By Glenn Greenwald
Dwight Eisenhower delivered his farewell address after serving two terms as U.S. president; the five-star general chose to warn Americans of this specific threat to democracy: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” That warning was issued prior to the decadelong escalation of the Vietnam War, three more decades of Cold War mania, and the post-9/11 era, all of which radically expanded that unelected faction’s power even further.
This is the faction that is now engaged in open warfare against the duly elected and already widely disliked president-elect, Donald Trump. They are using classic Cold War dirty tactics and the defining ingredients of what has until recently been denounced as “Fake News.”
Their most valuable instrument is the U.S. media, much of which reflexively reveres, serves, believes, and sides with hidden intelligence officials. And Democrats, still reeling from their unexpected and traumatic election loss as well as a systemic collapse of their party, seemingly divorced further and further from reason with each passing day, are willing — eager — to embrace any claim, cheer any tactic, align with any villain, regardless of how unsupported, tawdry and damaging those behaviors might be.
The serious dangers posed by a Trump presidency are numerous and manifest. There are a wide array of legitimate and effective tactics for combatting those threats: from bipartisan congressional coalitions and constitutional legal challenges to citizen uprisings and sustained and aggressive civil disobedience. All of those strategies have periodically proven themselves effective in times of political crisis or authoritarian overreach.
But cheering for the CIA and its shadowy allies to unilaterally subvert the U.S. election and impose its own policy dictates on the elected president is both warped and self-destructive. Empowering the very entities that have produced the most shameful atrocities and systemic deceit over the last six decades is desperation of the worst kind. Demanding that evidence-free, anonymous assertions be instantly venerated as Truth — despite emanating from the very precincts designed to propagandize and lie — is an assault on journalism, democracy, and basic human rationality. And casually branding domestic adversaries who refuse to go along as traitors and disloyal foreign operatives is morally bankrupt and certain to backfire on those doing it.
By Keith Preston
It increasingly looks to me like the Deep State, with the assent of the ruling class generally, is trying to pull a coup against Trump similar to the Chilean coup of 1974, with Trump assuming the role of Salvador Allende and Hillary perhaps ironically assuming the role of Augusto Pinochet.
I always thought something like that would probably happen if a maverick candidate was ever elected President. Trump is not nearly as maverick as some other figures might be (for example, if someone from like Ron Paul, Jill Stein, Eugene Puryear, Kshama Sawant, Darrell Castle, Louis Farrakhan or David Duke were elected), but, like a mafia godfather, the imperialist overlords apparently tolerate not even a smidgen of real dissent or disobedience.
Given that I consider Trump to have been, all things considered, the more progressive of the two major candidates, the Pinochet-Allende analogy fits well there as well. The current efforts to undermine Trump’s election are a CIA-sponsored right-wing coup engineered on behalf of the American ruling class against a comparably liberal nationalist who is being accused of serving as a tool of the Russians. Just like Allende, Arbenz, Mossadegh, Sukarno, and so many others. Only this time it’s a domestic rather than foreign coup.
Trump is a “liberal” only when compared to the normal Republicans and the Hilllaryites. As I have said in other posts, the regular Republicans are ultra-hawks comparable to Israel’s Likud Party on foreign policy, and hold reactionary plutocratic views on economics similar to what you would find among the right-wing parties in El Salvador and Honduras. Trump strikes me as an old-fashioned Nixon-Rockefeller moderate Republican, with some old fashioned Mondale-Gephardt labor protectionist ideas on trade. While he uses George Wallace like popuilst rhetoric at times (which Nixon also appropriated), Trump is clearly a social liberal who has no problem with gay marriage and transgender bathrooms.
He is “liberal” in the sense of at least giving lip service to the idea of reducing poverty and unemployment as opposed to the “Let them eat cake” attitude of the normal Republicans and the Hillaryites. He is liberal in the sense of apparently favoring a Nixon-like detente relationship with Russia and China, as opposed to the neocon and Hillaryite idea of encircling Russia with NATO and military bases in Central Asia, antagonizing China in the South China seas, and overthrowing Middle Eastern governments that reject the Washington Consensus.
Ironically, it was the Nixon administration that was behind the Chilean coup in 1974. Now the Deep State wants a coup against Trump because another Nixon would be too liberal for their tastes. That shows how far things have fallen in recent decades. The US has gone from being a centrist liberal democracy to being a right-wing oligarchy.