Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Skepticism and critical thinking is not panacea, but can help to understand the world better

Creepy neocon Joe Biden

Biden is the quintessential swamp rat, having served in Washington, almost continuously, since Jan 1973. He voted for the Iraq War (which should disqualify him for running for any public office)  and is up to the neck in the dirt of Clinton-era deregulation. Like Hillary, he also is a symbol of destruction of Libya, Syria and Ukraine by Obama administration; He was instrumental in EuroMaydan coup which destroyed the standard of living of ordinary Ukrainians. His narcoaddict son fleeced Ukraine to the tune of several millions a year

 

News Conversion of Democratic Party into War Party Recommended Links Obama administration directed the intelligence services putsch against Trump Ukraine-gate as Russiagate 2.0 Ukraine: From EuroMaydan to EuroAnschluss Nulandgate  Blob attacks Trump: Viper nest of neocons in state department fuels Ukrainegate
Civil war in Ukraine Adam Schiff Witch Hunt Alexandra Chalupa role in fueling Russiagate FBI and CIA contractor Crowdstrike and very suspicious DNC leak saga UA officials role in fueling Russiagate and Ukrainegate Ukrainian Security Services role in Spygate (aka Russiagate) Zelensky presidency as Saakashvilli 2.0 Poroshenko presidency
Alexander Vindman role in Ukrainegate Eric Ciaramella as potential fake whistleblower and Brennan pawn Nancy Pelosi impeachment gambit Rick Perry induced Trump blunder Manafort and his Ukrainian connections Blob attacks Trump: Viper nest of neocons in state department fuels Ukrainegate FBI and CIA contractor Crowdstrike and very suspicious DNC leak saga Demonization of Putin
Russiagate -- the attempt to entrap Trump with Russia ties by CIA, FBI, MI6 and Clinton mafia Russiagate: Special Prosecutor Mueller and his fishing expedition Creating Insurance: the appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit Strzok-gate Steele dossier Brennan elections machinations Appointment of a Special Prosecutor gambit Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak
 NeoMcCartyism Crisis of legitimacy of neoliberal elite Cold War II "Fuck the EU": State Department neocons show EU its real place The Far Right Forces in Ukraine as Trojan Horse of Neoliberalism To whom Euromaydan Sharp-shooters belong? Odessa Massacre of May 2, 2014 Neocolonialism as Financial Imperialism
Media-Military-Industrial Complex The Deep State Nation under attack meme Clinton Cash The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich New American Militarism  Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA Obama: a yet another Neocon Neocons Credibility Scam
Corporatist Corruption: Systemic Fraud under Clinton-Bush-Obama Regime Blowback against neoliberal globalization Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism American Exceptionalism Noble Lie Deception as an art form Demexit: Abandonment of Democratic party by working class and middle class Cold War II
Predator state The Iron Law of Oligarchy Elite [Dominance] Theory And the Revolt of the Elite Inverted Totalitarism == Managed Democracy == Neoliberalism Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich   Politically Incorrect Humor  Etc

Introduction: From Ukraine with love

Biden is a weaker version of Bill Clinton: wolf in sheep's' clothing -- the person who sold Democratic Party to Wall Street. At some point the Democratic establishment has decided that all that they need is a more likeable candidate, dusted off Biden and pushed him into the race.

And yes, Biden is more favorable ratings in polls than Hillary right now, but then Hillary's favorability was much higher before she kicked off her campaign. Chances for this  grinning neoliberal sell-out are approximately the same as Hillary.  He is a staunch neocon who stands well to the right of most republicans on key elements of the USA foreign policy. So like Hillary he personify conversion of neoliberal Dems into the second war party. This stooge of MIC voted for Iraq war, which alone should disqualify him from any public office.  One reason for Biden run is to deny  Sanders or Warren the nomination. 

The fact that  DemoRats (Clinton wing of Democratic Party) dusted off and added Joe Biden to the already overclouded roster of candidates  (and falsified polls to show that he is a leader and thus artificially created a following for his candidacy) was clearly a move directed on reelection of Trump, a very favorable for Trump event.  And it is true that DemoRats are afraid of Bernie Sanders more then of Trump.

In September three House committees announced earlier this month that they were investigating whether Trump used the withholding of military aid as leverage to get Ukraine’s new President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to probe the Bidens — an allegation that has been bolstered by a  "whistle-blower"( this person is not a whistle-blower but a leaker, as we are talking about potentially criminal actions by Biden, which do deserve investigation by the Ukrainian side)  complaint from inside the  intelligence community.

Democrats risk to discover that in the released transcript Trump did not cross the line and at this point you can say good-buy to Creepy Joe as the leader of the pack, if not as a candidate. So it could well be  that the "whistle-blower" is Warren sympathizer within the intelligence community and the whole operation was devised  to prop-up Warren and hurt Trump in best Russiagate style. Looks like powerful faction within the intelligence community clearly had a candidate in 2016. Do they also have one in 2020?

The US authorities now are obligated to conduct a full-scale inquiry of Biden behavior, but what is even worse that will add a lot of additional air time to allegations about Biden criminality, linking their party’s 2020 presidential front-runner to Clinton family corruption. The last thing Democrats want is another candidate on the defensive, after Trump was rolled over Hillary 2016.”  Also in view of the scandal voters may think Biden not only just too old to be the President, but that maybe that he carries was too much neoliberal baggage. The whistleblower incident is more likely to end the political career of Biden. The whole matter involving his son’s foreign business dealings not only raises unflattering questions but also provides plenty of reminders about his life in the swamp. Trump practically has been defined by his ability to outlive Democratic “witch hunts.'”

Trump probably will crush Creepy Joe even with all the negative factors he now has, or will acquire.  Creepy Joe (as WaPo nicknamed him) has three major skeletons in the closet:

  1. his narcoaddict son magically escaped justice when a crack pipe was found in his rental car
  2. Biden role in Ukrainian events which are disgusting if not outright criminal. Later after the EuroMaydan events he instrumental if firing Ukrainian Chief Persecutor to squash investigating of gas company Burisma (where his some do some reason got a position in the board of the company) which paid around $50K a month to his son) and his son financial dealings with China.  So his son fleeced impoverished Ukraine where standard living dropped 2-3 times after Euromaydan, which was converted into the debt slave of the  West and where most population live of $2 a day or less.

    The fact of the matter is that Hunter wasn’t on the board because of his expertise in Eastern European energy issues. He’s part of a long tradition of nepotism when family members of influential politicians profiting off a sense that it’s politically and economically useful to cultivate these connections.

    not to mention his past as the  "mentor" of Yanukovich whom he later backstabbed
  3. His China dealings

At night on September 24, 2019 Pelosi  have announced they will pursue impeachment charges against President Trump because an unverified, hearsay whistleblower made a complaint about a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. 

In response Trump published the transcript of the call. Trump’s move to release the un-redacted transcripts of the phone call was the right move. But Dems did not stop. They just moved goalposts.

There are few hard facts: a leak claims a whistleblower in the intelligence community believes that during a July 25 phone call, Trump made unspecified “promises” to the Ukrainian president in return for his investigating Biden family corruption. The whistleblower did not have direct knowledge of what was said, and may have read a transcript or summary. Trump knew the call was monitored by multiple people yet said whatever he said anyway

The actual words matter a lot. If this whole thing looks like a dance around some flippant statement by the president about investigating corruption that may involve the Biden family turning it into a quid pro quo accusation, it will fail spectacularly with voters. If we all have to become whistleblower law experts the same way we all were obstruction experts just a few weeks ago, it fails.

Yet while the actual words matter, it should not be lost that none of what Trump was supposed to have really done — using military aid to get dirt on Biden — happened.  

No one claims the Ukrainians investigated Biden at Trump’s demand (and Dems insist there was no Biden wrongdoing anyway, so an investigation would be for naught). It is thus a big problem in this narrative that the long-promised military aid to the Ukraine was only delayed and then paid out, as if the bribe was given for nothing in return—which makes it hardly a bribe. Trump is apparently bad at bribing. Even though he made the decision to temporarily withhold the aid for some reason, the Ukrainians were never even told about it until weeks after the “extortion” phone call, meaning nobody’s arm got knowingly twisted. So no bribe was given, or to the Ukrainians’ knowledge, no money withheld.

In previous case FBI plot to entrap Trump with Moscow hotel  led to the Dems claim that they see a smoking gun. But there is no body on the ground under the muzzle. So will this devolve into another complicated thought crime, another “conspiracy” to commit without the committal?

“No explicit quid pro quo is necessary to betray your country,” helpfully tweeted Adam Schiff, chair of the House Intelligence Committee, a member of Congress Pro-Israel lobby. He does not even understand how right he is.

People became way too cynical following the collapse of Russiagate for Dems to have any level of success in derailing Trump.

Hunter Biden’s American-based firm, Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, was hired by the Ukrainian natural gas firm, Burisma Holdings in 2014. They gave Hunter Biden a seat on their board and paid Biden’s firm an average of $166,000 a month during his employment with them. The problem? Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin in the Ukraine started a widespread corruption probe into Burisma Holdings with specific plans to look at all board members – including Joe Biden’s son.  (Source)

As Vice President, Joe Biden traveled to Ukraine to give them the news that the United States was going to be granting Ukraine $1 Billion in loan guarantees. While there, he threatened to pull the guarantees if they did not fire Prosecutor Shokin, who was investigating the firm Biden’s son was a board member of. (Source)

Sure enough, Ukraine folded in order to not risk losing the loan guarantees and fired Prosecutor Shokin. The corruption investigation into Burisma Holdings was abandoned and no charges were brought against the firm or Hunter Biden. Last year, Joe Biden bragged on video about personally strong-arming the Ukrainians into firing the prosecutor. (Source)

Biden as a neoliberal

Biden is dyed-in-the-wool in the wool neocon and neoliberal. His real constituents wear pinstripe suits and works on Wall Street and in corporate headquarters. He is the only 2020 candidate who voted for Iraq war. As a part of Obama administration he was instrumental in Libya and Ukraine disasters. He created a sinecure for his cocaine addicted sun in Ukraine in the form of the board member of oil and gas company Burisma and prevented corruption investigation of the company by Ukrainian authorities by forcing the  firing of the Chief Prosecutor by President Poroshenko) . Kind of mini Clinton cash scandal. Al-in-all he is a fossilized remnant of Clinton wing of Democratic Party. 

When people learn about his voting record his ratings will probably drop:

Iraq War supporter? Check. Clinton was pilloried by the left and the right alike as a wild-eyed hawk; her vote in favor of the Iraq invasion haunted both her 2008 and 2016 campaigns. ...Let's be clear: If he runs, Biden will be the only candidate -- out of up to 20 Democrats running for the nomination -- to have voted for the Iraq War.

Friend of Wall Street? Check. Clinton had a Goldman Sachs problem; Biden has an MBNA problem. Headquartered in his home state of Delaware, the credit card giant MBNA was his biggest donor when he served in the Senate. In 2005, Biden threw his weight behind a bankruptcy bill, signed into law by President George W. Bush, that shamefully protected credit card companies at the expense of borrowers.

Champion of mass incarceration? Check. Clinton took flak for supporting the 1994 crime bill, which helped push up the U.S. prison population, introduced new federal death penalty crimes, and hugely exacerbated racial disparities in the criminal justice system. And Biden? Well, he wrote the damn thing!

Establishment-friendly? Check. Biden arrived in D.C. in 1973; he spent 36 years in the Senate and eight years in Obama's cabinet.When Trump tries to run again as an anti-establishment outsider in 2020, what will Biden's response be?

Loser? Check. Clinton won the Democratic nomination in 2016, at the second attempt, having been defeated by Obama eight years earlier. For Biden, it would have to be third-time lucky.

Biden is 76 and he is one of the oldest candidate, older then Trump. As Trump sarcastically noted during a CBS interview last year running against Biden would be “a dream,” noting that Barack Obama “took him out of the garbage heap” to make him his running mate in 2008:  Biden unsuccessfully sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 1988 and in 2008, both times dropping out after poor showings. That was evidence, Trump said, that Biden “by himself could never do anything.” ( The Washington Post )

Biden biggest and only strength is that he is well known establishment neoliberal. It is also his biggest weakness. It is well known that Biden is beholden to Wall Street (Strategic Culture).

In 1978, Biden worked for Wall Street by voting to rollback bankruptcy protections for college graduates with federal student loans. Six years later he did the same to vocational school graduates. In 2005, he worked with Republican allies to pass the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, which put traditional “clean slate” Chapter 7 bankruptcy out of reach for millions of ordinary Americans and thousands of small businesses. The bill put bankruptcy filers under far stricter Chapter 13 rules, turning countless citizens into de facto indentured servants of finance capital (including the many credit card companies headquartered in Delaware.) Biden backed an earlier version of the bill that was too corporatist even for Bill and Hillary Clinton.

He voted against a bill that would have compelled credit card companies to warn customers of the costs of only making minimum payments.

In 1979, Biden recognized campaign donations from Coca-Cola by cosponsoring a bill that permitted soft-drink producers to skirt antitrust laws. That same year he was one of just two Congressional Democrats to vote against a Judiciary Committee measure to increase consumers’ rights to sue corporations for price-fixing.

Biden strongly supported the 1999 Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, which permitted the re-merging of investment and commercial banking by repealing the Depression-era Glass–Steagall Act. This helped create the 2007-8 financial crisis and subsequent recession.

Biden naturally supported the corporate-neoliberal North American Free Trade agreement and the globalist investor rights Trans-Pacific Partnership deal.

All of this and more in Biden’s record is richly consistent with the beginning of his political career. He’s been an unapologetic corporatist from the start. As Branko Marcetic noted on Jacobin last summer:

“In 1984, the Washington Post specifically named him, along with Gary Hart and Bill Bradley, as one of the best-known figures among that era’s Democratic Party’s ‘neo-liberals,’ who ‘singled out slimming the role of government and pushing new technology’….Biden built his career advertising himself as someone who refuses to toe the progressive line. He proudly boasted of defying liberal orthodoxy on school busing, for instance. But throughout his career, that boast has most often taken the form of bashing liberal ‘special interests.’ Biden toured the country in 1985 chiding…unions and farmers for being too narrowly focused, and complained that Democrats too often ‘think in terms of special interests first and the greater interest second.’ In the latter case, Biden was specifically complaining about their opposition to his calls for a spending freeze on entitlements and an increase in the retirement age” (emphasis added).

During 2018 cycle he  supported Hillary Joe Biden Shills For Establishment Over Nevada Berniecrat -

Politically all he time in congress Biden is a classic corrupt, beholden to insurance companies and large banks  Third Way neoliberal similar to Bill and Hillary Clinton. He spend years attacking progressive “special interests” while crossing the aisle to vote with Republicans in major instances that were decidedly unhelpful to the working class.

He also excels in Clinton-style corruption: The most well-known case is Biden’s relationship with MBNA, a major credit card company based in his home state that was his largest single donor between 1989 and 2000. By sheer coincidence, Biden voted against a measure requiring credit card companies to warn consumers of the consequences of making only minimum payments and voted four times for an industry-supported bankruptcy bill that made it harder for financially strained borrowers to get protection from creditors. Another coincidence: MBNA hired Biden’s son, Hunter, as a lobbyist straight out of law school, and later hired him as a consultant from 2001 to 2005 — the same years Biden was helping to pass the bill.

Another coincidence: MBNA hired Biden’s son, Hunter, as a lobbyist straight out of law school, and later hired him as a consultant from 2001 to 2005 — the same years Biden was helping to pass the bill.

Another side of neoliberal corruption are exorbitant speaking fess. Biden has long been prolific on the speaking circuit. By 1979, he was one of the Senate’s top twenty-five earners of outside income — and, along with twenty-two others on that list, voted against a bill to limit such earnings. As early as 1977, his speaking-fee income was among the highest in the Senate, totaling $22,596 that year (almost $94,000 in today’s dollars) for a practice that even then was controversial. And while he did sponsor a bill that year to bar senators from taking such fees, he clearly wasn’t bothered by its failure, continuing to rack up thousands of dollars in fees from pro-Israel groups and others in the ensuing years, and commanding $100,000–$200,000 per speech today.

Biden can close connection with lobbyists. Many Biden’s longtime staffers became lobbists  From 1989 to 2008 the industry donated $344,400 to him, more then the $300,000 given to him by finance and credit card companies.  He openly proclaims himself a neoliberal:

This hints at the larger issue with Biden: at a time when left-wing populism is increasingly accepted as the antidote to Trump and the GOP’s nativist and corporate-friendly pitch, Biden stands as a remnant of precisely the sort of left-averse, triangulating Democratic politics that Hillary Clinton was relentlessly criticized for personifying.

If you don’t believe me, there’s someone else who can tell you all about it. His name is Joe Biden.

In 2001, Biden was specifically asked by the National Journal about whether or not he thought a “populist message” was an effective one. This was his response:

[Bill] Clinton got it right. I was one of those guys in 1987 who tried to run on a platform that Clinton basically ran on in 1992. And that is, for a lack of a better phrase, his “Third Way.” It worked. It’s where the American people are. It’s where the Democratic Party should have been. Al Gore abandoned it without an alternative, and [Sen.] Paul Wellstone [D-Minn.] thinks we lost because we didn’t take care of Ralph Nader’s voters. One of the things I’m most angry about in the [aftermath of the] 2000 election, we’re now renegotiating as a party what the hell our message should be and who we are, when for me it was settled in 1992 ….

The idea now, and it’s credible, is that class warfare and populism is the way we should conduct the next election. We do that [and] George Bush will be a second term president, regardless of how bad a job he may do.

In fact, even in today’s political climate, Biden continues to defend the ultrarich from criticism — “I don’t think five hundred billionaires are the reason we’re in trouble. The folks at the top aren’t bad guys,” he said last year — suggests his views haven’t shifted much in the last seventeen years.

Biden’s always been a traitor of his class. In 1984, Washington Post specifically mentions  that he (with Gary Hart and Bill Bradley) is the the best-known Democratic Party “neo-liberal”. Politician that subscribes to deregulation, slimming the role of government and pushing new technology

Biden also spent the 1990s voting for a string of neoliberal policies: NAFTA, one of the most devastating political defeats for unions in recent memory, and one where Biden was a crucial vote that switched to help it pass; the balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, which he had earlier decried as “mak[ing] Herbert Hoover’s economic policy a constitutional mandate,” a claim that if anything understates the case; Clinton’s appalling welfare reform; and the repeal of the New Deal-era Glass-Steagall prohibition on banks engaging in risky securities dealings. He did this all while moaning endlessly about excessive government spending.

Being the establishment candidate has a lot of advantages. One is money. Biden got over 6 million in his chest the day he announced his candidacy.

His speeches are full of platitudes and balderdash. Biden has no new political ideas and have no clur how to deal with the crisi of neoliberalism in the USA (one of the side  effects of which was the election of Trump). His sole point is "I am better then  Trump."

Biden as a neocon

Biden is a dangerous neocons, Hillary Clinton without any selling points as one commenter defined him.  See Joe Biden I'm a Democrat and I love John McCain - YouTube

He is adamantly anti-Iran politician:

 Bro. Curtis, Feb 8, 2009

MUNICH – Vice President Joe Biden warned Saturday that the U.S. stands ready to take pre-emptive action against Iran if it does not abandon nuclear ambitions and its support for terrorism...."We will draw upon all the elements of our power — military and diplomatic, intelligence and law enforcement, economic and cultural — to stop crises from occurring before they are in front of us,"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090207/ap_on_go_pr_wh/biden_europe

Not long after the turn of the twentieth century, Biden enthusiastically voted for the greatest foreign policy disaster of the twenty-first: the Iraq War (“I voted to go into Iraq, and I’d vote to do it again”). It was the worst of a pattern for Biden, who backed Margaret Thatcher’s war in the Falklands and was one of the key figures pushing for NATO’s eastward expansion in the 1990s, a needless provocation of Russia that the famed Cold War diplomat George Kennan, speaking more than a year before Vladimir Putin took office, presciently denounced as “the beginning of a new cold war.” Biden’s strategy for Afghanistan is indistinguishable from the one the Trump administration is now pursuing, and his “counterterrorism plus” approach — the use of drone strikes and special forces anywhere in the world — became Obama’s anti-terror policy, one that visited death and carnage to a long series of countries and fueled the very threat it was supposed to extinguish.

Needless to say, Biden isn’t just pro-Israel — he’s one of the most Israel-friendly politicians of his generation.  See for example this  YouTube video:

SHILL! Joe Biden & Israel - YouTube

 

Through speaking fees and campaign donations, Israel has been good to Biden his whole career, and Biden’s been good right back, from pushing for more US aid to voting to move the embassy to Jerusalem — another extremist policy Trump cribbed from Biden and his friends — and even chiding the Bush administration for its criticism of Israel’s assassination program. But being “the best friend of Israel” in the Obama administration didn’t get him far with Benjamin Netanyahu, who openly rebelled against the US under Obama, and humiliatingly announced new illegal settlements in the middle of an official visit from Biden.

Biden involvement  in Obama administration color revolution against  Trump

The "putsch" that intelligence agencies organized after Trump election as well as gambit to appointed the special prosecutor were not unprecedented (JFK assassination is probably one close instance, Nixon removal is another).  But it enjoyed full and continues support of Justice department and several key Obama administration officials, including Obama himself.

Obama has had an outstanding record of dirty tricks and connections to intelligence  agencies, even by Democrat standards with Bill Clinton and Hillary as standards in this area.  His state senate campaign, the Senate campaign…and it would explain some oddities in the 2012 Presidential campaign. Not to mention 2016. Obama White House was not only aware of the intelligence agencies operation against Trump - but possibly was directing it (FBI Spying On Trump Started In London, Earlier Than Thought, New Texts Implicate Obama White House). To hide traces the intelligence agencys targeting of Trump associates wouldn't occur on U.S. soil, Obama moved them to London. London was the center of the "Operation Crossfire Hurricane"  - the code name given to the early official Trump-Russia investigationSome now  accuse the UK of colluding with the Obama administration and Clinton campaign to influence the 2016 US election.

As David Stockman  observed (The RussiaGate Witch-Hunt Stockman Names Names In The Deep State's Insurance Policy )

There was a sinister plot to meddle in the 2016 election, after all. But it was not orchestrated from the Kremlin; it was an entirely homegrown affair conducted from the inner sanctums---the White House, DOJ, the Hoover Building and Langley----of the Imperial City.

Likewise, the perpetrators didn't speak Russian or write in the Cyrillic script. In fact, they were lifetime beltway insiders occupying the highest positions of power in the US government.

Here are the names and rank of the principal conspirators:

To a person, the participants in this illicit cabal shared the core trait that made Obama such a blight on the nation's well-being. To wit, he never held an honest job outside the halls of government in his entire adult life; and as a careerist agent of the state and practitioner of its purported goods works, he exuded a sanctimonious disdain for everyday citizens who make their living along the capitalist highways and by-ways of America.

So we can talk about the particlation or implisit support of the putsch by at least two departments (Justice Departemant and the Department of State) as well as several key figures of ama administration, especially Susan Rice and Samatha Powell. 

Fmr. FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom argues the FBI planned to destroy Donald Trump's presidency (Dec 19, 2017). In his Fox interview said that there was a "cabal" of FBI personnel around Comey as well Justice Department.  He asks an interesting question: "Why Trump Justice Department does not comply with congressional subpoena?".

The role of Peter Strzok is also pretty interesting: Jordan Appears There Was Orchestrated Plan Within DOJ, FBI to Prevent Trump From Becoming President - YouTube

I realize that Clinton wing of Democratic Party (soft neoliberals) and their supporters which include a part of Wall Street, large part of Silicon valley and most MSM progressives hate Donald Trump so much that they believe that any pretext is justified in taking him down. So they joined efforts with the neoconservatives. That's why war-mongering against Russia is now OK for them and Democratic party now is just another War Party (as was evident from Hillary campaign).

Many people who detest Trump view Russiagate as the most effective path to achieve Trump’s impeachment, so this desirable end justifies whatever means. that makes them very similar to supported of Ukrainian Maydan, which removed Yanukovich and installed far right junta with a lot of unsavory characters. But to me it look like Trump surrendered after just 100 of anti-Russian smear campaign launched by neocons. So why they still  want to finish him?  So it must be more  to it; there might be some skeletons in the closet revealing of which previous administration and their factions in intelligence  services the are afraid to death . Because their action is as close to sedition as one  can get. In other words they went va bank  by unleashing on Trump Steele dossier (va bank is a common expression among Russian and German speakers. which means to put everything at risk in order to win. And nowhere it is more clear then in sordid case of Steele dossier.

Russiangate can be viewed as "American Maydan" story.  Ukrainian Maydan was about  Yanukovich removal. Yanukovich  who was a neoliberal wanted to bargain more before signing EU memorandum and postpone its signing despite pressure.  At this point EU and the USA decided that he crosses the line and decided to remove legitimatly elected president of Ukraine by force.

Similarly Trump wanted to reach some level of detente  with Russia (at least during the election campaign) rightly considering the level of hostility achieved under Obama dangerous and counterproductive (to the extent that Obama might be controlled by Brennan it might be not Obama personal fault).  In this sense Trump also crossed the line (with the only difference that he did it during he election campaign) and at this point all power of neocons and neolib including their factions in intelligence agencies was unleashed for his removal.

That's why Steele dossier was created and advertized: as part of anti-Trump coup d'état by the neocons, Clinton neoliberals and parts of the US intelligence services.  In both case the interests of the USA and national security suffers. In a way both neocons and neoliberals  are elements of foreign influence that do not care much about ordinary Americans. In any case now two third of US population now is brainwashed into adamantly anti-Russian mindset, increasing the risk of the major war

First let's discuss the historical origins of  the  term “color revolution”. The latter is a new  subversive tactics which was successfully used as a means to triggering “regime change”, which have emerged in a large number of countries in the course of the last decade, especially in xUSSR space (Georgia, Ukraine, Modlova, Russia, etc). But the key methods of "color revolution" coup d'état can be traced to Chilean coup d'état or even earlier.

The “color revolution” is a US intelligence operation which consists of covertly supporting as well as infiltrating protest movements with a view to triggering “regime change” under the banner of a pro-democracy template. The objective of a “color revolution” is to manipulate or delegitimize elections (if the winner in nor desired candidate), foment social unrest and use the protest movement to topple an existing legitimate government.  Formatting social unrest is done via media (and achieving media dominance is an important  step in unleashing a color revolution)  which serve important role in any color revolution. Similar to the role of aviation in modern wars. With the only difference that it drops propaganda bombs. The goal is always the same -- to install a compliant pro-neoliberal, pro-US government (“puppet regime”).

The main underlying features of color revolution is that  those activities are structured as intelligence operation and some players might not even understand that they are pupett of pretty nefarious sceme and  beleave in noble slogans that are on the curface of events.  A lot of technologies in color revolution was taken  from Trostyiate and Bolshevicks handbooks. That include the role of students as foot solgers of regime change, Attempt to capute media as the  first step, digging  dirt on key figures of existing government (corruption is the favorite change oin such revolutions). Color revolution added several new  features: massive fincial infusion to keep unrest going, coordinating role of neoliberal NGO and think tanks in particular country, penetration into and use of law enforcement for deposing the members of the current government (typically on corruption changes). 

This contact bombardment of public with negative information about the current administration and "outsize" role of intelligence agencies we can observe  in the current campaign to de-legitimize and depose President Trump.  Instead of corruption changes they use  the  change  of cooperation with country which they demonized and present as adversary -- Russia. That why some call this color revolution Russiagate. As James Petras observed (Imperial Power Centers, July 24, 2017):

With the ascent of Donald Trump to the US Presidency, imperial rulership has become openly contested terrain, fought over amid unyielding aspirants seeking to overthrow the democratically elected regime.

While Presidents rule, today the entire state structure is riven by rival power centers. At the moment, all of the power seekers are at war to impose their rule over the empire.

In the first place, the strategically placed security apparatus is no longer under Presidential control: They operate in coordination with insurgent Congressional power centers, mass media and extra-governmental power configurations among the oligarchs (business, merchants, arms manufacturers, Zionists and special interest lobbies).

Sectors of the state apparatus and bureaucracy investigate the executive, freely leaking damaging reports to the media, distorting fabricating and/or magnifying incidents. They publicly pursue a course with the goal of regime change.

The FBI, Homeland Security, the CIA and other power configurations are acting as crucial allies to the coup-makers seeking to undermine Presidential control over the empire. No doubt, many factions within the regional offices nervously look on, waiting to see if the President will be defeated by these opposing power configurations or will survive and purge their current directors.

The Pentagon contains both elements that are pro as well as anti-Presidential power: Some active generals are aligned with the prime movers pushing for regime change, while others oppose this movement. Both contending forces influence and dictate imperial military policies.

The most visible and aggressive advocates of regime change are found in the militarist wing of the Democratic Party. They are embedded in the Congress and allied with police state militarists in and out of Washington.

Engineered protest movements are carefully planned and well financed (to the extent of create a caste of "professional protesters"). Again the key feature of all color revolutions is that they are essentially intelligence ops performed via NGO and similar organization, with huge role of the US embassy as the coordinating center.  They use non-governmental organizations and opposition media to recruit protesters.  Creation of powerful opposition media is the necessary prerequisite step in preparation of the color revolution. The protest need to be televised in order to amplify their significance (preferably out of proportion and TV is perfectly suitable for that, using the necessary angles to create impression of huge crowd and interviewing patsies to show deep discontent), and create a critical mass of discontent among the population. Again, the  change of corruption is the favorite delegitimization tactics in such events (and  who in modern political life is not corrupt, or do not have skeletons in the closet?).  As if it can be stopped by the "regime change" (often after color revolution corruption and looting of the country becomes much worse, reaching like was case with Russia in 1990th and Ukraine in 1990th and after 2014 really epic scales).  Often even more corrupt oligarchs come to power as a result, only more  subservant to multinational corporations. And BTW its multinationals such as GE which control the US media too. How convenient. 

Looks like McCabe, Rosenstein, Clinton, Morell, Brennan et al have betrayed the US Constitution by treating the national security services’ staff as their personal servants for political (and material) gains.

 

Biden corruption and Ukrainian adventures

Biden steered billions of dollars in aid to the Ukraine, while his son, Hunter Biden, raked in millions through a deal with a Ukrainian energy company.  "This blurs the ethical line so much that you can't even make out the line anymore. What Hunter Biden did may be technically legal, but it is grotesque abuse of elite sun privileges. This is as bad as the Clintons getting money from Pinchuk.

Biden might have problems with MeToo movement

Biden has also long been criticized for his creepy contacts with women and girls, and was even referred to as “Creepy Uncle Joe Biden” by the Washington Post.

The Great America PAC, according to The Hill, dumped six figures into the ad titled "Creepy Joe." The minute-long video showcases children watching a television screen of Biden accuser former state Sen. Lucy Flores (D-NV) explaining the "mortifying" interaction she had with the then-vice president during an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper. As the audio of the interview continues, the ad cuts to images of Mr. Biden touching young girls' faces, arms, and shoulders, and pressing his face up against them and kissing their head.

But that's just one of this character flaw.  That is another one.

A gaffe machine

 

In public appearances, he is known to deviate from prepared remarks at will.[162] According to political analyst Mark Halperin, he has shown "a persistent tendency to say silly, offensive, and off-putting things";[161]

The New York Times writes that Biden's "weak filters make him capable of blurting out pretty much anything".[159] Journalist James Traub has written that "Biden's vanity and his regard for his own gifts seem considerable even by the rarefied standards of the U.S. Senate."[134]

Joe Biden - Wikipedia

The question arise: Why a comfortably  retired politician with so much dirty lining and skeletons in the closet risks (including but not limited to his Ukrainian connections and his son corruption) all this humiliation that will follow. Is he is already senile enough and does not understand that?  Add to this his inability to keep his tong in his mouth and you can anticipate a disastrous, humiliating run.

The question arise: Why a comfortably  retired politician with so much dirty lining and skeletons in the closet risks (including but not limited to his Ukrainian connections and his son corruption) all this humiliation that will follow. Is he is already senile enough and does not understand that? 

Add to this his chronic inability to keep his tong in his mouth ('I am a gaffe machine' ) and you can anticipate a disastrous, humiliating run. He even made a gaffe about his intentions to run for the White House. In march 2019, a month  before announcing his intention  to run he accidentally let it slip, saying at a dinner for the Delaware Democratic party that he has “the most progressive record of anybody running”. After cheers from the crowd Biden seemed to recognize the mistake, and jokingly gave the sign of the cross, saying he “didn’t mean it”.

Infamously in 2015, while Ashton Carter was being sworn in as the secretary of defense, Biden put his hands on his wife Stephanie’s shoulders, rubbing them and appearing to whisper in her ear. “Joe Biden, We Need to Talk About the Way You Touch Women,” Gawker wrote at the time, collecting a series of photo ops in which Biden appears to behave in an overly familiar way with women, young and old alike. “America Shouldn’t Tolerate ‘Biden Being Biden,’” Time remarked.

Biden’s awkward behavior over the years is not limited to what he has said, but also how he acts. Several women have recently come forward to say he has made inappropriate physical contact with them, leaving them feel uncomfortable.

He called himself a gaffe machine (The Guardian, April 29, 2019):

The 2008 election wasn’t the first time Biden ran for president. After it was revealed that Biden had taken to adopting language used by then British Labour party leader Neil Kinnock – not only turns of phrases but taking parts of his biography as his own on stump speeches – Biden dropped out of the 1988 race.

Clips of the speeches were put together by challengers, damaging Biden’s reputation.
Biden initially called it a “tempest in a teapot” at the time, but after further accusations of plagiarism were reported, stretching back to his days in law school, he stepped down.

As troubling as some of his misstatements might be, and as serious some of the concerns people have about Biden’s retrograde positioning among a new crop of progressive candidates, a sizable percentage of the US electorate finds the often goofy Biden charming.

It didn’t hurt matters that Obama often reacted to them with bemusement. “I don’t remember exactly what Joe was referring to, not surprisingly,” Obama quipped after a typically confusing statement from Biden about the passage of a stimulus package in 2010.

In 2015, presidential candidate Donald Trump spoke about the prospect of squaring off against Biden if he had ended up running. “I think I’d match up great,” he said. “I’m a job producer. I’ve had a great record, I haven’t been involved in plagiarism.”  We may yet get to see how that works on the 2020 campaign trail. Trump is not exactly gaffe-free, to put it mildly. “I hope it’s Biden,” Trump said again last month. “When I say something that you might think is a gaffe, it’s on purpose. It’s not a gaffe. When Biden says something dumb, it’s because he’s dumb.”

“I am a gaffe machine,” Biden admitted in December when asked about potential liabilities of his campaign. “But my God what a wonderful thing compared to a guy who can’t tell the truth,” he said.

This was the basis for the hilarious series of Onion articles from the Obama years that portrayed Biden as a kind of aging Dukes of Hazzard character.

 

The role on Biden in the coming 2020 election is probably the role of spoiler

The fight against Trump can not be won by Clinton DemoRats.  For example Creepy Joe Biden probably understands that he is unelectable.  He was want to get enough  delegates to derail any non-establishment candidate.

There are probably three candidates with some chances to defeat Trump.  All of them are dgangeour for the ciurrent Democrtatic Establishemnt as they, each in thier own way, repudiate the Party neoliberal orientation:

A Sanders/Gabbard ticket in the general election is the one that currently have most promise. With Warren as a Treasury Secretary. That what  Biden will try to prevent.


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

Home 2020 2019

For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section

[Aug 09, 2020] Are the Democrats a Political Party or a CIA-backed Fifth Column by Mike Whitney

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The protests are largely a diversion aimed at shifting the public's attention to a racialized narrative that obfuscates the widening inequality chasm (created by the Democrats biggest donors, the Giant Corporations and Wall Street) to historic antagonisms that have clearly diminished over time. ..."
"... The Democrats are resolved to set the agenda by deciding what issues "will and will not" be covered over the course of the campaign. And– since race is an issue on which they feel they can energize their base by propping-up outdated stereotypes of conservatives as ignorant bigots incapable of rational thought– the Dems are using their media clout to make race the main topic of debate. In short, the Democrats have settled on a strategy for quashing the emerging populist revolt that swept Trump into the White House in 2016 and derailed Hillary's ambitious grab for presidential power. ..."
"... Let's be clear, the Democrats do not support Black Lives Matter nor have they made any attempt to insert their demands into their list of police reforms. BLM merely fits into the Dems overall campaign strategy which is to use race to deflect attention from the gross imbalance of wealth that is the unavoidable consequence of the Dems neoliberal policies including outsourcing, off-shoring, de-industrialization, free trade and trickle down economics. These policies were aggressively promoted by both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as they will be by Joe Biden if he is elected. They are the policies that have gutted the country, shrunk the middle class, and transformed the American dream into a dystopian nightmare. ..."
Jul 05, 2020 | www.unz.com
Vandalized Statue of Christopher Columbus

How do the Democrats benefit from the nationwide Black Lives Matter protests?

While the protests are being used to paint Trump as a race-bating white supremacist, that is not their primary objective. The main goal is to suppress and demonize Trump's political base which is comprised of mainly white working class people who have been adversely impacted by the Democrats disastrous free trade and immigration policies. These are the people– liberal and conservative– who voted for Trump in 2016 after abandoning all hope that the Democrats would amend their platform and throw a lifeline to workers who are now struggling to make ends meet in America's de-industrialized heartland.

The protests are largely a diversion aimed at shifting the public's attention to a racialized narrative that obfuscates the widening inequality chasm (created by the Democrats biggest donors, the Giant Corporations and Wall Street) to historic antagonisms that have clearly diminished over time. (Racism ain't what it used to be.)

The Democrats are resolved to set the agenda by deciding what issues "will and will not" be covered over the course of the campaign. And– since race is an issue on which they feel they can energize their base by propping-up outdated stereotypes of conservatives as ignorant bigots incapable of rational thought– the Dems are using their media clout to make race the main topic of debate. In short, the Democrats have settled on a strategy for quashing the emerging populist revolt that swept Trump into the White House in 2016 and derailed Hillary's ambitious grab for presidential power.

The plan, however, does have its shortcomings, for example, Democrats have offered nearly blanket support for protests that have inflicted massive damage on cities and towns across the country. In the eyes of many Americans, the Dems support looks like a tacit endorsement of the arson, looting and violence that has taken place under the banner of "racial justice". The Dems have not seriously addressed this matter, choosing instead to let the media minimize the issue by simply scrubbing the destruction from their coverage. This "sweep it under the rug" strategy appears to be working as the majority of people surveyed believe that the protests were "mostly peaceful", which is a term that's designed to downplay the effects of the most ferocious rioting since the 1970s.

Let's be clear, the Democrats do not support Black Lives Matter nor have they made any attempt to insert their demands into their list of police reforms. BLM merely fits into the Dems overall campaign strategy which is to use race to deflect attention from the gross imbalance of wealth that is the unavoidable consequence of the Dems neoliberal policies including outsourcing, off-shoring, de-industrialization, free trade and trickle down economics. These policies were aggressively promoted by both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as they will be by Joe Biden if he is elected. They are the policies that have gutted the country, shrunk the middle class, and transformed the American dream into a dystopian nightmare.

They are also the policies that have given rise to, what the pundits call, "right wing populism" which refers to the growing number of marginalized working people who despise Washington and career politicians, feel anxious about falling wages and dramatic demographic changes, and resent the prevailing liberal culture that scorns their religion and patriotism. This is Trump's mainly-white base, the working people the Democrats threw under the bus 30 years ago and now want to annihilate completely by deepening political polarization, fueling social unrest, pitting one group against another, and viciously vilifying them in the media as ignorant racists whose traditions, culture, customs and even history must be obliterated to make room for the new diversity world order. Trump touched on this theme in a speech he delivered in Tulsa. He said:

"Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values and indoctrinate our children. Angry mobs are trying to tear down statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials and unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities."

Author Charles Burris expanded on this topic in an article at Lew Rockwell titled America's Monumental Existential Problem:

"The wave of statue-toppling spreading across the Western world from the United States is not an aesthetic act, but a political one, the disfigured monuments in bronze and stone standing for the repudiation of an entire civilization. No longer limiting their rage to slave-owners, American mobs are pulling down and disfiguring statues of abolitionists, writers and saints in an act of revolt against the country's European founding, now re-imagined as the nation's original sin, a moral and symbolic shift with which we Europeans will soon be forced to reckon."

The statue-toppling epidemic is vastly more disturbing that the the looting or arson, mainly because it reveals a ideological intensity aimed at symbols of state power. By tearing down the images of the men who created or contributed to our collective history, the vandals are challenging the legitimacy of the nation itself as well as its founding "enlightenment" principles. This is the nihilism of extremists whose only objective is destruction. It suggests that the Democrats might have aspirations that far exceed a mere presidential victory. Perhaps the protests and riots will be used to justify more sweeping changes, a major reset during which traditional laws and rules are indefinitely suspended until the crisis passes and order can be restored. Is that at all conceivable or should we dismiss these extraordinary events as merely young people "letting off a little steam"?

Here's how General Michael Flynn summed up what's going on on in a recent article:

"There is now a small group of passionate people working hard to destroy our American way of life. Treason and treachery are rampant and our rule of law and those law enforcement professionals are under the gun more than at any time in our nation's history I believe the attacks being presented to us today are part of a well-orchestrated and well-funded effort that uses racism as its sword to aggravate our battlefield dispositions. This weapon is used to leverage and legitimize violence and crime, not to seek or serve the truth .The dark forces' weapons formed against us serve one purpose: to promote radical social change through power and control."

I agree. The toppling of statues, the rioting, the looting, the arson and, yes, the relentless attacks on Trump from the day he took office, to Russiagate, to the impeachment, to the insane claims about Russian "bounties", to the manipulation of science and data to trigger a planned demolition of the US economy hastening a vast restructuring to the labor force and the imposition of authoritarian rule; all of these are all cut from the same fabric, a tapestry of lies and deception concocted by the DNC, the Intel agencies, the elite media, and their behind-the-scenes paymasters. Now they have released their corporate-funded militia on the country to wreak havoc and spread terror among the population. Meanwhile, the New York Times and others continue to generate claims they know to be false in order to confuse the public even while the people are still shaking off months of disorienting quarantine and feelings of trepidation brought on by 3 weeks of nonstop social unrest and fractious racial conflict. Bottom line: Neither the Democrats nor their allies at the Intel agencies and media have ever accepted the "peaceful transition of power". They reject the 2016 election results, they reject Donald Trump as the duly elected president of the United States, and they reject the representative American system of government "by the people."

So let's get down to the nitty-gritty: Which political party is pursuing a radical-activist strategy that has set our cities ablaze and reduced Capitol Hill to a sprawling warzone? Which party pursued a 3 year-long investigation that was aimed at removing the president using a dossier that they knew was false (Opposition research), claiming emails were hacked from DNC computers when the cyber-security company that did the investigation said there was no proof of "exfiltration"? (In other words, there was no hack and the Dems knew it since 2017) Which party allied itself with senior-level officials at the FBI, CIA, NSA and elite media and worked together collaboratively to discredit, surveil, infiltrate, entrap and demonize the administration in order to torpedo Trumps "America First" political agenda, and remove him from office?

Which party?

No one disputes the Democrats right to challenge, criticize or vigorously oppose a bill or policy promoted by the president. What we take issue with is the devious and (possibly) illegal way the Democrats have joined powerful elements in the Intelligence Community and the major media to conduct a ruthless "dirty tricks" campaign that involved spying on members of the administration in order to establish the basis for impeachment proceedings. This is not the behavior of a respected political organization but the illicit conduct of a fifth column acting on behalf of a foreign (or corporate?) enemy. It's worth noting that an insurrection against the nation's lawful authority is sedition, a felony that is punishable by imprisonment or death. Perhaps, the junta leaders should consider the possible consequences of their actions before they make their next move.

What we need to know is whether the Democrat party operates independent of the Intel agencies with which it cooperated during its campaign against Trump? We're hopeful that the Durham investigation will shed more light on this matter. Our fear is that what we're seeing is an emerging Axis–the CIA, the DNC, and the elite media– all using their respective powers to terminate the Constitutional Republic and establish permanent, authoritarian one-party rule. As far-fetched as it might sound, the country appears to be slipping inexorably towards tyranny.

[Aug 09, 2020] Dems have morphed into a branch of the CIA – not unlike origins of the East German Stasi government...

Oct 21, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Renee Parsons via Off-Guardian.org,

Even before Rep. Tulsi Gabbard threatened to boycott the October 15th Dem debate as the DNC usurps the role of voters in the Democratic primacy 2020 election and with an impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump on the table, the Swamp was stirred and its slimy muck may be about to come to the surface as never before.

If so, those revelations are long overdue.

It is no secret to the observant that since the 2016 election, the Democratic Party has been in a state of near-collapse, the victim of its own hubris, having lost their moral compass with unsubstantiated Russisgate allegations; those accusations continue as a futile exercise of domestic regime change.

Today's Dems are less than a bona fide opposition party offering zero policy solutions, unrecognizable from past glories and not the same political party many of us signed up for many years ago. Instead, the American public is witnessing a frenzied, unscrupulous strategy.

Desperate in the denial of its demise, confronting its own shadow of corruption as the Dems have morphed into a branch of the CIA – not unlike origins of the East German Stasi government.

It should not be necessary to say but in today's hyper volatile political climate it is: No American should be labelled as anything other than a loyal American to be deeply disturbed by the Democrat/CIA collusion that is currently operating an unprecedented Kangaroo Court in secret, behind closed doors; thus posing an ominous provocation to what remains of our Constitutional Republic.

As any politically savvy, independent thinking American might grasp, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and their entire coterie of sycophants always knew that Russiagate was a crock of lies.

They lied to their willing Democratic rank n file, they lied to American public and they continue to lie about their bogus Impeachment campaign.

It may be that whistleblower Ed Snowden's revelations about the NSA surveillance state was the first inkling for many Americans that there is a Big Problem with an out-of-control intelligence community until Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer warned that Trump was being 'really dumb " in daring to question Intel's faulty conclusion that Russia hacked the 2016 election.

"Let me tell you. You take on the intelligence community = they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you."

Inescapably, Schumer was suggesting that the Congress has no oversight, that there is no accountability and that the US has lost its democratic roots when a newly elected President does not have the authority to question or publicly disagree with any of the Intel agencies.

Since the 2016 election, there has been a steady drumbeat of the US Intel's unabashed efforts to undermine and otherwise prevent a newly elected President from governing – which sounds like a clear case of insubordination or some might call it treasonous.

The Intel antipathy does not appear to be rooted in cuts to a favorite social services program but rather protecting a power, financial and influence agenda that goes far deeper and more profound than most Americans care to contemplate.

Among a plethora of egregious corporate media reactions, no doubt stirred by their Intel masters, was to a July, 2018 summit meeting between Russian President Putin and Trump in Helsinki emblematic of illegitimate censures from Intel veterans and its cronies:

" Trump sides with Putin over US Intelligence " – CNN

" Did Trump Commit Treason at Putin Meeting ? " – Newsweek , and

" Trump Slammed Over Disgrace, Disgusting Press Conference with Putin " – Newsweek .

Not one praised Trump for pursuing peace with Russia.

And yet, fellow Americans, it is curious to consider that there was no outrage after the 911 attacks in 2001 from any member of Congress, President Bush or the Corporate Media that the US intelligence community had utterly failed in its mission to keep the American public safe.

There was no reckoning, not one person in authority was held accountable, not one person who had the responsibility to 'know' was fired from any of the Intel agencies. Why is that?

As a result of the corrupt foundation of the Russiagate allegations, Attorney General Bob Barr and Special Investigator John Durham appear hot on the trail with law enforcement in Italy as they have apparently scared the bejesus out of what little common sense remains among the Democratic hierarchy as if Barr/Durham might be headed for Obama's Oval Office.

Barr's earlier comment before the Senate that " spying did occur' and that ' it's a big deal' when an incumbent administration (ie the Obama Administration) authorizes a counter-Intelligence operation on an opposing candidate (ie Donald Trump) has the Dems in panic-stricken overdrive – and that is what is driving the current Impeachment Inquiry.

With the stark realization that none of the DNC's favored top tier candidates has the mojo to go the distance, the Democrats have now focused on a July 25th phone call between Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in which Trump allegedly ' pressured ' Zelenskyy to investigate Joe Biden's relationship with Burisma, the country's largest natural gas provider.

At issue is any hanky panky involving Burisma payments to Rosemont Seneca Partners , an equity firm owned by Joe's errant son, Hunter, who served on Burisma's Board for a modest $50,000 a month.

Zelenskyy, who defeated the US-endorsed incumbent President Petro Poroshenko in a landslide victory, speaks Russian, was elected to clean up corruption and end the conflict in eastern Ukraine. The war in the Donbass began as a result of the US State Department's role in the overthrow of democratically elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014.

Trump's first priority on July 25th was Crowd Strike , a cybersecurity firm with links to the HRC campaign which was hired by the DNC to investigate Russian hacking of its server.

The Dems have reason to be concerned since it is worth contemplating why the FBI did not legally mandate that the DNC turn its server over to them for an official Federal forensic inspection.

One can only speculate those chickens may be coming home to roost.

Days after an anonymous whistleblower (not to be confused with a real whistleblower like Edward Snowden) later identified as a CIA analyst with a professional history linked to Joe Biden, publicly released a Complaint against Trump.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the initiation of an ambiguous Impeachment Inquiry campaign with little specificity about the process. The Complaint is suspect since it reads more like a professionally prepared Affidavit and the Dems consider Pelosi's statement as sufficient to initiate a formal process that fails to follow the time-honored path of a full House vote predicating a legitimate impeachment inquiry on to the Judiciary Committee.

Of special interest is how the process to date is playing out with the House Intelligence Committee in a key role conducting what amounts to clandestine meetings , taking depositions and witness statements behind closed doors with a still secret unidentified whistleblower's identity and voice obscured from Republican members of the Intel Committee and a witness testifying without being formally sworn in – all too eerily similar to East Germany.

The pretense of shielding the thinly veiled CIA operative as a whistleblower from public exposure can only be seen as an overly-dramatic transparent performance as the Dems have never exhibited any concern about protecting real whistleblowers like Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Bill Binney, Thomas Drake, John Kiriakou, Julian Assange, Jeffrey Sterling and others who were left to fend for themselves as the Obama Administration prosecuted more true, authentic whistleblowers than any other administration since the Espionage Act of 1917 .

As the paradigm shift takes its toll on the prevailing framework of reality and our decayed political institutions, (the FBI and DOJ come to mind as the Inspector General's report is due at week's end), how much longer does the Democratic Party, which no longer serves a useful public purpose, deserve to exist?

[Aug 04, 2020] Joe Biden is Not a Nice Guy - The American Conservative

Notable quotes:
"... I think the issues regarding the abuse of others material is valid, and it reflects something about the nature of his positions and responses to: Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Russia, Libya and of course the Ukraine. ..."
"... The Democratic party had the opportunity to run a more decent, forward looking candidate both in 2016 and 2020, but in both cases presented us with insiders who feel entitled to the nomination simply because of seniority and name recognition. ..."
"... Don't need that history when the real Biden was on display with the corrupt and ugly Ukraine kickback and extortion scheme. ..."
Aug 04, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Steve Jackson Geoff Guth3 hours ago

You have got to be kidding!! Not only is Biden a serial liar about his background and other important things, the article didn't even touch on his massive financial corruption during his ridiculously long career in "public service ". Not only "sweetheart deals" for Hunter but also for his two brothers, sister and daughter and her husband. If you are so inclined, you can read all about it in Peter Schweitzer's book, "Profiles in Corruption".

Collin Reid Geoff Guth2 hours ago

Wow! Claims that Biden dodged the draft to avoid becoming Vietnam. That do it! It did not work for Quayle, Clinton, Bush, Cheney, and Trump. So 20 of the last 28 years we have a President that found ways of avoiding going to Vietnam! In fact avoiding wars to helped your Presidential case? Care to ask Kerry about it?

EliteCommInc.13 hours ago

I don't much like the character debates. They are loaded with suggestions and eventually get into all manner of speculation of did he, did she, has she has he . . . snore. What I need to know is their integrity on policy and here VP Biden loses, he even loses to the current executive.

Even someone as prudish as me knows, it's not hard to make a mess of some issue regardless of washed one attempts to be.

I think the issues regarding the abuse of others material is valid, and it reflects something about the nature of his positions and responses to: Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Russia, Libya and of course the Ukraine.

The current executive's weakness in the knees unless he is making personal attacks or appointing judges or some innocuous policy move such as removing several thousand troops out of Germany which apparently were already in decline. has managed avoiding actually making matters worse despite the hooopla ha.

Given the disastrous state we were supposed to be in -- well more disastrous --- it is safe to say on foreign policy, the VP doesn't have much in the way to offer that would get me near 100 yards of considering voting for him.

John10 hours ago

The snark in the comments is astounding. Biden is nasty with people who challenge him - "lying dog-faced pony soldier," anyone? This behavior was recognized as problematic by the left before he won the nomination. These comments are also more directed at women, too, showing his sexism. No whataboutism with Trump, please.

The Democratic party had the opportunity to run a more decent, forward looking candidate both in 2016 and 2020, but in both cases presented us with insiders who feel entitled to the nomination simply because of seniority and name recognition.

It's too bad the Green Party is so marginalized and the Democrats keep presenting themselves as progressive, when it is clear they are nothing but a mouthpiece for left leaning corporate oligarchs. We might get a real choice from them otherwise.

JPH10 hours ago

Don't need that history when the real Biden was on display with the corrupt and ugly Ukraine kickback and extortion scheme. Add to that the 1.5 billion Chinese investment channeled through that Hunter creature. And do not overlook Biden's participation in Obamagate weaponizing the Intelligence Services against a political opponent (even after Trump's election and installation) which reduced Watergate to a boy scout prank.

Mother12410 hours ago

Biden's most disgraceful act was more personal:

His first wife drove into an intersection with her young children in the car, and was hit by large truck driven by Curtis Dunn. She, along with her infant daughter were killed; the two boys were injured. For years, Biden related the story that Dunn had "decided to drink his lunch" and that was the cause of the tragedy. Police investigation found Dunn blameless .

Joe was approached by Dunn's family, even after he died in the 90's, begging him to clear Dunn's name. He didn't. He repeated the slander until as late as 2007.

If someone can be destroyed for using the N -word 40 years ago (Paula Deen, call your office!) how much worse is this act by Joe, which he took on the road for DECADES?

No one, it appears, ahs EVER questioned him about it, and called him to account for it.

https://www.nationalreview....

BCZ Mother12410 hours ago

It's good to one how even handed and committed to police reports you would be if your spouse and I can't child were killed....

... Your cold rectitude is deeply impressive.

Mother124 BCZ9 hours ago • edited

So, the police investigated, determined that Dunn wasn't drinking, but Joe "knows" that he was??????

Biden received enormous sympathy for losing his wife and daughter, and the injuries to his sons. But that wasn't enough for him; he had to embellish.

Biden is the Walter Mitty of politics. He constantly creates scenarios in which he is a hero, adored, and the center of the story. He has to be the bride at every wedding and the corpse at every funeral.

I'm sure he "believes" that Dunn had a 2-martini lunch. Just like he "believes" he got arrested with Mandela, and took part in civil rights marches and sit-ins, and had a soldier tell him he didn't deserve a medal because his buddy died.

The internet is a wonderful thing. Do some research.

Feral Finster KevinS4 hours ago

Sociopaths are well known for their ability to feign emotion.

gnt7 hours ago

I will add this to my list of reasons not to vote for Donald Trump over Joe Biden. So far, the list includes:
- Joe Biden is not as sharp as he once was
- Joe Biden treats women badly
- Joe Biden will have an aggressive foreign policy
- Joe Biden is an authoritarian
- Joe Biden and his family are corrupt
- Joe Biden is not nice (today's entry)

The stories all share the same weakness. Even if I believe every word of every thinly-sourced allegation, Donald Trump is worse on every one of those measures.

It may be possible that Joe Biden is just as bad as Donald Trump. However, Joe Biden is a competent politician, and will put together a competent team of people. Trump's incapable of competence. If the election comes down to a choice between two bad men, I'll take the competent one.

SatirevFlesti Blood Alcohol2 hours ago • edited

Clearly you've had your head in the sand. Biden has been at the heart of the American political system's corruption for 5 decades. Scum is too nice a word for this guy. He deserve a scaffold, not the White House. Do some research (here are some good starters):

[Aug 02, 2020] The onset of dementia is not the only Biden problem

Aug 02, 2020 | www.msn.com

WASHINGTON -- It was one of the few issues on which President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. disagreed -- how far to go in limiting the influence of lobbyists in government.

The vice president privately complained that his boss's effort to slam shut the revolving door between K Street and the administration would deprive it of experienced talent, and he bristled when Mr. Obama's aides tried to block him from hiring a well-connected Washington operator who had lobbied for pharmaceutical and insurance companies, credit agencies and others.

Eight years later, that same confidant, Steve Ricchetti, is helping to run Mr. Biden's presidential campaign. Also involved to varying degrees are other advisers, operatives, fund-raisers and allies with deep connections to Washington's lucrative lobbying, communications and strategic consulting industry.

That puts Mr. Biden at odds with powerful elements of his party's liberal base. Increasingly, they are expressing concern that the military contractors, Wall Street banks and other major corporations that paid members of Mr. Biden's inner circle while they were out of government could hold disproportionate power in a Biden administration.

Politically, it could limit Mr. Biden's ability to cast himself as the antidote to the anything-goes access peddling that has proliferated in President Trump's administration . Under Mr. Trump, lobbyists and campaign donors have not only enjoyed access to the highest levels of the administration , but have been tapped to lead cabinet departments and have exerted remarkable influence over policies of intense interest to their former employers.

"It's worrisome, broadly speaking, that a Biden administration could end up abiding by the unfortunate bipartisan norms of putting people in posts where they oversee industries or employers they just left," said David Segal, co-founder of the liberal group Demand Progress.

His organization was among those that sent a letter to the Biden and Trump campaigns this week asking them not to appoint anyone to senior administration positions overseeing interests they served in the private sector. The letter called out Mr. Trump's administration for taking that dynamic "to new extremes," but Mr. Segal added that Mr. Biden's orbit includes "some folks with troubling track records."

Mr. Biden has pledged to, if elected, " expand on and codify " the Obama administration lobbying executive order -- the same policy he had privately complained about. That plan barred lobbyists from going to work for agencies they had tried to influence within the previous two years, and barred departing officials from lobbying until the end of the administration.

With scrutiny intensifying, some Biden allies are now distancing themselves from their corporate work to better position themselves for official roles with the campaign, transition team or in a potential Biden administration.

Andrew Bates, a spokesman for Mr. Biden's campaign, said the former vice president's ethics proposal would be "the most ambitious" of "any administration in American history."

Mr. Bates said Mr. Biden was "deeply proud" of the ethics policies enacted in the Obama administration, and of his work in the Senate before that "to curtail the influence of lobbyists, money and special interests in government."

But after eight years as vice president and decades in the Senate, Mr. Biden maintains extensive ties to Washington's permanent political class of policy and political experts who move between government and private sector positions.

Mr. Ricchetti spent years as a registered lobbyist, and through a company called Ricchetti Consulting Group is being paid by both the Biden campaign and AT&T, his only corporate client over the last nine years. Anita Dunn, Mr. Biden's chief campaign strategist, was also still doing work for AT&T last month.

As of Saturday Ms. Dunn is taking "an official leave" from her firm, which had been paid millions in recent years to help an airline advocacy group, while also providing communications advice to an Israeli spyware firm and the fugitive Nissan executive Carlos Ghosn , for whom the firm had been registered to lobby . It ended all those client relationships in the past year.

A leading candidate to become defense secretary, Michèle A. Flournoy , started a firm whose website lists work for financial services, technology and pharmaceutical companies. The former C.I.A. and Obama national security official Avril Haines , who consulted for the data-mining company Palantir, on Saturday resigned from Ms. Flournoy's firm to begin work on Mr. Biden's transition team.

None of these advisers are registered as lobbyists, reflecting a trend in which major corporate and foreign players hire former officials as consultants, or as legal counsel, allowing them to use their connections and expertise, while avoiding the notoriety and disclosure requirements that come with formal lobbying. This phenomenon was exacerbated by Mr. Obama's lobbying policy.

Mr. Biden's more liberal challengers for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, both campaigned against K Street, in part, to differentiate themselves from the candidate they now support.

Ms. Warren proposed a plan that would expand the definition of lobbying to include consultants and lawyers who try to influence government, while barring corporate lobbyists from joining the government for six years. Supporters of Mr. Sanders and Ms. Warren are pushing Mr. Biden's team to go further than he has on those issues.

Mr. Ricchetti -- a self-effacing fixer likely to occupy a top position if Mr. Biden is elected -- personifies the prevalence of influence industry veterans in Mr. Biden's orbit that concerns progressives.

He rose to prominence as a liaison to the Senate under President Bill Clinton. He left the White House in 1995 and opened a lobbying shop where he specialized in health care, with a goal, a person close to him said, of getting back into government once he had set up his family financially.

He was recruited to return to the White House in 1998 by the then-White House chief of staff, John D. Podesta. Mr. Ricchetti sold his firm to Mr. Podesta's brother Tony, until recently one of the town's best-known lobbyists.

In 2001, after Mr. Clinton left office, Mr. Ricchetti opened a new boutique lobbying firm, Ricchetti Inc.

Within two years, he had compiled a client list that included General Motors, Experian, the American Hospital Association, AT&T, Eli Lilly, Nextel, Novartis, Pfizer and Fannie Mae, the quasi-governmental mortgage lender whose late entry into the subprime housing market exacerbated the 2008 financial crisis.

When Mr. Ricchetti backed Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign, aides to her rival for the Democratic nomination, Mr. Obama, seized on Mr. Ricchetti's $120,000-a-year contract with General Motors. The Obama campaign connected his work to an $8 million earmark Mrs. Clinton secured for the company's New York operations as a senator, a claim Mr. Ricchetti has denied.

But Mr. Ricchetti, whose discursive and regular-guy style mirrors Mr. Biden's, was viewed with skepticism in the Obama White House even after he had satisfied the two-year lobbying cooling-off period required by Mr. Obama's policy. When Mr. Biden settled on Mr. Ricchetti to help run his office in late 2011, the White House aides Jim Messina and David Plouffe flatly rejected the idea, according to people close to the situation.

A short, intense scrap ensued, ending only when Mr. Obama gave into Mr. Biden's argument that he had the "right" to pick his own top deputy, several former aides recalled.

Mr. Ricchetti was hired and by late 2013 was officially appointed Mr. Biden's chief of staff. Over the next few years, he essentially took control of Mr. Biden's post-presidential life, setting up a network of nonprofits and academic institutions that would serve as a base of operations, negotiating the former vice president's lucrative book deal, and, most important, helping to set up the initial structure of the 2020 campaign, according to aides and Biden associates.

While the campaign's internal policy allows consultants like Mr. Ricchetti to continue receiving outside income from approved sources like his consulting arrangement with AT&T, some of Mr. Biden's top advisers have begun leaving the influence industry to join the campaign, and possibly a future administration.

Jake Sullivan, who has been helping to develop the Biden campaign's policy positions and moderating virtual fund-raising events , resigned this year from a part-time job at the consulting firm Macro Advisory Partners . At the firm, he had negotiated with labor leaders on behalf of the ride-hailing company Uber to try to exempt its drivers from being classified as full-time employees in California.

On Saturday, Antony J. Blinken, a deputy secretary of state in the Obama administration who is running Mr. Biden's foreign policy operation, joined the campaign full time and took an unpaid leave of absence from his role as a managing partner in WestExec Advisors, a firm he co-founded with Ms. Flournoy.

Aaron Keyak, who was named director of Jewish engagement for Mr. Biden's campaign last month, took a leave from his public affairs firm, Bluelight Strategies.

Early in the Trump administration, the firm had been paid $10,000-a-month for Mr. Keyak's help waging a public affairs campaign against the Gulf state of Qatar by Elliott Broidy, a Republican donor who owns a defense consulting firm. Federal investigators have since looked into whether that campaign violated foreign lobbying laws , but Mr. Keyak has not been interviewed by prosecutors, the Biden campaign said.

Some Democrats argue a Biden administration would be wise not to wall itself off from people with both government and private sector experience.

"We can't all go to think tanks, or into academia, and you wouldn't want to fill the government entirely with people who came from ivory tower institutions that are detached from the mechanics of Washington," said James P. Rubin, who had served as a foreign policy adviser to Mr. Biden in the Senate and then moved to the State Department in the 1990s before becoming a registered lobbyist.

In an effort to ease potential hurdles to joining a Biden administration, Mr. Rubin in recent weeks terminated his lobbying registrations for a range of clients.

Mr. Rubin argued that Mr. Biden's decades of experience in government meant aides would be less able to shape his worldview, but he nonetheless contrasted the years of public policy experience inside and outside government of many Biden advisers to the relatively less experienced set of advisers around Mr. Trump.

"I'd like to think that now we have to acknowledge that having expertise is good," he said.

Shane Goldmacher contributed reporting.

Shane Goldmacher contributed reporting.


[Aug 02, 2020] Russiagate, Nazis, and the CIA by ROB URIE

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The U.S. has spent a century or more trying to install a U.S.-friendly government in Moscow. Following the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, the U.S. sent neoliberal economists to loot the country as the Clinton administration, and later the Obama administration, placed NATO troops and armaments on the Russian border after a negotiated agreement not to do so . Subsequent claims of realpolitik are cover for a reckless disregard for geopolitical consequences. ..."
"... The paradox of American liberalism, articulated when feminist icon and CIA asset Gloria Steinem described the CIA as ' liberal, nonviolent and honorable ,' is that educated, well-dressed, bourgeois functionaries have used the (largely manufactured) threat of foreign subversion to install right-wing nationalists subservient to American business interests at every opportunity. ..."
"... To the point made by Christopher Simpson , the CIA could have achieved better results had it not employed former Nazi officers, begging the question of why it chose to do so? ..."
"... Russiagate is the nationalist party line in the American fight against communism, without the communism. Charges of treason have been lodged every time that military budgets have come under attack since 1945. In 1958 the senior leadership of the Air Force was charging the other branches of the military with treason for doubting its utterly fantastical (and later disproven) estimate of Soviet ICBMs. Treason is good for business. ..."
"... Shortly after WWII ended, the CIA employed hundreds of former Nazi military officers, including former Gestapo and SS officers responsible for murdering tens and hundreds of thousands of human beings , to run a spy operation known as the Gehlen Organization from Berlin, Germany. Given its central role in assessing the military intentions and capabilities of the Soviet Union, the Gehlen Organization was more likely than not responsible for the CIA's overstatement of Soviet nuclear capabilities in the 1950s used to support the U.S. nuclear weapons program. Former Nazis were also integrated into CIA efforts to install right wing governments around the world. ..."
"... Under the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act passed by Congress in 1998, the CIA was made to partially disclose its affiliation with, and employment of, former Nazis. In contrast to the ' Operation Paperclip ' thesis that it was Nazi scientists who were brought to the U.S. to labor as scientists, the Gehlen Organization and CIC employed known war criminals in political roles. Klaus Barbie, the 'Butcher of Lyon,' was employed by the CIC, and claims to have played a role in the murder of Che Guevara . Wernher von Braun, one of the Operation Paperclip 'scientists,' worked in a Nazi concentration camp as tens of thousands of human beings were murdered. ..."
"... To understand the political space that military production came to occupy, from 1948 onward the U.S. military became a well-funded bureaucracy where charges of treason were regularly traded between the branches. Internecine battles for funding and strategic dominance were (and are) regularly fought. The tactic that this bureaucracy -- the 'military industrial complex,' adopted was to exaggerate foreign threats in a contest for bureaucratic dominance. The nuclear arms race was made a self-fulfilling prophecy. As the U.S. produced world-ending weapons non-stop for decades on end, the Soviets responded in kind. ..."
"... Long story short, the CIA employed hundreds of former Nazi officers who had the ideological predisposition and economic incentive to mis-perceive Soviet intentions and misstate Soviet capabilities to fuel the Cold War. ..."
"... the U.S. had indicated its intention to use nuclear weapons in a first strike -- and had demonstrated the intention by placing Jupiter missiles in Italy, nothing that the U.S. offered during the Missile Crisis could be taken in good faith. ..."
"... Following the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, the Cold War entered a new phase. Cold War logic was repurposed to support the oxymoronic 'humanitarian wars' -- liberating people by bombing them. In 1995 'Russian meddling' meant the Clinton administration rigging the election of Boris Yeltsin in the Russian presidential election. Mr. Clinton then unilaterally reneged on the American agreement to keep NATO from Russia's border when former Baltic states were brought under NATO's control . ..."
"... The Obama administration's 2014 incitement in Ukraine , by way of fostering and supporting the Maidan uprising and the ousting of Ukraine's democratically elected President, Viktor Yanukovych, ties to the U.S. strategy of containing and overthrowing the Soviet (Russian) government that was first codified by the National Security Council (NSC) in 1945. The NSC's directives can be found here and here . The economic and military annexation of Ukraine by the U.S. (NATO didn't exist in 1945) comes under NSC10/2 . The alliance between the CIA and Ukrainian fascists ties to directive NSC20 , the plan to sponsor Ukrainian-affiliated former Nazis in order to install them in the Kremlin to replace the Soviet government. This was part of the CIA's rationale for putting Ukrainian-affiliated former Nazis on its payroll in 1948. ..."
"... That Russiagate is the continuation of a scheme launched in 1945 by the National Security Council, to be engineered by the CIA with help from former Nazi officers in its employ, speaks volumes about the Cold War frame from which it emerges ..."
"... Its near instantaneous adoption by bourgeois liberals demonstrates the class basis of the right-wing nationalism it supports. That liberals appear to perceive themselves as defenders 'democracy' within a trajectory laid out by unelected military leaders more than seven decades earlier is testament to the power of historical ignorance tied to nationalist fervor. Were the former Gestapo and SS officers employed by the CIA 'our Nazis?' ..."
"... Furthermore, are liberals really comfortable bringing fascists with direct historical ties to the Third Reich to power in Ukraine? And while there are no good choices in the upcoming U.S. election, the guy who liberals want to bring to power is lead architect of this move. ..."
Jul 31, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org
Facebook Twitter Reddit Email

The political success of Russiagate lies in the vanishing of American history in favor of a façade of liberal virtue. Posed as a response to the election of Donald Trump, a straight line can be drawn from efforts to undermine the decommissioning of the American war economy in 1946 to the CIA's alliance with Ukrainian fascists in 2014. In 1945 the NSC (National Security Council) issued a series of directives that gave logic and direction to the CIA's actions during the Cold War. That these persist despite the 'fall of communism' suggests that it was always just a placeholder in the pursuit of other objectives.

The first Cold War was an imperial business enterprise to keep the Generals, bureaucrats, and war materiel suppliers in power and their bank accounts flush after WWII. Likewise, the American side of the nuclear arms race left former Gestapo and SS officers employed by the CIA to put their paranoid fantasies forward as assessments of Russian military capabilities. Why, of all people, would former Nazi officers be put in charge military intelligence if accurate assessments were the goal? The Nazis hated the Soviets more than the Americans did.

The ideological binaries of Russiagate -- for or against Donald Trump, for or against neoliberal, petrostate Russia, define the boundaries of acceptable discourse to the benefit of deeply nefarious interests. The U.S. has spent a century or more trying to install a U.S.-friendly government in Moscow. Following the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, the U.S. sent neoliberal economists to loot the country as the Clinton administration, and later the Obama administration, placed NATO troops and armaments on the Russian border after a negotiated agreement not to do so . Subsequent claims of realpolitik are cover for a reckless disregard for geopolitical consequences.

The paradox of American liberalism, articulated when feminist icon and CIA asset Gloria Steinem described the CIA as ' liberal, nonviolent and honorable ,' is that educated, well-dressed, bourgeois functionaries have used the (largely manufactured) threat of foreign subversion to install right-wing nationalists subservient to American business interests at every opportunity. Furthermore, Steinem's aggressive ignorance of the actual history of the CIA illustrates the liberal propensity to conflate bourgeois dress and attitude with an imagined gentility . To the point made by Christopher Simpson , the CIA could have achieved better results had it not employed former Nazi officers, begging the question of why it chose to do so?

On the American left, Russiagate is treated as a case of bad reporting, of official outlets for government propaganda serially reporting facts and events that were subsequently disproved. However, some fair portion of the American bourgeois, the PMC that acts in supporting roles for capital, believes every word of it. Russiagate is the nationalist party line in the American fight against communism, without the communism. Charges of treason have been lodged every time that military budgets have come under attack since 1945. In 1958 the senior leadership of the Air Force was charging the other branches of the military with treason for doubting its utterly fantastical (and later disproven) estimate of Soviet ICBMs. Treason is good for business.

Shortly after WWII ended, the CIA employed hundreds of former Nazi military officers, including former Gestapo and SS officers responsible for murdering tens and hundreds of thousands of human beings , to run a spy operation known as the Gehlen Organization from Berlin, Germany. Given its central role in assessing the military intentions and capabilities of the Soviet Union, the Gehlen Organization was more likely than not responsible for the CIA's overstatement of Soviet nuclear capabilities in the 1950s used to support the U.S. nuclear weapons program. Former Nazis were also integrated into CIA efforts to install right wing governments around the world.

By the time that (Senator) John F. Kennedy claimed a U.S. 'missile gap' with the Soviets in 1958, the CIA was providing estimates of Soviet ICBMs (Inter-continental Ballistic Missiles), that were wildly inflated -- most likely provided to it by the Gehlen Organization. Once satellite and U2 reconnaissance estimates became available, the CIA lowered its own to 120 Soviet ICBMs when the actual number was four . On the one hand, the Soviets really did have a nuclear weapons program. On the other, it was a tiny fraction of what was being claimed. Bad reporting, unerringly on the side of larger military budgets, appears to be the constant.

Under the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act passed by Congress in 1998, the CIA was made to partially disclose its affiliation with, and employment of, former Nazis. In contrast to the ' Operation Paperclip ' thesis that it was Nazi scientists who were brought to the U.S. to labor as scientists, the Gehlen Organization and CIC employed known war criminals in political roles. Klaus Barbie, the 'Butcher of Lyon,' was employed by the CIC, and claims to have played a role in the murder of Che Guevara . Wernher von Braun, one of the Operation Paperclip 'scientists,' worked in a Nazi concentration camp as tens of thousands of human beings were murdered.

The historical sequence in the U.S. was WWI, the Great Depression, WWII, to an economy that was heavily dependent on war production. The threatened decommissioning of the war economy in 1946 was first met with an honest assessment of Soviet intentions -- the Soviets were moving infrastructure back into Soviet territory as quickly as was practicable, then to the military budget-friendly claim that they were putting resources in place to invade Europe. The result of the shift was that the American Generals kept their power and the war industry kept producing materiel and weapons. By 1948 these weapons had come to include atomic bombs.

To understand the political space that military production came to occupy, from 1948 onward the U.S. military became a well-funded bureaucracy where charges of treason were regularly traded between the branches. Internecine battles for funding and strategic dominance were (and are) regularly fought. The tactic that this bureaucracy -- the 'military industrial complex,' adopted was to exaggerate foreign threats in a contest for bureaucratic dominance. The nuclear arms race was made a self-fulfilling prophecy. As the U.S. produced world-ending weapons non-stop for decades on end, the Soviets responded in kind.

What ties the Gehlen Organization to CIA estimates of Soviet nuclear weapons from 1948 – 1958 is 1) the Gehlen Organization was central to the CIA's intelligence operations vis-à-vis the Soviets, 2) the CIA had limited alternatives to gather information on the Soviets outside of the Gehlen Organization and 3) the senior leadership of the U.S. military had long demonstrated that it approved of exaggerating foreign threats when doing so enhanced their power and added to their budgets. Long story short, the CIA employed hundreds of former Nazi officers who had the ideological predisposition and economic incentive to mis-perceive Soviet intentions and misstate Soviet capabilities to fuel the Cold War.

Where this gets interesting is that American whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg was working for the Rand Corporation in the late 1950s and early 1960s when estimates of Soviet ICBMs were being put forward. JFK had run (in 1960) on a platform that included closing the Soviet – U.S. ' missile gap .' The USAF (U.S. Air Force), charged with delivering nuclear missiles to their targets, was estimating that the Soviets had 1,000 ICBMs. Mr. Ellsberg, who had limited security clearance through his employment at Rand, was leaked the known number of Soviet ICBMs. The Air Force was saying 1,000 Soviet ICBMs when the number confirmed by reconnaissance satellites was four.

By 1962, the year of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the CIA had shifted nominal control of the Gehlen Organization to the BND, for whom Gehlen continued to work. Based on ongoing satellite reconnaissance data, the CIA was busy lowering its estimates of Soviet nuclear capabilities. Benjamin Schwarz, writing for The Atlantic in 2013, provided an account, apparently informed by the CIA's lowered estimates, where he placed the whole of the Soviet nuclear weapons program (in 1962) at roughly one-ninth the size of the U.S. effort. However, given Ellsberg's known count of four Soviet ICBMs at the time of the missile crisis, even Schwarz's ratio of 1:9 seems to overstate Soviet capabilities.

Further per Schwarz's reporting, the Jupiter nuclear missiles that the U.S. had placed in Italy prior to the Cuban Missile Crisis only made sense as first-strike weapons. This interpretation is corroborated by Daniel Ellsberg , who argues that the American plan was always to initiate the use of nuclear weapons (first strike). This made JFK's posture of equally matched contestants in a geopolitical game of nuclear chicken utterly unhinged. Should this be less than clear, because the U.S. had indicated its intention to use nuclear weapons in a first strike -- and had demonstrated the intention by placing Jupiter missiles in Italy, nothing that the U.S. offered during the Missile Crisis could be taken in good faith.

The dissolution of the USSR in 1991 was met with a promised reduction in U.S. military spending and an end to the Cold War, neither of which ultimately materialized. Following the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, the Cold War entered a new phase. Cold War logic was repurposed to support the oxymoronic 'humanitarian wars' -- liberating people by bombing them. In 1995 'Russian meddling' meant the Clinton administration rigging the election of Boris Yeltsin in the Russian presidential election. Mr. Clinton then unilaterally reneged on the American agreement to keep NATO from Russia's border when former Baltic states were brought under NATO's control .

The Obama administration's 2014 incitement in Ukraine , by way of fostering and supporting the Maidan uprising and the ousting of Ukraine's democratically elected President, Viktor Yanukovych, ties to the U.S. strategy of containing and overthrowing the Soviet (Russian) government that was first codified by the National Security Council (NSC) in 1945. The NSC's directives can be found here and here . The economic and military annexation of Ukraine by the U.S. (NATO didn't exist in 1945) comes under NSC10/2 . The alliance between the CIA and Ukrainian fascists ties to directive NSC20 , the plan to sponsor Ukrainian-affiliated former Nazis in order to install them in the Kremlin to replace the Soviet government. This was part of the CIA's rationale for putting Ukrainian-affiliated former Nazis on its payroll in 1948.

That Russiagate is the continuation of a scheme launched in 1945 by the National Security Council, to be engineered by the CIA with help from former Nazi officers in its employ, speaks volumes about the Cold War frame from which it emerges.

Its near instantaneous adoption by bourgeois liberals demonstrates the class basis of the right-wing nationalism it supports. That liberals appear to perceive themselves as defenders 'democracy' within a trajectory laid out by unelected military leaders more than seven decades earlier is testament to the power of historical ignorance tied to nationalist fervor. Were the former Gestapo and SS officers employed by the CIA 'our Nazis?'

The Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act came about in part because Nazi hunters kept coming across Nazi war criminals living in the U.S. who told them they had been brought here and given employment by the CIA, CIC, or some other division of the Federal government. If the people in these agencies thought that doing so was justified, why the secrecy? And if it wasn't justified, why was it done? Furthermore, are liberals really comfortable bringing fascists with direct historical ties to the Third Reich to power in Ukraine? And while there are no good choices in the upcoming U.S. election, the guy who liberals want to bring to power is lead architect of this move. Cue the Sex Pistols .

[Aug 01, 2020] We gotta talk about Joe Biden's cognitive decline because his US media cheerleaders won't it's so like the sad fate of Brezhnev

Aug 01, 2020 | www.rt.com

The examples and incidents illustrating Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden's failing faculties can no longer be ignored and it's inhumane for him to be allowed to campaign to be leader of the United States.

Mercy is rarely granted to high-profile politicians. They're either lauded or pilloried, there's no in-between – it comes with the territory. But someone has to make an exception for Joe Biden.

The Democratic nominee has served his country, whether you agree with his values and opinions or not, proudly and with distinction. He entered the Senate in 1973 to represent Delaware and went on to become vice president during Barack Obama's reign.

But this is a man who, at 78 years old in November, is close to the end of his road; he's not one who should be preparing for four or even eight years at the White House.

The reason why is quite simple: he is cognitively not there any longer.

This is no laughing matter, or a political point, or a vehicle to mock him with: mental decline is a sad, tortuous process to watch, particularly in someone of his standing.

Earlier this week, Biden staggered on stage in his home state saying: " Good Afternoon everyone. Welcome to Kingswood Community Center ." The event was at William 'Hicks' Anderson Community Center.

After losing his focus for a few seconds and genuinely looking lost, he uttered: " I didn't know where we were. "

//www.youtube.com/embed/s3gn9VepAvo

For someone on the move a lot, it can be easy to get places mixed up – rock stars are regularly caught shouting out a city, totally different to the one they are actually playing. This wasn't that, Biden didn't have a clue where he was.

The heartbreaking element is that you can see he senses it, he realizes himself. That he's aware of these episodes must be terrifying for the poor man.

It is far from an isolated incident.

Speaking not so long ago, Biden said during an event : " He's saying that it was President (pause) my boss. " He knew he had worked for President Obama, but just couldn't recall his name.

Then during a TV interview, when asked about Covid-19, he stated: " We have to take care of the cure, that will make the problem worse no matter what ."

At a presidential rally in South Carolina, he announced: " Where I come from, you don't get far unless you ask – my name is Joe Biden. I'm a Democratic candidate for the United States Senate. Look me over, if you like what you see, help out. If not, vote for the other Biden ."

There's one particularly chilling theme that will chime with anyone who's seen elderly relatives suffer mental decline. Biden loses his train of thought regularly, it's the most obvious indicator – you're talking away and they end up silently staring into space.

It happened to Biden during one session on TV and after a bit of mumbling, he had to say the only words he could: " I don't know. "

//www.youtube.com/embed/ggxSvLFHQZU

The only thing saving him from complete humiliation time after time are the printed notes, auto-cues and his off-camera staff. When he freezes, he loses his gaze and then eventually clicks back into gear thanks to these props.

Another crutch is that he often holds a pen or even a small notebook – which can figuratively convey the sense of being in control.

Some may label all this as hypercritical or even blatant scaremongering, but it's eerily similar to a harrowing speech delivered by Soviet ruler Leonid Brezhnev in the last months of his reign.

//www.youtube.com/embed/E66oM2iAMwM

His New Year address in 1979 would make even his biggest enemy sympathetic. His speech is slurred, his staff talk to him like a child, he even changes glasses as he can't see – it's incredulous that at the time, he was the leader of a superpower.

It's reckoned at the time he was addicted to alcohol and sleeping pills, and suffering from the aftereffects of minor strokes.This all leads to problems with general cognitive behaviour, and within a short time other people were running things for him, before he died in office in 1982.

President Ronald Regan was another world leader whose age caught up with him. He died of Alzheimer's fifteen years after leaving the White House in 1989, but one of his sons is sure that he felt the onset of the disease began when he was still in office.

In his book about his father, Ron Reagan wrote : " My heart sank as he floundered his way through his responses, fumbling with his notes, uncharacteristically lost for words. He looked tired and bewildered ."

Britain's wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill is another whose deficiencies were concealed.

It was only after his death that it became common knowledge that he had suffered a stroke during his second stint at premier in the early 1950s. Some feel Churchill had a neurological disease related to Alzheimers but that is refuted by the International Churchill Society, who say it was progressive dementia .

These three juggernauts prove that 77-year old Biden is only succumbing to what so many others have. The thing is, they were all from another era when prestige and power were held as the be-all and end-all.

It's 2020 and times have changed.

ALSO ON RT.COM Staying quiet has served Biden well so far, but when he finally comes out of his basement it's Trump who will most likely benefit

The man's dignity and health has to come first. He clearly needs care, and shame on the charlatans sending him on this presidential campaign.

That's his campaign staff and party members who are out banging the drum for him. They may feel the end justifies the means to rid the American people of the deeply divisive Donald Trump, but it doesn't.

Aside from politics, Biden is a husband, father and grandfather. Let him live out the rest of his days with dignity, as a proud man, not as a laughing stock. The mainstream media, a lot of whom are liberals with a Democratic leaning, also need to assume culpability too.

Why aren't they discussing this openly and sensibly, pleading for some humanity to be shown? Instead, the left-leaning Democrat-supporting media simply ignore it, while those on the right snigger away insidiously on podcasts or review shows.

They should be taking a stand and letting the whole Democratic machine know that this isn't humane. Instead the left-leaning media act not just as cheerleaders for him, but have basically become part of his campaign team, covering up the reality.

They're out there, pushing his campaign and ignoring his slip-ups and the reality of his mental health, and putting a frail old man in harm. Just because they hope to claim part of the applause for booting Trump out of the White House. It's cruel.

Fox News' Chris Wallace tried to get a one-to-one interview with Biden and would no doubt have grilled him hard. It would have probably shattered Biden's bid and let everyone see how badly he is struggling mentally. But what happened?

Wallace revealed: " In our interview last week with President Trump, he questioned whether his Democratic opponent, Joe Biden, could handle a similar encounter. This week, we asked the Biden campaign for an interview and they said the former vice president was not available ."

Joe Biden is a political puppet. An unwell one. The puppet masters need to stop and let the gentleman enjoy his golden years with grace and dignity.

apothqowejh 6 hours ago "Terrifying for the poor man?" But he's not a poor man. He's a very rich man, and sovis everyone else in his immediate family. They got rich through his corruption and influence peddling. He was a criminal unqualified for high office long before he ever started declining. Let's don't forget just who this rich man is, or how he got there.

[Jul 31, 2020] The Democratic Dark Money Behind These 'Local Newspapers' -

Notable quotes:
"... Cardinal & Pine ..."
"... The American Conservative ..."
"... The American Conservative. ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... The American Conservative ..."
"... Citizen's United ..."
Jul 31, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

he non-profit that sent the Democratic Party haywire during the Iowa Caucus earlier this year has a new strategy: creating partisan news outlets in key states across the country ahead of the 2020 election. With the financial backing of Hollywood, hedge fund managers, and Silicon Valley, Acronym's Courier Newsroom may just change local journalism and politics forever.

Courier Newsroom , created by the dark-money (not required to disclose donors) progressive non-profit Acronym, states that they were created to restore trust in journalism by helping to rebuild local media across the country. The opposite of this is true. Their true goal? Winning elections in key states.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13045197114175078?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13045197114175078-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&rid=www.theamericanconservative.com&width=838

Acronym CEO Tara McGowan, in a leaked memo obtained by Vice, has stated that the goal of establishing Courier Newsroom is to defeat Republicans on the new frontier of Internet political advertising. McGowan attributes Trump's 2016 success to the campaign's ability to "shape and drive mainstream media coverage" through an influx of internet spending. Courier seeks to counter this by challenging Trump on social media. By definition, Courier serves as a political advertising operation for the Democratic Party rather than a legitimate media source.

Calling for a new approach to political advertising, McGowan lambasted Hillary Clinton's failed media strategy for its over-reliance on spending on traditional media, "In 2016, the Hillary Clinton for President campaign raised an estimated $800 million online -- and spent a large majority of it on television and radio advertisements." The 2016 election has proven to be the reason for the creation of Courier Newsroom.

McGowan explicitly states that the papers are being used to boost political results, " The Dogwood will not only function to support the flipping of both State House and State Senate chambers in Virginia this November, but will serve as a vehicle to test, learn from and scale best practices to new sites as we grow." The Dogwood , as of the time of the writing of the leaked memo, was intended to be the prototype for future courier new sites.

Courier has established news sites across key 2020 states including: Copper Courier (Arizona), The Dogwood (Virginia), Up North News (Wisconsin), The Gander (Michigan), Cardinal & Pine (North Carolina), The Keystone (Pennsylvania), and The Americano (nationwide, intended for Latino audiences). Courier extensively utilizes social media to promote stories made by the publications, generating clicks in order to shape public voter opinion.

me title=

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.400.1_en.html#goog_884035211 Ad ends in 15s Next Video × Next Video J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker, Pro-family Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019 Cancel Autoplay is paused

Courier stories are written with the intent of mobilizing women and young people. McGowan writes that Courier does this by "framing issues from health care to economic security in a way that provides these voters with more personal and local relevance than they are often targeted through traditional political ads." While these are real stories, they are packaged with the intent on provoking a positive reaction from certain demographics of the population, in order to spur them to vote for the Democratic Party this November. Courier itself has conceded that they exist solely to challenge Republicans on social media.

Courier Newsroom Editor-in-Chief Lindsay Schrupp disagreed with the concerns regarding journalistic integrity of its writers and service. Schrupp told The American Conservative the following,

Courier Newsroom and its affiliated sites are independent from ACRONYM. We maintain an editorial firewall, just like any other media company, and the managing editor of each site, in addition to me as editor in chief, has ultimate discretion and control over content published. Painting all partisan-leaning outlets with the same brush is dangerous and too often creates false equivalency between very different types of newsrooms. All outlets in the Courier Newsroom network operate with integrity and adhere to traditional journalistic standards. It's offensive to our journalists -- many of whom have won state, regional and national awards for their reporting -- to try to make a direct comparison to partisan outlets on the right that often don't publish bylines, don't hire experienced or even local reporters, don't comply with basic fact-checking standards, and don't do original reporting in the regions where they operate. Courier aims to combat the misinformation spread by such right-wing sites pretending to be "local news" by providing readers with transparently progressive local reporting.

According to data from Facebook Ad Library, between May 2018 and July 12, 2020 Courier Newsroom spent $1,478,784 on Facebook ads on topics that include social issues, elections or politics. Conservative alternatives , such as the Daily Wire or Breitbart, have spent considerably less money on Facebook advertising. Breitbart spent $11,404 since March 2018 and the Daily Wire spent $418,578 since March 2018 according to Facebook's ad library.

Courier's political agenda is obvious. By looking into their Facebook ad-buys, Courier Newsroom has spent extensively on vulnerable Democrats who came into office in the 2018 midterms. These pieces, while factual, highlight the accomplishments of narrowly elected Democrats.

Among those that are frequently featured in mass ad-buys on Facebook are:

Reps. Cindy Axne , AbbyFinkenauer , Lauren Underwood , Andy Kim, Elissa Slotkin , Antonio Delgado , and Jared Golden . These Representatives all represent crucial swing-districts; all but Rep. Fikenauer's district voted for Donald Trump in 2016. Americans for Public Trust reported that Rep. Andy Kim received at least $40,000 dollars worth of positive Facebook advertising by Courier ad-buys. Other highlighted candidates likely have received a similar amount in positive coverage.

"Courier Newsroom's goal is to help elect Democrats. The site doesn't say that, but its founder, Tara McGowan, has made this clear." Gabby Deutch of Newsguard, a journalism watchdog focused on identifying fake news, tells The American Conservative. Deutch claims that Courier is different from other partisan news outlets because their intentions are not clearly stated. Courier instead argues that they are seeking to fill a void left in local journalism.

According to The New York Times in a story published in 2019, 1 in 5 local newspapers have been forced to shut down forever. Political groups, such as Acronym, are poised to revitalize local journalism with a new twist -- political advertising. Deutch warned The American Conservative of this worrying development, "With fewer local newspapers -- a decline that's gotten even worse due to the financial havoc wreaked by the pandemic -- there's room for political groups to fill the void, playing off people's trust in local news. So they make a site that looks like local news but has few (if any) reporters in the state, and then create content to woo voters."

There are examples on the right side of the spectrum too, she points out, including the conservative Star network (Michigan Star and Tennessee Star are two examples) and AlphaNewsMN, a conservative Minnesota site. "Readers deserve to know the agenda of the websites where they get their news."

Browsing North Carolina's Courier news site Cardinal & Pine, one finds it brands itself as "local news for the NC community." Newsguard' s assessment of Courier, is indeed true, with the overwhelming majority of stories highlighting the successes of North Carolina Democrats such as Governor Roy Cooper, attacking Republicans such as vulnerable Senator Thom Tillis, and promoting Democratic policy positions -- notably as it relates to COVID-19 and BLM social justice protests. Similarly, Virginia's Courier news site, The Dogwood, did not publish an article detailing Virginia's biggest scandal of 2019: Governor Northam's controversial blackface yearbook photo. Nor can one find any reference of Tara Reade, Joe Biden's sexual assault accuser who entered the public eye earlier this spring.

Even more striking, is that as a 501(c)(4), Acronym is not required to disclose donors. Acronym in 2018 received $250,000 from New Venture Fund which is managed by Arabella. Through its dark-money ties, Arabella has raised $2.4 billion dollars since 2006, making it one of the largest financiers in American politics. Arabella's influence came into the limelight during the 2018 mid-term elections, in which they raised the most ever by a left-leaning political non-profit. Courier Newsroom is, in other words, entirely funded by secret donors that likely have significant ties to the Democratic Party and the Super PACs bankrolling the 2020 election.

Acronym has invested millions of dollars to establish these papers across the country with plans to continue their expansion into local media across the country in preparation for the 2020 election and beyond. Acronym has claimed that they are separate from Courier and allow the creators to produce their own independent ideas, although, tax documents have revealed them to be full owners .

"This is all probably legal," says Bradley Smith, former Chairman of the FEC and foremost scholar on campaign finance. "What surprises me is that more entities–especially on the conservative side, since the majority of traditional media already lean left–don't do this. But there are examples on the right–for example, NRA Radio." Donors can be kept secret, as under Citizen's United , the 'periodicals' of 501(c)(4) groups do not have to be filed with FECA. (Federal Election Campaign Act) Smith believes organizations such as Courier will likely be a part of a greater trend in local journalism across the country.

Pacronym, also under the Acronym umbrella, is a Democratic Super-PAC charged with the single goal of electing Joe Biden. Pacronym ads present similar content to what one would see on a Courier publication, focusing heavily on the failures of Trump's handling of COVID-19, the struggling of small-businesses across key-swing states (North Carolina, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin), and Joe Biden's proposed response to the virus.

Courier, with the same goal, repurposes ideas by PACs and the Democratic Party by attaching a 'news' label for legitimacy. "The anti-Trump ads from Courier focus on the same points as Pacronym and other Democratic political groups, but if they look like news articles, the audience sees them differently than the same content coming from a politician," According to Deutch at Newsguard.

Pacronym donors are publicly disclosed, and may have present a clue into Courier Newsroom's finances. Some notable financiers of Pacronym include billionaire hedge fund manager Seth Klarman, Hollywood icon Steven Spielberg and his wife Kate Kapshaw, a billionaire heiress to the Levi Strauss brand Mimi Haas, and silicon valley's very own LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman. Pacronym has targeted a $75 million-dollar digital ad campaign, primarily using Facebook, against President Trump for the upcoming election.

Acronym is also involved in another scandal, notably the 2020 Iowa Democratic caucus. Shadow Inc, also operating under Acronym's umbrella, was established with the purpose of digitally registering and mobilizing voters. Shadow Inc's leadership primarily consisted of 2016 ex-Clinton campaign staff. Shadow Inc received a contract by the Iowa Democratic Party for $63,183 to develop an application to help count votes in the Iowa Caucus. Shadow Inc's application, the IowaReporterApp, failed to properly report the caucus, leading to a delayed result. Campaigns, pundits, and election officials were confused due to the inconsistencies found in the results.

Candidate Pete Buttigieg claimed victory despite the caucus results not having been properly released. According to data by the FEC, Pete Buttigieg's campaign paid Shadow Inc. $21,250 for "software rights and subscriptions" in July 2019. Acronym CEO Tara McGowan's husband, Michael Halle, was a senior strategist for the Pete Buttigieg campaign. Michael Halle's brother, Ben Halle, was Pete Buttigieg's Iowa Communications Director. Many have suspected foul play, or at least incompetence.

Courier Newsroom is distinct from both fake-news and astro-turf operations that came into the public eye during the 2016 election. Rather than produce fake content with the intent to mislead, Courier articles are legitimate and are written by real writers. In the leaked Acronym memo, CEO Tara McGowan claimed that the Democratic Party was losing "the media war."

In 2014 the National Republican Congressional Committee established fake news websites and paid to boost them on Google. These websites were deceptive with the intent on defeating the opposing candidate. Although, these websites publicly disclosed that they were paid for by the committee at the bottom of the article. Courier's funding remains undisclosed.

PACs, in tandem with a surge in online political advertising, have weaponized newsrooms to present misleading news for electoral success.
Alberto Bufalino is a student at Wake Forest University in North Carolina and TAC's summer editorial intern.


M Orban a day ago

Good on them. That's how the game is played.

Tom Riddle M Orban 20 hours ago

I don't know . . . It's bad enough that the republic has to deal with a broad swath of people getting their news from terrible facebook feeds. It's why America has a president selling beans and promoting demon sperm doctors, and why it's one of the few countries that can't keep covid down despite it's resources.

I don't think trying to get the rest of getting our news from people that operate at the level of Ben Shapiro, Tucker Carlson, and Breitbart is praiseworthy.

M Orban Tom Riddle 20 hours ago • edited

You are right in principle.
We have this six hundred pound Citizens United crapping all over the room though.
I too wish that the game was played by different rules. But this is not Switzerland and we need to win first.

Tom Riddle M Orban 18 hours ago

Is it clear though that repealing Citizens United would change this? The Double Plus Wealthy are already funding the top online websites to the tune of millions of dollars a year, and the funders of the Federalist are famously anonymous despite the Federalist basically being an arm of the Republican party/embarrassment to thinking.

I am happy though that the anonymous funders of the Courier are not sponsoring fake news that makes their readers dumber, unlike *checks the article** the National Republican Congressional Committee . Yowza.

Baruch Dreamstalker Tom Riddle 11 hours ago

Repeal of Citizens United would make it possible to regulate who funds whom. It would not guarantee the outing of arrangements like Courier. Give me a leaked memo any day.

[Jul 30, 2020] The Democratic Dark Money created 'Local Newspapers' in battelground states to influence the election

Jul 30, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

L RNY 2 hours ago

Its difficult for me to speak objectively because I haven't read a newspaper in reliably for about 40 years and even then I got very tired on news reporting always being biased to the left and sensationalizing the news which was right around the time when real objective investigatory news ended and commentator based news as well as entertainment news started to take over.

kalendjay L RNY an hour ago

A leftist newspaper is always the one that advertises butt lifts and lawyers.

[Jul 29, 2020] What, exactly, is the Biden Coalition

Biden is the person who supports the return to "classic neoliberalism" and his support is from groups who are interesting is kicking the can down the road.
Jul 29, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com
What, exactly, is the "Biden Coalition?"


Is a puzzlement! (Yul Brynner reference)

Supporting the likely victory of Bidenismo are several groups with seemingly conflicting interests:

The Congressional Democrats; Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff, Nadler et al. Like all politicians their main concern is the acquisition and retention of power. They act en bloc on the orders of their leaders in whatever might be going on. This was on display yesterday in the Barr hearing in the House. The Democrat members had been instructed to deny Barr an opportunity to answer their questions and they did that with a great deal of posturing and faux pique.

The true leftists; Bernie, Warren, AOC, Wheeler of Portland, the other squaddies, etc. Some of these are members of Congress but their socialist cause is more important to them than their political careers. These folks have the Bernie Bro masses at their backs. They have thus far controlled just about everything in the Biden "program." But, they are not content. Biden does not yet accept "Medicare for all," (universal single payer, not Medicare at all), and he says that rioters should be punished. A senior Bernie staffer said yesterday that voting for Biden is "like eating half a s--t sandwich.

The Marxist revolutionary anarchist groups; BLM and Antifa. These folks are movements rather than hierarchical countrywide structures. Nevertheless, someone or something is supporting them with large sums of money to fund transportation, living costs and logistical arrangements for the purchase and stockpiling of riot supplies. A tent full of these was captured by the Feds near the Portland court house. These groups do not adhere to either party. They want to destroy the existing social, governmental, and financial system, but who can doubt that they favor the Democrats as the "lesser of two weevils?"

The monied leftists in Wall Street and Silicon Valley, they are the financial engine that drives Biden's dream. They recoil in horror from the idea of Warren and AOC playing a significant role in a Biden government.

The Biden coven of VP possibilities. The woman chosen is likely to be president after "a decent interval." And what a group! Demings is a former police chief! Warren - Nah! Kamala Harris, half Indian, a formerly ferocious prosecutor and judge in California. She and Demings will go over splendidly with the anarcho-marxist groups of Biden supporters. Susan Rice! A "Black" person from a Portland, Maine family, descended from a West Indian sailor who came ashore there several generations back and settled down with a Down East woman. Well, pilgrims, whomever Joe's minders allow him to have, this person will have interests that compete with those of all the others, including those of Biden himself.

My money is on Rice.

This sounds like fun for the feebleminded. pl

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yul_Brynner

Sir

The core of the backing of both parties are big money interests who use their wealth to gain massive political influence as big government is what drives market concentration.

Take for example big tech. Their CEOs are testifying to Congress this week. There's no better examples of market concentration. Yet both parties "leadership" will be working to insure the tech monopolies are protected. When billions are used to purchase political influence, the entire system is fully bought and paid for. Between the Obama and Trump administrations the amount of money conjured up and handed over to the financiers is in the trillions with a capital T. This is exactly what political influence buys when big money and big government are locked together in a symbiotic relationship.

The Bernie/AOC wing will make a lot of noise, just like the evangelists did in the GOP. But in my opinion we should look at the details of the legislation that actually gets enacted not the rhetoric that is designed to distract. The fact is the working and middle class are sold increasingly strident rhetoric to divide and distract while they're being looted blind for generations.

Biden in my opinion is just a front for Obama's third term. Obama's team is running the Biden campaign. Obama was very friendly to global corporate and Wall St interests. The first person he hung out with on leaving the White House was Richard Branson.

Below is a link with some charts. Well worth a perusal.
https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

Posted by: Jack | 29 July 2020 at 12:43 PM

Leith

She would be 150% neocon in her foreign policy. She wants to crush and dominate people, any people will do. Obama actually reigned her in.

Posted by: turcopolier | 29 July 2020 at 04:38 PM

Sir,

I was asking myself the same question today when reading a Politico piece on Biden's VP menu. I think you missed two big names: Rep. Karen Bass and Sen. Tammy Duckworth. I think Biden's campaign are looking at the VP from the POV of how each candidate could help him in a specific area. Let me explain my theory:

1. Karen Bass: Congressional Black Caucus head, will deliver both the congress' black votes and will brigde between Biden's campaign and progressives and has the correct 'optics'. plus Biden himself admitted that it was Rep. Clyburn who delivered the black votes to him, and I think for this reason rep. Bass fits well into this situation.

2. Tammy Duckworth: war veteran, Filipino, has the support of both liberal internationalists and and Never Trumpers. She can deliver F.P. to biden But she has no name recognition compared to Warren and Kamala. Plus she is not a huge name anyway.

3. Kamala: has the California factor, tough on crime (independents and centrists like her very much), Indian and Black, name recognition, has that 'presidential vibe' that makes her naturally in charge much like how Cheney did during Bush 43's tenure. has F.P. similar to Obama's, but not very specialized there. Maybe somewhere in-between progressive f.p. and liberal internationalists.

4. The rest is hard to sell to the leftists, espeically to the radicals. Delmingo, Bottoms, et. al don't strike me as VP quality material and at best are the mini version of Kamala.

5. Susan Rice is the dark horse here and is purely specialized in F.P. and nat sec affairs. What would Biden gain from Rice, is most likely be undoing what Trump has done since 2016. Meaning bringing back multilaterlaism, free-trade, R2P, Paris, JCPOA, and others. Although the congressional republicans will do their best to block these attempts, there are bipartisan issues that will be addressed like maintaining NATO, keeping troops in the ME, humanitarian pivot to China and social engineering projects broadly, a.k.a. the continuation of forever wars. domestically, I don't think Rice has anything to offer to Biden on domestic policy. It is just not her forte.

...

Which brings us to this question: What is the immediate priority of Biden's campaign if he is able to pull off the win in November 8th with regards to his pick for the VP? Domestic concern? if the answer is yes, then it will be Karen Bass, Warren, and Kamala. But if the priority is foreign policy, then it will be Rice and Duckworth to a lesser degree, but primarily Rice.

My gut tells me he will pick Kamala next week instead of Susan Rice. She can deliver both, but rice can only deliver F.P.

Posted by: Polish Janitor | 29 July 2020 at 05:26 PM

@ the Beaver

Given the possibility of a new (4th or 5th??!) election and the low popularity of Bibi (21%), his handling of the Covid-19, the growing unrest of the Hasidic Orthdox Jews (his base) with his restrictive policies, the new rounds of court hearing about his corruption (and his wife's) and the recent escalations in northern borders it would be hard to see Bibi in office if Biden becomes president.

I think Democrats are more favorable to the Tel Aviv aspect of Israel if you know what I mean, than the Jerusalem aspect. Plus, Benny Gantz is already serving both as PM alternate and war minister, and several key nat sec dems have already voiced their support of him.

I too am interested to see how the Biden admin (if elected) and Israel's relationship will look like...

Posted by: Polish Janitor | 29 July 2020 at 05:43 PM


Barbara Ann , 29 July 2020 at 05:55 PM

What Jack says was true in the pre Trump era. Yes, the Uniparty has been an exercise in faux rhetorical battles distracting from a single underlying agenda in the past . But this time it is different. Trump is the last bulwark against the sweeping away of conservatism as a political force altogether. The ideological battle is real and the stakes could not be higher.

It matters very much who wins, it could scarcely matter more. If the above described witches brew of leftists gains power under the Dem standard, the US will be unrecognizable in short order. Love him or loathe him, Trump is the only barrier to a tsunami of crazy ideas being unleashed upon us. All in the interest of hastening the Brave New World and saving us from our simpleminded and outmoded notions; ones like personal & state sovereignty.

Trump himself has displayed some authoritarian tendencies, but his value system does at least appear to be rooted in humanism. The great irony of the TDS afflicted who rage against his supposed tyrannical designs, is that very often they display utter contempt for the millions of regular folk who voted him into power. For me, Trump is the only thing standing in the way of the tyrannies each of the various leftist crackpot groups would unleash.

The sclerotic Dem old guard, as you say, are just interested in power and of course the attendant opportunities for personal enrichment. By and large they have zero respect for the actual people who they nominally serve. They are corrupt, but otherwise not the most dangerous constituency and may well be swept away by a hard Left takeover.

The Marxists and anarchists, as always, are desperate to force us to be free and bring about the greatest good for all. So a few (million?) may have to be re-educated or liquidated in the process. Well that's the price of Progress. No thanks.

The financial engine; the élites of the Silicon Valley and Wall Street, see people as mere units of account in their schemes; sources of data or sources of debt - to be exploited by their respective systems. I see them, particularly the Big Tech and global finance techno-fascists, as the most dangerous. Davos chair Klaus Schwab describes a coming Fourth Industrial Revolution which will "redefine what it means to be human". What is it with such people, why can't they just be happy with humans the way we are? All such talk stems from the most profound of delusions; that Mankind may somehow transcend its flawed existence thru the use of ever more sophisticated technology. Transhumanism it is called - literally engineering ourselves into something better. And dare we ask whose definition of "better" - in whose image are we to be remade - Bill Gates'?

Religion and spiritualism are of course the correct places to seek to be reconciled with the seeming paradoxes of the human condition. Conservatism comes closest to embracing this path to true happiness and rejecting the false gospel of technology-induced redemption. All other roads lead to dystopias of one kind or another and IMO there is a great concentration of such roads leading away from a Dem win in November.

J , 29 July 2020 at 07:52 PM

I can't even imagine a Biden Presidency. Actually, I really can't imagine it because his presidency will be really that of the people who are able to pull more of his puppet strings.

If we're talking Republican women as VP picks, I find it strange that they all somehow disreagarded Tulsi Gabbard. She's the only one who actually seemed human to me and not a wind-up blathering doll spewing tape-recorded messages.

Posted by: Diana Croissant | 29 July 2020 at 05:58 PM

A female version of Caligula, which takes great delight in crushing people. We as a nation don't need her.

nbsp; turcopolier , 29 July 2020 at 08:19 PM

Fourth and Long

Such women are relentlessly hostile about male courtesies like holding a door or a chair. I worked in parallel with a woman NIO who told me that it was unfair for me to mention my experience of war in congressional testimony. The intent was clearly to intimidate.

Antoinetta III , 29 July 2020 at 09:19 PM

I suspect, that if Biden should get elected he will only be a mouthpiece for various puppet-masters. And when it comes to FP, lurking just off-stage, will be the Chief puppet-master, the Hildebeast!

Antoinetta III

[Jul 29, 2020] Russia and the next Presidential election in the US by The Saker

Jul 29, 2020 | www.unz.com

A quick look at Russia

Before looking into Russian options in relation to the US, we need to take a quick look at how Russia has been faring this year. The short of it would be: not too well. The Russian economy has shrunk by about 10% and the small businesses have been devastated by the combined effects of 1) the economic policies of the Russian government and Central Bank, and 2) the devastating economic impact of the COVID19 pandemic, and 3) the full-spectrum efforts of the West, mostly by the Anglosphere, to strangle Russia economically. Politically, the "Putin regime" is still popular, but there is a sense that it is getting stale and that most Russians would prefer to see more dynamic and proactive policies aimed, not only to help the Russian mega-corporations, but also to help the regular people. Many Russians definitely have a sense that the "little guy" is being completely ignored by fat cats in power and this resentment will probably grow until and unless Putin decides to finally get rid of all the Atlantic Integrationists aka the "Washington consensus" types which are still well represented in the Russian ruling circles, including the government. So far, Putin has remained faithful to his policy of compromises and small steps, but this might change in the future as the level of frustration in the general population is likely to only grow with time.

That is not to say that the Kremlin is not trying. Several of the recent constitutional amendments adopted in a national vote had a strongly expressed "social" and "patriotic" character and they absolutely horrified the "liberal" 5th columnists who tried their best two 1) call for a boycott, and 2) denounce thousands of (almost entirely) imaginary violations of the proper voting procedures, and to 3) de-legitimize the outcome by declaring the election a "fraud". None of that worked: the participation was high, very few actual violations were established (and those that were, had no impact on the outcome anyway) and most Russians accepted that this outcome was the result of the will of the people. Furthermore, Putin has made public the Russian strategic goals for 2030 ,which are heavily focused on improving the living and life conditions of average Russians (for details, see here ). It is impossible to predict what will happen next, but the most likely scenario is that Russia has several, shall we say, "bumpy" years ahead, both on the domestic and on the international front.


JasonT , says: July 28, 2020 at 10:53 pm GMT

Good analysis.

I would add that Russia should also start opening channels of communication with various organizations in Canada, especially those in the far north. While Canada is small politically, it is vastly bigger than the U.S. in natural resources, very strategically located and right next door to Russia.

Twilight Patriot , says: Website July 29, 2020 at 12:26 am GMT

I really agree with you that the "blame Russia" and "blame China" thing has gotten out of hand in US politics. Whether it will turn into a shooting war seems doubtful to me, as the government is still full of people who are looking out for their own interests and know that a full-sized war with Russia, China, Iran or whoever will not advance their interests.

But who would have guessed, a few years ago, that "Russian asset" would become the all-purpose insult for Democrats to use, not just against Republicans, but against other Democrats?

... ... ...

aandrews , says: July 29, 2020 at 3:22 am GMT

" at worst, the crisis will move to a new stage . "

Highly likely.

I think Trump can win, though, if he successfully hangs the escalating Antifa/BLM mayhem around the Democrat's necks. Normal, salt-of-the-earth-type Americans won't vote for the party of Maoist mayhem. I just hope their numbers are still sufficient. So, really, the mayhem needs to worsen and get ultra-bad, and Trump needs to carefully respond with just enough law enforcement to bait the Democrats into defending the insurrectionists and their tactics and loudly condemning Trump's "fascist" response. Normal people will see the true story and in the privacy of the voting booth, not vote Democrat. And if you think the other side lost their minds after the 2016 election .

GMC , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:54 am GMT

Thanks Saker – I would have loved it, had Alaska been able to hang on to the 90s relationship with Russia. It was a perfect match, except that Russian economy { as we were told} was just tanking, and they had no money to throw into the tourist trade. Not that us Alaskans, expected much more than what our bush villages had to offer. lol But , I'm afraid this will never happen again, with the Zio freaks in charge of the US. I recall when I was flying and living in McGrath in the 90s, that a womens Russian helicopter team dropped down to refuel and I was workin on my cessna about 50 yrds away. I saw about 6+ really good looking Russian chicks come out of those choppers, and us guys were floored ! We started to communicate with them, they told us that they were re -tracing the WW II lend lease route and were headed to the lower 48. Just about the time we started getting close tho, an old Lady colonel jumped out and put the girls in place – lol . I also remember the Magadan hockey team came over to play against our University teams Anchorage and Fairbanks. My neighbor here in Kryme, was on that Russian team – small world. Ya, Russia and Alaska would be a great match today – just gotta get rid of Washington. Thanks for the memories.

Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist , says: Website July 29, 2020 at 12:22 pm GMT

" until and unless Putin decides to finally get rid of all the Atlantic Integrationists aka the "Washington consensus" types which are still well represented in the Russian ruling circles, including the government."

Putin's regime is merely a less unbearable version of the Yeltsin regime, with open loot by oligarchs replaced by less overt loot by smaller scale actors. Putin is exactly as beholden to the neoliberal capitalist system as Yeltsin. To expect Putin to change sides as this point is ludicrous.

" Russia and the Empire have been at war since at least 2013, for no less than seven years (something which Russian 6th columnists and Neo-Marxists try very hard to ignore)."

I have no idea what a "neo" Marxist is (apart from a blatant made up term to taint us by association with the neo-Nazis), but as a Marxist, which the Saker obviously is not, it's obvious to me that the Imperialist States of America has been at war with Russia since the Yeltsinite attack on the Moscow parliament in 1993, and probably from the failed patriotic coup of 1991. If we ignore the Saker's idea of a war since 2013 it's only because we know it's twenty years out of date.

Things will never improve between Amerikastan and Russia and don't need to. Amerikastan is sinking and will sink; Putin will, if he continues on the neoliberal capitalist track, sink Russia as well in the end.

RoatanBill , says: July 29, 2020 at 12:32 pm GMT

The video link to Sahra Wagenknecht's report was the best part of this article although the article itself was spot on if one has any respect for reality.

I keep waiting for Germany to tell NATO and the US to get the hell out, but their political establishment is just as corrupt as the US's.

The amount of money the US Fed Gov steals from the population in taxes and regulation or causes loss of purchasing power by increasing debt could be much better put to use than shoveling it into the military to murder people around the globe. The entire Fed Gov will, I hope, disappear like fart gas as a result of the economic collapse in the making.

mark tapley , says: July 29, 2020 at 4:54 pm GMT
@Emily at was just a brutal form of monopoly capitalism that is the essence of the Zionist syndicate we all are up against. Today piratized not privatized Russia is suffering a less severe form but it is estimated that half Jew Putin and his oligarch cronies control ap. 30% of the Russian economy. all of this insider theft was "codified and Legalized" by Larry Summers and the Harvard Jews. Same thing is happening in Jewmerica and moving lots faster now with the theft under cover of the fake virus. Don't forget in 08-09 the bailout for billionaires cost the regular economy trillions then too. No problem, the Jews at Black Rock picked up some great bargains as they will this time.
Stanley Dundee , says: Website July 29, 2020 at 5:27 pm GMT

Per the Saker:

The real cause of the West's hatred for Russia is as simple as it is old: Russia cannot be conquered, subdued, subverted or destroyed.

I would add that Putin (a masterful statesman) tamed Russia's oligarchs. The greatest fear of America's oligarchs might well be a similar taming by a masterful American statesman. Hence the refusal to allow anyone other than corrupted mediocrities anywhere near nominal power in the US. And hence the entirely genuine hatred for Putin. He embodies their worst nightmare.

Harold Smith , says: July 29, 2020 at 5:50 pm GMT

"Russia will never attack first (which is a major cause of frustration for western russophobes)"

Now that team orange clown (with the full support of congress) has done away with the doctrine of mutually assured destruction, apparently replacing it with the concept of a "winnable" nuclear war (impliedly by way of a devastating first strike), the time may come when Russia may have to either strike first or be struck first.

Also, what about the case where the empire is finally successful in starting a war against Iran, for example, and the war goes badly for the empire (i.e. Iran is inflicting some serious damage), whereupon the empire resorts to nukes. Would Russia just sit back and watch, or would Russia then realize that the monster has to be put down?

"The real cause of the West's hatred for Russia is as simple as it is old: Russia cannot be conquered, subdued, subverted or destroyed."

In a sense that's true as far as it goes, but it really doesn't explain very much. Lots of countries are unable to subdue, subvert or conquer other countries but that in itself doesn't generally lead to "hatred." The simpler and more profound explanation is that the empire does what it does because it's evil. And the evil empire is analogous to an aggressive cancer: either the cancer wins and the patient dies, or the cancer is completely eradicated and the patient survives. There is no peaceful coexistence with the evil empire just like there is no peaceful coexistence with glioblastoma. You cannot negotiate with it to find some kind of a reasonable compromise.

AnonFromTN , says: July 29, 2020 at 6:53 pm GMT
@JVC

The US government and FRS seem to be hell-bent on destroying the value of the US $: when someone issues debt obligations (treasuries) and then buys them himself because there are no other takers, you cannot help smelling a rat.

The crash of the $ will hurt everyone, but some will recover faster than others. Euro and yen would be buried with the US $, but assets in less US-dependent countries that have real economies producing things other than hot air will likely fare better. Which leaves Russia, big China, South Korea, and some SE Asia countries.

Harold Smith , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:14 pm GMT
@Stanley Dundee

"And hence the entirely genuine hatred for Putin. He embodies their worst nightmare."

Evil hates a good example.

cassandra , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:27 pm GMT
@Jake t statistic for China is surprisingly better than I would have guessed. According to the CBO chart at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States ,

the US was at about the same level in 2013: "The top 10% of families held 76% of the wealth in 2013, while the bottom 50% of families held 1%. Inequality worsened from 1989 to 2013"

Indications are that the worsening has only continued since then, and with all the money being poured into the stock market by the Fed this year, 2020 is on track to be exceptionally iniquitously inequitable.

Xaxa , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:47 pm GMT

Trump 're-election' is certain. All roads are paved toward it. In fact and so far Trump is the best Neocon/Deep State's man they found. Stop pretending Saker!

Agent76 , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:50 pm GMT

June 17, 2020 America: An Empire Eating Itself

Empire has one trick – divide and conquer. When it runs out of territory, nations, and people abroad to consume, it turns inward on itself.

https://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2020/06/america-empire-eating-itself.html

Jul 3, 2020 Independence Day Under Dictatorship

The US is under rule by decree, not by rule of law. Looking at the original list of grievances the Colonists had against King George, it looks like most of them are met – and then some – by our current system of government. Can we regain our independence?


Wally , says: July 29, 2020 at 7:53 pm GMT
@Herald

said:
"A Trump re-election will virtually guarantee civil war, but that is still a better option than a Biden hot war against Russia. Either way though, the country is totally fucked."

– We already have a civil war.

– Either way there will be no "hot war against Russia". That's just silly.

– And there is no "Biden" there.

– The US is much, much better off with Trump, it's not even close. Especially if you value free speech, fighting violence, and at least some semblance of a market economy devoid of the 'Green New Deal' scam.

Alfred , says: July 29, 2020 at 8:35 pm GMT
@Anon

after Vietnam war, Vietnam, ally of China , keep their regime in their own hand.

The ally of North Vietnam was Russia.

China blocked the transit of Russian weapons to North Vietnam. After North Vietnam defeated the Americans, with Russian help, China invaded North Vietnam and was defeated.

marryne , says: July 29, 2020 at 8:47 pm GMT

For Saker it is always about Russia, Russia, Russia Sure, Russia is a big world power, it used to be and it is now. It is so mostly because of its military, which draws its strength and know-how from the USSR (meaning it is not strictly Russian). However, Russia will never again be a superpower as the USSR had been. It was possible then only because of the (historically) unparalleled appeal of the communist ideology. Firstly and objectively, Russia does not have an economy necessary to support such a status. Secondly, Russia has no sufficient population which, again, is a limiting factor to its economy. Putin probably realized that although he did not realize that the Putin-inspired immigration from the former Muslim republic of the USSR will not alleviate the problem. But again, who would even want to go to today's Russia if not Asiatic muslims. It will slowly but surely make Russia not much different from the West. Muscovites, just like New Yorkers are already leaving the city, those who can afford.
And, subjectively, Russia or the Russians don't have the most important ingredient fort the superpower status – the MENTALITY. The recent (1990-2020) Russian history clearly displays that. It shows that in order to realize the centuries old dreams of the few (so called "elites") Russia as a nation and as country had put itself to the downward trajectory: As an empire it sold Alaska; as a civilization – it destroyed itself by dismantling the rest of the empire, the USSR. As an ally it abandoned and handed over the most Russophile german friend and ally E. Honecker and others to the "partners" in the west. And, as an orthodox and Slavic "brother" it betrayed and abandoned the only people that have always loved Russia – the Serbs. As an ally it behaved recklessly and treacherously. Russia will do the same again. So, hate Russia.

Ko , says: July 29, 2020 at 8:59 pm GMT

Since 2016 I've always believed Trump will be legally elected in 2020 but the DNC/Deep State will reject the result much more forcefully and violently than they've been doing since 2016. The DNC/Deep State will establish a shadow government minus the shadow. It will not be Joe Biden leading it but someone much younger, possibly Biden's VP choice – who was (will be) selected to replace Biden should Biden actually win. Hell, it may even be Hussein since he's such a treasonous pussy and easy to manipulate. The communists behind the scenes (aren't they always such cowards) currently coordinating BLM and Antifa riots all over America will again use rioting but with firearms and bombings. This must be met with a military response and the violence will be nationwide. At some point either Trump declares martial law and outright civil war ensues, or a military coup takes over with or without Trump as a figurehead and they crush the communists and leftists while right wing militias join in the hunt. The only wild-card is if race driven factionalism within lower ranks cause wide divisions and some officers break away – then the whole show is over and there will be no place safe from people with guns and bad intentions. We will be fighting over food and gasoline. At least, like in China, there will be plenty of dogs to satisfy hunger.

mark tapley , says: July 29, 2020 at 9:01 pm GMT
@Wally

To Wally and Herald: How many Presidential election circuses have you guys seen. Probably a lot of them like me...

cassandra , says: July 29, 2020 at 9:16 pm GMT

Putin's difficulty is that Russia is really too important for the West to ignore.

Western elites, and not just in the US, but in the EU and the western-hemisphere in general, are facing a problem: people are beginning to notice that human values are not universal. This had been one of the main pillars for the existence and credibility of a technocratic elite, specifically for the people to trust the elites to implement some unspecified but benevolent neo-enlightenment.

Putin became truly anathema first when he rejected western neoliberal criminality because

[Hide MORE] it was destroying his country, secondly, when he thwarted amputation of Crimea by color revolution, and thirdly, when he kept calling out NATO/EU expansionism for what it was. This made conversion of Russia to the neoliberal finance and 'universal value" system even less likely than the conversion to Roman Catholicism prophesied at Fatima. Putin decided that Russia would live by its own values, thank you very much. Russia could still have been an arms-length ally, but Anglo-Zionist geopolitical extremism forced him to make cause with a clearly adversarial China, and encouraged him to circumvent the western currency system as well.

But peoples within the west were also developing this NGTOW (Nations Going Their Own Way) attitude. Hungary and Poland were already becoming thorns in the side of the EU over the "human value" immigration, and the elections of Trump and Brexit were further assertions of populist preferences. Other politicians like Wagenknecht, LePen and Salvini are nurturing this movement elsewhere. It remains to be seen whether the neoliberal oligarchy, by dialing up propaganda and censorship, and by using Orwellian cancel terrorism, can quell this awakening rebellion.

alwayswrite , says: July 29, 2020 at 9:18 pm GMT
@marryne elves out

Capital flight is enormous,especially through London

Ask yourself why????

Because British intelligence knows absolutely the places all this money goes to

British intelligence aren't stupid, they've played this game for centuries

Which gives them enormous leverages over the Russians,who are trapped by this age old system

Putin knows this as do all Russian oligarchs

Money rules,not silly hypersonic weapons !!!!

Which doesn't come into the sakers evaluation

Basically,the saker doesn't understand power,money power!!!

AnonFromTN , says: July 29, 2020 at 9:59 pm GMT
@Wally licies.
6. Dramatically improve US education, from elementary school up.
7. Reform US healthcare, with a view of making it healthcare, rather than extortion racket it is today.

There are many other things, but anyone attempting to do even half of those listed would be promptly JFK'ed by the Deep State. That is why there is no one in the US politics decent enough to even talk about real problems, not to mention attempting to do what needs to be done to save the country. Hence, I can name no names.

As things stand, even Trump is better than senile and corrupt Biden. But being better than that piece of shit is not a big achievement.

hu_anon , says: July 29, 2020 at 10:07 pm GMT
@Alfred

China allowed Soviet arms through to North Vietnam and was herself giving weapons to them. The Soviets didn't trust the Chinese though, so they preferred to transport more advanced weapons on ships rather than by train through China, to prevent the Chinese from getting a close look on these.

China attacked Vietnam for invading Cambodia, but this war exposed the weakness of the Chinese Army. Deng Xiaoping was able to push through military reforms after the debacle.

mark tapley , says: July 29, 2020 at 10:30 pm GMT
@Ko e and destabilize western nations. These paid activists, opportunists and useful idiots could be taken care of by the local law enforcement as the constitution mandates if allowed to do so. The goal of the Zionist criminals is to create enough chaos and breakdown that people will demand that the national gov. step in with martial law. This is exactly what the Zionists want so they can get rid of the locally controlled police and implement a gestapo of thugs that are accountable only to the elite at the top.

The zionist politicians and their operatives from the mayors to the Governors on up need to be thrown out of office. That is the first step in restoring the Republic.

annamaria , says: July 29, 2020 at 10:49 pm GMT
@alwayswrite ernative media has excellent analysts) instead of immersing in the stinky products of presstituting MSM controlled by 6 zio-corporations.

Your hysterics about Russia's alleged attempts at destabilizing the EU are particularly entertaining. For starter, 1. learn about US bases in Europe and beyond, and 2. read about the consequences of the wars of aggression (also known as Wars for Israel) in the Middle East for the EU.

If you are in search of neonazi, turn your attentions to a great project run by ziocons and neonazi in Ukraine. See Grossman, Kolomojsky, Zelinsky, Nuland-Kagan, Pyatt, Carl Gershman (NED), and the whole Kagans' clan united with Banderites What can go wrong?

[Jul 29, 2020] The key question of November elections: Will a majority of voters side with the rioters?

Jul 29, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

What a terrific video of "peaceful protests" Jordan presented. Yowza. The leftist gaslighting will continue in spite of it, but would it be fair then to label these "peaceful protests", these "myths" (according to Chairman Nadler), The Unicorn Riots?

Seriously, is it possible the leftists are pursuing a winning strategy by either ignoring/denying (at best) all of the violence and destruction or (at worst) by making excuses for it and condemning those who are trying to maintain order? Will a majority of voters side with the rioters? I refuse to believe we're that far gone as a country, refuse to believe the polls that state Biden's in the lead everywhere. Instead, I'm beginning to suspect the polls are a desperate attempt to make it look like a horserace when it's not.

I may be wrong, REALLY wrong of course - no doubt there are a lot of Trump and Deplorables haters that would vote for a decomposed corpse rather than the POTUS, but still, these riots surely aren't helping their cause and that's why they're feigning ignorance. Do they believe campaigning on good old "Law and Order" is passe now, a no-no because it's unappealing to the [obviously TERRIBLY unhappy] young anarchists/socialists/communists? Has the mainstream Democratic Party turned into Vichyites?

Posted by: akaPatience | 28 July 2020 at 10:41 PM

[Jul 28, 2020] Joe Biden's alternate reality

Jul 28, 2020 | townhall.com

Joe Biden's alternate reality: "I know a fair amount about American foreign policy." Reality Check from Robert Gates, Obama/Biden's former defense secretary: Biden has "been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades."

[Jul 26, 2020] Biden as Brezhnev reincarnation

We need to stop reading MSM. Go fishing. Go for a walk. Take up a hobby. Ignore mainstream media and politics.
Jul 26, 2020 | www.unz.com

"Looking at Biden vs Trump almost makes me long for the days of the 2016 election – almost. As I have written, Trump is out of his depth dealing with these crises, and the generals who could have helped him are long gone – and gone on bad terms, at that. Biden is so visibly senile the only question is whether he drops out as soon as his VP is announced (who then moves into the lead slot & picks her own VP), or is propped up through the election like Brezhnev in his final year.

"Trump it seems has boxed himself into a corner. This situation needed decisive, tough action up front, and that didn't happen. Now we have simmering violence & renewed lockdowns to keep the pot boiling. We simply may not make it to November without a three (or four?) – sided civil war – I would hate to make book on it either way, the right spark and the whole thing blows up. But if we get to the election, what then? If Trump wins, the DNC-Antifa-BLM "Axis of REAL Evil" which is fueling these crises (aided by the MSM, of course) will shriek 'foul!' and the cities burn again, at which point old guys like me & my veteran neighbors & younger versions of us pick up our AR-15s and fight it. If Trump loses, the same thing happens between November & January. We are, my old friend (well, younger friend .!) heading between political versions of Scylla & Charybdis with broken rudders. Barring a miracle (and I hope SO much I am wrong!), this will make the 1861-65 war seem like a walk in the park."

obwandiyag , says: July 23, 2020 at 7:26 pm GMT

@Kevin Barrett

Thank you for that. I oppose BLM "antiracism" color-revolution whatever-it-is, and I oppose police brutality, too. Am I crazy?

[Jul 26, 2020] Is Biden a democrat?

Of course not. He is a neocon.
Jul 26, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
ay_arrow

847328_3527 , 9 hours ago

Liberals and "progressives" are traditionally against wars. This new "woke" group of Demorats shows they are NOT liberals or progressives since they support the Establishment War Criminals like Obama and his side kick, demented Biden, and Bloodthirsty Clinton.

HenryJonesJr , 8 hours ago

WTF? Liberals pushed for war the entire 20th Century - Wilson in WWI; Roosevelt in WWII; Truman in Korea: Johnson in Vietnam. Did you go to high school?

yerfej , 9 hours ago

The federal government is big enough it gives cover to idiots and retards so they can push others to participate in useless wars with no goal and no objective, just so they can promote their careers or personally profit.

captain noob , 9 hours ago

What is America without war?

captain noob , 9 hours ago

Peace doesn't sell as much

captain noob , 9 hours ago

Vampirism and parasitism can't survive without wars

[Jul 26, 2020] Patriotic Dissent- How A Working-Class Soldier Turned Against -Forever Wars- -

Jul 26, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Patriotic Dissent: How A Working-Class Soldier Turned Against "Forever Wars"


by Tyler Durden Sat, 07/25/2020 - 00:05 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Steve Early and Suzanne Gordon via Counterpunch.org,

When it comes to debate about US military policy, the 2020 presidential election campaign is so far looking very similar to that of 2016. Joe Biden has pledged to ensure that "we have the strongest military in the world," promising to "make the investments necessary to equip our troops for the challenges of the next century, not the last one."

In the White House, President Trump is repeating the kind of anti-interventionist head feints that won him votes four years ago against a hawkish Hillary Clinton. In his recent graduation address at West Point, Trump re-cycled applause lines from 2016 about "ending an era of endless wars" as well as America's role as "policeman of the world."

In reality, since Trump took office, there's been no reduction in the US military presence abroad, which last year required a Pentagon budget of nearly $740 billion. As military historian and retired career officer Andrew Bacevich notes , "endless wars persist (and in some cases have even intensified ); the nation's various alliances and its empire of overseas bases remain intact; US troops are still present in something like 140 countries ; Pentagon and national security state spending continues to increase astronomically ."

me title=

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.398.1_en.html#goog_129109962

When the National Defense Authorization Act for the next fiscal year came before Congress this summer, Senator Bernie Sanders proposed a modest 10 percent reduction in military spending so $70 billion could be re-directed to domestic programs. Representative Barbara Lee introduced a House resolution calling for $350 billion worth of DOD cuts. Neither proposal has gained much traction, even among Democrats on Capitol Hill. Instead, the House Armed Services Committee just voted 56 to 0 to spend $740. 5 billion on the Pentagon in the coming year, prefiguring the outcome of upcoming votes by the full House and Senate.

An Appeal to Conscience

Even if Biden beats Trump in November, efforts to curb US military spending will face continuing bi-partisan resistance. In the never-ending work of building a stronger anti-war movement, Pentagon critics, with military credentials, are invaluable allies. Daniel Sjursen, a 37-year old veteran of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan is one such a critic. Inspired in part by the much-published Bacevich, Sjursen has just written a new book called Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War (Heyday Books)

Patriotic Dissent is a short volume, just 141 pages, but it packs the same kind of punch as Howard Zinn's classic 1967 polemic, Vietnam: The Logic of Withdrawal . Like Zinn, who became a popular historian after his service in World War II, Sjursen skillfully debunks the conventional wisdom of the foreign policy establishment, and the military's own current generation of "yes men for another war power hungry president." His appeal to the conscience of fellow soldiers, veterans, and civilians is rooted in the unusual arc of an eighteen-year military career. His powerful voice, political insights, and painful personal reflections offer a timely reminder of how costly, wasteful, and disastrous our post 9/11 wars have been.

Sjursen has the distinction of being a graduate of West Point, an institution that produces few political dissenters. He grew up in a fire-fighter family on working class Staten Island. Even before enrolling at the Academy at age 17, he was no stranger to what he calls "deep-seated toxically masculine patriotism." As a newly commissioned officer in 2005, he was still a "burgeoning neo-conservative and George W. Bush admirer" and definitely not, he reports, any kind of "defeatist liberal, pacifist, or dissenter."

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

Sjursen's initial experience in combat -- vividly described in his first book, Ghost Riders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of The Surge (University Press of New England) -- "occurred at the statistical height of sectarian strife" in Iraq.

"The horror, the futility, the farce of that war was the turning point in my life," Sjursen writes in Patriotic Dissent .

When he returned, at age 24, from his "brutal, ghastly deployment" as a platoon leader, he "knew that the war was built on lies, ill-advised, illegal, and immoral." This "unexpected, undesired realization generated profound doubts about the course and nature of the entire American enterprise in the Greater Middle East -- what was then unapologetically labeled the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT)."

A Professional Soldier

By the time Sjursen landed in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan, in early 2011, he had been promoted to captain but "no longer believed in anything we were doing."

He was, he confesses, "simply a professional soldier -- a mercenary, really -- on a mandatory mission I couldn't avoid. Three more of my soldiers died, thirty-plus were wounded, including a triple amputee, and another over-dosed on pain meds after our return."

Despite his disillusionment, Sjursen had long dreamed of returning to West Point to teach history. He applied for and won that highly competitive assignment, which meant the Army had to send him to grad school first. He ended up getting credentialed, while living out of uniform, in the "People's Republic of Lawrence, Kansas, a progressive oasis in an intolerant, militarist sea of Republican red." During his studies at the state university, Sjursen found an intellectual framework for his "own doubts about and opposition to US foreign policy." He completed his first book, Ghost Riders , which combines personal memoir with counter-insurgency critique. Amazingly enough, it was published in 2015, while he was still on active duty, but with "almost no blowback" from superior officers.

Before retiring as a major four years later, Sjursen pushed the envelope further, by writing more than 100 critical articles for TomDispatch and other civilian publications. He was no longer at West Point so that body of work triggered "a grueling, stressful, and scary four-month investigation"by the brass at Fort Leavenworth, during which the author was subjected to "a non-publication order." At risk were his career, military pension, and benefits. He ended up receiving only a verbal admonishment for violating a Pentagon rule against publishing words "contemptuous of the President of the United States." His "PTSD and co-occurring diagnoses" helped him qualify for a medical retirement last year.

Sjursen has now traded his "identity as a soldier -- the only identity I've known in my adult life -- for that of an anti-war, anti-imperialist, social justice crusader," albeit one who did not attend his first protest rally until he was thirty-two years old. With several left-leaning comrades, he started Fortress on A Hill, a lively podcast about military affairs and veterans' issues. He's a frequent, funny, and always well-informed guest on progressive radio and cable-TV shows, as well as a contributing editor at Antiwar.com , and a contributor to a host of mainstream liberal publications. This year, the Lannan Foundation made him a cultural freedom fellow.

In Patriotic Dissent , Sjursen not only recounts his own personal trajectory from military service to peace activism. He shows how that intellectual journey has been informed by reading and thinking about US history, the relationship between civil society and military culture, the meaning of patriotism, and the price of dissent.

One historical figure he admires is Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler, the recipient of two Medals of Honor for service between 1898 and 1931. Following his retirement, Butler sided with the poor and working-class veterans who marched on Washington to demand World War I bonus payments. And he wrote a best-selling Depression-era memoir, which famously declared that "war is just a racket" and lamented his own past role as "a high-class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the Bankers."

Reframing Dissent NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

Sjursen contrasts Butler's anti-interventionist whistle-blowing, nearly a century ago, with the silence of high-ranking veterans today after "nineteen years of ill-advised, remarkably unsuccessful American wars." Among friends and former West Point classmates, he knows many still serving who "obediently resign themselves to continued combat deployments" because they long ago "stopped asking questions about their own role in perpetuating and enabling a counter-productive, inertia-driven warfare state."

Sjursen looks instead to small left-leaning groups like Veterans for Peace and About Face: Veterans Against the War (formerly Iraq Veterans Against the War), and Bring Our Troops Home. US, a network of veterans influenced by the libertarian right. Each in, its own way, seeks to "reframe dissent, against empire and endless war, as the truest form of patriotism." But actually taming the military-industrial complex will require "big-tent, intersectional action from civilian and soldier alike," on a much larger scale. One obstacle to that, he believes, is the societal divide between the "vast majority of citizens who have chosen not to serve" in the military and the "one percent of their fellow citizens on active duty," who then become part of "an increasingly insular, disconnected, and sometimes sententious post-9/11 veteran community."

Not many on the left favor a return to conscription.

But Sjursen makes it clear there's been a downside to the U.S. replacing "citizen soldiering" with "a tiny professional warrior caste," created in response to draft-driven dissent against the Vietnam War, inside and outside the military. As he observes:

"Nothing so motivates a young adult to follow foreign policy, to weigh the advisability or morality of an ongoing war as the possibility of having to put 'skin in the game.' Without at least the potential requirement to serve in the military and in one of America's now countless wars, an entire generation -- or really two, since President Nixon ended the draft in 1973–has had the luxury of ignoring the ills of U.S. foreign policy, to distance themselves from its reality ."

At a time when the U.S. "desperately needs a massive, public, empowered anti-war and anti-imperial wave" sweeping over the country, we have instead a "civil-military" gap that, Sjursen believes, has "stifled antiwar and anti-imperial dissent and seemingly will continue to do so." That's why his own mission is to find more "socially conscious veterans of these endless, fruitless wars" who are willing to "step up and form a vanguard of sorts for revitalized patriotic dissent." Readers of Sjursen's book, whether new recruits to that vanguard or longtime peace activists, will find Patriotic Dissent to be an invaluable educational tool. It should be required reading in progressive study groups, high school and college history classes, and book clubs across the country . Let's hope that the author's willingness to take personal risks, re-think his view of the world, and then work to change it will inspire many others, in uniform and out.

me name=


Justus_Americans , 59 minutes ago

Do we need to be in 160 countries with our military and can we afford it?

Cat Daddy , 1 hour ago

I am all for bringing the troops home except for this one unnerving truth; nature abhors a vacuum, specifically, when we pull out, China moves in. A world dominated by the CCP will be a dangerous place to be. When we leave, we will need to make sure our bases are safely in the hands of our friends.

dogbert8 , 1 hour ago

War is effectively the way the U.S. has done business since the Spanish American War, our first imperial conquests. War is how we ensure big business has the materials and markets they demand in return for their support of political parties and candidates. War is the only area left with opportunities for growth and profit. Don't think for a minute that TPTB will ever let us stop waging war to get what we (they) want.

TheLastMan , 2 hours ago

If you are new to zh all you need to do is study PNAC and the related nature of all parties to understand the criminality of USA militarization and for whose benefit it serves

Anonymous IX , 2 hours ago

I have written many times on this platform the exact same sentiments.

I am most disheartened by the COVID + Antifa/BLM Riots because of the facts this author presents.

We are distracted with emotional and highly volatile MASSIVELY PROPAGANDIZED stories by MSM (I don't watch) while the real problem in the world is as the author describes above.

We are war-mongering nation who needs to bring our troops home and disband over half of our overseas installations and bases.

We have no right to levy economic sanctions to impoverish, sicken, and weaken the citizens of Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, or anywhere else.

Yet, we run around arguing about masks and who can go into a restaurant or toppling statutes and throwing mortar-type fireworks at federal officers. This is what we do instead of facing a real problem which is that we are war-mongering nation with no moral/ethical conscience. These scraggily bearded white Antifas need to WTFU and realize who their true enemy.

Oh, wait. They work for the true enemy! Get it?

Max21c , 1 hour ago

We have no right to levy economic sanctions to impoverish, sicken, and weaken the citizens of Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, or anywhere else.

I don't agree with the economic sanctions nonsense thing as they seem to be more of a crutch for people that are not any good at planning, strategy, analytical thinking, critical thinking, strategic thinking, and lack much in the way of talent or creativity or intellectual acumen or intellectual skills...I believe there's around just shy of 10k economic sanctions by Washington...

But the USA does have the right to receive or refuse to receive foreign Ambassadors and Consuls and to recognize or not recognize other nations governments thus it does have some degrees of the right to not trade or engage in commerce with other nations to a certain extent... per imports and exports... et cetera... though it's not necessarily an absolute right or power

IronForge , 2 hours ago

Sjursen may admire General Butler; but he doesn't seem to know that several of the General's Descendants Served in the US Military.

Sjursen isn't Butler. The General Prevented a Coup in his Time.

The USA are a Hegemony whose KleptOchlarchs overtook the Original Constitutional Republic.

PetroUSD, MIC, Corporate Expansion-Conquest, AgriGMO, and Pharma Interests Span the Globe.

Wars are Rackets; and Societies to Nation-States have waged them over Real Estate, Natural Resources, Trade Routes, Industrial Capacity, Slavery, Suppresive Spite, Religious/Ideological Zeal, Economic Preservation, and Profiteering Greed.

YET, Militaries are still formed by Nation-States to Survive and for Some - Thrive above such Competitive Existenstential Threats.

*****

The Hegemony are running up against New Shifts in Global Power, Systems, and Influences; and are about to Lose their Unilateral Advantages. The Hegemon themselves may suffer Societal Collapses Within.

Sjursen should read up on Chalmers Johnson. Instead of trying to Coordinate Ineffective Peace Demonstrations, the Entire Voting/Political Contribution/Candidacy Schemes should be Separated from the Oligarchy of Plutocrats and Corporate/Political KleptOchlarchs.

Without Bringing the Votes back to the Collective Hands of Citizenry Interests First and Foremost, the Republic are Forever Conquered; and the Ethical may have to resort to Emigration and/or Secession.

Ink Pusher , 2 hours ago

Nobody rides for free,there's always a cost and those who can't pay in bullion will often pay in bodily fluids of one form or another.

Profiteers that create warfare for profit are simply parasitical criminals and should not be considered a "special breed" when weighed upon the Scales of Justice.

gzorp , 2 hours ago

Read 'Starship Troopers' by Robert A Heinlein (1959) pay especial attention to the "History and Moral Philosophy" courses... that's where his predictions for the future course of 'America's' future appear.... rather accurately. Heinlein was a 1930's graduate of Annapolis (Navy for you dindus and nohabs).....

A DUDE , 2 hours ago

t's not just the war machine but the entire system, the corporatocracy, of which the MIC is a part. And there is no way to change the system from within the system because whatever is anti-establishment becomes absorbed and neutered and part of the system.

So why would anyone vote is my question? 11. Trump and Biden Are Far Right of Center and Running to Offenbach Nearly Every Day

sbin , 2 hours ago

Tulsi Gabbard ran on anti interventionism foreign policy.

Look how fast the DNC disappeared her.

Of course destroying Kamala Harris in a debate and going after the ancient evil Hitlery sealed her fate.

BarkingWolf , 2 hours ago

In reality, since Trump took office, there's been no reduction in the US military presence abroad, which last year required a Pentagon budget of nearly $740 billion. As military historian and retired career officer Andrew Bacevich notes , "endless wars persist (and in some cases have even intensified ); the nation's various alliances and its empire of overseas bases remain intact; US troops are still present in something like 140 countries ; Pentagon and national security state spending continues to increase astronomically ."

Now wait just a minute there mister, that sounds like criticism of the Donald John PBUH PBUH PBUH ... you can't do that ... the cult followers will call you a leftist and a commie if you point out stuff like that even if it is objectively true! That's strike one, punk.

An Appeal to Conscience

Even if Biden beats Trump in November, efforts to curb US military spending will face continuing bi-partisan resistance.

November doesn't have anything to do with anything really. The appeal to conscience is wasted. The appeal would be better spent on removing the political class that is on the AIPAC dole and have dual citizenship in a foreign country in the ME while pretending to serve America while they are members of Congress. That's only the tip of the spear ... and that is a nonstarter from the get go.

Sjursen skillfully debunks the conventional wisdom of the foreign policy establishment, and the military's own current generation of "yes men for another war power hungry president."


I don't think Trump is necessarily a war power hungry president. While it is true that we have not withdrawn from Syria and basically stole their oil as Trump has repeated promised he would do, it is also true that Trump has yet to deliver Israels war with Iran and in fact had called back an invasion of Iran ten minutes before a flotilla of US warships was about to set sail to ignite such an invasion leaving Tel Aviv not only aggrieved, but angry as well.

Sjursen has now traded his "identity as a soldier -- the only identity I've known in my adult life -- for that of an anti-war, anti-imperialist, social justice crusader," albeit one who did not attend his first protest rally until he was thirty-two years old. With several left-leaning comrades ...

Okay, this is where you are starting to lose me .... i't like listening to a concert and suddenly the music is hitting sour notes that are off key, off tempo, and don't seem to fit somehow.

Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler, the recipient of two Medals of Honor for service between 1898 and 1931. Following his retirement, Butler sided with the poor and working-class veterans who marched on Washington to demand World War I bonus payments. And he wrote a best-selling Depression-era memoir, which famously declared that "war is just a racket" and lamented his own past role as "a high-class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the Bankers."

"On July 28, 1932, at the command of Gen. Douglas MacArthur, they marched down Pennsylvania Avenue toward the Capitol to launch an attack on World War I veterans. " https://www.stripes.com/news/us/the-veterans-were-desperate-gen-macarthur-ordered-us-troops-to-attack-them-1.480665

Butler was correct, war especially nowadays, is a racket that makes rich people who never seem to get their hands dirty, even richer. As one grunt put it long ago, "it's a dirty job, but somebody has to do it."

That "somebody" is going to be the kids of the little people (the real high-class muscle-men ) who are hated by their political class overlords even as the political class are worshipped as gods.

Sjursen looks instead to small left-leaning groups like Veterans for Peace and About Face: Veterans Against the War (formerly Iraq Veterans Against the War), and Bring Our Troops Home. US, a network of veterans influenced by the libertarian right.

The problem here is that the so-called "left" brand has always been about war and the capitalism of death.

The Democrat party is really the group that started the American civil war for instance, they are the ones behind legacy of Eugenists like Margaret Sanger who was a card carrying Socialist who founded the child murder mill known today as Planned Parenthood that sadly still exists under Trump but has turned into the industrialized slaughter of children ...even after birth so that their organs can be "harvested" for profit.

Sjursen's affinity for "the left" as saintly purveyors of peace, goodness, love, and life strikes me as rather disingenuous. Then he seems to argue if I read the analysis correctly that conscription will somehow be the panacea for the insatiable appetite for war?

One false flag such as The Gulf of Tonkin or 911 or even Perl Harbor or the Sinking of the Lusitania or the assassination of an Arch Duke ... is all that is really needed to arouse the unbridled hoards to march off to battle with almost erotic enthusiasm -the political class KNOWS IT!

Amendment X , 2 hours ago

And don't forget President Wilson (D) who was re-elected on the platform "He kept us out of the war" only to drag U.S. into the hopeless European Monarchary driven WWI.

11b40 , 1 hour ago

Yo! Low class muscle man here, and I have to agree with bringing back the draft. It should never have been eliminated, and is the root of the golbalists abiity to keep us in Afghanistan, and other parts of the ME, for going on 20 years.

Skin in the game. It means literally everything. As noted we now have 2 generations of men who never had to give much thought at all to what's happening around the world, and how America is involved....and look at the results. It would be a much different situation today if all those 18 year olds had to face the draft board with an unforgiving lottery.

Yes, one false falg can whip up the country to a war time fever pitch, but unless there is a real, serious threat, the fever cannot be maintained. The 1969 draft lottery caught me when I stayed out the first semester of my senior year. Didn't want to go, but accepted my fate and did the best job I could to stay alive and keep those around me as safe as possible. In 1966, I was in favor of the war, and was about to go Green Beret on the buddy system. We were going to grease gooks with all the enthusiasm of John Wayne. My old man, an artillery 1st Sgt at the time in Germany, talked me out of it. More like get your *** on a plane back to the States and into college, befroe i kick it up around your shouders. A WW2 & Korea vet, he told me then it was the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.

The point is, when kids are getting drafted, Mom's, Dad's, and everyone else concerned with the safety of their friends & relatives, start paying attention and asking hard questions of politicians. Using Afghanistan as an example, we would have been on the way out by the 2004 election cycle, or at max before the next one in 2008. That was 12 years ago, and we are still there.

I addition, the reason we went would have been more closely examined, and there may have been a real investigtion into 9/11. Plus, I am convinced that serving your country makes for a better all around citizen, and God knows, we need better citizens.

Cassandra.Hermes , 2 hours ago

Trump and Pompeo started new cold war with China, but have no way to back up their threats and win it!! When i was in Kosovo peace corps i heard so many stories from Albanian who were blamed to be Russian or American spy because of double cold war against Albania. Trump and Pompeo just gave excuse to Xi to blame anyone who protest as American spy. BBC were showing China's broadcast of the protests in Oregon to Hong Kong with subtitle "Do you really want American democracy?", LMFAO

Max21c , 2 hours ago

Joe Biden has pledged to ensure that "we have the strongest military in the world," promising to "make the investments necessary to equip our troops for the challenges of the next century, not the last one."

The United States shall continue to have a weak military until it starts to fix its foreign policy and diplomacy. You cannot have the strongest military in the world if you lack a good foreign policy and good diplomacy. Brains are a lot more important than battleships, battalions, bullets, barrels, or bombs. Get a frickin' clue you friggin' Washington morons.

Washington is weak because they are dumb. Blind, deaf, and dumb.

Heroic Couplet , 2 hours ago

Too little, too late. Great ad for a book that will be forgotten in a week. Read Bolton's book. The minute Trump tries to reduce troops, Bolton is right there, saying "No, we can't move troops to the perimeter. No, we can't move troops from barracks to tents at the perimeter." Who needs AI?

Erik Prince wrote 3.5 years ago that 4th gen warfare consists of cyberwarfare and bio-weapons. The US military is fooked. There's probably an interesting book to be researched: How do Republicans feel about contracting COVID-19 after listening to Trump fumble?

ChecksandBalances , 3 hours ago

Blame the voters. Run on a platform to reduce military and police spending. See how many of those lose. Probably all of them. You have to stop feeding the beast. This is a slogan Trump correctly said but as usual didn't actually mean. We should cut all military and police spending by 1/2 and then take the remaining money and build a smarter, more efficient military and police force.

Max21c , 3 hours ago

It's not just the "Deep State." It's Washingtonians overall. It's Deep Crazy. They're all Deep Crazy! They're nuts. And the rare exceptions that may know better and have enough common sense to know its wrong to sick the secret police on innocent American civilians aren't going to say anything or do anything to stop it. The few that know better in foreign policy aren't going to say anything or do anything against the new Cold Wars on the Eastern Front against China or on the Western Front against Russia since they're not willing to go up against the Regime. So the Regimists know they have carte blanche to persecute or terrorize or go after any that stand in their way. This is how tyrannies and police states operate. It's the nature of the beast. At a minimum they brow beat people into submission. People don't want to stick their neck out and risk going up against the Regime and risk losing to the Regime, its secret police, and the powers that be. They shy away from anything that would bring the Regime and its secret police and its radicals, extremists, fanatics, and zealots their way.

nonkjo , 4 hours ago

It's okay to be against "forever war" and still not have to be a progressive douchbag.

Sjursen is an unprincipled ******** artist. He leaves Iraq disillusioned as a lieutenant but sticks around long enough for them to pay for his grad school and give him some sweet "resume building" experiences that he can stand on to sell books? FYI, from commissioning time as a second lieutenant to promotion to captain is 3 years...that means Sjusen was so disillusioned that he decided to stick around for 12 more years which is about 9 years longer than he actually needed to as an Academy grad (he only had to serve 6 unless he elected to go to grad school).

The bottom line is Sjusen capitalizes on people not knowing how the military works. That is, that his own self-interest far outweighs his the principles he espouses. Typical leftist hypoctite.

Max21c , 4 hours ago

...the U.S. "desperately needs a massive, public, empowered anti-war and anti-imperial wave ..."

Perhaps the USA just needs a better foreign policy. Though we all know that's not going to happen with the flaky screwballs of Washington and the flaky screwballs in the Pentagon, CIA, State Department, foreign policy establishment, think tanks et cetera.

Minor technical point: the time for the "anti-imperial wave" was before Washingtonians destroyed much of the world and created their strategic blunders and disastrous foreign policy. You folks all went along with this nonsense and now you have your quagmires, forever wars, and numerous trouble spots that have popped up here and there along the way to boot.

Pottery barn rule: you broke it and you own it and it's yours...Ma'am please pay at the register on the way out...Sorry Ma'am there's no more free gluing...though the gluing specialist may be in on the third Thursday this month though it's usually the second Tuesday each month...

Contemporaneously, in the same vein the American public has been brainwashed into going along with the new Cold Wars on the Western Front against Moscow and the even newer Cold War on the Eastern Front against Beijing. It's like P.T. Barnum said "There's a sucker born every minute," and you fools in the American public just keep buying right in to the brainwashing. They're now successfully indoctrinating you into buying into their new Cold Wars with Russia and China. The Cold War on the Eastern Front versus Peking is more getting more fanciful attentions at the moment and the Cold War on the Western Front has temporarily been relegated to the back burner but they'll move the Western Front Cold War from simmer to boil over whenever it suits their needs. It's just a rendition of the Oceania has always been at war with East Asia and Eurasia is our friend are just gameplays right out of George Orwell's 1984.

Most of the quagmires can be fixed to a certain extent by applying some cement and engineering to the quicksand and many of the trouble spots can become more settled and less unstable if not stable in some instances. Even some of the more serious strategic problems like the South China Sea, North Korean nuclear weapons development, and potential Iranian nuclear weapons development can still be resolved through peaceful strategies and solutions.

In re sum, while I won't disparage a peace movement I do not believe it is either necessary nor proper simply because you will not solve anything through a peace movement. The sine qua non or quintessential element is simply to end one of these wars successfully through a peaceful diplomatic solution or solve one of these serious foreign policy problems through diplomacy which is something that hasn't been the norm since the downfall of the Berlin Wall, is no longer in favor, and which is the necessary element to prove that peace can be achieved through strategy and diplomacy and thereby change the course of the country's future.

In foreign affairs the foreign policy establishment has its pattern of behavior and it is that pattern of behavior that has to be changed. It's the mindset of the Washingtonians & elites that has to be changed. Just taking to the streets won't really change their ways or their beliefs for any significant part of the duration. They may pay lip service to peace & diplomacy but it won't win out in their minds in the long run. They are so warped in their views and beliefs that it'll have little or no effect over the long haul. As soon as the protests dissipate they'll be right back at it, back to their bad ways and bad behavior.

Son of Captain Nemo , 4 hours ago

For the past 19 years... And as Anti-War as you will ever get!...

https://action.ae911truth.org/p/salsa/web/common/public/signup?signup_page_KEY=11418&killorg=True&loggedOut=True

https://www.ae911truth.org/grandjury

P.S.

Remind 0range $hit $tain ( https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/11/14/trump-im-reopening-911-investigation/ ) that if he makes this a campaign pledge and an issue for debate he maybe can avoid a war crimes tribunal given how much has already been spent on the war machine ( https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/944-trillion-reasons-why-fed-quietly-bailing-out-hedge-funds )!

Hatterasjohn , 4 hours ago

Was it George Carlin that said " if voting made a difference they wouldn't let us do it " ? The only way to stop these forever wars is for people to stop joining the military. Parents should teach their children that joining the military and trotting off to some country to fight a war for the elite is not being patriotic . I was in the military from 1964 -1968. When Lyndon Johnson became president he drug out the Vietnam war as long as he could. Oh ! Lady Byrd Johnson bought Decon Company [ rat poison ] when most people never heard of it. Johnson bought this rat poison , government paid for ,at an inflated price . Sent ship loads of it to Vietnam .Never mind all the Americans and so called enemy killed.. Jane Fonda , Hanoi Jane , was really a hero who helped save countless lives by helping to end the war. Tommy and **** Smothers , Smother Brothers , spoke out against the war . Our government had them black balled from TV. Our government is probably as corrupt as any other country.

No-Go zone , 5 hours ago

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-19/top-us-general-says-american-troops-should-be-ready-die-israel

cowboyted , 7 hours ago

A piece of irony, one of our greatest generals was Dwight Eisenhower, the Allied Supreme Commander in WWII and two term president. He kept the peace for almost 10 years and warned Americans to beware of the "military-industrial complex." Most military men never want war, they just make sure they are ready if it comes. We have had the military industrial complex for way too long, it needs to be reduced and we need more generals to run for president, Gen. Flynn maybe? I'll also take Schwartzkoff.

cowboyted , 7 hours ago

The U.S. should only use our military if we are attacked, period. Otherwise, as Jefferson astutely stated, a standing army is a threat to democracy.

captain noob , 7 hours ago

Capitalism has no morals

Profit is the driving force of every single thing

cowboyted , 7 hours ago

The U.S. should only use our military if we are attacked, period. Otherwise, as Jefferson astutely stated, a standing army is a threat to democracy.

Chief Joesph , 7 hours ago

After what General Smedley Butler had to say and warned us about, here we are, 90 years later, doing the very same thing. Goes to show how utterly dumb, unprogressive, sheepish, and Medieval Americans really are. And you thought this is what makes America Great????

cowboyted , 8 hours ago

The U.S. Constitution provides for a "national defense." Yet, the last time we were attacked by a foreign nation was on Dec. 7, 1941 in which, the Congress declared war on Japan. Yet, in the past 100 years our country's leaders have convinced Americans that we can wage war if the issue concerns our "national INTEREST." This is wrong and needs to be deleted and replaced with our Constitution's language. Also, Congress is the ONLY Constitutional authority to declare war, not the executive branch. Too many countries, including the U.S., spend too much money preparing for war on levels of destruction that are unnecessary. We must attain a new paradigm with leading countries to achieve a mutual understanding that the people of the world are better off with jobs, food, families, peace, and a chance at a better life, filled with hope, faith, and flourishing communities. Things have to change.

transcendent_wannabe , 8 hours ago

I have to agree in sentiment with the author, but the reality of humans on earth almost demands constant war, it is the price we pay for the modern city lifestyle. There are various reasons.

1. Ever since WW1, the country has become citified, and the old peaceful country farm life was replaced with the rat race of industrial production. Without war, there is no need for the level of industrial production required to give full employment to the overpopulated cities. People will scream for war and jingoism when they have no city jobs. How do you deal with that? Sure, War is a Racket, but so far a necessary racket.

2. Every 20 years the military needs a real shooting war to battle test its upcoming soldiers and new equipment. Now the battles are against insurgencies... door-to-door in cities and ghettos, and new tactics need to be field tested. If the military goes more than 20 years without a real shooting war, they lose the real men, the sargeant majors, who just become fat pot bellied desk personel without the adrenaline of a real fight.

3. Humans inately like to fight. Even children, boys wrestle, girls taunt one another. There is no way discovered yet to keep people from turning violent in their attempts to steal what others have, or to gain dominance thru physical intimidation. Without war, gangs will form and fight over territorial boundaries. There is no escaping it.

4. Earth is where the battle field is, Battlefield Earth. There is no fighting allowed in heaven, so Earth is where souls come to fight. Nobody on earth likes it, but fighting and war is here to stay, and you should really use this life to find out how to transcend earth and get to a place where war is not needed or allowed, like heaven or Valhalla.

Tortuga , 8 hours ago

So. He thinks the crooked, grifting, regressive hate US murdering dim pustules aren't the warmongering, globalist, hate US, crooked, grifting, murdering republicrats. What a mo ron.

HenryJonesJr , 8 hours ago

Real conservatives were always against foreign intervention. It was the Left that embraced foreign wars (Wilson / Roosevelt / Truman / Johnson).

messystateofaffairs , 8 hours ago

From my perspective being a professional goon to serve the greater glory of international criminals, is, aside from having to avoid the mirror, way too much hard and dangerous work for the money. As a civilian of a society run by criminals on criminal imperialist principles, I have no literal PTSD type of skin in that filthy game, but like most citizens, knowing and unknowing, I do swim in that sewer everyday, doing my best to avoid bumping into the larger turds. My "patriotism" lies where the turds are fewest, anywhere in the world that might be.

bh2 , 8 hours ago

The threat to US interests is not in the ME (apart from Israel). It's in the Pacific.

NATO was never intended to be a defense arrangement perpetually funded by the US. Once stood up and post-war economies in Europe were restored, it was supposed to be a European defense shield with the US as ultimate backup. Not as a sugar-daddy for wealthy nations. Now that Russia is no longer situated to attack through the Fulda Gap, NATO is a grotesque expression of Parkinson's Law writ large.

China is a real threat to US interests. That's obvious simply by consulting a map. Military assets committed to engagement in theaters that no longer seriously matter is feckless and spendthrift. Particularly when Americans are put in harm's way with no prospect of either winning or leaving.

Worse yet is the accelerating prospect of being drawn into conflict in the South China Sea because fewer than decisive US and allied assets are deployed there.

While nations are now responding to that threat (including Japan, who are re-arming), China must realize a successful Taiwan invasion faces steadily diminishing prospects. They must act soon or give up the opportunity. Moreover, the CCP are loosing face with their own people because of multiple calamities wreaking havoc. The danger of a desperate CCP turning to a hot war to save face is an ever-rising threat. (If Three Gorges Dam fails, that could be the final straw.)

FDR deliberately suckered Japan into attacking the US (but apparently never guessed it would be on Pearl Harbor). It appears modern neo warmongers of all stripes would be delighted if China were tempted into yet another senseless war in the Pacific. And more lives lost on all sides.

While the size of US military and (ineptly named) "intelligence" budgets are vastly out of scale, the short-term cost in money is secondary to risk of long-term cost in blood. Surging the budget may make good sense when guns are all pointing in the wrong direction and political donors don't care as long as it pays well.

Defeating that outrageously wasteful spending is the first battle to be won. Disengaging from stupid, distracting, unwinnable conflicts is an imperative to achieve that goal.

The Judge , 8 hours ago

US. is the real threat to US interests.

DeptOfPsyOps-14527776 , 8 hours ago

An important part of this statue quo is propaganda and in particular neo-con propaganda.

Once it was clear that agitating against the Russian federation had failed, they started agitating against the PRC.

FDR administration wasn't that clever, they just had (((support))). They wanted Imperial Japan unable to strengthen itself against the United Kingdom as it was waging a war against the European Axis, did not realize that the Japanese fleet could reach as far as Hawaii and after Pearl Harbor, believed the West Coast could have been attacked as well.

Hovewer, they likely expected the Japanese to intercept their fleet on the way to the Phillipines after a war between Imperial Japan and the Commonwealth had started.

Salzburg1756 , 8 hours ago

"FDR deliberately suckered Japan into attacking the US (but apparently never guessed it would be on Pearl Harbor)." No, we knew the japs were going to attack Pearl Harbor. We had broken their code. That's why we sent our best battle ships away from Hawaii just before the attack. Most of the ships they sank were old and worthless; our good ships were out at sea.

TheLastMan , 4 hours ago

What constitutes "America's interests"?

the us military is the world community welcome wagon for global multi national Corp chamber of commerce

Do us citizens serve corporations or do corporations serve us citizens?

next ?, who owns / controls corporations?

Alice-the-dog , 8 hours ago

There is a reason why suicide is the leading cause of death among active duty military. They come to realize that what they are doing is perfect male bovine fecal matter. That they are guilty of participating in completely unwarranted death and destruction.

847328_3527 , 9 hours ago

Liberals and "progressives" are traditionally against wars. This new "woke" group of Demorats shows they are NOT liberals or progressives since they support the Establishment War Criminals like Obama and his side kick, demented Biden, and Bloodthirsty Clinton.

[Jul 21, 2020] I think the neoliberals are more afraid of losing institutional control than they are losing this or that election.

Jul 21, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

@likbez

I've been saying that black is the new orange (revolution) but purple works to.

It's hard to know what is going on any more because the only people who talk politics are yelling about it while the people I am most interested in hearing from in my personal life have gone silent.

I think the neoliberals are more afraid of losing institutional control than they are losing this or that election. Thus Trump's haplessness has been reassuring to them. If I were a globalist, I would want Democrats to take the senate and Trump to win a narrow election that I could say was illegitimate.

One thing I am interested in knowing is if/how divided the security and intelligence agencies are about all of this. There are wild rumors going around to the effect that the CIA is anti-Trump but the NSA is pro-Trump.

Personally, I have come reluctantly but now immovably to the idea that white identity politics are inevitable and that whites must begin waging them en masse sooner rather than later. The age of ideology is over and the demographic age has begun. The globalists understand this (indeed, they arranged it), as do non-white elites. It is only the corrupt and incompetent white elite that either can't or won't see this.

The institutional GOP is the biggest gatekeeper to a pro-white politics, and so it must either be subverted, seized or destroyed. The clown car that is late-stage conservatism must be diminished to the same stature as, say, the Fourth International over at wsws.org.

Those who want the GOP to remain a gate-keeping exercise - think Israelis like Hazony - are now trying to concoct a sham called "national conservatism" to keep whites on the conservative plantation but there are too many who already see this for what it is and so I expect it to go nowhere.

It may be that normal people are so appalled by this globaist-sponsored and Democrat-abetted violence that a backlash is building. If so, I can't see it.


Posted by: Vegetius | 20 July 2020 at 11:33 AM


likbez: The only "purple revolution" we are now experiencing in the US is the purple tee-shirted SEIU types and the teachers unions against the blue line police unions.

This is simply a public sector union turf war we are now experiencing.

Covid hysteria reduced the tax dollar pie which long supported all three of them. Not they are fighting over the size of the slices of the pie - with the police unions long getting the largest slices. Defund the police --and divert those same funds, not back to the taxpayers, but to teachers and other government support employee unions tells you all you need to know.

Using this lens to view events of the past few months in the US and everything finally makes sense: Internecine public sector turf war.

Even WSJ editorial today admits Gov Newsom, when he speaks, is merely representing the demands of the state teachers unions (CTA). Truth be told, and this is an existential election year for the 44 million public sector union members - 99% all Democrats. OrangeMan must be defeated., by any means necessary. They have all their skin in this game.

Posted by: Deap | 20 July 2020 at 12:06 PM

[Jul 19, 2020] Neoliberal Dems decided that ethno-narcissism and in-group preference can serve as a smoke screen of their coziness to Wall Street and their utter disregard of the interests of common Americans in having decent jobs and stemming the sliding standard of living (which led a large part of working class to vote for Trump in 2016).

Jul 19, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

@Vegetius | 19 July 2020 at 12:55 PM


It will be an example of the "Bradley Effect" only if this transparent effort to depress turn-out succeeds and Trump supporters stay home because they think his re-election is hopeless.

However, unless what we are seeing is some kind of rope-a-dope, the President's own behavior so far may depress the votes among those who in 2016 put him over the top. I am one of these.

That's true that Trump was a disappointment for many (probably majority) of low and middle income voters who voted for him in 2016. But I think more powerful factors are now in play that can override Trump inaptness and his betrayal of voters and his election promises.

The BLM movement codified the prejudices of black ethno-nationalists and is fully supported by neoliberal Dems as the last desperate attempt to topple Trump. Kind of "stage three" of the Purple color revolution (with Russiagate and Ukrainegate as previous two).

Effectively, neoliberal Dems decided that ethno-narcissism and in-group preference can serve as a smoke screen of their coziness to Wall Street and their utter disregard of the interests of common Americans in having decent jobs and stemming the sliding standard of living (which led a large part of working class to vote for Trump in 2016).

They bet that can became the new ideology of Democratic Party creating rag tag coalition from disaffected minorities and East and West Coast financial and technocratic elite as well as selected groups of professionals. In short the groups who are net winners from neoliberal globalization and are not that affected by outsourcing of jobs. I think this is a huge mistake.

IMHO this might became a very powerful, may be the decisive factor that favors Trump in 2020 re-election.

In fact, I suspect that BLM enablers in the neoliberal MSM actually are working for Trump re-election. In no way the rest of America will throw their support behind ethno-narcissism and BLM bigoted underbelly with the new Red Guards running amok.

These catch-all buzzwords about racial justice make it perfectly OK for rioters to tear down public monuments, loot and pillage stores and businesses, beat others who do not conform to their views, lay siege to police stations, and take up arms against the state. If you disagree with this, however, you're the racist. This trick will not work.

Truth be told, the USA criminal justice system, for all its faults, has been reasonably fair and effective in creating a harmonious environment for the various tribes that exist in modern USA.

And it egregious to call the USA a racist country, if we compare it for example with Israel or even Russia, to say nothing about various "stans", or China.

Posted by: likbez | 19 July 2020 at 02:33 PM

[Jul 16, 2020] How Joe Biden's privatization plans helped doom Latin America and fuel the migration crisis - The Grayzone

Jul 16, 2020 | thegrayzone.com

How Joe Biden's privatization plans helped doom Latin America and fuel the migration crisis


On the campaign trail, Joe Biden has boasted of his role in transforming Colombia and Central America through ambitious economic and security programs. Colombians and Hondurans tell The Grayzone about the damage his plans did to their societies. By Max Blumenthal

While campaigning for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination this year, former Senator and Vice President Joseph Biden has touted the crucial role he played in designing US mega-development and drug war campaigns that transformed the socio-political landscape of large swaths of Latin America.

"I was one of the architects of Plan Colombia," Biden boasted in a July 5 interview with CNN, referring to the multi-billion dollar US effort to end Colombia's civil war with a massive surge of support for the country's military. According to Biden, the plan was a panacea for Colombia's problems, from "crooked cops" to civil strife.

But Biden's plan for Colombia has contributed directly to the country's transformation into a hyper-militarized bastion of right-wing rule, enhancing the power and presence of the notoriously brutal armed forces while failing miserably in its anti-narcotic and reformist objectives.

This year alone, more than 50 human rights defenders were killed in Colombia in the first four months of 2019, while coca production is close to record levels. And as Colombian peace activists lamented in interviews with The Grayzone, the US is still in complete control of Bogotá's failed anti-drug policy, thanks largely to Plan Colombia.

Biden has also pumped up his role in an initiative called the Alliance for Prosperity, which was applied to the Northern Triangle of Central America. The former vice president was so central to the program's genesis that it was informally known as "Plan Biden."

Marketed as an answer to the crisis of child migration, Biden's brainchild channeled $750 million through a right-wing government installed by a US-orchestrated military coup to spur mega-development projects and privatize social services.

The Grayzone visited Honduras in July and documented, through interviews with human rights defenders, students, indigenous activists, and citizens from all walks of life, how the Alliance for Prosperity helped set the stage for a national rebellion.

In recent months, teachers, doctors, students, and rural campesinos have been in the streets protesting the privatization plans imposed on their country under the watch of Biden and his successors.

The gutting of public health services, teacher layoffs, staggering hikes in electricity prices, and environmentally destructive mega-development projects are critical factors in mass migration from Honduras. And indeed, they are immediate byproducts of the so-called "Biden plan."

"Biden is taking credit for doing something constructive to stop the migration crisis and blaming the concentration camps [on the US-Mexico border] on Trump. But it's Biden's policies that are driving more people out of Central America and making human rights defenders lives more precarious by defending entities that have no interest in human rights," explained Adrienne Pine, a professor of anthropology at American University and leading researcher of the social crisis in Honduras, in an interview with The Grayzone.

"So $750 million US taxpayer dollars that were allocated to supposedly address child migration are actually making things worse," Pine added. "It started with unaccompanied minors and now you have children in cages. Largely thanks to Biden."

'I was one of the architects of Plan Colombia'

In an interview with CNN on July 5 , Biden was asked if he favored decriminalizing the entry of Latin American migrants to the United States. Responding with a definitive "no," Joe Biden stated that he would be "surging folks to the border to make those concrete decisions" about who receives asylum.

Biden argued that he had the best record of addressing the root causes of the migration crisis, recalling how he imposed a solution on Central America's migration crisis. "You do the following things to make your country better so people don't leave, and we will help you do that, just like we did in Colombia," he said.

"What did we do in Colombia? We went down and said, okay, and I was one of the architects of Plan Colombia," Biden continued. "I said, here's the deal. If you have all these crooked cops, all these federal police, we're sending our FBI down, you let us put them through a lie detector test, let us tell you who you should fire and tell you the kind of people you should hire. They did and began to change. We can do so much if we're committed."

With the arrogance of a pith-helmeted high colonial official meting out instructions on who to hire and fire to his docile subjects, Biden presided over a plan that failed miserably in its stated goals, while transforming Colombia into a hyper-militarized bastion of US regional influence.

Plan Colombia: 'They come and ask for bread, and you give them stones'

Plan Colombia was originally conceived by Colombian President Andrés Pastrana in 1999, as an alternative development and conflict resolution plan for his war-torn country. He considered calling it the "Plan for Colombia's Peace."

The proposal was quickly hijacked by the Bill Clinton administration, with Joe Biden lobbying in the Senate for an iron-fisted militarization plan. "We have an obligation, in the interests of our children and the interests of the hemisphere, to keep the oldest democracy in place, to give them a fighting chance to keep from becoming a narcostate," Biden said in a June 2000 floor speech.

When Plan Colombia's first formal draft was published, it was done so in English, not Spanish. The original spirit of peace-building was completely sapped from the document by Biden, whose vigorous wheeling-and-dealing ensured that almost 80 percent of the $7.5 billion plan went to the Colombian military. 500 US military personnel were promptly dispatched to Bogota to train the country's military.

"If you read the original Plan Colombia, not the one that was written in Washington but the original Plan Colombia, there's no mention of military drives against the FARC rebels," Robert White, the former number two at the US embassy in Bogota, complained in 2000 . "Quite the contrary. [Pastrana] says the FARC is part of the history of Colombia and a historical phenomenon, he says, and they must be treated as Colombians."

White lamented how Washington had abused the trust of the Colombians: "They come and ask for bread, and you give them stones."

Plan Colombia was largely implemented under the watch of the hardline right-wing President Álvaro Uribe. In 1991, Uribe was placed on a US Drug Enforcement Agency list of " important Colombian narco-traffickers ," in part due to his role in helping drug kingpin Pablo Escobar's obtain licenses for landing strips while Uribe was the head of Colombia's Civil Aeronautics Department.

Under Uribe's watch, toxic chemicals were sprayed by military forces across the Colombian countryside, poisoning the crops of impoverished farmers and displacing millions.

Biden with former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe at the Concordia Summit in June 2017

Six years after Bill Clinton initiated Plan Colombia, however, even US drug czar John Walters was forced to quietly admit in a letter to the Senate that the price of cocaine in the US had declined, the flow of the drug into the US had risen, and its purity had increased.

Meanwhile, a UN Office of Drugs and Crime report found that coca cultivation reached record levels in Colombia in 2018. In other words, billions of dollars have been squandered, and a society already in turmoil has been laid to waste.

For the military and right-wing paramilitary forces that have shored up the rule of leaders like Uribe and the current ultra-conservative Colombian president, Ivan Duque, Plan Colombia offered a sense of near-total impunity.

The depravity of the country's military was put on bold display when the so-called "false positives" scandal was exposed in 2008. The incident began when army officers lured 22 rural laborers to a far-away location, massacred them, and then dressed them in uniforms of the leftist FARC guerrillas.

Victims of Colombia's "false positives" scandal, where laborers were massacred to justify Plan Colombia funding

It was an overt attempt to raise the FARC body count and justify the counter-insurgency aid flowing from the US under Plan Colombia. The officers who oversaw the slaughter were paid bounties and given promotions.

Colombian academics Omar Eduardo Rojas Bolaños and Fabián Leonardo Benavides demonstrated in a meticulous study that the "false positives" killings reflected "a systematic practice that implicates the commanders of brigades, battalions and tactical units" in the deaths of more than 10,000 civilians. Indeed, under Plan Colombia, the incident was far from an isolated atrocity.

Colombian activist Santiago Salinas in Bogotá
Colombian activist Santiago Salinas in Bogotá (Photo: Ben Norton)
Forfeiting Colombia's national sovereignty

In an interview in Bogotá this May, The Grayzone's Ben Norton asked Colombian social leader Santiago Salinas if there was any hope for progressive political transformation since the ratification of Plan Colombia.

An organizer of the peace group Congreso de los Pueblos , Salinas shrugged and exclaimed, "I wish." He lamented that many of Colombia's most pivotal decisions were made in Washington.

Salinas pointed to drug policy as an example. "It seems like the drug decisions about what to do with the drugs, it has nothing to do with Colombia.

"There was no sovereign decision on this issue. Colombia does not have a decision," he continued. It was the Washington that wrote the script for Bogota. And the drug trade is in fact a key part of the global financial system, Salinas pointed out.

But Biden was not finished. After 15 years of human misery and billions of wasted dollars in Colombia, he set out on a personal mission to export his pet program to Central America's crime and corruption-ravaged Northern Triangle.

Biden eyes Central America, selling mass privatization

In his July sit-down with CNN, Joe Biden trumpeted his Plan Colombia as the inspiration for the Alliance for Prosperity he imposed on Central America. Channeling the spirit of colonial times once again, he bragged of imposing Washington's policies on the governments of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.

"We'll make a deal with you," Biden recalled telling the leaders of these countries. "You do the following things to make your country better so people don't leave, and we will help you do that."

Biden announced his bold plan on the editorial pages of the New York Times in January 2015. He called it "a joint plan for economic and political reforms, an alliance for prosperity ." Sold by the vice president as a panacea to a worsening migration crisis, the Alliance for Prosperity was a boon for international financial institutions which promised to deepen the economic grief of the region's poor.

The Alliance for Prosperity "treated the Honduran government as if it were a crystal-clear, pure vessel into which gold could be poured and prosperity would flow outward," explained Dana Frank, a professor of history at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and the author of the book, The Long Honduran Night .

"In reality, the Plan would further enrich and strengthen the political power of the very same elites whose green, deliberate subversion of the rule of law, and destruction of natural resources and of Indigenous and campesino land rights, were responsible for the dire conditions the proposal ostensibly addressed," Frank added.

In Honduras, the government had no capacity or will to resist Biden's plan. That is because the country's elected president, Juan Manuel Zelaya , had been removed in 2009 in a coup orchestrated by the United States.

As Zelaya told The Grayzone's Anya Parampil , the Obama administration was infuriated by his participation in ALBA, a regional economic development program put forward by Venezuela's then-President Hugo Chavez that provided an alternative to neoliberal formulas like the so-called "Biden Plan."

Following the military coup, a corporate-friendly administration was installed to advance the interests of international financial institutions, and US trainers arrived in town to hone the new regime's mechanisms of repression.

Under the auspices of the Central American Regional Security Initiative, the FBI was dispatched to oversee the training of FUSINA, the main operational arm of the Honduran army and the base of the Military Police for Public Order (PMOP) that patrols cities like an occupation force.

In an October 2014 cable, the US embassy in Tegucigalpa acknowledged that the PMOP was riven with corruption and prone to abuse, and attempted to distance itself from the outfit, even though it operated under the umbrella of FUSINA.

This June, the PMOP invaded the Autonomous University of Honduras , attacking students protesting the privatization of their school and wounding six.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=maxblumenthal&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1150064825793425408&lang=en&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fthegrayzone.com%2F2019%2F07%2F28%2Fbiden-privatization-plan-colombia-honduras-migration%2F&siteScreenName=TheGrayzoneNews&theme=light&widgetsVersion=9066bb2%3A1593540614199&width=550px

The creation by the US embassy in Honduras of a special forces unit known as the Tigres has added an additional layer of repressive muscle. Besides arresting activists, the Tigres reportedly helped a drug kingpin escape after he was detained during a US investigation.

While violent crime surged across Honduras, unemployment more than doubled . Extreme poverty surged, and so too did the government's security spending.

To beef up his military, President Juan Orlando Hernández dipped into the social programs that kept a mostly poor population from tumbling into destitution.

Chart on Honduran budget priorities by the Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2017

As Alex Rubinstein reported for The Grayzone , the instability of post-coup Honduras has been particularly harsh on LGTTBI (Lesbian, Gay, Trans, Travesti, Bisexual, and Intersex) Hondurans. More than 300 of them have been killed since 2009, a dramatic spike in hate crimes reinforced by the homophobic rhetoric of the right-wing Evangelical Confraternity that represents the civil-society wing of the ultra-conservative Hernandez government.

As the social chaos enveloped Honduran society , migration to the US-Mexico border began to surge to catastrophic levels . Unable to make ends meet, some Hondurans sent their children alone to the border, hoping that they would temporary protective or refugee status.

By 2014, the blowback of the Obama administration's coup had caused a national emergency. Thousands of Hondurans were winding up in cages in detention camps run by the US Department of Homeland Security, and many of them were not even 16 years old.

That summer, Obama went to Congress for $3.7 billion in emergency funds to ramp up border militarization and deport as many unaccompanied Central American minors as possible.

Biden used the opportunity to rustle up an additional billion dollars , exploiting the crisis to fund a massive neoliberal project that saw Honduras as a base for international financial opportunity. His plan was quickly ratified, and the first phase of the Alliance for Prosperity began.

From the IADB's sanitized survey of the Alliance for Prosperity
Energy industry rush dooms indigenous communities and human rights defenders

The implementation of the Alliance for Prosperity was overseen by the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), a US-dominated international financial institution based in Washington, DC that supports corporate investment in Latin America and the Caribbean.

A graphic on the IADB's website outlined the plan's objectives in anodyne language that concealed its aggressively neoliberal agenda.

For instance, the IADB promised the "fostering [of] regional energy integration." This was a clear reference to Plan Pueblo Panama, a region-wide neoliberal development blueprint that was conceived as a boon to the energy industry. Under the plan, the IADB would raise money from Latin American taxpayers to pay for the expansion of power lines that would carry electricity from Mexico all the way to Panama.

Honduras, with its rivers and natural resources, provided the project with a major hub of energy production. In order for the country's energy to be traded and transmitted to other countries, however, the International Monetary Fund mandated that its national electricity company be privatized.

Since the implementation of that component of "Plan Biden," energy costs have begun to surge for residential Honduran consumers. In a country with a 66 percent poverty rate, electricity privatization has turned life from precarious to practically impossible.

Rather than languish in darkness for long hours with unpaid bills piling up, many desperate citizens have journeyed north towards the US border.

As intended, the Alliance for Prosperity's regional energy integration plan has spurred an influx of multi-national energy companies to Honduras. Hydro-electric dams and power plants began rising up in the midst of the lush pine forests and winding rivers that define the Honduran biosphere, pushing many rural indigenous communities into a life-and-death struggle.

This July, The Grayzone traveled to Reitoca, a remote farming community located in the heart of the Honduran "dry sector." The indigenous Lenca residents of this town depend on their local river for fish, recreation, and most importantly, water to irrigate the crops that provide them with a livelihood. But the rush on energy investment brought an Italian-Chilean firm called Progelsa to the area to build a massive hydro-electric dam just upstream.

Reitoca community leader Wilmer Alonso by the river threatened by a major hydro-electric project (Photo: Ben Norton)

Wilmer Alonso, a member of the Lenca Indigenous Council of Reitoca, spoke with The Grayzone, shaking with emotion as he described the consequences of the dam for his community.

"The entire village is involved in this struggle," Alonso said. "Everyone knows the catastrophe that the construction of this hydro-electric plant would create."

He explained that, like so many foreign multi-nationals in Honduras, Progelsa employs an army of private thugs to intimidate protesters: "The private company uses the army and the police to repress us. They accuse us of being trespassers, but they are the ones trespassing on our land."

US reinforces 'factors that generate violence the most in our society'

The Alliance for Progress also provided the backdrop for the assassination of the renowned Honduran environmentalist and feminist organizer Berta Cáceres.

On March 3, 2016, Cáceres was gunned down in her home in rural Honduras. A towering figure in her community with a presence on the international stage, Cáceres had been leading the fight against a local dam project overseen by DESA, a powerful Honduran energy company backed by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and run by powerful former military officers.

The representative that DESA sent to sign its deal with USAID, Sergio Rodríguez, was later accused of masterminding Cáceres' murder, alongside military officials and former company employees.

In March 2018, the Honduran police arrested DESA's executive president, Roberto David Castillo Mejía, accusing him of "providing logistics and other resources to one of the material authors" of the assassination. Castillo was a West Point graduate who worked in the energy industry while serving as a Honduran intelligence officer.

This July, The Grayzone visited the family of Berta Cáceres in La Esperanza, a town nestled in the verdant mountains of Intibucá. Cáceres' mother, Doña Berta, lives there under 24-hour police guard paid for by human rights groups.

The Cáceres household is bristling with security cameras, and family members get around in armored cars. In her living room, we met Laura Zúñiga Cáceres of the Civic Council of Indigenous and Popular Organizations of Honduras (COPINH), the human rights group that her mother Berta founded.

Laura Zuniga Caceres of COPINH in the home where Berta Caceres was raised (Photo: Ben Norton)

"The violence in Honduras generates migrant caravans, which tears apart society, and it all has to do with all of this extractivism, this violence," Zúñiga Caceres told The Grayzone. "And the response from the US government is to send more soldiers to our land; it is to reinforce one of the factors that generates violence the most in our society."

"We are receiving reports from our comrades that there is a US military presence in indigenous Lenca territory," she added. "For what? Humanitarian aid? With weapons. It's violence. It's persecution."

Gutting public healthcare, driving more migration

The Alliance for Prosperity also commissioned the privatization of health services through a deceptively named program called the Social Protection Framework Law, or la Ley Marco de Protección Social.

Promoted by Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández as a needed reform, the scheme was advanced through a classic shock doctrine-style episode: In 2015, close associates of Hernández siphoned some $300 million from the Honduran Institute for Social Services (IHSS) into private businesses, starving hospitals of supplies and causing several thousand excess deaths, mostly among the poor.

With the medical sector in shambles, Hondurans were then forced to seek healthcare from the private companies that were to provide services under Hernandez's "Social Protection" plan.

"The money that was robbed [in the IHSS scandal] was used to justify the Ley Marco Proteccion Social," Karen Spring, a researcher and coordinator for the Honduras Solidarity Network, told The Grayzone. "The hospitals were left in horrible conditions with no human capital and they were left to farm out to private hospitals."

"When Hondurans go to hospitals, they will be told they need to go to a private company, and through the deductions in their jobs they will have to pay a lot out of pocket," Spring said. "Through the old universal system you would be covered no matter what you had, from a broken arm to cancer. No more."

In response, Hondurans poured out into the streets, launching the March of Torches – the first major wave of continuous protests against Hernandez and his corrupt administration.

In March 2015, in the middle of the crisis, Joe Biden rushed down to Guatemala City to embrace Hernández and restore confidence in the Alliance for Prosperity.

"I come from a state that, in fact, is the corporate capital of America. More corporations are headquartered there than anyplace else," Biden boasted , with Hernández and the presidents of Guatemala and El Salvador standing by his side. "They want to come here. Corporate America wants to come."

Joseph Biden embraces Juan Orlando Hernandez in Guatemala City, February 2016

Emphasizing the need for more anti-corruption and security measures to attract international financial investment, Biden pointed to Plan Colombia as a shining model – and to himself as its architect. "Today Colombia is a nation transformed, just as you hope to be 10 to 15 years from now," the vice president proclaimed.

Following Biden's visit, the privatization of the Honduran economy continued apace -- and so did the corruption, the repression, and the unflinching support from Washington.

Hondurans take to the streets, wind up in US-style supermax prisons

By 2017, the movement in Honduras that had galvanized against the US-orchestrated 2009 coup saw its most immediate opportunity for political transformation at the ballot box. President Hernández was running for re-election, violating a constitutional provision on term limits. His opponent, Salvador Nasrallah, was a popular broadcast personality who provided a centrist consensus choice for the varied elements that opposed the country's coup regime.

When voting ended on November 26, Nasrallah's victory appeared certain, with exit polls showing him comfortably ahead by several points. But suddenly, the government announced that a power outage required the suspension of vote counting. Days later, Hernández was declared the victor by about 1 percent.

The fraud was so transparent that the Organization of American States (OAS), normally an arm of US interests in Latin America, declared in a preliminary report that "errors, irregularities and systemic problems," as well as "extreme statistical improbability," rendered the election invalid.

But the United States recognized the results anyway, leaving disenfranchised Hondurans with protest as their only recourse.

"Hondurans tried to change what happened in their country through the 2017 elections, not just Hernández but all the implementation of all these policies that the Biden plan had funded and implemented all these years since the coup," explained Karen Spring, of the Honduras Solidarity Network.

"They tried to change that reality through votes and when the elections turned out to be a fraud, tons of people had no choice but to take to the streets."

At the front lines of the protests in 2017 was Spring's longtime partner, the Honduran activist Edwin Espinal. Following a protest in November of that year where property damage took place, Espinal was arrested at gunpoint at his home and accused of setting fire to the front door of a hotel. He fervently denied all charges, accusing the government of persecuting him for his political activism.

In fact, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights had placed a protective measure on Espinal in 2010 in response to previous attempts to legally railroad him.

The government placed Espinal in pre-trial detention in La Tolva, a US-style maximum security prison normally reserved for violent criminals and narco-traffickers. Last October, Espinal and Spring were married in the jail while surrounded by masked guards.

Karen Spring and Edwin Espinal marry in La Tolva in October 2018 (Photo: Karen Spring)

"Since the Biden plan, contractors have been coming down to build these US-style maximum security prisons," Spring said. "That's where my husband Edwin Espinal is being held."

"They say the company is Honduran but there's no way Hondurans could have built that without US architects or US construction firms giving them the plans," she added. "I've been in the prison and it's like they dumped a US prison in the middle of Honduras."

Reflecting on her husband's persecution, Spring explained, "Edwin wanted to stay in his country to change the reality that caused mass migration. He's one of the people who's faced consequences because he went to the streets. And he's faced persecution for years because he's one of the Hondurans who wanted to change the country by staying and fighting. Berta Caceres was another."

"Hondurans wanted to use their votes to change the country and now they're voting with their feet," she continued. "So if Biden's plan really addressed the root causes of the migrant crisis, why aren't people asking why migration is getting worse? Hondurans are voting on the Biden plan by fleeing and saying your plan didn't work and it made our situation worse by fleeing to the border."

Max Blumenthal

Max Blumenthal is an award-winning journalist and the author of several books, including best-selling Republican Gomorrah , Goliath , The Fifty One Day War , and The Management of Savagery . He has produced print articles for an array of publications, many video reports, and several documentaries, including Killing Gaza . Blumenthal founded The Grayzone in 2015 to shine a journalistic light on America's state of perpetual war and its dangerous domestic repercussions. thegrayzone.com

[Jul 15, 2020] The shadow of Soviet Politburo over Washington: Joe Biden looks more and more as Konstantin Chernenko plus dementia -- Over A Third Of Americans Believe He Is Incapable Of Debating Trump

Highly recommended!
Soviet joke: TASS communicated that "Today, being in dangerous state of health and without regaining consciousness Konstantin Ustonivich Chernenko took up the duties of Secretary General" (the first part of the sentence is the common beginning of state leaders' obituaries)
Although only medical evaluation can tell the truth, the inability to hold on to his own train of thought, slurring of his speech, forgetting where he is and who he's with, grossly incorrect use of language, and inappropriate behavior are typical early symptoms of dementia. Excessive irritability and paranoia is also a symptom.
Over time though, I began to pity Joe as I realized the untenable situation Democrats had placed him in. What is wrong with his family, allowing him to be humiliated on a daily basis? Some think he is being "set up"
Elite rotation clearly is not working in the USA. Just look at Pelosi.
On the other hand Reagan was clearly senile, and that was no hindrance to him becoming President -- so why should it be any different in the case of Biden?
Jul 15, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

With questions continuing to swirl about his mental health, a new Rasmussen poll has found that only 54 per cent of Americans believe Joe Biden is capable of debating President Trump.

The national telephone survey found that just over half of likely voters thought Biden could take part in a debate with Trump while 36 per cent disagree and say he is not capable. A further 11 per cent are not sure either way.

... Polls show that 38 per cent of American voters think Biden has "some form of dementia," including one in five Democrats. 61 per cent of voters also think Biden should address the dementia issue publicly.

CB March 9, 2020 at 13:07

Today, NPR has been playing clips from Biden's terrifyingly incoherent St. Louis speech. He sounds like he's falling down drunk.

Here's my transliteration of 31:10 on C-SPAN:

"You're all part ma movemen a moob men that has a backbone the backbone of the Democratic Party a mooin's gun defeat Donald Trump."

Hearing the clip this morning put tears in my eyes because it so acutely reminded me of the final speech patterns of my grandfather, a brilliant nuclear physicist who died of Alzheimers at age 78.

I also cried at clip #33 because the pain in Jill Biden's eyes projected me right back into the helplessness of witnessing Granddad's cognitive decline.

It's tragically time to take away Biden's car keys, and yet these endorsements are trying to buy him a Maserati. How can this nightmare be happening. Thank you, Caitlin Johnstone, for maintaining this much-needed reality check.

[Jul 15, 2020] The real Bill Browder story (part one)- What US-UK media won t tell you about billionaire lobbyist s dubious narrative by John Ryan

Bill is the primary suspect for killing Magnitsky. He has incentive, methods and means.
Jul 15, 2020 | www.rt.com

By John Ryan, Ph.D . – Retired Professor of Geography and Senior Scholar, University of Winnipeg, Canada

If anyone has proven the adage that "a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on it shoes," it's Bill Browder. The mega-rich vulture capitalist has been spinning a yarn for years.

Intriguingly, after Germany's leading news magazine kiboshed his fake narrative, Anglo-American media ignored the revelations.

Browder's narrative suits the US/UK establishment as it provides a convenient excuse to sanction Russia, but the story has more holes than Swiss cheese.

The billionaire vulture capitalist has been a figure of some prominence on the world scene for the past decade. A few months back, Der Spiegel published a major exposé on him and the case of Sergei Magnitsky, but the US/UK mainstream media failed to follow it up and so, aside from Germany, few people are aware of Browder's background.

Browder had gone to Moscow in 1996 to take advantage of the privatization of state companies by then-Russian President Boris Yeltsin. Browder founded Hermitage Capital Management, a Moscow investment firm registered in offshore Guernsey in the Channel Islands. For a time, it was the largest foreign investor in Russian securities. Hermitage Capital Management was rated as extremely successful after earning almost 3,000 percent in its operations between 1996 and December 2007.

During the corrupt Boris Yeltsin years, with his business partner's US$25 million, Browder amassed a fortune. Profiting from the large-scale privatizations in Russia from 1996 to 2006, his Hermitage firm eventually grew to $4.5 billion.

When Browder encountered financial difficulties with Russian authorities, he portrayed himself as an anti-corruption activist and became the driving force behind the Magnitsky Act, which resulted in economic sanctions aimed at Russian officials. However, an examination of Browder's record in Russia and his testimony in court cases reveal contradictions with his statements to the public and Congress, and raises questions about his motives in attacking corruption in Russia.

ALSO ON RT.COM Russia to impose reciprocal sanctions on UK following publication of 'Magnitsky List'

Although he has claimed that he was an 'activist shareholder' and campaigned for Russian companies to adopt Western-style governance, it has been reported that he cleverly destabilized companies he was targeting for takeover. Canadian blogger Mark Chapman has revealed that after Browder would buy a minority share in a company, he would resort to lawsuits against this company through shell companies he controlled. This would destabilize the company with charges of corruption and insolvency. To prevent its collapse, the Russian government would intervene by injecting capital into it, causing its stock to rise -- with the result that Browder's profits would rise exponentially.

Later, through Browder's Russian-registered subsidiaries, his accountant Magnitsky acquired extra shares in Russian gas companies such as Surgutneftegaz, Rosneft and Gazprom. This procedure enabled Browder's companies to pay the residential tax rate of 5.5 percent instead of the 35 percent that foreigners would have to pay.

However, the procedure to bypass the Russian presidential decree that banned foreign companies and citizens from purchasing equities in Gazprom was an illegal act. Because of this and other suspected transgressions, Magnitsky was interrogated in 2006 and later in 2008. Initially he was interviewed as a suspect and then as an accused. He was then arrested and charged by Russian prosecutors with two counts of aggravated tax evasion committed in conspiracy with Bill Browder in respect of Dalnyaya Step and Saturn, two of Browder's shell companies to hold shares that he bought. Unfortunately, in 2009, Magnitsky died in pre-trial detention because of a failure by prison officials to provide prompt medical assistance.

Browder has challenged this account and for years he has maintained that Magnitsky's arrest and death were a targeted act of revenge by Russian authorities against a heroic anti-corruption activist.

It's only recently that Browder's position was challenged by the European Court of Human Rights, which in its ruling on August 27, 2019 concluded that Magnitsky's "arrest was not arbitrary, and that it was based on reasonable suspicion of his having committed a criminal offence." And as such, "The Russians had good reason to arrest Sergei Magnitsky for Hermitage tax evasion."

"The Court observes that the inquiry into alleged tax evasion, resulting in the criminal proceedings against Mr Magnitskiy, started in 2004, long before he complained that prosecuting officials had been involved in fraudulent acts."

Prior to Magnitsky's arrest, because of what Russia considered to be questionable activities, Browder had been refused entry to Russia in 2005. However, he did not take lightly his rebuff by the post-Yeltsin Russian government under Vladimir Putin. As succinctly expressed by Professor Halyna Mokrushyna at the University of Ottawa:

[Browder] began to engage in a worldwide campaign against the Russian authorities, accusing them of corruption and violation of human rights. The death of his accountant and auditor Sergei Magnitsky while in prison became the occasion for Browder to launch an international campaign presenting the death as a ruthless silencing of an anti-corruption whistleblower. But the case of Magnitsky is anything but.

Despite Browder's claims that Magnitsky died as a result of torture and beatings, authentic documents and testimonies show that Magnitsky died because of medical neglect – he was not provided adequate treatment for a gallstone condition. It was negligence typical at that time of prison bureaucracy, not a premeditated killing. Because of the resulting investigation, many high-level functionaries in the prison system were fired or demoted.

For the past 10 years, Browder has maintained that Magnitsky was tortured and murdered by prison guards. Without any verifiable evidence he has asserted that Magnitsky was beaten to death by eight riot guards over 1 hour and 18 minutes. This was never corroborated by anybody, including by autopsy reports. It was even denied by Magnitsky's mother in a video interview.

Nevertheless, on the basis of his questionable beliefs, he has carried on a campaign to discredit and vilify Russia and its government and leaders.

In addition to the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights, Browder's basic underlying beliefs and assumptions are being seriously challenged. Very recently, on May 5, 2020, an American investigative journalist, Lucy Komisar, published an article with the heading Forensic photos of Magnitsky show no marks on torso :

On Fault Lines today I revealed that I have obtained never published forensic photos of the body of Sergei Magnitsky, William Browder's accountant, that show not a mark on his torso. Browder claims he was beaten to death by prison guards. Magnitsky died at 9:30pm Nov 16, 2009, and the photos were taken the next day.

READ MORE UK sanctions head of Russian investigative committee, following US lead

Later in her report she states:

I noted on the broadcast that though the photos and documents are solid, several dozen U.S. media – both allegedly progressive and mainstream -- have refused to publish this information. And if that McCarthyite censorship continues, the result of rampant fear-inducing Russophobia, I will publish it and the evidence on this website.

Despite evidence such as this, till this day Browder maintains that Sergei Magnitsky was beaten to death with rubber batons. It's this narrative that has attracted the attention of the US Congress, members of parliament, diplomats and human rights activists. To further refute his account, a 2011 analysis by the Physicians for Human Rights International Forensics Program of documents provided by Browder found no evidence he was beaten to death.

In his writings, as supposed evidence, Browder provides links to two untranslated Russian documents. They were compiled immediately after Magnitsky died on November 16, 2009. Recent investigative research has revealed that one of these appears to be a forgery. The first document, D309, states that shortly before Magnitsky's death: "Handcuffs were used in connection with the threat of committing an act of self-mutilation and suicide, and that the handcuffs were removed after thirty minutes." To further support this, a forensic review states that while in the prison hospital, "Magnitsky exhibited behavior diagnosed as 'acute psychosis' by Dr. A. V. Gaus at which point the doctor ordered Mr. Magnitsky to be restrained with handcuffs."

The second document, D310, is identically worded to D309 except for a change in part of the preceding sentence. The sentence in D309 has the phrase "special means were" is changed in D310 to "a rubber baton was."

As such, while D309 is perfectly coherent, in D310 the reference to a rubber baton makes no sense whatsoever, given the title and text it shares with D309. This and other inconsistencies, including signatures on these documents, make it apparent that D310 was copied from D309 and that D310 is a forgery. Furthermore, there is no logical reason for two almost identical reports to have been created, with only a slight difference in one sentence. There is no way of knowing who forged it and when, but this forged document forms a major basis for Browder's claim that Magnitsky was clubbed to death.

The fact that there is no credible evidence to indicate that Magnitsky was subjected to a baton attack, combined with forensic photos of Magnitsky's body shortly after death that show no marks on it, provides evidence that appears to repudiate Browder's decade-long assertions that Magnitsky was viciously murdered while in jail.

With evidence such as this, it repeatedly becomes clear that Browder's narrative contains mistakes and inconsistencies that distort the overall view of the events leading to Magnitsky's death.

Despite Magnitsky's death, the case against him continued in Russia and he was found guilty of corruption in a posthumous trial. Actually, the trial's main purpose was to investigate alleged fraud by Bill Browder, but to proceed with this they had to include the accountant Magnitsky as well. The Russian court found both of them guilty of fraud. Afterwards, the case against Magnitsky was closed because of his death.

After Browder was refused entry to Russia in November of 2005, he launched a campaign insisting that his departure from Russia resulted from his anti-corruption activities. However, the real reason for the cancellation of his visa that he never mentions is that in 2003, a Russian provincial court had convicted Browder of evading $40 million in taxes. In addition, his illegal purchases of shares in Gazprom through the use of offshore shell companies were reportedly valued at another $30 million, bringing the total figure of tax evasion to $70 million.

ALSO ON RT.COM Bill Browder points finger at Bernie Sanders on Magnitsky Act vote, but the real story is his own corruption

It's after this that the Russian federal government next took up the case and initially went after Magnitsky, the accountant who carried out Browder's schemes.

But back in the US, Browder portrayed himself as the ultimate truth-teller, and embellished his tale by asserting that Sergei Magnitsky was a whistleblowing "tax lawyer," rather than one of Browder's accountants implicated in tax fraud. As his case got more involved, he presented a convoluted explanation that he was not responsible for bogus claims made by his companies. This is indeed an extremely complicated matter and as such only a summary of some of this will be presented.

The essence of the case is that in 2007, three shell companies that had once been owned by Browder were used to claim a $232 million tax refund based on trumped-up financial loses. Browder has stated that the companies were stolen from him, and that in a murky operation organized by a convicted fraudster, they were re-registered in the names of others. There is evidence, however, that Magnitsky and Browder may have been part of this convoluted scheme.

Browder's main company in Russia was Hermitage Capital Management, and associated with this firm were a large number of shell companies, some in the Russian republic of Kalmykia and some in the British Virgin Islands. A law firm in Moscow, Firestone Duncan, owned by Americans, did the legal work for Browder's Hermitage. Sergei Magnitsky was one of the accountants for Firestone Duncan and was assigned to work for Hermitage.

An accountant colleague of Magnitsky's at Firestone Duncan, Konstantin Ponomarev, was interviewed in 2017 by Komisar, who said:

According to Ponomarev, the firm – and Magnitsky -- set up an offshore structure that Russian investigators would later say was used for tax evasion and illegal share purchases by Hermitage the structure helped Browder execute tax-evasion and illegal share purchase schemes.

He said the holdings were layered to conceal ownership: The companies were 'owned' by Cyprus shells Glendora and Kone, which, in turn, were 'owned' by an HSBC Private Bank Guernsey Ltd trust. Ponomarev said the real owner was Browder's Hermitage Fund. He said the structure allowed money to move through Cyprus to Guernsey with little or no taxes paid along the way. Profits could get cashed out in Guernsey by investors of the Hermitage Fund and HSBC.

Ponomarev said that in 1996, the firm developed for Browder 'a strategy of how to buy Gazprom shares in the local market, which was restricted for foreign investors.'

READ MORE Anti-Russian sanctions based on fraudster's tales? Spiegel finds Magnitsky narrative fed to West by Browder is riddled with lies

In the course of their investigation, on June 2, 2007, Russian tax investigators raided the offices of Hermitage and Firestone Duncan. They seized Hermitage company documents, computers and corporate stamps and seals. They were looking for evidence to support Russian charges of tax evasion and illegal purchase of shares of Gazprom.

In a statement to US senators on July 27, 2017, Browder stated that Russian Interior Ministry officials "seized all the corporate documents connected to the investment holding companies of the funds that I advised. I didn't know the purpose of these raids so I hired the smartest Russian lawyer I knew, a 35-year-old named Sergei Magnitsky. I asked Sergei to investigate the purpose of the raids and try to stop whatever illegal plans these officials had."

Contrary to what Browder claims, Magnitsky had been his accountant for a decade. He had never acted as a lawyer, nor did he have the qualifications to do so. In fact, in 2006, when questioned by Russian investigators, Magnitsky said he was an auditor on contract with Firestone Duncan. In Browder's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2017, he claimed Magnitsky was his lawyer, but in 2015, in his testimony under oath in the US government's Prevezon case, Browder told a different story, as will now be related.

On Browder's initiative, in December 2012, he presented documents to the New York District Attorney alleging that a Russian company, Prevezon, had "benefitted from part of the $230 million dollar theft uncovered by Magnitsky and used those funds to buy a number of luxury apartments in Manhattan." In September 2013, the New York District Attorney's office filed money-laundering charges against Prevezon. The company hired high-profile New York-based lawyers to defend themselves against the accusations.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=true&id=1018928646755581952&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Frussia%2F494802-browder-story-what-uk-wont-tell%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=9066bb2%3A1593540614199&width=550px

As reported by Der Spiegel, Browder would not voluntarily agree to testify in court, so Prevezon's lawyers sent process servers to present him with a subpoena, which he refused to accept and was caught on video literally running away. In March 2015, the judge in the Prevezon case ruled that Browder would have to give testimony as part of pre-trial discovery. Later, while in court and under oath and confronted with numerous documents, Browder was totally evasive. Lawyer Mark Cymrot spent six hours examining him, beginning with the following exchange:

ALSO ON RT.COM Russian court orders arrest of UK investor Bill Browder over organization of criminal network

Cymrot asked: Was Magnitsky a lawyer or a tax expert?

He was "acting in court representing me," Browder replied.

And he had a law degree in Russia?

"I'm not aware he did."

Did he go to law school?

"No."

How many times have you said Mr. Magnitsky is a lawyer? Fifty? A hundred? Two hundred?

"I don't know."

Have you ever told anybody that he didn't go to law school and didn't have a law degree?

"No."

Critically important, during the court case, the responsible US investigator admitted during questioning that his findings were based exclusively on statements and documents from Browder and his team. Under oath, Browder was unable to explain how he and his people managed to track the flow of money and make the accusation against Prevezon. In his 2012 letter that launched the court case, Browder referred to "corrupt schemes" used by Prevezon, but when questioned under oath, he admitted he didn't know of any. In fact, to almost every question put forth by Mark Cymrot, Browder replied that he didn't know or didn't remember.

(Read the next part of The Real Bill Browder story on Thursday, here on RT)

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

[Jul 14, 2020] Joe Biden is an obvious stalking horse for something more sinister

Jul 14, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

upstater , 13 July 2020 at 06:43 PM

As Jim Kunstler wrote today, "C."

How about Susan Rice as a IDpol check-the-boxes VP and Samantha Power at State. R2P on steroids. Create several dozen Ukraines, Libyas and Syrias.

[Jul 14, 2020] In foreign policy Biden is worse than Trump by Ted Rall

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Biden was the guy who convinced Obama to ramp up Bush's drone assassination program, which kills 50 innocent bystanders for every 1 targeted "militant" -- who often gets away and is rarely a threat to the United States, just to our authoritarian allies. Someday soon, Biden's drone killings abroad will be used to justify killing Americans here at home. ..."
"... Elsewhere, Marcetic writes: "When Reagan invaded Grenada in 1983, bombing a hospital in the process, Biden said he 'did the right thing.' When he bombed Libya three years later, killing 36 civilians and dictator Muammar Gaddafi's 15-month-old daughter, Biden said, 'There can be no question that Gaddafi has asked for and deserves a strong response like this.' And when George H. W. Bush invaded Panama three years after that, an outrageous war to depose a leader who had been a CIA asset and that saw dead civilians 'buried like dogs,' as one witness put it, Biden called it 'appropriate and necessary.'" ..."
"... Another problem with Biden - one of them at least - that all of the stupid talking heads ignore is that he has been in govt so long and is running on a campaign of fixing alleged problems that have allegedly existed for years. Why didn't he just tell Obama how to fix things? Trump will ask him that if given a chance. If not given a chance, Trump will simply state it in campaign ads and viewers will say, "Hmmm. Yeah really!". ..."
"... Think of NGOs, Civil Societies, non-state actors and of course the silicon valley and social media. the future foreign policy of the U.S. lies right here and Silicon Valley is a big part of it. No Direct military intervention, but mobilization of young naive people in targeted countries through social media and other methods to topple the incumbent government's institutions and the culture without firing a bullet ..."
"... I consider Biden as part of the 1st group that still peddle the joint neoconservative+liberal democratic template of the new world order, NATO, maintaining and spreading liberal int'l institutions, keeping troops in Afgh. and Iraq to do social engineering with the help of EU which is not going anywhere btw. So anything other than their views are not allowed at all as F.P. ..."
"... Strangely the 1st group are rather soft on China and were the faction responsible for making China a godzilla by opening up western markets to China (1990s and early 2000s) with the hope that once it is economically liberal somehow magically it would automatically transform into a liberal democracy of Washington's desire. ..."
"... While the 1st are extremely hawkish on Russia and Iran (anti-authoritarianism) and economical with their condemnation of China, the 2nd camp is quite hawkish on China and Iran and moderately hawkish on Russia (Anti-totaliratianism). ..."
"... As Jim Kunstler wrote today, "Joe Biden is an obvious stalking horse for something more sinister." ..."
Jul 14, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"Biden, notes Marcetic, pushed for "the 1999 bombing of Serbia, which actually dissolved the local pro-democracy movement and rallied popular support around the country's dictator." Biden voted for the U.S. wars against Afghanistan and Iraq. "I voted to go into Iraq, and I'd vote to do it again," Biden said in August 2003. Now he defends himself by saying he was so stupid that he fell for Bush's lies about WMDs.

Biden was the guy who convinced Obama to ramp up Bush's drone assassination program, which kills 50 innocent bystanders for every 1 targeted "militant" -- who often gets away and is rarely a threat to the United States, just to our authoritarian allies. Someday soon, Biden's drone killings abroad will be used to justify killing Americans here at home.

Elsewhere, Marcetic writes: "When Reagan invaded Grenada in 1983, bombing a hospital in the process, Biden said he 'did the right thing.' When he bombed Libya three years later, killing 36 civilians and dictator Muammar Gaddafi's 15-month-old daughter, Biden said, 'There can be no question that Gaddafi has asked for and deserves a strong response like this.' And when George H. W. Bush invaded Panama three years after that, an outrageous war to depose a leader who had been a CIA asset and that saw dead civilians 'buried like dogs,' as one witness put it, Biden called it 'appropriate and necessary.'"

A vote for Biden isn't just a vote against Trump. It's a vote in favor of Biden's vote to kill 1 million Iraqis. If we elect Joe Biden, we will send a message to the world: America hates you; we're glad we killed all those people, and we plan to kill more." Ted Rall

---------------

Rall isn't someone I am likely to cite extensively but in this case I can only agree with much of what he says about these two men in the foreign policy area.

I do not know Trump, have never met him, and wouldn't cross the street to do so. Actually, that takes some effort these days.

Biden is one of the most belligerent and nastily "pushy" people I have known in the Borg (foreign policy establishment). He is a screamer who will get right up in your face to see if you will back away from him. He will stab in the chest with a forefinger for the same purpose. He will insult you or threaten to fight you in an attempt to intimidate. He has a bully's personality, and he is not too bright. Let us not forget his history of plagiarism.

He and Obama seemed to have enjoyed killing "inferiors" around the world and they participated directly in the process of selection of targets for Death by Drone. LBJ, another loathsome critter, picked individual bombing targets in VN, but I don't think he targeted individuals.

As Rall says, if Biden wins you will see a lot more patriotic Americans condemned to participate in Death by Biden. pl

Posted at 01:08 PM in Borg Wars , Policy | Permalink | Comments (11)


Deap , 13 July 2020 at 01:33 PM

our personally observed description of Biden is so far apart from the image the general public sees, and is not intentionally created for him in his campaign videos.

The reassuring, calm, magnanimous friendly uncle, not the crazy lady in the attic. I worry how this carefully scripted Biden imagery will play out in November, since everyone now has vivid impressions of media-filtered Trump in the raw.

Biden will never come out of his bunker - his handlers will not allow this. The medium is the massage. From the Selling of the President to Sequestering the President - our political journey into mass media comes full circle since TV's first Nixon vs Kennedy race in the 1960's.

J , 13 July 2020 at 04:43 PM

Colonel,

Since former VP Cheney is now among the Anti-Trump Lincoln Project, I imagine that Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) is most probably now an associate member in it's backdrop. Liz has been working fervently with Dem. (former Army Ranger with tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan) Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) to keep U.S. bogged down in Afghanistan, and continue the Germany boondoggle. Although the Germany boondoggle had it's perks I have to admit, their beer, wine, food, and fests.

Crow/Cheney Amendment to the NDAA, appears that Crow and Cheney bought into the bogus GRU bounty crap.

One would think that since Rep. Crow ate sand in both sandboxes, he'd want everybody out of there, but I guess since his arse isn't on the firing line anymore he could give a crap about other people's children.

Harry , 13 July 2020 at 05:23 PM

Disconcerting.

I was already had a bad opinion of Mr. Biden. Your testimony has made it worse.

Eric Newhill , 13 July 2020 at 05:58 PM

Sir,

Interesting and useful information. Trump will be wise to use it. Americans are not eager for more senseless war. And there is the whole "racism" facet to the wars and killings that could be played up in this weird over-sensitive climate.

Another problem with Biden - one of them at least - that all of the stupid talking heads ignore is that he has been in govt so long and is running on a campaign of fixing alleged problems that have allegedly existed for years. Why didn't he just tell Obama how to fix things? Trump will ask him that if given a chance. If not given a chance, Trump will simply state it in campaign ads and viewers will say, "Hmmm. Yeah really!".

Polish Janitor , 13 July 2020 at 06:36 PM

Col. Lang,

The way I see the foreign policy establishment is based on how best and most efficient the dual goal of 1. spread of democracy and 2. the building a military forts in the targeted country can be achieved. There are 3 camps which formulate their own ideas of how this goal can be achieved and that they operate basically like cartels (call it foreign policy cartels if you will). Each have their competing templates based on which they conceptualize their doctrines and depending on which administration is in power their doctrines will ultimately find their ways to the W.H.; for the purpose of simplification allow me define these camps by their template doctrines:

  1. Wilson Doctrine (as the main template) with variations derived from it as the following: Truman Doctrine, Kennedy Doctrine, Carter Doctrine (Brzezinski Doctrine is a derivation), Clinton/Albright Doctrine, Bush Doctrine (Both Sr. and Jr.). This is the most powerful and bipartisan camp with regards to f.p.
  2. Reagan Doctrine (Main template) with variations as the following: Kirkpatrick Doctrine (Bolton and Pompeo Doctrine is modern day variation of Kirkpatrick's), Powell Doctrine, Trump Doctrine (if there's any...)
  3. Obama and Power Doctrine (as one main template), try to sell themselves as realist but they are quite interventionist and not conventionally but unconventionally. Think of NGOs, Civil Societies, non-state actors and of course the silicon valley and social media. the future foreign policy of the U.S. lies right here and Silicon Valley is a big part of it. No Direct military intervention, but mobilization of young naive people in targeted countries through social media and other methods to topple the incumbent government's institutions and the culture without firing a bullet. Basically they will do it for the u.s. policy makers, so no need for boots on the ground.

    Think of the Arab Spring wave in the M.E. Jared Cohen, a former State Dep. official is an architect. So is Susan Rice and Sam Power.

    Their model is S.Africa post apartheid. Their people in congress are the progressives and the so-called "Squad" quartet with more coming, think of jamal Malik. Watch them carefully. IMH when the times comes these will also become frenzied and as interventionist as neocons during W's tenure, but very cunningly. During the Floyd riots, america experienced some of this F.P. domestically, and it is very chaotic and anti-institutional in their methods.

Notable mention: Realist Doctrine (Kissinger, Scowcroft, Nixon and Powell Doctrines) is no longer represented in the new F.P. oracle.

Which brings us to Joe Biden: I consider Biden as part of the 1st group that still peddle the joint neoconservative+liberal democratic template of the new world order, NATO, maintaining and spreading liberal int'l institutions, keeping troops in Afgh. and Iraq to do social engineering with the help of EU which is not going anywhere btw. So anything other than their views are not allowed at all as F.P.

Strangely the 1st group are rather soft on China and were the faction responsible for making China a godzilla by opening up western markets to China (1990s and early 2000s) with the hope that once it is economically liberal somehow magically it would automatically transform into a liberal democracy of Washington's desire.

Compared to the 2nd group, the 1st group except for condemning China's human rights record and related issues, are concerned mostly with transforming China politically and do not share the holistic view of the 2nd camp that view China as America's new strategic foe in the long term. While the 1st are extremely hawkish on Russia and Iran (anti-authoritarianism) and economical with their condemnation of China, the 2nd camp is quite hawkish on China and Iran and moderately hawkish on Russia (Anti-totaliratianism).

Interestingly, the 3rd camp are modestly pro-China and again for obvious reasons which do not need further elaboration.

The biggest thing IMO on the horizon for the U.S. policy makers is the China question and more specifically, how will Biden define the China policy? Will his pick for the VP (assuming "SHE" will be mostly belonging to the 3rd camp) define China policy, or the good 'ol liberal democratic+ neocons define it for him as they have been doing so far? or the new formula of the convergence of 1st and 3rd camp for a new foreign policy globally?

P.S.
I remember reading one of your past posts about your memory of a meeting with Biden and how rude and crude Joe Biden's F.P. views were and how one of his aides (whisperers?) would literally dictate his talking points to him...

upstater , 13 July 2020 at 06:43 PM

As Jim Kunstler wrote today, "Joe Biden is an obvious stalking horse for something more sinister."

How about Susan Rice as a IDpol check-the-boxes VP and Samantha Power at State. R2P on steroids. Create several dozen Ukraines, Libyas and Syrias.

Trump has proven himself to be a great disappointment and a weak leader. But an HRC-like bunch threatens nuclear war.

Effinghell , 13 July 2020 at 06:46 PM

300 odd million people and those two are the best you can come up with..truely incredible. That said, as a Brit, I would still back Trump over Biden. How Trump handles the incoming bad news (for him) will be key.

Vegetius , 13 July 2020 at 08:58 PM

Other than cutting off all aid to parasite clients, dronestriking cartel leaders, and possibly invading Canada to depose Trudeau and liberate Alberta, I support a less aggressive approach to our foreign policy.

Deap , 13 July 2020 at 09:03 PM

Biden's America: a black man reports on a BLM protest in Dallas, while he is trying to dine with family and friends - very candid and very worth watching. BLM infected with white Berniecrats - goal is to create chaos and then scream police brutality - all in one easy to follow video with an excellent ongoing commentary: https://www.instagram.com/tv/CChuSeWJxm5/?utm_source=ig_embed

Deap , 13 July 2020 at 09:08 PM

Trump is not a weak leader.

But he is weakened right now after 3.5 years of utter partisan garbage thrown at him. He will get his second wind. He deserves some down time right now before the big push to November. The zone will come.

The Silent Majority is not leaving him. But he does need some down time. True colors will be displayed to anyone who cannot grant him that.

akaPatience , 13 July 2020 at 10:17 PM

I suspect one big reason - and maybe the MAIN reason - for prolonging the irrational COVID-19 fear mongering is:

I'm not surprised to read the colonel's real-life personal impression of Biden. To me, he's let his mask slip enough times over the decades to reveal a bullying, high-handed and narrow-minded nature. Trump's a goy real estate developer based in NYC, a challenging occupation that probably accounts for much of his pugilistic demeanor.

[Jul 13, 2020] Michele Flournoy- Queen of the Blob -

Jul 13, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Home / The State Of The Union / Michele Flournoy: Queen Of The Blob Michele Flournoy: Queen Of The Blob

This is how the elite, Ivy League-educated technocrats profit while the nation's real interests take a back seat. Michele Flournoy in 2015 CNAS/Flickr

JULY 7, 2020

|

8:00 PM

KELLEY BEAUCAR VLAHOS

Jonathan Guyer, managing editor of The American Prospect, has an unbelievably well-reported piece on the making of a Washington national security consultancy, starring two high placed Obama-era officials and one of the Imperial City's more successful denizens -- Michele Flournoy.

Flournoy may not be a household name anywhere but the Beltway, but when she met Sergio Aguirre and Nitin Chadda (Chiefs of staff to UN Ambassador Samantha Power and Secretary of Defense Ash Carter respectively) she was already trading lucratively on her stints in two Democratic administrations. In fact, according to Guyer, by 2017 she was pulling nearly a half a million dollars a year a year wearing a number of hats: senior advisor for Boston Consulting Group (where she helped increase their defense contracts to $32 million by 2016), founder and CEO of the Democratic leaning Center for a New American Security, senior fellow at Harvard's Belfer Center, and a member of various corporate boards.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13045197114175078?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13045197114175078-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&rid=thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com&width=838

Hungry to get their own consulting business going after Hillary Clinton's stunning loss in 2016, according to Guyer, Aguirre and Chadda approached Flournoy for her starpower inside the Blob. Flournoy did not want "to have a firm with her name on it alone," so they sought and added Tony Blinken, former Under Secretary of State and "right hand man" to Joe Biden for 20 years. WestExec Advisors, named after the street alongside the West Wing of the White House, was born. "The name WestExec Advisors trades on its founders' recent knowledge of the highest echelons of decision-making," writes Guyer. "It also suggests they'll be walking down WestExec toward 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue someday soon."

Soon the firm was raking in corporate contracts and the high sums that go with it. They weren't lobbying per se (wink, wink) but their names and connections provided the grease on the skids their clients needed to make things happen in Washington. They shrewdly partnered with a private equity group and a Google affiliate. Before long, Guyer says, they did not need to market: CEO's were telling other CEO's to give them a call. More:

The founders told executives they would share their "passion" for helping new companies navigate the complex bureaucracy of winning Pentagon contracts. They told giant defense contractors how to explain cutting-edge technologies to visitors from Congress. Their approach worked, and clients began to sign up.

One was an airline, another a global transportation company, a third a company that makes drones that can almost instantly scan an entire building's interior. WestExec would only divulge that it began working with "Fortune 100 types," including large U.S. tech; financial services, including global-asset managers; aerospace and defense; emerging U.S. tech; and nonprofits.

The Prospect can confirm that one of those clients is the Israeli artificial-intelligence company Windward.

To say that the Flournoy helped WestExec establish itself as one of the most successful of the Beltway's defense and national security consultancies is an understatement. For sure, Flournoy has often been underestimated -- she is not flamboyant, nor glamorous, and is absolutely unrecognizable outside of the Washington market because she doesn't do media (though she is popular on the think tank conference circuit ). She's a technocrat -- smart and efficient and highly bred for Washington's finely tuned managerial class. She is a courtier for sure, but she is no sop. She has staying power, quietly forging relationships with the right people and not trying too hard to make a name or express ideas that might conflict with doctrine. She no doubt learned much in two stints in the Pentagon, which typically chews up the less capable, greedier, more narcissistic neophytes (not to mention idealists). She's not exactly known as a visionary, however, and one has to wonder which hat she is wearing when she expounds on current defense threats, like this piece about beefing up the Pentagon budget to confront China .

But what does it all mean? Flournoy has been at the forefront of strategy and policy in two administrations marked by overseas interventions (Clinton from 1993 to 2000) and Obama (2009 to 2012). All of her aforementioned qualities have helped her to personally succeed and profit -- especially now, no doubt helping weapons contractors get deals on the Hill, as Guyer susses out in his piece, not to mention how well-placed she would be for an incoming Biden Administration. But has it been in the best interest of the country? I think not. For this, she is queen of the Blob.

me title=

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.394.0_en.html#goog_87831358 00:12 / 00:59 00:00 Next Video × Next Video J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker, Pro-family Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019 Cancel Autoplay is paused

But elite is as elite does. She went from Beverly Hills High School to Harvard to Oxford, and then back to Harvard, before landing a political appointment in the Clinton Administration. In between government perches, she did consulting and started CNAS in hopes of creating a shadow national security council for Hillary Clinton. When Clinton didn't get the nomination, Flournoy and her colleagues supported Obama and helped populate his administration, supporting the military surge in Afghanistan and prolonging the war. She was called the "mastermind" behind Obama's Afghan strategy, which we now know was a failure, an effort at futility and prolonging the inevitable. In fact, we know now that most of the war establishment was lying through its teeth . But that hasn't stopped her from getting clients. They pay for her influence, not her ability to win wars.

Queen of the Blob, Queen of Business as Usual -- a business, as we well know from Guyer's excellent reporting, that pays off bigtime. But it has never paid off for the rest of America. But really, why should she care? She was never really with "us" to begin with.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, executive editor, has been writing for TAC since 2007, focusing on national security, foreign policy, civil liberties and domestic politics. She served for 15 years as a Washington bureau reporter for FoxNews.com, and at WTOP News in Washington from 2013-2017 as a writer, digital editor and social media strategist. She has also worked as a beat reporter at Bridge News financial wire (now part of Reuters) and Homeland Security Today, and as a regular contributor at Antiwar.com. A native Nutmegger, she got her start in Connecticut newspapers, but now resides with her family in Arlington, Va.

email

Tom Sadlowski 6 days ago

I wish that you would cover this equally in both parties; the near entire senior level of the political apparatus (apart from the few individuals truly invested in the best for all Americans) has become corrupted informing the policies, or lack thereof; whether implemented, ignored, or written into law.

Connecticut Farmer Tom Sadlowski 5 days ago

I think that what she wrote actually applies to both parties. One is the same as the other (as Ralph Nader called 'em "The Republicrats").

And neither of 'em give a rat's ass for you, for me,or for the rest of us pilgrims.

State Dept 6 days ago

We really need to get these "Blob" people out of our government. Electing Trump didn't fix the problem, and judging by this article, electing Biden won't either. Half of them people aren't even recognizably American. They're global elites, and they'll continue to use Americans and what's left of America to further their globalist agenda. With someone like Flournoy, selling powerful US technology to known spies and thieves like the Israelis, who take our tech, copy it, and sell it to enemies like China, only scratches the surface of what's going on. She should be in prison after all the damage she's done to America, not looking forward to yet another national security role in which she can get more Americans killed, wreck more foreign countries, and waste and steal more billions of taxpayer money.

Teddy007 6 days ago

Ms. Flournoy is an example of the type of competent high level staffer of which the Trump Administration is devoid. Do you think that Mr. Fluornoy that those who work for her would have had anything overturned at the Supreme Court because they were too lazy to complete the paperwork?

Bostonian Teddy007 4 days ago

"Ms. Flournoy is an example of the type of competent high level staffer of which the Trump Administration is devoid."

I have to agree that Trump's administration is devoid of competent people, but don't forget that it was incompetents like Flournoy that got Trump elected.

Teddy007 Bostonian 4 days ago

If you want to ID the individual most likely for President Trump winning, look up Joel Benenson. He was Hilary Clinton's chief of strategy and was convinced that Trump could not win any of the blue wall states. Ms. Fluornoy had nothing to do with that. Mr. Fluornoy would have been the Secretary of Defense in a Hillary Clinton Administration and probably would have been more competent that the current Secretary of Defense.

Alan Vanneman 6 days ago

You would have done better just to critique her article in Foreign Affairs. As it is, you sound like you're mad at Michele because she makes more money than you do (presumably).

kouroi Alan Vanneman 5 days ago

I think that it is a bit unfair, given the fact that the odds are stack the way they are. Ms. Vlahos has dedicated many years (they are so many she only whispers the number) on issues related with foreign policy. The path she has chosen is the harder path, the ethical, and moral one, which was never going to pay. If Ms. Vlahos is incensed, I bet that it is not because of the money, but because she sees that in Washington DC, only crime and wanton murder pays. She is accusing Ms Flournoy that she is a sellout to the crime syndicate, like a cop that has started herself supporting the drug trafficking.

You should know that people believe in more things than only making money. Ms. Flournoy it seems, has decided that she wants a piece of the cake and to hell with this absurd idea of "arms to plowshares"....

stephen pickard kouroi 5 days ago

Ms. Valhos can speak for herself. No one should project onto others their values. But it does seem that Valhos does make a point that Flournoy does not have any guiding philosophy . Except to be in a position to make a fine living from her contacts.

Could be that Flournoy is more greedy than not. She sure has the resume that would get her into any job which she wanted to interview for. And she paid her dues also.

When one looks at Valhos's resume it likewise is impressive. She too it seems to be proud of her connection to the elites. We should not condem either. We all want our children to excell. Unless Flournoy is an unindicted co conspirator, this article is just a piece of fluff. Too much time on Valhos's hands perhaps?

While I don't have anything else to do, I had hoped to read some good dirt. Alas all I got was one high achieving person carping bout another person of similar achievement. Bless them both.

kouroi stephen pickard 5 days ago

The dirt presented is facilitating arms contracts. By peddling the need of strong military and war. Being a merchant of death, which Ms. Vlahos doesn't seem to be, disqualifies Ms. Flournoy entirely. of anything.

johnhenry stephen pickard 5 days ago • edited

You write like a person in-the-know, but very poorly for all that.

stephen pickard johnhenry 4 days ago

Not sure what you mean " poorly for it". I tend not to get wrapped around the axle . But like it when someone comments on me personally. Lost perspective in old age. Would like to know more what you mean. Unless you just want to be mean

hooly 5 days ago • edited

But really, why should she care? She was never really with "us" to begin with.

That's a bit harsh don't you think? I remember that time on September 11, 2001, I was in the New York area when it happened, I even had a close acquaintance who died in the Twin Towers. I remember when America was united in its blood lust, it its ravenous quest for revenge, ... revenge on anything and anyone. When America's vengeful eye was set on the Taliban government of Afghanistan, it was off to the races. Left and Right, liberal and conservative, Democrat and Republican, ... all were united in avenging 9/11 on the evil Taliban and Afghan tribal peoples for harboring OBL. And I'm sure both you Miss Vlahos and Miss Flournoy were united as well in wanting someone to pay ... am I right? So don't give me this BS about 'us' and 'them' okay? America is a democracy, the American people get the government they vote for, they get the President, Senators and Members of Congress they vote for, that means they also get the flunkies, hangers on and entourages of think tankers and careerists they vote for. Understand? You get what you deserve, you don't get to whine and complain when you're leaders are incompetent and corrupt okay? So don't give me this 'us and them' nonsense and absolve yourself of the blood lust you once had all those years ago on September 11, 2001.

=marco01= hooly 5 days ago

No, liberals were not for taking it out on the Afghan tribal peoples. We were for getting those responsible, and sorry no, we didn't include the Afghan tribal people in on that too, despite any sympathies some of them may have had for AQ.

We had no 'blood lust' and we don't believe in collective punishment.

Bureaucrat =marco01= 7 hours ago

Did you just say liberals "don't believe in collective punishment"? I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not lock-step in support of the #BLM and Critical Race Theory...

But your other point about liberals being anti-war is also flawed. Just connect the foreign intervention (not just wars, but also funding to foreign opposition groups) with some humanitarian urgency (think of those Afghan women!) and liberals have always advocated for the same foreign policies than neoconservatives.

johnhenry hooly 5 days ago • edited

"...I'm sure both you Miss Vlahos and Miss Flournoy..."

It's been decades since I've seen the word "Miss" used in print - except when I write to my granddaughter. In my profession, I write to women all the time, and although it used to be that unmarried ones were quite accepting of - and indeed expecting to receive - missives from me addressing them as such, I would be embarrassed to use that appellation when addressing adult women today in a professional or unacquainted capacity. Now, I only use it for women who wish it - old women, unmarried Catholic women and irascible old-school lesbians.

Your Time Machine needs a lube job.

Ron Johnson 5 days ago

Ah, yes. Highly educated, multiple degrees, cultivated....and extremely dangerous. All of that wonderful education dedicated to wanton killing and influence peddling. These people, the hidden professionals of pull, are the most difficult to fight because unlike a politician or a bureaucrat they are nearly invisible. She can only be effective if she is not seen. To her, public exposure is toxic. So expose away! Make her name known to everyone.

[Jul 09, 2020] I've been reading The Hidden Injuries of Class which leads me to believe that the prospects for Trump are better than many of you think they are

Jul 09, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

Anarcissie 07.08.20 at 5:11 am (
89
)

I've been reading The Hidden Injuries of Class which leads me to believe that the prospects for Trump are better than many of you think they are. However, the future of a further Trump administration seems direly unpredictable, whereas Biden-Rice (my guess) will try to bring back the good old days -- didn't B. say 'nothing will change'? In the spirit of looking for my keys under the streetlight where I can see, rather than in the dark where I probably dropped them, I've been trying to think about the trajectory of this very conservative team in the midst of what I think will turn out to be a fairly catastrophic, fairly rapid set of changes. Some things that seem to be evading a lot of people's calculus here are Biden-Rice's continued devotion to warmongering and imperialism, which I think might actually have consequences even if it's intended only as political claptrap; I expect as well the continued production of funny money to inflate asset prices -- these impinge on the poor through rents. When the poor are evicted, where will they go? Into the streets. There are some unanswered questions here for students of Biden and Company.

[Jul 09, 2020] That's what you're voting for.

Jul 09, 2020 | www.unz.com

james charles , says: July 9, 2020 at 10:33 am GMT

"Let's take Biden. What does it mean to vote for Joe Biden? He has this kind of goofy persona which some people find charming. What is Biden's record? What is a person voting for if they back Biden on Election Day 2020?

The humiliation of courageous women like Anita Hill who confronted her abuser. You vote for the architects of endless war. You vote for the apartheid state in Israel. Biden supports those things. With Biden you are voting for wholesale surveillance by the government, including the abolition of due process and habeas corpus. You vote for austerity programs. You vote for the destruction of welfare. That was Biden. You vote for cuts to Social Security, which he has repeatedly called for cutting, along with Medicaid. You vote for NAFTA, you vote for "free trade" deals. If you vote for Biden, you are voting for a real decline in wages and the loss of hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs.

With Biden you are also voting for the assault on public education and the transfer of federal funds to Christian "charter schools." With Biden you are voting for more than a doubling of the prison population. With Biden you are voting for the militarized police and against the Green New Deal.

You are also voting to limit a woman's right to abortion and reproductive rights. You are voting for a segregated public school system. With Biden you are voting for punitive levels of student debt and the inability of people to free themselves of that debt through bankruptcy. A vote for Biden is a vote for deregulating banking and finance. Biden also supports for-profit insurance and pharmaceutical corporations.

A vote for Biden is also a vote against the possibility of universal health care. You vote for Biden and you are supporting huge, wasteful and bloated defense budgets. Biden also supports unlimited oligarchic and corporate money to buy the elections.

That's what you're voting for.

A vote for Joe Biden is a vote for more of the same. The ruling elites would prefer Joe Biden, just like they preferred Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump is vulgar and an embarrassment. But the ruling elites also made it abundantly clear about their interests: Many of these people were quoted by name saying that if Bernie Sanders was the nominee -- or even Elizabeth Warren -- they would vote for Donald Trump."

https://www.salon.com/2020/04/28/pulitzer-winner-chris-hedges-these-are-the-good-times–compared-to-whats-coming-next/

[Jul 09, 2020] Neoliberal Dems support of black population is just a tactical trick: they despise rioters as pawns in the bigger game and are afraid of extremists in BLM

Highly recommended!
People vote their resentments as much as their wallets. Dems are fighting to create voting block that will lead them to the victory. In the past (and in some countries who updated the applicable definitions, still), the most relevant additional class was the petty bourgeoisie; in the modern US, however, the concept of the professional-managerial class is the most useful frame of reference as for the base of neoliberal Democrats.
People who think the Democratic Party is responsive to the concerns or interests of the poor and working classes are delusional, full stop. The Democrats are neoliberal sellouts to the financial oligarchy.
Notable quotes:
"... The Democrats are resolved to set the agenda by deciding what issues "will and will not" be covered over the course of the campaign. And -- since race is an issue on which they feel they can energize their base by propping-up outdated stereotypes of conservatives as ignorant bigots incapable of rational thought -- the Dems are using their media clout to make race the main topic of debate. ..."
"... Let's be clear, the Democrats do not support Black Lives Matter nor have they made any attempt to insert their demands into their list of police reforms. BLM merely fits into the Dems overall campaign strategy which is to use race to deflect attention from the gross imbalance of wealth that is the unavoidable consequence of the Dems neoliberal policies including outsourcing, off-shoring, de-industrialization, free trade and trickle down economics. These policies were aggressively promoted by both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as they will be by Joe Biden if he is elected. They are the policies that have gutted the country, shrunk the middle class, and transformed the American dream into a dystopian nightmare. ..."
"... They are also the policies that have given rise to, what the pundits call, "right wing populism" which refers to the growing number of marginalized working people who despise Washington and career politicians, feel anxious about falling wages and dramatic demographic changes, and resent the prevailing liberal culture that scorns their religion and patriotism. ..."
"... This is Trump's mainly-white base, the working people the Democrats threw under the bus 30 years ago and now want to annihilate completely by deepening political polarization, fueling social unrest, pitting one group against another, and viciously vilifying them in the media as ignorant racists whose traditions, culture, customs and even history must be obliterated to make room for the new diversity world order. ..."
"... "Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values and indoctrinate our children. Angry mobs are trying to tear down statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials and unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities." ..."
Jul 08, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

likbez 07.07.20 at 12:15 am

People vote with their wallets.

The answer is "not always" due to existence of "What's the matter with Kansas" effect.

People can and do vote against their economic interests, although this is more common for lower strata of population than for the elite.

This is the essence of the current play by the Neoliberal Democrats. Mike Whitney pointed out that their support of black population is just a tactical trick:

The protests are largely a diversion aimed at shifting the public's attention to a racialized narrative that obfuscates the widening inequality chasm (created by the Democrats biggest donors, the Giant Corporations and Wall Street) to historic antagonisms that have clearly diminished over time. (Racism ain't what it used to be.)

The Democrats are resolved to set the agenda by deciding what issues "will and will not" be covered over the course of the campaign. And -- since race is an issue on which they feel they can energize their base by propping-up outdated stereotypes of conservatives as ignorant bigots incapable of rational thought -- the Dems are using their media clout to make race the main topic of debate.

In short, the Democrats have settled on a strategy for quashing the emerging populist revolt that swept Trump into the White House in 2016 and derailed Hillary's ambitious grab for presidential power.

The plan, however, does have its shortcomings

Let's be clear, the Democrats do not support Black Lives Matter nor have they made any attempt to insert their demands into their list of police reforms. BLM merely fits into the Dems overall campaign strategy which is to use race to deflect attention from the gross imbalance of wealth that is the unavoidable consequence of the Dems neoliberal policies including outsourcing, off-shoring, de-industrialization, free trade and trickle down economics. These policies were aggressively promoted by both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as they will be by Joe Biden if he is elected. They are the policies that have gutted the country, shrunk the middle class, and transformed the American dream into a dystopian nightmare.

They are also the policies that have given rise to, what the pundits call, "right wing populism" which refers to the growing number of marginalized working people who despise Washington and career politicians, feel anxious about falling wages and dramatic demographic changes, and resent the prevailing liberal culture that scorns their religion and patriotism.

This is Trump's mainly-white base, the working people the Democrats threw under the bus 30 years ago and now want to annihilate completely by deepening political polarization, fueling social unrest, pitting one group against another, and viciously vilifying them in the media as ignorant racists whose traditions, culture, customs and even history must be obliterated to make room for the new diversity world order. Trump touched on this theme in a speech he delivered in Tulsa. He said:

"Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values and indoctrinate our children. Angry mobs are trying to tear down statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials and unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities."

He than went off the rail, but still the part of his analysis reproduced above looks pretty prescient.

[Jul 09, 2020] Does the next Presidential election even matter by The Saker

Notable quotes:
"... Whoever gets elected will certainly affect details of how the ship sinks ..."
"... I have come to hate the Maoist/Jacobin scum today referred to as "The Left". I want Trump to get a second term because it will cause my enemies to suffer. ..."
"... The real question in dire need of asking is: Do the Next 10 Presidential Elections Even Matter? And the answer remains: not a dime's worth of difference. "We the People" will continue to witness the same electoral circus complete with its fake debates as our elite's addiction to war will be craving its habitual fix. "We the People" are too stupefied and mired in our own addictions to cell phones and other mind numbing gadgets while being fed a steady diet of lies by the MSM. Our awakening is too remote for us to take back our country. ..."
"... Once again, talk is cheap. Why would the "deep state" "hate" him so much? Did he investigate 9/11? Did he end any wars, or pull out of NATO, or improve relations with Russia and/or China, or cut aid to Israel, etc.? No. ..."
"... I think there are some key differences here on what could take shape. If Biden wins, the Republicans can put down the Trump saga as a regrettable mistake and go back to being the boring old Jen Bush party moaning about lowering taxes for the rich and abortion. ..."
"... However if Trump wins, the Republicans will have to acknowledge that people support Trumpism and will have to start re orientating the party towards Trumpian Populism in future elections as they will realize that it is a permanent vote winner. ..."
"... One of guys on The Duran said that the politicians on the Left and Right don't care about Black Lives Matter, the statues, history, gender wars, gay this/LGXYZ that, the culture wars. That doesn't really concern them; they'll just let the sheeple fight it out. ..."
"... What they DO care about is their corporate masters, the people they are really beholden to. As long as their masters continue to make money and the culture wars don't disturb that, then all is well. ..."
Jul 09, 2020 | www.unz.com

JULY 2, 2020

The fact is that for the past four years the US liberals have waged a total informational war against Trump and it would be absolutely unthinkable for them to ever accept a Trump re-election, even if he wins by a landslide. For the US Dems and neo-liberals, Trump is the personification of evil, literally, and that means that "resistance" to him and everything he represents must be total. And if he is re-elected, then there is only one possible explanation: the Russians stole the election, or the Chinese did. But the notion that Trump has the support of a majority of people is literally unthinkable for these folks.

Truth be told, Trump has proven to be a fantastically incompetent President, no doubt about that. Was he even worse than Obama? Maybe, it really all depends on your scoring system. In my personal opinion, and for all his very real sins and failings, Trump, at least, did not start a major war, which Obama did, and which Hillary would have done (can't prove this, but that is my personal belief). That by itself, and totally irrespective of anything else, makes me believe that Trump has been a "lesser evil" (even if far more ridiculous) President than Obama has been or Hillary would have been. This is what I believed four years ago and this is what I still believe: considering how dangerous for the entire planet "President Hillary" would have been, voting for Trump was not only the only logical thing to do, it was the only moral one too because giving your voice to a warmongering narcissistic hyena like Hillary is a profoundly immoral act (yes, I know, Trump is also a narcissist – most politicians are! – but at least his warmongering has been all hot air and empty threats, at least so far). However, I don't think that this (not having started a major war) will be enough to get Trump re-elected.

Why?

Because most Americans still like wars. In fact, they absolutely love them. Unless, of course, they lose. What Americans really want is a President who can win wars, not a President who does not initiate them in the first place. This is also the most likely reason why Trump did not start any major wars: the US has not won a real war in decades and, instead, it got whipped in every conflict it started. Americans hate losing wars, and that is why Trump did not launch any wars: it would have been political suicide to start a real war against, say, the DPRK or Iran. So while I am grateful that Trump did not start any wars, I am not naive to the point of believing that he did so for pure and noble motives. Give Trump an easy victory and he will do exactly what all US Presidents have done in the past: attack, beat up the little guy, and then be considered like a "wartime President hero" by most Americans. The problem is that there are no more "little guys" left out there: only countries who can, and will, defend themselves if attacked.

The ideology of messianic imperialism which permeates the US political culture is still extremely powerful and deep seated and it will take years, probably decades, to truly flush it down to where it belongs: to the proverbial trash-heaps of history. Besides, in 2020 Americans have much bigger concerns than war vs. peace – at least that is what most of them believe. Between the Covid19 pandemic and the catastrophic collapse of the economy (of course, while the former certainly has contributed to the latter, it did not single-handedly cause it) and now the BLM insurgency, most Americans now feel personally threatened – something which no wars of the past ever did (a war against Russia very much would, but most Americans don't realize that, since nobody explains this to them; they also tend to believe that nonsense about the US military being the best and most capable in history).

Following four years of uninterrupted flagwaving and MAGA-chanting there is, of course, a hardcore of true believers who believe that Trump is nothing short of brilliant and that he will "kick ass" everything and everybody: from the spying Russians, to the rioting Blacks, from the pandemic, to the lying media, etc. The fact that in reality Trump pitifully failed to get anything truly important done is completely lost on these folks who live in a reality they created for themselves and in which any and all facts contradicting their certitudes are simply explained away by silly stuff like "Q-anon" or "5d chess". Others, of course, will realize that Trump "deflated" before those whom he called "the swamp" almost as soon as he got into the White House.

As for the almighty Israel Lobby, it seems to me that it squeezed all it could from Trump who, from the point of view of the Zionists, was always a "disposable President" anyway. And now that Trump has done everything Israel wanted him to do, he becomes almost useless. If anything, Pelosi, Schumer and the rest of them will try to outdo Trump's love for everything Israeli anyway.

So how much support is there behind Trump today? I really don't know (don't trust the polls, which have always been deeply wrong about Trump anyway), but I think that there is definitely a constituency of truly frightened Americans who are freaking out (as they should, considering the rapid collapse of the country) and who might vote Trump just because they will feel that for all his faults, he is the only one who can save the country. Conversely, they will see Biden as a pro-BLM geriatric puppet who will hand the keys of the White House to a toxic coalition of minorities.

So what if Trump does get re-elected?

In truth, the situation is so complex and there are so many variables (including many "unknown unknowns"!) that make predictions impossible. Still, we can try to make some educated guesses, especially if based on some kind of logic such as the one which says that "past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior". In other words, if Trump gets elected, we will get more of the same. Personally, I would characterize this "same" as a further destruction of the US from within by the Democrats and their "coalition of minorities" combined with a further destruction of the US Empire abroad by delusional Republicans.

I very much doubt that it makes any sense at all to vote for that, really. Better stay at home and do something worthwhile with your time, no?

Now what about a Biden election?

Remember that Biden is now the de-facto leader of what I would loosely call the "anti-US coalition", that is the "coalition of minorities" which really have nothing in common except their hatred of the established order (well, and, of course, their hatred of Trump and of those who voted for him).

These minorities are very good at hating and destroying, but don't count on them to ever come up with constructive solutions – it ain't gonna happen. For one thing, they are probably too stupid to come up with any constructive ideas, but even more important is the fact that these folks all have a hyper-narrow agenda and, simply put, they don't care about "constructing" anything. These folks are all about hatred and the instant gratification of their narrow, one-topic, agenda.

This also begs the question of why the Dems decided to go with Biden in spite of the fact that he is clearly an extremely weak candidate. In spite? I am not so sure at all. I think that they chose him because he is so weak: the real power behind him will be in the hands of the Schumer-Pelosi-Obama gang and of the interests these folks represent.

Unlike Trump who prostituted himself only after making it to the White House, the neo-liberal Dems have *already* prostituted themselves to everybody who wanted to give them something in return, from the Ukie Nazis to the thugs of BLM, to the powerful US homo-lobby. Don't expect them to show any spine, or even less so, love for the USA, if they get the White House. They hate this country and most of its people and they are not shy about it.

What would happen to the US if the likes of Bloomberg or Harris took control? First, there would be the comprehensive surrender to the various minorities which put these folks in power followed by a very strong blowback from all the "deplorables" ranging from protests and civil disobedience, to local authorities refusing to take orders from the feds. Like it or not, but most Americans still love their country and loathe the kind of pseudo-liberal ideology which has been imposed upon them by the joint actions of the US deep state and the corporate world. There is even a strong probability that if Biden gets elected the USA's disintegration would only accelerate.

On the international front, a Biden Presidency would not solve any of the problems created by Obama and Trump: by now it is way too late and the damage done to the international reputation of the United States is irreparable. If anything, the Dems will only make it worse by engaging in even more threats, sanctions and wars. Specifically, the Demolicans hate Russia, China and Iran probably even more than the Republicrats. Besides, these countries have already concluded a long time ago that the US was "not agreement capable" anyway (just look at the long list of international treaties and organization from which the US under Trump has withdrawn: what is the point of negotiating anything with a power which systematically reneges on its promises and obligations?)

The truth is that if Biden gets elected, the US will continue to fall apart internally and externally, if anything, probably even faster than under a re-elected Trump.

Which brings me to my main conclusion:

Why do we even bother having elections?

First, I don't think that the main role of a democracy is to protect minorities from majorities. A true democracy protects the majority against the many minorities which typically have a one-issue agenda and which are typically hostile to the values of the majority . Oh sure, minority rights should be protected, the question is how exactly?

For one thing, most states have some kind of constitution/basic law which sets a number of standards which cannot be violated as long as this constitution/basic law is in force. Furthermore, in most states which call themselves democratic all citizens have the same rights and obligations, and a minority status does not give anybody any special rights or privileges. Typically, there are also fundamental international standards for human rights and fundamental national standards for civil rights. Minority rights (individual or collective), however, are not typically considered a separate category which somehow trumps or supplements adopted norms for human and civil rights (if only because it creates a special "minority" category, whereas in true "people power" all citizens are considered as one entity).

It is quite obvious that neither the Republicrats nor the Demolicans represent the interests of "we the people" and that both factions of the US plutocracy are under the total control of behind-the-scenes real powers. What happened four years ago was a colossal miscalculation of these behind-the-scenes real powers who failed to realize how hated they were and how even a guy like Trump would seem preferable to a nightmare like Hillary (as we know, had the Dems chosen Sanders or even some other halfway lame candidate, Trump would probably not have prevailed).

This is why I submit that the next election will make absolutely no difference:

The US system is rigged to give all the power to minorities and to completely ignore the will of the people The choice between the Demolicans and the Republicrats is not a choice at all The systemic crisis of the US is too deep to be affected by who is in power in the White House

Simply put, and unlike the case of 2016, the outcome of the 2020 election will make no difference at all. Caring about who the next puppet in the White House will be is tantamount to voting for a new captain while the Titanic is sinking . The major difference is that the Titanic sank in very deep water whereas the "ship USA" will sink in the shallows, meaning that the US will not completely disappear: in some form or another, it will survive either as a unitary state or as a number of successor states. The Empire, however, has no chance of survival at all. Thus, anything which contributes to make the US a "normal" country and which weakens the Empire is in the interests of the people of the USA. Voting for either one of the candidates this fall will only prolong the agony of the current political regime in the USA.


Diversity Heretic , says: July 2, 2020 at 9:39 pm GMT

The truth is that if Biden gets elected, the US will continue to fall apart internally and externally, if anything, probably even faster than under a re-elected Trump.

This observation suggests that one should vote for Biden if one votes at all. Perhaps if one is going to the election because there's a particularly crucial vote for county board of supervisors candidates (very important, by the way) and you happen to be at the polls anyway, the fastest way to further the process of saying good riddance to the American empire is to vote for Joe Biden.

AaronInMVD , says: Website July 2, 2020 at 9:46 pm GMT

Whoever gets elected will certainly affect details of how the ship sinks. Two consecutive elections with Gerontocrats. Neither of the two nominally different parties has a very deep roster evidenced by the poverty of options they have been putting forward.

Given his decline, I don't expect Biden to have a long presidency if he survives to officially get the nomination.

nickels , says: July 2, 2020 at 11:30 pm GMT

Unless ur a 100% reprehensible crack head, go vote for Dumbo J Trump. He is awful, he is beaten, he is an Israel sellout. But the other side will kill you.

Swede55 , says: July 3, 2020 at 2:09 am GMT

If Biden wins, the emboldened mob will come to your home to kill you. If you call the police, they won't come and they won't investigate your rape/torture/death. If you defend yourself, you will be arrested and prosecuted. The media will deny it is happening and also say that you deserved it.

WorkingClass , says: July 3, 2020 at 3:33 am GMT

I have come to hate the Maoist/Jacobin scum today referred to as "The Left". I want Trump to get a second term because it will cause my enemies to suffer.

In rural Counties (Red America) an elected Sheriff is the chief local law officer. Watch for coalitions of Counties, within or across State lines, demanding secession or limited autonomy. The only way forward for sane Americans is to remove themselves from Woke jurisdictions. The election won't change that. But I will vote for Orange Man anyway. Just for spite!

Justsaying , says: July 3, 2020 at 4:46 am GMT

Does the Next Presidential Election Even Matter?

The real question in dire need of asking is: Do the Next 10 Presidential Elections Even Matter? And the answer remains: not a dime's worth of difference. "We the People" will continue to witness the same electoral circus complete with its fake debates as our elite's addiction to war will be craving its habitual fix. "We the People" are too stupefied and mired in our own addictions to cell phones and other mind numbing gadgets while being fed a steady diet of lies by the MSM. Our awakening is too remote for us to take back our country.

Harold Smith , says: July 3, 2020 at 5:27 am GMT

"Just by asking the question of whether the next Presidential election matters, I am obviously suggesting that it might not. To explain my reasons for this opinion, I need to reset the upcoming election in the context of the previous one. So let's begin here."

Would the U.S. Navy have launched a cruise missile attack against the Shayrat airbase in Syria if Trump didn't order it? Would Gen. Solemani have been assassinated if Trump didn't order it? Of course the next presidential election "matters" if we have one, that is.

Now that the constitution and the rule of law are defunct and all power has been de facto consolidated into the office of president, whether we have WW3 or not (for example) depends almost exclusively on the character of the person in the White House.

"The first thing which, I believe, ought to be self-evident to all by now is that there was no secret operation by any deep state, not even a Zionist controlled one, to put Donald Trump in power."

Seriously? So why did Comey undermine Clinton's campaign and why didn't Obama fire him for it? And why did Obama attack the Syrian Army at Deir Ezzor in Sept. 2016, an act that greatly escalated tensions with Russia and apparently scared some Sanders supporters into Trump's camp, giving Trump a narrow margin of victory in three key states which put him in the White House? Because shit happens?

"I would even argue that the election of Donald Trump was the biggest slap in the face of US deep state and of the covert transnational ruling elites this deep state serves. Ever."

I would argue that you've been fooled. If that were actually the case, they would've impeached and removed him, right? Or they would've deployed a lone nut against him. Or he would've at least encountered some kind of meaningful political or legal opposition.

"My evidence? Simple, look what these ruling 'elites' did both before and after Trump's election: before, they ridiculed the very idea of 'President Trump' as both utterly impossible and utterly evil."

Talk is cheap. How come they didn't seem to have a problem with his war crimes in Syria; or his moving the embassy to Jerusalem; or his attempts to start a war with Iran; or his trade war with China; or his attempt to starve Venezuela into submission; or his arming of Ukraine; or his withdrawal from the INF treaty; etc,?

"As somebody who has had years of experience reading the Soviet press or, in another style, the French press, I can honestly say that I have never seen a more ridiculously outlandish hate campaign against anybody that would come even close to the kind of total hate campaign which Trump was subjected to."

Once again, talk is cheap. Why would the "deep state" "hate" him so much? Did he investigate 9/11? Did he end any wars, or pull out of NATO, or improve relations with Russia and/or China, or cut aid to Israel, etc.? No.

But let's say for the sake of argument that "they" really do "hate" him for some reason. So what? That doesn't mean that they don't want him as president, right? If they really do hate him then he may be just the person they need.

Kronos , says: July 3, 2020 at 5:49 am GMT
@Diversity Heretic ruits of financial empire. The Boomers are still the biggest demographic in the US. Starting in the 1980s onward, they established portfolio systems that extracted wealth via the US's world reserve currency status.

This marks the unholy covenant made by Wall Street and middle class Boomers. The Boomers are dying off, and taking the US Empire with it into the afterlife. The younger generation won't receive a nickel, and that's likely a good thing in the long term. But Trump and Sanders still can't make aggressive economic reform while America is still dominated by "The United States of Boomer." They can only pave the road for reform and future leaders to lead the charge.

anon [335] Disclaimer , says: July 3, 2020 at 6:43 am GMT
@WorkingClass

I have come to hate the Maoist/Jacobin scum today referred to as "The Left". I want Trump to get a second term because it will cause my enemies to suffer.

I agree. MORALE COUNTS. Data geeks don't understand this. Political watchers don't understand this. People who analyze the number of tanks and guns don't understand this. Morale wins wars. We need to defy the Left any way we can. A Trump win will be spit in their eyes. It will put some fighting spirit into our side.

chris , says: July 3, 2020 at 6:46 am GMT

These minorities are very good at hating and destroying, but don't count on them to ever come up with constructive solutions – it ain't gonna happen. For one thing, they are probably too stupid to come up with any constructive ideas, These folks are all about hatred and the instant gratification of their narrow, one-topic, agenda.

I don't know about that, I think Alastair Crooke, may be closer to the mark with his conclusion.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/06/29/god-that-failed-why-us-cannot-now-re-impose-its-civilisational-worldview/

The "toy radicals, and Champagne Bolsheviks" – in these terms of dripping disdain from Williamson – are very similar to those who rushed into the streets in 1917. But before dismissing them so peremptorily and lightly, recall what occurred.

Into that combustible mass of youth – so acultured by their progressive parents to see a Russian past that was imperfect and darkly stained – a Trotsky and Lenin were inserted. And Stalin ensued. No 'toy radicals'. Soft became hard totalitarianism.

Hartnell , says: July 3, 2020 at 8:22 am GMT

I think there are some key differences here on what could take shape. If Biden wins, the Republicans can put down the Trump saga as a regrettable mistake and go back to being the boring old Jen Bush party moaning about lowering taxes for the rich and abortion.

However if Trump wins, the Republicans will have to acknowledge that people support Trumpism and will have to start re orientating the party towards Trumpian Populism in future elections as they will realize that it is a permanent vote winner. Basically how they started to change themselves into becoming an evangelical Conservative party due to Reagan where as before, it was the Democrats who were the Conservatives.

Even if they do this though, the Republicans are still going to remain the good old American majority white party so out right winning future elections after Trump is going to be very difficult. I think this all potentially bodes for a potential secession crisis in the future.

However even if Trump wins, the Democrats may start to take notice and try to compete with the Republicans and start to moderate their policies, shifting away from Identity politics and embracing the populist waves and trying to alternate with a more centrist position. But considering all the crazy lefties in power within the party structure, this would be an incredibly difficult task, almost Herculean to achieve.

So we could still be looking at a potential secession down the road.

But we all have to admit one thing – Donald Trump, love him or loathe him, has changed ultimately the political face of politics for the better. Even though he actually has done very little, just the fact he got elected with his views really does go to show the people have had enough and want changes.

bmx557 , says: July 3, 2020 at 8:41 am GMT

Debating electoral politics at this point is for autists and morons. The globalists have won. They will be educating your children while you work your shit job getting felt up by Africans on the way to your meaningless conference in Tempe.

This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends

Not with a bang but a whimper

Alden , says: July 3, 2020 at 8:46 am GMT
@WorkingClass

Me too. I too will vote for Trump just out of spite. Saker is so ignorant about America and Americans. That's why I usually don't read the Saker articles. The average homeless black guy is more informed about America than Saker.

Anonymous [341] Disclaimer , says: July 3, 2020 at 10:40 am GMT

the neo-liberal Dems have *already* prostituted themselves to everybody who wanted to give them something in return, from the Ukie Nazis to the thugs of BLM, to the powerful US homo-lobby. Don't expect them to show any spine, or even less so, love for the USA, if they get the White House. They hate this country and most of its people and they are not shy about it.

The Ukie "Nazis", BLM and homo-lobby are just tools. You make it sound like they're in charge. Please stop posting garbage like that.

Thomasina , says: July 3, 2020 at 11:02 am GMT

Saker – you started out by saying that it was a complete shock to the ruling elite when Trump won. I agree. You then described how the Left (and most on the Right) have made Trump's presidency a living hell. I agree.

But then you said: "Truth be told, Trump has proven to be a fantastically incompetent President, no doubt about that. Was he even worse than Obama? Maybe, it really all depends on your scoring system."

Obama was treated with kid gloves because he's an insider, a player. That's the only reason he ended up in the White House; the elite sanctioned him and put him there.

But Trump is not an insider and he wasn't elite-approved. OF COURSE HE COULDN'T GET MUCH DONE! They didn't let him. They have fought him every step of the way. After seeing what Trump has had to contend with, no outsider is ever going to attempt it again.

If Obama had gone through what Trump has gone through, his skinny little legs would have folded before his first month was up.

No comparison. One's a player; the other isn't.

Thomasina , says: July 3, 2020 at 11:19 am GMT

One of guys on The Duran said that the politicians on the Left and Right don't care about Black Lives Matter, the statues, history, gender wars, gay this/LGXYZ that, the culture wars. That doesn't really concern them; they'll just let the sheeple fight it out.

What they DO care about is their corporate masters, the people they are really beholden to. As long as their masters continue to make money and the culture wars don't disturb that, then all is well.

They just stole $6 trillion and handed it to Wall Street, hedge funds, private equity. Covid, the lock downs and the culture wars are a great smoke screen to hide the looting going on.

Turn around and look at the real war.

Thomasina , says: July 3, 2020 at 12:04 pm GMT
@Robert Dolan

"With Republicans siding with BLM, and wanting to replace Columbus Day with Juneteenth
with friends like that who needs enemies?"

They do what their corporate donors tell them to do, just like the Dems. All that matters on both sides of the aisle are the corporate campaign donors. Nothing else. Nike, for instance, wants Blacks to continue buying their shoes. If they have to get down on one knee, so be it. The politicians follow suit.

follyofwar , says: July 3, 2020 at 12:31 pm GMT
@anon n't be a Koch-brothers Speaker Ryan around to undermine Trump's agenda. And, the GOP needs to dump Turtle Man as their Senate leader, and promote someone who could actually do the job, like the other Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. If those things happen, real progress could finally be made in saving what's left of the country.

At one point there wasn't a "dime's worth of difference" between the two parties, but, as the D's have gone further and further White Man-hating crazy Left, that is no longer true today. The election of Biden will guarantee a radical left-wing minority female sitting in the White House (how much longer will that name last?) within six months.

Harold Smith , says: July 3, 2020 at 1:18 pm GMT
@ploni almoni Trump is a mentally and morally defective total moron who's completely unfit for the office he holds. Knowing this, the "deep state" put him there for one reason and one reason only: because they felt he could be manipulated into taking risks above and beyond those which their dime-a-dozen political opportunists would take – in the pursuit of their stalled imperial agenda.

As I see it, the following linked statement by the "World Mental Health Coalition" (particularly paragraphs two and five) fully explains the Trump "presidency."

https://worldmhc.org/urgent-communication-to-congress/

Patagonia Man , says: July 3, 2020 at 1:37 pm GMT
@mark tapley roximation of where I'm going with all this).

And as has been attributed to Sinclair Lewis, HL Mencken and several others:

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying the cross."

3. And that's when the first large economically-sustainable states e.g., California or Texas or New York or Pennsylvania or Georgia will seek to break out of the Union – and take their smaller neighboring states with them in blocs.

4. And in a futile attempt to prevent a dissolution of the Union from happening, Federal troops will be brought in – and that's when the first shots of the next civil war will be fired.

Agent76 , says: July 3, 2020 at 2:02 pm GMT

Twain nailed at the turn of the century, "If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it." Mark Twain

Who's Afraid of an Open Debate? The Truth About the Commission on Presidential Debates

The Commission on Presidential Debates is a private corporation headed by the former chairmen of the Republican and Democratic parties. The CPD is a duopoly which allows the major party candidates to draft secret agreements.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/1NXhoP5bQ2M?feature=oembed

The 2012 Debates – Memorandum of Understanding Between the Obama and Romney Campaigns

https://publicintelligence.net/obama-romney-debate-mou/

Thim , says: July 3, 2020 at 2:08 pm GMT

The Pentagram considered Hillary intolerable. The Generals stared down the CIA and FBI on election night.

Harold Smith , says: July 3, 2020 at 2:14 pm GMT

"The fact is that for the past four years the US liberals have waged a total informational war against Trump "

No, not a "total informational war against Trump" but a conspicuously partial informational war against Trump.

They have no problem with his various war crimes and endless provocations against Russia, China, Iran and Venezuela. They have no problem with his withdrawing from the INF treaty and starting an arms race that puts the whole world in great danger. They choose to focus on his failure to wear a mask in public, for example, while ignoring that he's brought the world to the brink of WW3. And this should be an important clue as to what's going on here yet it somehow escapes "The Saker" just like it apparently escapes other pundits e.g. Paul Craig Roberts.

" and it would be absolutely unthinkable for them to ever accept a Trump re-election, even if he wins by a landslide."

If it is so "absolutely unthinkable" then why don't they run somebody against him who's not showing signs of senile dementia, for example?

In any case it seems Trump's handlers and enablers realize that he will likely not be reelected no matter who they run against him, so they're pulling out all the stops to get some kind of a major war started before the end of his term. In desperation they installed him in the White House and in desperation they now seek to force a major war before we go back to government by opportunistic-career-politician-puppet-rulers.

follyofwar , says: July 3, 2020 at 2:24 pm GMT
@Robert Dolan

Are there any Republican Senators beside Lankford (OK) and Johnson (WIS), who are supporting this travesty? After Tucker Carlson skewered them the other night, I wonder how many more will be dumb enough to back it? Don't buck the Tuck if you don't want to be flooded with calls and emails from constituents who hate you.

ploni almoni , says: July 3, 2020 at 2:46 pm GMT
@Harold Smith . President Donald Trump, as a direct response to the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack that occurred on 4 April."
You and everyone knows that there was no "chemical attack," and that Shayrat was empty. The US "missile response" was, on the one hand, an attempt to "save face" having been outmaneuvered and lost the Isis gambit, and on the other to test Russian missile defenses for technical purposes, for the upcoming war. In all these cases Trump has to "take responsibility" or admit that all he controls is what is served for lunch.
Make believe is all fine and good, but you people are the forces of darkness kidding yourselves and the rest of us into oblivion.
Harold Smith , says: July 3, 2020 at 2:47 pm GMT
@RP1 ump), and the fact that international treaties and agreements to which the United States is a party, demonstrably no longer mean anything.

And for the icing on the cake (i.e. the consummation of the degenerative process which began before Trump) the fake president was charged with "abuse of power" and "obstruction of congress" – in a fake impeachment trial – and was acquitted, thus proving to the rest of the world (if anymore proof was necessary) that the concepts of "separation of powers"/"checks and balances"/"rule of law" have been replaced by the concept of rule by the psychotic impulses of an unaccountable, politically omnipotent psychopath.

Truth , says: July 3, 2020 at 2:50 pm GMT
@Biff

It will mail-in ballots in Nov. The cornholahoax took care of that.

Whitewolf , says: July 3, 2020 at 2:54 pm GMT
@4 Pete Saker with economics. Ann Coulters spruiking for Trump was about immigration not economics.

Whether Trump failed on immigration because of a lack of will or a lack of backup by the republican side of The Party is irrelevant. It just means voting is pointless either way.

It's hard to see much enthusiasm being manufactured on either side of the manufacturerd political divide this election. Biden is an incoherent clown and Trump is a known quantity now unable to claim future greatness like he did in 2016.

The best vote in 2020 is staying home or going to a gun store and stocking up on election day. Voting just encourages more bs from the political class.

polistra , says: Website July 3, 2020 at 2:54 pm GMT

Elections rarely matter, but this one actually could make a difference. Replacing Trump puppet with Biden puppet won't change Federal actions, because Federal actions NEVER change. But the replacement WILL change the media. As soon as Biden puppet is in office, the media will IMMEDIATELY stop creating panic and fear, and the lockdowns and masks will subside if not quite disappear. It's worth campaigning and voting for Biden.

Harold Smith , says: July 3, 2020 at 3:20 pm GMT
@ploni almoni CIA establishment, which is run by Israel, carried out the murder of Soleimani and Trump was told about it after the fact, and was told 'you own it.'"

For the Nth time: In that case why didn't "the CIA establishment run by Israel" assassinate Soleimani when Obama was president? Why didn't the embassy get moved to Jerusalem or Syrian land be given to Israel or the INF treaty be repudiated or Venezuela be starved or self-destructive trade war with China be started, etc.,when Obama was president?

Your "reasoning" has been thoroughly debunked ad nauseum; give it up. (I will likely not waste any more time arguing absurdities with you). Chris Cosmos , says: July 3, 2020 at 3:21 pm GMT

Great analysis as usual. However, let me point out some problems with what you've written. First, Americans do love wars but they don't care about winning. The US military corrupt and incompetent as it is the most popular by a mile of any us institution. Americans love the military as an idea. That idea is that it represents, theoretically and mythically, the ultimate struggle between "good guys" and "bad guys" which fully mature military officers use to represent "them" and us. Since military conflicts are out of sight and out of mind and the mainstream media lies so blatantly and the collective memory is no longer than a few months it is possible that no matter how obvious the defeat or obvious the corruption to you an me who follow events the vast majority of Americans only see movies of the glory of the US military and covert operatives and quickly forget war-crimes/massive violations of the Geneva Conventions on War, defeat, and so on in favor of the fantasy/myth represented in commercials for military recruitment.

Second, the idea that so-called minorities represented by BLM and so on can or will have power in Washington is absurd. These groups are used and have been used by the corporate oligarchs as a way to divide the working and middle classes–making grand gestures of "solidarity" with BLM (always a corporate oriented group) means nothing. The grand movement of wealth from the working and middle classes towards the 0.001% will continue inexorably as it has since the late 70s whether the RP or the DP is in power. As far as the oligarchs are concerned manipulating popular culture through mind-control techniques (using the smartest human on Earth) will keep their people in power. Trump was a slight interruption

Trump himself was boxed in a corner very quickly by the purge of Flynn and his refusal to vet staff. He had no choice but to blunder from one thing to another with ALL of Washington and Hollywood solidly against him. The positives that he brought, however, to the his Presidency was that he showed in high relief the nature of the Deep State–even the term was largely forbidden (I was kicked out of a liberal/progressive blog, in part, for using the term "Deep State"). We saw through the Russiagate fiasco the reality that the US mainstream media is primarily kind of Ministry of Truth not an "objective" institution that sought truth. Like the American love for the military, most Americans will go along with the media Narrative because all societies need narratives, myths, and commons frames of reference–so even if most people see (with their lying eyes) the reality of the propaganda organs, they'll still "believe". Trump, as you said blustered and bloviated on going to war but never really did–he was the dove in the administration–he hired people like Pompeo and Bolton in order to keep from being eaten by the Deep State. Trump had to spend all his time in office out-foxing the operatives within his administration from destroying or even killing him. The Deep State does not play nice.

Trump has absolutely no chance of winning in November. People in this country are just tired of conflict and are ready to give the Deep State all the power it wants as long as they can rule. It is likely that the Senate will turn blue and we will have one party rule. The Republican demographic is, at present, neither large nor enthusiastic enough to be of much help. As for the coalition of minorities, they have no chance to go beyond the ghettos and if they come around here trying to burn anything down they will be met by a lot of veterans who are armed to the teeth–so I don't see much cultural change outside the coasts and large urban areas. Meanwhile Covid will continue to disrupt life, drug ODs will increase, access to health-care will be reduced, and we are headed for a very new dispensation that may involve a dissolution of the country.

CW2isComing , says: July 3, 2020 at 3:32 pm GMT

While I agree with the author's conclusions I disagree that " most Americans still like wars."

No. I think that we hate them, hate to send our children to die/be ripped apart for a bunch of old scumbags who are in the pockets of the Defense Industry, hate to see us reviled by the World, hate to see our Blood & Treasure spent on people who despise us and hate to pay for it all.

Sadly, the author's conclusions are spot-on. There is no remedying this disaster; we are in our final days as a coherent Nation. This is "Operation Enduring Clusterfuck" writ large. As the acronym goes, "TINVOWOOT."

The best that I can see is Balkanization–with or without preliminary/local & regional shooting–with division along racial lines. Give blacks the cities that they inhabit now in great numbers, give them a region (with ocean access) and have people move to "Red" and "Blue" states according to their race/safety/beliefs. Trade–or war–will follow as a natural consequence.

But, Blacks need to know that when THEY riot their cities burn; when Whites riot entire CONTINENTS burn.

Oh, BTW, NEVER give up your guns.

grimfandango , says: July 3, 2020 at 3:45 pm GMT

I voted for Trump. I was conned. Trump was selected by the .001% as the most effective figurehead to preside over the destruction of America.

Do you really believe the most wealthy and powerful people in the world would leave the choice of a major leader up to the unwashed masses? They manipulate everything, absolutely everything.

If voting could actually negatively impact their power and wealth, they would never allow it.

The .001% are just Jeffrey Dahmer cannibals in expensive clothing, and YOU are on the menu.

Anonymous [320] Disclaimer , says: July 3, 2020 at 4:13 pm GMT

Trump got elected for two main issues he pledged during his 2016 campaign: ending all foreign wars and greatly reducing immigration.

On ending foreign wars and bringing home the troops, he's failed. Since he took office he's been dialing up the heat to the verge of war with Iran, NK, China, Russia, Venezuela, and we still have troops everywhere incl. in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Meanwhile all the trade war jabs with China is just Kabuki theater. The intention is not to bring back manufacturing as he claimed but to blackmail the CCP into handing over control of China's banks to the globalist bankers. His overt pandering to Israel at every turn is nauseating. I suspect Mossad has him by the balls when they seized all records from his Jewish attorney.

On immigration, again nothing like what he promised. He has drastically reduced asylum seeking, but illegal immigration reached a record under his watch until he thankfully won an important quick deportation law against those who failed asylum app. His border wall is still largely not visible. After four long years, he is finally doing something about legal immigration, but his temporary suspension of H1b visas and green cards until the end of the year may be too little too late to save him, and he still hasn't done anything to suspend OPT and EB5. I fear this is all just for show. Immediately after he gets reelected, he will feel all generous and remove all those restrictions.

But the alternative is unthinkable. Biden will immediately resume all ME wars as directed by Israel. He is as compromised as Trump, Mossad already has him by the balls with his bribery scandals in Ukraine and China through his son. Zionists/deep state like to have dirty politicians elected, the dirtier the better, as the easier it is for them to be blackmailed.

The question is will his followers feel enthusiastic enough to come out and vote?

Ram , says: July 3, 2020 at 4:21 pm GMT

Trump's election has proved one thing. His election must have come as a surprise even to him, and he was unprepared with a list of candidates for the various posts he had to fill to carry out his wishes. He was dependent on others who were not well disposed towards him.

Even though Foreign Policy supposedly the President's prerogative, in this case his hands were tied behind his back, such that even low level functionaries were opposing his policies quite openly. The military were running rings around him when he wanted to reduce military presence in the Occupied countries. In fact he was coerced into bombing some facilities in those countries based on fake incidents. What Trump had promised his electorate, he could not deliver. He is a failure. The Blob defeated him at every turn. In fact by appointing the likes of Pompeo he became even less powerful, if that is possible.

If he gets elected a second time somehow, he will not be able to deliver on his promises unless he destroys the Blob completely

Truth , says: July 3, 2020 at 4:27 pm GMT
@grimfandango s highest paid twitter troll.

Ralph Nader said something that opened my eyes to the true nature of national elections in 2000. The Democrips started that day's whole "A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush" nonsense, and a reporter asked him about it. He said "The Republicans have nominated that worst candidate for US President in history, he's bad on every level. If Al Gore can't run a run a decent enough campaign to defeat him, what good is he?"

I stopped voting for anything above state representitive in 2012 and will not vote in hat will be either our ultimate or penultimate presidential election this year.

Vingo Vreez , says: July 3, 2020 at 4:28 pm GMT
@Z-man soldiers

He will cause the whole world to dump the US Dollar as a reserve currency, because he acts like a bully who ignores his blatant weakpoints. At that moment, the USA will just become a bankrupt state and will lose its special status: the US power is based mainly on that.

He will not reverse the tax policies that he implemented HIMSELF He is a zionist elite agent and he will stay like that

You are dreaming too much. How could he do, during his second term, the exact opposite of what he did in the first? It is a total nonsense

Sgt. Joe Friday , says: July 3, 2020 at 4:35 pm GMT

the real power behind him will be in the hands of the Schumer-Pelosi-Obama gang and of the interests these folks represent.

Precisely. Biden will be a ceremonial head of state, much as the president of the USSR was. There are a lot of people saying that Biden's VP will be the de facto president, but I'm not so sure. I think Pelosi – Schumer – Obama will form the ruling junta, which is fitting inasmuch as they've been trying really hard to turn the USA into a corrupt banana republic.

Vingo Vreez , says: July 3, 2020 at 4:35 pm GMT
@Z-man ers

He will cause the whole world to dump the US Dollar as a reserve currency, because he acts like a bully who ignores his blatant weakpoints. At that moment, the USA will just become a bankrupt state and will lose its special status: the US power is based mainly on that.

He will not reverse the tax policies that he implemented HIMSELF He is a zionist elite agent and he will stay like that
You are dreaming too much. How could he do, during his second term, the exact opposite of what he did in the first? It is a total nonsense

Harold Smith , says: July 5, 2020 at 5:54 pm GMT
@Anonymous y demanding that Russia give back Crimea, for example, something that everyone knew Russia could not do?

"That was a no go w the Establishment and they have engaged in a relentless campaign against him."

Let's see, he's betrayed his supporters on many issues; his health is obviously deteriorating; as you point out he's an "incompetent narcissist"; there's a "relentless campaign against him" according to you; and polls show him trailing Biden in several key states; so why is he running for reelection? If LBJ can retire after one term why can't Trump?

mark tapley , says: July 5, 2020 at 6:46 pm GMT
@Harold Smith ls go back before WW1 to Samual Bush who was brought onto the Jew run War Industries Board (what a great racket that was) by Percy Rockefeller during the puppet actor and syphilitic W. Wilson's catatonic lay about under Col. House (Rothschilds employee) and Bernard Baruch administration. The Zionists control both phony parties and just use the Jew run MSM to put on a show. Many commentators such as Patagonia Man believe it is too late but I still maintain the remote possibility that enough people will wake up to put some decent rep. in the House. Forget about the Presidential baboons.
mark tapley , says: July 5, 2020 at 8:40 pm GMT
@mark tapley

https://www.youtube.com/embed/JUlvCbb2Zzw?feature=oembed

Shabbos goy Trump at work.

Patagonia Man , says: July 6, 2020 at 11:59 pm GMT
@Authenticjazzman ictims, but accomplices."

3. I have outlined, not only the breakup of the US into several geopolitical units (and quite possibly, but hopefully not, another civil war) but the megaregions in which North America is heading, within say, the next 150 – 250 years.

Just because I believe all of the above doesn't mean I can't observe and comment on the theater that passes for US politics. Needless to say, I won't be voting in November.

Finally, there's a great saying attributed to Einstein:

"The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result"

james charles , says: July 8, 2020 at 9:34 pm GMT
@mark tapley "Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism. "
https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S1537592714001595
Ken31 , says: July 10, 2020 at 12:14 am GMT

You can tell the Saker doesn't live in America, since he believes Americans love war. This has never been true and it is safe to assume Americans are really sick of American Imperialism in general right now.

War and warmongering do not enjoy any significant support in any major political block in the USA right now. Only the Oligarchs, NWO, Plutocrats and Neocons are for wars and they are not even collectively close to being a plurality.

[Jul 08, 2020] Impeachment Witness Vindman Quits Over 'White House Bullying' -

Jul 08, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman - who was accused of being coached by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff during testimony when he told House committees that he "did not think it was proper" for President Trump to ask Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky to investigate former VP Joe Biden during a July 25 phone call - is retiring from the US Army after over 21 years, according to CNN .

Vindman has endured a "campaign of bullying, intimidation, and retaliation" spearheaded by the President following his testimony in the impeachment inquiry last year, according to his attorney, Amb. David Pressman. - CNN

Last November, Vindman admitted to violating the chain of command when he reported his concerns over a July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky, in which Trump requested an investigation into Joe Biden and his son Hunter over corruption.

Vindman, a NSC Ukraine expert (who was asked three times to become their Defense Minister), claimed he had no idea that Burisma, a natural gas company which paid Hunter to sit on its board, routed over $3 million to accounts tied to Hunter Biden .

... ... ...

Vindman fell under scrutiny during the impeachment - and has been accused of leaking knowledge of the July 25 call with Zelensky to the whistleblower whose complaint (after consulting with Adam Schiff's office) sparked Trump's impeachment.

[Jul 08, 2020] Alexander Vindman, Trump impeachment witness, retires from military

This arrogant and clueless neocon got only part of he deserved. He decided to play big politics and was burned, although not as badly as he should be. So far he escaped prison.
Notable quotes:
"... History will remember him as an incompetent, arrogant, office gossip ..."
"... ! Both he and his brother should have been charged with mishandling classified information! ..."
Jul 08, 2020 | www.foxnews.com

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman , a key impeachment witness against President Trump , retired from the Army Wednesday, with his lawyer citing "a campaign of bullying, intimidation and retaliation" for cutting short his military career.

... ... ...

Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., last Thursday announced her intention to block Senate confirmations for 1,123 senior U.S. Armed Forces promotions until Defense Secretary Mark Esper confirms he will not block the "expected and deserved" promotion for Vindman , an Iraq war veteran.

Duckworth, also an Iraq War veteran who served as a helicopter pilot, accused Trump of trying to politicize the armed forces.


nlocker Leader 23s

Good riddance to traitorous rubbish. See ya, MR. Vindman.

RustynFL Leader 24s

The House of Representatives' sham impeachment inquiry was an act of political revenge a) for losing the 2016 presidential election, and b) for impeaching Bill Clinton. It's as simple as that. V. looked like he had trouble remembering what he was told to say. Wasn't three rehearsals enough? He lied when he called it a "demand.' What demand? No demand. "Favor." V didn't follow the chain of command. Then lies about it being a busy day. NO. He was told what to say and who to go to. No officer can trust a subordinate that leaks, goes public, etc for political or personal gain. No one trusts a man that should be charged with sedition.

ᴅᴇsᴛʀᴜᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ-ᴀʟᴛʀᴜɪsᴛs Leader 26s

That next chapter should be prison.

useyourhead19 Leader 31s

Bullying like doing everything possible to undermine a presidency

IveSeenthisbefore Leader 46s

This is a traitor! A very bad person who never accepted President Trump in his heart.

RobertKearney45 Leader 1m

History will remember him as an incompetent, arrogant, office gossip of classified imformation! Both he and his brother should have been charged with mishandling classified information!

oldmarine83 Leader 1m

Well now that that lying sack of poo is leaving, he can take that job of Defense Minister of Ukraine. That's want he wants. Hopefully he will renounce his citizenship in America and not receive a penny in retirement pay if he take that position in a foreign country. Don't need people like him in the military. Need to sack EVERY Democrat in Congress. And any Obama holdovers. Let them know what the unemployment line is like and how it works. Cut the "retirement" pay also, since they REALLY HAVE NEVER WORKED since they went to the house or senate.

nlocker Leader 16s ArizonaConservative738

Vindman broke the chain of command, leaked classified information, and helped the Dems try to overthrow the President. He deserves prison.

[Jul 07, 2020] I doubt that the Democrats have "won" working class votes, white, black, hispanic, or other, since the time of LBJ, and possibly before that

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... What they have "won" is an electorate where a significant minority, but still a minority, are the party faithful but the majority (growing over time) vote Democratic only as the lesser evil, i.e. because they believe that the media coverage and electoral system's exclusion of third parties in effect forces them to vote Democratic by holding a gun to their head. Maybe I'm wrong, but then I would want to see more media coverage of third party candidates combined with "Is the Democratic Party nominee your first choice?" polling before conceding that I am. ..."
Jul 07, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

Andres 07.06.20 at 4:54 pm58

Chetan Murthy @48: "The Dems didn't lose working-class votes in 2016: the median income of a Hillary voter was less than that of a Trump voter [or maybe it was average? In any case, not much difference.] What the Dems lost, was "white non-college-educated" voters. They retained working class voters of color."

I doubt that the Democrats have "won" working class votes, white, black, hispanic, or other, since the time of LBJ, and possibly before that. What they have "won" is an electorate where a significant minority, but still a minority, are the party faithful but the majority (growing over time) vote Democratic only as the lesser evil, i.e. because they believe that the media coverage and electoral system's exclusion of third parties in effect forces them to vote Democratic by holding a gun to their head. Maybe I'm wrong, but then I would want to see more media coverage of third party candidates combined with "Is the Democratic Party nominee your first choice?" polling before conceding that I am.

What I see is that U.S. voters are forced into a choice between a conservative center-right national-security party (Democrats) whose main virtues are that they are not fascist or racist and are willing to provide a basic welfare state safety net, though one not as extensive as in Europe. Opposed to them is a party whose ideology and behavior are degenerating into something combining the pre-conditions of fascism (e.g., pre-Great War Germany) and the 1860 secessionist South.

Changing this state of affairs is not something that will be accomplished by elections, but by large and sustained protest movements (think Occupy or BLM multiplied many times). The next few decades will be interesting, but not fun.

Orange Watch 07.06.20 at 5:40 pm (no link)

Chetan Murthy@48:

It's helpful that you told us who you were, in so few words. 43% of the US are non-voters. The median household income of non-voters is less than half of the median income of a Clinton voter (which was higher than the overall US median, albeit by less than the Trump median was). Clinton didn't lose in 2016 because of who voted as much as who didn't ; every serious analysis (and countless centrist screeds) since Trump's installation has told us that. Losing the working class doesn't require that the Republicans gain them; if the working class drops out, that shifts the electoral playing field further into the favor of politics who cater to the remaining voting blocks. Democrats playing Republican-lite while mouthing pieties about how they're totally not the party of the rich will always fare worse in that field than Republicans playing Republicans while mouthing pieties about how they ARE the party of the rich, but also of giving everyone a chance to make themselves rich. I know it's been de rigour for both Dems and the GOP to ignore the first half of Clinton's deplorable quote, but it truly was just as important as the half both sides freely remember. The Democrats have become a party of C-suite diversity, and they have abandoned the working class. And when their best pick for President's plenty bold plan for solving police violence is to encourage LEOs to shoot people in the leg instead of the chest (something that could only be said by a grifter or someone with more knowledge of Hollywood than ballistics or anatomy), the prospect of keeping the non-white portions of the working class from continuing to drop out is looking bleak.

MisterMr@49:

The traditional threading of that needle is to expand class-based analysis to more accurately reflect real-world political and economic behavior. In the past (and in some countries who updated the applicable definitions, still), the most relevant additional class was the petty bourgeoisie; in the modern US, however, the concept of the professional-managerial class is the most useful frame of reference.

[Jul 07, 2020] BLM merely fits into the Dems overall campaign strategy which is to use race to deflect attention from the gross imbalance of wealth that is the unavoidable consequence of the Dems neoliberal policies including outsourcing, off-shoring, de-industrialization, free trade and trickle down economics

Jul 07, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

likbez 07.07.20 at 12:15 am

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

People vote with their wallets.

The answer is "not always" due to existence of "What the matter with Kansas" effect.

People can and do vote against their economic interests, although this is more common for lower strata of population then for the elite.

This is the essence of the current play by the Neoliberal Democrats. Mike Whitney pointed out that their support of black population is just a tactical trick:

The protests are largely a diversion aimed at shifting the public's attention to a racialized narrative that obfuscates the widening inequality chasm (created by the Democrats biggest donors, the Giant Corporations and Wall Street) to historic antagonisms that have clearly diminished over time. (Racism ain't what it used to be.)

The Democrats are resolved to set the agenda by deciding what issues "will and will not" be covered over the course of the campaign. And– since race is an issue on which they feel they can energize their base by propping-up outdated stereotypes of conservatives as ignorant bigots incapable of rational thought– the Dems are using their media clout to make race the main topic of debate.

In short, the Democrats have settled on a strategy for quashing the emerging populist revolt that swept Trump into the White House in 2016 and derailed Hillary's ambitious grab for presidential power.

The plan, however, does have its shortcomings

Let's be clear, the Democrats do not support Black Lives Matter nor have they made any attempt to insert their demands into their list of police reforms. BLM merely fits into the Dems overall campaign strategy which is to use race to deflect attention from the gross imbalance of wealth that is the unavoidable consequence of the Dems neoliberal policies including outsourcing, off-shoring, de-industrialization, free trade and trickle down economics. These policies were aggressively promoted by both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama as they will be by Joe Biden if he is elected. They are the policies that have gutted the country, shrunk the middle class, and transformed the American dream into a dystopian nightmare.

They are also the policies that have given rise to, what the pundits call, "right wing populism" which refers to the growing number of marginalized working people who despise Washington and career politicians, feel anxious about falling wages and dramatic demographic changes, and resent the prevailing liberal culture that scorns their religion and patriotism. This is Trump's mainly-white base, the working people the Democrats threw under the bus 30 years ago and now want to annihilate completely by deepening political polarization, fueling social unrest, pitting one group against another, and viciously vilifying them in the media as ignorant racists whose traditions, culture, customs and even history must be obliterated to make room for the new diversity world order. Trump touched on this theme in a speech he delivered in Tulsa. He said:

"Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values and indoctrinate our children. Angry mobs are trying to tear down statues of our founders, deface our most sacred memorials and unleash a wave of violent crime in our cities."

He then went off the rail, but still the part of his analysis reproduced above looks pretty prescient.

[Jul 06, 2020] The inevitable end of neoliberal Dems political dominance

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... This is a zugzwang for neoliberal Dems. Without working class votes they can't win. And those votes are lost. Clinton gambit that in Cola-Pepsi duopoly the working class has nowhere to go (because Republicans are ever worse) worked for a couple of decades but in 2016 suddenly stopped. They same happened in UK. And will soon happen in Germany as Merkel is history too: Biden without senility. ..."
"... We need to accept the fact that the Neoliberal Dems lost its key constituency and that limits their ability to win the political power. They can't even select a decent leader, because Biden as a party leader is a cruel joke. ..."
"... IMHO 20% of upper middle class is not enough as the key constituency simply because a part of this voter block belongs to Republicans (military middle class). And that essentially all what the neoliberal Dems, as "Republicans-lite" currently have. ..."
"... Although in 2020 they might have a unique chance due to Trump self-disintegration. But their ability to hold into minorities votes, while selling those minorities down the river is an aberration, so in this case in 2022 they might lose all the gains. ..."
"... Biden in a way symbolizes the crisis of Clinton wing of the Democratic Party really well: they have no future, only the past. ..."
"... It is July. By January 2021, the U.S. economy will have suffered a structural collapse in multiple sectors. That is the economic consequence of the pandemic. Restaurants, shopping malls, bars, colleges, hotels, airlines, cruise lines -- easily 15% of the workforce will be unemployed and another 25% seriously underemployed. ..."
"... For some reason, the main divide in politics today is a sort of culture war, and republicans and other right wing parties managed to present the traditionalist side of the culture war as the "working class" one, and therefore the other side as the evil cosmopolitan prosecco sipping faux leftish but in reality very snobbish one, so that they pretend that they are the working class party because of their traditionalist stance. ..."
"... But they aren't: already the fact that they blame "cosmopolitans" shows that they think in terms of nationalism (like Trump and his China virus), which is a way to deflect the attention from class conflict. ..."
"... This doesn't automatically mean that the Dems get the working class: what happens is that conservative vote is U shaped, they get a ton of votes from very low incomes, and a ton of votes from very high incomes, but few votes in the middle. ..."
"... it is still true that in the very low incomes Reps rake up a lot of votes (although, as for my previous comment, I think this is a case of false consciousness, aka they cling to their guns and their Bibles, aka they've been bamboozled). ..."
Jul 06, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

likbez 07.05.20 at 10:36 pm ( 39 )

a party that is no longer of the working class is unlikely to pass legislation that benefits the working class.

This is an important point worth repeating again and again.

This is a zugzwang for neoliberal Dems. Without working class votes they can't win. And those votes are lost. Clinton gambit that in Cola-Pepsi duopoly the working class has nowhere to go (because Republicans are ever worse) worked for a couple of decades but in 2016 suddenly stopped. They same happened in UK. And will soon happen in Germany as Merkel is history too: Biden without senility.

Using "identity wedge" and amplifying the current riots is a desperate move of "substituting with minorities" the lost working class votes. They want to split the country in such a way that Republicans are in minority. Probably will not work as nationalism as a platform is on upswing now and Trump's "national neoliberalism" has some grass roots support even among the minorities, despite that his promises are all fake. Riots dramatically increased polarization and the result of this polarization are not necessary beneficial to neoliberal Dems.

We need to accept the fact that the Neoliberal Dems lost its key constituency and that limits their ability to win the political power. They can't even select a decent leader, because Biden as a party leader is a cruel joke. The fact that "there is no alternative" no longer holds -- the return (on a new level) to some form of the New Deal is clearly an alternative. The alternative that the majority of population wants.

All those neoliberal fairy tales about "free market" (can it exists with multinationals in power?), "personal responsibility" (which means unlimited ability of capital to eliminate decent jobs and replace them with perma-temps, or offshore them) and that "rising tide lifts all boats" no longer work. That's why Bezos supports BLM while paying below average to the workers in warehouses. He "feels the pain." ;-)

IMHO 20% of upper middle class is not enough as the key constituency simply because a part of this voter block belongs to Republicans (military middle class). And that essentially all what the neoliberal Dems, as "Republicans-lite" currently have.

Although in 2020 they might have a unique chance due to Trump self-disintegration. But their ability to hold into minorities votes, while selling those minorities down the river is an aberration, so in this case in 2022 they might lose all the gains.

Biden in a way symbolizes the crisis of Clinton wing of the Democratic Party really well: they have no future, only the past.

While Republicans now can play the nationalist card like in Weimar Germany. The recent riots play into their hands, and this effect will last till November.

bruce wilder 07.06.20 at 4:11 am (45 )

mainstream Democrats recognise the need for radical change, and Biden will align with the mainstream position as he always has done

You said you would leave this, your third assumption, to comments, so here is my comment.

The U.S. is in the midst of a deep legitimacy crisis and contrary to popular belief among liberals, it is not Trump particularly whose legitimacy is being called into question. Oh, sure, there have been relentless attacks on him -- from partisan opponents and from much of mainstream media -- but like the "anti-racism" of the recent protests -- much of it is dissembling and distraction. Charges of colluding with Putin to win the 2016 election turned out to be fake news -- rather obviously so from the beginning -- but a big enough mob went down that path with no self-awareness. I am not saying Trump is not an egregiously bad President; he is. But, notice please, before you go assuming that mainstream Democrats are going wake up in 2021 wanting to govern in the real world , that they have not shown much inclination toward truth-telling or critical realism these last 20 years.

It is July. By January 2021, the U.S. economy will have suffered a structural collapse in multiple sectors. That is the economic consequence of the pandemic. Restaurants, shopping malls, bars, colleges, hotels, airlines, cruise lines -- easily 15% of the workforce will be unemployed and another 25% seriously underemployed.

Did I mention that the U.S. is undergoing a legitimacy crisis?? Whose legitimacy is being called into question?

I would submit that the legitimacy of the elite professional and managerial classes is being called into question, for want of performance or any sense of responsibility. The urban PMC are the core constituency of the establishment Democratic Party. The vestigial working class elements and the ideological Left are distant memories and oppressed minorities seeking social justice, mere props. I would say the Party establishment is confident they can put the re-animated corpse of Biden into the White House. And look how gleefully they welcome Republican never-Trumpers into the clubhouse! If you were one of the fools and tools who thought Obama did not want Republicans to control Congress, you are getting another chance to see how the Obama Alumni Association works with the Lincoln Project, how happy they are to deliver the kind of policy that appeals to rich, old, suburban Republican women.

The thing is, the political classes -- the millionaire media pundits, the politicians, the lobbyists, the generals, the journamalists, the manipulative political operatives and propagandists, the pious policy "experts", the highly paid executives and financial managers running monopolies into the ground and non-profits into irrelevance -- they have enacted their neo-liberal agenda and it doesn't work.

We have just watched the once highly touted CDC completely botch the great Pandemic. They could not devise a test. They screwed up the rules on who could or should be tested. They lied early on about the need to wear masks. They staged a moral panic over a need for ventilators, when ventilators are a terrible therapeutic alternative. In the new Puritanism, they shut down public beaches but they watched passively as liberal heroes like Cuomo set off a holocaust by sending COVID-19 patients to nursing homes.

This in a country that cannot manufacture PPE. Or win a war. Trump, in his fumbling way, might get the U.S. out of Afganistan, but the NY Times -- who brought us WMD not that long ago -- reports the Russians are paying bounties on American soldiers killed. No report on the treatment of Julian Assange though. Boeing is going to get the 737 Max in the air real soon now. Citibank is borrowing at 0.03 from the Fed and lending to credit card users at 27% and may be insolvent.

So, let us assume the Democrats, after nominating an elderly sob who had a hand in the crime bill that gave the U.S. the highest incarceration rate in the world, the bankruptcy bill that saddled tens of millions with credit card and student debt that cannot be discharged, and every stupid war of the last nearly twenty years, will suddenly see the necessity of radical change. And, after making an alliance with conservative Republicans hostile to even Trump's fake populism in order to elect Biden, seeing the light on radical reform is so likely! So plausible.

And, what's the play? The carrot of bi-partisan cooperation coupled with the fearful stick of abolishing the filibuster someday somehow if they don't play nice. You do realize that only Republicans are allowed to manipulate the filibuster and only in ways that favor their agenda of, say, stacking the courts? And, the strategic vision? Reinforcing the Rube Goldberg contraption which is Obamacare? You do know Biden is on record as adamantly opposed to Medicare4all? And, that Medicaid is a need-based nightmare of controlled deprivation? In a country where public health is such a shambles that a pandemic is running out of control.

You can do better.

Chetan Murthy 07.06.20 at 6:45 am ( 48 )

likbez @ 39:

Without working class votes they can't win. And those votes are lost

It's helpful that you told us who you were, in so few words. The Dems didn't lose working-class votes in 2016: the median income of a Hillary voter was less than that of a Trump voter [or maybe it was average? In any case, not much difference.] What the Dems lost, was "white non-college-educated" voters. They retained working class voters of color.

But hey, they don't count as working-class voters to you. Thanks for playing.

MisterMr 07.06.20 at 8:21 am ( 49 )

Two points:

  1. White collar are, by definition, working class, because they don't own the means of production. What I see is an opposition between blue collars and white collars, that are two wings of the working class, not that democrats are going against the working class.

    For some reason, the main divide in politics today is a sort of culture war, and republicans and other right wing parties managed to present the traditionalist side of the culture war as the "working class" one, and therefore the other side as the evil cosmopolitan prosecco sipping faux leftish but in reality very snobbish one, so that they pretend that they are the working class party because of their traditionalist stance.

    But they aren't: already the fact that they blame "cosmopolitans" shows that they think in terms of nationalism (like Trump and his China virus), which is a way to deflect the attention from class conflict.

    So comparatively the Dems are still the working class party, and the fact that some working class guys vote for trump sows that they suffer from false consciousness, not that the Dems are too right wing (the dems ARE too right wing, but this isn't the reason some working class guys are voting Trump).

  2. Neoliberalism and free markets are not the same thing, and furthermore neoliberalism and capitalism are not the same thing; at most neoliberalism is a form of unadultered capitalism. However since neoliberalism basically means "anti new deal", and new deal economies were still free market and still capitalist (we can call them social democratic, but in this sense social democracy is a form of controlled capitalism), it follows that the most economically successful form of capitalism and free markets to date is not neoliberalism.
MisterMr 07.06.20 at 8:30 am ( 50 )

@Chetan Murthy 48

"the median income of a Hillary voter was less than that of a Trump voter"

This doesn't automatically mean that the Dems get the working class: what happens is that conservative vote is U shaped, they get a ton of votes from very low incomes, and a ton of votes from very high incomes, but few votes in the middle.

Since income distribution is pear shaped (there is more distance between high incomes and the median than between low incomes and the median) this still gives an higher average income than the Dem's base, but it is still true that in the very low incomes Reps rake up a lot of votes (although, as for my previous comment, I think this is a case of false consciousness, aka they cling to their guns and their Bibles, aka they've been bamboozled).

[Jul 06, 2020] It is July. By January 2021, the US economy will have suffered a structural collapse in multiple sectors. That is the economic consequence of the pandemic. Restaurants, shopping malls, bars, colleges, hotels, airlines, cruise lines -- easily 15% of the workforce will be unemployed and another 25% seriously underemployed.

Notable quotes:
"... I would submit that the legitimacy of the elite professional and managerial classes is being called into question, for want of performance or any sense of responsibility. The urban PMC are the core constituency of the establishment Democratic Party. The vestigial working class elements and the ideological Left are distant memories and oppressed minorities seeking social justice, mere props. ..."
"... The thing is, the political classes -- the millionaire media pundits, the politicians, the lobbyists, the generals, the journamalists, the manipulative political operatives and propagandists, the pious policy "experts", the highly paid executives and financial managers running monopolies into the ground and non-profits into irrelevance -- they have enacted their neo-liberal agenda and it doesn't work. ..."
"... This in a country that cannot manufacture PPE. Or win a war. Trump, in his fumbling way, might get the U.S. out of Afghanistan, but the NY Times -- who brought us WMD not that long ago -- reports the Russians are paying bounties on American soldiers killed. No report on the treatment of Julian Assange though. Boeing is going to get the 737 Max in the air real soon now. Citibank is borrowing at 0.03 from the Fed and lending to credit card users at 27% and may be insolvent. ..."
"... So, let us assume the Democrats, after nominating an elderly SOB who had a hand in the crime bill that gave the U.S. the highest incarceration rate in the world, the bankruptcy bill that saddled tens of millions with credit card and student debt that cannot be discharged, and every stupid war of the last nearly twenty years, will suddenly see the necessity of radical change. And, after making an alliance with conservative Republicans hostile to even Trump's fake populism in order to elect Biden, seeing the light on radical reform is so likely! So plausible. ..."
Jul 06, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

bruce wilder 07.06.20 at 4:11 am (45 )

mainstream Democrats recognize the need for radical change, and Biden will align with the mainstream position as he always has done

You said you would leave this, your third assumption, to comments, so here is my comment.

The U.S. is in the midst of a deep legitimacy crisis and contrary to popular belief among liberals, it is not Trump particularly whose legitimacy is being called into question. Oh, sure, there have been relentless attacks on him -- from partisan opponents and from much of mainstream media -- but like the "anti-racism" of the recent protests -- much of it is dissembling and distraction. Charges of colluding with Putin to win the 2016 election turned out to be fake news -- rather obviously so from the beginning -- but a big enough mob went down that path with no self-awareness. I am not saying Trump is not an egregiously bad President; he is. But, notice please, before you go assuming that mainstream Democrats are going wake up in 2021 wanting to govern in the real world , that they have not shown much inclination toward truth-telling or critical realism these last 20 years.

It is July. By January 2021, the U.S. economy will have suffered a structural collapse in multiple sectors. That is the economic consequence of the pandemic. Restaurants, shopping malls, bars, colleges, hotels, airlines, cruise lines -- easily 15% of the workforce will be unemployed and another 25% seriously underemployed.

Did I mention that the U.S. is undergoing a legitimacy crisis?? Whose legitimacy is being called into question?

I would submit that the legitimacy of the elite professional and managerial classes is being called into question, for want of performance or any sense of responsibility. The urban PMC are the core constituency of the establishment Democratic Party. The vestigial working class elements and the ideological Left are distant memories and oppressed minorities seeking social justice, mere props.

I would say the Party establishment is confident they can put the re-animated corpse of Biden into the White House. And look how gleefully they welcome Republican never-Trumpers into the clubhouse! If you were one of the fools and tools who thought Obama did not want Republicans to control Congress, you are getting another chance to see how the Obama Alumni Association works with the Lincoln Project, how happy they are to deliver the kind of policy that appeals to rich, old, suburban Republican women.

The thing is, the political classes -- the millionaire media pundits, the politicians, the lobbyists, the generals, the journamalists, the manipulative political operatives and propagandists, the pious policy "experts", the highly paid executives and financial managers running monopolies into the ground and non-profits into irrelevance -- they have enacted their neo-liberal agenda and it doesn't work.

We have just watched the once highly touted CDC completely botch the great Pandemic. They could not devise a test. They screwed up the rules on who could or should be tested. They lied early on about the need to wear masks. They staged a moral panic over a need for ventilators, when ventilators are a terrible therapeutic alternative. In the new Puritanism, they shut down public beaches but they watched passively as liberal heroes like Cuomo set off a holocaust by sending COVID-19 patients to nursing homes.

This in a country that cannot manufacture PPE. Or win a war. Trump, in his fumbling way, might get the U.S. out of Afghanistan, but the NY Times -- who brought us WMD not that long ago -- reports the Russians are paying bounties on American soldiers killed. No report on the treatment of Julian Assange though. Boeing is going to get the 737 Max in the air real soon now. Citibank is borrowing at 0.03 from the Fed and lending to credit card users at 27% and may be insolvent.

So, let us assume the Democrats, after nominating an elderly SOB who had a hand in the crime bill that gave the U.S. the highest incarceration rate in the world, the bankruptcy bill that saddled tens of millions with credit card and student debt that cannot be discharged, and every stupid war of the last nearly twenty years, will suddenly see the necessity of radical change. And, after making an alliance with conservative Republicans hostile to even Trump's fake populism in order to elect Biden, seeing the light on radical reform is so likely! So plausible.

And, what's the play? The carrot of bi-partisan cooperation coupled with the fearful stick of abolishing the filibuster someday somehow if they don't play nice. You do realize that only Republicans are allowed to manipulate the filibuster and only in ways that favor their agenda of, say, stacking the courts? And, the strategic vision? Reinforcing the Rube Goldberg contraption which is Obamacare? You do know Biden is on record as adamantly opposed to Medicare4all? And, that Medicaid is a need-based nightmare of controlled deprivation? In a country where public health is such a shambles that a pandemic is running out of control.

You can do better.

Hidari 07.06.20 at 9:59 am ( 51 )

'All the attention in this thread so far has been on the political dimension of uncertainty, but it seems to me the public health dimension is also crucial and quite up in the air. What will the trajectory of the virus look like in the US over the next several months? Will infections continue to explode out of control?'

Not just the public health, but the economic effects of the public health. As I pointed out in a previous thread, it's not difficult to work out why Trump looked like he was going to win in January: the stock market was booming, unemployment was low, crime was low, there were no new wars it's not a mystery.

People vote with their wallets.

If Trump someone manages to face down the neo-liberals in his own party and arrange for a gigantic stimulus bill (bigger than the last one) and keeps 'benefits' going past August, he is in with a shout. If he doesn't, and if the economy continues its path to free fall, he will lose.

People vote with their wallets. It is not difficult. You don't need to invoke Russia and etc. to work out why Trump won in 2016 (the impact of the Obama stimulus package, which was too small, hadn't et 'percolated through' to people's bank balances at that point). And, if Trump loses in 2020, the reasons will be self-evident and nothing to do with 'people seeing through him' or 'brave liberals averted a turn to fascism'. If he loses it will be because he screwed up on the 'good' economy.

People vote with their wallets.

[Jul 05, 2020] Biden prannocement of "woman of color" is identity politics in action as it eliminates qualified whites from the compertition

Jul 05, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN July 2, 2020 at 9:57 am

I think you must mean Susan Rice – Obama's former National Security Advisor. A known Russophobe and neo-liberal Democrat warhawk. I believe Biden promised, in one of his lucid moments, to choose 'a woman of color' for his VP. This is what it has come to in the fight to capture votes; it's not enough to spend – literally – billions in campaign funds, but you also have to court as many communities as possible instead of just picking the best person for the job. I'm not suggesting it is impossible a black or brown woman could be the best person for the job, but in that case there would be no need to announce it in advance, thereby eliminating all whites and males from competition. You can blame the voters for that as much as the politicians – screwing up the job of leadership has become so commonplace that a perception has arisen that the choice should be made on the basis of 'whose turn it is'.

Susan Rice could be baited into war with Russia at the drop of a hat – she is not a diplomat, has a filthy temper and is totally committed to the ideal of the United States as a benevolent tyrant which is not afraid to make the tough decisions because it knows what's best. When it says 'do', you do. Or else. I think it is pretty plain now that the Democratic strategy is to either use Biden – if elected – as a talking head for the Clinton Machine if he is able to remain reasonably convincing, or to relieve him for health reasons if he becomes visibly incompetent. Either way, rule in that administration will not be Biden's decisions.

ET AL July 2, 2020 at 10:24 am

I should stop drinking and posting.

You are right Mark, but also wrong! I found the article:

Joe Biden's ideal VP is Condoleezza Rice
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/501685-joe-bidens-ideal-vp-is-condoleezza-rice
####

It's only an opinion piece and Condo is a Republican obvs, but I did have as you say have Susan in mind.

MARK CHAPMAN July 2, 2020 at 5:45 pm

It is so much easier to get along when both can be right and wrong in the same exchange. I do not have to run to my room to bury my face in my pillow and scream, like I do when I'm wrong. Well, that's The Hill, so it's a solid recommendation and not one of those throwaway "Hey, she'd make a great president!" endorsements like the papers make whenever some new mouthpiece appears briefly on the radar (remember 'Joe the plumber'?) But Condi has been out of politics an eternity, in political time, and would have to rebuild alliances and get quickly up to speed. I frankly doubt Biden is considering her.

She would be a marginal improvement on Susan Rice, though, for the faults I have already cited.

MOSCOWEXILE July 2, 2020 at 10:46 am

During Obama's presidency, the US ambassador to the UN was a wonderfully talented brown woman. Can't remember her name now, but she liked taking names.

MOSCOWEXILE July 2, 2020 at 10:48 am

Bear in mind, at the same time the US had a couple of dumb blue-eyed blondes as spokeswomen for the Department of State.

MOSCOWEXILE July 2, 2020 at 10:49 am

Not to mention a retarded vice-admiral!

JENNIFER HOR July 2, 2020 at 12:10 pm

No, no, this was during the first couple of years of Donald Trump's Presidency: the woman's name was Nikki Haley, originally born Nimrata Randhawa and of Sikh Indian background. She liked keeping a long shit list of people and countries to nurture dreams of punishment against.

ET AL July 5, 2020 at 4:41 am

Further to recent posts about Susan Rice as a potential BiDumb running mate:

TheHill.com Susan Rice sees stock rise in Biden VP race
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/505683-susan-rice-sees-stock-rise-in-biden-vp-race

Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) are getting most of the buzz, but former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice is also been getting a lot of attention in Joe Biden's campaign as he considers who to pick as his running mate, sources say
####

I say, is that a cheeky cooking pun squeezed in to the headline? It gets a clap from me if it is intentional!


[Jul 05, 2020] If iconoclasm activity continues, chances of Biden with his semi-senility as an albatross around his neck might become more problematic. Essentially rioters increase the chances of Trump re-election.

Jul 05, 2020 | crookedtimber.org

RobinM 07.04.20 at 7:04 pm (no link)

From the way the project is framed, it seems to be a quite traditional top-down view of how things might/will unfold. What seems to me to be absent from the outline is the possibility that the underlying social reality the politicians regularly try to cope with has been so churned up during the last few months that no attempt to comprehend "the economic consequences of the pandemic" can get very far unless that new reality is first evaluated.

likbez 07.05.20 at 4:49 am ( 15 )

@RobinM 07.04.20 at 7:04 pm (#14)

What seems to me to be absent from the outline is the possibility that the underlying social reality the politicians regularly try to cope with has been so churned up during the last few months that no attempt to comprehend "the economic consequences of the pandemic" can get very far unless that new reality is first evaluated.

Right. And not only COVID-19 is a "known unknown." Riots are yet another factor. If iconoclasm activity continues, chances of Biden with his semi-senility as an albatross around his neck might become more problematic. Essentially rioters increase the chances of Trump re-election.

So, let's not count chickens before they hatch.

[Jul 04, 2020] The Economic Consequences of the Pandemic by JOHN QUIGGIN

Notable quotes:
"... So called “Democrats”, especially Biden himself, and Biden entourage are sellouts to financial oligarchy. They represent defeated in 2016 wing of the US neoliberal elite — adherents to classic neoliberalism and neoliberal globalization. ..."
"... To expect them to attempt anything of value other the kicking the neoliberalism can down the road is extremely naive. ..."
Jul 04, 2020 | crookedtimber.org
J-D 07.04.20 at 7:59 am ( 2 )

The more you tie your analysis of economic consequences to the assumption of a Democratic victory in the Presidential election and a Democratic majority in the Senate, the more of it will be at risk of being rendered moot by the Republicans retaining either the Presidency or a Senate majority or both, but I guess you know that and are implicitly accepting the risk of having to do a lot of rewriting in that event (if the book is supposed to appear after the elections) or of the book rapidly losing value after the elections (if it’s supposed to appear earlier).

By the same logic, the more you tie your analysis of economic consequences to one particular the way the political strategic battle will play out following the election of a Democratic President and Congressional majority, the more of it will be at risk of being rendered moot by the Democrats pursuing a different strategy. Given the initial assumption of a Democratic President with Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, I suggest you would do better with a short discussion at a very high level of generality about why

I’m assuming that the title is supposed to be a genuine indication of the main topic of the book and not a way of disguising a real topic of ‘What’s Going to Happen Next’ or ‘What Should Happen Next’, which would not be quite the same.

Lee A. Arnold 07.04.20 at 5:20 pm ( 12 )

If the Democrats take the White House and Congress they’ll have a very short window to get anything done. The plutocracy will react by weakening the dollar e.g. by moving small amounts into the euro, cryptocurrencies and/or even the renmimbi. Interest rates will rise, and this will frighten many (or most) of the Democrats into austerity measures to reduce the budget deficit.

Thus will arise the old propaganda refrain that Democrats don’t know what they are doing, and the resulting frustrations, and Fox News falsehoods, might prompt voters to return Congress to Republican control in the midterms.

Therefore the Democrats should adopt a strategy of getting a few irreversible things done at the very beginning by ditching the filibuster and passing some popular programs which might ALSO help the party against Republican propaganda in future elections. This can be done in healthcare, comprehensive immigration reform, infrastructure, and new constitutional amendments.

Amendment against executive misconduct: A. Executive branch inspectors general shall not be removed but by Congressional approval. B. Not complying with Congressional subpoenas is an impeachable offense. C. In the case of House impeachment, “executive privilege” is automatically voided. D. If a President is removed from office, all of his or her pardons are automatically voided and the miscreants returned to jail.

likbez 07.05.20 at 2:29 am

So called “Democrats”, especially Biden himself, and Biden entourage are sellouts to financial oligarchy. They represent defeated in 2016 wing of the US neoliberal elite — adherents to classic neoliberalism and neoliberal globalization.

To expect them to attempt anything of value other the kicking the neoliberalism can down the road is extremely naive.

In this sense Lee A. Arnold post ( 07.04.20 at 5:20 pm #12) is completely detached from reality.

[Jul 03, 2020] I don't think we can assume that even now Trump actually has control of the FBI; it is still in hands of Obama faction

Highly recommended!
FBI does have strong levers on Trump. This is the essence of the "Deep State" concept -- intelligence agencies became unhinged and work as a powerful political actors.
Notable quotes:
"... Thank you Mina, yes that or the deep state throwing down the gauntlet. I don't think we can assume that Trump actually has control of the FBI. If he did he would likely have deep sixed the Democrazis through the Awan family spy and blackmail scam. But he didn't. They and Debbie Wasserman Shultz were protected/had dirt on DT. ..."
Jul 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
uncle tungsten , Jul 3 2020 7:08 utc | 107

Mina #101

Maxwell's arrest makes me wonder if it is not about Trump throwing down the gauntlet?

Thank you Mina, yes that or the deep state throwing down the gauntlet. I don't think we can assume that Trump actually has control of the FBI. If he did he would likely have deep sixed the Democrazis through the Awan family spy and blackmail scam. But he didn't. They and Debbie Wasserman Shultz were protected/had dirt on DT.

If the kiddy fiddlers get outed following Ghislaine dropping some of her likely thousands of hours of home movies then that includes Trump and Biden.

In the fetid atmosphere of accusations against pussy grabbers and finger f#ckers and hair sniffers neither could survive. The pack will run rabid.

Is there a woman in the house? Yes, they cried AND she has experience!! Plus the campaign will be televised and it would be a virtual campaign because Covid. No need to rig audience, the polls or the balllot.

[Jul 03, 2020] Biden on July 4: this good and benevolent government was given to us by, you know, the thing

Jul 03, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Via Babylon Bee,

"This good and benevolent government was given to us by, you know, the thing," said Joe Biden.

"We should take a moment and be thankful for that. You know, I was around on the first Dependence Day, when Paul Washington and George Revere rode their donkeys into the holy city of Washington. I watched them come into town. I even stuck a feather in Revere's hat and called him 'macaroni'. He didn't really appreciate that, you know. But it was a good time."

[Jul 03, 2020] Apparently, however, Mayor Durkan does not want posterity to forget the glory days of what she had predicted would be a summer of love.

They did "God's work" for neoliberal Dems as unforgettable Vampire Squid head honcho Lloyd Blankfein quipped for a different reason
Jul 03, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Writes The Washington Post:

"Durkan called for charges to be dismissed against those who were arrested for alleged misdemeanors The mayor also said that Seattle arts and parks departments would preserve a community garden and artwork and murals that protesters created within the zone."

...Statues of Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Grant and Theodore Roosevelt are dragged down, while the murals and graffiti of misfits who trashed downtown Seattle are to be preserved.

[Jul 02, 2020] Was Nikolai Yezhov (head of the NKVD from 1936 to 1938) an inspiration for Pelosi: she now claims tha the USA should sanction Russia for alleged bounty scheme

It is not just senility. Looks like Ukrainegate is not enough for her and she wants to throw kitchen sink at Trump. Charging for "alleged" action is directly from Stalin's NKVD practice
Jul 02, 2020 | www.msn.com

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday called for US sanctions against Russia's intelligence service over bounties that it reportedly offered Taliban militants to kill American soldiers in Afghanistan.

[Jul 02, 2020] Buying cat in a bag, Biden style: Neoliberal Democrats are reportedly HIDING Biden's economic advisers (as well as Joe himself) - and there is a simple reason for that

Jul 02, 2020 | www.rt.com

...After drawing outrage from progressives for having Larry Summers – a neoliberal economist who ran the Treasury under Bill Clinton and later Harvard University – advising the campaign, back in April, Biden's handlers have decided to keep mum about his advisers going forward.

Anyone advising Biden has been sworn to secrecy, banned from even acknowledging their relationship with the campaign, let alone revealing the names of other members, according to a New York Times feature on Thursday, titled 'Biden's Brain Trust on the Economy: Liberal and Sworn to Silence'.

"Simply put, do not talk to the press": Biden is now seeking input from more than 100 left-leaning economists and other researchers, but shrouding his team in secrecy. ⁦ @jimtankersley ⁩ ⁦ @thomaskaplanhttps://t.co/E6h8Eumydf

[Jul 02, 2020] 'I'll read my daily briefings' Joe Biden hailed online for setting 'lowest bar ever' for US president -- RT USA News

Notable quotes:
"... "lowest bar ever" ..."
Jul 02, 2020 | www.rt.com

Presumptive Democratic nominee for President Joe Biden has perplexed the Internet by making a highly confusing brag against sitting President Donald Trump, by saying that he will "read his daily briefings."

...The lack of overt context in his statement quickly led many commenters to declare his pledge the "lowest bar ever" for a presidential hopeful.

Biden can't read a teleprompter, never mind daily briefings. https://t.co/MMSnPM2pao

-- 🇺🇸 Mark Trumpinski 🇺🇸 (@mbski23) July 2, 2020

[Jun 30, 2020] It is naive that old semi-senile neocon (aka MIC prostitute) change his antics; bind will continue Full spectrum Dominance policies, no matter how deeply in dent is the the country

Jun 30, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Biden's known foreign policy advisers are a who's who of the foreign policy establishment. Recent comments by some high-profile members of Biden's brain trust show an undiminished, and decidedly unprogressive, enthusiasm for regime change wars, sanctions, and nuclear weapons.

Biden's top foreign policy adviser, former deputy secretary of state Antony Blinken, recently expressed his regret that the Obama administration didn't do enough to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria. Clearly he would like a second bite at the apple. And in a recent discussion hosted by the American Jewish Committee (AJC), Blinken promised that a Biden administration would keep in place all U.S. sanctions on Iran, including the ones that were put in place by Trump, in violation of the terms of the Iranian nuclear accord. Music to AIPAC's ears.

Meanwhile, two other Biden advisers, former Defense Department officials Jim Townsend and Michelle Flournoy, recently took to the pages of Der Spiegel to argue against a proposal by the chairman of the social democrats in the Bundestag to remove American nuclear weapons from Germany. Townsend and Flournoy write that the very idea of a Germany without the capacity to drop nuclear bombs "strikes at the heart of the trans-Atlantic bargain." The idea that Germany might (quite understandably) want to free itself from such a Strangelovian "bargain" left the two former Pentagon officials aghast.

Even worse, as The Atlantic 's Peter Beinart points out, "Instead of challenging the Pentagon's sky-high budget, Biden's highest-profile foreign-policy foray since clinching the Democratic nomination has been to try to out-hawk Donald Trump on China."

Then there's Biden's own record on matters of war and peace. As ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden appeared to ridicule the testimony of UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter, who testified before the committee in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Biden, as we all know, would subsequently vote to authorize the war.


kouroi 7 hours ago

Is it Biden though? I didn't think a turnip can run foreign policy. There is no difference here between democrats and republicans, they both agree on the full spectrum dominance and keeping Europe (Germany), Russia, China, Japan down (never mind the smaller actors like Iran and Venezuela, or Cuba for that matter), by all means...

phreethink kouroi 5 hours ago

Cute "turnip" comment. Of course, Trump has supposedly been running our foreign policy for three years, so I'm not all that worried about Biden.

And yes, the American imperialist foreign policy over the past decades has been bipartisan. And wrong.

phreethink 5 hours ago

Well stated. Agree completely. The fact that the Dems nominated someone who voted for the Iraq war is disappointing...

[Jun 29, 2020] Secret Service Agent Confirms Horrific Biden Stories - YouTube

Jun 29, 2020 | www.youtube.com



Victor Valenti
, 1 month ago

Sexual assault is not about sex, it's about power. I watched about half of that montage mentioned and I was thoroughly disgusted... Biden is the worst kind of creep... Where's the metoo movement on him??


Ivy Moon
, 3 weeks ago

Joe Biden is despicable and is only a place holder for whoever the deep state really wants!!


Susie Alavi
, 1 month ago

I grew up right there as well. My late father respected joe's dad who used to come into the dealership to make his car payment ( my dad's first job.) Dad always insisted that joe is a phoney, a plagerist, and elitist. Everyone with a brain from the Brandywine Valley and Wilmington area knows he's a liar and a racist as well. He thinks he's smart, but he's a creepy old weirdo, the uncle your parents warned you to stay away from at family functions!


Douglas Carlson
, 1 month ago

I'm old enough to remember Biden when was serving as the chair of the committee investigating Anita Hill's allegations against Clarence Thomas. At that time, I know nothing if his sexual appetite, but his behavior during those proceedings was weird.

[Jun 28, 2020] Krystal Ball Predicts- Biden's failures will trigger a Dem civil war

Jun 28, 2020 | www.youtube.com

Dorian Michel Armenteros Sanchez , 2 days ago

And u won't move Biden an inch to the progressive side. That's just an illusion the guy DOESNT CARE. U can't reason with something that DOESNT CARE.

[Jun 28, 2020] Once neocon always neocon, even with dementia: Biden slams Trump for not sanctioning Russia over Afghan militant 'bounties' intelligence; previously before dementia hit him be supported similar rumor that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction

Rumors presented as fact: "This is beyond the pale. It's a betrayal of the most sacred duty in the nation: to protect our troops when we send them into harm's way,
Notable quotes:
"... "Intelligence" is not evidence. ..."
"... A war was started based on "Intelligence" that was never supported by evidence. ..."
Jun 28, 2020 | thehill.com

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany later denied that Trump and Vice President Pence were briefed on the intelligence, but did not deny that the intelligence was accurate.

The Russian government and Taliban officials have also denied the reports.

..."This is beyond the pale. It's a betrayal of the most sacred duty in the nation: to protect our troops when we send them into harm's way," Biden said.


UnFNbelievable 37 minutes ago

"Vlad! Vlad! You gotta give me something here! They're MY men! You want to kill MY MEN and I don't get NOTHING? Vlad! I thought you were a businessman!"
Jose Canisales 2 hours ago
Shut-up Biden, you old fart. Always criticizing every move Trump makes. I'm tired of hearing you complain. You have no solutions other than criticize.
This Latino-Hispanic for Trump. section data-role="main" data-tracking-area="main"
SlammoFandango 4 hours ago
"Intelligence" is not evidence.

There was "Intelligence" that Saddam Hussein was furnishing terrorists with chemical, biological, and radiological weapons.....but of course there wasn't any evidence because there can not be evidence of something that does not exist. A war was started based on "Intelligence" that was never supported by evidence.

There was "Intelligence" that the North Vietnamese Navy attacked the USS Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin and a war was started but never was there evidence to support the claims of "Intelligence".

[Jun 28, 2020] Biden is the intelligence services' ideal candidate -- an easily manipulated empty suit.

Jun 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

JohnH , Jun 27 2020 14:45 utc | 2

Biden is the intelligence services' ideal candidate -- an easily manipulated empty suit. There's a reason why charges of Biden wrongdoing are as easily dismissed as nonsensical charges against Trump and Russia get fabricated. And that reason is that the media is as happy to be manipulated as Biden.

[Jun 28, 2020] Is Amendment 25 is Dems post-election plan in case of victory?

Jun 28, 2020 | thehill.com

Bonsoir 24 minutes ago • edited

Who's kidding who? Joe has early stage Alzheimer's. I know it. You know it. The people running Joe's campaign know it. But they also realize Joe is the only candidate with a chance to beat Trump.

So the plan is to run him, despite his failing memory and unfortunate mental disease, get him elected, then use Amendment 25 to send him to Shady Grove Assisted Living and elevate his VP to the Whote House.

The disgrace of course is the Dems running mentally handicapped man for strictly political reasons

[Jun 25, 2020] Did Obama-Biden Lie Strzok's Newly Discovered FBI Notes Reignite Obamagate by John Solomon

Jun 24, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
Authored by John Solomon via JustTheNews.com,

The belated discovery of disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok's January 2017 notes raises troubling new questions about whether President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden were coordinating efforts during their final days in office to investigate Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn -- even as the FBI wanted to shut down the case.

Investigators will need to secure testimony from Strzok, fired two years ago from the FBI, to be certain of the exact meaning and intent of his one paragraph of notes, which were made public in court on Wednesday.

But they appear to illuminate an extraordinary high-level effort by outgoing Obama-era officials during the first weekend of January to find a way to sustain a counterintelligence investigation of Flynn in the absence of any evidence of wrongdoing.

The Justice Department says the notes were written between Jan. 3-5, 2017, the very weekend the FBI agent who had investigated Flynn's ties to Russia for five months recommended the case be closed because there was "no derogatory" evidence that he committed a crime or posed a counterintelligence threat. FBI supervisors overruled the agent's recommendation.

Strzok's notes appear to quote then-FBI Director James Comey as suggesting that Flynn's intercepted calls with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak "appear legit," bolstering other recently disclosed evidence showing the bureau saw nothing wrong with Flynn's behavior.

The notes also suggest Biden -- who once claimed he had no knowledge of the Flynn probe -- raised the issue of the Logan Act, an obscure, centuries-old law, as a possible avenue for continuing to investigate Flynn.

And Strzok appears to quote Obama as suggesting the FBI assign "the right people" to pursue the case.

You can read the notes here:

These conversations, if accurately portrayed in the Strzok notes, occurred during the same three-day period in which FBI supervisors overruled their field agent's recommendation to shut down the Flynn case and pivoted toward the strategy of luring Flynn into an FBI interview where he might be caught lying.

Sidney Powell, Flynn's lawyer, laid out the potential ramifications of the notes in a court filing on Wednesday, calling the new evidence "stunning and exculpatory."

"Mr. Obama himself directed that 'the right people' investigate General Flynn. This caused former FBI Director Comey to acknowledge the obvious: General Flynn's phone calls with Ambassador Kislyak 'appear legit,'" Powell argued in her new motion.

" According to Strzok's notes, it appears that Vice President Biden personally raised the idea of the Logan Act. That became an admitted pretext to investigate General Flynn," she added.

You can read her filing here: The notes are unlikely to have a substantial impact on the outcome of Flynn's case because a three-judge appeals court panel in Washington earlier Wednesday ordered U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan to immediately dismiss Flynn's prior conviction for lying to the FBI.

Even if the rebuked judge appeals the decision or the full appeals court reconsiders the case, Flynn is likely on a path to being a free and innocent man.

The real impact of the notes may be on the Justice Department's ongoing investigation of the Russia investigators, where U.S. Attorneys John Durham and Jeff Jensen are determining whether the FBI or others committed crimes in deceiving the courts or Congress about the evidence in the now-discredited Russia collusion allegations.

A former senior FBI official told Just the News that Strzok's notes about the White House meeting are a red flag that the Comey-led bureau may have been involving itself illegitimately in a political dispute between the outgoing Obama administration and incoming Trump administration.

"It was a political meeting about a policy dispute, and the bureau had no business being involved," Former Assistant Director for Intelligence Kevin Brock said. "No other FBI director would ever have attended such a meeting.

"Comey is quoted in the notes as saying the Kislyak call appeared legit. At that point he should have gotten up and left the room," Brock added.

"The FBI had no business being represented in that meeting. It did not have a counterintelligence interest any longer."

A second impact of the notes could be on the campaign trail. A few months ago, Biden claimed he was unaware of the Flynn probe as he was leaving the VP's office.

"I know nothing about those moves to investigate Michael Flynn," he said.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/3Yrblo64caA

He then clarified his denial.

"I was aware that they asked for an investigation," Biden said. "But that's all I know about it, and I don't think anything else."

If Powell's interpretation of the notes is correct, Biden was knowledgeable enough to suggest a possible pretext for continued investigation, the Logan Act. And he eventually unmasked one of Flynn's intercepted phone calls a week later.

Former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes told Just the News on Wednesday the newly discovered notes affirm his long-held suspicion that the Obama White House was trying to influence the FBI's Russia probe in untoward ways.

" Now we know both Obama and Biden were directly involved in planning the attack on Flynn ," Nunes said.

"The Obama administration exploited our intelligence community to spy on their political opponents and engineer bogus investigations and prosecutions of them.

"This is the single biggest abuse of power I've seen in my lifetime," he added.

[Jun 23, 2020] It is shocking to see such a disgusting piece of human garbage like Joe Biden get so many working class voters to vote for him. Biden has never missed a chance to stab the working class in the back in service to his wealthy patrons.

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... From wiping out the ability of regular folks to declare bankruptcy (something supported by our founding fathers who were NOT socialists), to shipping our industrial base to communist China (which in less enlightened days would have been termed treason), to spending tens of trillions of dollars bailing out and subsiding the big banks (that's not a misprint), to supporting "surprise medical billing," to opening the borders to massive third-world immigration so that wages can be driven down and reset and profits up (As 2015 Bernie Sanders pointed out), Backstabbing Joe Biden is neoliberal scum pure and simple. ..."
"... It's astonishing that so many people will just blindly accept what they are told, that Biden is. "moderate." Biden is so far to the right, he makes Nixon look like Trotsky. ..."
"... Joe Biden is a crook and a con man. He has been lying his whole life. Claimed in his 1988 Campaign to have got 3 degrees at college and finished in top half of his class. Actually only got 1 degree & finished 76th out of 85 in his class. ..."
Mar 03, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

TG , Mar 3 2020 22:02 utc | 56

Yet another circus. The proles get to scream and holler, and when all is done, the oligarchy gets the policies it wants, the public be damned. Our sham 'democracy' is a con to privatize power and socialize responsibility.

Although it is shocking to see such a disgusting piece of human garbage like Joe Biden get substantial numbers of people to vote for him. Biden has never missed a chance to stab the working class in the back in service to his wealthy patrons.

The issue is not (for me) his creepiness (I wouldn't much mind if he was on my side), nor even his Alzheimer's, but his established track record of betrayal and corruption.

From wiping out the ability of regular folks to declare bankruptcy (something supported by our founding fathers who were NOT socialists), to shipping our industrial base to communist China (which in less enlightened days would have been termed treason), to spending tens of trillions of dollars bailing out and subsiding the big banks (that's not a misprint), to supporting "surprise medical billing," to opening the borders to massive third-world immigration so that wages can be driven down and reset and profits up (As 2015 Bernie Sanders pointed out), Backstabbing Joe Biden is neoliberal scum pure and simple.

It's astonishing that so many people will just blindly accept what they are told, that Biden is. "moderate." Biden is so far to the right, he makes Nixon look like Trotsky. Heck, he makes Calvin Coolidge look like Trotsky.

Mao , Mar 3 2020 22:01 utc | 55

Ian56:

Joe Biden is a crook and a con man. He has been lying his whole life. Claimed in his 1988 Campaign to have got 3 degrees at college and finished in top half of his class. Actually only got 1 degree & finished 76th out of 85 in his class.

[VIDEO]

https://twitter.com/Ian56789/status/1234914227963518977

[Jun 22, 2020] It's not hard to look back and say we blew it, again

Semi-senile Creepy Joe is not a part of the answer; he is a part of the problem
Jun 22, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
George , Jun 22 2020 0:30 utc | 61

DD@54.

get rid of a very popular socialist leaning candidate with absolutely no consideration about having a candidate better than Bernie.

Agree

I don't know why but no one takes the primary elections seriously, (except Circe) when in reality it really is the most important one of all. Could it be Americans are just not ready for what the rest of the world has? That is health care and education as a right?

How is it all you hear now is how there is no choice between these two pieces of boomer poop when the opportunity to elect younger, more viable candidate's have come and gone, yet again.

I read right here how Bernie was a socialist, Gabbard stood with Israel, Yang was bent right, Warren was faux Native American, Buttigieg hails SCOTUS decision on LGBTQ workers "an enormous step forward" and Harris make her career sleeping with powerful people and so on.

No one wanted to get behind any of these or the others and push them into the White House. It was just constant nit picking that got us Biden, the DNC default.

It's not hard to look back and say we blew it, again.

[Jun 22, 2020] I should think when Joe Biden's brain starts flat-lining and only a cryogenic chamber can keep him alive will he finally become the perfect candidate to contest the 2020 US Presidential elections

Jun 22, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jen , Jun 22 2020 1:45 utc | 69

I should think when Joe Biden's brain starts flat-lining and only a cryogenic chamber can keep him alive will he finally become the perfect candidate to contest the 2020 US Presidential elections. One has to be brain-dead to even think of campaigning for a job where the main job requirement is to park your brain at the door, irrespective of how much you might earn and whether you get to have that little gadget with the red button (that sends all the start-up codes to your nation's nuke missiles) in your desk.

[Jun 16, 2020] How Woke Politics Keeps Class Solidarity Down by GREGOR BASZAK

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Anti-racism as an ideology serves a perfect function for corporations that ultimately take workers for granted. ..."
"... Today, we find Lincoln statues desecrated . Neither has the memorial to the 54th Massachusetts Infantry , one of the first all-black units in the Civil War, survived the recent protests unscathed. To many on the left, history seems like the succession of one cruelty by the next. And so, justice may only be served if we scrap the past and start from a blank slate. As a result, Lincoln's appeal that we stand upright and enjoy our liberty gets lost to time. ..."
"... Ironically, this will only help the cause of Robert E. Lee -- and the modern corporations who rely on cheap, inhumane labor to keep themselves going. ..."
"... Before black slaves did this work, white indentured servants had. (An indentured servant is bound for a number of years to his master, i.e. he can't pack up and leave to find a new opportunity elsewhere.) ..."
"... But in the eyes of the Southern slavocracy, the white laboring poor of the North also weren't truly human. Such unholy antebellum figures as the social theorist George Fitzhugh or South Carolina Senator James Henry Hammond urged that the condition of slavery be expanded to include poor whites, too. Their hunger for a cheap, subservient labor source did not stop at black people, after all. ..."
"... Always remember Barbara Fields's formula: The need for cheap labor comes first; ideologies like white supremacy only give this bleak reality a spiritual gloss. ..."
"... Michael Lind argues in his new book The New Class War that many powerful businesses in America today continue to rely on the work of quasi indentured servants. Hungry for unfree, cheap workers, corporations in Silicon Valley and beyond employ tens of thousands of foreign workers through the H-2B visa program. These workers are bound to the company that provided them with the visa. If they find conditions at their jobs unbearable, they can't switch employers -- they would get deported first. In turn, this source of cheap labor effectively underbids American workers who could do the same job, except that they would ask for higher pay. ..."
"... We're getting turned into rats. Naturally, this is no fertile soil for solidarity. And with so many jobs precarious and subcontracted out on a temporary basis, there is preciously little that most workers can do to fight back this insidious managerial control. Free labor looks different. ..."
"... It's hard to come out of the 2020 primaries without realizing that the corporations that run our mainstream media will do anything to protect their right to abuse cheap labor. ..."
"... At this point in history, to the extent that black people suffer any meaningful oppression at all, its down to disproportionate poverty rates, not their racial background. ..."
"... I agree one hundred percent with your take on Biden. Let me add something else: he is a war hawk who not only voted for the Iraq war but used his position as the chairman of an important committee to promote it. ..."
"... Because of slavery alot of bad political policy was incorporated in the founding documents. If a police officer is about to wrongly arrest you because you are black , you do not care if his hatred stems from 400 years of discrimination against blacks. Rather you care that he won't kill you in this encounter because of his racism. ..."
"... Baszak believes racism has no life of its own, it exists only as a tool of the bosses. This is vulgar Marxism. At least since the decades after Bacon's Rebellion ended in 1677, poor whites have invested in white supremacy as a way of boosting their social status. Most Southern families owned no slaves, yet most joined the Civil War cause. ..."
"... They made a movie that beautifully touches this in the 1970s with Harvey Keitel and Richard Pryor called " Blue Collar ." ..."
"... "That's exactly what the company wants: to keep you on their line," says Smokey, the coolest and most strategically minded of the crew. "They'll do anything to keep you on their line. They pit the lifers against the new boys, the old against the young, the black against the white -- everybody -- to keep us in our place." ..."
"... The core thesis in this piece is the animating foundation of The Hill's political talk show "Rising." Composed of a populist Bernie supporter (Krystal Ball) and populist conservative (Saagar Enjeti) as hosts, they frequently highlight the purpose of woke cultural battles is to distract everyone for their neoliberal economic models ..."
Jun 16, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Anti-racism as an ideology serves a perfect function for corporations that ultimately take workers for granted.

Former injured Amazon employees join labor organizers and community activists to demonstrate and hold a press conference outside of an Amazon Go store to express concerns about what they claim is the company's "alarming injury rate" among warehouse workers on December 10, 2019 in Chicago, Illinois. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

On April 2, 1865, in the dying days of the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln wandered the streets of burnt out Richmond, the former Confederate capital. All of a sudden, Lincoln found himself surrounded by scores of emancipated men and women. Here's how the historian James McPherson describes the moving episode in his magisterial book Battle Cry of Freedom :

Several freed slaves touched Lincoln to make sure he was real. "I know I am free," shouted an old woman, "for I have seen Father Abraham and felt him." Overwhelmed by rare emotions, Lincoln said to one black man who fell on his knees in front of him: "Don't kneel to me. That is not right. You must kneel to God only, and thank Him for the liberty you will enjoy hereafter."

Lincoln's legacy as the Great Emancipator has survived the century and a half since then largely intact. But there have been cracks in this image, mostly caused by questioning academics who decried him as an overt white supremacist. This view eventually entered the mainstream when Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote misleadingly in her lead essay to the "1619 Project" that Lincoln "opposed black equality."

Today, we find Lincoln statues desecrated . Neither has the memorial to the 54th Massachusetts Infantry , one of the first all-black units in the Civil War, survived the recent protests unscathed. To many on the left, history seems like the succession of one cruelty by the next. And so, justice may only be served if we scrap the past and start from a blank slate. As a result, Lincoln's appeal that we stand upright and enjoy our liberty gets lost to time.

Ironically, this will only help the cause of Robert E. Lee -- and the modern corporations who rely on cheap, inhumane labor to keep themselves going.

***

The main idea driving the "1619 Project" and so much of recent scholarship is that the United States of America originated in slavery and white supremacy. These were its true founding ideals. Racism, Hannah-Jones writes, is in our DNA.

Such arguments don't make any sense, as the historian Barbara Fields clairvoyantly argued in a groundbreaking essay from 1990. Why would Virginia planters in the 17th century import black people purely out of hate? No, Fields countered, the planters were driven by a real need for dependable workers who would toil on their cotton, rice, and tobacco fields for little to no pay. Before black slaves did this work, white indentured servants had. (An indentured servant is bound for a number of years to his master, i.e. he can't pack up and leave to find a new opportunity elsewhere.)

After 1776 everything changed. Suddenly the new republic claimed that "all men are created equal" -- and yet there were millions of slaves who still couldn't enjoy this equality. Racism helped to square our founding ideals with the brute reality of continued chattel slavery: Black people simply weren't men.

But in the eyes of the Southern slavocracy, the white laboring poor of the North also weren't truly human. Such unholy antebellum figures as the social theorist George Fitzhugh or South Carolina Senator James Henry Hammond urged that the condition of slavery be expanded to include poor whites, too. Their hunger for a cheap, subservient labor source did not stop at black people, after all.

Always remember Barbara Fields's formula: The need for cheap labor comes first; ideologies like white supremacy only give this bleak reality a spiritual gloss.

The true cause of the Civil War -- and it bears constant repeating for all the doubters -- was whether slavery would expand its reach or whether "free labor" would reign supreme. The latter was the dominant ideology of the North: Free laborers are independent, self-reliant, and eventually achieve economic security and independence by the sweat of their brow. It's the American Dream. But if that is so, then the Civil War ended in a tie -- and its underlying conflict was never really settled.

***

Michael Lind argues in his new book The New Class War that many powerful businesses in America today continue to rely on the work of quasi indentured servants. Hungry for unfree, cheap workers, corporations in Silicon Valley and beyond employ tens of thousands of foreign workers through the H-2B visa program. These workers are bound to the company that provided them with the visa. If they find conditions at their jobs unbearable, they can't switch employers -- they would get deported first. In turn, this source of cheap labor effectively underbids American workers who could do the same job, except that they would ask for higher pay.

America's wealth rests on this mutual competition between workers -- some nominally "free," others basically indentured -- whether it be through unjust visa schemes or other unfair managerial practices.

Remember that the next time you read a public announcement by the Amazons of this world that they remain committed to "black lives matter" and similar identitarian causes.

Fortunately, very few Americans hold the same racial resentments in their hearts as their ancestors did even just half a century ago. Rarely did we agree as much than when the nation near unanimously condemned the death of George Floyd at the hands of a few Minneapolis police officers. This is in keeping with another fortunate trend: Over the last 40 years, the rate of police killings of young black men declined by 79% percent .

But anti-racism as an ideology serves a perfect function for our corporations, even despite the evidence that people in this country have grown much less bigotted than they once were: As a management tool, anti-racism sows constant suspicion among workers who are encouraged to detect white supremacist sentiments in everything that their fellow workers say or do.

We're getting turned into rats. Naturally, this is no fertile soil for solidarity. And with so many jobs precarious and subcontracted out on a temporary basis, there is preciously little that most workers can do to fight back this insidious managerial control. Free labor looks different.

And so, through a surprising back door, the true cause for which Robert E. Lee chose to betray his country might still be coming out on top, whether we remove his statues or not -- namely, the steady supply to our ruling corporations of unfree workers willing to hustle for scraps.

It's time to follow Abraham Lincoln's urging and get off our knees again. We should assert our rights as American citizens to live free from economic insecurity and mutual resentment. The vast majority of us harbor no white supremacist views, period. Instead, we have so many more things in common, and we know it.

Another anecdote from the last days of the Civil War, also taken from Battle Cry of Freedom, might prove instructive here: The surrender of Lee's Army of Northern Virginia to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865 essentially ended the Civil War. The ceremony was held with solemn respect for Lee, though one of Grant's adjutants couldn't help himself but have a subtle dig at Lee's expense:

After signing the papers, Grant introduced Lee to his staff. As he shook hands with Grant's military secretary Ely Parker, a Seneca Indian, Lee stared a moment at Parker's dark features and said, "I am glad to see one real American here." Parker responded, "We are all Americans."

Gregor Baszak is a PhD Candidate in English at the University of Illinois at Chicago and a writer. His articles have appeared in Los Angeles Review of Books, Public Books, Spectator USA, Spiked, and elsewhere. Follow Gregor on Twitter at @gregorbas1.


Megan S 15 hours ago

It's a bit off-topic but this is a big reason I supported Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Primary this year, he was the only candidate talking about how businesses demand that cheap labor, illegal labor, replace American labor. For this, the corporate media called him a racist, an anti-semite, a dangerous radical. None of his opponents aside from Elizabeth Warren had anything to run on aside from pseudo-woke touchy-feely bs. And somehow, with the media insisting that Joe Biden was the only one who could beat Trump, we ended up with the one candidate who was neither good on economics, good for American workers, or offering platitudes about wokeness.

It's hard to come out of the 2020 primaries without realizing that the corporations that run our mainstream media will do anything to protect their right to abuse cheap labor.

JonF311 Victor_the_thinker 8 hours ago

Racism is very real. If it weren't it couldn't be used to "divide and conquer" the working calss. we can walk and chew gum and the same time: oppose racism, and also oppose exploitive labor practices.

Bureaucrat Victor_the_thinker an hour ago • edited

What kind of polemic, unsupported statement is "black fast food workers are the ones who gave us the fight for $15"? How about it was a broad coalition of progressives (of all colors)? Moreover, $15 minimum wage is a poor, one-size-fits-all band-aid that I doubt even fits ONE scenario. Tackling the broader shareholder capitalism model of labor arbitrage (free trade/mass immigration), deunionization, and monopolistic hurdles drafted by corporations is where it actually matters. And on that, we are seeing the inklings of a populist left-right coalition -- if corporate-funded race hustlers could only get out of the way.

Bureaucrat JonF311 2 hours ago • edited

That's the problem. We CAN'T chew gum and walk at the same time. Every minute focusing on racial friction is a minute NOT talking about neoliberal economics. What's the ratio of air time, social media discussion, or newspaper inches are devoted to race vis-a-vis the economic system that has starved the working class -- which is disproportionately black and brown? 10 to 1? 100 to 1? 1000 to 1? If there are no decent working class jobs for young black and brown men, then it makes it nearly impossible to raise families. Let's be clear: Systemic racism is real, but it is far less impactful than economic injustices and family dissolution.

Selvar Victor_the_thinker 33 minutes ago • edited

Class really isn't the primary issue for black people.

That's a frankly ridiculous statement. At this point in history, to the extent that black people suffer any meaningful oppression at all, its down to disproportionate poverty rates, not their racial background. No one--except a few neurotic, high-strung corporate HR PMC types--cares about "microaggressions". Even unjust police shootings of blacks are likely down to class and not race--despite the politically correct narrative saying otherwise.

Putting racial identity politics as an equal (or even greater) priority than class-based solidarity creates an absurd system where an upper-middle class black woman attending Yale can act as if a working class white man is oppressing her by not acknowledging his "white privilege", and not bowing to her every demand. It's utterly delusional to think that sort of culture is going to create a more just or equal world.

joeo Megan S 9 hours ago shiva

Biden is a Rorschach test, people see whatever they want in a party apparatchik. Trump has been Shiva, the destroyer of the traditional Republican party. How else do you explain the support among Multi-Billionaires for the Democratic party. Truly ironic.

Jessica Ramer Megan S 8 hours ago

I agree one hundred percent with your take on Biden. Let me add something else: he is a war hawk who not only voted for the Iraq war but used his position as the chairman of an important committee to promote it. I understand that he still wants to divide Iraq into three separate countries--a decision for Iraqis to make and not us. If we try to implement that policy, it would doubtless lead to more American deaths--to say nothing of Iraqi deaths.

So not only is he not good for American workers, he is not good for the American soldier who is disproportionately likely not to be from the elite classes but rather from the working and lower-middle class.

The only other Democratic candidate who opposed war-mongering besides Sanders was Tulsi Gabbard. I watched CNN commentary after a debate in which she participated. While the other participants received lots of commentary from CNN talking heads. she got almost nothing. She was featured in a video montage of candidates saying "Trump"; other than that, she was invisible in the post-debate analysis.

Megan S Jessica Ramer 7 hours ago

I don't know how far it travelled outside of Democratic primary voters, but I recall Biden's campaign saying that they were planning to be sort of a placeholder that would pass the torch to the next generation. He's insinuated that he only wants to serve one term and saw jumping into the race as the only way to beat Trump. Not the most exciting platform for the Democrats to run on.

As depressing as this primary was, it's good to see that the rising generation of Democrats was resistant to platitudes and demanded actual policy proposals.

Shame the party elders fell for the same old tricks yet again. I just hope that once there are more of us, we can have a serious policy debate in both major parties about free trade, immigration, inequality. The parties' voters aren't all that far apart on economics, yet neither of us is being given what we want. Whichever party sincerely takes a stand for the American working class stands to dominate American politics for a generation.

kouroi Megan S 5 hours ago

"Shame the party elders fell for the same old tricks yet again."

Oops, they tripped, poor oldies, not good in keeping their balance, eh?!

Bureaucrat Megan S 2 hours ago • edited

The problem with Biden's "placeholder" comments is that he specifically mentioned it for Pete Buttigeig, the McKinsey-trained career opportunist who believes in his bones the same neoliberal economics and interventionist foreign policies as the last generation. Same bad ideas, new woke packaging.

Megan S Bureaucrat 2 hours ago

On the bright side, young people despise Buttigieg and his attempt to cast us all as homophobic didn't really catch on outside of corporate media.

Bureaucrat Megan S an hour ago

Kamala Harris and Susan Rice, both tops on the VP list, will do just fine in place of Buttigieg - he's slated to revive TPP as the new USTR cabinet lead.

kouroi 14 hours ago

And just like that Mr. Baszak has become the second favorite writer here at TAC, after Mr. Larison...

stephen pickard 9 hours ago

Because of slavery alot of bad political policy was incorporated in the founding documents. If a police officer is about to wrongly arrest you because you are black , you do not care if his hatred stems from 400 years of discrimination against blacks. Rather you care that he won't kill you in this encounter because of his racism.

To me, I have always thought that America's original sin was slavery. Its stain can not be completely wiped out.

And I further believe that if Native Americans would have enslaved the newly arrived Europeans, and remained the ruling majority, white people would be discriminated against today.

So the problem is not that white people are inherently evil, or other races are inherently good. It is that because of slavery black people are bad, white people are good.

As a nation we have never been able to wash out the stain completely. Never will. Getting closer to the promised land is the best we are going to do. Probably take another 400 years.

In everyday encounters no one cares how discrimination began, just treat me like you want to be treated. Pretty simple.

Randolph Bourne 2 hours ago

"As a management tool, anti-racism sows constant suspicion among workers who are encouraged to detect white supremacist sentiments in everything that their fellow workers say or do."

The author does not offer one smidgen of proof that any company uses antiracism to divide workers. It might be plausible that it's happened, but Baszak has no data at all.

Over the last 40 years, the rate of police killings of young black men declined by 79% percent.

You think this is an accident? It came about through intense pressure on the police to stop killing Black people -- exactly the sort of racial emphasis the author seems to be decrying. Important to note that the non-fatal mistreatment has remained high.

The need for cheap labor comes first; ideologies like white supremacy only give this bleak reality a spiritual gloss

Baszak believes racism has no life of its own, it exists only as a tool of the bosses. This is vulgar Marxism. At least since the decades after Bacon's Rebellion ended in 1677, poor whites have invested in white supremacy as a way of boosting their social status. Most Southern families owned no slaves, yet most joined the Civil War cause. The psychological draw of racism, its cultural strength, are obviated by Barszak. And I bet Barbara Fields does not consider racism an epiphenomenon of economics.

Bureaucrat 2 hours ago

They made a movie that beautifully touches this in the 1970s with Harvey Keitel and Richard Pryor called "Blue Collar."

"That's exactly what the company wants: to keep you on their line," says Smokey, the coolest and most strategically minded of the crew. "They'll do anything to keep you on their line. They pit the lifers against the new boys, the old against the young, the black against the white -- everybody -- to keep us in our place."

Bureaucrat an hour ago

The core thesis in this piece is the animating foundation of The Hill's political talk show "Rising." Composed of a populist Bernie supporter (Krystal Ball) and populist conservative (Saagar Enjeti) as hosts, they frequently highlight the purpose of woke cultural battles is to distract everyone for their neoliberal economic models -- a system that actually has greater deleterious impact on black communities.

This video is one recent example of what you'll rarely see in mainstream media:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Chq_VxzDsSc

[Jun 16, 2020] Krystal Ball- Dems virtue signal on BLM while preserving status quo

Just like Cornell West suggested, black faces in high places hasn't solved the problem. Obama is a vivid example.
Notable quotes:
"... It is Class Warfare. There are no "Democrats" or "Republicans" .. There are the "Rich and Powerful" and then the "Rest of Us" And when we stand up, they take aim... ..."
"... Dr. Cornel West, "We have tried Black Faces in high places ..." ..."
Jun 16, 2020 | www.youtube.com

Krystal Ball calls out D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and the Dem establishment for surface level support of the Black Lives Matter movement.


Crush Inverted Totalitarianism, 12 hours ago

Speaking of black faces in high places, the entire black caucus endorsed ELIOT ENGEL over a black educater (Jamaal Bowman)...this is aclass war, not a race war

Robert Quin, 12 hours ago (edited)

THERE IS NO DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF AMERICA! There is only Repugnican and Repugnican Lite. There is only hard right and soft right in American politics. There is no left in power.

akinbodeog , 7 hours ago

Electoralism is a scam. You're playing with an unplugged controller. Organise, unionize, protest, riot. If you want to vote, you should vote third party. The Democratic party isn't part of the solution. They are playing good cop, bad cop with republicans with both sides working for capital to impoverish the working class.

Bernard Brother , 6 hours ago

Corporate Democrats would rather lose to a Republican than let a Progressive win. Their resistance is fake AF.

George H , 7 hours ago (edited)

Krystal forgot one "innovation" Biden has suggested.

When talking to black community leaders in Wilmington, Joe Biden said, "Instead of standing there and teaching a cop when there's an unarmed person coming at 'em with a knife or something, shoot 'em in the leg instead of in the heart."

Joe Biden: shoot [protesters] in the leg!

oopsieeee , 5 hours ago

It is Class Warfare. There are no "Democrats" or "Republicans" .. There are the "Rich and Powerful" and then the "Rest of Us" And when we stand up, they take aim...

Paul Rubin , 1 hour ago (edited)

Dr. Cornel West, "We have tried Black Faces in high places ..."

Zain Were , 7 hours ago (edited)

Bravo Krystall!!!!! Often disagree with you but you're a sharp mind...Nailed it this time!!!!!

Sagaar does make a point in terms of the movement being reallly sustantial though..We'll have to see abou that!

[Jun 16, 2020] David Sirota: The real reason Biden is HIDING his economic advisors

Jun 16, 2020 | www.youtube.com

Editor-At-Large at the Jacobin David Sirota discusses the secretive tactics the Biden campaign is using to cover his potential council of advisors from the public.


Alan Schmidt , 4 days ago

Biden is a puppet and it's no surprise they aren't revealing who will really be pulling the strings.

DR Dan , 2 days ago

Joe isn't hiding his advisors, he just cant remember who they are.

Dularr , 4 days ago

It's already been decided. If Biden wins, is all in for the corporate Democrats. Don't expect any changes from the past 40 years.

Robert Quin , 4 days ago

Wall Street has Joe's back and Joe has Wall Street's back. America is owned by the corporatist aristocracy, lock, stock, and barrel,

hudson2441 , 4 days ago

People who should not be listened to by anyone: Rahm Emmanuel, David Axlerod, Anyone from Goldman Sachs or Wall Street, Obama, Clinton, hell any former Presidents, anyone in the DNC.... NO


Stephen Goodfellow
, 4 days ago

Advising Joe? That's hilarious. They're not advising him or his 'team'. They advising his handlers. Joe is way too far gone to make any rational decision on anything. When you vote for Joe, it is his handlers that you will be voting for. The Orange Man or Senile Man? Our goose is cooked.

[Jun 16, 2020] Saagar Enjeti- Obamagate is real and the media can't just ignore it

They gaslighted the whole nation. Amazing achievement. In other words, they are a real criminal gang, a mafia. No questions about it. This is Nixon impeachment level staff. This are people that brought us Lybia, Syria: this senile Creepy Joe.
Jun 16, 2020 | www.youtube.com

Saagar Enjeti blasts former President Obama after it was revealed in transcripts he was the person who told then-deputy attorney general Sally Yates about Mike Flynn's intercepted phone call with the Russian ambassador, Joe Biden responds to Flynn claims on Good Morning America.

Maniachael Productions , 1 month ago

Lmao a war criminal complaining about the rule of law not being upheld

C.I.A. , 3 weeks ago

It's disgusting to me how news sources say that Obama gate isn't real.

[Jun 16, 2020] Saagar Enjeti- BOMBSHELL reveals Biden at center of Obamagate, media ignores

They gaslighted the whole nation. Amazing achievement. In other words, they are a real criminal gang, a mafia. No questions about it.
Jun 16, 2020 | www.youtube.com

Columbus1152 , 1 month ago

Dementia comes in handy at a time like this.

RayC1 , 1 month ago

Biden just described his entire political career, "I was there, but i had nothing to do with it"

Arthur Sprong , 1 month ago

He's not senile, he's getting ready to be "unfit for trial".

Charles Jannuzi , 1 month ago

Bad Brain Joe was Obomber's point man in the Ukraine coup and all the grifting and grafting that followed.

john smith , 1 month ago

"I know nothing about those moves to investigate Flynn." "These documents clearly outline that you were in a meeting at a specific time specifically about that." "OH! I'm sorry! I thought you asked if I was INVOLVED IN IT!"

Jeff Zekas , 1 month ago (edited)

The word is "entrapment" - Years ago, one of the officers in the investigations squad said to me, "How can you claim to be better than them, if you break the law to catch 'em?" - Now I understand what he was saying.

[Jun 14, 2020] Trojan horse in BLM camp (superpredators in her terminology): With friends like Hillary (she pushed Joe Biden's 1994 Crime Bill), who needs enemies; she is simply salivating at another opportunity to take revenge on Trump

Highly recommended!
Neoliberalism promotes identity wedge to spit "despicable" in a classic startegy "devide and conqure".
Notable quotes:
"... She supported her husband and Joe Biden's 1994 Crime Bill that led to an explosion in mass incarceration across the country. ..."
Jun 14, 2020 | www.mintpressnews.com

The former New York senator published her thoughts on her on Medium blog , where she appeared to endorse the Black Lives Matter movement, something she has previously stayed well clear of doing. "George Floyd's life mattered. Ahmaud Arbery and Breonna Taylor's lives mattered. Black lives matter," she began by stating.

"I promise to keep fighting alongside all of you to make the United States a place where all men and all women are treated as equals, just as we are and just as we deserve to be," she added, positioning herself on the same side as the protestors, many of whom are demanding the abolition of the police. Clinton commended the amazing "power of solidarity" she had seen and promised to "speak out against white supremacy in all its forms," declaring that America is long overdue for "an honest reckoning" with its racism problem.

However, an honest reckoning with Clinton's past unearths a myriad of troubling incidents and positions that are difficult to square with her newfound radical antiracist stance. She supported her husband and Joe Biden's 1994 Crime Bill that led to an explosion in mass incarceration across the country.

[Jun 14, 2020] The personalities of Trump and Biden no longer matter in 2020 elections: the level of polarization of the USA electorate is a more important factor now

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... From this point of view the current situation is a mixed bag for Neoliberal Dems: protest are partially genuine protests against the level of inequality caused by neoliberalism, partially are an attempt to exploit legitimate grievances in order to topple Trump (CHAZ in Seattle looks like a kind of a new Maidan and clearly were at least partially city council and the governor supported.) ..."
"... The USA version of Hongweibings toppling statues definitely play into Trump hand: radicalization of protests gives Trump an advantage to present himself now as the only "law and order" candidate, the "Silent majority" candidate, a la Nixon. ..."
"... The key weakness of Neoliberal Democrats is the level of hypocrisy in their support of protests: Pelosi (and Schumer) looks like a wolf in sheep clothing donning African scarves. Along with Bill Clinton they did a lot to deprive Afro Americans of the social security benefits they enjoyed under the New Deal Capitalism, and putting them in jails for minor infractions with the law (Biden was the key player here) ..."
"... I would assume that the 2020 election will be a choice between two platforms, not between two candidates. And Trump now represents "law and order" platform. While Biden is forced to represent "change we can believe in" platform. And Democrats already burned all the bridges. ..."
Jun 14, 2020 | angrybearblog.com

likbez , June 14, 2020 10:31 pm

Trump is staggering. He's plunging in the polls, and his behavior has become erratic and unhinged. I don't mean he's being crude, infantile and wrapped in a world of fantasy -- he's always like that. Rather, I see him as suddenly incoherent, fumbling with threats and catchphrases as if he were locked out of his house at night, frantically trying one key after another to see if any will work.

I think the personalities of Trump and Biden no longer matter: the level of polarization of the USA electorate is a more important factor now.

In other words, the reaction to the protests of independents will determine the results on 2020 elections.

From this point of view the current situation is a mixed bag for Neoliberal Dems: protest are partially genuine protests against the level of inequality caused by neoliberalism, partially are an attempt to exploit legitimate grievances in order to topple Trump (CHAZ in Seattle looks like a kind of a new Maidan and clearly were at least partially city council and the governor supported.)

The USA version of Hongweibings toppling statues definitely play into Trump hand: radicalization of protests gives Trump an advantage to present himself now as the only "law and order" candidate, the "Silent majority" candidate, a la Nixon.

The key weakness of Neoliberal Democrats is the level of hypocrisy in their support of protests: Pelosi (and Schumer) looks like a wolf in sheep clothing donning African scarves. Along with Bill Clinton they did a lot to deprive Afro Americans of the social security benefits they enjoyed under the New Deal Capitalism, and putting them in jails for minor infractions with the law (Biden was the key player here)

One minor point: exaggerated threats is the way Trump operate. He like poker players use bluffing as a part of the political strategy. It's like he is trying to determine some limits for each situation and sense how far he can go, as well as putting the opponents off balance provoking them to overreact,. Then he retreats to a more reasonable position.

I would assume that the 2020 election will be a choice between two platforms, not between two candidates. And Trump now represents "law and order" platform. While Biden is forced to represent "change we can believe in" platform. And Democrats already burned all the bridges.

Please note that Biden political history is the history of a staunch neoliberal, completely hostile to the interests of the majority of the USA population and, especially, Afro Americans and white working class (aka deplorable). As such he will now look as hypocrite no matter what he say.

[Jun 14, 2020] As far as I know BLM is also dead silent on the black slave markets care of Obama and the EU in Libya.

Jun 14, 2020 | www.unz.com

AriusArmenian , says: Show Comment Next New Comment June 13, 2020 at 6:54 pm GMT

@Ashino Wolf Sushanti As far as I know BLM is also dead silent on the black slave markets care of Obama and the EU in Libya.

There are also stories that money contributed to BLM will end up going to the DNC.

This is looking like another 1960's type insurrection that will end up the same way: it will be used by the rich and powerful elites (notice how the corporate controlled media has gone on one knee for BLM and has gone outright anti-white?), there will be a back lash that will crush it (right after the election), and its leaders will be either absorbed into the establishment or offed.

America looks like a hybrid of Stephen King, Brave New World, and 1984, and the rich and powerful US elites and intel agencies stroke it and love it. Notice that the US super rich have been raking it in since January 2020? While at the same time Trump is busy making the US a vassal state of Israel and accelerating the roll-out of Cold War v2 which is just fine with US elites that will not change with the election of moron Biden (if the people elect Biden they are electing his VP as Biden will not last long; he is a lot like Yeltsin that was pumped up on mental stimulants and nutriments to perform for short periods until the next treatment). What a country, what a ship of fools.

[Jun 09, 2020] How Interventionists Hijack the Rhetoric of Morality

Jun 09, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

ori Schake objects to Biden's foreign policy record on the grounds that he is not hawkish enough and too skeptical of military intervention. She restates a bankrupt hawkish view of U.S. military action:

This half-in-half-out approach to military intervention also strips U.S. foreign policy of its moral element of making the world a better place. It is inadequate to the cause of advancing democracy and human rights [bold mine-DL].

The belief that military intervention is an expression of the "moral element" of U.S. foreign policy is deeply wrong, but it is unfortunately just as deeply-ingrained among many foreign policy professionals. Military intervention has typically been disastrous for the cause of advancing democracy and human rights. First, by linking this cause with armed aggression, regime change, and chaos, it tends to bring discredit on that cause in the eyes of the people that suffer during the war. Military interventions have usually worsened conditions in the targeted countries, and in the upheaval and violence that result there have been many hundreds of thousands of deaths and countless other violations of human rights.

Destabilizing other countries, displacing millions of people, and wrecking their infrastructure and economy obviously do not make anything better. As a rule, our wars of choice have not been moral or just, and they have inflicted tremendous death and destruction on other nations. When we look at the wreckage created by just the last twenty years of U.S. foreign policy, we have to reject the fantasy that military action has something to do with moral leadership. Each time that the U.S. has gone to war unnecessarily, that is a moral failure. Each time that the U.S. has attacked another country when it was not threatened, that is a moral abomination.

Schake continues:

Biden claims that the U.S. has a moral obligation to respond with military force to genocide or chemical-weapons use, but was skeptical of intervention in Syria. The former vice president's rhetoric doesn't match his policies on American values.

If Biden's rhetoric doesn't match his policies here, we should be glad that the presumptive Democratic nominee for president isn't such an ideological zealot that he would insist on waging wars that have nothing to do with the security of the United States. If there is a mismatch, the problem lies with the expansive rhetoric and not with the skepticism about intervention. That is particularly true in the Syria debate, where interventionists kept demanding more aggressive policies without even bothering to show how escalation wouldn't make things worse. Biden's skepticism about intervention in Syria of all places is supposed to be held against him as proof of his poor judgment? That criticism speaks volumes about the discredited hawkish crowd in Washington that wanted to sink the U.S. even more deeply into that morass of conflict.

One of the chief problems with U.S. foreign policy for the last several decades is that it has been far too militarized. To justify the constant resort to the threat and use of force, supporters have insisted on portraying military action as if it were beneficent. They have managed to trick a lot of Americans into thinking that "doing something" to another country is the same thing as doing good. Interventionists emphasize the goodness of their intentions while ignoring or minimizing the horrors that result from the policies they advocate, and they have been able to co-opt the rhetoric of morality to mislead the public into thinking that attacking other countries is legitimate and even obligatory. This has had the effect of degrading and distorting our foreign policy debates by framing every argument over war in terms of righteous "action" vs. squalid "inaction." This turns everything on its head. It treats aggression as virtue and violence as salutary. Even a bog-standard hawk like Biden gets criticized for lacking moral conviction if he isn't gung-ho for every unnecessary war.


Feral Finster a day ago

That America's wars of aggression advance the cause of human rights is a hoot.
Rkramden66 Feral Finster a day ago
"Ya gotta laugh to keep from cryin.'"
kouroi 17 hours ago
Very strong words Mr. Larison, kudos for them.

As for Mr. Biden's "but was skeptical of intervention in Syria", maybe he was aware of the actual perpetrators of the gas attacks (as several OPCW whistle-blowers testified) and was maybe uncomfortable being again the spearhead for another war, like he was with Iraq as the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Feral Finster kouroi 6 hours ago
Biden has been out of office for four years now. If I recall correctly, he didn't say jack to support Trump's two failed attempts to pull out from Syria.

TL;DR Don't get your hopes up.

Carpenter E 7 hours ago • edited
Kori Schake writes for the British neocon IISS, which has been secretly funded by the Sunni dictator in Bahrain, who holds down the Shia majority with imported Pakistanis as soldiers and police. Ordinary Bahrainis are like occupied prisoners in their own country. Everything is for the small Sunni elite. Though there are also ordinary Sunnis who oppose them.

Kori Schake is simply paid to promote neocon interests, which the Bahraini dictator is closely aligned with. The Sunni king dissolved parliament and took all the power, aided by Saudi tanks crushing protesters, who were tortured and had their lives destroyed. The dictator even destroyed Bahrain's famous Pearl Monument, near which the protesters had camped out, so it wouldn't be a symbol of resistance. (Forever making it a symbol of resistance.) The tower was on all the postcards from Bahrain and it appeared on the coins. It's like destroying the Eiffel Tower. Kori's Sunni paymasters want Shia Iran destroyed as it speaks up for the oppressed Shias in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, Yemen and the UAE.

Mark Thomason 3 hours ago
Biden is and for over four decades always was an example of all that is worst in militarized US foreign policy. The idea that he isn't hawkish enough is itself crazy.

[Jun 06, 2020] Biden has played an important role in the militarisation of policing and in the growth of the incarceration system

Jun 06, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Biden has played an important role in the militarisation of policing and in the growth of the incarceration system: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/politics/2014/08/militarization-police-force-ferguson-congress

Posted by: Tuyzentfloot | Jun 5 2020 22:05 utc | 42

Jay , Jun 5 2020 22:00 utc | 41

b:

Trump reacted by calling up the military and a myriad of federal police forces to 'dominate the battlespace' of Washington DC and other cities.

Trump did NOT call up the military in any US city out side of Washington DC, which is a district, so not a state, controlled by the federal government.

Nor are federal police out on the streets in the protests outside of Washington DC.

Right, there are quite possibly special forces units acting as agent provocateurs--sort of akin to the US Army sniper team that was the back-up when the Memphis PD killed MLK in 1968.

Right, that Biden line is racist dog whistle crap. Telling many people to "vote Trump or stay home in November".

[Jun 04, 2020] I don't think the Dems want to win. Nobody wants the next four years

Notable quotes:
"... The irony is that Biden is a lowlife who inflames hatred and reinforces divisions while holding up a moral shield. He has always chosen expedient lies over the truth to get elected. Support for him shows a desperate hate of Trump. ..."
Jun 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

450.org , Jun 3 2020 17:59 utc | 4

I don't think the Dems want to win. Nobody wants the next four years. Hell, nobody wants the next eight years or twelve or sixteen. Except the criminally insane autocrats.

Not that I think the Dems in control of the executive and legislative branches would change the course of events. The collapse is in full swing. It's a steam roller at this point. A freight train. An avalanche. There's no more blood to squeeze from the rocks. Game over. Except it and manage the decline as humanely and constructively and equitably as possible or else let chaos reign and lead which is an existential gambit for sure but one the extractive elites appear to have chosen.


Erelis , Jun 3 2020 18:16 utc | 5

The individual states need to realize they are on their own. Trump and Congressional gopers and dems have abandoned them in favor of working full time for FIRE (very new and revealing term for me) and various other elite interests. Each state will need to form various alliances with other states to develop proverbial out of the box solutions including developing independent import and trade agreements with China and the EU among others.
Skeletor , Jun 3 2020 18:45 utc | 11
If Trump is as smart as he claims to be he will...

He doesn't need to be smart per se. He just needs to be **smarter** than Joe Biden. Just like he was smarter than Hillary + all the legacy media in 2016 to such an extent that to deny they had been outsmarted... #Russiagate was born lol

The irony is that Biden is a lowlife who inflames hatred and reinforces divisions while holding up a moral shield. He has always chosen expedient lies over the truth to get elected. Support for him shows a desperate hate of Trump.

Good luck to all and sundry.

Exhilarating times!!!

Hal Duell , Jun 3 2020 20:07 utc | 34
Writing Trump's political obituary has become something of a global cottage industry over the last four years.
Also true is he is looking isolated, sad and lonely right now.
Best wait and see. We have all underestimated him before.

[Jun 04, 2020] Democrats are totally pathetic: they are still "soft neoliberals" of Bill Clinton vintage

Jun 04, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

JohnH , Jun 3 2020 19:52 utc | 28

Democrats wait for Republicans to act, then position themselves a hair's width to the left. Then they wring their hands and shed lots of crocodile tears about Republicans' proposals before signing off on whatever Republicans want.

I liken the Democrats to the Washington Generals, who lost almost every game to the Harlem Globetrotters. When they won, it was accidental. Bubba won in '92 due to Perot's presence. Obama won only because of the financial crisis. Though they are committed losers, there could be no game without them.

Democrats are totally pathetic.

Now there are lots pundits are praising the new Joe Biden, whose makeover will disappear the day after the election.

[Jun 03, 2020] Dems ratpack of reparations freaks, weird sexual curiosities, and race hustlers is actually a fifth column for Trump re-election by Fred Reed

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The Democrats are fielding as candidates a roster of middle-school clowns and unflavored tapioca. Are they secretly in Trump's pay? Like Clinton with her "Deplorables" suicide line? ..."
"... Probably the Russians are behind it. ..."
Jul 25, 2019 | www.unz.com

They're going to do it, I tell you: The whole touchy-feely do-gooding ratpack of Microaggression worriers, reparations freaks, weird sexual curiosities, race hustlers, bat.-Antifa psychos, and egalitarian enstupidators of universities. They are going to elect Trump. Again.

Washington, where I shortly will be for a bit, is crazy. It has not the slightest, wan, etiolated idea of what is going on in America. The Democrats are fielding as candidates a roster of middle-school clowns and unflavored tapioca. Are they secretly in Trump's pay? Like Clinton with her "Deplorables" suicide line?

Probably the Russians are behind it.

[Jun 03, 2020] Nine Reasons Why You Should Support Joe Biden For President by Caitlin Johnstone

Highly recommended!
Apr 04, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

Former Vice President Joe Biden has released a video statement telling the American people that the accusations he is now facing of touching women in inappropriate ways without their consent is the product of changing "social norms", assuring everyone that he will indeed be adjusting to those changes.

And thank goodness. For a minute there, I was worried Biden might cave under the pressure of a looming scandal and decline to run for president on the grounds that it could cripple his campaign and leave America facing another four years of Donald Trump. Here are nine good reasons why I hope Joe Biden runs for president, and why you should support him too:

1. It's his turn.

It's Biden's turn to be president. He's spent years playing second fiddle while other leading Democrats hogged all the limelight, and that's not fair. He's been waiting very patiently. Come on.

2. Most Qualified Candidate Ever.

If Joe Biden secures the Democratic Party nomination for president, he would be the Most Qualified Candidate Ever to run for office. His service as a US Senator and a Vice President has given him unparalleled experience priming him for the most powerful elected office in the world. Everything Biden has done throughout his entire career proves that he'd make a great Commander-in-Chief.

3. He's closely associated with a popular Democratic president.

You think Biden, you think Obama. You think Obama, you think greatness. You can't spend that much time with a great Democratic president without absorbing his greatness yourself. It's called osmosis.

4. You liked Obama, didn't you?

Biden was part of the Obama administration. Remember the Obama administration? It was magical, right? If you want more of that, vote Biden.

5. But Trump!

Do you want Trump to win the next election? You know he'll shatter all our norms and literally end the world if he does, right? You should be terrified of the possibility of Trump winning in 2020, and if you are, you should want him running against Joe Biden. What's the alternative? Nominating some crazy unelectable socialist like Bernie Sanders? Might as well just hand Trump the victory now, then. Anyone who wants to beat Trump must fall in line behind the Most Qualified Candidate Ever.

6. Iraq wasn't so bad.

Okay, maybe some of his past foreign policy positions look bad in hindsight, but come on. Pushing for the Iraq war was what everyone was doing back in those days. It was all the rage. We all made it through, right? I mean, most of us?

7. This is happening whether you like it or not.

We're doing this. We're going to push Joe Biden through whether you like it or not, and we can do it the easy way or the hard way. Just relax, take deep breaths, and think about a nice place far away from here. Don't struggle. This will be over before you know it. We'll use plenty of lube.

8. Just vote for him.

Just vote for him, you insolent little shits. Who the fuck do you think you are, anyway? You think you're entitled to a bunch of ponies and unicorns like healthcare and drinkable water? You only think that because you're a bunch of racist, sexist homophobes. You will vote for who we tell you to or we'll spend the next four years calling you all Russian agents and screaming about Susan Sarandon.

9. Nothing could possibly go wrong.

Honestly, what could possibly go wrong? It's not like the Most Qualified Candidate Ever could manage to lose an election to some oafish reality TV star. Hell, Biden could beat Trump in his sleep. He could even skip campaigning in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania and still win by a landslide, because those states are in the bag. There's no way he could fail, barring some unprecedented and completely unforeseeable freak occurrences from way out of left field that nobody could possibly have anticipated.

[May 29, 2020] Andrew Weisdman, the attack dog of Mueller investigation, fundraiser links Creepy Joe to Russiagate and Mueller

May 29, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

The Biden campaign has quietly canceled a fundraiser headlined by Andrew Weissman - former special counsel Robert Mueller's 'attack dog' lawyer who hand-picked the so-called '13 angry Democrats.'

Weissman, who attended Hillary Clinton's election night party in 2016, donated to Obama and the DNC, yet somehow conducted an unbiased investigation that turned up snake-eyes, was set to do a June 2 "fireside chat" with Biden , according to the WSJ , which notes that the fundraiser was pulled right after it was posted late last week - shortly after the Trump campaign began to latch onto it.

Yes, there's more value in keeping the lie going that the mueller special counsel hasn't already been established beyond any doubt as a fraudulent and deeply unethical partisan takedown scheme against Trump https://t.co/5wuFYpgggr https://t.co/mxaHomTaQO

-- Buck Sexton (@BuckSexton) May 29, 2020

Weissman - known as the "architect" of the case against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort - notably reached out to a Ukrainian oligarch for dirt on Trump and his team days after FBI agent Peter Strzok texted "There's no big there there" regarding the Trump investigation in exchange for 'resolving the Firtash case' in Chicago, in which he was charged in 2014 with corruption and bribery linked to a US aerospace deal.

According to investigative journalist John Solomon, Firtash turned down Weissman's offer because he didn't have credible information or evidence against Trump , Manafort, or anyone else.

[May 22, 2020] Why Trump Will Likely Lose in November

Predictions are difficult, especially about the future. Who wll vote for Creepy Joe? that is the question. But it is true that many people who voted for trump in 2016 hoping for changes will not vote for him. Most will not vote at all. With his foreign policies and smug warmonger Pompeo at the State Department he lost all anti-war independents block. With COVID-19 fiasco he lost a large part of working class -- which was most severely hit by the lockdown as well as small business support.
Notable quotes:
"... Look at how Trump is getting killed among people that don't like either candidate. And how he's losing independents solidly. That's your danger zone, not the left. He won in 2016 in large part because he had those two in the bag. ..."
May 22, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Mitt Romney was treated by the mainstream media with derision and ridicule, portrayed as an out-of-touch plutocrat who babbled about binders full of women. They depicted him as "a wealthy 1950s sitcom dad who liked firing poor people. Trump will attacked in the same way

Donald Trump captured the presidency in 2016 in part because he perceived, alone among presidential contenders that year, that a chasm had opened up between the country's arrogant meritocratic elite and vast numbers of citizens who felt the elites had turned on them and were leading the country astray. But another factor was the perception of many voters that Barack Obama's second term had been a mild failure (following a mild first-term success; hence his 2012 reelection). Incumbent performance in office remains a potent factor in presidential elections.

And that's why Donald Trump likely will lose the presidency come November. His performance, thoroughly at variance from his blustery rhetoric, will have rendered him, in the eyes of a majority of Americans, ineligible for rehire. His is not the kind of record that normally leads to a two-term presidency or to party retention of the White House when the incumbent is not on the ballot. Viewed from this perspective, Trump looks like a goner.

Trump supporters will of course recoil at this prediction. In disbelief, they will point to the intensity of his followers and the fecklessness of his opposition. And it is true that former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic candidate, appears hapless as he hunkers down in his Delaware basement and projects himself with a certain halting awkwardness. But history tells us that voters focus far more on incumbent performance, which can be sharply defined, than on predictions of challenger performance, which are wispy at best.

It is true also that Trump's knot of popular support–about 43 percent of the electorate, based on approval surveys–is remarkably solid, willing to accept just about anything he does or says so long as he continues to attack those dastardly elites.

But presidential elections also don't turn on any incumbent's base of support. Reelection requires that a president build upon that base and create a governing coalition by bringing in new converts through Oval Office achievement.


engineerscotty David Naas 3 days ago

With Trump, I expect a "surprise" (and other various dirty tricks) here on out.

As I've noted before, the Burisma nonsense may end up backfiring. Not only did it get him impeached (even though he wasn't removed from office), but it may innoculate Biden from further such surprises--there will be a presumption, if anything scandalous comes from out of left field, that it might well be another attempt at rat-f***ing.

(And Biden has been equally fortunate in his accusers from the left; as the Tara Reade allegations seem to be falling apart. He's not entirely in the clear--the vagueness of the allegations prevent Biden from mounting an affirmative defense, such as an alibi, but right now he seems to be winning the credibility battle on that front).

Mother124 engineerscotty 2 days ago
The Tara Reade allegations aren't "falling apart." They're being smothered. They're either ignored, or dismissed with a "Biden says it never happened? Oh, OK....never mind" attitude.
Room_237 David Naas 2 days ago
A QAnnon crazy just won the Oregon GOP senate primary. Not only is Trump losing he is taking the entire GOP down with him. Either the GOP clears up the nuts or the nuts take over.
Mother124 PeteZilla 2 days ago
I agree. Trump has taken politics to a new low. When he's not on teleprompter, his "speeches" are more of a stand-up act where he exaggerates his accomplishments ("the best ever"..."record" everything) and lobs personal insults at his perceived enemies "loser,""incompetent," "the worst").

He has NO intention of expanding his base. He's happy to play to their adoration. And his cultists don't want him to "pivot and change." They cheer him on.

That this is what so many people in this country want from a president is appalling.

TISO_AX2 KeepAmericaGreat! 2 days ago
He proved that in '16. Rather, we did. We the people made it happen. DJT just happens to be the means by which we re-made the American political landscape. Leftist Democrats still haven't caught up.

They learned nothing from 2016 and after...nothing. They still cling to Washington establishment politics like a communist to The Party. Power in a handful of politicians is all that matters to them. They'll sooner or later see that the people are the source of our government.

MPC TISO_AX2 a day ago
TISO you seem like a pretty reasonable guy generally.

Look at how Trump is getting killed among people that don't like either candidate. And how he's losing independents solidly. That's your danger zone, not the left. He won in 2016 in large part because he had those two in the bag.

I'm in those groups and voted for him then - I won't repeat this year. He was a good statement to make in 2016 but for me that's now made. Personally he looks like a real idiot handling a crisis but I don't like his personality cult, I don't like his floppiness with the ruling elite, and I especially don't like his turning immigrants into the white male of the right. I hate idpol and he's just refined a right wing version of it.

My two cents. No doubt I'll be back to voting Republicans in 22 or 24.

Robert Bruce MPC 16 hours ago
Nice post!!!!!!! Trump is indeed losing the indie vote as well as a sliver of the true conservative vote. The guy is only a shade or two better than having a president Camacho from Idiocracy. Trump won both the GOP nomination and the general election because he was the only GOP candidate that said what the majority of GOP voters wanted to hear and was the only candidate that didn't come off as an Establishment clone. On top of that, Hilary was not a well liked candidate(either was Trump) as two thirds of GOP and Dem voters didn't like their candidate, but disliked the other just a bit more. It is sad that we are in the same situation in 2020, in which there really isn't a really good candidate to choose from
Robert Bruce TISO_AX2 16 hours ago
Guy was a moron for his famous line to a GOP crowd insinuating that half the people in the country were freeloaders. Not too far fetched of a statement, but absolutely a campaign killer. They indeed did depict him as a rather wealthy 1950's Mr Cleaver type that was a job killer, but that wasn't far off the mark either. The banking cartel had their boy in office already so there was no need for a change, thus the rather stale, boring, and easily targeted Romney was hung out to dry.
EboTebo PeteZilla 2 days ago
He's NOT stupid, but he's dumb, thick and most of all lazy, too lazy to stand up and do the right thing!
The_Anthropologist_Forensic Bryce David Sylvia 2 days ago • edited
He "defeated" the ISIS Caliphate? And here i was under the impression that Iran was a Shia country and Syria was mostly secular, while ISIS was a product of Salafist and Wahabist American allies like the Saudis?

This commenter epitomizes everything wrong with the Fox News cheerleading devotee. So consumed by the cult of Personality that is Trump and "owning the Libs" that they can't see they have gotten nothing from Trump. No immigration reform, no wall, no end to Middle East adventurism..... Just "tough tweets"

LETS LOOK AT THE FEW THINGS HE HAS DONE...He along with Kim Kardashian put forth the "First Step Act" freeing tens of thousands of mostly inner city felons; the situation in the Middle East exponentially worse "thanks" to his rhetoric, loose usage of missiles on countries WE ARE NOT at war with along with ASSASSINATING NATIONAL HEROES/MILITARY COMMANDERS of other sovereign nations we are not at war with; he passed a corporate tax cut, Trump has focussed on spreading LGBT values to Africa and abroad, and after attacking NAFTA for two decades passed "NAFTA 2.0", and has consistently made this country look even worse than it normally has over the past 40 years.

If Israel isn't your priority in regards to the embassy moves or if your not a corporate head benefiting from Trumps "we need more immigration than ever before" glut of cheap third world labor, then you should see him as an unmitigated disaster. Look beyond the Grifters like Charlie Kirk and Sean Hannity.

FND The_Anthropologist_Forensic 2 days ago
The ISIS caliphate was defeated. ISIS still exists. One cannot destroy an ideology on the battlefield. The caliphate was their "country" that they carved out of Syria. Virtually ALL of the rebels in Syria, even the non-ISIS ones are Sunni, not Shia. The Shia are on the side of the Syrian government. That includes Iran.
JonF311 FND 2 days ago
To be clear, the US did not defeat the "caliphate". That honor goes to Syria and its patron Russia. America was just the cheering section.
Blood Alcohol JonF311 2 days ago • edited
Iran was not mentioned for some reason!
Iranians were the first to recognize ISIL was an arm of Israel/UAE/US axis to destabilize not only Syria but any country that stood up to the axis. Then the Russian read the message on the wall and got involved.
Robert Bruce DukeofAnarchy . 16 hours ago
Of course they did. Any decent economic/business magazine/ web site/blog was saying as far back as last September that the FED was running out of "ammo" to forestall a collapse that was going to happen late this summer or early fall, then the virus hits to take the blame for the poor economy instead of where it belongs and that is with the Federal Reserve and co. Now we are hearing we are going to get QE to infinity and beyond, which basically means the globalists are tanking the dollar for probably a global digital currency sometime in the not too distant future.

[May 22, 2020] The CIA's Murderous Practices, Disinformation Campaigns, and Interference in Other Countries Shape the World Order and U.S. Politics by Glenn Greenwald

Notable quotes:
"... Democrats, early in Trump's presidency, saw clearly that the CIA had become one of Trump's most devoted enemies, and thus began viewing them as a valuable ally. Leading out-of-power Democratic foreign policy elites from the Obama administration and Clinton campaign joined forces not only with Bush/Cheney neocons but also former CIA officials to create new foreign policy advocacy groups designed to malign and undermine Trump and promote hawkish confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia. Meanwhile, other ex-CIA and Homeland Security officials, such as John Brennan and James Clapper, became beloved liberal celebrities by being hired by MSNBC and CNN to deliver liberal-pleasing anti-Trump messaging that, on a virtually daily basis, masqueraded as news . ..."
"... the current function ..."
May 22, 2020 | theintercept.com

In his extraordinary election-advocating op-ed, Hayden, Bush/Cheney's CIA chief, candidly explained the reasons for the CIA's antipathy for Trump: namely, the GOP candidate's stated opposition to allowing CIA regime change efforts in Syria to expand as well as his opposition to arming Ukrainians with lethal weapons to fight Russia (supposedly "pro-Putin" positions which, we are now all supposed to forget, Obama largely shared ). As has been true since President Harry Truman's creation of the CIA after World War II, interfering in other countries and dictating or changing their governments -- through campaigns of mass murder, military coups, arming guerrilla groups, the abolition of democracy, systemic disinformation, and the imposition of savage despots -- is regarded as a divine right, inherent to American exceptionalism. Anyone who questions that or, worse, opposes it and seeks to impede it (as the CIA perceived Trump was) is of suspect loyalties at best.

The CIA's antipathy toward Trump continued after his election victory. The agency became the primary vector for anonymous illegal leaks designed to depict Trump as a Kremlin agent and/or blackmail victim. It worked to ensure the leak of the Steele dossier that clouded at least the first two years of Trump's presidency. It drove the scam Russiagate conspiracy theories. And before Trump was even inaugurated, open warfare erupted between the president-elect and the agency to the point where Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer explicitly warned Trump on the Rachel Maddow Show that he was risking full-on subversion of his presidency by the agency:

This turned out to be one of the most prescient and important (and creepy) statements of the Trump presidency: from Chuck Schumer to Rachel Maddow - in early January, 2017, before Trump was even inaugurated: pic.twitter.com/TUaYkksILG

-- Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) April 8, 2019
Democrats, early in Trump's presidency, saw clearly that the CIA had become one of Trump's most devoted enemies, and thus began viewing them as a valuable ally. Leading out-of-power Democratic foreign policy elites from the Obama administration and Clinton campaign joined forces not only with Bush/Cheney neocons but also former CIA officials to create new foreign policy advocacy groups designed to malign and undermine Trump and promote hawkish confrontation with nuclear-armed Russia. Meanwhile, other ex-CIA and Homeland Security officials, such as John Brennan and James Clapper, became beloved liberal celebrities by being hired by MSNBC and CNN to deliver liberal-pleasing anti-Trump messaging that, on a virtually daily basis, masqueraded as news .

The all-consuming Russiagate narrative that dominated the first three years of Trump's presidency further served to elevate the CIA as a noble and admirable institution while whitewashing its grotesque history. Liberal conventional wisdom held that Russian Facebook ads, Twitter bots and the hacking and release of authentic, incriminating DNC emails was some sort of unprecedented, off-the-charts, out-of-the-ordinary crime-of-the-century attack, with several leading Democrats (including Hillary Clinton) actually comparing it to 9/11 and Pearl Harbor . The level of historical ignorance and/or jingostic American exceptionalism necessary to believe this is impossible to describe. Compared to what the CIA has done to dozens of other countries since the end of World War II, and what it continues to do , watching Americans cast Russian interference in the 2016 election through online bots and email hacking (even if one believes every claim made about it) as some sort of unique and unprecedented crime against democracy is staggering. Set against what the CIA has done and continues to do to "interfere" in the domestic affairs of other countries -- including Russia -- the 2016 election was, at most, par for the course for international affairs and, more accurately, a trivial and ordinary act in the context of CIA interference. This propaganda was sustainable because the recent history and the current function of the CIA has largely been suppressed. Thankfully, a just-released book by journalist Vincent Bevins -- who spent years as a foreign correspondent covering two countries still marred by brutal CIA interference: Brazil for the Los Angeles Times and Indonesia for the Washington Post -- provides one of the best, most informative and most illuminating histories yet of this agency and the way it has shaped the actual, rather than the propagandistic, U.S. role in the world.

Entitled "The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World," the book primarily documents the indescribably horrific campaigns of mass murder and genocide the CIA sponsored in Indonesia as an instrument for destroying a nonaligned movement of nations who would be loyal to neither Washington nor Moscow. Critically, Bevins documents how the chilling success of that morally grotesque campaign led to its being barely discussed in U.S. discourse, but then also serving as the foundation and model for clandestine CIA interference campaigns in multiple other countries from Guatemala, Chile, and Brazil to the Philippines, Vietnam, and Central America: the Jakarta Method.

Our newest episode of SYSTEM UPDATE, which debuts today at 2:00 p.m. on The Intercept's YouTube channel , is devoted to a discussion of why this history is so vital: not just for understanding the current international political order but also for distinguishing between fact and fiction in our contemporary political discourse. In addition to my own observations on this topic, I speak to Bevins about his book, about what the CIA really is and how it has shaped the world we still inhabit, and why a genuine understanding of both international and domestic politics is impossible without a clear grasp on this story.

[May 21, 2020] American democracy in action: in 2020 election the choice is between a President who has been an "utter circus" and has proven to be a freak show, and a "garden-variety" corrupt politician who also has dementia

May 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Richard Steven Hack , May 21 2020 0:28 utc | 53

milomilo at 51 may have a point.

Looking at my own reaction to the 2016 candidates, I knew Hillary was the the most corrupt politician since Hermann Goering. I also knew Trump was a freak show. However, Trump did claim to be against new wars and getting along with Russia. Not that I believed him, but in a choice between the two, Trump was obviously better. And that's what the Trump supporters believed and that's why he was elected (with some help from the Electoral College setup.)

Today, it's a choice between a President who has been an *utter circus* and has *proven* to be a freak show, and a "garden-variety" corrupt politician who also has dementia. People elect corrupt politicians all the time. Is there any other kind? How likely is it that the electorate will take the time to fully understand the depth of corruption of Biden vs the *obvious* lunacy of Trump? How many people are going to believe Biden has dementia, especially if the mainstream media (outside of Fox) refuses to even mention it (you know that's what they will do)?

I don't know the answer to that and neither does anyone else.

The real questions are: how will the economy question play out before November? Does Trump get blamed? Does he get rewarded for reopening the economy even though the death toll from the virus spikes? If the virus slows in the summer, does he get rewarded for that? If a second virus wave roars in before election dat, what impact will that have? What happens with Venezuela, Iran and China over the next five months? There's plenty of time for SHTF on any of those fronts - does any of it reward or downgrade Trump's chances?

Like I said before, it is *way too soon* to be estimating the outcome of this election.


vk , May 21 2020 0:58 utc | 56

Richard Steven Hack , May 21 2020 0:58 utc | 57
This article doesn't really violate the "no-coronavirus" rule because it applies to Trump generally...and thus to the election...

The plan is to have no plan
4 May 2020 11:02 pm
https://tinyurl.com/y8tqwwje

"There is no genius there, only a damaged human being playing havoc with our lives."

Got that exactly right.

[May 21, 2020] Tapes Prove Biden's Intervention In Ukraine But Not His Motive

May 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kadath , May 21 2020 16:31 utc | 3

I would suspect that the government in Kiev is trying to play kingmaker, leveraging the tapes to try to get a better deal from Trump or the Democrats. As the current holder of the Whitehouse, Trump is in a stronger position to make and follow through on his offers (although he also has a history of breaking promises). Conversely, the Democrats have every incentive to break the bank to keep those recordings secret.

So I guess we'll have to wait and see who makes the Ukrainians a better offer.

If Trump is going to give them a good offer it would need to be fairly soon (before Aug), so lets see if he announces new arms sales or additional IMF funding for the government in Kiev this summer. If he does, then more tapes will leak as we get closer to the election.


Sally Snyder , May 21 2020 16:47 utc | 4

As shown in this article, there is a key aspect to the entire anti-Russia/pro-Ukraine story that has received absolutely no coverage by the mainstream media:

https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2019/11/a-divided-ukraine-story-that-west.html

JohnH , May 21 2020 16:47 utc | 5
Presumably Biden was still coherent when talking with Poroshenko?

Of course, Biden can't openly talk about the US' real interest in Burisma: hegemony via control of energy resources and the Crown Jewels of the Ukrainian economy...nor can he talk about any personal stake he had in the deal.

I remember when Chavez took over PDVSA, Venezuelans claim to have learned that the Venezuelan oil company's technology subsidiary's board of directors had been infested with top CIA. You have to assume that they were not serving pro bono... Nor was Hunter Biden...

[May 21, 2020] Press Conference "NEW FACTS OF INTERNATIONAL CORRUPTION AND EXTERNAL GOVERNANCE OF UKRAINE

May 21, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Curmudgeon , May 20 2020 18:42 utc | 25

Press Conference "NEW FACTS OF INTERNATIONAL CORRUPTION AND EXTERNAL GOVERNANCE OF UKRAINE"

English CC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaE9OZ89bnQ

[May 20, 2020] Phone Calls Between Biden And Ukraine's Poroshenko Leaked; Details $1 Billion Quid Pro Quo To Fire Burisma Prosecutor Zero

Highly recommended!
May 20, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Phone Calls Between Biden And Ukraine's Poroshenko Leaked; Details $1 Billion "Quid Pro Quo" To Fire Burisma Prosecutor by Tyler Durden Wed, 05/20/2020 - 05:12 Leaked phone calls between Joe Biden and former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko explicitly detail the quid-pro-quo arrangement to fire former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Victor Shokin - who Poroshenko admits did nothing wrong - in exchange for $1 billion in US loan guarantees (which Biden openly bragged about in January, 2018 ).

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Q0_AqpdwqK4?start=3118

The calls were leaked by Ukrainian MP Andrii Derkach , who says the recordings of "voices similar to Poroshenko and Biden" were given to him by investigative journalists who claim Poroshenko made them.

Shokin was notably investigating Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company that hired Biden's son, Hunter, to sit on its board. Shokin had opened a case against Burisma's founder, Mykola Zlochevsky, who granted Burisma permits to drill for oil and gas in Ukraine while he was Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources. In January, 2019, Shokin stated in a deposition that there were five criminal cases against Zlochevesky, including money laundering, corruption, illegal funds transfers, and profiteering through shell corporations while he was a sitting minister.

Viktor Shokin

The leaked calls begin on December 3, 2015 , when former Secretary of State John Kerry starts laying out the case to fire Shokin - who he says "blocked the cleanup of the Prosecutor Generals' Office," and sated that Biden "is very concerned about it," to which Poroshenko replies that the newly reorganized prosecutor general's office (NABU) won't be able to pursue corruption charges, and that it may be difficult to fire Shokin without cause.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/EbmDLhJ43cU

Later in the leaked audio on February 18, 2016 - less than three months after the Kerry conversation - Poroshenko delivers some "positive news."

"Yesterday I met with General Prosecutor Shokin," says Poroshenko. And despite of the fact that we didn't have any corruption charges, we don't have any information about him doing something wrong, I specially asked him - no, it was day before yesterday - I specially asked him to resign. In, uh, as his, uh, position as a state person. And despite of the fact that he has a support in the power. And as a finish of my meeting with him, he promised to give me the statement on resignation. And one hour ago he bring me the written statement of his resignation . And this is my second step for keeping my promises. "

To which Biden replied: "I agree."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/EbmDLhJ43cU?start=246

Four weeks later on March 22, 2016, Biden says "Tell me that there is a new government and a new Prosecutor General. I am prepared to do a public signing of the commitment for the billion dollars. "

Poroshenko tells Biden that one of the leading candidates is the man who replaced Shokin, Yuriy Lutsenko who later said in a deposition that Hunter Biden and his business partners were receiving millions of dollars in compensation from Burisma.

Then, on May 13, 2016, Biden congratulates Poroshenko on "getting the new Prosecutor General," saying that it will be "critical for him to work quickly to repair the damage Shokin did."

" And I'm a man of my word ," Biden adds. "And now that the new Prosecutor General is in place, we're ready to move forward to signing that one billion dollar loan guarantee ."

Poroshenko thanks Biden for the support, and says that it was a "very tough challenge and a very difficult job."

Shokin, meanwhile, filed a criminal complaint against Biden in Kiev this February, in which he writes:

During the period 2014-2016, the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine was conducting a preliminary investigation into a series of serious crimes committed by the former Minister of Ecology of Ukraine Mykola Zlotchevsky and by the managers of the company "Burisma Holding Limited "(Cyprus), the board of directors of which included, among others, Hunter Biden, son of Joseph Biden, then vice-president of the United States of America.

The investigation into the above-mentioned crimes was carried out in strict accordance with Criminal Law and was under my personal control as the Prosecutor General of Ukraine.

Owing to my firm position on the above-mentioned cases regarding their prompt and objective investigation, which should have resulted in the arrest and the indictment of the guilty parties, Joseph Biden developed a firmly hostile attitude towards me which led him to express in private conversations with senior Ukrainian officials, as well as in his public speeches, a categorical request for my immediate dismissal from the post of Attorney General of Ukraine in exchange for the sum of US $ 1 billion in as a financial guarantee from the United States for the benefit of Ukraine.

* * *

And while we cannot verify the authenticity of the recordings with absolute certainty, we now have the audio revealing how the deed was orchestrated.

[May 18, 2020] Turley: The 'Unmasking' Of Joe Biden

Notable quotes:
"... The contradictions revealed in recent disclosures, including the list of officials seeking to "unmask" the identity of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, are shocking. There seems a virtual news blackout on these disclosures, including the fact that both former President Barack Obama and former Vice President Joe Biden followed the investigation. Indeed, Biden's name is on the unmasking list. ..."
"... The declassification of material from the Michael Flynn case has exposed more chilling details of an effort by prosecutors to come up with a crime to use against the former national security adviser. ..."
"... That included the testimony of Evelyn Farkas, a former White House adviser who was widely quoted by the media with her public plea for Congress to gather all of the evidence that she learned of as part of the Obama administration. ..."
"... That story would have been encompassing if it was learned that there was no direct evidence to justify the investigation and that the underlying allegation of Russian collusion was ultimately found to lack a credible basis. ..."
"... But the motives of Obama administration officials are apparently not to be questioned. Indeed, back when candidate Donald Trump said the Obama administration placed his campaign officials under surveillance, the media universally mocked him. That statement was later proven to be true. The Obama administration used the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court to conduct surveillance of Trump campaign officials. ..."
"... While unmasking is more routinely requested by intelligence officials, with a reported 10,000 such requests by the National Security Agency last year alone, it is presumably less common for figures like Biden or White House chief of staff Denis McDonough ..."
"... The media portrayed both Obama and Biden as uninvolved. But now we know they both actively followed the investigation. ..."
May 18, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

The contradictions revealed in recent disclosures, including the list of officials seeking to "unmask" the identity of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, are shocking. There seems a virtual news blackout on these disclosures, including the fact that both former President Barack Obama and former Vice President Joe Biden followed the investigation. Indeed, Biden's name is on the unmasking list.

The declassification of material from the Michael Flynn case has exposed more chilling details of an effort by prosecutors to come up with a crime to use against the former national security adviser. This week, however, a letter revealed another unsettling detail. Among over three dozen Obama administration officials seeking to "unmask" Flynn in the investigation was former Vice President Joe Biden . This revelation came less than a day after Biden denied any involvement in the investigation of Flynn. It also follows a disclosure that President Obama was aware of that investigation.

For three years, many in the media have expressed horror at the notion of the Trump campaign colluding with Russia to influence the 2016 election. We know there was never credible evidence of such collusion. In recently released transcripts, a long list of Obama administration officials admitted they never saw any evidence of such Russian collusion. That included the testimony of Evelyn Farkas, a former White House adviser who was widely quoted by the media with her public plea for Congress to gather all of the evidence that she learned of as part of the Obama administration.

The media covered her concern that this evidence would be lost "if they found out how we knew what we knew" about Trump campaign officials "dealing with Russians." Yet in her classified testimony under oath, she said she did not know anything. Farkas is now running for Congress in New York and highlighting her role in raising "alarm" over collusion. As much of the media blindly pushed this story, a worrying story unfolded over the use of federal power to investigate political opponents.

There is very little question that the response by the media to such a story would have been overwhelming if George Bush and his administration had targeted the Obama campaign figures with secret surveillance .

That story would have been encompassing if it was learned that there was no direct evidence to justify the investigation and that the underlying allegation of Russian collusion was ultimately found to lack a credible basis.

But the motives of Obama administration officials are apparently not to be questioned. Indeed, back when candidate Donald Trump said the Obama administration placed his campaign officials under surveillance, the media universally mocked him. That statement was later proven to be true. The Obama administration used the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court to conduct surveillance of Trump campaign officials.

Yet none of this matters as the media remains fully invested in the original false allegations of collusion. If Obama administration officials were to be questioned now, the coverage and judgment of the media may be placed into question, as even this latest disclosure from the investigation of the unmasking request of Biden will not alter the media narrative.

Unmasking occurs when an official asks an intelligence agency to remove anonymous designations hiding the identity of an individual. This masking is a very important protection of the privacy of American citizens who are caught up in national security surveillance. The importance of this privacy protection is being dismissed by media figures, like Andrea Mitchell, who declared the Biden story to be nothing more than gaslighting.

While unmasking is more routinely requested by intelligence officials, with a reported 10,000 such requests by the National Security Agency last year alone, it is presumably less common for figures like Biden or White House chief of staff Denis McDonough. Seeking unmasking information that was likely to reveal the name of a political opponent and possibly damage the Trump administration raises a concern. More importantly, it adds a detail of the scope of interest and involvement in an investigation that targeted Flynn without any compelling evidence of a crime or collusion.

The media portrayed both Obama and Biden as uninvolved. But now we know they both actively followed the investigation.

[May 17, 2020] Obamagate Shows Biden Is Inadequate in Challenging Trump by Paul Antonopoulos

Notable quotes:
"... The majority of U.S. media will most likely try and find appropriate excuses so they can minimize Obama's role in these scandals. It is completely clear that the battle over who will be in the White House in the next four years is now taking focus on the Obama era as of opposed to Trump's mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic that has claimed the lives of over 80,000 Americans and infected more than 1.3 million people. ..."
"... With endless tweets by Donald Trump dedicated to Obama over the past few days, it is as if the presidential battle in November will be fought between him and Obama, and not Democrat сandidate Joe Biden . ..."
"... It is likely Obama is becoming more public as Trump's opponent Biden is proving inadequate and incapable of defeating Trump ..."
"... Trump also retweeted statements from CIA agent Buck Sexton, in which he accused Obama of sabotaging the Trump administration in the first days of his term. Sexton also called former FBI Director Andrew McCabe "a dishonorable partisan scumbag who has done incalculable damage to the reputation of the FBI and should be sitting in a cell for lying under oath" ..."
"... As for the affair with the secret operation of selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels, journalists of Forbes in 2011 wondered whether that operation would become Obama's "Watergate," ..."
May 17, 2020 | astutenews.com

May 16, 2020

Source: InfoBrics Former U.S. President Barack Obama is coming under increasing pressure, led by what President Donald Trump is calling "Obamagate." This comes as Mexico has requested to finally clarify the affair with the secret sale of American weapons to Mexican drug cartels. Mexico is asking for the case to be clarified after almost ten years.

In this secret operation conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, weapons from the U.S. were sold to Mexican drug cartels. The U.S. claimed that about 2,000 automatic weapons were sold to Mexicans so that the Barack Obama administration could follow their path to the drug cartels. Instead, these weapons were used in massacres. Mexican authorities are now seeking answers from the United States.

In addition to selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels, Obama is responsible for a lot of global upheaval on the world stage – primarily the so-called "Arab Spring" that should be more accurately described as the "Arab Winter" as it brought death and destruction across the Arab world.

The sale of these weapons to Mexican drug cartels is another ugly legacy of Obama's rule that liberals like to view as one of the best periods of American history. Let's not forget that in 2009 Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize for his apparent "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people."

The majority of U.S. media will most likely try and find appropriate excuses so they can minimize Obama's role in these scandals. It is completely clear that the battle over who will be in the White House in the next four years is now taking focus on the Obama era as of opposed to Trump's mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic that has claimed the lives of over 80,000 Americans and infected more than 1.3 million people.

With endless tweets by Donald Trump dedicated to Obama over the past few days, it is as if the presidential battle in November will be fought between him and Obama, and not Democrat сandidate Joe Biden .

The reason for Trump's many tweets against the former president was because of Obama's private conversation that was leaked to the public in which he criticized the suspension of the investigation against Trump's former national security adviser Michael Flynn , while he called Trump's fight against the coronavirus epidemic a "chaotic disaster."

The American president started tweeting on the morning of May 10 and stopped late in the evening, making over a hundred tweets against Obama. This exchange between Obama and Trump is not common in American politics as former presidents usually do not interfere in the politics of their successors. However, there are suggestions that Obama still has connections to the deep state and is actively undermining Trump.

Obama, who openly admitted he would remain active in politics and wished he could contend for a third term, could be exerting influence through Hillary Clinton and Biden. It is likely Obama is becoming more public as Trump's opponent Biden is proving inadequate and incapable of defeating Trump.

The battle between Obama and Trump started with the announcement that the Ministry of Justice is terminating the investigation against former Trump's national security adviser Michael Flynn. Flynn, who was probably the shortest-serving national security adviser in history, was sacked at the beginning of his term on charges of lying to Vice President Mike Pence about talks with the Russian ambassador to Washington. His removal triggered a chain of failed investigations and campaigns against Trump and his alleged links to Russian interference during the U.S. presidential election, which also ended in a failed impeachment.

In private conversations that leaked to the public, Obama described Flynn's acquittal as a threat to the rule of law.

Trump also retweeted statements from CIA agent Buck Sexton, in which he accused Obama of sabotaging the Trump administration in the first days of his term. Sexton also called former FBI Director Andrew McCabe "a dishonorable partisan scumbag who has done incalculable damage to the reputation of the FBI and should be sitting in a cell for lying under oath"

Trump then continued with accusations on Twitter and said that Obama committed "the biggest political crime in American history, by far!" and ended briefly with "Obamagate."

As for the affair with the secret operation of selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels, journalists of Forbes in 2011 wondered whether that operation would become Obama's "Watergate," and it appears that it very well could be. Obama's attempts to smear Trump has not only backfired, but it could have very serious legal ramifications against him and others in his administration.

[May 16, 2020] What Biden new and when he knew about Obama coup d' tat against Trump

Biden is the Democratic Party's presumptive presidential nominee, he's running as the heir to Obama's legacy, and he was at that meeting with Rice. He had denied even knowing anything about the FBI investigation into Flynn before being forced to correct himself after ABC's George Stephanopoulos pointed out that he was mentioned in Rice's email. It's completely legitimate to wonder what he knew about the investigation.
May 16, 2020 | www.youtube.com

g bridgman , 4 days ago

Obama sounds almost as incoherent at Biden.

Censorship is Book Burning , 5 days ago div tabindex="0"

role="article"> Susan Rice knowingly spread misinformation, apparently to protect China. She is an enemy of the State

I King , 4 days ago

Biden probably cant even remember being in that meeting...

Skumstwo , 5 days ago

Obama was a failed experiment

Victor Avera , 1 day ago

Obama is a smooth talking "Big Lie" player, a criminal is what Obama is.

Golden Wings , 3 days ago div tabindex="0" role="article"

> I can't for the life of me understand why Democrats have such an obsession with "Trump colluding with Russia" when the Democrats are continually cosying up to CHINA. So it's bad if Russia interferes with the US, but it's OK if China does? I don't for a moment believe Trump has ever colluded with Russia, but would 100% believe that the Democrats are in the pockets of the Chinese. How much Chinese money has Pėlosí & Co pocketed in exchange for spouting pro-Chinese anti-American propaganda?

hillock10 , 2 days ago (edited)

The USA is going to have to make a big decision in prosecuting Obama and all his accomplices for the crimes of using the intel agencies to create and implement a fraudulent/illegal scheme to remove a legally elected president. My guess is that everything will be delayed until Trump wins his second term. Then the full force of the government will hold all Obama officials responsible for their crimes. That is my guess.

Tara Jordan , 1 day ago

Susan Rice is the Democrat version of Condoleezza Rice. They are both dirty as a public toilet rubber seat.

Yellow Bird , 2 days ago

Biden probably wasn't born when he was the vice President , according to his memory.

Sticky Wicket , 4 days ago

Perfect timing for Sleepy J's 'dementia' to surface.

The Handsome Supreme Lord Emperor Donald J. Trump , 3 days ago

Dementia Joe: BARRY don't worry about Trump's Wall. We got ObamaGate. Barry Obama: Shut up, Joe.

Paul Milton Robicheaux , 1 day ago

"If you can't beat them, smear them," say the Democrats. Nobody is brainless enough to vote to the Democrats, so they are importing their votes as cast by the illegal immigrants! Then they accuse the Republicans of foreign influence in our elections!!??

[May 12, 2020] High Stakes: Gambling on Biden's Foreign Policy by Maj. Danny Sjursen, USA (ret.)

May 12, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

Recently, there's been rather heated debate – a sort of progressive civil war – over what's being called " lesser evil " voting. To Biden, or not to Biden; that seems the existential question. However, most discussion centers on whether Joe Biden would be a meaningfully better than Donald Trump on domestic policy: healthcare, taxes, immigration, and – of course – the coronavirus response. Fair questions, all; but on one subject – over which presidents have near limitless power – Biden's extensive record provides clear answers. For when it comes to foreign – especially military – policy, the man has hardly ever been right. On war, Biden's is a blood-soaked litany indeed.

Biden's foreign policy has been one big series of gambles. In the past, he's even framed it as such. Undoubtedly, few remember the time way back in Barack Obama's first term, when Biden – assigned as the administration's point-man on all things Iraq – predicted with absolute certainty that the Baghdad government would accede to the enduring presence of small numbers of American troops after the December 31, 2011 "end of combat operations." In fact, the ever-folksy Biden told the New York Times he would bet his vice presidency that Iraq would extend this Status of Forces Agreement (SoFA). It didn't. Nevertheless, Joe reneged on the wager and kept the number two spot in the land. Biden, like just about every establishment policymaker in both major parties, underestimated the independence and growing hostility of the Shia strongman Nouri al-Maliki, whom the vice president himself helped install after the prime minister had lost an election.

Yet Biden's Iraq War record goes far deeper. Sure, he voted for Bush's initial invasion. Only that's not the half of it. From his senior perch as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the future vice president quite literally sold the war to his more doubtful colleagues – twisting arms, making calls, and applying the classic Biden-charm – and to the American people writ large. Then, months after it was crystal clear that the invasion had been built on lies (no WMDs, no Saddam-Al Qaeda connection, etc.) – and by which point chaos and local resistance already reigned – Biden continued to defend the war and the "popular" president who orchestrated it. Biden didn't just vote for aggression and mayhem in Iraq; he championed it.

Beyond Baghdad, Biden's national security positions have also been abysmal. What's more, based on his own published campaign vision , other than the discrete Iraq War vote itself, the presumptive Democratic nominee is unwilling to apologize for, or meaningfully alter, his past formulas for failure. It's what Biden's "vision" doesn't mention that's most troubling: Obama- destroyed Libya, his old boss's floundering quagmire in Syria, any meaningful challenge to Israeli apartheid , or commitment to a full withdrawal of U.S. troops from Mideast disaster areas. Better yet, the word "drone" doesn't appear once – so one assumes the terror bombing won't abate under Biden. In the final analysis, Joe offers little more than the status quo from West Africa to Central Asia – an intolerable situation he himself crafted over decades as the Democrats' leading foreign policy guru.

When it comes to war and peace, nominating Biden is like assigning the criminal with solving the crime. Indeed, so consistently wrong has he been on these issues, that one wonders whether he's a secret (if nefarious) genius. As I've sardonically theorized , being policy-wrong every time – like scoring zero on a multiple-choice test – almost requires knowing all the right answers and choosing to fail. Yet it seems unlikely that this sort of cynical savvy applies to ole Joe.

Is he better alternative than Trump on foreign affairs? Yes and no. Despite his populist "bring home the troops" campaign rhetoric – and occasional reprises in office – The Donald has hardly followed through. Often he's escalated bombings and boots-on-the-ground in the Greater Middle East. And admittedly, Biden seems more likely – but hardly certain – to reinstate the Iran nuclear deal and modestly tone down the march-to-war rhetoric. Then again, so far – though the colluding duo of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu try to gin up real combat – Trump has shown eleventh-hour restraint and eschewed full-blown war with Tehran. Not to say that The Donald, who has aggressively upped-the-ante on unwarranted conflict with Iran merits apologia. However, so far at least – an inconvenient admission for some – Trump is the first president since Jimmy Carter who hasn't attempted an overt violent foreign regime change. True, this is a low bar indeed.

Make no mistake, Donald Trump is temperamentally, intellectually, and morally unfit to serve as commander-in-chief. His ignorant and bellicose position on nuclear weapons makes him a potentially existential threat to life well beyond America's borders. Still, even Trump's more vociferous opponents should know what they're getting when they gamble on Biden: nothing more than a polite emperor to replace the rather coarse and clothes-less current occupant of the throne.

Even if he's preferable on some individual foreign policy issues, Biden has never questioned the imperium itself. That he won't change his spots and suddenly do so, is undergirded by the fact – as Chris Hedges recently pointed out – that "the ruling elites would prefer Biden" over the "vulgar embarrassment" of Donald Trump. Thus, selecting an emperor – given a presidency long unfettered by constitutional checks and balances – amounts to a matter of taste; of style over substance.

The "masters of the universe" that Hedges describes aren't remotely troubled by reliable, known-quantity-Joe's sordid foreign policy past. Neither, apparently, are Washington insiders, mainstream media pundits, or – if we're being honest – most common citizens. There's certainly been no penalty for Biden – or anyone else – being repeatedly dead wrong on the most decisive decisions a leader can make. American politics positively reinforces failure.

In even a marginally healthy republic, Biden's championing of the Iraq War alone – and decades worth of pathological lying about that record – ought to have disqualified him. That it hasn't exposes – like the COVID crisis – the structural and societal rot undergirding this country. Among the senior ranks of politicians, soldiers , and corporate oligarchs , obvious and undeniable failure carries few consequences. Blame and punishment is reserved for the lowest level of practitioners whilst power and profits continue to accrue to existing national security elites.

In contemporary America, there's zero accountability for top policymakers – even those a heartbeat away from the presidency – who repeatedly gamble soldiers (and foreigners) lives in far-flung adventures and regularly lose big. Neoconservative and neoliberal militarist leaders who drummed up disasters like the 2003 Iraq invasion should've been forever discredited. Instead, they've been laundered like dirty money, rehabilitated , and born-again as expert analysts on CNN or MSNBC. These, of course, being the very networks that – in the case of the Bush-era figures, at least – once lambasted them. As for the real heavy-hitters – Iraq cheerleading Biden and Libya regime change architect Hillary Clinton – the Democratic Party "opposition" runs them for president.

The narrowness of permitted debate on US war policy – and of the electoral options the two-party duopoly provides – is obscene. It's also proof positive that real challenges to American militarism must come from outside the system. At stake this November is more than what some sardonically call " choosing between two rapists ." What's really on the ballot is the minor matter of emperor selection. And the choices ain't great. Throughout his nearly 50 years of senior-level public service, Biden consistently made high-stakes war wagers – playing on credit with blood and treasure. So far his losses amount to $6.4 trillion in taxpayer cash, more than 7,000 dead troopers, 21 million refugees, and 335,000 civilian lives.

With that sort of track record at the life-and-death tables, Biden should really seek a meeting . Instead, he's become the last great white hope of polite liberals everywhere. And make no mistake, this doesn't end well. So be careful gambling on Biden. Like Joe betting his vice presidency on Iraqi elections, it might be a sure loser.

Danny Sjursen is a retired US Army officer and contributing editor at Antiwar.com . His work has appeared in the NY Times, LA Times, The Nation, Huff Post, The Hill, Salon, Popular Resistance, and Tom Dispatch, among other publications. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . His forthcoming book, Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War is now available for pre-order . Sjursen was recently selected as a 2019-20 Lannan Foundation Cultural Freedom Fellow . Follow him on Twitter @SkepticalVet . Visit his professional website for contact info, to schedule speeches or media appearances, and access to his past work.

Copyright 2020 Danny Sjursen

[May 11, 2020] Old white male plutocrat Dems media have no shame backing Joe Biden, who personifies exactly what they bash Trump for by Paul Street

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... lunch bucket Joe ..."
"... I don't think five hundred billionaires are the reason we're in trouble. The folks at the top aren't bad guys. ..."
"... The younger generation now tells me how tough things are -- give me a break, ..."
"... No, no, I have no empathy for it, give me a break ..."
"... a physical revolution ..."
"... beaten the hell out of Trump ..."
"... You're a damn liar .Look, fat you're too old to vote for me ..."
"... We hold these truths to be self-evident ..."
"... All men um, are created by the, um, co, oh, YOU KNOW THE THING ..."
"... put on the television, I mean the record player ..."
"... a lying dog-faced pony soldier. ..."
"... have been killed ..."
"... the lesser evil. ..."
"... Aptly described by the late left political scientist Sheldon Wolin as " the Inauthentic Opposition, ..."
May 11, 2020 | www.rt.com

Do the Democratic Party's leadership and its many allied mainstream media outlets have no shame? They are determined to run Joe Biden, a presidential candidate who embodies many of the evils for which they condemn Donald Trump. Corporate Joe

Democrats rightly charge the reputed billionaire Donald Trump with serving the wealthy few . Yes, but what about Joe? His corporatist and pro-Wall Street record in Congress included votes to rollback bankruptcy protections for college graduates (1978) and vocational school graduates (1984) with federal student loans.

He worked with Republicans to pass the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, which put " clean slate " Chapter-7 bankruptcy out of reach for millions of ordinary Americans (2005).

Biden voted against a bill that would have compelled credit card companies to warn customers of the costs of only making minimum payments. He honored campaign cash from Coca-Cola by cosponsoring a bill that permitted soft-drink producers to skirt antitrust laws (1979).

He joined just one other Congressional Democrat to vote against a Judiciary Committee measure to increase consumers' rights to sue corporations for price-fixing (1979).

He strongly backed the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which permitted the re-merging of investment and commercial banking by repealing the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act. (This helped create the 2007-8 financial crisis and subsequent recession, which led to a massive taxpayer bailout of the rich combined with little for the rest of the population – a policy that Biden backed as vice presidential candidate and as Vice President).

During his time as a US Senator, " lunch bucket Joe " Biden supported the globalist investor rights North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which cost millions of US manufacturing workers their jobs.

Adding neoliberal insult to neoliberal injury, presidential candidate Biden has criticized those who advocate a universal basic income (a fundamental need, in the wake of the current Covid-19 crash) of " selling American workers short " and undermining the "dignity" of work.

Biden opposes calls for supposedly " too expensive " universal Single Payer health insurance, going so far as to say he would veto a Medicare for All bill as president! He defends Big Business and the rich from popular criticism, mocking those who "want to single out big corporations for all the blame" and proclaiming " I don't think five hundred billionaires are the reason we're in trouble. The folks at the top aren't bad guys. "

Biden even says he has "no empathy" for Millennials' struggle to get by in the savagely unequal precariat economy he helped create over his many years of service to the Lords of Capital. " The younger generation now tells me how tough things are -- give me a break, " said Biden, while speaking to Patt Morrison of the Los Angeles Times two years ago. " No, no, I have no empathy for it, give me a break ."

Biden has not spoken one critical word about Trump and Congress's taxpayer-funded bailout for the American capitalist "elite" and its top corporations and financial institutions in the wake of Covid-19 – a massive and largely unaccountable giveaway that puts no caps on executive compensation and elite profits while offering little more than a pittance to the nation's working-class majority.

Also on rt.com Wait, what? Biden claims he'll 'appoint' first African-American woman to US Senate in fresh gaffe Lyin' Joe

The Democrats and their media rightly accuse Trump of serial deception, misstatement, and lying. Okay, but what about Joe? In a lie told twice , in 2001 and 2007, Biden falsely and viciously claimed that his first wife and baby boy were killed by a drunk truck driver in 1972.

On the campaign trail last year, Biden told a ridiculous tale (a longstanding recurrent Biden fib) about his supposed heroic role in honoring a medal-winning US soldier in a war zone as vice president.

Last February, at a campaign event in South Carolina, Biden tried to win Black votes by falsely claiming to have been arrested while trying to visit Nelson Mandela in jail during the apartheid era in South Africa.

Last January, during a debate, Biden claimed that he argued against George W. Bush's invasion of Iraq immediately after it began. In fact, it took Biden two years to admit that Bush's war and Biden's own Senate vote to authorize it were "mistakes" (try 'crimes').

Sleepy Joe

The Democrats and their media raise legitimate questions about Trump's mental health and fitness. Fine, but what about Joe? Earlier this year, he strangely invaded centrist MSNBC host Joy Reid's physical space to accuse her of being a radical who wants " a physical revolution ."

As a presidential candidate in the current cycle, Biden has forgotten what state he's in, confused his wife with his sister , and claimed that he would have " beaten the hell out of Trump " in high school. Last September , he tried to woo Black voters with a bizarre and rambling story about an alleged past adolescent swimming pool confrontation with a young Black tough named " Corn Pop ."

On the campaign trail in Iowa, an unhinged Biden said this to an older white male Elizabeth Warren supporter who dared to ask about the corruption involved in Hunter Biden's lucrative presence on the board of a gas company in Ukraine: " You're a damn liar .Look, fat you're too old to vote for me ."

Speaking in Texas last March, Biden made audience members cringe when he called Super Tuesday " Super Thursday " and tried to quote from the American Declaration of Independence. " We hold these truths to be self-evident ," Biden gaffed: " All men um, are created by the, um, co, oh, YOU KNOW THE THING !"

Biden responded to a debate question about racial inequality, segregation, and the legacy of slavery last September by smirkng and then awkwardly telling Black parents to " put on the television, I mean the record player " for their children.

Last February, he called a young female voter in New Hampshire " a lying dog-faced pony soldier. " He also said that "150 million" Americans – almost half of the US population – " have been killed " due to gun violence.

In debates and interviews, the 77-year old Biden routinely loses his train of thought in mid-sentence, mis-pronounces his words, forgets basic facts, and generally looks confused while seeming to rave and be on the verge of punching someone.

Bodyguards have had to stand between Biden and voters because he lacks the impulse control to stop himself from touching, sniffing, and massaging women in his vicinity.

It's not for nothing that the Democratic National Committee and the Biden campaign are keeping "Sleepy Joe" as much out of the public eye – almost literally locked in his basement – as possible.

But just as FOX News looks the other way when it comes to Trump's mental illness and difficulties, the liberal mainstream media is shockingly silent on Biden's clearly fading cognitive health.

In 2020 as in previous US elections, Democrats are telling American progressives yet again that they must vote for an inadequate, duplicitous, imperial, and corporate-captive presidential candidate as " the lesser evil. " In reality, however, Lesser Evil-ism is a self-fulfilling prophecy that helps move the narrow American major-party spectrum further to the right while channeling popular political energies into an electoral system that does not represent the nation's working- and middle-class majority.

Aptly described by the late left political scientist Sheldon Wolin as " the Inauthentic Opposition, " the neoliberal Democratic Party offers no serious resistance, electoral or otherwise, to the corporate and financial class rule advanced by the rightmost of the only two viable political organizations. The mentally declining liar and corporatist Joe Biden is graphic and depressing evidence for Wolin's thesis.

Paul Street is the author of numerous books, including They Rule: The 1% v. Democracy (Routledge, 2014) and The Empire's New Clothes: Barack Obama in the Real World of Power (Routledge, 2011).

[May 10, 2020] The One-Choice Election

May 10, 2020 | angrybearblog.com
  1. likbez , May 8, 2020 8:54 pm

    Chris Hedges tried to address the same issue in his article "The One-Choice Election" published Mar 09, 2020

    https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-one-choice-election/

    While this is somewhat questionable take, because a bitter infighting between two major camps of the US neoliberal elite is ignored, there some truth in the statement that Clinton wing can live with Trump's second term.

    Chris Hedges is definitely wrong about Sanders and now he probably realized that. I also think that this infighting is a positive thing, the implicit search for the direction, which might help the country, not only bare knuckle, raw fight for power as he thinks (although abuse of intelligence agencies by Clinton wing spoiled the broth) . The misery of the working class in the USA in comparison with the same in East Asia, or Latin America is still far less despite sliding standard of living. Three person family were each adult earns $10 an hour can still survive. The real misery is concentrated mainly in single mothers segment of population.

    At least he raises important questions:

    There is only one choice in this election. The consolidation of oligarchic power under Donald Trump or the consolidation of oligarchic power under Joe Biden.

    The oligarchs, with Trump or Biden, will win again. We will lose. The oligarchs made it abundantly clear, should Bernie Sanders miraculously become the Democratic Party nominee, they would join forces with the Republicans to crush him. Trump would, if Sanders was the nominee, instantly be shorn by the Democratic Party elites of his demons and his propensity for tyranny.

    The oligarchs preach the sermon of the least-worst to us when they attempt to ram a Hillary Clinton or a Biden down our throats but ignore it for themselves. They prefer Biden over Trump, but they can live with either.

    Only one thing matters to the oligarchs. It is not democracy. It is not truth. It is not the consent of the governed. It is not income inequality. It is not the surveillance state. It is not endless war. It is not jobs. It is not the climate. It is the primacy of corporate power -- which has extinguished our democracy and left most of the working class in misery -- and the continued increase and consolidation of their wealth.


    Biden represents the old neoliberal order. He personifies the betrayal by the Democratic Party of working men and women that sparked the deep hatred of the ruling elites across the political spectrum. He is a gift to a demagogue and con artist like Trump, who at least understands that these elites are detested. Biden cannot plausibly offer change.

    He can only offer more of the same. And most Americans do not want more of the same. The country's largest voting-age bloc, the 100 million-plus citizens who out of apathy or disgust do not vote, will once again stay home. This demoralization of the electorate is by design. It will, I expect, give Trump another term in office.

    ..By voting for Biden, you You vote for deregulating the banking industry and the abolition of Glass-Steagall. You vote for the for-profit insurance and pharmaceutical corporations and against universal health care. You vote for bloated defense budgets. You vote for the use of unlimited oligarchic and corporate money to buy our elections. You vote for a politician who during his time in the Senate abjectly served the interests of MBNA, the largest independent credit card company headquartered in Delaware, which also employed Biden's son Hunter.

    The right wing uses those on the margins of society as scapegoats. The culture wars mask the reality. Both parties are full partners in the reconfiguration of American society into a form of neofeudalism. It only depends on how you want it dressed up.

    " By fostering an illusion among the powerless classes" that it can make their interests a priority, the Democratic Party "pacifies and thereby defines the style of an opposition party in an inverted totalitarian system," political philosopher Sheldon Wolin writes.

    The Democrats will once again offer up a least-worst alternative while, in fact, doing little or nothing to thwart the march toward corporate totalitarianism

    He thinks "We need to halt corporate pillage and regulate Wall Street and corporations. ". Easier said then done because there is no politically organized countervailing forces that can oppose Wall Street and large corporations. They own the Capitol Hill. But clearly Biden while preferable to Trump is one step forward two steps back.

[May 08, 2020] Joe Biden Could Sexually Harass Someone in the Middle of Fifth Avenue ...and get away with it

Unveiled is the total hypocrisy of #MeToo and how self-righteous Dems are when these techniques are used by them rather than against them.
May 08, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Tara Reade says Joe Biden once grabbed her privates and demanded sex. Will that change the election in November?

The Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court hearings were a turning point, when the presumption of innocence was thrown out in favor of a new standard, "credible accusation." Evidence was replaced by #BelieveAllWomen. Praised by Dems and the media as fierce justice then, it's Biden's turn now.

Imagine the same type of proceedings directed at him. Amy Klobuchar repeats her accusation that Kavanaugh, er, Biden, is a drunk, with about as little evidence now as then. Senator Dick Durbin demands Biden demand an FBI investigation into himself. Durbin says of Biden, as he did of Kavanaugh, that if he has nothing to hide then he has nothing to fear, a line often attributed to Joseph Goebbels. Kamala Harris goes in as bad cop, righteously shouting down whatever is said to her by Biden. The truth? You can't handle the truth.

After that show, imagine a second one where Elizabeth Warren, long-shot Biden VP pick Florida Representative Val Demings, Kirsten Gillibrand, Stacey Abrams, and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer all show up to stand by Biden, not believe Reade, and/or remain silent when asked. Watching people force themselves to support Biden under these conditions is what I imagine the Beach Boys looked like backstage trying to mix Viagra and meth so they could get through "Surfin' USA" one more time.

To flesh things out, voters could call in to ask those Democratic leaders how the very serious business of #MeToo got turned into just another political tool by the "party of women." Alyssa Milano, whose take on the Kavanaugh hearings was that she believed all women without the need for due process, could be brought out to explain how now "the notion that this should be disqualifying to Biden in a race against Trump is patently ridiculous. Anybody who claims otherwise is using sexual assault as a political football."

[May 07, 2020] Womens' Rights Attorney Lisa Bloom: Yes, Biden Is A Rapist But I Endorse Him

May 07, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

" I believe you, Tara Reade ...[but] I still have to fight Trump, so I will still support Joe. But I believe you. And I'm sorry.

[May 06, 2020] The Moral and Strategic Calculus of Voting for Biden -- or Not by Jeremy Scahill

US voters are caught between a rock and a hard place -- Morton's fork , which is: a choice between two equally unpleasant alternatives (in other words, a dilemma), or two lines of reasoning that lead to the same unpleasant conclusion. It is analogous to the expressions "between the devil and the deep blue sea,"
“In philosophy seminars, the choice is usually between good and evil. In the real world, however, the choice is often between a bad guy and a worse guy.” ― Dinesh D'Souza, Letters to a Young Conservative
“Every four years we go through the same cycle of hope and disillusionment.” ― Sheri Holman, The Mammoth Cheese
“Voting Republican or Democrat is a wasted vote for the common people.” ― Steven Magee
“Typically, in politics, more than one horse is owned and managed by the same team in an election. There's always and extra candidate who will slightly mimic the views of their team's opposing horse, to cancel out that person by stealing their votes just so the main horse can win. Elections are puppet shows. Regardless of their rainbow coats and many smiles, the agenda is one and the same.” ― Suzy Kassem, ― Suzy Kassem, Rise Up and Salute the Sun: The Writings of Suzy Kassem
“Voter: someone smart enough to choose how to be fooled.” ― Jakub Bożydar Wiśniewski
Notable quotes:
"... Perhaps the most devastating dimension of Trump's time in office, on a policy level, is how the Republican establishment brilliantly exploited Trump as a Trojan horse for its extreme agenda. It is unlikely that any of the GOP's preferred candidates could have beaten Hillary Clinton in 2016. Trump dragged the Republican Party kicking and screaming back into executive power. For them, he was a messiah they chided and scorned when he first appeared, but now they prostrate themselves before him every minute of every day. ..."
"... More broadly, the real terror of the past three and a half years boils down to this: The consolidation of power by some of the most vile figures and interests in the Republican party. This includes the scores of federal judges named to the bench, the shaping of the Supreme Court, the radical drive toward deregulation, and the canceling of even the most minimal commitments the U.S. has made to try to confront climate change. What the Republicans have managed to accomplish on a policy level in Trump's time in office is profound and terrifying. ..."
"... Trump's economic policies have enriched corporations and special interest groups beyond their imaginations, while sawing off the already inadequate social programs in this country. We still have no idea of the extent to which Trump and his family are financially benefiting from his presidency. He talks about women in disgusting ways, including attempting to publicly humiliate the women he is accused of raping and assaulting. And the sick reality is that a significant number of people in the U.S. clearly like these things even if they won't openly admit it, though a disturbing number of them do feel emboldened to admire it. Trump has offered up an IPO on ignorance and hatred as a source of pride, and a lot of people enthusiastically bought in. ..."
"... Trump's rise to power is, in many ways, the logical product of the U.S. as a failed state. Trump says the quiet parts about the system out loud. ..."
"... It's always worth remembering that Biden was picked in 2008 to make Obama less threatening to moderates -- so we can't even bank on a return to Obama's brand of neoliberalism. ..."
Apr 20, 2020 | theintercept.com

Donald Trump ran for president in 2016 on an often ad-libbed and reactionary campaign of hate, greed, xenophobia, misogyny, and racism. He clearly viewed the fact that a black man had ascended to the presidency as an abomination and rightly assessed that there were a lot of racists in this country who saw the eight years the Obamas spent living in the White House as a crime against the real, white America. Trump already had a brand, realized early on the power of being an outsider in U.S. presidential elections, and focused on some key economic issues, including trade, that would play well with people dissatisfied with the two party system's regular offerings. And he focused on hate.

To directly call Trump fascistic is not incorrect, but it also may give him too much credit. He has largely been an incompetent authoritarian, albeit one whose key policies have caused massive suffering and death. What we have seen throughout his career and his three and a half years in power is that Trump is primarily concerned with making money for himself, his family, and his cronies. Literally everything this man does is a racket.

His foreign policy has been hawkish and reckless, but aside from his often insane rhetoric and public threats to annihilate various countries, it has not represented a radical departure from that of his predecessors. He acts like an unstable buffoon on the international stage, and he burns bridges with traditional U.S. allies, governments, and international bodies across the globe. Trump openly embraces vile authoritarians and mocks democratic leaders and institutions. All of this is certainly dangerous and unsettling, though some of it is disproportionately offensive to establishment foreign policy elites. Trump's predecessor started his own share of wars, did some regime change, ratcheted up an existing war, downsized another, and greatly expanded the use of weaponized drones and so-called targeted killings. But Barack Obama delivered these policies with an intelligently crafted, though at times absurd, justification wrapped in the notion of inventing a "smarter" way to wage war. Liberals ate it up. Obama's policies killed a lot of innocent people.

The few times Trump has signaled his openness to pursue a less militaristic approach to long-existing crises, such as the war in Afghanistan or the conflict with North Korea, he has been ridiculed by leading Democrats and liberal pundits. In terms of Trump's military pursuits, he has proven less murderous than George W. Bush and more of a war criminal than Jimmy Carter. So far. That can certainly change with a second term.

Perhaps the gravest threat posed by the unstable narcissist in the White House is that of the use of a first strike nuclear weapon. It has never been beyond the pale to imagine an apocalyptic nuclear scenario that begins with a tweet from a foreign leader Trump hates. The fact that we can even imagine this is nothing to wag a stick at.

Trump's monumentally incompetent handling of the coronavirus pandemic hammers home some of the greatest dangers posed by his presidency. It has highlighted the extent to which he is motivated not by any sense of duty or concern for his fellow citizens, but by money and his popularity among a fairly small circle of corporations, television hosts, and special interests. That Trump uses the daily platform of what are supposed to be public health briefings by professionals to pontificate ignorantly, babble incoherently, or to score points politically underscores how little he actually cares about the U.S. public and our lives. Instead, he is obsessed with the stock market as an imagined extension of his own ego. It is the sign of a deeply sick individual that he would effectively make aid conditional on how nice governors are to him. Trump encourages group protests against Democratic governors during a pandemic with scores of people refusing to wear protective gear, while his administration has insisted on testing visitors for coronavirus before meeting with the president or vice president. All of this costs lives, as sure as any military operation.

Perhaps the most devastating dimension of Trump's time in office, on a policy level, is how the Republican establishment brilliantly exploited Trump as a Trojan horse for its extreme agenda. It is unlikely that any of the GOP's preferred candidates could have beaten Hillary Clinton in 2016. Trump dragged the Republican Party kicking and screaming back into executive power. For them, he was a messiah they chided and scorned when he first appeared, but now they prostrate themselves before him every minute of every day.

The real terror of the past three and a half years boils down to this: the consolidation of power by some of the most vile figures and interests in the Republican party.

The public still does not know the full story of how Mike Pence ended up on the ticket as Trump's running mate, but when it was announced, it was clear that the professional Republicans and the extremist evangelical lobby had their inside man. With Mitch McConnell running the Senate and Pence babysitting the president, Trump could focus on barking for the crowds in between golf outings and Twitter rants while the political hitmen in Washington dust off every extreme right-wing initiative they've cooked up for decades and which they work day and night to methodically ram through. Trump has had his signature moments, but much of his policy has been outsourced to craftier and more sophisticated policymakers.

Trump is famously not a fan of reading detailed briefings, but give him a few nuggets of oversimplified policy talking points to pepper throughout his rants, and he's going to be your gaudy QVC host pitching the crappy product to his base. The bonus is that none of it actually has to be true, it just needs to be acceptable to the right people and truthfully exposed or documented by journalists whom he can then dismiss as the fake news media.

More broadly, the real terror of the past three and a half years boils down to this: The consolidation of power by some of the most vile figures and interests in the Republican party. This includes the scores of federal judges named to the bench, the shaping of the Supreme Court, the radical drive toward deregulation, and the canceling of even the most minimal commitments the U.S. has made to try to confront climate change. What the Republicans have managed to accomplish on a policy level in Trump's time in office is profound and terrifying.

Out in full view, Trump has presided over the separation of families and the locking up of immigrant children in cages, empowering ICE agents to act as storm troopers. He has intervened to protect war criminals from accountability, threatened to kill the families of suspected terrorists, sought to ban -- and in some ways has succeeded in banning -- Muslims from entering the country. His threat to fill Guantanamo prison back up still looms, especially in the era of the coronavirus pandemic. Is it so hard to imagine it becoming a disease-ridden black hole for migrants seeking refuge?

Trump's economic policies have enriched corporations and special interest groups beyond their imaginations, while sawing off the already inadequate social programs in this country. We still have no idea of the extent to which Trump and his family are financially benefiting from his presidency. He talks about women in disgusting ways, including attempting to publicly humiliate the women he is accused of raping and assaulting. And the sick reality is that a significant number of people in the U.S. clearly like these things even if they won't openly admit it, though a disturbing number of them do feel emboldened to admire it. Trump has offered up an IPO on ignorance and hatred as a source of pride, and a lot of people enthusiastically bought in.

Trump's rise to power is, in many ways, the logical product of the U.S. as a failed state. Trump says the quiet parts about the system out loud.

Donald Trump's presidency is not an aberration of U.S. history in substance. His rise to power and the policies he has implemented are, in many ways, the logical product of the U.S. as a failed state, politically and functionally. Trump says the quiet parts about the system out loud, but his agenda is firmly rooted in the bloody history of this republic. And his rise was made possible by the failed two-party system and the corporate dominance of electoral politics in the U.S. Also, let's not pretend that congressional Democrats have not enabled Trump by regularly voting for his obscene military budgets and sweeping surveillance powers while simultaneously calling him the most dangerous president in history.

What would happen if Trump wins the election in November? In practical terms, it would be a nightmare.... Four more years of this will be deadly.

... ... ...

Biden has an abominable public policy record on a wide range of issues. He has a penchant for lying -- about his role in the civil rights movement and about being arrested in apartheid South Africa. He continues to lie and mislead about his support for the war in Iraq, the most consequential foreign policy decision of the post-Vietnam era. He has been accused by eight women of misconduct, including one allegation of very serious sexual assault by his former Senate staffer Tara Reade. Biden's cognitive health and mental acuity is, to say the least, questionable, particularly when you compare his current performance with videos from just a few years ago. He frequently rambles without a clear point, forgets what office he is running for, and has to rely on teleprompters and notes to make it through interviews and speeches without saying something embarrassing. In numerous interactions with voters, Biden has poked their chests in an aggressive manner; told an immigrant rights activist to "vote for Trump"; called voters childish names; and threatened a union worker in Detroit, telling the man to stop objecting to Biden pointing his finger in his face unless the worker "want[s] to go outside with me." Let's not even discuss the tale of his showdown with a rusty razor-wielding "Corn Pop" at the pool. Trump's temperament is frightening, but Biden isn't exactly a cool head who exudes competence or confidence.

Liberals may poo poo the whole Hunter Biden-Burisma-Ukraine-China attacks from Trump, but this is going to be a problem in the general election. On many of the key issues where Democrats could attack Trump, Biden is going to be virtually incapacitated by his own skeletons. What Sen. Elizabeth Warren did to Mike Bloomberg at a February debate would be impossible for Biden to do to Trump. "You have more allegations of sexual assault than I do, Donald," is not a good line. "Your sons have profited off the presidency more than my son did off my vice presidency" -- also not a winning zinger. And don't think for a moment that Trump won't hammer away on Biden's Iraq War vote and his trade policies. The Democratic primary is not the general election.

It's always worth remembering that Biden was picked in 2008 to make Obama less threatening to moderates -- so we can't even bank on a return to Obama's brand of neoliberalism.

There is no point to going through and listing all of the terrible aspects of Biden's career, his policy record, his mental stamina, or his substantial failures to make himself visible or consistently cogent since securing the presumptive nomination. All of this is going to be put on display for the next six months. The Democratic Party and the voters in the roughly 50 percent of primaries that were held have committed our fate to Biden's candidacy. Obama and other senior party leaders, major news organizations, and a lot of money deployed to attack Sen. Bernie Sanders also played a role in manufacturing this reality. Sanders ending his campaign and vowing to support Biden leaves people with two viable candidates on the ballot. Barring a health crisis or death of one of these older men, the only two candidates with enough public support to win the presidency will be Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

What we get with Trump is as clear as it is terrifying. What we get with Biden, in his current form, is less apparent. Biden will have a team of competent (for better and worse) technocrats and, in all likelihood, an incredibly influential vice president and an unelected chief of staff running the show. Biden's administration will also include appointments aimed at throwing some bones to progressives and likely other Cabinet appointments that recognize the growing influence of progressive ideas. It will, without a doubt, also be riddled with a disproportionate number of hawkish, corporatist Democratic apparatchiks. It will be an administration that does the bidding of Wall Street, believes in bloated war budgets, and will put a friendlier face on the worst excesses of empire. It's always worth remembering that Biden was picked in 2008 to make Obama less threatening to moderates -- so we can't even bank on a return to Obama's brand of neoliberalism. But there will be policy areas where some victories may be possible for a well-organized and militant left willing to take Biden on. Such a dynamic wouldn't be the worst thing in the world and would be better for more people than a second Trump term in virtually every tangible way.

[May 05, 2020] How the Dems have cancelled democracy and decency

Dems are a joke.
May 05, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
The dems are incapable of finding a credible stand in for Biden. Some flunky might come to the fore but thet will most likely be the result of a 'committee' decision as the dems have cancelled democracy and decency.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 5 2020 18:31 utc | 4


Jackrabbit , May 5 2020 20:31 utc | 15

Seeing everyone get worked up over Biden is funny. Do you think you'll get a better candidate? Bernie dropped out for a reason. He was never a real candidate. There will not be any real candidate for change.

Killary's pretended "health problems" in 2016 seem like a fore-shadowing of Biden's. May be she really is the ultimately "the one" in 2020.

All we can do is watch and LOL.

!!

ptb , May 5 2020 19:09 utc | 9

nah, as long as DC Democrats run the show, it'll be Biden all the way.
VP nominee: Jeb Bush in drag.

burnemall , May 5 2020 19:17 utc | 10
Burn em all!
Elephant , May 5 2020 19:20 utc | 11
It doesn't matter who the nominee is, and that's true for both parties. As I believe we all know, Wall Street, the military-industrial complex and, to some extent, the bureaucracy, are what drives the agenda. The goons heading up the parade are simply an odd form of bread and circus.
Lozion , May 5 2020 19:30 utc | 12
I say its time for Cthulhu.

https://cthulhuforamerica.com/

After all, Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn..
Right?

Jen , May 5 2020 20:08 utc | 14
Lozion @ 14:

Cthulhu couldn't destroy the US any more than its politicians and other leaders in its other institutions (in education, in the entertainment and media industries, in the financial sector, in the defence industry) have already done so perhaps his time has come.

Yog Sothoth for Vice President!

[May 03, 2020] Realignment and Legitimacy: taking even larger chuck of the labor movement out of the Democrat orbit would be interesting.

May 03, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Third Party:

Here is what is real.

The Democratic Party elite doesn't care what we think. So all of the work that we do and have done around them is pretty much self torture.

We only will make a difference when we make ourselves a genuine #3rdparty collective voice. And it will be fun.

-- RoseAnn DeMoro (@RoseAnnDeMoro) May 1, 2020

By the midterms:

Fundamentally, we need a progressive 3rd party.

I am willing to spend the rest of my life working for that.

And yes, November is a massive problem.

I just don't ever want to be here again with bad choices in my lifetime.

We should prepare for a #3rdParty for the midterms.

-- RoseAnn DeMoro (@RoseAnnDeMoro) April 30, 2020

The other players would seem to be DSA and the Greens, and I'm not sure what they would think of this. But taking a big chuck of the labor movement out of the Democrat orbit would be interesting. Especially considering that nurses are as well-liked as, say, firefighters.

[May 02, 2020] Biden Campaign Fundraising Email Reminds Donors Sexual Assault Allegations Don't Bury Themselves"

This is useless (most politicians are sexual predators; that comes with the territory) but pitch perfect interpretation of Biden's Tara Reade story from Onion
May 02, 2020 | www.theonion.com

"We'll be honest -- this isn't going to be cheap. It's not just going away like we thought it would. We know it seems like we can coast off the media suppressing the story, but there's a lot of important work to be done behind the scenes to ensure these accusations never see the light of day.

These sexual assault allegations have already broken through to The Washington Post, and if we don't meet our fundraising goal by midnight tonight, it could be front page news tomorrow."

[Apr 30, 2020] Joe Biden is principally responsible for the Patriot Act

Apr 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

jadan , Apr 30 2020 16:19 utc | 158

The degree to which government "by and for the people" cannot create consensus is the measure of its failure to represent the people. The government is not trusted because it is undemocratic. Rule By Secrecy is the rule.

Where did the Patriot Act come from? This abridgment of liberty appeared seemingly out of nowhere in October 2001. No representative of the people actually read it and yet it was voted into law. ( Hint: Joe Biden is principally responsible for the Patriot Act )

The surveillance state is well established in our midst and in our minds and the need to promote the general welfare by defending against pandemics will entail more surveillance and more constraints on personal liberty. The degree to which the government must rely on secrecy and denial of the Bill of Rights to remain in power is the degree to which it will earn the fear & loathing of the people and simple mistrust will become violence. When Elon Musk, one of our favorite oligarchs, attacks government for its handling of the pandemic, government should worry.

[Apr 28, 2020] All is calm on the feministm front if it is Biden: Whatever Trump's sins, I doubt that Trump has groped as many women and children as Biden has

Apr 28, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

1. Joe Biden is accused of having done what Trump bragged about, i.e., having inserted finger or fingers into a woman staffer's vagina by force and without her consent, she being a senate staffer at the time. Is this not rape?


Voatboy , 27 April 2020 at 06:55 PM

having done what Trump bragged about, i.e., having inserted finger or fingers into a woman staffer's vagina by force and without her consent,

My understanding was that Trump claimed that any woman would consent to Trump's advances, and thus Trump always claimed to enjoy the consent of any woman he grabbed. Whatever Trump's sins, I doubt that Trump has groped as many women and children as Biden has.

David O White , 27 April 2020 at 07:00 PM
I have to say that as a Democrat, I believed the accusers of Trump and Kavanaugh. So I also have to believe the accuser of Biden. Because of this and his apparent old age disabilities, I will not vote for him, or Trump either for that matter. But I am 71 years old and I guess it is up to other generations to determine the fate of the country.
turcopolier , 27 April 2020 at 09:13 PM
All

https://www.businessinsider.com/former-neighbor-corroborates-joe-bidens-accuser-2020-4

[Apr 28, 2020] In a Slap in the Face to Progressives, Biden Appoints Larry Summers, a Literal Architect of Neoliberalism, to Economic Advisor

That means loss of 80% or more of Sanders supporters.
Notable quotes:
"... By Thomas Neuburger. Originally published at DownWithTyranny ..."
Apr 28, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Yves here. Larry Summers watchers may recall our piece, Why Larry Summers Should Not Be Permitted to Run Anything More Important than a Dog Pound . Summers had put his hat in the ring to become Fed chairman, which elicited an impressive level of negative coverage. So memories have now faded enough that Summers be allowed to hold an important domestic role again?

In fairness, Summers has attempted some rehabilitation, and now regularly takes positions to the left of the former boundary-setter of the limits of Goodthinking Liberal policy, Paul Krugman. Not that that stands for much.

By Thomas Neuburger. Originally published at DownWithTyranny

Joe Biden has chosen as his economic adviser the main Democratic proponent of the China PNTR deal and Wall Street deregulation. Apparently, Biden may really have meant it when he said "nothing will fundamentally change." https://t.co/UokamnmgyA

-- David Sirota (@davidsirota) April 23, 2020

Over the past three decades, Summers has amassed a policy record of almost unrivaled social ruin.
-- Zach Carter, Huffington Post

In a slap in the face to progressives , Joe Biden, who has already announced that if he's elected "nothing would fundamentally change," has appointed the head of Barack Obama's National Economic Council, Larry Summers, as a key adviser to his campaign.

From Bloomberg , which occasionally still reports the news (emphasis added):

Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers is advising Joe Biden's presidential campaign on economic policy, including its plans to revive the U.S. economy after the coronavirus pandemic, according to five people familiar with his involvement.

The Obama and Clinton administration veteran's role roiled progressives who view his past work on the 2009 recovery as too favorable to big banks. That's awkward for the Biden campaign at a time when it is trying to win the trust of former supporters of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.

Five people confirming is a deliberate leak, especially since non of them are said to be "unauthorized to speak about the matter."

Progressive groups are aghast, of course:

Two Sanders-aligned groups, Justice Democrats and Sunrise Movement, said Friday they "hope Biden publicleconomic y rejects Summers's role as an economic adviser to better earn the trust of our generation." They said they also plan to start a petition calling on Biden to pledge to exclude Summers from his transition team or administration.

" Larry Summers's legacy is advocating for policies that contributed to the skyrocketing inequality and climate crisis we're living with today," the groups said in a joint statement.

Summers is such a bad choice for the campaign to be aligned with that The American Prospect writer Robert Kuttner put Summers at the top of his "do not re-appoint" list .

But as Rising's Saagar Enjeti points out , the real group that Biden needs to assure isn't Progressive Avenue, or even Main Street -- it's Wall Street -- and leaking via five sources to Bloomberg News that Summers is now in Biden's inner circle does just that. As Bloomberg put it, with this move Biden has "offered some reassurance [to] Wall Street that Biden is not moving too far to the left from the centrist positions that earned him his establishment support."

I'm not if sure this will get him elected, but it is certain to be noticed, even by not-well-read voters who nonetheless care about the direction of the country. Summers was a marquee name in the Obama administration. As Robert Kuttner points out :

Under Clinton, Summers was a prime architect and huge enthusiast of what proved to be fatal financial deregulation. He was also in charge of Clinton's economic policy for post-Soviet Russia , and was responsible for pushing for early and catastrophic privatization of state assets, a fire sale that led directly to the creation of Russia's oligarchs. As president of Harvard, he proved to be both arrogant and sexist, to the point where he got himself fired.

[As Obama's chief economic advisor, Summers] not only lowballed the necessary economic stimulus and ended it prematurely, but he successfully fought for rescuing the biggest banks rather than taking them into temporary receivership . Back at Harvard, Summers earns over $600,000 as a university professor but also moonlights at the hedge fund D.E. Shaw, where his compensation is well into the seven figures. (Some would say he moonlights at Harvard.)

There are so many ways that Summers is a bad choice, it's difficult to enumerate them, though both Kuttner and the HuffPost's Zach Carter try. ( Carter : "Over the past three decades, Summers has amassed a policy record of almost unrivaled social ruin." Then he lists the ways.)

It's sufficient to say that his appointment is the economic-policy equivalent of bringing in Rahm Emanuel, who famously called liberals " fucking retarded ," to handle the Biden's relationship with progressive groups.

If Larry Summers' appointment is part of the mainstream Democratic plan to unite the Party and rally "change voters" behind the Biden candidacy, good luck.

[Apr 27, 2020] In my neighborhood, one car with a "Bernie" sticker now has a (home-made) "F*ck Biden" sticker

I sincerity doubt that Bernie supporter would vote for Neoliberal Dems (Clinton wing of Democratic Party) at all. Most probably will vote for the third party, or not vote at all. Few will vote for Trump -- much less then in 2018 as it is not clear what Trump represents and it has nothing to do with bernie program.
Apr 27, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Adam Eran , April 26, 2020 at 2:55 pm

What? After appointing Summers as an economics advisor!? I don't get that as a progressive move, especially after (Biden ally) Pelosi appoints Shalala to oversee CARE. In fact I see no explicit concessions to progressives by the D's or Biden and would welcome the chance to be wrong.

Meanwhile, in my neighborhood, one car with a "Bernie" sticker now has a (home-made) "F*ck Biden" sticker. So there's at least one person Status Quo Joe hasn't convinced.

[Apr 22, 2020] Especially as the insane neoliberal economy we live in, we are ruled by a group of kleptocrats and vicious stooges. Which make allegations against Biden deserving a closer look but that does not make them automatically credible

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The Progressive ..."
Apr 22, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

"Evidence" means testimony, writings, material objects, or other things presented to the senses that are offered to prove the existence or nonexistence of a fact. -- California Evidence Code sec 140


JTMcPhee , April 21, 2020 at 6:19 pm

... ... ...

Even the NYT acknowledged (before it erased the text in its story on Reade that noted there were no other sexual misconduct charges pending against him other than that long history of assaults and sniffing and hands-on, text removed by the Times at the instance of the Biden campaign staff?

Here's the original text: " The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden, beyond the hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable." Waiting for the apologists to tell us why the edit to remove the last clause starting "beyond " is just "Good journalism."

He and Trump are bad examples of the male part of the species. Nothing to choose that I can see, other than who among the people that revise those bribes to them will be the first in line at the MMT watering hole

just_kate , April 21, 2020 at 8:54 pm

i had a lengthy discussion about this with my brother and sil, it came down to her saying I DON'T CARE ABOUT THAT re bidens history of being a ttl letch plus possible rapist and my brother questioning what is obvious discomfort in multiple video evidence.

They said defeating trump was paramount to anything against biden. i simply give up at this point.

cm , April 21, 2020 at 3:28 pm

No mention of Brett Kavanaugh or Christine Blasey Ford in the article

michael99 , April 21, 2020 at 6:30 pm

The Heart-Wrenching Trauma of the Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh Hearings
It's difficult. It hurts. It's unfair. But women will keep telling our stories.
By Joan Walsh
September 28, 2018

lyman alpha blob , April 21, 2020 at 5:46 pm

Lots of partisan hackery and TDS going around in the last few years in once respectable lefty publications. Mother Jones has gone completely to hell rather than raising any, as was once their mission statement. I haven't read the Nation as much in recent years – I let my subscription lapse a while ago as I found I just couldn't keep up with reading it. Coincidentally I think that was about the time I started reading NC. The Nation has a history of sheepdogging lefties to rally behind bad Dem candidates, which was another reason I didn't feel bad letting my subscription go.

I do still have my subscription to Harper's but they were getting on my nerves quite a bit to the point I considered cancelling them too. Rebecca Solnit wrote some truly cringe-worthy editorials for them after Trump's election. They seem to have removed her from writing the main editorial so maybe I wasn't the only one who felt she left a little to be desired. I'm quite fond of the newer woman they have doing editorials, Lionel Shriver. She seems like she'd fit in quite well here!

sierra7 , April 21, 2020 at 3:39 pm

I left (pun intended) the Nation pub in the dust way back in the 1990's and buried it post 9/11. Used to be a real good alternative press pub 30-40 years ago. Somewhere along the line it lost it's way and joined the wishy-washy "gatekeeper' society of "approved news."
RIP

urblintz , April 21, 2020 at 3:33 pm

Joan Walsh is a partisan fraud and The Nation's worst hire since . forever.

Olga , April 21, 2020 at 8:09 pm

The Nation was a sanity saviour back in late 70s and through 1980s; then something happened. Not clear when or what, but I know I let my subscription lapse. Tried again later, but it was never the same. It's mostly unbearable now, except for Stephen Cohen. Walsh has been in the unbearable category for many years now.

Voltaire Jr. , April 21, 2020 at 10:08 pm

Subscribed to The Nation and The Progressive in 1971. Read and learned for a decade or so, moved on. Also read every Henry George book I could.

marku52 , April 21, 2020 at 3:59 pm

Leonard Pitts just had an editorial in my local paper where he opined that even if Biden had sexually assaulted Reade, it didn't really matter because we had to vote against Trump.

I wrote this in reply:
So Leonard Pitts thinks that Biden's alleged sexual attack on Tara Reade isn't disqualifying, even if true. Strange, he didn't think that way about Brett Kavanagh. I didn't want to attack the columnist as a hypocrite without being sure, so I looked it up. Here is what he wrote:

"It's a confluence of facts that speak painfully and pointedly to just how unseriously America takes men's predations against women. You might disagree, noting that the Senate Judiciary Committee has asked Ford to testify. But if history is any