by Scott Creighton
On Morning Joe just now, they spent the first 10 minutes of the show with Jonathan Turley listening to him explain how Acting Attorney General Janet Yates was wrong and out of line yesterday evening when she ordered Justice Department lawyers to refuse to defend Trump’s new travel ban restrictions when they come to court for challenges. Turley explained how he couldn’t understand her decision since the ban is certainly supported constitutionally and the 1952 law expressly gives the president a lot of leeway in determining who can and who cannot come into the country if he perceives our nation interests are threatened. Turley’s position on this is not extraordinary. Most legal scholars agree that Trump’s executive order will hold up in federal court on both constitutional and legal grounds.
Of course, right after he was finished, Joe went off on Trump’s use of the word “betrayed” in his statement about how the administration felt about Yates’ move yesterday and explained that as the reason to fire her and replace her with Dana Boente last night. Scarborough’s position was that the use of the word “betrayed” meant Trump and his “young” advisors were acting as autocrats and they should “take that to Venezuela”
Then he went off for 10 whole minutes about how Trump actually betrayed his new cabinet picks by not informing them of this order prior to Trump signing it and it’s release. He was especially incensed by Trump’s team not informing Sec. Mattis about the order and went on and on about how Trump’s new cabinet picks should basically resign because of this “betrayal”
That, by the way, is EXACTLY what Eliot A. Cohen said in his op-ed type article on Jan. 29th… the same article I mentioned yesterday in an article I wrote about the fake left standing with a neocon PNAC war-mongering war-criminal, Eliot A. Cohen. I guess now we know who else reads and stands with neocon war-mongers, don’t we Joe?
Scarborough went on and on about how Sec. Mattis and all the other military figures in Trump’s cabinet were “heroes” and they deserved better treatment from the administration. Joe’s self-righteous indignation was nearly as profound as Ashton Kutcher’s at the opening of the SAG awards on Sunday.
If it’s true and Trump and his close team didn’t inform Sec. Mattis about this order prior to signing it, would you like to know why? I’ll tell you why:
“At the Pentagon, Defense Secretary James Mattis is compiling a list of Iraqis who helped U.S. troops during the war, whom he wants to exempt from the ban…
Iraqis who were granted what’s known as special immigrant visas have been caught in the ban, with some detained at U.S. airports over the weekend. The special immigrant visa program allows Iraqis and Afghans who helped the United States as interpreters and in other roles during the wars in their countries to resettle in America.” The Hill
Some have suggested on this website that Trump’s order could not be about denying the CIA’s and Special Operations’ terrorists entry into the states because it exempted people with ties to the military. Turns out, that isn’t true at all and in fact, some have already been detained trying to get into the country after completing their tour of service to our deep state.
Not only that but it seems Sec. Mattis immediately started crafting a list to exempt these contractors from Trump’s travel ban just as soon as he found out about it. That indicates to me, if he were kept out of the loop on this order, that was done so for a reason.
Let me explain this for you. Interpreters are important to our efforts over there but they are not something that can’t be replaced. And they don’t necessarily have to be Muslim. For that matter, why would anyone be concerned about them undergoing some enhanced screening? And just how many of them really want to leave the country after serving some time working for Uncle Sam?
On the other hand, “moderate” terrorist contractors would have some difficulty with that screening process wouldn’t they and for the most part, yes, they are all Muslim. And they would certainly want to leave and start over here in the states because 1. it was promised to them as part of the deal and 2. they are terrorists and known to be terrorists in their countries of origin and want to get out as quickly as possible because they really have no future in those countries… especially if things go south for our occupation/regime change operations.
So are these interpreters they want to give a free pass directly into the country or are they something else?
And isn’t that what I have been saying all along?
People should remember, before Sec. Mattis was Defense Secretary, he was Gen. Mattis and one of the things he did in service to our country was help run the Iraqi death squads using indigenous contractors to wipe out growing opposition to our occupation. He was also involved in a number of massacres and other war-crimes.
Gen. Mattis knows how our Special Operations system works in “program countries” and he knows a good part of the incentive we offer desperate, out of work indigenous criminal-types in those countries to get them to do what they do on behalf of the deep state is the promise of a new life here in America.
That’s why so many politicos and pundits are predicting a backlash from groups like “ISIS” or al-Nusra for example. How are they going to react when the new president breaks the deal they had with the old one and they are no longer expecting to receive their “special immigrant visas” which promise them a free pass through the screening process at the airport?
Not only that, but that particular bonus being taken from the tool bin of the recruiters will make their jobs much harder.
Our puppet regime in Iraq is angry as well. They are saying that the U.S. OWES these various regime change contractors special access across our borders because of all the fine work they have been doing killing off the opposition like good little attack dogs. They passed some form of similar ban restrictions yesterday in response to all of this.
Ultimately what we are looking at is further destabilization in Iraq which I am sure Trump will resolve by simply sending in more U.S. troops because, don’t get me wrong, Trump serves the interests of the deep state just like Obama and Bush and Clinton did before him.
My guess though is, Trump is opposed to this type of warfare, not necessarily imperialism itself. He did say we should have “taken the oil” and he did say Obama created “ISIS” by pulling out of Iraq as opposed to staying in. So The Donald isn’t some kind of anti-interventionist in any sense of the word… I just think this kind of … well, let’s call it what it is… terrorism… offends him. And my guess is it scares him as well.
We know for a fact that there have been deep state actors/contractors making hits and creating mass casualty events here in the states and in Canada over the past years. Hell, one took place just two days ago.
It’s out of control and if you don’t think Trump is wise enough to see it for what it is, you can bet your bottom dollar Trump fans that Bannon knows what’s up. Breitbart is a Zionist entity but they also publish a lot of work on all of the recent American Gladio ops and you better believe Bannon knows all about it.
Over the course of his campaign, Trump often made reference to our hiring of “moderate” terrorists overseas and said he wanted that to stop. Specifically with respect to Syria.
Trump’s efforts were deliberately undermined by the former acting Attorney General Sally Yates. By instructing her lawyers to refuse to defend the policy when it came up in court in these emergency hearings what she was doing was hoping Trump would wait a couple days before taking action against her and during that time, the opposition would win some court cases by default since the legal team defending the new order would effectively stand down and offer no defense. She knew damn good and well the constitution and the law was with Trump so the only thing she could do to help the deep state, was order her lawyers to lay down on the job and effectively let them win.
Trump saw through that and immediately fired her and replaced her with someone who would rescind that order of hers.
And in the case of Gen. Mattis, he got that right as well. This list he is cobbling together proves that point. He still has allegiances to the deep state and would probably have intervened in some fashion to make sure the advances he helped secure in Iraq and elsewhere were not lost.
Again, I am no fan of Donald Trump. Did not vote for him or Killary. But he is absolutely right on this one. And he was right not to keep Mattis in the loop because Mattis would probably have done something similar to what Yates did on behalf of the same folks.
Chuck Schumer can fake tears all he wants and Joe Scarborough can get high sniffing his own self-righteous indignation all day long for that matter. The more they screech and misrepresent the executive order and the legal standing it’s based on, the more I am convinced this was never about banning Muslims from entering the country as much as it was about keeping the CIA’s terrorist contractors from moving in next door to you or your kids.
They say once you’re in the CIA you never really leave. Same can be said I guess about their “moderate” terrorist contractors I suppose. And for that reason, I have to reluctantly give Trump credit on this one.
Yeah folks, it’s painfully clear at this time he is deliberately poking a stick in the eye of the Special Operations weapon of choice program and I gotta give him credit for it. He’s sticking to his guns and good for him for doing it.
by Scott Creighton
Being a former actor (from way back when) I stopped channel surfing for minute when I happened to land on the SAG Awards last night. It had just started and Ashton Kutcher was doing some “because I’m an actor” intro monologue from backstage. After that he strolled onstage and said something about airports and our CIA’s destabilization contractors being welcome in “MY AMERICA!!!” with all the self-righteous indignation he could muster.
I changed the channel and still have no idea who won what… and care even less than I did before I happened to land on their show.
That;s what ignorant actors injecting themselves into political discourse does for me. I don’t know about your feelings on the subject.
Turns out, I have already expressed a number of times, I don’t like Trump much. He’s as much of a neocon fascist as the rest of them. You can certainly review my work on the subject going back a year and a half if you need confirmation on the subject.
But as I have also pointed out here and here, the fake left and the complicit media are presenting this executive order of the president’s as something that it is not. And they are doing so in a highly inflammatory way without giving any consideration to the consequences. Mr. Kutcher’s effort last night is a prime example but it is not the only one.
Yesterday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the fake progressive leader of the New New Dems (who backed warmonger Killary and voted for idiot Ben Carson the other day), went before a crowd at an airport and did that little “megaphoning” trick the infiltrators used in the Occupy movement way back when to get out her own self-righteous indignation message to the gathered gullible masses who were protesting.
She lied to them and told them Trump was banning Muslims and what he was doing was “illegal”. It’s not illegal. The president has a lot of control over the borders and can prohibit anyone from entering the country if it preserves our “national interests” and if you don’t believe me, just watch Jonathan Turley’s CNN appearance.
Unfortunately, one cannot easily explain away Warren’s mistake when it comes to getting it wrong on this one by saying she ignorant like the Hollywood self-important actor-class is. She’s just a lying opportunist.
Like I said, the order seems to me to be an an attempt to dissuade Obama’s “moderate” terrorist contractors from attempting to enter the country even after they were promised a new life in the Shining City on the Hill after they completed a tour of duty terrorizing people of various nations like (Iraq, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia…) and I base that on their reactions to the order from the likes of John McCain who never met a terrorist contractor he didn’t like as well as on actually reading the bill itself (which I published)
Again, adding a little more to my original conclusion, I found an essay published by The Atlantic yesterday and written by Eliot A. Cohen.
For those of you who don’t know, Cohen is a founding member of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and helped write “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”. He is a war-monger in the classic sense and when given an opportunity in the Bush administration, he became a war-criminal.
Cohen was one of the first neoconservatives to publicly advocate war against Iran and Iraq. In a November 2001 op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, Cohen identified what he called World War IV and advocated the overthrow of Iran’s government as a possible next step for the Bush Administration. Cohen claimed “regime change” in Iran could be accomplished with a focus on “pro-Western and anticlerical forces” in the Middle East and suggested that such an action would be “wise, moral and unpopular (among some of our allies)”. He went on to argue that such a policy was as important as the then identified goal of Osama Bin Laden‘s capture: “The overthrow of the first theocratic revolutionary Muslim state and its replacement by a moderate or secular government, however, would be no less important a victory in this war than the annihilation of bin Laden.”
“We know that he [Saddam Hussein] supports terror. There’s very solid evidence that the Iraqis were behind an attempt to assassinate President Bush’s father. And we—by the way, we do know that there is a connection with the 9/11 terrorists. We do know that Mohamed Atta, the ringleader of the 9/11 terrorists, met with Iraqi intelligence in Prague. So.” 
Here’s how PNAC co-founder Cohen feels about the “Muslim ban” of Trump’s that isn’t really a Muslim ban:
“I am not surprised by President Donald Trump’s antics this week. Not by the big splashy pronouncements such as announcing a wall that he would force Mexico to pay for, even as the Mexican foreign minister held talks with American officials in Washington. Not by the quiet, but no less dangerous bureaucratic orders, such as kicking the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff out of meetings of the Principals’ Committee…
In an epic week beginning with a dark and divisive inaugural speech, extraordinary attacks on a free press, a visit to the CIA that dishonored a monument to anonymous heroes who paid the ultimate price, and now an attempt to ban selected groups of Muslims (including interpreters who served with our forces in Iraq and those with green cards, though not those from countries with Trump hotels, or from really indispensable states like Saudi Arabia), he has lived down to expectations.”
Precisely because the problem is one of temperament and character, it will not get better. It will get worse, as power intoxicates Trump and those around him. It will probably end in calamity—substantial domestic protest and violence, a breakdown of international economic relationships, the collapse of major alliances, or perhaps one or more new wars (even with China) on top of the ones we already have. It will not be surprising in the slightest if his term ends not in four or in eight years, but sooner, with impeachment or removal under the 25th Amendment. The sooner Americans get used to these likelihoods, the better.” Eliot A. Cohen, war-monger
I’m sorry, but when a war-monger who lied about Iraq’s involvement with 9/11 and argued regime changing Iran through violence as more important than finding bin Laden starts talking about someone’s “temperament” and the chance they might start another war… I have to laugh because the hypocrisy is overwhelming.
Cohen hits all the talking points including that all important one about Trump’s ban effecting those Muslims “moderate” terrorists who helped us in our fight to regime change various countries. Of course, he can’t them by profession, but do you really think he gives a crap about translators?
The apex of Mr. Cohen’s hypocrisy was stated as follows:
“To be associated with these people (Trump administration) is going to be, for all but the strongest characters, an exercise in moral self-destruction.” Eliot A. Cohen, war-monger
Morals? Talk of moral self-destruction coming from an a-moral neoliberal neocon like Cohen who lied through his teeth every day for years in order to get the public behind bombing a million Iraqis to death is talking about “moral self-destruction”?
Are we not supposed to be able to remember what this man really is and what he did? He should be in prison but instead…
Instead, he’s standing alongside celebrity leftists like Kutcher and fake-left politicians like Elizabeth Warren in their call to remove President Trump from office for “humanitarian” reasons and stuff like that.
Ultimately, Cohen’s screed about Trump yesterday almost reads as if he is trying to incite violence from someone against him. Repeatedly he makes less than nuanced suggestions about violence toward him and violence he predicts that will erupt in the streets (violence like that our “moderate” terrorists brought to places like Libya, Syria and Ukraine recently?)
” It (Trump presidency) will probably end in calamity—substantial domestic protest and violence, a breakdown of international economic relationships, the collapse of major alliances, or perhaps one or more new wars (even with China) on top of the ones we already have. It will not be surprising in the slightest if his term ends not in four or in eight years, but sooner, with impeachment or removal under the 25th Amendment. The sooner Americans get used to these likelihoods, the better.” Eliot A. Cohen, war-monger
For those self-aggrandizing celebrities on the left and all you phony liberals in congress, I want you to understand what it is you are doing and who you are standing with at this critical time.
When you find yourself on the same side as folks like John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Eliot A. Cohen, you might want to take a step back and do a little more research into your cause. You might just find it isn’t what you thought it was.
Of course, they all “stood with” the neocon war-crimals already when they backed Hillary Clinton over Trump this past year. So maybe the left is just going that way these days. Wrapping themselves in the feel-good blanket of “humanitarianism” while dropping more bombs on Libya and Syria standing hand in hand with PNAC and if that is the way of the left these days, if it’s not some horribly misguided mistake, then, by all means, war-monger it up with your new buddies lefties.
But you count me out. I’m changing the channel. I still have soul that’s not running high on my own self-satisfaction right now.
A group of European journalists and aviation experts has sent an open letter to Donald Trump asking him to back a new UN-run investigation into the 2014 crash of Flight MH17. The current Dutch-led inquiry is “neither independent nor convincing,” they said.
The open letter, signed by 25 journalists, former civil aviation pilots and researchers from Germany, the Netherlands and Australia, was posted on the website of Joost Niemoller – a Dutch journalist who publicly challenged the current investigation into the ill-fated Flight MH17, which was downed over Ukraine in July 2014…
[read more here]
from RTThe Dutch prosecutor’s office says it lacks information to read the radar images provided by Moscow after the Dutch-led team of international investigators published its report into the crash of MH17 in September.
“Further information is needed to properly understand the meaning of the radar images,” a spokesman for the Dutch prosecutor’s office said in Amsterdam on Saturday, as cited by Der Standard. The spokesman claimed the format in which the data was presented by the Russian side in October has failed to meet international standards.
The Dutch investigators have forwarded a request to Moscow “to send the correct information”, Der Telegraaf reported, citing the spokesman for the prosecutor’s office.
A similar request was reportedly sent by the International Organization for Air Safety, according to the publication.
Evert van Zijtveld, chairman of the MH147 Aviation Disaster Foundation, said the confusion with the interpretation of the radar data is a major setback.
“Therefore, there remain doubts about the true causes of the crash. This could not be allowed,” he told Telegraaf, adding that the families of the victims are still in the dark about the course of the investigation.
“We still know officially nothing on the progress,” Zijtveld said.
Russia had handed over radar data from the area over Eastern Ukraine where the plane was brought down on July 17 2014 to the Dutch embassy in Moscow late October.
All 298 people onboard the plane were killed…
[read more here]
by Scott Creighton
UPDATE: see update at end of article
I don’t think anybody has ever accused me of giving Donald Trump “too much credit” but that happened yesterday when I wrote about President Trump’s executive order involving enhanced screening of people coming from certain countries where we hire, train and equip Muslim terrorists to destabilize and regime change the “program nations”
I wondered aloud in my article if Trump and his people weren’t somehow targeting the CIA’s and the State Department’s regime change contractors and at least one reader thought I was giving him too much credit.
Let’s take a look at what Robert Gates said yesterday about the situation and the trouble it might cause:
“Any effort to strengthen national security to improve the vetting process, I think that’s all perfectly reasonable and totally legitimate,” Gates told ABC’s Martha Raddatz on Sunday’s “This Week.” “In fact, we would expect that of the president.
“The key is doing it in a way that doesn’t risk creating more enemies than threats it deters – and that’s the balance that has to be weighed.”
Gates added some concern shared by “former senior commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan” about the presentation of “this order” impacting some former Iraqi’s who aided operations there who were “promised safe haven in the United States and now may not get it.“ NewsMax
Former Iraqis who aided operations were promised a new life in the land of the Big PX after their “tour of duty”(?) not getting what they were promised?
I think that sounds exactly like what I was talking about, right?
You go into a shit-hole of a country (one we turned into a shit-hole by the way) and you find a bunch of young, unemployed, hopeless men and offer them a chance out. You cut a deal with them that if they serve 3 years or so on one of your destabilization teams, in the end they get a certain amount of money (remember that 500 million Obama got to “train” “moderate” terrorists in Syria? How many did they “train”? 50? What do you think happened with all that money?) and a ticket to the States where they can attend college and will have a job waiting for them when they get there.
Who is going to pass on that?
Seems to me this new plan from Trump is taking that incentive away from the recruiters and simultaneously it will cause a great deal of conflict within the ranks of those already serving their time in places like Libya, Syria and Iraq. Right?
Terror supporters like McCain and Lindsey Graham are livid right now showing their anger at Trump for doing this. As are the CIA controlled fake left in Hollywood.
Chuck Schumer got out in front of a podium yesterday and pretended to cry with a couple Muslim kids standing next to him as props.
Potential DNC heads are going on Fox saying this is “literally tearing families apart” (and they said nothing about ObamaGod’s drone strikes that literally blew families apart)
Jonathan Turley, a man who doesn’t support this action, just went on Morning Joe and explained that the argument being used out on the streets against this program has almost nothing to do with the reality of it. It’s hyperbole and a farce. That’s basically what he said.
Truth is, people are being detained, questioned and released.
I think this is part of an effort to put an end, at least in part, to the irregular warfare operations across the Middle East which use Muslim men from various countries either recruiting them from those 7 nations or sending them into them to serve their time and earn passage over here to the States where they can start a new life.
Of course, Trump can’t say that and so he has to deal with the “It’s a BAN ON MUSLIMS!!” disinfo that is being propagated across the country by the usual suspects who have ties to our deep state.
God knows I don’t give Trump “too much credit” on anything. And after Gates’ statement, I feel more convinced than ever that I haven’t started with this one.
UPDATE: McCain and Graham made it clear which Muslims they were concerned about yesterday.
“At this very moment, American troops are fighting side-by-side with our Iraqi partners to defeat ISIL. But this executive order bans Iraqi pilots from coming to military bases in Arizona to fight our common enemies. Our most important allies in the fight against ISIL are the vast majority of Muslims who reject its apocalyptic ideology of hatred.” UPI
The 5 or 10 Iraqi Air Force pilots learning to fly F-16s would not be included in the ban.
So which “Iraqi partners” are war-mongers Graham and McCain talking about coming here to the U.S.?
by Scott Creighton
Why are CNN and other MSM outlets reporting President Trump’s “Protecting the Nation…” order as banning Muslims from entering the United States from 7 specific countries?
“The executive order bars all people hailing from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen — or at least 218 million people, based on 2015 data published by the World Bank — from entering the United States.” CNN
Trump’s order, Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States, does not mention those 7 specific nations. The only one it mentions is Syria. The full text of the order can be found at the link and at the end of this article as well.
The list of 7 comes from a reference made in the order. Specifically, it’s the title of Sec. 3 of his order: “Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern”
The reference is to a previous bill passed in Feb. of 2016, under one President Barack H. Obama. That one was titled the “Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015”. The “countries of particular concern” were spelled out in that law as: Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. It is indeed the same countries.
Under the Act, travelers in the following categories are no longer eligible to travel or be admitted to the United States under the VWP:
These restrictions do not apply to VWP travelers whose presence in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen was to perform military service in the armed forces of a program country, or in order to carry out official duties as a full-time employee of the government of a program country. We recommend those who have traveled to the seven countries listed above for military/official purposes bring with them appropriate documentation when traveling through a U.S. port of entry.
The vast majority of VWP-eligible travelers will not be affected by the new Act. New countries may be added to this list at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security.” Department of Homeland Security
The 2015 order placed restrictions on travel for people coming from those nations, just as Trump’s bill does. But no one protested outside airports when Obama signed it. No one filed legal cases against it. Not a peep from folks like CNN or Rachel Maddow when Barack Obama set in motion the beginning of the bill that Trump is not being attacked for expanding.
Well I shouldn’t say it was the beginning of the bill because that dates back to the second Bush administration:
“We’re going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran” –General Wesley Clark
Switch out Lebannon with Yemen (due to the unexpected uprising against out puppet Saleh) and you have the exact same list. What a coincidence, right?
Anyway, lets forget for a second that the fake left is going ballistic over Trump’s banning of people supposedly from those countries (when he doesn’t actually mention them by name in his order) while they have been quiet as little church mice as their hero, ObamaGod, bombed every one of them… and more.
Let’s also forget about them calling Trump a Nazi for keeping some family from getting off an airplane in New York after saying nothing as President Peace Prize spent 8 long years calling in drone strikes on Terror Tuesday, killing scores of families across the Middle East.
And let’s not say a thing about how they weep for some director who cant attend the Oscars because of Trump while they actually applaud the work of the White Helmets, a group put together to spin up propaganda about Obama’s terrorists (al Qaeda by the way) in Syria.
Lets forget all of that because if we focus on that kind of stuff, it almost makes it seem like it isn’t worth trying to save this goddamned country…
And lets focus instead on what is really behind this temporary ban of Trump’s. Who is he really trying to keep out? Muslims or … something else?
If you consider Trump’s “Protecting the Nation..” order to be an expansion of Obama’s “Visa Waver Program…” bill then we have to take a look at the desired effect of each and see how they differ if we want to try to understand what Trump (and Obama) were doing with each of them.
Think back to last week when the likes of Keith Olbermann were screeching all of a sudden about how “crazy” Trump had to be removed from office IMMEDIATELY! Why was he and the others doing that right at that time?
Trump was talking about signing an executive order to begin a full investigation into the election results from a couple states, one of which was California.
That sent the fake left into panic mode. Why? Because Hillary “won” California by something like 4 million votes, when it was all said and done. And those 4 million extra votes provided her and her minions with the fodder to claim she actually won the popular vote in the country. She didn’t. California also rigged the unDemocratic Party primary election if you recall and almost all of those extra 4 votes in Cali for Killary in the general election came well after Nov. 8th. They simply padded the numbers for her, knowing she had lost, but hoping they could muddy the waters enough with that 2.8 million vote lead they fabricated to push the various efforts they pushed after the election and before the Dec. 18th deadline… all in an effort to install Hillary.
Trump’s order to start the investigation was a threat. It’s that simple. He backed off of it and as far as I know, he hasn’t brought it up again, but it was a threat and it was one that the corporate left took very seriously.
As bad as the fake Dems are right now, as bad a shape as they are in, can you imagine where they would be were folks to get a better look at just how incredibly corrupt they really are? And that is too say nothing of the damage an investigation would do to their “stability enforcing” e-voting machines trick.
I’m telling you that because I think there is a purpose to Trump’s “7 Country Muslim Ban” order that goes a little beyond “extreme vetting”
Take that line from Obama’s DHS FAQ page for the “Visa Waver Program..” law for instance. It gives you some keen insight into what the bill is really doing.
“These restrictions do not apply to VWP travelers whose presence in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen was to perform military service in the armed forces of a program country, or in order to carry out official duties as a full-time employee of the government of a program country.” DHS
What does that mean? That means if you were a hired gun for the Pentagon, CIA, State Department or anyone else, working in a “program country” ( one of those countries with a “regime change” program taking place) these restrictions do not apply to you.
These are all countries we had assets in and 6 of the 7 were targeted for regime change back in 2001, right? So his law simply doesn’t apply… to our terrorists.
Ah. An important distinction when you think about it.
Now, Let’s look at Trump’s order and see what it does:
“(c) To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).”
First of all, Trump doesn’t base his exceptions on the military and various agencies who hire contractors to work in “program countries”. He gives very specific details about who will be granted exceptions limited them to “foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas”
Second of all, unlike Obama’s, his ban is not permanent, which is a key aspect to this. Trump is simply buying time to get a system in place, country by country, by which our immigration services can carefully vet anyone who comes into the country… regardless of their prior military service in “program countries”
The only permanent bans of nationals from specific countries that exists in his order would be those from countries who flat out refuse to provide specific, detailed information on their nationals who wish to gain entry into the country.
“(e) After the 60-day period described in subsection (d) of this section expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the President a list of countries recommended for inclusion on a Presidential proclamation that would prohibit the entry of foreign nationals (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas) from countries that do not provide the information requested pursuant to subsection (d) of this section until compliance occurs.”
This is an important clause because, I believe, it goes to the heart of what this is all about.
We own many nations. And when I say “we” what I mean too say is “the CIA, IMF, World Bank, Bank for International Settlements and the various other “national interests” our lying politicians serve.
And in those nations we own, we usually install various “intelligence” agencies and death squads and the like, who are always more than willing to help out when called upon.
So it would not be difficult for them to ship someone over to help a destabilization program right here in the states, would it?
When Trump says he’s trying to protect US citizens from terrorist acts committed by people coming in from other nations, I think he means what he says.
I just don’t think he’s worried about “ISIS” sending them.
Who is Trump really at war with right now? Clintons? Yemen (though he did authorize a bombing the other day)? Russia?
Trump is at war with the CIA and it’s the CIA who just happens to have cornered the import/export market on extremist terrorist contractors these days, right? They’re the ones who train them in Syria and Jordan and hire them from Saudia Arabia or Qatar and export them from places like Libya to Syria… right? They’ve been doing that for decades. It’s called irregular warfare. Look it up.
And right now, the CIA is hot for Mr. President. He insulted them. He wants to pull out of the Greater Kurdistan project. He and Theresa May at least pay lip service to ending the regime change program that has made so many well placed CIA executives very, very rich over the years.
It appears to me that it’s at least possible that Donald Trump understands this and understands that tensions will rise as he and his administration try to impose different restrictions on folks returning from “program countries” and so, until he can get an adequate system in place, he decided to cut off all of them… just to be sure.
That’s my guess anyway.
—PROTECTING THE NATION FROM FOREIGN TERRORIST ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq., and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, and to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States, it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The visa-issuance process plays a crucial role in detecting individuals with terrorist ties and stopping them from entering the United States. Perhaps in no instance was that more apparent than the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, when State Department policy prevented consular officers from properly scrutinizing the visa applications of several of the 19 foreign nationals who went on to murder nearly 3,000 Americans. And while the visa-issuance process was reviewed and amended after the September 11 attacks to better detect would-be terrorists from receiving visas, these measures did not stop attacks by foreign nationals who were admitted to the United States. Numerous foreign-born individuals have been convicted or implicated in terrorism-related crimes since September 11, 2001, including foreign nationals who entered the United States after receiving visitor, student, or employment visas, or who entered through the United States refugee resettlement program. Deteriorating conditions in certain countries due to war, strife, disaster, and civil unrest increase the likelihood that terrorists will use any means possible to enter the United States. The United States must be vigilant during the visa-issuance process to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism. In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles. The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation. Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks in the United States; and to prevent the admission of foreign nationals who intend to exploit United States immigration laws for malevolent purposes. Sec. 3. Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern. (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall immediately conduct a review to determine the information needed from any country to adjudicate any visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual seeking the benefit is who the individual claims to be and is not a security or public-safety threat. (b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall submit to the President a report on the results of the review described in subsection (a) of this section, including the Secretary of Homeland Security’s determination of the information needed for adjudications and a list of countries that do not provide adequate information, within 30 days of the date of this order. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a copy of the report to the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence. (c) To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas). (d) Immediately upon receipt of the report described in subsection (b) of this section regarding the information needed for adjudications, the Secretary of State shall request all foreign governments that do not supply such information to start providing such information regarding their nationals within 60 days of notification. (e) After the 60-day period described in subsection (d) of this section expires, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the President a list of countries recommended for inclusion on a Presidential proclamation that would prohibit the entry of foreign nationals (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas) from countries that do not provide the information requested pursuant to subsection (d) of this section until compliance occurs. (f) At any point after submitting the list described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Homeland Security may submit to the President the names of any additional countries recommended for similar treatment. (g) Notwithstanding a suspension pursuant to subsection (c) of this section or pursuant to a Presidential proclamation described in subsection (e) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked. (h) The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall submit to the President a joint report on the progress in implementing this order within 30 days of the date of this order, a second report within 60 days of the date of this order, a third report within 90 days of the date of this order, and a fourth report within 120 days of the date of this order. Sec. 4. Implementing Uniform Screening Standards for All Immigration Programs. (a) The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall implement a program, as part of the adjudication process for immigration benefits, to identify individuals seeking to enter the United States on a fraudulent basis with the intent to cause harm, or who are at risk of causing harm subsequent to their admission. This program will include the development of a uniform screening standard and procedure, such as in-person interviews; a database of identity documents proffered by applicants to ensure that duplicate documents are not used by multiple applicants; amended application forms that include questions aimed at identifying fraudulent answers and malicious intent; a mechanism to ensure that the applicant is who the applicant claims to be; a process to evaluate the applicant’s likelihood of becoming a positively contributing member of society and the applicant’s ability to make contributions to the national interest; and a mechanism to assess whether or not the applicant has the intent to commit criminal or terrorist acts after entering the United States. (b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary of State, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of this directive within 60 days of the date of this order, a second report within 100 days of the date of this order, and a third report within 200 days of the date of this order. Sec. 5. Realignment of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for Fiscal Year 2017. (a) The Secretary of State shall suspend the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 120 days. During the 120-day period, the Secretary of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of Homeland Security and in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, shall review the USRAP application and adjudication process to determine what additional procedures should be taken to ensure that those approved for refugee admission do not pose a threat to the security and welfare of the United States, and shall implement such additional procedures. Refugee applicants who are already in the USRAP process may be admitted upon the initiation and completion of these revised procedures. Upon the date that is 120 days after the date of this order, the Secretary of State shall resume USRAP admissions only for nationals of countries for which the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence have jointly determined that such additional procedures are adequate to ensure the security and welfare of the United States. (b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality. Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization. (c) Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the United States and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the USRAP to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest. (d) Pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the entry of more than 50,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017 would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and thus suspend any such entry until such time as I determine that additional admissions would be in the national interest. (e) Notwithstanding the temporary suspension imposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit individuals to the United States as refugees on a case-by-case basis, in their discretion, but only so long as they determine that the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest — including when the person is a religious minority in his country of nationality facing religious persecution, when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its conduct to a preexisting international agreement, or when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship — and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States. (f) The Secretary of State shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of the directive in subsection (b) of this section regarding prioritization of claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution within 100 days of the date of this order and shall submit a second report within 200 days of the date of this order. (g) It is the policy of the executive branch that, to the extent permitted by law and as practicable, State and local jurisdictions be granted a role in the process of determining the placement or settlement in their jurisdictions of aliens eligible to be admitted to the United States as refugees. To that end, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall examine existing law to determine the extent to which, consistent with applicable law, State and local jurisdictions may have greater involvement in the process of determining the placement or resettlement of refugees in their jurisdictions, and shall devise a proposal to lawfully promote such involvement. Sec. 6. Rescission of Exercise of Authority Relating to the Terrorism Grounds of Inadmissibility. The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall, in consultation with the Attorney General, consider rescinding the exercises of authority in section 212 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182, relating to the terrorism grounds of inadmissibility, as well as any related implementing memoranda. Sec. 7. Expedited Completion of the Biometric Entry-Exit Tracking System. (a) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall expedite the completion and implementation of a biometric entry-exit tracking system for all travelers to the United States, as recommended by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. (b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit to the President periodic reports on the progress of the directive contained in subsection (a) of this section. The initial report shall be submitted within 100 days of the date of this order, a second report shall be submitted within 200 days of the date of this order, and a third report shall be submitted within 365 days of the date of this order. Further, the Secretary shall submit a report every 180 days thereafter until the system is fully deployed and operational. Sec. 8. Visa Interview Security. (a) The Secretary of State shall immediately suspend the Visa Interview Waiver Program and ensure compliance with section 222 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1222, which requires that all individuals seeking a nonimmigrant visa undergo an in-person interview, subject to specific statutory exceptions. (b) To the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary of State shall immediately expand the Consular Fellows Program, including by substantially increasing the number of Fellows, lengthening or making permanent the period of service, and making language training at the Foreign Service Institute available to Fellows for assignment to posts outside of their area of core linguistic ability, to ensure that non-immigrant visa-interview wait times are not unduly affected. Sec. 9. Visa Validity Reciprocity. The Secretary of State shall review all nonimmigrant visa reciprocity agreements to ensure that they are, with respect to each visa classification, truly reciprocal insofar as practicable with respect to validity period and fees, as required by sections 221(c) and 281 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1201(c) and 1351, and other treatment. If a country does not treat United States nationals seeking nonimmigrant visas in a reciprocal manner, the Secretary of State shall adjust the visa validity period, fee schedule, or other treatment to match the treatment of United States nationals by the foreign country, to the extent practicable. Sec. 10. Transparency and Data Collection. (a) To be more transparent with the American people, and to more effectively implement policies and practices that serve the national interest, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall, consistent with applicable law and national security, collect and make publicly available within 180 days, and every 180 days thereafter: (i) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been charged with terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; convicted of terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; or removed from the United States based on terrorism-related activity, affiliation, or material support to a terrorism-related organization, or any other national security reasons since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; (ii) information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been radicalized after entry into the United States and engaged in terrorism-related acts, or who have provided material support to terrorism-related organizations in countries that pose a threat to the United States, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and (iii) information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including honor killings, in the United States by foreign nationals, since the date of this order or the last reporting period, whichever is later; and (iv) any other information relevant to public safety and security as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, including information on the immigration status of foreign nationals charged with major offenses. (b) The Secretary of State shall, within one year of the date of this order, provide a report on the estimated long-term costs of the USRAP at the Federal, State, and local levels. Sec. 11. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations. (c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. DONALD J. TRUMP
by Scott Creighton
Cenk Uygur is heading up something called the Justice Democrats in an attempt, as they say, to remake the unDemocratic Party and rid it of it’s bought off corporate leadership. The way they plan to do this is to cultivate and promote locally owned “real” progressives and get them to run for office, local or national, and thus move the party back to the “real” progressive left… in time.
Kyle Kulinski of Secular Talk and a couple of the Sanders campaign planners have joined up with him and created a platform that is sure to appeal to a number of those Sanders supporters who abandoned the Dems in the wake of Hillary Clinton and her team stealing the nomination from them.
Some real outsiders there, huh?
Uygur did an announcement of this group a couple days ago on the Young Turks. Secular Talk did one as well. I think Jimmy Dore in onboard as well since he’s mentioned it favorably after he recently joined the Young Turks.
Let me say this: this is abject opportunism that will go no where… by design. Cenk is a lifelong apologist for the corporate Dems. That’s a roll he has played consistently from 2011 till Nov. 8, 2016 and I have the videos to prove it. Don’t be suckered in by this. This is Cenk doing his sheepdog trick hoping to make himself a little more accessible to the establishment, not oppose it.
You gotta see through this stuff folks.
Basically, the Justice Democrats have slightly retooled the Bernie Sanders campaign platform, added a few little caveats that will never pass (like changing our entire election system) and are trying to raise money, the Bernie Sanders campaign kind of money, so they can replace a few of the corporate Dems in Washington… with themselves.
Let’s say things go perfectly. They raise a whole bunch of money from desperate people who don’t have representation in the unDemocratic Party anymore and they get… lets say… 50 Justice Dems in the House of Representatives in 2018. Okay? Let’s say 50 and that is one HELL of a lot for them (most likely they could win 10 maybe, but lets just say 50 for the fun of it)
Who are they going to caucus with? They wont be on any committees. The corporate Dems will shun them, the reactionary Rethuglicans will detest them and do everything to embarrass them and get them voted out in two years. Or redistrict them like they did Cynthia McKinney.
So what are they going to do? There are 435 seats in the House and at best they might control 50 of them… in two years. Are they going to pass single payer healthcare by 2020 like that? Are they going to be able to do ANYTHING on that platform list of theirs by then? Of course not.
So we wait for 2022? We run a candidate for the White House from the Democrat side in 2020? Is that the plan?
We did that in 2016. How did that work out?
So what is this?
Money? Yeah. Someone looking to capitalize on the “crisis” that is the mess of the unDemocratic Party these days? Of course.
And who is looking to do that? Kyle Kulinski and Cenk Uygur of course.
Mr. Hero Progressive Uygur is nothing of the sort. On election day he sat around doing a live broadcast and at first he and his “crew” were feeling all tingly because they just knew their candidate was going to win. Their candidate was Hillary Clinton.
Now, he was a Bernie Supporter up until the end, but when push came to shove, he backed her corrupt, criminal enterprize right along with all the establishment globalists and the neocons from the Project for the New American Century.
Sorry, but that doesn’t ring “progressive” to me.
During his live feed you can watch him come to near tears when it becomes clearer and clearer that Trump is winning and going to win. Immediately afterwards they turn all “progressive” again and start bad mouthing Killary. Like rats leaving a sinking ship, it didn’t take him long to regain the will to survive by jumping off the Clinton train and heading back to the fringes of the unDemocratic Party.
Essentially, he wanted to join the winning team until it became obvious she wasn’t winning.
Like a reed blowing in the wind. The direction matters not.
Here’s the real kicker though. I want you to watch Cenk from 2011 talk about the “dictator” Gaddafi and how Obama was “right” to kill all those Libyans to force him out of office and eventually kill him brutally. He was younger then and getting his paycheck from MSNBC, which, by the way, was still owned at that time I believe in part by GE, a military contractor.
“The message it would send to the brutal dictators of the world if Obama did nothing is “the way to retain power is by brutally murdering your own people”” Cenk , 2011
Sorry folks. That’s not “progressivism” and it’s not even good journalism since back then it was clear to a lot of folks, myself included, that the whole thing was based on lies and Hillary got the go ahead from her friends in Britain and France and Muammar was killing his own people, but in fact, it was what Cenk called “the rebels” who were actually killing them. “Rebels” who were actually mercenary terrorists hired to force a regime change in the country.
That was years ago, and yes, he was working for MSNBC so some might say he had to toe the line as they say.
Here he is this year talking about Ukraine on his own show where he says “Russia already went into Ukraine” which is a lie. He does this pathetic attempt to propagandize Russia in a segment he put together in Aug. of 2016 when he was actively trying to make sure Killary got into the White House.
“Russia did not seize Crimea? Well they got a funny way of showing it since they seized Crimea. ha ha” Cenk Aug 2016
The people of Crimea took part in a referendum after Obama and his administration staged a color revolution coup in the country and imposed a pro-Western leader who would keep them in the EU and at the beggars table of the IMF. They VOTED by a MASSIVE MAJORITY to break away from Ukraine and to rejoin Russia.
The Russia military that everyone says “went into” Crimea is in fact the naval base that has been there for decades. They didn’t “go into” Crimea. They’ve been there. And they didn’t “seize” Crimea, the people VOTED to become Russians once again after our bloody coup in Ukraine.
Cenk knows all of this and he is simply LYING… on behalf of HILLARY CLINTON AND THE CORPORATE DEMS LIKE BARACK OBAMA.
And that wasn’t even 6 months ago.
And now we have folks suggesting we follow this asshole into an “opposition” party WITHIN the unDemocratic Party?
Is that a joke?
They are already positioning a new Bernie campaign to try to KEEP real progressives in the unDemocratic Party for 2018. And THAT ladies and gentlemen is what this sycophant and apologist for Hillary and Obama has done his ENTIRE PROFESSIONAL LIFE.. and is what he is doing right now.
Please don’t fall for this shit. Keep in mind folks, Bernie Sanders, for all his efforts and good ideas, supported all these “humanitarian interventions” during the Obama days and after he was denied his rightful victory by the corporate Dems during the primary, he had an opportunity to jump over to the Green Party and head up that ticket, Jill Stein offered him the presidential nomination with her as VP… he turned them down.
Sanders, had he taken it, would have won in a massive landslide victory and our boy The Donald would be back where he belongs, shaving Vince McMahon’s head at WrestleMania.
So no, I don’t buy Cenk U. as a prophet for the new age of progressivism nor do I wish to invest in a group also run by certain members of Sanders’ former campaign. Because to me it seems like all they are doing is the same thing Sanders did for Killary, or tried to anyway… serve as a sheep dog keeping the flock all nice and warm down on the farm of the unDemocratic Party.
It’s a fraud, it’s a scam. It ain’t going no where.
I’ll tell you what though… Debbie over at the Sane Progressive gets it. Good for her. And good for us. Just goes to show, many of us aren’t as stupid or gullible or desperate as they would like us to believe. And by the way, Fuck Cenk and Jimmy Dore to if he continues to promote this fraud. (gotta go pick up mom. have a good one.)
— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) January 24, 2017
by Scott Creighton
The Donald signed an executive order yesterday, one of many that promises to free the glorious markets and let loose the invisible hand of Big Business, in this case Big Oil, so it can bitch-slap anyone who happens to get in it’s way (or live in its way as it turns out)
“President Trump signed executive orders Tuesday to revive the controversial Dakota Access and Keystone XL oil pipelines, another step in his effort to dismantle former president Barack Obama’s environmental legacy.
He also signed an executive order to expedite environmental reviews of other infrastructure projects, lamenting the existing “incredibly cumbersome, long, horrible permitting process (pipelines are considered part of our “critical infrastructure”).” Washington Post
Native Americans, protesters and anyone else who gives a shit about individual rights, clean drinking water, environmental protection and stuff like that are a bit perturbed by President Populist’s apparent sycophancy to America’s established interests.
One can hardly blame him though seeing as how the future of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) may directly affect the president’s stock portfolio.
The DAPL is owned by Energy Transfer Partners and it was reported that The Donald actually owns something to the tune of a million dollars worth of their stock.
“In May 2015, according to campaign disclosure reports, Trump owned between $500,000 and $1 million worth of shares of Energy Transfer Partners, the pipeline’s lead developer, but had less than $50,000 invested when he sold off the remainder of his shares this summer, according to The Washington Post.” Huffington Post
His ownership of the stock remains a point of contention. His spokesperson back in Nov. claimed he sold the stock. This has yet to be confirmed and if he did sell it, to whom did he sell it? Did he “sell” it to one of his family members for $1?
“President-elect Donald Trump sold off his shares of Energy Transfer Partners, the owner of the $3.7 billion Dakota Access pipeline that has become the focus of protests by Native American and environmental groups, according to his spokeswoman Hope Hicks.
Trump’s share, which in a May 2015 disclosure was listed at between $500,000 and $1 million, had fallen to less than $50,000 by the time he sold it in the summer of 2016, according to a disclosure earlier this year.
The sale would eliminate one possible conflict of interest for Trump, who has vowed to speed up permits for oil and gas pipelines in order to spur more oil and gas development in the United States.” Washington Post
Phillips 66 is a relatively small oil company but it owns a substantial investment in the DAPL and Trump owns a bit of Phillips 66.
“Trump is also invested to the tune of $100,000 and $250,000 in Phillips 66, which owns 1/4 of ETP. It is easy to see why Sharon Buccino the Natural Resources Defense Council says…” PoliticusUSA
In Aug of 2016, Fortune magazine published Trump’s top 14 stock holdings. Phillips 66 ranked 12th. This guys reports Phillips 66 stock prices have jumped 13% since The Donald won the election and predicts it will go even higher because… free market and shit. I guess that’s the same kind of “free market” Halliburton represented during the Cheney years.
Energy Transfer Partners CEO, Kelsy Warren, has contributed BIG TIME to republican politicians over the years and to PACs that backed “free market” folks like Rick Perry and … The Donald.
“Warren this year has made $1.53 million in campaign contributions to super PACs and $252,300 to individual campaigns and the GOP, according to the Center for Responsive Politics,” the Post reported. “In June 2015, he gave $5 million to Opportunity and Freedom PAC, which supported Rick Perry’s presidential campaign. The Trump Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee that includes Trump’s campaign, the Republican National Committee and some state parties, received a $100,000 contribution from Warren on June 29.” David Badash
What were we trying to drain? Oh yeah. The swamp. Why? Because they were all corrupt and bought out by Big Business. Ain’t that right Donnie?
I don’t know if he still owns interests in those companies, I don’t know if he actually sold the stocks or not, or who he sold it to? His dog? His 13-year-old son? His wife perhaps? That PR persona he used to pretend he was back in the day? Who knows.
Point is, the free markets are poised to trickle-down all over us like R Kelly on a school girl.
Point is, it took Obamaites 8 long years to wake up from their self-induced coma and figure out that wetness on their back wasn’t a warm spring shower. In fact, many of em never figured it out. How long before the Trumpshirts wake up I wonder? Will they?
To hell with it. If you can’t beat em…BEHOLD! Hurry and get your official (and by “official” I mean “not in anyway endorsed by the President but thanks to deregulation…”) TRUMPSHIRT uniform!! for the low-lo price of just $395.99 plus shipping and handling (an additional $395.99)
(Oh. Did they fail to mention Pai was appointed to the board in 2012 by the fake progressive president, Barack Obama? Pai wrote a letter when Trump was elected stating he hoped that they could revisit Net Neutrality as soon as possible. Pai “voted against orders lowering the cost of cable boxes, advancing municipal broadband, lowering rates for prison phone calls, restricting data collection by ISPs, and so on.”)
from LA Times
President Trump on Monday designated Ajit Pai, a Republican member of the Federal Communications Commission and an outspoken opponent of new net neutrality rules (and former Associate General Counsel at Verizon Communications Inc), to be the agency’s new chairman.
Pai, 44, would take over for Tom Wheeler, a Democrat who stepped down on Friday. Wheeler’s term had not expired but Trump gets to designate a new chairman as Republicans gain the FCC majority.
“I look forward to working with the new administration, my colleagues at the commission, members of Congress, and the American public to bring the benefits of the digital age to all Americans,” Pai said.
A telecommunications lawyer who has served on the FCC since May 2012, Pai is a free-market advocate who has been sharply critical of new regulations adopted by Democrats in recent years.
[read more here]
by Scott Creighton
UPDATE: Cenk Uygur praised Trump for “killing” the TPP Monday. He kept citing a New York Times article during his video.
Folks are all a tither about Donald Trump signing an executive order yesterday saying the US is no longer ready to sign the Trans Pacific Partnership (or TPP) with 11 other nations in the Asia Pacific and Mexico. This is supposedly some sign that Trump is going to keep at least some of his campaign promises and stand with the workers of this country.
He also signed an order saying he was going to erase “75% of regulations” on U.S. corporations in order to make it more profitable for them to stay here in the states. How do you those will affect the average U.S. worker?
But aside from that, the TPP was dead long ago. What Trump is doing is something akin to President Obama “killing bin Laden” and dumping his body at sea before anyone can take a picture of it.
“Have you heard? In an amazing feat of international people power prevailing over multinational corporate power, citizens united around the world have beaten the TPP…
It was stopped by thousands of diverse organizations representing working people united across borders — fighting against corporate power and for the environment, health, human rights and democracy. Although it was called a “trade” agreement, the TPP was not mainly about trade. Of TPP’s 30 chapters, only six dealt with traditional trade issues.” Public Citizen
“If you read the headlines, Donald Trump’s election has killed the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The headlines have it wrong.
Donald Trump didn’t kill the TPP. Assuming we see the fight through to the bitter end, it’s the cross-border, cross-sector, progressive “movement of movements” that will have defeated the TPP.” Nov. 11th, 2016
Donald Trump was able to campaign on a platform of killing these horrific trade deals and his audiences could only have been able to understand and agree with him because thousands of hard working people have been working to kill the TPP for years. YEARS.
The most important thing to the planners of the TPP during the negotiating process was secrecy. That’s because they knew their fascist plans would be undermined if the people of the 12 nations involved in the deal ever got wind of what it was before it was signed into law. And that is exactly what happened.
But it wasn’t because of Trump any more than the New England Patriots are going to yet another Super Bowl because of me.
It’s not even because of congress who deliberately washed their hands of the damn thing when they gave ObamaGod fast track authority last year so he and he alone could bring about the corporate Nirvana state.
Imagine for a second what would happen if Trump signed the TPP yesterday. Those crowds of millions of protesters from this past weekend would be BACK out there by noon today with one major difference: Trump’s supporters would be with them.
And why is that? Because the common folk know what the TPP really is and is that because of Donald Trump? Hell no.
That’s because so many people did YEARS worth of work exposing the TPP and eventually the word got out.
Trump didn’t do a thing yesterday when signing that executive order other than buy himself a little populist cover which he will use later.
So don’t thank The Donald for killing the TPP, thank an activist or one of the few real journalists who have been covering the fascist “trade” deal for years while Mr. Trump was worrying about his make-up on the set of his staged “reality” TV show.
Find and thank one of those everyday people pictured above. Because by killing TPP they did you a massive service. A much greater service than Trump did for you yesterday by saying he was going to kill 75% of regulations on Big Business here in the states. That’s for damn sure.
by Scott Creighton
The British Supreme Court has ruled that the Brexit vote held last year, June 2016, which simply asked “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?” was essentially meaningless other than serving as a sort of massive opinion poll. According to them by an 8 to 3 count, the United Kingdom cannot leave the European Union without a vote in Parliament first. In fact, the ruling says Theresa May cannot even begin talks with the EU about Britain’s exit without a vote.
“Parliament must vote on whether the government can start the Brexit process, the Supreme Court has ruled.
The judgement means Theresa May cannot begin talks with the EU until MPs and peers give their backing – although this is expected to happen in time for the government’s 31 March deadline.
But the court ruled the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Ireland assemblies did not need a say.
Brexit Secretary David Davis will make a statement to MPs later on Tuesday.
During the Supreme Court hearing, campaigners argued that denying the UK Parliament a vote was undemocratic.” BBC
The British parliament is about as corrupt as the American congress. Maybe more so. I don’t know how anything could be more corrupt, but I guess it’s possible. What’s interesting is the fact that their Supreme Court decided that taking the will of the people and acting upon that would be “undemocratic”
It’s an interesting definition of the term they use I suppose. Perhaps it’s something akin to all those “democracies” we install, promote and prop-up in other countries across the globe.
Lead plaintiff Gina Miller said that only parliament was sovereign and that the MPs would bring their “experience” to the table and help shape the Article 50 negotiations. She said it wasn’t a victory for her, but rather for the constitution. That’s funny isn’t it because the SC justices argued that they couldn’t do it because it violated the laws of the EU, not Britain.
This will significantly kneecap the Brexit process. Some are even calling for another referendum after Parliament drags out the negotiation process as long as they can. That will give ’em a chance to steal that vote like I’m sure they wish they stole it back in June.
“The SNP responded to the ruling by saying it would table 50 “serious and substantive” amendments.
Labour said it too would seek to amend the bill but would not “frustrate” the Brexit process.” BBC
How long do you think it will take Parliament to debate and agree on 50+ “serious” amendments to the bill? Could take a while don’t you think?
Hell, the UK’s leaving the EU might be scrapped altogether according to some:
“Events in the Lords – where the government does not have a working majority and there are 178 non-affiliated cross-bench peers – could be more unpredictable. Mark D’Arcy says there are murmurings of an organised attempt to resist Article 50 and a “doomed last stand” by diehard Remainers.” BBC
Though they don’t think it is “likely” at this time, who knows what reforms will take place between now and the eventual Article 50 vote in Parliament. Anything could happen.
This decision just adds to the bureaucracy of the process which will slow it down considerably and allow for various corporate interests to use their considerable influence on the MPs they own to cripple the exit plans or derail them completely.
Prime Minister May’s efforts to move forward with Brexit have garnered her some rather harsh, conspiracy-ladened criticism of late.
Nick Clegg seems to think by following the will of the British people, the Prime Minister is doing the bidding of dirty protectionists like President Trump and Vladamir Putin.Donald Trump in Washington on Friday, Mr Clegg will name the new US president as part of an “axis of aggressive nationalism” stretching from the White House to the Kremlin and taking in hardline Brexiteers in the UK and populist parties in countries across Europe.” The Independent
God help the Queen and the blessed European Union of Undemocratic Technocratic Control if the damn “populist parties” across Europe start acting on the will of the unwashed masses. Chaos could ensue and we all know how much Big Banking and Big Business prefer “stability” to chaos.
Cute isn’t it? Equating following the will of the people to the threat of the Red Menace?
The ruling is really much ado about nothing in terms of giving Parliament a say in the matter of Brexit. May said last week that whatever deal they strike with the EU would be put to both houses of Parliament for a vote. Of course she also said that Britain would leave the single market of the union, which may be something that the globalist banksters from London wish to have their houseboys in Commons and Lords put a nix on before she can even negotiate.
Theresa May made the following statement through a spokesperson today:
“The British people voted to leave the EU, and the government will deliver on their verdict – triggering Article 50, as planned, by the end of March. Today’s ruling does nothing to change that.”
“It’s important to remember that Parliament backed the referendum by a margin of six to one and has already indicated its support for getting on with the process of exit to the timetable we have set out.”
“We respect the Supreme Court’s decision, and will set out our next steps to parliament shortly.” Prime Minster May
We will see, but I disagree with the prime minister. Today’s ruling will have an effect on the process if not the outcome itself.
May finds herself in a difficult position and doesn’t wish to invoke the clause that stipulates there must be new elections if the Brexit referendum is not honored by the British government. She doesn’t want to be the known as the British Prime Minister who served the shortest amount of time in office because she defied the democratic process. That also explains that 6 to 1 vote in Parliament as well.
We will see how it goes but the phrase “delay and destroy” seems to apply here in my opinion. God only knows what great war may develop between now and Exit time that would force the Brits to remain a unified block with Europe. And by “God” I mean the masters of the universe of course.
President Donald Trump told business leaders visiting the White House on Monday that he will cut taxes and regulation “massively,” while urging them to make their products in the United States.
“We are going to be cutting taxes massively both for the middle class and for companies — and that’s massively,” he told the executives gathered in the Roosevelt Room.
The tax rate for companies, Trump suggested, should go down to 15 or 20 percent. And his administration thinks “we can cut regulations by 75 percent, maybe more,” he said, arguing that existing regulations on businesses are cumbersome and unnecessary.
[read more here]
(If you watch the USA Today video you can clearly see Trump turn to former president Obama and thank him for the graceful transition right as the doors behind him open and the soldiers come down the steps. They have no umbrellas in their hands. After getting new orders from anther officer, they turn, disorganized, and walk away. Turning their backs on the new president as they left.)
by Jerry White, WSWS
A strange and disturbing sequence took place behind President Donald Trump as he delivered his inaugural address Friday, which has gone virtually without comment in the news media.
Early in his address, ten military officers walked up and stood behind the president so they would prominently appear with Trump in the camera shots beamed across the US and the world. After 45 seconds, a Marine officer prompts the sailors and soldiers to leave, and they walk away.
The unusual incident prompted two comments during the New York Times live blog of the address. Jon Meacham, a presidential historian and the current executive editor at publisher Random House wrote, “The military guard behind him seems unusual; am I right?”
Maggie Haberman, the New York Times White House correspondent, responded, “Yes, and they have dispersed, but was it because it was raining?”
Meacham is presumably a well-informed commentator on inaugural protocol, having written a Pulitzer Prize-winning biography of Andrew Jackson in 2009 and a 2012 biography of Thomas Jefferson. However, the Times, the Washington Post and other major dailies and news networks never commented on the event further. The only mention of it was in the celebrity gossip web site TMZ and in the Daily Mail in the United Kingdom.
The innocent explanation about protecting the president and his guests from the light drizzle does not seem credible. While the first Air Force officer comes down with an umbrella in hand at 1:00 into the speech, the other officers who appear 16 seconds later have nothing in their hands. What happens next was not seen by most viewers because most networks cut away from Trump to view former President Obama nod approvingly as Trump praises Barack and Michelle Obama for “their gracious aid during this transition.”
However, a more distant camera shot available on the web site of USA Today provides more detail. At one minute and 16 seconds into the speech, Trump turns around, at which point two marine sentries behind him open the doors of the west side of the capitol building to allow the group of 10 officers to walk down the steps to stand directly behind Trump.
The group, consisting of mostly junior officers along with captains and higher-ranking officers from the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps, appeared just as Trump was saying, “Today’s ceremony, however, has very special meaning. Because today we are not merely transferring power from one Administration to another, or from one party to another—but we are transferring power from Washington, DC, and giving it back to you, the American People.”
“For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost.”
At that point, the Marine officer tells the officers to disperse.
[read more here]
by Scott Creighton“IF YOU CANT TELL, THIS IS ALL AN ACT. ITS SCHTICK. THAT’S WHY I ACT ALL CRAZY AND SHIT FLAILING MY ARMS.. ITS AN ACT… I NEED MONEY!… YOU WANT SOME BEER?”
Di$info Jone$ was feeling it at the Trump inauguration and the marches this past weekend. It was his moment to shine and shine he did.
At one instance, Di$info found himself surrounded by a massive crowd of about 20 people, so he cut loose with his trademark “bull in a commie China shop” routine. He was flexing his flabby arms, making the “crazy with AmeriLOVE” face and ad-libbing like no one else can… I tell ya he was in the zone and feeling it boys… until, tragedy struck.
Yeah, it was Donald Trump who came up with “crooked Hillary”… or so the story goes. Sometimes it’s good to have a script or at least something planned. That way you don’t fuck up and call your new neoliberal hero an idiot in front of a bunch of his supporters. Watch his face right after he says it. Watch him try to win back the crowd. It’s funny.
Does anyone remember the Dancing Israelis? You know, those 5 guys who later claimed to have been sent to record the event on 9/11 and who were seen video taping a burning tower and dancing on the top of a van? You guys remember that?
Here’s Di$info Jone$ dancing with 5 Dancing Zionists at the inauguration. You can’t make this stuff up folks. You just cant.
Here’s Di$info slurring his way through an interview with a “Jew 4 Trump” the night before. AJ is hammered. And I mean HAMMERED. But look how nice he was to this guy.
Drunk Di$info wasn’t very nice to “cupcake” though. I wonder what the difference was.
“if you want to keep pushing with your commie Chinese everything else we are going to blow you off the map. All the secret weapons arent the control you are they? blu blu blah… I had a coffee earlier”
“Our ancestors (sic) a thousand years from now on hundreds and hundreds of star systems, they’ll look back and say “these are the people that had the vision… it wont be Japan it wont be China it wont be Russia or Latin America. It’s be America. America will be seen as the launch base for the entire program.” Alex Jones.
Uh. I think the word he was drunkenly searching for was “descendants”. Our ancestors wont be around a thousand years from now since they died a thousand years ago. Just sayin.
I particularly like the part at the end where he was stumbling around waiting for the PR guy to get the hired actors ready for their “we love you” scene. Very authentic looking, if you ask me. And by “authentic” I mean too say it was “obviously staged by his publicist”
There you go. Another set of classic Di$info Jone$ moments brought to you by Trump’s head Brown Shirt, Alex Jones.He’s ready to round up the damn commies, grwwwwllll! and do God’s Will for the sake of all humanity and space and shit.
Jone$’ drunken fascist routine is available for parties and bar mitzvahs. Call 1-800-HAS-BARA and ask for Deep Throat, the Growling Ass Clown and he will be there to entertain (and INFOWAR) your kiddies on their special day! Just don’t have any GODDAMNED COMMIE PINKO leftist kiddies!
(other AJ classics)
“That’s right people. I’M AN ASTROTURFER! I’M HERE TO MAKE THE LIBERTY MOVEMENT LOOK INSANE! I TAKE VIABLE ISSUES OF REAL CONCERN AND MAKE THEM LOOK AS RIDICULOUS AS POSSIBLE… IF YOU CANT TELL, THIS IS ALL AN ACT. ITS SCHTICK. THAT’S WHY I ACT ALL CRAZY AND SHIT FLAILING MY ARMS.. ITS AN ACT… I NEED MONEY!… YOU WANT SOME BEER?”
by Scott Creighton
Let me first start off by saying a president has more important things to worry about than turnout at his rallies or the attendance of his inauguration. But what do you expect from a guy who spent the last 12 years looking for validation through Nielsen ratings? He’s a carnival barker. Ticket sales are his life.
I heard a little about the AttendanceGate conspiracy yesterday evening when I accidentally turned on CNN for a minute. They showed the New York Times comparison photos of Trump’s inauguration on Friday verses one from Obama’s 2009 event. They frothed with pretend outrage over the fact that he dared bring it up while standing in front of the wall of stars at CIA headquarters.
Notice they didn’t use his 2012 pics? Not by accident.
They went on to provide “evidence” that Trump’s event was poorly attended and chastised Trump’s Press Secretary for coming out before the pompous press and scolding them for under-reporting The Donald’s box-office draw appeal.
It was too silly for words so I ignored it… til now.
Turns out the Times photo comparison isn’t totally dishonest. The photos were from the various inaugurations they claim to represent. Just at different times.
If you go to CNN’s Gigapixel 360 deg photo of the inauguration taken at the moment Trump started his inaugural address and you pan around to the crowd, then zoom in a bit… you see a very different turnout than the one presented in the photo above and it’s quite sad that CNN decided to jump on the Trump-bashing bandwagon on this one because the proof of the deception is right there on CNN’s own website… so it’s not like they would have had to work very hard to find it.
This guy took a screenshot but I suggest you follow the link to CNN’s own photo and judge for yourself.
The photographic evidence does make it clear that more attended Obama’s first inauguration than showed up for Trump’s. He was a lot more popular at the time and especially with the kinds of folks who could afford to take time off from work and travel to D.C. to attend. Lots of Trump’s supporters aren’t in a position to do that just now and that is in part thanks to former president Obama himself and the people he really works for.
But it makes you wonder why such a sophomoric trick like this was pulled in the first place.
Probably because they knew it would get under his skin a lot sooner than the truth of the matter would get to the people. They were counting on his reaction to be juvenile and self-absorbed and for the most part, that’s exactly what they got.
Needling. Baiting. Antagonizing. Like a pack of ants biting a grasshopper. This is the role of the press these days I suppose.
Its quite a dramatic turn from the role they took on during the Obama days when they served as his apologists while they loyally regurgitated for our consumption whatever ridiculous propaganda the White House was serving that day.
This latest stunt from the “free press” is pathetic and at least as embarrassing as Trump’s Press Secretary’s statement yesterday. Honestly, it’s like watching 6th graders squabbling in the lunchroom over which Pokemon characters are the most powerful. None of these people belong in the professions they ended up in but sycophancy has its rewards now doesn’t it?
But if you are one to be keeping score, truth is, the press was being deceptive with their comparison photos of the two events.
Trump, in his childish, self-absorbed, pouting little way, was right on this one.
Still, he should have been big enough to let it go. But he was right. For what that’s worth.
by Scott Creighton
Across the country yesterday millions of people got together and marched in solidarity to oppose the new president, Donald Trump, who hadn’t even been their new president for a full day by time they started out on the streets.
Trump had done a few noteworthy things which could have motivated them… but that wasn’t why they were there.
His reactionary cabinet of billionaires and Ayn Rand fanatics should have been enough to motivate anyone to get out on the streets and demand a recall, I’ll give em that much. But truth be told, after listening to endless hours of “woman on the street” testimony filmed at the rallies, I doubt if half of those attending could name 5 Trump appointees much less explain what the word “reactionary” means.
The two executive orders he signed the day before right after taking office could have motivated them. One deregulated ObamaCare so Big Insurance could make even more money off it while the other will make it harder for poor, working class families to buy homes. But I didn’t hear a single protester list those actions as a reason they were there. And in fact, these marches were planned LONG before The Donald was allowed to sign anything in the Oval Office.
So why were they there? Why were they protesting the actions of a president who hadn’t done a single thing they opposed as of yet (at least not one they were aware of)?
Some say it was more about Hillary Clinton losing the election than anything else. Madonna said in her appearance at one of the marches that “good didn’t win” the election and that is a theme we see over and over again in the reporting on these events.
It’s also extremely weak in terms of a motive considering the history of Hillary’s criminal behavior and corruption.
There were many signs that seemed to suggest at least part of the protesters were there because they felt their identity politician had been cheated out of the election (by the FBI or the Russians or whomever). This is exemplified by Madonna’s statement that “good” didn’t win meaning the Hillary supporters are “good” and the Trump voters are… something else? Identity politics.
Adding to that conclusion is the fact that many of the groups who sponsored the protest are actually financed in part by George Soros who was a huge supporter of Clinton’s candidacy throughout her campaign.
The protest was also a global event, with many nations hosting some sort of “solidarity” marches. Interestingly, the largest of which were held in the 5 Eyes nations, westernized countries who share intelligence on their own citizens with each other. Many of these countries will be facing their own elections soon enough and the threat of populism running amuck may have been enough for their own deep state actors to run some color revolution protest rehearsals.
Frankly I find it hard to believe that some women in Australia were moved to protest because Donald Trump said he could screw anyone he wanted to 12 years ago or because he got into a spat with a “Gold Star” family here in the states. They got their own problems in Australia.
Interestingly, CNN was running with a story this morning about Iranians chanting “death to America” as Trump took office. I found that kind of odd, so I looked it up. No, no “death to America women’s march” in Tehran. CNN is just dusting off the same old Iranian regime change propaganda they’ve been spouting for years.
However, I did find these:
CNN doing Hasbara’s bidding here in the US. At least some things never change.
When I think about the size of the protests here in the states I have to wonder about what really drove folks out in the streets. By all accounts (even on Fox News) the protests were large. Extremely large when you consider they were protesting a president who had been in office a total of 20 hours when they got started.
Some say they were there for Hillary others say it is to support reproductive right while still others say they want a more inclusive country and don’t want walls blocking off Mexicans or Muslims being banned from entering the country. Some were there supporting the LGBT community, some condemning the rise of the US prison state.
This hog-podge of causes could lend support to the notion that the invisible hand of Soros had more to do with the turnout than anything else. Since he has influence on so many activist groups, it makes sense he could push their leadership to mobilize their members to get out on the streets with their own agendas motivating them to do so.
That makes sense.
But I think there is something fundamentally uniting each of these so-called “opposition groups” that goes much deeper than even George Soros’ bottomless pockets of cash for identity politics organizations or the deep state of the CIA and all their influence peddlers they pay to stir up trouble across the globe.
Something deeper than any of that drove that myriad of folks out onto the streets yesterday. Something primal perhaps rooted in their way down deep in their collective DNA.
President Obama was the left-cover president the masters of the universe needed to normalize the Project for a New American Century’s new world order. They needed him to silence the left while they continued the neoliberal economic policies of Bush and Clinton before him and they needed silence from the “moral left” as Obama turned the two wars of his predecessor into 7. They needed complacent complicity from the fawning left as Obama killed thousands of civilians with his drone strikes in countries we have no business being involved in. They needed the left to shut up as Obama refused to prosecute war criminals from the Bush days. They needed them to accept without question his decision to “look forward and not backward” when he refused to prosecute a single bankster for deliberately crippling the US economy back in 2008. They needed him to provide left cover for all the neoliberal reactionary economic policies he quietly imposed on the citizens of this country as his fan base sat on their hands and did nothing for eight, long, years.
That’s what they needed and that is what they got.
Of course, with that comes a certain regret, shame and self-loathing from the fake left which built itself over the years into a kind of silent, unrequited rage in many of them.
Their natural instincts have been repressed for a long time. They see events unfolding that pull them from their moral centers out into the streets to demand satisfaction and yet, they moved not one inch to satisfy the better angels of their nature. And did that simply because… Obama was their man.
Imagine the anguish they carried all that time, unable to even speak of it even among themselves. It must have been something akin to being imprisoned all that time.
I say “imagine what it’s like” because… I don’t know what they are feeling, what they have been feeling all this time. I am a leftist and proud to be one. I still have a soul and a moral center and I (like a few others) have been able to maintain mine throughout the Obama presidency. I held his predecessor accountable back in the Cheney days and I continued to do the same thing during the ObamaGod years. And for that, I received a fair amount of hate-filled diatribes from various sources over the years. But I did it and I’m glad I did.
When asked by a lefty I once knew if “I wanted to be right or did I want to have friends” I made the right choice. Not the easy one, but the right one.
And it certainly wasn’t easy being on the left and reporting on Obama’s behavior over the last 8 years in the way I have, I will tell you that.
But the job comes with a certain perk and that is… I don’t have the slightest clue what these repressed, desperately seeking validation leftists are feeling right now. Not a clue. Because I never abandoned by personal belief system in exchange for the rightness of being on the Obama-train with all the rest.
I never forced the better angels of my nature to sit in the corner and shut up because a Democrat was in office.
And because of that, I didn’t have to get up early yesterday and take a bus or a train to a drizzly damp city sidewalk and stand around with a bunch of manic protesters who didn’t really even have a clue as to why they were there, but they were there just the same and motivated to be there like they have never been motivated in their lives to do anything.
Yesterday was a cathartic act for an entire population forced to exile the best parts of themselves for political expediency. It was inevitable. Bound to happen. Written in stone since the first day of Obama’s left-cover presidency and the fact that they didn’t even wait for the ink to be dry on Trump’s first reactionary executive order makes that crystal clear.
It was group therapy, if you will.
Again, I’m not knocking it. It’s good too see some folks out on the streets protesting something, even if they don’t really know why they are there.
In 2008 I lost friends by telling them we should work to elect McCain because if we don’t, the anti-globalization movement and the anti-war movement were going to be shelved for at least 4 years.
In 2012 I said the same thing about electing Romney.
And in 2016 I wrote that the LAST THING we needed as a country was four more years of left-cover politics keeping the left immobile and further crippling what remained of their moral centers.
So here we are and less than 24 hours after he takes the oath of office, the fake left rushes out into the streets to protest… something… to do with Donald J. Trump.
I argue it could have been anybody. They results would have been the same.
It didn’t matter what he did with his two executive orders the day before or how incredibly unqualified most of his cabinet picks are.
It didn’t even really matter that Hillary Clinton lost the election.
Most leftist understand deep down just how corrupt, criminal and detestable she was as a candidate. Hell, the only reasons most voted for her was she wasn’t Donald Trump and she just happened to have a vagina. And that’s it. My guess is, Carly Fiorina or Condi Rice would have destroyed Hillary Clinton… for the same reasons.
In the wake of the moral torture that was the fake-left presidency of Barack Obama, the “progressives” of the left needed a release in the worst kind of way.
His extended presidency and his continual betrayal of the “CHANGE” he promised the left ate at their souls like an addiction erodes the confidence of the addict. In secret and shrouded by shame.
Like miners released from their confinement after a cave in, the left danced out into the light yesterday reborn and with a new lease on life. And in that sense you have to kind of envy them. The best meal a prisoner ever eats is the first he has upon release. It doesn’t matter what it is.
Yesterday millions of Americans roared out into the street to taste freedom, real freedom, for the first time in eight years. It doesn’t really matter why they were there. It doesn’t matter if Fox News says they didn’t have a shared message. They’re too shallow over there to see what was happening anyway.
If Soros pushed his for-profit “activists” out into the street to suit his needs… if the Five Eyes were running dress rehearsals for color revolution yet to come across the globe… all that is well and good… and most likely in my opinion.
But none of it matters.
I submit to you that it doesn’t really matter why a slave is released from captivity. The important thing is that they are released and that they will find their own way in time.
Let em enjoy the sunlight for a day or two. The sordid business of rebellion can wait.
We’ve waited for eight years to welcome them back. What’s another week in the grand scheme of things?
So welcome back America’s left. As Fletcher Gull might say, tomorrow we begin with level flight.