The Deep State Goes to War with President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer 2

By Glenn Greenwald

The Intercept

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.

READ MORE

Keith Preston: Intel services seek to cause ‘friction between US and Russia’ Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

The American intelligence community is seeking to cause “friction” between the United States and Russia as President-elect Donald Trump has signaled willingness to improve relations with Moscow, says a political analyst.

Keith Preston, the chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com, made the remarks on Wednesday in an interview with Press TV when asked about new legislation introduced in the Senate to impose sweeping new sanctions on Russia.

Five Democrats and five Republicans unveiled the new punishments on Tuesday after the intelligence community concluded in a report that the Russian government had sought to influence the outcome of the November election through cyberhacking and a smear campaign, a claim that Trump and Moscow have both rejected.

“It’s extraordinarily foolish for the American Congress to try to impose any kind of sanctions on Russia on the grounds that Russia has supposedly interfered in the American election, that has not been proven,” Preston said.

“The intelligence services are trying to create a greater degree of friction between the United States and Russia, and the Democratic Party is going along with this, in part because they want to blame the Russians for their loss in the election,” he added.

The proposed legislation would solidify many of the sanctions President Barack Obama’s outgoing administration has imposed against Russia and limit Trump’s ability to improve relations with Moscow.

Preston said, “the intelligence services and the political establishment are trying to undermine (Trump)’s efforts to bring the United States closer to Russia,” adding, “they have allies in Congress, particularly in the Democratic Party” to help them achieve their goal.

He said one reason they do not want better ties with Russia is that “the military industrial complex wants to expand NATO right up the Russia’s border and they also want to circle Russia with military bases in Central Asia.”

“This is part of a wider program of establishing and maintaining the American hegemony in that particular region,” the analyst added.

The new sanctions against Russia include visa bans and financial asset freezes against those the US intelligence claimed were behind the cyberattacks against US Democratic organizations and officials. The measure, called “Countering Russian Hostilities Act of 2017,” would also target Russia’s vast energy sector and companies that invest in or help develop its civil nuclear projects.

 

After the Hysteria Reply

An assessment of Trump by libertarian-decentralist-populist Bill Kauffman, whose take on Trump pretty much mirrors my own.

By Bill Kauffman

The American Conservative

Gore Vidal once said that the three saddest words in the English language were Joyce Carol Oates. “President Hillary Clinton” would have dislodged the exophthalmic novelist from that epigram, but as for “President Donald Trump”… the jury is not only still out, the crime hasn’t even been committed yet, despite the drama queens caterwauling on the campuses.

(For 13 years college snots sat on their lazy asses while the U.S. government waged immoral and unconstitutional wars, but now they take to the streets because the candidate of the proles defeated the candidate of the 1 percent? Gimme a break!)

I voted for Jill Stein on foreign-policy grounds. Gary Johnson was unsound on the mandatory cake-baking issue, and as for his running mate, the only good Weld is Tuesday.

I walked to the polling place with someone quite dear to me. She, too, intended to vote for Stein, but about halfway there she halted, as if thunderstruck, grinned, and said, “To hell with it; I’m voting for Trump to stick it to the media.” That’s the spirit!

READ MORE

Keith Preston: Obama wants to prevent close ties between Trump, Putin Reply

Listen here.

The administration of US President Barack Obama is trying to muddy the waters with Russia before the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump, says an American political analyst.

Keith Preston, the director of the attackthesystem.com made the remarks with regards to Obama’s reported plans to introduce new sanctions against Russia.

Washington is set to announce measures designed to retaliate against what it considers Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election to allegedly help Trump with his victory, CNN reported Wednesday, citing government officials.

“Well, what this seems to be is a case of domestic partisan politics in the United States intruding into American foreign policy and international relations,” Preston told Press TV on Thursday.

Preston said the presidential race between Trump and his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton as “one of the most contentious” votes in the US history and the political fallout was inevitable.

“Hillary Clinton actually won the popular vote, Donald Trump was elected by to the electoral votes,” he said, noting that the Democratic Party was looking for a scapegoat.

Pointing to the Obama administration’s “unsubstantiated” claims that Moscow interfered in the vote, Preston predicted that the allegations would continue until Trump takes office on January 20.

“Given that the Democratic Party is till the ruling party for the time being… it appears that the Democratic Party is trying to retaliate against Russia, on the belief that Russia cost them the election,” the analyst explained.

“There are a lot of foreign policy hawks in the Obama administration with a very negative view of Russia,” he added.

Unlike the current administration, however, Trump and his incoming administration have taken a reconciliatory line with Moscow.

“So it maybe that various elements in the American government are trying to retaliate or act against Russia before Trump takes office,” Preston argued.

Economic sanctions against Moscow were originally introduced in March 2014, after the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea joined Russia following a referendum.

The new sanctions are going to be a “token gesture” more than anything else, Preston said.

According to Obama, the CIA and other US intelligence agencies are in possession of evidence that shows Russian President Vladimir Putin supervised the hacks, which targeted the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and John Podesta, a top aide to Clinton.

Putin has categorically denied Washington’s hacking claims, calling on Obama and his administration to either provide evidence or stop their accusations.

Keith Preston: US unremittingly aligned with Israel on Palestinian issue Reply

Press TV. Listen Here.

The United States has protected Israel from UN action and international criticism for decades, despite Tel Aviv’s violation of a broad range of international laws, and President-elect Donald Trump will maintain that cynical policy, an American political analyst in Virginia says.

“The United States has always been unremittingly aligned with Israel and when comes to the United Nations, rarely has the United States ever broken with Israel on any issues in the region, certainly when it comes to the Palestinian issue,” said Keith Preston, the chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com.

“Donald Trump will be continuing what previous presidents have done,” Preston told Press TV on Thursday.

“It was predicted, even during the campaign, that Donald Trump will have a very pro-Israel position and he seems to be following up on that,” he added.

On Thursday, Trump urged the outgoing Obama administration to veto a UN Security Council draft resolution that calls for an immediate halt to illegal settlement building on the occupied Palestinian land.

“The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council regarding Israel should be vetoed,” the incoming Republican president said in a statement.

“As the United States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of terms by the United Nations,” he said.

The UN resolution calls for “the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-state solution,” stating that the activities are dangerously imperiling” and threatening the viability of any future Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank.

Last week, Trump nominated David Friedman, a hardline Zionist, as US ambassador to Israel, likely paving the way toward a controversial decision to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem al-Quds.

Over half a million Israelis live in more than 230 illegal settlements built since the 1967 Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem al-Quds.

All Israeli settlements are illegal under international law. Tel Aviv has defied international calls to stop the settlements expansion in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Neocon Panic and Agony 2

Unz Review

There are clear signs that the Neocons running the AngloZionist Empire and its “deep state” are in a state of near panic and their actions indicate they are truly terrified.

The home front

One the home front, the Neocons have resorted to every possible dirty trick on the book to try to prevent Donald Trump from ever getting into the White House: they have

  • organized riots and demonstrations (some paid by Soros money)
  • encouraged the supporters of Hillary to reject the outcome of the elections (“not my President”)
  • tried to threaten the Electors and make them either cast a vote for Hillary or not vote at all
  • tried to convince Congress to refuse the decision of the Electoral College and
  • they are now trying to get the elections annulled on the suspicion that the (apparently almighty) Russian hackers have compromised the election outcome (apparently even in states were paper ballots were used) and stolen it in favor of Trump.

More…

Will Trump be Allowed to Take Office? 2

By Keith Preston

Libertarian Alliance

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.

https://ia802300.us.archive.org/…/Killing%20Hope%20How%20Pr…

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.

Keith Preston: Nepotism not unprecedented in US politics Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

Nepotism in US politics is not new and the decision by President-elect Donald Trump to bring his family into his inner circle is not unprecedented and has occurred in previous US administrations, a political analyst in Virginia says.

“If we look at the specific [nepotism] complaints that have been made against Trump, we see no fundamental departure from what previous administrations have done,” said Keith Preston, the chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com.

Former US President Bill Clinton gave his wife, Hillary Clinton, a formal role to carry out healthcare reform during his administration in the 1990s, Preston told Press TV on Wednesday.

Hillary Clinton, who lost the 2016 US presidential election to Trump, was appointed by Bill Clinton as the chair of a federal task force devising the healthcare plan, although her efforts failed and she suffered enormous political fallout after the project.

The Bush family, one of the most successful political dynasties in American history, has also relied on family ties to exercise important political roles, Preston noted.

Trump’s decision to bring his children into his inner circle, alongside several highly controversial cabinet appointments, has provoked concerns about nepotism, ethics and national security, and experts worry he will go unchecked in office, despite federal nepotism laws.

A law enacted in the 1960s bars presidents from employing relatives. The law was passed after former US President John F. Kennedy made his brother, Robert, the head of the US Justice Department.

But as long as Trump’s Jewish son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his children are not federal employees, whether paid or unpaid, they may dance around the law, one ethics expert said.

The expert, who asked to remain anonymous because of current representation for government figures, said that if Trump’s family members continued talking to him without giving any administration staffers instructions, then it would be difficult to find a law that they had violated.

US diplomats are also worried that if Trump allows his children and other relatives to work as informal ambassadors, they could undermine the carefully structured efforts of the Foreign Service.

“It makes us look like we’re some sort of banana republic,” one State Department official told POLITICO in a report published on Tuesday. “This is not the way that grown-up nations do things.”

Keith Preston: Trump trying to moderate his rhetoric 3

Press TV. Listen here.

S President-elect Donald Trump is “moderating” the rhetoric he had adopted during the course of his campaign before he won the election, an analyst says.

During his long meeting with editors of The New York Times on Tuesday, Trump distanced himself away from some of the incendiary statements he had made before defeating his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton on November 8.

The billionaire businessman had described the Electoral College “a disaster for a democracy,” but told The Times that it was “actually genius.”

He had called President Barack Obama “the worst president in US history,” but now he said he “liked him a lot” after meeting the president at the White House.

On Clinton’s email server scandal, Trump has vowed to put her in “jail,” calling her “guilty as hell,” however, he told The Times he has no intention of prosecuting the former secretary of state over her use of a private email server.


Trump speaks during a campaign event in Phoenix, Arizona, in July. (File photo)

“It’s clear what Donald Trump is trying to do is moderate his rhetoric considerably,” Keith Preston, the chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com, told Press TV on Wednesday.

“Because during the course of the campaign when he was running in the primaries particularly he would say a lot of inflammatory things, things that were clearly designed to appeal for the particular base that he was trying to reach, he was obviously trying to reach the rank-and-file voters of the Republican Party and a lot of the rhetoric that he was using during that period worked very well for him,” he continued.

“This is entirely predictable, if we go back and we look at Trump’s entire career as a public figure going back for decades, we see that he has always pretty much had the same kind of stances on key issues,” Preston added.

“He’s always been irrelatively liberal, he’s certainly more liberal than the normal Republican and in many ways he’s much more liberal than Hillary Clinton,” he noted.

In his interview with The Times, Trump did not rule out the possibility of man-made climate change, unlike in the past when he dismissed climate change as an expensive, money-making hoax.

He had previously vowed to pull the US out of the 2015 Paris Agreement, according to which about 200 countries will work to reduce global carbon emissions.

Keith Preston: 4 factors that could still make Trump president 1

Press TV. Listen here.

As Donald Trump’s bragging about sexual assault attempts were released, many saw the scandal as a nail in the coffin of his campaign for the US 2016 presidential election.

According to a Real Clear Politics average of recent polls, Trump is trailing Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton by 5.5 points while a poll by the NBC News/Wall Street Journal released on Sunday, showed the former secretary of state leads the real estate mogul by 11 points.

Trump’s drop in polls followed the release of a 2005 recording, in which he is heard bragging about groping women without consent.

Apart from that, there has been a “wide range of reasons” for Clinton’s victory since the beginning of the election process, Keith Preston, the chief editor of AttacktheSystem.com, told Press TV in a phone interview on Sunday.

“The most important thing is demographics. It’s currently the case in the United Sates that the population groups that are inclined to vote for the Democratic Party are simply larger in number,” Preston said.

However, there are also those who “consistently” opt for the GOP, including a large portion of people “in the south and the Midwest as well as elderly white people, on a more general level.”

The Virginia-based analyst further suggested that it would be difficult for Trump to tackle such demographic issues, “particularly given that he is such a divisive figure within his own party.”

“As the election is getting closer, it does look like that Hillary Clinton is going to be the winner.”

‘Unpalatable’ Hillary

There are, however, four factors that could possibly change the equation in favor of the New York businessman, Preston noted.

“One would be if lots of Democratic Party voters simply abstain from voting because they find Mrs. Clinton unpalatable as a candidate. There are certainly many Democrats who feel that way,” he said.

The second factor, according to Preston, involves the Trump campaign’s potential “appeal” to the working class, who classically vote for the Democrats.

“Another would be if Trump manages to get a large crossover vote from blue collar and working class Democrats.”

There is also another factor with a “fairly dubious” prospect and that is the US minorities’ votes for Trump.

”Another issue would be if Trump is able to get an unusually high percentage of the votes of the racial and ethnic minorities,” among whom the New York billionaire is currently quite unpopular.

The course of the election could also turn in Trump’s favor if third party presidential candidates, Jill Stein from the Green Party and Gary Johnson from the Libertarian Party, gain more power in the run-up to the November 8 vote.

“It’s possible that these two candidates could draw votes from Mrs. Clinton and put Donald Trump on top.”

Preston argued, however, that as the Election Day approaches, Trump’s presidency looks “increasingly unlikely.”

Keith Preston: Trump’s legal tax evasion means his business operated ‘at a loss’ Reply

Press TV. Listen here.

GOP nominee Donald Trump’s legal evasion of income taxes for nearly two decades means his business was “operating at a loss” at the time, which would not make him a “genius” as his ally, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, would like voters to believe, suggests an analyst.

Keith Preston, the chief editor and director at AttacktheSystem.com, made the comments in an interview with Press TV on Tuesday in regard to earlier remarks by Giuliani.

“The man’s a genius. He knows how to operate the tax code to the benefit of the people he’s serving,” the Republican politician said in an interview with CNN on Sunday, a day after the New York Times said that the billionaire businessman reported a loss of $916 million on his 1995 income tax returns.

The tax deduction is said to be so substantial that it could have allowed Trump to legally avoid paying taxes for a period of 18 years.


A general view of Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue, September 29, 2016 in New York City. (photo by AFP)

Preston explained that businesses in the US “have to report their gross revenue and… any expenditures are allowed to be deducted from their gross revenue, so their taxable income is only their net revenue after expenses have been deducted.”

“When you have a business that’s actually losing money, the way it works is that all of your expenses become tax deductible because you simply don’t have any net revenue, of which to pay taxes on. It appears that that was the case with Donald Trump with the business difficulty that he experienced previously.”

The Virginia-based analyst affirmed that the real estate mogul had not resorted to any illegal activity just as Guiliani (pictured above)  said, yet suggesting that this means he was not very successful in his business..

“It shows what a genius he is. It shows he was able to preserve his enterprise and that he was able to build it,” Guiliani reiterated.

According to Preston, “business interests in the Unites States receive all sorts of favors from the state.”

“We can go and look at a lot of different corporate interests throughout the United States and we can identify ways in which corporations are able to avoid paying taxes for all sorts of other reasons,” he said, describing “tax loopholes” a serious problem in the US economy.

Trump has been under pressure by the campaign of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton to release his tax returns like any other candidate running for president in the country.

The Unrelenting Pundit-Led Effort to Delegitimize All Negative Reporting About Hillary Clinton 1

What I find interesting is how so many people, and not just liberals and leftists but also many conservatives and libertarians and a few anarchists, regard Trump as some special category of sinner or menace. I’m not a Trump guy. I think he’s a loud mouthed, corrupt, egocentric asshole. But how is he any worse than most of the “normal” politicians? Of the original 17 candidates in the GOP primaries, every one of them with the possible exception of Rand Paul was at least as pro-war at Trump and usually more so. Trump was the only one among them that would seriously criticize the Iraq War, if belatedly. He was the only one to take a conciliatory stance towards Russia. Right now, it’s Trump who is the dove on Russia while the Clintonites are baiting Russia Joe McCarthy-style.

More…

Donald Trump: Nelson Rockefeller’s Revenge? 1

Thus far, there appears to be only one truism about Donald Trump: You can’t believe a word he says.

But what matters is what Trump would actually do as a head of state, not what he says to the press or during campaign speeches. His track record indicates that he normally assumes whatever position is convenient at the moment, and whatever will play the best to the audience of the hour. Throughout his career as a public figure, he’s been on virtually every side of every issue. Now that he has the GOP nomination in the bag he’s already moving to the center, and the general election season hasn’t even started yet. Trump will likely govern as an unprincipled centrist in roughly the same manner as Bill Clinton, not because he’s a closet Clintonite, but because that’s how pursuing politics as “the art of the deal” is actually done, i.e. playing off different interests against one another. Trump will “make America great again” in the same way that Reagan “got the government off our backs” or that Obama brought us “hope and change.”

Trump is pursuing the presidency for the same reason he pursues celebrity recognition, business deals, and supermodel wives. It’s all about the glory of Trump, not carrying out some kind of right-wing revolution. The debate about Trump often consists of leftists who think Trump is some kind of right-wing, racist, fascist, nationalist, revolutionary and think that’s awful, and rightists who share the same assessment of Trump and think that’s wonderful. But both assessments seem to me at least to be a matter of false perceptions. Trump is against gun control, except for when he’s against it. He’s pro life, except for when he supports Planned Parenthood. He’s against the Israel Lobby, except for when he kowtows to AIPAC. He’s the peace candidate except for when he wants to “bomb the shit” out of someone. He’s for tax reform that’s “negotiable.” He’s for immigration restriction except for when illegals are working in his business, and he wants to give illegal immigrants a pathway to return after they’ve been deported. He’s a social conservative who thinks it’s fine to let transexuals in the ladies room. He’s against gay marriage except for when he’s for it. I could go on. This guy changes positions on issues like underwear.

He has been a fairly consistent economic nationalist and opposed neoliberal “free trade” deals throughout his career, so I’ll give him that, though I don’t that he would actually do anything about it. And he doesn’t seem to have the zeal for antagonizing Russia that the neocons do so he’s certainly superior to them (but then who isn’t?)

The two most important issues for the USA right now are avoiding an escalation of conflict with Russia, and thwarting the neocons plans for war with Iran. Trump may well be better than the Dragon Lady on those two issues given that the neocons are defecting to her camp. Trump has done a service to humanity by knocking the neocons and Conservatism, Inc to the sidelines. Other than that, this guy is a farce.

Ironically, if Trump is successful at permanently marginalizing the neocons and Conservatism, Inc (and good for him if he accomplishes that) all that it means is that US politics would return to what it was in the 1970s before the coup by the neocon/neoliberal alliance, with the same range of ideological perspectives more or less being represented. I guess we could say that Trump is “Nelson Rockefeller’s revenge.”

One thing many people don’t seem to realize is that all the “Reagan Revolution” of the 1980s really did was slow down the rapid leftward drift of the 1960s and 1970s. Reagan did not govern any further rightward than JFK, and his successors Bush 1 and Clinton were essentially Rockefeller Republicans (literally, in the case of Bush 1 and de facto in the case of Clinton). The Bush 2 administration was mostly a reincarnation of the welfare-warfare state of LBJ (complete with the state department socialists turned neocons pushing for war with the rest of the world). As I wrote in 2003, ” The liberal orientation of the supposedly “conservative” Bush administration-Keynesian economics, nationalized education, massive subsidies to “curing AIDS in Africa”, the liberal “constitution” to be imposed on Iraq, proposed amnesty for illegal immigrants- attests to this.”

More…

A liberal case for Donald Trump: The lesser of two evils is not at all clear in 2016 Reply

By Walter Bragman

Salon.Com

A liberal case for Donald Trump: The lesser of two evils is not at all clear in 2016Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump(Credit: Reuters/Brian Snyder/Photo montage by Salon)

There are perhaps no three words more jarring to liberals than “President Donald Trump.” The GOP front-runner and presumptive nominee has undoubtedly made enemies with his nativist rhetoric and bellicose persona. That said, now that the race between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton is effectively over, with the former secretary of state essentially guaranteed the nomination, many liberals and progressives are preparing, once again, to vote for the lesser of two evils. The choice may not be as clear as some Democrats believe — especially if Democrats can take back the Senate and assure themselves of a check on a GOP House.

 Once you’ve let that sink in, try this: There is a liberal case to be made for Donald Trump. The prospect of Trump defeating Clinton this November is not necessarily the apocalypse that some would lead you to believe. Here are some of the reasons why.

Don’t Trust Trump on Foreign Policy Reply

By Thomas Knapp

The Garrison Center

In March, an open letter from 121 Republican “national security leaders” characterized GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump’s foreign policy vision as “wildly inconsistent and unmoored in principle,” swinging “from isolationism to military adventurism within the space of one sentence.”

While it’s always wise to take proclamations from the people who brought us the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq with a grain of salt, in this case they were right — and Trump himself proved it with his speech before the Center for National Interest on April 27.

More…

Keith Preston: Trump buying his way into electoral campaign 2

Press TV. Listen here: http://presstv.ir/Detail/2016/04/19/461447/US-election-Donald-Trump/

“It’s only because of the system that Donald Trump’s candidacy is as popular as it is,” Keith Preston says.

US Republican front-runner Donald Trump is buying his way into the electoral campaign and the corrupt political system is the reason why his candidacy is successful, an analyst says.

More…

Trump and the Liberal Intelligentsia Reply

The best response to the Trump campaign from the Left that I’ve seen to date. This is a must read, and a reminder of why Counterpunch is one of the few leftist forums to take their anti-imperialist seriously. This article is an almost perfect critique of the Left as well.

By Jean Bricmont

Counterpunch

A new specter haunts the American elites: the candidacy of Donald Trump in the US President election and his success so far in the Republican primaries. The Republican establishment itself hopes to block his rise, even as he is drawing huge crowds into the party. As for the Democrats, they are hoping that his repugnant image will make the election of Hillary Clinton that much easier.

Let’s start by admitting what seems obvious: Trump is vulgar, insulting, demagogic. He says one thing and then the opposite, and shows distinct signs of megalomania.

That much said, the anti-Trump campaign is typical of the rhetoric of the dominant political class.

Our indignant elites resort to one of their favorite arch reflexes: warnings against “fascism” and yet another “new Hitler”. Ever since Nasser was “Hitler on the Nile”, when he nationalized the Suez Canal, “new Hitlers” spring up in the Western imagination like mushrooms in an autumn woods: Milosevic, LePen, Putin, Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, Assad have all been subjected to such comparisons.

READ MORE