2016 Presidential election campaign 3

584 posts / 0 new
Last post
bekayne

NDPP wrote:

The 'Elite' Coup of 2016

https://t.co/cNJBno8kPh

 

From the comments:

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/12/elite-coup.html#c6a00d8341c640e53ef...

First bullet point on motives says CIA assassination programs will be cut by Trump fails because one, no one knows this, two, there's always somebody in the CIA who'll do what the President wants because it pays and three, Trump is apt to find different targets for the CIA. Duterte if he's a problem for the anti-China campaign, for one. They can overbill for spying on China. The CIA as a whole has no motive, except to pacify lame duck Obama until he's gone.

Second bullet point says military sales to ME will be cut. Irrelevant as Trump plans to increase military purchases by US. Nobody has a motive here.

Third bullet point says Trump isn't a Zionist supporter. There isn't a shred of evidence he isn't. Adelson, Netanyahu, AIPAC, none of those are shy about fighting their enemies. Nor is Trump. He's an opponent of China, not Israel. Wishful thinking doesn't count.

Fourth bullet point says Trump isn't a warhawk. Trump never said that he was against wars. In fact, when he said he would win the wars he was saying he was a militarist. The number of generals he's hired on confirms it. The only way this isn't nuts is if Trump is playing twelve dimensional chess...but that idea is nuts too.

DOA this post, riddled with with its own bullet points.

 

 

bekayne

Revisiting the third point from that comment: anyone that doesn't realize that the Trump administration will be closer to the Israeli far right than any other US administration in history is a complete and utter imbecile.

NDPP

Zio influence and power in and over both main US parties is indeed significant and  and I tend to agree with the above as likely. The top donors to both campaigns were Zios and both candidates are avowed Zio sympathizers. Adelson, who is on record as wanting to 'nuke' Iran, gave Trump $25 M   M of A is always worth reading. Even if you don't agree with the post, you are sure to come away with valuable discussion and insights from the comments.

NDPP

Can We Make Sense of Trump?  -  by Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich

http://informationclearinghouse.info/46054.htm

"US foreign policy will not change under a Trump administration - it will simply change tactic. As with every administration before it, the Trump administration will serve Israel."

swallow swallow's picture

Zio? 

6079_Smith_W

I believe it is a reference to Zionism. Of course the ultimate problem with those kinds of buzz words is that people don't always know exactly what you mean, (nor do they sometimes care) and make their own assumptions about it based on their predudices.

And as with a lot of buzzwords, a clue to meaning isn't so much in the word itself, but in who is using it.

 

JKR

NDPP wrote:

Zio influence and power in and over both main US parties is indeed significant and  and I tend to agree with the above as likely. The top donors to both campaigns were Zios and both candidates are avowed Zio sympathizers. Adelson, who is on record as wanting to 'nuke' Iran, gave Trump $25 M   M of A is always worth reading. Even if you don't agree with the post, you are sure to come away with valuable discussion and insights from the comments.

To me this "Zios" stuff sounds anti-Semitic.

bekayne

Here's the Orange Dove Of Peace's choice for ambassador to Israel:

The President-elect tapped New York-based attorney David Friedman Thursday to represent the United States. Friedman, who maintains a residence in Jerusalem, is known for hardline views that depart from decades of established American policy and in some cases are to the right of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

    Friedman argues that Israeli settlement construction in Palestinian areas shouldn't be illegal and has called the effort to find a two-state solution an "illusion." In Trump's announcement, the bankruptcy lawyer and Orthodox Jew welcomed moving the embassy from Tel Aviv to "Israel's eternal capital, Jerusalem" -- settling in one phrase a fraught issue that has been designated for final peace talks, as Palestinians claim Jerusalem as their capital as well.

     

    ygtbk

    And in new news:

    http://www.npr.org/2016/12/19/506188169/donald-trump-poised-to-secure-electoral-college-win-with-few-surprises

    More faithless electors tried to abandon Hillary than Donald. That is actually - wait for it - Hillarious.

    ygtbk
    josh

    Oh, the Daily Mail. They still haven't gotten over Hitler's suicide. And had you been following developments, you would not have been surprised by the electoral college defections since several Washington state electors have been saying they would vote for someone else.

    ygtbk

    josh wrote:
    Oh, the Daily Mail. They still haven't gotten over Hitler's suicide. And had you been following developments, you would not have been surprised by the electoral college defections since several Washington state electors have been saying they would vote for someone else.

    Josh, your rejoinders are getting steadily weaker.

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/19/politics/electoral-college-donald-trump-vote/index.html

    Your shtick of blaming the source rather than analyzing what it said was stale 8 years ago.

    radiorahim radiorahim's picture

    Clinton did not lose the election because of "Russian hacking".

    Clinton lost because she was a shitty candidate that the Democratic Party elites insisted on running.   They could have put some icing sugar on this shitty candidate by perhaps choosing someone like Elizabeth Warren to be her Veep running mate.   But no.   The Dem elites picked an ex-Dixiecrat governor from a right to work state.

    Rather than accept responsibility for the complete shit show they ran, the Dem elites would rather risk provoking WW3.  

    I suspect that the "Russian hacking" crap from Dem spin doctors is more aimed at heading off any attempt at grassroots democratic reform of the Democratic Party by the Sanders folks than anything else.

     

     

     

    NDPP

    I agree with you rr and so does Diana Johnstone:

    The Bad Losers (And What They Fear Losing) 

    http://counterpunch.org/2016/12/19/the-bad-losers-and-what-they-fear-losing

    "...The whole miserable spectacle is nothing but a continuation of the Russophobia exploited by Hillary Clinton to distract from her own multiple scandals...The propaganda machine has found a response to unwelcome news: it must be fake.

    The problem isn't Trump but a political system which reduces the people's choice to two hated candidates backed by big bucks."

    However, having won, he now becomes very much the problem.

    radiorahim radiorahim's picture

    Quote:
    However, having won, he now becomes very much the problem.

    Yes and this "problem" was delivered gift wrapped by Clinton and the Democratic Party hacks.

     

    josh

    It is not an either/or proposition.  Clinton was a bad candidate who ran a bad campaign.  But that doesn't mean she would not have won had the Russian hacking and/or Comey not occurred.

    josh

    Fascist Putin tells Democrats to get over it. Continues his bromance with Trump.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/trump-syria-hacking-and-terr...

    josh

    The Justice Department inspector general will review actions by officials in the FBI and Department of Justice in the lead up to the 2016 election.

    According to a statement posted online by ABC News, Justice Deparment inspector general Michael Horowitz would investigate allegations "leading up to or relating to" announcements from James Comey on July 5, Oct. 28, and Nov. 6, 2016, to determine if "underlying investigative decisions were based on improper considerations, among other things. 

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/justice-department-inspector-general-investigation?utm_content=bufferfd019&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

     

     

    josh

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-russia-dos...

    At minimum it appears that the Russians and the FBI were working separately toward the same goal.

    NDPP

    Real Purpose of the Intelligence Report on Russian Hacking With Abby Martin and Ben Norton

    https://www.rt.com/shows/on-contact/373730-us-report-russian-hacking/

    On this week's episode of On Contact, CHRIS HEDGES is joined by journalists ABBY MARTIN and BEN NORTON to discuss the declassified US intelligence report on Russia's alleged influence campaign on the US presidential election.

    They explore the allegations and why a large portion of the report is dedicated to RT America's programming."

    MUST WATCH

    josh
    NorthReport

    Clinton and her people need to take a hint: Get lost!

    Democrats sweat Clinton vs. Sanders rift

    Long after the presidential nomination was settled, the contentious 2016 primary fight continues to divide the party.

     

    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/democrats-clinton-sanders-dnc-233648

    Sean in Ottawa

    I think there is nothing for Clinton to contribute now.

     

    Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

    Matt Taibbi covered the campaign for Rolling Stone. He's just put out a book based on his columns, entitled "Insane Clown President". He was interviewed on Democracy Now about the book and related matters.

    abnormal
    josh

    The FBI and five other law enforcement and intelligence agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation into Russian attempts to influence the November election, including whether money from the Kremlin covertly aided President-elect Donald Trump, two people familiar with the matter said.The agencies involved in the inquiry are the FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and representatives of the director of national intelligence, the sources said.

    Investigators are examining how money may have moved from the Kremlin to covertly help Trump win, the two sources said.

     

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article127231799.html

     

     

    Sean in Ottawa

    josh wrote:

    The FBI and five other law enforcement and intelligence agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation into Russian attempts to influence the November election, including whether money from the Kremlin covertly aided President-elect Donald Trump, two people familiar with the matter said.The agencies involved in the inquiry are the FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and representatives of the director of national intelligence, the sources said.

    Investigators are examining how money may have moved from the Kremlin to covertly help Trump win, the two sources said.

     

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article127231799.html

     

     

    To me this contradicts the notion that Trump is good to the Russian because they have compromising material. He has other reasons to make nice with Putin.

    josh

    This is only one side of the coin.

    Sean in Ottawa

    josh wrote:

    This is only one side of the coin.

    Well the coin is face down and you can't see the other side.

    It is not helpful to promote allegations without a reasonable standard of proof -- I say this often here. One reason is the loss in credibility will damage your case in cases where you have better evidence.

    This is like a court trial. You do not advance low quality evidence since you will tarnish your better evidence and possibly lose what might have been a good case.

    This is in addition to all the other ethical arguments for having a high standard.

    Now I laughed at the golden showers only becuase it was fair turnaround as Trump has leveled unsubstaniated lies about others. The problem is when you start confusing fair turnaround on lies with established fact. In this case we have a strong but unproven allegation where some of the facts have been challenged or disproven. The standard of evidence is lacking.

    We know that when the evidence is not good two things may happen -- a person who is innocent of a charge is unfairly accused OR a person who is guilty cannot be proven to be. The lack of sufficient evidence means you do not know.

    That said it is easy to say Trump did this to others and Karma seems fair.

    The big problem then goes past both sides in the here and now to what is this doing to public standards for evidence and fairness over the long term. Both sides will continue to feel this is turnaround and the post truth world is built.

    When one side lies and the other stays to a high standard you have a hope of coming back to balance when the liar is exposed. When both start lying there is no way back. I think the US is in this position now and we are suffering from the drop in standards becuase culture does not stop at borders.

    this does not mean I see them as equivalent -- but I do see them employing tactics that neither should accept.

    Sean in Ottawa

    Let me put it this way -- rules are firm lines and are helpful. They are not about degrees. When you brak a rule you no longer accept it. when you break a rule you cannot have credibility to accuse another of breaking it. The rule is gone until a new line is established.

    This is why it is so important to look to those on your side and demand they respect these lines if they ever want to be protected by them or have a benefit from them. This is why I always help the NDP to the standards it wanted other to meet and would get attacked by those who were partisan. Asking the NDP to respect the rules is about protecting those rules so the NDP can use them.

    In the US both sides have repudiated the rules such that there are now no rules.

    Trump is going to extremes to exploit this in my opinion. The Democrats have been outplayed, by playing in the gutter they got dirty and lost their ability to effectively challenge trump on the rules. Bernie Sanders knew this and many of his fans supported him becuase of that. Demands for integrity have to come from a place of integrity -- not just someone saying I am somewhat better than the other but the rules do not apply to me either.

    josh

    Patience. In due time the truth will out. The smoke you see now will reveal a fire.

    Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

    Quote:
    Now I laughed at the golden showers only becuase it was fair turnaround as Trump has leveled unsubstaniated lies about others.

    Q:  what's the difference between a chickpea and a garbanzo bean?

    A:  Donald Trump has never had a garbanzo bean on his face.

    Timebandit Timebandit's picture

    I think there's an important difference between unsubstantiated information and "lies". The report was meant to turn up any useful information, not to be presented in a court of law - Steele was hired to do up a report by Republicans against Trump and then the Democrats. The possibility that there was something that a foreign government could hold over the head of the president was why Steele took it to the US government in the first place. The fact that he is well respected in his circles is also noteworthy.

    And that the information was unsubstantiated was why most news outlets refused to go to press with it.

    So there may or may not be something to it. We'll find out sooner or later, I'm sure.

    Sean in Ottawa

    Timebandit wrote:

    I think there's an important difference between unsubstantiated information and "lies". The report was meant to turn up any useful information, not to be presented in a court of law - Steele was hired to do up a report by Republicans against Trump and then the Democrats. The possibility that there was something that a foreign government could hold over the head of the president was why Steele took it to the US government in the first place. The fact that he is well respected in his circles is also noteworthy.

    And that the information was unsubstantiated was why most news outlets refused to go to press with it.

    So there may or may not be something to it. We'll find out sooner or later, I'm sure.

    Yes exactly -- it is being called lies by Trump but his statement too is unsubstantiated.

    I do hope we get a final answer. I do know that Trump has called lies things that have been categorically proven to be true (video of making fun of disabled reporter was an example).

    While I think we have to have a high standard for unsubstantiated allegations and recognize what is unproven, there are good reasons to think that this one is more likely to be true than false. We just have to retain the acceptance of uncertainty as long as it exists.

    NDPP

    Fail Stream Media

    https://youtu.be/3_wAJBxY01k

    "The relationship between US politics and media during and after the 2016 presidential election."

    josh
    Doug Woodard

    The data that turned the world upside down: How our likes helped Trump win:

    https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-our-likes-helped-trump-win

     

    Sean in Ottawa

    Doug Woodard wrote:

    The data that turned the world upside down: How our likes helped Trump win:

    https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-our-likes-helped-trump-win

     

    Wow.

    josh
    NorthReport

    Clinton’s Ground Game Didn’t Cost Her The Election

    Reporters gave Clinton’s field operation too much credit before.

    Now it’s getting too much blame.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clintons-ground-game-didnt-cost-her...

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/tag/the-real-story-of-2016/

    NorthReport

    Unfortunately it's quite simple. The right wing is a lot smarter at winning elections than the so-called left because the right-wing realize the importance of winning no matter what: To the victors go the spoils.

    Donald Trump Had A Superior Electoral College Strategy

    How Hillary Clinton and the media missed the boat.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-had-a-superior-elector...

    josh

    Trump campaign officials and associates had contact with high ranking members of Russian intelligence.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/russia-intelligence-commu...

    josh

    An examination by The New York Times, based on interviews with more than 30 current and former law enforcement, congressional and other government officials, found that while partisanship was not a factor in Mr. Comey’s approach to the two investigations, he handled them in starkly different ways. In the case of Mrs. Clinton, he rewrote the script, partly based on the F.B.I.’s expectation that she would win and fearing the bureau would be accused of helping her. In the case of Mr. Trump, he conducted the investigation by the book, in the F.B.I.’s traditional secrecy.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/22/us/politics/james-comey-election.html?emc=edit_nn_20170424&nl=morning-briefing&nlid=77748371&te=1

     

     

    NDPP

    Cynthia McKinney: Hillary Supporters are NOT the Left (podcast)

    https://soundcloud.com/user-208734627/3-cynthiamckinney-war

    "What is characterized as Left is not the Left. I'm almost speechless at what the Democratic Party has become. Whoever would have thought that the Democratic Party would be the most rabidly pro-war, pro-bank, pro-military-industrial complex?"

    epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

    ..excellent podcast ndpp. txs.

    Doug Woodard

    Why did Trump win? See

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/05/01/why-did-tru...

    Basically, too many voters had suffered from neoliberal policies the Democrats (and most Republicans) endorsed.

    josh

    Yes, that's the main problem.  Democrats' quarter century or so embrace of neo-liberal economics came home to roost in the Midwest.

    quizzical

    lol best comment ever re voting Trump vs Clinton in the WP article comments from above.

    "it's like rejecting herion for being dangerous and taking up crack cocaine instead"

     

    josh

    Apparently Russia really did try to hack the election.

    http://amp.usatoday.com/story/102549928/

     

    kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

    josh wrote:

    Apparently Russia really did try to hack the election.

    http://amp.usatoday.com/story/102549928/

    I didn't see the evidence only that, "the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee told USA TODAY on Tuesday that Russian attacks on election systems were broader and targeted more states than those detailed in an explosive intelligence report leaked to the website The Intercept."  I love how they link to an article about the leaked report that this politician says didn't go far enough.

    The Intercept issued a statement Tuesday saying it obtained the report anonymously and did not know the source until the news broke late Monday.

    "It is important to keep in mind that these (charging) documents contain unproven assertions and speculation designed to serve the government’s agenda and as such warrant skepticism," the statement said. "Winner faces allegations that have not been proven. The same is true of the FBI’s claims about how it came to arrest Winner."

    Pages