke. He became a part of the swaps.

In foreign policy he became a marionette of neocons and Israel lobby and despite lesser weight of foreign policy in the US elections it definitely became Trump liability. As Mueller investigation raised the question about foreign influence on the US elections and many understand that Russian influence is just a smoke screen hiding real Great Britain, Israeli and Saudi influence ( a well informed part of US voters think about Russiagate as another instance of Iraq WDMs scare which brought the country into Iraq war ).

Israel lobby might become a wedge issue in the incoming elections, and here Trump connection to Zionist donors and shady figures like Kushners might be liability. His appointment of Jared Kushner as Mid-East envoy is a classic example of both nepotism and incompetence. his cozy relations with Israel right wing Prime Minister Netanyahu also might slightly backfire depriving Trump of anti-war votes. Here is how Daniel Larison the leading political analyst in highly respected The American Conservative magazine recently ( March 21, 2019 ) characterized Trump attempt to ensure Benjamin Netanyahu victory in oncoming Israel elections by violating all existing international law norms and US resolutions and using the old principle "the might makes right" (Trump Puts America Last )

On domestic front Trump also failed measurably to fulfill his election promises. he did not built the wall. He did not stem the flow of illegal immigrants (and how can he is he is a "national neoliberalism" adherent; national neoliberalism approves slave labor). Moreover, Trump's key promise to voters was to raise the standard of living of the middle class and create meaningful jobs. That was a blatant deception on his part, as he did nothing to alleviate the plight of common Americans who suffer under neoliberalism "without jobs, without perspectives, being treated as disposable napkins"

Trump did introduced changes in the US neoliberal system, converting it into a new flavor of neoliberalism which can be called National neoliberalism. As Sheldon Wolin observed about previous administration (and this process of conversion started under Bush II, not under Trump, this is slide toward "inverted totalitarism" form of governance, where population has no voice in determining either domestic or foreign policy:

In this sense Trump is a very dangerous development, despite his buffoonery. Like in Germany in 1920-1930th immiseration of blue collar and lower middle class create a favorable conditions for rise of ultra right supported by military brass and financial oligarchy, who are afraid of political measures eroding their political power and wealth. and instead of the USA oligarchy (Bush family in particular) support of nazy party we have Great Britain support of intelligence agencies coup against Trump. And the remaining most staunch supporters of Trump are from the ultra-right segment of population.

The damage that the re-imposition of US sanctions is doing a great damage to Iran’s economy, but inflicting pain for its own sake is pointless cruelty. The US gains nothing from this, and it imposes high costs on the Iranian people who bear most of the burden. Actually higher oil price damages the US economy too. This is a typical MIGA policy and Trump pandering to Zionist lobby is one of the factor that will prevent many people voting for him in 2020. The last thing the people od the USA need is a foreign lobby stooge in the White House. Actually Russiagate should properly be investigation about Israel and Great Britain interference in the the US election. Russian interference is just a smoke screen designed to hide those obvious two as well as Hillary political fiasco.

National neoliberalism is neoliberalism without neoliberal globalization, or, more correctly, where globalization was replaced by colonization (if necessary by military means) and the direct dictate and bullying. Which makes is similar to national socialism, but without national socialist domestic social policy elements. If one looks at NSDAP program of 1920 paradoxically those social demands position national socialist of 1920th to the left of the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party, which is in the pocket of financial oligarchy and is ready to privatize Social Security and Medicare to please its Wall Street sponsors. To say nothing about Republican Party and Trump:

All that means that national socialism became now like in 1920 attractive again and in sole form is present in resurgent far-right movement all over Europe, where in several countries they are already in power. The USA is late to the party but is no exception.

In no way those changes favor the 'deplorables" -- bottom 90% of the US population, which brought Trump to victory. So it would be only fair if Trump loses 2020 election. But the US political system is more complex that this simplistic reasoning and I would not predict the result of 2020 elections ;-)

During 2016 elections Trump, with all his buffoonery and clownish acts, at least is able to offer some hope to many disenfranchised US voters and has shredded the myth of invincibility of the establishment candidate, neocon warmonger Hillary. But after coming to power Trump behaved like Bush II trying to bully its way toward world hegemony. In a way Trumpism emerged from the Pandora's box of Bush policies that destabilized the Middle East and his "you are iether with us or against us dilemma." In the process he lost a large part of his votes, including anti-war independents. Logically, his incompetence and incoherence almost guarantees that he'll be a one-term president, but again the US political system is pretty unique and often behave illogically (there are some analists who try to promote hypothesis that Trump is playing more complex game that it appears, some kind of 4 dimensional chess, but this hypothesis does not stand Occam razor test)

President Donald Trump is completely captured by neocons. And one of prime cause of that isolation is his wet kiss with neocons, especially the appointment of John Bolton. Since taking over as National Security Advisor to the President in April 2018, Bolton has purged the old staff and replaced them with sycophants whose primary qualifications are decades of collaboration with Bolton.

Since the December departures of John Kelly and James Mattis, Bolton has had near total control over the flow of policy recommendations into the President. Better said: The lack of flow

MAGA to MIGA transformation

("Effect of Adelson/Kushner")

Trump is probably most pro-Israel president since Lyndon B Johnson. And several of his foreign policy moves looks like dictated by Israel interests not the USA interests. He also interfered in Israel election trying to influence Isreqli electorate in favor of Netanyahu.

When he was running, Trump was sharp about Adelson's money’s influence. He said that he would make Marco Rubio into “his perfect little puppet.” But later Trump badly needed Abelson's money both for his election (his claim that his election campaign was financed only by his own money was a blatant lie) and to stem Democrats advanced during Midterm, where they have chance to win both Senate and the house. So who’s the puppet now?

Long with connection to Adelson. Trump connection of Kushner is another liability. Jared is avoid Zionist, member of suspicious mystical religious cult (one of very few Orthodox cults that accept Israel and often accused of links to Mossad):

After April 2017 Trump became a typical neocon and promoted " the "will of the strong" approach to foreign policy essentially positioning the USA as a rogue state that does not care one bit about international treaties and obligations. And about UN which still for some strange reason resides in NYC. His policies were transactional in nature but coercion election built-in "give me something and I will give you a little bit in return" approach. But give me now, or..." He was captured by neocons soon after election mainly because he did not really rely on his own money during the elections -- he took around $100 million from Casino billionaire Adelson:

That's why Trump appointed Haley who is close to Israel lobby and later arrived to his current version of foreign policy with Pompeo and Bolton.

In addition to Adelson, Jared Kushner moved Trump in the same direction ("Kushner effect"). That's why contrary to his election promises Trump continued all beneficial to Israel colonial wars (in Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Ukraine) and is trying to launch a couple of others (Iran, Korea, Venezuela).

He several times bombed Syrian air fields on false pretences of chemical attack (which in reality were false flag operation by the ISIS, performed with the exact goal to get the US to act as ISIS air force bombing Syria government targets). His administration also tried to stage a coupe d'état in Turkey, which failed and strained relations between two countries.

Netanyahu is well aware that for his policies and plans to destroy all geopolitical and regional competitors, another such chance as Donald Trump may never exist. And he wants to milk it to the fullest extent possible. Trump, in turn, also proved that conventions, treaties, agreements, and just some established customs and traditions in international relations mean little to him.

The total score of Trump administration in both foreign and domestic polices is negative - the standard of living for the majority of the USA population did not increased (but it did not decreased either, remaining probably around the same as under Obama), jobs continued to evaporate, outsourcing continues With the exception of outsourcing with China -- he did launched tariff war with China as he promised.

His policies toward Iran looks like pandering to Israel lobby, not so much defending interests in of the USA in this region. while existence of any theocratic regime is objectionable, the double standard of treating KSA and Iran differently is too obvious to get Trump administration any points in his desire to confront Iran.

The total US debt rose (due to increased military budget and tax cuts). Trump increased military spending to a vain attempt to appease MIC ( and by the way he increased American aid to Israel as if it is necessary). To add insult to injury, while campaigning on the basis of interests of blue collar workers and middle class Americans, squeezed by neoliberal globalization and greed of the US corporations, he pushed tax cuts for the rich.

The fact that he cooperated in the Lubavitch (Chabad) sect (rumored to be connected to/used by Mossad) is generally a disgrace. Why it was necessary for Trump to bring Kushner and Ivanka (members of this strange sect) to the White House I do not understand. Especially in view of the criminal past of Kushner father (from whom Jared inherited his real estate empire; Jared own move in this area was disastrous purchase of Fifth Avenue 666 skyscraper just before the Great Recession; later he offloaded it his political connection to Gulf monarchies)

Elections 2016 period and three month after inauguration can be be called "MAGA stage" of his presidency. Here are several links from his 2018 campaign

Trump as a fake anti-war crusader who populated his administration with neocons

Like Obama before him, Trump proved to be a sad joke of a anti-neoliberal, anti-war crusader. The same is true about his anti-globalization stance, it looks like he prefers the direct economic racket, open bullying of weaker trade partners to treaties (bullying does suggest a power imbalance). He still wants to sustain and expand the US neoliberal empire, no matter what are the costs for the US people. Venezuela is a good example here. Of course US oil companies want to return to this country. On the tips on the bayonets , if necessary. And Trump preaching "national neoliberalism" is very accommodative to such requests.

US relations with Russia, which Trump promised to improve, have chilled to Cold War status. Essentially Trump administration policies toward Russia of does not differ one bit from the policies of Obama administration. And do not much differ from what we would expect form Hillary. Part of this is connected the the President no longer determines the foreign policy. Other forces do. That increases chances of WWIII, which might mean that perishing of the human civilization, as we know it.

Khrushchev's bon mot about the US nuclear superiority still apples, He said something like that: "Yes, the USA is much stronger, we just have the capability to destroy the USA one time, while they have the capability to destroy the USSR many times"). This saying is fully applicable to the Trump adoption of the "supersized" military budget.

It does not matter how many times you exceed your opponent military budget, because you can blow out the planet only once. As the result of care and feeding of MIC and Imperial Wars launched since 1980, the US national debt is now larger than the US economy. This is imperial overstretch. It is probably unsustainable "in a long run". The only thing we do not know if the long run means 10 years, 20, or 50. Much depends on the price oil oil dynamic. As soon as it exceeds $80-$100 per barrel the USA economy will slide in "perma-rececssion" (aka secular stagnation).

His "Draining the swamp" slogan in reality turned to be as phony as "change we can believe is. " he proved to be another Bush II, uneducated, inarticulate, and incompetent President fully controlled by neocon lobby (which in its immense gratitude for services he provided wants to depose him and organized Mueller witch hunt). Add to this his impulsivity and narcissistic desire to be in the spotlight and you get a really toxic brew. The number of neocons in Trump administration is comparable with the number of neocons in Bush II and Obama administrations.

Trump allowed to Washington foreign policy elite to conduct his foreign policy. The latter is arrogant (just look at Pompeo and Bolton), out of touch with reality and still stuck in the 1990s when the USA really rules the world (USSR collapsed, and China was far from its present economic might). They believed in American exceptionalism and that the US had an almost divine right to run the world. American power at this time supposedly rivaled imperial Rome.

Clinton, Bush, Obama and (as we discovered too late) Trump all shared similar foreign policy objectives. First of all they wanted to to spread the US-style neoliberalism. Even if this needs to be accomplished on the tips of bayonets. Any dissenters are branded as authoritarian dictators, sanctioned. any non nuclear players (and one small nuclear player -- North Korea) were threatened with force. The Washington elite believes it is America’s destiny to lead the world forever, despite their own alarming level of degeneration and incompetence.

Due to this neocons mindset, Government officials and media commentators who have promoted disastrous wars suffer no consequences and are welcomed back into circles of power. The cost of imperial wars since dissolution of the USSR runs at around 6 trillion. It is now clear that that large part of the defense budget would be better spent at home, upgrading the country's infrastructure.

Trump proved to be completely different politician then he was pretending to be during 2016 election. In this sense he competes with Obama for the title of Grandmaster of "bait and switch" game. His main accomplishment was "Trump tax cut for the rich". Similar to Bush II cut. In this sense he performed a deft "bait and switch" maneuver similar to one done by Obama and can be called "Republican Obama." Another classic turncoat US politician, who betrayed his voters three months after the elections.

Thanks to Trump, the US is now in the Israeli situation - an increasing percentage of the population in many countries is beginning to hate him. A taught us the classics "ideas become a material force when they masses start believing in them"

Moreover, trump pushes himself into the situation of the former USSR, when the main production is the production of weapons. And except that the filing of the neo-cons will give countries a second Afghan in Iran (with the help of his great friend Netanyahu.)

Analogy with Obama reelection

Obama proves to be completely describable turncoat, but still he (and Bush II before him) managed to get reelected for the second term. That create some home for Trump as it is probably impossible to exceed Obama in duplicity and mendacity (drone strikes, "Osama Bin Laden" killing with some signs of a false flag, Libya, Syria, Ukraine). But truth be told foreign adventures does not mean much in the US Presidential election; the candidates mostly complete on domestic issues. Here Trump failed dismally -- there are very few new manufacturing jobs. Under neoliberalism profits come before people. And that's why jobs continued to be outsourced out of the USA. Just destinations might slightly changed. Instead of China other countries more commonly used.

That means that like Obama Trump now depends of the weakness otf Dem party candidate. Against any "decent" candidate he has almost no chances. Especially newcomer to politics without much political baggage into whom electorate can project their wishes like it did with Obama and Trump before. In this case Trump can zero chances for reelection. He will be new Hillary in elections 2020: aging erratic warmonger (with Bolton as an albatross around his neck) with health problems.

Although Trump, like Obama before him won mostly of the boldness of his election promises, now he need to complete on substance an truck record of his Administration. That's a tough task. After two years in office Trump should be viewed like strange mixture of Bush II and Obama. It makes him more like Obama from the point of view of a serial betrayer of election promises. Obama attacked a slate of very denigrating nicknames (Obomber is one, "Teleprompter" is another ;-) . And Trump's nicknames gallery is even richer and includes: Agent Orange, Very Stable Genius, Covfefe, Vulgarian, von Clownstick, Trampolino, dRamp, and Pinocchio. Those nicknames for Trump are not accidental. Among anti-Trump Republicans, discontent is extremely high. When Ann Coulter Fires Back at Trump: ‘The Only National Emergency Is That Our President Is an Idiot’ it is easy to understand the President does have problem with his former base. Ann said that she didn’t need a Tarot card reader to know that Trump would “totally f-over his base.”

In 2016 election campaign Trump had the freedom to position himself as anti-war, anti-establishment candidate and some of his points resonated strong with the the US population. Now after he betrayed all of them, his options are much more narrow. The one he already tried to position himself as "anti-socialist" and use Venezuela as a trial balloon for attracting this segment of voters. Of course his posture is fake, but some fish might swallow this hook. Although in the USA everything is possible. But it is clear not that he is a part of neoliberal establishment, "national neoliberalism" promoter so to speak.

His anti-war track record is non-existent (Syria bombings, Iran and Korean saber-rattling, launching Venezuela color revolution, weapons supplies to Ukraine, support of Yemen war, etc) and his anti-corruption and pro white-collar stance now is a sad, nasty joke (Javanka, "Trump university" scam, his appointments). He essentially did nothing for blue collar voters who secured his victory in 2015 presenting them "tax cut for rich" as a substitute. So most probably the lion share of those votes now are going to Tulsi and Warren, respectively, not to Trump. If remaining votes are enough to overcome the opposition, then God bless.

The main issue in this election is that the Neoliberal Imperial Oligarchy has now taken off the mask. They have abandoned the pretense of "Coke Pepsi" two party competition to unite to defend the interests on neoliberal oligarchy, with WikiLeaks detailing the gory details of their corruption and malfeasance. Essentially they represent a single party, the joint party of MIC and Wall Street. But they will fight furiously and might try to accomplish with Tulsi the same dirty trick as they accomplished with Sanders in 2016, using her as a sheepdog.

Is close connection to MIC improves Trump chances for re-election

I would say it does. In a sense Israel should be viewed as a part of MIC lobby. Trump inflated military spending, including nuclear weapons and military assistance to Israel. All this actions raise serious wuestion and Us infrastructure is in decay and standard of living of the bottom 80% of population continues to slide.

According to journalist URI Friedman, the United States has been fighting terrorism with a credit card for more than 15 years, naming this just a socialism for MIC. Perhaps the country might change the course only after the next financial collapse ( a decade expired after the collapse of 2008, so it can happen anytime soon). If the collapse happens before elections then Trump is doomed.

MIGA instead of MAGA? Is close connection with Israeli lobby an advantage in incoming elections ?

Pandering of Trump administration to Israel should be viewed in the context of Trump links to MIC, not as an isolated phenomena: Israel should be viewed as a part of MIC lobby.

The Trump administration’s recent steps in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict should surely lay to rest any doubts about the enormous, and dangerous, power of the Israel lobby in Washington. Under Trump, the lobby has shown it can wield unprecedented influence – even by its usual standards – in flagrant disregard for all apparent US interests.

First, there was the move this month of the US embassy to Jerusalem, not quietly but on the 70th anniversary of the most sensitive day in the Palestinian calendar, Nakba Day. That is when Palestinians commemorate their mass expulsion from their homeland in 1948. By relocating the embassy, Trump gave official US blessing to tearing up the 25-year-old peace process – and in choosing Nakba Day for the move, he rubbed the noses of Palestinians, and by extension the Arab world, in their defeat. Then, the White House compounded the offence by lauding Israeli snipers who massacred dozens of unarmed Palestinians protesting at the perimeter fence around Gaza the same day. A series of statements issued by the White House could have been written by Israel’s far-right prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, himself.

At the United Nations, the US blocked a Security Council resolution calling for the massacre to be investigated, while Nikki Haley, Trump’s UN envoy, observed to fellow delegates: “No country in this chamber would act with more restraint than Israel has.”

None of these moves served any obvious US national interest, nor did Trump’s decision the previous week to tear up the 2015 nuclear accord with Iran that has long been reviled by the Israeli government. In fact, quite the contrary: These actions risk inflaming tensions to the point of a regional war that could quickly drag in the major powers, or provoke terror attacks on US soil.

All of these various lobbies have long wielded significant power in Washington, but remained largely separate. In recent years, their interests have come to overlap considerably, making Israel ever more unassailable in US politics.

Under Trump, their agendas have aligned so completely that this multi-headed lobby has as good as collectively captured the presidency on matters that concern it most.

That is not to say that the Israel lobby will not face future challenges. Other pressures are emerging in reaction to the unaccountable power of the Israel lobby, including progressive voices in US politics that are, for the first time, breaking with the long-standing bipartisan nature of the debate about Israel.

Bernie Sanders’s unexpected surge in the Democratic nomination race for the presidency, the rise of the international boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, the growing alienation of young US Jews from Israel, and the US public’s ever-greater exposure on social media to Israel’s crimes are signs of trends it will be difficult for Israel to counter or reverse.

But Israel is getting its way at the moment. But hubris is a fault we have been warned about since the time of the ancient Greeks. Israel may yet come to learn a little humility – the hard way.

Will color revolution launched by the Deep State against Trump help him to win 2020 elections

Assuming something is cobbled together worth opening impeachment hearings over, the Republican majority in the Senate is still unlikely to convict. Trump will run for reelection in 2020. Will public opinion, empathy, following impeachment proceedings, help him as it did Bill Clinton? How many voters will see through this politicization of the constitutional process? How many Democrats who wanted real progress on health care and immigration will see this all as just a waste of time, their midterm votes squandered on a circus?

Peter Van Buren • March 11, 2019

This will be the first elections in the USA history which are run after unsuccessful color revolution against sitting President (aka Russiagate), and unprecedented McCarthyism-style witch hunt unleashed against him.

Successfully played against Trump the Special Prosecutor gambit (with Rosenstein as the Trojan horse and Comey as sacrificial pawn) might be viewed the first color revolution against sitting President in the history of the USA that did not yet resulted in removal of the President from his position (if we do not view JFK assassination and Nixon Watergate as two previous color revolutions; Bush senior was involved in both). And as such Russiagate will got to history books along with Kennedy assassination, Nixon impeachment and 9/11 as a watershed event for the county.

The witch hunt against Trump, the game which he was not supposed to win, unmasked the level of politicization and corruption within higher echelons of FBI, pernicious connection of its counterterrorism division to CIA and blatant disregard of the law. for that we should be grateful to Trump, but only for that.

Still, in a way Trump is an anomaly which defied the concerted rigging of election by neoliberals including Wall Street money and the mainstream media presstitutes.

Recently Trump tried to position himself as a fighter against socialism. How successful is this phony positioning (with his tax cuts he proved to be an advocate of corporate socialism) remain to be seen. He remain a shallow. inexperienced, somewhat impulsive politician, who betrayed his voters.

Despite all Trump faults and his unpreparedness to the position of the President of the USA, the color revolution against Trump launched by Deep State is still deeply wrong and deeply troubling. Especially the role FBI, CIA, and especially MI6 (Steele dossier), played in it. But to defend Trump now would be just the defense of the constitution, not the particular person. In this sense, and only in this sense he still deserves our sympathy and support.

Russiagate has shown to all thinking people in the USA and all people of the world that the real rulers of the USA. And it is not sitting President and his administration, but intelligence agencies, MIC (which includes Israel lobby) and Wall Street (so called the Deep State)

Will sympathy to Trump as a victim of vicious witch hunt overweight resentment from his betrayal of his voters in the same way as Obama faced in 2010 against Romney is difficult to say. But now I see the point when Trump is called "Republican Obama".

Obama managed to win his second term despite blatant betrayal of his voters because he faced much weaker candidate. Who will be Trump opponent in 2020 election remains to be seen, but neither Liz Warren, nor Tulsi Gabbard will give him the same advantages as running against universally hated neocon warmonger Hillary. Also Obama was a "CIA-democrat" who enjoyed unconditional support of intelligence agencies both in the USA and UK. Which is not true for Trump.

The other important legacy of 2016 election is the role of British intelligence serves and surviving Obama faction in CIA and FBI (which is essentially the same of neocon faction). in 2016 intelligence agencies emerged as kingmakers, throwing Sanders under the bus and allowing neocon warmonger Hillary (who has suffered at least five fainting spells on public ) to run against Trump -- which led to surprising Trump victory.

New faces on the election field might well be result of Trump policies

Elections 2020 might be the fist when the USA might have anti-war candidate -- Tulsi Gabbard. But neoliberals and neocons are like new generation of Bolsheviks -- dishonest, Machiavellian and power hungry to the extreme and will do everything to push her under the bus. Add to this oversize role of intelligence agencies which like a new Praetorian Guard pretend for the role of kingmakers.

I think Trump already lost most of independent voters, who voted for him in 2016, and lion share of anti-war votes (if he invades Venezuela he will lost all of them).

He also will not enjoy the huge privilege of running against Hillary, and as such is not longer entitled to "anybody but Hillary" vote, which probably was at least 10% of all votes for him and, in fact, propelled him to the Presidency.

Because "Trump University" story was enough for anybody with IQ above 100 to understand some negative trait of this person.

Which strata of US voters Trump already irrevocably lost?

The fact the Democratic field is highly fractured and more then a dozen candidates compete in 2002 elections can help, but not by much as only three main candidates have any chances to get finish line.

With the help of "DemoRats" (Clinton neoliberal democrats faction of the Democratic Party) as well US and British intelligence agencies a new scapegoat for Hillary fiasco in election, a new American enemy that might help to unite divided bation has been manufactured in the form of the Russian Federation and its President, Vladimir Putin, who drew the ire of the Washington for resisting the US hegemony. This reached a crescendo in 2018 when DemoRats won the Congress. The dubious accusations of election interference made by the same intelligence agencies that sold the pack of lies that Iraq possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction are not new.

But alarmingly they become "Official US Truth" (OUT) in Washington propaganda NewSpeak and challenging any of them can cost a candidate a lot. Tulsi already feels the wrath on neocon -- those greedy and unscrupulous lobbyists for MIC. BTW the most rabid neocons from the US establishment has even likened the alleged intrusion by Moscow to 9/11 forgetting that this analogy holds if and only if we view both as false flag operations, conducted by CIA with the help of Mossad, MI6 and other "fiends".

Warren will also soon find herself under fire from Wall Street. That's for sure. And that can help Trump.

Trump lost anti-war right -- the part of electorate that probably ensured his victory in 2016

Trump's rhetorical efforts to sell himself as the “anti-war” president have been exposed as a fraud. Moreover it's hard to tell who’s in charge in the Trump administration. In case of assassination of General Soleimani looks like this evilgelical "Rupture" nut Pompeo was the key figure. Trump hired a dozen of Bush II neocons, who not only do not support his agenda but openly defy (Pompeo, Haley, Pence, Ester) and betray (Fiona Hill) him. Here is one insightful comment from unz.com (the site that well represents anti-war right):

follyofwar March 5, 2019 at 2:19 am GMT

Neocons Pompeo and Bolton are the two most warlike consiglieres I have witnessed in my lifetime. It certainly appears that, one way or the other, they will get their war against someone, anyone. They may be concerned that time is running out, since their boss has less than a 50% chance of re-election. Let’s see, will it be Venezuela, Iran, North Korea, China, or Russia – or all of them at once?

... ... ...

I take that back. I forgot about Queen Hillary and her delight over Colonel Gadhafi’s gruesome death by bayonet up the anus.

Realist March 5, 2019 at 12:35 pm GMT
@follyofwar

Neocons Pompeo and Bolton are the two most warlike consiglieres I have witnessed in my lifetime.

These two d*ckheads were hand picked by Trump….but his base is too stupid to see Trump is a part of the Deep State.

Actually Trump lost anti-war republicans after the first three month of his presidency. As of January 2020 contributions to Sanders from members of the US military exceeded their contributions to Trump. Probably he did not value military lives that much, and they feel it.

In this sense Trump is treasonous turncoat. That does not make his the establishment candidate: please do not forget this silly and extremely dangerous neo-McCarthyism Russiagate compaign unleashed against him, which culminated in Ukrainegate and impeachment by the House. For some reason corrupt, completely in pocket of Wall Street, DemoRats (aka Clinton wing of Democratic party) and intelligence agencies careerists like Brennan and Clapper never count him of "their" guy, no matter how hard he tried to please them:

libezkova -> sanjait... , April 10, 2017 at 04:17 PM

"Trump and Putin are both Kabuki theater specialists who use foreign military adventurism to stoke nationalism and distract from other issues."

It was Obama and Hillary who were Kabuki theater specialists. The first was Nobel Price winner, my God. Real Kabuki Theater.

But especially Hillary. Remember Libya theater and poor Colonel Gaddafi, sodomized with the bayonet. We came, we saw. he died.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y

Trump campaigned on non-interventionism platform. Almost paleo--conservative platform. And on April 6 he lost "anti-war right". And even some part of anti-war left ( Sanders supporters who really hated Hillary for her jingoism and corruption ) who supported him holding the nose. Probably forever.

That might have consequences for him because he lost support from politically active and important segment of his electorate. Which to certain extent protected him from impeachment as the last thing DemoRats want are fierce protests up to armed clashes with alt-right afterward.

If his calculation was that DemoRats (neoliberal Democrats) are now also a War party, so it does not matter, he probably badly miscalculated.

He now needs to worry what Russians might have on him because Wikileaks or other similar sites might get some interesting materials. Of course Pence would be even more horrible POTUS, and revenge is a dish that better serve cold, but still he probably did not sleep well after this "Monica" show of strength.

He also probably can forget about any compromises of the style "something for nothing" (as previous presidents enjoyed from Russia in a wane hope of improving relations between two countries) from Russians for a while.

Only things prepaid with yuans from now on ;-).

The whole move smells with "Monica" and Iraq WDM: "Shoot first ask questions later".

Now he really can be impeached by DemoRats with impunity and there will be little on no protests. But now, when he surrendered to neocons, why DemoRats take trouble to impeach him?

In other words, from April 6 "Agent Orange" is walking in his new clothing like naked king from Andersen tale.

Trump lost part of blue collar votes, as his administration like Obama administration did nothing for them

Trump tax cut was an an insult. He cut taxes for his family and friends, not for his voters.

How Trump won The revenge of working-class whites - The Washington Post

he won using thiser votes and then betrayed him with the same ease as OPbama did

For the past 40 years, America's economy has raked blue-collar white men over the coals. It whittled their paychecks. It devalued the type of work they did best. It shuttered factories and mines and shops in their communities. New industries sprouted in cities where they didn't live, powered by workers with college degrees they didn't hold.

They were not the only ones who felt abandoned by a rapidly globalizing economy, but they developed a distinctly strong pessimism in its face.

On Tuesday, their frustrations helped elect Donald Trump, the first major-party nominee of the modern era to speak directly and relentlessly to their economic and cultural fears. It was a “Brexit” moment in America, a revolt of working-class whites who felt stung by globalization and uneasy in a diversifying country where their political power had seemed to be diminishing

It was a rejection of the business-friendly policies favored at various points by elites in both parties, which deepened trade relationships with foreign countries and favored allowing more immigrants in. And it was a raw outburst at the trends of rising inequality and economic dislocation that defined America's economy thus far this century.

Whites without a college degree — men and women — made up a third of the 2016 electorate. Trump won them by 39 percentage points, according to exit polls, far surpassing 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney's 25 percent margin. They were the foundation of his victories across the Rust Belt, including a blowout win in Ohio and stunning upsets in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

In polling, these voters have expressed deep racial and cultural anxieties. In exit polls they were more likely than the country as a whole to say that illegal immigrants should be deported. But those polls also suggested economic concerns and hostility toward leaders in Washington were much more important factors driving them to Trump.

[Markets plunge worldwide as Trump surges to White House]

Half of these voters said the economy was the most important issue in their vote, compared to 14 percent for immigration. A majority said international trade takes away American jobs. Three-quarters said the economy is “not good” or “poor” and nearly 8 in 10 said their personal financial situation was the same or worse than it was four years ago. Two-thirds said they preferred Trump to handle the economy instead of Democrat Hillary Clinton, compared with less than half of the electorate overall.

Trump loss of of a part of military votes

Trump attempt to privatize Veteran Administration hospitals and health care faces stiff resistance of veterans ( “Doubling Down” With Private Care Push, Trump’s VA — ProPublica, Jan 30, 2019 )

When Congress passed a bill last year to transform the Department of Veterans Affairs, lawmakers said they were getting rid of arbitrary rules for when the government would pay for veterans to see private doctors.

Under the old program, veterans could go to the private sector if they would have to wait 30 days or travel 40 miles for care in the VA. Lawmakers and veterans groups, including conservatives, criticized those rules as arbitrary. The new law, known as the Mission Act, was supposed to let doctors and patients decide whether to use private sector based on individualized health needs.

On Wednesday, the Trump administration proposed new rules, known as access standards, to automatically make veterans eligible for private care. Instead of 30 days, it’s 20 days for primary care or 28 days for specialty care. Instead of 40 miles, it’s a 30-minute drive for primary care or a 60-minute drive for specialty care.

The announcement appeared to do little to settle the debate over whether the VA’s rules are arbitrary.

“Twenty days is just as arbitrary as 30 days,” Bob Wallace, the executive director of Veterans of Foreign Wars, one of the largest veterans service organizations, said in a statement.

What is clear about the new rules is that they are dramatically more permissive. The new drive-time standard alone will make 20 percent of veterans eligible for private primary care and 31 percent eligible for private specialty care, up from 8 percent for both kinds of care under the old program, according to a briefing document circulated on Capitol Hill.

“This is doubling down on the administrative rules such as drive times and wait times,” said David Shulkin, the former VA secretary who was fired last year by President Donald Trump, in part over disagreements about this bill. “I was in favor of a system that was clinically based, that put veterans’ needs first and allowed the right match of services. This is just changing and loosening the administrative rules.”

VA spokeswoman Susan Carter declined to comment.

Last month, a ProPublica investigation of the private-care program that the administration is now expanding found overhead costs that were much higher than industry standards and comparable government programs. In response to the article, VA Secretary Robert Wilkie acknowledged that the agency was “taken advantage of” with these overhead costs and vowed to improve.

On the campaign trail, Trump presented himself as a champion for veterans, and as president he frequently boasts about what his administration has done for former service members. But at the same time, he has enthusiastically supported shifting more veterans to private medical care, over the objection of major veterans groups that want to preserve the VA’s health system. He has also plunged the VA into chaos by upending his own leadership team at the agency and handing vast influence to three men nicknamed the “Mar-a-Lago Crowd” because they meet at the president’s resort in Florida.

The new access standards are the most important step toward reshaping the VA in line with Trump’s vision of enlarging the private sector’s role.

“None of this should be a surprise to anybody: President Trump has made it clear from pretty much the moment he started running he wanted full choice,” said Dan Caldwell, the executive director of Concerned Veterans for America, a political group that advocates for more private care and that is backed by the Koch brothers, the industrialists who have donated hundreds of millions of dollars to conservative causes. “This does get us closer to full choice. That’s the model we want to get to.”

The VA is planning to continue widening the access standards, dropping the wait time for primary care to 14 days in 2020, according the agency’s briefing materials.

Already, according to the document, almost half of the VA’s primary care sites (69 out of 141) have wait times longer than 20 days, meaning their patients could get private care. In gastroenterology, 81 out of 128 sites have waits longer than 28 days. But, the document cautioned, “This data is not reliable.”

According to people present for briefings on Wednesday, congressional staff and veterans groups had a long list of questions that largely went unanswered by VA officials. Among them:

How many more veterans will become eligible for private care based on the wait times standards?

How does the software that the VA bought from Microsoft calculate drive times?

How many more patients does the VA expect to choose private care?

How many more private-sector appointments does the VA expect to pay for?

How many more veterans will sign up for VA benefits, or use the VA instead of their other insurance coverage, now that they could see private doctors at no cost to them?

How will the VA ensure, as required by the Mission Act, that veterans referred to the private sector can get appointments there sooner than they could in the VA? (The VA’s briefing materials said average national wait times are higher than in the VA.)

“They just didn’t provide a whole lot of answers to questions about the impact,” said Carl Blake, Paralyzed Veterans of America’s executive director. “The fact is it’s going to open up eligibility. It’s debatable whether there are adequate resources to do so. What won’t be acceptable is for them to take money from other programs in the VA to pay for it.”

The unanswered questions could dramatically change the program’s cost. The official notice for the new rules on the website for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs says the “Anticipated Costs and Benefits” are “TBD.” In Wednesday’s briefings, officials said the new access standards will increase the agency’s expenses by $2.7 billion to $3.1 billion next year and by $19 billion to $20 billion over five years, the people present said.

Lawmakers have cast doubt on the VA’s cost projections. In a letter to Wilkie on Monday, 28 Democratic senators noted that officials had provided “widely varying and potentially contradictory” figures depending on the day.

“I don’t know why they’re not using the resources we used to model this,” said Nancy Schlichting, the former CEO of the Henry Ford Health System who led a congressionally chartered commission that in 2016 issued a report on the VA’s future. The commission estimated that paying for veterans to see private doctors without a referral from the VA could increase costs by $96 billion to $179 billion a year.

“It’s very, very unsophisticated, frankly,” Schlichting said of the administration’s proposal.

When debating the Mission Act, lawmakers relied on a projection by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office that assumed the rate of veterans using the private sector would stay about the same. That assumption has now been blown up by the way the administration is implementing the law.

“Today’s announcement hastily rolling out new access standards places core VA services and vital research programs at risk by shifting money towards care outside VA,” House veterans committee chairman Mark Takano said in a statement on Wednesday, vowing to hold a hearing. “Today’s announcement places VA on a pathway to privatization and leads Congress to assume the worst.”

The Shadow Rulers of the VA

How Marvel Entertainment chairman Ike Perlmutter and two other Mar-a-Lago cronies are secretly shaping the Trump administration’s veterans policies.

Wilkie had moved to pre-empt such criticism. “Some will claim falsely and predictably that they represent a first step toward privatizing the department,” he said in a lengthy statement on Monday, two days before the news access standards were announced.

As evidence, Wilkie said appointments in the VA’s health system have increased by 3.4 million since 2014 to more than 58 million in 2018. But his statement did not mention how much the VA’s private-sector appointments have grown: more than four times as much. According to agency data provided to ProPublica, the VA’s private-care appointments increased by 14.9 million since 2014 to 33.2 million in 2017. Private care accounted for 37 percent of the VA’s total outpatient appointments in 2017, up from 25 percent in 2014, the data shows.

In developing these access standards, Wilkie relied extensively on Darin Selnick, who previously worked for Concerned Veterans for America, the organization supported by the Koch brothers. Selnick signed onto an infamous 2016 proposal to dismantle the VA’s government-run health system. Selnick also worked closely with the trio of unofficial advisers known as the “Mar-a-Lago Crowd.”

Selnick sat on the “executive steering committee” in charge of implementing the Mission Act and reported directly to Wilkie as a senior adviser, according to an organization chart obtained by ProPublica. However, when the VA presented a version of the same chart to Congress at a December hearing, Selnick’s name was not there.

Lawmakers voted for the Mission Act with the understanding that access standards would automatically trigger private care for only a few kinds of services, such as lab tests, X-rays and urgent care, the 28 Senate Democrats said. But now the administration is making the access standards apply to everything, a plan that ProPublica first revealed in November.

“This proposal risks needlessly siphoning away VA resources to private providers, which could irresponsibly starve excellent existing VA clinics and hospitals,” Senate veterans committee member Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said in a statement on Wednesday.

Lawmakers and the public may not get more information about the how the program will be funded until the White House releases its budget for 2020. But officials have indicated they won’t submit the president’s budget to Congress on time, blaming the 35-day partial government shutdown. The shutdown did not affect the VA, but it did furlough staff in the Office of Management and Budget, putting the VA at risk of being late on the Mission Act regulations that are due in June, according to an agency report obtained by ProPublica.

The VA recently chose Optum, a division of UnitedHealth Group, to take over administering the new private-care program in most of the country. However, because the agency was late in awarding the contracts, Optum won’t be ready to start when the new program is supposed to take effect in June.

In the interim, program will be run by TriWest Healthcare Alliance, the old vendor that charged unusually high fees. TriWest has also filed a formal protest challenging the VA’s decision to hire Optum. The dispute will be adjudicated by the Government Accountability Office.

See also Inside Trump’s VA

Help us investigate: Do you know what’s going on at the VA? Are you a VA employee or a veteran who receives VA benefits and services? Contact Isaac Arnsdorf at 917-512-0256 or [email protected] Here’s how to send tips and documents to ProPublica securely.
Correction, Feb. 5, 2019: This story, relying on incorrect calculations from the Department of Veterans Affairs, originally misstated the proportion of total VA outpatient appointments in the private sector. It was 37 percent in 2017, up from 25 percent in 2014; not 58 percent in 2017, up from 33 percent in 2014.

Danger from anticorruption crusader Elizabeth Warren

As Clinton wing launched a color revolution against Trump, the USA now is not a newcomer to using color revolutions mechanisms as a political tool. I do not see why this some Gene Sharp recommendation can't be implemented by Eliabeth Warren in 2020 race against Trump -- who is a perfect opponent for any anti-corruption crusader.

A fearsome the anti-corruption campaign can be launched against Trump administration too member of which has had its share of transgressions and scandals. In a way Trump is an ideal political sparring partner for an anti-corruption candidate, who can be send into knockdown with relatively modest effort. Just the story of Trump university ( a classic "bait and switch" scheme) if properly revived can so a real damage (hint -- he settled the NY lawsuit for 25 millions). And Warren is a more formidable opponent for Trump in this area that those two weaklings of 2016 Presidential race: Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz (The Sad Story of Trump 'University' ):

I don't know anything about starting a university, and that was a fake university," Rubio said as Trump repeatedly tried to interrupt him. "There are people who borrowed $36,000 to go to Trump University, and they're suing now. $36,000 to go to a university that's a fake school. And you know what they got? They got to take a picture with a cardboard cutout of Donald Trump."

"I've won most of the lawsuits," Trump protested.

Cruz also got in on the act. "You know, Marco made reference earlier to the litigation against Trump University. It's a fraud case. His lawyers have scheduled the trial for July," he said. "I want you to think about, if this man is the nominee, having the Republican nominee on the stand in court, being cross-examined about whether he committed fraud. You don't think the mainstream media will go crazy on that?"

Friday morning on NBC's Today, Rubio kept the heat on Trump for his "fake school." "You have a guy who is being sued right now for fraud for Trump University," said Rubio. "I've had stories written about my driving record."

Warren really has teeth in this area and Trump will feel very very uncomfortable in any debate that raises this topic.

Javanka problem: the curious case of Jared Kushner and the Israel lobby

Kushner crossed the line from using his First Amendment right to speak freely about government policy into subverting official US foreign policy in favor of Israel very early, even before his father-in-law inauguration. He attempted via Flynn to influence the vote of Russia on UN anti-Israel resolution. It did not work well (but was fraudulently used to fueled Russiagate hysteria) and got Flynn into hot water. Later Flynn was deliberately ambushed by Muller and caught in lies to FBI. So Flynn was the first victim of Kushner pro-Israel machinations.

Later Donald Trump had appointed Jared Kushner to be his point-person on US relations with the Middle East. The latter was specifically charged with forging an Israel-Palestine peace plan, which Trump, in typical flamboyant fashion, called "the ultimate deal". Essentially appointing a Zionist with zero experience in international diplomacy and close connections to stanch Zionist Netanyahu (and this distrusted by Palestinians) to run this intricate negotiation. The result was predictable. In June 2019 Pompeo declared this plan DOA.

Both Israeli elite and leaders throughout the region were stunned that the US had appointered real estate speculator with resolving one of the world’s most difficult diplomatic problem. Moreover Kushner has made significant donations to Israeli settlements, was already known to be heavily pro-Israel in his approach. For some reason he determined that the Saudis were the key to unlock the Arab part of the equation. So he’s made three visits to the Saudi kingdom in the past year. He brought his father-in-law on the latter’s first foreign trip as president to visit King Salman and the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman. This was an astonishing turn in US relations. Cultivate the Saudi royals, expecting them to “bring along” the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world towards that "ultimate" peace deal was a bold and risky gamble to forge Israel-Saudi alliance. It was also very risky step with a lot of diplomatic fallout. With the rel possibility of creating the alliance of Turkey, Iran and Qatar opposing fledging Isreal-Saudi alliance pushed by Kushner. Due to his close association with Israel Kushner is putting US Middle East policy in lock-step with Israel. That certainly leaves the Palestinians, among others, out in the cold.

Due to his continuing business deal in foreign countries Kushner also has problem obtaining the security clearances. Trump overruled FBI experts which were reluctant to grant this clearance. Brennan recently described this is some detail ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1BSmwJb6gs ) Kushner also has albatross about his neck in a form of skyscraper called 333 Fifth Avenue ( Kushner, Inc Vicky Ward on How Jared and Ivanka’s Greed & Ambition Compromise U.S. Foreign Policy - YouTube ). Loan 1.4 billon was coming due and no America lender with touch it. So he badly needed a foreign investor. The Trump-Kushner “pivot” toward Saudi Arabia accords along with a similar Israeli embrace of the House of Saud also was directed against Trump arch-enemy -- Iran. He eventually got money from Qatar -- on unimaginably favorite conditions (99 year lease for 1.3 billion)

Kushner and Ivanka were also instrumental is pushing out of Trump administration several key people, such as Bannon.

Violating the Logan Act

The Wall Street Journal reported a new development in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation: did Jared Kushner violate the Logan Act whenr he lobbied UN Security Council members to sabotage a resolution denouncing Israeli settlements. The act dates back to the earliest days of the republic when the USA was much weaker then European powers. Who were eager to interfere with the domestic and foreign affairs of weaker states. For that reason, American legislators passed the Logan Act which prohibited private citizens from becoming agents of foreign states in trying to influence US foreign policy. The curious case of Jared Kushner and the Israel lobby Middle East Eye

The Act, as it was implemented, became something of a double-edged sword as it enabled the political party in power to target anyone in the opposition who exercised his right to lobby for a particular policy regarding various foreign states.

Eventually, virtually everyone realised that a weapon you used against an opponent could be wielded against you once you were out of power. So the Act fell into limbo. Only one individual was ever charged with violating it and he was never prosecuted.

But news that Kushner was under suspicion of violating the Act raised interesting issues. Though many US politicians have been accused of being shills for Israel and the Israel lobby holds sway over an enormous number of legislators, and though numerous Americans have been convicted of spying on Israel's behalf, no one has ever been convicted of harming the interests of the US for Israel's sake.

In fact, the rallying cry of the lobby is that there is no difference between Israeli and US interests. In other words, when you work on behalf of Israel's interests, you're also advancing America's. Of course, this is utter nonsense. It turns both countries into awkwardly conjoined Siamese twins.

Kushner is placing US Middle East policy in lock-step with Israel. That certainly leaves the Palestinians, among others, out in the cold

That's certainly what Kushner did in this case: Netanyahu, who initiated the request for Trump's intervention in the UN affair, wanted to fend off the resolution at all costs. It was originally put forward by Egypt.

As Vicky Ward, the author of Kushner, Inc. Greed. Ambition. Corruption. The Extraordinary Story of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump told Democracy Now the joke is Bebi Netanyahu was the US Secretary of State the last two years. Here is a counple comments from Youtube that refect prevalent sentiments of the audience

The decline of neoliberalism continues, and Trump attempt to revive it by converting to "national neoliberalism" by-and-large failed

If Trump did something useful in dismantling neoliberalism in the USA it would be his discreditation of the neoliberal MSM, such as CNN, MSNBC, NYT and WaPo.

Here Trump, surprisingly, did play a rare positive role, sometimes helping to unmask those "rascals of the pen", the presstitutes of financial oligarchy which rules the country. thanks to Trump, CNN now is now called "Clinton News Channel", NYT -- "the CIA bulletin", and WaPo -- "Bezos' blog".

Neoliberalism is now in decline, and with it is in decline the international influence and significance of the USA. Many people in the USA started to understand that neoliberalism destroyed their well-being and continue to do so. That's why they, after "serial betrayer" Obama "bait and switch" maneuver, Trump managed to lob a hand grenade into the Capitol and White House blowing out Hillary chances.

That means that in 2020 Trump can't position himself in the same way as in 2016 as now he has considerable and controversial political baggage as a defender of the US neoliberal empire. Most of the items in this part of his baggage are pretty disappointing.

Trump administration policies vs election promises

Trump administration looks like Bush III administration and is infected with neocons and representatives of financial oligarchy. As "Personnel is policy" you can easily guess what policies they pursued and Trump did nothing to stimulate employment in the USA and to stop migration of jobs from the USA oversees. And he was elected on the promises to stop outsourcing and offshoring of US jobs.

Tim Swift in his article Trump v Republican elite - the split explained outlined several election-time difference. The net result after two years of Trump administration are close to zero. Trump stance on NATO changed. Trump stance on Russia became undistinguishable from Obama polices.

www.bbc.com

Mr Trump describes himself as a "commonsense conservative" and the fact that his message has earned him millions of Republican votes suggests a fracture between the grassroots and leadership.

Here are five key issues upon which the billionaire businessman diverges from Republican orthodoxy as represented by leaders like Mr Ryan and presidents of the past.

Immigration

Mainstream Republicans: Traditionally Republicans have favoured increased immigration in keeping with the party's close relationship with the business community. Both President Ronald Reagan and President George HW Bush extended amnesty to millions of undocumented workers while in office. Mainstream Republican figures such as Florida Senator Marco Rubio initially favoured similar immigration reforms that would have provided a "path to citizenship", but those efforts stopped after meeting resistance from more conservative members of Congress.

Trump: Views on immigration have shifted rightward across the Republican Party in recent years, but Mr Trump's views are some of the most extreme in American politics. He has:

advocated deporting nearly 11 million undocumented workers

called for a border wall to be built between the US and Mexico

said he would force Mexico to pay for the wall by threatening to ban Mexicans in the US from sending remittances home

Most Republicans oppose mass deportations. While they support increased border security, they do not advocate a border wall paid for by the Mexican government.

International trade

Mainstream Republicans: Republicans have long supported trade agreement such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta), which increased trade between Canada, the US and Mexico in the 1990s. Many Republicans in the Congress currently support the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a pending trade agreement between the US and many Pacific Rim countries. Supporters of these agreements say the pacts increase economic growth and enhance American competitiveness in the global market.

Trump: Mr Trump has aggressively criticised international trade agreements, particularly NAFTA, saying the pacts have harmed the US manufacturing sector and cost millions of US jobs. He has pointed to the country's massive trade deficit with China, saying tariffs are needed to address the imbalance. Most Republicans oppose tariffs, saying they would spark a trade war that would damage the economy.

Foreign policy

Mainstream Republicans: Republicans have long supported a muscular foreign policy and have not shied away from supporting the use of military force aboard. While generally opposed to government spending, Republicans make a key exception for defence spending, allowing the US military to maintain scores of bases overseas and protect the interests of its allies in Europe and the Pacific.

Trump: Mr Trump has been a vocal critic of the Iraq War and says the US need not be the world's policeman. While Mr Trump has supported strengthening the military, he says he would do so by extracting concessions from allies. He has repeatedly said the US should rethink its commitments to Nato, saying other member countries do not pay their fair share of the organization's budget. He has also floated an idea that South Korea and Japan could arm themselves with nuclear weapons - eliminating the need for US protection.

Social services

Mainstream Republicans: A key faction of the Republican Party is made of fiscal conservatives who view the federal deficit as a major long-term problem for the country. After defence spending, two social services programmes that benefit the elderly - Social Security and Medicare - are the next biggest contributors to the deficit. Social Security provides living expenses for workers older than 65 and Medicare provides health care benefits to older Americans. Republicans - in particularly Mr Ryan - have long supported changes to Social Security and Medicare that would turn those programmes over to the private market. Mr Ryan currently supports turning Medicare into a programme in which the government provides vouchers that would be used to purchase private insurance.

Trump: Efforts to make changes to Social Security and Medicare are deeply unpopular with American voters. Mr Trump has said he would not make cuts or changes to those programmes and instead he would bolster their funding sources by strengthening the US economy and reallocating some foreign aid to the coffers of Social Security and Medicare.

Trump adopted a typical neocons foreign policy, not that different from Bush II administration

Despite his campaign rhetoric (“our foreign policy is a complete and total disaster”; “we’re rebuilding other countries while weakening our own”), Trump used the playbook of the neocon foreign-policy. He practiced typical gagster capitalism, well know from previous administration which unleashed wars in Iraq and Libya. he continued the war in Syria, but as elections 2020 became close decided to withdraw some troops, still leaving small contingent in the country; effectively relocation them across the border to Iraq. He decided to withdraw from the Intermediate Missiles Treaty with Russia, the treaty that was tremendously beneficial to The USA. He continue the war in Afghanistan. In short, Trump policy is really undistinguishable from the Policies that Hillary might pursue, strengthening the assertion that Presidents perform mainly ceremonial duties legitimizing the regime in the eyes of voters. And the real foreign policy decisions are done by the Deep State. Which make the USA radically different from what we understand as a democratic country. It is a typical "inverted totalitarism" regime with gif leaf of election covering like the smoke screen the brutal and directed against the interests of people of the USA policies of financial oligarchy and MIC (neocons are just lobbyists for MIC)

The withdrawal from tremendously beneficial to the USA INF treaty with Russia is another nail into Trump political coffin. Most experts view it as both reckless and stupid move (as most Trump moves in foreign policy), which advances interests of MIC and its despicable lobbyists like Boot, Kristol and Kagan. But not the security and well-being of American people.

The USA foreign policy after 1991 can be compared with Third Reich polices. It has the slogan "America Uber Alles", which can he tattooed on the foreheads of Bolton and Pompeo. In essence after collapse of the USSR on 1991 the Washington elite tried to position the USA as the "ruler of Earth", which drained the country resources and impoverished the majority of population while enriching MIC and financial oligarchy (all wars are bankers wars).

Trump definitely is not a diplomat. His methods are taken from the playbook of organized crime, and he himself looks more and more like NYC racketeer. He essentially operated more like a gangster selling his protection racket, than as a mature politician and skillful diplomat (remember the quip attributed to Al Capone "You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word.").

His foreign policy was a typical neocon foreign policy. With the only positive step so far of Syria withdrawal after bombing the Assad air force three time, the air force which is fighting against the USA supported Islamic State fighters , essentially serving as ISIS air force (which in reality means movement of forces over the border to Iraq). And even this withdrawal is incomplete (around 500 troops are left in the county; left illegally). This withdrawal is a bone thrown to his former anti-war voters, it too little too late and is offset by his saber-rattling with Venezuela. He betrayed Kurds and strained relations with Turkey -- a unique diplomatic achievement.

That means that in 2020 he can't count on anti-war voters, which was significant fraction of independents who votes for him despite all his faults

While neocons are now very happy with his foreign policies, most of them (for example Max Boot, Kagan and Kristol ) defected to Democratic Party and will try to damage his reelection bid. Association with neocons and bringing several of them into administration (which as infested with neocons as Bush II administration) is a self-defeating policy and might further diminish his chances for reelection.

Even some members of establishment started to realize that Trump neocons such as Pompeo and Bolton are dangerous for the country (better late, then never ;-). See for example Stephen Walt’s The Hell of Good Intentions. Here is one Amazon comment

C. Overgaard

A Powerful Critique of US Foreign Policy November 4, 2018
This is a well written, well researched, and well reasoned criticism of Liberal Hegemony (“LH”). LH rests on the belief that the United States is uniquely positioned to spread democracy and shape the international system to promote international peace and prosperity. LH has led to the invasion of Iraq, military efforts in Afghanistan, and counterterrorism operations in Somalia, Yemen, Libya and Syria. The results, according to Walt, are not favorable:

Our military operations have been costly in both dollars and lives but have had scant success;

The number of violent extremists and the number of places where they are active is greater now then when Al Qaeda first emerged;

Our military efforts have created resentment because of civilian casualties;

Our foreign activities have taken time, attention and resources away from pressing domestic concerns; and

Efforts to promote democracy and human rights have gone into reverse with a decline in many countries of political rights and civil liberties.

In spite of this, LH continues to be advocated almost universally in the media and by political and foreign policy commentators. People who criticize its exercise are ostracized. Nevertheless, Walt names proponent’s names and few well known political and military spokesmen are spared.

Walt reviews Trump’s foreign policy and military efforts and concludes he has made matters worse.

Walt presents a very persuasive alternative strategy that he calls Offshore Balancing. It would entail a continued strong military but much less active military involvement in other countries and more use of diplomacy. This is truly a book well worth reading.

Trump immigration stance

The only area where Trump was more or less consistent with his election promises was the immigration. But even here his record is not that satisfactory as he missed his changes to build the Wall and retracted on many important issues like H1B visa, etc. In this sense he might be helped by continuing crisis of Democratic Party (aka Demexit) and its inability to get rid off the corrupt to the core Clinton wing of Dems.

Forget Russiagate, Trump revealed himself as the agent of Israeli lobby

Hs stance toward Israel is controversial and led to a sarcastic rewording of his slogan MAGA into MIGA. His behavior in Syria might signify his complete political dependence on Israel lobby, which now is viewed suspiciously by most US voters. So while Russiagate witch hunt tries to find connection between Trump and Russia (although connections between Trump and Russian mobsters might really exists) the real scandal is the level of subservience of Trump toward Israel.

Trump is neocons hostage and does not control the USA foreign policy. In this circumstances China needs to get tough on casino modul Adelson to get her message heard by Bolton and other neocons

Dec 19, 2018 | www.unz.com

In his recent article "Averting World Conflict with China" Ron Unz has come up with an intriguing suggestion for the Chinese government to turn the tables on the December 1 ^st arrest of Meng Wanzhou in Canada. Canada detained Mrs. Meng, CFO of the world's largest telecoms equipment manufacturer Huawei, at the request of the United States so she could be extradited to New York to face charges that she and her company had violated U.S. sanctions on Iran. The sanctions in question had been imposed unilaterally by Washington and it is widely believed that the Trump Administration is sending a signal that when the ban on purchasing oil from Iran comes into full effect in May there will be no excuses accepted from any country that is unwilling to comply with the U.S. government's demands. Washington will exercise universal jurisdiction over those who violate its sanctions, meaning that foreign officials and heads of corporations that continue to deal with Iran can be arrested when traveling internationally and will be extradited to be tried in American courts.

There is, of course, a considerable downside to arresting a top executive of a leading foreign corporation from a country that is a major U.S. trading partner and which also, inter alia, holds a considerable portion of the U.S. national debt. Ron Unz has correctly noted the " extraordinary gravity of this international incident and its potential for altering the course of world history." One might add that Washington's demands that other nations adhere to its sanctions on third countries opens up a Pandora's box whereby no traveling executives will be considered safe from legal consequences when they do not adhere to policies being promoted by the United States. Unz cites Columbia's Jeffrey Sachs as describing it as "almost a U.S. declaration of war on China's business community." If seizing and extraditing businessmen becomes the new normal those countries most affected will inevitably retaliate in kind. China has already detained two traveling Canadians to pressure Ottawa to release Mrs. Meng. Beijing is also contemplating some immediate retaliatory steps against Washington to include American companies operating in China if she is extradited to the U.S.

Ron Unz has suggested that Beijing might just want to execute a quid pro quo by pulling the licenses of Sheldon Adelson's casinos operating in Macau, China and shutting them down, thereby eliminating a major source of his revenue. Why go after an Israeli-American casino operator rather than taking steps directly against the U.S. government? The answer is simple. Pressuring Washington is complicated as there are many players involved and unlikely to produce any positive results while Adelson is the prime mover on much of the Trump foreign policy, though one hesitates to refer to it as a policy at all.

Adelson is the world's leading diaspora Israel-firster and he has the ear of the president of the United States, who reportedly speaks and meets with him regularly. And Adelson uses his considerable financial resources to back up his words of wisdom. He is the fifteenth wealthiest man in America with a reported fortune of $33 billion. He is the number one contributor to the GOP having given $81 million in the last cycle. Admittedly that is chump change to him, but it is more than enough to buy the money hungry and easily corruptible Republicans.

In a certain sense, Adelson has obtained control of the foreign policy of the political party that now controls both the White House and the Senate, and his mission in life is to advance Israeli interests. Among those interests is the continuous punishment of Iran, which does not threaten the United States in any way, through employment of increasingly savage sanctions and threats of violence, which brings us around to the arrest of Meng and the complicity of Adelson in that process. Adelson's wholly owned talking head National Security Adviser John Bolton reportedly had prior knowledge of the Canadian plans and may have actually been complicit in their formulation. Adelson has also been the major force behind moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, has also convinced the Administration to stop its criticism of the illegal Israeli settlements on Arab land and has been instrumental in cutting off all humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. He prefers tough love when dealing with the Iranians, advocating dropping a nuclear bomb on Iran as a warning to the Mullahs of what more might be coming if they don't comply with all the American and Israeli demands.

Trump tax cuts for the rich

His tax cuts benefitted mainly the rich -- clear betrayal of his 2016 platform, which emphasized creation of jobs for middle class and improving the condition of workers. He adopted monstrous military budget which clearly is stealing funds from his voters.

Softpanorama May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)	Home	Switchboard	Unix Administration	Red Hat	TCP/IP Networks	Neoliberalism	Toxic Managers
	(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix

Softpanorama May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)	Home	Switchboard	Unix Administration	Red Hat	TCP/IP Networks	Neoliberalism	Toxic Managers
	(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix

Depression Era Unemployment Statistics
Year	Population	Labor Force	Unemployed	Percentage of Labor Force
1929	88,010,000	49,440,000	1,550,000	3.14
1930	89,550,000	50,080,000	4,340,000	8.67
1931	90,710,000	50,680,000	8,020,000	15.82
1932	91,810,000	51,250,000	12,060,000	23.53
1933	92,950,000	51,840,000	12,830,000	24.75
1934	94,190,000	52,490,000	11,340,000	21.60
1935	95,460,000	53,140,000	10,610,000	19.97
1936	96,700,000	53,740,000	9,030,000	16.80
1937	97,870,000	54,320,000	7,700,000	14.18
1938	99,120,000	54,950,000	10,390,000	18.91
1939	100,360,000	55,600,000	9,480,000	17.05
1940	101,560,000	56,180,000	8,120,000	14.45
1941	102,700,000	57,530,000	5,560,000	9.66

"All hat, no cattle" Cowboy Trump

Abstract

Introduction